RV-Archive.digest.vol-ns
October 28, 2002 - November 02, 2002
I hope this thread dies soon.
Gary
| From: | "Peter H. Blake" <pblake(at)epix.net> |
| Subject: | Match drilling etc. |
Does anyone know what manufacturing practices are used in building the
quick-build kits? Do they drill, deburr, dimple, then rivet? Or do they
just dimple and rivet? Whatever they do, I'd be comfortable doing on my
plane (if I were lucky enough to have predrilled parts!!!).
Peter Blake
RV6
New O-360 mounted!
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <etech(at)ucnsb.net> |
,
, ,
,
| Subject: | GI-106A for sale |
Hello Everyone,
We have an extra GI-106A that belongs to a customer for sale. Has never been installed
or used. Still in original box with install kit and install manual.
Customer was going to get two CDIs, but decided to get an HSI and a CDI. Customer
asking $1398.37 plus S&H. We can pre-wire for a small additonal fee.
If interested, please call or email.
Rick Case
Electronic Technologies
1501 Airway Circle
New Smyrna Beach, FL 32168
(386) 426-1213
www.electronictechnologies.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: . and engine horsepower mods. |
Stein Bruch wrote:
>our little 4 bangers. You will reach a point where you've done so much to
>the engine that it will only last for a couple of hours. Case in point,
>
>
There's another side to this that few seem to consider, that Stein just
brought up. Everything you do to these engines to get more HP is going
to reduce the life of the engine. I, too had dreams of high compression
pistons, polished and ported, custom induction, etc. to get the most
speed out of my bird. Until July 31 this year, when I was involved in
an engine failure accident at very low altitude (200 feet- take off)
over very unhospitable terrain (city.) I wasn't flying, just a
passenger, and except for quick thinking and excellent airmanship on the
part of the pilot, it could well have been five fatalities. As it was
we all walked away with minor injuries. After some soul searching, I
decided to stick with my project, but I resolved that I would not do
ANYTHING which would decrease engine reliability. No fuel system mods,
no souped up anything. These planes fly great on a box-stock engine.
Sure, you may get another 5 or even 10 mph by tricking them out, but at
what cost? It's just not worth the risk, IMHO.
Jeff Point
RV-6 finish kit
Milwaukee WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Laird Owens <owens(at)aerovironment.com> |
| Subject: | LOE2 report: more wacky ramblings |
>----Original Message Follows----
>From: "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com>
snipped stuff about LOE2
>
>And on a lighter note, there was a report of a toilet papering, bestowed
>upon Laird "Fowling Piece" Owens' RV-6 after receiving the much coveted,
>lauded and lusted after Grand Champion award. Witnesses were interviewed,
>interrogated and bought off as necessary to find the most likely suspect,
>who goes by the name of "NORDO ROSIE".
>
>More news at eleven. :)
>
>Brian "don't let him lead or #4 will end up in the dirt" Denk
>RV8 N94BD
I uploaded a picture of what my RV looked like the morning after
getting the award. See it at:
http://members3.clubphoto.com/socal230330/974070/owner-9b41.phtml
I had a great time hanging out at LOE2 with Brian and Larry and
everybody else this past weekend. I'm sure it'll be HUGE next year!
I just wish everyone else around the country could have made. I'm
sure the award would have gone to someone else if everybody could
have made it...but I'll take it anyway ;-) The award was just icing
on the cake of a great weekend.
For the new guys on the list who probably don't know, the "Fowling
Piece" comment Brian made was because of the Hawk strike I took in
the RV a couple of years ago. (If your interested about how a how a
RV windshield holds up to a hawk, just check the archives searching
Laird & Hawk, and some pictures at:
http://members3.clubphoto.com/socal230330/429051/guest.phtml
Laird RV-6
SoCal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Miller Robert <rmiller3(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Not really RV related |
Sorry for the "not RV" post. ...
But I'd like to ask the eminently logical bunch of RV builders and flyers on
this list which handheld GPS you are using?
Which model is the best value?
I don't want to spend much right now....(need the money for my RV 9a builder's
fund).
I apologize again for the off-topic topic.
Robert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "MARSHALL,STEPHANIE (HP-Corvallis,ex1)" <stephanie.marshall(at)hp.com> |
| Subject: | Not really RV related |
We _rely_ on the Magellan Gold, a driving trip wasn't really a trip (without
the Magellan) unless I either got us lost or took us 4 hours out of the way.
