RV-Archive.digest.vol-mf
January 20, 2002 - January 25, 2002
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Sipp" <rsipp(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit |
Has anyone retrofit the new style "tall" gear and engine mount to a
complete and flying RV-4?
If so, what problems were encountered? What change, if any, did you
notice in the landing characteristics?
Would you do it again?
Many thanks.
Dick Sipp
N250DS 250 Hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael McGee <jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Parachute value |
>
>Listers:
>I am interested in a couple of parachutes for my soon to be complete
>RV4(anytime in the next who knows how long time). Since I also have a
>citabria that needs chutes for future airbatic training and practice, I
>have looked for seat pack types. A pair of nice chutes have been
>offered to me and I need to know their relative value. They are:
>G.Q.Security Parachutes Inc, Model 500 slow speed, Seat packs. They
>were manufactured in 1990. They are in nice shape and I will have them
>inspected and re-packed prior to sale, so those who might reply can
>assume they are in good shape. Anyone know what they might be worth?
>Thanks for your input. By the way, I hope NOT TO start a thread on the
>merits of back-pack over seat-pack or the decision to wear or not wear a
>seatbelt. Just input about what these chutes might be worth.
>Dave Aronson
>RV4 N504RV
>
This turned into a long answer and almost answers David's question. I
don't know the current market value of the parachute he's looking
at. Since I got all this typed out anyway I thought I would share my
perspective with the rest of you as I have some experience with the
equipment in general.
From a old skydiver (1600 jumps) and Parachute Rigger's perspective
(mine). Assuming you are willing to use it if you need to and this isn't
just to stay legal (don't laugh, I've talked to enough pilots that have no
intentions of using the chute they HAVE to wear), these are the questions I
would ask:
1) What size is the canopy (22' or 26') and how heavy are you? If you are
over 165 pounds dripping wet or your ground elevation is anything above sea
level, you will want it to be 26' unless you aren't worried about having to
walk away from the landing. I don't remember what size canopy GQ Security
put in the 500.
2) If these are really LOW SPEED parachutes (TSO C23b: ..limited to
aircraft under 150 kts), think about this: The Citabria, if it's broken
will come out of the sky at maybe 150 or a little more. If you get out of
it you won't overload the canopy on opening. On the other hand, if you
break the RV-4 and get out, you could easily be doing 250 in a dive and
deploying the parachute at that speed would likely cause a catastrophic
failure (not to mention what it'll do to yer 'nads).
I'm currently shopping for a rig (Emergency Parachute) for my RV-4. I am
165 dripping wet, full dress flight gear and a 12 pound rig on me puts the
suspended weight at about 180-185. I'm looking for at least a MEDIUM
SPEED canopy/harness combination with a 26' canopy.
And now the test:
Your plane has become a 250 MPH lawn dart, you have 15 seconds to get out
of the plane and deploy your parachute. The canopy needs 500 feet to
deploy and slow you down.
What altitude did you make the decision to get out?
How long did it take you to figure out you needed to get out?
Mike
Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Aurora, OR
13B in gestation mode
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "alisonandneil" <alisonandneil(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Inverted fuel tank senders question |
I'm trying to get the geometry right on the float wires in my -7 QB fuel
tanks. I've moved the Stewart Warner type senders to the second bay outboard
per the plans and I'm having trouble getting a configuation where the floats
don't hit the either the top or the bottom of the tank. Anybody done this
and have dimensions, angles ect.?
Neil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: electric trim switch nose up or down? |
> For panel mounted, it makes the most sense IMHO to push up for up, and
down
> for down. Have the trim indicator correspond.
I don't think this is what you want - pushing the switch up should be
analogous to rolling the trim wheel on a Piper or Cessna type airplane up.
I.e., pushing the switch up (maps to pushing the hat switch on the stick
forward) should lower the nose and v-v.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
6A N66AP flying 80 hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tony Castellano" <tcastell(at)bestweb.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic Ignitions |
I am using one of Jef Rose's electronic ignitions in place of the right mag
on my RV6. I have
97 hours tach time since Feb 2001.
Prior to this, I flew my Bede 4 for a couple of hundred hours with this same
setup.
Performance on both airplanes has been outstanding; just as Jef advertises.
I have been responsible for the installations of Electrair ignitions on the
following planes;
Glassair 2, Glassair 3, Lancair, RV6-A, and most recently a RV8.
All of these pilots have been very satisfied.Tony Castellano
tcastell(at)bestweb.net
Hopewell Junction, NY
RV-6
N401TC
----- Original Message -----
From: <SSPRING83(at)aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: Re: Electronic Ignitions
>
> Hello Listers,
> I have a question for those of you that are flying electronic
> ignitions in your RVs. I am due for an annual next month and my mechanic
> tells me that I have a high time mag that has to be replaced, The right
one
> ,I think he said...... rather than put in another 70 year old design, I
> thought that I'd replace it with new technology and go with either an
> "Electroair" that Jeff Rose puts out , or the "Lightspeed. " My
question
> is, which one of these units do you guys that are using them , consider
to
> be the best? I,d like to hear the pro's and con's on either of them and
if
> any of you have had any problems with them. Also, any noticable
performance
> enhancement from your engines?....... Less fuel burn? smoother idle or
> cruise?
> Thanks in advance..... George RV-4 Chester, Conn.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: IO-360 Engine Problem/Failure |
Might have been over-torqued by using the larger value for the smaller
studs.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph Czachorowski" <zackrv8(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RV-List: Fw: IO-360 Engine Problem/Failure
Photos of the engine cylinder stud failure can be seen at the link
below.
Joe
http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/mid-atlrvwing/lst?&.dir/Ralphs+Engine+Problem&.srcgr&.viewt&.last1
----- Original Message -----
From: Joseph Czachorowski
Subject: IO-360 Engine Problem/Failure
Guys,
I was flying today with my friend who has an RV8 with an
IO-360 (200hp). After takeoff he started noticing a vibration that
increased as time went on. He said he felt it in his throttle quadrant.
It got so bad that he almost put it down on an interstate road but
luckily made it to an airport.
After he took the cowl off, he noticed all but 2 bolts/nuts
were holding the #2 cylinder head on to the crankcase. He took off the
valve cover and everything appeared normal, i.e., rotated the prop and
the valves opened and closed normally. He did a leak down check and the
cylinder was 71/80.
He asked me to put this on the list to see if anyone had any ideas
of why this might of happened. Obviously, he'll know more when he pulls
the jug. Any ideas out there? Why would this happen to only one
cylinder?
Joe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruno" <fo320(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Info on fuel adapter / converter |
Hello everyone
A friend of mine just installed a fuel computer on his C-185
and he's missing the fuel adapter between his fuel computer and his Trimble
2000 GPS.The adapter no is # RS422 / RS 232 ,Trimble p/n 12480-00,I
wondering if anyone on the list is using such an adapter or know where he
could get one.
As always your help will be greatly appreciated.
Thank you
Bruno Dionne
C-GDBH RV-4
E-mail# fo320(at)sympatico.ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | Aileron Brass Bushing |
That would be OK, however I would recommend a reamer if possible. A drill
bit will cut unevenly throughout the bushing. I used reamers to ream all of
the brass bushins in the control system. Cutting blades are evenly spaced
and produce an almost perfect hole.
Cheers,
Stein Bruch
RV6, Minneapolis,
Finishing the finish kit.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bobby Hester
Subject: RV-List: Aileron Brass Bushing
I take it I should just put this in a vice snug it down just enough to
hold it and run a 1/4 bit through it, best to do on the drill press?
--
Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
Starting RV7A wings :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: IO-360 Engine Problem/Failure |
(just looked at the photos, too)
This looks a lot like a problem we had with our club aircraft's Lycoming
O-235 a year or so ago. During flight, a vibration started that got
kind of worrisome. Pilot landed at a nearby field, inspected, couldn't
find anything right off the bat (didn't occur to him to look at the
cylinder head bolts), took it up for a circuit around the field,
vibration got a *lot* worse, came back and landed to find that all but
two studs had sheared off of one cylinder. I think it was even the #2
cylinder, IIRC.
When the engine was disassembled, we found that the camshaft lobe for
the exhaust valve had worn down (ie., it was no longer a lobe, and it
wasn't opening the valve). Something had caused it to wear through the
case hardening on the outside of the lobe, and once that happened the
lobe ground itself down pretty quickly. We were getting good
lubrication in that area, but it didn't help. No indication as to what
caused it to wear through the lobe, but the engine was up to about 1600
hours so age could be a factor here.
It was speculated that this alone shouldn't have caused the studs to
fail, but it's the only thing wrong with our engine that was found. It
is certainly possible that the engine had a little excess torque applied
to it's cylinder head bolts when it was assembled (it's a homebuilt
aircraft, the engine was overhauled 1600 hours ago by one of our
members), so that could have contributed to the scenario as well...
Hope some of this helps!
-RB4
Joseph Czachorowski wrote:
>
>Guys,
>
> I was flying today with my friend who has an RV8 with an
>IO-360 (200hp). After takeoff he started noticing a vibration that
>increased as time went on. He said he felt it in his throttle quadrant.
> It got so bad that he almost put it down on an interstate road but
>luckily made it to an airport.
>
> After he took the cowl off, he noticed all but 2 bolts/nuts
>were holding the #2 cylinder head on to the crankcase. He took off the
>valve cover and everything appeared normal, i.e., rotated the prop and
>the valves opened and closed normally. He did a leak down check and the
>cylinder was 71/80.
>
> He asked me to put this on the list to see if anyone had any ideas
>of why this might of happened. Obviously, he'll know more when he pulls
>the jug. Any ideas out there? Why would this happen to only one
>cylinder?
>
>Joe
>
>
--
---------
Rob Prior
rv7 "at" b4.ca
-----------------------------
Stop dreaming... Start flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Roger Embree <rembree(at)sympatico.ca> |
While listening to my clothes clunk around in the dryer last weekend, an
excellent idea popped into my head. Why not use an old dryer for
preheating. In past years I had used my tiger torch connected to a long
length of stove pipe (not for my clothes). I always worried about the
open flame and hard to control temperature.
Now a clothes dryer, that sounded great. Hot dry forced air. Dryers have
a temperature control and a timer. I had to try it.
I had an old electric dryer and fired it up in the cool of my brothers
garage. The first test didn't look promising. The mass of the drum
sucked up too much heat. The long hose cooled the air too much. My
brother felt he could make it work. He modified it slightly and we tried
it out the next day on his RV3.
In short, we ran it for 50 minutes and it did a great job.
For a more detailed explanation with temperatures and times have a look at
http://www3.sympatico.ca/rembree/heat/heater.htm
Roger Embree
6A fuselage
my next idea is to use it to heat my paint booth
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SSPRING83(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Cylinder bolts |
Joe,
You did'nt mention if the studs pulled out of the engine case, or
the nuts backed them selves off the threads from vibration. If that is the
case, then your friend had better check the remaining three cyl's before he
takes it out again. I have never heard of studs pulling out of a case, you
can over torque them and rip out the threads, of course, but not pull out on
their own.
George
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paulbaird(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: electric trim switch nose up or down? |
In Vans prototype RV9 they had it set up so that for nose up you pushed the
bottom of the rocker switch. The indicator would move to the bottom for nose
up. This seems intuitive to me. The other way would seem backwards.
Paul
90355
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | " Bill VonDane" <n8vd(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Hidden Baggage Door Hinge? |
Larry...
There is an -8 builder on my filed that built a hidden hinge for the baggage door on his -8... You can see the pix (first 7 or so) here: http://eaa72.org/vafml/members/rlynn/index.htm
He just started flying in this month... His e-mail is: jrlynn(at)netzero.net
-Bill VonDane
Colorado Springs, CO
RV-8A
-----Original Message-----
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 23:19:32 -0500
Subject: RV-List: Hidden Baggage Door Hinge?
Re:
Re: Didn't I see a picture or description of a 'hidden' baggage door hinge
Re: recently? I can't find it now. Anyone remember?
Re:
Re: Thanks,
Re:
Re: -
Re: Larry Bowen
Re: RV-8 fuse
Re: Larry(at)BowenAero.com
Re: http://BowenAero.com
--
-Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Cylinder bolts |
Picture showed that the stud snapped off flush with the top of the cylinder
flange. It was either overtorqued or the threads on the flange stopped at
that point so the nut bottomed on the stud threads.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: <SSPRING83(at)aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: Re: Cylinder bolts
Joe,
You did'nt mention if the studs pulled out of the engine case, or
the nuts backed them selves off the threads from vibration. If that is the
case, then your friend had better check the remaining three cyl's before he
takes it out again. I have never heard of studs pulling out of a case, you
can over torque them and rip out the threads, of course, but not pull out on
their own.
George
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Cylinder bolts- corrected |
Picture showed that the stud snapped off flush with the top of the cylinder
flange. It was either overtorqued or the threads on the stud stopped at
that point so the nut bottomed on the stud threads.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: <SSPRING83(at)aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: Re: Cylinder bolts
Joe,
You did'nt mention if the studs pulled out of the engine case, or
the nuts backed them selves off the threads from vibration. If that is the
case, then your friend had better check the remaining three cyl's before he
takes it out again. I have never heard of studs pulling out of a case, you
can over torque them and rip out the threads, of course, but not pull out on
their own.
George
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
| From: | Don.Alexander(at)AstenJohnson.com |
01/21/2002 09:50:53 AM
Snip:
And now the test:
Your plane has become a 250 MPH lawn dart, you have 15 seconds to get out
of the plane and deploy your parachute. The canopy needs 500 feet to
deploy and slow you down.
Nice reply, Mr. McGee
As a skydiver myself, I have no problem riding the "silken angel" down if
the need is there. My question to the listers is this:
If you have to bail out of your pride and joy, can you physically get out?
Will our canopys slide aft at 250 mph, or are we trapped until the curtain
call? Are we deluding ourselves with parachutes? Don't forget that you
have a responsiblity to your passenger as well. You must brief them on the
use of a 'chute. Don't just tell them how to deploy it...make sure that
you tell them what happens after deployment. Tell them how to steer and
land, and how to pick out a landing site. Make sure that they can reach
the deployment ring with their eyes closed. Also make sure that they know
how to get out of the seat harness with their eyes closed. I strongly
suggest that you take a couple of jumps with the local jump facility before
you strap a 'chute on just so you don't soil yourself if the time comes to
use it. A sport 'chute flys differently than an emergency 'chute, but the
experience would be great to have, not to mention how fun it is :-)
I am curious to see if anyone has been able to open their canopy in flight
in order to bail out. Are there any experts on this subject?
Don Alexander
RV-8
empenage (2nd try on the trim tab)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Burton" <dburton(at)nwlink.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cylinder bolts |
The one image that shows the fracture surface of the stud looks like a
fatigue failure. If you can send me (or post ) pictures of the others with
oblique lighting (from the side) I can tell you if the other studs failed
from fatigue or were broken in tension. That may give us some indication of
what the mode of failure was. Look carefully at the nut/flange surface of
the cylinder to see if there had been fretting. This will tell us if the
nuts loosened on the studs before the failure.
Dave Burton
RV6, wings
near Seattle
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
Don.Alexander(at)AstenJohnson.com wrote:
> As a skydiver myself, I have no problem riding the "silken angel" down if
> the need is there. My question to the listers is this:
>
> If you have to bail out of your pride and joy, can you physically get out?
> Will our canopys slide aft at 250 mph, or are we trapped until the curtain
> call? Are we deluding ourselves with parachutes?
More than likely we would never be able to get out of an RV-6
tip-up.....especially under the pressure of an actual emergency.
Sam Buchanan (RV-6)
"The RV Journal" http://thervjournal.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RVer273sb(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit |
Dick,
I have about 50 hrs in a short leg RV4 and 600 in my
long leg RV4. I personally prefer the long gear legs.
More ground clearance and a higher nose attitude.
Easier to stall land ect. Also looks better.
Stewart RV4 Co.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Andy <winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
> If you have to bail out of your pride and joy, can you physically get out?
> Will our canopys slide aft at 250 mph,
And how about the RV-6 tilt-ups. I don't have a lot of confidence in that
little red release handle gently whisking away the canopy, so you can
gratiously stand up and swan dive out. More likely, if it releases at all, the
glare shield is going to chop your head off as the whole thing crashes back
into the verticle stab. Either way, its not going to be a pretty sight. I
wonder if this system has ever been tested in any way.
Andy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Miller Robert <rmiller3(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
Does the tip-up release mechanism make successful egress more likely?
Robert
Don.Alexander(at)AstenJohnson.com wrote:
>
> Snip:
> And now the test:
> Your plane has become a 250 MPH lawn dart, you have 15 seconds to get out
> of the plane and deploy your parachute. The canopy needs 500 feet to
> deploy and slow you down.
>
> Nice reply, Mr. McGee
> As a skydiver myself, I have no problem riding the "silken angel" down if
> the need is there. My question to the listers is this:
>
> If you have to bail out of your pride and joy, can you physically get out?
> Will our canopys slide aft at 250 mph, or are we trapped until the curtain
> call? Are we deluding ourselves with parachutes? Don't forget that you
> have a responsiblity to your passenger as well. You must brief them on the
> use of a 'chute. Don't just tell them how to deploy it...make sure that
> you tell them what happens after deployment. Tell them how to steer and
> land, and how to pick out a landing site. Make sure that they can reach
> the deployment ring with their eyes closed. Also make sure that they know
> how to get out of the seat harness with their eyes closed. I strongly
> suggest that you take a couple of jumps with the local jump facility before
> you strap a 'chute on just so you don't soil yourself if the time comes to
> use it. A sport 'chute flys differently than an emergency 'chute, but the
> experience would be great to have, not to mention how fun it is :-)
> I am curious to see if anyone has been able to open their canopy in flight
> in order to bail out. Are there any experts on this subject?
>
> Don Alexander
> RV-8
> empenage (2nd try on the trim tab)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Miller Robert <rmiller3(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
> More than likely we would never be able to get out of an RV-6
> tip-up.....especially under the pressure of an actual emergency.
>
>
Doesn't the tip-up incorporate full release of the forward edge for emergencies
or as needed?
Robert
Sam Buchanan wrote:
>
> Don.Alexander(at)AstenJohnson.com wrote:
>
> > As a skydiver myself, I have no problem riding the "silken angel" down if
> > the need is there. My question to the listers is this:
> >
> > If you have to bail out of your pride and joy, can you physically get out?
> > Will our canopys slide aft at 250 mph, or are we trapped until the curtain
> > call? Are we deluding ourselves with parachutes?
>
>
> More than likely we would never be able to get out of an RV-6
> tip-up.....especially under the pressure of an actual emergency.
>
> Sam Buchanan (RV-6)
> "The RV Journal" http://thervjournal.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Sanford" <bsanford(at)silverlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV8-List: (no subject) |
Will do and I think you're ok leaving it "dry".
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: <JamesTSherry(at)cs.com>
Subject: RV8-List: (no subject)
> --> RV8-List message posted by: JamesTSherry(at)cs.com
>
> Hi, I would be interested in an insulation kit for my RV-8 QB. It is a
great
> idea and thanks for the effort of trying first!! I just started the
wings.
> Question: Does the WD-421 need any lubricant on the brass bushing. I
reamed
> it out and it rotates very freely. I was just wondering what the effect
of
> metal on metal would have after prolonged use. Thanks, Jim Sherry
Boulder,
> CO
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
By pulling the handle, you can't get the canopy out. The canopy has to be
raised up and lifted straight up to come out of the bearing blocks that hold
it in. For this reason, I didn't go through the trouble of installing the
release mechanism. It is futile.
The only thing the release mechanism is good for is service on the ground.
If you are going down, go down with the ship I say!
Paul Besing
RV-6A N197AB Arizona
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
First Flight 22 July 01
Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy" <winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
>
> > If you have to bail out of your pride and joy, can you physically get
out?
> > Will our canopys slide aft at 250 mph,
>
> And how about the RV-6 tilt-ups. I don't have a lot of confidence in that
> little red release handle gently whisking away the canopy, so you can
> gratiously stand up and swan dive out. More likely, if it releases at
all, the
> glare shield is going to chop your head off as the whole thing crashes
back
> into the verticle stab. Either way, its not going to be a pretty sight.
I
> wonder if this system has ever been tested in any way.
>
> Andy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV8-List: (no subject) |
I called Van's on what to use to lubricate the aileron bell crank bushing.
They recommended standard bearing grease. Don't leave it dry.
Carl Froehlich
RV-8A (to the airport soon)
Vienna, VA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Sanford" <bsanford(at)silverlink.net>
Subject: RV-List: Re: RV8-List: (no subject)
>
> Will do and I think you're ok leaving it "dry".
>
> Bill
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <JamesTSherry(at)cs.com>
> To:
> Subject: RV8-List: (no subject)
>
>
> > --> RV8-List message posted by: JamesTSherry(at)cs.com
> >
> > Hi, I would be interested in an insulation kit for my RV-8 QB. It is a
> great
> > idea and thanks for the effort of trying first!! I just started the
> wings.
> > Question: Does the WD-421 need any lubricant on the brass bushing. I
> reamed
> > it out and it rotates very freely. I was just wondering what the effect
> of
> > metal on metal would have after prolonged use. Thanks, Jim Sherry
> Boulder,
> > CO
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
My tip-up canopy on the 6A has been on and off several times. I
incorporated an extension mechanism to disengage the locking pins so I could
get to the stuff behind the panel, but I did not make it an in-flight
operable mechanism.
The motions and articulations required to move the canopy into position for
removal are not consistent with the forces applied by the windstream in
flight. I and my building cohorts feel strongly that the canopy would not
release in flight with the pins extracted. If you were to install and
remove a canopy yourself I'm confident you would reach the same conclusion.
It is strictly conjecture on my part, but perhaps the early rev levels of
canopy engagement afforded freeing the canopy in flight - the geometry has
been modified over the years.
Dennis Persyk 6A N600DP 110 hours
----- Original Message -----
From: "Miller Robert" <rmiller3(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
>
> Does the tip-up release mechanism make successful egress more likely?
> Robert
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terrywatson3(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
I hate to bring this up but it seems necessary here. I am aware of one
person bailing out of an RV-8. His name was Von Alexander. He was on his
way home to Oregon after winning the craftsmanship award at the Arlington
Washington fly in two years ago. His plane was on fire. He didn't have a
parachute. He died.
Terry
RV-8A fuselage & finish
Seattle
>
> > I am curious to see if anyone has been able to open their canopy in
flight
> in order to bail out. Are there any experts on this subject?
>
> Don Alexander
> RV-8
> empenage (2nd try on the trim tab)
________________________________________________________________________________
There are two of us in Fargo that would appreciate firewall forward photo's
of IO-360 200 HP installations, especially if you have an inverted oil
system and smoke system installed. We are looking for some BEST practices
of installing oil coolers, cabin heat inverted oil and smoke systems on the
RV8. If anyone has digital photos and information that they would like to
share please email to the address below.
Thank you,
Francis Butler
Butler Machinery Co.
(701) 298-1758 direct
(701) 476-3208 fax
francis_butler@butler-machinery.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Sanford [mailto:bsanford(at)silverlink.net]
Subject: Re: RV8-List: (no subject)
--> RV8-List message posted by: "Bill Sanford"
Will do and I think you're ok leaving it "dry".
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: <JamesTSherry(at)cs.com>
Subject: RV8-List: (no subject)
> --> RV8-List message posted by: JamesTSherry(at)cs.com
>
> Hi, I would be interested in an insulation kit for my RV-8 QB. It is a
great
> idea and thanks for the effort of trying first!! I just started the
wings.
> Question: Does the WD-421 need any lubricant on the brass bushing. I
reamed
> it out and it rotates very freely. I was just wondering what the effect
of
> metal on metal would have after prolonged use. Thanks, Jim Sherry
Boulder,
> CO
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Burton" <dburton(at)nwlink.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
The assumption is that Von took off his seat belt and was trying to get
to the fire extinguisher which was fastened to the back of his seat. We
don't know if he inadvertently bumped the stick and ejected himself or what
really happened. He was not burned and had not ingested smoke into his
lungs so we don't feel that he chose to bail out...
It does make you think about the placement of your fire extinguisher.
Dave Burton
RV6, wings
near Seattle
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry Watson" <terrywatson3(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
>
> I hate to bring this up but it seems necessary here. I am aware of one
> person bailing out of an RV-8. His name was Von Alexander. He was on his
> way home to Oregon after winning the craftsmanship award at the Arlington
> Washington fly in two years ago. His plane was on fire. He didn't have a
> parachute. He died.
>
> Terry
> RV-8A fuselage & finish
> Seattle
>
>
> >
> > > I am curious to see if anyone has been able to open their canopy in
> flight
> > in order to bail out. Are there any experts on this subject?
> >
> > Don Alexander
> > RV-8
> > empenage (2nd try on the trim tab)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Brass Bushing |
In a message dated 1/20/02 5:17:48 PM Pacific Standard Time, bhester(at)apex.net
writes:
<< I take it I should just put this in a vice snug it down just enough to
hold it and run a 1/4 bit through it, best to do on the drill press? >>
I did one with a 1/4 in drill bit and decided it was too loose. I did the
replacement and the other with a 1/4 in. reamer chucked in a very slow
battery powered drill and they came out very well. Just my $0.02 worth.
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, finish kit stuff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
I'm not sure why people seem worried about their canopy removal (on the
tip-up model)... There's got to be at least a hundred pounds of lift on
it in flight, maybe more. Add that to the adrenaline-fuelled pilot who
now wants to regretfully egress from his aircraft, and I think getting
out would be a no-brainer if the front hinges were releaseable, which
apparently is the case.
Before you all say "but the air blowing on the canopy will keep it on",
keep in mind that the majority of your lift is generated by the first
25% of your wing, too... The 25% that's shaped a lot like the front of
your canopy. It also only has to help until you get a gap underneath
the glareshield at the front. Once that's there, the air will gladly
fill your cabin and pressurize it to help you remove the canopy further.
It may hit the tail on the way by, but since you're planning on getting
out anyway, it's not likely to be a huge concern...
-Rob P.
Dennis Persyk wrote:
>
>My tip-up canopy on the 6A has been on and off several times. I
>incorporated an extension mechanism to disengage the locking pins so I could
>get to the stuff behind the panel, but I did not make it an in-flight
>operable mechanism.
>
>The motions and articulations required to move the canopy into position for
>removal are not consistent with the forces applied by the windstream in
>flight. I and my building cohorts feel strongly that the canopy would not
>release in flight with the pins extracted. If you were to install and
>remove a canopy yourself I'm confident you would reach the same conclusion.
>
>It is strictly conjecture on my part, but perhaps the early rev levels of
>canopy engagement afforded freeing the canopy in flight - the geometry has
>been modified over the years.
>
>Dennis Persyk 6A N600DP 110 hours
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Miller Robert" <rmiller3(at)earthlink.net>
>To:
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
>
>
>>
>>Does the tip-up release mechanism make successful egress more likely?
>>Robert
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "J Andrews" <rv8a(at)lycos.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
I remember reading in one of the old RVators that Van wears a chute whenever he
is testing some significant mod to the design of one of our kits. What do you
suppose the designer of our aircraft knows about egress that we don't?
Jim ( never go up without a chute on ) Andrews
RV-8A (flying)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cole, Ed" <Ed_Cole(at)maximhq.com> |
| Subject: | Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
Rob,
You obviously haven't built a tip up and are not familiar with what it takes
to remove it. Along with lift comes a 150 MPH breeze that will fight that
lift.
The angle of the goosenecks require quite a lift to remove the canopy frame.
The quick release is a maintenance feature only at this point in my opinion.
The very early tip-ups had almost straight hinges. These may have been
able to jettison, but not the present design.
Ed Cole
RV6A N2169D Flying (TIP-UP)
RV6A N648RV Finishing (TIP-UP)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Prior [SMTP:rv7(at)b4.ca]
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 11:01 AM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
>
>
> I'm not sure why people seem worried about their canopy removal (on the
> tip-up model)... There's got to be at least a hundred pounds of lift on
> it in flight, maybe more. Add that to the adrenaline-fuelled pilot who
> now wants to regretfully egress from his aircraft, and I think getting
> out would be a no-brainer if the front hinges were releaseable, which
> apparently is the case.
>
> Before you all say "but the air blowing on the canopy will keep it on",
> keep in mind that the majority of your lift is generated by the first
> 25% of your wing, too... The 25% that's shaped a lot like the front of
> your canopy. It also only has to help until you get a gap underneath
> the glareshield at the front. Once that's there, the air will gladly
> fill your cabin and pressurize it to help you remove the canopy further.
> It may hit the tail on the way by, but since you're planning on getting
> out anyway, it's not likely to be a huge concern...
>
> -Rob P.
>
> Dennis Persyk wrote:
>
> >
> >My tip-up canopy on the 6A has been on and off several times. I
> >incorporated an extension mechanism to disengage the locking pins so I
> could
> >get to the stuff behind the panel, but I did not make it an in-flight
> >operable mechanism.
> >
> >The motions and articulations required to move the canopy into position
> for
> >removal are not consistent with the forces applied by the windstream in
> >flight. I and my building cohorts feel strongly that the canopy would
> not
> >release in flight with the pins extracted. If you were to install and
> >remove a canopy yourself I'm confident you would reach the same
> conclusion.
> >
> >It is strictly conjecture on my part, but perhaps the early rev levels of
> >canopy engagement afforded freeing the canopy in flight - the geometry
> has
> >been modified over the years.
> >
> >Dennis Persyk 6A N600DP 110 hours
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Miller Robert" <rmiller3(at)earthlink.net>
> >To:
> >Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
> >
> >
> >>
> >>Does the tip-up release mechanism make successful egress more likely?
> >>Robert
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
Maxim Home Page:
http://www.maxim-ic.com
Products Page:
http://www.maxim-ic.com/MaximProducts/products.htm
New Products:
http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/new_products.cfm
Datasheets:
http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/l_datasheet3.cfm
The information contained in this message is confidential
and may be legally privileged. The message is intended
solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination,
or reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cole, Ed" <Ed_Cole(at)maximhq.com> |
| Subject: | Magellan GPS repairs |
I believe there were a couple of listers looking to have their Magellan
GPS's repaired.
Magellan was bought out by a French firm named Thales Navigation
in July of 2001.
They still represent Magellan and Ashtech under their name.
They have an office in Santa Clara, Calif. (408) 615-5100
Here are the phone numbers listed for service and repairs.
800-707-7845 Repair
800-669-4477 Service
800-707-9971 Tech Support
Their website is www.thalesnaviagation.com
Ed Cole
RV6A N2169D Flying
RV6A N648RV Finishing
Maxim Home Page:
http://www.maxim-ic.com
Products Page:
http://www.maxim-ic.com/MaximProducts/products.htm
New Products:
http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/new_products.cfm
Datasheets:
http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/l_datasheet3.cfm
The information contained in this message is confidential
and may be legally privileged. The message is intended
solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination,
or reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Zilik" <zilik(at)bewellnet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
AMT Bookstore wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure why people seem worried about their canopy removal (on the
> > tip-up model)... There's got to be at least a hundred pounds of lift on
> > it in flight, maybe more. Add that to the adrenaline-fuelled pilot who
> > now wants to regretfully egress from his aircraft, and I think getting
> > out would be a no-brainer if the front hinges were releaseable, which
> > apparently is the case.
>
> Sounds reasonable. I look forward to your flight test results. : )
>
> Andy
>
I know of a 6 that had the tip-up canopy unlatch in flight one afternoon.
The report was that the canopy opened to a 45 degree angle, high enough that
the PAX had to unbuckle to reach the handle to get it closed. The plane also
nosed over and dove for the ground. One quote was " So this is how it's
going to end" as the ground filled the windscreen.
So, from this information I would surmise that the tip up canopy could be
ejected in flight in one wanted to.
