RV-Archive.digest.vol-jz
January 06, 2001 - January 12, 2001
> > and
> > > what happens if I go past 2600 RPMs ?
> >
> > It is not wise to go past 2600RPM IMHO! Sensenich thinks that the limit
may
> > be bogus based on some faulty instrumentation. They are planning to
retest
> > the prop and "MIGHT" elimate the limit based on the outcome. I have
offered
> > them my airplane as a test vehicle if they wish to come here to S Fla
and do
> > the test. Ed Z has indicated an interest and maybe it will happen.
> >
> > How does it affect you flying? Probably saves your engine wear and
tear.
> > You
> > can not demonstrate your airplane at low altitudes and high power levels
> > during anything except climb attitudes are you will overspeed. At 9500
feet
> > pressure altitude on a hot day, I still can not run wide open throttle
at
> > peak power mixture w/o exceeding the limit and I am using an 80inch
pitch on
> > a 6A. 2600 RPM gives TAS of about 190 mph.
> >
> > Bernie Kerr, 6A , SE Fla
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kempthornes" <kempthornes(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ? |
> >How is a 2600 RPM limit on the Sensinich prop going to effect my flying
It means your engine won't get a chance to develop full rated horsepower.
(I'm assuming you have one rated at 2700)
hal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ? |
Oops! I slight slip of the typoinng fingerss....
1600 rpm max would indeed be a cruise prop!
Sam Buchanan
----------------------
Cy Galley wrote:
>
>
> I hope it will exceed 1600!!!!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sam Buchanan" <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 7:50 PM
> Subject: Re: RV-List: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ?
>
> >
> >
> > Greg Tanner wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Bernie,
> > > I assume you're running an O-360? If so, would the same problem occur
> with
> > > an O-320? I know the RPM limit still exists but with the smaller engine,
> > > would the likelyhood of exceeding the 2600 RPM limit be less?
> > >
> > > Greg Tanner
> >
> >
> > The Sensenich prop for the O-360 does not have the rpm restriction.
> >
> > The ability to spin a prop beyond 2600 rpm is dependent on the pitch of
> > the prop, not just the horsepower of the engine.
> >
> > The engine in my RV-6 could spin the Sensenich prop beyond 2600 when it
> > was a tired 150 hp engine. It is now a fresh 160, but since I had the
> > prop repitched, it is less likely to exceed 1600 rpm.
> >
> > Sam Buchanan (RV-6, just back from a GREAT day of flying to Gwinnett
> > County, GA, and points between here and there.....
> >
> > "The RV Journal" http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal
> >
> > ========================
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Rv660wm(at)AOL.COM
> > > Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 2:36 PM
> > > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> > > Subject: Re: RV-List: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ?
> > >
> > >
> > > In a message dated 1/6/01 2:33:54 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> WPAerial(at)AOL.COM
> > > writes:
> > >
> > > > How is a 2600 RPM limit on the Sensinich prop going to effect my
> flying
> > > and
> > > > what happens if I go past 2600 RPMs ?
> > >
> > > It is not wise to go past 2600RPM IMHO! Sensenich thinks that the limit
> may
> > > be bogus based on some faulty instrumentation. They are planning to
> retest
> > > the prop and "MIGHT" elimate the limit based on the outcome. I have
> offered
> > > them my airplane as a test vehicle if they wish to come here to S Fla
> and do
> > > the test. Ed Z has indicated an interest and maybe it will happen.
> > >
> > > How does it affect you flying? Probably saves your engine wear and
> tear.
> > > You
> > > can not demonstrate your airplane at low altitudes and high power levels
> > > during anything except climb attitudes are you will overspeed. At 9500
> feet
> > > pressure altitude on a hot day, I still can not run wide open throttle
> at
> > > peak power mixture w/o exceeding the limit and I am using an 80inch
> pitch on
> > > a 6A. 2600 RPM gives TAS of about 190 mph.
> > >
> > > Bernie Kerr, 6A , SE Fla
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Nellis" <mnellis(at)emailusa.net> |
| Subject: | CORRECTION - Pitot Static Poly-Flow hookup |
Randy Lervold was kind enough to question me on one of the part numbers I
listed my web site picture. The nipple fitting should be AN816-4D and not
AN816-2D. The fitting in the picture is the correct nipple but has the
wrong part number listed.
Sorry for the confusion and thanks Randy.
Mike Nellis - RV-6 N699BM (res)
Plainfield, IL
Building Tanks
http://mnellis.jnet.net/rv-6_page
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ClecoToo(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | RV4 kit for sale, Kansas area |
I am considering selling my partially built RV4 kit, all four kits.
Essentially wing kit done, tail kit done, fuse kit I started laying out and
other parts. Some parts powder coated. I have too many projects and not
enough time. This is not a give away but reasonable offers will be considered
with flexibility, I am a professional A&P, metal worker and the work on the
baby is excellent and it will be a pretty airplane. Along that line if I were
to sell it I would want it to go to a RV4 fan (nut), some one who will do it
justice. It has been in storage since my move from Arizona. If interested
e-mail me off list. I am thinking this is like a quick build at somewhat less
than standard kit price. Cleco
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman Hunger" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel pick up tube with screen from vans. Problem. |
Cut the stiffner to fit the fuel pick up tube. It shouldn't affect the
stiffner's ability to do it's job as you are only trimming at it's edge.
Norman Hunger
RV6A Wiring
> I would have to cut more than
> half of the angle stiffener on the bottom of the tank not sure if that's
what
> I want to do. The only thing I can see that will help me is that I have to
> blank tank access covers (no hole in them) they came with my capacitive
fuel
> quantity sender. IM not using the float type. I just don't no if I change
the
> location of the fuel bulkhead fitting if there would be a problem.
> Need advice RV6
> Bill
> Pembroke Ma
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank and Dorothy <frankv(at)infogen.net.nz> |
| Subject: | Re: Vertical Stab and antennas or lights... |
"Daniel Estrada F." wrote:
> What can you tell me about make a...how do you say that?..conduit, wiring or
> whatever for the instalation of atennas or lights in the vertical stab.
Probably not necessary. What light are you going to put on the VS
anyway? If you're thinking about a red rotating beacon, perhaps rethink
in terms of strobes in the wingtips and perhaps rudder.
If in future you find that you do want that red beacon, you can drill a
couple of holes in the VS top and bottom ribs (in front of the spar I
think -- the side of the spar where there's no centre rib) and poke a
piece of wire through.
Incidentally, some of the questions you're asking are already answered
at http://fly.to/bunnysguide
Frank.
Marton, NZ
RV-6 Finish Kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Nellis" <mnellis(at)emailusa.net> |
| Subject: | A couple of interesting modifications |
ABAYMAN (Scott Reviere) sent me a couple of pictures of modifications that
Don Hughes has performed on his RV. Once picture is a rudder cable fairing
and the other shows the fuel system components outside of the cockpit in the
wing root area.
http://mnellis.jnet.net/rv-6_page
Mike
> BUILDER DON HUGHES IN TAMPA
> has a couple of neat mods worth considering
> #1 shows the use of rv4 horizontal stabilizer tips for rudder cable
fairings
> #2 shows all fuel componets outside of the cockpit.
>
> if you have room on your website, please post as i have gotten tons of
> request to see these pics.
> thanks
> scott reviere
> tampa rv6a finishing
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ? |
In a message dated 1/6/01 6:17:54 PM Eastern Standard Time,
gtanner(at)bendcable.com writes:
> I assume you're running an O-360? If so, would the same problem occur with
> an O-320? I know the RPM limit still exists but with the smaller engine,
> would the likelyhood of exceeding the 2600 RPM limit be less?
>
No, it is an 0-320. There is not a 2600 RPM limit on their 0-360 prop
Bernie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com> |
| Subject: | Vertical Stab and antennas or lights... |
FWIW--
I chose not to to put lights in the VS because some of those who did
complained of distracting reflections off the canopy and panel. Just
something else to consider...
I'm going with the rudder strobe and RMD wing tip lights.
Cheers,
Larry Bowen
RV-8 fuse
Email: Larry(at)BowenAero.com
Web: http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
>
> "Daniel Estrada F." wrote:
> What can you tell me about make a...how do you say
> that?..conduit, wiring or
> whatever for the instalation of atennas or lights in the vertical stab.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "skybolt-aviator" <skybolt-aviator(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: pressure problem |
Cary---Sounds to me like a weak eng fuel pump.When inverted fuel is above
eng,hence a higher fuel press.In my carb.180,just lowering the nose will
increase fuel press.
Ollie&Lorene Washburn
RV6-A,N795LW,@FD77.
O-360,180HP,C/S,300+hrs.
----- Original Message -----
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Balch <kbalch1(at)mediaone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders? |
Hi Cy,
While I certainly hear what you're saying about Van's needing to cover their
expenses and make a fair profit, I see this situation as a different sort of
business & customer service issue.
A purchaser (of anything, from anyone) simply shouldn't expect to be charged
any more for an item than the price agreed upon with the seller at the time the
purchasing contract is originally executed. Delays in delivery are never the
fault of the purchaser (unless such delay is specifically requested by him) and
a seller shouldn't take advantage of such delays to pass on unanticipated costs
to the purchaser. This all strikes me as particularly true where a) the seller
has been paid in full (not with a credit card that may or may not be fully
charged at the time of the order, but with cash or certified check, etc.) at
the time of the order, and b) where the seller has made no CYA notation (such
as 'actual prices are those in effect at time of shipment', etc.) in the
purchasing contract. No such provision was on Van's prop order form last
September.
As far as walking away from the deal, I agree that's certainly an option. As
you point out, however, I still need a prop and the price here is still a good
one. I don't want to walk away from the deal -- I want the seller to honor the
agreed upon price, for which he's already received payment.
I don't think I'm being unreasonable here. Am I?
Ken
Let's also keep this in perspective and not create a tempest in the proverbial
teapot: I still haven't spoken to Van's about this and won't until tomorrow
morning. They may yet do the right thing, if only given the opportunity.
Cy Galley wrote:
>
> Look at another way. Van priced selling you a prop with his cost in mind.
> Manufacturer raised the price. Now you really have maybe three options...
>
> 1. Get a refund as Van no longer can sell you a prop at what you paid. You
> still have to buy a prop and this might be the best option if you think you
> can beat Van's new price some where else.
>
> 2. Pay the increase because you can't do any better even at the new price.
> Remember, all sources probably have increased their price to reflect their
> new cost.
>
> 3. Negotiate with Van so that Van gets the same amount for a mark up as he
> did with the old price. This will be to your advantage if Van uses a
> percent mark up. If the markup from the prop maker is $200 then he is using
> a flat fee and you will not get any benefit. It is also possible that the
> prop maker increased the cost by more than $200 and Van already is giving
> you a break by absorbing some of the increase.
>
> Remember Van cannot sell you anything very long unless he makes a profit to
> cover his expenses and overhead. With out Van's making a profit so he can
> continue to support you, you and the rest of the RV builder lose; big time!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ? |
I have the metal 70CM7S9-0-78 Sensenich prop on my RV6A 0320 160 HP and I
have found that it works well for me. Take off roll is a bit longer then the
RV6A 160 HP with a C/S prop, RV6A with a wood prop. RV4 with a wood prop. WE
(the 4 of us) have flown many hours together as a flight of 3 or 4 and had a
great time flying placeses together. We all have about the same cruise speed.
I can maintain full power on takeoff and at level flight, RPM gets real close
to the 2600 RPM but will not exceed it in straight and level flight. If I
start a decent at full power it will exceed the 2600 RPM restriction. When a
decent is started I am usually not in full power so I watch the rpm at that
time. Terry E. Cole RV6A N468TC 175 hrs.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders? |
I think your last line says it all.
I just tried to list some of the reasons and options. It is unrealistic to
expect Van to lose money just because his supplier raised the price. He
might make a deal for you and sell at his cost. He will lose money on the
deal as he does have overhead, unless he can have it drop shipped, Drop
shipping is sending the item from the supplier directly instead of in this
case to Van and then to you. He may already do this however.
I have never dealt with Van except to do minor repairs on his planes at
Oshkosh so I do not really have any knowledge of his operations.
Cy Galley - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
EAA Chapter 75 helping fellow aviators
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Balch" <kbalch1(at)mediaone.net>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 9:16 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders?
>
> Hi Cy,
>
> While I certainly hear what you're saying about Van's needing to cover
their
> expenses and make a fair profit, I see this situation as a different sort
of
> business & customer service issue.
>
> A purchaser (of anything, from anyone) simply shouldn't expect to be
charged
> any more for an item than the price agreed upon with the seller at the
time the
> purchasing contract is originally executed. Delays in delivery are never
the
> fault of the purchaser (unless such delay is specifically requested by
him) and
> a seller shouldn't take advantage of such delays to pass on unanticipated
costs
> to the purchaser. This all strikes me as particularly true where a) the
seller
> has been paid in full (not with a credit card that may or may not be fully
> charged at the time of the order, but with cash or certified check, etc.)
at
> the time of the order, and b) where the seller has made no CYA notation
(such
> as 'actual prices are those in effect at time of shipment', etc.) in the
> purchasing contract. No such provision was on Van's prop order form last
> September.
>
> As far as walking away from the deal, I agree that's certainly an option.
As
> you point out, however, I still need a prop and the price here is still a
good
> one. I don't want to walk away from the deal -- I want the seller to
honor the
> agreed upon price, for which he's already received payment.
>
> I don't think I'm being unreasonable here. Am I?
>
> Ken
>
> Let's also keep this in perspective and not create a tempest in the
proverbial
> teapot: I still haven't spoken to Van's about this and won't until
tomorrow
> morning. They may yet do the right thing, if only given the opportunity.
>
> Cy Galley wrote:
>
> >
> > Look at another way. Van priced selling you a prop with his cost in
mind.
> > Manufacturer raised the price. Now you really have maybe three
options...
> >
> > 1. Get a refund as Van no longer can sell you a prop at what you paid.
You
> > still have to buy a prop and this might be the best option if you think
you
> > can beat Van's new price some where else.
> >
> > 2. Pay the increase because you can't do any better even at the new
price.
> > Remember, all sources probably have increased their price to reflect
their
> > new cost.
> >
> > 3. Negotiate with Van so that Van gets the same amount for a mark up as
he
> > did with the old price. This will be to your advantage if Van uses a
> > percent mark up. If the markup from the prop maker is $200 then he is
using
> > a flat fee and you will not get any benefit. It is also possible that
the
> > prop maker increased the cost by more than $200 and Van already is
giving
> > you a break by absorbing some of the increase.
> >
> > Remember Van cannot sell you anything very long unless he makes a profit
to
> > cover his expenses and overhead. With out Van's making a profit so he
can
> > continue to support you, you and the rest of the RV builder lose; big
time!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chuck Rabaut" <crabaut(at)coalinga.com> |
| Subject: | Re: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ? |
Hey Guys,
This question is for those who know. In my 4 (O-320, 160hp, wood
pacesetter prop) I occasionally exceed my 2600rpm limit whilst playing
aerobatically. How bad am I being on my prop (and or engine)? Anything I
should do to minimize the risk, like frequent prop/bolts/etc.. inspections?
Chuck
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ? |
Is it the same prop just re-pitched or a different model? If it is
different model, I would think that an O-360 prop could be used on an O-320
if pitched correctly.
But this is not even an educated guess. I've been told that metal props are
like a giant tuning fork. They have critical resonant frequencies that can
be set up by the engine rpm. These frequencies vary also due to blade
length. That is why props can only be shortened a certain amount. A few
years back we were having T-18s throwing blades, wrenching out motors due
to shortening a metal prop down creating a destructive harmonic. So in this
case Sensenich has determined that over 2600 creates the destructive
harmonics and therefore red lined them at that point.
If the prop was longer (ground clearance problem) or shorter (less
efficient) then the harmonic problem might also be in a different rpm. But
this might also occur in a normal running range which is even more of
restrictive than the 2600 limit.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Buchanan" <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 7:50 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ?
>
>
> Greg Tanner wrote:
> >
> >
> > Bernie,
> > I assume you're running an O-360? If so, would the same problem occur
with
> > an O-320? I know the RPM limit still exists but with the smaller engine,
> > would the likelyhood of exceeding the 2600 RPM limit be less?
> >
> > Greg Tanner
>
>
> The Sensenich prop for the O-360 does not have the rpm restriction.
>
> The ability to spin a prop beyond 2600 rpm is dependent on the pitch of
> the prop, not just the horsepower of the engine.
>
> The engine in my RV-6 could spin the Sensenich prop beyond 2600 when it
> was a tired 150 hp engine. It is now a fresh 160, but since I had the
> prop repitched, it is less likely to exceed 1600 rpm.
>
> Sam Buchanan (RV-6, just back from a GREAT day of flying to Gwinnett
> County, GA, and points between here and there.....
>
> "The RV Journal" http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal
>
> ========================
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Rv660wm(at)AOL.COM
> > Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 2:36 PM
> > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: RV-List: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ?
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 1/6/01 2:33:54 PM Eastern Standard Time,
WPAerial(at)AOL.COM
> > writes:
> >
> > > How is a 2600 RPM limit on the Sensinich prop going to effect my
flying
> > and
> > > what happens if I go past 2600 RPMs ?
> >
> > It is not wise to go past 2600RPM IMHO! Sensenich thinks that the limit
may
> > be bogus based on some faulty instrumentation. They are planning to
retest
> > the prop and "MIGHT" elimate the limit based on the outcome. I have
offered
> > them my airplane as a test vehicle if they wish to come here to S Fla
and do
> > the test. Ed Z has indicated an interest and maybe it will happen.
> >
> > How does it affect you flying? Probably saves your engine wear and
tear.
> > You
> > can not demonstrate your airplane at low altitudes and high power levels
> > during anything except climb attitudes are you will overspeed. At 9500
feet
> > pressure altitude on a hot day, I still can not run wide open throttle
at
> > peak power mixture w/o exceeding the limit and I am using an 80inch
pitch on
> > a 6A. 2600 RPM gives TAS of about 190 mph.
> >
> > Bernie Kerr, 6A , SE Fla
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Shook" <billshook(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV4 kit for sale, Kansas area |
I am not interested in the entire kit, however if you would like to part
with the fuselage and the finish kit I would be interested in talking to you
about that. I'm a bit gun shy about it, I must admit, after buying the wing
kit I have from another builder who not only shorted me on the parts, but
had put a rear spar in upside down with 1/2" of run out. Still, it sounds
like you have not started the fuse much, and I assume the finish kit is
still in the boxes. Let me know and we'll discuss it.
Bill
-4 wings nearly complete
----- Original Message -----
From: <ClecoToo(at)AOL.COM>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 2:53 AM
Subject: RV-List: RV4 kit for sale, Kansas area
>
> I am considering selling my partially built RV4 kit, all four kits.
> Essentially wing kit done, tail kit done, fuse kit I started laying out
and
> other parts. Some parts powder coated. I have too many projects and not
> enough time. This is not a give away but reasonable offers will be
considered
> with flexibility, I am a professional A&P, metal worker and the work on
the
> baby is excellent and it will be a pretty airplane. Along that line if I
were
> to sell it I would want it to go to a RV4 fan (nut), some one who will do
it
> justice. It has been in storage since my move from Arizona. If interested
> e-mail me off list. I am thinking this is like a quick build at somewhat
less
> than standard kit price. Cleco
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Jory" <rickjory(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Woodward Governors |
Anyone with a good source/pricing for a Woodward governor. Per a recent
thread, apparently Van's doesn't carry the Woodward line. Thanks in
advance.
Rick Jory
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ClecoToo(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: RV4 kit for sale, Kansas area |
Bill, no, sorry, I cannot split up the kit. All my work is professional in
every respect. It is possible a few pieces of extrusion have been lost or
something like that and I would take that into acount of course. Good luck
with your project. Cleco
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ? |
Wood props don't have the harmonic problems of a metal prop. The 2600 rpm
limit was for a metal prop and only that particular metal prop. The next
limit is the suggested rpm limit from your engine manufacturer.
Remember ALL generalizations are false... Including this one!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Rabaut" <crabaut(at)coalinga.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 8:16 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ?
>
> Hey Guys,
>
> This question is for those who know. In my 4 (O-320, 160hp, wood
> pacesetter prop) I occasionally exceed my 2600rpm limit whilst playing
> aerobatically. How bad am I being on my prop (and or engine)? Anything I
> should do to minimize the risk, like frequent prop/bolts/etc..
inspections?
>
> Chuck
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ? |
Missed one! Frequent inspections of props is always advisable. Especially
the Bolt torques on ANY wooden prop!
Cy Galley - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
EAA Chapter 75 helping fellow aviators
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Rabaut" <crabaut(at)coalinga.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 8:16 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ?
>
> Hey Guys,
>
> This question is for those who know. In my 4 (O-320, 160hp, wood
> pacesetter prop) I occasionally exceed my 2600rpm limit whilst playing
> aerobatically. How bad am I being on my prop (and or engine)? Anything I
> should do to minimize the risk, like frequent prop/bolts/etc..
inspections?
>
> Chuck
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry & Karen Gooding <GOODING(at)hargray.com> |
| Subject: | Free Weather Monitor |
There's a nifty free weather monitor at http://ww2.weatherbug.com
It displays the current weather for your ZIP code in an easily scanned
format, tells you the reporting site, and is updated continuously. We have
been using it for about a month now and have noticed no ill side effects
from the download. It also has an audio alerting feature.
Unchecking the "authorize" box must keep you off the junk mail list because
we get no more than usual.
Karen Gooding
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KAKlewin(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | W-621 Flap Brace |
OK....Im a bit perplexed....
Plans DWG-17 shows the W-621 flap brace to be 56 5/8in long. The 2
braces that came in the kit are only 56 in long. Any ideas?? Also I assume
I am to build them so that they mirror each other?? Plans are a bit
confusing.....
Thanks again for your help...
Kurt in OKC
"scraching my head"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John" <fasching(at)amigo.net> |
I have been putting off flying my Rv6A to Oshkosh too long, and have decided
to do it this year.
I don't like camping, and so I need to figure out what works best for those
of you that have flown there and been afoot. Where? How did you get back
and forth? Any tips?
John RV6A Salida, CO
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Thompson <grobdriver(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: W-621 Flap Brace |
--- KAKlewin(at)AOL.COM wrote:
>
> OK....Im a bit perplexed....
>
> Plans DWG-17 shows the W-621 flap brace to be 56 5/8in long. The
> 2
> braces that came in the kit are only 56 in long. Any ideas?? Also
> I assume
> I am to build them so that they mirror each other?? Plans are a bit
> confusing.....
Don't sweat it. Take the brace up to the aileron end and let the root
end go. You will be hacking it up there and some of it will of
necessity float. You won't miss the length.
Definitely mirror images!
Write for details if you wish.
Mike Thompson
Austin, TX
-6 N140RV (Reserved)
Canopy
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders? |
| From: | b green <rvinfo(at)juno.com> |
I would have to disagree [respectfully] with Cy's analysis of this
situation
This is actually a rather classic contract situation and I will give a
disclaimer that without having actually examined the documents in
question, everything I say may be in error. Van's made an offer to sell
Ken a prop for $4650 and he accepted the offer by paying the money.
Offer and accetpance are the requirements of a contract, and it appears
that there is a contract in place.
Now when two people contract, what they are essentially doing is
allocating risk. They are guading against the possiblity of future price
changes essentially. In a contract, they can allocate that risk anyway
they want if they choose to address it. In this case it was probably not
addressed in any of the converstations or in the pieces of paper that may
have been exchanged, which could mean that they are both locked in. If
they are in fact locked in, that means if Hartzel raises their price, too
bad for Van's, and conversely, if Hartzel had a price reduction or if
someone else, like Stoddard-Hamilton say started selling them cheaper,
too bad for Ken, he is the one bearing the risk of the price going down.
Now having said all that, there are many factors that may come into play
as to what the contract actually says or means. Even if the paper
exchanged between Van's and Ken doesn't address future price increases,
it could be that Van's has posted somewhere in view of Ken, like on the
website or in the information packet that we all bought or with the
initial kit order that supplier price increases will be passed on to
buyers. If that is the case, then the risk of a price increase may have
been Ken's problem. Another factor is what is called trade usage, if
Van's and other kit supplier's always pass on this kind of an increase,
then it could be assumed to be part of the contract.
Now having made this more complicated than anyone would like, we need to
remember a few things; first is that it is only $200, second that Van's
could generally speaking charge everyone more than they do for many
things, and third that it is to everyone's advantage to have Van's
operate at a profit and not go the way of S-H. Also from Van's point of
view, passing on the increase would certainly leave a bad taste in Ken's
mouth and it may be worth it to them for good will purposes to give him
some sort of break. That may depend on just how big or small their
margins are on parts like that.
So, Ken, let us know how all this works out.
Bruce Green
RV-8 plans
Skybolt
>
> Look at another way. Van priced selling you a prop with his cost in
> mind.
> Manufacturer raised the price. Now you really have maybe three
> options...
>
> 1. Get a refund as Van no longer can sell you a prop at what you
> paid. You
> still have to buy a prop and this might be the best option if you
> think you
> can beat Van's new price some where else.
>
> 2. Pay the increase because you can't do any better even at the new
> price.
> Remember, all sources probably have increased their price to reflect
> their
> new cost.
>
> 3. Negotiate with Van so that Van gets the same amount for a mark up
> as he
> did with the old price. This will be to your advantage if Van uses
> a
> percent mark up. If the markup from the prop maker is $200 then he
> is using
> a flat fee and you will not get any benefit. It is also possible
> that the
> prop maker increased the cost by more than $200 and Van already is
> giving
> you a break by absorbing some of the increase.
>
> Remember Van cannot sell you anything very long unless he makes a
> profit to
> cover his expenses and overhead. With out Van's making a profit so
> he can
> continue to support you, you and the rest of the RV builder lose;
> big time!
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Greg Tanner" <gtanner(at)bendcable.com>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 1:20 PM
> Subject: RE: RV-List: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders?
>
>
>
> >
> > According to the letter I received with my last purchase, any 2000
> order
> > placed and paid in full before the price increase the first of the
> year
> > would not receive an increase. If you already paid for it--you
> shouldn't
> > have to pay more--unless they didn't charge you shipping charges
> or
> > something like that.
> >
> >
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ken Balch
> > Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 10:59 AM
> > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: RV-List: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders?
> >
> >
> >
> > I'd like to solicit some opinions on this before speaking to Van's
> on
> > Monday.
> >
> > This morning I received some mail from Van's. It seems that my
> prop
> > will be shipped in about two weeks and Van's is looking to receive
> the
> > balance due. "What balance due is that?" says I, since I paid the
> 2000
> > price of $4650 in full back in September when I placed the order.
> It
> > seems that they want to stick me with the $200 price increase on
> this
> > prop for 2001.
> >
> > It's not my fault that they've taken this long to ship the prop.
> I've
> > been paid in full for four months. Is this right?
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Ken Balch
> > Ashland, MA
> > RV-8 #81125 (N118KB)
> > fabricating panel
> > www.egroups.com/files/bostonrvbuilders
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Ervin <bjervin(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders? |
Ken
From what I remember of my contract law classes in Collage, you are
right. At least common sense would say that, But then, I'm not a lawyer
so I can use abstract concepts like common sense. If I felt so strongly
that I was in the right I might consult one of those guys, but It may
cost you that much or more to prove yourself right. By then, what's the
point!!!
Do not Achive
I'd talk to vans, and see if they will bend a little!!
Bill
RV-6 Fus (Way too cold to work in the Garage!!)
Spokane
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gardner, Douglas (GA01)" <douglas.gardner(at)honeywell.com> |
| Subject: | NavAid A/P Power Up |
Question to the NavAid crowd- When I power up the control unit the electric
Mtr/gryo makes a hell of a load noise. It sounds smooth but very loud. Is
this normal. Also, seeing that this also is the turn coordinator, I have it
wired to the 5Amp CB, so when the master switch is turned on, off it goes,
just like in the 172 I'm learning to fly. Could this be wired to a SCB
instead, or is the the standard practice ??
Thanks for your response.
Doug Gardner -8A #80717 FWF
0-360 now on order, all else is close to finished.
(Now I need to learn how to fly, have 15Hrs to date, I need to hurry, expect
project to be finished this year)
Palm Harbor Florida
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Ervin <bjervin(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders? |
See what I mean!!!
This is not a slam on Mr. Green, But after 20 years on the Enforcement
side of the law, I'm a bit Cynical!! Go Figure!!
Bill
RV-6 Fus
Spokane
b green wrote:
>
> Now having said all that, there are many factors that may come into >play as
to what the contract actually says or means. Even if the paper
> exchanged between Van's and Ken doesn't address future price >increases, it could
be that Van's has posted somewhere in view of Ken, >like on the website or
in the information packet that we all bought or >with the initial kit order
that supplier price increases will be passed >on to buyers. If that is the case,
then the risk of a price increase >may have been Ken's problem. Another factor
is what is called trade >usage, if Van's and other kit supplier's always
pass on this kind of an >increase, then it could be assumed to be part of the
contract.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman Hunger" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Vertical Stab and antennas or lights... |
> Speaking of bushings....
> I also recently installed 1/4" snap bushings in my wings (as well as the
> vertical and horizontal stabs). These bushings doesn't have a very tight
fit
> though. I doubt they'll fall out but they will definately move around or
> vibrate.
> Do you have a concern with this?
I smeared RTV behind each one as best I could with my finger for exactly
that reason. Ones that I still doubt get a 3/16's hole drilled nearby and
have a tie strap through with the wires and grabbing all of them then
passing back throught the bulkhead in the new hole. I also don't buy the tie
straps at the local auto parts store. The ones I use in all areas that I
want permanent protection are much better. They are made from a durable
material with a metal retaining clip.
Norman Hunger
RV6A Delta BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bmaynard507(at)cs.com |
Well, its time to paint the airplane. I was planning on doing it myself, but
circumstance have change. I now have a local professional doing it.
Therefore the HVLP and Respirator system I had purchased is no longer needed.
I place the Web Page address below showing the product. I will let it go
for 825.00. It has the Gravity Feed pressure spray gun paint container. It
has never been used. Still in the Box.
I will soon give details on my first flight. Still Collecting data.
http://www.axispro.com/citation_split.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | earl fortner <e.fortner(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: First long flying day experience in my 6A (long DNA, non |
building)
$1.77 a gallon! Man, what a deal. $2.40 a gal is the cheapest price
in the Charlotte, N.C. area for 100LL. Sounds like a nice trip even
with the wind.