My hubby said enough and got the gold. I haven't got us lost since, I have
tried my hardest though....the darn thing just won't let me. :)
Stephanie Marshall
-----Original Message-----
From: Miller Robert [mailto:rmiller3(at)earthlink.net]
Subject: RV-List: Not really RV related
Sorry for the "not RV" post. ...
But I'd like to ask the eminently logical bunch of RV builders and flyers on
this list which handheld GPS you are using?
Which model is the best value?
I don't want to spend much right now....(need the money for my RV 9a
builder's
fund).
I apologize again for the off-topic topic.
Robert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | RV-6A airspeed problem |
I am helping a friend fly off the restrictions of his RV-6A. He has an O-320 with
a Sensenich metal prop sold by Van's. I don't know the pitch, but it was
ordered from Van's as the prop for the RV-6 and a 160 HP O-320.
We can't seem to get more than about 145 KIAS out of this airplane. Have checked
it with GPS, and it is close enough. Here is what we have so far:
Max RPM we can get out of it is about 2650. (8000' 75%)
Manifold pressure is good.
Climb is very good. 1500 FPM 80 KIAS
All fairings and pants are installed
Could there be a pitch problem here? 140 KIAS seems pretty slow for an O-320.
Anyone else flying a Sensenich have this problem? All signs are pointing to the
prop.
Paul Besing
RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bartrim, Todd" <sbartrim(at)mail.canfor.ca> |
| Subject: | Freedom and right |
> And thanks to Robert McCallum for reminding us that our neighbors to the
> North get along very well with a less arrogant attitude than we often have
> in the US. The Canadians stand up for their freedoms, too, but they don't
> have half the world pissed off at them.
>
Actually, we had a TFR last summer, IIRC it was 75 nm radius around
Kananaskis Alberta, during the G-8 summit, while we were being visited
by...... you guessed it. George W. Bush.
S. Todd Bartrim
Turbo 13B rotary powered
RX-9endurance (FWF)
C-FSTB (reserved)
http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
RE: RV-List: Freedom and right
And thanks to Robert McCallum for reminding us that our neighbors to the North
get along very well with a less arrogant attitude than we often have in the US.
The Canadians stand up for their freedoms, too, but they don't have half the
world pissed off at them.
Actually, we had a TFR last summer, IIRC it was 75 nm radius around Kananaskis
Alberta, during the G-8 summit, while we were being visited by...... you guessed
it. George W. Bush.
S. Todd Bartrim
Turbo 13B rotary powered
RX-9endurance (FWF)
C-FSTB (reserved)
http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Huft" <rv8tor(at)lazy8.net> |
A fouled or misfiring spark plug will defiantly make the EGT go up (the fuel
is still burning as it exits the cylinder). It is also common that a plug
will misfire at full power (higher combustion pressure) but not after you
pull the power back. So you should check the plugs, maybe try another set.
Check your harness too.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
MeangreenRV4(at)aol.com
Subject: RV-List: Hi-EGT's
This is somthing that has started in the last month or so. My engine is a IO
360 A1B Angle Valve 200 + hp. On take off my # 1 cycinder goes to 1400
degrees. # 2 1375 degrees. # 3 & 4 1275 degrees. the problem is it never
went
past 1300 degrees in the first 200 hrs. Once I climb out, level off
everything seems fine. Something has cause the EGT' on # 1 to go higher.
My problem is I don't understand why.
Things that I have done;
1. Cleaned the injectors
2. Look at and make sure that all hoses & fittings were tight
3. Cleaned all screens
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed problem |
Paul,
Does he have the gear pants, gear leg fairings and intersection fairings
installed? We picked up almost 20 kts when we installed ours.
Chuck & Dave Rowbotham
RV-A
>From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: RV-List: RV-6A airspeed problem
>Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 15:11:07 -0700
>
>
>I am helping a friend fly off the restrictions of his RV-6A. He has an
>O-320 with a Sensenich metal prop sold by Van's. I don't know the pitch,
>but it was ordered from Van's as the prop for the RV-6 and a 160 HP O-320.
>
>We can't seem to get more than about 145 KIAS out of this airplane. Have
>checked it with GPS, and it is close enough. Here is what we have so far:
>
>Max RPM we can get out of it is about 2650. (8000' 75%)
>Manifold pressure is good.
>Climb is very good. 1500 FPM 80 KIAS
>All fairings and pants are installed
>
>Could there be a pitch problem here? 140 KIAS seems pretty slow for an
>O-320.
>
>Anyone else flying a Sensenich have this problem? All signs are pointing
>to the prop.
