RV-Archive.digest.vol-ml

February 28, 2002 - March 06, 2002



      1. Mixture too lean
      2. Improper grade of fuel
      3. Air leaks in induction system
      4. High carburetor air inlet temperature
      5. Magnetos improperly timed
      6. Damaged cylinder baffles, fins, or restrictions in airflow
      7. Incorrect valve operation or clearance
      8. Restrictions in exhaust system
      9. Temperature gauge defective
      10. Thermocouple wires too close to exhaust manifold
      11. Spark retarded
      12. Pre-ignition through carbon or defective spark plugs
      13. Warped valves
      14. Loose valve seats and guides
      15. Worn valve guides 
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      Engine Won=92t Stop When Switch is Turned Off (4 points)
      
      1. Magneto ground wires loose or broken
      2. Faulty magneto switch
      3. Engine excessively hot
      4. Incandescent carbon in cylinders
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      Carburetor Leaks Fuel (6 points)
      
      1. Leaky or stuck float
      2. Excessive fuel supply pressure
      3. Poor seating of needle valve
      4. Worn float fulcrum pin
      5. Improper float level
      6. Loose needle valve seat
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      Engine "Spits Back" in Carburetor (13 points)
      
      1. Cold engine or cold mixture
      2. Lean mixture
      3. Air leaks in manifold
      4. Air leaks around intake valve stems
      5. Weak valve springs
      6. Sticking valves
      7. Spark plug wires crossed or incorrectly connected
      8. Ignition out of time or retarded
      9. Camshaft out of time
      10. Overheating
      11. Carbon
      12. Improper grade of fuel
      13. Water in gasoline
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      Engine Misses Intermittently (13 points)
      
      1. Incorrect mixture
      2. Improper grade of fuel
      3. Water in fuel
      4. Air leaks in induction system
      5. Slow valve action
      6. Defective magnetos or ignition harness
      7. Distributor points or contact breaker points dirty or pitted
      8. Carburetor air heater defective
      9. High oil temperature
      10. Defective spark plugs
      11. Improper timing
      12. Carburetor icing
      13. Magneto ground wire swinging and periodically grounding
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      Engine Misses Regularly (6 points)
      
      1. Fouled spark plug
      2. Defective spark plug
      3. Broken or grounded spark plug wire
      4. Improper valve clearance
      5. Low compression on one or more cylinders
      6. Damaged magneto distributor head
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      Scattering Misfire (12 points)
      
      1. Lean mixture
      2. Rich mixture
      3. Water in gasoline
      4. Air leak in intake manifold
      5. Intake valve holding open
      6. Sticky valve guides
      7. Weak valve springs
      8. Excessive breaker point clearance
      9. Weak breaker arm spring
      10. Excessive rotor contact gap clearance
      11. Moisture on distributor block
      12. Faulty spark
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      Single Cylinder Miss at High Speed (6 points)
      
      1. Short circuited spark plugs
      2. Short circuited spark plug wire
      3. Short circuited distributor block
      4. Spark plug gap too wide
      5. Weak exhaust valve springs
      6. Insufficient valve tappet clearance
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      Single Cylinder Miss at Low Speed (7 points)
      
      1. Short circuited spark plug
      2. Short circuited spark plug wire
      3. Short circuited distributor block
      4. Wrong spark plug gap
      5. Weak compression
      6. Air leak around intake valve stem
      7. Weak exhaust valve spring
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      Causes of Pre-Ignition (5 points)
      
      1. Carbon
      2. Overheating
      3. Excessively rich mixture
      4. Ignition out of time
      5. Spark plug wires crossed or connected to wrong cylinder
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      Causes of Excessive Carbon Deposit (5 points)
      
      1. Engine flooded with oil
      2. Worn piston rings
      3. Inferior quality of engine oil
      4. Rich mixture
      5. Engine operated for long period without cleaning carbon
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      Magneto Fails to Deliver any Spark (4 points)
      
      1. Primary circuit grounded or open
      2. Secondary circuit grounded or open
      3. Ground wire or switch grounded
      4. Condenser circuit open or shorted, or condenser punctured
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      Crankcase Fills with Oil (Dry-sump System) (6 points)
      
      1. Scavenger pump has lost its prime
      2. Scavenger pump screen stopped up
      3. Scavenger suction or pressure lines stopped up
      4. Air leak in suction side of scavenger pump
      5. Broken scavenger pump drive
      6. Scavenger pump badly worn
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      Engine Pumps Oil (10 points)
      
      1. Piston rings poor fit in piston grooves
      2. Piston rings poor fit in cylinder
      3. Broken piston rings
      4. Scored cylinder walls
      5. Excessive piston clearance
      6. Excessive oil pressure
      7. Thin oil
      8. Improper grade of oil
      9. Excessive bearing clearance
      10. Faulty scavenger pump
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      Faulty Spark (19 points)
      
      1. Breaker point clearance incorrect
      2. Breaker points burned or dirty
      3. Collector brush worn out or dirty
      4. Distributor brush worn out or dirty
      5. Distributor segments/rotor contact corroded or burnt
      6. Collector ring short circuited or dirty
      7. Distributor rotor short circuited or dirty
      8. Incorrect E-gap
      9. Primary winding short circuited or dirty
      10. Secondary winding short circuited or burned out
      11. Condenser short circuited or punctured
      12. Magnets weak or crossed
      13. Loose or corroded connection within the magneto
      14. Ground wire or switch short circuited
      15. Moisture within the magneto 16. Armature touches pole pieces
      17. Foreign material collected on armature
      18. Defective spark plugs
      19. Carbon tracks resulting from flashover caused by moisture.
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      Mixture Analysis by Exhaust Flame (4 points)
      
      1. Rich Mixture: Long deep blue flame with red tip, black smoke.
      2. Lean Mixture: Short irregular light blue flame with yellow tip.
      3. Proper Mixture: Quick blue flame without yellow tip.
      4. Oil pumping is shown by blue exhaust smoke.
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      A "Too-Rich Mixture" may be caused by: (6 points)
      
      1. High fuel pressure
      2. Oil in cylinders
      3. Carburetor float valve seating improperly
      4. Float leaking air
      5. Jet gaskets of improper thickness or out of shape
      6. Float level too high (these troubles would be responsible for the 
      carburetor flooding and a rich mixture, particularly at low speeds)
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      A "Too-Lean Mixture" may be caused by: (9 points)
      
      1. Insufficient fuel in tank
      2. Partially clogged fuel line
      3. Insufficient air pressure in pressure fuel tank
      4. Air vent on fuel tank clogged
      5. Fuel filter or jets clogged
      6. Carburetor float level too low
      7. Water in carburetor or system
      8. Air leaks in induction system
      9. Sticking valves
      Return to top - Table of Contents
      