Gary Zilik RV-6A, Slider
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
rob
i've read 3 differant stories about the rv 6 tipup canopy being forgotten to
be latched before takeoff. once take off, the canopy raised about 4-6 inches
and stayed there in the slip stream. one fellow claimed he tried to push it
up to slam it shut , but couldn't move it up or down. keep in mind he stayed
in the pattern and didn't acheive full speed. he held on to it until landing.
i didn't install the release mech. for these reasons.
just my thoughts.
scott
tampa
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
And, if you research the RVator at the time the hinge design was changed,
you'll find that Van clearly stated that you would still need to notch the
forward fuselage skin if you wanted the goosneck design to be in-flight
releasable. That would unfortunately negate one advantage the goosneck
design incorporated - keeping out the rain. My straight hinge leaked like a
sieve even with vinyl tape over the notch. I can't imagine how the gooseneck
canopy could be removed in-flight without these notches.
Rick McBride
RV-6 N523JC
RV-8 80027
In a message dated 1/21/02 3:01:15 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Ed_Cole(at)maximhq.com writes:
>
> Rob,
> You obviously haven't built a tip up and are not familiar with what it
> takes
>
> to remove it. Along with lift comes a 150 MPH breeze that will fight that
> lift.
> The angle of the goosenecks require quite a lift to remove the canopy
> frame.
>
> The quick release is a maintenance feature only at this point in my
> opinion.
>
> The very early tip-ups had almost straight hinges. These may have been
> able to jettison, but not the present design.
>
> Ed Cole
> RV6A N2169D Flying (TIP-UP)
> RV6A N648RV Finishing (TIP-UP)
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rob Prior [SMTP:rv7(at)b4.ca]
> > Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 11:01 AM
> > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
> >
> >
> > I'm not sure why people seem worried about their canopy removal (on the
> > tip-up model)... There's got to be at least a hundred pounds of lift on
> > it in flight, maybe more. Add that to the adrenaline-fuelled pilot who
> > now wants to regretfully egress from his aircraft, and I think getting
> > out would be a no-brainer if the front hinges were releaseable, which
> > apparently is the case.
> >
> > Before you all say "but the air blowing on the canopy will keep it on",
> > keep in mind that the majority of your lift is generated by the first
> > 25% of your wing, too... The 25% that's shaped a lot like the front of
> > your canopy. It also only has to help until you get a gap underneath
> > the glareshield at the front. Once that's there, the air will gladly
> > fill your cabin and pressurize it to help you remove the canopy further.
> > It may hit the tail on the way by, but since you're planning on getting
> > out anyway, it's not likely to be a huge concern...
> >
> > -Rob P.
> >
> > Dennis Persyk wrote:
> >
>
> > >
> > >My tip-up canopy on the 6A has been on and off several times. I
> > >incorporated an extension mechanism to disengage the locking pins so I
> > could
> > >get to the stuff behind the panel, but I did not make it an in-flight
> > >operable mechanism.
> > >
> > >The motions and articulations required to move the canopy into position
> > for
> > >removal are not consistent with the forces applied by the windstream in
> > >flight. I and my building cohorts feel strongly that the canopy would
> > not
> > >release in flight with the pins extracted. If you were to install and
> > >remove a canopy yourself I'm confident you would reach the same
> > conclusion.
> > >
> > >It is strictly conjecture on my part, but perhaps the early rev levels
> of
> > >canopy engagement afforded freeing the canopy in flight - the geometry
> > has
> > >been modified over the years.
> > >
> > >Dennis Persyk 6A N600DP 110 hours
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Miller Robert" <rmiller3(at)earthlink.net>
> > >To:
> > >Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >>Does the tip-up release mechanism make successful egress more likely?
> > >>Robert
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> Maxim Home Page:
> http://www.maxim-ic.com
> Products Page:
> http://www.maxim-ic.com/MaximProducts/products.htm
> New Products:
> http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/new_products.cfm
> Datasheets:
> http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/l_datasheet3.cfm
> The information contained in this message is confidential
> and may be legally privileged. The message is intended
> solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination,
> or reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
> by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
Everyone is right, I haven't built a tip-up canopy myself nor looked all
that closely at the mechanism. I'm only just starting the Empennage on
my first RV, a -7, that will have a sliding canopy. I did see the
prototype RV-7, with tilt-up canopy and a big black & yellow canopy
jettison handle on the dash. I just assumed that Van had designed it so
that it would jettison if needed.
So far all of the stories people have posted fit 100% with what i've
experienced in flight in other aircraft. If you unlatch a
door/window/etc. at the back, and it's hinged at the front, the lower
pressure region (from the air rushing past) outside the door/window/etc.
will draw it open *a bit* (where a bit can be anything from 1 to 10
inches, depending on aircraft and flight configuration). If you then
released it at the front too, the same low pressure region would pull
the front out just as easily. I know when we released the latch on the
jump door (hinged at the top) on the Cessna 180 I used to skydive from,
it hit the underside of the wing faster than you could grab it to stop
it... The wing showed the effects of this constant pounding, too...
Now on an RV this may only be enough to pull the front of the canopy an
inch away from the fuselage. But by the time the canopy reaches that
point, it's now getting 150-200mph air in through that gap, pressurizing
the cabin. So it's my opinion that canopy will be gone faster than you
can say "holy sh*t!" and bring up your arms to make sure part of it
doesn't bonk you on the way by (as it's not likely to depart perfectly
straight up and back, right?).
This is, of course, only my opinion... Since this is the internet, feel
free to disagree... Preferably without slander and name-calling... 8-)
-Rob P.
ABAYMAN(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>rob
>i've read 3 differant stories about the rv 6 tipup canopy being forgotten to
>be latched before takeoff. once take off, the canopy raised about 4-6 inches
>and stayed there in the slip stream. one fellow claimed he tried to push it
>up to slam it shut , but couldn't move it up or down. keep in mind he stayed
>in the pattern and didn't acheive full speed. he held on to it until landing.
>i didn't install the release mech. for these reasons.
>just my thoughts.
>scott
>tampa
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bernie Kerr" <kerrjb(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute (Fred Stucklen ??) |
Maybe Fred would like to expound on this. He seems to have more first hand
data on this than most of us. All the input I had prior to talking to Fred
said that the canopy would go to about 6 inches open and that you were not
going to muscle it from there. You should just land now and forget trying to
close it in the air. Fred has opened his on purpose at 100 indicated and
basically reports the same thing about where it goes and can not be moved.
He also reports a large trim change with it open. He says you can close it
by slowing to flap speed and slowly drop the flap and the canopy will close.
Based on these reports, I do not beleive you can get the canopy open far
enough to eject the thing in flight because of the hook shape of the hinge.
Bernie Kerr, 6A tipup, SE Fla
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > I'm not sure why people seem worried about their canopy removal (on
the
> > > tip-up model)... There's got to be at least a hundred pounds of lift
on
> > > it in flight, maybe more. Add that to the adrenaline-fuelled pilot
who
> > > now wants to regretfully egress from his aircraft, and I think getting
> > > out would be a no-brainer if the front hinges were releaseable, which
> > > apparently is the case.
> >
> > Sounds reasonable. I look forward to your flight test results. : )
> >
> > Andy
> >
>
> I know of a 6 that had the tip-up canopy unlatch in flight one afternoon.
> The report was that the canopy opened to a 45 degree angle, high enough
that
> the PAX had to unbuckle to reach the handle to get it closed. The plane
also
> nosed over and dove for the ground. One quote was " So this is how it's
> going to end" as the ground filled the windscreen.
>
> So, from this information I would surmise that the tip up canopy could be
> ejected in flight in one wanted to.
>
> Gary Zilik RV-6A, Slider
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gert <gert(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute (Fred Stucklen ??) |
You know, there is an interesting short article in the oct 97 RVator
(page 14) about an rv4 canopee opening in flight, ripping off of the
airplane.
Gert
Bernie Kerr wrote:
>
>
> Maybe Fred would like to expound on this. He seems to have more first hand
> data on this than most of us. All the input I had prior to talking to Fred
> said that the canopy would go to about 6 inches open and that you were not
> going to muscle it from there. You should just land now and forget trying to
> close it in the air. Fred has opened his on purpose at 100 indicated and
> basically reports the same thing about where it goes and can not be moved.
> He also reports a large trim change with it open. He says you can close it
> by slowing to flap speed and slowly drop the flap and the canopy will close.
> Based on these reports, I do not beleive you can get the canopy open far
> enough to eject the thing in flight because of the hook shape of the hinge.
>
> Bernie Kerr, 6A tipup, SE Fla
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > I'm not sure why people seem worried about their canopy removal (on
> the
> > > > tip-up model)... There's got to be at least a hundred pounds of lift
> on
> > > > it in flight, maybe more. Add that to the adrenaline-fuelled pilot
> who
> > > > now wants to regretfully egress from his aircraft, and I think getting
> > > > out would be a no-brainer if the front hinges were releaseable, which
> > > > apparently is the case.
> > >
> > > Sounds reasonable. I look forward to your flight test results. : )
> > >
> > > Andy
> > >
> >
> > I know of a 6 that had the tip-up canopy unlatch in flight one afternoon.
> > The report was that the canopy opened to a 45 degree angle, high enough
> that
> > the PAX had to unbuckle to reach the handle to get it closed. The plane
> also
> > nosed over and dove for the ground. One quote was " So this is how it's
> > going to end" as the ground filled the windscreen.
> >
> > So, from this information I would surmise that the tip up canopy could be
> > ejected in flight in one wanted to.
> >
> > Gary Zilik RV-6A, Slider
> >
>
--
is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV4" <VansRV4GRVMJ(at)btinternet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IO 360 engine trouble |
Re: post earlier this week,
have a look at www.sacskyranch.com/torque.htm
this website has some interesting articles on engines and maintenance,
troubleshooting.
Marcel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Haan <bhaan(at)easystreet.com> |
Announcing a new and improved WigWag II.
We have added new features to the
original WigWag plus we were able to make it 9% lighter.
* The bulb filament warmer feature is now optional at time of installation.
* Noise rejection has been increased on all inputs, increasing the number
of switch
options.
* Alarm outputs have greater voltage swings allowing WigWag II to interface
with a
larger number of displays and alarm devices.
WigWag II retains all of the features of the original WigWag such as:
* A slower flash cycle that allows the filaments to come to full bright so
that your airplane will be seen from a greater distance.
* A redundant power supply will provide a light for landing even with a
fault on one side.
For a picture and a Data Sheet of detailed information go to
http://easystreet.com/~bhaan
To order your WigWag II send a check for $150 plus $6 for shipping to:
Robert Haan
14270 SW Koven Court
Tigard, OR 97224
>
> Lead time 4 to 6 weeks
Bob
RV6A almost
http://easystreet.com/~bhaan/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Stratman" <pauls(at)kc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Microsoft Flight Simulator for RV-6 |
Hey All,
Does anyone have the aircraft model and configuration file created for
Microsoft flight ism 2000 or above.?
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Cylinder bolts- corrected |
Aircraft Maintenance Articles
Re-torquing cylinder base studs
Q. How do you feel about the practice of "re-torquing" cylinder
base nuts after a run-in period?
Fatigue fractured cylinder base stud from insufficient preload.
Notice black fretting material around stud.
A. The only reason I can think of for re-torquing the joint would
be a quality control measure to make sure all nuts were properly torqued
to begin with. If assembled properly cylinder base nuts will not be
loose after the run-in period. I used to run a test cell where we ran
engines can be revealing. If you find the nuts loose you have an engine
failure.
On my airplane no mechanic is going to install cylinders until he
shows me the calibration sticker on his torque wrench and shows me that
he has a copy of the lycoming engine procedure on installing cylinders
and torquing.
see Torque Wrench Accuracy and the Moment of Inertia
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Cylinder bolts- corrected |
Aircraft Maintenance Articles
Re-torquing cylinder base studs
Q. How do you feel about the practice of "re-torquing" cylinder
base nuts after a run-in period?
Fatigue fractured cylinder base stud from insufficient preload.
Notice black fretting material around stud.
A. The only reason I can think of for re-torquing the joint would
be a quality control measure to make sure all nuts were properly torqued
to begin with. If assembled properly cylinder base nuts will not be
loose after the run-in period. I used to run a test cell where we ran
engines can be revealing. If you find the nuts loose you have an engine
failure.
On my airplane no mechanic is going to install cylinders until he
shows me the calibration sticker on his torque wrench and shows me that
he has a copy of the lycoming engine procedure on installing cylinders
and torquing.
see Torque Wrench Accuracy and the Moment of Inertia
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Microsoft Flight Simulator for RV-6 |
Paul, this web page has most of the RV series as well as some other
homebuilts
http://dkoelzer.murkworks.com/hangarx/
Ed Anderson
Matthews NC
RV-6A N494BW
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Stratman" <pauls(at)kc.rr.com>
Subject: RV-List: Microsoft Flight Simulator for RV-6
>
> Hey All,
>
> Does anyone have the aircraft model and configuration file created for
> Microsoft flight ism 2000 or above.?
>
> Paul
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joseph Czachorowski" <zackrv8(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | IO-360 Engine Problem/Failure follow-up |
Guys,
Thanks for the many thought provoking responses to
Ralph's engine problem. I have forwarded the responses to him for
consideration.
I just got off the phone with him. After pulling the
jug, he found no problems out all with the cylinder, piston, connecting
rod or push rods. The cam is brand new (approx 90 hrs). The only
problem he could find was the bolts/studs that were snapped in tension
(not shear). See the pictures at the link below.
http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/mid-atlrvwing/vwp?.dir/Ralphs+Engine+Problem&.srcgr&.dnmDSC00013_WEB.jpg&.viewt&.donehttp%3a//photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/mid-atlrvwing/lst%3f%26.dir/Ralphs%2bEngine%2bProblem%26.srcgr%26.viewt
Also, I should note that Ralph put high compression pistons in
his engine. He had all 4 cylinders reworked and new pistons from Lycon
in CA. They told him to put the ignition timing at 20 degrees.
After a phone conversation with Lycon this afternoon, Ralph
was told by Ken that they have seen this problem before. They traced it
to the magnetos. He said Slick mags should be checked/replaced after
500hrs. Ralph said the mags were yellowed tagged but did not know the
hours on them. Lycon went on to say that there was "arcing" in the
magneto and that caused a detonation in the cylinder.
I'm just the messenger. What do you guys think of this
explanation?
Joe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Burton" <dburton(at)nwlink.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IO-360 Engine Problem/Failure follow-up |
Good luck solving the problem.
My 2 cents, from the limited view I can get from the photos. Having
analyzed thousands of failures like this I'm willing to state that the studs
did not fail in tension, they were fatigue failures, probably caused by
the nuts being loose...
Dave Burton
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph Czachorowski" <zackrv8(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RV-List: IO-360 Engine Problem/Failure follow-up
>
> Guys,
>
> Thanks for the many thought provoking responses to
> Ralph's engine problem. I have forwarded the responses to him for
> consideration.
>
> I just got off the phone with him. After pulling the
> jug, he found no problems out all with the cylinder, piston, connecting
> rod or push rods. The cam is brand new (approx 90 hrs). The only
> problem he could find was the bolts/studs that were snapped in tension
> (not shear). See the pictures at the link below.
>
> http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/mid-atlrvwing/vwp?.dir/Ralphs+Eng> ine+Problem&.srcgr&.dnmDSC00013_WEB.jpg&.viewt&.donehttp%3a//> photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/mid-atlrvwing/lst%3f%26.dir/Ralphs%2bEng> ine%2bProblem%26.srcgr%26.viewt
>
> Also, I should note that Ralph put high compression pistons in
> his engine. He had all 4 cylinders reworked and new pistons from Lycon
> in CA. They told him to put the ignition timing at 20 degrees.
>
> After a phone conversation with Lycon this afternoon, Ralph
> was told by Ken that they have seen this problem before. They traced it
> to the magnetos. He said Slick mags should be checked/replaced after
> 500hrs. Ralph said the mags were yellowed tagged but did not know the
> hours on them. Lycon went on to say that there was "arcing" in the
> magneto and that caused a detonation in the cylinder.
>
> I'm just the messenger. What do you guys think of this
> explanation?
>
> Joe
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chandler" <Chandler(at)arbbs.net> |
| Subject: | IO360 PROBLEM/FAILURE |
Joseph,
I have a Mooney with an IO360A1B6D that had the same
problem. My partner was flying the aircraft at cruise when the engine
started running slightly rough. He was only a few miles from an airport,
and by the time he reach it he said it had got progressively worse. Upon
investigation at an FBO, they found that the NO 1 cylinder bolts/nuts
had all sheared off except for two of them. They performed a compression
check that turned out good, but they also found that the induction tube
bolts had come loose at the cylinder. The question I had and still have
is, could an induction leak have caused the problem? Would a detonation
or preignition cause a cylinder to over stress therefore shear the
bolts/nuts off. If any one has a theory please reply.
rv8 chandler
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
One aspect of departing in the middle of a wad of aircraft at Sun-N-Fun
is that the hustle and bustle is likely to take you out of your ordinary
pre-flight drill if you aren't as careful as you should be. The taxi
position on the RV-6 tip-up canopy (safety latch resting on top of the
canopy bow) is very effective at directing a blast of propwash into the
cabin while in a long taxi line.
However, if the flag man waved your gaggle of aircraft into action
sooner than you anticipated, it might be possible to forget the canopy
was still unlatched, especially on a hot Florida spring day, with five
or six million people watching you. If that *was* to happen, the welcome
rush of cool air upon throttle-up would within an instant or so be
followed with the realization that you aren't supposed to feel a welcome
rush of cool air on take off in an RV-6!
So if this happened to you, and this was your first exposure to taking
off with the canopy unlatched, what should you do? Land on the far end
of the runway and throw the entire fly-in departure sequence out of
whack? Go ahead and fly and close the canopy in the air? Pull the
jettison handle and fly home without the canopy?
If this was to happen to me, I suppose I would go ahead with the flight
and close the canopy on the climb-out while the airspeed was still in
Cessna 172 range. I would nervously look at the pack of aircraft all
around me, and probably notice that there wasn't much way I could sneak
out of the area without sending planes scurrying in all directions.
So.....I would trim the plane for a stable climb, clamp the stick
between my knees for good measure, reach up and calmly close the canopy
which was riding nicely about 6-8" open.......and providing a welcome
rush of cool air......
I would also probably panic when I realized I couldn't get the canopy
shut! There would be no way I could pull hard enough with one hand to
pull the canopy down far enough to latch it with the other hand. I
suppose what I would do next is get an even firmer grip on the stick
with my knees, and the bottom of the seat with other parts of the
anatomy, grab the safety latch with BOTH hands, and BARELY be able to
pull the canopy down enough to force the latch closed. I would probably
be convinced that I had damaged the latch since it would be so difficult
to lock.
Needless to say, I doubt that I would have the presence of mind to try
pushing the canopy open further just to settle some questions on the
RV-list.
I just hope this never happens to me.....at Sun-N-Fun 2001......in my
RV-6..............and if it did, I suspect I would be much more careful
from then on about completing the preflight checklist..........
Sam Buchanan (RV-6, canopy securely latched)
"The RV Journal" http://thervjournal.com
=========================
Bernie Kerr wrote:
>
>
> Maybe Fred would like to expound on this. He seems to have more first hand
> data on this than most of us. All the input I had prior to talking to Fred
> said that the canopy would go to about 6 inches open and that you were not
> going to muscle it from there. You should just land now and forget trying to
> close it in the air. Fred has opened his on purpose at 100 indicated and
> basically reports the same thing about where it goes and can not be moved.
> He also reports a large trim change with it open. He says you can close it
> by slowing to flap speed and slowly drop the flap and the canopy will close.
> Based on these reports, I do not beleive you can get the canopy open far
> enough to eject the thing in flight because of the hook shape of the hinge.
>
> Bernie Kerr, 6A tipup, SE Fla
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > I'm not sure why people seem worried about their canopy removal (on
> the
> > > > tip-up model)... There's got to be at least a hundred pounds of lift
> on
> > > > it in flight, maybe more. Add that to the adrenaline-fuelled pilot
> who
> > > > now wants to regretfully egress from his aircraft, and I think getting
> > > > out would be a no-brainer if the front hinges were releaseable, which
> > > > apparently is the case.
> > >
> > > Sounds reasonable. I look forward to your flight test results. : )
> > >
> > > Andy
> > >
> >
> > I know of a 6 that had the tip-up canopy unlatch in flight one afternoon.
> > The report was that the canopy opened to a 45 degree angle, high enough
> that
> > the PAX had to unbuckle to reach the handle to get it closed. The plane
> also
> > nosed over and dove for the ground. One quote was " So this is how it's
> > going to end" as the ground filled the windscreen.
> >
> > So, from this information I would surmise that the tip up canopy could be
> > ejected in flight in one wanted to.
> >
> > Gary Zilik RV-6A, Slider
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David L. Grebe" <davegrebe(at)pond.com> |
| Subject: | XP360 Installations |
I'm considering an XP360 for my RV-8 but don't really want to be "first on
your block".....Anyone have first hand knowledge of the Superior engine in
an RV?
David Grebe
RV-8 #80354...North Wales, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Irwin" <rv6eric(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | XP360 Installations |
Check out the following web page for the details of a XP360 installation in
an RV-6A: http://www.attawayair.com/new_page_3.htm
I'm considering an XP360 for my RV-8 but don't really want to be "first on
your block".....Anyone have first hand knowledge of the Superior engine in
an RV?
David Grebe
RV-8 #80354...North Wales, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cylinder bolts |
I read an informative article in Kitplanes about fatigue stress. One
example cited was: Don't paint the cylinder head or crankcase surfaces
where where head contacts case - the paint (softer than metal) will wear and
you'll lose some of the torque, resulting in fatiguing and eventual failure
of the studs.
David Carter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Fw: RV-List: Re: Cylinder bolts- corrected
>
> Aircraft Maintenance Articles
>
> Re-torquing cylinder base studs
> Q. How do you feel about the practice of "re-torquing" cylinder
> base nuts after a run-in period?
>
>
> Fatigue fractured cylinder base stud from insufficient preload.
> Notice black fretting material around stud.
>
> A. The only reason I can think of for re-torquing the joint would
> be a quality control measure to make sure all nuts were properly torqued
> to begin with. If assembled properly cylinder base nuts will not be
> loose after the run-in period. I used to run a test cell where we ran
> engines can be revealing. If you find the nuts loose you have an engine
> failure.
>
> On my airplane no mechanic is going to install cylinders until he
> shows me the calibration sticker on his torque wrench and shows me that
> he has a copy of the lycoming engine procedure on installing cylinders
> and torquing.
>
> see Torque Wrench Accuracy and the Moment of Inertia
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Microsoft Flight Simulator for RV-6 |
Flightsim.com has a RV-6 and -6A for FS2K2. They feature a slider
canopy, and the flight modeling is much improved over the FS98 versions
of the -6 I've seen. The file name is rv6_2k2.zip
<http://www.flightsim.com/cgi/kdl/main/50/rv6_2k2.zip?4diaz04L> . If
you're not a subscriber to Flightsim.com, lemme know and I'll send it to
you directly.
Jeff Point
RV-6 fuselage
Milwaukee WI
Paul Stratman wrote:
>
>Hey All,
>
> Does anyone have the aircraft model and configuration file created for
>Microsoft flight ism 2000 or above.?
>
>Paul
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "R.E. Butcher" <sirs(at)neosoft.com> |
| Subject: | Wing Root Gap Seal RV-8 |
RV-8 BUILDERS:
Not that anyone except myself would send his -8 up without the wing-root
gap seals installed, but just in case you ever have the thought... DON'T
DO IT!. If you choose to do so, be warned that at speeds of 100 mph or
less, in ANY landing configuration, you will experience sufficient
turblance on the horizintal stab/elevator such that it will (1)stop
flying completely and the nose will drop rapidly and/or (2) you will
have severe buffeting and VERY LITTLE elevator authority. Not a pretty
picture.
Rubber gap seals installed... Flys as advertised.
Some things we learn the hard way.
Safe Flying!
Ernie Butcher
RV-8 N99SU
SIRS! Uniform Services 'Special Delivery'
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eustace Bowhay" <ebowhay(at)jetstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical help |
Hi Chris & Susie:
I spoke to the aviation radio service center for our area today about your
problem, these folks are highly regarded and have 25 plus years in this
field. They are well know for their major installations in business
aircraft.
They said that your problem is not uncommon and one thing that might help is
to move the antenna farther back. They also realize that this is not
practical on an RV because of it's size. They have done some installations
in RV's including my RV 6 so are familiar with the aircraft.
They asked if your radio was working ok and if so probably the best thing is
to just ignore it and carry on as the condition will not harm anything.
Eustace Bowhay Blind Bay, B.C.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris & Susie" <rv6(at)ssc.net.au>
Subject: RV-List: Electrical help
>
> When I transmit on the radio the Vans amp gauge goes -40 and the manifold
> guage goes full deflection also the cht and egt values change???
> Any ideas???
>
>
> Chris and Susie
> VH-MUM (reserved)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Curt Reimer" <cgreimer(at)mb.sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Microsoft Flight Simulator for RV-6 |
The best FS2000 version of the RV-6 that I have found is at
http://fsplanet.com/18082001.htm
I believe here is an FS2002 updated version floating around as well.
These seem to be missing a couple of gauges and switches but fly well and
look fabulous.
Curt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Microsoft Flight Simulator for RV-6
>
> Paul, this web page has most of the RV series as well as some other
> homebuilts
>
> http://dkoelzer.murkworks.com/hangarx/
>
> Ed Anderson
> Matthews NC
> RV-6A N494BW
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Stratman" <pauls(at)kc.rr.com>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Microsoft Flight Simulator for RV-6
>
>
> >
> > Hey All,
> >
> > Does anyone have the aircraft model and configuration file created
for
> > Microsoft flight ism 2000 or above.?
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6) |
I'm building an RV-6 tail dragger and have copies of e-mail last year with a
Van's engineer, and finally, one from RV himself, discouraging me from
trying to increase the angle of the wing in the 3 point attitude so as to
land slower. The engineer did give me specific measurement of how much I
could lower the aft spar. I will do that and will make an identical change
to Horiz Stab angle (increase it same amount - haven't figured details of
how to measure that yet).
At Oshkosh, I went looking for larger diameter tires & wheel - can't find
any combination that matches the horizontal distance between the axles
bearing surfaces (inner and outer bearings). I'll have to custom machine a
sleeve to go on stock axle to use a larger wheel and tire - I'm willing to
do that.
I also will bend (anneal, bend, re-heat treat) or make from scratch a new
tail wheel "leg" to come out back of fuselage to let tail be lower.
The reason for all this is: I had taken training with Mike in Oregon a
couple of years ago and had held it off on one landing to near full stall
and tail hit about a foot (wild guess) before mains. Back home, I looked up
stall angle for the airfoil in Abbott and Doenhoff (maybe 15 degrees) and
then measured the angle of wing chord line sitting on ground (Dwg #1 or some
such with sideview of aircraft) - was about 11 degrees. I don't like to
give up that amount of angle of attack and corresonding reduction in 3 point
touchdown speed.
Now, what is the history of this RV-8 "long gear"? Did it come from Van's?
If not, where can I get one made for an RV-6? Based on the recent problem a
fellow had with the bolt holding his gear leg in the engine mount weldment,
I realize that all that is needed is a longer "straight leg" to go into the
std Van's engine mount. If I can get longer legs for the RV-6, then I won't
have to change anything in the wing incidence, horiz stab incidence, tail
"leg" shape, and axle mod for larger wheel/tire.
- Cost of long legs?
David Carter
RV-6 tail light, Nederland, Texas
409-722-7259
----- Original Message -----
From: <RVer273sb(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit
>
> Dick,
> I have about 50 hrs in a short leg RV4 and 600 in my
> long leg RV4. I personally prefer the long gear legs.
> More ground clearance and a higher nose attitude.
> Easier to stall land ect. Also looks better.
> Stewart RV4 Co.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KBoatri144(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
In a message dated 1/21/02 10:10:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, sbuc(at)hiwaay.net
writes:
<< One aspect of departing in the middle of a wad of aircraft at Sun-N-Fun
is that the hustle and bustle is likely to take you out of your ordinary
pre-flight drill if you aren't as careful as you should be. The taxi
position on the RV-6 tip-up canopy (safety latch resting on top of the
canopy bow) is very effective at directing a blast of propwash into the
cabin while in a long taxi line. >>
I'm glad nobody has had this happen to them. Certainly not of the kind of
thing that would never happen to an attentive pilot.
Personally, I'd hate to be on a 500 mile cross county at night in a Piper
Tomahawk with a dead battery - in 30F weather, on a return trip from
South Florida. To make this hypothetical situation more comical, imagine a
nighttime fuel stop, when after re-fueling, your buddy gives the prop a
mighty heave in the 30 F weather to start the beast (of course, people doing
such foolish things would probably be wearing T-shirts and shorts, with all
of the warm gear stored neatly in the baggage compartment). Hypothetically,
just as you are both belted in, with doors closed, headsets on, and the cabin
heat just beginning to fight the onset of frostbite, you might both realize
that the airplane is about 10 feet from the fuel pumps and there is no way
you're going anywhere without shutting down, pushing back, and repeating the
entire process...
IF anyone was to do such a thing, it might feel as if the temperature had
dropped from 30F to 25F on the second excursion outside the airplane, and
your buddy might not speak to you for a while.
Kyle Boatright
0-320/Aymar Demuth RV-6 Slider
Kennesaw, GA
http://www.angelfire.com/my/rv6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
I'm reading all the info and am fascinated by the examples that are coming
out. So, you and your buddy opened the canopy intentionally. The key point
is that there were 2 of you, so one guy could fly the plane and the other
manipulate the canopy. Did the "canopy man" use 2 hands and then lock the
canopy before landing, or just let it ride 4" high through the landing?
David Carter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
OK, who has a "dinged" tip-up canopy lying around who wants to donate it for
a test? Anyone have an extra vertical stab, too, in case .. . . . .? Can
NASA put a "safety net" behind (downwind) of an RV-6 in the wind tunnel's
test section to catch the canopy so we don't have to do this in-flt?
(ashamed to give my name)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Prior" <rv7(at)b4.ca>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
>
> I'm not sure why people seem worried about their canopy removal (on the
> tip-up model)... There's got to be at least a hundred pounds of lift on
> it in flight, maybe more. Add that to the adrenaline-fuelled pilot who
> now wants to regretfully egress from his aircraft, and I think getting
> out would be a no-brainer if the front hinges were releaseable, which
> apparently is the case.
>
> Before you all say "but the air blowing on the canopy will keep it on",
> keep in mind that the majority of your lift is generated by the first
> 25% of your wing, too... The 25% that's shaped a lot like the front of
> your canopy. It also only has to help until you get a gap underneath
> the glareshield at the front. Once that's there, the air will gladly
> fill your cabin and pressurize it to help you remove the canopy further.
> It may hit the tail on the way by, but since you're planning on getting
> out anyway, it's not likely to be a huge concern...
>
> -Rob P.
>
> Dennis Persyk wrote:
>
> >
> >My tip-up canopy on the 6A has been on and off several times. I
> >incorporated an extension mechanism to disengage the locking pins so I
could
> >get to the stuff behind the panel, but I did not make it an in-flight
> >operable mechanism.
> >
> >The motions and articulations required to move the canopy into position
for
> >removal are not consistent with the forces applied by the windstream in
> >flight. I and my building cohorts feel strongly that the canopy would
not
> >release in flight with the pins extracted. If you were to install and
> >remove a canopy yourself I'm confident you would reach the same
conclusion.
> >
> >It is strictly conjecture on my part, but perhaps the early rev levels of
> >canopy engagement afforded freeing the canopy in flight - the geometry
has
> >been modified over the years.
> >
> >Dennis Persyk 6A N600DP 110 hours
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Miller Robert" <rmiller3(at)earthlink.net>
> >To:
> >Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
> >
> >
> >>
> >>Does the tip-up release mechanism make successful egress more likely?
> >>Robert
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
If canopy won't come off, then the Air Force type "canopy breaker",
typically meant for ground egress, could also be used to make an opening to
bail out through. The principle is that plexiglass shatters fairly easily.
The canopy breakers in my fighters were fairly short, stubby, heavy, with
short blade like a wide bladed hunting knife. Need to make a BIG hole so
you don't hang up, and maybe reduce cuts from the sharp edges. Thinking of
that, you might be able to clean it out all the way back to the roll bar
assembly over the seat backs.