Earl
Rv660wm(at)AOL.COM wrote:
>
>
> Now that my airplane is finally painted, my wife has lifted the quarantine of
> no leaving the state! :>) A neighbor was going to be stranded in Evergreen,
> Al (home of SERFI) and was looking at a 24 hour bus ride. He is a 6A QB'er,
> so offered to run up (501 miles) and pick him up. It was a clear, cold and
> windy day. About 34 degrees here when I left TCAP (Port St Lucie, FL) and
> predictions of 45 mph at 320 degrees were not friendly but at least it was
> suppose to last until we would be returning. I chose to stay low (4,500)
> since the forecast winds were worst the higher you went and the air was
> smooth as silk. It was exactly as predicted, at 65-70 % power, 7 gph, TAS of
> 182mph my ground speed was hovering 138-140 yuk. I had just installed Vans
> new 270 degree arc gages. The gages and my trusty EIS were indicating the
> same amount of fuel consumed at the end of two hours(15 gallons). The wind
> moderated as I flew over Tallahassee and turned slighty more west for
> Evergreen. We were on the field at 3.5 hours. It was the first time the
> NAVAID has been used to track the Garmin 195 for any distance. I had become
> disenchanted with it because it was not tracking right on top of the map line
> of the Garmin when I would try it momentarily on short trips. It turns out
> that it tracks a very straight line, but was offset about 1 mile from the map
> route line and the airplane held altitude better than I do once the trim was
> correct. Hands off for 15 minute stretches!
>
> KGZH was very friendly except for fuel prices ($2.40) compared to the $1.77 I
> am used to paying at KOBE. Added 20 gals. They loaned us a courtesy car to
> grab a sandwich in town and we were on the way back. My friend weighs 230 and
> he had a small amount of luggage. The plane flew fine at 1650 pounds gross
> weight in that cold dry air. 2.5 hours we were landing at TCAP and taxied
> into my back door hangar. 1000 miles in 6 hours and 40 gallons of fuel .
> Can't wait to try a long trip in a zero wind condition.
>
> Bernie Kerr, 6A, 70 hours of grin time, SE Fla
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders? |
This reminds me of the landing gear I bought for my Vari-Eze. I had bought
and paid for it over a year before. When it was my turn to take delivery, I
considerately said send it to the next guy as I wasn't and still am not
ready for the landing gear. The guy that was building them said later when
I did request it that the price was now more. When I pointed out the facts
that I listed, he relented and sent me the landing gear at the price I had
paid.
What is different, is that he was the manufacturer, not the middleman like
Van. You are probably right, if the payment was made in full, then Van needs
to deliver a prop as the acceptance of the money binds the contract.
----- Original Message -----
From: "b green" <rvinfo(at)juno.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders?
>
> I would have to disagree [respectfully] with Cy's analysis of this
> situation
>
> This is actually a rather classic contract situation and I will give a
> disclaimer that without having actually examined the documents in
> question, everything I say may be in error. Van's made an offer to sell
> Ken a prop for $4650 and he accepted the offer by paying the money.
> Offer and accetpance are the requirements of a contract, and it appears
> that there is a contract in place.
>
> Now when two people contract, what they are essentially doing is
> allocating risk. They are guading against the possiblity of future price
> changes essentially. In a contract, they can allocate that risk anyway
> they want if they choose to address it. In this case it was probably not
> addressed in any of the converstations or in the pieces of paper that may
> have been exchanged, which could mean that they are both locked in. If
> they are in fact locked in, that means if Hartzel raises their price, too
> bad for Van's, and conversely, if Hartzel had a price reduction or if
> someone else, like Stoddard-Hamilton say started selling them cheaper,
> too bad for Ken, he is the one bearing the risk of the price going down.
>
> Now having said all that, there are many factors that may come into play
> as to what the contract actually says or means. Even if the paper
> exchanged between Van's and Ken doesn't address future price increases,
> it could be that Van's has posted somewhere in view of Ken, like on the
> website or in the information packet that we all bought or with the
> initial kit order that supplier price increases will be passed on to
> buyers. If that is the case, then the risk of a price increase may have
> been Ken's problem. Another factor is what is called trade usage, if
> Van's and other kit supplier's always pass on this kind of an increase,
> then it could be assumed to be part of the contract.
>
> Now having made this more complicated than anyone would like, we need to
> remember a few things; first is that it is only $200, second that Van's
> could generally speaking charge everyone more than they do for many
> things, and third that it is to everyone's advantage to have Van's
> operate at a profit and not go the way of S-H. Also from Van's point of
> view, passing on the increase would certainly leave a bad taste in Ken's
> mouth and it may be worth it to them for good will purposes to give him
> some sort of break. That may depend on just how big or small their
> margins are on parts like that.
>
> So, Ken, let us know how all this works out.
>
> Bruce Green
> RV-8 plans
> Skybolt
>
> >
> > Look at another way. Van priced selling you a prop with his cost in
> > mind.
> > Manufacturer raised the price. Now you really have maybe three
> > options...
> >
> > 1. Get a refund as Van no longer can sell you a prop at what you
> > paid. You
> > still have to buy a prop and this might be the best option if you
> > think you
> > can beat Van's new price some where else.
> >
> > 2. Pay the increase because you can't do any better even at the new
> > price.
> > Remember, all sources probably have increased their price to reflect
> > their
> > new cost.
> >
> > 3. Negotiate with Van so that Van gets the same amount for a mark up
> > as he
> > did with the old price. This will be to your advantage if Van uses
> > a
> > percent mark up. If the markup from the prop maker is $200 then he
> > is using
> > a flat fee and you will not get any benefit. It is also possible
> > that the
> > prop maker increased the cost by more than $200 and Van already is
> > giving
> > you a break by absorbing some of the increase.
> >
> > Remember Van cannot sell you anything very long unless he makes a
> > profit to
> > cover his expenses and overhead. With out Van's making a profit so
> > he can
> > continue to support you, you and the rest of the RV builder lose;
> > big time!
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Greg Tanner" <gtanner(at)bendcable.com>
> > To:
> > Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 1:20 PM
> > Subject: RE: RV-List: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders?
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > According to the letter I received with my last purchase, any 2000
> > order
> > > placed and paid in full before the price increase the first of the
> > year
> > > would not receive an increase. If you already paid for it--you
> > shouldn't
> > > have to pay more--unless they didn't charge you shipping charges
> > or
> > > something like that.
> > >
> > >
> > > Greg
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ken Balch
> > > Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 10:59 AM
> > > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> > > Subject: RV-List: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I'd like to solicit some opinions on this before speaking to Van's
> > on
> > > Monday.
> > >
> > > This morning I received some mail from Van's. It seems that my
> > prop
> > > will be shipped in about two weeks and Van's is looking to receive
> > the
> > > balance due. "What balance due is that?" says I, since I paid the
> > 2000
> > > price of $4650 in full back in September when I placed the order.
> > It
> > > seems that they want to stick me with the $200 price increase on
> > this
> > > prop for 2001.
> > >
> > > It's not my fault that they've taken this long to ship the prop.
> > I've
> > > been paid in full for four months. Is this right?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Ken Balch
> > > Ashland, MA
> > > RV-8 #81125 (N118KB)
> > > fabricating panel
> > > www.egroups.com/files/bostonrvbuilders
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Calvert" <rv6bldr(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: W-621 Flap Brace |
Kurt,
Mine are 56 inches too. Build each brace to fit each wing. They may not
come out exactly mirror images, but close.
Glad to see the sun!
Still trying to catch up,
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok
-6 fuselage
----- Original Message -----
From: <KAKlewin(at)AOL.COM>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 12:05 PM
Subject: RV-List: W-621 Flap Brace
>
> OK....Im a bit perplexed....
>
> Plans DWG-17 shows the W-621 flap brace to be 56 5/8in long. The 2
> braces that came in the kit are only 56 in long. Any ideas?? Also I
assume
> I am to build them so that they mirror each other?? Plans are a bit
> confusing.....
>
> Thanks again for your help...
>
> Kurt in OKC
> "scraching my head"
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John" <fasching(at)amigo.net> |
I have not paid much attention lately, but I recall pretty clearly that when
I was building that Van's always said in their paper work that the price was
that which was in effect at the time of shipping. A few times there was a
bump up in some things, but never enough to get me too disturbed since
everything was always going up and up then anyway.
FWIW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: W-621 Flap Brace |
56 5/8 " is the length of the flap and ail attached to the wing, the top of
that drawing shows the flap brace not going all the way to the root. Over
to the right and down a little on plans 17 says the flap brace is 55 1/2 "
long per change one dtd 12/89 so I ended up cutting a half inch off of
both of mine...keep an eye on the angles and remember that the bottom is
where the thing gets riveted to the skin and hinge. They do get mirrored!
I just finished building (cutting really!) my flap braces right before the
holidays. I too lost some hair on that one.
More details - zap me offline!
Ralph Capen
Richardson TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ? |
Cy Galley wrote:
>
>
> Is it the same prop just re-pitched or a different model? If it is
> different model, I would think that an O-360 prop could be used on an O-320
> if pitched correctly.
Cy, I guess your question was directed at my post.
The prop that I have on my RV-6 is the same prop (70CM series) that was
on the 150 hp engine. I added three inches of pitch when the engine was
rebuilt to 160 hp.
I doubt the O-360 prop (72FM8 series) would be a good match for the
O-320. The additional two inches of diameter would make it difficult to
achieve a good range of performance. If the 72" prop was pitched so the
engine could achieve 2700 rpm, top speed would suffer (because the pitch
would be less than optimum). It would be possible to pitch for good
climb performance, but the range of performance would be narrower than
is possible with the 70" prop.
Sam Buchanan (RV-6, 225 hrs, O-320, Sensenich metal F/P prop)
"The RV Journal" http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal
===================
>
> But this is not even an educated guess. I've been told that metal props are
> like a giant tuning fork. They have critical resonant frequencies that can
> be set up by the engine rpm. These frequencies vary also due to blade
> length. That is why props can only be shortened a certain amount. A few
> years back we were having T-18s throwing blades, wrenching out motors due
> to shortening a metal prop down creating a destructive harmonic. So in this
> case Sensenich has determined that over 2600 creates the destructive
> harmonics and therefore red lined them at that point.
>
> If the prop was longer (ground clearance problem) or shorter (less
> efficient) then the harmonic problem might also be in a different rpm. But
> this might also occur in a normal running range which is even more of
> restrictive than the 2600 limit.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sam Buchanan" <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 7:50 PM
> Subject: Re: RV-List: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ?
>
> >
> >
> > Greg Tanner wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Bernie,
> > > I assume you're running an O-360? If so, would the same problem occur
> with
> > > an O-320? I know the RPM limit still exists but with the smaller engine,
> > > would the likelyhood of exceeding the 2600 RPM limit be less?
> > >
> > > Greg Tanner
> >
> >
> > The Sensenich prop for the O-360 does not have the rpm restriction.
> >
> > The ability to spin a prop beyond 2600 rpm is dependent on the pitch of
> > the prop, not just the horsepower of the engine.
> >
> > The engine in my RV-6 could spin the Sensenich prop beyond 2600 when it
> > was a tired 150 hp engine. It is now a fresh 160, but since I had the
> > prop repitched, it is less likely to exceed 1600 rpm.
> >
> > Sam Buchanan (RV-6, just back from a GREAT day of flying to Gwinnett
> > County, GA, and points between here and there.....
> >
> > "The RV Journal" http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal
> >
> > ========================
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Rv660wm(at)AOL.COM
> > > Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 2:36 PM
> > > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> > > Subject: Re: RV-List: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ?
> > >
> > >
> > > In a message dated 1/6/01 2:33:54 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> WPAerial(at)AOL.COM
> > > writes:
> > >
> > > > How is a 2600 RPM limit on the Sensinich prop going to effect my
> flying
> > > and
> > > > what happens if I go past 2600 RPMs ?
> > >
> > > It is not wise to go past 2600RPM IMHO! Sensenich thinks that the limit
> may
> > > be bogus based on some faulty instrumentation. They are planning to
> retest
> > > the prop and "MIGHT" elimate the limit based on the outcome. I have
> offered
> > > them my airplane as a test vehicle if they wish to come here to S Fla
> and do
> > > the test. Ed Z has indicated an interest and maybe it will happen.
> > >
> > > How does it affect you flying? Probably saves your engine wear and
> tear.
> > > You
> > > can not demonstrate your airplane at low altitudes and high power levels
> > > during anything except climb attitudes are you will overspeed. At 9500
> feet
> > > pressure altitude on a hot day, I still can not run wide open throttle
> at
> > > peak power mixture w/o exceeding the limit and I am using an 80inch
> pitch on
> > > a 6A. 2600 RPM gives TAS of about 190 mph.
> > >
> > > Bernie Kerr, 6A , SE Fla
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: W-621 Flap Brace |
Just read what I sent...Ooooops - NOT the aileron - just the flap attached
to the wing.
It does show that it's shorter though.
Sorry if I confused anyone,
Ralph - confused myself - at times!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <pbesing(at)rmi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: NavAid A/P Power Up |
You got it wired properly...just to a circuit breaker. Mine is actually
hooked up off a different bus, which is activated by my avionics master, so
my Navaid doesn't come on until the avionics master is switched on. It is
kind of loud, but not much louder than a standard turn coordinator in a 172.
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Finish Kit (Still)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gardner, Douglas (GA01)" <douglas.gardner(at)honeywell.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 1:00 PM
Subject: RV-List: NavAid A/P Power Up
>
> Question to the NavAid crowd- When I power up the control unit the
electric
> Mtr/gryo makes a hell of a load noise. It sounds smooth but very loud. Is
> this normal. Also, seeing that this also is the turn coordinator, I have
it
> wired to the 5Amp CB, so when the master switch is turned on, off it goes,
> just like in the 172 I'm learning to fly. Could this be wired to a SCB
> instead, or is the the standard practice ??
>
> Thanks for your response.
>
> Doug Gardner -8A #80717 FWF
> 0-360 now on order, all else is close to finished.
> (Now I need to learn how to fly, have 15Hrs to date, I need to hurry,
expect
> project to be finished this year)
> Palm Harbor Florida
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Mack" <don(at)dmack.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV to Oshkosh |
John,
There are buses that take you to Appleton hotels. Last year it was $15/day
round trip. You can also take buses to the dorms.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John" <fasching(at)amigo.net>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 12:47 PM
Subject: RV-List: RV to Oshkosh
>
> I have been putting off flying my Rv6A to Oshkosh too long, and have
decided
> to do it this year.
>
> I don't like camping, and so I need to figure out what works best for
those
> of you that have flown there and been afoot. Where? How did you get back
> and forth? Any tips?
> John RV6A Salida, CO
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ? |
Interesting. I was always under the impression that a longer prop was more
efficient not less.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Buchanan" <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ?
>
>
> Cy Galley wrote:
> >
> >
> > Is it the same prop just re-pitched or a different model? If it is
> > different model, I would think that an O-360 prop could be used on an
O-320
> > if pitched correctly.
>
>
> Cy, I guess your question was directed at my post.
>
> The prop that I have on my RV-6 is the same prop (70CM series) that was
> on the 150 hp engine. I added three inches of pitch when the engine was
> rebuilt to 160 hp.
>
> I doubt the O-360 prop (72FM8 series) would be a good match for the
> O-320. The additional two inches of diameter would make it difficult to
> achieve a good range of performance. If the 72" prop was pitched so the
> engine could achieve 2700 rpm, top speed would suffer (because the pitch
> would be less than optimum). It would be possible to pitch for good
> climb performance, but the range of performance would be narrower than
> is possible with the 70" prop.
>
> Sam Buchanan (RV-6, 225 hrs, O-320, Sensenich metal F/P prop)
> "The RV Journal" http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal
>
> ===================
>
>
> >
> > But this is not even an educated guess. I've been told that metal props
are
> > like a giant tuning fork. They have critical resonant frequencies that
can
> > be set up by the engine rpm. These frequencies vary also due to blade
> > length. That is why props can only be shortened a certain amount. A few
> > years back we were having T-18s throwing blades, wrenching out motors
due
> > to shortening a metal prop down creating a destructive harmonic. So in
this
> > case Sensenich has determined that over 2600 creates the destructive
> > harmonics and therefore red lined them at that point.
> >
> > If the prop was longer (ground clearance problem) or shorter (less
> > efficient) then the harmonic problem might also be in a different rpm.
But
> > this might also occur in a normal running range which is even more of
> > restrictive than the 2600 limit.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Sam Buchanan" <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
> > To:
> > Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 7:50 PM
> > Subject: Re: RV-List: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ?
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Greg Tanner wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Bernie,
> > > > I assume you're running an O-360? If so, would the same problem
occur
> > with
> > > > an O-320? I know the RPM limit still exists but with the smaller
engine,
> > > > would the likelyhood of exceeding the 2600 RPM limit be less?
> > > >
> > > > Greg Tanner
> > >
> > >
> > > The Sensenich prop for the O-360 does not have the rpm restriction.
> > >
> > > The ability to spin a prop beyond 2600 rpm is dependent on the pitch
of
> > > the prop, not just the horsepower of the engine.
> > >
> > > The engine in my RV-6 could spin the Sensenich prop beyond 2600 when
it
> > > was a tired 150 hp engine. It is now a fresh 160, but since I had the
> > > prop repitched, it is less likely to exceed 1600 rpm.
> > >
> > > Sam Buchanan (RV-6, just back from a GREAT day of flying to Gwinnett
> > > County, GA, and points between here and there.....
> > >
> > > "The RV Journal" http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal
> > >
> > > ========================
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Rv660wm(at)AOL.COM
> > > > Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 2:36 PM
> > > > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> > > > Subject: Re: RV-List: sensenich prop 2600 rpm limit ?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > In a message dated 1/6/01 2:33:54 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> > WPAerial(at)AOL.COM
> > > > writes:
> > > >
> > > > > How is a 2600 RPM limit on the Sensinich prop going to effect my
> > flying
> > > > and
> > > > > what happens if I go past 2600 RPMs ?
> > > >
> > > > It is not wise to go past 2600RPM IMHO! Sensenich thinks that the
limit
> > may
> > > > be bogus based on some faulty instrumentation. They are planning to
> > retest
> > > > the prop and "MIGHT" elimate the limit based on the outcome. I have
> > offered
> > > > them my airplane as a test vehicle if they wish to come here to S
Fla
> > and do
> > > > the test. Ed Z has indicated an interest and maybe it will happen.
> > > >
> > > > How does it affect you flying? Probably saves your engine wear and
> > tear.
> > > > You
> > > > can not demonstrate your airplane at low altitudes and high power
levels
> > > > during anything except climb attitudes are you will overspeed. At
9500
> > feet
> > > > pressure altitude on a hot day, I still can not run wide open
throttle
> > at
> > > > peak power mixture w/o exceeding the limit and I am using an 80inch
> > pitch on
> > > > a 6A. 2600 RPM gives TAS of about 190 mph.
> > > >
> > > > Bernie Kerr, 6A , SE Fla
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KAKlewin(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Aileron Trim...??? |
OK...one more question for the group....Ive searched the archives on this
one and havent found too much on it....so here goes. Im trying to decide if
installing an adjustable aileron trim is worth while or not. I have a QB, so
the aileron is built and would be quite a project to install an electric
trim. I would consider the manual trim, but every GA aircraft that I have
flown hasn't had or hardly used the aileron trim and even the bigger ones I
fly at work that have aileron trim I very rarely use (unless I get a large
fuel imbalance or when on one engine). So my logical conclusion is to omit
the adjustable aileron trim and go with a small ground adjustable trim tab.
So those of you with flying RVs with aileron trim do you use it much? Do you
think a ground adjustable tab is good enough?? Thanks again for the
knowledge....
Kurt in OKC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)teleport.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders? |
Ken Balch wrote:
>
>
> Hi Cy,
>
> While I certainly hear what you're saying about Van's needing to cover their
> expenses and make a fair profit, I see this situation as a different sort of
> business & customer service issue.
>
First off Ken you need to be talking to Van's BEFORE YOU start bitching
about it in public. It could jusy be a misunderstanding but now you have
800-1000 people wondering if Van's is doing the ethical thing or not.
As I said talk to Van before you start bitching in public, then if it does
not go the way you like then discuss it.
Jerry Springer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Pardue" <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
>
>
> OK...one more question for the group....Ive searched the archives on this
>one and havent found too much on it....so here goes. Im trying to decide
if
>installing an adjustable aileron trim is worth while or not. I have a QB,
so
>the aileron is built and would be quite a project to install an electric
>trim. I would consider the manual trim, but every GA aircraft that I have
>flown hasn't had or hardly used the aileron trim and even the bigger ones I
>fly at work that have aileron trim I very rarely use (unless I get a large
>fuel imbalance or when on one engine).
I can hardly imagine flying without the manual aileron trim. I use it
several times a flight; partly because having a passenger or not and fuel
imbalance makes a big difference in this airplane and partly because my
airplane is slightly out of rig so that trim changes with speed (it might
happen to you too). The great thing is this trim system is inexpensive and
elegantly simple and effective.
On an airplane with such light control forces I would hate to have to hold
even a small amount of constant stick pressure.
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP Flying
http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ted French" <ted_french(at)canada.com> |
| Subject: | Navaid install in RV-6A |
Listers
I have posted new pictures on my web page showing a slightly different
approach to installing the Navaid servo and connecting it to the controls.
See http://www3.telus.net/elfrench/rv6%20no4.html
Ted French
Prince George BC
RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Balch <kbalch1(at)mediaone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders? |
Jerry Springer wrote:
> First off Ken you need to be talking to Van's BEFORE YOU start bitching
> about it in public. It could jusy be a misunderstanding but now you have
> 800-1000 people wondering if Van's is doing the ethical thing or not.
> As I said talk to Van before you start bitching in public, then if it does
> not go the way you like then discuss it.
I really didn't think I was 'bitching', as I did make it clear that I haven't
spoken to Van's yet and don't know what they'll do. The only reason I posted on
this at all was to solicit opinions on whether I should even be questioning Van's
about the price increase, or to simply pay it. I was hoping to get some
confirmation on how reasonable it is to feel that I shouldn't have to pay for the
increase. I did that and most of the opinions I received, publicly and privately,
supported my initial feelings to varying degrees. I don't feel that a discussion
of the issues does Van's any harm at all, and anyone wondering about the outcome
will know the matter's resolution shortly after I do tomorrow.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
In a message dated 1/7/2001 7:06:29 PM Central Standard Time,
KAKlewin(at)AOL.COM writes:
> (unless I get a large
> fuel imbalance or when on one engine). So my logical conclusion is to omit
> the adjustable aileron trim and go with a small ground adjustable trim tab.
>
>
Hey Kurt,
When I first flew I had a heavy right wing and almost made the mistake of
riveting a tab to my aileron, forgetting that all I needed to do was squeeze
the trailing edge of the left aileron. With that said and the heavy wing
fixed I thought all my problems were solved, but I found that on long trips
as fuel was emptied in one tank the other wing was heavy. I installed Van's
simple aileron trim kit and the problem was solved. I think that if you plan
to installed an autopilot you may need the servo, but if not I recommend the
manual trim kit rather than the electric. Keep in mind that I like
everything manual.
Blue Skies,
Carey Mills
-4, 64hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CAGPADDLES(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Complete RV-6 Tail for Sale |
Fellow RV'ers,
I have a nearly completed -6 tail that I am offering for sale. I've decided
to switch horses and build an -8 instead. All components are complete with
the exception of fiberglass tip caps and elevator counter weights. All
skins, ribs, spars have been "Variprimed" and Vans plastic coating is still
on the skins for scratch protection. I will include all plans, drawings,
(although you will want to get updated ones from VANS) and remaining hardware.
I believe that the quality of construction is quite good but encourage any
potential buyer to see it first hand. I'm asking $1000 plus shipping if
required. Call or email me with any questions.
Jim Brown
229 Lakeside Oaks Circle
Fort Worth, TX 76135
817-237-6162
cagpaddles(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <pbesing(at)rmi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
Understand this is speaking from a builder, not a flyer. I think the
electric aileron trim tab is kind of tacky looking...really disturbs the
look of the trailing edge of the wing. From my understanding and limited
experience, these airplanes go where you put them. The standard trim is
very simple, and couldn't hurt to put it in, but don't really know how much
you would really use it. I have a Navaid wing leveler/single axis autopilot
installed, so aileron trim is not installed on mine. I feel if I am getting
to the point of trimming the ailerons, I must be cruising for long
distances, at which point the Navaid will be on.
Food for thought..
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Finish Kit (Still)
----- Original Message -----
From: <KAKlewin(at)AOL.COM>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 6:03 PM
Subject: RV-List: Aileron Trim...???
>
>
> OK...one more question for the group....Ive searched the archives on
this
> one and havent found too much on it....so here goes. Im trying to decide
if
> installing an adjustable aileron trim is worth while or not. I have a QB,
so
> the aileron is built and would be quite a project to install an electric
> trim. I would consider the manual trim, but every GA aircraft that I have
> flown hasn't had or hardly used the aileron trim and even the bigger ones
I
> fly at work that have aileron trim I very rarely use (unless I get a large
> fuel imbalance or when on one engine). So my logical conclusion is to
omit
> the adjustable aileron trim and go with a small ground adjustable trim
tab.
> So those of you with flying RVs with aileron trim do you use it much? Do
you
> think a ground adjustable tab is good enough?? Thanks again for the
> knowledge....
>
> Kurt in OKC
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bmaynard507(at)cs.com |
Well, its time to paint the airplane. I was planning on doing it myself, but
circumstance have change. I now have a local professional doing it.
Therefore the HVLP and Respirator system I had purchased is no longer needed.
I place the Web Page address below showing the product. I will let it go
for $825.00. It has the Gravity Feed pressure spray gun paint container. It
has never been used. Still in the Box.
I will soon give details on my first flight. Still Collecting data.
http://www.axispro.com/citation_split.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Ervin <bjervin(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Speaking of Aileron trim ??? |
Has anyone seen plans or info on a built in aileron trim tab. What I
mean by built in is similar to the elevator trim tab, not just an add on
tab riveted to the trailing edge.
I've only seen this on a couple of RVs and it looks alot better than
vans tab. A bit more work maybe, but it looks good and no one would bump
it (read: put a gash in their leg) at airshows. Not that the looky-loos
would ever do anything like that.
Bill
RV-6 Fus
Spokane Wa
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
-----Original Message-----
From: KAKlewin(at)AOL.COM <KAKlewin(at)AOL.COM>
Date: Sunday, January 07, 2001 7:27 PM
Subject: RV-List: Aileron Trim...???
>So those of you with flying RVs with aileron trim do you use it much? Do
you
>think a ground adjustable tab is good enough?? Thanks again for the
>knowledge....
>
> Kurt in OKC
In my limited experience with my 6A, I use the manual aileron trim about
once every 15 minutes and the electric elevator trim about once every 3
minutes during straight and level flight.
Dennis Persyk 6A N600DP 26 hours
Hampshire, IL C38
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ted French" <ted_french(at)canada.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
You do need aileron trim for the many small adjustments required as you burn
off fuel, or fly with a passenger or not. Simple to install, inexpensive,
and foolproof.
Ted French
Prince George BC
RV-6A
http://www3.telus.net/elfrench/aircraft.html
----- Original Message -----
From: <KAKlewin(at)AOL.COM>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 5:03 PM
Subject: RV-List: Aileron Trim...???
>
>
> OK...one more question for the group....Ive searched the archives on
this
> one and havent found too much on it....so here goes. Im trying to decide
if
> installing an adjustable aileron trim is worth while or not. I have a QB,
so
> the aileron is built and would be quite a project to install an electric
> trim. I would consider the manual trim, but every GA aircraft that I have
> flown hasn't had or hardly used the aileron trim and even the bigger ones
I
> fly at work that have aileron trim I very rarely use (unless I get a large
> fuel imbalance or when on one engine). So my logical conclusion is to
omit
> the adjustable aileron trim and go with a small ground adjustable trim
tab.
> So those of you with flying RVs with aileron trim do you use it much? Do
you
> think a ground adjustable tab is good enough?? Thanks again for the
> knowledge....
>
> Kurt in OKC
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wvu(at)mail.ameritel.net |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
Kurt,
I don't have any aeileron trim on my -6 and it has not been quite a problem,
even on long trips. I find it a good reminder to check the fuel level and
switch tanks. I can almost do it by the increasing feel of force to hold
the wings level. My hand is approx. half way down the stick and it never
takes more than 2 or 3 finger tips to hold her level. Now, having to keep
readjusting the trim as you burn down fuel will remind you to do the same.
It's a toss up in my opinion. Please takeit for what it's worth. Good luck.
Anh
N985VU
Maryland
>
>
> OK...one more question for the group....Ive searched the archives on this
>one and havent found too much on it....so here goes. Im trying to decide if
>installing an adjustable aileron trim is worth while or not. I have a QB, so
>the aileron is built and would be quite a project to install an electric
>trim. I would consider the manual trim, but every GA aircraft that I have
>flown hasn't had or hardly used the aileron trim and even the bigger ones I
>fly at work that have aileron trim I very rarely use (unless I get a large
>fuel imbalance or when on one engine). So my logical conclusion is to omit
>the adjustable aileron trim and go with a small ground adjustable trim tab.
>So those of you with flying RVs with aileron trim do you use it much? Do you
>think a ground adjustable tab is good enough?? Thanks again for the
>knowledge....
>
> Kurt in OKC
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Harvey Sigmon" <flyhars(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
Paul and Kurt: As other listers have discussed, the manual aileron trim
will almost become a must item after you fly the RV. You might not think
so now, but the trim changes all the time and the auto pilot tracks a lot
better if the trim is adjusted from time to time to take the pressure away
from the stick. My view only from my last RV-6 experience.
Harvey Sigmon RV-6AQB -Finishing stuff.
> [Original Message]
> From: Paul Besing <pbesing(at)rmi.net>
> To:
> Date: 1/7/01 10:04:39 PM
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Aileron Trim...???