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Huft" <rv8tor(at)lazy8.net>
Subject: The engine debate
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Thanks for the heads-up, Ed. I listen to them every sat am while I am a building on the airplane. For the paranoid among us, they are safely to the right of the rest of NPR. It should be fun. john rv8 half done. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ewinne(at)aol.com rv7-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RV-List: The engine debate This is for people who: 1) want to reopen the auto vs Lycoming engine debate, or 2) have a bit of a sense of humor: This weekend on Car-Talk (you know, the National Public Radio program) The guys take a phone call from me regarding the subaru engine in a home built aircraft. Needless to say, they had a lot of fun with the topic, and were NO help at all! For some reason, they seemed to be of the impression that those who build aircraft in their garages are less than normal. Listen in. We recorded the segment on Wednesday, and they don't guarantee it'll get on (they "mix and match" the calls to get the best mix of humor and time limit potential) but they are already asking me for pix to post on their web site. Ed Winne RV 9A Palmyra PA wings/QB fuse ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Subject: Re: When to Wire Wings
From: cecilth(at)juno.com
Basically I really just need to know if I should worry about this > now, or just leave the > top skin off and worry about it much later on. > I would suggest you put the top skins on first and bottom skins last. The last skins on are the hardest, and thats where mistakes can mess up the finish. No one will see the bottom skins. Cecil Hatfield RV6A writes: > > Okay, my wings are drilled, deburred, dimpled, and skins are ready > to rivet. I intend > to position lights / strobes in the wing tips. > > Can someone describe what they did to get electrical out to the > tips? I'm looking for > a fairly detailed description. Did you drill extra holes in the > ribs or run through one of > the existing lightening holes? Did you use grommets? Run a piece > of PVC? > > Basically I really just need to know if I should worry about this > now, or just leave the > top skin off and worry about it much later on. > > Thanks. > > -Joe > > > > > messages. > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2002
From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: blue mountain avionics
Randy and Kyle, I am awaiting the arrival of my EFIS/Lite, hopefully sometime in March. You can rest assured there will be a report as soon as the unit is installed and flying. :-) As Kyle stated, the Blue Mtn units are very impressive, and Greg Richter strikes me as a feller who has all his dogs barking. It is impossible to walk away from a demo of the units without being convinced that conventional gyros are experiencing their last days. Sam Buchanan (RV-6) "The RV Journal" http://thervjournal.com ================== Randy Lervold wrote: > > > > I'm waiting to hear from Sam Buchanan on how the EFIS lite works out, > because > > that might be a good investment for me from a safety and utility > perspective > > - I'd like to have a gyro panel, but have not installed gyros simply > because > > of cost, weight, and wear issues associated with acro flying. The EFIS > lite > > still isn't cheap, but it is light and shouldn't suffer acro related gyro > > failure. > > Sam, many of us would really appreciate hearing your usual thorough and > informative review of this product. I just re-did my panel and specifically > left a path for me to install the EFIS/lite. > > Thanks in advance! > > Randy Lervold > www.rv-8.com > Home Wing VAF > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Lenleg(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Subject: Looking for Louis Smith
Sorry to take this to the list but is Louis Smith on line - seems his email address has changed? Lou? Len Leggette RV-8A N901LL (res) Greensboro, N.C. Hanger # 23 at INT ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2002
From: "Owens, Laird" <Owens(at)aerovironment.com>
Subject: AVWeb Picture of the Week
"socal-rvlist" AVweb's Picture Of The Week... *** PREVIOUS RESULTS *** We received over 40 pictures last week. Congratulations to this week's winner, David Webber, of Lancaster, Calif. David's picture shows a Van's RV-6 flying off into the sunset after takeoff from Montgomery Field (MYF), San Diego. The airplane was built and flown by Gary Sobek. Great picture, David! Your AVweb prize is on the way. To check out the winning picture, or to enter next week's contest, go to <http://www.avweb.com/potw>. Coratulations David, Great picture. Laird ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ollie Washburn" <skybolt-aviator(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: ipack and anywhere map
Date: Feb 28, 2002
I am very happy with the system.I live in Fl and the heat has't affected it, but i do shade the ipaq when airplane is parked.With the new Sentenial gps i only have one wire going to it which is the external power cable. They have a good discusion board at www.anywheremapwx.com/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi Ollie&Lorene Washburn RV6-A,N795LW,@ 97FL Loves Airpark ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ollie Washburn" <skybolt-aviator(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: ipack and anywhere map
Date: Feb 28, 2002
YOU can declutter the screen to show what YOU want.--Ollie ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steve Hurlbut" <hurlbut_steve(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: When to Wire Wings
Date: Feb 28, 2002
I enlarged the tooling holes to 5/16 and inserted plastic gromets from Wick's Aircraft. If I had to do it again I would make the hole a bit larger (room for wing tip landings lights + nav lights), say 1/2 and then insert plastic grommets. Steve RV-7A >From: cecilth(at)juno.com >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV-List: When to Wire Wings >Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 06:44:48 -0800 > > > Basically I really just need to know if I should worry about this > > now, or just leave the > > top skin off and worry about it much later on. > > > >I would suggest you put the top skins on first and bottom skins last. The >last skins on are the hardest, and thats where mistakes can mess up the >finish. No one will see the bottom skins. >Cecil Hatfield >RV6A > > >writes: > > > > Okay, my wings are drilled, deburred, dimpled, and skins are ready > > to rivet. I intend > > to position lights / strobes in the wing tips. > > > > Can someone describe what they did to get electrical out to the > > tips? I'm looking for > > a fairly detailed description. Did you drill extra holes in the > > ribs or run through one of > > the existing lightening holes? Did you use grommets? Run a piece > > of PVC? > > > > Basically I really just need to know if I should worry about this > > now, or just leave the > > top skin off and worry about it much later on. > > > > Thanks. > > > > -Joe > > > > > > > > > > messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Berryhill" <berryhill1911(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: ipack and anywhere map
Date: Feb 28, 2002
I called Control Vision the other day and asked them about the difference between the 3700 and the 3800 series ipaqs. They thought that the 3800 has a better interface on the bottom and would reduce some of the plug-coming-loose problems that the 3700 has. Is anyone using the Anywhere Map with a 3800 series ipaq that can confirm this? Dave Berryhill > >I am very happy with the system.I live in Fl and the heat has't affected >it, >but i do shade the ipaq when airplane is parked.With the new Sentenial gps >i >only have one wire going to it which is the external power cable. > They have a good discusion board at >www.anywheremapwx.com/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi > Ollie&Lorene Washburn ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Subject: Re: When to Wire Wings
From: cecilth(at)juno.com
Basically I really just need to know if I should worry about this > now, or just leave the > top skin off and worry about it much later on. > I would suggest you put the top skins on first and bottom skins last. The last skins on are the hardest, and thats where mistakes can mess up the finish. No one will see the bottom skins. Cecil Hatfield RV6A writes: > > Okay, my wings are drilled, deburred, dimpled, and skins are ready > to rivet. I intend > to position lights / strobes in the wing tips. > > Can someone describe what they did to get electrical out to the > tips? I'm looking for > a fairly detailed description. Did you drill extra holes in the > ribs or run through one of > the existing lightening holes? Did you use grommets? Run a piece > of PVC? > > Basically I really just need to know if I should worry about this > now, or just leave the > top skin off and worry about it much later on. > > Thanks. > > -Joe > > > > > messages. > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Richard D. Fogerson" <rickf(at)velocitus.net>
Subject: Brakes - another perspective, heel stirrups
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Since everyone else has offered their opinion, I feel obligated to offer mine. Most of my time in the Air Force was is F-4's, 68 to 72. I put heel stirrups on my 6 because I liked them in the F-4. Pulling G's, dog fighting, landing, taxing, whatever, your feet were always in the right position on the pedals. You did NOT want to land with any brakes on!!!! Because your feet position was fixed with the stirrup, you were not figiting or pushing against the pedals to keep them from slipping off and getting out of position. Relaxed feet mean no inadvertant brake application. Never had a problem in the F-4, never had a problem in my 6. I can send a picture to a website if someone is interested. Rick Fogerson RV3 wings Boise, ID ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HCRV6(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Subject: Another Brake Question
When I installed one of Van's parking brake valves low on the firewall (-6) right in front of the left side rudder/brake pedals, I had a problem in that the inlet holes in the valve are too close together to install 90 degree AN fittings (at least I couldn't figure out how to get them in). Without the ANs I could not use the high pressure hoses that Van's supplies. I called Van's and one of the guys, I think it was Gus, suggested that I use the high pressure plastic tubing and brass elbow fittings that they supply for use on the right side. He referenced years of success with this solution on the early RV-4s. Now I am seeing references to leaking plastic lines and problems with the early -4s in this area and it sounds like I'd better figure out a better way. Can any of you guys who have used Van's parking brake valve tell me how you were able to connect it (mine is in a location that requires elbow fittings for clearance from the rudder pedals)? Also, does anybody know if their really was a frequent problem on the early -4s with the plastic/brass fittings? Harry Crosby Pleasanton, California RV-6, finish kit stuff ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Subject: Fix for plastic brake line leaks??
From: czechsix(at)juno.com
Guys, I'm about to install the plastic brake lines between the reservoir and master cylinders in my -8A, and have been watching the thread about leaks. Another local -8 builder had leaks in his system too. I've been thinking about possible options to fix it, and the recent RVator article came to mind...about flaring the plastic tubes for pitot/static connections to the instruments. Why wouldn't this work for the brake system too? I'm thinking this might be the way to go...get an AN Tee fitting to screw into the reservoir, put a couple right angle AN fittings on the master cylinders, flare each end of the plastic lines and install using the regular aluminum AN hardware just like the aluminum fuel vents and brake lines. Anyone see a reason why this wouldn't work? Seems like you'd retain the advantage of light weight / low cost that the plastic tube offers, and being able to see the fluid/bubbles when bleeding the system...but hopefully create a much more robust attachment t! hat should never leak. Since you all are such an opinionated bunch, I'd like to hear what you think about doing it this way : ) --Mark Navratil Cedar Rapids, Iowa RV-8A finish kit stuff... ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "C J Heitman" <cjh(at)execpc.com>
Subject: Another Brake Question
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Harry, You can see how I dealt with this here: http://www.execpc.com/~cjh/brake_valve.html Even with the fittings shown, I had to grind a few thousandths off one of the fittings to be able to install it. Chris Heitman Dousman WI RV-9A N94ME (reserved) engine baffles -----Original Message----- When I installed one of Van's parking brake valves low on the firewall (-6) right in front of the left side rudder/brake pedals, I had a problem in that the inlet holes in the valve are too close together to install 90 degree AN fittings (at least I couldn't figure out how to get them in). ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2002
From: Chris Good <chrisjgood(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: 6A tilting slider mod
Hey guys. Anyone know anything about the 6A with the "tilting slider" canopy mod, shown in these photos? http://www.rv.supermatrix.com/slide-tilt.html It looks like the builder has modified the front wheel assemblies to tilt at that angle, then also must have notched the rear track to allow it to release, & finally added a support to hold it tipped up. This would certainly make baggage loading a whole lot easier. In particular, the folding bikes we use are a bit of a struggle to load & unload, but they would be no problem with the canopy tipped! I'd like to locate the builder, or at least find some further details. Regards, Chris Good, http://www.rv.supermatrix.com West Bend, WI RV-6A N86CG, 328 hrs ==== Regards, Chris Good, http://www.rv.supermatrix.com West Bend, WI RV-6A N86CG, 250 hrs http://greetings.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2002
From: "Gary Zilik" <zilik(at)bewellnet.com>
Subject: Re: Another Brake Question
HCRV6(at)aol.com wrote: > > > When I installed one of Van's parking brake valves low on the firewall (-6) > right in front of the left side rudder/brake pedals, I had a problem in that > the inlet holes in the valve are too close together to install 90 degree AN > fittings (at least I couldn't figure out how to get them in). Without the > ANs I could not use the high pressure hoses that Van's supplies. 45 degree fittings work well for this application and allow the van's supplied black hose assembly to be attached directly to the parking brake valve. > Also, does > anybody know if their really was a frequent problem on the early -4s with the > plastic/brass fittings? As I recall some of the early 4's used the plastic line all the way to the calipers. Lines would melt, fluid would catch fire.... Needless to say not a good design. I use the plastic lines as supplied by van for the pax side brakes and have no leaks or any other problems but then I have only been flying for 300 hrs and two years. The pax brakes get used quite a bit as myself and my wife's instructor both fly from the right seat. Gary Zilik ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gordon or Marge Comfort" <gcomfo(at)tc3net.com>
Subject: Re: Fix for plastic brake line leaks??
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Subject: RV-List: Fix for plastic brake line leaks?? > > Guys, I'm about to install the plastic brake lines between the reservoir and master cylinders in my -8A, and have been watching the thread about leaks. Another local -8 builder had leaks in his system too. I've been thinking about possible options to fix it, and the recent RVator article came to mind...about flaring the plastic tubes for pitot/static connections to the instruments. Why wouldn't this work for the brake system too? I'm thinking this might be the way to go...get an AN Tee fitting to screw into the reservoir, put a couple right angle AN fittings on the master cylinders, flare each end of the plastic lines and install using the regular aluminum AN hardware just like the aluminum fuel vents and brake lines. Anyone see a reason why this wouldn't work? Seems like you'd retain the advantage of light weight / low cost that the plastic tube offers, and being able to see the fluid/bubbles when bleeding the system...but hopefully create a much more robust attachment! > --Mark Navratil Mark: My attempts to flare plastic tubing have come to grief when the flared portion of the tubing creeps out from under the tapered portion of the nut. My -4 has all plastic lines and I replaced the high pressure lines last year because there had been some chafing with the wheel fairing. They all use brass compression fittings. On the reservoir side I had a plastic tee with plastic compression elements on the running portion of the tee. The threaded portion of the tee in the reservoir tended to seep. This was replaced with a brass tee and the 1/8 taper pipe thread does not leak. However, one side of the tee/compression nut did leak and what I found was that the compression sleeve had been pushed on a bit too far from the end of the tube upon assembly and the ferrule was prevented from seating in the fitting. The combination of the insert thimble and the tube itself was sufficiently strong to keep the thing from seating. None of the rest of the system has leaked and I have had no trouble at all at the wheels. I do tend not to overheat the brakes however. Gordon Comfort N363GC ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Subject: mount garmin 195 in rv4
From: "Glenn Bridges" <robwil(at)nlamerica.com>
AN RV 4 STOPPED AT ST SIMONS ISLAND ENROUTE TO THE KEYS RECENTLY. HE HAD MOUNTED HIS GARMIN 195 TO THE RIGHT FRONT CANOPY FRAME, BY CUTTING AND ADAPTING THE GARMIN MOUNT SO ;IT COULD BE BOLTED THROUGH THE FRAME. I FAILED TO SKETCH THE CUT OFF LOCATION ON THE MOUNT. I BELIEVE THE RV4 WAS FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE. IF ANY ONE KNOWS THE PLANE AND HOW I COULD GET IN TOUCH, PLEASE PUT IT ON THE LIST ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Norman" <jnorman(at)intermapsystems.com>
Subject: Masking tape on Canopy
Date: Feb 28, 2002
OK, my turn for some advice... Getting ready for paint... For the past 1.5 years I've had a piece of plastic over my windshield/canopy which was held all around the edges very nicely with masking tape. OOOOOOOps... Well it has protected the canopy very nicely from scratches, however, the masking tape has dried out completely and it cannot be taken off. It is dried, brittle and a problem. Obviously I can't scrape it with a razor blade (at least not too much) because it will scratch the acrylic. So... I'm sure I can't be the first person who has made this mistake... what solvent combined with what type of mechanical methods are best to remove this dried-on, falling apart, and hopelessly stuck on masking tape without ruining the acrylic? Please do archive so somebody doesn't put masking tape on the canopy and leave it there for any length of time. jim Tampa ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ABAYMAN(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Subject: Re: Masking tape on Canopy
________________________________________________________________________________
From: ABAYMAN(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Subject: Re: Masking tape on Canopy
hey jim i had a similar problem, what i did was to apply a fresh piece of duct tape, (much better grip than masking tape ) over the masking tape and use a heat gun to remove it. don't get the canopy too hot ! just enough so the duct tape will pull the masking tape off. good luck, if you wait till sat, i'll bring my heat gun over and a roll of duct tape. and by all means please stay out from under fast moving automobiles ;-) that leaves you with what ? 8 lives left? scott tampa ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2002
From: Will Cretsinger <cretsinger(at)ticnet.com>
Subject: Re: RV6 Tilt Canopy - Cabin Frame
David, I wrote some instructions for tilt canopy 'bout a hundred years ago so they are probably of no value now. You might look at them anyway...I think they are still at <http://www.flash.net/~gila> Will Cretsinger, Arlington, Texas -6A tilt canopy David Roseblade wrote: > > > Listers, > > I am about to begin building the cabin frame, and need some assistance. > > The manual says that these parts are very close to design dimensions. By > laying the F-631's on a table with the nominal dimensions of 42 1/8" wide > and 17 7/8" high I find a gap of approx 1/4" between the two halves at the > top - is this normal ? if so has anyone filled the front gap with a small > bonded strip. > > The sides are a little bit wavy, it is necessary to adjust these to > perfection or is a little waviness acceptable. Unfortunately I do not have > access to any aircraft to look at to see what others have done. > > I intend on using screws to hold the canopy in place, has anyone any > experience in this, ie is it OK to put a thread in the frame or insert > rivnuts or similar? > > I would appreciate any help/hints and tips in this area. > > Regards > > David Roseblade > RV6 Fuselage, > Dubai, UAE > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2002
From: Will Cretsinger <cretsinger(at)ticnet.com>
Subject: Brake Pedals for Tall Pilots
Posted for Billy Wilson I think for tall, long-legged guys, the brake pedals should be tilted forward relative to the rudder pedals. The reason tilting the pedals might be a good idea for a tall person is that our legs are bent too much when sitting. When I sit in mine, my knees are bent, my heels are on the floor, and my feet are inclined at about a 15 degree angle forward of vertical. Shorter legged pilots' feet would be more vertical. Everybody would need to set them to their own leg/foot geometry, sitting in the plane with as much seat and brake hardware in place as possible. This is more work than putting a spacer on the rudder pedal, but it retains some leg room. Also, when I positioned my pedal assembly, I allowed too much room for brake pedal/rudder pedal motion. The rudder pedal travel can be accounted for via the plans, but I didn't know how far the brake pedals would move since they were not filled with fluid at the time. Since then, I find that if the brakes are properly bled, the brake pedal motion is practically nothing. Billy Wilson Senior Engineering Specialist Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control - Dallas Work: 972-603-9719 > Fax: 972-603-9275 > email: billy.wilson(at)lmco.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Subject: Hodges Volatility Tester
Listers, I've recently started testing autogas in my RV-6A, and I wanted to order the Hodges Volatility Tester that Petersen Aviation sells for testing autogas. Unfortunately, Mr Petersen says he can't get the syringes for his tester, and is not producting any testers now. So, I'm interested in cobbling together something myself for now. Can any of you who already owns a Hodges tester tell me the vacuume readings that correspond to the "safe" zone? From a photo I have, it appears that the safe zone is 5.5 psi or more of vacuume, but I can't be sure. Thanks, Tim Lewis ****** Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA) RV-6A N47TD - First Flight 18 Dec 99 http://www.geocities.com/timrv6a ****** ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: Masking tape on Canopy
Date: Feb 28, 2002
I would think an ordinary hair dryer would be better so one doesn't over heat the canopy and distort it. 300 degrees can come very quick and it has happened to even the best like Lyle Hefel. Cy Galley Editor, EAA Safety Programs cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org ----- Original Message ----- From: <ABAYMAN(at)aol.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: Masking tape on Canopy hey jim i had a similar problem, what i did was to apply a fresh piece of duct tape, (much better grip than masking tape ) over the masking tape and use a heat gun to remove it. don't get the canopy too hot ! just enough so the duct tape will pull the masking tape off. good luck, if you wait till sat, i'll bring my heat gun over and a roll of duct tape. and by all means please stay out from under fast moving automobiles ;-) that leaves you with what ? 8 lives left? scott tampa ________________________________________________________________________________
From: KBoatri144(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Subject: Re: Masking tape on Canopy
In a message dated 2/28/02 5:59:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, jnorman(at)intermapsystems.com writes: << OK, my turn for some advice... Getting ready for paint... For the past 1.5 years I've had a piece of plastic over my windshield/canopy which was held all around the edges very nicely with masking tape. OOOOOOOps... Well it has protected the canopy very nicely from scratches, however, the masking tape has dried out completely and it cannot be taken off. It is dried, brittle and a problem. Obviously I can't scrape it with a razor blade (at least not too much) because it will scratch the acrylic. So... I'm sure I can't be the first person who has made this mistake... what solvent combined with what type of mechanical methods are best to remove this dried-on, falling apart, and hopelessly stuck on masking tape without ruining the acrylic? Please do archive so somebody doesn't put masking tape on the canopy and leave it there for any length of time. jim Tampa >> Jim, I used a citrus oil based cleaner to solve this exact problem. I don't remember the name of the cleaner (goof-off? Goo-gone?), but it worked well. I found it at Home Depot or Lowe's. Make sure and get the citrus based product. There is a product with a similar name which is petrochemical based. Using that would be bad... Kyle Boatright 0-320/Aymar Demuth RV-6 Slider Kennesaw, GA http://www.angelfire.com/my/rv6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Subject: AOA PROPRIETARY SYSTEMS
From: "Glenn Bridges" <robwil(at)nlamerica.com>
I BOUGHT AND INSTALLED JIM FRANTZ'S PROPRIETARY SYSTEMS ANGLE OF ATTACK SYSTEM WITH THE PORTS INSTALLED PROPERLY IN THE OUTER WING AREA AND DISCUSSED THE CALIBRATION WITH HIM ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS. I GUESS I'M TOO OLD TO FOOL WITH COMPUTERS, CALIBRATIONS, ETC. I PLAN TO JUST LISTEN TO THE WIND IN THE WIRES AND TRY TO KEEP FROM STALLING. DOES ANYONE WANT THE CPU UNIT. I CAN'T GET TO THE PORTS. THEY CAN BE ORDERED FROM JIM. WILL ACCEPT ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ABAYMAN(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Subject: Re: Masking tape on Canopy
the original formula goof off is not got for plexi , in fact i'm reading a can of it right now and it warns against using on plexi and plastic and recommends to use their citus type goof off 2. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gaylen Lerohl" <lerohl@rea-alp.com>
Subject: Re: Fix for plastic brake line leaks??
Date: Feb 28, 2002
I had a leak on one of the compression fittings on the brake actuator. Retightening it a couple of times to the proper torque with my finely tuned sense of feel didn't cure it. With nothing left to loose, I tightened until it stopped leaking. It took much more torque than I was comfortable applying but it did stop leaking. Gaylen Lerohl Alexandria, MN RV8 - Installing Mazda Rotary ----- Original Message ----- From: <czechsix(at)juno.com> Subject: RV-List: Fix for plastic brake line leaks?? > > Guys, I'm about to install the plastic brake lines between the reservoir and master cylinders in my -8A, and have been watching the thread about leaks. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JTAnon(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Subject: Canopy Tint
I'm about to order my finish kit for an RV7A (slider). Already checked the archives, but does anyone have any additional thoughts to share regarding tinted vs clear canopy? Does tint impair visibility? Is there a big difference in cockpit temps? Does it look significantly cooler? My machine will get some (not a lot) of night use. I live in the Northeast where we get quite a few hazy days. John McDonnell (RV7A - All important choices made, looking for $$$ to implement same) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Randy Lervold" <randy@rv-8.com>
Subject: Re: Masking tape on Canopy
Date: Feb 28, 2002
> Getting ready for paint... For the past 1.5 years I've had a piece of > plastic over my windshield/canopy which was held all around the edges very > nicely with masking tape. OOOOOOOps... Well it has protected the canopy > very nicely from scratches, however, the masking tape has dried out > completely and it cannot be taken off. It is dried, brittle and a problem. > > Obviously I can't scrape it with a razor blade (at least not too much) > because it will scratch the acrylic. > > So... I'm sure I can't be the first person who has made this mistake... what > solvent combined with what type of mechanical methods are best to remove > this dried-on, falling apart, and hopelessly stuck on masking tape without > ruining the acrylic? > > Please do archive so somebody doesn't put masking tape on the canopy and > leave it there for any length of time. > > jim > Tampa Jim, Been there, done that, it's the pits. I can't remember the name, but one of those citrus cleaners took it right off with no damage to the canopy. Randy Lervold RV-8, Vancouver, WA www.rv-8.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2002
From: Richard Scott <rscott(at)cascadeaccess.com>
Subject: Re: Masking tape on Canopy
I understand that soaking in paint thinner (mineral spirits, not lacquer thinner) softens dried masking tape. Don't know what it would do to your canopy, though. Richard Scott At 02:54 PM 2/28/02, you wrote: > >OK, my turn for some advice... > >Getting ready for paint... For the past 1.5 years I've had a piece of >plastic over my windshield/canopy which was held all around the edges very >nicely with masking tape. OOOOOOOps... Well it has protected the canopy >very nicely from scratches, however, the masking tape has dried out >completely and it cannot be taken off. It is dried, brittle and a problem. > >Obviously I can't scrape it with a razor blade (at least not too much) >because it will scratch the acrylic. > >So... I'm sure I can't be the first person who has made this mistake... what >solvent combined with what type of mechanical methods are best to remove >this dried-on, falling apart, and hopelessly stuck on masking tape without >ruining the acrylic? > >Please do archive so somebody doesn't put masking tape on the canopy and >leave it there for any length of time. > >jim >Tampa > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us>
Subject: Brakes
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Guys, Actually one doesn't have much adjustment at the upper longeron without also changing rudder cable link length.The pivot for the two pedal assembly tubes must be about roughly 1.25 inches apart. So if the pedals don't strike an isosceles triangle straight down then they will pivot kinda strange from right foot to left foot. There is some room for adjustment here, but not much. I personally much prefer the way my pedals are now that I've gotten used to it, and the mod is very easy to install after its flying as its not a redesign, but really an add-on. So no matter how/when one does it. Certainly during taxi tests you should confirm that the aircraft can be safely operated through ground/air transition. The large hose on the lower tube would work just as well for the 6's with the overhead pedals. I will add that I originally found this problem on the 8 and didn't think it was happening to my 6 until I did a real soft cross wind wheel landing and realized that one wheel was chirping a lot more than it shoulda been on touch down. When the pedal was extended my toes were putting on brake, and it was hard to avoid while trying to control all the levers and knobs and switches and whistles and bells and crap in my cockpit. ;{) W <<<<<<<<<< I guess someone has to stick up for Van's design. I installed my brakes per the plans, with the plastic tubing from the reservoir and from the right side pedals to the left (high pressure tubing). Since I started flying my Six I have never had a lick of trouble of any kind with the brakes - no leaks - no inadvertent application. The geometry of the pedals is exactly per the plans but remember that you can adjust the angle of the brake pedal by changing the mounting position of the pivot blocks on the longeron. This does NOT change the distance of the rudder pedals from the seat - the only way you can do that is to change the length of the cables or the links. If you haven't flown yet, don't redesign the brakes - spend your time finishing the airplane. If you have a problem later, which is very unlikely, deal with it then. Dave -6 So Cal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: Masking tape on Canopy
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Get a rubber razor blade from an auto body supply store. It is a tool made for removing stickers and such without scratching glass or window tint. 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: "Jim Norman" <jnorman(at)intermapsystems.com> Subject: RV-List: Masking tape on Canopy > > OK, my turn for some advice... > > Getting ready for paint... For the past 1.5 years I've had a piece of > plastic over my windshield/canopy which was held all around the edges very > nicely with masking tape. OOOOOOOps... Well it has protected the canopy > very nicely from scratches, however, the masking tape has dried out > completely and it cannot be taken off. It is dried, brittle and a problem. > > Obviously I can't scrape it with a razor blade (at least not too much) > because it will scratch the acrylic. > > So... I'm sure I can't be the first person who has made this mistake... what > solvent combined with what type of mechanical methods are best to remove > this dried-on, falling apart, and hopelessly stuck on masking tape without > ruining the acrylic? > > Please do archive so somebody doesn't put masking tape on the canopy and > leave it there for any length of time. > > jim > Tampa > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: Fix for plastic brake line leaks??
Date: Feb 28, 2002
For the brakes (and everything else) I have used steel braided hose. If you were only using it for the brakes, it won't cost you that much. Maybe $50 or so in fittings and hose. 70 hours on mine and no leaks. It is a much more secure material in my opinion. I started putting in the plastic and after about 5 minutes threw it in the trash and bought the steel stuff. 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: "Gordon or Marge Comfort" <gcomfo(at)tc3net.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: Fix for plastic brake line leaks?? > > > Subject: RV-List: Fix for plastic brake line leaks?? > > > > > > Guys, I'm about to install the plastic brake lines between the reservoir > and master cylinders in my -8A, and have been watching the thread about > leaks. Another local -8 builder had leaks in his system too. I've been > thinking about possible options to fix it, and the recent RVator article > came to mind...about flaring the plastic tubes for pitot/static connections > to the instruments. Why wouldn't this work for the brake system too? I'm > thinking this might be the way to go...get an AN Tee fitting to screw into > the reservoir, put a couple right angle AN fittings on the master cylinders, > flare each end of the plastic lines and install using the regular aluminum > AN hardware just like the aluminum fuel vents and brake lines. Anyone see a > reason why this wouldn't work? Seems like you'd retain the advantage of > light weight / low cost that the plastic tube offers, and being able to see > the fluid/bubbles when bleeding the system...but hopefully create a much > more robust attachment! > > --Mark Navratil > > Mark: My attempts to flare plastic tubing have come to grief when the > flared portion of the tubing creeps out from under the tapered portion of > the nut. My -4 has all plastic lines and I replaced the high pressure lines > last year because there had been some chafing with the wheel fairing. They > all use brass compression fittings. On the reservoir side I had a plastic > tee with plastic compression elements on the running portion of the tee. > The threaded portion of the tee in the reservoir tended to seep. This was > replaced with a brass tee and the 1/8 taper pipe thread does not leak. > However, one side of the tee/compression nut did leak and what I found was > that the compression sleeve had been pushed on a bit too far from the end of > the tube upon assembly and the ferrule was prevented from seating in the > fitting. The combination of the insert thimble and the tube itself was > sufficiently strong to keep the thing from seating. None of the rest of the > system has leaked and I have had no trouble at all at the wheels. I do tend > not to overheat the brakes however. > > Gordon Comfort > N363GC > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: When to install baffles
Date: Feb 28, 2002
You need to have the cowl done before the baffles, to get the curvature of the baffles to match the cowl. So, you need to have the engine on to do the cowl. Therefore, you need to wait to do the baffles when you have the engine on. Trust me, waiting is just fine for doing the baffles, as they are a major pain. 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: <Knicholas2(at)aol.com> Subject: RV-List: When to install baffles > > Is it best/easiest to install the engine baffles while the engine in on the > stand or should I wait until it is bolted to the mounts? > > So many questions.....so little time.... > > Kim Nicholas > RV9 > Seattle,WA > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Nancy and Walter Shipley" <wshipley(at)esper.com>
Subject: Masking tape on canopy
Date: Feb 28, 2002
A friend of mine who retired from Amaco oil company recommended I try charcoal lighter fluid to remove masking tape residue from plexi. I tried it and it works great. Walt Shipley RV-8A N314TS ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2002
From: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Masking tape on Canopy
Jim, Use Goo Gone. It is a citrus based solvent which works extremely well and is harmless to plastics. I've used it on numerous pieces of clear plastic and Plexiglass. It's competitor Goof Off is really bad news on Plexiglass. However, Goof Off has now come out with a new product which is also citrus based. The original (bad) Goof Off comes in a metal can and smells like lighter fluid. The new (good) Goof Off comes in an orange plastic bottle with a pump spray top. My advice is to use the Goo Gone. It works the fastest. You can find it at K Mart in the housewares area, next to the floor wax. Home Depot carries it as well. You will find it there in the paint section, next to the aerosol spray paints. Soak the tape with Goo Gone for 5 minutes and the tape will lift right off. I've removed 4 year old tape with it before. Really easy and no danger of damage. I've posted on this product before. It's in the achieves. Charlie Kuss RV-8A fuselage Boca Raton, Fl. > >OK, my turn for some advice... > >Getting ready for paint... For the past 1.5 years I've had a piece of >plastic over my windshield/canopy which was held all around the edges very >nicely with masking tape. OOOOOOOps... Well it has protected the canopy >very nicely from scratches, however, the masking tape has dried out >completely and it cannot be taken off. It is dried, brittle and a problem. > >Obviously I can't scrape it with a razor blade (at least not too much) >because it will scratch the acrylic. > >So... I'm sure I can't be the first person who has made this mistake... what >solvent combined with what type of mechanical methods are best to remove >this dried-on, falling apart, and hopelessly stuck on masking tape without >ruining the acrylic? > >Please do archive so somebody doesn't put masking tape on the canopy and >leave it there for any length of time. > >jim >Tampa > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike Nellis" <mike(at)bmnellis.com>
Subject: Re: Masking tape on Canopy
Date: Feb 28, 2002
You are going to think I'm crazy but you might try this. In the restaurant business it's not uncommon for people to post things on stainless with scotch tape or other types of tape for long periods of time. The way we get the stuff off without scraping the stainless is with ...... get this Mayonnaise. That's right, mayonnaise. Take a glob and smear it on the area and let it set for a few (5) minutes then rub it off. You may have to repeat this step once or twice. I figure if I can eat the stuff it should be safe for acrylic but there are no guarantees. Mike Nellis - http://bmnellis.com Georgetown, TX Waiting to start Fuselage RV6 N699BM Reserved 1947 Stinson 108-2 N9666K ----- Original Message ----- From: <ABAYMAN(at)aol.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: Masking tape on Canopy > > hey jim > i had a similar problem, what i did was to apply a fresh piece of duct tape, > (much better grip than masking tape ) over the masking tape and use a heat > gun to remove it. don't get the canopy too hot ! just enough so the duct tape > will pull the masking tape off. > good luck, if you wait till sat, i'll bring my heat gun over and a roll of > duct tape. > > and by all means please stay out from under fast moving automobiles ;-) > that leaves you with what ? 8 lives left? > > scott > tampa > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jerry Calvert" <rv6(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Fix for plastic brake line leaks??