As for hitting vertical tail, if have control, then pull up fairly
steeply and leave at as slow a speed as possible; also, trim full nose down
before bailing out so plane noses down away from you ('jettison's you'). If
no pitch control (out of control) and high speed, do whatever it takes to
try to stay alive - get out if you can and take your chances. Not getting
out in that scenario has a 100% certain outcome.
David Carter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Buchanan" <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
>
>
> Don.Alexander(at)AstenJohnson.com wrote:
>
> > As a skydiver myself, I have no problem riding the "silken angel" down
if
> > the need is there. My question to the listers is this:
> >
> > If you have to bail out of your pride and joy, can you physically get
out?
> > Will our canopys slide aft at 250 mph, or are we trapped until the
curtain
> > call? Are we deluding ourselves with parachutes?
>
>
>
> More than likely we would never be able to get out of an RV-6
> tip-up.....especially under the pressure of an actual emergency.
>
> Sam Buchanan (RV-6)
> "The RV Journal" http://thervjournal.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6) |
| From: | James Freeman <flyeyes(at)bellsouth.net> |
On Monday, January 21, 2002, at 10:50 PM, David Carter wrote:
> I realize that all that is needed is a longer "straight leg" to go into
> the
> std Van's engine mount. If I can get longer legs for the RV-6, then I
> won't
> have to change anything in the wing incidence, horiz stab incidence, tail
> "leg" shape, and axle mod for larger wheel/tire.
> - Cost of long legs?
>
I'm sure you would realize this if you thought it through a minute, but
the fact that RV4 and RV6 gear legs are swept back means you can't just
lengthen the legs without also changing the angle of the gear socket/motor
mount. Longer legs would also move the wheels aft, and they're already
pretty close to the CG.
If the absolute minimum landing speed is your most important criterion, it
might be worth considering changing to a -6A, which would allow a higher
AOA prior to touchdown. In practice, I don't think the difference matters
much (IMHO)
James Freeman
RV8 canopy skirt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jaye and Scott Jackson <jayeandscott(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Parachute value |
I understand that the useful life of a parachute is twenty years and most
original manufacturers will not repack them after reaching this age. The
USAF retires theirs after ten years. This might help determine the value of
the chutes.
Incidentally, the more the canopy is handled-i.e., repacked-the shorter the
life of the canopy, according to one manufacturer's website.
Scott In Vancouver
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Aronson" <aronsond(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: RV-List: Parachute value
>
> Listers:
> I am interested in a couple of parachutes for my soon to be complete
> RV4(anytime in the next who knows how long time). Since I also have a
> citabria that needs chutes for future airbatic training and practice, I
> have looked for seat pack types. A pair of nice chutes have been
> offered to me and I need to know their relative value. They are:
> G.Q.Security Parachutes Inc, Model 500 slow speed, Seat packs. They
> were manufactured in 1990. They are in nice shape and I will have them
> inspected and re-packed prior to sale, so those who might reply can
> assume they are in good shape. Anyone know what they might be worth?
> Thanks for your input. By the way, I hope NOT TO start a thread on the
> merits of back-pack over seat-pack or the decision to wear or not wear a
> seatbelt. Just input about what these chutes might be worth.
> Dave Aronson
> RV4 N504RV
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jaye and Scott Jackson <jayeandscott(at)shaw.ca> |
Cheapest leak detector I have found yet is a washdown with Varsol followed
by a spray with Dr. Scholl's foot powder.
Scott in Vancouver
----- Original Message -----
From: "Glenn & Judi" <dirtyrottenscoundrels(at)attbi.com>
Subject: RV-List: Oil Leak
>
> Hi,
> I started my engine up for the first time. I seem to have an oil leak
> somewhere on the back of the engine. It is hard to pinpoint where the
leak
> is, but it seems to be in the vicinity of the spin on oil filter mount, or
> the oil filter seal itself. Any suggestions for finding it? The engine
is
> a factory new O360-A1A.
>
> Thanks,
> Glenn Gordon
> N442E (almost!)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jaye and Scott Jackson <jayeandscott(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: IO-360 Engine Problem/Failure |
Is there a danger of a partly-spun main bearing in this scenario? Does the
tension of the cylinder holdown bolts help keep the main bearings in place ?
I know some of them do go right through the crankcase from one side to the
other on certain models. Could lead to a broken crankshaft/connecting rod
shortly after being returned to service.
Scott in Vancouver
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph Czachorowski" <zackrv8(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RV-List: IO-360 Engine Problem/Failure
>
> Guys,
>
> I was flying today with my friend who has an RV8 with an
> IO-360 (200hp). After takeoff he started noticing a vibration that
> increased as time went on. He said he felt it in his throttle quadrant.
> It got so bad that he almost put it down on an interstate road but
> luckily made it to an airport.
>
> After he took the cowl off, he noticed all but 2 bolts/nuts
> were holding the #2 cylinder head on to the crankcase. He took off the
> valve cover and everything appeared normal, i.e., rotated the prop and
> the valves opened and closed normally. He did a leak down check and the
> cylinder was 71/80.
>
> He asked me to put this on the list to see if anyone had any ideas
> of why this might of happened. Obviously, he'll know more when he pulls
> the jug. Any ideas out there? Why would this happen to only one
> cylinder?
>
> Joe
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jaye and Scott Jackson <jayeandscott(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Parachute value |
Michael:
Using your experience, I'd like to know what you think of the National
425 Chairpack 'chute.
The lowest price I've been able to find is at
www.wingsandwheels.com
Thanks
Scott in VAncouver
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael McGee" <jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Parachute value
>
> >
> >Listers:
> >I am interested in a couple of parachutes for my soon to be complete
> >RV4(anytime in the next who knows how long time). Since I also have a
> >citabria that needs chutes for future airbatic training and practice, I
> >have looked for seat pack types. A pair of nice chutes have been
> >offered to me and I need to know their relative value. They are:
> >G.Q.Security Parachutes Inc, Model 500 slow speed, Seat packs. They
> >were manufactured in 1990. They are in nice shape and I will have them
> >inspected and re-packed prior to sale, so those who might reply can
> >assume they are in good shape. Anyone know what they might be worth?
> >Thanks for your input. By the way, I hope NOT TO start a thread on the
> >merits of back-pack over seat-pack or the decision to wear or not wear a
> >seatbelt. Just input about what these chutes might be worth.
> >Dave Aronson
> >RV4 N504RV
> >
>
> This turned into a long answer and almost answers David's question. I
> don't know the current market value of the parachute he's looking
> at. Since I got all this typed out anyway I thought I would share my
> perspective with the rest of you as I have some experience with the
> equipment in general.
>
> From a old skydiver (1600 jumps) and Parachute Rigger's perspective
> (mine). Assuming you are willing to use it if you need to and this isn't
> just to stay legal (don't laugh, I've talked to enough pilots that have no
> intentions of using the chute they HAVE to wear), these are the questions
I
> would ask:
>
> 1) What size is the canopy (22' or 26') and how heavy are you? If you
are
> over 165 pounds dripping wet or your ground elevation is anything above
sea
> level, you will want it to be 26' unless you aren't worried about having
to
> walk away from the landing. I don't remember what size canopy GQ Security
> put in the 500.
> 2) If these are really LOW SPEED parachutes (TSO C23b: ..limited to
> aircraft under 150 kts), think about this: The Citabria, if it's broken
> will come out of the sky at maybe 150 or a little more. If you get out of
> it you won't overload the canopy on opening. On the other hand, if you
> break the RV-4 and get out, you could easily be doing 250 in a dive and
> deploying the parachute at that speed would likely cause a catastrophic
> failure (not to mention what it'll do to yer 'nads).
>
> I'm currently shopping for a rig (Emergency Parachute) for my RV-4. I am
> 165 dripping wet, full dress flight gear and a 12 pound rig on me puts the
> suspended weight at about 180-185. I'm looking for at least a MEDIUM
> SPEED canopy/harness combination with a 26' canopy.
>
> And now the test:
> Your plane has become a 250 MPH lawn dart, you have 15 seconds to get out
> of the plane and deploy your parachute. The canopy needs 500 feet to
> deploy and slow you down.
>
> What altitude did you make the decision to get out?
>
> How long did it take you to figure out you needed to get out?
>
> Mike
>
>
> Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Aurora, OR
> 13B in gestation mode
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jaye and Scott Jackson <jayeandscott(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
I noticed at Arlington that a REALLY fast RV-6 (and we all know who that is)
had the front sliding canopy rollers anchored to the canopy frame with dual,
quick-release pins on wire cables. Somebody's already thinking about this...
Scott in Vancouver
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
>
> By pulling the handle, you can't get the canopy out. The canopy has to be
> raised up and lifted straight up to come out of the bearing blocks that
hold
> it in. For this reason, I didn't go through the trouble of installing the
> release mechanism. It is futile.
>
> The only thing the release mechanism is good for is service on the ground.
> If you are going down, go down with the ship I say!
>
>
> Paul Besing
> RV-6A N197AB Arizona
> http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
> First Flight 22 July 01
> Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
> http://www.kitlog.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andy" <winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
>
>
> >
> > > If you have to bail out of your pride and joy, can you physically get
> out?
> > > Will our canopys slide aft at 250 mph,
> >
> > And how about the RV-6 tilt-ups. I don't have a lot of confidence in
that
> > little red release handle gently whisking away the canopy, so you can
> > gratiously stand up and swan dive out. More likely, if it releases at
> all, the
> > glare shield is going to chop your head off as the whole thing crashes
> back
> > into the verticle stab. Either way, its not going to be a pretty sight.
> I
> > wonder if this system has ever been tested in any way.
> >
> > Andy
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6) |
David Carter wrote:
>
>
> I'm building an RV-6 tail dragger and have copies of e-mail last year with a
> Van's engineer, and finally, one from RV himself, discouraging me from
> trying to increase the angle of the wing in the 3 point attitude so as to
> land slower. The engineer did give me specific measurement of how much I
> could lower the aft spar. I will do that and will make an identical change
> to Horiz Stab angle (increase it same amount - haven't figured details of
> how to measure that yet).
>
> At Oshkosh, I went looking for larger diameter tires & wheel - can't find
> any combination that matches the horizontal distance between the axles
> bearing surfaces (inner and outer bearings). I'll have to custom machine a
> sleeve to go on stock axle to use a larger wheel and tire - I'm willing to
> do that.
>
> I also will bend (anneal, bend, re-heat treat) or make from scratch a new
> tail wheel "leg" to come out back of fuselage to let tail be lower.
>
> The reason for all this is: I had taken training with Mike in Oregon a
> couple of years ago and had held it off on one landing to near full stall
> and tail hit about a foot (wild guess) before mains. Back home, I looked up
> stall angle for the airfoil in Abbott and Doenhoff (maybe 15 degrees) and
> then measured the angle of wing chord line sitting on ground (Dwg #1 or some
> such with sideview of aircraft) - was about 11 degrees. I don't like to
> give up that amount of angle of attack and corresonding reduction in 3 point
> touchdown speed.
>
> Now, what is the history of this RV-8 "long gear"? Did it come from Van's?
> If not, where can I get one made for an RV-6? Based on the recent problem a
> fellow had with the bolt holding his gear leg in the engine mount weldment,
> I realize that all that is needed is a longer "straight leg" to go into the
> std Van's engine mount. If I can get longer legs for the RV-6, then I won't
> have to change anything in the wing incidence, horiz stab incidence, tail
> "leg" shape, and axle mod for larger wheel/tire.
> - Cost of long legs?
>
> David Carter
> RV-6 tail light, Nederland, Texas
> 409-722-7259
>
I can't belive I am reading this. You are joking right David? I bumped the
tail whell a time or two while learning about landing my RV-6 but it is now a
non issue. YOU CANNOT JUST ADD A LONGER GEAR LEGS. Now how are you going to
extend the tailwhell spring to do any good? if you lower the tail anymore you
well be hitting the bottom of the rudder on the spring. Maybe I don't
understand what you are trying to do with the tailwheel spring but I don't see
what advantage you are going to get.
Jerry(let the tailwhell bump first once in a while who cares)Springer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Gray <douggray(at)ihug.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Cylinder bolts |
Lubricating the threads will also result in loose nuts. Initially the
lubricant will be held in place and the torque will be transmitted into tensile
load on the stud via hydraulic pressure. In time the lubricant will seep out
releasing the tension on the stud. So... torque the nuts dry.
Doug Gray
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bernie Kerr" <kerrjb(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
Hi Kyle,
Glad I wasn't flying in the middle of the night with two guys whose brain's
were obviously slowing down due to hyperthermia!!
Are you going to make Lakeland this weekend??
Bernie
----- Original Message -----
From: <KBoatri144(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
>
> In a message dated 1/21/02 10:10:19 PM Eastern Standard Time,
sbuc(at)hiwaay.net
> writes:
>
> << One aspect of departing in the middle of a wad of aircraft at Sun-N-Fun
> is that the hustle and bustle is likely to take you out of your ordinary
> pre-flight drill if you aren't as careful as you should be. The taxi
> position on the RV-6 tip-up canopy (safety latch resting on top of the
> canopy bow) is very effective at directing a blast of propwash into the
> cabin while in a long taxi line. >>
>
>
> I'm glad nobody has had this happen to them. Certainly not of the kind of
> thing that would never happen to an attentive pilot.
>
> Personally, I'd hate to be on a 500 mile cross county at night in a Piper
> Tomahawk with a dead battery - in 30F weather, on a return trip
from
> South Florida. To make this hypothetical situation more comical, imagine
a
> nighttime fuel stop, when after re-fueling, your buddy gives the prop a
> mighty heave in the 30 F weather to start the beast (of course, people
doing
> such foolish things would probably be wearing T-shirts and shorts, with
all
> of the warm gear stored neatly in the baggage compartment).
Hypothetically,
> just as you are both belted in, with doors closed, headsets on, and the
cabin
> heat just beginning to fight the onset of frostbite, you might both
realize
> that the airplane is about 10 feet from the fuel pumps and there is no way
> you're going anywhere without shutting down, pushing back, and repeating
the
> entire process...
>
> IF anyone was to do such a thing, it might feel as if the temperature had
> dropped from 30F to 25F on the second excursion outside the airplane, and
> your buddy might not speak to you for a while.
>
> Kyle Boatright
> 0-320/Aymar Demuth RV-6 Slider
> Kennesaw, GA
> http://www.angelfire.com/my/rv6
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New WigWag II |
Bob,
Glad to hear that about your new WigWag II. We have your WigWag I installed
and it provides great visibility - definitly recommended!
Chuck & Dave Rowbotham
RV-8A (Niantic, CT)
>From: Bob Haan <bhaan(at)easystreet.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: New WigWag II
>Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 17:44:33 -0800
>
>
>Announcing a new and improved WigWag II.
>
>We have added new features to the
>original WigWag plus we were able to make it 9% lighter.
>
>* The bulb filament warmer feature is now optional at time of installation.
>* Noise rejection has been increased on all inputs, increasing the number
>of switch
>options.
>* Alarm outputs have greater voltage swings allowing WigWag II to interface
>with a
>larger number of displays and alarm devices.
>
>WigWag II retains all of the features of the original WigWag such as:
>* A slower flash cycle that allows the filaments to come to full bright so
>that your airplane will be seen from a greater distance.
>* A redundant power supply will provide a light for landing even with a
>fault on one side.
>
>For a picture and a Data Sheet of detailed information go to
>http://easystreet.com/~bhaan
>
>To order your WigWag II send a check for $150 plus $6 for shipping to:
>Robert Haan
>14270 SW Koven Court
>Tigard, OR 97224
> >
> > Lead time 4 to 6 weeks
>
>Bob
>RV6A almost
>http://easystreet.com/~bhaan/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Newton" <enewton57(at)cableone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
Hi all,
So far all of this thread has been about tip up canopies. I wonder if a
slider would open. The aft end has to be raised slightly to get it sliding
down the track. I wonder how much pressure is there. Anyone know?
The other thought I had (I know thinking is a dangerous thing) is everyone
has been talking about an airplane going 200+ miles per hour flying forward
and pushing the canopy down. No one has mentioned that in all likelihood,
you are not going to be bailing out of a perfectly good airplane that is
flying straight ahead (at least I wouldn't). I assume the bailout would
occur after some catastrophic failure of the wing or maybe an unrecoverable
flat spin, which in either case the airplane would be tumbling or falling in
a stalled condition and the pressure on the canopy would not be the same as
in normal flight. Just a thought.
Eric Newton - Long Beach, MS
RV-6A N57ME (Flying)
www.ericsrv6a.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jaye and Scott Jackson" <jayeandscott(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
>
> I noticed at Arlington that a REALLY fast RV-6 (and we all know who that
is)
> had the front sliding canopy rollers anchored to the canopy frame with
dual,
> quick-release pins on wire cables. Somebody's already thinking about
this...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Earl Fortner <efortner(at)vnet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Magellan GPS repairs |
I have already talked with Thales and their response is they no longer
support
Megellan aviation products. Will not repair or update them.
Earl RV4
"Cole, Ed" wrote:
>
> I believe there were a couple of listers looking to have their Magellan
> GPS's repaired.
>
> Magellan was bought out by a French firm named Thales Navigation
> in July of 2001.
>
> They still represent Magellan and Ashtech under their name.
>
> They have an office in Santa Clara, Calif. (408) 615-5100
>
> Here are the phone numbers listed for service and repairs.
>
> 800-707-7845 Repair
> 800-669-4477 Service
> 800-707-9971 Tech Support
>
> Their website is www.thalesnaviagation.com
>
> Ed Cole
> RV6A N2169D Flying
> RV6A N648RV Finishing
>
> Maxim Home Page:
> http://www.maxim-ic.com
> Products Page:
> http://www.maxim-ic.com/MaximProducts/products.htm
> New Products:
> http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/new_products.cfm
> Datasheets:
> http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/l_datasheet3.cfm
> The information contained in this message is confidential
> and may be legally privileged. The message is intended
> solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination,
> or reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
> by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
| From: | Eric.J.Henson(at)chase.com |
09:37:07 AM
I'm certainly no expert. I was for a few years a Marine ejection seat
mechanic. I was trained on F-4's, A-4's, A-6's (Martin Baker & EscapePac
systems). The history of ejection seats is full of canopy removal problems.
Blasting some hot-shots carcass out of a plane was only half the battle.
One would think that if you remove the locks from a canopy it would blow
off. Not the deal at all. Most times its compressed on the airframe with a
force exponentially multiplying with speed. Most ejection systems Vietnam
era and later have in-line charges in the actuator that multiplies the
pneumatic pressure already in the system. This will provide enough force to
blow even an F-14 canopy clear of the tail of the aircraft while sitting on
the ground. This should give you an idea of the force supplied to get a
canopy off the airframe. No, Goose could not have died that way. The
interlock mechanism would have prevented the seat from firing until the
canopy was clear of the seat trajectory. The canopy in every system I have
ever heard of is ripped from the hinges, or the hinges are ripped from the
airframe as the canopy is levered back against its mounting point.
Exploding bolts? Neva hoppen GI. Its hard to get new hotshot aviators to
fall for getting a bucket of prop wash or 100' of flight line. So we seat
mechs tell them about exploding bolts. "Sir, you can't come up here, we're
putting exploding bolts in the canopy." Actually you're just reading
Playboy in the cockpit. (Don't go there). Now days a lot of the
manufacturers get by all of these problems by just putting the seats
through the canopy, either by det cord or having canopy breakers on top of
the seats themselves. Some do both.
To answer the question of could you remove a canopy at 230 MPH. I don't
know, sure don't plan to find out. I have to believe the average Joe could
not budge it. It would have to be leveraged into the slip stream first. I
also suspect that a tipup would be harder to remove than a slider. If you
can't get it into the slip stream and get some air under it, you have a
1,000 lb weight on top of it. Case in point would be the A-4 Skyhawk. Still
my favorite ejection system. The canopy was held open by a bungee/cam
system. The early A-4's had no charge in the canopy removal system. Instead
on each canopy sill was two "canopy kickers" They were just simple
explosive charges that would kick up a prong on each canopy sill about 3".
This got the small canopy in the slip stream where it tore away from the
airframe.
A former hangar mate of mine mounted a D-ring in his RV-6 by the locking
handle on his slider. Actually, he had no locking handle since the forces
the slip stream tended to keep the canopy closed. Where the handle went was
a D-ring attached to two throttle cables that were routed around to the
front canopy rollers. Instead of bolts the ends of the throttle cables held
the canopy on. Another cable attached the d-ring to the front of the
canopy. Pull the d-ring and immediately the pins are out of the front
canopy rollers, continue the pull and now its you against the slipstream.
BTW, I believe this is why the WWII fighters had mostly crank canopies, to
provide mechanical leverage at high airspeeds. Simply conjecture.
I used to love to fly the T-34's with the canopy open. I generally allowed
the passengers to have theirs open since it got pretty windy back there
with both of them open. They were usually shocked at how hard you had to
pull to get the canopy to move the first two inches. When you did pull
the canopy back, there was a big sucking sound as a pressure differential
was equalized, then the canopy pulled open nicely. This was at 120 MPH. It
seemed to indicate that there definitely was a pressure pushing down on the
canopy, or more like sucking it closed. It was impossible to have the
canopy open 1", it would just suck closed. Figure that out. At 230 MPH, I
think you would have a real problem. I think the only way would be to loose
the airspeed or lever the canopy up into the slipstream, which would be
pretty impractical.
Just my take on this.
Eric Henson
RF-4B (VMFP-3 Eyes of the Corps)
Two seats used, two satisfied customers.
Meet your maker
In a Martin-Baker
Don.Alexander(at)AstenJohnson.com@matronics.com on 01/21/2002 10:05:49 AM
Please respond to rv-list(at)matronics.com
Sent by: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
cc:
Subject: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
Snip:
And now the test:
Your plane has become a 250 MPH lawn dart, you have 15 seconds to get out
of the plane and deploy your parachute. The canopy needs 500 feet to
deploy and slow you down.
Nice reply, Mr. McGee
As a skydiver myself, I have no problem riding the "silken angel" down if
the need is there. My question to the listers is this:
If you have to bail out of your pride and joy, can you physically get out?
Will our canopys slide aft at 250 mph, or are we trapped until the curtain
call? Are we deluding ourselves with parachutes? Don't forget that you
have a responsiblity to your passenger as well. You must brief them on the
use of a 'chute. Don't just tell them how to deploy it...make sure that
you tell them what happens after deployment. Tell them how to steer and
land, and how to pick out a landing site. Make sure that they can reach
the deployment ring with their eyes closed. Also make sure that they know
how to get out of the seat harness with their eyes closed. I strongly
suggest that you take a couple of jumps with the local jump facility before
you strap a 'chute on just so you don't soil yourself if the time comes to
use it. A sport 'chute flys differently than an emergency 'chute, but the
experience would be great to have, not to mention how fun it is :-)
I am curious to see if anyone has been able to open their canopy in flight
in order to bail out. Are there any experts on this subject?
Don Alexander
RV-8
empenage (2nd try on the trim tab)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6) |
I bothers me that you are taking a proven design and modifying it BEFORE you
have even flown it.
I have a couple of questions...
1. How many tail dragger hours have you flown? Where did you obtain your
knowledge for the "improvements?"
2. Are you an aeronautical engineer. If so what tail dragger have you
designed?
When you change the physical characteristic of an airplane, you also change
the aerodynamics. Most of the time when a plane is in operation, it is
flying not landing. The present configuration has worked well for a couple
thousand RVs.
Remember the design of an airplane is all compromises. When you change
something to "improve" the landing, something else suffers.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net>
Subject: RV-List: Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6)
I'm building an RV-6 tail dragger and have copies of e-mail last year with a
Van's engineer, and finally, one from RV himself, discouraging me from
trying to increase the angle of the wing in the 3 point attitude so as to
land slower. The engineer did give me specific measurement of how much I
could lower the aft spar. I will do that and will make an identical change
to Horiz Stab angle (increase it same amount - haven't figured details of
how to measure that yet).
At Oshkosh, I went looking for larger diameter tires & wheel - can't find
any combination that matches the horizontal distance between the axles
bearing surfaces (inner and outer bearings). I'll have to custom machine a
sleeve to go on stock axle to use a larger wheel and tire - I'm willing to
do that.
I also will bend (anneal, bend, re-heat treat) or make from scratch a new
tail wheel "leg" to come out back of fuselage to let tail be lower.
The reason for all this is: I had taken training with Mike in Oregon a
couple of years ago and had held it off on one landing to near full stall
and tail hit about a foot (wild guess) before mains. Back home, I looked up
stall angle for the airfoil in Abbott and Doenhoff (maybe 15 degrees) and
then measured the angle of wing chord line sitting on ground (Dwg #1 or some
such with sideview of aircraft) - was about 11 degrees. I don't like to
give up that amount of angle of attack and corresonding reduction in 3 point
touchdown speed.
Now, what is the history of this RV-8 "long gear"? Did it come from Van's?
If not, where can I get one made for an RV-6? Based on the recent problem a
fellow had with the bolt holding his gear leg in the engine mount weldment,
I realize that all that is needed is a longer "straight leg" to go into the
std Van's engine mount. If I can get longer legs for the RV-6, then I won't
have to change anything in the wing incidence, horiz stab incidence, tail
"leg" shape, and axle mod for larger wheel/tire.
- Cost of long legs?
David Carter
RV-6 tail light, Nederland, Texas
409-722-7259
----- Original Message -----
From: <RVer273sb(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit
>
> Dick,
> I have about 50 hrs in a short leg RV4 and 600 in my
> long leg RV4. I personally prefer the long gear legs.
> More ground clearance and a higher nose attitude.
> Easier to stall land ect. Also looks better.
> Stewart RV4 Co.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | hoggwild(at)swbell.net |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
i do believe that getting out of the cockpit in flight
will be more difficult then getting the canapy off.
i have a friend that lives near me in got me into
building my first plane. he has a rv-4. during flight
the canapy came off in straight and level flight. he
surrived the ordeal with major damage to the rudder
& horzontal stab. not to mention the cuts on his face
from the broken plexiglass.
this is not a isolated case either, check the builders manual
it even says so.
Eric.J.Henson(at)chase.com wrote:
>
> I'm certainly no expert. I was for a few years a Marine ejection seat
> mechanic. I was trained on F-4's, A-4's, A-6's (Martin Baker & EscapePac
> systems). The history of ejection seats is full of canopy removal problems.
> Blasting some hot-shots carcass out of a plane was only half the battle.
> One would think that if you remove the locks from a canopy it would blow
> off. Not the deal at all. Most times its compressed on the airframe with a
> force exponentially multiplying with speed. Most ejection systems Vietnam
> era and later have in-line charges in the actuator that multiplies the
> pneumatic pressure already in the system. This will provide enough force to
> blow even an F-14 canopy clear of the tail of the aircraft while sitting on
> the ground. This should give you an idea of the force supplied to get a
> canopy off the airframe. No, Goose could not have died that way. The
> interlock mechanism would have prevented the seat from firing until the
> canopy was clear of the seat trajectory. The canopy in every system I have
> ever heard of is ripped from the hinges, or the hinges are ripped from the
> airframe as the canopy is levered back against its mounting point.
> Exploding bolts? Neva hoppen GI. Its hard to get new hotshot aviators to
> fall for getting a bucket of prop wash or 100' of flight line. So we seat
> mechs tell them about exploding bolts. "Sir, you can't come up here, we're
> putting exploding bolts in the canopy." Actually you're just reading
> Playboy in the cockpit. (Don't go there). Now days a lot of the
> manufacturers get by all of these problems by just putting the seats
> through the canopy, either by det cord or having canopy breakers on top of
> the seats themselves. Some do both.
>
> To answer the question of could you remove a canopy at 230 MPH. I don't
> know, sure don't plan to find out. I have to believe the average Joe could
> not budge it. It would have to be leveraged into the slip stream first. I
> also suspect that a tipup would be harder to remove than a slider. If you
> can't get it into the slip stream and get some air under it, you have a
> 1,000 lb weight on top of it. Case in point would be the A-4 Skyhawk. Still
> my favorite ejection system. The canopy was held open by a bungee/cam
> system. The early A-4's had no charge in the canopy removal system. Instead
> on each canopy sill was two "canopy kickers" They were just simple
> explosive charges that would kick up a prong on each canopy sill about 3".
> This got the small canopy in the slip stream where it tore away from the
> airframe.
>
> A former hangar mate of mine mounted a D-ring in his RV-6 by the locking
> handle on his slider. Actually, he had no locking handle since the forces
> the slip stream tended to keep the canopy closed. Where the handle went was
> a D-ring attached to two throttle cables that were routed around to the
> front canopy rollers. Instead of bolts the ends of the throttle cables held
> the canopy on. Another cable attached the d-ring to the front of the
> canopy. Pull the d-ring and immediately the pins are out of the front
> canopy rollers, continue the pull and now its you against the slipstream.
> BTW, I believe this is why the WWII fighters had mostly crank canopies, to
> provide mechanical leverage at high airspeeds. Simply conjecture.
>
> I used to love to fly the T-34's with the canopy open. I generally allowed
> the passengers to have theirs open since it got pretty windy back there
> with both of them open. They were usually shocked at how hard you had to
> pull to get the canopy to move the first two inches. When you did pull
> the canopy back, there was a big sucking sound as a pressure differential
> was equalized, then the canopy pulled open nicely. This was at 120 MPH. It
> seemed to indicate that there definitely was a pressure pushing down on the
> canopy, or more like sucking it closed. It was impossible to have the
> canopy open 1", it would just suck closed. Figure that out. At 230 MPH, I
> think you would have a real problem. I think the only way would be to loose
> the airspeed or lever the canopy up into the slipstream, which would be
> pretty impractical.
>
> Just my take on this.
>
> Eric Henson
> RF-4B (VMFP-3 Eyes of the Corps)
>
> Two seats used, two satisfied customers.
>
> Meet your maker
> In a Martin-Baker
>
> Don.Alexander(at)AstenJohnson.com@matronics.com on 01/21/2002 10:05:49 AM
>
> Please respond to rv-list(at)matronics.com
>
> Sent by: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
>
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> cc:
> Subject: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
>
>
> Snip:
> And now the test:
> Your plane has become a 250 MPH lawn dart, you have 15 seconds to get out
> of the plane and deploy your parachute. The canopy needs 500 feet to
> deploy and slow you down.
>
> Nice reply, Mr. McGee
> As a skydiver myself, I have no problem riding the "silken angel" down if
> the need is there. My question to the listers is this:
>
> If you have to bail out of your pride and joy, can you physically get out?
> Will our canopys slide aft at 250 mph, or are we trapped until the curtain
> call? Are we deluding ourselves with parachutes? Don't forget that you
> have a responsiblity to your passenger as well. You must brief them on the
> use of a 'chute. Don't just tell them how to deploy it...make sure that
> you tell them what happens after deployment. Tell them how to steer and
> land, and how to pick out a landing site. Make sure that they can reach
> the deployment ring with their eyes closed. Also make sure that they know
> how to get out of the seat harness with their eyes closed. I strongly
> suggest that you take a couple of jumps with the local jump facility before
> you strap a 'chute on just so you don't soil yourself if the time comes to
> use it. A sport 'chute flys differently than an emergency 'chute, but the
> experience would be great to have, not to mention how fun it is :-)
> I am curious to see if anyone has been able to open their canopy in flight
> in order to bail out. Are there any experts on this subject?
>
> Don Alexander
> RV-8
> empenage (2nd try on the trim tab)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
| From: | cecilth(at)juno.com |
Don.Alexander(at)AstenJohnson.com wrote:
"Nice reply, Mr. McGee
As a skydiver myself, I have no problem riding the "silken angel"
down if the need is there. My question to the listers is this:
If you have to bail out of your pride and joy, can you physically
get out? Will our canopy slide aft at 250 mph, or are we trapped until
the
curtain call? Are we deluding ourselves with parachutes? "
It is simple to fix a slider so it will jettison during flight.
Install two pins where the canoe bow fastens to the rollers on the sides.
To jettison it: Release the overhead handle, Pull the two pins and push
up into the slipstream and its gone.
Whether you have the willpower to follow it is the question.
Cecil Hatfield
RV6A
Don.Alexander(at)AstenJohnson.com writes:
>
>
> Snip:
> And now the test:
> Your plane has become a 250 MPH lawn dart, you have 15 seconds to
> get out
> of the plane and deploy your parachute. The canopy needs 500 feet
> to
> deploy and slow you down.