>
>
> Understand this is speaking from a builder, not a flyer. I think the
> electric aileron trim tab is kind of tacky looking...really disturbs the
> look of the trailing edge of the wing. From my understanding and limited
> experience, these airplanes go where you put them. The standard trim is
> very simple, and couldn't hurt to put it in, but don't really know how
much
> you would really use it. I have a Navaid wing leveler/single axis
autopilot
> installed, so aileron trim is not installed on mine. I feel if I am
getting
> to the point of trimming the ailerons, I must be cruising for long
> distances, at which point the Navaid will be on.
>
> Food for thought..
>
> Paul Besing
> RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
> http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
> Finish Kit (Still)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <KAKlewin(at)AOL.COM>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 6:03 PM
> Subject: RV-List: Aileron Trim...???
>
>
> >
> >
> > OK...one more question for the group....Ive searched the archives on
> this
> > one and havent found too much on it....so here goes. Im trying to
decide
> if
> > installing an adjustable aileron trim is worth while or not. I have a
QB,
> so
> > the aileron is built and would be quite a project to install an electric
> > trim. I would consider the manual trim, but every GA aircraft that I
have
> > flown hasn't had or hardly used the aileron trim and even the bigger
ones
> I
> > fly at work that have aileron trim I very rarely use (unless I get a
large
> > fuel imbalance or when on one engine). So my logical conclusion is to
> omit
> > the adjustable aileron trim and go with a small ground adjustable trim
> tab.
> > So those of you with flying RVs with aileron trim do you use it much?
Do
> you
> > think a ground adjustable tab is good enough?? Thanks again for the
> > knowledge....
> >
> > Kurt in OKC
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
--- Harvey Sigmon
--- flyhars(at)earthlink.net
--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
> I think the
> electric aileron trim tab is kind of tacky looking...
This bothered me also but I wanted electric trim. My solution was to
install the manual trim and then hook it up to a MAC-8 servo located under
the passenger seat. The Mac is nutplated to an aluminum plate that rests
between the rib and floor. You will either have to fit a spacer or modify
the ribs between it and the manual trim mechanism to give the push rod a
straight shot.
Ross
6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Nellis" <mnellis(at)emailusa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Speaking of Aileron trim ??? |
Bill, I will be attempting exactly what you're talking about. I'm taking
my inspiration from Dick Martins RV8. I'll be going off of memory and I'll
document it on my web site. Click here for a picture of Dicks setup.
http://mnellis.jnet.net/rv-6_page/images/DCP00968.JPG
Mike Nellis - RV-6 N699BM (res)
Plainfield, IL
Building Tanks
http://mnellis.jnet.net/rv-6_page
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Ervin" <bjervin(at)home.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 9:50 PM
Subject: RV-List: Speaking of Aileron trim ???
>
> Has anyone seen plans or info on a built in aileron trim tab. What I
> mean by built in is similar to the elevator trim tab, not just an add on
> tab riveted to the trailing edge.
>
> I've only seen this on a couple of RVs and it looks alot better than
> vans tab. A bit more work maybe, but it looks good and no one would bump
> it (read: put a gash in their leg) at airshows. Not that the looky-loos
> would ever do anything like that.
>
> Bill
> RV-6 Fus
> Spokane Wa
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
Paul Besing wrote:
>
>
> Understand this is speaking from a builder, not a flyer. I think the
> electric aileron trim tab is kind of tacky looking...really disturbs the
> look of the trailing edge of the wing. From my understanding and limited
> experience, these airplanes go where you put them. The standard trim is
> very simple, and couldn't hurt to put it in, but don't really know how much
> you would really use it. I have a Navaid wing leveler/single axis autopilot
> installed, so aileron trim is not installed on mine. I feel if I am getting
> to the point of trimming the ailerons, I must be cruising for long
> distances, at which point the Navaid will be on.
>
> Food for thought..
>
> Paul Besing
> RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
> http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
> Finish Kit (Still)
My RV-6 has both a Navaid autopilot and the manual aileron trim system.
After 225 hrs, both units have proven to be very valuable.
Yes, the Navaid will hold an out-of-trim plane level. However, most of
us choose not to land with the Navaid engaged! I am VERY picky about
having the plane properly trimmed while in the landing pattern, to the
point where if the controls are released at any time (except the landing
flare) the plane will continue to fly straight and at the proper descent
rate. If I get distracted somehow in the pattern, the last thing I want
is a sensitive RV-6 rolling into a turn while my attention is directed
elsewhere.
The Navaid in my plane works beautifully in calm air and very light
turbulence. Anything heavier, and I can fly the plane smoother than the
Navaid. This means that large portions of a long trip might require
hand-flying the plane, and an out-of-trim plane is just more hassle than
we should have to endure. The aileron trim systems (manual or electric,
but I prefer the manual) make the RV-6 much more enjoyable, and safer.
I recommend that all builders install an aileron trim of some sort on
their RVs. This is much more of an issue on our planes than on a 172 or
Warrior.
Sam Buchanan
===============
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Aileron Trim...??? |
Thread-Topic: RV-List: Aileron Trim...???
Thread-Index: AcB5HSNQt+0vEPVlQCe+bpbHbjaG9AACQahQ
| From: | "Bob Japundza" <Bob.Japundza(at)realmed.com> |
I wouldn't go without aileron trim for the same reasons Larry mentions.
On occasions where you have a fuel imbalance without a passenger, the
aileron trim can make a world of difference; also it's rather annoying
to have to maintain constant pressure in one direction when you can be
flying with just your fingertips. Tweak that baby. Lets say you have a
heavy right wing and you're flying on a cross-country and you have to
unfold a map with both hands...the airplane can change course pretty
quickly when out of trim. With the aileron trim I can let go of the
stick and not worry about looking up and being in a steep bank. The
navaid a/p will also take care of this for you, but I like flying my
plane so much that I'm reluctant to hand it over to anyone else, man or
machine :).
Bob Japundza
RV-6 N244BJ O-360C/S
Flew yesterday with a friend in a Cherokee 180. Not used to a takeoff
roll without a shove back in the seat with the required big grin going
on anymore. Maybe I'm just a spoiled baby....
> I can hardly imagine flying without the manual aileron trim. I use it
> several times a flight; partly because having a passenger or
> not and fuel
> imbalance makes a big difference in this airplane and partly
> because my
> airplane is slightly out of rig so that trim changes with
> speed (it might
> happen to you too). The great thing is this trim system is
> inexpensive and
> elegantly simple and effective.
>
> On an airplane with such light control forces I would hate to
> have to hold
> even a small amount of constant stick pressure.
>
> Larry Pardue
> Carlsbad, NM
>
> RV-6 N441LP Flying
> http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
In a message dated 1/7/01 7:08:04 PM Pacific Standard Time,
dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
<< In my limited experience with my 6A, I use the manual aileron trim about
once every 15 minutes and the electric elevator trim about once every 3
minutes during straight and level flight. >>
By contrast, I use electric aileron trim about once every 5 minutes at
straight and level cruise (O-360 sucks a little more fuel) and the elevator
trim about once every 15 minutes. I have coolie hat switch on the stick so
it's very convenient, and I do it automatically without much thought.
-GV (RV-6A N1GV)
vanremog(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Speaking of Aileron trim ??? |
In a message dated 1/7/01 6:50:41 PM Pacific Standard Time, bjervin(at)home.com
writes:
<< Has anyone seen plans or info on a built in aileron trim tab. What I
mean by built in is similar to the elevator trim tab, not just an add on
tab riveted to the trailing edge. >>
Rich Hansen did this on his award winning 6A so you may be able to get in
touch with him at .
-GV (RV-6A N1GV)
vanremog(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
In a message dated 1/7/01 6:43:55 PM Pacific Standard Time, pbesing(at)rmi.net
writes:
<< From my understanding and limited
experience, these airplanes go where you put them. The standard trim is
very simple, and couldn't hurt to put it in, but don't really know how much
you would really use it. I have a Navaid wing leveler/single axis autopilot
installed, so aileron trim is not installed on mine. I feel if I am getting
to the point of trimming the ailerons, I must be cruising for long
distances, at which point the Navaid will be on. >>
Actually they go where you "wish" them to.
IMO you will use trim all of the time (due to fuel consumption -- SBS is
worse as the moment arm is longer) and you will enjoy flying your RV so much
that you will want to hand fly it virtually all of the time (regardless of
whether or not you have a wing leveler).
-GV (RV-6A N1GV)
vanremog(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KAKlewin(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
OK Im sold....going to get the manual trim....thanks guys for all the
input....that is exactly what I wanted....some good solid info. Thanks for
the help. What would I do without the list???
Kurt in OKC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gordon Robertson <gordon(at)safemail.com> |
| Subject: | RV-8 NASA cooling duct |
Hello folks,
This is a question to those RV-8 standard builders who have been here
before me. I am about to close out the right wing, and the
instructions tell me that the NASA cooling duct should be attached to
the lower inboard skin before closing. But I do not have the duct in
the kit, and I have heard somewhere that the duct is in the fuselage
kit.
Is this true? If so, can the duct be attached by reaching in through
the wing rib holes?
Thanks for info.
Gordon Robertson
RV8 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "skybolt-aviator" <skybolt-aviator(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
----- Original Message -----
From: <KAKlewin(at)AOL.COM>
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 8:03 PM
Subject: RV-List: Aileron Trim...???
Hi Kurt---I have the manual trim in 6A and use it all the time.I think
because of light wt of rv it is more sensitive to wt shift.(pass or no
pass,fuel unbalance).Besides the manual trim is so simple to install and it
works.
Ollie&Lorene Washburn
RV6-A,N795LW,@FD77.
O-360,180HP,C/S,300+hrs.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Hatwell <RV8OR(at)overvne.demon.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Pacesetter Propellers |
Listers
Does anyone know the telephone number of Pacesetter Propellers in
Hillsboro Oregon
Thanks
RV8 80274
--
Rob Hatwell
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Douglas G. Murray" <dgmurray(at)telusplanet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders? |
Ken -
I have been biting my tongue on this one but feel that I must comment on
your last posting. I have been in business for almost 30 years and even
though I am 'just a business', I know that I appreciate a customer who comes
directly to me about a difficulty rather than 'test the water' with all my
customers first. Even though the subject matter may be of little consequence
to me I feel that it shows a definate level of respect and maturity from my
costomer to deal one on one with me to resolve any differences of opinion. I
know that Vans' is not a 'sacred cow' but as an honest business man he ought
to be shown the respect that all businesses deserve.
I would recommend that you personally call Van and resolve your
question in private.
Douglas G. Murray
Southern Alberta
> I did think before posting my original message. I thought I'd seek the
> opinions of my community on a matter that concerned me and, by extension,
> possibly some of them. I refuse to believe that even the suggestion that
> Van's MIGHT do something wrong (but very well might not) does them any
> harm, or that free discussion of any issues in an open forum does any
> harm to anyone. I think that some of us need to take a deep breath and
> try to keep in perspective the fact that Van's is just a business that we
> all patronize (however much we enjoy the product and respect the founder)
> and not some sacred cow beyond even the possibility of reproach.
>
> Ken Balch
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "skybolt-aviator" <skybolt-aviator(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Besing" <pbesing(at)rmi.net>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <KAKlewin(at)AOL.COM>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 6:03 PM
> Subject: RV-List: Aileron Trim...???
>
> If the airplane is not in trim the autopilot will be under load all the
time.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 NASA cooling duct |
Gordon
Yes, the NACA ducts come with the fuselage kit. They can be installed
after closing the wing. Simply coat the flange with ProSeal and install
through the forward most lightening hole in the main ribs.
Charlie Kuss
>
> Hello folks,
>
> This is a question to those RV-8 standard builders who have been here
> before me. I am about to close out the right wing, and the
> instructions tell me that the NASA cooling duct should be attached to
> the lower inboard skin before closing. But I do not have the duct in
> the kit, and I have heard somewhere that the duct is in the fuselage
> kit.
>
> Is this true? If so, can the duct be attached by reaching in through
> the wing rib holes?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Di Meo" <bdimeo(at)mediaone.net> |
| Subject: | RV-8 NASA cooling duct |
Gordon,
The duct comes with the fuselage kit. It's easy enough to put it in with
the wing assembled. I used Proseal as recommended in the directions. I had
the wing on a table, put Proseal on the duct and reached in through the
lightening holes in the rib to put it in place.
Bob
RV8#423 Working on fuselage bulkheads
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Gordon Robertson
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 8:46 AM
Subject: RV-List: RV-8 NASA cooling duct
Hello folks,
This is a question to those RV-8 standard builders who have been here
before me. I am about to close out the right wing, and the
instructions tell me that the NASA cooling duct should be attached to
the lower inboard skin before closing. But I do not have the duct in
the kit, and I have heard somewhere that the duct is in the fuselage
kit.
Is this true? If so, can the duct be attached by reaching in through
the wing rib holes?
Thanks for info.
Gordon Robertson
RV8 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com> |
| Subject: | 2001 price increases for 2000 orders? |
He has every right to discuss this issue in this forum. Quit *your*
bitching.
--
Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA
Network Adminstrator
Union Safe Deposit Bank
209-946-5116
"Fear of failure is only for the weak and arrogant,
for those who foolishly think that somehow they
can achieve success without paying the price."
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Springer [mailto:jsflyrv(at)teleport.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 5:10 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: 2001 price increases for 2000 orders?
Ken Balch wrote:
>
>
> Hi Cy,
>
> While I certainly hear what you're saying about Van's needing to cover
their
> expenses and make a fair profit, I see this situation as a different sort
of
> business & customer service issue.
>
First off Ken you need to be talking to Van's BEFORE YOU start bitching
about it in public. It could jusy be a misunderstanding but now you have
800-1000 people wondering if Van's is doing the ethical thing or not.
As I said talk to Van before you start bitching in public, then if it does
not go the way you like then discuss it.
Jerry Springer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John B. Abell" <jbabell(at)mediaone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
I installed the manual aileron trim kit because the electrical version was so
"Rube Goldberg," but modified it to be servo-driven. I operate it with a coolie
hat on my stick grip. I use it routinely and wouldn't be without it.
Best wishes,
Jack Abell
KAKlewin(at)AOL.COM wrote:
>
> OK...one more question for the group....Ive searched the archives on this
> one and havent found too much on it....so here goes. Im trying to decide if
> installing an adjustable aileron trim is worth while or not. I have a QB, so
> the aileron is built and would be quite a project to install an electric
> trim. I would consider the manual trim, but every GA aircraft that I have
> flown hasn't had or hardly used the aileron trim and even the bigger ones I
> fly at work that have aileron trim I very rarely use (unless I get a large
> fuel imbalance or when on one engine). So my logical conclusion is to omit
> the adjustable aileron trim and go with a small ground adjustable trim tab.
> So those of you with flying RVs with aileron trim do you use it much? Do you
> think a ground adjustable tab is good enough?? Thanks again for the
> knowledge....
>
> Kurt in OKC
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Zercher" <ez(at)sensenich.com> |
| Subject: | 2001 price increases for 2000 orders? |
Ken and all,
I usually don't get into these but since there has been so much debate and
since it is a prop matter....
The situation is very unfortunate; however it does come down to a decision
from the manufacturer not Vans. When price increases come along, a
manufacturer has the decision when to make it effective. Some increases are
based on time of order. Other manufacturers say the increase takes effect at
time of shipment, no matter when it was ordered, which is obviously the case
here. Did Vans' know this in September? Probably not. Most price increases
are released in December.
I would suggest expressing your displeasure to the manufacturer. We make
the rules that Vans must follow.
Ed Zercher
Sensenich Propeller Manufacturing Company
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Balch <kbalch1(at)mediaone.net> |
| Subject: | 2001 price increase update |
The bottom line is that Van's is standing pat on the 2001 price. I
discussed this with Barbara for about ten minutes and then caved.
In their favor was the single (entirely unnoticed on my part),
handwritten line on my order confirmation: 'subject to 2001 pricing'.
In my favor was the fact that this wasn't made known to me
(notwithstanding the inconspicuousness of the 'notice') until after
they'd accepted full payment based on their advertised price.
I still think I'm right about this one, but I can see that I'm not going
to get anywhere arguing with Van's about it and I still need the prop.
I don't see any practical options at all other than to pay them the
$200. I'll leave it to others to debate the questionable ethics
involved here.
Thanks to all those who took my initial inquiry in the spirit in which
it was intended and offered useful and supportive commentary.
--
Regards,
Ken Balch
Ashland, MA
RV-8 #81125 (N118KB)
forward baggage door
www.egroups.com/files/bostonrvbuilders
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Manual to electric Trim Picture |
>Hey Ross, do you have a picture of your setup that you could share?
>Eric
No, not really. It would be difficult to get a picture of it installed
because it is hidden under a mounting plate. A picture of it uninstalled
would just show a MAC-8 Servo mounted on a plate using #8 flush screws. The
installation is straight forward. First install the manual trim. The
manual trim handle can either be left as is to serve as a visual indicator
or can be cut off. The Mac-8 is mounted on a plate that is wide enough to
span the sloping section of the passenger seat. I am nutplating my whole
floor so the plate the Mac unit is on is sandwiched between the rib and
floor pan with a hole pattern identical to 4 screws on the floor, two on
each side. The placement of the Mac on the plate is dictated by the length
of the control arm. I ran the Mac to the neutral position and attached the
clevis end of the control arm to the manual trim mechanism. I wanted the
maximum throw so I put the clevis as far from the springs of the manual trim
as possible. Some filing of the clevis was necessary to assure max. throw.
If the Mac is attached directly to a flat plate, the ribs between it at the
manual trim will have to be bent so the control arm does not bind. One
local builder took the other route of placing a spacer between the Mac and
the plate to lower the Mac so the control arm doesn't bind.
Ross
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: air box hose adaptor |
dear listers
i'm installing my air box, i bought the little round flange from vans to hook
up the carb heat from the exhaust system to the airbox. the round flange will
leave space for air to enter other than the heated air from the exhaust pipe.
am i supposed to block off the 2 sides of the flange? is the 2" round hole
enough air to serve the carb?
scott
tampa
rv6a finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scot Stambaugh <sstambaugh(at)qualcomm.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Paint System |
I am interested in your paint system. Can you give me more specific
information on the model number and any accessories such as half mask or
full mask, etc.
Thanks,
scot
>
>Well, its time to paint the airplane. I was planning on doing it myself, but
>circumstance have change. I now have a local professional doing it.
>Therefore the HVLP and Respirator system I had purchased is no longer needed.
> I place the Web Page address below showing the product. I will let it go
>for $825.00. It has the Gravity Feed pressure spray gun paint container. It
>has never been used. Still in the Box.
>
>I will soon give details on my first flight. Still Collecting data.
>
>
>http://www.axispro.com/citation_split.htm
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Tanner" <gtanner(at)bendcable.com> |
I'm about to order my wing kit. I'm not sure what sending units I need. I'm
leaning towards a digital display type unit and possibly a fuel management
system. My question then would be---will the capacitive style sending unit
Van's sells work with anybody's system or the EI unit only? Will I have to
decide on a system before I finish the tanks? Can I order the kit and build
it minus the tanks without any other problems before deciding? Are the
wingtips with provisions for postion lights the clear plastic lenses on the
factory demo AC? (front corners of the wingtip)
Greg Tanner
RV-9A Empennage (control surfacces)
SER #90186 N80BR RESERVED
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Andair gascolator in wing root |
Has anyone out there located an Andair gascolator in the wing root area on a
6 or 6A and if so can you tell me if there is any problem getting at the
locking ring to remove the bowl to clean the screen. It seems to me just
eyeballing that it might be difficult to reach in there to unscrew the
locking ring (I don't have my Andair yet so I'm guessing that that is how the
bowl is retained). Thanks.
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, working on slider canopy (almost finished)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <tcwatson(at)seanet.com> |
> I'm not sure what sending units I need. I'm
> leaning towards a digital display type unit and possibly a fuel management
> system. My question then would be---will the capacitive style sending unit
> Van's sells work with anybody's system or the EI unit only? Will I have to
> decide on a system before I finish the tanks? Can I order the kit and
build
> it minus the tanks without any other problems before deciding?
Greg,
The capacitive sending units are built into the tanks and must be installed
as the tanks are assembled. I don't know if anyone's guages other than EI
works with them yet. Although it should be possible to build the tanks
later, I think it would be easier to insure a good fit by doing them with
the rest of the wings.
Terry
RV-8A #80729 fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John B. Abell" <jbabell(at)mediaone.net> |
Greg,
I don't know anything about the capacitance-type senders Van sells; I installed
Vision Microsystem capacitance-type senders in my tanks. It was necessary to
install them before the tanks were finished. The probe is long; it resides in
the tank from the inboard aft corner to the upper outboard corner right behind
the fuel tank filler neck. Thus, it passes through every internal rib and must
be fitted before the aft baffle is installed. I suspect that Van's senders are
pretty much the same idea. Does this help?
Best wishes,
Jack Abell
Los Angeles
RV-6A "LOT$A JACK" N333JA Flying
Greg Tanner wrote:
>
> I'm about to order my wing kit. I'm not sure what sending units I need. I'm
> leaning towards a digital display type unit and possibly a fuel management
> system. My question then would be---will the capacitive style sending unit
> Van's sells work with anybody's system or the EI unit only? Will I have to
> decide on a system before I finish the tanks? Can I order the kit and build
> it minus the tanks without any other problems before deciding? Are the
> wingtips with provisions for postion lights the clear plastic lenses on the
> factory demo AC? (front corners of the wingtip)
>
> Greg Tanner
> RV-9A Empennage (control surfacces)
> SER #90186 N80BR RESERVED
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: air box hose adaptor |
| From: | Jim_Andrews(at)tivoli.com |
01/08/2001 01:41:22 PM
Scott,
I just finished this... No, don't block the area around the flange off.
Just leave it open. If you have a across over exhaust that entire area is
heated anyway so you will be getting the benefit of heated air no matter
what. Besides, if a two inch scat is not enough air at altitude you
probably will want the additional volume anyway.
- Jim Andrews
RV-8A ( FWF )
O-360 A1A Sensenich 85
N89JA reserved
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Lycoming O-320 Type Certificate Data Sheet E-274 |
I've looked everywhere I can think to look and still cannot find a copy of
the type certificate for Lycoming O-320 series engines. I believe it's
E-274. Can anyone help?
Bryan Jones -8 765BJ ~64-hrs
Pearland, Texas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Nellis" <mnellis(at)emailusa.net> |
There might be others, but I think the capacitative senders only work with
the EI units. The capacitative senders are built into tanks and attached to
the tank ribs so once the tanks are sealed up it's not possible to get to
them.
Mike Nellis - RV-6 N699BM (res)
Plainfield, IL
Building Tanks
http://mnellis.jnet.net/rv-6_page
>
> I'm about to order my wing kit. I'm not sure what sending units I need.
I'm
> leaning towards a digital display type unit and possibly a fuel management
> system. My question then would be---will the capacitive style sending unit
> Van's sells work with anybody's system or the EI unit only? Will I have to
> decide on a system before I finish the tanks? Can I order the kit and
build
> it minus the tanks without any other problems before deciding? Are the
> wingtips with provisions for postion lights the clear plastic lenses on
the
> factory demo AC? (front corners of the wingtip)
>
> Greg Tanner
> RV-9A Empennage (control surfacces)
> SER #90186 N80BR RESERVED
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Andair gascolator in wing root |
> Has anyone out there located an Andair gascolator in the wing root area on
a
> 6 or 6A and if so can you tell me if there is any problem getting at the
> locking ring to remove the bowl to clean the screen. It seems to me just
> eyeballing that it might be difficult to reach in there to unscrew the
> locking ring (I don't have my Andair yet so I'm guessing that that is how
the
> bowl is retained). Thanks.
I put mine in my 6A as close to the spar as I could. I will only have to
remove the upper gear leg intersection fairing to get at it. The bowl spins
off easily.
Ross
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owens, Laird" <Owens(at)aerovironment.com> |
| Subject: | Andair gascolator in wing root |
Hi Harry,
Check out:
http://members3.clubphoto.com/socal230330/RV-6_Builders_album/
I have a photo of my andair gascolator installation in the wing root. Servicing
isn't bad, but doing the safety wire is a bit of a trick, but still not too
bad.
I'd do it the same again.
No warrantee or offer of service given, price is what you pay for it, your mileage
will vary.....(jeez, some of the list has gone over the edge).
Laird Owens RV-6, N515L, 150 hrs
O-360, Sensenich (83)
Simi Valley, SoCal
Has anyone out there located an Andair gascolator in the wing root area on a
6 or 6A and if so can you tell me if there is any problem getting at the
locking ring to remove the bowl to clean the screen. It seems to me just
eyeballing that it might be difficult to reach in there to unscrew the
locking ring (I don't have my Andair yet so I'm guessing that that is how the
bowl is retained). Thanks.
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, working on slider canopy (almost finished)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Lycoming O-320 Type Certificate Data Sheet E-274 |
E-274 - AVCO Lycoming
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
E-274
Revision 15
TEXTRON Lycoming
O-320-A1A, -A1B, -A2A, -A2B, -A2C, -A2D, -A3A, -A3B,
-A3C, -B1A, -B1B, -B2A, -B2B, -B2C, -B2D, -B3A, -B3B, -B3C,
-C1A, -C1B, -C2A, -C2B, -C2C,-C3A, -C3B, -C3C,
-D1A, -D1B,-D1C, -D1D, -D1F, -D2A, -D2B, -D2C, -D2F,
-D2G, -D2H,-D2J, -D3G-E1A, -E1B,-E1C, -E1F -E1J,
-E2A, -E2B, -E2C, -E2D, -E2F, -E2G, -E2H, -E3D, -E3H,
-H1AD, -H1BD, -H2AD, -H2BD, -H3AD, -H3BD
February 19, 1998
TYPE CERTIFICATE DATA SHEET NO. E-274
Engines of models described herein conforming with this data sheet (which is
a part of type certificate No. 274) and other approved data on file with the
Federal Aviation Administration, meet the minimum standards for use in
certificated aircraft in accordance with pertinent aircraft data sheets and
applicable portions of the Civil Air Regulations/Federal Aviation
Regulations provided they are installed, operated and maintained as
prescribed by the approved manufacturer's manuals and other approved
instructions.
Type Certificate Holder
Textron Lycoming
AVCO Corporation
Williamsport, Pennsylvania 17701
Model
O-320-A1A, -A1B, -A2A, -A2B, -A2C, -A2D, -A3A, -A3B, -A3C,-C1A, -C1B, -C2A,
-C2B, -C2C,-C3A, -C3B, -C3C, -E1A, -E1B,-E1C, -E1F -E1J, -E2A, -E2B, -E2C, -
E2D, -E2F, -E2G, -E2H, -E3D, -E3H
O-320-H1AD,
-H1BD,-H2AD,
-H2BD, -H3AD,
-H3BD
O-320-B1A, -B1B,
-B2A, -B2B, -B2C,
-B2D, -B3A, -B3B,
-B3C, -D1A, -D1B,
-D1C, -D1D, -D1F,
-D2A, -D2B, -D2C,
-D2F, -D2G, -D2H,
-D2J, -D3G
Type
4H0A
- -
- -
Rating
Max. continuous, h.p. r.p.m. full throttle at:
Sea level pressure altitude
150-2700
160-2700
160-2700
Takeoff, h.p. r.p.m. full throttle at:
Sea level pressure altitude
1520-2700 (See NOTE 8)
160-2700 See NOTE 8
160-2700 (See NOTE 8)
Fuel
(Minimum grade aviation gasoline)
80/87
100 or 100LL
- -
Carburetion
Marvel-Schebler MA-4SPA
- -
- - (-B2D,-D1D-Marvel Schebler HA6)
Pressure limits
See NOTE 2
- -
- -
Pump Drive
See NOTE 3
- -
- -
Oil, Lubrication
(Lubricants should conform to the specifications as listed or to subsequent
revisions thereto)
Lycoming Specification No. 301-F
- -
- -
Oil sump capacity, Qt.
8
6
8
Usable oil sump capacity,
Qt.
6
4
6
Temperature Limits
See NOTE 1
- -
- -
Pressure Limits
See NOTE 2
- -
- -
Ignition
Dual magnetos
See NOTE 9
- -
- -
Timing BTC
25
25
25
Spark plugs
See NOTE 4
- -
- -
Compression
Bore and stroke, in.
5.125 x 3.875
- -
- -
Displacement, cu. in.
319.8
- -
- -
Compression ratio
7.00:1
9.00:1
8.50:1
Weight (dry) Lb.
See NOTE 9
- -
- -
C.G. location (dry)
From face of propeller
mounting flange, in.
14.25 14.57
14.25
14.25 14.70
Off propeller shaft C.L., in.
.97 Below .71 Below
.03 Right .12 Left
(-E2D,-E3D,-E2H,-E3H)
.97 Below
.00 (on C.L.)
.97 Below .79 Below
.03 Right .11 Left
(-B2D,-D1D)
Propeller shaft-specification A.S. 127
Integral flanged hub
SAE 2 modified
- -
- -
Crankshaft dampers
(torsional)
__
__
__
NOTES:
"- -" indicates "same as preceding model."
"__" indicates "does not apply."
Regulations & Amendments
Models
Date of Application
Date T.C. No. 274
Issued/Revised
CAR 13 effective March 5, 1952
O-320
October 13, 1952
July 28, 1953
O-320-A1A
As amended by 13- & 13-2
O-320-A2A
October 21, 1954
October 28, 1954
CAR 13 effective June 15, 1956
O-320-B1A, -B2A
May 24, 1957
July 25, 1957
As amended by 13-1 & 13-2
O-320-A1B, -A2B, -A3A, -A3B, -B1B, -B2B, -B3A, -B3B
February 1959
March 23, 1959
13-3
O-320-C2A, -C2B, -C3A, -C3B
January 18, 1960
February 11, 1960
O-320-A2C, -A3C, -B2C, -B3C
March 29, 1960
April 27, 1960
13-3
O-320-D1A, -D2A
November 1, 1961
November 30, 1961
O-320-D1B, -D2B
December 8, 1961
December 20, 1961
O-320-E1A, -E2A, -E1B, -E2B
January 26, 1962
February 15, 1962
13-4
O-320-C1A, -C1B, -C2C, -C3C
January 22, 1963
March 3, 1964
O-320-E2C
November 11, 1965
November 24, 1965
O-320-D2C
April 14, 1966
May 2, 1966
O-320-E2D
December 19, 1966
January 26, 1967
O-320-E1C
May 27, 1969
June 4, 1969
O-320-E1F, -E2F
July 24, 1970
August 3, 1970
O-320-E2G
December 11, 1970
December 23, 1970
O-320-E3D
January 26, 1971
February 3, 1971
O-320-D1F, -D2F
February 26, 1971
March 3, 1971
O-320-E2H, -E3H
July 15, 1971
July 27, 1971
O-320-D1C
September 14, 1971
September 30, 1971
O-320-A2D
March 2, 1972
March 14, 1972
O-320-D2G
March 14, 1974
March 21, 1974
O-320-D1D
March 27, 1974
May 1, 1974
O-320-E1J
January 21, 1975
January 29, 1975
O-320-H1AD, -H1BD, -H2AD, -H2BD
September 10, 1975
January 26, 1976
O-320-H3AD, -H3BD
June 1, 1976
June 4, 1976
O-320-D3G
August 11, 1976
August 23, 1976
O-320-D2H
May 17, 1977
May 20, 1977
O-320-D2J
December 28, 1978
January 4, 1979
O-320-B2D
June 11, 1992
June 25, 1992
Production basis
Production Certificate No. 3
NOTE 1.