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Paul, Where did you get your braided hose? Same stuff as can be purchased from Summit or Earls? Jerry Calvert Edmond Ok-6 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: Fix for plastic brake line leaks?? > > For the brakes (and everything else) I have used steel braided hose. If you > were only using it for the brakes, it won't cost you that much. Maybe $50 > or so in fittings and hose. 70 hours on mine and no leaks. It is a much > more secure material in my opinion. I started putting in the plastic and > after about 5 minutes threw it in the trash and bought the steel stuff. > > > 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: "Gordon or Marge Comfort" <gcomfo(at)tc3net.com> > To: > Subject: Re: RV-List: Fix for plastic brake line leaks?? > > > > > > > > > Subject: RV-List: Fix for plastic brake line leaks?? > > > > > > > > > > Guys, I'm about to install the plastic brake lines between the reservoir > > and master cylinders in my -8A, and have been watching the thread about > > leaks. Another local -8 builder had leaks in his system too. I've been > > thinking about possible options to fix it, and the recent RVator article > > came to mind...about flaring the plastic tubes for pitot/static > connections > > to the instruments. Why wouldn't this work for the brake system too? I'm > > thinking this might be the way to go...get an AN Tee fitting to screw into > > the reservoir, put a couple right angle AN fittings on the master > cylinders, > > flare each end of the plastic lines and install using the regular aluminum > > AN hardware just like the aluminum fuel vents and brake lines. Anyone see > a > > reason why this wouldn't work? Seems like you'd retain the advantage of > > light weight / low cost that the plastic tube offers, and being able to > see > > the fluid/bubbles when bleeding the system...but hopefully create a much > > more robust attachment! > > > --Mark Navratil > > > > Mark: My attempts to flare plastic tubing have come to grief when the > > flared portion of the tubing creeps out from under the tapered portion of > > the nut. My -4 has all plastic lines and I replaced the high pressure > lines > > last year because there had been some chafing with the wheel fairing. > They > > all use brass compression fittings. On the reservoir side I had a plastic > > tee with plastic compression elements on the running portion of the tee. > > The threaded portion of the tee in the reservoir tended to seep. This was > > replaced with a brass tee and the 1/8 taper pipe thread does not leak. > > However, one side of the tee/compression nut did leak and what I found was > > that the compression sleeve had been pushed on a bit too far from the end > of > > the tube upon assembly and the ferrule was prevented from seating in the > > fitting. The combination of the insert thimble and the tube itself was > > sufficiently strong to keep the thing from seating. None of the rest of > the > > system has leaked and I have had no trouble at all at the wheels. I do > tend > > not to overheat the brakes however. > > > > Gordon Comfort > > N363GC > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David White" <dwhite17(at)columbus.rr.com>
Subject: Re: 6A tilting slider mod
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Chris: The designer is Rich Meske. I know Rich has plans that he'll send you for about $25.00. I'll forward your e-mail to him. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Good" <chrisjgood(at)yahoo.com> Subject: RV-List: 6A tilting slider mod > > Hey guys. > > Anyone know anything about the 6A with the "tilting slider" canopy mod, shown > in these photos? > > http://www.rv.supermatrix.com/slide-tilt.html > > It looks like the builder has modified the front wheel assemblies to tilt at > that angle, then also must have notched the rear track to allow it to release, > & finally added a support to hold it tipped up. This would certainly make > baggage loading a whole lot easier. In particular, the folding bikes we use > are a bit of a struggle to load & unload, but they would be no problem with the > canopy tipped! > > I'd like to locate the builder, or at least find some further details. > > Regards, > > Chris Good, http://www.rv.supermatrix.com > West Bend, WI > RV-6A N86CG, 328 hrs > > > ==== > Regards, > > Chris Good, http://www.rv.supermatrix.com > West Bend, WI > RV-6A N86CG, 250 hrs > > http://greetings.yahoo.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com>
Subject: AOA PROPRIETARY SYSTEMS
Date: Feb 28, 2002
I'm interested. Is it the sport of the pro model? How much do you want? - Larry Bowen Larry(at)BowenAero.com http://BowenAero.com > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Glenn Bridges > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 6:57 PM > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: AOA PROPRIETARY SYSTEMS > > > > I BOUGHT AND INSTALLED JIM FRANTZ'S PROPRIETARY SYSTEMS ANGLE > OF ATTACK SYSTEM WITH THE PORTS INSTALLED PROPERLY IN THE > OUTER WING AREA AND DISCUSSED THE CALIBRATION WITH HIM ON > NUMEROUS OCCASIONS. I GUESS I'M TOO OLD TO FOOL WITH > COMPUTERS, CALIBRATIONS, ETC. I PLAN TO JUST LISTEN TO THE > WIND IN THE WIRES AND TRY TO KEEP FROM STALLING. DOES ANYONE > WANT THE CPU UNIT. I CAN'T GET TO THE PORTS. THEY CAN BE > 478-275-0200 > > > ========== > ========== > ========== > ========== > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Starn" <jhstarn(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Masking tape on Canopy
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Thanks Mike, I'm going to use your mayonnaise idea on two "NO STEP" signs printed on masking tape and put on the flaps. An old boot camp trick worked well on the well worn plumbing "chrome" fixtures. A-1 Steak Sauce. Couldn't use Brasso etc so we had due. A-1 worked great and polished the "brass" to a bright and lasting shine. (OK, I was in boot camp at Lackland in '57 and they were build pre-WWII). Hey Gummi we just may be able to get that stuff off. HA, HA, 8 ) (Guess who put that stuff on in the first place) KABONG ----- Original Message ----- From: Mike Nellis <mike(at)bmnellis.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: Masking tape on Canopy > You are going to think I'm crazy but you might try this> Mayonnaise. That's right, mayonnaise. Take a glob and smear it on the area > and let it set for a few (5) minutes then rub it off. You may have to > repeat this step once or twice. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2002
From: John Ciolino <jbc1(at)pop.snet.net>
Subject: Riveting root rib
Listers, I am finishing the left wing of my -8 and am riveting the root rib in place. The rivet holes in the bottom skins are spaced further apart and I think that on the -6 these holes are used to attach the wing root fairings. The plans, however, call out a 3-3.5 rivet. Do I rivet these holes? John Ciolino RV-8 Left wing damn near done ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2002
From: John Ciolino <jbc1(at)pop.snet.net>
Subject: Re: Masking tape on Canopy
Jim, Use WD-40 to remove the tape and glue residue. Lay a paper towel over the tape and soak with WD-40. Let sit awhile and wipe off. WD-40 doesn't hurt Plexi. JBC > >OK, my turn for some advice... > >Getting ready for paint... For the past 1.5 years I've had a piece of >plastic over my windshield/canopy which was held all around the edges very >nicely with masking tape. OOOOOOOps... Well it has protected the canopy >very nicely from scratches, however, the masking tape has dried out >completely and it cannot be taken off. It is dried, brittle and a problem. > >Obviously I can't scrape it with a razor blade (at least not too much) >because it will scratch the acrylic. > >So... I'm sure I can't be the first person who has made this mistake... what >solvent combined with what type of mechanical methods are best to remove >this dried-on, falling apart, and hopelessly stuck on masking tape without >ruining the acrylic? > >Please do archive so somebody doesn't put masking tape on the canopy and >leave it there for any length of time. > >jim >Tampa > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Pohl" <planewiz(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Canopy Tint
Date: Mar 01, 2002
John: The way I look at is: My cars all have tinted glass. Would I want a car without tinted glass? Hope this helps. DP >From: JTAnon(at)aol.com >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: RV-List: Canopy Tint >Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 19:15:28 EST > > >I'm about to order my finish kit for an RV7A (slider). > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com>
Subject: Fix for plastic brake line leaks??
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Mark, There is a simple fix. Go to the hardware store and buy the brass inserts that fit the 1/4" plastic tubing. Use these in place of the plastic tubing inserts, but keep the same brass compression fittings. You end up with the plastic tube compressed between the two brass components. When I first tried the plastic inserts they failed to hold their shape. Carl Froehlich RV-8A (moving to the airport Saturday) Vienna, VA -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of czechsix(at)juno.com Subject: RV-List: Fix for plastic brake line leaks?? Guys, I'm about to install the plastic brake lines between the reservoir and master cylinders in my -8A, and have been watching the thread about leaks. Another local -8 builder had leaks in his system too. I've been thinking about possible options to fix it, and the recent RVator article came to mind...about flaring the plastic tubes for pitot/static connections to the instruments. Why wouldn't this work for the brake system too? I'm thinking this might be the way to go...get an AN Tee fitting to screw into the reservoir, put a couple right angle AN fittings on the master cylinders, flare each end of the plastic lines and install using the regular aluminum AN hardware just like the aluminum fuel vents and brake lines. Anyone see a reason why this wouldn't work? Seems like you'd retain the advantage of light weight / low cost that the plastic tube offers, and being able to see the fluid/bubbles when bleeding the system...but hopefully create a much more robust attachment! t! hat should never leak. Since you all are such an opinionated bunch, I'd like to hear what you think about doing it this way : ) --Mark Navratil Cedar Rapids, Iowa RV-8A finish kit stuff... ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: Fix for plastic brake line leaks??
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Yep. Same stuff. Many builders have purchased from W.M Engineering. He is a distributor of Earl's fittings and hoses, and sells at jobber prices. I recommend getting a catalog so you know what to order. There is a fitting for just about everything. Here is his website. He has sold to many RV builders in the past. http://www.coredcs.com/~wmeng/ 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: "Jerry Calvert" <rv6(at)cox.net> Subject: Re: RV-List: Fix for plastic brake line leaks?? > > Paul, > > Where did you get your braided hose? Same stuff as can be purchased from > Summit or Earls? > > Jerry Calvert > Edmond Ok-6 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> > To: > Subject: Re: RV-List: Fix for plastic brake line leaks?? > > > > > > For the brakes (and everything else) I have used steel braided hose. If > you > > were only using it for the brakes, it won't cost you that much. Maybe $50 > > or so in fittings and hose. 70 hours on mine and no leaks. It is a much > > more secure material in my opinion. I started putting in the plastic and > > after about 5 minutes threw it in the trash and bought the steel stuff. > > > > > > 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: "Gordon or Marge Comfort" <gcomfo(at)tc3net.com> > > To: > > Subject: Re: RV-List: Fix for plastic brake line leaks?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: RV-List: Fix for plastic brake line leaks?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guys, I'm about to install the plastic brake lines between the > reservoir > > > and master cylinders in my -8A, and have been watching the thread about > > > leaks. Another local -8 builder had leaks in his system too. I've been > > > thinking about possible options to fix it, and the recent RVator article > > > came to mind...about flaring the plastic tubes for pitot/static > > connections > > > to the instruments. Why wouldn't this work for the brake system too? > I'm > > > thinking this might be the way to go...get an AN Tee fitting to screw > into > > > the reservoir, put a couple right angle AN fittings on the master > > cylinders, > > > flare each end of the plastic lines and install using the regular > aluminum > > > AN hardware just like the aluminum fuel vents and brake lines. Anyone > see > > a > > > reason why this wouldn't work? Seems like you'd retain the advantage of > > > light weight / low cost that the plastic tube offers, and being able to > > see > > > the fluid/bubbles when bleeding the system...but hopefully create a much > > > more robust attachment! > > > > --Mark Navratil > > > > > > Mark: My attempts to flare plastic tubing have come to grief when the > > > flared portion of the tubing creeps out from under the tapered portion > of > > > the nut. My -4 has all plastic lines and I replaced the high pressure > > lines > > > last year because there had been some chafing with the wheel fairing. > > They > > > all use brass compression fittings. On the reservoir side I had a > plastic > > > tee with plastic compression elements on the running portion of the tee. > > > The threaded portion of the tee in the reservoir tended to seep. This > was > > > replaced with a brass tee and the 1/8 taper pipe thread does not leak. > > > However, one side of the tee/compression nut did leak and what I found > was > > > that the compression sleeve had been pushed on a bit too far from the > end > > of > > > the tube upon assembly and the ferrule was prevented from seating in the > > > fitting. The combination of the insert thimble and the tube itself was > > > sufficiently strong to keep the thing from seating. None of the rest of > > the > > > system has leaked and I have had no trouble at all at the wheels. I do > > tend > > > not to overheat the brakes however. > > > > > > Gordon Comfort > > > N363GC > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeff Orear" <jorear(at)new.rr.com>
Subject: Mounting F604 in jig
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Fellow Listers: I am trying to get my F604 bulkhead mounted in my jig (thanks Dave W. The jig is working great) and I am stumped regarding the angle forward that it makes in the jig. Is it necessary to trim the F604 side pieces ( those that sit on the edge of the longerons) to compensate for this forward angle?? When I get the top of the F604 positioned 29 15/16 from the firewall and then angle the bulkhead forward so the bottom is 29 1/2 inches from the firewall, it creates quite a gap in the middle of the F604 side pieces where it is resting on the longerons. Seems to me that I would need to trim the top of the F604 sidepieces so they sit flush and even on the longeron. Haven't seen any reference to this in any instructions or the List archives, other than getting the bulkhead at the proper height from the jig crossmember. Thanks in advance folks. I sure feels good building this RV again after a long hiatus while building a house. Life is good again! Regards, Jeff Orear RV6A fuse Peshtigo, WI ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Oke" <wjoke(at)home.com>
Subject: Re: When to install baffles
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Concur with Mike T's remarks. It's quite easy to work on the engine when it is on the dynafocal on the aircraft. Lots of room at the back to do the aft baffle segments. My sequence on a -6A: 1. Mount lower cowl, incl. rivet back and bottom hinge segments 2. Fit back and side baffles. 3. Fit the front baffles and inlet floors - the lower cowl will be on and on quite a few times to fit the bottom cowl air inlets to the inlet floors 4. Rivet the Front and forward side baffles 5. Plan the oil cooler mounting (aft left baffle on my setup), do cutout, etc. 6. Rivet remaining baffles but leaving top 1-2" inches of vertical rivet lines undrilled. 7. Trim (in small steps) the front, side, and aft baffles to meet the cowl top. 8. When happy get top cowl settled in place and drill side and top hinge segments. 9. Drill the inner air inlet join. 10. Finish riveting the baffles. 11. Glue & rivet the remaining hinge segments. 12. Fabric seal cut, fit, & rivet. I'm currently somewhere between 11 & 12 myself. Jim Oke CYWG RV-3 RV-6A ---- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Thompson" <grobdriver(at)yahoo.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: When to install baffles > > --- Knicholas2(at)aol.com wrote: > > > > Is it best/easiest to install the engine baffles while the engine in > > on the > > stand or should I wait until it is bolted to the mounts? > > > Going through this now - almost done though. > You really need to have the engine mounted and the bottom cowl attached > to the fuse to do the baffles. > > The reason is that the inlet lip can't be sized until you have the cowl > to reference against. > > If you plan to build a plenum you will have to be able to mount the top > cowl as well to verify the plenum does not interfere with the line of > the cowl. > > Mike Thompson > Austin, TX > -6 N140RV (Reserved) > Firewall Forward > > > http://greetings.yahoo.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bruce Gray" <bruce.gray(at)snet.net>
Subject: Masking tape on Canopy
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Yea, Lakeland was fun. I went through there in '64. We had it real plush. For some reason we spent our entire time in the old WAC barracks, 4 to a room, seperate showers, real plush. You officers must have had it real nice. Bruce Glasair III -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of John Starn Subject: Re: RV-List: Masking tape on Canopy Thanks Mike, I'm going to use your mayonnaise idea on two "NO STEP" signs printed on masking tape and put on the flaps. An old boot camp trick worked well on the well worn plumbing "chrome" fixtures. A-1 Steak Sauce. Couldn't use Brasso etc so we had due. A-1 worked great and polished the "brass" to a bright and lasting shine. (OK, I was in boot camp at Lackland in '57 and they were build pre-WWII). Hey Gummi we just may be able to get that stuff off. HA, HA, 8 ) (Guess who put that stuff on in the first place) KABONG ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ABAYMAN(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 2002
Subject: Re: Mounting F604 in jig
hi jeff i would not cut it as it will reduce the total height of the longeron once the fuse is flipped over. besides, this bulkhead gets a cap on the inside and a top rail on the top. it will not be visiable once the canopy side rail braces are in place. one note, drill a hole about 1/2 inch from the longeron through the bulkhead for your pitot tube and or wires. it will be very difficult to drill this hole once the bulkhead is capped and the canopy rails/ arm rest are in place. the pitot line will run under the rail from the rear to the front and will have to pass through the bulkhead around the same area you are talking about only on the pilot side is necessary for the pitot tube, but you may want to run wires on the co-pilot side. if i'm not clear let me know, i'll try and be more specific. scott tampa painting and final assembly inspection set for mar 14 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2002
From: David Roseblade <davidagr(at)emirates.net.ae>
Subject: Hodges Volatility Tester
Tim, The Petersen tester I use has the vacuum safe zone from 5.5 psi to the stop which is 12.8 psi, or 37.5 kPa to the stop at 85 kPa. Regards David Roseblade RV6A Finish Dubai, UAE -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tim Lewis Subject: RV-List: Hodges Volatility Tester Listers, I've recently started testing autogas in my RV-6A, and I wanted to order the Hodges Volatility Tester that Petersen Aviation sells for testing autogas. Unfortunately, Mr Petersen says he can't get the syringes for his tester, and is not producting any testers now. So, I'm interested in cobbling together something myself for now. Can any of you who already owns a Hodges tester tell me the vacuume readings that correspond to the "safe" zone? From a photo I have, it appears that the safe zone is 5.5 psi or more of vacuume, but I can't be sure. Thanks, Tim Lewis ****** Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA) RV-6A N47TD - First Flight 18 Dec 99 http://www.geocities.com/timrv6a ****** ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com>
Subject: Masking tape on Canopy
Date: Mar 01, 2002
The paint department of a large auto parts store will have a number of products designed to take off old masking tape as well as some blue 3M masking tape that will not get hard over time and costs an arm and a leg for each roll. Steve Soule Huntington, Vermont -----Original Message----- Getting ready for paint... For the past 1.5 years I've had a piece of plastic over my windshield/canopy which was held all around the edges very nicely with masking tape. OOOOOOOps... Well it has protected the canopy very nicely from scratches, however, the masking tape has dried out completely and it cannot be taken off. It is dried, brittle and a problem. Obviously I can't scrape it with a razor blade ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: Canopy Tint
Date: Mar 01, 2002
The tint is ever so slight. Night vision is not impaired. It dosn't do much on a hot day either. It does look like it is slightly tinted from the outside, but not from the inside, really. I put a strip of static cling type tint up on the top of the canopy, which really helps keep glare and heat of of your noggin'. 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: <JTAnon(at)aol.com> Subject: RV-List: Canopy Tint > > I'm about to order my finish kit for an RV7A (slider). > > Already checked the archives, but does anyone have any additional thoughts to > share regarding tinted vs clear canopy? Does tint impair visibility? Is > there a big difference in cockpit temps? Does it look significantly cooler? > > My machine will get some (not a lot) of night use. I live in the Northeast > where we get quite a few hazy days. > > John McDonnell (RV7A - All important choices made, looking for $$$ to > implement same) > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rick Jory" <rickjory(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: Canopy Tint
Date: Mar 01, 2002
A reminder that Todd of Todd's Canopies sells his own brand of tint, perhaps a bit darker than Van's but I'm not sure, plus an option for a canopy that's a bit thicker than Van's. I went this route for an 8A (not sure whether he supports all models). Haven't flown yet (I have sat in the cockpit and made noises) but I was impressed with the quality of his product. Rick Jory ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Besing <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: Canopy Tint > > The tint is ever so slight. Night vision is not impaired. It dosn't do > much on a hot day either. It does look like it is slightly tinted from the > outside, but not from the inside, really. I put a strip of static cling > type tint up on the top of the canopy, which really helps keep glare and > heat of of your noggin'. > > > 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: <JTAnon(at)aol.com> > To: > Subject: RV-List: Canopy Tint > > > > > > I'm about to order my finish kit for an RV7A (slider). > > > > Already checked the archives, but does anyone have any additional thoughts > to > > share regarding tinted vs clear canopy? Does tint impair visibility? Is > > there a big difference in cockpit temps? Does it look significantly > cooler? > > > > My machine will get some (not a lot) of night use. I live in the > Northeast > > where we get quite a few hazy days. > > > > John McDonnell (RV7A - All important choices made, looking for $$$ to > > implement same) > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: dirtyrottenscoundrels(at)attbi.com
Subject: N442E First Flight
Date: Mar 01, 2002
Hi, RV-6 N442E took to the skies yesterday with test pilot Steve Flattum at the controls. Everything went very well, some minor adjustments here and there (idle, tailwheel breakout force, rudder trim wedge). I will provide some more detailed information and photos in the near future. Thank you to everyone on this list who helped me out over the last 3 1/2 years. This list was a priceless resource. Sincerely, Glenn Gordon N442E Olson Airport, Elgin Illinois ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2002
Subject: Lightweight starters...
From: czechsix(at)juno.com
I'm a bit confused about the lightweight starters currently available. It was my understanding and general impression that most RV builders were getting the Skytech starter because it was the lightest, best all-around starter. But I've heard a few less than positive things about Skytech's track record recently. I looked at the Magnaflite starter, which appears to be a new motor bolted on to the old "Bendix drive"....it's roughly comparable in price to a Skytech, is 0.1 pounds lighter, and makes the claim that it has more torque than "any other lightweight starter out there". I haven't looked at the B&C unit but if I recall correctly it was heavier and more expensive than the Skytech. So, is the Skytech getting a lot of use simply because Vans sells it (both separately and on their new Lycomings) or is there something I'm missing? Thanks, --Mark Navratil Cedar Rapids, Iowa RV-8A finish kit stuff.... ________________________________________________________________________________
From: MeangreenRV4(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 01, 2002
Subject: Re: Lightweight starters...
In a message dated 3/1/2002 9:43:48 AM Pacific Standard Time, czechsix(at)juno.com writes: > I'm a bit confused about the lightweight starters currently available. It > was my understanding and general impression that most RV builders were > getting the Skytech starter because it was the lightest, best all-around > starter. But I've heard a few less than positive things about Skytech's > track record recently. I looked at the Magnaflite starter, which appears > to be a new motor bolted on to the old "Bendix drive"....it's roughly > comparable in price to a Skytech, is 0.1 pounds lighter, and makes the > claim that it has more torque than "any other lightweight starter out > there". I haven't looked at the B&C unit but if I recall correctly it was > heavier and more expensive than the Skytech. So, is the Skytech getting a > lot of use simply because Vans sells it (both separately and on their new > Lycomings) or is there something I'm missing? > > I have a Skytech Starter on my IO-360A1B with 10-1 Pistons and for 131hrs it has worked flawlessly Tim Barnes Meangreen RV-4 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2002
From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org>
Subject: Glove box
I am doing my panel, and I would love to use Van's glove box kit, but I will need to use one that is about 5/8 inch shorter. I don't have one I can look at, so I don't know how it is constructed. Can the height be easily reduced? Does anyone have pictures of the kit on the web, or could post them? Or should I just roll my own. In that case, how is the latch done? Thanks, Gary LIming ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rick Caldwell" <racaldwell(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Glove box
Date: Mar 01, 2002
Gary, I made up my own box for my RV-6 panel and used a flush latch from an inspection panel robbed from a wrecked chopper (the whirlybird kind.) I used piano hinge on the bottom of the door and slotted the holes that attach the hinge to the door. This allows the door to lift clear of the panel as it swings open. To shut, just push down lightly as you close the door. I also put a hinged door as the back of the box. This opens to reveal the fuse blocks mounted on the bulkhead back there. It's real nice to be able to store the other headset, maps, etc. in the box when flying solo aerobatics. Also real nice to sit in the passenger's seat and change fuses. Rick Caldwell RV-6 in Melbourne, FL >From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: RV-List: Glove box >Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 13:43:00 -0800 > > >I am doing my panel, and I would love to use Van's glove box kit, but I >will need to use one that is about 5/8 inch shorter. > >I don't have one I can look at, so I don't know how it is constructed. Can >the height be easily reduced? Does anyone have pictures of the kit on the >web, or could post them? Or should I just roll my own. In that case, how >is the latch done? > >Thanks, > >Gary LIming > > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "kevin lane" <n3773(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: Lightweight starters...
Date: Mar 01, 2002
I have a lightweight started from some builder in OK, it's a 280Z starter I believe, has worked fine for 500 hrs. Kevin ----- Original Message ----- From: MeangreenRV4(at)aol.com To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 10:43 AM Subject: Re: RV-List: Lightweight starters... In a message dated 3/1/2002 9:43:48 AM Pacific Standard Time, czechsix(at)juno.com writes: > I'm a bit confused about the lightweight starters currently available. It > was my understanding and general impression that most RV builders were > getting the Skytech starter because it was the lightest, best all-around > starter. But I've heard a few less than positive things about Skytech's > track record recently. I looked at the Magnaflite starter, which appears > to be a new motor bolted on to the old "Bendix drive"....it's roughly > comparable in price to a Skytech, is 0.1 pounds lighter, and makes the > claim that it has more torque than "any other lightweight starter out > there". I haven't looked at the B&C unit but if I recall correctly it was > heavier and more expensive than the Skytech. So, is the Skytech getting a > lot of use simply because Vans sells it (both separately and on their new > Lycomings) or is there something I'm missing? > > I have a Skytech Starter on my IO-360A1B with 10-1 Pistons and for 131hrs it has worked flawlessly Tim Barnes Meangreen RV-4 messages. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2002
From: Jaye and Scott Jackson <jayeandscott(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Masking tape on Canopy
Had the same problem with mine. Phoned the local Industrial Plastics outlet and the tech person there said to use nothing but methyl hydrate as everything else would eventually cloud the acrylic as it slowly worked into the material. At least, I think it was methyl hydrate, he said to buy gas-line antifreeze which was the same thing. Scott in Vancouver ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Norman" <jnorman(at)intermapsystems.com> Subject: RV-List: Masking tape on Canopy > > OK, my turn for some advice... > > Getting ready for paint... For the past 1.5 years I've had a piece of > plastic over my windshield/canopy which was held all around the edges very > nicely with masking tape. OOOOOOOps... Well it has protected the canopy > very nicely from scratches, however, the masking tape has dried out > completely and it cannot be taken off. It is dried, brittle and a problem. > > Obviously I can't scrape it with a razor blade (at least not too much) > because it will scratch the acrylic. > > So... I'm sure I can't be the first person who has made this mistake... what > solvent combined with what type of mechanical methods are best to remove > this dried-on, falling apart, and hopelessly stuck on masking tape without > ruining the acrylic? > > Please do archive so somebody doesn't put masking tape on the canopy and > leave it there for any length of time. > > jim > Tampa > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: New Positech Oil Cooler
Date: Mar 01, 2002
Listers, I sent my original Positech cooler back to them after hearing from some folks here on the list (THANKS!) that they would exchange it for one that works. Well, I just received the new one and it looks to be MUCH improved over the original design. The air passages between the oil cells are significantly wider, and the whole thing seems to weigh less as a result. The welding and general construction of the unit is top notch. I'm very pleased that they would offer a brand new unit, no questions asked, for not even the cost of shipping. I plan to save it for my next project (RV-10?) so I won't have any actual test data anytime soon. It's good to see there is a company out there that will recognize when there is a quality issue, and correct it when asked. My faith in Positech is now restored, from a customer satisfaction standpoint. From what I see so far, I fully expect the cooler will be as effective as a Stewart Warner or Niagara. Brian Denk RV8 N94BD Niagara on board. If it ain't broke, don't fix it! Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2002
From: "John B. Abell" <jbabell(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: N442E First Flight
Nice going, Glenn. Jack Abell dirtyrottenscoundrels(at)attbi.com wrote: > > Hi, > RV-6 N442E took to the skies yesterday with test pilot > Steve Flattum at the controls. Everything went very > well, some minor adjustments here and there (idle, > tailwheel breakout force, rudder trim wedge). I will > provide some more detailed information and photos in the > near future. > > Thank you to everyone on this list who helped me out > over the last 3 1/2 years. This list was a priceless > resource. > > Sincerely, > Glenn Gordon > N442E > Olson Airport, Elgin Illinois > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net>
Subject: Re: Brakes
Date: Mar 01, 2002
You talking about the "new" overhead mounted brakes on the -6? David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wheeler North" <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> Subject: RV-List: Brakes > > > Guys, > > Actually one doesn't have much adjustment at the upper longeron without also > changing rudder cable link length.The pivot for the two pedal assembly tubes > must be about roughly 1.25 inches apart. So if the pedals don't strike an > isosceles triangle straight down then they will pivot kinda strange from > right foot to left foot. There is some room for adjustment here, but not > much. > > I personally much prefer the way my pedals are now that I've gotten used to > it, and the mod is very easy to install after its flying as its not a > redesign, but really an add-on. So no matter how/when one does it. Certainly > during taxi tests you should confirm that the aircraft can be safely > operated through ground/air transition. The large hose on the lower tube > would work just as well for the 6's with the overhead pedals. > > I will add that I originally found this problem on the 8 and didn't think it > was happening to my 6 until I did a real soft cross wind wheel landing and > realized that one wheel was chirping a lot more than it shoulda been on > touch down. When the pedal was extended my toes were putting on brake, and > it was hard to avoid while trying to control all the levers and knobs and > switches and whistles and bells and crap in my cockpit. ;{) > > W > > > <<<<<<<<<< > I guess someone has to stick up for Van's design. I installed my brakes per > the > plans, with the plastic tubing from the reservoir and from the right side > pedals to the left (high pressure tubing). Since I started flying my Six I > have > never had a lick of trouble of any kind with the brakes - no leaks - no > inadvertent application. The geometry of the pedals is exactly per the plans > but remember that you can adjust the angle of the brake pedal by changing > the > mounting position of the pivot blocks on the longeron. This does NOT change > the > distance of the rudder pedals from the seat - the only way you can do that > is > to change the length of the cables or the links. > > If you haven't flown yet, don't redesign the brakes - spend your time > finishing > the airplane. If you have a problem later, which is very unlikely, deal with > it > then. > > Dave -6 So Cal > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Doug Shenk <dshenk3(at)attbi.com>
Date: Mar 01, 2002
Subject: Looking for prop
I'm looking for a wooden prop for a RV-6A with 180 hp O-360. I was planning to order one from Aymar-Dumuth but the lead time is several months. I would consider metal props also. If anyone has a prop they want to sell or knows where I might inquire I would be grateful. Please contact me off-list at dshenk3(at)attbi.com. Thanks for any help. Doug "suffering from my own poor planning" Shenk, RV-6A > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2002
From: Earl Fortner <efortner(at)vnet.net>
Subject: Re: Lightweight starters...
I replaced the starter on my 180 HP Lycoming powered arrow three years ago with the Skytech starter. I used to have problems with hot starts and when the weather was really cold. The Skytech solved all that and I beleive it turns the engine at least twice as fast as the old starter. If it were to fail I would replace it with another Skytech. Earl, RV4 MeangreenRV4(at)aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 3/1/2002 9:43:48 AM Pacific Standard Time, > czechsix(at)juno.com writes: > > > I'm a bit confused about the lightweight starters currently available. It > > was my understanding and general impression that most RV builders were > > getting the Skytech starter because it was the lightest, best all-around > > starter. But I've heard a few less than positive things about Skytech's > > track record recently. I looked at the Magnaflite starter, which appears > > to be a new motor bolted on to the old "Bendix drive"....it's roughly > > comparable in price to a Skytech, is 0.1 pounds lighter, and makes the > > claim that it has more torque than "any other lightweight starter out > > there". I haven't looked at the B&C unit but if I recall correctly it was > > heavier and more expensive than the Skytech. So, is the Skytech getting a > > lot of use simply because Vans sells it (both separately and on their new > > Lycomings) or is there something I'm missing? > > > > > > I have a Skytech Starter on my IO-360A1B with 10-1 Pistons and for 131hrs it > has worked flawlessly > > Tim Barnes > Meangreen RV-4 > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2002
From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Glove box
Rick, I like your glove box idea and the access through the back to fuse blocks. I'm planning to use mostly fuses in blocks and only a few circuit breakers per the Aeroelectric Connection suggestions. During your DAR inspection was there any question or objection to the use of fuses instead of circuit breakers? Regards, Richard Dudley Rick Caldwell wrote: > > > Gary, > > I made up my own box for my RV-6 panel and used a flush latch from an > inspection panel robbed from a wrecked chopper (the whirlybird kind.) I used > piano hinge on the bottom of the door and slotted the holes that attach the > hinge to the door. This allows the door to lift clear of the panel as it > swings open. To shut, just push down lightly as you close the door. I also > put a hinged door as the back of the box. This opens to reveal the fuse > blocks mounted on the bulkhead back there. It's real nice to be able to > store the other headset, maps, etc. in the box when flying solo aerobatics. > Also real nice to sit in the passenger's seat and change fuses. > > Rick Caldwell > RV-6 in Melbourne, FL > > >From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> > >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > >Subject: RV-List: Glove box > >Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 13:43:00 -0800 > > > > > > > >I am doing my panel, and I would love to use Van's glove box kit, but I > >will need to use one that is about 5/8 inch shorter. > > > >I don't have one I can look at, so I don't know how it is constructed. Can > >the height be easily reduced? Does anyone have pictures of the kit on the > >web, or could post them? Or should I just roll my own. In that case, how > >is the latch done? > > > >Thanks, > > > >Gary LIming > > > > > > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: Looking for prop
Date: Mar 01, 2002
Hi Doug, Contact : Colin Walker A (604) 581-9602 11393-96A Avenue Surrey, BC, V3V 1Z7 Canada (604) 581-9602 I'm told he makes good props at good prices. Jim in Kelowna ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Shenk" <dshenk3(at)attbi.com> Subject: RV-List: Looking for prop > > I'm looking for a wooden prop for a RV-6A with 180 hp O-360. I was planning to order one from > Aymar-Dumuth but the lead time is several months. I would consider metal props also. > If anyone has a prop they want to sell or knows where I might inquire I would be grateful. > Please contact me off-list at dshenk3(at)attbi.com. > Thanks for any help. > Doug "suffering from my own poor planning" Shenk, RV-6A > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2002
From: "Owens, Laird" <Owens(at)aerovironment.com>
Subject: Looking for prop
Doug, Do I have a deal for you......no, seriously. I have a Sensenich 72FM prop for the 0-360 that came off my RV-6 (after 200 hrs) after I upgraded to a Hartzell. It's a 83" pitch and Sensenich metal spinner (painted white) and mounting bolts comes with it. $1500 for all. You pay for shipping. Let me know if that works for you. (Or anybody else for that matter). Laird SoCal From: rv-list(at)matronics.com on Fri, Mar 1, 2002 3:06 PM Subject: RV-List: Looking for prop I'm looking for a wooden prop for a RV-6A with 180 hp O-360. I was planning to order one from Aymar-Dumuth but the lead time is several months. I would consider metal props also. If anyone has a prop they want to sell or knows where I might inquire I would be grateful. Please contact me off-list at dshenk3(at)attbi.com. Thanks for any help. Doug "suffering from my own poor planning" Shenk, RV-6A > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: N442E First Flight
Date: Mar 02, 2002
Glenn, CONGRATULATIONS and WELL DONE !!! Chuck Dave Rowbotham RV-8A (Niantic, CT) From: dirtyrottenscoundrels(at)attbi.com Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RV-List: N442E First Flight Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 17:31:27 +0000 -- RV-List message posted by: dirtyrottenscoundrels(at)attbi.com Hi, RV-6 N442E took to the skies yesterday with test pilot Steve Flattum at the controls. Everything went very well, some minor adjustments here and there (idle, tailwheel breakout force, rudder trim wedge). I will provide some more detailed information and photos in the near future. Thank you to everyone on this list who helped me out over the last 3 1/2 years. This list was a priceless resource. Sincerely, Glenn Gordon N442E Olson Airport, Elgin Illinois ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tom & Cathy Ervin" <tcervin(at)valkyrie.net>
Subject: Transponder Antenna Location
Date: Mar 01, 2002
List, I am trying to determine a good location for the Transponder Antenna on my RV6-A? How about in front of the Battery Box with the cable up the inside of the firewall? Anyone flying know if the exhaust is a problem? Thanks, Tom in Ohio ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ABAYMAN(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 01, 2002
Subject: Re: A survival tool (to avoid your wife's wrath)
wow rick i'm gonna start calling you austin caldwell or rick tinkler scott tampa no not archive ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2002
From: emrath(at)comcast.net
Subject: Re: Mounting F604 in jig