>
> Nice reply, Mr. McGee
> As a skydiver myself, I have no problem riding the "silken angel"
> down if
> the need is there. My question to the listers is this:
>
> If you have to bail out of your pride and joy, can you physically
> get out?
> Will our canopys slide aft at 250 mph, or are we trapped until the
> curtain
> call? Are we deluding ourselves with parachutes? Don't forget that
> you
> have a responsiblity to your passenger as well. You must brief them
> on the
> use of a 'chute. Don't just tell them how to deploy it...make sure
> that
> you tell them what happens after deployment. Tell them how to steer
> and
> land, and how to pick out a landing site. Make sure that they can
> reach
> the deployment ring with their eyes closed. Also make sure that
> they know
> how to get out of the seat harness with their eyes closed. I
> strongly
> suggest that you take a couple of jumps with the local jump facility
> before
> you strap a 'chute on just so you don't soil yourself if the time
> comes to
> use it. A sport 'chute flys differently than an emergency 'chute,
> but the
> experience would be great to have, not to mention how fun it is :-)
> I am curious to see if anyone has been able to open their canopy in
> flight
> in order to bail out. Are there any experts on this subject?
>
> Don Alexander
> RV-8
> empenage (2nd try on the trim tab)
>
>
>
>
> messages.
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
"'RV-List Digest Server '"@matronics.com
Yeah,
by phone and they have been CC'd in all my emails.
They seem to be rather non responsive about it all. I expect they don't
have a clue either.
W
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Sears
Subject: Re: RV-List: Gauges
I'm just wondering if any of you guys with the gauge problem is
reporting it
to Van's. If not, he'll never get the message.
I'm sure appreciative of the reports you guys have given. I have no
Van's,
or ISSPRO, guages in my RV. However, I'm thinking about building a
RV-7A.
If I do that, I'll stay clear of his gauges and buy what I did the last
time.
Jim Sears in KY
RV-6A N198JS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6) |
Good questions and comments. I have no problem with these questions and
comments.
- But don't shoot the messenger. I repeat, I responded to someone
else's post that there is an RV-4 flying with long gear legs. I would like
to think that the questions you have asked me are simply the questions that
I want the long-legged RV-4 fellow to respond to. He's the one flying the
plane and said he liked it - not me. I'm just interested. I'm just trying
to get info. In my first post, I askeds if it came from Van's.
- So, I can't answer your questions - I'm just trying to find out what
the long legged RV-4 fellow found out. After I/we find out, then let's see
if your questions and comments have been adequately addressed.
- I'm not advocating or saying it should be done - just responding to
one who HAS DONE IT. I have an interest. I've already explained my
interest - being closer to the stall angle of attack of the wind in the 3
point landing attitude.
I will answer two questions that I feel qualified to answer: 1) I learned
to fly in J-3 Cubs and Aeronca Champs, with some time in a Meyers OTW with
Kiner 5 cyl radial. Then, after 43 years and almost 5000 hours of tricycle
jet fighter time, I got 1.3 hours in an RV-6, which I thoroughly enjoyed.
No, I don't think J-3 time and experience is adquate preparation to fly an
RV-6. RV-6 time is needed.
2) No, I am not an aero engineer. I completed my freshman year of aero
engineering (coop student with Chance Vought Aircraft Company in Grand
Prairie/Dallas, Texas) before entering the Air Force with a goal of flying
fighters - before my eyes faded away from too much studying or genetics like
happened to my older brother (our mom also developed near sighted
astigmatism). I have read and researched design topics continuously since I
was a teenager, always hoping someday to design an airplane. I feel that
aero engineering is an "avocation" of mine, not a vocation. It is an
interest, and I am fairly widely read. I can understand and discuss issues,
such as those you raise. I am cautious, not foolhardy. I seek info.
Asking me questions which I have already inquired about (at least
implicitely) can only be worthwhile if those with the info (not me) will
respond. Hope they don't feel intimidated, now, or have a fear of being
"flamed".
David Carter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6)
>
> I bothers me that you are taking a proven design and modifying it BEFORE
you
> have even flown it.
>
> I have a couple of questions...
>
> 1. How many tail dragger hours have you flown? Where did you obtain your
> knowledge for the "improvements?"
>
> 2. Are you an aeronautical engineer. If so what tail dragger have you
> designed?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kevin lane" <n3773(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flour bombing |
I was the co-pilot/bombardier. We would make a pass at 80mph. On base
we would unlatch the canopy. Near the target the pilot, Brian, would
drop my wing 60+ degrees in an attempt to see our target (believe me,
high wings have a huge advantage here). I would lift the canopy maybe a
foot so I could toss out the flour bag. Our accuracy was terrible.
There's a world of difference when your plane will fly at 35mph vs 80.
But yes, we discovered that an unlatched canopy at slower speeds is no
big deal. I was able to latch the canopy in flight, although I remember
I had to use my right arm, using my left put my elbow in the pilot's
way. I have heard of others doing "bombing runs" with the bags on
strings run thru the flap hole. We didn't have any string with us so we
"tossed it out the window"! Kevin
----- Original Message -----
From: David Carter
To: RV-list
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 9:38 PM
Subject: RV-List: Flour bombing
I'm reading all the info and am fascinated by the examples that are
coming
out. So, you and your buddy opened the canopy intentionally. The key
point
is that there were 2 of you, so one guy could fly the plane and the
other
manipulate the canopy. Did the "canopy man" use 2 hands and then lock
the
canopy before landing, or just let it ride 4" high through the
landing?
David Carter
messages.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Oke" <wjoke(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
Ah, brings back memories of earlier days.
The CF-104 had "canopy thrusters" as Eric describes below to lift the front
end of the canopy as step two or three in the ejection sequence. Lots of
systems in the airplane were interrelated in some way - wiggle the ailerons
on the ground and the engine fuel flow would twitch as the flight controls
loaded the engine driven hydraulic pump - that sort of thing.
When checking out a new guy, the instructor in the back seat of a dual would
add a finger to his switch as the newbie in the front "pressed to test" the
caution lights panel. The lights would keep going and the question would
come from in front of how to get them stopped. The usual reply was "three
taps to the canopy thrusters, left one first please". If done correctly, the
back seat finger was removed, the "problem" was solved and the flight
continued. Depending on the gullibility of the novice, this routine could be
continued for months with everyone back in the pilot's lounge happy to agree
that "yes, this is sure a complex airplane" to keep the gag going when this
amazing "fix" was described postflight. Funny thing, the problem never
seemed to occur in a single though.
Newbies were also cautioned that if they ever found the outside thruster
body would rotate about the inner shaft to only turn it clockwise for fear
of unscrewing the thing and letting a horribly powerful spring loose. Some
actually believed this. Sometimes if the "tap the thruster" fix didn't work
for the caution lights, the "backup method" of rotating the thruster would
magically work instead!
"Most gullible" award went to the guy who went home and explained to his
wife that he had been told "just today" that whale sperm was being trialed
on the CF-104 to prevent rain from beading on the windscreen at 500 kias
plus airspeeds. She, being of somewhat tougher mind, saw fit to break the
news that he had been had once again.
The Canadian CF-104s used only the original Lockheed C-2 seat with pretty
good results when used inside the envelope as several guys I know found out.
Most other F-104 operators retrofitted with Martin-Baker seats with not
particularly better ejection results but much worse cockpit ergonomics. With
CFIT at 500 or so kts, the brand of seat didn't seem to matter much.
Back "on-topic" for the RV-list, I usually wear a Security 150 parachute
(which I also use in my sailplane) when I am flying my RV-3. No special
concerns, just a better seating and comfort factor in the cockpit. I
sometimes refer to my RV-3 as a "very poor man's Mustang" so maybe there is
a bit of this involved too.
Glider pilots usually wear emergency chutes when flying higher performance
sailplanes and worry about the "bail-out" odds with canopy jettison being a
concern. Actual flight experience (sometimes planned, sometimes unplanned)
indicates canopy removal is not a big factor. Some newer designs add a sort
of hook at the back upper edge that engages the canopy frame to act as a
rotation point to encourage the canopy to leave as cleanly as possible.
Canopy design and speeds are somewhat different than in an RV series
aircraft however.
More years ago than I care to remember, I learned to fly on the DeHavilland
Chipmunk. We wore chutes, probably to get us used to these things for later
on. The Chipmunk had a sliding canopy which included a spring loaded "flap"
or "speed brake" at the back perhaps 18" square. This was normally held
flush with the outside of the canopy by a catch and was hinged at the back
edge in a sort of clamshell arrangement. Pulling the jettison knob in the
cockpit released the canopy locks and also pulled the catch on the outside
canopy flap. This would spring up into the airflow and act like a speed
brake or air scoop. The backward drag force would then pull the canopy open.
The occupants would then go "over the side" just like in the movies. Those
with aft sliding canopy systems (such as RV-8 owners) could do something
similar fairly easily.
Jim Oke
CYWG
RV-3 C-FIZM
RV-6A C-????
----- Original Message -----
From: <Eric.J.Henson(at)chase.com>
Subject: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
>
>
> I'm certainly no expert. I was for a few years a Marine ejection seat
> mechanic. I was trained on F-4's, A-4's, A-6's (Martin Baker & EscapePac
> systems). The history of ejection seats is full of canopy removal
problems.
> Blasting some hot-shots carcass out of a plane was only half the battle.
> One would think that if you remove the locks from a canopy it would blow
> off. Not the deal at all. Most times its compressed on the airframe with a
> force exponentially multiplying with speed. Most ejection systems Vietnam
> era and later have in-line charges in the actuator that multiplies the
> pneumatic pressure already in the system. This will provide enough force
to
> blow even an F-14 canopy clear of the tail of the aircraft while sitting
on
> the ground. This should give you an idea of the force supplied to get a
> canopy off the airframe. No, Goose could not have died that way. The
> interlock mechanism would have prevented the seat from firing until the
> canopy was clear of the seat trajectory. The canopy in every system I have
> ever heard of is ripped from the hinges, or the hinges are ripped from the
> airframe as the canopy is levered back against its mounting point.
> Exploding bolts? Neva hoppen GI. Its hard to get new hotshot aviators to
> fall for getting a bucket of prop wash or 100' of flight line. So we seat
> mechs tell them about exploding bolts. "Sir, you can't come up here, we're
> putting exploding bolts in the canopy." Actually you're just reading
> Playboy in the cockpit. (Don't go there). Now days a lot of the
> manufacturers get by all of these problems by just putting the seats
> through the canopy, either by det cord or having canopy breakers on top of
> the seats themselves. Some do both.
>
> To answer the question of could you remove a canopy at 230 MPH. I don't
> know, sure don't plan to find out. I have to believe the average Joe could
> not budge it. It would have to be leveraged into the slip stream first. I
> also suspect that a tipup would be harder to remove than a slider. If you
> can't get it into the slip stream and get some air under it, you have a
> 1,000 lb weight on top of it. Case in point would be the A-4 Skyhawk.
Still
> my favorite ejection system. The canopy was held open by a bungee/cam
> system. The early A-4's had no charge in the canopy removal system.
Instead
> on each canopy sill was two "canopy kickers" They were just simple
> explosive charges that would kick up a prong on each canopy sill about 3".
> This got the small canopy in the slip stream where it tore away from the
> airframe.
>
> A former hangar mate of mine mounted a D-ring in his RV-6 by the locking
> handle on his slider. Actually, he had no locking handle since the forces
> the slip stream tended to keep the canopy closed. Where the handle went
was
> a D-ring attached to two throttle cables that were routed around to the
> front canopy rollers. Instead of bolts the ends of the throttle cables
held
> the canopy on. Another cable attached the d-ring to the front of the
> canopy. Pull the d-ring and immediately the pins are out of the front
> canopy rollers, continue the pull and now its you against the slipstream.
> BTW, I believe this is why the WWII fighters had mostly crank canopies, to
> provide mechanical leverage at high airspeeds. Simply conjecture.
>
> I used to love to fly the T-34's with the canopy open. I generally allowed
> the passengers to have theirs open since it got pretty windy back there
> with both of them open. They were usually shocked at how hard you had to
> pull to get the canopy to move the first two inches. When you did pull
> the canopy back, there was a big sucking sound as a pressure differential
> was equalized, then the canopy pulled open nicely. This was at 120 MPH. It
> seemed to indicate that there definitely was a pressure pushing down on
the
> canopy, or more like sucking it closed. It was impossible to have the
> canopy open 1", it would just suck closed. Figure that out. At 230 MPH, I
> think you would have a real problem. I think the only way would be to
loose
> the airspeed or lever the canopy up into the slipstream, which would be
> pretty impractical.
>
> Just my take on this.
>
> Eric Henson
> RF-4B (VMFP-3 Eyes of the Corps)
>
> Two seats used, two satisfied customers.
>
> Meet your maker
> In a Martin-Baker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KostaLewis" <mikel(at)dimensional.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
Are we deluding ourselves with parachutes? "
>
Canopy release: Pull the two pins and push up into the slipstream and its
gone.
>
> Whether you have the willpower to follow it is the question.
Exactly. It would probably amaze you to know how many pilots wear a
parachute that have never been under any canopy. Which is to say, the first
time they dazzle themselves with the art of skydiving will be in a high
stress, everything has gone wrong already situation. And a situation where
fast action will be key, not building up the courage on the spot to do
something and trying to remember what.
In formation school some of the requirements are: wear a parachute and be
thoroughly briefed on its use; Be psychologically prepared to use the
parachute if it becomes necessary.
Sitting on the ground with a parachute on in the airplane and practicing
getting out (if you can) is one thing. Doing it with blood in your eyes from
the broken canopy, 160kt of wind in your face and, oh yeah, why you're
getting out in the first place, a broken gyrating airplane, heading for
terra firma.
SO. You get out, you've practiced your D-ring grab and pull, but suddenly
notice your right hand must have hit something because you can't grip with
it. How long is the D-ring line and have you practiced pulling it with your
left hand?
Next repack, go stand in the repack hanger and strap on the parachute.
Making sure you actually have it on right (!), grab the D-ring and give it a
pull. How far do you have to pull it and with what force? Nice to know when
the houses are getting bigger.
My POH mentions ducking as the canopy is released. Will I remember to do
that? Don't want to find out, but the thought is there. Maybe another reason
to wear a helmet (oh, no; don't bring that up again).
Be prepared. Practice. Review your emergency procedure cards (you do have
one, don't you?) often, maybe every run-up. Don't get in a situation where
the silk is needed.
Good news: many RVs flying, VERY few have come apart in the air.
Yikes. Let's talk about something fun.
Michael
RV4 N232 Suzie Q
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ripsteel(at)edge.net (Mark Phillips) |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
At this stage of the discussion, I just gotta ask- anybody investigated a BRS
type system for an RV?
From the PossumWorks
Mark Phillips -6A fuse
> As a skydiver myself, I have no problem riding the "silken angel"
> down if the need is there. My question to the listers is this:
> If you have to bail out of your pride and joy, can you physically
> get out?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
Several things that I've seen to cause stud failures,,,
Corrosion pits on the studs (may have been due to sand blasting)
Paint or anything from debrie to burrs between the case and the cylinder
flange. (I know one fella got a piece of corn into his forehead while
crashing into a corn field because of silicon sealant used to seal the
cylinders in a Cherokee Six.) This flat surface fit should be a honed fit
with only the o-ring and a slight film of assembly oil. Anything else in
there causes it to eventually get loose as there is a infintesimal amount of
flexing every cylinder cycle.
Detonation
Not using the plates on narrow deck cylinders.
Warped base flange. (was hard to tell if this happened before or after
failure, but the cylinder had been in service for over 6000 hours, total
time)
Improper torque, (too loose, too tight, or wrong sequence)
In any event, there is a Lycoming SB/SI/SL discussing the concept that if
one stud fails, they should all be replaced as the rest have now been
overloaded.
I would also be very wary of reusing that jug. The flange has probably been
twisted, cracked and or chafed.
W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV4" <VansRV4GRVMJ(at)btinternet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6) |
>>In my first post, I askeds if it came from Van's.
All RV4 kits are now delivered with the long gear legs. I'm not sure when
exactly Van's changed the short ones for the long ones. I believe the main
reason was ground clearance for the prop; people fitted O-360's and had some
problems with the bigger props. Remember that the -4 was originally designed
for O-320's, the prototype RV4 had only 150HP and a wood prop if I'm not
mistaken.
To my knowledge the long legs are not available for the 6. If Van designs
something for a -4 it is for a -4 and not a -6 or a -8. If the design covers
more or all models than one it will tell you so. This does not mean that
parts or components can be made to fit on a model they are not designed for.
Marcel
RV4/G-RVMJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
I know a friend who lost a slider canopy on a low wing, Can't remember what
it was. It was designed to be released by loosing the slider rails as well
as the forward attachment. (Kid was playing in cockpit the day before and he
missed the release latch being part way out on preflight.)
The one thing he thought was remarkable was how straight up the canopy went.
at least at a 45 deg angle. Its in the bottom of a local lake still.
The other thought is the Grumman Tiger, which is as close to an RV6A as
you'll ever get. I believe they are certified to fly with the slider back 6
inches, to the first latch stop. I've never tried to open one in flight
though.
Anybody have more experience with Tigers?
W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Tate" <tate(at)onlinemac.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6) |
Has there been a change in the length of gear legs for the 3?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of RV4
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6)
>>In my first post, I askeds if it came from Van's.
All RV4 kits are now delivered with the long gear legs. I'm not sure when
exactly Van's changed the short ones for the long ones. I believe the main
reason was ground clearance for the prop; people fitted O-360's and had some
problems with the bigger props. Remember that the -4 was originally designed
for O-320's, the prototype RV4 had only 150HP and a wood prop if I'm not
mistaken.
To my knowledge the long legs are not available for the 6. If Van designs
something for a -4 it is for a -4 and not a -6 or a -8. If the design covers
more or all models than one it will tell you so. This does not mean that
parts or components can be made to fit on a model they are not designed for.
Marcel
RV4/G-RVMJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <racker(at)rmci.net> |
> The other thought is the Grumman Tiger, which is as close to an RV6A as
> you'll ever get
Robin Sport is far closer to an RV-6 (two seats, 160hp, slightly less
performance, aerobatic).
Rob Acker (RV-6, Tiger and Robin time).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
There's an ad running in the current flying magazines for some Grumman
low wing aircraft that shows the pilot and his passenger flying
hands-off, canopy open, and fingers all up in the breeze... I think the
combination of lower speed and their particular geometry makes this
possible. A similar situation should be achievable in an RV, but I
suspect you'd need to reinforce the canopy and it's mounts a bit before
you'd want to try it...
-RB4
Wheeler North wrote:
>
>I know a friend who lost a slider canopy on a low wing, Can't remember what
>it was. It was designed to be released by loosing the slider rails as well
>as the forward attachment. (Kid was playing in cockpit the day before and he
>missed the release latch being part way out on preflight.)
>
>The one thing he thought was remarkable was how straight up the canopy went.
>at least at a 45 deg angle. Its in the bottom of a local lake still.
>
>The other thought is the Grumman Tiger, which is as close to an RV6A as
>you'll ever get. I believe they are certified to fly with the slider back 6
>inches, to the first latch stop. I've never tried to open one in flight
>though.
>
>Anybody have more experience with Tigers?
>
>W
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Stud Failures |
There was an article in one of the latest Kitplanes (which isn't in
front of me, unfortunately) that showed that the only gasket on some
cylinder to case mounting was a silk thread, that snaked its way between
the studs. I forget what engine it was, but I remember being surprised
that that's all the gasketing needed between a cylinder and a case...
-RB4
Wheeler North wrote:
>Paint or anything from debrie to burrs between the case and the cylinder
>flange. (I know one fella got a piece of corn into his forehead while
>crashing into a corn field because of silicon sealant used to seal the
>cylinders in a Cherokee Six.) This flat surface fit should be a honed fit
>with only the o-ring and a slight film of assembly oil. Anything else in
>there causes it to eventually get loose as there is a infintesimal amount of
>flexing every cylinder cycle.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Pardue <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net> |
>
>The other thought is the Grumman Tiger, which is as close to an RV6A as
>you'll ever get. I believe they are certified to fly with the slider back 6
>inches, to the first latch stop. I've never tried to open one in flight
>though.
>
>Anybody have more experience with Tigers?
>
Don't have experience with Tigers but I have flown two seat Grummans with
the canopy open. I can't remember anything special about it which must
mean no high forces are involved in sliding it open or closed. As you
stated they are only approved for flight with the canopy a few inches
open. It seems like there is a pretty slow airspeed limitation also.
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP Flying
http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Balch <kbalch1(at)mediaone.net> |
| Subject: | T/C static problem... |
I've installed my comm antenna today, plugged in my headset, switched
everything on and was blown away at the amazing amount of static. I
couldn't hear anything but static, even from a handheld transmitting
from three feet away. I eventually traced the problem to the Falcon
turn coordinator (from Van's). With the t/c out of the circuit, I had
no static on the line and could pick up local frequencies clearly.
One the one hand, a vast relief that I hooked everything (radio, antenna
coax, intercom, etc.) up correctly. On the other hand, a major problem
with the t/c. Any ideas out there on what to do with this thing?
Doorstop? Anchor? Paperweight? :-)
--
Regards,
Ken Balch
Ashland, MA
RV-8 #81125 (N118KB)
last 90%
groups.yahoo.com/group/BostonRVBuilders/files/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cole, Ed" <Ed_Cole(at)maximhq.com> |
Silk thread is used between the case halves and not cylinder to case.
The reason the very thin silk thread is used is to maintain the crankshaft
bearing
clearances as the two halves fit around the crank. A gasket there would vary
the
clearance depending on how thick it was and how it compressed.
The case halves are lined bored with nothing in between the case halves.
Ed Cole
RV6A N2169D Flying
RV6A N648RV Finishing
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Prior [SMTP:rv7(at)b4.ca]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2002 11:50 AM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Stud Failures
>
>
> There was an article in one of the latest Kitplanes (which isn't in
> front of me, unfortunately) that showed that the only gasket on some
> cylinder to case mounting was a silk thread, that snaked its way between
> the studs. I forget what engine it was, but I remember being surprised
> that that's all the gasketing needed between a cylinder and a case...
>
> -RB4
>
> Wheeler North wrote:
>
> >Paint or anything from debrie to burrs between the case and the cylinder
> >flange. (I know one fella got a piece of corn into his forehead while
> >crashing into a corn field because of silicon sealant used to seal the
> >cylinders in a Cherokee Six.) This flat surface fit should be a honed fit
> >with only the o-ring and a slight film of assembly oil. Anything else in
> >there causes it to eventually get loose as there is a infintesimal amount
> of
> >flexing every cylinder cycle.
> >
>
>
>
>
>
Maxim Home Page:
http://www.maxim-ic.com
Products Page:
http://www.maxim-ic.com/MaximProducts/products.htm
New Products:
http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/new_products.cfm
Datasheets:
http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/l_datasheet3.cfm
The information contained in this message is confidential
and may be legally privileged. The message is intended
solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination,
or reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Balch <kbalch1(at)mediaone.net> |
| Subject: | Shorted BNC connector |
For some unknown reason, the crimp-on BNC connector on my transponder
lead turned out shorted, causing the transponder (SL-70) to fail its
startup tests. Considering that I'd just crimped on the comm radio's
BNC connector without incident, I'm completely at a loss as to how I
screwed up.
I'm out of BNC connectors, so I have at least a few more days to sit and
think about what I did. Any ideas?
--
Regards,
Ken Balch
Ashland, MA
RV-8 #81125 (N118KB)
last 90%
groups.yahoo.com/group/BostonRVBuilders/files/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SportAV8R(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
> I am curious to see if anyone has been able to open their canopy in flight
> in order to bail out. Are there any experts on this subject?
>
Experts, probably not... but plenty of speculation in the archives. I will
repeat (only this once) my own hunch that you will never get the canopy off
of a tip-up 6 with goose-neck hinges once in flight; too much hardware and
physics holding it on. Slider, that's another matter. RV-4 canopy? We KNOW
they can come completely off in flight, even unintentionally ;-)
-BB -6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: T/C static problem... |
Did you hear the static in the handheld? If so, the static was radiative,
and not easily cured. If you didn't hear it in the handheld, then the
static was conducted mainly via the wiring and there is hope. Get a 0.01 or
0.1 uFd disc capacitor from Radio Shack and connect them from +V to ground
at the input to the TC using the shortest route to ground.
However, it sounds like arcing brushes, which does not bode well for the
life of the TC.
Dennis Persyk Amateru Radio N9DP 6A N600DP 113 hours
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Balch" <kbalch1(at)mediaone.net>
Subject: RV-List: T/C static problem...
>
> I've installed my comm antenna today, plugged in my headset, switched
> everything on and was blown away at the amazing amount of static. I
> couldn't hear anything but static, even from a handheld transmitting
> from three feet away. I eventually traced the problem to the Falcon
> turn coordinator (from Van's). With the t/c out of the circuit, I had
> no static on the line and could pick up local frequencies clearly.
>
> One the one hand, a vast relief that I hooked everything (radio, antenna
> coax, intercom, etc.) up correctly. On the other hand, a major problem
> with the t/c. Any ideas out there on what to do with this thing?
> Doorstop? Anchor? Paperweight? :-)
>
> --
> Regards,
> Ken Balch
> Ashland, MA
> RV-8 #81125 (N118KB)
> last 90%
> groups.yahoo.com/group/BostonRVBuilders/files/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Stud Failures |
There is an o-ring gasket that goes around the cylinder barrel and fits into
the chamfer of the case of the flat aircraft engines.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Prior" <rv7(at)b4.ca>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Stud Failures
There was an article in one of the latest Kitplanes (which isn't in
front of me, unfortunately) that showed that the only gasket on some
cylinder to case mounting was a silk thread, that snaked its way between
the studs. I forget what engine it was, but I remember being surprised
that that's all the gasketing needed between a cylinder and a case...
-RB4
Wheeler North wrote:
>Paint or anything from debrie to burrs between the case and the cylinder
>flange. (I know one fella got a piece of corn into his forehead while
>crashing into a corn field because of silicon sealant used to seal the
>cylinders in a Cherokee Six.) This flat surface fit should be a honed fit
>with only the o-ring and a slight film of assembly oil. Anything else in
>there causes it to eventually get loose as there is a infintesimal amount
of
>flexing every cylinder cycle.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steven Eberhart <newtech(at)newtech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stud Failures |
On Tue, 22 Jan 2002, Rob Prior wrote:
>
> There was an article in one of the latest Kitplanes (which isn't in
> front of me, unfortunately) that showed that the only gasket on some
> cylinder to case mounting was a silk thread, that snaked its way between
> the studs. I forget what engine it was, but I remember being surprised
> that that's all the gasketing needed between a cylinder and a case...
>
> -RB4
>
THe silk thread is the gasket between the case halves not the case and
cylinder.
Steve Eberhart
RV-7A - just a whole bunch of aluminum, in various states of attachment,
filling up my half of the garage. Some of it looks like it might belong
on the back end of an airplane. The rest looks like it might, some day,
help hold it up in the air.... but what do I know.
N14SE reserved
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
Van wrote an article for the RVator recently about this. I can't find
the issue just now, but the thrust of it was that Van felt that it would
cost too much and weigh way too much and would not be of any benefit.
The only scenario where the BRS system is really handy is an in-flight
structural failure, and these have been very rare in RVs. In fact the
additional weight of the chute and related hardware could increase the
likelyhood of breakup. The psychological effect is harder to measure,
but as Van summarized, do you really want a 60 lb, $6K placebo in your
airplane?
Jeff Point
6 fuselage
Milwaukee WI
Mark Phillips wrote:
>
>At this stage of the discussion, I just gotta ask- anybody investigated a BRS
>type system for an RV?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6) |
Thanks, everyone, for the responses. I see that the evolution of the RV-4
long gear was not something that could be tranlated into an RV-6 mod.
I realize, now, that I am "on my own" if I should choose to pursue any
change to the 3 point attitude - and why would I want to do that, before
getting the airplane flying? Little (?) changes are the worst enemy of
completing and flying the RV, or, as said in the Pentagon, "Better is the
worst enemy of good."
David Carter
----- Original Message -----
From: "RV4" <VansRV4GRVMJ(at)btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6)
>
> >>In my first post, I askeds if it came from Van's.
>
> All RV4 kits are now delivered with the long gear legs. I'm not sure when
> exactly Van's changed the short ones for the long ones. I believe the main
> reason was ground clearance for the prop; people fitted O-360's and had
some
> problems with the bigger props. Remember that the -4 was originally
designed
> for O-320's, the prototype RV4 had only 150HP and a wood prop if I'm not
> mistaken.
>
> To my knowledge the long legs are not available for the 6. If Van designs
> something for a -4 it is for a -4 and not a -6 or a -8. If the design
covers
> more or all models than one it will tell you so. This does not mean that
> parts or components can be made to fit on a model they are not designed
for.
>
> Marcel
> RV4/G-RVMJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
Jim
Certainly Van would recommend opening it in flight if you really needed to
step out, I hope.
I mean he would probably rather have you around without an airplane so you
could buy and build another, rather than being a not so profitable grease
stain on the mountainside. ;{)
I require all my passengers to keep their arm hanging out during any taxi
ops so that they truly get the full experience of looking cool on the ramp
in a slider.
w
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Sears [mailto:sears(at)searnet.com]
Subject: Re: RV-List: canopy
> Anybody have more experience with Tigers?
Will 9.5 years with a Cheetah do? Yes, you can fly with the canopy open
and have no problems with it. The railing, etc. is pretty robust.
Actually, my canopy usually tried to shut itself. I've heard of those who
have flown their Grummans with the canopy all the way back. I never tried
that.
I built a tip up because Van's did not recommend opening the canopy in
flight when I was building my -6A. I'd do the tip up again.
Jim Sears in KY
RV-6A N198JS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com> |
Listers,
I did not report my problem with the ammeter to Van's, even though I bought
a second ammeter (which did the same thing as the first.)
I wired my RV-6A according to the diagram Z-1 in the Aeroelectric Connection
EXCEPT that I added the ammeter and wired it as shown on Van's diagram. In
the Z-1 schematic, the power from the alternator goes (if I recall right) to
the battery contactor, not to the main bus. The Van's wiring schematic for
the ammeter, however, runs the leads to the ammeter shunt to the starter
contactor and the main bus. Therefore, there is a good chance that I am
measuring something other than the load on the battery.
I don't have the electrical skills to figure out where the electrons are
going. 'Lectric Bob more or less says I got what I deserved (my words, not
his) for deviating from the Z-1 schematic, since he recommends that the
builder do without an ammeter altogether. He does say, however, that nothing
that a guy can do with a radio in an airplane should make the needle on the
ammeter go to full 40 amps discharge. (Again, my words, not his.)
I'm still OK with the notion that a person who knows more about 'lectricity
than I will come on a white charger (nice pun, huh?) and figure out this
problem.
Steve Soule
Huntington, Vermont
-----Original Message-----
I'm just wondering if any of you guys with the gauge problem is
reporting it
to Van's. If not, he'll never get the message.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ripsteel(at)edge.net (Mark Phillips) |
| Subject: | Building Q for -6 tippers |
In laying out my "cabin frame" (we all know it's a rollbar, right?!)
with the bottom width set to match the width of my F-605 (minus the
width of the 631-C angles) and the top (where the two 631A's "should"
meet) set at the 17-7/8" dimension per dwg. 39, I have a 1/2" gap
between the left & right halves at the top. With the gap present, the
top of the rollbar is a continuous, smooth curve. If I bring the two
halves together at the top, the overall curvature of the rollbar dips
down at the intersection noticeably, not matching the curvature of the
plexiglass. Anyone else seen this and what did you do? Fill the gap
with bondo? Cover it? Just leave it?
It also may make sense to leave the rollbar a little narrower than the
plans say to allow for "gaskets" to seal rear glass to the rollbar- by
adjusting the thickness of this seal, the glass could be brought out
flush with the skin. Any recommendations here? What is typically used
to seal the rear glass to the rollbar anyway?
Thanks!