>
>
>Paul Besing
>RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
>http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
>Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
>http://www.kitlog.com
>
>
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/2monthsfree.asp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Donald Mei" <don_mei(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Cleaning Out the Hangar |
Dear All,
I have a couple of items that I don't need. Hope the bandwidth use isn't
offensive.
1) Fumoto Valve. Quick oil change valve. The version for the Lycoming
costs 31.95 delivered. This is brand new version with the optional nipple
to attach a hose to. I'll even include the hose.
It doesn't clear my Vetterman 4 header exhaust. (damn!!)
$25 - I'll pay shipping.
2) Flightcom IIsx portable intercom. About $120 new from discounter. Good
condition. $40+shipping.
Thanks.
Don Mei
RV-4 N92CT
3B9 - Chester, CT
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/2monthsfree.asp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorto1537(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed problem |
>
>I am helping a friend fly off the restrictions of his RV-6A. He has
>an O-320 with a Sensenich metal prop sold by Van's. I don't know
>the pitch, but it was ordered from Van's as the prop for the RV-6
>and a 160 HP O-320.
>
>We can't seem to get more than about 145 KIAS out of this airplane.
>Have checked it with GPS, and it is close enough. Here is what we
>have so far:
>
>Max RPM we can get out of it is about 2650. (8000' 75%)
>Manifold pressure is good.
>Climb is very good. 1500 FPM 80 KIAS
>All fairings and pants are installed
>
>Could there be a pitch problem here? 140 KIAS seems pretty slow for an O-320.
>
>Anyone else flying a Sensenich have this problem? All signs are
>pointing to the prop.
>
>Paul Besing
Paul,
I assume all the fairings are installed, but you didn't mention that.
Please confirm.
Airspeed Accuracy - You say the airspeed was checked with the GPS -
which method did you use? Was this checked at the same time the 145
mph speed was determined, or did you check the airspeed accuracy some
other time? I would like to nail down the accuracy of this speed, to
make sure that we aren't looking at an inaccuracy in the IAS. I like
Doug Gray's method, as modified by the National Test Pilot School.
See:
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rvlinks/doug_gray/TASCALC.ZIP
http://www.ntps.com/GPS_SpeedTrack.XLS
If you want, I would be happy to run the calculations, if you will
gather the data. Go to 8000 ft, with the altimeter set to 29.92.
Record the outside air temperature. Do four runs, every 90 deg
(track or heading - it doesn't matter for this method). Let the
aircraft stabilize on speed. Record the IAS, GPS ground speed, and
GPS track for each run. All runs must be at the same IAS, even if
this means you need to do a very slight climb or descent on some
runs. Reset the altimeter after the tests are complete.
Prop pitch - if you get 2650 rpm at 8000 ft with full throttle, the
prop pitch is probably not the reason why you are so slow. If 2650
is with less than full throttle, then the prop pitch may be to blame.
Mind you, I think the redline with that prop is 2600 rpm, so you may
need a different pitch to avoid going over redline.
Tachometer accuracy - find a prop tach, and verify the tach is accurate.
Engine - How many hours on the engine? Is there perhaps a problem
with the mixture, carb or air filter?
Wing twist - find a digital level (Smart Level) and check the
incidence of each wing at several stations. Do you have a wing twist?
Flaps and ailerons - check the rigging when they are retracted. If
they are rigged so that they don't come all the way up to zero, that
could slow you down a bit.
According to Van's web site, that aircraft should be able to do about
188 mph TAS at 8000 ft. The numbers you mention are certainly well
short of that, if the IAS is accurate. 145 mph CAS at 8000 ft,
standard day, is about 163 mph TAS.
Keep us posted,
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
Ottawa, Canada
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed problem |
All fairings are installed. The airplane is trimmed out, painted, clean,
etc. I'm going to do some extensive GPS tests tomorrow, as well as noting
the MAP and Fuel Flow to make sure that it is inline with engine
performance. As far as the prop is concerned, I was under the impression
that Sensenich has removed the 2600 RPM restriction on the 160 HP models.
Only the 180 HP has the 2600 restriction.
Paul Besing
RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Horton" <khorto1537(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-6A airspeed problem
>
> >
> >I am helping a friend fly off the restrictions of his RV-6A. He has
> >an O-320 with a Sensenich metal prop sold by Van's. I don't know
> >the pitch, but it was ordered from Van's as the prop for the RV-6
> >and a 160 HP O-320.
> >
> >We can't seem to get more than about 145 KIAS out of this airplane.