Mount the bulkhead with the proper dimensions, only trim the F604 sides if the bulkhead is not at the proper height from the jig cross member. The skin will bridge the gap and there are no "gotchas" in this area that I saw. Put it in place, clamp well -- I still have my Frey Jig and birdcage option that makes this a piece of cake if anyone cares to purchase it -- finish the skeleton, skin, drill, deburr, dimple, prime, rivet..... and move on. Good Luck! Marty in Brentwood TN, RV-6A ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Orear" <jorear(at)new.rr.com> Subject: RV-List: Mounting F604 in jig > > Fellow Listers: > > I am trying to get my F604 bulkhead mounted in my jig (thanks Dave W. > The jig is working great) and I am stumped regarding the angle forward > that it makes in the jig. Is it necessary to trim the F604 side pieces > ( those that sit on the edge of the longerons) to compensate for this > forward angle?? When I get the top of the F604 positioned 29 15/16 from > the firewall and then angle the bulkhead forward so the bottom is 29 > 1/2 inches from the firewall, it creates quite a gap in the middle of > the F604 side pieces where it is resting on the longerons. Seems to me > that I would need to trim the top of the F604 sidepieces so they sit > flush and even on the longeron. Haven't seen any reference to this in > any instructions or the List archives, other than getting the bulkhead > at the proper height from the jig crossmember. > > Thanks in advance folks. I sure feels good building this RV again after > a long hiatus while building a house. Life is good again! > > Regards, > > Jeff Orear > RV6A > fuse > Peshtigo, WI > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rick Caldwell" <racaldwell(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Glove box
Date: Mar 02, 2002
Richard, No problems with the fuses for the inspection. My DAR was the very knowledgable John Murphy who has built at least 12 homebuilts. He only recommended I discard the nuts on the oil transducer & use AN lock nuts. I had used the regular nuts that came with the transducer. Rick >From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net> >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV-List: Glove box >Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 17:32:13 -0500 > > >Rick, > >I like your glove box idea and the access through the back to fuse >blocks. > >I'm planning to use mostly fuses in blocks and only a few circuit >breakers per the Aeroelectric Connection suggestions. During your DAR >inspection was there any question or objection to the use of fuses >instead of circuit breakers? > >Regards, > >Richard Dudley > > >Rick Caldwell wrote: > > > > > > Gary, > > > > I made up my own box for my RV-6 panel and used a flush latch from an > > inspection panel robbed from a wrecked chopper (the whirlybird kind.) I >used > > piano hinge on the bottom of the door and slotted the holes that attach >the > > hinge to the door. This allows the door to lift clear of the panel as it > > swings open. To shut, just push down lightly as you close the door. I >also > > put a hinged door as the back of the box. This opens to reveal the fuse > > blocks mounted on the bulkhead back there. It's real nice to be able to > > store the other headset, maps, etc. in the box when flying solo >aerobatics. > > Also real nice to sit in the passenger's seat and change fuses. > > > > Rick Caldwell > > RV-6 in Melbourne, FL > > > > >From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> > > >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > > >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > > >Subject: RV-List: Glove box > > >Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 13:43:00 -0800 > > > > > > > > > > > >I am doing my panel, and I would love to use Van's glove box kit, but I > > >will need to use one that is about 5/8 inch shorter. > > > > > >I don't have one I can look at, so I don't know how it is constructed. >Can > > >the height be easily reduced? Does anyone have pictures of the kit on >the > > >web, or could post them? Or should I just roll my own. In that case, >how > > >is the latch done? > > > > > >Thanks, > > > > > >Gary LIming > > > > > > > > > > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: > > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx > > > > Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mills, Trevor R" <MillsTR(at)az1.bp.com>
Subject: Lost first page
Date: Mar 02, 2002
I have lost the first page of the RV 8 fuse manual, If someone could send a copy via E-Mail it would help. (both sides please) Thank you. Trevor Mills 80605 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JhnstnIII(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 01, 2002
Subject: Fwd: Fw: TIP-UP SLIDER, for RV's
From: "rmeske" <rmeske(at)gcfn.org> Subject: Fw: TIP-UP SLIDER, for RV6 Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 20:18:12 -0500 Can you copy the text below and forward this to the list for me. I can't seem to get it to go. THANKS! ----- Original Message ----- From: rmeske Subject: TIP-UP SLIDER, for RV6 OK, OK, Yea, I'm the guy that did this first. I guess I'm famous now. I saw my pictures on the internet today to my surprise. (www.rv.supermatrix.com/slide-tilt.html) THANKS! I first introduced this modification at the Oshkosh show in 2000. This was the first time I flew into Oshkosh and also the first time I flew my RV-6A in too. It was the first time I had anything to show off. I had a blast talking to all of you enthusiastic builders! The canopy TIP-UP / SLIDER modification is great if you want to carry a fold-up bicycle, heavy, or awkward to load baggage. You don't even have to risk scratching your canopy or dropping your heavy loads on your wing anymore. You can even retrofit this to an already built RV6. I don't have the exact plans for other RVs, but I believe you savey RV builders out there can utilize my set of plans and adapt them to work for the RV7 and RV9 as well. . . Just some easy redimension would have to be accomplished. Enough people have asked me to get some plans together for this thing, so I did. I now have a series of good pictures I will e-mail and a set of drawings I will land mail to anyone that can cough up $25.00 for my trouble. Just e-mail me for the exact details: (rmeske(at)gcfn.org) THANKS Rich Meske P.E. Can you copy the text below and forward this to the list for me. I can't seem to get it to go. THANKS! ----- Original Message ----- From: <A titlermeske(at)gcfn.org href"mailto:rmeske(at)gcfn.org">rmeske To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Cc: vansairforce(at)yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 8:00 PM Subject: TIP-UP SLIDER, for RV6 OK, OK, Yea, I'm the guy that dfirst. I guess I'm famous now. I saw my pictures on the internet today to my surprise. (www.rv.supermatrix.com/slide-tilt.html) THANKS! I first introduced this modification at the Oshkosh show in 2000. This wasthe first time I flew into Oshkosh and also the first time I flew my RV-6A in too.It was the first time I had anything to show off. I had a blast talking to all of you enthusiastic builders! The canopy TIP-UP / SLIDER modification is great if you want to carry a fold-up bicycle, heavy, or awkward to load baggage. You don't even have to risk scratching your canopy or dropping your heavy loads on your wing anymore. You can even retrofit this to an already built RV6. I don't have the exact plans for other RVs, but I believe you savey RV builders out there can utilize my set of plans and adapt them to work for theRV7 and RV9 as well.. . Just some easy redimensionwould have to be accomplished. Enough people have asked me to get some plans together for this thing, so I did. I now have a series of good pictures I will e-mail and a set ofdrawings I will land mail to anyone that can cough up $25.00 for my trouble. Just e-mail me for the exact details: (rmeske(at)gcfn.org) THANKS Rich Meske P.E. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 02, 2002
Subject: Re: Lightweight starters...
In a message dated 3/1/2002 9:43:54 AM Pacific Standard Time, czechsix(at)juno.com writes: > I'm a bit confused about the lightweight starters currently available. It > was my understanding and general impression that most RV builders were > getting the Skytech starter because it was the lightest, best all-around > starter. But I've heard a few less than positive things about Skytech's > track record recently. I looked at the Magnaflite starter, which appears > to be a new motor bolted on to the old "Bendix drive"....it's roughly > comparable in price to a Skytech, is 0.1 pounds lighter, and makes the > claim that it has more torque than "any other lightweight starter out > there". I haven't looked at the B&C unit but if I recall correctly it was > heavier and more expensive than the Skytech. So, is the Skytech getting a > lot of use simply because Vans sells it (both separately and on their new > Lycomings) or is there something I'm missing? Mark- First of all, the manufacturer is Sky-Tec so people can actually search properly. The Sky-Tec starter in my 6A has 500 hrs on it and just a week ago I replaced the solenoid on the side of the starter for $40. A good deal as that appears to be the only thing that ages on them (I'll see if brushes are the next thing but for now they're good). I think it is a super unit and I would get the same setup if I were to build again. The great thing is that these starters really crank if you have a good battery. I recently replaced my 23 lb Concord RG25 battery with the 14 lb Odyssey PC680, which you can get on the web for $100 or less ($70 less than Van's), and boy does it turn things over sprightly. You can taxi on this starter. -GV (N1GV) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Glenn & Judi" <dirtyrottenscoundrels(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Transponder Antenna Location
Date: Mar 02, 2002
Tom, It may be a problem. My brother in law has a Cirrus SR-20 with the transponder antenna located there. He and other Cirrus owners have some problems with their transponder from time to time of not being received from ATC. Turn the plane 10 degrees or so, and the problem fixed itself. The Cirrus has some long exhaust pipes and could be shielding the signal. Perhaps the shorter pipes on an RV won't be a problem. I located mine slightly off center just forward of the elevator belcrank on my RV-6. It is accesable through the center baggage area inspection plate. -Glenn Gordon N442E > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tom & Cathy > Ervin > Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 6:15 PM > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: Transponder Antenna Location > > > List, > I am trying to determine a good location for the Transponder > Antenna on my RV6-A? How about in front of the Battery Box with the > cable up the inside of the firewall? Anyone flying know if the exhaust > is a problem? > > Thanks, Tom in Ohio > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2002
Subject: Re: RV8-List: Mag compass in panel?
From: John B Seal <j.seal(at)juno.com>
I have an American made vertical card compass in the top center of my instrument panel. It works fine. When I turn on the landing lights it get a 15 degree deviation error. I grounded the landing lights in the wing tips which may set up a magnetic field in the aircraft. A friend has the same vertical card in a Rocket. Works fine. I went through 2 Chinese vertical cards which immediately failed before I got the US made. Boyd Seal RV-6 Building RV-8 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tom & Cathy Ervin" <tcervin(at)valkyrie.net>
Subject: Re: Transponder Antenna Location
Date: Mar 02, 2002
Glenn, It looks like I was about to make a mistake that a "Certified Aircraft Manufacture" has made! Sure don't want my RV6-A to slip to their standards. I thought about heat being a problem but not interference from the exhaust (I'm an Accountant not an Engineer) so before jumping presented this idea to the list. I have been told the Transponder Antenna won't interfere with the Comm. Antennas even if placed in their circle of operation. Is this Correct? Tom in Ohio ----- Original Message ----- From: "Glenn & Judi" <dirtyrottenscoundrels(at)attbi.com> Subject: RE: RV-List: Transponder Antenna Location > > Tom, > > It may be a problem. > > My brother in law has a Cirrus SR-20 with the transponder antenna located > there. He and other Cirrus owners have some problems with their transponder > from time to time of not being received from ATC. Turn the plane 10 degrees > or so, and the problem fixed itself. The Cirrus has some long exhaust pipes > and could be shielding the signal. Perhaps the shorter pipes on an RV won't > be a problem. I located mine slightly off center just forward of the > elevator belcrank on my RV-6. It is accesable through the center baggage > area inspection plate. > > -Glenn Gordon > N442E > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tom & Cathy > > Ervin > > Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 6:15 PM > > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > > Subject: RV-List: Transponder Antenna Location > > > > > > > > List, > > I am trying to determine a good location for the Transponder > > Antenna on my RV6-A? How about in front of the Battery Box with the > > cable up the inside of the firewall? Anyone flying know if the exhaust > > is a problem? > > > > Thanks, Tom in Ohio > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry Pardue" <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net>
Subject: Re: Canopies
Date: Mar 02, 2002
> > Guys, > I meant to save that web address on the slider/tilt canopy > but dumped it accidentally. Would someone who has it please put it up > again. > Thank You
http://www.rv.supermatrix.com/slide-tilt.html Larry Pardue Carlsbad, NM RV-6 N441LP Flying http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chris Brooks" <brooksrv6(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: 90 degree park brake fittings
Date: Mar 02, 2002
There was some recent discussion about getting 90 degree fittings in the closely spaced holes of the Matco park brake valve. I used AN914 elbows, and screwed AN816 nipples into them. Worked well for me. Chris Brooks MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2002
Subject: Re: Lightweight starters...
From: Denis Walsh <deniswalsh(at)earthlink.net>
I seem to agree with everyone on this one. I have a Sky Tec, and it works real good. It does seem to require more power from the battery, and it does eat solenoids. So it appears to me the B&C should definitely be considered by builders who are looking for increased reliability, and quality at an increased price. I have found very few people around my airport who are willing or able to hand prop a low hanging O-360 with a short prop. I am not one! I am going to get a spare and carry it on X countries. It looks like it can be changed without even removing the starter from the engine. Unhook the electrical connections and two Phillips head screws on the front. I have replaced my Sky-Tec solenoid (the one on the starter itself), twice now, so it appears that this is a significant trend. Don't have my maintenance records here but I recollect the times were about 500 hours and again at around 850 hours. It is a puzzle to me, one of many. The solenoid appears to be a standard automotive item, and not peculiar to sky- Tec. This last time I replaced it with a very generic type, and rewired it so it is not held in by the "wind down" voltage from the motor. I will report if this influences the life, but I am very skeptical. Also it will be another year or two at my current slow flying pace. The failure mode was that it became intermittent. Some times it worked sometimes not. I therefore suspect it just got fried from all the heat it sees, and the coils became fused or somehow otherwise ineffective. I still have the last one if anyone wants to do an autopsy.??? D Walsh > From: Vanremog(at)aol.com > Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 00:14:41 EST > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: Lightweight starters... > > > In a message dated 3/1/2002 9:43:54 AM Pacific Standard Time, > czechsix(at)juno.com writes: > > >> I'm a bit confused about the lightweight starters currently available. It >> was my understanding and general impression that most RV builders were >> getting the Skytech starter because it was the lightest, best all-around >> starter. But I've heard a few less than positive things about Skytech's >> track record recently. I looked at the Magnaflite starter, which appears >> to be a new motor bolted on to the old "Bendix drive"....it's roughly >> comparable in price to a Skytech, is 0.1 pounds lighter, and makes the >> claim that it has more torque than "any other lightweight starter out >> there". I haven't looked at the B&C unit but if I recall correctly it was >> heavier and more expensive than the Skytech. So, is the Skytech getting a >> lot of use simply because Vans sells it (both separately and on their new >> Lycomings) or is there something I'm missing? > > Mark- > > First of all, the manufacturer is Sky-Tec so people can actually search > properly. > > The Sky-Tec starter in my 6A has 500 hrs on it and just a week ago I replaced > the solenoid on the side of the starter for $40. A good deal as that appears > to be the only thing that ages on them (I'll see if brushes are the next > thing but for now they're good). I think it is a super unit and I would get > the same setup if I were to build again. > > The great thing is that these starters really crank if you have a good > battery. I recently replaced my 23 lb Concord RG25 battery with the 14 lb > Odyssey PC680, which you can get on the web for $100 or less ($70 less than > Van's), and boy does it turn things over sprightly. You can taxi on this > starter. > > -GV (N1GV) > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Burton" <dburton(at)nwlink.com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Fw: TIP-UP SLIDER, for RV's
Date: Mar 02, 2002
Try this: http://www.rv.supermatrix.com/slide-tilt1.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2002
From: Garry LeGare <"versadek"@earthlink.net>
"Gary A. Sobek"
Subject: Terra Transponder
I'm looking for a Terra TRT 250D transponder, new or used. Since I already have the tray mounted and wired it will be a real pain to change over. They don't make them any more, so if you haven't cut your panel yet don't. I'm looking for a spare so I can swap one while the other is out for service. The older Terra products where OK, but after Trimble bought Terra the QC went down hill. Contact me off list if you got one to sell. Garry "Casper" Hopefully back in the air this week end. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2002
From: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Rudder pedal mods
Listers, I have now included Rick Fogerson's RV-6 rudder pedal stirrup mod on the SE Florida RV Builders site. Rick's mod is for the "overhead" style of rudder pedals. Wheeler North's mod relates to either the floor mounted or overhead style. See them at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SEFlaRVbuilders/files/Controls%20%26%20Control%20Surfaces/Control%20Linkages/ Click on the folder marked RUDDER PEDALS Charlie Kuss ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2002
Subject: Lightweight starters
From: czechsix(at)juno.com
Thanks for the clarification....Vans website, and another dealer I found on the web in a search, call them "Skytech". But in looking very closely at the label on the starter itself, it appears to say "Sky-Tec". --Mark Navratil Cedar Rapids, Iowa RV-8A finish kit stuff.... ------ From: Vanremog(at)aol.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Lightweight starters... Mark- First of all, the manufacturer is Sky-Tec so people can actually search properly. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2002
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: "Bunny's Guide to RV Building" Now on Matronics Server!
RV-Listers, Frank van der Hulst's "Bunny's Guide to RV Building" has been moved to the Matronics server. You can pruse Franks excellent documentation by going to the following Link: http://www.matronics.com/rv-list/bunnys-guide There is also a link from the standard RV-List web page at: http://www.matronics.com/rv-list/ Frank will be maintaining his pages directly on the Matronics server. Best Regards, Matt Dralle Matronics Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2002
From: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Transponder Antenna Location
Tom & Cathy Ervin wrote: > > > Glenn, It looks like I was about to make a mistake that a "Certified > Aircraft Manufacture" has made! Sure don't want my RV6-A to slip to their > standards. > I thought about heat being a problem but not interference from > the exhaust (I'm an Accountant not an Engineer) so before jumping presented > this idea to the list. > I have been told the Transponder Antenna won't interfere with > the Comm. Antennas even if placed in their circle of operation. Is this > Correct? > > Tom in Ohio Tom, on my -6 I have two comm radios and the antennas are located right in front of the spar as far apart as i can get them. The transponder antenna is in the center right in front of the spar between the two comm antennas. They have been working great for 13 years. I don't know if you have room to do this with the little wheel on the wrong end of the airplane because of the main gear support structure of the -6A :) Jerry ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Richard D. Fogerson" <rickf(at)velocitus.net>
Subject: LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator
Date: Mar 02, 2002
I would like opinions from those who are flying with the LRI. I want to get my IAS from a RMI Encoder and have planned to install the LRI to supplement airspeed. If I lost air speed because of an electrical problem, I'm wondering if how well you could fly with just the LRI. Maybe it would be fine, I'm just having a hard time imagining flying without an air speed indicator (having never been in that situation). Thanks, Rick Fogerson RV3 fuselage soon Boise, ID ________________________________________________________________________________
From: DANBERGERONHAM(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 02, 2002
Subject: Tool Advice for a New Builder
I'm in process of setting up a workshop and hope to start work on an RV-7 by Fall. I have all of stationary tools recommended in RV-7 Preview Plans, i.e., a bench grinder, 1" belt sander, 30 gal air compressor, band saw and drill press. I've been looking through tool catalogs and checking on-line for hand tools and am wondering if tool kits offered in Aircraft Spruce and Specialty Company 2001 - 2002 catalog are a good deal. They are on p. 466 - P/N TP 176RV for $605, and p. 467 - P/N TP176MKB for $795. Does anyone have any experience with these kits? Are these reasonably good tools? How about the listed TP82 or TP83 rivet guns? I have little experience w/ riveting and want to get a reasonably good item. Are these kits a good way to pick up many of the required tools to build an RV or should I look elsewhere? Where? ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Glenn & Judi" <dirtyrottenscoundrels(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Transponder Antenna Location
Date: Mar 02, 2002
Tom, I don't know if they would interfere with each other or not. I placed my Comm antenna just aft of the battery box. It is far away from the transponder antenna, however I don't know it it really matters. My radio/intercom system has zero interference noise from the transponer or the strobes. It worked for me. -Glenn Gordon N442E > > Glenn, It looks like I was about to make a mistake that a "Certified > Aircraft Manufacture" has made! Sure don't want my RV6-A to slip to their > standards. > I thought about heat being a problem but not interference from > the exhaust (I'm an Accountant not an Engineer) so before jumping > presented > this idea to the list. > I have been told the Transponder Antenna won't interfere with > the Comm. Antennas even if placed in their circle of operation. Is this > Correct? > > Tom in Ohio > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Glenn & Judi" <dirtyrottenscoundrels(at)attbi.com> > To: > Subject: RE: RV-List: Transponder Antenna Location > > > > > > > Tom, > > > > It may be a problem. > > > > My brother in law has a Cirrus SR-20 with the transponder > antenna located > > there. He and other Cirrus owners have some problems with their > transponder > > from time to time of not being received from ATC. Turn the plane 10 > degrees > > or so, and the problem fixed itself. The Cirrus has some long exhaust > pipes > > and could be shielding the signal. Perhaps the shorter pipes on an RV > won't > > be a problem. I located mine slightly off center just forward of the > > elevator belcrank on my RV-6. It is accesable through the > center baggage > > area inspection plate. > > > > -Glenn Gordon > > N442E > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > > > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tom & Cathy > > > Ervin > > > Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 6:15 PM > > > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > > > Subject: RV-List: Transponder Antenna Location > > > > > > > > > > > > > List, > > > I am trying to determine a good location for the Transponder > > > Antenna on my RV6-A? How about in front of the Battery Box with the > > > cable up the inside of the firewall? Anyone flying know if the exhaust > > > is a problem? > > > > > > Thanks, Tom in Ohio > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2002
From: Bobby Hester <bhester(at)apex.net>
Subject: Re: Tool Advice for a New Builder
DANBERGERONHAM(at)aol.com wrote: > > I'm in process of setting up a workshop and hope to start work on an RV-7 by > Fall. I have all of stationary tools recommended in RV-7 Preview Plans, > i.e., a bench grinder, 1" belt sander, 30 gal air compressor, band saw and > drill press. I've been looking through tool catalogs and checking on-line for > hand tools and am wondering if tool kits offered in Aircraft Spruce and > Specialty Company 2001 - 2002 catalog are a good deal. They are on p. 466 - > P/N TP 176RV for $605, and p. 467 - P/N TP176MKB for $795. Does anyone have > any experience with these kits? Are these reasonably good tools? How about > the listed TP82 or TP83 rivet guns? I have little experience w/ riveting and > want to get a reasonably good item. Are these kits a good way to pick up > many of the required tools to build an RV or should I look elsewhere? Where? I bought RV Empennage Tool Kit ( I got the 2X rivet gun) from http://www.ClevelandTool.com and then I added to it some items from http://www.averytools.com. These two places specalize in RV tools. One thing I can tell you is that if you are going to build the wings you will need 300 - 3/32 clekos -- Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/ RV7A Working on the wings :-) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ABAYMAN(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 02, 2002
Subject: Re: rf grimlins finally chased out
hi guys just had a couple builders stop by to help me fiqure what was wrong with my com/nav audio panel. well i was confident it was wired right, but wanted to verify with don who has the same terra radios etc... we double checked all my wiring was right on. but when i was putting the audio panel connector in back of the rack i noticed that the connector wasn't polorized, meaning it could be attached to the audio panel upside down, and right side up. guess what, i had it upside down. once i flipped it over everything came to life as it was supposed to. i can even hear traffic at peter o knight, sitting in my shop. ended up something so simple, and all those sleepless nights should stop now. thanks to all who gave me advise and offered to help. scott tampa ________________________________________________________________________________
From: CW9371(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 02, 2002
Subject: Re: Tool Advice for a New Builder
In a message dated 3/2/2002 5:28:34 PM Central Standard Time, bhester(at)apex.net writes: > I bought RV Empennage Tool Kit ( I got the 2X rivet gun) from > http://www.ClevelandTool.com and then I added to it some items from > http://www.averytools.com. both are very good, i bought all my tools from brown aviation supply. they are geared more towards the a&p market but there prices are better then the above and they sell great tools, in many cases the sames tools. I bought my c frame bench riviter from brown and it was the avery with the avery stickers etc. chris ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2002
From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: RV8 C/S Prop Spinner Backing Plate Jig Available
Rv8don(at)aol.com wrote: > > > To the RV8 builders out there: > > When it came time to mount my prop to fit the cowl, I didn't want to deal > with having to walk around the prop all the time or worry about the low > ceiling in my shop so I made a jig out of an old C/S prop hub in order to > hold the spinner backing plate in the same position as the regular prop hub. > Anyway, I'm done with it, and while I'd like to maintian ownership of it, if > it will help anyone else, I'd be happy to make it availalbe. Contact me off > list. > > It's for an RV8/IO-360/Hartzel compact hub setup. > > Regards, > > -Don > RV8 NJ > rv8don(at)aol.com Here's another trick for jigging the spinner backplate into proper position without having to mount the prop: http://home.HiWAAY.net/~sbuc/journal/engine2.html Scroll down to the fourth photo. Sam Buchanan (RV-6) "The RV Journal" http://thervjournal.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "kevin lane" <n3773(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: Lightweight starters...
Date: Mar 02, 2002
I forgot to mention it before, the lightweight starter I bought that is made by an RV builder in OK (I forget his name) using a 280Z starter costs about $180. It has run flawlessly for 500 hours and many G's! I remember the OK part because a tornado had ruined his shop and damaged his RV the week before I ordered it. Kevin ----- Original ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2002
From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Koger chocks
Ralph Koger, of Koger Sunshade fame, has introduced a set of heavy duty plastic wheel chocks especially for the aircraft market. You can see a review here: http://home.HiWAAY.net/~sbuc/journal/koger-chocks.htm Sam Buchanan "The RV Journal" http://thervjournal.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2002
From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator
I have flown the LRI in my RV-6 for a good many hours and like it (in spite of a few negative comments about the LRI on this list mostly from folks who have never flown the unit). You can see my comments and observations here: http://home.HiWAAY.net/~sbuc/journal/liftreserve.htm The only airspeed indicator in my plane (until the Blue Mtn EFIS/Lite arrives!!) is a RMI uEncoder. I would have no problems at all landing with just the LRI, matter of fact it is the primary instrument used for airspeed control during takeoffs and landings. By the way, there is no reason to ever have an electrical failure that would render the uEncoder inoperative if proper wiring architecture is used. Get a copy of Bob Nuckoll's book "The AeroElectric Connection" and read the section on dual bus systems......several times if necessary. :-) Sam Buchanan (RV-6) "The RV Journal" http://thervjournal.com ==================== "Richard D. Fogerson" wrote: > > > I would like opinions from those who are flying with the LRI. I want to > get my IAS from a RMI Encoder and have planned to install the LRI to > supplement airspeed. If I lost air speed because of an electrical > problem, I'm wondering if how well you could fly with just the LRI. > Maybe it would be fine, I'm just having a hard time imagining flying > without an air speed indicator (having never been in that situation). > > Thanks, > Rick Fogerson > RV3 fuselage soon > Boise, ID > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2002
From: Al Mojzisik <prober(at)iwaynet.net>
Subject: Re: Lightweight starters...
Kevin, The person you are referring to is Mark Landoll. I met him at Oshkosh '00 and saw his damaged RV-4. Mark is a real character but I have heard only good things about his starters and harmonic balancers'. He might be in the Yeller pages. HTH AL > >I forgot to mention it before, the lightweight starter I bought that is >made by an RV builder in OK (I forget his name) using a 280Z starter >costs about $180. It has run flawlessly for 500 hours and many G's! I >remember the OK part because a tornado had ruined his shop and damaged >his RV the week before I ordered it. Kevin > ----- Original > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net>
owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
Date: Mar 02, 2002
Subject: REHodges Volatility Tester
Dave, I got a vacuume gauge and hooked it up to a small syringe with a sample of gas. I was able to obtain about 7psi vaccume, which did not appear to cause the gas to "boil", although there were a few tiny bubbles from around the plunger seal. I think they were from tiny air leaks, not fuel boiling. I believe I need a bigger syringe. I have a question regarding operating of the system. Are you supposed to pull the plunger and note the vacuume at the point that the fuel just starts to boil, or are you supposed to pull the plunger out, get the fuel boiling merrily away, and read the gauge when the fuel stops boiling? Also, do you have the info regarding translating the Hodges reading to Reid Vapor Pressure? Thanks, Tim Lewis ****** Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA) RV-6A N47TD - First Flight 18 Dec 99 http://www.geocities.com/timrv6a ****** ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Mar 02, 2002
Subject: Re: LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator
On 2 Mar 2002, at 20:30, Sam Buchanan wrote: > I have flown the LRI in my RV-6 for a good many hours and like it (in > spite of a few negative comments about the LRI on this list mostly > from folks who have never flown the unit). That's me. I've not flown the LRI. I have, however, spent a lot of time reading the patent, it's mathematical description, and the approximate mathematical underpinnings that used to be published on the LRI web site. Everything I saw led me to suspect that the LRI will give reasonably consistent readings in 1 G flight (good for final approach energy management), but in higher G flight (tight base to final turns, for example) will show more "lift reserve" (stall margin) than actually exists. If that's the case, pilots need to know about it, because it could be dangerous. It would also call in to question the LRI web site's claim of "100% Stall Protection." When this was raised in the past (see archives in '00), the owner of the company (Mr Huntinton) had no data to address the question. He said EAA's Glastar project was supposed to address the question, but I'm not familiar with the results. Has anybody on the list seen any quality test results? Has anybody on the list who owns a LRI taken the data to determine what the LRI indicates at the stall in 1, 2, 3G flight? Tim Lewis ****** Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA) RV-6A N47TD - First Flight 18 Dec 99 http://www.geocities.com/timrv6a ****** ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator
Date: Mar 02, 2002
In all honesty, I believe that a pilot who pulls two to three Gs turning base-to-final needs to know that such behavior is of itself dangerous and can lead to his death. The LRI probably does show a false reserve in an accelerated stall but I think that the probability of an incident due to running out of lift near the ground is far more probable than one due to false lift indications from an LRI. Dennis Persyk N600DP 114 hours ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net> Subject: Re: RV-List: LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator > > On 2 Mar 2002, at 20:30, Sam Buchanan wrote: > > > I have flown the LRI in my RV-6 for a good many hours and like it (in > > spite of a few negative comments about the LRI on this list mostly > > from folks who have never flown the unit). > > That's me. I've not flown the LRI. I have, however, spent a lot of > time reading the patent, it's mathematical description, and the > approximate mathematical underpinnings that used to be published on > the LRI web site. Everything I saw led me to suspect that the LRI will > give reasonably consistent readings in 1 G flight (good for final > approach energy management), but in higher G flight (tight base to > final turns, for example) will show more "lift reserve" (stall margin) > than actually exists. If that's the case, pilots need to know about it, > because it could be dangerous. It would also call in to question the > LRI web site's claim of "100% Stall Protection." > > When this was raised in the past (see archives in '00), the owner of the > company (Mr Huntinton) had no data to address the question. He > said EAA's Glastar project was supposed to address the question, > but I'm not familiar with the results. > > Has anybody on the list seen any quality test results? Has anybody > on the list who owns a LRI taken the data to determine what the LRI > indicates at the stall in 1, 2, 3G flight? > > Tim Lewis > ****** > Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA) > RV-6A N47TD - First Flight 18 Dec 99 > http://www.geocities.com/timrv6a > ****** > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Tool Advice for a New Builder
From: "" <tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com>
Date: Mar 03, 2002
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html --- StripMime Errors --- A message with no text/plain section was received. The entire body of the message was removed. Please resend the email using plaintext formatting --- ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Tool Advice for a New Builder
From: "" <tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com>
Date: Mar 03, 2002
Dan, Finally...an issue I have input on. I am somewhat in the same boat as you. I have been watching the list the last couple of years, and I have finally bought all my tools. As for the vendors...I think Avery, Cleveland, and Brown all sell the same stuff (with the exception of the Avery squeezer). Of the three, Brown seems to have the best prices and has been very easy to deal with (haven't delt with Avery or Cleveland). One option I took that saved me a great deal of money was buying some surplus stuff. There is a place in Wichita called the Yard Store (http://yardstore.com/). They sell new, used, and surplus stuff. Their website really doesn't tell you what they have. You really need to call or go by if you want some deals. They almost always have good used rivet guns under $100, and they will generally beat any other vendor's prices on new stuff (they had a Brown catalog when I was there). Some of the good deals I got include a good used US Tool 3x gun for $89 and about 400 clecos for $0.23 each (metal-bodied type). Now if I can only decide which kit to order. (I think I'm leaning toward the 8A over the 7A.) Scott ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bernie Kerr" <kerrbernie(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator(vs PS AOA)
Date: Mar 03, 2002
I agree with Sam B and the others that the LRI is probably a very satisfactory device to fly the airplane safely during landing and T/O. I use the propietary systems AOA and have tested it during a high G accel stall and it is very accurate.When I did my BFR ride this year the CFI was an aerobatic Pitts instructor and he ask me had I ever tested the airplane during hard accel stalls. Maybe 1.5 to 2 g's. He proceeded to lean into it and he estimated the G at 2.5 to 3. The top red light on the AOA came on just at the break during both a left and right stall. It would be interesting to try the LRI at the same type conditions, but I agree that I would never pull anything near that many G's near the ground unless it was to avoid an ostacle like an unseen airplane or tower!! Bernie Kerr, 6A , SE Fla >From: "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net> >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >To: >Subject: Re: RV-List: LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator >Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 23:03:46 -0600 > > >In all honesty, I believe that a pilot who pulls two to three Gs turning >base-to-final needs to know that such behavior is of itself dangerous and >can lead to his death. The LRI probably does show a false reserve in an >accelerated stall but I think that the probability of an incident due to >running out of lift near the ground is far more probable than one due to >false lift indications from an LRI. > >Dennis Persyk N600DP 114 hours > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net> >To: >Subject: Re: RV-List: LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator > > > > > > On 2 Mar 2002, at 20:30, Sam Buchanan wrote: > > > > > I have flown the LRI in my RV-6 for a good many hours and like it (in > > > spite of a few negative comments about the LRI on this list mostly > > > from folks who have never flown the unit). > > > > That's me. I've not flown the LRI. I have, however, spent a lot of > > time reading the patent, it's mathematical description, and the > > approximate mathematical underpinnings that used to be published on > > the LRI web site. Everything I saw led me to suspect that the LRI will > > give reasonably consistent readings in 1 G flight (good for final > > approach energy management), but in higher G flight (tight base to > > final turns, for example) will show more "lift reserve" (stall margin) > > than actually exists. If that's the case, pilots need to know about it, > > because it could be dangerous. It would also call in to question the > > LRI web site's claim of "100% Stall Protection." > > > > When this was raised in the past (see archives in '00), the owner of the > > company (Mr Huntinton) had no data to address the question. He > > said EAA's Glastar project was supposed to address the question, > > but I'm not familiar with the results. > > > > Has anybody on the list seen any quality test results? Has anybody > > on the list who owns a LRI taken the data to determine what the LRI > > indicates at the stall in 1, 2, 3G flight? > > > > Tim Lewis > > ****** > > Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA) > > RV-6A N47TD - First Flight 18 Dec 99 > > http://www.geocities.com/timrv6a > > ****** > > > > > > Bernie Kerr, 6A,O-320,tipup,Sensenich metal,SE Fla ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 2002
From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Glove box