Just trying to get it right at the PossumWorks
Mark Phillips -6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John" <fasching(at)amigo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
Re: Tip-up canopy egress: several years ago I opened the canopy and let it
rest on the securing handle which was turned 90-degrees to let in some air
while I was waiting for my turn to take off on a hot day. Of course, as you
already guessed, I forgot to re-lock the canopy. When airborne and going
pretty well, but still over the runway, the canopy popped up and there was a
great rush of wind noise...very unsettling. I more or less automatically
reached up with my right arm and grabbed the locking handle and pulled for
all I was worth...it would not budge, nor could I push it up at all...it
just stuck there between the lifting force and the force of the air hitting
it. But I hung on just to be sure and went around the pattern and landed,
all the the other arm. Scarry, but I doubt I would ever be able to exit the
plane unless that canopy somehow came off cleanly...FWIW
\
John at Salida, CO
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Building Q for -6 tippers |
I would insert a spacer to fill the gap - that's what I did. I believe the
supplied radii are incorrect.
There is no need for a gasket on the rear windows.
If I had it to do over, I'd make the roll bar 2.5 inches higher than my
plans (circa '98) call out. As it was, thanks to the list, I made it 3/4
inch higher than plans. However, my canopy had a very generous skirt, and I
could have easily made my roll bar 2.5 inches higher. That would have
really helped with headroom!
Dennis Persyk 6A N600DP 113 hours
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Phillips" <ripsteel(at)edge.net>
Subject: RV-List: Building Q for -6 tippers
>
> In laying out my "cabin frame" (we all know it's a rollbar, right?!)
> with the bottom width set to match the width of my F-605 (minus the
> width of the 631-C angles) and the top (where the two 631A's "should"
> meet) set at the 17-7/8" dimension per dwg. 39, I have a 1/2" gap
> between the left & right halves at the top. With the gap present, the
> top of the rollbar is a continuous, smooth curve. If I bring the two
> halves together at the top, the overall curvature of the rollbar dips
> down at the intersection noticeably, not matching the curvature of the
> plexiglass. Anyone else seen this and what did you do? Fill the gap
> with bondo? Cover it? Just leave it?
>
> It also may make sense to leave the rollbar a little narrower than the
> plans say to allow for "gaskets" to seal rear glass to the rollbar- by
> adjusting the thickness of this seal, the glass could be brought out
> flush with the skin. Any recommendations here? What is typically used
> to seal the rear glass to the rollbar anyway?
>
> Thanks!
> Just trying to get it right at the PossumWorks
> Mark Phillips -6A
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Allison <stevea(at)svpal.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Building Q for -6 tippers |
I had a similar problem on both the roll bars I built (the first one was,
errrr, for practice :-) ). I had about a 1/4 inch gap both times, even
with the roll bar set to all the dimensions per print. No plans to
attempt to fill in the gap.
Steve Allison
On Tue, 22 Jan 2002, Mark Phillips wrote:
>
> In laying out my "cabin frame" (we all know it's a rollbar, right?!)
> with the bottom width set to match the width of my F-605 (minus the
> width of the 631-C angles) and the top (where the two 631A's "should"
> meet) set at the 17-7/8" dimension per dwg. 39, I have a 1/2" gap
> between the left & right halves at the top. With the gap present, the
> top of the rollbar is a continuous, smooth curve. If I bring the two
> halves together at the top, the overall curvature of the rollbar dips
> down at the intersection noticeably, not matching the curvature of the
> plexiglass. Anyone else seen this and what did you do? Fill the gap
> with bondo? Cover it? Just leave it?
>
> It also may make sense to leave the rollbar a little narrower than the
> plans say to allow for "gaskets" to seal rear glass to the rollbar- by
> adjusting the thickness of this seal, the glass could be brought out
> flush with the skin. Any recommendations here? What is typically used
> to seal the rear glass to the rollbar anyway?
>
> Thanks!
> Just trying to get it right at the PossumWorks
> Mark Phillips -6A
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim & Betty" <jbanglin(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6) |
If it'll help I am flying a short legged RV-4 and have no problem landing; I
touch the tailwheel occasionally - no big deal. Usually when I land I
release backpressure on the stick at touchdown to avoid a bounce. I flew a
standard geared RV-6 for 8 years with no problems. You just learn and there
you go. You are making too big a deal out of it. As for the long gear legs
on the -4: they were produced to increase ground clearance and they require
a different motor mount - otherwise the main wheels will be too far aft and
the plane will be nose heavy on the ground, most likely wouldn't even stand
up on it's own.
Jim
RV-6 : sold
RV-4 : flying
HR II : under const.
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6)
>
> Good questions and comments. I have no problem with these questions and
> comments.
> - But don't shoot the messenger. I repeat, I responded to someone
> else's post that there is an RV-4 flying with long gear legs. I would
like
> to think that the questions you have asked me are simply the questions
that
> I want the long-legged RV-4 fellow to respond to. He's the one flying the
> plane and said he liked it - not me. I'm just interested. I'm just
trying
> to get info. In my first post, I askeds if it came from Van's.
> - So, I can't answer your questions - I'm just trying to find out
what
> the long legged RV-4 fellow found out. After I/we find out, then let's
see
> if your questions and comments have been adequately addressed.
> - I'm not advocating or saying it should be done - just responding to
> one who HAS DONE IT. I have an interest. I've already explained my
> interest - being closer to the stall angle of attack of the wind in the 3
> point landing attitude.
>
> I will answer two questions that I feel qualified to answer: 1) I learned
> to fly in J-3 Cubs and Aeronca Champs, with some time in a Meyers OTW with
> Kiner 5 cyl radial. Then, after 43 years and almost 5000 hours of
tricycle
> jet fighter time, I got 1.3 hours in an RV-6, which I thoroughly enjoyed.
> No, I don't think J-3 time and experience is adquate preparation to fly an
> RV-6. RV-6 time is needed.
> 2) No, I am not an aero engineer. I completed my freshman year of
aero
> engineering (coop student with Chance Vought Aircraft Company in Grand
> Prairie/Dallas, Texas) before entering the Air Force with a goal of flying
> fighters - before my eyes faded away from too much studying or genetics
like
> happened to my older brother (our mom also developed near sighted
> astigmatism). I have read and researched design topics continuously since
I
> was a teenager, always hoping someday to design an airplane. I feel that
> aero engineering is an "avocation" of mine, not a vocation. It is an
> interest, and I am fairly widely read. I can understand and discuss
issues,
> such as those you raise. I am cautious, not foolhardy. I seek info.
> Asking me questions which I have already inquired about (at least
> implicitely) can only be worthwhile if those with the info (not me) will
> respond. Hope they don't feel intimidated, now, or have a fear of being
> "flamed".
>
> David Carter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6)
>
>
> >
> > I bothers me that you are taking a proven design and modifying it BEFORE
> you
> > have even flown it.
> >
> > I have a couple of questions...
> >
> > 1. How many tail dragger hours have you flown? Where did you obtain
your
> > knowledge for the "improvements?"
> >
> > 2. Are you an aeronautical engineer. If so what tail dragger have you
> > designed?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: T/C static problem... |
Ken, here is a filter 'Lectric Bob built for handling noisy stuff in the
panel:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/filter/filter.html
Hope this helps,
Sam Buchanan
"The RV Journal" http://thervjournal.com
======================
Ken Balch wrote:
>
>
> I've installed my comm antenna today, plugged in my headset, switched
> everything on and was blown away at the amazing amount of static. I
> couldn't hear anything but static, even from a handheld transmitting
> from three feet away. I eventually traced the problem to the Falcon
> turn coordinator (from Van's). With the t/c out of the circuit, I had
> no static on the line and could pick up local frequencies clearly.
>
> One the one hand, a vast relief that I hooked everything (radio, antenna
> coax, intercom, etc.) up correctly. On the other hand, a major problem
> with the t/c. Any ideas out there on what to do with this thing?
> Doorstop? Anchor? Paperweight? :-)
>
> --
> Regards,
> Ken Balch
> Ashland, MA
> RV-8 #81125 (N118KB)
> last 90%
> groups.yahoo.com/group/BostonRVBuilders/files/
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Nellis" <mike(at)bmnellis.com> |
| Subject: | Texas - Sun & Fun? |
BlankIs anyone going to Sun & Fun passing through the Austin, TX area
and in need of a passenger? My wife is spending 3 weeks in the Orlando
area and maybe this could give me a chance to visit her and attend Sun &
Fun for the first time.
Of course I'd love to share expenses.
Mike Nellis - http://bmnellis.com
Georgetown, TX
Waiting to start Fuselage
RV6 N699BM Reserved
1947 Stinson 108-2 N9666K
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ron Schreck <RonSchreck(at)compuserve.com> |
Message text written by INTERNET:rv-list(at)matronics.com
If canopy won't come off, then the Air Force type "canopy breaker",
typically meant for ground egress, could also be used to make an opening to
bail out through. The principle is that plexiglass shatters fairly easily.
The canopy breakers in my fighters were fairly short, stubby, heavy, with
short blade like a wide bladed hunting knife. Need to make a BIG hole so
you don't hang up, and maybe reduce cuts from the sharp edges. Thinking of
that, you might be able to clean it out all the way back to the roll bar
assembly over the seat backs.
As for hitting vertical tail, if have control, then pull up fairly
steeply and leave at as slow a speed as possible; also, trim full nose down
before bailing out so plane noses down away from you ('jettison's you').
If
no pitch control (out of control) and high speed, do whatever it takes to
try to stay alive - get out if you can and take your chances. Not getting
out in that scenario has a 100% certain outcome.<
All of this emergency egress discussion reminds me of an "urban legend"
tale of the Air Force Circle Club which was making the rounds while I was
in Air Force pilot training in T-38's in the late 60's. The Circle Club
was an esteemed group of intrepid (read "brainless") aviators who had
opened the T-38 canopy in flight after pulling up into a zero airspeed nose
high position and quickly opened then closed the canopy. Done properly,
the canopy could "theoretically" be closed and locked before the inevitable
"end swap" and rapid accelleration to canopy separation airspeed. Proof of
the "done deed" was a circle inscribed with a grease marker on the outside
of the front windscreen. While I never had the guts to try this, and never
met anyone who did, the legend remained. It seemed like a plausable deed.
The canopy was manually actuated by a large lever on the left side of the
cockpit that would unlock, open, then close and lock the canopy with a
swift aft/foreward motion.
On the serious side. Every T-38 was equipped with a heavy steel,
short-bladed canopy breaker tool that was to be used to break the canopy
away if it did not separate as advertised during the "normal" ejection
sequence. Such a tool might be a good accessory in the RV. The
alternative might be to carry a regular drill bit and a small hand drill.
We all know what regular bits do to the canopy when you are building the
airplane. :-)
Ron Schreck
Charlotte, NC
RV-8
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Luster" <rlluster(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV9 for sale |
Listers:
I currently have an RV9 in process and now for sale. In talking with Van's, we
feel it is at about 49% complete. The emp, wings and fuse are about 80-90% complete
each. I have set up a page to view photos. I will be selling it for material
cost and not my labor. There is 925 hours into the airplane at this point.
I am a 30 year precision machinist, who owns a machine shop in the Arlington
Washington area. For more information please call or email.
Richard Luster
360-659-0505/ 360-435-6629
Marysville, Washington
http://www.msnusers.com/RV9details
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Denis Walsh <deniswalsh(at)earthlink.net> |
Does anyone have information of whomsoever was manufacturing the 6A tow bar
which doubled as a gust lock?
Thanks
D Walsh
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jaye and Scott Jackson <jayeandscott(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: canopy/egress |
I found one of these breakers on the internet for $45 including the mounting
clip and it's in the mail.
Now I just have to figure where to mount it....
Scott in Vancouver
-6 finishing
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron Schreck" <ronschreck(at)compuserve.com>
Subject: RV-List: canopy/egress
>
> Message text written by INTERNET:rv-list(at)matronics.com
>
> If canopy won't come off, then the Air Force type "canopy breaker",
> typically > swift aft/foreward motion.
>
> On the serious side. Every T-38 was equipped with a heavy steel,
> short-bladed canopy breaker tool that was to be used to break the canopy
> away if it did not separate as advertised during the "normal" ejection
> sequence. Such a tool might be a good accessory in the RV. The
> alternative might be to carry a regular drill bit and a small hand drill.
> We all know what regular bits do to the canopy when you are building the
> airplane. :-)
>
> Ron Schreck
> Charlotte, NC
> RV-8
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard D. Fogerson" <rickf(at)velocitus.net> |
| Subject: | RV-3/RV-4 Builders & 90 degree oil filter adapter |
I am building an RV-3 and would like to avoid installing a firewall
recess. Are there any builders that have been able to do this by using
the adapter that B&C sells that turns the oil filter 90 degrees?
It also makes changing the filter much easier. There is no doubt it
gives sufficient clearance with the firewall but it may need some
spacers to help the filter miss the engine mount.
Thanks for any input, Rick Fogerson, fuselage, Boise, ID.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard D. Fogerson" <rickf(at)velocitus.net> |
| Subject: | Catto 3 blade prop - RV experience |
I am considering using the Catto 3 blade wood prop on an RV-3. I notice
in the archives that some people, Matt Draile, et al., have talked about
sharing their experiences after they have flown with it a while. How
about some input now on smoothness, efficiency, satisfaction, pro's,
con's, 2 blade vs 3 blade recommendations, etc.
Thanks in advance for all the great information I and the list members
are about to inherit.
Rick Fogerson
RV-3 fuselage
Boise, ID
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard D. Fogerson" <rickf(at)velocitus.net> |
| Subject: | Slider Canopy Frames for RV-3's |
I am building an RV-3 and would like to include the slider canopy option
which Van's doesn't support with parts. Does anyone know of someone who
supplies welded parts for the RV-3 slider option. I'm not a welder and
would really like some help.
Thanks, Rick Fogerson, RV-3 fuselage, Boise, ID.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard D. Fogerson" <rickf(at)velocitus.net> |
| Subject: | Slider Canopy Frames for RV-3's |
I am building an RV-3 and would like to include the slider canopy option
which Van's doesn't support with parts. Does anyone know of someone who
supplies welded parts for the RV-3 slider option. I'm not a welder and
would really like some help.
Thanks, Rick Fogerson, RV-3 fuselage, Boise, ID.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Finn Lassen <finnlassen(at)netzero.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV3-List: Slider Canopy Frames for RV-3's |
What firewall recess? RV-3 plans do not call for any recess.
Van's is now again selling RV-3 kits. Should include any weldments you need.
Finn
"Richard D. Fogerson" wrote:
> --> RV3-List message posted by: "Richard D. Fogerson"
>
> I am building an RV-3 and would like to include the slider canopy option
> which Van's doesn't support with parts. Does anyone know of someone who
> supplies welded parts for the RV-3 slider option. I'm not a welder and
> would really like some help.
>
> Thanks, Rick Fogerson, RV-3 fuselage, Boise, ID.
----------------------------------------------------
Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today
Only $9.95 per month!
http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "sam jones" <silentsamson(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV9 for sale |
Richard what are you asking for your kit and is the finishing kit included.
Sam
>From: "Richard Luster" <rlluster(at)msn.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: "rv-list"
>Subject: RV-List: Re: RV9 for sale
>Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 18:14:09 -0800
>
>
> Listers:
>
>I currently have an RV9 in process and now for sale. In talking with Van'>s, we
feel it is at about 49% complete. The emp, wings and fuse are about> 80-90%
complete each. I have set up a page to view photos. I will be sel>ling it for
material cost and not my labor. There is 925 hours into the a>irplane at this
point. I am a 30 year precision machinist, who owns a mac>hine shop in the Arlington
Washington area. For more information please c>all or email.
>
>
>Richard Luster
>360-659-0505/ 360-435-6629
>Marysville, Washington
>
>http://www.msnusers.com/RV9details
>
>
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KostaLewis" <mikel(at)dimensional.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6) |
>1) I learned to fly in J-3 Cubs and Aeronca Champs, with some time in a
Meyers OTW with Kiner 5 cyl radial. Then, after >43 years and almost 5000
hours of tricycle jet fighter time, I got 1.3 hours in an RV-6, which I
thoroughly enjoyed. No, I >don't think J-3 time and experience is adquate
preparation to fly an RV-6. RV-6 time is needed.
OK, I can't stay quiet any longer.
Not having any -6 time, I can't tell you if the long legs would be worth
changing to. I thought they were already the long legs. I have a
short-legged -4, as the long legs were not available at the time. Would have
gotten 'em if they were. But, I like Suzie Q the way she is and wouldn't
ground her for the time/hassle it would take to change to the longer gear.
Landings: I can flop all three on at the same time. I also occasionally drag
the tail first with the mains thumping on in short order, without any
phlugoid bounce. Or, the main touch first sometimes. Sometimes all these
landings are done on purpose, sometimes they come as a surprise. Depends on
I don't know what. Passengers make a big difference. And the -4 lands slow
enough already to make me happy. Is it a J-3? No. But it goes somewhat
faster. If you want to slow the airplane down for landing, fire up the
search engine and look under Vortex Generators. Leave the tried and true
designs Van has so graciously shared with us alone (wing incidence, etc).
Time in a J-3 can absolutely help set you up for transition to an RV.
Taildragger time is the key. As much as you can get, in different flying
circumstances. But you MUST have some hours in the type you are building
before you get out there and fly yours. Recent time. Time as PIC, not riding
around. Get someone that knows the quirks of flying an RV, of which there
are darn few (OK, here you are, low and slow, turning final and you aren't
quite lined up with the runway. Little left rudder would push the tail
around there and correct that, alright and then WOOPS you have slowed the
left wing down enough to make it, well, quit flying, which is a left wing
STALL, the one that is aimed at the ground and now is heading there
faster......)
Keep building, quit figuring so much.........
IMHO
Michael
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: canopy/egress |
Scott,
Would you care to share with us where you found it? I'm sure others
would be interested.
Jeff Point
6 fuselage
Milwaukee WI
Jaye and Scott Jackson wrote:
>
>I found one of these breakers on the internet for $45 including the mounting
>clip and it's in the mail.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael McGee <jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Parachute value |
Okay, someone correct me on this if I'm wrong, I no longer have the
National manuals. I think the National 425 has a Phantom reserve in it
and >I think< that is a block constructed canopy. My preference is for a
bias constructed canopy (if I were to use a round canopy). I've heard the
425 are very comfortable rigs to wear, I have no experience with them
except packing them (a long time ago).
Do you know if it is a medium speed rated canopy?
>
>Michael:
> Using your experience, I'd like to know what you think of the National
>425 Chairpack 'chute.
> The lowest price I've been able to find is at
>www.wingsandwheels.com
>Thanks
>Scott in VAncouver
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Michael McGee" <jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com>
>To:
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Parachute value
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >Listers:
> > >I am interested in a couple of parachutes for my soon to be complete
> > >RV4(anytime in the next who knows how long time). Since I also have a
> > >citabria that needs chutes for future airbatic training and practice, I
> > >have looked for seat pack types. A pair of nice chutes have been
> > >offered to me and I need to know their relative value. They are:
> > >G.Q.Security Parachutes Inc, Model 500 slow speed, Seat packs. They
> > >were manufactured in 1990. They are in nice shape and I will have them
> > >inspected and re-packed prior to sale, so those who might reply can
> > >assume they are in good shape. Anyone know what they might be worth?
> > >Thanks for your input. By the way, I hope NOT TO start a thread on the
> > >merits of back-pack over seat-pack or the decision to wear or not wear a
> > >seatbelt. Just input about what these chutes might be worth.
> > >Dave Aronson
> > >RV4 N504RV
> > >
> >
> > This turned into a long answer and almost answers David's question. I
> > don't know the current market value of the parachute he's looking
> > at. Since I got all this typed out anyway I thought I would share my
> > perspective with the rest of you as I have some experience with the
> > equipment in general.
> >
> > From a old skydiver (1600 jumps) and Parachute Rigger's perspective
> > (mine). Assuming you are willing to use it if you need to and this isn't
> > just to stay legal (don't laugh, I've talked to enough pilots that have no
> > intentions of using the chute they HAVE to wear), these are the questions
>I
> > would ask:
> >
> > 1) What size is the canopy (22' or 26') and how heavy are you? If you
>are
> > over 165 pounds dripping wet or your ground elevation is anything above
>sea
> > level, you will want it to be 26' unless you aren't worried about having
>to
> > walk away from the landing. I don't remember what size canopy GQ Security
> > put in the 500.
> > 2) If these are really LOW SPEED parachutes (TSO C23b: ..limited to
> > aircraft under 150 kts), think about this: The Citabria, if it's broken
> > will come out of the sky at maybe 150 or a little more. If you get out of
> > it you won't overload the canopy on opening. On the other hand, if you
> > break the RV-4 and get out, you could easily be doing 250 in a dive and
> > deploying the parachute at that speed would likely cause a catastrophic
> > failure (not to mention what it'll do to yer 'nads).
> >
> > I'm currently shopping for a rig (Emergency Parachute) for my RV-4. I am
> > 165 dripping wet, full dress flight gear and a 12 pound rig on me puts the
> > suspended weight at about 180-185. I'm looking for at least a MEDIUM
> > SPEED canopy/harness combination with a 26' canopy.
> >
> > And now the test:
> > Your plane has become a 250 MPH lawn dart, you have 15 seconds to get out
> > of the plane and deploy your parachute. The canopy needs 500 feet to
> > deploy and slow you down.
> >
> > What altitude did you make the decision to get out?
> >
> > How long did it take you to figure out you needed to get out?
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Aurora, OR
> > 13B in gestation mode
> >
> >
Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Aurora, OR
13B in gestation mode
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Hurlbut" <hurlbut_steve(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Priming Firewall |
Do you guys prime the cockpit side of the stainless steel firewall?
I will paint the engine side later with a glossy paint that will be easy to
clean.
As well anybody use sealant on the rivets to help keep fumes out of the
cockpit?
Thankx
Steve Hurlbut
RV-7A
Kingston, Ont
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Priming Firewall |
In a message dated 1/22/2002 10:16:22 PM Pacific Standard Time,
hurlbut_steve(at)hotmail.com writes:
> Do you guys prime the cockpit side of the stainless steel firewall?
>
> I will paint the engine side later with a glossy paint that will be easy to
>
> clean.
Huh? What's easier to clean than CRES. I won't even be the first to mention
the folly of painting a flame resistant material with a non-flame resistant
one.
Ever see the inside of a Mickey D's? CRES everywhere.
-GV (N1GV)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Blake Harral" <bharral(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | RE: RV-List Digest: 34 Msgs - 01/20/02 |
____
From: "Joseph Czachorowski" <zackrv8(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RV-List: Fw: IO-360 Engine Problem/Failure
Photos of the engine cylinder stud failure can be seen at the link
below.
Joe
http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/mid-atlrvwing/lst?&.dir/Ralphs+Engine+Problem&.srcgr&.viewt&.last1
Joe,
In looking at the pictures (particularly #21), it appears that the cylinders
may have
been painted around the stud holes. I read the overhaul manual several
times through
before overhauling my Lycoming. The manual cautions against any coating
(even primer)
in the area where the nut bears on the cylinder flange. The reason being
that the
coating is much softer than the steel and will creep, causing a loss of
torque/tension
in the joint.
The loss of tension can subsequently lead to the cylinder flange alternately
slamming
between the nut and the crankcase, causing the stud to fail.
Of course, the nuts may have been overtorqued. Whatever the case, it would
seem prudent
to inspect and recheck the torque on the remaining cylinders.
Blake Harral
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Canopy Breakers |
For anyone looking for a canopy breaker, there's one on eBay right now.
Not quite Military Spec, but seems to have everything...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/aw-cgi/ebayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=600792593&r=0&t=0
-Rob P.
rv7 "at" b4.ca
RV7 Empennage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Priming Firewall |
Hi Steve,
I don't remember seeing anyone painting the engine side of the firewall. It
is stainless steel and will most likely clean up easier if left unpainted.
I've seen engine turning done on one and one very highly polished one. The
rest that I've seen where plain.
Stainless does not seem to like to accept coatings without aggressive
surface treatment. The stainless is very thin about .016 I chose to avoid
any heavy scratching or abrasive treatments because I was not sure about
creating stress rizers in the material. besides it would be extra work that
to my knowledge is uncalled for.
A Few thoughts re- inside firewall:
Painting the Stainless part of inside firewall is not required.
There is the possibility that you might want to insulate the area to stop
heat and sound migration. The stainless is thin and there is a lot of heat
and noise thrown at it.
My personal choice is to use the insulation that I ordered from Van's. It
appears to be a Felt material that has been treated with flame retardant and
has aluminum coating on both sides.
I tested the insulation medium with an open flame and found that it resisted
burning but tended to give off smoke when forced to burn smolder.
I cut out the various triangle shapes etc. then used hardware store aluminum
duct tape to seal all the edges of all the pieces. The tape is thicker than
the insulation coating and about 2 1/2 inches wide. I taped all the edges in
an effort to prevent moisture, oil, and brake fluid, etc. from collecting in
the insulation.
I don't intend to have leaks spills slops and water leaks but crap happens.
Also, in the event of very excessive heat the sealed pieces will be less
able to smolder or burn due to limited air supply.
The pieces of insulation stay in place when pushed into place and I intend
to use the tape to lock them into place when all the firewall penetrations
are done. The thought here is that the pieces will be removable should any
firewall revisions, inspections or repairs happen in the future
After reading about air leaks in the firewall area (in the RVator I.think) I
decided to use Hi heat silicone sealant every place that I could imagine air
leaks might happen. It's messy stuff but with careful usage and masking tape
the job turned out ok. I did not use any thing on the firewall rivets when
properly in place they should be airtight.
Jim in Kelowna
from: "Steve Hurlbut"
Subject: RV-List: Priming Firewall
>
> Do you guys prime the cockpit side of the stainless steel firewall?
>
> I will paint the engine side later with a glossy paint that will be easy
to
> clean.
>
> As well anybody use sealant on the rivets to help keep fumes out of the
> cockpit?
>
> Thankx
> Steve Hurlbut
> RV-7A
> Kingston, Ont
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Derrick W. Vogt" <dvogt(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV3-List: Slider Canopy Frames for RV-3's |
I have some RV-3 weldements here from an RV-3 project that never got built,
they are the control stick the weldments around them.
Also have a set of legs that are already pre bent and heat treated, tail
spring, not heat treated and a tail wheel.
If anyone is interested let me know.
Derrick in Wichita, KS.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Finn Lassen" <finnlassen(at)netzero.net>
Subject: Re: RV3-List: Slider Canopy Frames for RV-3's
> --> RV3-List message posted by: Finn Lassen
>
> What firewall recess? RV-3 plans do not call for any recess.
>
> Van's is now again selling RV-3 kits. Should include any weldments you
need.
>
> Finn
>
> "Richard D. Fogerson" wrote:
>
> > --> RV3-List message posted by: "Richard D. Fogerson"
> >
> > I am building an RV-3 and would like to include the slider canopy option
> > which Van's doesn't support with parts. Does anyone know of someone who
> > supplies welded parts for the RV-3 slider option. I'm not a welder and
> > would really like some help.
> >
> > Thanks, Rick Fogerson, RV-3 fuselage, Boise, ID.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today
> Only $9.95 per month!
> http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV 4 Gear tall gear retro fit (for RV-6) |
"Better is the enemy of finished" is the way I remember it from my Pentagon
days. And as I finally begin to see the light at the end of my RV-4 tunnel, I
now understand the profound wisdom of the phrase.
Ray Grenier -- Short gear 4
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ollie Washburn" <skybolt-aviator(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stud Failures |
Rob: you should read the article again.The thread is between the case halves
and not between the cyl. and case.
Ollie&Lorene Washburn
RV6-A,N795LW,@ 97FL
Loves Airpark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Zilik" <zilik(at)bewellnet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Priming Firewall |
>
>
> Do you guys prime the cockpit side of the stainless steel firewall?
Negative, gets covered with insulation
>
>
> I will paint the engine side later with a glossy paint that will be easy to
> clean.
Negative - SS is easy to clean
>
>
> As well anybody use sealant on the rivets to help keep fumes out of the
> cockpit?
YES, YES, YES, Proseal works best, but Hi Temp RTV will do.
>
>
> Thankx
> Steve Hurlbut
> RV-7A
> Kingston, Ont
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Earl Fortner <efortner(at)vnet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Shorted BNC connector |
It only takes one strand of wire from the shield to short the connector. It
is easy to
overlook when putting one together. Cut it off and try again.
Earl RV4
Ken Balch wrote:
>
> For some unknown reason, the crimp-on BNC connector on my transponder
> lead turned out shorted, causing the transponder (SL-70) to fail its
> startup tests. Considering that I'd just crimped on the comm radio's
> BNC connector without incident, I'm completely at a loss as to how I
> screwed up.
>
> I'm out of BNC connectors, so I have at least a few more days to sit and
> think about what I did. Any ideas?
>
> --
> Regards,
> Ken Balch
> Ashland, MA
> RV-8 #81125 (N118KB)
> last 90%
> groups.yahoo.com/group/BostonRVBuilders/files/
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Earl Fortner <efortner(at)vnet.net> |
Don, have you sold the prop yet and which engine is it for?
Donald Mei wrote:
>
> I have one of the original Bernie Warnke props on my RV. It is a climb
> prop. Since I fly in the flatlands of the East, it doesn't really fit my
> needs well. Does anyone have any interest in purchasing a used, in very
> good condition original Bernie Warnke prop. If you have an interest, let me
> know. Marjorie Warnke said a fair price would be $650 to $700. Contact
> me off list for details and questions.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Don Mei
>
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Balch <kbalch1(at)mediaone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Shorted BNC connector |
Yep, that's exactly what happened. I found a few right-angle BNC connectors,
crimped one on and the transponder started right up without errors.
Ken
Earl Fortner wrote:
>
> It only takes one strand of wire from the shield to short the connector. It
> is easy to overlook when putting one together. Cut it off and try again.
> Earl RV4
>
> Ken Balch wrote:
>
> >
> > For some unknown reason, the crimp-on BNC connector on my transponder
> > lead turned out shorted, causing the transponder (SL-70) to fail its
> > startup tests. Considering that I'd just crimped on the comm radio's
> > BNC connector without incident, I'm completely at a loss as to how I
> > screwed up.
> >
> > I'm out of BNC connectors, so I have at least a few more days to sit and
> > think about what I did. Any ideas?
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Ken Balch
> > Ashland, MA
> > RV-8 #81125 (N118KB)
> > last 90%
> > groups.yahoo.com/group/BostonRVBuilders/files/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Donald Mei" <don_mei(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Emergency Egress |
Just my .02 from someone who has no experience in this area, but I can
speculate with the best of them. In WW II I seem to recall that Mustang
pilots were intructed to, if able, slide the canopy back, release their
harness, roll the plane upside down and PUSH the stick forward.
Re: RV-4 with a tip over. I know there have been cases of some canopies
departing the aircraft because the pilot failed to properly secure the
canopy. Does any one have any info on the results of those occurances??
Re: someone's posting about the airplane in an unrecoverable flat spin.
Remember, a spin is a stalled condition. By definition, it is a 1 G
maneuver.
Don
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dag adamson <dag_adamson(at)yahoo.com> |
Yes-
Flying with the canopy open in a TIger on final in the
summer is done all the time - if memory serves me -
the sticker says 107 Kts. Its nice to having open for
taxiing too.
-Dag
<-- snip-->
The other thought is the Grumman Tiger, which is as
close to an RV6A as
you'll ever get. I believe they are certified to fly
with the slider back 6
inches, to the first latch stop. I've never tried to
open one in flight
though.
Anybody have more experience with Tigers?
W
====
*****************
Dag Adamson
617 513 1182
Natick, MA
RV-8A Fuselage
*****************
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ed Holyoke <bicyclop(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | Emergency Egress |
Just my .02 from someone who has no experience in this area, but I can
speculate with the best of them. In WW II I seem to recall that Mustang
pilots were intructed to, if able, slide the canopy back, release their
harness, roll the plane upside down and PUSH the stick forward.
Re: RV-4 with a tip over. I know there have been cases of some canopies
departing the aircraft because the pilot failed to properly secure the
canopy. Does any one have any info on the results of those occurances??
Re: someone's posting about the airplane in an unrecoverable flat spin.