> >Have checked it with GPS, and it is close enough. Here is what we
> >have so far:
> >
> >Max RPM we can get out of it is about 2650. (8000' 75%)
> >Manifold pressure is good.
> >Climb is very good. 1500 FPM 80 KIAS
> >All fairings and pants are installed
> >
> >Could there be a pitch problem here? 140 KIAS seems pretty slow for an
O-320.
> >
> >Anyone else flying a Sensenich have this problem? All signs are
> >pointing to the prop.
> >
> >Paul Besing
>
> Paul,
>
> I assume all the fairings are installed, but you didn't mention that.
> Please confirm.
>
> Airspeed Accuracy - You say the airspeed was checked with the GPS -
> which method did you use? Was this checked at the same time the 145
> mph speed was determined, or did you check the airspeed accuracy some
> other time? I would like to nail down the accuracy of this speed, to
> make sure that we aren't looking at an inaccuracy in the IAS. I like
> Doug Gray's method, as modified by the National Test Pilot School.
> See:
>
> http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rvlinks/doug_gray/TASCALC.ZIP
> http://www.ntps.com/GPS_SpeedTrack.XLS
>
> If you want, I would be happy to run the calculations, if you will
> gather the data. Go to 8000 ft, with the altimeter set to 29.92.
> Record the outside air temperature. Do four runs, every 90 deg
> (track or heading - it doesn't matter for this method). Let the
> aircraft stabilize on speed. Record the IAS, GPS ground speed, and
> GPS track for each run. All runs must be at the same IAS, even if
> this means you need to do a very slight climb or descent on some
> runs. Reset the altimeter after the tests are complete.
>
> Prop pitch - if you get 2650 rpm at 8000 ft with full throttle, the
> prop pitch is probably not the reason why you are so slow. If 2650
> is with less than full throttle, then the prop pitch may be to blame.
> Mind you, I think the redline with that prop is 2600 rpm, so you may
> need a different pitch to avoid going over redline.
>
> Tachometer accuracy - find a prop tach, and verify the tach is accurate.
>
> Engine - How many hours on the engine? Is there perhaps a problem
> with the mixture, carb or air filter?
>
> Wing twist - find a digital level (Smart Level) and check the
> incidence of each wing at several stations. Do you have a wing twist?
>
> Flaps and ailerons - check the rigging when they are retracted. If
> they are rigged so that they don't come all the way up to zero, that
> could slow you down a bit.
>
> According to Van's web site, that aircraft should be able to do about
> 188 mph TAS at 8000 ft. The numbers you mention are certainly well
> short of that, if the IAS is accurate. 145 mph CAS at 8000 ft,
> standard day, is about 163 mph TAS.
>
> Keep us posted,
> --
> Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
> Ottawa, Canada
> http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Weiler" <dougweil(at)pressenter.com> |
| Subject: | Re: . and engine horsepower mods. |
> >
> There's another side to this that few seem to consider, that Stein just
> brought up. Everything you do to these engines to get more HP is going
> to reduce the life of the engine. I, too had dreams of high compression
> pistons, polished and ported, custom induction, etc. to get the most
> speed out of my bird. Until July 31 this year, when I was involved in
> an engine failure accident at very low altitude (200 feet- take off)
> over very unhospitable terrain (city.) I wasn't flying, just a
> passenger, and except for quick thinking and excellent airmanship on the
> part of the pilot, it could well have been five fatalities. As it was
> we all walked away with minor injuries. After some soul searching, I
> decided to stick with my project, but I resolved that I would not do
> ANYTHING which would decrease engine reliability. No fuel system mods,
> no souped up anything. These planes fly great on a box-stock engine.
> Sure, you may get another 5 or even 10 mph by tricking them out, but at
> what cost? It's just not worth the risk, IMHO.
>
> Jeff Point
> RV-6 finish kit
> Milwaukee WI
Jeff brings up a very good point (and I am also glad he is here to discuss
it). Many folks do "soup" up their engines, but when I decided to have
Bart LeLond build up my engine, I told him I wanted the safest, most
reliable engine he could build. Thus it is a rather plain Jane, 0-360-A1A,
carb, mags, etc... just standard everything. Just my two cents worth.
Doug Weiler
Hudson, WI
Flying RV-4
Under construction RV-4
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner(at)wans.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed problem |
Dear Paul,
I think it is the other way around regarding Sensenich's Prop Limitation:
I believe the 160hp is limited to 2600 RPM, but the 180hp is not.
But then I may be wrong (again?)