Maximum permissible temperatures are as follows:
Cylinder head 500F (well-type thermocouple)
Cylinder barrel 325F
Oil inlet 245F
NOTE 2.
Fuel pressure limits: Minimum 0.5 p.s.i.- Maximum 8 p.s.i. For gravity feed
systems, minimum fuel pressure is 15.0 inches of gasoline differential
pressure across the fuel inlet fitting on O-320-D2J..
Oil pressure limits: (Normal operation) Minimum 55 p.s.i. - Maximum 95
p.s.i.
(Idling) 25 p.s.i.
(Starting and warm-up) Maximum 115 p.s.i.
NOTE 3.
The following accessory drive provisions are available:
O-320 Models
Accessory
All
Models
not
otherwise
Shown
-H1AD,
-H1BD,
-H3AD,
-H3BD
-A2D,
-E2D,
-E2G,
-E2H,
-E3D,
-E3H
-H2AD,
-H2BD
Rotation
facing
Drive
Pad
Speed Ratio
to
Crankshaft
Max.
Torque
(in.-lb.)
Cont. Static
Max.
Overhang
Moment
(in.-lb.)
Starter
*
*
*
*
CC
13.556:1
__ 450
150
Starter
**
**
**
**
CC
16.556:1
__ 450
150
Generator
*
__
__
__
C
1.910:1
60 120
175
Generator
**
__
__
__
C
2.500:1
60 120
175
Alternator
__
**
__
**
C
1.910:1
60 120
175
Alternator
**
*
*
*
C
3.250:1
60 120
175
Vacuum Pump
*
__
*
__
CC
1.300:1
70 450
25
Vacuum Pump
__
*
__
**
CC
1.313:1
70 450
25
Hydraulic Pump
__
__
__
__
C
1.300:1
100 800
40
Tachometer
*
*
*
*
C
.500:1
7 50
5
Prop. governor
__
__
__
__
C
.895:1
125 1200
40
Prop. governor
*
__
__
__
C
.886:1
125 1200
40
Fuel Pump (Plunger)
**
**
*
**
__
.500:1
__ __
10
Fuel Pump
**
**
__
**
CC
1.000:1
25 450
25
Optional Dual Drive Mounting on Vacuum Pump Drive Pad
Vacuum Pump
**
__
__
__
CC
1.300:1
70 450
6
Hydraulic Pump
**
__
__
__
CC
1.300:1
Total Total
10
or
Vacuum Pump
**
__
__
__
CC
1.300:1
70 450
6
Vacuum Pump
__
**
__
**
CC
1.313:1
70 450
6
Prop. Governor
**
__
__
__
CC
1.300:1
Total Total
10
Prop. Governor
__
**
__
**
C
1.000:1
125 1200
40
"__" Does not apply *Standard **Optional
"C"Clockwise "CC" Counter Clockwise
Accessory
-B2D
-D1C
-D1D
-D1F
-E1E
-E1J
-D2F
-E2F
-D2G
-D2H
-D3G
-D2J
Rotation
facing
Drive
Pad
Speed Ratio
to
Crank shaft
Max. Torque
(in.-lb.)
Cont. Static
Max. Overhang
Moment
(in.-lb.)
Starter
*
*
*
*
*
CC
13.556:1
__ 450
150
Starter
**
**
**
**
**
CC
16.556:1
__ 450
150
Generator
__
__
__
__
__
C
1.910:1
60 120
175
Generator
__
__
__
__
__
C
2.500:1
60 120
175
Alternator
__
__
__
__
__
C
1.910:1
60 120
175
Alternator
*
*
*
*
*
C
3.250:1
60 120
175
Vacuum Pump
**
**
**
*
*
CC
1.300:1
70 450
25
Vacuum Pump
__
__
__
__
__
C
1.910:1
60 120
175
Hydraulic Pump
__
*
**
__
__
C
1.300:1
100 800
40
Tachometer
*
*
*
*
*
C
.500:1
7 50
5
Prop. governor
__
*
__
__
__
C
.895:1
125 200
40
Prop. governor
*
__
__
__
__
C
.866.1
125 1200
40
Fuel Pump (Plunger)
*
**
*
*
__
__
.500:1
__ __
10
Fuel Pump
__
__
__
__
__
CC
1.000:1
25 450
25
Optional Dual Drive Mounting on Vacuum Pump Drive Pad
Vacuum Pump
**
__
__
**
**
CC
1.300:1
70 450
6
Hydraulic Pump
**
__
__
**
**
CC
1:300:1
Total Total
10
or
Vacuum Pump
**
__
__
**
**
CC
1:300:1
70 450
6
Vacuum Pump
__
__
__
__
__
CC
1.313:1
70 450
6
Prop. Governor
**
__
__
__
**
CC
1.300:1
Total Total
10
Prop. Governor
__
__
__
__
__
C
1:000:1
125 1200
40
"__" Does not apply *Standard **Optional
"C"Clockwise "CC" Counter Clockwise
NOTE 4.
Spark plugs approved for use on these engines are listed in the latest
revision of Textron Lycoming Service Instruction No. 1042.
NOTE 5.
The above models incorporate additional characteristics as follows:
O-320 Models
Characteristics
O-320
Basic model - four cylinder, horizontally opposed air cooled, direct drive
with automotive type generator and starter, provides for single acting
controllable pitch propeller.
O-320-A1A
Same as O-320, model designation change only.
O-320-B1A
Same as O-320-A1A except for compression ratio, fuel grade and rating.
O-320-A1B, -B1B
Same as O-320-A1A and -B1A respectively except have straight bore carburetor
riser.
O-320-A2A, -A2B,
and -B2A, -B2B
Same as O-320-A1A, -A1B, -B1A and B1B respectively except have not
provisions for controllable pitch propellers.
O-320-A2D
Same as O-320-E3D except crankcase machined for conical instead of Dynafocal
mounts.
O-320-A3A, -A3B,
-B3A, and -B3B
Same as O-320-A1A, -A1B, -B1A, and -B1B respectively except have provisions
for 7/16" propeller attaching bolts.
O-320-A2C, -A3C
Same as O-320-A2B and -A3B respectively, except for magnetos.
O-320-B2C, -B3C
Same as O-320-B2B and B3B respectively, except for magnetos.
O-320-B2D
Same as O-320-D1D except conical engine mounts and no prop governor
O-320-C2A, -C2B,
-C3A, -C3B
Same as O-320-B2A, -B2B, -B3A and B3B respectively, except have O-320-A
series, low compression pistons, reduced ratings and lower grade fuel
requirements.
O-320-C1A, -C1B,
-C2C, -C3C
Same as O-320-B1A, -B1B, -B2C, -B3C respectively, except have been converted
to low compression pistons.
O-320-D1A
Same as O-320-B3B except has provisions for dynafocal mounts.
O-320-D1E, -D2B
Same as O-320-D1A and -D2A receptively, except for magnetos.
O-320-D1C
Identical to O-320-D2C except has provision for controllable pitch
propellers.
O-320-D1D
Similar to O-320-D1A except incorporates Slick instead of Bendix magnetos
and has a horizontal carburetor and induction housing
O-320-D1F
Identical to O-320-E1F except is equipped with high compression pistons and
has higher H.P. rating.
O-320-D2A
Same as O-320-D1A except has no provisions for controllable pitch propellers
O-320-D2C
Similar to model O-320-D2A except for magnetos.
O-320-D2F
Similar to O-320-D1F but does not have provisions for controllable pitch
propeller.
O-320-D2G
Identical to O-320-D2A except incorporates Slick instead of Bendix magnetos
and 7/16 instead of 3/8 prop. flange bolts.
O-320-D2H
Same as D2G except has O-320-B sump and intake pipes and provision for AC
type fuel pump.
O-320-D2J
Similar to O-320-D2G except is equipped with two Slick impulse coupling
magnetos and the prop. governor pad, fuel pump and governor pads on
accessory housing are not machined.
O-320-D3G
Same as D2G except has 3/8 in prop. attaching bolts.
O-320-E1A, -E2A
Same as O-320-D1A and -D2A respectively, except have lower compression ratio
and performance.
O-320-E1B, -E2B
Same as O-320-E1A and -E2A respectively except for magnetos.
O-320-E1C, -E2C
Same as O-320-E1A and -E2A respectively except have 1200 series magnetos.
O-320-E1F
Similar to O-320-E1C except has propeller governor drive located on left
front of crankcase instead of on the accessory housing.
O-320-E1J
Same as O-320-E1F except is equipped with Slick magnetos.
O-320-E2D
Similar to O-320-E2A except has no provisions for controllable pitch
propeller.
O-320-E2F
Identical to O-320-E1F including provisions for propeller governing but does
not contain propeller governor drive gears.
O-320-E2G
Similar to O-320-E2D except is equipped with O-320-A series sump and intake
pipes.
O-320-E2H
Identical to O-320-E2D except incorporates Bendix instead of Slick magnetos.
O-320-E3D
Identical to O-320-E2D except has provisions for .375 in. propeller flange
bolts instead of .4375 in. flange bolts.
O-320-E3H
Identical to O-320-E2H except has .375 in. propeller flange bushings instead
of .4375 in. flange bushings.
O-320-H1AD
Integral accessory section crankcase, front mounted fuel pump external
mounted oil pump and D4RN-2O21 impulse coupling dual magneto.
O-320-H2AD
Same as -H1AD but with fixed pitch propeller.
O-320-H3AD
Same as -H2AD but with 3/8 in. instead of 7/16 in. propeller flange bolts.
O-320-H1BD
Same as -H1AD but with D4RN-2200 retard breaker dual magneto.
O-320-H2BD
Same as -H2AD but with D4RN-2200 retard breaker dual magneto.
O-320-H3BD
Same as -H3AD but with D4RN-2200 retard breaker magneto.
NOTE 6.
These engines incorporate provisions for absorbing propeller thrust in both
tractor and pusher type installations.
NOTE 7.
These engines are approved for horizontal helicopter application and
operation.
NOTE 8.
The O-320-E2A and -E2C have alternate rating of 140 hp. @ 2450 r.p.m., the
O-320-D series have alternate ratings of 150 hp at 2500 r.p.m. and 155 hp.
at 2600 r.p.m.; the O-320-H series have an alternate rating of 150 h.p. at
2600 r.p.m.
NOTE 9.
O-320- Weight (dry) and ignition, dual.
Models
Weight Lb.
Magnetos*
-A1A, -A1B, -A2A-A2B,-A3A, -A3B
244
S4LN21, S4LN20 ( TCM)+
-A2D
249
4251, 4250 (Slick)
-A2C, -A3C
243
S4LN-200, S4LN-204 ( TCM)
-B1A, -B1B, -B2A
250
S4LN-21, S4LN-20 ( TCM)
-B2B, -B3A, -B3B
250
S4LN-21, S4LN-29 ( TCM)
-B2C, -B3C
249
S4LN-200, S4LN-204 ( TCM)
-B2D
283
4373, 4370 (Slick)
-C1A, -C1B, -C2A
250
S4LN-21, S4LN-20 ( TCM)
-C2B, -C3A, -C3B
250
S4LN-21, S4LN-20 ( TCM)
-C2C, -C3C
249
S4LN-200, S4LN-204 ( TCM)
-D1A, -D2A
255
S4LN-21, S4LN-20 ( TCM)
-D1B, -D2B
254
S4LN-200, S4LN-204 ( TCM)
-D1C, -D2C
256
24LN-1227, SRLN-1209 ( TCM)
-D1D
253
4251, 4250 (Slick)
-D1F, -D2F
255
S4LN-1227, S4LN-1209 ( TCM)
-D2G
251
4251, 4250 (Slick)
-E1A, -E2A
244
S4LN-21, S4LN-20 ( TCM)
-E1B, -E2B
243
S4LN-200, S4LN-204 ( TCM)
-E1C, -E2C
245
S4LN-1227, S4LN-1209 ( TCM)
-E1F, -E2F
248
S4LN-1227, S4LN-1209 (TCM)
-E2D
249
4251, 4250 (Slick)
-E2G
249
4251, 4250 (Slick)
-E2H
252
S4LN-21, SRLN-20 ( TCM)
-E3D
249
4250, 4251 (Slick)
-E3H
252
S4LN-21, S4LN-20 ( TCM)
-E1J
245
4251, 4250 (Slick)
-D2H
251
4251, 4250 (Slick)
-D2J
255
(2) 4251 (Slick)
-D3G
251
4251, 4250 (Slick)
-H1AD
253
D4RN-2021 ( TCM)
-H2AD
253
D4RN-2021 ( TCM)
-H3AD
253
D4RN-2021 ( TCM)
-H1BD
253
D4RN-2200 ( TCM)
-H2BD
253
D4RN-2200 ( TCM)
-H3BD
253
D4RN-2200 ( TCM)
* For alternate magnetos see latest revision of TEXTRON Lycoming Service
Instruction 1443
+ TCM formally Bendix
NOTE 10.
All models equipped with one impulse coupling magneto may use two impulse
coupling magnetos as optional equipment. Starters, generators and
alternators approved for use on the engines are listed in the latest
revision of TEXTRON Lycoming Instruction No. 1154.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jones, Bryan D." <bryan.jones@lyondell-citgo.com>
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 2:16 PM
Subject: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Type Certificate Data Sheet E-274
<bryan.jones@lyondell-citgo.com>
>
> I've looked everywhere I can think to look and still cannot find a copy of
> the type certificate for Lycoming O-320 series engines. I believe it's
> E-274. Can anyone help?
>
> Bryan Jones -8 765BJ ~64-hrs
> Pearland, Texas
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Caldwell" <racaldwell(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Andair gascolator in wing root |
Harry,
I have the Andair gascolator in the right wing root on my -6. The
Push-to-Drain is sticking thru the bottom of the wing root fairing. I have
no problem removing the bowl and safetying it back on. Its a tight fit with
the hands but I can do it with no problem. I have also proven it does catch
water in this location, along with a lot of small crud from the tanks, i.e.
the small grass, dirt, etc. that is down in the groove around the fuel caps
when I remove them.
Rick Caldwell
-6 184 hrs Doing the annual condition inspection.
Melbourne, FL
>From: HCRV6(at)AOL.COM
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: Andair gascolator in wing root
>Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 14:08:04 EST
>
>
>Has anyone out there located an Andair gascolator in the wing root area on
>a
>6 or 6A and if so can you tell me if there is any problem getting at the
>locking ring to remove the bowl to clean the screen. It seems to me just
>eyeballing that it might be difficult to reach in there to unscrew the
>locking ring (I don't have my Andair yet so I'm guessing that that is how
>the
>bowl is retained). Thanks.
>
>Harry Crosby
>Pleasanton, California
>RV-6, working on slider canopy (almost finished)
>
>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matthew Gelber <mgelber(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | RV-8 NASA cooling duct |
Gordon-
The duct parts do come with the fuse... it was very easy to attach the scoop
using ProSeal after the wing is all built. Just did it a few (has it really
been months?) ago.
Matthew
-8A fuse (aligning and measuring and aligning and measuring)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Gordon Robertson
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 5:46 AM
Subject: RV-List: RV-8 NASA cooling duct
Hello folks,
This is a question to those RV-8 standard builders who have been here
before me. I am about to close out the right wing, and the
instructions tell me that the NASA cooling duct should be attached to
the lower inboard skin before closing. But I do not have the duct in
the kit, and I have heard somewhere that the duct is in the fuselage
kit.
Is this true? If so, can the duct be attached by reaching in through
the wing rib holes?
Thanks for info.
Gordon Robertson
RV8 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Myths For The Last Millennium-maneuvering speed |
Something's not right about the FAA's determination that maneouvring speed
isn't affected by VGs. Maneouvring speed is simply Vs*F
0.5 where F is
the maximum load factor. It as to go down as Vs goes down.
Someone made a distinction between maneouvring speed and corner speed.
I've always understood them to be the same thing (or rather, two different
"things" but the same speed). Can anyone clarify this?
Tedd McHenry
Van's Air Force
Western Canada Wing
tedd(at)vansairforce.org
http://www.vansairforce.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Shook" <billshook(at)mindspring.com> |
Anyone put the AOA system by Proprietary software systems in their aircraft
yet? Do you put it in while you are building the wings, or prior to flight.
It would seem to me, that delaying it as long as possible gives you the
opportunity to wait out new technology and/or better pricing. Any comments?
Bill
-4 just about closing the wings.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | federigo(at)pacbell.net |
| Subject: | Sheet Metal Class |
Henry Gorgas (near Portland, Oregon) has two more openings for his
February 2nd & 3rd sheetmetal class. His phone number is 1-503-472-5187.
Leland
gettin' ready to build a 9
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | barry <bpote(at)erols.com> |
Greg,
I too am using the EI units (capacitive) sold by Van's. I am going to
use the EI Dual fuel sender. The more I see and read about EI, the more
I like them.
snip..
the wingtips with the clear plastic lenses (front corners of the
wingtip) are the ones meant for the position lights. You will need the
position/strobe (white) on the rudder as well, because the wing tips
don't allow for the required coverage. I was hoping to put landing
lights in there too, but there is not enopugh room, so I am using the
DUCKWORKs mounted in the leading edge.
There are other things that sneak up on you with the wings. Plan for
your wire chases or conduit (make the holes in the ribs before riveting
to the wings!). Think about the heated pitot possibilities. If you are
going to use Angle of Attack, it is easier to mount before closing.
Barry Pote RV9a wings
>
> Greg Tanner
> RV-9A Empennage (control surfacces)
> SER #90186 N80BR RESERVED
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "himsl" <vhimsl(at)turbonet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 NASA cooling duct |
But I do not have the duct in
> the kit, and I have heard somewhere that the duct is in the fuselage
> kit.
> Is this true?
ANS: Yes
If so, can the duct be attached by reaching in through
> the wing rib holes?
ANS: Yes
Vince Himsl
RV8 Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Gesele <sgesele(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Updated Web Pages |
I've recently moved and updated my web page. It is now at:
http://n506rv.webjump.com
- Added a description and many more pictures detailing the internal ski rack
that I installed in my RV-6A. For any RV-6 pilot who enjoys skiing, this
modification works VERY well.
- Updated the POH. The main change is that the graphics are of a much
higher quality. It increased the file size, but I believe the benefits are
well worth it.
- Added a page for downloading BMPs that are optimized for using as Windows
wallpaper with a 800x600 screen size. The pictures were taken of / from my
RV-6A in flight. The first seven were taken after the 1999 builders
conference in Oswego, NY, when I had the honor of flying in formation with
both Ken Bartow (in his 6A) and Bill Benedict (in 58VA). The last BMP on
the page, the one on final at KJAC makes a very good wallpaper.
- Added a page for downloading MPEGs. These mpegs were taken by Ken Bartow
during the above mentioned flight.
That's it for now. I hope to be making more additions in the near future.
Scott Gesele - N506RV -Flying
http://n506rv.webjump.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Craig Hagen" <chagen(at)hagenrealestate.com> |
| Subject: | fuel tank attach doubler |
Looking at the archives, I noticed a thread about a pre-manufactured
doubler used in the inside of the fuel tank where the fuel tank attach
angle is mounted. Looking at the parts list on Van's web site, I don't
find such an animal. Calling Van's today, I was on eternal hold and
thought I would post my first question after 2+ years of lurking.
Any help?
Thanks
C. Hagen
RV-6A fuel tanks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: fiber-glass? |
> I have drilled the pants on my 6A. After I drill the fiberglass for the
> screws and c/s for the washers, I have this large hole.
> Do I need to put 2 or 3 bids of glass on the inside of the pants around
> the screw holes so the c/s tool will have something to machine??
>
> Also, I can't use the " clamp a plate with the pilot hole in it"
> technique to align the c/s. Any ideas for techique would help.
To minimize potential enlargement in the holes in the fiberglass, I bonded
small (maybe 1" square) .040" thick aluminum plates on the inside of the
wheel fairings everywhere there is a fastening screw. My main reason for
doing this is to reduce vibration enlarging the holes. These plates serve
additionally to stabilize the countersink during the countersinking step.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
6A
------ http://USFamily.Net/info - Unlimited Internet - From $7.99/mo! ------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Todd" <motodd(at)pol.net> |
| Subject: | maneuvering speed and VG's |
I believe my 4 G stall speed was lowered by slightly more than 10 knots with
the addition of VG's to my RV4. Obviously, that's not surprising since the
1 G stall speed reduction was in the 5 to 5 1/2 knot range. As far as I
know, VG's 'work' at all the airspeeds and angles of attack we're likely to
encounter. I tried but couldn't measure a difference in 75% cruise speed in
my RV4 at 185 mph TAS (neither could Terry B in his RV6 or Rick D in his RV4
from what they tell me).
VG's HAVE to increase parasitic drag some, so how can they NOT hurt cruise
performance? The principal explanation I got was that the inboard VG pair
placement is important in helping to decrease interference (wing
root/fuselage intersection) drag. Even though this interference drag
probably represents less than 2% of the total drag of the airplane in
cruise, the net effect of adding VG's on total drag may be a wash. Since
the parasitic drag goes up by the square of airspeed, we wouldn't be
surprised if some of the faster RV's see at least a few mph loss off the top
end with VG's. We'll see what Terry Jantzi comes up with in his faster RV6
and better testing gear.
Would a 10+% decrease in 1 G stall speed be worth, say, a 1or 2% reduction
in 75% cruise? I'd guess that'd be strictly a matter of personal
preference.
Mark
From: "John Huft" <widgeon92l(at)email.msn.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Myths For The Last Millennium-maneuvering speed
As far as Cessna 180s go, the two companies that offer VGs have said that
the difference between the two is that one works at a higher angle of attack
(lower airspeed) than the other. They each have arguments why thier's is
better, but I wonder if the VGs really only work at higher angle of attacks
(that is, for 1G stalls) and not at lower angles of attack (higher
airspeeds) so that they do not lower the stall speed for a 4G stall, which
is what matters in turbulence. I suspect that is why there is no change in
placards for maneuvering and turbulent air penetration speeds when VGs are
added. This would also be the basis for claims that cruise speeds are
unaffected.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: spar is a work of art |
In a message dated 1/8/2001 8:21:28 PM Central Standard Time,
Knicholas2(at)AOL.COM writes:
> I am applying a mil spec. primer on everything. Should I also
> prime the spar even though it is alodined?
Hey Kim,
Your spar should be anodized and if so that's all the protection you will
ever need.
Blue Skies,
Carey Mills
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank attach doubler |
In a message dated 1/8/2001 8:27:08 PM Central Standard Time,
chagen(at)hagenrealestate.com writes:
> C. Hagen
>
I recall that I had to fabricate those from .063, but I would have to check
my plans to confirm.
Carey Mills
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Sheehan <ctsheehan(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | 200HP IO-360 in RV-6? |
I'm posting this for a friend who's new to this list (address is on the
He is about to begin his firewall forward installation of a 200HP IO-360
in an RV-6.
Has anyone got any experience or info on this? I know it can/has been
done (although Van's 'officially' discourages it).
Mike could use some help! Let's welcome him to the list with some useful
info!
Thanks everyone,
Chris Sheehan
(RV-6 still anxiously awaiting wing kit)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | barry <bpote(at)erols.com> |
Bill, I just did this on the NINE.
They say you can do this on a completed plane, but I am so big and
clumsy and clothed in 9 layers to combat the NJ chill, that I would not
want to think of doing that nor installing a heated pitot after the
wings were closed.
You have to drill 3 holes in the top wing skin (2 mounting, 1 sensor)
and 4 holes in the bottom wing skin (2 mounting 1 sensor and 1 water
vent for the unit that is mounted on the top skin.
I don't think the tech is going to change that much in the near future.
I don't think it would be a fun job later.
Barry RV9a wings
PS to you guys thinking about AOA, Jim at AOA is an OK guy. We have
talked and emailed etc. They like the unit mounted in the most out board
bay. I had already put a Duckworks landing light out there. I thought it
would mess the air flow for the AOA unit. Jim assured me it would not.
Jerry VanG himself did just that (mount the AOA behind the light) and it
works fine.
Bill Shook wrote:
> Anyone put the AOA system by Proprietary software systems in their aircraft
> yet? Do you put it in while you are building the wings, or prior to flight.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ENewton57(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank attach doubler |
In a message dated 1/8/01 8:27:14 PM Central Standard Time,
chagen(at)hagenrealestate.com writes:
<< Looking at the archives, I noticed a thread about a pre-manufactured
doubler used in the inside of the fuel tank where the fuel tank attach
angle is mounted. Looking at the parts list on Van's web site, I don't
find such an animal. Calling Van's today, I was on eternal hold and
thought I would post my first question after 2+ years of lurking. >>
I couldn't find this either until I finally realized that the doublers are
cut into the funny shaped design that was inside the reinforcement rings for
the inspection plates of the tanks. If you haven't removed the metal that
was inside those rings, take a look at it and you will see the plates that
are shaped like the front of the end tank ribs. There are two doublers in
each ring, one for each of the two end ribs of each tank.
At least thats where mine were in my year 2000 kit.
Hope this helps,
Eric Newton - Long Beach, Mississippi
RV-6A N57ME (Reserved) (Fuselage)
http://www.ericsrv6a.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | barry <bpote(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: spar is a work of art |
Kim, I only know enough to be dangerous, but you will meet 3 kinds of
builders.
1. Those that prime everything.
2. Those that prime nothing.
3. Those that prime everything that is not alclad or annodized.
I am building using #3 (mostly). The kicker however, is that every
scratch or counter sink you make or do, even on anodized materials needs
to be primed, if you are a proper religious person of the #3 ilk.
#3 ilk meetings are held the 3rd (appropriate)Wednesday of every month.
Barry Pote RV9a WINGS
>
> > I am applying a mil spec. primer on everything. Should I also
> > prime the spar even though it is alodined?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randall Henderson" <randallh(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: air box hose adaptor |
> I just finished this... No, don't block the area around the flange off.
> Just leave it open. If you have a across over exhaust that entire area is
> heated anyway so you will be getting the benefit of heated air
[snip]
Alternate view: I started with it that way, and after flying with it for a
while I replaced the flange with a homemade fiberglass one that blocks off
most of the gap (could probably do something similar just adding on to the
AL flange but I'm a glutton for punishment I guess :-) The reason was that I
was getting virtually no RPM drop with it the way it was, and although I
didn't have a temp. probe in the carb at the time, there was a lot of lore
floating around about that suggested that set-up offers minimal temp.
increase. After modifying it (and installing a temp. probe) I get a solid 16
degrees increase, and a small but noticable RPM drop. Doesn't really run any
rougher either so I think I'm still getting plenty of air.
See it at http://www.edt.com/homewing/rhproject/fwallfwd.html.
Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (~175 hrs)
Portland, OR
http://www.edt.com/homewing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Calvert" <rv6bldr(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank attach doubler |
Craig,
There are 2 per tank. These are needed to help seal the nose ribs at each
end of tank and also reinforce the angles at the root ends. Seems like
these were already roughly cut in a sheet but still attached to the sheet by
a little material and had to be broke loose and custom fit to each tank.
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok
-6 fuselage.
----- Original Message -----
From: Craig Hagen <chagen(at)hagenrealestate.com>
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 6:24 PM
Subject: RV-List: fuel tank attach doubler
>
> Looking at the archives, I noticed a thread about a pre-manufactured
> doubler used in the inside of the fuel tank where the fuel tank attach
> angle is mounted. Looking at the parts list on Van's web site, I don't
> find such an animal. Calling Van's today, I was on eternal hold and
> thought I would post my first question after 2+ years of lurking.
>
> Any help?
>
> Thanks
>
> C. Hagen
> RV-6A fuel tanks
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Nellis" <mnellis(at)emailusa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank attach doubler |
The part number is T-410 Nose reinforcement plate. It is included in the
plastic wrapped access cover plate package. I think it's part of the T-407
package. If you didn't know they were there, it would be easy to throw them
away as they could be mistaken for scrap.
Mike Nellis - RV-6 N699BM (res)
Plainfield, IL
Building Tanks
http://mnellis.jnet.net/rv-6_page
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Hagen" <chagen(at)hagenrealestate.com>
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 7:24 PM
Subject: RV-List: fuel tank attach doubler
>
> Looking at the archives, I noticed a thread about a pre-manufactured
> doubler used in the inside of the fuel tank where the fuel tank attach
> angle is mounted. Looking at the parts list on Van's web site, I don't
> find such an animal. Calling Van's today, I was on eternal hold and
> thought I would post my first question after 2+ years of lurking.
>
> Any help?
>
> Thanks
>
> C. Hagen
> RV-6A fuel tanks
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Nellis" <mnellis(at)emailusa.net> |
I couldn't agree with you more Barry, Jim has been great to work with. If
you installed the AOA in the outboard bay it would be no problem. The only
difficulty might be running the small tubes, but as long as you can get the
tubes through the main spar to the conduit it would be no more difficult
than running any other wires from the wingtip.
You can see pictures of how I mounted mine on this page
http://www.mnellis.jnet.net/rv-6_page/WingSkinning3.htm
Mike
>
>
> Bill, I just did this on the NINE.
> They say you can do this on a completed plane, but I am so big and
> clumsy and clothed in 9 layers to combat the NJ chill, that I would not
> want to think of doing that nor installing a heated pitot after the
> wings were closed.