Remember, a spin is a stalled condition. By definition, it is a 1 G
maneuver.
Don
1 Gee down maybe, but how many Gees in centrifugal force? Climbing out
might be difficult. If you've broken your airplane, it's unlikely you've
got enough control to roll inverted and push. If the airplane's not
broken, you should probably count on landing it. Our planes land at much
lower speeds than WWII fighters. They used to bail out of them for
engine failures.
Ed Holyoke
No expert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Al Grajek" <algrajek(at)msn.com> |
"VansAirForce"
| Subject: | RV8 pre punched wings |
Listers:
I am just putting the skins on my rv8 Pre punched wings. The construction manual
talks about "drawing intersecting lines on the main skins at the hole for the
tie down ring". I am lost here I can't figure out what they mean or why to
do it. Any advice? Thanks in advance. Al Grajek
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress |
<< RV-4 with a tip over. I know there have been cases of some canopies
departing the aircraft because the pilot failed to properly secure the
canopy. >>
the rv4 canopy is designed to rip off the aircraft if opened in flight.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Bowen <lcbowen(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV8 pre punched wings |
I illustrated this on my web site: http://BowenAero.com (under the wing kit
menu, wings section).
Larry.
--- Al Grajek wrote:
>
> Listers:
> I am just putting the skins on my rv8 Pre punched wings. The construction> manual
talks about "drawing intersecting lines on the main skins at the> hole
for the tie down ring". I am lost here I can't figure out what they> mean or
why to do it. Any advice? Thanks in advance. Al Grajek
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan&Patty Krueger <pndkrueg(at)infi.net> |
| Subject: | Moving RV6A to hangar |
I am working with a local tow company to transport my plane to the
hangar. Will be using a tilt flat bed truck. It appears that the tilt
of the truck bed when loading the plane will cause the tail to drag on
the ground if we load nose first or the tail will hit the bed before we
can get the wheels on if we load tail first.
Those of you that have transported a 6A with this type of truck - how
did you get the plane on and off the truck?
Thank you for your help,
Dan Krueger
RV6A N926DK
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: XP360 Installations |
David,
I have an early Xp-360 kit that is one of the first if not the first one to
be shipped and I took delivery early oct.
I am about reay to mout it on my rv-8 and have been using standard items from
vans with no probelms. There is another builder about an hour from me who is
putting one in his rv-8a he is building and it seems to be going fairly well
for him also.
The quality seems to be first rate, but only do this if time is not an issue.
It may be diferent now that they have been shipping? Tech support from mattituck
has been excellent.
If you would like more details email me directly.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Planejoel(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Moving RV6A to hangar |
If you have a ditch you can back the truck into, this would result in a
lesser angle. Or you can find three sturdy planks which would allow an
extension of the bed decreasing the angle.
Joe
RV6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John B. Abell" <jbabell(at)mediaone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Moving RV6A to hangar |
You may be able to take advantage of terrain, i.e., a sloping driveway or
whatever. In my case, I used the same type of truck and only needed a couple of
fairly short, diagonally-cut 4x4s to raise the main wheels enough to avoid
scraping the tail. I also lifted the tail as it was pulled onto the trailer.
That was enough.
Best wishes,
Jack Abell
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Hurlbut" <hurlbut_steve(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Firewall Question #2 |
Ok so I won't paint the firewall.
What about the aluminum pieces. Are the majority of builders priming them
either?
Steve
Rv-7A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com> |
| Subject: | Moving RV6A to hangar |
I made a wooden skid to fit on and around the tail tie-down. It skidded on
the ground for a mere instant of time as we pulled it nose-first onto the
tilt bed.
Steve Soule
Huntington, Vermont
N227RV
-----Original Message-----
I am working with a local tow company to transport my plane to the
hangar. Will be using a tilt flat bed truck. It appears that the tilt
of the truck bed when loading the plane will cause the tail to drag on
the ground if we load nose first or the tail will hit the bed before we
can get the wheels on if we load tail first.
Those of you that have transported a 6A with this type of truck - how
did you get the plane on and off the truck?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Hurlbut" <hurlbut_steve(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV8 pre punched wings |
This is to locate the hole that the tie down ring goes into.
There is actually no need to locate the hole as described in the
instructions since the hole is already there. Look of it on the bottom skin.
You do have to enlarge it however. If you alinged the tie down ring
correctly the hole should line up perfectly.
Steve
RV-7A
>From: Larry Bowen <lcbowen(at)yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: RV8 pre punched wings
>Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 09:07:06 -0800 (PST)
>
>
>I illustrated this on my web site: http://BowenAero.com (under the wing kit
>menu, wings section).
>
>Larry.
>
>
>--- Al Grajek wrote:
> >
> > Listers:
> > I am just putting the skins on my rv8 Pre punched wings. The
>construction> > manual talks about "drawing intersecting lines on the main skins
at
>the> > hole for the tie down ring". I am lost here I can't figure out what
>they> > mean or why to do it. Any advice? Thanks in advance. Al Grajek
>
>http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steven DiNieri" <capsteve(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Moving RV6A to hangar |
2-2 x 12 planks for the mains will raise the fuse heigth enough as the
nose wheel stays on the ground untill it hits the truck platform. I
pulled the fuse up backward using the rear tiedown on the winch with the
2 x 12's.
hope this helps..
steve
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-
>server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan&Patty Krueger
>Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 12:11 PM
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: Moving RV6A to hangar
>
>
>I am working with a local tow company to transport my plane to the
>hangar. Will be using a tilt flat bed truck. It appears that the tilt
>of the truck bed when loading the plane will cause the tail to drag on
>the ground if we load nose first or the tail will hit the bed before we
>can get the wheels on if we load tail first.
>
>Those of you that have transported a 6A with this type of truck - how
>did you get the plane on and off the truck?
>
>Thank you for your help,
>
>Dan Krueger
>RV6A N926DK
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | b green <rvinfo(at)juno.com> |
I had the same problem with my Electronics International gauges. I spoke
to a very experienced avionics person about it and he didn't have a
definate answer, but suggested that "ferrite beads" may solve the
problem. He gave me some, little beads with holes in them that go on the
wires, but I never put them on. I just got used to it. He didn't seem
to think there was anything wrong with the gauge.
Bruce Green
writes:
>
>
> Chris and Susie,
>
> I now know of about 8 RVs using Vans new gauges that have this
> problem, and
> when I last checked with Vans they didn't seem to think there is a
> problem.
> I've included them in this cc as well as the rest of the list, but
> at this
> time I am reasonably convinced that they are selling a defective
> product, or
> at least a product that doesn't perform as it should given the
> common
> configurations and installations found on their aircraft. (IE these
> gauges
> work great but they just can't be used around any transmitters)
>
> I personally have tested my RV-6 with two different 'Vans' amp
> gauges, have
> looked at it with a scope (Unfortuneately mine only reads up to
> 100mhz so I
> can't really see what is making the noise) I have tried several Caps
> and
> inductors to shield/absorb this as suggested by the very
> knowledgeable
> electronics folks on this list, all to no avail. Mine tends to send
> the amp
> gauge a different place everytime I transmit. And it does it on any
> radio.
> Some of the other folks just seem get wild gyrations.
>
> I have their MAP and it also fades lower during transmission, I
> don't have
> their cht/egt as they weren't available.
>
> At some time I hope that Vans will be good to their general
> reputation and
> help us figure out what this problem is, as well as then providing a
> reasonable remedy. It would seem their instrumentation is too
> sensitive.
>
> One common denomiator type question I have for all the other folks
> on the
> list with "this problem/these gauges" is are your comm antenna(s)
> top
> mounted or bottom mounted? Mine are both on top. Maybe the folks who
> have
> had success with these gauges have their antennas on the bottom???
>
> Thanks
> Wheeler
> 23841
> RV-6 07/07/01 164hrs and flys like an obscene dream, smooth, silky
> and loads
> of pure pleasure
>
>
> From: "Chris & Susie" <rv6(at)ssc.net.au>
> Subject: RV-List: Electrical help
>
>
> When I transmit on the radio the Vans amp gauge goes -40 and the
> manifold
> guage goes full deflection also the cht and egt values change???
> Any ideas???
>
>
> Chris and Susie
> VH-MUM (reserved)
>
>
>
>
> messages.
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Question #2 |
Hi Steve,
All the firewall Aluminum parts should at least be primed with a good primer
sealer or primed and painted. Later this area will be one of the most
difficult areas reach and perform any work on.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Hurlbut" <hurlbut_steve(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: RV-List: Firewall Question #2
>
> Ok so I won't paint the firewall.
>
> What about the aluminum pieces. Are the majority of builders priming them
> either?
>
> Steve
> Rv-7A
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "rickjory" <rickjory(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
This was posted earlier, but Watkins Aviation (www.watkinsaviation.com) has
a military issue "pilot's survival/canopy knife" ($28), and then something
that looks a bit kinky . . . here's a cut and paste:
Item 9063. Designed to be stored inside the cockpit, this new generation
rescue device has multiple roles including breaking through plexiglass
canopies. Modeled after a WWII crash ax, it features a pointed blade for
penetration and a sharpened edge for chopping. The 1/4 inch thick, epoxy
powder coated 1075 carbon steel construction provides all the strength
needed for prying as well as hacking. The tool is equipped with a Kraton
handle and lanyard for a positive grip in heavy use. Includes a heavy-duty
Cordura nylon and leather sheath with pivot ring and belt loop. Black. 7 W,
13-1/8 L
This latter item is $75.
This is not a commercial endorsement . . . don't have either product, nor
have I tried either product. Of course, if any of the listers want to buy
one and send it to me I'll try it out some day.
Rick Jory RV8A
----- Original Message -----
From: David Carter <dcarter(at)datarecall.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
>
> If canopy won't come off, then the Air Force type "canopy breaker",
> typically meant for ground egress, could also be used to make an opening
to
> bail out through. The principle is that plexiglass shatters fairly
easily.
> The canopy breakers in my fighters were fairly short, stubby, heavy, with
> short blade like a wide bladed hunting knife. Need to make a BIG hole so
> you don't hang up, and maybe reduce cuts from the sharp edges. Thinking
of
> that, you might be able to clean it out all the way back to the roll bar
> assembly over the seat backs.
> As for hitting vertical tail, if have control, then pull up fairly
> steeply and leave at as slow a speed as possible; also, trim full nose
down
> before bailing out so plane noses down away from you ('jettison's you').
If
> no pitch control (out of control) and high speed, do whatever it takes to
> try to stay alive - get out if you can and take your chances. Not getting
> out in that scenario has a 100% certain outcome.
>
> David Carter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sam Buchanan" <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Emergency Egress/ Parachute
>
>
> >
> >
> > Don.Alexander(at)AstenJohnson.com wrote:
> >
> > > As a skydiver myself, I have no problem riding the "silken angel" down
> if
> > > the need is there. My question to the listers is this:
> > >
> > > If you have to bail out of your pride and joy, can you physically get
> out?
> > > Will our canopys slide aft at 250 mph, or are we trapped until the
> curtain
> > > call? Are we deluding ourselves with parachutes?
> >
> >
> >
> > More than likely we would never be able to get out of an RV-6
> > tip-up.....especially under the pressure of an actual emergency.
> >
> > Sam Buchanan (RV-6)
> > "The RV Journal" http://thervjournal.com
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Moving RV6A to hangar |
| From: | Don Jordan <dons6a(at)juno.com> |
Dan:
You are right. it will have to go on backwards. I borrowed a huge goose
neck & the guys dooley to pull the thing.
After I scratched the paint off the tail , we loaded it tail first. the
bed was wide enough for the gear.
You will need 2 real long 2x12 for the mains & a short one for the nose
gear. Just before you start up some one has to raise the tail under the
horz stabilizer.
After the painter destroyed the paint, I use my 6x16 trailer to move it
back home ( so I could paint it) & then to the airport.
My trailer is to narrow, so I used a 2x12 under the gear. Screw chokes
around the main tires of she wants to come off the main beam.
my sides have 2 inch bars 12 inches high. I had a 2x under the main beam
so it will slide up on top of the bars & not off the trailer, . I have a
winch up front to pull it up. You could do it with a come a long. I built
a 12 high box from 2x12's for the nose gear.
strapped it down & loosely cross strapped the tail. TAKE THE RUDDER OFF.
It has to go on tail first. I built 2 rudder locks & broke them.
4 men can pull it off, just don't let it come off the main beam. We
dropped mine cause the team got in a hurry. She hit the trailer under the
LH rear spar attach point. Just call me lucky.
Don Jordan - N6DJ - 6A
Arlington, Tx
******************************
writes:
>
> I am working with a local tow company to transport my plane to the
> hangar. Will be using a tilt flat bed truck. It appears that the
> tilt
> of the truck bed when loading the plane will cause the tail to drag
> on
> the ground if we load nose first or the tail will hit the bed before
> we
> can get the wheels on if we load tail first.
>
> Those of you that have transported a 6A with this type of truck -
> how
> did you get the plane on and off the truck?
>
> Thank you for your help,
>
> Dan Krueger
> RV6A N926DK
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Earl Fortner <efortner(at)vnet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Emergency Egress |
I remember reading an artical in the RVator about someone losing a canopy in
an RV4 and they did land the plane without incident. Don't remember which
issue but it was several years ago.
Earl RV4
Donald Mei wrote:
>
> Just my .02 from someone who has no experience in this area, but I can
> speculate with the best of them. In WW II I seem to recall that Mustang
> pilots were intructed to, if able, slide the canopy back, release their
> harness, roll the plane upside down and PUSH the stick forward.
>
> Re: RV-4 with a tip over. I know there have been cases of some canopies
> departing the aircraft because the pilot failed to properly secure the
> canopy. Does any one have any info on the results of those occurances??
>
> Re: someone's posting about the airplane in an unrecoverable flat spin.
> Remember, a spin is a stalled condition. By definition, it is a 1 G
> maneuver.
>
> Don
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Question #2 |
Hi steve,
My impression is that you have not as yet begun assembly (riveted) the
firewall parts together as yet. In my previous email I meant to say that
what I did is prime with epoxy primer and then paint all the parts "before"
assembly and final riveting.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Firewall Question #2
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> All the firewall Aluminum parts should at least be primed with a good
primer
> sealer or primed and painted. Later this area will be one of the most
> difficult areas reach and perform any work on.
>
> Jim in Kelowna
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Hurlbut" <hurlbut_steve(at)hotmail.com>
> To: ;
> Subject: RV-List: Firewall Question #2
>
>
> >
> > Ok so I won't paint the firewall.
> >
> > What about the aluminum pieces. Are the majority of builders priming
them
> > either?
> >
> > Steve
> > Rv-7A
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Barnes" <skytop(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | Electrical wire route over -6 spar |
I am considering running a small bundle of wires through a hole in the
F-604 ABOVE the spar, then down through the area with the fuel selector
valve, then forward in the center section of the floor pan and under the
battery, then up the firewall to where needed. There is no center
section support between the fuel console and the panel.
Can someone tell me that this is a reasonable thing to do, or is there a
more standard way?
Thanks in advance,
Tom Barnes -6 wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Will Cretsinger <cretsinger(at)ticnet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Building Q for -6 tippers |
Mark, 'bout a hundred years ago I wrote some notes for the tipup
canopy. They are probably obsolete now but you might give them a look.
They are at <http://www.flash.net/~gila>. Let me know if they help.
Will Cretsinger, Arlington, Texas
-6A flying past 425 hours
Mark Phillips wrote:
>
>
> In laying out my "cabin frame" (we all know it's a rollbar, right?!)
> with the bottom width set to match the width of my F-605 (minus the
> width of the 631-C angles) and the top (where the two 631A's "should"
> meet) set at the 17-7/8" dimension per dwg. 39, I have a 1/2" gap
> between the left & right halves at the top. With the gap present, the
> top of the rollbar is a continuous, smooth curve. If I bring the two
> halves together at the top, the overall curvature of the rollbar dips
> down at the intersection noticeably, not matching the curvature of the
> plexiglass. Anyone else seen this and what did you do? Fill the gap
> with bondo? Cover it? Just leave it?
>
> It also may make sense to leave the rollbar a little narrower than the
> plans say to allow for "gaskets" to seal rear glass to the rollbar- by
> adjusting the thickness of this seal, the glass could be brought out
> flush with the skin. Any recommendations here? What is typically used
> to seal the rear glass to the rollbar anyway?
>
> Thanks!
> Just trying to get it right at the PossumWorks
> Mark Phillips -6A
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Will Cretsinger <cretsinger(at)ticnet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Building Q for -6 tippers |
Mark, 'bout a hundred years ago I wrote some notes for the tipup
canopy. They are probably obsolete now but you might give them a look.
They are at <http://www.flash.net/~gila>. Let me know if they help.
Will Cretsinger, Arlington, Texas
-6A flying past 425 hours
Mark Phillips wrote:
>
>
> In laying out my "cabin frame" (we all know it's a rollbar, right?!)
> with the bottom width set to match the width of my F-605 (minus the
> width of the 631-C angles) and the top (where the two 631A's "should"
> meet) set at the 17-7/8" dimension per dwg. 39, I have a 1/2" gap
> between the left & right halves at the top. With the gap present, the
> top of the rollbar is a continuous, smooth curve. If I bring the two
> halves together at the top, the overall curvature of the rollbar dips
> down at the intersection noticeably, not matching the curvature of the
> plexiglass. Anyone else seen this and what did you do? Fill the gap
> with bondo? Cover it? Just leave it?
>
> It also may make sense to leave the rollbar a littX-Mozilla-Status: 0009
> plans say to allow for "gaskets" to seal rear glass to the rollbar- by
> adjusting the thickness of this seal, the glass could be brought out
> flush with the skin. Any recommendations here? What is typically used
> to seal the rear glass to the rollbar anyway?
>
> Thanks!
> Just trying to get it right at the PossumWorks
> Mark Phillips -6A
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Duane Bentley" <dbentley(at)fuse.net> |
| Subject: | Wing Root Fairings |
Okay, I've gone through the several hundred archived messages on the
subject, and don't see an answer to this specific question. I've trimmed
the wing root fairings to fit, have located them, and have started drilling
the holes for the plate nuts. The attachment to the inboard rib flange
isn't too difficult -- from the trailing edge to the spar, that is until I
get to the fuel tank. On my QB fuel tank inner rib, the rivets currently in
place on the rib are spaced so that a plate nut will not fit between them.
The rivets, however, were installed so as to fit exactly the spacing of the
two rivet holes on the platenut, so that every other pair of rivets could
conveniently secure a platenut, with about a 3 inch spacing. This then
entails drilling the screw hole between the rivets, drilling out the two
installed rivets, locating the platenut, and then re-rivet the top skin,
rib, and platenut together. My concern is that the pro-seal job on the tank
was well done and does not leak. Am I risking disturbing the seal? Do I
need to stick more proseal into each rivet (ugh) as I put it back together
to make sure I'm not opening a small leak?
I guess the second choice (maybe less work) is to space the platenuts just
inboard of the rib, but it would only have the top skin as a support.
What's been the accepted practice?
Thanks
Duane Bentley
RV6QB - Finishing Kit
N515DB(reserved)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Oke" <wjoke(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical wire route over -6 spar |
Hi;
I am just about at the same place myself. My solution was to drill a hole in
the RH wing spar web similar in size and location to the (manual) trim cable
hole in the LH spar web. Plus a corresponding hole in the F-604. I put in a
snap-in bushing and a piece of 1/2 in. cable sheathing to contain the 6 or
so conductors I need to run through there.
Objection to this is that the wings will be hard to install remove. The
answer (picked up from some where on this list) is to cut out the material
in the web from the hole (trim cable or wiring) to the inboard end of the
web. The cable/wiring can remain in place with this arrangement as the wings
slide in or out.
Can't say if this is standard procedure or otherwise.
Jim Oke
Winnipeg
RV-3 flying sometimes
RV-6A wiring &FWF stuff.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Barnes" <skytop(at)megsinet.net>
Subject: RV-List: Electrical wire route over -6 spar
>
> I am considering running a small bundle of wires through a hole in the
> F-604 ABOVE the spar, then down through the area with the fuel selector
> valve, then forward in the center section of the floor pan and under the
> battery, then up the firewall to where needed. There is no center
> section support between the fuel console and the panel.
> Can someone tell me that this is a reasonable thing to do, or is there a
> more standard way?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Tom Barnes -6 wiring
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical wire route over -6 spar |
> I am considering running a small bundle of wires through a hole in the
> F-604 ABOVE the spar, then down through the area with the fuel selector
> valve, then forward in the center section of the floor pan and under the
> battery, then up the firewall to where needed. There is no center
> section support between the fuel console and the panel.
> Can someone tell me that this is a reasonable thing to do, or is there a
> more standard way?
Perfect place.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
6A N66AP flying 80 hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KBoatri144(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Root Fairings |
In a message dated 1/23/02 6:36:00 PM Eastern Standard Time,
dbentley(at)fuse.net writes:
<< I guess the second choice (maybe less work) is to space the platenuts just
inboard of the rib, but it would only have the top skin as a support.
What's been the accepted practice?
Thanks
Duane Bentley
RV6QB - Finishing Kit
N515DB(reserved)
This really isn't a structural item. I'd go with putting the platenuts on the
skin only - no rib. That's what I did, and I have not lost a wing root
fairing yet...
Kyle Boatright
0-320/Aymar Demuth RV-6 Slider
Kennesaw, GA
http://www.angelfire.com/my/rv6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Calvert" <rv6bldr(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical wire route over -6 spar |
There is a hole in the F-604 for the elevator trim cable. If you have
electric trim, use that hole for wires. I have manual trim so drilled
another hole symmetrical to the original hole. One for wiring and one for
trim cable. Just add a grommet. The wires will come out right where you
need them to and can continue to the battery box and firewall.
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok -6
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Barnes" <skytop(at)megsinet.net>
Subject: RV-List: Electrical wire route over -6 spar
>
> I am considering running a small bundle of wires through a hole in the
> F-604 ABOVE the spar, then down through the area with the fuel selector
> valve, then forward in the center section of the floor pan and under the
> battery, then up the firewall to where needed. There is no center
> section support between the fuel console and the panel.
> Can someone tell me that this is a reasonable thing to do, or is there a
> more standard way?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Tom Barnes -6 wiring
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glenn & Judi" <dirtyrottenscoundrels(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Electrical wire route over -6 spar |
Jim took the words right out of my mouth.
-Glenn Gordon
N442E (almost)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jim Oke
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 5:38 PM
> To: skytop(at)megsinet.net
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Electrical wire route over -6 spar
>
>
> Hi;
>
> I am just about at the same place myself. My solution was to
> drill a hole in
> the RH wing spar web similar in size and location to the (manual)
> trim cable
> hole in the LH spar web. Plus a corresponding hole in the F-604.
> I put in a
> snap-in bushing and a piece of 1/2 in. cable sheathing to contain the 6 or
> so conductors I need to run through there.
>
> Objection to this is that the wings will be hard to install remove. The
> answer (picked up from some where on this list) is to cut out the material
> in the web from the hole (trim cable or wiring) to the inboard end of the
> web. The cable/wiring can remain in place with this arrangement
> as the wings
> slide in or out.
>
> Can't say if this is standard procedure or otherwise.
>
> Jim Oke
> Winnipeg
> RV-3 flying sometimes
> RV-6A wiring &FWF stuff.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Barnes" <skytop(at)megsinet.net>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Electrical wire route over -6 spar
>
>
> >
> > I am considering running a small bundle of wires through a hole in the
> > F-604 ABOVE the spar, then down through the area with the fuel selector
> > valve, then forward in the center section of the floor pan and under the
> > battery, then up the firewall to where needed. There is no center
> > section support between the fuel console and the panel.
> > Can someone tell me that this is a reasonable thing to do, or is there a
> > more standard way?
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Tom Barnes -6 wiring
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Tip-up cabin frame, was Building Q for 6 tippers |
Somewhere during this thread, someone mentioned raising the height of
the 6 tip up cabin frame a little bit to gain headroom. Unfortunately I
deleted this message. Could the person who posted it, and anyone else
who has done this, tell me how much they raised the frame and what if
any problems it caused. It would seem to me that the limiting factor is
the amount of plexi which is to be trimmed away, but I don't have my
canopy yet to measure.
Thanks
Jeff Point
6 fuselage
Milwaukee WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Question #2 |
Steve,
I primed and finish painted the aluminium angles on the rear of the
firewall. I used PPG Delta (equivilent of Imron) which I had matched to the
powder coated light gray parts that Van's sends.
Charlie Kuss
>
>Ok so I won't paint the firewall.
>
>What about the aluminum pieces. Are the majority of builders priming them
>either?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Root Fairings |
Duane,
Why not substitute "single leg" plate nuts in the areas where you have
clearance problems? This style has only 1 ear (leg) with holes for
2 mounting rivets. Using this style of platenut will allow you to
compensate for the uneven spacing of the screw holes. Building an RV is all
about improvising, adapting and overcoming those little "VANdalisims that
occur! :-)
Charlie Kuss
RV-8A fuselage
>
>Okay, I've gone through the several hundred archived messages on the
>subject, and don't see an answer to this specific question. I've trimmed
>the wing root fairings to fit, have located them, and have started drilling
>the holes for the plate nuts. The attachment to the inboard rib flange
>isn't too difficult -- from the trailing edge to the spar, that is until I
>get to the fuel tank. On my QB fuel tank inner rib, the rivets currently in
>place on the rib are spaced so that a plate nut will not fit between them.
>The rivets, however, were installed so as to fit exactly the spacing of the
>two rivet holes on the platenut, so that every other pair of rivets could
>conveniently secure a platenut, with about a 3 inch spacing. This then
>entails drilling the screw hole between the rivets, drilling out the two
>installed rivets, locating the platenut, and then re-rivet the top skin,
>rib, and platenut together. My concern is that the pro-seal job on the tank
>was well done and does not leak. Am I risking disturbing the seal? Do I
>need to stick more proseal into each rivet (ugh) as I put it back together
>to make sure I'm not opening a small leak?
>
>I guess the second choice (maybe less work) is to space the platenuts just
>inboard of the rib, but it would only have the top skin as a support.
>What's been the accepted practice?
>
>Thanks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kevin lane" <n3773(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Moving RV6A to hangar |
Chris moved his in a Ryder truck with an enclosed box. It just barely
fits, (the tires squeak on the sides, that tight) but it does fit. We
ramped it up. I suggest three people.
----- Original Message -----
From: Dan&Patty Krueger
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 9:10 AM
Subject: RV-List: Moving RV6A to hangar
I am working with a local tow company to transport my plane to the
hangar. Will be using a tilt flat bed truck. It appears that the tilt
of the truck bed when loading the plane will cause the tail to drag on
the ground if we load nose first or the tail will hit the bed before
we
can get the wheels on if we load tail first.
Those of you that have transported a 6A with this type of truck - how
did you get the plane on and off the truck?
Thank you for your help,
Dan Krueger
RV6A N926DK
messages.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dag adamson <dag_adamson(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Painting notes: Goodbye Tempo - Hello VariPrime |
Just something for the archives-
I have no experience (until now) painting with a paint
gun.
I chose Tempo Zinc Chromate spray cans initially
because:
1) a lot of people had used them
2) I was worried about the cleanup and overall hassle
of spray guns - I wanted something simple
3) No one is ever going to see the inside of the wings
anyways
My experience:
1) Tempo takes days - if not more than a week for it
to cure -even if you paint and put it in a higher
temperature area (above 70 degrees)- so you have to
plan your final riveting around this unless you don't
mind those little scratches
2) It doesn't spray consistently - beginning of the
can behaves differently than at the end of the can -
different cans spray differently - it might be ok for
little pieces if weren't for the amount of time it
takes to dry
3) I tried to be careful - but it seem that I would
get a lot of runs - (but who cares no one will see it
inside the wing panel)
4) Even though I bought the best NIOSH approved mask I
could find - the cancer warnings make me a little
nervous.
Now that I am working on the cockpit and I will need
to look at it - I figured it would be a good time to
learn how to do a higher quality job and maybe I
should learn how to use a paint gun.
I bought a used gun from a local auto body shop and
had a half hour intro to mix, how to use the gun and
basically how to handle clean up.
Spray guns are awesome!
Some things I learned:
1) Variprime dries quickly - a few hours - and I am in
New England - its less than 70 degrees in the shop.
This is going to help me be more productive.
2) Sprays evenly - no runs at all!
3) Cleanup is a snap. Just rinse the gun out with
Lacquer thinner and place the tip in the jug with a
little thinner to keep it clean.
Go for the gun its easy --- of course final paint is
another thing - I'll still probably have a pro paint
the outside ... but I am glad that I am learning how
to use a paint gun.
-Dag
====
*****************
Dag Adamson
617 513 1182
Natick, MA
RV-8A Fuselage
*****************
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com> |
| Subject: | Great reference book |
I just stumbled across a catalog that a friend was using. He lent it to me
to locate some parts to order. It's the General Aircraft Hardware Co
catalog. It is one of the best reference books on aircraft hardware and
fittings I have seen. It has a picture of every part associated with a
given part number. It's great for builders like me who even after 4 years
of building are STILL not familiar with what an AN-this or that is. Also
you can look and see the fitting you want and get the part number.
Pictures! I like pictures! The website is
http://www.gen-aircraft-hardware.com You can order the catalog from there
(they call it a reference manual) or you can download their entire inventory
in a PDF file for offline searches.
I did see an obscure reference to this catalog in the archives by two savy
list'ers who apparently knew all about GAH. I thought I'd post this for our
newer members and people who don't regularly search the archives. ;-)
(like me!)
--
Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA (and oh yeah, RV-4 builder)
Network Administrator
Union Safe Deposit Bank
209-946-5116
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman, Jim" <jnorman(at)intermapsystems.com> |
| Subject: | Oshkosh Planning |
Yo,
Having never been to Oshkosh, I plan on making this year the "coming out
party" for N555JN.
I need advice. I want to know what day to arrive so that I am near the
beginning of the arrivals. I want to put my new plane on the show line,
etc...
What day should I arrive? When do most people leave?
The EAA's site says that the fly in is officially July 23-29-- which is
Tuesday through the following Monday....
What do you experts recommend?
Jim
Tampa
6A getting ready for the paint shop.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WoodardRod(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | RV images for Embroidery |
Kind of a strange question, but does anybody know of any images of RV
airplanes that have been "digitized" for use with an embroidery sewing
machine. My brother's wife got a new whiz-bang sewing machine that does
embroidery. She offered to sew RV stuff on all my plain sweatshirts if we can
find this "digitized" image.
Thanks in advance!
Rod Woodard
RV-3 #11339 in progress (slow progress, that is)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Oshkosh Planning |
Sunday before if not earlier.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
----- Original Message -----
From: "Norman, Jim" <jnorman(at)intermapsystems.com>
Subject: RV-List: Oshkosh Planning
Yo,
Having never been to Oshkosh, I plan on making this year the "coming out
party" for N555JN.
I need advice. I want to know what day to arrive so that I am near the
beginning of the arrivals. I want to put my new plane on the show line,
etc...
What day should I arrive? When do most people leave?
The EAA's site says that the fly in is officially July 23-29-- which is
Tuesday through the following Monday....
What do you experts recommend?
Jim
Tampa
6A getting ready for the paint shop.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gusndale(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Moving RV6A to hangar |
In a message dated 1/23/2002 9:12:57 AM Pacific Standard Time,
pndkrueg(at)infi.net writes:
> . It appears that the tilt
> of the truck bed when loading the plane will cause the tail to drag on
> the ground if we load nose first or the tail will hit the bed before we
> can get the wheels on if we load tail first.
>
Dan,
I had my 6A transported on a towing company tilt flat bed truck just
like you are describing and worried about this same issue. When the day came
I was surprised and relieved to see that it loaded with no difficulty at all.
Mine went on facing forward for the 25 mile ride. I loaded from a flat level
surface and the tail got close to the ground as the nose wheel started up
onto the truck bed but never actually touched the ground. Once all three
wheels are on board you just tilt the bed back horizontal, move the fuselage
forward and secured it. Comes off just as easilly.
Don't waste any more time worrying about it. Just take it slow and
careful and it will load just fine.