Konrad
> I was under the impression that Sensenich has removed the 2600 RPM
restriction on the 160 HP models.
> Only the 180 HP has the 2600 restriction.
>
> Paul Besing
> RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Glaser <airplane(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed problem |
I just rechecked the site and 2600 is still the red line for the 320 prop.
Konrad Werner wrote:
>
> Dear Paul,
> I think it is the other way around regarding Sensenich's Prop Limitation:
> I believe the 160hp is limited to 2600 RPM, but the 180hp is not.
> But then I may be wrong (again?)
> Konrad
>
> > I was under the impression that Sensenich has removed the 2600 RPM
> restriction on the 160 HP models.
> > Only the 180 HP has the 2600 restriction.
> >
> > Paul Besing
> > RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Pardue" <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed problem |
>
> All fairings are installed. The airplane is trimmed out, painted, clean,
> etc. I'm going to do some extensive GPS tests tomorrow, as well as noting
> the MAP and Fuel Flow to make sure that it is inline with engine
> performance. As far as the prop is concerned, I was under the impression
> that Sensenich has removed the 2600 RPM restriction on the 160 HP models.
> Only the 180 HP has the 2600 restriction.
>
Just the opposite. No restriction on the 180 HP but the 2600 restriction is
still in effect for the 160 HP.
http://www.sensenich.com/new/70cmprop.htm
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP Flying
http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed problem |
145 KIAS (knots) is 167 IAS (mph) there is also a correction addition for
8000' altitude so the True is above 170mph. Might check timing and
induction. Does the engine when the mixture is slowly pulled exhibit the 25
to 50 rpm expected rise?
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-6A airspeed problem
>
> All fairings are installed. The airplane is trimmed out, painted, clean,
> etc. I'm going to do some extensive GPS tests tomorrow, as well as noting
> the MAP and Fuel Flow to make sure that it is inline with engine
> performance. As far as the prop is concerned, I was under the impression
> that Sensenich has removed the 2600 RPM restriction on the 160 HP models.
> Only the 180 HP has the 2600 restriction.
>
> Paul Besing
> RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
> http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
> Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
> http://www.kitlog.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kevin Horton" <khorto1537(at)rogers.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-6A airspeed problem
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >I am helping a friend fly off the restrictions of his RV-6A. He has
> > >an O-320 with a Sensenich metal prop sold by Van's. I don't know
> > >the pitch, but it was ordered from Van's as the prop for the RV-6
> > >and a 160 HP O-320.
> > >
> > >We can't seem to get more than about 145 KIAS out of this airplane.
> > >Have checked it with GPS, and it is close enough. Here is what we
> > >have so far:
> > >
> > >Max RPM we can get out of it is about 2650. (8000' 75%)
> > >Manifold pressure is good.
> > >Climb is very good. 1500 FPM 80 KIAS
> > >All fairings and pants are installed
> > >
> > >Could there be a pitch problem here? 140 KIAS seems pretty slow for an
> O-320.
> > >
> > >Anyone else flying a Sensenich have this problem? All signs are
> > >pointing to the prop.
> > >
> > >Paul Besing
> >
> > Paul,
> >
> > I assume all the fairings are installed, but you didn't mention that.
> > Please confirm.
> >
> > Airspeed Accuracy - You say the airspeed was checked with the GPS -
> > which method did you use? Was this checked at the same time the 145
> > mph speed was determined, or did you check the airspeed accuracy some
> > other time? I would like to nail down the accuracy of this speed, to
> > make sure that we aren't looking at an inaccuracy in the IAS. I like
> > Doug Gray's method, as modified by the National Test Pilot School.
> > See:
> >
> > http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rvlinks/doug_gray/TASCALC.ZIP
> > http://www.ntps.com/GPS_SpeedTrack.XLS
> >
> > If you want, I would be happy to run the calculations, if you will
> > gather the data. Go to 8000 ft, with the altimeter set to 29.92.
> > Record the outside air temperature. Do four runs, every 90 deg
> > (track or heading - it doesn't matter for this method). Let the
> > aircraft stabilize on speed. Record the IAS, GPS ground speed, and
> > GPS track for each run. All runs must be at the same IAS, even if
> > this means you need to do a very slight climb or descent on some
> > runs. Reset the altimeter after the tests are complete.
> >
> > Prop pitch - if you get 2650 rpm at 8000 ft with full throttle, the
> > prop pitch is probably not the reason why you are so slow. If 2650
> > is with less than full throttle, then the prop pitch may be to blame.