>
> You have to drill 3 holes in the top wing skin (2 mounting, 1 sensor)
> and 4 holes in the bottom wing skin (2 mounting 1 sensor and 1 water
> vent for the unit that is mounted on the top skin.
>
> I don't think the tech is going to change that much in the near future.
> I don't think it would be a fun job later.
> Barry RV9a wings
>
> PS to you guys thinking about AOA, Jim at AOA is an OK guy. We have
> talked and emailed etc. They like the unit mounted in the most out board
> bay. I had already put a Duckworks landing light out there. I thought it
> would mess the air flow for the AOA unit. Jim assured me it would not.
> Jerry VanG himself did just that (mount the AOA behind the light) and it
> works fine.
>
>
> Bill Shook wrote:
>
> > Anyone put the AOA system by Proprietary software systems in their
aircraft
> > yet? Do you put it in while you are building the wings, or prior to
flight.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Nellis" <mnellis(at)emailusa.net> |
| Subject: | Nellis Web Site Down |
To anyone trying to access my web site, I had a major problem today and
I've got to rebuild all the navigation links. The pages are still there
but you might not be able to navigate between them. It should be up in
the next day or so.
Mike Nellis - RV-6 N699BM (res)
Plainfield, IL
Building Tanks
http://mnellis.jnet.net/rv-6_page
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Evan&Megan Johnson" <evmeg(at)snowcrest.net> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank attach doubler |
yep......you will find them nested inside the reinforcing rings that go
behind the first
rib for the inspection cover. They just look like the real stubby leading
edge airfoil
patterns.
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Nellis <mnellis(at)emailusa.net>
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 7:32 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: fuel tank attach doubler
>
> The part number is T-410 Nose reinforcement plate. It is included in the
> plastic wrapped access cover plate package. I think it's part of the
T-407
> package. If you didn't know they were there, it would be easy to throw
them
> away as they could be mistaken for scrap.
>
> Mike Nellis - RV-6 N699BM (res)
> Plainfield, IL
> Building Tanks
> http://mnellis.jnet.net/rv-6_page
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Craig Hagen" <chagen(at)hagenrealestate.com>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 7:24 PM
> Subject: RV-List: fuel tank attach doubler
>
>
> >
> > Looking at the archives, I noticed a thread about a pre-manufactured
> > doubler used in the inside of the fuel tank where the fuel tank attach
> > angle is mounted. Looking at the parts list on Van's web site, I don't
> > find such an animal. Calling Van's today, I was on eternal hold and
> > thought I would post my first question after 2+ years of lurking.
> >
> > Any help?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > C. Hagen
> > RV-6A fuel tanks
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Nellis" <mnellis(at)emailusa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank attach doubler |
Hi Evan,
Did that radio arrive yet?
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Evan&Megan Johnson" <evmeg(at)snowcrest.net>
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 4:25 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: fuel tank attach doubler
>
> yep......you will find them nested inside the reinforcing rings that go
> behind the first
> rib for the inspection cover. They just look like the real stubby leading
> edge airfoil
> patterns.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mike Nellis <mnellis(at)emailusa.net>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 7:32 PM
> Subject: Re: RV-List: fuel tank attach doubler
>
>
> >
> > The part number is T-410 Nose reinforcement plate. It is included in
the
> > plastic wrapped access cover plate package. I think it's part of the
> T-407
> > package. If you didn't know they were there, it would be easy to throw
> them
> > away as they could be mistaken for scrap.
> >
> > Mike Nellis - RV-6 N699BM (res)
> > Plainfield, IL
> > Building Tanks
> > http://mnellis.jnet.net/rv-6_page
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Craig Hagen" <chagen(at)hagenrealestate.com>
> > To:
> > Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 7:24 PM
> > Subject: RV-List: fuel tank attach doubler
> >
> >
>
> > >
> > > Looking at the archives, I noticed a thread about a pre-manufactured
> > > doubler used in the inside of the fuel tank where the fuel tank attach
> > > angle is mounted. Looking at the parts list on Van's web site, I don't
> > > find such an animal. Calling Van's today, I was on eternal hold and
> > > thought I would post my first question after 2+ years of lurking.
> > >
> > > Any help?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > C. Hagen
> > > RV-6A fuel tanks
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | barry <bpote(at)erols.com> |
Mike, for what it is worth, one of the reasons (and only one) that I
mounted the landing light there (the end bay) was to take the short U
turn out through the tip (using a small snap ring in the end rib) with
all the wing wiring, strobes, position, landing lights etc. I then duck
it into Van's conduit (that weighs almost nothing) and run it inboard on
the aft side of the main wing spar. I intend to run the AOA tubing
there, also. I mention this as an idea for others, as I don't see many
pictures on web sites about wire runs. Of course, one does not know if
ones 'clever' ideas are great until much later! I also finished the AOA
drain hole with a snap ring. It looks sharp. I can't think that it will
mess up the air flow anymore that the tube hanging out in the breeze.
Barry POte RV9a WINGS
Mike Nellis wrote:
>
>
> I couldn't agree with you more Barry, Jim has been great to work with. If
> you installed the AOA in the outboard bay it would be no problem. The only
> difficulty might be running the small tubes, but as long as you can get the
> tubes through the main spar to the conduit it would be no more difficult
> than running any other wires from the wingtip.
>
> You can see pictures of how I mounted mine on this page
> http://www.mnellis.jnet.net/rv-6_page/WingSkinning3.htm
>
> Mike
> >
> >
> > Bill, I just did this on the NINE.
> > They say you can do this on a completed plane, but I am so big and
> > clumsy and clothed in 9 layers to combat the NJ chill, that I would not
> > want to think of doing that nor installing a heated pitot after the
> > wings were closed.
> >
> > You have to drill 3 holes in the top wing skin (2 mounting, 1 sensor)
> > and 4 holes in the bottom wing skin (2 mounting 1 sensor and 1 water
> > vent for the unit that is mounted on the top skin.
> >
> > I don't think the tech is going to change that much in the near future.
> > I don't think it would be a fun job later.
> > Barry RV9a wings
> >
> > PS to you guys thinking about AOA, Jim at AOA is an OK guy. We have
> > talked and emailed etc. They like the unit mounted in the most out board
> > bay. I had already put a Duckworks landing light out there. I thought it
> > would mess the air flow for the AOA unit. Jim assured me it would not.
> > Jerry VanG himself did just that (mount the AOA behind the light) and it
> > works fine.
> >
> >
> > Bill Shook wrote:
> >
> > > Anyone put the AOA system by Proprietary software systems in their
> aircraft
> > > yet? Do you put it in while you are building the wings, or prior to
> flight.
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank attach doubler |
The fuel tank doublers were inside the ring already precut. the ring is the
access hole where the fuel sender is mounted.
good luck
scott
tampa rv6a finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Perri <jperri(at)aros.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 200HP IO-360 in RV-6? |
Chris, have Mike contact me off the list and I will help him. I have 230HP
in my 6.
JMP
Chris Sheehan wrote:
>
> I'm posting this for a friend who's new to this list (address is on the
>
> He is about to begin his firewall forward installation of a 200HP IO-360
> in an RV-6.
>
> Has anyone got any experience or info on this? I know it can/has been
> done (although Van's 'officially' discourages it).
>
> Mike could use some help! Let's welcome him to the list with some useful
> info!
>
> Thanks everyone,
>
> Chris Sheehan
> (RV-6 still anxiously awaiting wing kit)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: air box hose adaptor |
| From: | Jim_Andrews(at)tivoli.com |
01/09/2001 07:56:39 AM
>Alternate view: I started with it that way, and after flying with it for a
>while I replaced the flange with a homemade fiberglass one that blocks off
>most of the gap (could probably do something similar just adding on to the
>AL flange but I'm a glutton for punishment I guess :-) The reason was that
I
>was getting virtually no RPM drop with it the way it was, and although I
>didn't have a temp. probe in the carb at the time, there was a lot of lore
>floating around about that suggested that set-up offers minimal temp...
Randall,
Please take this in the sprit of my education rather than criticism...
I heard the same discussion about 18 months ago regarding the speculation
that Van's carb heat solution was insufficient heat for the job and that it
should be redesigned. I then went out a poled a few of the folks that were
currently flying sixes at the time at the local air park and was told that
it was more that adequate and that it was patterned after existing setups
in production aircraft and that I should not worry about it.
So in the interest of getting the whole story, did you by any chance check
and see what the temperature drop was with newly installed temperature
probe on the old airbox carb heat feeder tube? It would be really nice to
see if it's worth all the trouble to worry about this or not.
Many thanks,
- Jim Andrews
RV-8A ( FWF )
O-360 A1A Sensenich 85
N89JA reserved
http://www.homestead.com/RV8A/files/
________________________________________________________________________________
Bill,
I also have to agree with Mike that as long as you have access to the first
outboard bay it is very easy to install the sensors and drain after the wing
is built. You mentioned putting off as long as possible in case of
technology improvements. Jim will sell you an "A" kit which consists of just
the sensors, drain, and pressure lines. You can then put off buying the
indicator and cpu until you really need them.
Rick McBride
80027
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thomas Nguyen" <TNGUYEN(at)OSS.OCEANEERING.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: Myths For The Last Millennium-maneuvering speed |
My understanding is that the maneuvering speed is the speed at which the aircraft
desinger designs his airframe to be able to withstand the loads (wind gusts,
turbulences) with full deflection on control surfaces. This maneuvering speed
is tied more to the structural integrity of the airframe itself than the stall
speed. The maneurveing speed usually was taken into consideration during
the design/development of the airframe, not at during the flight testing.
Therefore, I believe that by installing the VG, which produce lower stall speed
doesn't necesary impact the maneouvering speed for that particular aircraft/airframe.
If I am wrong, would some one please correct me.
T.Nguyen
>>> tedd(at)vansairforce.org 01/08/01 07:18PM >>>
Something's not right about the FAA's determination that maneouvring speed
isn't affected by VGs. Maneouvring speed is simply Vs*F
0.5 where F is
the maximum load factor. It as to go down as Vs goes down.
Someone made a distinction between maneouvring speed and corner speed.
I've always understood them to be the same thing (or rather, two different
"things" but the same speed). Can anyone clarify this?
Tedd McHenry
Van's Air Force
Western Canada Wing
tedd(at)vansairforce.org
http://www.vansairforce.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Huft" <widgeon92l(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | maneuvering speed and VG's |
Mark, this is very interesting. We know that stall speed varies with the
square root of the load, so stall speed at 4 Gs should be twice the 1 G
stall speed. So you are saying that the reduction of stall speed (with VGs
installed) is twice as much - 10 kts instead 5?
How did you test this? Can you really do repeatable stalls, taking data at 4
Gs? And you did that before and after installing the VGs?
Thanks, John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Mark Todd
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 7:53 PM
Subject: RV-List: maneuvering speed and VG's
I believe my 4 G stall speed was lowered by slightly more than 10 knots with
the addition of VG's to my RV4. Obviously, that's not surprising since the
1 G stall speed reduction was in the 5 to 5 1/2 knot range. As far as I
know, VG's 'work' at all the airspeeds and angles of attack we're likely to
encounter. I tried but couldn't measure a difference in 75% cruise speed in
my RV4 at 185 mph TAS (neither could Terry B in his RV6 or Rick D in his RV4
from what they tell me).
VG's HAVE to increase parasitic drag some, so how can they NOT hurt cruise
performance? The principal explanation I got was that the inboard VG pair
placement is important in helping to decrease interference (wing
root/fuselage intersection) drag. Even though this interference drag
probably represents less than 2% of the total drag of the airplane in
cruise, the net effect of adding VG's on total drag may be a wash. Since
the parasitic drag goes up by the square of airspeed, we wouldn't be
surprised if some of the faster RV's see at least a few mph loss off the top
end with VG's. We'll see what Terry Jantzi comes up with in his faster RV6
and better testing gear.
Would a 10+% decrease in 1 G stall speed be worth, say, a 1or 2% reduction
in 75% cruise? I'd guess that'd be strictly a matter of personal
preference.
Mark
From: "John Huft" <widgeon92l(at)email.msn.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Myths For The Last Millennium-maneuvering speed
As far as Cessna 180s go, the two companies that offer VGs have said that
the difference between the two is that one works at a higher angle of attack
(lower airspeed) than the other. They each have arguments why thier's is
better, but I wonder if the VGs really only work at higher angle of attacks
(that is, for 1G stalls) and not at lower angles of attack (higher
airspeeds) so that they do not lower the stall speed for a 4G stall, which
is what matters in turbulence. I suspect that is why there is no change in
placards for maneuvering and turbulent air penetration speeds when VGs are
added. This would also be the basis for claims that cruise speeds are
unaffected.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com> |
| Subject: | fuel tank attach doubler |
Mine came pre-punched within the fuel tank access cover reinforcing ring.
I'm sorry I can't give you a part number or anything.
--
Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA
Network Administrator
Union Safe Deposit Bank
209-946-5116
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Hagen [mailto:chagen(at)hagenrealestate.com]
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 4:24 PM
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV-List: fuel tank attach doubler
Looking at the archives, I noticed a thread about a
pre-manufactured
doubler used in the inside of the fuel tank where the fuel
tank attach
angle is mounted. Looking at the parts list on Van's web
site, I don't
find such an animal. Calling Van's today, I was on eternal
hold and
thought I would post my first question after 2+ years of
lurking.
Any help?
Thanks
C. Hagen
RV-6A fuel tanks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com> |
| Subject: | Fiberglass primer |
No, not that kind of primer! Ye gods! Who wants to get that going again!
No I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions as to a good how-to book,
video, or whatever for fiberglass? I've never worked with the stuff and
feel a little intimidated by it.
--
Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA
Network Administrator
Union Safe Deposit Bank
209-946-5116
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | glenn williams <willig10(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | maneuvering speed and VG's |
Guys math aside let's look at what the purpose of the
vg is for. It is simply keeping the boundary layer
attached to the wing in a slow airspeed reducing your
stall only. Nothing else is affected. i.e. maneuvering
speed or Vne. No appreciable weight is added only a
few ounces. There might be a little parasitic drag but
not enough to notice on high cruise. So all this aside
you are gaining more than you are losing. SO as an A&P
I personally would have no problem installing them on
a wing other than my personal preference is that
anytime I see a leading edge device on ANY wing it
tells me that the wing is not efficient. That said
everything is a compromise in aviation. SO I
personally will just get used to the stall speed on my
airplane and deal with it. Hope this helps.
Glenn Williams
A&P
8A
--- John Huft wrote:
>
>
> Mark, this is very interesting. We know that stall
> speed varies with the
> square root of the load, so stall speed at 4 Gs
> should be twice the 1 G
> stall speed. So you are saying that the reduction of
> stall speed (with VGs
> installed) is twice as much - 10 kts instead 5?
>
> How did you test this? Can you really do repeatable
> stalls, taking data at 4
> Gs? And you did that before and after installing the
> VGs?
>
> Thanks, John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf
> Of Mark Todd
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 7:53 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: maneuvering speed and VG's
>
>
>
>
> I believe my 4 G stall speed was lowered by slightly
> more than 10 knots with
> the addition of VG's to my RV4. Obviously, that's
> not surprising since the
> 1 G stall speed reduction was in the 5 to 5 1/2 knot
> range. As far as I
> know, VG's 'work' at all the airspeeds and angles of
> attack we're likely to
> encounter. I tried but couldn't measure a
> difference in 75% cruise speed in
> my RV4 at 185 mph TAS (neither could Terry B in his
> RV6 or Rick D in his RV4
> from what they tell me).
>
> VG's HAVE to increase parasitic drag some, so how
> can they NOT hurt cruise
> performance? The principal explanation I got was
> that the inboard VG pair
> placement is important in helping to decrease
> interference (wing
> root/fuselage intersection) drag. Even though this
> interference drag
> probably represents less than 2% of the total drag
> of the airplane in
> cruise, the net effect of adding VG's on total drag
> may be a wash. Since
> the parasitic drag goes up by the square of
> airspeed, we wouldn't be
> surprised if some of the faster RV's see at least a
> few mph loss off the top
> end with VG's. We'll see what Terry Jantzi comes up
> with in his faster RV6
> and better testing gear.
>
> Would a 10+% decrease in 1 G stall speed be worth,
> say, a 1or 2% reduction
> in 75% cruise? I'd guess that'd be strictly a
> matter of personal
> preference.
>
> Mark
>
>
> From: "John Huft" <widgeon92l(at)email.msn.com>
> Subject: RE: RV-List: Myths For The Last
> Millennium-maneuvering speed
>
>
>
> As far as Cessna 180s go, the two companies that
> offer VGs have said that
> the difference between the two is that one works at
> a higher angle of attack
> (lower airspeed) than the other. They each have
> arguments why thier's is
> better, but I wonder if the VGs really only work at
> higher angle of attacks
> (that is, for 1G stalls) and not at lower angles of
> attack (higher
> airspeeds) so that they do not lower the stall speed
> for a 4G stall, which
> is what matters in turbulence. I suspect that is why
> there is no change in
> placards for maneuvering and turbulent air
> penetration speeds when VGs are
> added. This would also be the basis for claims that
> cruise speeds are
> unaffected.
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
====
Glenn Williams
8A
A&P
N81GW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Burch" <rv6man(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: spar is a work of art |
Subject: RV-List: spar is a work of art
>
> I picked up the wing kit for my Rv9 last week. The spar is beautiful!
It
> is well crafted, alodine is a consistant gold - truly a work of art. I
> almost hate to hide it inside the wings!
>
> Question: I am applying a mil spec. primer on everything. Should I also
> prime the spar even though it is alodined? (I know that I may be being
"over
> cautious" here but I like the piece of mind.)
>
> Thanks
>
> Kim Nicholas
> Seattle
>
Kim, that is not Alodine. The spars are anodized. They do not
need priming. Anodizing is as good as it gets..Terry B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fiberglass primer |
| From: | Jim_Andrews(at)tivoli.com |
01/09/2001 10:18:35 AM
Scott,
There are a number of fine video tapes and books detailing this process
however I had a friend who is building a Long EZ come over and give me a
hands on primer and it was a God send. Up till now I my only experience
has been repairing my bass boats in the past. This usually consisted of
sanding followed by slapping a layer of resin on followed by cloth and then
more resin. Pretty much a slam bam approach to fiberglass. I had no idea
how slick it could be done until this friend gave me this tutorial.
I just recently had the opportunity to glass the FAB airbox to correct the
position of the snout so that it would align better with my cowl. I
documented the process with my digital camera and will have my website
updated with the pictures and a step by step of the details and materials
by tomorrow.
- Jim Andrews
RV-8A ( FWF )
O-360 A1A Sensenich 85
N89JA reserved
http://www.homestead.com/RV8A/files/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Austin" <6430(at)axion.net> |
HI All,
I have a standard Lycoming starter for sale which may be useful
for some-one who did not get a starter with their engine.
This is also helpful for those with a wood prop who may need a little more
weight up front.
It is a geared 149 tooth type....sell cheap....if interested, please contact
me off line.
Austin.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randall Henderson" <randallh(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: air box hose adaptor |
[snip]
> So in the interest of getting the whole story, did you by any chance check
> and see what the temperature drop was with newly installed temperature
> probe on the old airbox carb heat feeder tube? It would be really nice to
> see if it's worth all the trouble to worry about this or not.
No I didn't and you make a good point. I wish I had, but without that I have
to admit my comments about it being insufficient before the change have to
be taken with a grain of salt.
Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (~175 hrs)
Portland, OR
http://www.edt.com/homewing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: air box hose adaptor |
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim_Andrews(at)tivoli.com <Jim_Andrews(at)tivoli.com>
Date: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 8:20 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: air box hose adaptor
>
>
>>Alternate view: I started with it that way, and after flying with it for a
>>while I replaced the flange with a homemade fiberglass one that blocks off
>>most of the gap (could probably do something similar just adding on to the
>>AL flange but I'm a glutton for punishment I guess :-) The reason was that
>I
>>was getting virtually no RPM drop with it the way it was, and although I
>>didn't have a temp. probe in the carb at the time, there was a lot of lore
>>floating around about that suggested that set-up offers minimal temp...
>
>
>Randall,
>
>Please take this in the sprit of my education rather than criticism...
>
>I heard the same discussion about 18 months ago regarding the speculation
>that Van's carb heat solution was insufficient heat for the job and that it
>should be redesigned. I then went out a poled a few of the folks that were
>currently flying sixes at the time at the local air park and was told that
>it was more that adequate and that it was patterned after existing setups
>in production aircraft and that I should not worry about it.
>
>So in the interest of getting the whole story, did you by any chance check
>and see what the temperature drop was with newly installed temperature
>probe on the old airbox carb heat feeder tube? It would be really nice to
>see if it's worth all the trouble to worry about this or not.
>
>Many thanks,
>
>- Jim Andrews
>RV-8A ( FWF )
>O-360 A1A Sensenich 85
>N89JA reserved
>http://www.homestead.com/RV8A/files/
>
With all due respect, Jim, I don't think the "polling" method reflects the
spirit of the scientific method, especially as concerns so emotional a topic
as the design in our favorite toy. As the sign on the Director of
Engineering' s office said, "In God we trust -- others bring hard data."
Until someone measures the delta-T with a calibrated probe we don't know.
I'd love to do it, but my carb probe hole is stuffed with an optical ice
detector probe. Which brings me to the substance of this post.
I have heard from many RV types that carb icing does not occur in an RV.
I'm here to tell you that it does, and I have hard data. My Iceman detector
utilizes an LED and phototransistor to monitor the optical path between the
two components. When rime or sufficiently thick clear ice forms on either
or both surfaces the light is attenuated and an annunciator goes off. Three
times in my short 26 hours of flying the annunciator went off. All three
times I noted mp, pulled carb heat, noted the annuciator went off, removed
carb heat and noted an increase in mp of 0.2 inches. It should be noted
that this was in conditions of lower temperature and dewpoint, not very
favorable to carb icing. I look forward to summer when I can experience real
carb conditions and report the results! By the way, my interest in carb
icing stems from an icing experience over the mountains in my C150. Ever
since my planes have carb ice detectors.
Everyone: Please bring data!
Dennis Persyk 6A N600DP 26 hours
Hampshire, IL C38
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com> |
>
>HI All,
> I have a standard Lycoming starter for sale which may be useful
>for some-one who did not get a starter with their engine.
>This is also helpful for those with a wood prop who may need a little more
>weight up front.
>It is a geared 149 tooth type....sell cheap....if interested, please
>contact
>me off line.
>Austin.
>
>
Same here folks. Please contact Austin first if you need one, then once his
is gone, let me know if another one is needed. Mine is working fine, just
needs some cleaning and lubrication of the bendix drive.
Brian Denk
RV8 N94BD
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John B. Abell" <jbabell(at)mediaone.net> |
Hello Les,
This might be too long a story, but here goes. I bought the Vision
Microsystems 10-in-1 engine instrumentation, OAT/CAT system, and
chronometer. Given these purchases, I decided to install the VMS fuel
quantity system so that all the gauges would match in appearance and
lighting. It was a mistake. What I didn't know then was that the
capacitance-type senders of the VMS system were really designed for
installation in fiberglass airplanes like the Glasairs and Lancairs.
Installation in aluminum fuel tanks requires adaptation of the senders to the
tanks by way of fittings that can be welded to the senders and riveted to the
tanks. (At least that's how I installed them.)
The senders reside in the lower inboard corners of the tanks, as far into the
corners as one can get them and still manage, with difficulty, to install
them. Sealing them properly with Proseal or its equivalent turned out to be
difficult as well. I have no leaks and the senders work, but I wouldn't do
it again. It's difficult, risky, and time-consuming. If I had it to do over
again, I'd use the simplest system available, i.e., a float installed in the
tank's access panel.
I'm sorry I have no information on the compatibility of the VMS senders with
the EI gauges or vice versa. I'm not familiar with Van's capacitance-type
system. If you decide to use the VMS senders, I'd try to answer any
questions you have about their installation.
Best wishes,
Jack Abell
Les Rowles wrote:
> Hi Jack,
> You have got me interested in your post about senders and fuel gauges. I
> have the senders Vans supplies and felt I might use the Vision Micro
> Systems units instead of the one Vans sells. I have tried to get
> information on the installation of the VMS senders and found it almost
> impossible. I don't think Vans were keen to see me use them ( but were
> helpful) As I have not started my tanks yet, I thought I might prevail
> upon you to tell me how you got on installing the senders. If you answer
> this note I would appreciate it.
>
> All the best.
> Les Rowles.
> Traralgon Australia.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Electric primer valve plumbing (was Gascolator in wing root) |
Thanks to everyone who responded to my question about locating an Andair
gascolator in the wing root. I had such good luck with that one that I'll
try a follow up for those who are using electric priming valves in connection
with the wing root mounted gascolator. My thinking is that I want plumb the
gascolator before the Facet pump to provide filtered fuel to the pump, then
put a "T" fitting in the fuel line after the Facet pump to supply pressurized
fuel to the primer valve (I am using the slotted tube type fuel pickups with
no significant filtering ability). Does this make sense to those who have
"been there and done that".
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, starting systems installation
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 1/9/01 3:50:32 AM Pacific Standard Time, bpote(at)erols.com
writes:
<< I also finished the AOA drain hole with a snap ring. It looks sharp. >>
Hi Barry: What do you mean by "snap ring"? Sounds good but I'm not sure
what you are referring to.
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, starting systems
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fiberglass primer- |
01/09/2001 14:19:43
Sam James has a Fiberglass 101 tape. I purchased it along with some of his
polly resin and cloth. The tape was informative and got me going on F/G
basics. I have learned much,much more being the laborer on a Glassair III
project. The vinal-ester(sp) resins are a different animal then the epoxies
& poly resins we RV'ers tend to play with.
For learning I might suggest your local EAA chapter and contact someone up
to his(her) elbos in a lanceair, glasair or velocity or any plastic
airplane and spend the afternoon in a real lay-up session.
"Van Artsdalen, Scott"
To: "Rv-List (E-mail)"
Sent by: cc:
owner-rv-list-server@mat Subject: RV-List: Fiberglass
primer
ronics.com
01/09/2001 10:42 AM
Please respond to
rv-list
No, not that kind of primer! Ye gods! Who wants to get that going again!
No I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions as to a good how-to book,
video, or whatever for fiberglass? I've never worked with the stuff and
feel a little intimidated by it.
--
Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA
Network Administrator
Union Safe Deposit Bank
209-946-5116
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric primer valve plumbing (was Gascolator in wing root) |
> Thanks to everyone who responded to my question about locating an Andair
> gascolator in the wing root. I had such good luck with that one that I'll
> try a follow up for those who are using electric priming valves in
connection
> with the wing root mounted gascolator. My thinking is that I want plumb
the
> gascolator before the Facet pump to provide filtered fuel to the pump,
then
> put a "T" fitting in the fuel line after the Facet pump to supply
pressurized
> fuel to the primer valve (I am using the slotted tube type fuel pickups
with
> no significant filtering ability). Does this make sense to those who have
> "been there and done that".
>
> Harry Crosby
I did just this. I wanted the gasolator to be at the low point between the
fuel selector and the firewall. From the fuel selector, I run downhill to
the gasolator in the left wing root. I then route back inside the cabin
with a short tube to the facet pump mounted at a 45 degree angle. Then a
line uphill to the firewall connecting to an in-line T bulkhead connection
on the engine side. The 90 degree portion of the T has a reducer fitting
that connects directly to the electric primer solenoid. The straight
portion of the bulkhead T goes to the mechanical fuel pump via Earls
perform-o-flex hose and 2- 90 degree speed flex ends.
Ross
6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | maneuvering speed and VG's |
| From: | Scott.Fink(at)microchip.com |
01/09/2001 01:05:14 PM,
Serialize complete at 01/09/2001 01:05:14 PM
I kind of hate to keep this thread going, but my understanding was that
maneuvering speed was the speed below which the aircraft would stall
before structureal damage could occur from either turbulance or full
control deflection. It seems to me that if the VGs lower the stall speed,
that the aircraft wouldn't stall before damage would occur at the (non VG)
maneuvering speed. Am I thinking completely wrong here?
Scott Fink
glenn williams
Sent by: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
01/09/2001 08:45 AM
Please respond to rv-list
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
cc:
Subject: RE: RV-List: maneuvering speed and VG's
Guys math aside let's look at what the purpose of the
vg is for. It is simply keeping the boundary layer
attached to the wing in a slow airspeed reducing your
stall only. Nothing else is affected. i.e. maneuvering
speed or Vne. No appreciable weight is added only a
few ounces. There might be a little parasitic drag but
not enough to notice on high cruise. So all this aside
you are gaining more than you are losing. SO as an A&P
I personally would have no problem installing them on
a wing other than my personal preference is that
anytime I see a leading edge device on ANY wing it
tells me that the wing is not efficient. That said
everything is a compromise in aviation. SO I
personally will just get used to the stall speed on my
airplane and deal with it. Hope this helps.
Glenn Williams
A&P
8A
--- John Huft wrote:
>
>
> Mark, this is very interesting. We know that stall
> speed varies with the
> square root of the load, so stall speed at 4 Gs
> should be twice the 1 G
> stall speed. So you are saying that the reduction of
> stall speed (with VGs
> installed) is twice as much - 10 kts instead 5?
>
> How did you test this? Can you really do repeatable
> stalls, taking data at 4
> Gs? And you did that before and after installing the
> VGs?
>
> Thanks, John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf
> Of Mark Todd
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 7:53 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: maneuvering speed and VG's
>
>
>
>
> I believe my 4 G stall speed was lowered by slightly
> more than 10 knots with
> the addition of VG's to my RV4. Obviously, that's
> not surprising since the
> 1 G stall speed reduction was in the 5 to 5 1/2 knot
> range. As far as I
> know, VG's 'work' at all the airspeeds and angles of
> attack we're likely to
> encounter. I tried but couldn't measure a
> difference in 75% cruise speed in
> my RV4 at 185 mph TAS (neither could Terry B in his
> RV6 or Rick D in his RV4
> from what they tell me).