Regards,
Dale Wotring
RV6A
Vancouver, WA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gert <gert(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Oshkosh Planning |
Ya want frontrow seats, ya have to come eeeearly. maybe one or two days
in advance
Gert
"custom parking north, keeper of North point"
"Norman, Jim" wrote:
>
>
> Yo,
> Having never been to Oshkosh, I plan on making this year the "coming out
> party" for N555JN.
>
> I need advice. I want to know what day to arrive so that I am near the
> beginning of the arrivals. I want to put my new plane on the show line,
> etc...
>
> What day should I arrive? When do most people leave?
>
> The EAA's site says that the fly in is officially July 23-29-- which is
> Tuesday through the following Monday....
>
> What do you experts recommend?
>
> Jim
> Tampa
> 6A getting ready for the paint shop.
>
--
is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KBoatri144(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Oshkosh Planning |
In a message dated 1/23/02 9:27:42 PM Eastern Standard Time,
jnorman(at)intermapsystems.com writes:
<< Yo,
Having never been to Oshkosh, I plan on making this year the "coming out
party" for N555JN.
I need advice. I want to know what day to arrive so that I am near the
beginning of the arrivals. I want to put my new plane on the show line,
etc...
What day should I arrive? When do most people leave? >>
I showed up after the show on Thursday (the show's third day) in 2001. I got
an awesome parking place on the front row of the RV line... If I go this
year, I'm torn between whether I'll do showplane parking or showplane
camping...
Kyle Boatright
0-320/Aymar Demuth RV-6 Slider
Kennesaw, GA
http://www.angelfire.com/my/rv6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Nellis" <mike(at)bmnellis.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Oshkosh Planning |
Show up on Sunday before the start.
Mike Nellis - http://bmnellis.com
Georgetown, TX
Waiting to start Fuselage
RV6 N699BM Reserved
1947 Stinson 108-2 N9666K
> Yo,
> Having never been to Oshkosh, I plan on making this year the "coming out
> party" for N555JN.
>
> I need advice. I want to know what day to arrive so that I am near the
> beginning of the arrivals. I want to put my new plane on the show line,
> etc...
>
> What day should I arrive? When do most people leave?
>
> The EAA's site says that the fly in is officially July 23-29-- which is
> Tuesday through the following Monday....
>
> What do you experts recommend?
>
> Jim
> Tampa
> 6A getting ready for the paint shop.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary A. Sobek" <rv6flier(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Electrical wire route over -6 spar |
--- Glenn & Judi wrote:
>
>
> Jim took the words right out of my mouth.
>
> -Glenn Gordon
> N442E (almost)
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jim Oke
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 5:38 PM
> > To: skytop(at)megsinet.net
> > Subject: Re: RV-List: Electrical wire route over -6 spar
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi;
> >
> > I am just about at the same place myself. My solution was to
> > drill a hole in
> > the RH wing spar web similar in size and location to the (manual)
> > trim cable
> > hole in the LH spar web. Plus a corresponding hole in the F-604.
> > I put in a
> > snap-in bushing and a piece of 1/2 in. cable sheathing to contain
> the 6 or
> > so conductors I need to run through there.
> >
> > Objection to this is that the wings will be hard to install remove.
> The
> > answer (picked up from some where on this list) is to cut out the
> material
> > in the web from the hole (trim cable or wiring) to the inboard end
> of the
> > web. The cable/wiring can remain in place with this arrangement
> > as the wings
> > slide in or out.
> >
> > Can't say if this is standard procedure or otherwise.
> >
> > Jim Oke
> > Winnipeg
> > RV-3 flying sometimes
> > RV-6A wiring &FWF stuff.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Tom Barnes" <skytop(at)megsinet.net>
> > To:
> > Subject: RV-List: Electrical wire route over -6 spar
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I am considering running a small bundle of wires through a hole
> in the
> > > F-604 ABOVE the spar, then down through the area with the fuel
> selector
> > > valve, then forward in the center section of the floor pan and
> under the
> > > battery, then up the firewall to where needed. There is no
> center
> > > section support between the fuel console and the panel.
> > > Can someone tell me that this is a reasonable thing to do, or is
> there a
> > > more standard way?
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance,
> > > Tom Barnes -6 wiring
> > >
> > >
I have wires routed under the longeron, over F-604B&C, and F-604E&F.
There is a 1/8" gap for the wires to run through. No factor taking the
wings on or off in this location. Use sleaving over the wires to
prevent chafing.
====
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,002.9+ Flying Hours So. CA, USA
http://SoCAL_WVAF.tripod.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Starn" <jhstarn(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV images for Embroidery |
Our EAA Chapter has only only our Chapter patch "digitzed". We would like
images of RV's, Rockets etc. etc if you find any. KABONG
----- Original Message -----
From: <WoodardRod(at)aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: RV images for Embroidery
>
> Kind of a strange question, but does anybody know of any images of RV
> airplanes that have been "digitized" for use with an embroidery sewing
> machine. My brother's wife got a new whiz-bang sewing machine that does
> embroidery. She offered to sew RV stuff on all my plain sweatshirts if we
can
> find this "digitized" image.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Rod Woodard
> RV-3 #11339 in progress (slow progress, that is)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Oshkosh Planning |
True, the RV parking area does fill up by the opening day. However,
there does always seem to be a number of planes which depart by friday
afternoon or saturday morning, so a weekend arrival may have a good
chance of finding a good spot in the RV area. And, since us custom
parking grunts are almost all RV guys, we will always find you a spot,
even if it means evicting a Lancair or two. All we ask is that you bone
up on the OSH arrival procedures and standard flagman signals (AIM.)
If you've never been to a Convention before, you're going to love it.
Jeff Point
"custom parking north, and OSH camper mate of the keeper of North Point"
gert wrote:
>
>Ya want frontrow seats, ya have to come eeeearly. maybe one or two days
>in advance
>
>Gert
>
>"custom parking north, keeper of North point"
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Graham Murphy <jgmurphy(at)xtra.co.nz> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Question #2 |
Folks
Corrosion 101.
Aluminium against steel will ALWAYS corrode the aluminium. So always
apply a barrier between the aluminium (sorry aluminum) and ANY type of
steel. The big boys often cad plate stainless parts that are in contact
with al', not to protect the cres but to protect the al'. FWIW I used a
sealant (250 degF) between my primed and painted alum' and the firewall.
Graham Murphy
Aero Structures Repair Engr
Blenheim
New Zealand
Steve Hurlbut wrote:
>
>
> Ok so I won't paint the firewall.
>
> What about the aluminum pieces. Are the majority of builders priming them
> either?
>
> Steve
> Rv-7A
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom & Cathy Ervin" <tcervin(at)valkyrie.net> |
List: I am getting ready to purchase 2 antennas (Bent Whip) for the
belly of my RV6-A that are light weight and reasonable. Has anybody used
R.A. Miller P/n AV-534? They are on page 433 of the latest Spruce
Catalog.
Thanks
Tom in Ohio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Balch <kbalch1(at)mediaone.net> |
I'm using a belly-mounted bent-whip comm antenna. Should I use a
doubler inside the fuselage skin to help support the antenna's weight?
It doesn't seem to weigh very much...
--
Regards,
Ken Balch
Ashland, MA
RV-8 #81125 (N118KB)
last 90%
groups.yahoo.com/group/BostonRVBuilders/files/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Newton" <enewton57(at)cableone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Comant CI-122C |
That's what I did. I put a piece of scrap .040 about 3" X 6" inside and
used some flush rivets to attach it to the skin. Then drilled through both
to attach the antennae using plate nuts and screws. The rivets and screws
will assure a good ground plane with the surrounding metal. Makes for a
good solid installation.
Eric Newton - Long Beach, MS
RV-6A N57ME (Flying)
www.ericsrv6a.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Balch" <kbalch1(at)mediaone.net>
Subject: RV-List: Comant CI-122C
>
> I'm using a belly-mounted bent-whip comm antenna. Should I use a
> doubler inside the fuselage skin to help support the antenna's weight?
> It doesn't seem to weigh very much...
>
> --
> Regards,
> Ken Balch
> Ashland, MA
> RV-8 #81125 (N118KB)
> last 90%
> groups.yahoo.com/group/BostonRVBuilders/files/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill VonDane <bvondane(at)cso.atmel.com> |
I recommend the Comant 122...
CI 122 . VHF Com Antenna Bent Whip
Part No. CI 122 Antenna VHF Comm 45 des whip
$126.50 From Chief Aircraft - http://www.chiefaircraft.com
Designed specifically to mount to the underside of an aircraft,
providing excellent radiation coverage for air to ground communications.
Bent configuration is ideally suited for helicopters and low wing
aircraft.
Rated to 350 kts. Freq: 118-136MHz VSWR: 3.0:1 max
Height: 8.2" Weight: 1 lb. Imp: 50 ohms
TSO C37b, Class 1, C38b, DO-160
-Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom & Cathy
Ervin
Subject: RV-List: Antennas
-->
List: I am getting ready to purchase 2 antennas (Bent Whip) for the
belly of my RV6-A that are light weight and reasonable. Has anybody used
R.A. Miller P/n AV-534? They are on page 433 of the latest Spruce
Catalog.
Thanks
Tom in Ohio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Whitaker <rmwhitaker(at)lanl.gov> |
| Subject: | Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
I'm approaching the point where I need to start thinking about
an engine for my RV-9 project. Up to this point, I've been blissfully building
away, but now, this engine thing is starting to bug me. We've all heard
about the Eggenfellner Subaru. There are some good arguments
to go with this engine over a tried and true 0-320 Lyc.
My biggest hesitation with regard to the Subaru is the potential
hit one might take when it comes time to sell (if it ever does come)
the airplane. I understand that it is a very speculative issue, but I'll
throw it out there anyway.
In your opinion, how would the demand for and/or the value of an RV-9
equipped with the Eggenfellner Subaru compare to one equipped
with a new Lycoming or Aerosport Power overhauled Lyc?
Rob
RV-9 - Starting fuse.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
Rob,
Value is in the eye of the beholder. If you find someone who wants what you
have, you can ask top dollar. What you need to do is a informal survey to
see if a potential market exists for your then used Subaru airplane, and
bracket a realistic market price.
The other area I recommend you look at is total ownership costs of selecting
this engine over the standard 2000 hour TBO. Get a comparison quote for
insurance, how much you really save once all the firewall forward is done,
etc.
This is the process I went through to look at alternative engines.
Carl Froehlich
RV-8A (O-360, AFP injection, dual Lightspeed ignitions)
Vienna, VA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Whitaker" <rmwhitaker(at)lanl.gov>
Subject: RV-List: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value
>
> I'm approaching the point where I need to start thinking about
> an engine for my RV-9 project. Up to this point, I've been blissfully
building
> away, but now, this engine thing is starting to bug me. We've all heard
> about the Eggenfellner Subaru. There are some good arguments
> to go with this engine over a tried and true 0-320 Lyc.
>
> My biggest hesitation with regard to the Subaru is the potential
> hit one might take when it comes time to sell (if it ever does come)
> the airplane. I understand that it is a very speculative issue, but I'll
> throw it out there anyway.
>
> In your opinion, how would the demand for and/or the value of an RV-9
> equipped with the Eggenfellner Subaru compare to one equipped
> with a new Lycoming or Aerosport Power overhauled Lyc?
>
> Rob
> RV-9 - Starting fuse.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SportAV8R(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Comant CI-122C |
In a message dated 01/24/2002 8:10:14 AM Eastern Standard Time,
kbalch1(at)mediaone.net writes:
> I'm using a belly-mounted bent-whip comm antenna. Should I use a
> doubler inside the fuselage skin to help support the antenna's weight?
> It doesn't seem to weigh very much...
>
> --
I would, and did. It's not the weight so much as the air loads, repetitive
flexing, etc.
In a few months, I will be removing my belly antennas - if the wingtip
antenna design in AeroElectric Connection's appendix works out well in actual
field tests. I am already almost finished relocating my transponder whip
antenna from the middle of the belly skin to the dead space behind the aft
bulkhead of the right wheel pant (2-piece). Funny how, once you finish these
airplanes, you can't leave them alone. Little tweaks here and there to eke
out more speed, range, or comfort become a second obsession.
-BB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
Robert Whitaker wrote:
>
>
> I'm approaching the point where I need to start thinking about
> an engine for my RV-9 project. Up to this point, I've been blissfully building
> away, but now, this engine thing is starting to bug me. We've all heard
> about the Eggenfellner Subaru. There are some good arguments
> to go with this engine over a tried and true 0-320 Lyc.
>
> My biggest hesitation with regard to the Subaru is the potential
> hit one might take when it comes time to sell (if it ever does come)
> the airplane. I understand that it is a very speculative issue, but I'll
> throw it out there anyway.
>
> In your opinion, how would the demand for and/or the value of an RV-9
> equipped with the Eggenfellner Subaru compare to one equipped
> with a new Lycoming or Aerosport Power overhauled Lyc?
>
> Rob
> RV-9 - Starting fuse.
Rob, I have never seen a Subaru powered RV on the market, but I suspect
one would sell for about half what a Lyc powered plane would
bring......if you could sell it. This is not necessarily a reflection on
the quality of the Subaru powerplant, but its very limited acceptance as
an airplane engine.
The exception would be if you had a buyer who specifically wanted the
Subaru power.
Sam Buchanan (RV-6, 342 hrs)
"The RV Journal" http://thervjournal.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
a local guy bought a subaru powered rv 6a for 35k. this was a real nice
looking rv6 as if it were equiped with a lyc. it would have sold for about
70-75k. he bought the plane and removed the subaru engine and installed a lyc
0320. he is just about to fly now. not sure why he removed the subaru.
scott
tampa
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Andy <winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
My guess; If you install any auto-conversion engine you will immediate eliminate
90% of your market from even considering your plane. It will simply be dismissed
out of hand, no questions asked.
That doesn't mean that you might not get lucky and have your first caller as one
of the other 10%.
Andy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Perry" <eperry(at)san.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Micro Encoder Eprom and Accessory |
I have upgraded my u-encoder to version 11.2 and have an unused version
10.02 eprom and crystal if anybody wants to upgrade an older unit to use
Fahrenheit and use your GPS info serial port plus more. Anyway it sells
for $35 and if you are interested the first one to respond gets it for
shipping cost. Sounds like a good deal to me.
Ed Perry
eperry(at)san.rr.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | RV7 Flap Assembly Question |
Part CM-4MS 1/4 X 1/4 Rod End Bearing, as called for on page 14 of plans
does not seem to be in my list of materials. Can anyone advise what
bearing is used?
Larry in Indiana
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Zilik" <zilik(at)bewellnet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Primer Question... |
KAKlewin(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> For those using the Primer Sol. sold by spruce and the like (Parker B2DX62) I
> have a few questions as I cant seem to find the instructions (Im sure they
> are piled under something important =) ).
>
> 1. The two wires out the back are both black. Touching to a 9V battery it
> seems to open the valve both ways. Does it matter which is the positive and
> which is the ground?
NO
>
>
> 2. The two ports are labled 1 and 2. Which is in and which is out?
The valve is simply opened or closed so either direction will work. I used 1
for in, and 2 for out.
Gary Zilik (Gotta love that 4 port electric primer)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cole, Ed" <Ed_Cole(at)maximhq.com> |
| Subject: | Primer Solenoid Orientation |
This is from the archives.
Ed Cole
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Harrill [SMTP:KHarrill(at)osa.state.sc.us]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 11:29 AM
> To: 'Rv-list(at)matronics.com'
> Subject: RV-List: Primer Solenoid Orientation
>
>
> Mike Thompson & others,
>
> Today I talked with a tech support person with Skinner Valve Division of
> Parker about our solenoid valves. The inlet is marked "2" and the outlet
> is
> marked "1" as previously reported. It turns out that this is important.
> The fuel pressure is assisting with the sealing of the valve when "2" is
> the
> inlet, not so if "1" is used as the inlet.
>
> Therefore, it is quite possible that if the valve is plumbed wrong we
> could
> experience reduced fuel pressure under some conditions. This would most
> likely manifest itself as an increased tendency to vapor lock. (my guess,
> not that of the tech rep.)
>
> I will be replumbing mine. I hope this helps!
>
>
> Ken Harrill
> RV-6
> Columbia, SC
>
>
>
>
>
Maxim Home Page:
http://www.maxim-ic.com
Products Page:
http://www.maxim-ic.com/MaximProducts/products.htm
New Products:
http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/new_products.cfm
Datasheets:
http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/l_datasheet3.cfm
The information contained in this message is confidential
and may be legally privileged. The message is intended
solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination,
or reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Craig Hiers" <craig_rv4(at)alltel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
Another thought, what if you have an engine problem
while away from home?
You can "almost" always find Lycoming trained
people at an airport.
To quote a popular movie " Who you gonna call" when
your Subaru has a problem.
I do not have a problem with auto engines, but they
do present a lot of obstacles you won't find with a
Lycoming/Continental.
Craig Hiers
Moultrie,GA.
>
> Robert Whitaker wrote:
> >
> >
> > I'm approaching the point where I need to start thinking about
> > an engine for my RV-9 project. Up to this point, I've been blissfully
building
> > away, but now, this engine thing is starting to bug me. We've all heard
> > about the Eggenfellner Subaru. There are some good arguments
> > to go with this engine over a tried and true 0-320 Lyc.
> >
> > My biggest hesitation with regard to the Subaru is the potential
> > hit one might take when it comes time to sell (if it ever does come)
> > the airplane. I understand that it is a very speculative issue, but I'll
> > throw it out there anyway.
> >
> > In your opinion, how would the demand for and/or the value of an RV-9
> > equipped with the Eggenfellner Subaru compare to one equipped
> > with a new Lycoming or Aerosport Power overhauled Lyc?
> >
> > Rob
> > RV-9 - Starting fuse.
>
>
> Rob, I have never seen a Subaru powered RV on the market, but I suspect
> one would sell for about half what a Lyc powered plane would
> bring......if you could sell it. This is not necessarily a reflection on
> the quality of the Subaru powerplant, but its very limited acceptance as
> an airplane engine.
>
> The exception would be if you had a buyer who specifically wanted the
> Subaru power.
>
> Sam Buchanan (RV-6, 342 hrs)
> "The RV Journal" http://thervjournal.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Planejoel(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Avionics Prices |
Yup
We'll not plugging Van's, but I bought my King
radio/transponder/encoder/entercom prewired from Vans, still works fine after
several years.
Joe
RV6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Avionics Prices |
> Just thought I'd pass along my recent experience with avionics
> buying.
> Ken Brooks - RV8QB
Ken,
Be sure to check with John Stark at
http://www.mindspring.com/~jts7/starkav.html (706) 321-1008
jts7(at)mindspring.com
Tell him I sent you. He had the best prices on an Apollo Full Stack and
great service.
Ross Mickey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ross Schlotthauer <rdschlotthauer(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV7 Flap Assembly Question |
Larry,
I ran in to the same problem. The rod end bearing
comes with the fuse kit. The platenut it goes into
however is needed before you can close the flap. The
platenuts were not in my kit and I had to have Vans
send them to me. I guess they found the problem some
time after my wing kit and corrected it. You may or
may not have the platenut.
Best Regards,
Ross Schlotthauer
RV7 wings
--- LarryRobertHelming wrote:
>
>
> Part CM-4MS 1/4 X 1/4 Rod End Bearing, as called for
> on page 14 of plans
> does not seem to be in my list of materials. Can
> anyone advise what
> bearing is used?
>
> Larry in Indiana
>
>
>
> Contributions of
> any other form
>
> latest messages.
> other List members.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glenn & Judi" <dirtyrottenscoundrels(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Operating Limitations |
Hi,
What is the MINIMUM in operating limitations that must be on board an RV-6
to fulfil the requirements of the FARs in regard to on board documentation
(AROW)?
Thanks,
Glenn Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris Santschi" <rv8pilot(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Weight of Oregon Aero seats |
Listers:
I saw some old postings in the archives about the weight of Oregon Aero
seats. I'm thinking about these for my 8 and never found a definite answer
to the question, so I called them. The weight of the front seat with fabric
is 5lbs, and the rear is 8lbs. Hopes this helps.
Chris S. 80881 Installing fuel lines..
Festus,MO.
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: burglar outcome |
dear listers,
delete now if you don't care about my misfortune. today i had the pleasure of
watching the judge sentence my burglar to 5 years, no early release for the
attempted burglary of my shop.the victums impact statement was what made the
judge throw the book at him.( that and his 15 prior burglary convictions) he
would not tell me where my stuff went, as that would have been like pleading
guilty to the previous burglaries. they did not take his shoe prints as
evidence like i wanted to tie him into the burglaries. unfortunatly, since he
got so much time, there will be no restitution. but between Nation's Air
builders risk policy, which by the way paid 100% of a new elevator already
built from vans, and they paid for the parts and my labor and paint for the
other elevator. had vans had both elevators in stock, they would have paid
for both. zero deductable. i am very pleased with the service John Helms on
this list and David at Pheonix Aviation. My business insurance paid 6k out of
9k for tools that had gotten stolen.depreciation was the reason, and 1k
deductable.
anyway, i finished my left elevator last night and ready to paint it again,
so i'm not looking back.
see you guys at the 1st annual RV ( Fun N-D Sun ).
scott
tampa
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Curt Reimer" <cgreimer(at)mb.sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Wing Fairing Attachment Screws - how to countersink? |
Hi,
I'm trying to figure out where and how to install the nutplates for the
screws that hold down the aluminum wing fairings. I've checked the archives
on this one, and I know that a lot of builders, like me, didn't think about
attaching their wing fairings (and lower skin carry-through) until after the
wings were built and riveted.
I can drill out every second rivet and use that as my screw location, but
its too late to dimple to accept a countersunk screw on the fairing. I'm
pretty sure dimpling three thicknesses of aluminum at once isn't going to
work. I could use round head screws instead of flush to hold down the
fairing, but that's ugly and draggy. So how did everyone else do it? Drill
out enough of the wing skin rivets so you can separate them to get a dimpler
in there to dimple the skins and ribs individually, or did you just
countersink through the three thicknesses of metal?
thanks,
Curt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Curt Reimer" <cgreimer(at)mb.sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical wire route over -6 spar |
As far as I know this is the standard method and also approved and
recommended by Van's. It worked well for me although I would recommend
securing the wires (and trim cable) from possible interference with the
elevator pushrod, as everything is in close proximity.
Curt
> I am just about at the same place myself. My solution was to drill a hole
in
> the RH wing spar web similar in size and location to the (manual) trim
cable
> hole in the LH spar web. Plus a corresponding hole in the F-604. I put in
a
> snap-in bushing and a piece of 1/2 in. cable sheathing to contain the 6 or
> so conductors I need to run through there.
>
> Objection to this is that the wings will be hard to install remove. The
> answer (picked up from some where on this list) is to cut out the material
> in the web from the hole (trim cable or wiring) to the inboard end of the
> web. The cable/wiring can remain in place with this arrangement as the
wings
> slide in or out.
>
> Can't say if this is standard procedure or otherwise.
>
> Jim Oke
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Busick" <panamared1(at)brier.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
The biggest concern I would have is when you can not get the engine to run
correctly, who do you turn to. You will not find an A&P at most airports
that know anything about a Subaru. I have trouble getting some A&Ps to work
on
my Lycoming certified engine just because it is on an experimental.
But, as long as you understand that you will be the only person to work on
the engine, and you have the knowledge, tools and capability to do anything
that needs to be done on the Subaru, and you really know the engine inside
and out, go for it.
At my airport, the slogan from all of the A&Ps is "You are the Builder"
meaning, they expect me to do all engine work and to do it correctly, for
the most part even if they know something is wrong, they hesitate to say
anything and go their way mumbling, "afterall he is the builder?!"
As for me, the Lycoming has been a real handful, even with the help of
about 4 different A&Ps. All but one of them missed an intake gasket that
was half way installed, causing the engine to run very poorly.
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
I think you would find that your resale value is significantly lower than with
a Lycoming. Even if you find someone who specifically wants a Subaru, he's
going to know you're selling to a smaller market.
The answer, of course, is not to worry about it. If you decide to sell one
day, and if, by then, the lustre hasn't worn off Lycomings completely, then you
just yank the Subaru out to use in your next plane and install a Lycoming in
the one you're selling.
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Kilpatrick <aeronut58(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Operating Limitations |
Glenn:
My understanding is that you should have the original
operating limitations document given to you by the FAA
or DAR. In my case that's 3 typewritten pages.
George
N888GK
--- Glenn & Judi
wrote:
> --> > Hi,
> What is the MINIMUM in operating limitations that
> must be on board an RV-6
> to fulfil the requirements of the FARs in regard to
> on board documentation
> >
> Contributions of
> any other form
>
> latest messages.
> other List members.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Micro Encoder Eprom and Accessory |
In a message dated 1/24/2002 9:41:03 AM Pacific Standard Time,
eperry(at)san.rr.com writes:
> I have upgraded my u-encoder to version 11.2 and have an unused version
> 10.02 eprom and crystal if anybody wants to upgrade an older unit to use
> Fahrenheit and use your GPS info serial port plus more. Anyway it sells
> for $35 and if you are interested the first one to respond gets it for
> shipping cost. Sounds like a good deal to me.
>
> Ed Perry
> eperry(at)san.rr.com
>
Hey ED, Talk to me.
Fred (Flintstone) LaForge RV-4 180 cs EAA Tech Counselor in
SO.CAL. ................at Cable..............................
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gert <gert(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: burglar outcome |
Now, correct me if I am wrong here but if you register the kit and
applied an N number, it would have become a federal office rather than a
state office.
ABAYMAN(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> dear listers,
> delete now if you don't care about my misfortune. today i had the pleasure of
> watching the judge sentence my burglar to 5 years, no early release for the
> attempted burglary of my shop.the victums impact statement was what made the
> judge throw the book at him.( that and his 15 prior burglary convictions) he
> would not tell me where my stuff went, as that would have been like pleading
> guilty to the previous burglaries. they did not take his shoe prints as
> evidence like i wanted to tie him into the burglaries. unfortunatly, since he
> got so much time, there will be no restitution. but between Nation's Air
> builders risk policy, which by the way paid 100% of a new elevator already
> built from vans, and they paid for the parts and my labor and paint for the
> other elevator. had vans had both elevators in stock, they would have paid
> for both. zero deductable. i am very pleased with the service John Helms on
> this list and David at Pheonix Aviation. My business insurance paid 6k out of
> 9k for tools that had gotten stolen.depreciation was the reason, and 1k
> deductable.
> anyway, i finished my left elevator last night and ready to paint it again,
> so i'm not looking back.
> see you guys at the 1st annual RV ( Fun N-D Sun ).
> scott
> tampa
>
--
is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Collins <collins(at)pali.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
I don't suppose any of you remember that you are building an
"experimental" aircraft. It might be useful to encourage, or at
least not discourage, someone who might want to try something
different.
Building an airplane isn't all about money, is it? If you value
your time at all, you'd be far ahead with an already built plane,
RV or otherwise.
Let's support the builders who want to experiment. It very well
might benefit you in the long run.
Bob Collins
Sunnyvale CA USA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Micro Encoder Eprom and Accessory |
Ed,
How much did the 11.2 upgrade cost you? What additional features does it
have?
Charlie Kuss
>
>I have upgraded my u-encoder to version 11.2 and have an unused version
>10.02 eprom and crystal if anybody wants to upgrade an older unit to use
>Fahrenheit and use your GPS info serial port plus more. Anyway it sells
>for $35 and if you are interested the first one to respond gets it for
>shipping cost. Sounds like a good deal to me.
>
>Ed Perry
>eperry(at)san.rr.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eustace Bowhay" <ebowhay(at)jetstream.net> |
I would like to thank those that sent me info on the plenum. After
taking a hard look at it and making a list of advantages versus
disadvantages I have decided not to build it. As I don't have a cooling
problem the only advantage I could see was to relieve some pressure on
the cowl and possibly some hinge maintenance.Again I find that it is
hard to improve on Van's designs.
If I may ask for some more info, could someone with a 6A equipped with a
0360 and constant speed Hartzell
and a gyro panel give me the empty weights on the wheels you used to
calculate the c of g.
Eustace Bowhay, Blind Bay. B.C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan DeNeal <rv6apilot(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | An Altimeter Mistake |
I think I bought the Altimeter at least two years ago
from Vans. When it arrived I remember looking at it
and even setting the elevation at 700 ft above sea
level. What I did not realize was that it had
millibars instead of inches for the barimetric
pressure. I looked over the receipt and that's the way
I ordered it. What was I THINKING!!!!
So what can I do with this Altimeter. Can it be
changed or would I be better off and just order
another Altimeter.
Dan DeNeal
rv6a - building the panel
N256GD (reserved)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Haywire" <haywire(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
>
> Another thought, what if you have an engine problem
> while away from home?
>
> You can "almost" always find Lycoming trained
> people at an airport.
Isn't it funny how certified engine guy's are always thinking about where
they're going to find help??
> To quote a popular movie " Who you gonna call" when
> your Subaru has a problem.
I would imagine that Subaru dealers far outnumber Lycoming dealers. Any
auto parts store would also carry most any parts. Competent auto mechanics
also outnumber A&P's. Call-out charge would be far less than an A&P rate
just to look under the cowl. If you did land in a strange town in need of
parts you could get a cab into town, buy your parts, buy dinner, stay in a
fancy hotel, etc.... and still save money.
> > > My biggest hesitation with regard to the Subaru is the potential
> > > hit one might take when it comes time to sell (if it ever does come)
> > > the airplane. I understand that it is a very speculative
> issue, but I'll
> > > throw it out there anyway.
If you are building this plane to sell and build another etc.. then install
a Lyc. If you are building this plane for yourself, then install the engine
that YOU feel is the best. Don't worry about what other people want.
(remember, if they are buying yours, they probably can't/won't do their own
work, so won't understand the reasons for alternative power, and will want
to go with a "proven" engine(old)).
When the time comes that you do want to sell, if attitudes haven't changed
yet, then you can either take the hit or you can put a Lyc in it, and sell
the Sub separately or use in your next project.
If you don't use the engine that you want then you will always wish you
had
instead of catering to others ideas. It's YOUR plane, build it the way YOU
want.
S. Todd Bartrim
13B rotary powered
RV-9 (finish kit)
C-FSTB (reserved)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
Keep in mind that AVEMCO currently is the only insurance company to my
knowledge that will insure an aircraft with an automotive engine. If they
pull the plug, you're on your own.
There is a reason they they call them aircraft engines.
Happy Landings
Bill Mahoney
RV-6 N747W Lycoming O-360
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
Collins wrote:
>
>
> I don't suppose any of you remember that you are building an
> "experimental" aircraft. It might be useful to encourage, or at
> least not discourage, someone who might want to try something
> different.
>
> Building an airplane isn't all about money, is it? If you value
> your time at all, you'd be far ahead with an already built plane,
> RV or otherwise.
>
> Let's support the builders who want to experiment. It very well
> might benefit you in the long run.
>
> Bob Collins
> Sunnyvale CA USA
Well, Bob, now that you brought it up, here is the exact quote from the
original post:
"In your opinion, how would the demand for and/or the value of an RV-9
equipped with the Eggenfellner Subaru compare to one equipped
with a new Lycoming or Aerosport Power overhauled Lyc?"
To this dumb redneck it sounds like the builder has some concerns about
the $$$$$ value of a Subaru-powered airplane. I feel the replies he
received from me and other listers were pretty even-handed and to the
point.
Now, your quote:
"Let's support the builders who want to experiment. It very well might
benefit you in the long run."
Every person who has ever built an RV instead of opting to spend their
flying days in a certificated aircraft has acutely realized, and even
remembers to this day, that we all have "experimented". I think all us
experimenters will "benefit in the long run" if we are truthful and
honest about the observations we have made while researching, building,
and flying our experimental RV's.
Another of your quotes:
"If you value your time at all, you'd be far ahead with an already built
plane, RV or otherwise."
I could not disagree with you more on this one. I value my time dearly,
and the time I spent building my RV-6, and the time I have spent
corresponding with fellow builders has been some of the highest quality
time I have ever enjoyed!
I wish all RV builders well, regardless of the powerplant they wish to
install.
Sam Buchanan (RV-6.........whew......I fell better now.........)