Rick, Thanks for your reply. I have read comments from others on the list who had inspections from FAA or DARs whose mindset was that in flight accessible CBs were required. This was counter to the more reasonable Aeroelectric philosophy. Regards, Richard Rick Caldwell wrote: > > > Richard, No problems with the fuses for the inspection. My DAR was the very > knowledgable John Murphy who has built at least 12 homebuilts. He only > recommended I discard the nuts on the oil transducer & use AN lock nuts. I > had used the regular nuts that came with the transducer. > > Rick > > >From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net> > >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > >Subject: Re: RV-List: Glove box > >Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 17:32:13 -0500 > > > > > >Rick, > > > >I like your glove box idea and the access through the back to fuse > >blocks. > > > >I'm planning to use mostly fuses in blocks and only a few circuit > >breakers per the Aeroelectric Connection suggestions. During your DAR > >inspection was there any question or objection to the use of fuses > >instead of circuit breakers? > > > >Regards, > > > >Richard Dudley > > > > > >Rick Caldwell wrote: > > > > > > > > > Gary, > > > > > > I made up my own box for my RV-6 panel and used a flush latch from an > > > inspection panel robbed from a wrecked chopper (the whirlybird kind.) I > >used > > > piano hinge on the bottom of the door and slotted the holes that attach > >the > > > hinge to the door. This allows the door to lift clear of the panel as it > > > swings open. To shut, just push down lightly as you close the door. I > >also > > > put a hinged door as the back of the box. This opens to reveal the fuse > > > blocks mounted on the bulkhead back there. It's real nice to be able to > > > store the other headset, maps, etc. in the box when flying solo > >aerobatics. > > > Also real nice to sit in the passenger's seat and change fuses. > > > > > > Rick Caldwell > > > RV-6 in Melbourne, FL > > > > > > >From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> > > > >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > > > >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > > > >Subject: RV-List: Glove box > > > >Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 13:43:00 -0800 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >I am doing my panel, and I would love to use Van's glove box kit, but I > > > >will need to use one that is about 5/8 inch shorter. > > > > > > > >I don't have one I can look at, so I don't know how it is constructed. > >Can > > > >the height be easily reduced? Does anyone have pictures of the kit on > >the > > > >web, or could post them? Or should I just roll my own. In that case, > >how > > > >is the latch done? > > > > > > > >Thanks, > > > > > > > >Gary LIming > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: > > > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx > > > > > > > > > Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. > http://www.hotmail.com > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "MSices" <msices(at)megsinet.net>
Subject: FOR SALE
Date: Mar 03, 2002
Great product, but I need to cut back on my budget a bit: For Sale: AOA Sport Angle of Attack system by Proprietary Software Systems. See more info at http://www.angle-of-attack.com/Default.htm This unit is brand new in original packaging, never opened or attempted install. Guaranteed to include everything you would receive if you bought one new for $890. Will sell for 10% discount at $801 plus $7 shipping/handling. Please contact me off-list if you are interested: Michael Sices msices(at)core.com RV8 Kenosha, WI ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Shane Summerhays" <ssummerhays(at)attbi.com>
Subject: tapering the wingskins
Date: Mar 03, 2002
Dear Friends Does anyone have any suggestions or tecniques for tapering the edge of the wingskins? My first guess is that all van wants you to do is just knock off the edge lightly, possibly with a sanding block etc.. Any comments would be appreciated Thank you Shane Summerhays R-V8 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 2002
From: gert <gert(at)execpc.com>
Subject: Re: Tool Advice for a New Builder
I bought a used pneumatic rivet squeezer from the Yard a few years ago for about $200. after 4 weeks it started leaking air and quit squeezing rivets. Send the yard an Email message inquiring about a seal for the piston so i could fix it. They would have nothing of it. They reply was basically. Send it back, WE will fix it for you. Short of it, I send it AND had it back within 5 days, no charge !! I'do business with the yard in a heartbeat again. matter of fact, i peruse their site on a regular basis. Gert tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com wrote: > > > Dan, > > Finally...an issue I have input on. I am somewhat in the same boat as you. I have been watching the list the last couple of years, and I have finally bought all my tools. As for the vendors...I think Avery, Cleveland, and Brown all sell the same stuff (with the exception of the Avery squeezer). Of the three, Brown seems to have the best prices and has been very easy to deal with (haven't delt with Avery or Cleveland). One option I took that saved me a great deal of money was buying some surplus stuff. There is a place in Wichita called the Yard Store (http://yardstore.com/). They sell new, used, and surplus stuff. Their website really doesn't tell you what they have. You really need to call or go by if you want some deals. They almost always have good used rivet guns under $100, and they will generally beat any other vendor's prices on new stuff (they had a Brown catalog when I was there). Some of the good deals I got include a good used US Tool 3x gun for $89 a! nd! > about 400 clecos for $0.23 each (metal-bodied type). > > Now if I can only decide which kit to order. (I think I'm leaning toward the 8A over the 7A.) > > Scott > > > -- is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net>
Subject: N numbers
Date: Mar 03, 2002
Sorry if this is already been posted, but the FAA has joined the modern age now with this on-line available N-number search. Follow this link and click N-number Availability. http://162.58.35.241/acdatabase/acmain.htm Alex Peterson Maple Grove, MN 6A N66AP flying 96 hours ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2002
From: wvu(at)mail.ameritel.net
Subject: UHMW Tape Adhesive Removal
Anyone know what would work well to remove the glue from UHMW tape? Some of the plastic part is curling up and I decided to get rid of it. I pull the tape off but some glue remained. It doesn't give easily. It doesn't even pull the paint off. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses at mail.ameritel.net] ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 2002
From: old ogre <jollyd(at)ipns.com>
Subject: Re: RV8-List: tapering the wingskins
If you have the "pre-punched holes kit"..always, always, always smooth the edges carefully...if you look at the edges carefully, you will see that even the edges done on a shear will have minute stress risers in them..the pro=punched are actually verrrrry jagged..that's the way the machiene does them..look at them unde a mag lenz....wow!..i always use a file, and then smooth with sandpaper..then run my finger over the edge..if no blood appears, it good...remember to was all blood off the metal, because IT corrodes....happy building..by the way, my RV8s is for sale 98-99% complete..if any one is interisted...jolly in aurora Shane Summerhays wrote: > --> RV8-List message posted by: "Shane Summerhays" > > Dear Friends > > Does anyone have any suggestions or tecniques for tapering the edge of > the wingskins? My first guess is that all van wants you to do is just > knock off the edge lightly, possibly with a sanding block etc.. > > Any comments would be appreciated > Thank you Shane Summerhays > > R-V8 > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: N numbers
Date: Mar 03, 2002
Gotta throw this in...since imho my search tool kicks the wheel pants off the FAA's and others': http://www.rvproject.com/nnumber.jsp It even lets you search for available N-numbers with your preferred suffix... And if you're looking for RVs nearby: http://www.rvproject.com/rvfinder.jsp )_( Dan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> Subject: RV-List: N numbers > > Sorry if this is already been posted, but the FAA has joined the modern age > now with this on-line available N-number search. Follow this link and click > N-number Availability. > > http://162.58.35.241/acdatabase/acmain.htm > > Alex Peterson > Maple Grove, MN > 6A N66AP flying 96 hours > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Burton" <dburton(at)nwlink.com>
Subject: Re: UHMW Tape Adhesive Removal
Date: Mar 03, 2002
Auto paint shops sell "adhesive removing solvent" for this purpose. It will take the goo off without damaging your paint. I've used a citrus based solvent for this too, on other surfaces then paint, but would hesitate to use anything that I wasn't sure was safe for paint.... Dave Burton, RV6, wings ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us>
Subject: brakes
Date: Mar 03, 2002
Yeah the early ones had floor mounted brakes. Not sure when they changed to the overhead design. W You talking about the "new" overhead mounted brakes on the -6? David ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eustace Bowhay" <ebowhay(at)jetstream.net>
Subject: Re: Exxon Elite
Date: Mar 03, 2002
Was wondering why we would want to change from Shell W a proven product that has saved operators untold amounts of money over the years. When Shell W was put on the market years ago those that switched to it achieved longer service life, lower overhaul costs and in the case of the radial engines were able to get the TBO's increased by as much as 25% a saving of up to $10,000.00 per engine on the larger twin row radials such as the R1830's. If you could see the inside of on engine at tear down that has been run on Shell W compared to one run on something else I think this would make a believer out of you. Eustace Bowhay Blind Bay B.C. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 2002
From: "Owens, Laird" <Owens(at)aerovironment.com>
Subject: UHMW Tape Adhesive Removal
I just went thru this. The UHMW peels off the adhesive easy, leaving about 3 mils of the adhesive. I ended up using a heat gun to soften the adhesive, and then you can peel it up. It took some of the paint under it though.... Laird From: rv-list(at)matronics.com on Sun, Mar 3, 2002 7:38 AM Subject: RV-List: UHMW Tape Adhesive Removal Anyone know what would work well to remove the glue from UHMW tape? Some of the plastic part is curling up and I decided to get rid of it. I pull the tape off but some glue remained. It doesn't give easily. It doesn't even pull the paint off. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses at mail.ameritel.net] ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Glenn & Judi" <dirtyrottenscoundrels(at)attbi.com>
Subject: UHMW Tape Adhesive Removal
Date: Mar 03, 2002
Look for a product called "Goo Gone". Test it on a small area first to make sure it doesn't affect your paint. -Glenn Gordon N442E > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of > wvu(at)mail.ameritel.net > Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2002 4:13 AM > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: UHMW Tape Adhesive Removal > > > Anyone know what would work well to remove the glue from UHMW > tape? Some of > the plastic part is curling up and I decided to get rid of it. I pull the > tape off but some glue remained. It doesn't give easily. It doesn't even > pull the paint off. > > --- > [This E-mail was scanned for viruses at mail.ameritel.net] > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HCRV6(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 03, 2002
Subject: Re: Tool Advice for a New Builder
I have no first hand knowledge of the Spruce kits but suggest you also check Avery Tools (800-652-8379, www.averytools.com) and Clevaland Aircraft Tools (515-432-6794). Both offer very high quality tool kits designed expressly for RV building. My experience is that I have never been disappointed with the quality of any tool from these two suppliers. Can't say as much for some of the others. Harry Crosby Pleasanton, California RV-6, finish kit stuff ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Joe Larson" <jpl(at)showpage.org>
Subject: Re: RV-List Digest: 36 Msgs - 03/02/02
Date: Mar 03, 2002
Dan, another site -- one I trust -- is Avery Tools. I bought their RV tool kit years ago, and I'm quite satisfied. http://www.averytools.com -Joe > From: DANBERGERONHAM(at)aol.com > Subject: RV-List: Tool Advice for a New Builder > > > I'm in process of setting up a workshop and hope to start work on an RV-7 by > Fall. I have all of stationary tools recommended in RV-7 Preview Plans, > i.e., a bench grinder, 1" belt sander, 30 gal air compressor, band saw and > drill press. I've been looking through tool catalogs and checking on-line for > hand tools and am wondering if tool kits offered in Aircraft Spruce and > Specialty Company 2001 - 2002 catalog are a good deal. They are on p. 466 - > P/N TP 176RV for $605, and p. 467 - P/N TP176MKB for $795. Does anyone have > any experience with these kits? Are these reasonably good tools? How about > the listed TP82 or TP83 rivet guns? I have little experience w/ riveting and > want to get a reasonably good item. Are these kits a good way to pick up > many of the required tools to build an RV or should I look elsewhere? Where? ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Huft" <rv8tor(at)lazy8.net>
Subject: N numbers
Date: Mar 03, 2002
Dan, this tool is way fast! I noticed a couple of anomolies a. all the numbers returned are 5 digits/letters b. none of the numbers returned have leading zeros. Thanks though, John -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway Subject: Re: RV-List: N numbers Gotta throw this in...since imho my search tool kicks the wheel pants off the FAA's and others': http://www.rvproject.com/nnumber.jsp It even lets you search for available N-numbers with your preferred suffix... And if you're looking for RVs nearby: http://www.rvproject.com/rvfinder.jsp )_( Dan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> Subject: RV-List: N numbers > > Sorry if this is already been posted, but the FAA has joined the modern age > now with this on-line available N-number search. Follow this link and click > N-number Availability. > > http://162.58.35.241/acdatabase/acmain.htm > > Alex Peterson > Maple Grove, MN > 6A N66AP flying 96 hours > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 2002
From: Ed Holyoke <bicyclop(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: tapering the wing skins
Are you talking about at the overlap? I did a test piece day before yesterday with my angle die grinder and 2" relock disk. I can taper to a knife edge, although that doesn't seem like a real good idea. I'm going to do some more test pieces before I go after the wing skins. It looks like Van's wants a longer taper on the underlying sheet and the top sheet is more of a cosmetic round over. Ed Holyoke 6qb Dear Friends Does anyone have any suggestions or tecniques for tapering the edge of the wingskins? My first guess is that all van wants you to do is just knock off the edge lightly, possibly with a sanding block etc.. Any comments would be appreciated Thank you Shane Summerhays R-V8 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Greg Young" <gyoung@cs-sol.com>
Subject: N numbers
Date: Mar 03, 2002
John, a) all the 3 & 4 char "JH"'s must be taken - try something else (e.g. GY) and you can find other than 5 chars b) no leading zeroes are allowed in N-numbers. There are some other rules like no I,O or Q since they can be confused with 1 & 0. Don't know if Dan implemented all the rules in his search. Regards, Greg Young RV-6 N6GY RIP searching for Navion... > > Dan, this tool is way fast! I noticed a couple of anomolies > > a. all the numbers returned are 5 digits/letters > > b. none of the numbers returned have leading zeros. > > Thanks though, John > > > Gotta throw this in...since imho my search tool kicks the > wheel pants off > the FAA's and others': > > http://www.rvproject.com/nnumber.jsp > > It even lets you search for available N-numbers with your preferred > suffix... > > And if you're looking for RVs nearby: > > http://www.rvproject.com/rvfinder.jsp > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 2002
Subject: Re: Tool Advice for a New Builder
From: John Veld <jcveld(at)mac.com>
I have purchased several good quality, used tools from =8CThe Yard=B9 in Wichita. Their prices were good and on the one occasion that I rec=B9d a tool I was not satisfied with they replaced it immediately. They also sell some new tools. They generally publish a monthly list of available tools & prices. Contact them at; THE YARD 725 E CENTRAL WICHITA KS 67202 (800) 888-8991 From John Veld, RV-6A wings on jig, Kalamazoo, Mi ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: N numbers
Date: Mar 03, 2002
> Dan, this tool is way fast! I noticed a couple of anomolies > > a. all the numbers returned are 5 digits/letters Try something else, like: Search for Available N-Numbers Ending With "1z". You'll see a handful of 4-digit N-numbers are available. I think what you're referring to is the general shortage of N-numbers with fewer than 5 digits...yeah, many are already taken. > b. none of the numbers returned have leading zeros. This is illegal, at least according to the FAA. I just conform to their rules. Too bad we can't make our own. 8 ) )_( Dan ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Huft" <rv8tor(at)lazy8.net>
Subject: N numbers
Date: Mar 03, 2002
OK, thanks, and Greg too. I guess JH is a popular pair of initials. jh -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway Subject: Re: RV-List: N numbers > Dan, this tool is way fast! I noticed a couple of anomolies > > a. all the numbers returned are 5 digits/letters Try something else, like: Search for Available N-Numbers Ending With "1z". You'll see a handful of 4-digit N-numbers are available. I think what you're referring to is the general shortage of N-numbers with fewer than 5 digits...yeah, many are already taken. > b. none of the numbers returned have leading zeros. This is illegal, at least according to the FAA. I just conform to their rules. Too bad we can't make our own. 8 ) )_( Dan ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: N numbers
Date: Mar 03, 2002
Doesn't matter in the search as the FAA doesn't put those i.d.s up. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Young" <gyoung@cs-sol.com> Subject: RE: RV-List: N numbers John, a) all the 3 & 4 char "JH"'s must be taken - try something else (e.g. GY) and you can find other than 5 chars b) no leading zeroes are allowed in N-numbers. There are some other rules like no I,O or Q since they can be confused with 1 & 0. Don't know if Dan implemented all the rules in his search. Regards, Greg Young RV-6 N6GY RIP searching for Navion... > > Dan, this tool is way fast! I noticed a couple of anomolies > > a. all the numbers returned are 5 digits/letters > > b. none of the numbers returned have leading zeros. > > Thanks though, John > > > Gotta throw this in...since imho my search tool kicks the > wheel pants off > the FAA's and others': > > http://www.rvproject.com/nnumber.jsp > > It even lets you search for available N-numbers with your preferred > suffix... > > And if you're looking for RVs nearby: > > http://www.rvproject.com/rvfinder.jsp > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Mar 03, 2002
Subject: Autogas and the XP360
Listers, A Lycos search gave me this email from the Glaster list regarding the use of auto fuel in the XP360. I thought it was interesting, so I'm posting it to the RV list. Tim Lewis ----------------- From http://archives.glastar.org/0106/msg00044.html ----------------- Re: xp-360 To: (Recipients of 'building-fwf' suppressed) Subject: Re: xp-360 From: "building-fwf Listmanager" Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:14:43 -0700 Reply-To: "Building - Firewall Forward Traditional " From: "Bill Whitehouse" <w.a.whitehouse(at)worldnet.att.net> I have an advanced manual on the XP360. The engine is made from Superior Air Parts and they are PMA'ed parts. These parts when new are sold for installation on certified engines. The XP360 is a collection of certified parts for an O360 however I have not seen anything on the entire engine being certified and therefor no certified type plate on engine. These engines are being put together by Matituck now a Teledyne company. Superior Air Parts warrants the engine for two years after installation or two and one half years after purchase. Superior's maintenance procedures must be followed and no racing, aerobatics or other unusual operating conditions. The XP360 dimensions are: 24.6" high x 33.4" wide x 32.8 inches long from prop flange to back end of oil filter and weights 287 lbs. No governor or vacuum pump is mounted and will make the length longer. Mounting pad for these are available on rear no forward mounting governors. The fuel injected model is the same except the height is 24.0 inches and weights 290 lbs. There is a page on auto fuel the first paragraph says: "The XP360 can operate and perform at rated power using unleaded fuel of at least 91 Octane, leaded or unleaded. Of course the higher the octane used in the XP360, the greater the detonation margin during high power and/or hot operation. When operation on unleaded fuel, Superior recommends using fresh premium, 91-93 Octane, auto fuel available at major brand, reputable gas stations." The second paragraph warns of vapor pressure and that carburetor icing and vapor lock are more likely. And avoid fuel temperatures over 85 deg F and over 12500 feet. Third paragraph NO ETHANOL or and reformulated blends etc.... Use ASTM-439 and D4814 specified gasolines. Use alcohol and water tester is recommended. Fourth paragraph: Superior runs in the engine using 100 LL to provide initial lubricating lead to internal components.(valve guides). 100LL is not required after shipment but mixing 100LL with autofuel or periodically running 100LL is encouraged. ( I would run first 25 hours on 100LL). Fifth paragraph: Is on installation and talks about extra precautions on sharp bends, and fittings and recommends smooth bend tubing well insulated and location of boost pump as close to fuel tank as practical. Continues on vapor lock and vapor pressure potential problems to avoid. Recommends using Hodges Volatility Tester for a go no reading on vapor pressure. Recommends setting timing to 22 deg BTDC for auto fuel as it is faster burning. Sixth paragraph: Operation with auto fuel up through 75% is the same as aviation grade fuel. All over 75% must be at full rich mixture. This vapor pressure problem can be difficult. I had a friend who's carb float would start to sink and start causing rough running due to the rich mixture every time he crossed the mountains. Just get over the middle of the rough terrain and the engine would run rough. Carb was getting hot enough to start to boil the low vapor pressure gas. He had every thing insulated and shielded with air blowing on them and still had this problem. Bill Whitehouse #5769 To reply: mailto:building-fwf.42585(at)glastarnet.glastar.org To start a new topic: mailto:building-fwf(at)glastarnet.glastar.org To login: http://glastarnet.glastar.org/ Prev by thread: Re: xp-360 Next by thread: XP-360 Index(es): Thread ****** Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA) RV-6A N47TD - First Flight 18 Dec 99 http://www.geocities.com/timrv6a ****** ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Randy Lervold" <randy@rv-8.com>
Subject: Re: Exxon Elite
Date: Mar 03, 2002
> Was wondering why we would want to change from Shell W a proven product that > has saved operators untold amounts of money over the years. > > When Shell W was put on the market years ago those that switched to it > achieved longer service life, lower overhaul costs and in the case of the > radial engines were able to get the TBO's increased by as much as 25% a > saving of up to $10,000.00 per engine on the larger twin row radials such as > the R1830's. > > If you could see the inside of on engine at tear down that has been run on > Shell W compared to one run on something else I think this would make a > believer out of you. > > Eustace Bowhay Blind Bay B.C. Eustace, When you refer to Shell W does that include the 15W-50, or just the W family straight weights? Randy Lervold Vancouver, WA ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2002
From: wvu(at)mail.ameritel.net
Subject: UHMW Tape Adhesive Removal
Adhesive remover solvent worked. What a concept! Thanks to all responses. Anh Maryland > >Look for a product called "Goo Gone". Test it on a small area first to make >sure it doesn't affect your paint. > >-Glenn Gordon >N442E > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of >> wvu(at)mail.ameritel.net >> Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2002 4:13 AM >> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >> Subject: RV-List: UHMW Tape Adhesive Removal >> >> >> >> Anyone know what would work well to remove the glue from UHMW >> tape? Some of >> the plastic part is curling up and I decided to get rid of it. I pull the >> tape off but some glue remained. It doesn't give easily. It doesn't even >> pull the paint off. >> >> --- >> [This E-mail was scanned for viruses at mail.ameritel.net] >> >> > > >--- >[This E-mail was scanned for viruses at mail.ameritel.net] > > > --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses at mail.ameritel.net] ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 04, 2002
Subject: Wanted: Another Navaid Autopilot
A buddy of mine with a Harmon Rocket II wants a Navaid wing leveler and will buy your unit outright for $100 over what you paid to get it now. If you can help him out please call him directly. Ken Coe 925-443-7460 home or 925-980-9267 cell (west coast) -GV (N1GV) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Randall Henderson" <randallh(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: Pitot Static...
Date: Mar 03, 2002
> A short piece of rubber fuel line from the auto parts store > does a fine job of joining the lines. Yup. When I was doing mine the DAR who was to inspect the plane happened by -- I showed him the elaborite 4-piece assembly of fittings that I'd come up with, and asked if he thought I should do that or would maybe just a short piece of hose work...? He just smiled and pointed at the hose. I used those little spring-type hose clamps to secure it but the hose is tight enough on both tubes without them that that's probably even overkill. Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (~300 hrs) Portland, OR www.vanshomewing.org ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 04, 2002
From: Doug Gray <douggray(at)ihug.com.au>
Subject: Re: Tool Advice for a New Builder
Judging from the part numbers I believe these are from US Industrial. I bought such a kit when I started and still use it...but that was before I knew my ABC, ie Avery, Brown and Cleveland. All subsequent purchases have been from ABC. I can tell you that they make very good Rivet Guns, this is by far the best part of the kit. I would probably buy one of these in preference to all others if the need arose. Please DO check the archives for comments on other tools from this supplier. Doug Gray DANBERGERONHAM(at)aol.com wrote: > > I'm in process of setting up a workshop and hope to start work on an RV-7 by > Fall. I have all of stationary tools recommended in RV-7 Preview Plans, > i.e., a bench grinder, 1" belt sander, 30 gal air compressor, band saw and > drill press. I've been looking through tool catalogs and checking on-line for > hand tools and am wondering if tool kits offered in Aircraft Spruce and > Specialty Company 2001 - 2002 catalog are a good deal. They are on p. 466 - > P/N TP 176RV for $605, and p. 467 - P/N TP176MKB for $795. Does anyone have > any experience with these kits? Are these reasonably good tools? How about > the listed TP82 or TP83 rivet guns? I have little experience w/ riveting and > want to get a reasonably good item. Are these kits a good way to pick up > many of the required tools to build an RV or should I look elsewhere? Where? > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bruce Meacham" <bruce_meacham(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: neaded: RV-3 Plans info
Date: Mar 04, 2002
Can anyone get to me the instructions for doing the weight and ballance? I need the wheel moments. Thanks, Bruce Meacham ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Exxon Elite
From: Eric.J.Henson(at)chase.com
Date: Mar 04, 2002
09:05:49 AM Eustace, I saw exactly that a while back. On one stand was an IO-320 with 1600 since major and a prop strike. Its was like new inside, next to it was an O-360 with 650 hours, it had been running brand X with no additive and looked like a diesel tractor engine inside. Boy was I sold, the IO-320 had been religiously maintained with Aeroshell and the recommended additive. You can bet I'll be doing the same. Eric "Eustace Bowhay" (at)matronics.com on 03/03/2002 01:17:37 PM Please respond to rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent by: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com cc: Subject: Re: RV-List: Exxon Elite Was wondering why we would want to change from Shell W a proven product that has saved operators untold amounts of money over the years. When Shell W was put on the market years ago those that switched to it achieved longer service life, lower overhaul costs and in the case of the radial engines were able to get the TBO's increased by as much as 25% a saving of up to $10,000.00 per engine on the larger twin row radials such as the R1830's. If you could see the inside of on engine at tear down that has been run on Shell W compared to one run on something else I think this would make a believer out of you. Eustace Bowhay Blind Bay B.C. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jack Textor" <jack(at)IaJobs.com>
Subject: RE: RV8-List: tapering the wingskins
Date: Mar 04, 2002
Shane, I feathered the overlap edge were the skins met just behind the tank, about a 1 1/2 inches from the front edge. I feathered the bottom edges of both skins, using a disk sander at a very slow speed then buffed it with schotchbrite wheel. By the way I did it on the top skins only Jack Textor RV8, wings ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: neaded: RV-3 Plans info
Date: Mar 04, 2002
From: Larry Pardue <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net>
> > >Can anyone get to me the instructions for doing the weight and ballance? > I need the wheel moments. > I would recommend you measure to get the stations. The published stations on my RV-6 were incorrect. Larry Pardue Carlsbad, NM RV-6 N441LP Flying http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Lightweight starters...
Date: Mar 04, 2002
I have almost the same story as Gary with my Sky-Tec starter. 374 hrs. No problems. Odyssey battery. No components changed on the starter yet. O-320, 8.5:1 comp. All original and very satisfied. Bryan Jones -8 Pearland, Texas >Mark- > >First of all, the manufacturer is Sky-Tec so people can actually search >properly. > >The Sky-Tec starter in my 6A has 500 hrs on it and just a week ago I >replaced >the solenoid on the side of the starter for $40. A good deal as that >appears >to be the only thing that ages on them (I'll see if brushes are the next >thing but for now they're good). I think it is a super unit and I would >get >the same setup if I were to build again. > >The great thing is that these starters really crank if you have a good >battery. I recently replaced my 23 lb Concord RG25 battery with the 14 lb >Odyssey PC680, which you can get on the web for $100 or less ($70 less than >Van's), and boy does it turn things over sprightly. You can taxi on this >starter. > >-GV (N1GV) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 04, 2002
From: philip condon <pcondon(at)mitre.org>
"rv-list(at)matronics.com"
Subject: Static RPM Solved - Was Cheap VAN's Tach
I was able to reach book value for static RPM 2150 on the Sensenich metal -70CM 79 inch, for the 160 HP lycoming RV-4 (30 inch MP, 58 degrees OAT, 50 foot MSL, full rich, Graphic engine monitor showing all cylinders ok) verified with my optical tach. The cheap Chineese Vans tach was off by 260 to 310 RPM depending where you were on th scale. Also, the elapsed timee was measuring at 1/3 to 1/4 the real time. I had to wait untill this past weekend to get daylight to try my optical tach. A digital tach is in my future. Side thought......could this be (One of) the reasons why there is such a variance in reported TBO of A/C engines ?? Some engines "need" overhaul at 12 to 1600 hrs. while some go to 22 to 2600 or more hrs bevore TBO. There are many reasons for this variance, but could crappie tachs (and recording time faults) be part of the equation ??.. Back to work ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Joe Larson" <jpl(at)showpage.org>
Subject: Navaid Devices Availability
Date: Mar 04, 2002
> > A buddy of mine with a Harmon Rocket II wants a Navaid wing leveler and will > buy your unit outright for $100 over what you paid to get it now. If you can > help him out please call him directly. Is Navaid Devices having problems of some sort? I was kinda counting on using one. -Joe ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Sears" <sears(at)searnet.com>
Subject: Re: Autogas and the XP360
Date: Mar 04, 2002
> This vapor pressure problem can be difficult. I had a friend who's carb > float would start to sink and start causing rough running due to the > rich mixture every time he crossed the mountains. Just get over the > middle of the rough terrain and the engine would run rough. Carb was > getting hot enough to start to boil the low vapor pressure gas. He had > every thing insulated and shielded with air blowing on them and still > had this problem. I think I read the culprit to the problem right away. Seems to me that I read in the STCs I had on my C172 and AA-5A Cheetah that the altitude limit for auto gas was 10K feet. I've flown over the mountains in the east on numerous trips and never had problems with vapor locking; but, I never had to get above 10K feet. In fact, I can never remember having vapor locking problems in the air for the 16 years I've been using auto gas in my airplanes. I'm not flying above 10K feet, either. In the west, it's a given that some flying is going to be over the altitude limits. If that be the case, I don't find it unusual that the user of auto gas in those extremes is going to encounter problems with auto gas, at times. Even though the auto gas STC, and the use of auto gas in our homebuilts, is a great thing for most of us, it is not meant for all of us. It does have its limitations. I guess one could experiment with a mix of 100LL and autogas to see what one could do to improve on the limits; but, the limits are there for us to be aware of. When we live within those limits, it's a cheap alternative to fueling our steeds. Jim Sears in KY RV-6A N198JS EAA Tech Counselor ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 04, 2002
From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: Navaid Devices Availability
The only problem at Navaid is not being able to produce enough units to quickly meet demand. Navaid is a small operation that has been swamped by the demand created by the RV phenomenon. Last I heard delivery for the control head was about six months with the servo being available in a few weeks. Best advise is to call to get current delivery schedule. Sometimes success can breed its own problems.... :-) Sam Buchanan =========================== Joe Larson wrote: > > > > > > A buddy of mine with a Harmon Rocket II wants a Navaid wing leveler and will > > buy your unit outright for $100 over what you paid to get it now. If you can > > help him out please call him directly. > > Is Navaid Devices having problems of some sort? I was kinda counting on using > one. > > -Joe > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Engelmechanical(at)cs.com
Date: Mar 04, 2002
Subject: unsubsribe
Please remove me from your list ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Norman" <jnorman(at)intermapsystems.com>
Subject: Navaid Devices Availability
Date: Mar 04, 2002
I got mine about a month ago... exactly 7 months from date of order. I gave them a credit card number and forgot about it until it showed up 7 months later. If you must have one soon, they told me that they can give you the servo part that you need for your wing.. No waiting on that part (at least thats the way it was a few months back). Jim tampa -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Sam Buchanan Subject: Re: RV-List: Navaid Devices Availability The only problem at Navaid is not being able to produce enough units to quickly meet demand. Navaid is a small operation that has been swamped by the demand created by the RV phenomenon. Last I heard delivery for the control head was about six months with the servo being available in a few weeks. Best advise is to call to get current delivery schedule. Sometimes success can breed its own problems.... :-) Sam Buchanan =========================== Joe Larson wrote: > > > > > > A buddy of mine with a Harmon Rocket II wants a Navaid wing leveler and will > > buy your unit outright for $100 over what you paid to get it now. If you can > > help him out please call him directly. > > Is Navaid Devices having problems of some sort? I was kinda counting on using > one. > > -Joe > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HCRV6(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 04, 2002
Subject: Re: tapering the wing skins
Unless Van's has changed something since the old slow build kits, that tapering you are referring to is only supposed to be in a small triangular are at the front corner where the inboard and outboard skins overlap at the leading edge skin. Harry Crosby Pleasanton, California RV-6, finish kit stuff ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 04, 2002
From: Finn Lassen <finnlassen(at)netzero.net>
Subject: Re: RV3-List: neaded: RV-3 Plans info
You need to measure them yourself, aircraft level. Here's a bit of info: Datum: 50 " forward of wing leading edges. Design C.G. range: 18% to 27% of wing cord, or 9.72" to 14.58" from leading edge (add 50" to both to use datum). Example in my builder's manual: Left main wheel: 50.5" aft of datum Right main wheel: 50.25" Tail wheel: 216.5" Oil: 30" Pilot: 81" Baggage: 112.5" Example: Aircraft weighed empty in level flight attitude: Left main wheel: 360 lbs @ 50.5" aft of datum Right main wheel: 359 lbs @ 50.25" Tail wheel: 36 lbs @ 216.5" giving a gross C.G. of 44014 / 755 = 58.3". Add pilot and fuel to get into C.G. range. Finn Bruce Meacham wrote: > --> RV3-List message posted by: "Bruce Meacham" > > Can anyone get to me the instructions for doing the weight and ballance? > I need the wheel moments. > > Thanks, > > Bruce Meacham ---------------------------------------------------- Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today Only $9.95 per month! http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 04, 2002
From: Finn Lassen <finnlassen(at)netzero.net>
Subject: Re: RV3-List: neaded: RV-3 Plans info
Sorry, forgot two pieces of info you'll need: Fuel (wing): 58.5" Fuel (fuselage): 53". But you'd do well to verify all these locations while you have the the aircraft on the scales: Weigh it empty. Then with oil. Then with pilot, then with full fuel. You'll need to verify mail wheel location at each measurement as they may move with added weight. Finn Finn Lassen wrote: > --> RV3-List message posted by: Finn Lassen > > You need to measure them yourself, aircraft level. > Here's a bit of info: > Datum: 50 " forward of wing leading edges. > Design C.G. range: 18% to 27% of wing cord, or 9.72" to 14.58" from leading > edge (add 50" to both to use datum). > Example in my builder's manual: > Left main wheel: 50.5" aft of datum > Right main wheel: 50.25" > Tail wheel: 216.5" > Oil: 30" > Pilot: 81" > Baggage: 112.5" > > Example: Aircraft weighed empty in level flight attitude: > Left main wheel: 360 lbs @ 50.5" aft of datum > Right main wheel: 359 lbs @ 50.25" > Tail wheel: 36 lbs @ 216.5" > giving a gross C.G. of 44014 / 755 = 58.3". > Add pilot and fuel to get into C.G. range. > > Finn > > Bruce Meacham wrote: > > > --> RV3-List message posted by: "Bruce Meacham" > > > > Can anyone get to me the instructions for doing the weight and ballance? > > I need the wheel moments. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Bruce Meacham ---------------------------------------------------- Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today Only $9.95 per month! http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Russ Werner" <russ(at)maui.net>
Subject: Re: Navaid Devices Availability
Date: Mar 04, 2002
I ordered mine on Friday. They quoted me 18 weeks for delivery. I understand they are pretty accurate in their delivery estimates. They don't ask for money until 2 weeks prior to shipping. Russ HRII ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 04, 2002
From: philip condon <pcondon(at)mitre.org>
"rv-list(at)matronics.com"
Subject: Angle of Attack Theory Article (Long)
I have found very little on the operational theory on the AOA devices -- lots of testomonial, nothing in the text books. There has been some activity on the three AOA sites on the web that are very informative. There is even a interactive web based video presentation (anamation) on the theory of AOA. Here is a snip from a Bruce Meacham write-up that is useful. (Doing this so it makes it into the archives for future e-searching.) ..................................... Hanging on Alpha By Bruce Meacham Aircraft stay in the heavens for one reason; the wings push molecules of air down. Angle of attack (Ill call it Alpha from now on) is the angle at which a wing meets the wind that its going through. It directly relates to the amount of air a wing can push. An airfoil is only efficient in a narrow range of alpha. For many popular airfoils the range is around +/- 12 degrees. Above or below this, lift does not increase as rapidly as drag, and the airfoil is no longer effectively producing lift. Its important to know that the force the wind imparts on the wing increases as a square of the velocity. FL = alpha k v2 Equation 1 Here k compensate for the density of air and the characteristics of the airfoil. We can re-arrange this for alpha as alpha = FL / (k v2) Equation 2 It can be inferred from Equation 2 that at large velocities (cruise) the amount of alpha required to keep the aircraft aloft is quite small. As speed decreases, to maintain the same amount of lifting force the wings must increase alpha. The slower you go, the higher the alpha. Till eventually the wings alpha goes beyond the region of best performance and the wing stalls. What happens in a 60-degree bank? Lets look at Equation 2 again. In a level 60-degree bank the aircraft experiences twice the effective gravity force, so the FL term in the equation doubles. What does that do to alpha? Alpha too must double to compensate! This is why stall speed increases under increased G load. state of the airfoil in any given flight scenario. Stall speed, best glide, L/D Max, best rate of climb and best angle of climb are all constants of angle of attack, not air speed. At higher density altitudes or G loading all these speeds change, but not alpha. Another compelling argument for alpha is that at very low airspeed the Airspeed Indicator is less accurate while the angle of attack indicator only increases accuracy. The best kept pilot secret: The elevator is a direct alpha control! Its just that simple. Pull back: alpha goes up, lift goes up and speed goes down, pull forward the opposite happens. So what does this mean to the Pilot In Command? What are the really big benefits in practical application? Increase Approach accuracy. Alpha isnt power dependant, unlike velocity. For this reason, its dramatically easier to maintain an alpha vs. airspeed while the power is changing. Once alpha is stabilized on best glide, approach is simplified to controlling sink rate with throttle. The result is a rock solid approach that makes any pilot look like a test pilot. Overall Safety: When the navy implemented alpha techniques for their carrier born aircraft they saw a 50% decrease in accidents within a year. That alone says something about the overall increased safety margin this system enables. Base-Final stall avoidance: A stall-spin event on or around base to final is a real accident threat in any aircraft. This stage of flight is near stall speed, near the ground and under heavy pilot workloads. The desire to lineup an overshot runway can lead to high bank angles and increased G loading. More Gs means more alpha and stall The alpha gauge is a direct audible and visual warning of this threat. Best Glide: Best glide is much more easy to hit and maintain using alpha. Its also correct at all density altitudes. In an emergency this relatively small increase in performance could mean life or death. Airspeed Indicator backup: In the event of an IAS failure, the alpha gauge makes a very capable backup. Hypothetical Q&A: What about flaps? Dont they effectively change the wings alpha? Yes they do, so any good alpha indicator should sense flap position so they are properly calibrated for both wing configurations. Can you fly around on Alpha alone, why do I even need an airspeed indicator? Well quite frankly, yes, you could very safely fly on alpha alone. Of course youll never know how fast youre actually moving though the air. At any rate; 91.205 states that the airspeed indicator is required equipment. Where is the alpha display best mounted? I pedestal mounted my alpha display right on the glare shield. Its a small display with a tiny visual footprint, .25x1. On final its directly under the numbers in my immediate periphery vision. I dont ever have to move my visual focus away from the runway once Ive turned final. If you must panel mount, place it very high and near the center of the scan. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob Lueder <blueder@superior-air-parts.com>