>
> VG's HAVE to increase parasitic drag some, so how
> can they NOT hurt cruise
> performance? The principal explanation I got was
> that the inboard VG pair
> placement is important in helping to decrease
> interference (wing
> root/fuselage intersection) drag. Even though this
> interference drag
> probably represents less than 2% of the total drag
> of the airplane in
> cruise, the net effect of adding VG's on total drag
> may be a wash. Since
> the parasitic drag goes up by the square of
> airspeed, we wouldn't be
> surprised if some of the faster RV's see at least a
> few mph loss off the top
> end with VG's. We'll see what Terry Jantzi comes up
> with in his faster RV6
> and better testing gear.
>
> Would a 10+% decrease in 1 G stall speed be worth,
> say, a 1or 2% reduction
> in 75% cruise? I'd guess that'd be strictly a
> matter of personal
> preference.
>
> Mark
>
>
> From: "John Huft" <widgeon92l(at)email.msn.com>
> Subject: RE: RV-List: Myths For The Last
> Millennium-maneuvering speed
>
>
>
> As far as Cessna 180s go, the two companies that
> offer VGs have said that
> the difference between the two is that one works at
> a higher angle of attack
> (lower airspeed) than the other. They each have
> arguments why thier's is
> better, but I wonder if the VGs really only work at
> higher angle of attacks
> (that is, for 1G stalls) and not at lower angles of
> attack (higher
> airspeeds) so that they do not lower the stall speed
> for a 4G stall, which
> is what matters in turbulence. I suspect that is why
> there is no change in
> placards for maneuvering and turbulent air
> penetration speeds when VGs are
> added. This would also be the basis for claims that
> cruise speeds are
> unaffected.
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
====
Glenn Williams
8A
A&P
N81GW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Huft" <widgeon92l(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | maneuvering speed and VG's |
No, Scott, you are thinking correctly. I thought maybe VGs only affected the
1G stall speed, and that maybe that was why the feds and others do not
require new placards and new maneuvering and turbulent air penetration
speeds. If what Mark Todd says is true, however, then they really should
reduce both those speeds, and that is how we should operate the (VG
equipped) aircraft. That is why I was interested in Mark's testing.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Scott.Fink(at)microchip.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 1:05 PM
Subject: RE: RV-List: maneuvering speed and VG's
I kind of hate to keep this thread going, but my understanding was that
maneuvering speed was the speed below which the aircraft would stall
before structureal damage could occur from either turbulance or full
control deflection. It seems to me that if the VGs lower the stall speed,
that the aircraft wouldn't stall before damage would occur at the (non VG)
maneuvering speed. Am I thinking completely wrong here?
Scott Fink
glenn williams
Sent by: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
01/09/2001 08:45 AM
Please respond to rv-list
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
cc:
Subject: RE: RV-List: maneuvering speed and VG's
Guys math aside let's look at what the purpose of the
vg is for. It is simply keeping the boundary layer
attached to the wing in a slow airspeed reducing your
stall only. Nothing else is affected. i.e. maneuvering
speed or Vne. No appreciable weight is added only a
few ounces. There might be a little parasitic drag but
not enough to notice on high cruise. So all this aside
you are gaining more than you are losing. SO as an A&P
I personally would have no problem installing them on
a wing other than my personal preference is that
anytime I see a leading edge device on ANY wing it
tells me that the wing is not efficient. That said
everything is a compromise in aviation. SO I
personally will just get used to the stall speed on my
airplane and deal with it. Hope this helps.
Glenn Williams
A&P
8A
--- John Huft wrote:
>
>
> Mark, this is very interesting. We know that stall
> speed varies with the
> square root of the load, so stall speed at 4 Gs
> should be twice the 1 G
> stall speed. So you are saying that the reduction of
> stall speed (with VGs
> installed) is twice as much - 10 kts instead 5?
>
> How did you test this? Can you really do repeatable
> stalls, taking data at 4
> Gs? And you did that before and after installing the
> VGs?
>
> Thanks, John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf
> Of Mark Todd
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 7:53 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: maneuvering speed and VG's
>
>
>
>
> I believe my 4 G stall speed was lowered by slightly
> more than 10 knots with
> the addition of VG's to my RV4. Obviously, that's
> not surprising since the
> 1 G stall speed reduction was in the 5 to 5 1/2 knot
> range. As far as I
> know, VG's 'work' at all the airspeeds and angles of
> attack we're likely to
> encounter. I tried but couldn't measure a
> difference in 75% cruise speed in
> my RV4 at 185 mph TAS (neither could Terry B in his
> RV6 or Rick D in his RV4
> from what they tell me).
>
> VG's HAVE to increase parasitic drag some, so how
> can they NOT hurt cruise
> performance? The principal explanation I got was
> that the inboard VG pair
> placement is important in helping to decrease
> interference (wing
> root/fuselage intersection) drag. Even though this
> interference drag
> probably represents less than 2% of the total drag
> of the airplane in
> cruise, the net effect of adding VG's on total drag
> may be a wash. Since
> the parasitic drag goes up by the square of
> airspeed, we wouldn't be
> surprised if some of the faster RV's see at least a
> few mph loss off the top
> end with VG's. We'll see what Terry Jantzi comes up
> with in his faster RV6
> and better testing gear.
>
> Would a 10+% decrease in 1 G stall speed be worth,
> say, a 1or 2% reduction
> in 75% cruise? I'd guess that'd be strictly a
> matter of personal
> preference.
>
> Mark
>
>
> From: "John Huft" <widgeon92l(at)email.msn.com>
> Subject: RE: RV-List: Myths For The Last
> Millennium-maneuvering speed
>
>
>
> As far as Cessna 180s go, the two companies that
> offer VGs have said that
> the difference between the two is that one works at
> a higher angle of attack
> (lower airspeed) than the other. They each have
> arguments why thier's is
> better, but I wonder if the VGs really only work at
> higher angle of attacks
> (that is, for 1G stalls) and not at lower angles of
> attack (higher
> airspeeds) so that they do not lower the stall speed
> for a 4G stall, which
> is what matters in turbulence. I suspect that is why
> there is no change in
> placards for maneuvering and turbulent air
> penetration speeds when VGs are
> added. This would also be the basis for claims that
> cruise speeds are
> unaffected.
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
====
Glenn Williams
8A
A&P
N81GW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | glenn williams <willig10(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | maneuvering speed and VG's |
look at it this way. Maneuvering speed is just that to
maneuver within an airspeed that does not overstress
the aircraft. The rv series aircraft is a pilot
controlled aircraft i.e. you can bend the airframe by
exceeding the VA (maneuvering speed) A cessna 152 for
example will most likely not let you hurt the airframe
unless you do something stupid. the vg's only come
into their own at stall speed. You will notice that
the vg's are placed side by side to make a \/ what
this is in essence is bournoulis principle (high
pressure low velocity or in our case low pressure high
velocity) this extra velocity will make the boundary
layer stick to the wing and reduce your stall speed.
That is all. everything else will pretty much stay the
same. As I said before there may be some parasitic
drag at high cruise but not enough to reduce your
overall performance. Maneuvering speed should be the
same. When I say Maneuver I am talking about just that
Maneuvering i.e aerobatics etc. the vg's help you out
during the landing portion or slow flight in that it
only reduces the stall speed of the a/c by about 5
mph. I hope this helps you.
Glenn Williams
A&P
8A
--- Scott.Fink(at)microchip.com wrote:
> Scott.Fink(at)Microchip.com
>
> I kind of hate to keep this thread going, but my
> understanding was that
> maneuvering speed was the speed below which the
> aircraft would stall
> before structureal damage could occur from either
> turbulance or full
> control deflection. It seems to me that if the VGs
> lower the stall speed,
> that the aircraft wouldn't stall before damage would
> occur at the (non VG)
> maneuvering speed. Am I thinking completely wrong
> here?
>
> Scott Fink
>
>
> glenn williams
> Sent by: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> 01/09/2001 08:45 AM
> Please respond to rv-list
>
>
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> cc:
> Subject: RE: RV-List: maneuvering
> speed and VG's
>
>
>
>
> Guys math aside let's look at what the purpose of
> the
> vg is for. It is simply keeping the boundary layer
> attached to the wing in a slow airspeed reducing
> your
> stall only. Nothing else is affected. i.e.
> maneuvering
> speed or Vne. No appreciable weight is added only a
> few ounces. There might be a little parasitic drag
> but
> not enough to notice on high cruise. So all this
> aside
> you are gaining more than you are losing. SO as an
> A&P
> I personally would have no problem installing them
> on
> a wing other than my personal preference is that
> anytime I see a leading edge device on ANY wing it
> tells me that the wing is not efficient. That said
> everything is a compromise in aviation. SO I
> personally will just get used to the stall speed on
> my
> airplane and deal with it. Hope this helps.
>
> Glenn Williams
> A&P
> 8A
> --- John Huft wrote:
> >
> >
> > Mark, this is very interesting. We know that stall
> > speed varies with the
> > square root of the load, so stall speed at 4 Gs
> > should be twice the 1 G
> > stall speed. So you are saying that the reduction
> of
> > stall speed (with VGs
> > installed) is twice as much - 10 kts instead 5?
> >
> > How did you test this? Can you really do
> repeatable
> > stalls, taking data at 4
> > Gs? And you did that before and after installing
> the
> > VGs?
> >
> > Thanks, John
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On
> Behalf
> > Of Mark Todd
> > Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 7:53 PM
> > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: RV-List: maneuvering speed and VG's
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I believe my 4 G stall speed was lowered by
> slightly
> > more than 10 knots with
> > the addition of VG's to my RV4. Obviously,
> that's
> > not surprising since the
> > 1 G stall speed reduction was in the 5 to 5 1/2
> knot
> > range. As far as I
> > know, VG's 'work' at all the airspeeds and angles
> of
> > attack we're likely to
> > encounter. I tried but couldn't measure a
> > difference in 75% cruise speed in
> > my RV4 at 185 mph TAS (neither could Terry B in
> his
> > RV6 or Rick D in his RV4
> > from what they tell me).
> >
> > VG's HAVE to increase parasitic drag some, so how
> > can they NOT hurt cruise
> > performance? The principal explanation I got was
> > that the inboard VG pair
> > placement is important in helping to decrease
> > interference (wing
> > root/fuselage intersection) drag. Even though
> this
> > interference drag
> > probably represents less than 2% of the total drag
> > of the airplane in
> > cruise, the net effect of adding VG's on total
> drag
> > may be a wash. Since
> > the parasitic drag goes up by the square of
> > airspeed, we wouldn't be
> > surprised if some of the faster RV's see at least
> a
> > few mph loss off the top
> > end with VG's. We'll see what Terry Jantzi comes
> up
> > with in his faster RV6
> > and better testing gear.
> >
> > Would a 10+% decrease in 1 G stall speed be worth,
> > say, a 1or 2% reduction
> > in 75% cruise? I'd guess that'd be strictly a
> > matter of personal
> > preference.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> > From: "John Huft" <widgeon92l(at)email.msn.com>
> > Subject: RE: RV-List: Myths For The Last
> > Millennium-maneuvering speed
> >
> >
> >
> > As far as Cessna 180s go, the two companies that
> > offer VGs have said that
> > the difference between the two is that one works
> at
> > a higher angle of attack
> > (lower airspeed) than the other. They each have
> > arguments why thier's is
> > better, but I wonder if the VGs really only work
> at
> > higher angle of attacks
> > (that is, for 1G stalls) and not at lower angles
> of
> > attack (higher
> > airspeeds) so that they do not lower the stall
> speed
> > for a 4G stall, which
> > is what matters in turbulence. I suspect that is
> why
> > there is no change in
> > placards for maneuvering and turbulent air
> > penetration speeds when VGs are
> > added. This would also be the basis for claims
> that
> > cruise speeds are
> > unaffected.
> >
> >
> >
> > through
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> >
> > Matronics!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ====
> Glenn Williams
> 8A
> A&P
>
=== message truncated ==
====
Glenn Williams
8A
A&P
N81GW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Terry Jantzi <tjantzi(at)netrover.com> |
I have posted the final results of testing vortex generators on my RV-6.
<http://ontariorvators.org/pitot/pitot.htm>
Terry Jantzi
Kitchener ON
RV-6 C-GZRV
--
<http://www.netrover.com/~tjantzi/terry/> Home Page
<http://www.ontariorvators.org> VAFOW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Trim...??? |
I agree with Larry. The one other thing to remember is that this aircraft
has a very short wingspan for its size compared to spam cans. Makes it much
better for aerobatics but also makes it very sensitive to roll trim changes.
Mike Robertson
RV-8A N809RS
>From: "Larry Pardue" <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Aileron Trim...???
>Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 18:49:35 -0700
>
>
> >
> >
> > OK...one more question for the group....Ive searched the archives on
>this
> >one and havent found too much on it....so here goes. Im trying to
>decide
>if
> >installing an adjustable aileron trim is worth while or not. I have a
>QB,
>so
> >the aileron is built and would be quite a project to install an electric
> >trim. I would consider the manual trim, but every GA aircraft that I
>have
> >flown hasn't had or hardly used the aileron trim and even the bigger ones
>I
> >fly at work that have aileron trim I very rarely use (unless I get a
>large
> >fuel imbalance or when on one engine).
>
>I can hardly imagine flying without the manual aileron trim. I use it
>several times a flight; partly because having a passenger or not and fuel
>imbalance makes a big difference in this airplane and partly because my
>airplane is slightly out of rig so that trim changes with speed (it might
>happen to you too). The great thing is this trim system is inexpensive and
>elegantly simple and effective.
>
>On an airplane with such light control forces I would hate to have to hold
>even a small amount of constant stick pressure.
>
>Larry Pardue
>Carlsbad, NM
>
>RV-6 N441LP Flying
>http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm
>
>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 NASA cooling duct |
Gordon,
The Naca scopps DO come with the finish kit. I got he QB which had the wing
already buttoned up. It was very easy to install it. Don't worry about it.
Button up your wing and carry on.
Mike Robertson
RV-8A N809RS
>From: Gordon Robertson <gordon(at)safemail.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: RV-8 NASA cooling duct
>Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 05:45:35 -0800
>
>
>Hello folks,
>
>This is a question to those RV-8 standard builders who have been here
>before me. I am about to close out the right wing, and the
>instructions tell me that the NASA cooling duct should be attached to
>the lower inboard skin before closing. But I do not have the duct in
>the kit, and I have heard somewhere that the duct is in the fuselage
>kit.
>
>Is this true? If so, can the duct be attached by reaching in through
>the wing rib holes?
>
>Thanks for info.
>
>Gordon Robertson
>RV8 wings
>
>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Very professional job, Terry! You have good lab technique!
Dennis Persyk N600DP
-----Original Message-----
From: Terry Jantzi <tjantzi(at)netrover.com>
Date: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 4:04 PM
Subject: RV-List: VG testing
>
>I have posted the final results of testing vortex generators on my RV-6.
><http://ontariorvators.org/pitot/pitot.htm>
>
>Terry Jantzi
>Kitchener ON
>RV-6 C-GZRV
>--
><http://www.netrover.com/~tjantzi/terry/> Home Page
> <http://www.ontariorvators.org> VAFOW
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Pardue <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net> |
>
>
>I have posted the final results of testing vortex generators on my RV-6.
><http://ontariorvators.org/pitot/pitot.htm>
>
>Terry Jantzi
>Kitchener ON
>RV-6 C-GZRV
I think Terry deserves a lot of credit for not just speculating and not
just posting suspect data. It appears to me that he has found out some
real things.
My summary would be that the VGs lower the stall speed by about 3 knots
CAS, a small but maybe a significant change. Assuming Terry made a small
error in the data on his web page (it seems to show a top speed increase
with VGs) they also lowered the top speed by about 3 knots. So, the
whole speed range is decreased by 3 knots. That could or could not be
worthwhile depending on what an individual values. It looks better if
you look at it in terms of speed ratio: 3.84 with VGs as opposed to 3.66
without.
A surprise is that Terry's data shows essentially no change in stall
speed (CAS) with flap position when the VGs are installed and only 2
knots change without VGs.
The big question is does Terry think they are valuable enough that he is
going to keep them installed and put up with the esthetic and wing
cleaning drawbacks?
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP
http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
| Subject: | maneuvering speed and VG's |
Scott:
If I understand your post correctly, you're not thinking wrong. If VGs
lower the stall speed, then they will lower the manoeuvring speed. Here's
why.
Stall speed and manoeuvring speed are two points on the same curve, that
curve being the relationship between lift (load factor) and speed when the
wing is at maximum angle of attack (maximum lift coefficient). Level
flight stall occurs at the point where the curve crosses 1 G of lift
(load). Manoeuvring speed occurs at the point where the curve crosses
the limiting load factor (say, 6 G for an RV). The shape of the curve is
determined by the shape of the airplane (mostly, by the shape of the
wing).
If you change the shape of the airplane (by deploying flaps, for
example), you now have a new curve, with new stall and manoeuvring speed
points.
When you add VGs, you allow the air to remain "attached" (i.e. you don't
stall the wing) until you reach a higher angle of attack. So you now have
a higher maximum angle of attack, a higher maximum lift coefficient, and a
different curve altogether. Your stall speed will be lower, and so will
your manoeuvring speed. This has to be true, because they are simply two
points on one curve.
Where some people get off track with this is by thinking that VGs are
meant to keep the airflow attached at low airpseed. This is incorrect.
VGs keep the airflow attached at high angles of attack (and hence at high
lift coefficients). Both 1 G stall and manoeuvring speed occur at the
same (high) angle of attack.
Tedd McHenry
Van's Air Force
Western Canada Wing
tedd(at)vansairforce.org
http://www.vansairforce.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Whitaker <rmwhitaker(at)lanl.gov> |
Hello List,
I'm the proud new owner of an RV9 empennage kit just received
last week. I'm in the midst of gathering tools and have been looking
at Avery, Brown and Cleaveland catalogs. I've looked in the archives
and all say that these three companies sell quality stuff.
The one thing that I've noticed is that Brown's dimple die sets are
a lot less expensive then Avery and Cleaveland. I'm well aware of
the old adage, "you get what you pay for". Those of you that have
had experience with Brown dimple dies as well as with A or C's
dimple dies please comment. Do Brown's dies dimple as well as
their competitor's dies? As far as I can tell, the archives are
silent on this particular topic.
Thanks,
Rob Whitaker
RV-9 Emgennage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Knicholas2(at)AOL.COM |
FWIW. I have purchased tools from both Avery and Cleaveland. By far the
better service was from Avery. The tools (from both companies) are top notch
but I can always count on the order from Avery arriving 3-7 days faster.
...keep on building... I am working on the RV9 wing....GREAT FUN!!
Kim Nicholas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RVPilot4(at)webtv.net (BOBE.) |
I have dealt with Avery and they are the very best.Bob Avery is a firrst
class gentleman and they absolutely stand behind what they sell.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Im7shannon(at)AOL.COM |
In a message dated 1/9/01 4:05:05 PM Pacific Standard Time,
Knicholas2(at)AOL.COM writes:
> FWIW. I have purchased tools from both Avery and Cleaveland. By far the
> better service was from Avery. The tools (from both companies) are top
> notch
> but I can always count on the order from Avery arriving 3-7 days faster.
>
> ...keep on building... I am working on the RV9 wing....GREAT FUN!!
>
> Kim Nicholas
I second the motion, Avery stuff arrives very quick, and their dimple dies
are great. They have one that is small in diamerter and long length that fits
into tight places and behind flanges. A must have in your tool kit
Kevin
-9A wiring and panel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Huft" <widgeon92l(at)email.msn.com> |
Terry
First, I want to thank you for the fine work you did, and especially for
sharing it with all of us.
I do have two questions ... on the cruise speed chart, what is VG+ and VG-?
Which one is with VGs and which without?
Also, what did you decide. Will you keep the VGs, or give 'em back?
Thanks again, John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Terry Jantzi
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 2:30 PM
Subject: RV-List: VG testing
I have posted the final results of testing vortex generators on my RV-6.
<http://ontariorvators.org/pitot/pitot.htm>
Terry Jantzi
Kitchener ON
RV-6 C-GZRV
--
<http://www.netrover.com/~tjantzi/terry/> Home Page
<http://www.ontariorvators.org> VAFOW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiberglass primer |
Scott,
Check with the EAA book store. They sell a couple of very good how-to books
on fiberglassing. You also might want to check with Andy here on this list.
Andy??
>From: "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: "Rv-List (E-mail)"
>Subject: RV-List: Fiberglass primer
>Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 07:42:42 -0800
>
>
>
>No, not that kind of primer! Ye gods! Who wants to get that going again!
>No I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions as to a good how-to book,
>video, or whatever for fiberglass? I've never worked with the stuff and
>feel a little intimidated by it.
>--
>Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA
>Network Administrator
>Union Safe Deposit Bank
>209-946-5116
>
>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John" <fasching(at)amigo.net> |
I decided to share this with the rv-list after sending it to Terry
personally.
-----Original Message-----
From: John <fasching(at)amigo.net>
Date: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 7:33 PM
Subject: VG's
>Terry, aside from numbers (which I cannot accurately determine) there is a
>marked, although subjective, change in my RV6A after the VG's were
>attached. Here is what I noticed rather strongly:
>
>1. Stall was FAR, FAR more 'gentle' - that is, the nose-down pitch upon
>stall is far less than before, and recovery is quicker after hands off of
>the stick.
>
>2. A LOT more buffeting prior to stall than before. Lots more.
>
>3. A far more solid feel in slow flight, both straight ahead and in turns.
>
>4. I have a LRI (Lift Reserve Indicator) installed - without changing its
>probe's angular setting, stalls now occur when the analog indicator needle
>is well into the "red zone" - that's the lower end of the indicator scale
>where I had adjusted the pick up probe so that the needle just 'touched'
>the red zone at the point of stall previous to the VG's being installed.
Now
>the needle is about 1/3rd of the way into that lower end, or red zone. That
>seems to be telling me that the angle of attack is higher at the stall
point
>with the VG's installed, which makes sense to me. That also corresponds
with
>my sense that the aircraft's nose is pointed upward far greater than
before
>in the stalls that I have made.
>
>FWIW
>RV6A Salida, CO
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave" <dhrycauk(at)telusplanet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: MP3 player possibility. |
the problem with not using a disk is that you would then require a large
amount of memory and unless its a flash memory would probably have to down
load the songs each time you power down. I have not tried the portables but
have seen that some had 32 megs of ram, equivalent to about 8 songs. can
anybody tell me if the portables lose the songs with a loss of power?
Dave Hrycauk
RV-8 flaps ... fuse here
Lacombe, AB. Canada
http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dhrycauk/index.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Shook <billshook(at)mindspring.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 6:12 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: MP3 player possibility.
>
> I thought the whole reason for wanting MP-3 in an aircraft is the lack of
a
> disk and the subsequent lack of skipping. Do they not make a large
> capacity portable that doesn't have any moving parts?
>
> Bill
> -4 wings
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Richard Riley" <richard(at)riley.net>
> To: ;
> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 6:51 PM
> Subject: Re: RV-List: MP3 player possibility.
>
>
> >
> > I found the solution. Aiwa has an in dash unit, the CDC-MP3
> > http://www.aiwa.com/Catalog00/Products2.asp?id=94
> >
> > that goes for about $300 at Crutchfield, but there're starting to be
> > portables at $100 like the MPFit
> > http://www.easybuy2000.com/store/?cat=mp3%20players&subcat=mpFit
> > and the genecia
> > http://www.computergeeks.com/mp3/portable/default.asp
> >
> > They let you play about 10 hours on a single disk. Very cool. Thanks
for
> > all the help.
> >
> >
> > >
> > >Paul;
> > >
> > >the thing with MP3's is that you could store over 150 songs on a single
> > >disk. cd changes would not happen too often.
> > >
> > >Dave Hrycauk
> > >RV-8 Ailerons, Fuse inventoried
> > >Lacombe, AB
> > >http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dhrycauk/index.htm
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: Paul Besing <pbesing(at)rmi.net>
> > >To:
> > >Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 7:34 AM
> > >Subject: Re: RV-List: MP3 player possibility.
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> If you are going to put the MP3's on a cd, just convert and burn them
> in
> > >CD
> > >> audio format instead of MP3 and play it in your cd player...
> > >>
> > >> Paul Besing
> > >> RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
> > >> http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
> > >> Finish Kit (Still)
> > >>
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> From: "Steven DiNieri" <capsteve(at)adelphia.net>
> > >> To:
> > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 9:22 PM
> > >> Subject: RE: RV-List: MP3 player possibility.
> > >>
> > >>
>
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > I intend to get an IPAQ with the control vision software soon, but
I
> > >need
> > >> > something else in that realm as well. What I want is the smallest,
> > >> > simplest way of playing MP3's off a CD-ROM to feed into my
intercom.
> 32
> > >> > megs worth of MP3's are fine, but 600+ megs and cheap, exchangable
> media
> > >> is
> > >> > what I want. Anyone have a suggestion?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > try the neo 35 from ssi. it uses 3.5 inch standard hard
> drives,
> > >> and retails
> > >> > for about 219..effectively you could have a 20-30 gig MP3 player
for
> 219
> > >> > plus hd cost. if you get the remote display the neo will also act
as
> a
> > >> > changer with mounting out of site... it comes with two trays one
for
> the
> > >> > computer and one for the vehicle. when its in your computer it acts
> as
> > >an
> > >> > additional hd.
> > >> >
> > >> > http://www.think-box.com/neo35.html
> > >> >
> > >> > Steven DiNieri
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Richard Riley
> > Renaissance Composites
> > 3025 Airport Ave
> > Santa Monica, CA 90405
> > 310.391.1943
> > www.berkut.com
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul & Gerti RV-4 F-1 Rocket 006" <gertivs(at)netzero.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stero...the easy way |
For those interested in an ultra easy stereo installation try the PS
Engineering "Muse". A simple in-line plug-in unit that allow you to use a
portable cd, cassette or mp3 player with your headset. Made specifically for
aviation headsets, has a mute feature for radio or intercom traffic. Read
about it at http://www.ps-engineering.com/. Works as advertised.
Paul Vander Schuur
Shop online without a credit card
http://www.rocketcash.com
RocketCash, a NetZero subsidiary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Ervin <bjervin(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Speaking of Aileron trim ??? |
Thanks Mike, That's exactly what I was talking about!!
Bill
Mike Nellis wrote:
>
>
> Bill, I will be attempting exactly what you're talking about. I'm taking
> my inspiration from Dick Martins RV8. I'll be going off of memory and I'll
> document it on my web site. Click here for a picture of Dicks setup.
>
> http://mnellis.jnet.net/rv-6_page/images/DCP00968.JPG
>
> Mike Nellis - RV-6 N699BM (res)
> Plainfield, IL
> Building Tanks
> http://mnellis.jnet.net/rv-6_page
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bill Ervin" <bjervin(at)home.com>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 9:50 PM
> Subject: RV-List: Speaking of Aileron trim ???
>
> >
> > Has anyone seen plans or info on a built in aileron trim tab. What I
> > mean by built in is similar to the elevator trim tab, not just an add on
> > tab riveted to the trailing edge.
> >
> > I've only seen this on a couple of RVs and it looks alot better than
> > vans tab. A bit more work maybe, but it looks good and no one would bump
> > it (read: put a gash in their leg) at airshows. Not that the looky-loos
> > would ever do anything like that.
> >
> > Bill
> > RV-6 Fus
> > Spokane Wa
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV8bldr" <RV8bldr(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | MP3 player possibility. |
Dave:
Just bought my wife a COMPAQ MP3 player (PA-1). Smaller than a pack of
cigarettes, two 32mb non-volatile (flash) memory cards each of which is
about the size of a postage stamp. Both cards together are less than 3/16"
thick. Uses 2AAA batteries for about 10 hours use, backlit display, USB
interface. The number of songs you can store is adjustable, by altering the
compression amount when either converting a CD or other source to MP3 or
when you download to the player. Cost was $249 before a $50 rebate. I have
about 94 minutes of music stored, with 1.8mb still free. I don't know the
cost of the memory cards, but they are removable so you could have a
collection of music and swap the cards.
Hope this helps,
Russ Christopher
RV-8 Emp, wing coming Feb.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dave
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 6:48 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: MP3 player possibility.
>
>
> the problem with not using a disk is that you would then require a large
> amount of memory and unless its a flash memory would probably have to down
> load the songs each time you power down. I have not tried the
> portables but
> have seen that some had 32 megs of ram, equivalent to about 8 songs. can
> anybody tell me if the portables lose the songs with a loss of power?
>
> Dave Hrycauk
> RV-8 flaps ... fuse here
> Lacombe, AB. Canada
> http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dhrycauk/index.htm
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fiberglass primer |
| From: | Jim_Andrews(at)tivoli.com |
01/10/2001 07:30:47 AM
Scott and others,
As advertised :-) Please check out the latest addition to my web site.
http://www.homestead.com/RV8A/files/index.html
In the sprit of the tradition that I have learned from other generous
builders on this list as well as others in my immediate geography, I have
put together a tutorial on fiberglassing. This is certainly not the last
word on the subject. It's just what worked for me and others before me.
Enjoy,
- Jim Andrews
RV-8A ( FWF )
O-360 A1A Sensenich 85
N89JA reserved
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <stuckle(at)ifc.utc.com> |
"'RV-List'"@matronics.com
| Subject: | Transponder Antenna |
Listers,
Does anybody have any designs for constructing your own transponder
antenna? It would seem that that $68.95 simple device could be constructed
out of a chassis mount BNC connector and piano wire.....
Fred Stucklen
N925RV (1700+ hrs/7.5 Yrs)
E. Windsor, CT 06088
WK Email: stuckle(at)ifc.utc.com
Hm/Travel Email: wstucklen1(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Thompson <grobdriver(at)yahoo.com> |
--- Robert Whitaker wrote:
> The one thing that I've noticed is that Brown's dimple die sets are
> a lot less expensive then Avery and Cleaveland. I'm well aware of
> the old adage, "you get what you pay for".
The corollary to this rule is:
"Buy expensive tools, and only cry once".
Mike Thompson
Austin, TX
-6 N140RV (Reserved)
Canopy (Yes, STILL)
________________________________________________________________________________
This is just my experience,
I purchased a set of dies from Brown and they work well, I use them both in a
Tatco squeezer and "Avery Tool" bench frame.
The counter sinks are consistent and have not noticed and deformation around
the hole.
One note; the squeezer works best and I use it as often as practical. For
holes exceeding the squeezer depth, the Avery frame must be used. Some
practice with it to establish a fell for how hard to strike is critical and
if you notice some deformation in the surrounding aluminum try just a bit
harder a hit.