"The RV Journal" http://thervjournal.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Operating Limitations |
My FISDO inspector stressed that I should keep COPIES of all pertinent
documents in the plane at all times. The FAA is notorious for inconstancy
in application of guidelines and regs, so I'm not surprised that some
inspectors call for originals.
Dennis Persyk 6A N600DP 113 hours
----- Original Message -----
From: "George Kilpatrick" <aeronut58(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Operating Limitations
>
> Glenn:
>
> My understanding is that you should have the original
> operating limitations document given to you by the FAA
> or DAR. In my case that's 3 typewritten pages.
>
> George
> N888GK
> --- Glenn & Judi
> wrote:
> > --> > Hi,
> > What is the MINIMUM in operating limitations that
> > must be on board an RV-6
> > to fulfil the requirements of the FARs in regard to
> > on board documentation
> > >
> > Contributions of
> > any other form
> >
> > latest messages.
> > other List members.
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> > http://www.matronics.com/search
> > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George McNutt" <gmcnutt(at)intergate.ca> |
| Subject: | An Altimeter Mistake |
I think I bought the Altimeter at least two years ago
from Vans. When it arrived I remember looking at it
and even setting the elevation at 700 ft above sea
level. What I did not realize was that it had
millibars instead of inches for the barimetric
pressure. I looked over the receipt and that's the way
I ordered it. What was I THINKING!!!!
So what can I do with this Altimeter. Can it be
changed or would I be better off and just order
another Altimeter.
Dan DeNeal
rv6a - building the panel
N256GD (reserved)
Cheapest fix is to put a little conversion chart Mb. to In. on inst. panel
to convert setting when you get the ATIS.
Tower/Ground control should be able to supply altimeter settings in Mb. when
requested, tell them you are getting set for the changeover to Metric.
George McNutt
Langley B.C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: burglar outcome |
Scott: I like the results and your reply. "so i'm not looking back".
Keeping looking foreword, the end is worth it. Terry E. Cole
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | tom sargent <sarg314(at)earthlink.net> |
Eustace:
I'm considering a plenum too. I think the best justification for it is
to reduce the cooling drag. I saw Van comment once that cooling drag
was the largest single source of parasitic drag in the plane. Results
probably depend greatly on the details of the shape of the plenum,
though. Doesn't Sam James claim drag reduction if you use his
fiberglass cooling plenum?
--
Tom Sargent - RV-6A
Eustace Bowhay wrote:
>
> I would like to thank those that sent me info on the plenum. After
> taking a hard look at it and making a list of advantages versus
> disadvantages I have decided not to build it. As I don't have a cooling
> problem the only advantage I could see was to relieve some pressure on
> the cowl and possibly some hinge maintenance.Again I find that it is
> hard to improve on Van's designs.
.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
In a message dated 1/24/2002 7:27:52 PM Pacific Standard Time,
haywire(at)telus.net writes:
> I would imagine that Subaru dealers far outnumber Lycoming dealers. Any
> auto parts store would also carry most any parts. Competent auto mechanics
> also outnumber A&P's. Callout charge would be far less than an A&P rate
> just to look under the cowl.
We couldn't get any mobile auto diagnostic techs out to look at the Suzuki
engines in the P38 replica to save our life when we had trouble with the
original ElectroAir ignitions. Fortunately, tossing them off a cliff and
installing the SDS ignition systems solved the problem.
We were told that an auto mechanic's insurance is limited to his working on
auto engines in autos (airplanes to auto mechanics were as garlic to
werewolves). In short, I wouldn't hold my breath on getting a professional
auto mechanic out to the airport to look at your Subie unless they're your
close friends.
-GV (N1GV)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Gray <douggray(at)ihug.com.au> |
A good question. I thought the objective of the plenum was to permit the air
velocity to drop and the pressure to increase. The larger the plenum the greater
the pressure, and thus better the airflow around the cooling fins due to
increased upper/lower cowl pressure differential(or something like this). I
suspect that the original Van's design may actually perform better than a smaller
al or f/glass plenum.
Fluids and Thermodynamics were never an intuative science to me, perhaps someone
could make more sense of this.
I understand the FAB recovers manifold pressure in this way, but the concept may
not translate to cooling air.
Doug Gray
tom sargent wrote:
>
> Eustace:
> I'm considering a plenum too. I think the best justification for it is
> to reduce the cooling drag. I saw Van comment once that cooling drag
> was the largest single source of parasitic drag in the plane. Results
> probably depend greatly on the details of the shape of the plenum,
> though. Doesn't Sam James claim drag reduction if you use his
> fiberglass cooling plenum?
>
> --
> Tom Sargent - RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary A. Sobek" <rv6flier(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Avionics Prices |
--- Planejoel(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Yup
> We'll not plugging Van's, but I bought my King
> radio/transponder/encoder/entercom prewired from Vans, still works
> fine after
> several years.
>
>
> Joe
>
> RV6A
Joe:
When I did my IFR (GX60, SL30, ACU, CDI) panel upgrade in November, I
purchased all my radios from Van's as they had the best price.
====
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,002.9+ Flying Hours So. CA, USA
http://SoCAL_WVAF.tripod.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Planejoel(at)aol.com |
Eustace
1069LBS
Joe
RV6A
Do not archieve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Helms" <jhelms(at)i1.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
I agree that experimental builders should be supported and encouraged. But,
IMHO there are experimental builders out there who don't fit the
experimental builder profile that you describe (someone who wants a high
performance, 2 seat, aerobatic aircraft that he can resell in a few years
when he moves on to something bigger and better.)
Thus, that person posts here a question to poll those who know, or think
they know...lol. So the encouragement or discouragement obtained here was
asked for by the builder himself. If he didn't want to hear the answer he
shouldn't have asked the question. It sounds to me like the person who
posted the question is concerned about the value he will get out of his
experimental in a few years. I'm sure not all are, though, you're right.
The other issue with the Subaru power plant is the insurance. As it stands
right now, AVEMCO is the only company covering RV's with these or any auto
conversion engines in them. If that stays the same (which I would say is
safe to assume), for the next few years, then the person whom you sell to
has to not only not care if it is a Lyc, but also has to not care about
putting insurance on the aircraft, or paying an exorbitant (sp?) amount for
it.
.02
John "JT" Helms
----- Original Message -----
From: "Collins" <collins(at)pali.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value
I don't suppose any of you remember that you are building an
"experimental" aircraft. It might be useful to encourage, or at
least not discourage, someone who might want to try something
different.
Building an airplane isn't all about money, is it? If you value
your time at all, you'd be far ahead with an already built plane,
RV or otherwise.
Let's support the builders who want to experiment. It very well
might benefit you in the long run.
Bob Collins
Sunnyvale CA USA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
I've gotta jump in here. Ever been to an auto parts store and made the
mistake saying it was for an airplane? The guys go running for the door and
don't want to have anything to do with you. I bet the mechanics would do
the same thing. Granted, if you need an alternator, you can just go buy an
alternator for that engine and put it on, but as soon as you need
"professional" engine help, your are no better off having that engine than a
Lyc. Actually, if you are away from home and don't know any mechanics
personally, I bet you are worse off. Also, how are you going to get to an
autoparts store? What if you are at an aiport that is in the sticks, and
the closest auto parts store is 25 miles away, but there is an aircraft
mechanic on the field?
Now, building to build makes sense. To a degree. Are you NEVER going to
sell your airplane? If not, no big deal. But as soon as you do, are you
willing to lose thousands and thousands of dollars? Talk about a hit,
forget about making money, what about losing a boatload? If it was losing
3-5 thousand, maybe so. But I would say it is safe to say in this market
that you would lose at least $10-20 thousand depending on equipment, etc.
Also, the comment about "putting on a Lyc" before you sell is kind of out
there really. Lyc's are not plug and play with auto engines. Nor are the
cowl, intake, engine mount, engine instruments, etc. It would not be worth
buying a lycoming and all the required parts, rebuilding the cowl, runnin
new instrumentation, etc. Ok, so lets say your time is worth nothing, and
you like to "build" and you decide to do this. You spend 6 to 8 months
trying to get it done so you can sell it. Then you have to do flight
testing again. And, you have all the little bugs to work out with a new
engine installation.
Oh yeah, now you have to sell your high time Subaru aircraft converted
engine that you paid $13,000 that has to be rebuilt.
No thanks.
Paul Besing
RV-6A N197AB Arizona
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
First Flight 22 July 01 with an old Lycoming
Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Haywire" <haywire(at)telus.net>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value
>
>
> >
> > Another thought, what if you have an engine problem
> > while away from home?
> >
> > You can "almost" always find Lycoming trained
> > people at an airport.
>
> Isn't it funny how certified engine guy's are always thinking
about where
> they're going to find help??
>
> > To quote a popular movie " Who you gonna call" when
> > your Subaru has a problem.
>
> I would imagine that Subaru dealers far outnumber Lycoming
dealers. Any
> auto parts store would also carry most any parts. Competent auto mechanics
> also outnumber A&P's. Call-out charge would be far less than an A&P rate
> just to look under the cowl. If you did land in a strange town in need of
> parts you could get a cab into town, buy your parts, buy dinner, stay in a
> fancy hotel, etc.... and still save money.
>
>
> > > > My biggest hesitation with regard to the Subaru is the potential
> > > > hit one might take when it comes time to sell (if it ever does come)
> > > > the airplane. I understand that it is a very speculative
> > issue, but I'll
> > > > throw it out there anyway.
>
> If you are building this plane to sell and build another etc..
then install
> a Lyc. If you are building this plane for yourself, then install the
engine
> that YOU feel is the best. Don't worry about what other people want.
> (remember, if they are buying yours, they probably can't/won't do their
own
> work, so won't understand the reasons for alternative power, and will want
> to go with a "proven" engine(old)).
> When the time comes that you do want to sell, if attitudes haven't
changed
> yet, then you can either take the hit or you can put a Lyc in it, and sell
> the Sub separately or use in your next project.
> If you don't use the engine that you want then you will always
wish you had
> instead of catering to others ideas. It's YOUR plane, build it the way YOU
> want.
>
> S. Todd Bartrim
> 13B rotary powered
> RV-9 (finish kit)
> C-FSTB (reserved)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Newton" <enewton57(at)cableone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
> In a message dated 1/24/2002 7:27:52 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> haywire(at)telus.net writes:
>
>
> We were told that an auto mechanic's insurance is limited to his working
on
> auto engines in autos (airplanes to auto mechanics were as garlic to
> werewolves). In short, I wouldn't hold my breath on getting a
professional
> auto mechanic out to the airport to look at your Subie unless they're your
> close friends.
>
That's correct. This reminds me of when I took my starter off the Lycoming
O-320 to the local electric motor shop for repairs. The owner picked it up
off the counter and looked it over real good then asked "what's it off of?"
I told him its off of a Lycoming O-320 that's mounted in an experimental
aircraft. The shop owner, still holding the starter in his hands, looked my
square in the eye and said "Oh, its off of an airboat right?" At this
point, I hadn't got it yet and thought he hadn't heard me so I repeated it
was off of an airplane. At this point the shop owner set the starter back
down on the counter in front of me and said "so what you are saying is, this
aircraft engine is really mounted in an AIRBOAT, isn't that right?" Well,
my lightening fast mind finally got it and I agreed with him that the
starter was off of an airboat.
He winked and picked up the starter heading into the back shop area with it.
He said over his shoulder, and said "come back in about 2 hours fly-boy."
Happy building all you airboat drivers ;>)
Eric Newton - Long Beach, Mississippi
RV-6A (200 mph airboat that skims along at 10,000 above the water)
www.ericsrv6a.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Donald Mei" <don_mei(at)hotmail.com> |
Now you've done it. I am at work and feel the need to spend some of my
employer's time to write this. As someone who shopped around for his RV
before he built it, I can unequivocally say that a Subaru engine or any
other auto conversion will be worth less, far less than an RV pulled around
by that 300 pound lawn mower engine made by our buddies at Lycoming.
As far as pre-built experimentals go, RVs are a low risk purchase. There
are some 2700 of them flying, with a good safety record, etc. This is why
they are worth something. With that said. If I was building a plane
without an eye towards resale, the Subaru is so far superior it is not
funny. I laugh when I read the old "where are you going to get it fixed"
line. First of all, have any of you owned a Subaru? If you haven't, I'll
fill you in on something. THEY DON'T BREAK. Obviously everything made by
man will eventually break, but the truth is that you are so much less likely
to have problems with a properly engineered and installed (2 key issues)
Subaru conversion that "where am I going to find a mechanic" becomes moot.
We airplane people accept such poor service and performance from our engines
that it is PATHETIC. When was the last time you had to preheat your car.
And don't give me that crap about airplane engine oil being special and the
harsher duty cycle experienced by airplane engines. Don't get me on the
subject of airplane oil either. A good friend who does prototype blending
for castrol told me that airplane engine oil has only recently boldly
stepped into the 1980s.
The OHC subaru design is used in 400 hp turbocharged rally cars with no
internal modifications other than lower compression pistons to allow more
boost. These engines typically last for multiple rally seasons. Often
these cars are driven on the road by their owners during the week.
Internally modified versions of this engine make 600 hp and are very
reliable.
One question, when you go out to your car in the morning, do you think:
"boy, I hope it starts", or " I hope my Battery is adequate, it sure is cold
out here" Could you imagine if Honda recommended that you preheat your
engine whenever it was below 30 deg F.
The duty cycle argument is pathetically lame also. There are several
rebuttals. First, many auto engines have been successfully converted to
marine use where the duty cycle is at least as harsh as in aviation. A high
duty cycle does not require expensive products to meet its obligation for
service. My Briggs and Stratton lawnmower engine is an overhead valve,
magneto fired, air-cooled, carbureted, 4 cycle engine that has been designed
to run at or near full throttle for most of its existance. Does anyone see
the similarity??
Another thought. My car is powered by a `1.8 liter turbocharged,
intercooled engine that makes 180 hp. It has direct ignition (a separate
coil over each spark plug) and fuel injection. I don't need to prime it,
lean it at altitude, pre-heat it or baby it in any way. Its critical
altitude is somewhere around 15000 ft (according to VW tuners) There are
street cars with this engine that make 330 hp with nothing more than a new
chip, larger turbocharger, larger injectors and upgraded exhaust. I just
read an article about one such car that has just rolled over 150,000 miles.
Audi uses an internally identical engine in its TT that in Europe is tuned
to make 265 hp. It has had these modifications since new. I may be stupid,
but at an average speed of 50 mph, that's 3000 hrs. Oh yeah, one more
thing. The entire car that houses this engine can be had for about $18,000.
That includes the car, not just the engine.
The only legitimate argument for the pathetic state of aircraft piston
engine development is that the aircraft piston engine market is a very small
market and can not support millions, maybe even billions of dollars in R&D
that have been necessary to get Auto engines to such a level of
sophistication, performance, reliability, and ease of use.
Who could argue with that. I feel real sorry for those guys who own Cessnas
who are required by law to use these loud, rough, polluting, UNRELIABLE,
heavy pieces of garbage. BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO.
please, please, please no more excuses. Just accept the fact that the
modern aircraft piston engine is garbage and admit that you don't have an
auto conversion in your plane because you don't have the skills and/ or
motivation to engineer an installation and/or are Correctly concerned about
resale.
If you were building an RV to be your last airplane and had access to an
Eggenfeler pre-engineered firewall forward package THERE WOULD BE NO
ARGUMENT to using a Lycosaur.
Oh yeah regarding service. I counted 17 subaru dealers in the small state
of CT. That doesn't even include the huge number of independent subaru
shops out there.
OK I've vented. Thanks.
Don
p.s. With that said, If I were building an RV, I'd put a lycosaur, because
resale is very important to me. Unfortunately, there is probably a Cherokee
140 in my future in the next 10 yrs.
Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Craig Hiers" <craig_rv4(at)alltel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
>
> >
> > Another thought, what if you have an engine problem
> > while away from home?
> >
> > You can "almost" always find Lycoming trained
> > people at an airport.
>
> Isn't it funny how certified engine guy's are always thinking
about where
> they're going to find help??
Funny, maybe. It makes no diffrence what engine you
have, sometimes things go wrong.
I feel, you are in a far better position to get things repaired
with a lycoming (agian, just my opinion).
>
> > To quote a popular movie " Who you gonna call" when
> > your Subaru has a problem.
>
> I would imagine that Subaru dealers far outnumber Lycoming
dealers. Any
> auto parts store would also carry most any parts. Competent auto mechanics
> also outnumber A&P's.
Subaru dealers may outnumber Lycoming dealers, but I
bet you have a hard time getting them to work on your
airplane mounted engine because of liability concerns.
Also, The last time I took a truck to a dealership for
service it was 68$ an hour, the local FBO only charges
60$.
Agian, I do not have a problem with alternative engines,
they just present different obstacles.
Craig Hiers
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Knicholas2(at)aol.com |
How far apart do I need to space two com antennas on the fuse bottom to
prevent interference? Also, how far away from the com antennas should the
transponder antenna be located? (I have nav anatennas in the wing tips)
Kim Nicholas
RV9A
finishing fuse
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Comant CI-122C |
> I'm using a belly-mounted bent-whip comm antenna. Should I use a
> doubler inside the fuselage skin to help support the antenna's weight?
> It doesn't seem to weigh very much...
Yes.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Balch <kbalch1(at)mediaone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Comant CI-122C |
Randy Lervold wrote:
> > I'm using a belly-mounted bent-whip comm antenna. Should I use a
> > doubler inside the fuselage skin to help support the antenna's weight?
> > It doesn't seem to weigh very much...
>
> Yes.
All done & installed (with doubler) yesterday. It even works... :-)
KB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owens, Laird" <Owens(at)aerovironment.com> |
| Subject: | I feel better now.... |
So here I was last night at work writing a pissy response to a listers comments
about alternative engines (sounds almost like were talking about "alternative
lifestyles, the way people line up on a side).
Last thing I said in the post was "I must need to go flying". So I say to myself,
"Self, get your @$$ out to the airport". 1/2 hour later I'm pulling the RV
out of the hangar for a quick night flight.
Here in LA the last couple of days, it been cold (it was colder here than in Kansas
two days ago when I spoke to a friend there) and the winds have been blowing/gusting
out of the North. But the winds had calmed in the afternoon, so I
guessed it would be a good night. So it was perfect timing.
A quick flight out to the coast to refuel at Camarillo (the tanks were a little
low from my last flight in what seems like a month ago). It was one of those
beautiful nights were everything was crystal clear and you could see the lights
of the city for miles and miles. On the way back I pulled the power back and
just cruised........I could feel the stress of work just melting away. Now
this is better than talking to a shrink anytime.
I come back to Whiteman (near Burbank) and proceed to drop in a stinker of a landing.
"I can't put away the airplane after that landing", I say to myself.
So back to the active runway.
So I find myself in the pattern on a dead calm clear night. What a perfect time
to try some stuff I've wanted to do for a while, but never seemed to have time.
I started with some engine out exercises, first with the prop full forward. The
CS prop sure makes the RV drop like a stone without a little power. Had to
add some power to make the runway. That's not good.
What happens if I pull the prop with no power? I've tried this at altitude, and
get a 400 fpm increase in the decent rate, but I've never tried it in the pattern.
WOW, what a difference! It was like I had my old Sensenich fixed pitch prop on
it. It just extended the glide so much. I consistently overshot the landings
and had to adjust my approaches.
One trick I tried that worked well was using the prop as a break when I was a little
high and already had the flaps out and slipping as well. Push the knob
forward and it's comes down even faster. Just one more tool to use for altitude/speed
control.
I've been spoiled by the CS prop and it's breaking effect in the pattern. It just
adds so much flexibility to our RV's, but it really adds to the drag if there
no power being produced. It's also a good lesson for a real emergency.
So, I feel much better, and I've learned something (as well as being night current
for the next 90 days).
Life is good again. Thanks Van.
Laird
RV-6
SoCal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WoodardRod(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV images for Embroidery |
In a message dated 1/24/02 04:43:00 Mountain Standard Time,
winters.d(at)home.net writes:
> Hmm... I suspect you could use a scanner on any RV image, but the trick is
> to get it in a format you need. How do you program the machine? Does it
> use GIFs? JPegs? DXF? There are lot's of programs for file format
> conversion, just have to know what you want.
>
>
Actually, the way I understand things, a standard graphics file of almost any
type is processed (digitized) where instructions are added as to colors,
stitch pattern, size, etc. To those who work with these embroidery machines,
"digitized" has a meaning all its own. I'm plenty capable of scanning things
in on a scanner or taking digital pictures or whatever to get the basic
image. I just don't have access to this sewing "digitizing" software.
Thanks for your help. Best regards,
Rod Woodard
RV-3 in progress
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV images for Embroidery |
| From: | <racker(at)rmci.net> |
>
> or whatever to get the basic image. I just don't have access to this
> sewing "digitizing" software.
The manufacturer of my wife's fancy schmancy embroidery machine sold the
required software seperately. Try contacting the manufacturer of your
machine.
Rob Acker (RV-6).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Luster" <rlluster(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV9 for sale, SOLD |
Listers:
A few days ago, I listed a RV9 for sale at about 49% complete. The kit is no longer
available. The new owner has paid and taken his kit home to Oregon. Building
the RV9 has been one of the most enjoyable events in my 30 years in the aerospace
industry.
I would highly recommend the 9 to anyone who can build a model airplane.
Just a lot more time and fun. Hopefully I will be one of the first to start building
the new RV10 when it becomes available.
Richard Luster
Marysville, Washington
previous RV9 builder
soon to be RV10 builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owens, Laird" <Owens(at)aerovironment.com> |
| Subject: | Bahamas Travel Story |
"socal-rvlist"
(Delete now if you don't want to hear about somebody else having fun with RV's)
My friend Jim Baker from Kansas wrote up the story of the trip that Gary Zilik,
Jim, and I took to the Bahamas last May. It brought back lots of fun memories
reading it.
Jim isn't on the list, so I'm taking the liberty to pass it on.
If you need a shot of RV inspiration and a view of the end goal, see:
http://goodland.ixks.com/~vbaker/bahamas.htm
You can also find it in the travel pages on Doug Reeves excellent site.
Keep pounding those rivets. Someday they'll fly in close formation together!
Laird
RV-6
SoCal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John" <fasching(at)amigo.net> |
| Subject: | iPAQ/Anywhere Map/NavAid Wing Leveler |
Has anyone used Control Vision's Anywhere Map with the Garmin GPS35 package
to feed the Porcine converter and on to a NavAid wing leveler?
I wonder how much trouble 'fishing' out the NMEA 0182 data would be? Anybody
tried this combo?
John at Salida, CO
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | barry pote <barrypote(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
I will be putting together a chevy v6 4.3 with the bowtie aluminum block
shortly. Mr. Crower and I agreed, when I was having him make a cam, that
my RV9a is an 'off road' vehicle!
Barry Pote RV9a fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Duffy" <n174kt(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Emergency Egress/ Parachute |
This was one of the few realistic portions of the "TopGun" movie. The
business of hitting jetwash and getting a burner blowout/compressor stall
was fairly accurate, although in reality it was a rare occurrence. And
you'd really have to be a ham-fist to end up in a flat spin. But, it has
happened.
Thanks for renewing my faith in the movies. Now I can go on believing
everything I see :-)
Sounds like you've got the new prop installed. Bob was pissed that he did a
better job on your spinner than he did on his own :-) How's the Lightspeed
coming?
My canopy frame should be here any minute now via ABF freight.
Unfortunately, the frame cost $152 but the truck freight is $183!!! We're
in the wrong business, and if you doubt it, fly up to Troy, AL and check out
Wiley Sanders' hanger full of ex-military toys.
I should be out flying some this weekend, since I haven't seen the plane in
about a month. Spent a couple weeks in Cleveland since we last typed.
Still no buyers for the RV-8, which means that you and Bob aren't performing
your sales duties properly :-) I don't know where Bob is, but give me a
yell if you want to go out and "play" this weekend.
Rusty
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | Firewall Question #2 |
Steve,
You'll want to prime the aluminum pieces, AND especially the plain steel
braces in the corners. If you leave those untreated, they rust badly---how
do I know?? To many months in a box in a Minnesota summer!
Cheers,
Stein Bruch
RV6, Minneapolis. Finishing
Subject: RV-List: Firewall Question #2
Ok so I won't paint the firewall.
What about the aluminum pieces. Are the majority of builders priming them
either?
Steve
Rv-7A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kevin lane" <n3773(at)attbi.com> |
I am going to attempt a non-stop cross-country flight in my -6A,
Astoria, OR to Kittyhawk, NC, 2100nm. Obviously I need some data on
best mpg speeds, best altitudes and such. Has anyone else tried any of
these with their planes? I have gotten fuel burn down to 5.1 gal/hr
(39-40 degrees advance spark!) at about 125 - 130 kts and 2050-2100rpm
at 8500'. Someone told me that optimum altitude would be where full
throttle would yield desired rpm. Unfortunately 2050-2100 seems to be
up around 15,000' and I'm not wild about the idea of attempting an 18hr
flight while on oxygen the whole time, although I could find some good
tailwinds up there. My attempts to e-mail Jon Johansen have gone
unanswered. I haven;t tried any flights with the plane over gross as it
would be at takeoff and the next couple of hours. Jon says that his
plane (which takes off WAY over gross) doesn't have that much greater
take-off roll.
I would also like to hear opinions about having the ability to
quickly dump fuel. I guess Johansen doesn't really have that
capability. I will be flying with 18 gals behind me and 45+ gals as a
"passenger". Plumbing a quick drain would involve a lot of work I would
guess. I realize that I am accepting a lot of risk with this flight and
I won't be flying a 6G plane(not to mention straight and level, well, at
least until Ohio perhaps!).
Has anyone found an altitude alert that doesn't cost $800?
Kevin Lane
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Subaru / RV-7/9 Resale Value |
Speaking from personal experience of having installed a Mazda Rotary engine
in an RV-6A, I can suggest that an Auto Engine is NOT the ticket for most
folks. There is only one company today who is offering a FWF Rotary package
for the RV and when installed it will compare in cost to a Lycoming. I
understand that a Subaru package is also available (but, don't know the
cost).
Yes, if you roll your own installation, it can be done cheaper (or it can
cost you more - depending), but more importantly than cost or resale value,
you need to consider whether your "comfort level" or "Risk Profile" is right
for a roll-you-own auto installation. Even with the ones being offered for
sale as FWF packages and certainly for the roll-you-own, you as the
developer, are assuming all (or certainly most) of the development,
installation, and operational risk for something that may has not been
proven with anywhere near the 1000s of hours of research, development and
testing that certified aircraft engines have behind them. That does not
mean the Auto package are less reliable or safe than an aircraft engine
necessarily, but they certain don't have that kind of development and
testing (for aircraft use) behind them..
So if you think you may want to sell your pride and joy in the future, then
there is no doubt in my mine that the auto powered aircraft will probably
bring less than one with a Certified Lycoming. Actually, I would be
dumbfounded if it did not! I mean If I had paid $20+K for a new aircraft
engine and it did not add any more value than a $3000-$10,000 auto
conversion, I would be PiXXed. Yes, you might get lucky and find that
unusually person who would give you a price comparable to a Lycoming powered
RV - but don't hold your breath.
In addition to resale value, here are a few things that I think one needs to
consider about an auto conversion.
If you get frustrated by having to analyze, synthesize a design, reanalyze
it for failure modes, decide what approach(es) to chose to mitigate a
possible failure in that subsystem and then do it all over again a number
of times then stick with a Lycoming for your RV.
If you are not the type that likes to experiment and tinker with engines
then by all means the Lycoming is your best choice.
If you are not prepared to do your own maintenance work on the engine
including a teardown and rebuild (as well as haul certain hard to find parts
with you) - or have an experience friend who will do it, then a Lycoming is
again your best choice.
If you believe that having a certified engine makes it a safer engine for
you then again -look to a Lycoming- don't ignore your comfort zone.
If you believe that a certified engine will insure cheaper and easier to get
insurance then again the Lycoming is probably your best bet
HOWEVER, After my experience with the Mazda Rotary engine, I can tell you I
would not feel comfortable flying behind any engine with pistons. Yes, I
have flown most of my time behind Lycomings and have nothing against them.
I think for a piston engine they are a great aicraft engine. But personally
not having to worry about crankshafts that break, cylinder heads that crack
or fly off, connecting rods or bolts that let go, camshafts that lose lobes
or valves components that get swallowed makes me personally feel more
comfortable behind the Mazda Rotary engine.
My personal view is I enjoy the challenge and thrill of working out all the
problems with installing a non-aircraft engine in my RV-6A. But, I would
say for most - that keeping the "Experimental" restricted to the airframe is
probably the way to go.
My 0.02$ worth.
Ed Anderson
Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Sipp" <rsipp(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Constant speed props (was feel good) |
On 1/25/02 Laird wrote:
Like you I continue to be intrigued with how much flexibility and fun the
constant speed prop adds.
One minor downside to using low pitch settings late on final is the
possibility of a last minute surprise wave off and the possibility of
forgetting the prop as you shove the throttle in.
I am trying to develope a "last minute" final memorized check to be used at
say 200-300 agl that would include prop forward.
Dick Sipp
N250DS
> One trick I tried that worked well was using the prop as a break when I
was a little high and already had the flaps out and slipping as well. Push
the knob forward and it's comes down even faster. Just one more tool to use
for altitude/speed control.
>
> I've been spoiled by the CS prop and it's breaking effect in the pattern.
It just adds so much flexibility to our RV's, but it really adds to the drag
if there no power being produced. It's also a good lesson for a real
emergency.
>
> So, I feel much better, and I've learned something (as well as being night
current for the next 90 days).
>
> Life is good again. Thanks Van.
>
> Laird
> RV-6
> SoCal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "TERRY BENZER" <TERRYBENZER(at)prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Elevator servo installation |
Does anyone have a picture of the elevator trim srvo installed or mounted in
a rv-6 or
rv-8? Would like to see one before I start cutting the Z-supports
Thanks Terry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Nellis" <mike(at)bmnellis.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Constant speed props (was feel good) |
Dick, I re- read Lairds message and I don't think he was advocating the use
of low pitch settings late on final. During my complex training and the
several hundred hours after that I've flown my variable pitch Stinson, I've
always used full pitch whenever on final. Prior to pulling power for my
turn to base I usually go to full pitch. If, for some reason, I don't
remember this then I catch it on my final "GUMPS" check on final. I don't
think you want to using a combination of pitch and throttle to control
decent rate on final.
I fly by final approach speed by the numbers (RPM/MP settings). If I was to
try and use prop pitch to control decent that would make it all but
impossible to have a consistent RPM/MP setting. Obviously if you need to go
around quickly you don't have to think whether or not the prop is "in" or
not and you don't want to be giving it full throttle without the prop
screwed in. For those not familiar, it's like trying to accelerate a car
going 20 mph in 4th or 5th gear. Ping, Ping and go nowhere fast.
Just my opinion.
But I'm curious, since your flying a CS prop already, why would you want to
fly any part of the final approach with anything other than full pitch?
Mike Nellis - http://bmnellis.com
Georgetown, TX
Waiting to start Fuselage
RV6 N699BM Reserved
1947 Stinson 108-2 N9666K
>
> Like you I continue to be intrigued with how much flexibility and fun the
> constant speed prop adds.
>
> One minor downside to using low pitch settings late on final is the
> possibility of a last minute surprise wave off and the possibility of
> forgetting the prop as you shove the throttle in.
>
> I am trying to develope a "last minute" final memorized check to be used
at
> say 200-300 agl that would include prop forward.
>
> Dick Sipp
> N250DS
>
>
> > One trick I tried that worked well was using the prop as a break when I
> was a little high and already had the flaps out and slipping as well.
Push
> the knob forward and it's comes down even faster. Just one more tool to
use
> for altitude/speed control.
> >
> > I've been spoiled by the CS prop and it's breaking effect in the
pattern.
> It just adds so much flexibility to our RV's, but it really adds to the
drag
> if there no power being produced. It's also a good lesson for a real
> emergency.
> >
> > So, I feel much better, and I've learned something (as well as being
night
> current for the next 90 days).
> >
> > Life is good again. Thanks Van.
January 20, 2002 - January 25, 2002
RV-Archive.digest.vol-mf