Subject: Autogas and the XP360
Date: Mar 04, 2002
Very well put Jim. In fact our manual spells out not to exceed 12,500 feet and fuel temps over 85*F. We also encourage a blend of auto fuel and 100LL -----Original Message----- From: Jim Sears [mailto:sears(at)searnet.com] Subject: Re: RV-List: Autogas and the XP360 > This vapor pressure problem can be difficult. I had a friend who's carb > float would start to sink and start causing rough running due to the > rich mixture every time he crossed the mountains. Just get over the > middle of the rough terrain and the engine would run rough. Carb was > getting hot enough to start to boil the low vapor pressure gas. He had > every thing insulated and shielded with air blowing on them and still > had this problem. I think I read the culprit to the problem right away. Seems to me that I read in the STCs I had on my C172 and AA-5A Cheetah that the altitude limit for auto gas was 10K feet. I've flown over the mountains in the east on numerous trips and never had problems with vapor locking; but, I never had to get above 10K feet. In fact, I can never remember having vapor locking problems in the air for the 16 years I've been using auto gas in my airplanes. I'm not flying above 10K feet, either. In the west, it's a given that some flying is going to be over the altitude limits. If that be the case, I don't find it unusual that the user of auto gas in those extremes is going to encounter problems with auto gas, at times. Even though the auto gas STC, and the use of auto gas in our homebuilts, is a great thing for most of us, it is not meant for all of us. It does have its limitations. I guess one could experiment with a mix of 100LL and autogas to see what one could do to improve on the limits; but, the limits are there for us to be aware of. When we live within those limits, it's a cheap alternative to fueling our steeds. Jim Sears in KY RV-6A N198JS EAA Tech Counselor ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net>
Subject: Re: LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator
Date: Mar 04, 2002
----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net> Subject: Re: RV-List: LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator > That's me. I've not flown the LRI. I have, however, spent a lot of > time reading the patent, it's mathematical description, and the > approximate mathematical underpinnings that used to be published on > the LRI web site. Everything I saw led me to suspect that the LRI will > give reasonably consistent readings in 1 G flight (good for final > approach energy management), but in higher G flight (tight base to > final turns, for example) will show more "lift reserve" (stall margin) > than actually exists. If that's the case, pilots need to know about it, > because it could be dangerous. It would also call in to question the > LRI web site's claim of "100% Stall Protection." OK. A previous post on this topic by Bernie Kerr mentioned some flt testing with the Proprietary Systems AOA device, but just estimating g-load. Another post mentioned testing the LRI device at different wts. For anyone interested in flt testing to evaluate something like the LRI (or for other purposes) if you have an accurate stall speed (Calibrated Air Speed, not the inaccurate Indicated Air Speed we read on the gage at 1 g stall condition) for a known weight, then you can accurately calculate the stall speed for any other weight you are interested in, either higher or lower. I did this in the Air Force when studying what "g" I could (or needed to) pull in a given fighter at a given speed with variable weights (heavy with bombs and external tanks inbound to target, can't pull as many g's; much ligher after drop bombs and maybe the tanks, and can pull more g's at same speed when fighting your way back home - or pull same (read "required") g at lower speed.) I also do this for Cessna's I fly so I know stall speed at weights lighter than "max gross wt" which is all the POH gives. What seems to be wanted at this time in the case of the LRI is to pull some "g" until get accelerated stall at some speed and some weight, and see if LRI shows close to the expected "stall" indication. - Without g-meter, we can start at 1.5 times stall speed or higher and use attitude indicator to bank 60 degrees, then add power to hold airspeed and do a nice smooth level turn (hold altitude) - we will be pulling 2 g's. - If we then reduce power and reduce speed slowly, our 2 g's loading will stay same, but our angle of attack will increase, until we stall at 2 g's. The speed at this point of stall, being the same AOA as in a level flt 1 g stall, should be square root of 2 g's times our known level flt stall speed, adjusted for weight (see below). Square root of 2 is 1.414. For any and all weights different from the known weight at a known stall CAS: - New 1 g, level stall speed (CAS), let's call it Vsub2, = Vsub 1 (known stall speed at one particular wt, let's call it Wt sub1) times square root of the common fraction (Wt sub2/Wt sub 1). -- So, if Wt 2 is higher than Wt 1, the stall speed will be higher, & vice versa (common sense check) If the person doing the flt testing has a g-meter and he feels it is accurate (we swing them on an 18" arm on a rotating table in our Air Force instrument shops to verify accuracy), then, for any bank angle (no longer tied to that 60 degree "known point" thing), you will note the g-meter & indicated air speed readings, and the LRI reading, when you reach the accelerated stall at, say 3, 3.5, or 4 g's. - Then you land, correct IAS to CAS (I've always assumed no significant correction at the higher airspeeds - because the charts always show the error is most below final approach speed and negligable above that - but just now realized that the error may be mostly due to AOA, which means you may have the same 5, 6, or more knot error at stall AOA, at any IAS. Don't have a clue how to calibrate for that!) - Anyway, if you assume your IAS at the accelerated stall is = to CAS, then, 1) correct for wt (1 g stall speed for that day's wt = "book" stall speed (CAS) times sq rt of (Wt sub today divided by Wt sub "book"), then, 2) predicted stall speed at the observed 'g' loading = 1) above times sq rt of 'g' loading. Regardless of the errors in IAS at the accelerated stall point, this methodology should be close enough to evaluate accuracy of the LRI device's indications in an accelerated stall. David Carter ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Sears" <sears(at)searnet.com>
Subject: Re: Autogas and the XP360
Date: Mar 04, 2002
> Very well put Jim. In fact our manual spells out not to exceed 12,500 feet > and fuel temps over 85*F. We also encourage a blend of auto fuel and 100LL > I knew I was forgetting something. I have to admit that I'm getting older; so, my mind isn't as sharp as it used to be. I forgot the temperature! I've operated my airplanes at temps around 100F with no problems in the air. Again, I didn't go over 10K feet. However, I must remember the altitude is in density altitude (correct me if I'm wrong), not MSL, for it to make sense to me. Bob refers to his STC saying 12,500 feet and 85F. That's really getting up there compared to my 10K feet figure and could actually be stretching the limits on those really warm days; but, throw in the density altitude and one blows the dickens out of the altitude limit, if one isn't really careful. Although I don't pay as much attention to it in our low lander country, I think I've seen density altitude changes of as much as 3K, or more, feet on a hot day. It would be easy to pop over 12,500 feet density altitude on a really hot day when crossing the western mountain areas. For that matter, it would be easy to pop over 12,500 feet on a cool day! Whew! You got some mighty big pieces of rock out there! One tends to forget that when one lives where land is 1000' MSL, or less. I landed at Boulder, CO a couple of times at one mile high, which is an airport higher than I usually fly at. :-) At that point, elevation started taking notice for fuel pressures, etc. Go over a tall mountain, grap an updraft that pushes one a little higher, and bingo! The gas bubbles! I guess I'd better stay away from those mountains. I'm too cheap to buy enough 100LL to keep the bubbles away. :-) BTW, for those of you who are interested in this discussion. Some keep one tank for auto gas and one tank for 100LL. I don't do that; but, it is worth considering if one does fly at higher altitudes. Another thing about it is the fact that we're quickly getting to the time period each year when the temps rise faster than the refineries can get the gas switched from winter to summer blends. Yeah, autos can vapor lock, too. When that time period comes around, it's easier for our engines to vapor lock on the ground. For me, it's always been with fast turnarounds; so, I have to wait a little longer for things to cool down enough for the gas to be usable again. It's no big deal; but, it's something we auto gas users should be aware of as those springtime temps start to bounce in. I just sit back and socialize a tad longer. I'm pretty good at that. :-) Jim Sears in KY RV-6A N198JS EAA Tech Counselor ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bob Busick" <panamared1(at)brier.net>
Subject: Re: Pitot Static/Tansponder Check
Date: Mar 04, 2002
What is required for the Pitot Static/Transponder checks for VFR. My brand new Garmin GTX 327 failed the transponder check. To be fair to Garmin, so did every other transponder at the airport. After sending back the transponder test set (twice) and the Garmin failing two more times, what is the minimum requirement for the transponder to be legal VFR, I understand there is a different test for IFR. My transponder failed the SOS test (whatever that is). I sent it back to the avionics shop that I bought it from and they tested it with two different test sets and report that the transponder works perfect (to include the SOS tests). Is it possible that I could have mounted the antenna or transponder in such a way that everything works but the SOS? FWIW my transponder is the single most expensive (except for the engine) piece of equipment on the airplane. For something that is not even needed for flight to cost so much, and then standard 1965 test equipment can not even determine if it works, is amazing. I wonder if the ATC can even pick it up. How many times has ATC failed to receive a transponder that was properly working, just to find out that their equipment doesn't work properly? Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 04, 2002
From: philip condon <pcondon(at)mitre.org>
RV-List Digest Server
Subject: Timing Slick Mags (long)
Someday, you can retrieve this from the archives when you need it. I printed a copy for my engine book. The link where I got this may not exist in the future. Doing it this way(via RV list) makes it into the RV List archives for posterity... (Keywords) Slick Mag Mags mags slick engine timing magneto magnetos time timed points Slick Handling The following article written by Chris Maida was published in the September 1995 issue of Light Plane Maintenance. It is retyped here without the graphics due to poor reproduction quality. Removing, re-installing and retiming Slick mags isn't as easy as one-two three, but it's not rocket science, either Today's mission is to remove and re-install a set of Slick mags from an 0-320 Lycoming in a Cessna 172. If your situation is like most owners, your mags are probably coming off because it's time for the required 500-hour inspection. Yes that's right in addition to the standard 100-hour external inspection, Slick requires 500- and 1000-hour internal ones. If that's news to you, your not alone. It seems many owners and mechanics are equally uninformed. Both inspections required the mags to be removed from the engine. A variety of internal components must be checked for wear and serviceability. Obviously, any parts found overly worn, broken, or showing signs of malfunction will have to be replaced.(Although you may wind up replacing the entire mag. The fact is, if your mags need any parts other than a set of points and condenser, you're probably better off just getting a new one from Slick. Replacement parts are very expensive, whereas the mags themselves are not. A new #4300 series unit can be bought for about $375.00, or even less from a number of dealers in Trade-A-Plane San-Val, for example, will sell you a Slick 4301 mag for $322.95, Provided you send them a serviceable core [San-Val Discount, 800-423-3281]. A repair job on the same mag, if some parts are needed, plus labor, can easily be that amount.) Though it may be tempting to ignore these inspections, it's not a good idea. One reason is that it's against FAR's. Another is the common misconception that if the engine starts and the mag drop during run-up is within limits, the mag won't need any servicing. A wrong, and possibly deadly assumption. Magnetos usually fail during flight , not during run-up. This is not an unreasonable occurrence considering that's where they're operating most of the time. If Slick calls for a 500-hour inspection, it's because they know that certain components are near the end of their service life. In fact, many people are surprised to find that parts are indeed worn out when the inspections are done. No matter what your reasons for removing the mag, it has to come off. And whatever goes into it's place will have to be retimed. This is one operation where owners are definitely not encouraged to participate by FAA. In fact, aside from checking timing, FAA considers mags and mag timing so critical that only A&P's are allowed to do the removal, re-installation and timing. Fortunately, though, if your mechanic is willing to supervise and inspect your work (and sign it off), there's nothing to stop you from tackling the job yourself. Having said all that, let's take a look at what's involved in removing, reinstalling and re-timing a Slick magneto. The Tools Needed Removing the mags, once the engine's internals are correctly positioned, is really just a simple disassem-bly job. It's getting the mags back onto your engine and properly timed that's the interesting part. But that's not a complicated process, either. In fact, it will only take about an hour for removal and about an hour and a half for re-installation. Only two special tools are needed for the job. The first is Slicks Timing pin, #T-118. You can get one from any shop that overhauls Slick Mags. Or call Slick at 815-965-4700. They'll drop one in an envelope for you free of charge. Your A&P might even have a extra one kicking around in his toolbox. If you're getting a new mag, Slick always packs a timing pin along with it. The T-118 is used to set the mag's distributor gear position so it's ready to be installed on the engine. The second special tool is a magneto timing box to time the mags to your engine. You can buy one from a number of tool suppliers in Trade-A-Plane for about $40.00. Or borrow one from a generous A&P you know. Either way, the other tools are just the standard ones. Getting Prepped Whether the engine's a Lycoming or Continental, the process is basically the same. Check that the magnetos are both switched off and the mixture and throttle controls are at lean cutoff and idle positions, respectively. Then remove the top cowl. Visually check that both P leads are, in fact, still connected to the magnetos. The P-lead and the ground wire are the only wires connected to the mag other than the thick ignition wires, if the mags are the impulse coupling type. If the mags are the retard breaker type, there's another wire that connects the breakers to the starting circuit. Each mag should have all of these wires connected. Even then, to be on the safe side always treat the prop as if the engine could still start as soon as the prop is budged. To some, this may seem a bit overcautious. But because a mag is connected on the outside, doesn't mean it's connected on the inside. Besides, it's just as easy to move the prop while staying out of it's arc of travel, as it is to be in the arc and in potential danger. An engine is timed at a specific number of degrees BTC (Before Top Center). It fires the spark plugs for #1 cylinder at this point. Once this is set, the timing on all the other cylinders follows suit. So finding out what the timing number is for your engine is the next step. This information is in the engine's manual and stamped on its data plate. The data plato on Lycomings is located on the lower right hand side of the engine. But unless your really good with a mirror, it's necessary to remove the bottom cowl to read it. Continentals are easier because they have their data plate on the upper right side of the engine. For our O-320, the timing mark is at 25 degrees BTC. It's usually a number between 20 and 25. Next locate the two timing marks. On Lycomings, one or the marks is on the outer edge of the starter flywheel, which is mounted to the prop. Look for a line on the outer edge of the flywheel with the timing number stamped next to it. The other mark is the top center seam of the two engine case halves. Continentals are not that simple. The timing marks could be in a number of places or not be there at all. I guess it's the price you pay for having an easy to read data plate. Many Continentals have a bronze, safety wired, one-inch plug that's right behind the prop, on the left side of the engine case. A timing mark is stamped on the gear which is easily visible after the plug is removed. Rotate the engine slowly to give the oil a chance to run off the gear and reveal the marks. Don't be concerned if the number you see is 23 and there's a line marked 25 and another marked 20. Just extrapolate where 23 will be between them and use that. The other mark is the center line of the hole. If your not lucky enough to have a Continental with a timing plug, it's time to start hunting, On Some models, the timing mark is on a pulley on the accessory case at the rear of the engine. Other models have different locations. Still other models have no mark at all. A degree wheel must be mounted on the prop spinner and synchronized with the No. 1 piston's Top Dead Center (TDC) position. The BTC is figured from there to get a timing mark. You must check the maintenance manual for your particular model engine to find out where your marks are, if you don't already know. Or maybe ask your A&Phe'll probably know just by looking at it. If he starts laughing when you ask him, you've probably got the one without marks. Setting Up The Engine Once the timing marks are located, the next step is to line them up. Do this by first finding the No. 1 cylinder. On a Lycoming, No. 1 is the front cylinder on the right side of the engine, viewed facing the engine from the front of the plane (i.e., looking back towards the tail). For Continentals, No. 1 is always the right rear cylinder. Or just look an the engine. Both makes have every cylinder's number right on the engine case. Once you locate No.1, remove the top spark plug and lay it on top of the cylinder. Then put your finger over the plug hole and rotate the prop in the direction of normal rotation. Remember to stay out of the prop's arc of travel. As the No. 1 piston comes up on its compression stroke, it will force air out of the open plug hole. Listen and feel for this air pressure. When it starts to bleed by your finger, forget the piston and watch for the timing mark to come into view. As soon as you see it , stop. Move the prop the rest of the way into alignment by lightly tapping the trailing edge of the prop blade with the palm of your hand. In this way, bring the moving timing mark to align exactly with the fixed timing mark. Do this slowly. If you go past the fixed mark, you can't just tap the prop back a little. You will lose proper internal alignment due to gear lash. You must come up on the mark when moving in direction of rotation. If you do go past it, move the prop blade back about an eighth of a turn and come up on the mark again. Also, if you have an impulse-coupling type mag (usually there's only one), the prop must first be moved forward, past the fixed mark, until you hear the impulse coupling pop. Then move the prop back an eighth of a turn and come up onto the mark. Be careful not to go too far back or you'll engage the coupling again. If you don'' know if you have an impulse-coupled mag or not, just go past the mark and listen for the pop or snap sound as the coupling slips and spins the mag. No pop means no impulse coupling (or a defective one, in which case you'll probably removing the mag because the engine won't start). Mag Removal Once the timing marks are perfectly aligned, the mags can be removed. You may want to put a sign on the prop blade warning people not to move it, especially if the plane's going to be left unattended for a while. Then, pick a mag and remove the three screws that hold the ignition harness cap on. Put an alignment mark on the cap to show which end is up and make it easier to correctly position it during reassembly. The cap must go back onto the mag properly orientated. Once free, move the cap out of the way as much as possible. Then disconnect the P-lead and the other wire or wires from the mag. It's true that once you remove the P-lead, the mag is on or "hot." It's still safe, though, because the ignition harness cap has been removed. (Besides, what are you doing moving the prop, anyway?) Note how the magneto is positioned on the engine. It will go back in at about the same angle, in relation to the surrounding parts. On the Cessna 172 with the O-320 E2D, for example, U use the vacuum pump as my reference point. It's conveniently located right between both magnetos. Some mechanics like to scribe a small line from the mag mounting flange to the accessory case as a reference mark. Remove the two nuts, lock washers and clamps located at the base of the mag that secure it to the engine. A ?" open end wrench will do the job (a long, locking extension and a universal socket make this a whole lot easier). Usually, the nuts will not have enough room to come off the engine stud unless you move the mag off the engine case a little. If the mag has an impulse coupling, there will be about a one-inch thick base plate between the mag and the engine case. Be sure not to disturb this plate. If it breaks loose from the engine case, even a little, remove the plate, once the mag is off, and reinstall it with a new gasket. (Any motion of the impulse base plate usually damages the gasket, which means you'll be back doing this all again just to change the gasket. Deal with it now if you have to.) Once the mag's hardware is removed, carefully remove the mag from the engine. Handle it gently. There are two rubber bushings that are on the shaft end, inside the engine. This set of bushings rests in a oval-shaped steel retainer. If handled roughly, they will fall out of the retainer and into your accessory case, completely ruining your day. Being rubber, they can't be retrieved with a magnet, thus they are not easy to remove from the case. Other than disassembling the engine, the only other way is to fish around the case for hours trying to catch them with a grabbing tool of some sort. Once you've carefully removed the magneto, look into the accessory case. Hopefully, and usually, the bushings are still in the retainer. Carefully remove the bushings and lay them safely aside. Then, mark each mag left or right so they are not swapped when reinstalled. If new ones are to be installed, look at the data plate that's riveted to the mag's side. Get the model and serial number. Also, find the box market "ROT" for rotation. It will have a "R" or a "L" stamped in it. Note this info to know which mag goes into which access hole during re-installation. Clean all the old gasket from the engine case. You want a clean, dry gasket surface for the new gasket. Don't let anything fall into the case opening. Stuffing a clean rag into the hole will help. Remove the other magneto in the same way. If the lock washers are the split ring type, they can be used again. Otherwise, get new ones. Always use a new gasket. Setting Up The Mags When the magnetos are ready to go back onto the engine, they have to be positioned to fire on No. 1 cylinder. So, with mag in hand, look at the mag's data plate and find its rotation direction. Armed with this vital info, go to the top of the mag where the wiring harness attaches. Looking down on the top of Slick mags, you will see two holes in the distributor block. One is marked "L", the other, "R". On a mag that has a "L" stamped on it, insert the No. T-118 timing pin into the hole marked "L". (If the people at Slick make this any easier, I'll be out of a job.) Then gently and slowly rotate the drive gear, while trying to gently slip the timing pin deeper into the hole. When the pin fully seats in its timing hole, the mag will no longer turn. Don't force it. The distributor gear is now correctly positioned and ready to be installed. Leave the timing pin in the mag until it's mounted on the engine. The pin will prevent it from turning during installation. But be careful not to turn or put pressure on the drive gear with the timing pin installed. It will screw up parts in the mag. If you've got two mags going back on, set up the other one after this one is mounted. Installing The Mags Before installing the mags, check to see that the engine's timing marks are still lined up. Some bonehead might have turned the prop while you were gone. If it has been moved, remove the rags and reposition the timing marks as you did before. It doesn't matter that the mags are out. If all's well, remove one rag from the access hole. Then reinstall the two rubber bushings into their retainer. You may want to give them some incentive to stay in place by putting some grease in the retainer and on the bushings. Note that the bushings have a squared edge and a rounded edge the rounded edge faces out. Be sure you have the correct mag for the access hole you're working on. Next, look a the angle of the retainer in the engine. The magneto must be orientated the same way for the mag'' drive gear to slip between the bushings. Don'' try to move the mag's' drive gear for alignment. The timing pin will prevent it from turning. Instead, rotate the entire magneto in your hand so it's properly oriented. Remember how the mag was positioned in regards to the vacuum pump or whatever reference point you used. That should give you the proper orientation. Slip a new gasket onto the mag and then carefully install the mag into the engine case. Don't force it in. When the mag's drive gear is properly lined up with the bushings, it will just slip into place. The drive gear and bushings are aligned and fully engaged when the mag is fully seated against the engine case. Slip on the hold-down clamps, lock washers and nuts. Remember, to get the nuts on the mag, it may need to be moved back off the engine case a little. Don't go too far or the drive gear will be disengaged from the retainer and bushings. Thread the nuts down, hand tight. Then remove the timing pin. Tighten the nuts so the mag can be rotated about its base, but is still held snug against the engine case. Set up the other mag with the T-118 and install it in the same way. Don't worry about fine tuning the timing yet. Get both mags in first. Don't hook up any wires or harnesses yet, either. Fine Tuning The Timing Once both mags are mounted, get the timing box. Hook up the box's black wire to ground, which is anything metal on the engine. The other wires go to the mag's P-lead terminal, one wire per mag. Then switch on the box and slowly rotate the mag. The timing box will indicate that the mag's points have just opened and the mag is in its properly timed position by the light going on or off, and/or an audible buzzer sounding, depending on your model timing box. Do the same to the other mag. The next step is to check the timing job. Do this by moving the prop in reverse rotation for about an eighth of a turn. Then, by tapping the prop with your hand, as you did earlier, move the prop until the timing box again indicates the points have opened. Now check the engine's timing marks. Are they aligned? Usually one magneto goes off before the other one by a fraction of a rotation of the prop, so don't be concerned. If the marks are aligned, continue tapping the prop until the other mag goes off and check the marks again. It is very normal for the mags to go off at slightly different times and have the timing marks aligned. If a magneto went off too early or late, rotate the mag slightly. Don't be concerned that you may rotate the mag in the wrong direction. Then do the timing check again. Is it better or worse? Turn the offending mag accordingly. Do this until the mags are properly timed to the engine. How far you want to go with this is up to you. If you want both of them to go off at exactly the same time, so be it. When the mags are set, tighten down the nuts, locking the mags firmly in place. The recommended torque for the nuts is 17 ft/lbs maximum. If you go for gorilla torque it, the mounting flange may be damaged (or it may even break) and the mag must be removed and replaced. Then check your work one more time. If all's well, remove the timing box. Close up the timing plug and safety-wire it, if you are working on a so equipped Continental. Put a little anti-seize on the threads and reinstall the No. 1 top spark plug you removed earlier. Torque it to 30 to 35 ft/lbs and attach the ignition lead. Hook up the P-leads, other wires and ignition harness caps, in that order. Be sure not to over-torque the P-lead nut. To quote a Slick service tip, "it is extremely important to observe the 13 to 15 in/lb torque limit when tightening down the P-lead nut onto the condenser stud." Exceeding the limit will break the condenser, making it unsafe and requiring replacement (which means going through all this again). Install the top cowl and lock it in place with about half the fasteners. Wrapping It Up Remove all tools and such out of the way and recowl the engine. Fire it up and do the standard run-up checks. Are the mag drops within limits? There should be one, no matter how slight. Be sure to turn the mags off for a second to be sure they do indeed switch off and kill the engine. Then shut down the engine and remove the top cowl. Check for oil leaks at the mags and, if applicable, the timing plug. If all's well, install the top cowl. Then do the necessary log entries. Note that this model and serial number mag was removed and this model and serial number mag installed in this position on the engine, if a mag was replaced. Don't forget the yellow tags. Many mechanics just staple them right to the last page of the engine log book. If you don't put them there, they must be kept in some other secure place. Homepage URL: http://www.eaa49.av.org Webmaster: Paul Rosales (prosales(at)qnet.com) ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Pitot Static/Tansponder Check
Date: Mar 04, 2002
From: Larry Pardue <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net>
> > >What is required for the Pitot Static/Transponder checks for VFR. > > How many times has ATC failed to receive a transponder that was >properly working, just to find out that their equipment doesn't work >properly? > My question is why are transponder checks required? It's easy to know if it is working or not. ATC picks us up, they get the correct discrete code and the altitude checks. Why do we have to pay all the money to the radio shop, in my case to someone who doesn't know what they are doing, and in my case to someone who does even less than the functional check referred to above. Larry Pardue Carlsbad, NM RV-6 N441LP Flying http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Donald Mei" <don_mei(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Tire Observations and Selection Questions
Date: Mar 04, 2002
Well, its that time again. I need to replace the tires on my RV-4. First a couple of observations: I am currently using Condor tires. They were recommended to me by the FBO at my airport. They have given very good service, lasting almost twice as long as the McCreary tires I had used before. The McCreary's were inexpensive and wore like inexpensive tires. The Condors were about the same money ($40 from Desser) but were visually much more robust. Their cross section was more squared off with a much stiffer side wall and thicker tread. My question is this: Desser advertises "premium" retreads. They are about the same cost as a set of Condors. I wonder how they compare in longevity. If anyone has used these tires, or has some info on it, I'd greatly appreciate a reply. Thanks. Don Mei RV-4 - N92CT 3B9 - Chester, CT MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 04, 2002
From: Greg Puckett <rv8er(at)concentric.net>
Subject: Gasket Sealant on Lycoming's
Listers, I'm getting ready to re-install my oil sump and accessory housing on my IO360-A3B6D after mods for inverted oil and have a few questions. Should I use sealant on the gaskets when I do this? If so what type? Whatever type of sealant that was used the last time this engine was put together cured to a very rigid state. I can see that this might be necessary due to oil passages going through the gasket sealed area. I suppose if you used too much there could be a problem with sealant squeezing out into the passage and becoming loose. I can't find any info in the overhaul manual on if/what sealant to use. Also, This motor has the bendix dual magneto that I'm certain will not go back on. My original plan was a dual lightspeed setup. I'm not overly concerned about the redundancy of this installation (especially compared to the D3000)or the cost since I've been planning all along on a dual electrical system. But, I'm still very fond of the idea of giving the engine fuel and removing the grounds and it will run. I'd like to just put a single mag in the dual mag hole and have a lightspeed for the second mag. Has anyone done this? Does anyone know if a single mag will just fit right in where the dual mag came from? Where can I find the dimensions of the single mag? Thanks, Greg Puckett Elizabeth, CO ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 04, 2002
From: "Gary Zilik" <zilik(at)bewellnet.com>
Subject: Re: Tire Observations and Selection Questions
First set Air Hawks did not last verry long. Second set Condors lasted over 400 landings Third set are Desser recaps with airstop tubes (tubes cost more than tires) and they shown little wear after 200+ landings (touch and goes) Highly recomend the recaps Gary Donald Mei wrote: > > > Well, its that time again. I need to replace the tires on my RV-4. First a > couple of observations: > > I am currently using Condor tires. They were recommended to me by the FBO > at my airport. They have given very good service, lasting almost twice as > long as the McCreary tires I had used before. The McCreary's were > inexpensive and wore like inexpensive tires. The Condors were about the > same money ($40 from Desser) but were visually much more robust. Their > cross section was more squared off with a much stiffer side wall and thicker > tread. > > My question is this: Desser advertises "premium" retreads. They are about > the same cost as a set of Condors. I wonder how they compare in longevity. > If anyone has used these tires, or has some info on it, I'd greatly > appreciate a reply. Thanks. > > Don Mei > RV-4 - N92CT > 3B9 - Chester, CT > > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Gasket Sealant on Lycoming's
Date: Mar 04, 2002
> >Listers, > > >I'm getting ready to re-install my oil sump and accessory housing on my >IO360-A3B6D after mods for inverted oil and have a few questions. > >Should I use sealant on the gaskets when I do this? > >If so what type? > >Whatever type of sealant that was used the last time this engine was put >together cured to a very rigid state. I can see that this might be >necessary >due to oil passages going through the gasket sealed area. I suppose if you >used too much there could be a problem with sealant squeezing out into the >passage and becoming loose. I can't find any info in the overhaul manual on >if/what sealant to use. > > >Also, This motor has the bendix dual magneto that I'm certain will not go >back on. My original plan was a dual lightspeed setup. I'm not overly >concerned about the redundancy of this installation (especially compared to >the D3000)or the cost since I've been planning all along on a dual >electrical system. But, I'm still very fond of the idea of giving the >engine >fuel and removing the grounds and it will run. I'd like to just put a >single >mag in the dual mag hole and have a lightspeed for the second mag. > >Has anyone done this? Does anyone know if a single mag will just fit right >in where the dual mag came from? Where can I find the dimensions of the >single mag? > > >Thanks, > > >Greg Puckett >Elizabeth, CO > Greg, I know Pliobond and Dow Corning DC4 is recommended by Lycoming as a sealant/adhesive for the crankcase oil seal. Might also do just fine for the sump. A call to Bart Lalonde could answer your question straight away. A CFI friend of mine recently contacted Lightspeed with a need for an electronic ignition for the same type of magneto setup as you have. They supposedly have one that fits right in there perfectly. Brian Denk RV8 N94BD Lightspeed aboard and luvin' it. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Sears" <sears(at)searnet.com>
Subject: Re: RV-6 cowl plugs
Date: Mar 04, 2002
> Here is a vendor that just made me a set of custom n# > embroidered fabric covered cowl plugs. > > GROUND TECH 800-825-1245 (from the RV Yellow Pages) > > I just received a set from them and they fit great. > Although I've never purchased them for my RV, I did have them for my Skyhawk and my Cheetah. Both lasted a long time and were well made. I also used their canopy covers for both; but, I used GBI for the RV's canopy cover. So far, I can't complain about either company's products. For the RV, I made my own cowl plugs because I didn't think Ground Tech had them for the RV. I bought two car wash sponges, poked two holes in the center of each, and tied them together with a piece of ski rope. The first set, that I just replaced, lasted for over two years. I considered that pretty good since my airplane sits on the ramp year round with the nose pointed south into the sun. The cost was less than three bucks, even if one had to buy a short length of rope. Just over two bucks for the sponges. I keep telling you guys I'm cheap! Jim Sears in KY RV-6A N198JS EAA Tech Counselor ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike Nellis" <mike(at)bmnellis.com>
Subject: Re: Angle of Attack Theory Article (Long)
Date: Mar 04, 2002
You want information on AOA? You can read find out just about everything you want to know by searching this site. http://www.monmouth.com/~jsd/how/htm/aoa.html Mike Nellis - http://bmnellis.com Georgetown, TX Waiting to start Fuselage RV6 N699BM Reserved 1947 Stinson 108-2 N9666K ----- Original Message ----- From: "philip condon" <pcondon(at)mitre.org> Subject: RV-List: Angle of Attack Theory Article (Long) > > I have found very little on the operational theory on the AOA devices > -- lots of testomonial, nothing in the text books. There has been some > activity on the three AOA sites on the web that are very informative. > There is even a interactive web based video presentation (anamation) on > the theory of AOA. Here is a snip from a Bruce Meacham write-up that is > useful. (Doing this so it makes it into the archives for future > e-searching.) > > ..................................... > > Hanging on Alpha > > By Bruce Meacham > > Aircraft stay in the heavens for one reason; the wings push > molecules of air down. Angle of attack (Ill call it Alpha from now on) > is the angle at which a wing meets the wind that its going through. It > directly relates to the amount of air a wing can push. > > An airfoil is only efficient in a narrow range of alpha. > For many popular airfoils the range is around +/- 12 degrees. Above or > below this, lift does not increase as rapidly as drag, and the airfoil > is no longer effectively producing lift. Its important to know that > the force the wind imparts on the wing increases as a square of the > velocity. > > FL = alpha k > v2 > Equation 1 > > Here k compensate for the density of air and the characteristics of the > airfoil. > > We can re-arrange this for alpha as > > alpha = FL / (k > v2) > Equation 2 > > It can be inferred from Equation 2 that at large velocities > (cruise) the amount of alpha required to keep the aircraft > aloft is quite small. As speed decreases, to maintain the same amount > of lifting force the wings must increase alpha. The > slower you go, the higher the alpha. Till eventually the wings alpha > goes beyond the region of best performance and the > wing stalls. > What happens in a 60-degree bank? Lets look at Equation 2 > again. In a level 60-degree bank the aircraft > experiences twice the effective gravity force, so the FL term in the > equation doubles. What does that do to alpha? Alpha > too must double to compensate! This is why stall speed increases under > increased G load. > > state of the airfoil in any given flight scenario. Stall > speed, best glide, L/D Max, best rate of climb and best angle of climb > are all constants of angle of attack, not air speed. At > higher density altitudes or G loading all these speeds change, but not > alpha. > > Another compelling argument for alpha is that at very low > airspeed the Airspeed Indicator is less accurate while the > angle of attack indicator only increases accuracy. > > The best kept pilot secret: The elevator is a direct alpha > control! Its just that simple. Pull back: alpha goes up, lift > goes up and speed goes down, pull forward the opposite happens. > > So what does this mean to the Pilot In Command? What are the > really big benefits in practical application? > > Increase Approach accuracy. Alpha isnt power dependant, unlike > velocity. For this reason, its dramatically easier to > maintain an alpha vs. airspeed while the power is changing. Once alpha > is stabilized on best glide, approach is simplified > to controlling sink rate with throttle. The result is a rock solid > approach that makes any pilot look like a test pilot. > > Overall Safety: When the navy implemented alpha techniques for their > carrier born aircraft they saw a 50% decrease in > accidents within a year. That alone says something about the overall > increased safety margin this system enables. > > Base-Final stall avoidance: A stall-spin event on or around base to > final is a real accident threat in any aircraft. This stage > of flight is near stall speed, near the ground and under heavy pilot > workloads. The desire to lineup an overshot runway can > lead to high bank angles and increased G loading. More Gs means more > alpha and stall The alpha gauge is a direct > audible and visual warning of this threat. > > Best Glide: Best glide is much more easy to hit and maintain using > alpha. Its also correct at all density altitudes. In an > emergency this relatively small increase in performance could mean life > or death. > > Airspeed Indicator backup: In the event of an IAS failure, the alpha > gauge makes a very capable backup. > > Hypothetical Q&A: > What about flaps? Dont they effectively change the wings > alpha? Yes they do, so any good alpha indicator should > sense flap position so they are properly calibrated for both wing > configurations. > > Can you fly around on Alpha alone, why do I even need an > airspeed indicator? Well quite frankly, yes, you could > very safely fly on alpha alone. Of course youll never know how fast > youre actually moving though the air. At any rate; > 91.205 states that the airspeed indicator is required equipment. > > Where is the alpha display best mounted? I pedestal mounted > my alpha display right on the glare shield. Its a small > display with a tiny visual footprint, .25x1. On final its directly > under the numbers in my immediate periphery vision. I > dont ever have to move my visual focus away from the runway once Ive > turned final. If you must panel mount, place it very > high and near the center of the scan. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Warren" <jwdub(at)teleport.com>