You also might want to pick up a dimple set that uses a blind rivet gun, I
needed this for the last hole on every row closest to the fold.
Good luck
Tracy
RV8 tail complete, waiting for my wings to arrive!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Lycoming O-320 Type Certificate Data Sheet E-274 |
I've got the link to the TCDS on my RV-Links page. It is too long to try
to post here, as it would get truncated by the wonders of e-mail.
Go to: http://www.cyberus.ca/~khorton/rvlinks.html
Then go to the Engine and Prop section. You'll see a link to the various
TCDS for engines that normally go in RVs. Note that after selecting the
link, you'll need to click on the little PDF icon at the top left of the page.
I'm on the road for a couple of weeks, and have very spotty e-mail access.
Kevin Horton RV-8 (canopy)
khorton(at)cyberus.ca (613) 821-7862 (home)
Ottawa, Canada (613) 952-4319 (work)
http://eccentrix.com/misc/rv8/
>
>Bryan,
>
>You're right. The TCD is E-274. I would email it to you but it is too big.
>If you can't find it give me a call back and I will see if I can find it on
>the web for you.
>
>Mike Robertson
>RV-8A N809RS
>
>
> >From: "Jones, Bryan D." <bryan.jones@lyondell-citgo.com>
> >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> >To: "'rv-list(at)matronics.com'"
> >Subject: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Type Certificate Data Sheet E-274
> >Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 14:16:28 -0600
> >
> ><bryan.jones@lyondell-citgo.com>
> >
> >I've looked everywhere I can think to look and still cannot find a copy of
> >the type certificate for Lycoming O-320 series engines. I believe it's
> >E-274. Can anyone help?
> >
> >Bryan Jones -8 765BJ ~64-hrs
> >Pearland, Texas
> >
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Thompson <grobdriver(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Transponder Antenna |
--- "Stephen J. Soule" wrote:
>
> Electric Bob was selling them last year for $10 each.
No more. He got a handfull of them for a song when a friend was
cleaning out his hanger.
He sold what he had on the web site and sold the last one at a workshop
in Dallas last Spring (Jerry, did you get that one?).
Mike Thompson
Austin, TX
-6 N140RV (Reserved)
Canopy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
It sounds like they're proposing something similar to the RPP we've had in
Canada for several years. Our permit does require training--essentially
the same training as a Private Pilot licence, minus the procedural stuff
required at a controlled airport. If that's how it's implemented, I think
you'll find it's a good program.
Anecdotal evidence: All the pilots I know who've gone through the
training in Canada have gone on to get their regular Private Pilot
licence. They were all also trained in "stanard" training aircraft
(C-150s and -172s). I'm not sure if that would be allowed under the
system described in the AvWeb message. The effect of the program in
Canada has been to lower the economic barrier to getting started as a
pilot.
Tedd McHenry
Van's Air Force
Western Canada Wing
tedd(at)vansairforce.org
http://www.vansairforce.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | glenn williams <willig10(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | maneuvering speed and VG's |
Todd I respectfully disagree with your thinking here.
Heres why. A spoiler or flap is a device that is
attached mechanically to the airframe and it is
restricted to a certain deployment speed. Not so with
the vg's they are not "mechanically attached" hence
the maneuver speed will stay the same on a given
airplane. Granted the vg's keep the airflow attached
to the wings at higher angles of atack at high g
maneuvering and also at the low end speed envelope.
However this will not LOWER your maneuvering speed of
the aircraft. As no mechanical advantage is coming
into play here. I sincerely hope I have not stepped on
anyones toes here, I have been in the aviation
industry for a while and I have seen a lot of
misconceptions out there and this vg thing seems to be
one of them.
Glenn Williams
A&P
8A
--- Tedd McHenry wrote:
>
>
> Scott:
>
> If I understand your post correctly, you're not
> thinking wrong. If VGs
> lower the stall speed, then they will lower the
> manoeuvring speed. Here's
> why.
>
> Stall speed and manoeuvring speed are two points on
> the same curve, that
> curve being the relationship between lift (load
> factor) and speed when the
> wing is at maximum angle of attack (maximum lift
> coefficient). Level
> flight stall occurs at the point where the curve
> crosses 1 G of lift
> (load). Manoeuvring speed occurs at the point where
> the curve crosses
> the limiting load factor (say, 6 G for an RV). The
> shape of the curve is
> determined by the shape of the airplane (mostly, by
> the shape of the
> wing).
>
> If you change the shape of the airplane (by
> deploying flaps, for
> example), you now have a new curve, with new stall
> and manoeuvring speed
> points.
>
> When you add VGs, you allow the air to remain
> "attached" (i.e. you don't
> stall the wing) until you reach a higher angle of
> attack. So you now have
> a higher maximum angle of attack, a higher maximum
> lift coefficient, and a
> different curve altogether. Your stall speed will
> be lower, and so will
> your manoeuvring speed. This has to be true,
> because they are simply two
> points on one curve.
>
> Where some people get off track with this is by
> thinking that VGs are
> meant to keep the airflow attached at low airpseed.
> This is incorrect.
> VGs keep the airflow attached at high angles of
> attack (and hence at high
> lift coefficients). Both 1 G stall and manoeuvring
> speed occur at the
> same (high) angle of attack.
>
> Tedd McHenry
> Van's Air Force
> Western Canada Wing
> tedd(at)vansairforce.org
> http://www.vansairforce.org
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
====
Glenn Williams
8A
A&P
N81GW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
| Subject: | Re: maneuvering speed and VG's |
Boyd:
Manoeuvring speed is the speed at (or above) which the airplane is capable
of developing limiting load. It has nothing to do with the mass of the
aircraft, except that when you want to express limiting load in Gz rather
than units of force you have to divide by the mass. It has to do only
with how much lift (force) the wing can develop, and how much load (force)
the structure can withstand.
If you go back and look a Terry's numbers, you'll see that the 2G stall
speed is reduced by the VGs. You'll find the explanation for why this is
so in a previous post of mine in this thread. If the airplane produces 1G
at lower airspeed with the VGs, and 2G at lower airspeed with the VGs,
it's reasonable to assume that it will produce xG at a lower airspeed with
the VGs. Since mass isn't changing (significantly) during Terry's tests,
we can therefore conclude that the airplane is capable of generating any
given lift/load-factor/force-on-the-structure, including the limiting
load, at a lower airspeed with the VGs than without.
It's right there in Terry's numbers, if you know what manoeuvring speed
is.
Tedd McHenry
Van's Air Force
Western Canada Wing
tedd(at)vansairforce.org
http://www.vansairforce.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com> |
| Subject: | Fiberglass primer |
Beautiful! Now that's the kind of info this list needs. Thanks Jim!
--
Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA
Network Administrator
Union Safe Deposit Bank
209-946-5116
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim_Andrews(at)tivoli.com
[mailto:Jim_Andrews(at)tivoli.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 5:30 AM
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: Fiberglass primer
Scott and others,
As advertised :-) Please check out the latest addition to
my web site.
http://www.homestead.com/RV8A/files/index.html
In the sprit of the tradition that I have learned from other
generous
builders on this list as well as others in my immediate
geography, I have
put together a tutorial on fiberglassing. This is certainly
not the last
word on the subject. It's just what worked for me and
others before me.
Enjoy,
- Jim Andrews
RV-8A ( FWF )
O-360 A1A Sensenich 85
N89JA reserved
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Munn, Mike" <mmunn(at)jajones.com> |
| Subject: | Unison Lasar ignition |
Guys,
Has anyone installed a UMA electronic analog tach which operates from one
mag p-lead using the Unison Lasar system? If so, how have you wired it?
Mike Munn
RV8QB wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Zilik" <zilik(at)bewellnet.com> |
Lots of replies about fast service but few about the original post. I
have used all 3 brands of dimple dies and can not tell the difference. I
highly recomend Brown's dies. This was not a scientific study, just my
observations so it most likely usless information.
--
Gary Zilik - Pine Junction, Colorado
RV-6A N99PZ Flying
Engine: Aerosport Power O-360-A1A
Prop: Sensenich 72FM8S9-1-83
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wig wag circuit |
I'm looking for a source and model numbers of the flasher and relay (or the
stuff to build the relay) to construct Bob's wigwag circuit. (wigwag.pdf with
the lights and wigwag cicuit controlled by two switches). I've got the
switches and am at the point where I need to get this done, but the flasher
and relay aren't available at the Aeroelectric site.
If someone can provide a list of components, I'll just order them from
RadioShack.
Thanks,
Keith
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Brame <charleyb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Anti-ice (Carb Heat) for Fuel Injected Engines |
Listers,
I realize this is revisiting an old thread, but the recent discussions
about the air box hose adaptor triggered more questions. As I am
planning a fuel injection system on my RV-6A, and was not planned to
install any induction system heating, I am now rethinking the situation.
In theory, at least, fuel injected engines do not require induction heat
because there is no venturi to encourage icing. Carb icing is usually
associated with lower power settings. However, Dennis Persyk's comments
referred to an C-150 carb icing incident that apparently occurred at
high power. It also brought to mind an induction icing incident I had in
a jet airplane. It is a long story, but it occurred with moderate
temperatures and relatively low humidity (on the ground in Tucson, AZ.)
IMHO, rime ice, in particular, can build up anywhere in an induction
system, such as in the intake or on the filter. The insidious part of
rime ice buildup is it can occur PRIOR to reaching an induction heating
system, and based on the jet situation, rime can be produced by
accelerated air in any induction system.
Has anyone with a fuel injection system in an RV ever had problems that
could possibly be induction icing related? Has anyone with a fuel
injection system installed induction (carb) heat?
For Dennis: between what two surfaces does your Iceman detector look for
ice? Is it installed in the carb venturi or prior to the carb intake?
Charlie Brame
RV-6A QB
San Antonio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RVPilot4(at)webtv.net (BOBE.) |
If an untrained pilot causes an accident by blundering into class B
corridors we will all suffer.As much as I dislike FAA ,while they might
cut you a little slack with retraining in some cases,they absolutely
will not tolerate incursions or worse with the heavies.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fiberglass primer |
| From: | Jim_Andrews(at)tivoli.com |
01/10/2001 11:00:38 AM
>Did you do any filling or lay strips of fiberglass on the inside of the
>airbox?
Thanks!
Oh yeah. Good question. I plan on having an addendum to my basic tutorial
that has to do with the finer points of buid-up. After the exterior layer
of glass was able to hold the new airbox snout in the right place... I
ended up filling in the interior void with a resin and cotton fiber mixture
and then put down another layer of glass on the inside after I sanded the
cotton flush. I just sanded off the rough edges of the glass strips and
primed after that. If it had been an exterior piece like the cowl, I would
have done the glass bubbles or Superfil to make for an acceptable paint
surface. Lot's more finish work when it can be seen from the outside.
- Jim Andrews
RV-8A ( FWF )
O-360 A1A Sensenich 85
N89JA reserved
http://www.homestead.com/RV8A/files/index.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Anti-ice (Carb Heat) for Fuel Injected Engines |
Carb Icing can occur at any power setting if the humidity is high enough for
temperatures from 32 to 100.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Brame" <charleyb(at)earthlink.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 10:40 AM
Subject: RV-List: Anti-ice (Carb Heat) for Fuel Injected Engines
>
> Listers,
>
> I realize this is revisiting an old thread, but the recent discussions
> about the air box hose adaptor triggered more questions. As I am
> planning a fuel injection system on my RV-6A, and was not planned to
> install any induction system heating, I am now rethinking the situation.
>
> In theory, at least, fuel injected engines do not require induction heat
> because there is no venturi to encourage icing. Carb icing is usually
> associated with lower power settings. However, Dennis Persyk's comments
> referred to an C-150 carb icing incident that apparently occurred at
> high power. It also brought to mind an induction icing incident I had in
> a jet airplane. It is a long story, but it occurred with moderate
> temperatures and relatively low humidity (on the ground in Tucson, AZ.)
> IMHO, rime ice, in particular, can build up anywhere in an induction
> system, such as in the intake or on the filter. The insidious part of
> rime ice buildup is it can occur PRIOR to reaching an induction heating
> system, and based on the jet situation, rime can be produced by
> accelerated air in any induction system.
>
> Has anyone with a fuel injection system in an RV ever had problems that
> could possibly be induction icing related? Has anyone with a fuel
> injection system installed induction (carb) heat?
>
> For Dennis: between what two surfaces does your Iceman detector look for
> ice? Is it installed in the carb venturi or prior to the carb intake?
>
> Charlie Brame
> RV-6A QB
> San Antonio
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Anti-ice (Carb Heat) for Fuel Injected Engines |
The Iceman carb ice detector is marketed by Iceman Aviation Supplies. Their
web site is http://www.dica.ca/iceindex.htm and it has good discussions on
carb ice.
I believe the sensor is installed in the venturi -- however I am not sure of
the proper term for its location so please take a look at
http://www.dica.ca/installat.htm which has several sketches depicting the
installation of the sensor in the carb.
I am always surprised to see carb temp monitors installed in RVs -- in any
plane for that matter. The carb ice detector tells you when you are getting
ice and then confirms that the ice is gone when you pull carb heat. The
temp monitor only indicates that icing conditions are POSSIBLE, but tells
you little more! I'd suggest that if you are concerned about carb icing,
you spend the extra bucks and go for the definitive instrument.
Dennis Persyk 6A N600DP 26 hours with 0.0001 hours confirmed carb ice
-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Brame <charleyb(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 11:03 AM
Subject: RV-List: Anti-ice (Carb Heat) for Fuel Injected Engines
>
>Listers,
>
>I realize this is revisiting an old thread, but the recent discussions
>about the air box hose adaptor triggered more questions. As I am
>planning a fuel injection system on my RV-6A, and was not planned to
>install any induction system heating, I am now rethinking the situation.
>
>In theory, at least, fuel injected engines do not require induction heat
>because there is no venturi to encourage icing. Carb icing is usually
>associated with lower power settings. However, Dennis Persyk's comments
>referred to an C-150 carb icing incident that apparently occurred at
>high power. It also brought to mind an induction icing incident I had in
>a jet airplane. It is a long story, but it occurred with moderate
>temperatures and relatively low humidity (on the ground in Tucson, AZ.)
>IMHO, rime ice, in particular, can build up anywhere in an induction
>system, such as in the intake or on the filter. The insidious part of
>rime ice buildup is it can occur PRIOR to reaching an induction heating
>system, and based on the jet situation, rime can be produced by
>accelerated air in any induction system.
>
>Has anyone with a fuel injection system in an RV ever had problems that
>could possibly be induction icing related? Has anyone with a fuel
>injection system installed induction (carb) heat?
>
>For Dennis: between what two surfaces does your Iceman detector look for
>ice? Is it installed in the carb venturi or prior to the carb intake?
>
>Charlie Brame
>RV-6A QB
>San Antonio
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Well I bought almost all my tools from brown and the rest from cleaveland.
My dimple dies are fine, Mark fredricks looked over my stuff and thought it
was the same so... It all works good on my F1 rocket. I like browns pricing
and alot of the stuff comes from the same supplier. After talking to brown
it seemed the reason they were cheaper was volume as they normally sell to
A&P's and the homebuild market is secondary which is the reverse of
cleaveland and avery.
In a message dated 1/10/2001 11:58:30 AM Central Standard Time, lm4(at)juno.com
writes:
<< Hello List,
>
> I'm the proud new owner of an RV9 empennage kit just received
> last week. I'm in the midst of gathering tools and have been looking
> at Avery, Brown and Cleaveland catalogs. I've looked in the archives
> and all say that these three companies sell quality stuff.
>
> The one thing that I've noticed is that Brown's dimple die sets are
> a lot less expensive then Avery and Cleaveland. I'm well aware of
> the old adage, "you get what you pay for". Those of you that have
> had experience with Brown dimple dies as well as with A or C's
> dimple dies please comment. Do Brown's dies dimple as well as
> their competitor's dies? As far as I can tell, the archives are
> silent on this particular topic.
>
> Thanks,
> Rob Whitaker
> RV-9 Emgennage >>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com> |
Thanks for the inquiries on my Prestolite starter I posted for sale. I've
found a local guy who wants it which will save on the shipping.
I recommend Central Air Parts as a source for starters, flywheels, etc. The
other salvage operators also typically have them. The drive units can
usually be cleaned up and made operable if they start to hang up. The
motors themselves can be rebuilt by local automotive starter rebuilders.
Just love going Experimental!
Thanks again for the replies,
Brian Denk
RV8 N94BD
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Anti-ice (Carb Heat) for Fuel Injected Engines |
01/10/2001 13:41:24
My old Mooney had a alternate air door which drew inside-cowl-air into the
induction system when I pulled a knob. This was useful in the event of a
ice build-up in the intake inlet. Actually the door was spring loaded
too.... and if the front of the induction system was closed off in someway
(ice, bird..whatever) the spring loaded alt. air door would allow the
induction system to draw-in air (from the inside of the cowl area). This
"production" system of supplying alternate air might give a clew how to
safely set up your bird.
Charles Brame
To: RV List
Sent by: cc:
owner-rv-list-server@mat Subject: RV-List: Anti-ice
(Carb Heat) for Fuel Injected
ronics.com Engines
01/10/2001 11:40 AM
Please respond to
rv-list
Listers,
I realize this is revisiting an old thread, but the recent discussions
about the air box hose adaptor triggered more questions. As I am
planning a fuel injection system on my RV-6A, and was not planned to
install any induction system heating, I am now rethinking the situation.
In theory, at least, fuel injected engines do not require induction heat
because there is no venturi to encourage icing. Carb icing is usually
associated with lower power settings. However, Dennis Persyk's comments
referred to an C-150 carb icing incident that apparently occurred at
high power. It also brought to mind an induction icing incident I had in
a jet airplane. It is a long story, but it occurred with moderate
temperatures and relatively low humidity (on the ground in Tucson, AZ.)
IMHO, rime ice, in particular, can build up anywhere in an induction
system, such as in the intake or on the filter. The insidious part of
rime ice buildup is it can occur PRIOR to reaching an induction heating
system, and based on the jet situation, rime can be produced by
accelerated air in any induction system.
Has anyone with a fuel injection system in an RV ever had problems that
could possibly be induction icing related? Has anyone with a fuel
injection system installed induction (carb) heat?
For Dennis: between what two surfaces does your Iceman detector look for
ice? Is it installed in the carb venturi or prior to the carb intake?
Charlie Brame
RV-6A QB
San Antonio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Garth Shearing" <garth(at)Islandnet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Transponder Antenna |
The short answer is, yes you can. The tip of the piano wire should be about
2.5 inches from the ground plane.
However, there are a few disadvantages to this. First of all, it is kind of
difficult to solder the piano wire to the wire socket in the connector. Not
impossible, but difficult. Easier if the insulator in the connector is
teflon. Secondly, the narrow wire only produces satisfactory performance
over a narrow frequency range (about 3%). The transponder frequencies are
1030 and 1090 MHz. The narrow wire won't cover both of these frequencies
ideally. You'll notice that most of the antennas manufactured use a
relatively fat wire. That provides better service over the band, is
stonger, and is safer, particularly if there is a large ball soldered or
welded onto the end.
In order to broaden out the operating band, some antenna manufacturers make
the antenna look like a blade for wide band performance, and enclose it in
plastic for strength, appearance, and lower drag. The blade is the same
length as above, but can be up to an inch in diameter, oriented
longitudinally on the aircraft. Keep the bottom of the blade about a
quarter inch or more from the ground plane.
BTW, the transponder antenna on my VariEze uses squashed brass tube about
3/16 inch diameter, bought at a hobby store.
Or just buy one!
Garth.
RV-6A, 75%
----- Original Message -----
From: Stucklen, Frederic IFC <stuckle(at)ifc.utc.com>
<"'RV-List'"@matronics.com>
Sent: January 10, 2001 5:31 AM
Subject: RV-List: Transponder Antenna
>
> Listers,
>
> Does anybody have any designs for constructing your own transponder
> antenna? It would seem that that $68.95 simple device could be constructed
> out of a chassis mount BNC connector and piano wire.....
>
> Fred Stucklen
> N925RV (1700+ hrs/7.5 Yrs)
> E. Windsor, CT 06088
> WK Email: stuckle(at)ifc.utc.com
> Hm/Travel Email: wstucklen1(at)juno.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Jory" <rickjory(at)email.msn.com> |
Guys, I don't want to start a long thread, but I owned both a Tatco and
Avery. For my money, and for a lot of reasons, I think the Avery is a much,
much better squeezer than the Tatco. The handles are longer (more
leverage), changing the dies/heads seems so much easier, quicker. The
handles have a bigger diameter (easier to grip) and better material for the
cushioning. Again, I owned both, and sold the Tatco. If you haven't bought
the squeezer, my two cents says go Avery.
Rick Jory
----- Original Message -----
From: <TD2016(at)AOL.COM>
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 7:09 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Dimple Dies
>
> This is just my experience,
>
> I purchased a set of dies from Brown and they work well, I use them both
in a
> Tatco squeezer and "Avery Tool" bench frame.
>
> The counter sinks are consistent and have not noticed and deformation
around
> the hole.
>
> One note; the squeezer works best and I use it as often as practical. For
> holes exceeding the squeezer depth, the Avery frame must be used. Some
> practice with it to establish a fell for how hard to strike is critical
and
> if you notice some deformation in the surrounding aluminum try just a bit
> harder a hit.
>
> You also might want to pick up a dimple set that uses a blind rivet gun, I
> needed this for the last hole on every row closest to the fold.
>
> Good luck
> Tracy
> RV8 tail complete, waiting for my wings to arrive!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RWINGSPAN(at)AOL.COM |
In a message dated 1/9/01 6:36:51 PM Eastern Standard Time,
rmwhitaker(at)lanl.gov writes:
<< The one thing that I've noticed is that Brown's dimple die sets are
a lot less expensive then Avery and Cleaveland. I'm well aware of
the old adage, "you get what you pay for". >>
Rob,
Congrats on the kit purchase. Go with Browns dies in 3/32, 1/8, #8....you
wont go wrong and you will save a wad of cash. They are great dies.
Rich Greener
RV-8 81056
fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernest Kells" <ernest.kells(at)sympatico.ca> |
Listers: The same goes for a number of other tools, especially the C-Frame
tool and the Avery edge roller. There are others like the rivet tool (I
think only Souix is possibly better). On the tools that you use all the
time price is not an issue - you install thousands of very visible rivets.
Avery takes our type of requirements to heart. At least use the Avery A-kit
plus B-kit as a guideline on your basic tool requirements for any RV
project.
Ernest Kells
RV-9A - Building Wings, Planning: O-235 Wood Prop
Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario
> Guys, I don't want to start a long thread, but I owned both a Tatco and
> Avery. For my money, and for a lot of reasons, I think the Avery is a
much,
> much better squeezer than the Tatco.
________________________________________________________________________________
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
| Subject: | Re: RV-List Digest: 58 Msgs - 01/09/01 |
| From: | Marshall Dixon <mldixon(at)planetcable.net> |
I've had a Rio 500 for about 9 months and really like it, they're about $170
now. It has 64mb of internal memory and you can add smartmemory cards of up
to 64mb- for a total of 128mb. At CD quality, 128kps, that's 2hrs of tunes.
You can, though, lower the kps without much of degradation in heard sound
quality, that will dramatically improve listening time. Let's face it, the
listening environment isn't a quiet room with the music the only thing your
paying attention to. I doubt you could tell the difference between cassette
quality sound and CD quality while your flying.
The problem is the SM cards are expensive, but prices are plummeting. I just
bought a couple of 64mb card for $82 each, still expensive. But, the
cheapest I saw them last summer was double that. They also work in many
digital cameras, which is why I bought them.
Smartmedia, Compact flash media and sony's media stick are the three types
of memory used in these things. They don't require power to hold storage,
unlike the RAM in you're computer. I believe they are also the memory used
in PDA's
Rio is the brand name in these products. I've heard the Sony units are hard
to transfer music into, something about mp3 and copy rights. Since Sony has
a music division, the hardware side had some impediments to building the
best product.
The Rio doesn't skip ever and its very easy to full it up, via USB, from my
laptop. In addition there are a few products out, or in the near term
pipeline, that are basically hard drives with a simple OS that let's you
move mp3 flies, of digital photos, onto or off of the memory media without a
laptop. They have, at present 6 gig's of storage, I suppose that could be
easily increased up to the size of the max HD of laptops -30 gig or so; a
life times worth of music.
Personally installing a mp3 player permanently at this early stage of their
development seems foolish to me. The portables are nearly weightless and as
the technology and storage improves the changes will be dramatic over the
next few years. You'll be stuck with a heavy obsolete player in less then a
year. Besides, the CD-ROM mp3 players live seen are portable in the sense
you can move them form room to room. They are not shock proof enough for,
let's say a sports car, but would work on the highway in a Lexus.
Can the Compaq PDA do double duty, being an MP3 player at same time as being
a display?
> From: RV-List Digest Server <rv-list-digest(at)matronics.com>
> Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 23:57:02 -0800
> To: RV-List Digest List
> Subject: RV-List Digest: 58 Msgs - 01/09/01
>
> From: "Dave" <dhrycauk(at)telusplanet.net>
> Subject: Re: RV-List: MP3 player possibility.
>
>
> the problem with not using a disk is that you would then require a large
> amount of memory and unless its a flash memory would probably have to down
> load the songs each time you power down. I have not tried the portables but
> have seen that some had 32 megs of ram, equivalent to about 8 songs. can
> anybody tell me if the portables lose the songs with a loss of power?
>
> Dave Hrycauk
> RV-8 flaps ... fuse here
> Lacombe, AB. Canada
> http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dhrycauk/index.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Calvert" <rv6bldr(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Transponder Antenna |
No, I didn't get one while we were at the workshop. I did get one last week
though from B&C who is handling Bob's products now. Price is up to around
$32.00 dollars now, but still a good buy in my book!
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok
-6 fuselage
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Thompson <grobdriver(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 8:57 AM
Subject: RE: RV-List: Transponder Antenna
>
>
> --- "Stephen J. Soule" wrote:
> >
> > Electric Bob was selling them last year for $10 each.
>
>
> No more. He got a handfull of them for a song when a friend was
> cleaning out his hanger.
> He sold what he had on the web site and sold the last one at a workshop
> in Dallas last Spring (Jerry, did you get that one?).
>
> Mike Thompson
> Austin, TX
> -6 N140RV (Reserved)
> Canopy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 1/10/2001 4:10:12 PM Central Standard Time,
ernest.kells(at)sympatico.ca writes:
<< Listers: The same goes for a number of other tools, especially the
C-Frame
tool and the Avery edge roller. There are others like the rivet tool (I
think only Souix is possibly better). On the tools that you use all the
time price is not an issue - you install thousands of very visible rivets.
Avery takes our type of requirements to heart. At least use the Avery A-kit
plus B-kit as a guideline on your basic tool requirements for any RV
project.
Ernest Kells >>
just so you know, the c frame tool brown sells is the avery one and it was
when i bought mine less then what avery sold it for. Brown tools are great
quality and are less expenseive
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: First long flying day experience in my 6A (long DNA, non |
buildi...
In a message dated 1/7/01 4:18:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
e.fortner(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
> $1.77 a gallon! Man, what a deal. $2.40 a gal is the cheapest price
> in the Charlotte, N.C. area for 100LL. Sounds like a nice trip even
> with the wind.
> Earl
Sounds like I need to put wing tip tanks on so I don't have to refuel at
these high dollar places. KOBE has been one of the lowest priced places in
the country and it is only 19 miles east of our airpark.
Bernie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WHigg1170(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Flap width seems a little wide. |
Hello I started mounting the flap and flap brace and it seems that the flap
is to wide it pushes the top and bottom wing skins outward. I can get the top
skin to have the right contour without any problem because the flap brace
hasn't been drilled or riveted yet but on the bottom skin it pushes the skin
outward so when I put a ruler up against the skin there is a 1/8 th gap under
the ruler. I can't seem to come up with a fix.
Has anyone else had a problem like this
Thanks
Bill
Pembroke Ma
RV 6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AV8TURDON(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: First long flying day experience in my 6A (long DNA, non |
buildi...
I find it hard to believe he can sell it for that it cost him 2.15 to buy
it. Must have a hugh storage tank and bought it cheap.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pat Hatch" <pat_hatch(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Half-way point of an RV |
I would say that when you flip your fuselage over, you're probably about
half done.
Pat Hatch
RV-4, N17PH @ VRB, 700 hrs. TT
O-320, Hartzell C/S
RV-6, Fuselage
O-360, Hartzell C/S
pat_hatch(at)msn.com
From: "Are Barstad" <abarstad(at)bconnex.net>
Subject: RV-List: Half-way point of an RV
> For the ones that have finished their RV: What did you consider was the
> half-way mark (50% complete before first flight)?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DThomas773(at)AOL.COM |
Actually,,,,,even with a radio. A couple years back I was flying out of an
airport that also quartered a Jump operation. One day, all was quiet, I
hadn't heard a word on the Unicom, I announced departure on the favored
runway and I was lifting off when I was startled by 5 parachutes directly in
front of and descending through my departure path.
Fortunately there were no other aircraft in the area as I was forced to take
sudden and drastic evasive action.
Dennis Thomas
RV-9A Emp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bobpaulo(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Half-way point of an RV |
A builder friend of mine told me that when the airframe is complete you then
are only half way. The elect., pluming, inst., paint, interior, and... . I
am not sure if he is correct or not. Bob in Ark doin wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MOOREWAR(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | half-way point of an RV |
Working most weekends, holidays, and three or so nights a week, it took me
(first time builder) about 2 years to finish the basic -4 airframe, I've
been working on the finishing kit now for about 9 months and it seems like
there is a lot more to go -- lots of detail work with fiberglass, baffels,
wiring, airboxes, etc., so for my two cents worth, you are about 40% of the
way there when the finishing kit arrives. Of course I like the answer
experienced builders usually give --- 90% done with 50% to go!
Warren Moore
Huntington Beach.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Radio Requirements |
In a message dated 1/10/01 3:05:17 PM Pacific Standard Time,
gtanner(at)bendcable.com writes:
<< I hear ya there Scott. I almost took out an ultra-light at Lodi last year.
They didn't even have a radio. >>
This is a common problem with ultralights and other light aircraft. Despite
the low cost of radios these days, the number of craft operating without them
is appalling. OSH even accepts NORDO aircraft. With all the handhelds now
available this is idiocy.
When I flew ultralights in the mid '80s, we operated out of the, now closed,
Antioch, CA airport and were trained from day one to fit in with GA traffic.
Most of our club members used proper communications, however, among UL fliers
we were the exceptions. This was/is partly due to the high noise
environment. Those of us with radios used the 360 channel STS handhelds of
the time and interfaced to headset equipped helmets made by Ultra Pro. It
just made sense.
These helmets are still readily available from ACS at modest cost and IMO
should be required equipment for ultralights per FAR Part 103. For other
aircraft headsets are very cheap and work well with most handhelds. This is
not too much to ask for the safety of all. Isn't it time that all vehicles
that fly have radios?
-GV (RV-6A N1GV)
vanremog(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Half-way point of an RV |
In a message dated 1/10/01 7:25:25 PM Pacific Standard Time,
abarstad(at)bconnex.net writes:
<< For the ones that have finished their RV: What did you consider was the
halfway mark (50% complete before first flight)? Of course, a homebuilt
aircraft may never be 100% complete. I'm not thinking in terms of dollars
but time-wise of actual construction time. >>
IME, when the airframe is built, you are about halfway done.
-GV (RV-6A N1GV)
vanremog(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman Hunger" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | Product Report - Interior Light |
I was looking for some small lights to put in the luggage areas and the
footwells. For $6.41 Canadian ($4.27 USD) I settled on a good looking cheapo
from the local auto parts store. It is Grote part number 61501. North
American Listers will be able to find this locally at any auto parts store,
just ask. I went to a big store and they still had to order them in.
The lamp can be seen at:
http://grote.com/prodcat/prodcat.htm
Their home page is at:
http://grote.com/
This lamp burns only 0.27 amps. They are very effective when used in pairs
at around 24" apart. Wipes out the shadows as one rummages around at night.
I want two on the rear luggage bulkhead and two in the footwells. They need
to be focused within 24" as they aren't very powerful. I don't know what to
think about using them for the panel, they might not be appropriate. I have
other plans there. For map lights I'm using two of Van's Rotating Map/Panel
Lights (P/N LC Maplight 300 $39.95 USD) on the tip up frame.
Norman Hunger
RV6A Delta BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman Hunger" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Anti-ice (Carb Heat) for Fuel Injected Engines |
> Has anyone with a fuel
> injection system installed induction (carb) heat?
>
I'm planning to. I want the alternate path for intake air in case of bird
strike or airframe ice. It will be heated air.
Norman Hunger
RV6A Delta BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steven DiNieri" <capsteve(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | mike Seager / sun-n-fun |
i just received an e-mail from mike seager ( van's transition instructor ) .
he informed me that he will be conducting transition trainning 5 days prior
to this years sun - n - fun. acutally, he will train for 3 days, test fly
my
rv6a on one day, and go deep sea fishing on one day. i coordinated his
schedule 2 years ago and it went pretty smoothly.
i am now looking for pilots that are current, and close to finishing there
rv, and would liked to be transitioned into the rv from mike the week prior
to sun-n-fun.
for all those interested please contact me off list to get details, & i can
start planning his schedule.
Scott, how's it going.?? I'm gonna be ready by then to fly my bird, or
start ground testing but I'd like to get officially transitioned into the RV
by mike. it so happens that the model airplane "top gun show" is in palm
beach about 5 days before snf so I'd gladly come down a week early and give
up the snf experience for some model jet crashes and some more time with
mike seager. btw..i was scheduled with him during the last day of his visit
to the Fulton RV forum. but wouldn't ya know he munched a valve on the
thing. so drop me a line and let me know how things are panning out for a
schedule if it's not already too late. if it happens I can't get with him
I'll do what any other Cherokee ace would do...I'll say screw it and make
like Orville Wright........sort of.....;)
btw didn't you just hang your engine????you sound pretty confident about
being in the air by then.....hmmmm you didn't quit your day job, did you???
send me a pic if you can...
till then
Steve
capsteve(at)adelphia.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: First long flying day experience in my 6A (long DNA, non |
buildi...
In a message dated 1/10/01 8:20:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
AV8TURDON(at)AOL.COM writes:
> I find it hard to believe he can sell it for that it cost him 2.15 to buy
> it. Must have a hugh storage tank and bought it cheap.
You got me, but he sells a ton of gas. I've seen the tanker there several
times. They sell gas to a lot of folks from all over south florida who fly
there just to get gas. I've had to wait for 7 airplanes late on a pretty
Sunday afternoon. If they had a resturant, you would probablly always have to
wait :>)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Gray <douggray(at)ihug.com.au> |
> they not only work well but they are so highly polished that from a
> distance they appear to be chromed. I got a little rust on one of them,
> my fault, and it polished off easily with the polishing wheel. Delivery
>
Avery's dimple dies are Stainless Steel. They do not rust, trust me.
Doug Gray
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Half-way point of an RV |
Depending on how complex you panel will be, I would say after you finish you
canopy. That would give leave you with panel, engine, cowl, and the misc
stuff.
Carey Mills,
-4, 66hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "<Eric.J.Henson(at)chase.com> |
(Content Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with ESMTP id
for" ;
Thu,
11 Jan 2001 08:15:03.-0500(at)matronics.com
01/11/2001 08:15:45 AM
I'm with you Bernie, I'd sure like to have those myself. Anyone on the list
using the long range tanks that Van sells? It would sure be great for long
solo cross countrys to get to altitude and a little ways down the road
before you start dipping into your normal fuel supply. Would really give
the RV some legs. There should probably be a placard on them reading "not
for use with female passengers".
Eric Henson
Canopy Structure (God bless Jim Cone)
Rv660wm(at)AOL.COM@matronics.com on 01/10/2001 06:31:02 PM
Please respond to rv-list(at)matronics.com
Sent by: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
cc:
Subject: Re: RV-List: First long flying day experience in my 6A (long DNA,
non buildi...
In a message dated 1/7/01 4:18:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
e.fortner(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
> $1.77 a gallon! Man, what a deal. $2.40 a gal is the cheapest price
> in the Charlotte, N.C. area for 100LL. Sounds like a nice trip even
> with the wind.
> Earl
Sounds like I need to put wing tip tanks on so I don't have to refuel at
these high dollar places. KOBE has been one of the lowest priced places in
the country and it is only 19 miles east of our airpark.
Bernie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Andy <winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Half-way point of an RV |
> For the ones that have finished their RV: What did you consider was the
> half-way mark (50% complete before first flight)?
The most accurate answer to that question that I've heard, and probably backed
by my own experience is.
When the metal work is done, you are half way there.
Andy
________________________________________________________________________________
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
| Subject: | Rudder position light/RV-8 |
| From: | "Ed O'Connor" <edwardoconnor(at)compuserve.com> |
I have searched the archives for sugestions on how to pass the wiring for my
strobe/position light mounted on the rudder faring through the last bulkhead
and into the rudder faring. I found no hits to my search. Does anyone have
any photos, web sights or good discription on how to penetrate the
bulkhead, how what kind of connectors to use and where to place them, and
how you secure the wiring so it won't interfer with the rudder movement and
so the rudder can be removed without a lot of disassembly. I'm using the
Whalen single pover supply and the wire is a 5 wire coax like material. I
have looked at a 100 RVs at shows and always forget to at the important
things I need to look at. I'm always overwhelmed by the fit and finish of
each that I forget to look at the details. Any help would be appreciated.
Ed O'Connor/Panama City Fl
RV-8 #80366
Working on Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
| Subject: | Altimeter Static Tubing |
| From: | "Ed O'Connor" <edwardoconnor(at)compuserve.com> |
I am building an RV-8 and am installing the flush static ports purchased
from Van's. I have a question on securing the tubing along the longeron as
in goes toward the baggage compartment. I was thinking of using nylon wraps
and drilling small holes in longeron about every 8 inches or so. Does
anyone have a better suggestion. You can reply on list or send directly to
me. E-mail pictures would be great.
Ed O/Connor/Panama City
RV-8 #80366
Working on Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Sears <sears(at)searnet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Unwarranted government regulation, was I love it |
>If you want or need the EAA to carry your battle flag, why did you
>drop your membership???
For those of you who don't me very well, Mr. Galley and I've had our
shots at each other in the past. He is a strong defender of the EAA.
I'm not. Needless to say, some of our discussions have been very
heated and have oftentimes left a bad taste in my mouth. I was a
member for ten years and decided I'd had enough of the EAA. Why I
left the EAA has been discussed here at length and needs no more
discussion. Please excuse Mr. Galley's lack of tact in this matter.
I don't need the EAA to carry a battle flag for me. On the contrary, if
the EAA supports a NPRM that promotes a ruling that will endanger
my well being, I'm going to oppose them as best I can. A NPRM that
would allow ultralight pilots to move up to two place aircraft with no
special training would be such a ruling. Since I'm not sure about
what the NPRM will say, at this time, I can only speculate. The EAA
did not give me that information.
As I said in an earlier note, I went to AOPA for more information in
this matter. As a general aviation pilot, I look to AOPA to help us
make sure the NPRM will be a good one, rather than something that
will be less than desirable to us. Hopefully, they'll look into this and
give us more concrete information. Until then, we're only preaching
to the choir.
BTW, it may interest some of you to know that I took up over 300
kids in the Young Eagles program. I may not like the EAA, as a
whole; but, I sure do support programs like that. In fact, I was so
supportive of the Young Eagles program that I renewed my
membership an extra year so I could complete the 300 missions I had
set as my goal. I hope that makes me not such a bad guy. :-)
Jim Sears in KY
RV-6A N198JS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com> |
| Subject: | Acceptable repairs |
Looks fine to me. Call Van's if you want a "from the horse's mouth" answer.
I'd just install the rib and move on. You'll never see it.
--
Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA
Network Administrator
Union Safe Deposit Bank
209-946-5116
-----Original Message-----
From: himsl [mailto:vhimsl(at)turbonet.com]
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2000 11:48 PM
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: Acceptable repairs
Hello,
Though your repair may be acceptable, I suggest you just
order a replacement
rib from Van's. The price is right though the shipping and
handling will
bite. You'll get it in a week or so and be able to move on
without it
bugging you every time you look/think about it. I too
botched a rib among
other things.
Regards,
Vince Himsl
RV8 Fuselage
Moscow, ID USA
> Can anyone tell me if they think this repair is
acceptable? I rather redo
it
> now (before skinning) if it could be better or not pass
inspection.
>
> Please click on link for picture.
>
> http://www.avsim.com/hangar/fly/hangar/rib1.jpg
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com> |
| Subject: | Altimeter Static Tubing |
That's exactly what I did.
--
Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA
Network Administrator
Union Safe Deposit Bank
209-946-5116
-----Original Message-----
From: Ed O'Connor [mailto:edwardoconnor(at)compuserve.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 7:28 AM
To: RV-List
Subject: RV-List: Altimeter Static Tubing
I am building an RV-8 and am installing the flush static
ports purchased
from Van's. I have a question on securing the tubing along
the longeron as
in goes toward the baggage compartment. I was thinking of
using nylon wraps
and drilling small holes in longeron about every 8 inches or
so. Does
anyone have a better suggestion. You can reply on list or
send directly to
me. E-mail pictures would be great.
Ed O/Connor/Panama City
RV-8 #80366
Working on Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Tanner" <gtanner(at)bendcable.com> |
| Subject: | building in cold |
Here's a question for those furthur along. I'm almost finished with my emp
and this thought ocurred to me: I'm match drilling and riveting in a cold
shop--say 30 to 40 degrees. What are my skins going to look like in the
summer--all bulged up like a down comforter?
Greg Tanner
RV-9A Empennage
SER #90186 N80BR RESERVED
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Altimeter Static Tubing |
> I am building an RV-8 and am installing the flush static ports purchased
> from Van's. I have a question on securing the tubing along the longeron
as
> in goes toward the baggage compartment. I was thinking of using nylon
wraps
> and drilling small holes in longeron about every 8 inches or so. Does
> anyone have a better suggestion. You can reply on list or send directly
to
> me. E-mail pictures would be great.
>
> Ed O/Connor/Panama City
> RV-8 #80366
> Working on Fuselage
If you are using manual elevator trim you can tie-wrap it to the trim cable.
Randy Lervold
www.rv-8.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Keep in mind that most jump planes are strip bare for weight, but they should
still have at least one VHF radio and announce 1 min prior to drop and
jumpers away. Also you should know that all jumpers deploy their mains at or
above 2000 AGL. Beware of which side of the airport that the DZ is located
on, and everywhere I've jump which has been most major DZ's, the traffic
patterns are opposite the DZ. As an exjumper and former Golden Knight, I have
had my fare share of close call's with planes under canopy and in freefall,
and we're just as pissed as the pilot. Bottom line, communication is the key.
Blue Skies,
Carey Mills
-4, 68hrs
139hrs freefall time
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Caldwell" <racaldwell(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First long flying day experience in my 6A (long DNA, non |
buildi...
The resturuant will be open at KOBE in July. That's what they said last
Saturday when I was in line for fuel.
Rick
>From: Rv660wm(at)AOL.COM
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: First long flying day experience in my 6A (long DNA,
>non buildi...
>Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 03:03:56 EST
>
>
>In a message dated 1/10/01 8:20:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>AV8TURDON(at)AOL.COM writes:
>
> > I find it hard to believe he can sell it for that it cost him 2.15 to
>buy
> > it. Must have a hugh storage tank and bought it cheap.
>
>
>You got me, but he sells a ton of gas. I've seen the tanker there several
>times. They sell gas to a lot of folks from all over south florida who fly
>there just to get gas. I've had to wait for 7 airplanes late on a pretty
>Sunday afternoon. If they had a resturant, you would probablly always have
>to
>wait :>)
>
>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rudder position light/RV-8 |
> I have searched the archives for sugestions on how to pass the wiring for
my
> strobe/position light mounted on the rudder faring through the last
bulkhead
> and into the rudder faring. I found no hits to my search. Does anyone
have
> any photos, web sights or good discription on how to penetrate the
> bulkhead, how what kind of connectors to use and where to place them, and
> how you secure the wiring so it won't interfer with the rudder movement
and
> so the rudder can be removed without a lot of disassembly. I'm using the
> Whalen single pover supply and the wire is a 5 wire coax like material. I
> have looked at a 100 RVs at shows and always forget to at the important
> things I need to look at. I'm always overwhelmed by the fit and finish of
> each that I forget to look at the details. Any help would be appreciated.
>
> Ed O'Connor/Panama City Fl
> RV-8 #80366
> Working on Fuselage
Ed,
I am installing the rudder position light, although not with the strobe,
therefore I have only two wires to run, power and ground. Since my lighting
is all controlled from the righthand console (can be seen at...
www.rv-8.com/pgElectrical.htm#Switching), I routed the wires down the right
side of the fuselage on top of the lower longeron. I pop-riveted those cable
tie anchors aprroximately every 12 inches. I then put a 2" section of spiral
wrap around the wire and tie-wrapped it to the anchors. Probably didn't need
the spiral wrap but I didn't want the tie-wraps cutting into the wire over
time.
In terms of routing the wire into the rudder, I exited the rearmost bulkhead
(F-812) with a hole just above the tailwheel weldment using a snap bushing.
The two wires at that point will be protected in spiral wrap and will then
go over the top edge of the rudder fairing, which is cut a bit lower than
most installations. From there it just lays in the rudder fairing as it goes
aft to the light.
At present the rudder is not installed so I can't take pics for you, but the
wire is routed and laying just behind the F-812 while I finish painting and
prepare to install the empennage. This is by no means the *only* way to do
it... I can think of two or three others. Just get creative with snap
bushings, rubber grommets, and think through the travel of the rudder
relative to the cable. Work on something else while you contemplate it, I
have found that strategy to work well throughout the project. My
installation will be complete in 30-45 days and I can forward pics if you're
still unsure about what to do.
Regards,
Randy Lervold
RV-8, #80500, painting, then final wiring
www.rv-8.com
Home Wing VAF
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Rudder position light/RV-8 |
Ed,
I can empathize, I just went through the same thing on my -6. I've got a
dozen local RV's to look at but none use the tail strobe with the extra,
stiffer cable. Like you, I originally thought to come out of the bottom of
the bulkhead and into the fairing but the strobe cable and nav light wires
are too stiff to make the necessary bends. I wound up penetrating the center
of the vert stab spar a little above the elevator horn. The wires exit into
a horizontal slot cut in the leading edge of the rudder and then down to the
fairing inside the leading edge. The slot is wide enough to allow the rudder
to swing freely and tall enough so I can shove the connector down inside the
leading edge.
Regards,
Greg Young (Houston - DWH)
RV-6 N6GY systems & wiring, wings on finally!
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ed O'Connor
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 9:28 AM
Subject: RV-List: Rudder position light/RV-8
I have searched the archives for sugestions on how to pass the wiring for my
strobe/position light mounted on the rudder faring through the last bulkhead
and into the rudder faring. I found no hits to my search. Does anyone have
any photos, web sights or good discription on how to penetrate the
bulkhead, how what kind of connectors to use and where to place them, and
how you secure the wiring so it won't interfer with the rudder movement and
so the rudder can be removed without a lot of disassembly. I'm using the
Whalen single pover supply and the wire is a 5 wire coax like material. I
have looked at a 100 RVs at shows and always forget to at the important
things I need to look at. I'm always overwhelmed by the fit and finish of
each that I forget to look at the details. Any help would be appreciated.
Ed O'Connor/Panama City Fl
RV-8 #80366
Working on Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: building in cold |
01/11/2001 14:48:45
There was a thread a few years ago on this. Some folks used elect. blankets
to heat (swell) up the area prior to riveting. I can't recall any horror
stories either........The elect. blanket seems like cheap insurance.
"Greg Tanner"
To: "Rv-List"
Sent by: cc:
owner-rv-list-server@mat Subject: RV-List: building
in cold
ronics.com
01/11/2001 12:12 PM
Please respond to
rv-list
Here's a question for those furthur along. I'm almost finished with my emp
and this thought ocurred to me: I'm match drilling and riveting in a cold
shop--say 30 to 40 degrees. What are my skins going to look like in the
summer--all bulged up like a down comforter?
Greg Tanner
RV-9A Empennage
SER #90186 N80BR RESERVED
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Building time |
01/11/2001 14:55:39
re-posted with topic name change for future e-searching
Vanremog(at)AOL.COM
Sent by: To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
owner-rv-list-server@mat cc:
ronics.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Half-way
point of an RV
01/11/2001 01:05 AM
Please respond to
rv-list
In a message dated 1/10/01 7:25:25 PM Pacific Standard Time,
abarstad(at)bconnex.net writes:
<< For the ones that have finished their RV: What did you consider was the
halfway mark (50% complete before first flight)? Of course, a homebuilt
aircraft may never be 100% complete. I'm not thinking in terms of dollars
but time-wise of actual construction time. >>
IME, when the airframe is built, you are about halfway done.
-GV (RV-6A N1GV)
vanremog(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: First long flying day |
experience in my 6A (long DNA, non buildi...
Bernie & listers,
A possible explanation is that this FBO is part of the Seminole or Mikisoukie
Indian Nations. That would exempt them from having to pay ALL fuel taxes. The
same thing applies to liquor & cigarettes purchased on indian land. What do you
think Bernie?
Charlie Kuss
> The resturuant will be open at KOBE in July. That's what they said last
> Saturday when I was in line for fuel.
>
> Rick
>
>
> > > I find it hard to believe he can sell it for that it cost him 2.15 to
> >buy
> > > it. Must have a hugh storage tank and bought it cheap.
> >
> >
> >You got me, but he sells a ton of gas. I've seen the tanker there several
> >times. They sell gas to a lot of folks from all over south florida who fly
> >there just to get gas. I've had to wait for 7 airplanes late on a pretty
> >Sunday afternoon. If they had a resturant, you would probablly always have
> >to
> >wait :>)
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AV8TURDON(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: First long flying day experience |
in...
What a deal that is now days.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kempthornes" <kempthornes(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Building time WAS Half-way point of an RV |
You wrote:
> << Started the tail in '93, puttin on the canopy frame now. >>
Do the canopy frame now if you like but don't touch the plexiglass until you
have taxiied a few feet. In fact, fit the plexiglass last, just after
riveting on the front skin. Do all the fiberglass first along with baffles
and cowl as they will provide cheap learning experience. Moreover, you will
have better access to the back of the panel, subpanel and firewall that you
will need way more than you might think. Fit the front skin but don't rivet
till you must!
Looking back, I feel the canopy is much easier than the cowl and baffles and
had I done them first, my canopy would have turned out nicer.
Hal Kempthorne
RV6a N7HK - Certificated and ready to fly!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Shook" <billshook(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | NACA duct template? |
Ok, I very nearly screwed the proverbial pooch this time. Bottom skin
already riveted on...was going to cut the hole for the NACA duct. Vans
didn't include a template for the vent cutout in the kit I bought (RV-4
nothing is already cut) so I traced the inside of the plastic duct and was
going to cut the hole that size. Hmmm, thinks I....better call Van's and
make sure. Yikes...almost made a big boo boo. SO...moral is, I need a
template for that hole....anyone have one they could fax me? (407 678 4836)
Or email, or post on a website? Van's said...uh, well...not sure we have
any of those...I'll look and get back to you. I won't hold my breath.
Bill
-4 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Shook" <billshook(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Thanks for the NACA template |
Wow...that was fast. I received a couple email offers...but alas VANS came
through with a fax. Thanks for the quick help...and Van's has restored my
faith. Woohooo, I get to cut today afterall. :-)
Bill
-4 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kempthornes" <kempthornes(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: NACA duct template? |
Something sticks in my memory about the template being too large???
hal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "marcel de ruiter" <marcelderuiter(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing tip tanks |
> > $1.77 a gallon! Man, what a deal. $2.40 a gal is the cheapest price
> > in the Charlotte, N.C. area for 100LL. Sounds like a nice trip even
> > with the wind.
> > Earl
If you believe that $2.40 is a bit expensive, how would you feel if you had
to live AND fly on this side of the Atlantic?
Avgas 100LL is roughly $5.60/US Gal.
Please feel sorry for us here and leave those fuelprices out of your posts
in order to avoid traumatic stresssyndrome by pilots on this side of the
atlantic.
Marcel de Ruiter
RV4/G-RVMJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Marcel Bourgon" <mbourgon(at)elp.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: building in cold |
Greetings from El Paso.
They make real nice propane heaters for your shop. What fun is it building
it in the cold. Building a 9A should not be drudgery but should be fun.
Cold bad warm good. My helpers made me get a heater for shop and it works
great.
marcel in El Paso building wings now
----- Original Message -----
From: Greg Tanner <gtanner(at)bendcable.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 10:12 AM
Subject: RV-List: building in cold
>
> Here's a question for those furthur along. I'm almost finished with my emp
> and this thought ocurred to me: I'm match drilling and riveting in a cold
> shop--say 30 to 40 degrees. What are my skins going to look like in the
> summer--all bulged up like a down comforter?
>
> Greg Tanner
> RV-9A Empennage
> SER #90186 N80BR RESERVED
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: mike Seager / sun-n-fun |
| From: | Jody J Edwards <jodyedwards(at)juno.com> |
Dear Steve, I'll be nearing compleation of my RV-4 in April after 7 years
of building.Please E-mail me with availiable time slots for transition
training by mike ASAP . I'm located in ft.lauderdale, FL. Thanks Jody
Edwards (at)jodyedwards@juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Reeves, Doug" <Douglas.Reeves(at)archongroup.com> |
| Subject: | RV White Pages now in PDA friendly format. |
There is now a link on the front page of Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
(called 'PDA version') that brings up a PDA-friendly version of the RV White
Pages. If you have one of these devices, you can (with a couple of clicks)
carry the phone numbers for almost 800 RV builders/flyers in your pocket.
The file is a little over a hundred kilobytes (100k) in size.
Hope you find this helpful,
Doug Reeves
www.vansairforce.net
VAFWWW
PS. If you're not listed in the RV White Pages and you want to be, simply
go to http://www.metronet.com/~dreeves/vaf.htm#Join. Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Craig Hiers" <craig-rv4(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing tip tanks |
Damn, and I thought the 3.00$ a gallon here in Tallahassee was bad!
Craig Hiers
RV-4 151hours
H.B email me.
>
> > > $1.77 a gallon! Man, what a deal. $2.40 a gal is the cheapest price
> > > in the Charlotte, N.C. area for 100LL. Sounds like a nice trip even
> > > with the wind.
> > > Earl
>
> If you believe that $2.40 is a bit expensive, how would you feel if you
had
> to live AND fly on this side of the Atlantic?
> Avgas 100LL is roughly $5.60/US Gal.
>
> Please feel sorry for us here and leave those fuelprices out of your posts
> in order to avoid traumatic stresssyndrome by pilots on this side of the
> atlantic.
>
> Marcel de Ruiter
> RV4/G-RVMJ
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Andrew Larkin <aj_larkin(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | auto starters on O-320 |
Has anyone had any luck using an auto (Nissan, Toyota,
etc) starter on an O-320? If so, which part number
did you use and is there a special bracket to use to
attach it?
Thanks,
Andrew Larkin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: building in cold |
>
>Here's a question for those furthur along. I'm almost finished with my emp
>and this thought ocurred to me: I'm match drilling and riveting in a cold
>shop--say 30 to 40 degrees. What are my skins going to look like in the
>summer--all bulged up like a down comforter?
>
>Greg Tanner
Greg,
The skin and underlying structure are both made of the same material
(aluminum), so they will both expand or contract the same amount for a
given temperature change. So, the fit of your skins won't be affected.
Now, if your plane is sitting out in the hot sun, and the top skin is
warmer than the inside structure, you might be able to notice the skin
isn't perfectly tight, if you look at the right angle. This doesn't
matter, and it isn't worth worrying about because there is nothing you can
(or should) do about it.
Now, if you were trying to explain to your wife why you need to buy a
heater for your shop, send me a private note and I'll write up a good
sounding story and send it to you directly ;-)
Note: I'm on the road right now, and have very spotty e-mail access. So
don't be surprised if it takes me a while to respond to any messages.
Take care,
Kevin Horton RV-8 (canopy)
khorton(at)cyberus.ca (613) 821-7862 (home)
Ottawa, Canada (613) 952-4319 (work)
http://eccentrix.com/misc/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman Hunger" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Altimeter Static Tubing |
> I am building an RV-8 and am installing the flush static ports purchased
> from Van's. I have a question on securing the tubing along the longeron
as
> in goes toward the baggage compartment. I was thinking of using nylon
wraps
> and drilling small holes in longeron about every 8 inches or so. Does
> anyone have a better suggestion.
I try to keep the extra holes in the longerons to a minimum. They are the
only beefy structure that go from the firewall to the tail. I put tie strap
holes in the J-stringers instead. The tubing gets strapped every 3-4 inches.
Norman Hunger
RV6A 2100 hours construction. Canopy frame but no bubble, nothing forward of
firewall, wiring 50%, no landing gear, oh this is getting
depressing..........
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eustace Bowhay" <ebowhay(at)jetstream.net> |
| Subject: | Fw: VM1000 fuel probe inst. |
On reading John Abell's post on the probe installation I had the same
feelings about trying to install them using the fittings as supplied which
were designed as he says more for a fiberglass installation.
A friend has a computerized milling machine and was able to make me a
fitting that will rivet into the correct location and is also threaded to
the correct angle when the probe is screwed in.
I installed the probes after the tanks were finished but before starting any
riveting. I had some extra fittings milled at the same time which I can make
available and would be happy to supply instructions on my installation. The
probes are also removable but does require the removal of the tank to do
this.
Hope this will help some of you.
Eustace Bowhay Blind Bay, B. C.
-----Original Message-----
From: Eustace Bowhay <ebowhay(at)jetstream.net>
Date: Thursday, December 21, 2000 6:11 AM
Subject: VM1000 fuel probe inst.
>Have competed the fuel probe installation on the 6A. I was able to get
>fittings machined that rivet into the bottom rear inboard corner of the
>tanks that include a threaded bushing set at the correct angle. The
>installation requires approx 2.5 hours per tank, this includes the time to
>cut the holes in the tank ribs. This was done prior to pro-sealing and
>riveting.
>
>Have saved the computerized program for the milling of these fittings so
>could make them available to anyone interested. Contact me of the list.
>
>Eustace Bowhay Blind Bay B.C.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Teflon Fuel Lines |
After much expense and headache, I finally completed the fuel line system
that I posted a few days ago. While browsing the archives, I ran across one
post that mentioned that Lycoming recommends Teflon hose for fuel lines. I
used steel braided synthetic rubber with the understanding that these need
to be checked regularly and perhaps replaced every five years. I e-mailed
the Lycoming rep and his reply was "In the interest of safety, Lycoming
recommends the use of Teflon, stainless
steel braided fuel hose. Synthetic rubber not recommended."
I have written him back asking "Why?"
I put that question to the List....Why?
Ross
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "The Stribling's" <bbattery(at)bendcable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Half-way point of an RV |
My half way point was when i finished the tail
I figured I had a 50 / 50 chance of finishing the project a (6A). I am now F
W F and glad I stuck with it I have 13 months in to it and want to try
flying it in march, By the way I have read the manual very little but read
the rv list every night to watch for up coming problems to avoid. The plane
has gone together with out a hitch. I am glad I stuck with and looking
foward to take off.
Ken S. Engine and cowling on working on little stuff. 6 A 151RV
reserved
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Berryhill" <dwberryhill(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Teflon Fuel Lines |
"In the interest of safety, Lycoming
> recommends the use of Teflon, stainless
> steel braided fuel hose. Synthetic rubber not recommended."
>
> I have written him back asking "Why?"
>
> I put that question to the List....Why?
>
> Ross
In the "18 Years of RV-Ator" book, there is mention of some rubber lined,
stainless steel braided fuel hose deteriorating from Avgas but it doesn't
say if it was synthetic or natural rubber. The type mentioned is Aeroquip
601/303. Perhaps this is the reason.
Dave Berryhill
No RV (yet!)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bobpaulo(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: No more medicals |
I too am interested in how far off we are IF the new sportplane license comes
though. The 6, ummmmm stall is higher but the max load could be fudged?
thoughts
guys?
January 06, 2001 - January 12, 2001
RV-Archive.digest.vol-jz