Subject: Sensennich 70 series Prop for RV-3
Date: Mar 04, 2002
Has anyone on the list had any experience with the Sensennich metal prop on an RV-3? If so, please contact me off list. John Warren Building RV-6, looking at a "3" LaCenter WA ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Peter Wild" <Petewild(at)btinternet.com>
Subject: Tapering wing skins
Date: Mar 05, 2002
This is my first go at posting, bear with me... Shane - I just finshed my top skins and they worked out great. I laid the skin on an 'anti-slip' rubber mesh and used a vixen file to remove material down to just over half thickness at the edge. The filed area formed a tiangle about 3 inches in each direction from the corner. I then polished it to a satin finish with scotchbrite and checked the thickness with a micrometer. Now they are riveted up it looks great. Regards Pete Wild - RV 8 - Sussex - England ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 04, 2002
From: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Static RPM Solved - Was Cheap VAN's Tach
philip condon wrote: > > > > The cheap Chineese Vans tach was off by 260 to 310 RPM depending where > you were on th scale. Also, the elapsed timee was measuring at 1/3 to > 1/4 the real time. I had to wait untill this past weekend to get > daylight to try my optical tach. A digital tach is in my future. I don't usally knock Van's products but I well have to agree with the cheap tach. I bought one as a replacement in May of 01 and it quit while I was flying this weekend. It always has been hard to read the hours because the numbers did not line up with the windows. > Side thought......could this be (One of) the reasons why there is such a > variance in reported TBO of A/C engines ?? Some engines "need" overhaul > at 12 to 1600 hrs. while some go to 22 to 2600 or more hrs bevore TBO. > There are many reasons for this variance, but could crappie tachs (and > recording time faults) be part of the equation ??.. Back to work > Engines well usally tell us when they are ready for an overhaul, this should not have anyting to do with the number of hours on the tach. Jerry ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill VonDane" <n8vd(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Timing Slick Mags (long)
Date: Mar 04, 2002
Philip... I also have this article and posted it to my Local EAA web site... http://eaa72.org/tech/slickmags.htm -Bill -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of philip condon Subject: RV-List: Timing Slick Mags (long) Someday, you can retrieve this from the archives when you need it. I printed a copy for my engine book. The link where I got this may not exist in the future. Doing it this way(via RV list) makes it into the RV List archives for posterity... ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Michael J. Robbins" <kitfox(at)gte.net>
Subject: Van's Cheap Tach and other Instruments
Date: Mar 04, 2002
Speaking of Van's ROC made instruments, awhile back several postings noted that when they keyed the radio mike their manifold pressure gage went crazy. I tested mine the other day and it did the same thing. Does anyone know if this damages the gage over time, and what is Van's response? By the way don't blame the Chinese for any of these instrument's short comings. They are made in Taiwan, Republic of China, not Communist China. There is a big difference in the two countries. The Taiwanese are very smart people and have the capability of making very hi tech quality stuff. Been there and seen their stuff. Mike Robbins RV8Q 80591 N88MJ baffles done, finishing up last details ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 04, 2002
From: Michael McGee <jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com>
Subject: New bird from the nest..
Well.. I haven't seen anyone post anything yet.. so I guess I get to be the one to spill the beans.. I was out at Aurora working on the -4 today when I heard the unmistakable rumble or an RV going by the hanger door, always gotta look and wave at the guys from Va.........HEY...I didn't recognize that paint job! Jump up, look out.... yep, that's new.... and it's lookin' GOOD!! Nice paint job! They were all there after a few taxi tests, looking it over and talking to the boss....didn't want to interrupt so I went back to the hanger, they could be there for a while. Few minutes later the unmistakable buzz of an RV taking to the sky and it was the new one! The factory 8A followed shortly for some baby pictures with Ken in the driver's seat and Scott riding shotgun. All you guys, including me, building the -9A's now have something else to think about. The -9A has got a new little brother........... .............AND HIS TAIL'S DRAGGIN' ! ! ! ! WOO HOO!! Congratulations Van and the rest of the engineering / proto crew on your latest first flight and another (surely to be) successful model: N179RV the RV-9 . oh Diaaanaaaa...... .......we need to talk about this nose wheel thingy....... (heh heh). Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Aurora, OR, 13B in gestation mode #90221 Emp/Wings ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Norman" <jnorman(at)intermapsystems.com>
Subject: New bird from the nest..
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Yep, and the new model is boasting a brand new IK-2000 engine monitoring system...Installed 10 days ago. Expect to see it at Sun n Fun. jim tampa -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Michael McGee Subject: RV-List: New bird from the nest.. Well.. I haven't seen anyone post anything yet.. so I guess I get to be the one to spill the beans.. I was out at Aurora working on the -4 today when I heard the unmistakable rumble or an RV going by the hanger door, always gotta look and wave at the guys from Va.........HEY...I didn't recognize that paint job! Jump up, look out.... yep, that's new.... and it's lookin' GOOD!! Nice paint job! They were all there after a few taxi tests, looking it over and talking to the boss....didn't want to interrupt so I went back to the hanger, they could be there for a while. Few minutes later the unmistakable buzz of an RV taking to the sky and it was the new one! The factory 8A followed shortly for some baby pictures with Ken in the driver's seat and Scott riding shotgun. All you guys, including me, building the -9A's now have something else to think about. The -9A has got a new little brother........... .............AND HIS TAIL'S DRAGGIN' ! ! ! ! WOO HOO!! Congratulations Van and the rest of the engineering / proto crew on your latest first flight and another (surely to be) successful model: N179RV the RV-9 . oh Diaaanaaaa...... .......we need to talk about this nose wheel thingy....... (heh heh). Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Aurora, OR, 13B in gestation mode #90221 Emp/Wings ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Sears" <sears(at)searnet.com>
Subject: Re: Static RPM Solved - Was Cheap VAN's Tach
Date: Mar 05, 2002
> Engines well usally tell us when they are ready for an overhaul, this > should not have anyting to do with the number of hours on the tach. > Jerry is right on this one. I know you guys have been tearing up the cheap tachs; but, you may not be aware that all mechanical tachs will slow down, over time. In fact, the American Yankee Association has tach checks at all of their major events. It's that common. The AYA commonly finds tachs that are as much as 100 rpms slow. That's pretty important when we push our engines right up to the redline. Even if your tachs aren't failing, it's a good idea to check them out, from time to time. Like Jerry, I know not to worry about the number of hours on the tach. That's only for record keeping. I worry about how much metal I find at every oil change, how much compression I find at each cylinder during the inspection, what the oil analysis reported, etc. Those tell me the condition of things. When I purchased my instruments and gauges for my RV, I noted some of the indicated failings on the RV-list and bought accordingly. My instruments and gauges are from reputable companies that have been around for a long time. I've had none of the problems you guys have been discussing. Sometimes, it pays to pay a little more to get good quality, even if the faces don't say anything about Van's on them. I have to admit that I did buy his fuel gauges. That was the first and last time. They were just like what my friend uses in his boat building business. I'll get aviation types for the next one. Jim Sears in KY RV-6A N198JS EAA Tech Counselor ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Planejoel(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Subject: Re: Static RPM Solved - Was Cheap VAN's Tach
Yup, mine is about 200 hundred low, I use a prop tach for runup. Joe RV6A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ABAYMAN(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Subject: Re: Van's Cheap Tach and other Instruments
i would have to join the club. my manifold pressure gauge goes from 30 to zero when the mic is keyed. whats up with that? oh yeah, and when i activate the flaps i can hear the flap motor through the headsets. whats up with that also scott tampa millions of final details ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2002
From: Ken Balch <kbalch1(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: Van's Cheap Tach and other Instruments
Count me in. My Van's MP gauge will move either up or down when I key the transmitter. I haven't yet been able to detect any pattern to its movements, but they seem to be split pretty much evenly between up & down. When it moves up, the gauge pegs, but when it moves down, it only drops about ten inches. To add another data point to this mess, I noticed yesterday, after having the power on for about fifteen minutes (as opposed to just a minute or so to test one or two specific items), that the drop upon keying the transmitter was very slow and only resulted in a loss of three or four inches. Weirdness piled upon weirdness. If there's an actual solution for this, I'd like to implement it before riveting on my forward top skin later this week. I was thinking that I'd isolate the ground for the MP gauge,, which is currently ganged with the grounds from the other Van's gauges. Is this worth doing? Regards, Ken Balch RV-8 #81125 (N118KB) Ashland, MA going to the airport on or about 3/18 ABAYMAN(at)aol.com wrote: > > i would have to join the club. my manifold pressure gauge goes from 30 to > zero when the mic is keyed. > whats up with that? > oh yeah, and when i activate the flaps i can hear the flap motor through the > headsets. whats up with that also > scott > tampa > millions of final details ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2002
From: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Gasket Sealant on Lycoming's
> > >I'm getting ready to re-install my oil sump and accessory housing on my > >IO360-A3B6D after mods for inverted oil and have a few questions. > > > >Should I use sealant on the gaskets when I do this? > > > >If so what type? > > > >Whatever type of sealant that was used the last time this engine was put > >together cured to a very rigid state. I can see that this might be > >necessary > >due to oil passages going through the gasket sealed area. I suppose if you > >used too much there could be a problem with sealant squeezing out into the > >passage and becoming loose. I can't find any info in the overhaul manual on > >if/what sealant to use. >snipped > >Greg Puckett > >Elizabeth, CO > > > >Greg, > >I know Pliobond and Dow Corning DC4 is recommended by Lycoming as a >sealant/adhesive for the crankcase oil seal. Might also do just fine for >the sump. A call to Bart Lalonde could answer your question straight away. > >A CFI friend of mine recently contacted Lightspeed with a need for an >electronic ignition for the same type of magneto setup as you have. They >supposedly have one that fits right in there perfectly. > >Brian Denk >RV8 N94BD >Lightspeed aboard and luvin' it. Greg, If your gasket has a waxy coating (usually a gray color), do not add any sealant. That coating is a heat activated sealant. Assuming there is no sealant, I would stay away from an sort of RTV (like the ones mentioned above by Brian) The problems stem from possibly plugging any oil passageways. RTVs cure to a solid state and can easily plug up an oil passageway if you use to much. The best sealant for ANY sealing surface which has oil passages going through it, is a product called Hylomar. Hylomar is a Rolls Royce aerospace product. It is manufactured under license by Permatex (and others). It is approved by Lycoming. You can find it at any auto parts store. It is a thick blue liquid (as made by Permatex) which does not completely harden. The fact that it stays pliable will prevent it from plugging up an oil passageways. This is a great feature if you are of the Tim Allen persuasion. (If more is better, to much is just enough!) This stuff is GREAT! Charlie Kuss ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pitot Static/Tansponder Check
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Larry - I didn't see any responses to your question, so I'll take a stab. Transponder encoder checks are required basically when operating where they're required equipment. In a mode C veil and above 10K'. It's required (x-ponder use and 24 month check) by the FAR's. Reasoning? I'd imagine the feds just feel that if you're going to be "in the system" squawking an altitude, they want it accurate. Makes sense to me. You're in close proximity to airline and other IFR traffic in a mode C veil and when above 10K'. Also, the check has to be done by a certified shop/tech. I looked into this extensively and came to the conclusion that you can't self certify, even as a homebuilder. I spent about $100 for my last check. The tech "tuned" my system while checking it out. The performance improvement was noticable afterwards, based on my lack of complaints and range from ATC facilities. Before, I'd have problems with them "seeing" me occasionally. This basic x-ponder/encoder check is different than the pitot static system check required if operating IFR. Bryan Jones -8 Pearland, Texas >My question is why are transponder checks required? It's easy to know if >it is working or not. ATC picks us up, they get the correct discrete >code and the altitude checks. > >Why do we have to pay all the money to the radio shop, in my case to >someone who doesn't know what they are doing, and in my case to someone >who does even less than the functional check referred to above. Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tracy Dybowski" <td14228(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: RV8-List: Tapering wing skins
Date: Mar 05, 2002
A question for the engineer types out there. Could tapering or feathering and edge in this manner increase the possibility of a crack starting? TD RV8 all control surfaces done starting the wings >From: "Peter Wild" <Petewild(at)btinternet.com> >Reply-To: rv8-list(at)matronics.com >To: >Subject: RV8-List: Tapering wing skins >Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 01:54:15 -0000 > >--> RV8-List message posted by: "Peter Wild" > >This is my first go at posting, bear with me... >Shane - >I just finshed my top skins and they worked out great. >I laid the skin on an 'anti-slip' rubber mesh and used a vixen file to >remove material down to just over half thickness at the edge. The filed >area formed a tiangle about 3 inches in each direction from the corner. >I then polished it to a satin finish with scotchbrite and checked the >thickness with a micrometer. Now they are riveted up it looks great. >Regards >Pete Wild - RV 8 - Sussex - England > > Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2002
From: "Gary Zilik" <zilik(at)bewellnet.com>
Subject: Re: Van's Cheap Tach and other Instruments
The cheap tach refered to is the full size mechanical tack made by Falcon instruments which I believe was formerly Woltrad and it states in big letters MADE IN CHINA. The Isspro instruments van's and cheif aircraft now sell are made in Taiwan and just another example of "You get what you pay for" Gary Zilik "Michael J. Robbins" wrote: > > > Speaking of Van's ROC made instruments, awhile back several postings noted > that when they keyed the radio mike their manifold pressure gage went crazy. > I tested mine the other day and it did the same thing. Does anyone know if > this damages the gage over time, and what is Van's response? > > By the way don't blame the Chinese for any of these instrument's short > comings. They are made in Taiwan, Republic of China, not Communist China. > There is a big difference in the two countries. The Taiwanese are very > smart people and have the capability of making very hi tech quality stuff. > Been there and seen their stuff. > > Mike Robbins > RV8Q 80591 N88MJ baffles done, finishing up last details > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2002
From: Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca>
Subject: Re: Gasket Sealant on Lycoming's
> >The best sealant for ANY sealing surface >which has oil passages going through it, is a product called Hylomar. > Hylomar is a Rolls Royce aerospace product. It is manufactured under >license by Permatex (and others). It is approved by Lycoming. You can find >it at any auto parts store. It is a thick blue liquid (as made by Permatex) >which does not completely harden. The fact that it stays pliable will >prevent it from plugging up an oil passageways. This is a great feature if >you are of the Tim Allen persuasion. (If more is better, to much is just >enough!) This stuff is GREAT! >Charlie Kuss > Charlie, Does the Permatex version say Hylomar on the container? If not, how do we identify it? How did you determine what Lycoming has approved? I've looked at my overhaul manual, and all the Lycoming Service Letters, Service Instructions, etc, and I can't find anything which states which sealants etc Lycoming approves, except in a very few cases where a specific product will be mentioned for a particular use. Thanks, Kevin Horton RV-8 (engine installation & electrics) khorton(at)cyberus.ca (613) 821-7862 (home) Ottawa, Canada (613) 952-4319 (work) http://eccentrix.com/misc/rv8/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Pitot Static/Tansponder Check
Date: Mar 05, 2002
From: Larry Pardue <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net>
> > >Larry - > >I didn't see any responses to your question, so I'll take a stab. >Transponder encoder checks are required basically when operating where >they're required equipment. In a mode C veil and above 10K'. It's required >(x-ponder use and 24 month check) by the FAR's. > >Reasoning? I'd imagine the feds just feel that if you're going to be "in >the system" squawking an altitude, they want it accurate. Makes sense to >me. You're in close proximity to airline and other IFR traffic in a mode C >veil and when above 10K'. > I agree that the altitude needs to be accurate. I just don't see how a shop saying it is accurate is better than ATC saying it is accurate. Larry Pardue Carlsbad, NM RV-6 N441LP Flying http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm ________________________________________________________________________________
From: SportAV8R(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Subject: Re: LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator
dcarter(at)datarecall.net writes: > just now realized that the error may be mostly due to AOA, which means you > may have the same 5, 6, or more knot error at stall AOA, at any IAS. Don't > have a clue how to calibrate for that!) > David: I recently began taking notice of the GPS ground speed in my 6A on stabilized short final @ 65 mph IAS; it is typically 73-75 mph, and that's flying into whatever light wind there usually is. I hate to say it, but those 50 mph IAS stall speeds at Vso we admire the RV's for is probably off by about 10 mph due to pitot AOA error. Disappointing, but probably all the manufacturers cook their stall numbers the same way, by not applying the correction. -Bill B ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Meier, George" <George.Meier(at)goodrich.com>
Subject: Pitot Static/Tansponder Check
Date: Mar 05, 2002
As an ex-Air Force Avionics person, I can state that a GOOD transponder check, on the bench, will be better than any ATC check. A digital altitude is entered into the transponder, then the transmitter is tested for the presence of every bit and transmitter power and frequency. Together with a pitot/static and altimeter check this will verify the whole shebang. George Meier Avionics Software Engineer RV6A - Wings ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "martin heisler" <martinheisler(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: val radio
Date: Mar 05, 2002
hi , i have a val 720 radio for sale . if interested please contact me off line......marty ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Neil McLeod" <bedrock(at)theriver.com>
Subject: Re: LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator
Date: Mar 05, 2002
What's the density altitude when you are getting these readings? Neil -7 wings ----- Original Message ----- From: <SportAV8R(at)aol.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator > > dcarter(at)datarecall.net writes: > > > > just now realized that the error may be mostly due to AOA, which means you > > may have the same 5, 6, or more knot error at stall AOA, at any IAS. Don't > > have a clue how to calibrate for that!) > > > > David: I recently began taking notice of the GPS ground speed in my 6A on > stabilized short final @ 65 mph IAS; it is typically 73-75 mph, and that's > flying into whatever light wind there usually is. I hate to say it, but > those 50 mph IAS stall speeds at Vso we admire the RV's for is probably off > by about 10 mph due to pitot AOA error. Disappointing, but probably all the > manufacturers cook their stall numbers the same way, by not applying the > correction. > > -Bill B > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Gasket Sealant on Lycoming's
Date: Mar 05, 2002
> >The best sealant for ANY sealing surface > >which has oil passages going through it, is a product called Hylomar. > > Hylomar is a Rolls Royce aerospace product. It is manufactured under > >license by Permatex (and others). It is approved by Lycoming. You can >find > >it at any auto parts store. It is a thick blue liquid (as made by >Permatex) > >which does not completely harden. The fact that it stays pliable will > >prevent it from plugging up an oil passageways. This is a great feature >if > >you are of the Tim Allen persuasion. (If more is better, to much is just > >enough!) This stuff is GREAT! > >Charlie Kuss > > > > >Charlie, > >Does the Permatex version say Hylomar on the container? If not, how do we >identify it? > >How did you determine what Lycoming has approved? I've looked at my >overhaul manual, and all the Lycoming Service Letters, Service >Instructions, etc, and I can't find anything which states which sealants >etc Lycoming approves, except in a very few cases where a specific product >will be mentioned for a particular use. > >Thanks, > >Kevin Horton RV-8 (engine installation & electrics) >khorton(at)cyberus.ca (613) 821-7862 (home) >Ottawa, Canada (613) 952-4319 (work) >http://eccentrix.com/misc/rv8/ FWIW, I initially used Hylomar on the cork tank cover gaskets. Result: Leaks o'plenty. The blue color of the sealant mixed with the blue 100LL tint had me wondering what was fuel and what was sealant, that was dripping down the wing root. Indeed though, the sealant stays pliable, and slightly sticky in texture. Should work great on the sump/crankcase surfaces which is a much more rigid and uniform union vs. the flexible tank root rib and cover plate junction. My engine overhaul video shows a very sticky and somewhat clear looking sealant used on the parting surfaces of the crankcase, used in conjuction with the silk thread. It may very well be Hylomar. Definitely do NOT use red Permatex RTV!! Avgas eats it for lunch. I have one engine out landing in my logbook as a result of the inappropriate use of the stuff. Could have been a very costly mistake on my behalf. I would defer judgement on such a critical junction to those with engine building experience, or Lycoming directly. The Pliobond and DC4 sealants are the only specific products I have seen mentioned on a Lycoming nose seal installation procedure. This is a different type of joint for sure, being rubber (?) on metal vs. metal on metal with gasket in between. Kevin, the Hylomar is specified on the product package. It's available at Autozone, which is where I bought it. Brian Denk RV8 N94BD MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator
Date: Mar 05, 2002
From: Larry Pardue <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net>
> > >dcarter(at)datarecall.net writes: > > >David: I recently began taking notice of the GPS ground speed in my 6A on >stabilized short final @ 65 mph IAS; it is typically 73-75 mph, and that's >flying into whatever light wind there usually is. I hate to say it, but >those 50 mph IAS stall speeds at Vso we admire the RV's for is probably off >by about 10 mph due to pitot AOA error. Disappointing, but probably all the >manufacturers cook their stall numbers the same way, by not applying the >correction. > I'm not sure how this could be considered "cooking" stall numbers. If something is published as IAS that means what shows on the AS indicator and should not be considered TAS. IAS and TAS vary for many reasons and TAS in the small airplanes we fly is normally way different than IAS, particularly near stall and varying greatly with altitude and temperature. I am used to operating at high altitudes where this is particularly noticable. It is baffling to me when pilots ask what she indicates at cruise. What in the world does this mean. A cruise IAS could be anywhere from about 160 knots to 105 knots at the same TAS and is not a good indication of how fast the airplane is. IAS near the stall is a reference that is accurate at 1g and similar weights. That is all. It does not show how fast the airplane is going, nor is it meant to. Larry Pardue Carlsbad, NM RV-6 N441LP Flying http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2002
From: "Gary Zilik" <zilik(at)bewellnet.com>
Subject: Measured Performance; was LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator
From the CAFE report on Steve Barnard's RV-6A. MEASURED PERFORMANCE Propeller static RPM, 28.3 in Hg M.P. 2218 RPM Takeoff distance, 1645.5 lb @ 120' MSL 625 ft @ 70 F with 7 mph tailwind Liftoff speed, per barogaph, CAS 52.6 kt/60.6 mph Touchdown speed, barograph, CAS 54.9 kt/63.3 mph Rate of climb, 2500-3500 ft, STD Day, Vy 1233.8 fpm Stall speed, Vs1, clean, 1 G, CAS 51.0 kt/58.7 mph @ 1633lb Stall speed, Vso, landing, 1 G, CAS 45.2 kt/52.1 mph @ 1631lb Vmax@ 24.2", 2618 RPM, 12.2 gph, TAS 173.4 kt/199.7 mph, 7079' dens., 1634 lb Vmax@ 21.8", 2507 RPM, 11.3 gph, TAS 162.3 kt/191.6 mph, 9058' dens., 1626 lb Vc@ 21.1", 2441 RPM, 10.2 gph, TAS 158.4 kt/182.5 mph, 9145' dens., 1623 lb Vc@ 18.9", 2349 RPM, 7.8 gph, TAS 153.3 kt/176.6 mph, 9008' dens., 1622 lb Vc@ 18.3", 2292 RPM, 7.4 gph, TAS 147.2 kt/169.5 mph, 8987' dens., 1621 lb Vc@ 18.2", 2251 RPM, 7.7 gph, TAS 143.1 kt/164.8 mph, 8877' dens., 1620 l See http://members.eaa.org/home/flight_reports/rv-6a.html for the full report Gary > David: I recently began taking notice of the GPS ground speed in my 6A on > stabilized short final @ 65 mph IAS; it is typically 73-75 mph, and that's > flying into whatever light wind there usually is. I hate to say it, but > those 50 mph IAS stall speeds at Vso we admire the RV's for is probably off > by about 10 mph due to pitot AOA error. Disappointing, but probably all the > manufacturers cook their stall numbers the same way, by not applying the > correction. > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Stall Speed
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Perhaps the biggest factor in stall speed is the prop. A C/S prop acts as a brake whereas a F/P prop is generating considerable thrust at idle RPM on an RV. Put your idle RPM up a bit on a F/P prop and the stall speed decreases - cheapest way I know of to achieve that! Dennis Persyk 6A N600DP 114 hours ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Pardue" <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net> Subject: Re: RV-List: LRI Vs Air Speed Indicator > > > > > > > >dcarter(at)datarecall.net writes: > > > > > > > >David: I recently began taking notice of the GPS ground speed in my 6A on > >stabilized short final @ 65 mph IAS; it is typically 73-75 mph, and that's > >flying into whatever light wind there usually is. I hate to say it, but > >those 50 mph IAS stall speeds at Vso we admire the RV's for is probably off > >by about 10 mph due to pitot AOA error. Disappointing, but probably all the > >manufacturers cook their stall numbers the same way, by not applying the > >correction. > > > > I'm not sure how this could be considered "cooking" stall numbers. If > something is published as IAS that means what shows on the AS indicator > and should not be considered TAS. IAS and TAS vary for many reasons and > TAS in the small airplanes we fly is normally way different than IAS, > particularly near stall and varying greatly with altitude and temperature. > > I am used to operating at high altitudes where this is particularly > noticable. It is baffling to me when pilots ask what she indicates at > cruise. What in the world does this mean. A cruise IAS could be > anywhere from about 160 knots to 105 knots at the same TAS and is not a > good indication of how fast the airplane is. > > IAS near the stall is a reference that is accurate at 1g and similar > weights. That is all. It does not show how fast the airplane is going, > nor is it meant to. > > > Larry Pardue > Carlsbad, NM > > RV-6 N441LP Flying > http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Randall Henderson" <randallh(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: Pitot Static/Tansponder Check
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Coupla things to add to the txp check discussion. First, the tech checks (among other things) the thing across a range of altitudes, not just the one you happen to be flying at when you talk to ATC. And second, my research indicates that a homebuilder COULD in fact do the transponder check -- if he had calibrated and tested equipment that met the FAA specs for such checks, and was properly trained in its use. Owning, keeping calibrated, and keeping trained on such equipment would be way more money and time than I'd want to put out for something I'd no doubt forget how to do properly if only done once every year or two. Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (~300 hrs) Portland, OR www.vanshomewing.org ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Wayne Bonesteel" <rv8tor3(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Autogas and the XP360
Date: Mar 05, 2002
My hanger is in Minden NV.(MEV) 4720' & I live in South Lake Tahoe and have my plane there frequently, (TVL) 6250'. I fly back and forth to Monterey Bay area (WVI). I fly 12500' to and 11500' back using Auto gas, I have 70 hrs. on my RV-4 with O-320 and had no problems, the OAT at that Altitude is usually 40 deg. or less, but I will certainly be aware of this limitation. Wayne > > Very well put Jim. In fact our manual spells out not to exceed 12,500 feet > > and fuel temps over 85*F. We also encourage a blend of auto fuel and > 100LL ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Wilson, James Mike" <james.mike.wilson(at)intel.com>
Subject: Lightweight starters...
Date: Mar 05, 2002
That's great, I have a very different story. Nothing but problems, probably due to a weak battery (gives only one chance to start) but also due to a high compression engine and Light Speed Ignition and a wood prop (low inertia). What I've learned: 1) LSE can fire early if voltage drops below 12v (not sure where the limit is). Cost me 2ea ring gears, 2ea starter drive gears, starter housing and brush assembly to understand this (some parts for starter purchased to ensure good operation after failure). Solution: Keep ignition off until starter builds some momentum, then light it off. Works Great! Also in instructions note, connect ignition as close to Batt as possible (i.e. at pos terminal). This prevents a volt drop between LSE and batt source. 2) Battery must be capable of high current as Sky-Tec is very current hungry. PC680 is a good choice as I understand. I was using a look-a-like non-name brand of lower capacity. (Waiting for PC680 UPS) 3) Sky-Tec is weak at drive gear support. This is shown in off center wear pattern on teeth. Due to multiple self destruction episodes and nearly $700 in parts that still don't work right, I have decided to cut my loses and go B&C at the recommendation of others experiencing a similar situation. Again, I have high compression and you may not see this with stock engines. If you have any are all of these configuration issues, due more research. RV-4, Mike -----Original Message----- From: RV_8 Pilot [mailto:rv_8pilot(at)hotmail.com] Subject: Re: RV-List: Lightweight starters... I have almost the same story as Gary with my Sky-Tec starter. 374 hrs. No problems. Odyssey battery. No components changed on the starter yet. O-320, 8.5:1 comp. All original and very satisfied. Bryan Jones -8 Pearland, Texas >Mark- > >First of all, the manufacturer is Sky-Tec so people can actually search >properly. > >The Sky-Tec starter in my 6A has 500 hrs on it and just a week ago I >replaced >the solenoid on the side of the starter for $40. A good deal as that >appears >to be the only thing that ages on them (I'll see if brushes are the next >thing but for now they're good). I think it is a super unit and I would >get >the same setup if I were to build again. > >The great thing is that these starters really crank if you have a good >battery. I recently replaced my 23 lb Concord RG25 battery with the 14 lb >Odyssey PC680, which you can get on the web for $100 or less ($70 less than >Van's), and boy does it turn things over sprightly. You can taxi on this >starter. > >-GV (N1GV) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: N Number Placement
Date: Mar 05, 2002
I would like to put my N Numbers on the bottom of each side of the rudder (a vertical tail surface NOT the fuselage). By my read of the FAR's (see below), this is legal. Any comments? Ross Mickey FAR Section 45.25: Location of marks on fixed-wing aircraft. (a) The operator of a fixed-wing aircraft shall display the required marks on either the vertical tail surfaces or the sides of the fuselage, except as provided in 45.29(f). (b) The marks required by paragraph (a) of this section shall be displayed as follows: (1) If displayed on the vertical tail surfaces, horizontally on both surfaces, horizontally on both surfaces of a single vertical tail or on the outer surfaces of a multivertical tail. However, on aircraft on which marks at least 3 inches high may be displayed in accordance with 45.29(b)(1), the marks may be displayed vertically on the vertical tail surfaces. (2) If displayed on the fuselage surfaces, horizontally on both sides of the fuselage between the trailing edge of the wing and the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer. However, if engine pods or other appurtenances are located in this area and are an integral part of the fuselage side surfaces, the operator may place the marks on those pods or appurtenances. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "George McNutt" <gmcnutt(at)intergate.ca>
Subject: Pitot Static/Tansponder Check
Date: Mar 05, 2002
- Coupla things to add to the txp check discussion. First, the tech checks (among other things) the thing across a range of altitudes, not just the one you happen to be flying at when you talk to ATC. And second, my research indicates that a homebuilder COULD in fact do the transponder check -- if he had calibrated and tested equipment that met the FAA specs for such checks, and was properly trained in its use. Owning, keeping calibrated, and keeping trained on such equipment would be way more money and time than I'd want to put out for something I'd no doubt forget how to do properly if only done once every year or two. Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (~300 hrs) ---------------------------------------------------- Here is a new twist to this discussion - My new UPS SL-70 Transponder has a altitude readout - it is a certified and tested piece of equipment just as accurate as your bench test equipment. Sure that doesn't tell if the transmitter is drifting off frequency -butlets start promoting the idea that this new type of Transponder/Encoder should only need the static system and altimeter checked, the avionics part of the system is self reporting and any error that would cause ATC problems should be obvious!!! By the way it is interesting to note how long it takes the altitude encoder to come up to temperature and start reporting altitudes, one could easily be out of two or three thousand feet if the taxi distance was short. George McNutt Langley, B.C. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Michael J. Robbins" <kitfox(at)gte.net>
Subject: Re: Static RPM Solved - Was Cheap VAN's Tach
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Jim; So what engine instruments do you have. Mike Robbins RV8Q 80591 N88MJ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Sears" <sears(at)searnet.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: Static RPM Solved - Was Cheap VAN's Tach > > When I purchased my instruments and gauges for my RV, I noted some of the > indicated failings on the RV-list and bought accordingly. My instruments > and gauges are from reputable companies that have been around for a long > time. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Clark, Thomas IFC" <Tom.Clark(at)UTCFuelCells.com>
Subject: RV-8 Custom Jig
Date: Mar 05, 2002
List, I have a very well built and super accurate RV-8 jig for sale. This Jig is made with laminated beam side rails and is setup with locating marks and bulkhead locations. This jig has produced two perfect fuselages and is very easy to setup. Jig is located in central Massachusetts. The first $100 takes it and that's a lot less than it cost to build! Tom RV-8 Fastback List, I have a very well built and super accurate RV-8 jig for sale. This Jig is made with laminated beam side rails and is setup with locating marks and bulkhead locations. This jig has produced two perfect fuselages and is very easy to setup. Jig is located in central Massachusetts. The first $100 takes it and that's a lot less than it cost to build! Tom RV-8 Fastback ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Sears" <sears(at)searnet.com>
Subject: Re: Static RPM Solved - Was Cheap VAN's Tach
Date: Mar 05, 2002
> So what engine instruments do you have. I have a mix of Westach, Mitchell, and one Rochester. I tried staying away from UMA; but, I think I may have a UMA sender, or two. So far, those have worked. I know some folks don't like Westach's name; but, I bought TSO'd stuff and used bayonets for the four cylinder EGT and CHT. All of my gauges are electrical types and not do the quiver that you guys speak of. My MP is mechanical and works well. It has had problems sticking in the past; but, that finally cleared up. Must have been something in the line. I'll use a bigger line, next time. All in all, I'm quite happy with my choices. I had thought about Van's gauges for the next time; but, no more. For your viewing pleasure, attached is a photo of a panel with steam gauges instead of a black box. I kinda like it that way. :-) Jim Sears in KY ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "cmcgough" <rv6(at)ssc.net.au>
Subject: Re: Van's Cheap Tach and other Instruments
Date: Mar 06, 2002
I have been told to fix the manifold pressure guage you have to wrap the sender in tin foil!!! It works Chris and Susie VH-MUM readyto paint ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Joe Larson" <jpl(at)showpage.org>
Subject: Performance
Date: Mar 05, 2002
I'm trying to do some apples vs. apples judging of performance figures. I was just told of one configuration that'll cruise 160 MPH indicated. The guys with flying RVs -- what are you indicating at cruise altitude? The 160 sounded kinda low, but that could be the difference between indicated and true. Comments? -Joe ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Performance
Date: Mar 05, 2002
> > >I'm trying to do some apples vs. apples judging of performance figures. I >was >just told of one configuration that'll cruise 160 MPH indicated. > >The guys with flying RVs -- what are you indicating at cruise altitude? > >The 160 sounded kinda low, but that could be the difference between >indicated >and true. > >Comments? > >-Joe > > 160mph indicated is very typical. That's what I see on my RV8/O-360/FP at around 8,000'MSL cruise altitude. GPS groundspeeds can differ by as much as 50mph at times. Lots of variables enter into the IAC/TAS/GS equation. Brian Denk RV8 N94BD ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: N Number Placement
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Ross, What you read is correct. Have at it. Mike Robertson RV-8A >From: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >To: >Subject: RV-List: N Number Placement >Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 10:10:46 -0800 > > >I would like to put my N Numbers on the bottom of each side of the rudder >(a >vertical tail surface NOT the fuselage). By my read of the FAR's (see >below), this is legal. Any comments? > >Ross Mickey > >FAR Section 45.25: Location of marks on fixed-wing aircraft. >(a) The operator of a fixed-wing aircraft shall display the required marks >on either the vertical tail surfaces or the sides of the fuselage, except >as >provided in 45.29(f). > >(b) The marks required by paragraph (a) of this section shall be displayed >as follows: > >(1) If displayed on the vertical tail surfaces, horizontally on both >surfaces, horizontally on both surfaces of a single vertical tail or on the >outer surfaces of a multivertical tail. However, on aircraft on which marks >at least 3 inches high may be displayed in accordance with 45.29(b)(1), the >marks may be displayed vertically on the vertical tail surfaces. > >(2) If displayed on the fuselage surfaces, horizontally on both sides of >the >fuselage between the trailing edge of the wing and the leading edge of the >horizontal stabilizer. However, if engine pods or other appurtenances are >located in this area and are an integral part of the fuselage side >surfaces, >the operator may place the marks on those pods or appurtenances. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2002
From: Charles Brame <charleyb(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Firewall Plans
Somewhere in the dim recesses of my mind, I have seen a drawing of the engine side of the firewall showing suggested locations for all the firewall mounted goodies plus holes for penetrating cables, etc. Now I can't find it. It doesn't seem to be in my Van's supplied plans, and I have been through my collection of RVAtors without any luck. Building a -6A. Can anyone jog my memory? Charlie Brame RV-6A QB N11CB (Res.) San Antonio ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "C J Heitman" <cjh(at)execpc.com>
Subject: Firewall Plans
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Charlie, Drawing 19 for the RV-7 and RV-9 shows this. You can see a portion of this drawing on page 15 of the 6th issue, 2001 of the RVator. Chris Heitman Dousman WI RV-9A N94ME (reserved) engine baffles http://www.execpc.com/~cjh/rv9a.html -----Original Message----- Somewhere in the dim recesses of my mind, I have seen a drawing of the engine side of the firewall showing suggested locations for all the firewall mounted goodies plus holes for penetrating cables, etc. Now I can't find it. It doesn't seem to be in my Van's supplied plans, and I have been through my collection of RVAtors without any luck. Building a -6A. Can anyone jog my memory? Charlie Brame RV-6A QB N11CB (Res.) San Antonio ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "KostaLewis" <mikel(at)dimensional.com>
Subject: Re: Performance
Date: Mar 05, 2002
> I'm trying to do some apples vs. apples judging of performance figures. I was > just told of one configuration that'll cruise 160 MPH indicated. > > The guys with flying RVs -- what are you indicating at cruise altitude? > > The 160 sounded kinda low, but that could be the difference between indicated > and true. 152 mph indicated, 172 mph true at 2400/18-20 drinking 7.2 gph average. 160hp, Warnke wooden prop, RV-4. I like to cruise at this speed as the engine feels just right at that setting. Much higher RPM doesn't seem to be that beneficial on the speed/fuel thing. Sure, I can cruise at 185+ but I'm also going through 10.5 gph, last I looked. If I'm in a hurry, I'll sneak up to 2450 or 2500. That is over 8.5 gph. Heck, I'm used to a Cub, for crying out loud. Anything over 85 mph is a bonus. And what a deal going that fast and using that little fuel. Flat amazes my spam can friends. Michael RV-4 N232 Suzie Q OK, are you serious? 7 gallons per hour at 170? (he thinks I'm lying, I can tell) 'Well, it's 7.2, actually.' Oh. Huh. Huh. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Greg Young" <gyoung@cs-sol.com>
Subject: N Number Placement
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Oddly enough there was a brief discussion of this at lunch today. A local builder had put his N-number on the rudder and the inspector (FAA) made him move it to the VS. He did so with cheap stick on numbers. After he got his airworthiness cert he removed them with a heat gun and put the permanent ones on the rudder. On a subsequent call to the FSDO to clarify the regs he was told they left it to the discretion of the inspector. YMMV Regards, Greg Young RV-6 N6GY RIP searching for Navion... > > I would like to put my N Numbers on the bottom of each side > of the rudder (a > vertical tail surface NOT the fuselage). By my read of the FAR's (see > below), this is legal. Any comments? > > Ross Mickey ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Terry Watson" <terrywatson3(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: Firewall Plans
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Charlie, I think you are remembering the drawing on page 49 of Tony Bengelis' book "Tony Bengelis on Engines." It shows the layout for his RV-6A. Terry > > Somewhere in the dim recesses of my mind, I have seen a drawing of the > engine side of the firewall showing suggested locations for all the > firewall mounted goodies plus holes for penetrating cables, etc. Now I > can't find it. It doesn't seem to be in my Van's supplied plans, and I > have been through my collection of RVAtors without any luck. > > Building a -6A. Can anyone jog my memory? > > Charlie Brame > RV-6A QB N11CB (Res.) > San Antonio ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2002
From: "Owens, Laird" <Owens(at)aerovironment.com>
Subject: Performance
Hi Joe, Lots of fun stuff goes into trying to figure airspeed numbers when trying to compare airplane against airplane. One thing you need to nail down is % power. At what power setting are you getting 160 mph? Past writings from Van says that the industry stand for stating cruise speed is 8000' density altitude, full throttle/full prop. That's the altitude where full throttle will give you 75% power. (To get 8000' density altitude, you need to take your altitude (set to 29.92) and correct if for temp. Depending on the day, you might find yourself flying at 6500 msl or something like that to get 8000' density altitude). That's the best place to compare numbers. It's also best for the manufactures because that's where people look for good comparsions with high speed numbers. In real life we almost never use this 75% cruise in our normal flying. Most of the time were at 55% to 65% power. To get numbers to compare RV's to RV's, first you need to be able to get true airspeed vs power. Then we can start trying to compare #'s for you. If you can't determine power, try giving us some other info to try to work it out for you. Fly at 8000 density altitude and give us RPM and MP and TAS (remember indicated airspeed does little good for apples to apples comparsions). We probably also need to know what RV model, engine type, prop type to give us an idea of wether it's good or bad I've added a previous note in the archives I posted about how I go about getting 75% speed data. Regards, Laird SoCal Match: #48 Message: #94499 Date: Nov 15, 2001 From: "Owens, Laird" <Owens(at)aerovironment.com> Subject: Test Flight Update/Testing Eric, Great report, and you've only just begun to learn your airplane. The more you fly it, the more it becomes part of you. You just kinda wear it after a while. Just curious, in looking at you test points, could you clarify something for me. When testing at, say, 8000', are you taking into account temperature, (to determine density altitude) or are you just flying at that altitude. If your just flying that altitude, your not really getting the data that I think you really want. When reporting cruise speeds I think one wants to report the altitude as density altitude, or what the engine/airplane really think it's flying at. I think you'll find that what you think is 75% power is somewhat lower, and would reflect a slower speed that what your really doing. When taking speed data, I have a rigid checklist that I go thru to try to get repeatable data. The simple version is: Set altimeter to 29.92 Check OAT to determine indicated altitude to fly to get desired density altitude Stabilize at desired DA and recheck temp. (Adjust indicated alt as necessary) Note date, time, OAT, Indicated alt and fuel remaining (if you have a fuel computer-determines aircraft wieght) Full throttle Prop full forward Maintain altitude Find Peak EGT and note Back off EGT 50 deg I then take data on RPM, MP, Fuel Flow, Fuel Pressure, an all EGTs and CHT's Then fly heading of X, maintain altitude, stablize, and note GPS speed Fly heading of X + 120 deg and stabilize and note GPS speed Fly heading of X + 240 deg and stabilize and note GPS speed Once on the ground I can run the Excel spreadsheet I got off Kevin Horton's web page that takes 3 way GPS runs and then take the wind out. Leave you with a TAS. This way you don't have to worry about calibrating airspeed indicatior and static errors. The biggest thing to worry about is the weather conditions like turbulance and rising or falling air. That's why I'll try to get a least 4 different tests at very close to the same data point before I feel good about stating a speed to anyone. I'm currently using this technique to tweak my RV to go faster. So far the hardest thing to do is get 3 or 4 data points close to the same. I was also able to double check the test technique by having my Dad fly (without me in the airplane) and he came up with very similar results on 2 differnt days. So I feel pretty good that it's at least repeatable for my airplane. Now comparing 2 airplanes might yield differnt results because of instrumention errors. I'd like the others out who might have comments out there to critique my test technique to see if I'm missing something. Eric, Have fun testing. Laird RV-6 (8000' DA/full power speed 180 kts/207mph) SoCal From: rv-list(at)matronics.com on Thu, Nov 15, 2001 11:28 AM Subject: Test Flight Update Hi everyone, Sorry I took so long to send this flight update but I have been quite busy tweaking and flying and tweaking some more. snip good stuff on flight test- Weight for speed tests was 1,390 Lbs. with me plus 15 gallons total fuel. (outside air temp was 63f at sea level) All speeds are True Airspeed Speed in statute miles per hour: Top speed at 1,000 feet - 195 mph (TAS) (2,900 RPM) - Full Throttle 75% power at 8,000 feet - 188 mph (TAS) (2,700 RPM) - Full Throttle 65% power at 8,000 feet - 175 mph (TAS) (2,450 RPM) snip- Eric Newton - Long Beach, MS RV-6A - N57ME (flying) From: rv-list(at)matronics.com on Tue, Mar 5, 2002 1:36 PM Subject: RV-List: Performance I'm trying to do some apples vs. apples judging of performance figures. I was just told of one configuration that'll cruise 160 MPH indicated. The guys with flying RVs -- what are you indicating at cruise altitude? The 160 sounded kinda low, but that could be the difference between indicated and true. Comments? -Joe ________________________________________________________________________________
From: LeastDrag93066(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Subject: Re: Performance
I'm glad to see that the airspeed given was identified as indicated airspeed. What altitude? What power setting? On my RV-3 in level flight, I've seen 137 mph indicated at full throttle, and 212 mph indicated slightly less than full throttle. Anyone need to guess which was at 17,990' MSL (19,800' density) altitude, and which was at 1,500' MSL? Jim Ayers RV-3 N47RV ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2002
From: Greg Puckett <rv8er(at)concentric.net>
Subject: Re: Gasket Sealant on Lycoming's
Thanks for all the info, I also talked to an overhaul shop and was told to use Aviation Grade Permatex #3. Not sure if this is the same as Hylomar but I was told it also stays pliable. Use a very thin coating by putting a blob on your rubber glove covered fingers and running the gasket through was the recommended technique. I think I'll go to a auto supply and look for Hylomar or the Permatex #3 and be done with it. Greg Puckett Elizabeth, Colorado ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Wayne Bonesteel" <rv8tor3(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Performance
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Nautical or statue > The 160 sounded kinda low, but that could be the difference between indicated > and true. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ABAYMAN(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Subject: manifold vs alum foil
listers i took the tip from a lister today, to surround the manifold sender with aluminum foil to prevent it from spiking when the push to talk was switched. it didn't work in my case. i'll call vans tommorrow and find out what they have to say. scott tampa millions of details ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steve Hurlbut" <hurlbut_steve(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: RV-7/9 F711 & F712 fit
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Any body else have a hell of a time fitting the F711 and F712 to the F779 tail cone. All parts seem to be the right numbers but the fit is terrible. I'm having to bend the F711 and F712 to even get 2 clecoes in place. Any suggestions? Steve RV-7A http://members.kingston.net/sjhdcl/rv7a.htm MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2002
From: Dave Bristol <bj034(at)lafn.org>
Subject: Re: Static RPM Solved - Was Cheap VAN's Tach
Hey guys, Don't think that just because a tach is "digital" that it is accurate. Digital just makes it easier to read - if you want to check accuracy you must check it against a known standard. Dave Jim Sears wrote: > > > So what engine instruments do you have. > > I have a mix of Westach, Mitchell, and one Rochester. I tried staying away > from UMA; but, I think I may have a UMA sender, or two. So far, those have > worked. > I know some folks don't like Westach's name; but, I bought TSO'd stuff and > used bayonets for the four cylinder EGT and CHT. All of my gauges are > electrical types and not do the quiver that you guys speak of. My MP is > mechanical and works well. It has had problems sticking in the past; but, > that finally cleared up. Must have been something in the line. I'll use a > bigger line, next time. All in all, I'm quite happy with my choices. I had > thought about Van's gauges for the next time; but, no more. > > For your viewing pleasure, attached is a photo of a panel with steam gauges > instead of a black box. I kinda like it that way. :-) > > Jim Sears in KY > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2002
From: Roy Glass and Mary Poteet <rlglass(at)alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Firewall Plans
Try these drawings: DWG 19 -- Firewall bulkhead (RV-6,7,9) DWG 49 -- Fuel and brake system (RV-6) OP-10 -- Electrical system OP-12 -- RV-6 wiring harness OP-26 -- Control cable (RV-7,9) OP-27 -- Oil system (RV-7,9) OP-28 -- Fuel system (RV-7,9) OP-29 -- Cabin heat and manifold pressure (RV-7,9) Charles Brame wrote: > > > Somewhere in the dim recesses of my mind, I have seen a drawing of the > engine side of the firewall showing suggested locations for all the > firewall mounted goodies plus holes for penetrating cables, etc. Now I > can't find it. It doesn't seem to be in my Van's supplied plans, and I > have been through my collection of RVAtors without any luck. > > Building a -6A. Can anyone jog my memory? > > Charlie Brame > RV-6A QB N11CB (Res.) > San Antonio > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2002
From: Bobby Hester <bhester(at)apex.net>
RV7and7A
Subject: IE capacitive fuel sender system
Anybody installing the IE capacitive system in the fuel tanks, did you install the external bracket outside the root rib that they talk about in the instructions? Has anyone installed the electronic interface module yet? Would like to see a picture of what this looks like. -- Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/ RV7A Working on the wings :-) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Duberstein, Allen" <allen.duberstein(at)intel.com>
Subject: Performance
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Depends a lot on altitude, temp, etc but my RV6A shows around 170 MPH at 2600 RPM on 160 HP with a wood Sensenich prop. Flat out this gets to 180 indicated or a bit better. The best TAS I have recorded is 196. allen Allen Duberstein Potomac Program Manager 503-712-2323 allen.duberstein(at)intel.com -----Original Message----- From: Joe Larson [mailto:jpl(at)showpage.org] Subject: RV-List: Performance I'm trying to do some apples vs. apples judging of performance figures. I was just told of one configuration that'll cruise 160 MPH indicated. The guys with flying RVs -- what are you indicating at cruise altitude? The 160 sounded kinda low, but that could be the difference between indicated and true. Comments? -Joe ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "C J Heitman" <cjh(at)execpc.com>
Subject: IE capacitive fuel sender system
Date: Mar 05, 2002
-----Original Message----- Anybody installing the IE capacitive system in the fuel tanks, did you install the external bracket outside the root rib that they talk about in the instructions? Has anyone installed the electronic interface module yet? Would like to see a picture of what this looks like. <-- Bobby, The module is so small that the bracket is not necessary. Just a fat section in the cable covered with heatshrink. The weight is insignificant. By the way, you are supposed to get the interface modules when you order the EI fuel gauge from Van's (that's why it costs a lot more than from Aircraft Spruce). However, I didn't get them with my EI fuel gauge. I called Van's and they told me to call EI. When I called EI, they wanted to charge me for the modules and they explained that Van's had not specified the modules be included when they ordered their inventory. After I whined about paying for them twice, they shipped them to me at no charge. I suggested that they bill Van's for them. This was more than a year ago, so hopefully, the problem has been solved. I'll take a picture of one of the modules tomorrow and email a copy directly to you. One other thing: the modules do not come with BNC connectors. You must obtain and install these yourself. I got them from Mouser or Digkey (can't remember - but I could look it up). EI told me that it doesn't matter if they are 50 or 75 ohm connectors. Chris Heitman Dousman WI RV-9A engine baffles (what a pain) http://www.execpc.com/~cjh/rv9a.html ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Shane Summerhays" <ssummerhays(at)attbi.com>
Subject: skin tapering
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Thanks for the suggestions guys , I will have it done in a snap . Shane Summerhays ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2002
From: George Kilpatrick <aeronut58(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Stall Speed
--- Dennis Persyk wrote:> > Perhaps the biggest factor in stall speed is the > prop. A C/S prop acts as a > brake whereas a F/P prop is generating considerable > thrust at idle RPM on an > RV. Dennis is right. My RV-8, with O-360 and Fixed Pitch Prop (83" pitch), almost won't stall in level flight at moderate loading. At 3,000 feet, 65 degrees F, idle power, 1600 pounds weight, 60 mph ias, no flaps, she'll keep on flying in level flight until you lose interest. This is one of the reasons this airplane is easier to wheel land than to 3 point. My 60 mph ias hasn't been calibrated yet, but I don't think it's too far off, if any at all. Just my 2 cents worth. George N888GK ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2002
From: Dan Masys <dmasys(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: IE capacitive fuel sender system
Bobby Hester wrote: > > Anybody installing the IE capacitive system in the fuel tanks, did you > install the external bracket outside the root rib that they talk about > in the instructions? Has anyone installed the electronic interface > module yet? Would like to see a picture of what this looks like. I have the electronic interface but haven't installed it. I made .032 3/4 angle brackets from some leftover stiffener material. So you can see how big (or tiny, as the case may be) the EI sender unit is, I put it up against the bracket in the pictures available here: http://array.ucsd.edu/rv7a/FuelSender.html -Dan Masys -7A N747DL reserved, fuse ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Randall Henderson" <randallh(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Maintenance Schedule
Date: Mar 05, 2002
Someone recently mentioned the 500 hour TBO on Slick Mags. This reminded me of something that I've been thinking about since my focus has gone from "building" to "maintaining". And that is, a "maintenance schedule" that goes beyond the normal annual condition inspection. Kind of like the maintenance schedule for your car -- there's all of the regular 20K mile stuff which would be like our condition inspections, but also things like the timing belt at 60,000 miles which would be more like our magneto O/H. Has anyone worked up something like this? I'd like some suggestions for what to put on mine. I have the data from the C/S prop manual (lubricate every 6 months and at 100hr/condition inspection time, recommended O/H at 1000 hrs/60 or 72 months for aerobatic craft) the bit about the Slick Mags (500 hr internal inspection and service), and the engine recommended TBO. What else is there like that that would go on such a list? I know TBO for engine, prop, etc. are recommended, not mandatory. Be that as it may, I'd like to make up a comprehensive list for my plane of this kind of stuff. TIA Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (~300 hrs) Portland, OR www.vanshomewing.org ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rv6238(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 06, 2002
Subject: Towing a RV6 fusalage?
Time is near to move my 6 to the airport. In order to get the plane out of the basement I will excavate a ramp and lay a 3/4" plywood floor or maybe 2X12 "tracks" to roll the fuse up to ground level. The engine is installed and the tail will be removed. The panel and instruments are also installed. I estimate the weight to be around 550 lbs. I know this has been done before [Terry, are you watching?] so I could use advise. I am thinking of towing the fuse up the ramp with a 4WD or tractor. Question, will the tailwheel assembly and rear bulkheads stand the stress? Or is it better to tow by the front? If front is best how best to hook up the tow rope. Input needed! And perhaps a little courage.Thanks guys. Bill Griffin Balto., MD ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "George McNutt" <gmcnutt(at)intergate.ca>
Subject: Static RPM Solved - Was Cheap VAN's Tach
Date: Mar 06, 2002
Subject: Re: RV-List: Static RPM Solved - Was Cheap VAN's Tach Jim said -- Snip - I know you guys have been tearing up the cheap tachs; but, you may not be aware that all mechanical tachs will slow down, over time. In fact, the American Yankee Association has tach checks at all of their major events. It's that common. The AYA commonly finds tachs that are as much as 100 rpms slow. -------------------------------------------- And for all you from the Great White North - you may not have noticed that Transport Canada slipped the following into the regulations when they renamed them the CAR's. Now in addition to an annual compass swing and other things, you may have an annual tach check. CAR 605.86 - Appendix "C" 7. Tachometers The accuracy of mechanical drag cup type tachometers, for fixed wing propeller driven aircraft, shall be checked on site annually, and be accurate to within the tolerances established by the aircraft manufacturer or, where no tolerance has been specified by the aircraft manufacturer, to within +\- 4% of engine RPM at mid-point of the cruise range. (Note, thats 92 RPM error at 2300) George McNutt Langley B.C. Final Assembly, 6A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dana Overall" <bo124rs(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Towing a RV6 fuselage?
Date: Mar 06, 2002
Bill, I have moved a homebuilt to the airport on two different occasions, successfully I might add. If you can't come up with anything else check to see if a local wrecker driver is up too it. Use their wheel dollies to rest your mains in and attach the tail of the airplane to the boom. Worked great for me. Your local Ryder dealer may have the wheel dolly for rent, as a do it yourself project. Dana Overall Richmond, KY Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Henley" <henley(at)seii.net>
Subject: IO 360 Fuel Pump Plumbing
Date: Mar 06, 2002
Getting ready to hook up fuel lines to my engine and find that the inlet and outlet on the engine driven fuel pump are not labeled. Can anyone with an IO360 tell me looking at the pump on the rear of the engine, does the fuel flow from left to right or vice versa. John Henley ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 06, 2002
From: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Towing a RV6 fusalage?
How far do you have to tow? I towed mine by the tail wheel spring. Just used a pickup and made a cross bar across the bed of the pickup that would accept the tailwhell spring. this was with out the tailwheel assembly attached. I only had to go a couple miles but a friend of mine towed his this way about 5 miles. Seemed to work great without any problems Jerry Springer Rv6238(at)aol.com wrote: > > > Time is near to move my 6 to the airport. In order to get the plane out of > the basement I will excavate a ramp and lay a 3/4" plywood floor or maybe > 2X12 "tracks" to roll the fuse up to ground level. The engine is installed > and the tail will be removed. The panel and instruments are also installed. I > estimate the weight to be around 550 lbs. I know this has been done before > [Terry, are you watching?] so I could use advise. I am thinking of towing the > fuse up the ramp with a 4WD or tractor. Question, will the tailwheel assembly > and rear bulkheads stand the stress? Or is it better to tow by the front? If > front is best how best to hook up the tow rope. Input needed! And perhaps a > little courage.Thanks guys. > Bill Griffin > Balto., MD > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ollie Washburn" <skybolt-aviator(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: Performance
Date: Mar 06, 2002
All the guy wanted to know was what most people indicate on their normal everyday cruise.For me it's 170-180 INDICATED between 3-4000' here in Fl.which gives 155-160 Kt on gps average. 180 hp-c/s and mostly 2380-2400 rpm.----------Ollie ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 06, 2002
From: Earl Fortner <efortner(at)vnet.net>
Subject: Re: Towing a RV6 fusalage?
I towed my RV4 aproximately 20 miles with tail wheel lashed to the tailgate of my pickup when I moved several years ago. Had no problems. Earl RV4 Rv6238(at)aol.com wrote: > > Time is near to move my 6 to the airport. In order to get the plane out of > the basement I will excavate a ramp and lay a 3/4" plywood floor or maybe > 2X12 "tracks" to roll the fuse up to ground level. The engine is installed > and the tail will be removed. The panel and instruments are also installed. I > estimate the weight to be around 550 lbs. I know this has been done before > [Terry, are you watching?] so I could use advise. I am thinking of towing the > fuse up the ramp with a 4WD or tractor. Question, will the tailwheel assembly > and rear bulkheads stand the stress? Or is it better to tow by the front? If > front is best how best to hook up the tow rope. Input needed! And perhaps a > little courage.Thanks guys. > Bill Griffin > Balto., MD > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flamini2" <flamini2(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Transponder test
Date: Mar 06, 2002
BlankThis has been covered in the past and the EAA even had an article on it. Many forget that being the manufacturer of an aircraft gives you the same benefits as Boeing. See FAR 91.413(c)(3) Dennis and Fran Sec. 91.413 ATC transponder tests and inspections. (a) No persons may use an ATC transponder that is specified in 91.215(a), 121.345(c), or Sec. 135.143(c) of this chapter unless, within the preceding 24 calendar months, the ATC transponder has been tested and inspected and found to comply with appendix F of part 43 of this chapter; and (b) Following any installation or maintenance on an ATC transponder where data correspondence error could be introduced, the integrated system has been tested, inspected, and found to comply with paragraph (c), appendix E, of part 43 of this chapter. (c) The tests and inspections specified in this section must be conducted by-- (1) A certificated repair station properly equipped to perform those functions and holding-- (i) A radio rating, Class III; (ii) A limited radio rating appropriate to the make and model transponder to be tested; (iii) A limited rating appropriate to the test to be performed; [(iv) deleted] (2) A holder of a continuous airworthiness maintenance program as provided in part 121 or Sec. 135.411(a)(2) of this chapter; or (3) The manufacturer of the aircraft on which the transponder to be tested is installed, if the transponder was installed by that manufacturer. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Performance
Date: Mar 06, 2002
sounds a little low. My -8 with 160-hp will do 180-mph (ground speed) at 8000' lightly loaded. 165-170 mph fully loaded at 8000'. Verified several times with GPS. Bryan Jones -8 Pearland, Texas > >I'm trying to do some apples vs. apples judging of performance figures. I >was >just told of one configuration that'll cruise 160 MPH indicated. > >The guys with flying RVs -- what are you indicating at cruise altitude? > >The 160 sounded kinda low, but that could be the difference between >indicated >and true. > >Comments? ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob Lueder <blueder@superior-air-parts.com>
Subject: Maintenance Schedule
Date: Mar 06, 2002
One point to note about Slick Mags, when the go bad there is no downhill slide for them. One day they will just not work. Also, in most cases it will make more sense to replace them rather than repair them as the major components come up about $100 less than the new mags, factor in an A&P's labor........ -----Original Message----- From: Randall Henderson [mailto:randallh(at)attbi.com] Subject: RV-List: Maintenance Schedule Someone recently mentioned the 500 hour TBO on Slick Mags. This reminded me of something that I've been thinking about since my focus has gone from "building" to "maintaining". And that is, a "maintenance schedule" that goes beyond the normal annual condition inspection. Kind of like the maintenance schedule for your car -- there's all of the regular 20K mile stuff which would be like our condition inspections, but also things like the timing belt at 60,000 miles which would be more like our magneto O/H. Has anyone worked up something like this? I'd like some suggestions for what to put on mine. I have the data from the C/S prop manual (lubricate every 6 months and at 100hr/condition inspection time, recommended O/H at 1000 hrs/60 or 72 months for aerobatic craft) the bit about the Slick Mags (500 hr internal inspection and service), and the engine recommended TBO. What else is there like that that would go on such a list? I know TBO for engine, prop, etc. are recommended, not mandatory. Be that as it may, I'd like to make up a comprehensive list for my plane of this kind of stuff. TIA Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (~300 hrs) Portland, OR www.vanshomewing.org ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob Lueder <blueder@superior-air-parts.com>
Subject: IO 360 Fuel Pump Plumbing
Date: Mar 06, 2002
If your facing the rear of the engine ( from the cockpit) the output is on the left side of the pump, which goes to the carb or throttle body, the intake would be on the right side closer to your prop gov adapterand vacuum pump -----Original Message----- From: Henley [mailto:henley(at)seii.net] Subject: RV-List: IO 360 Fuel Pump Plumbing Getting ready to hook up fuel lines to my engine and find that the inlet and outlet on the engine driven fuel pump are not labeled. Can anyone with an IO360 tell me looking at the pump on the rear of the engine, does the fuel flow from left to right or vice versa. John Henley ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 06, 2002
From: Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca>
Subject: Re: Performance
Indicated airspeeds are pretty much useless when comparing performance, due to all the errors. At a given flight condition, you could probably change the indicated airspeed by changing ASIs and using different types and locations of static ports. If you want to figure out what true air speeds you should be able to get, check out the performance numbers that Van claims on his web site. The CAFE reports I've seen on the RV-6A and RV-8A showed that Vans numbers are realistic, for a well built aircraft, with a good engine and prop. Kevin Horton > > >I'm trying to do some apples vs. apples judging of performance figures. I > >was > >just told of one configuration that'll cruise 160 MPH indicated. > > > >The guys with flying RVs -- what are you indicating at cruise altitude? > > > >The 160 sounded kinda low, but that could be the difference between > >indicated > >and true. > > > >Comments? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 06, 2002
From: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Gasket Sealant on Lycoming's
> > >The best sealant for ANY sealing surface > >which has oil passages going through it, is a product called Hylomar. > > Hylomar is a Rolls Royce aerospace product. It is manufactured under > >license by Permatex (and others). It is approved by Lycoming. You can find > >it at any auto parts store. It is a thick blue liquid (as made by Permatex) > >which does not completely harden. The fact that it stays pliable will > >prevent it from plugging up an oil passageways. This is a great feature if > >you are of the Tim Allen persuasion. (If more is better, to much is just > >enough!) This stuff is GREAT! > >Charlie Kuss > > > > >Charlie, > >Does the Permatex version say Hylomar on the container? If not, how do we >identify it? > >How did you determine what Lycoming has approved? I've looked at my >overhaul manual, and all the Lycoming Service Letters, Service >Instructions, etc, and I can't find anything which states which sealants >etc Lycoming approves, except in a very few cases where a specific product >will be mentioned for a particular use. > >Thanks, > >Kevin Horton RV-8 (engine installation & electrics) Kevin, Yes, the Permatex product states that it is Hylomar on the tube. I'll get the Permatex product number for you today. I keep a tube in my toolbox. I had RV-4 builder & A&P, IA Jody Edwards check on what sealants Lycoming approves for sealing the crankcases. Hylomar was one of the approved sealants. Cork gaskets are rather fragile. They are often supplied as replacement gaskets for auto valve covers and engine & transmission oil pans. Most sealants act as a "grease" when used on cork gaskets. This allows the cork gasket to shift around when the bolts are tightened. Often, oil leakage is the result. I avoid using cork gaskets on automobiles when possible. I realize that doesn't help when dealing with certified aircraft engines. Short of using one of the PMAed silicone replacement valve cover gaskets, you are stuck with the cork gaskets. The best method I've found for installing cork valve cover gaskets is as follows. Clean the valve cover & cylinder head mating surfaces. Make sure that the surfaces are completely clean and oil free. I like to use aerosol spray cans of automotive brake cleaner to insure that the surfaces are oil free. Apply a thin layer of 3M super weatherstrip adhesive (aka Gorilla snot) to the valve cover side of the gasket. Set the gasket in the valve cover, then remove it for 1-3 minutes. This allows the adhesive to "tack up" (much like using contact cement) Reinstall the gasket in the valve cover. Quickly position the gasket in the cover so that all the bolt holes line up properly. (The adhesive becomes very sticky quickly). Leave the other gasket surface dry and install the cover. Install and tighten up the bolts using a nut driver. Torque to specs using a torque wrench. The real trick to successful installation of cork gaskets is in slow and even application of torque to the gaskets. Don't tighten the bolts down all at once. Tighten each one a little at a time. Snug up the bolts repeatedly till you can't tighten them with the nut driver. Set to final torque using a torque wrench. Cork splits easily (especially near the bolt holes) if it is not tightened up gradually. I hope this helps. I realize that 3M weatherstrip adhesive is probably not a Lycoming recommended product. It really works though. It's purpose is not so much as a sealant, but as an adhesive to prevent the cork gasket from moving during bolt tightening. Charlie Kuss PS As Brian Denk mentioned, RTV products work very well on crankcase front seal installation. This is a different application. The oil seal does not have a passageway or oil galley between the seal and the crankcase surface. Hylormar might allow the oil seal to slide forward and come off of the engine. RTV products not only seal but also act as an adhesive to hold the front crankshaft oil seal in place. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Donald Mei" <don_mei(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Compaq Ipaq Cheap for Anywhere map buyers
Date: Mar 06, 2002
I just got this email from a "deals" oriented email list: OfficeDepot - Compaq iPaq 3635 PocketPC for $179.99 at Brick and Mortar OfficeDepot (i.e. the actual store, not the web site) This one is on clearance at your local retail Office Depot store. They`re really running out of stock though, and they`re not getting any more in. The SKU# for this product is 858-251. Best of luck! If you are planning on doing anywhere map or icarus solid state efis any time soon, this is a steal. This item is sold on most web sites for $399. This item has just been EOl (end of life) according to a friend of mine who works at compaq. It is for all intents and purposes "current product" and is the same ipaq that you've heard all the good stuff about. Don Mei RV-4 - N92CT 3B9 - Chester, CT MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Randy Lervold" <randy@rv-8.com>
Subject: Re: Towing a RV6 fusalage?
Date: Mar 06, 2002
I used a similar method... http://www.rv-8.com/Pictures/MVC-465X.JPG Randy Lervold Vancouver, WA > How far do you have to tow? I towed mine by the tail wheel spring. > Just used a pickup and made a cross bar across the bed of the pickup that > would accept the tailwhell spring. this was with out the tailwheel assembly > attached. I only had to go a couple miles but a friend of mine towed his > this way about 5 miles. Seemed to work great without any problems > > Jerry Springer > > Rv6238(at)aol.com wrote: > > > > > > Time is near to move my 6 to the airport. In order to get the plane out of > > the basement I will excavate a ramp and lay a 3/4" plywood floor or maybe > > 2X12 "tracks" to roll the fuse up to ground level. The engine is installed > > and the tail will be removed. The panel and instruments are also installed. I > > estimate the weight to be around 550 lbs. I know this has been done before > > [Terry, are you watching?] so I could use advise. I am thinking of towing the > > fuse up the ramp with a 4WD or tractor. Question, will the tailwheel assembly > > and rear bulkheads stand the stress? Or is it better to tow by the front? If > > front is best how best to hook up the tow rope. Input needed! And perhaps a > > little courage.Thanks guys. > > Bill Griffin > > Balto., MD ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 06, 2002
From: "Gary Zilik" <zilik(at)bewellnet.com>
Subject: Re: Gasket Sealant on Lycoming's
Be forwarned that when Gorrilla Snot is used as a gasket adhesive the gasket will never come off without serious scraping or chemical soaking. Do not applly Gorrilla Snot to both sides of the gasket, you'll tear the cylinder from the crankase trying to get the valve cover off. 3M means business when they call a product an adhesive. It is good stuff. Gary > Apply a thin layer of 3M super weatherstrip adhesive (aka Gorilla snot) to > the valve cover side of the gasket. Set the gasket in the valve cover, > then remove it for 1-3 minutes. This allows the adhesive to "tack up" (much > like using contact cement) Reinstall the gasket in the valve cover. Quickly > position the gasket in the cover so that all the bolt holes line up > properly. (The adhesive becomes very sticky quickly). Leave the other > gasket surface dry and install the cover. Install and tighten up the bolts > using a nut driver. Torque to specs using a torque wrench. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Frazier, Vincent A" <VFrazier(at)usi.edu>
Subject: tach checking
Date: Mar 06, 2002
SNIP An optical prop tach can be checked (and should be every time it's used) by pointing it at a florescent light. (I don't think this will work with an incandescent bulb and my Prop Tach is at the Hanger) At 60 Hz (North American power grid cycles per sec) X 2 on-offs per cycle (AC power) X 60 seconds per minute = 7200 pulses per minute. Prop tach set to 2 blades, rpm shows 3600, Prop tach set to 3 blades, rpm shows 2400. SNIP I'm glad somebody chimed in with this suggestion. It's very easy to do after dark. Shine the light on the prop, increases the throttle slowly and you can see every multiple RPM of 60 go by... 600..1200...1800..2400... very easy. Try it, you'll see. Vince ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 06, 2002
Subject: Vans tach sender
From: czechsix(at)juno.com
Anybody know how Vans tach sender works (the one that plugs into the tach drive on the accessory case and is then wired up to their tach gauge)? I'm wondering if it is a frequency generator of some sort that might be compatible with the Grand Rapids EIS 4000 engine monitor (which is designed to pick up pulses from a mag P lead). I asked Vans about it and haven't received any response. I'd rather use a pickup off the tach drive so that I don't have to depend on one ignition source or the other to get rpm (or use a switch between the two mags when doing a mag check). Thanks, --Mark Navratil Cedar Rapids, Iowa RV-8A finish kit stuff...


February 28, 2002 - March 06, 2002

RV-Archive.digest.vol-ml