> > Mind you, I think the redline with that prop is 2600 rpm, so you may
> > need a different pitch to avoid going over redline.
> >
> > Tachometer accuracy - find a prop tach, and verify the tach is accurate.
> >
> > Engine - How many hours on the engine? Is there perhaps a problem
> > with the mixture, carb or air filter?
> >
> > Wing twist - find a digital level (Smart Level) and check the
> > incidence of each wing at several stations. Do you have a wing twist?
> >
> > Flaps and ailerons - check the rigging when they are retracted. If
> > they are rigged so that they don't come all the way up to zero, that
> > could slow you down a bit.
> >
> > According to Van's web site, that aircraft should be able to do about
> > 188 mph TAS at 8000 ft. The numbers you mention are certainly well
> > short of that, if the IAS is accurate. 145 mph CAS at 8000 ft,
> > standard day, is about 163 mph TAS.
> >
> > Keep us posted,
> > --
> > Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
> > Ottawa, Canada
> > http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Calvert" <rv6(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed problem |
I may have missed it in earlier posts, but what kind of elevator trim is
required at cruise? I did notice that she likes to climb and was wondering
if she needs a lot of nose down trim. If so, check the incidence at the
horizontal. I am not an engineer, but I believe a horizontal out of spec
will cost you airspeed.
Just a thought,
Jerry Calvert
N296JC -6
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-6A airspeed problem
>
> All fairings are installed. The airplane is trimmed out, painted, clean,
> etc. I'm going to do some extensive GPS tests tomorrow, as well as noting
> the MAP and Fuel Flow to make sure that it is inline with engine
> performance. As far as the prop is concerned, I was under the impression
> that Sensenich has removed the 2600 RPM restriction on the 160 HP models.
> Only the 180 HP has the 2600 restriction.
>
> Paul Besing
> RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
> http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
> Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
> http://www.kitlog.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kevin Horton" <khorto1537(at)rogers.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-6A airspeed problem
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >I am helping a friend fly off the restrictions of his RV-6A. He has
> > >an O-320 with a Sensenich metal prop sold by Van's. I don't know
> > >the pitch, but it was ordered from Van's as the prop for the RV-6
> > >and a 160 HP O-320.
> > >
> > >We can't seem to get more than about 145 KIAS out of this airplane.
> > >Have checked it with GPS, and it is close enough. Here is what we
> > >have so far:
> > >
> > >Max RPM we can get out of it is about 2650. (8000' 75%)
> > >Manifold pressure is good.
> > >Climb is very good. 1500 FPM 80 KIAS
> > >All fairings and pants are installed
> > >
> > >Could there be a pitch problem here? 140 KIAS seems pretty slow for an
> O-320.
> > >
> > >Anyone else flying a Sensenich have this problem? All signs are
> > >pointing to the prop.
> > >
> > >Paul Besing
> >
> > Paul,
> >
> > I assume all the fairings are installed, but you didn't mention that.
> > Please confirm.
> >
> > Airspeed Accuracy - You say the airspeed was checked with the GPS -
> > which method did you use? Was this checked at the same time the 145
> > mph speed was determined, or did you check the airspeed accuracy some
> > other time? I would like to nail down the accuracy of this speed, to
> > make sure that we aren't looking at an inaccuracy in the IAS. I like
> > Doug Gray's method, as modified by the National Test Pilot School.
> > See:
> >
> > http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rvlinks/doug_gray/TASCALC.ZIP
> > http://www.ntps.com/GPS_SpeedTrack.XLS
> >
> > If you want, I would be happy to run the calculations, if you will
> > gather the data. Go to 8000 ft, with the altimeter set to 29.92.
> > Record the outside air temperature. Do four runs, every 90 deg
> > (track or heading - it doesn't matter for this method). Let the
> > aircraft stabilize on speed. Record the IAS, GPS ground speed, and
> > GPS track for each run. All runs must be at the same IAS, even if
> > this means you need to do a very slight climb or descent on some
> > runs. Reset the altimeter after the tests are complete.
> >
> > Prop pitch - if you get 2650 rpm at 8000 ft with full throttle, the
> > prop pitch is probably not the reason why you are so slow. If 2650
> > is with less than full throttle, then the prop pitch may be to blame.
> > Mind you, I think the redline with that prop is 2600 rpm, so you may
> > need a different pitch to avoid going over redline.
> >
> > Tachometer accuracy - find a prop tach, and verify the tach is accurate.
> >
> > Engine - How many hours on the engine? Is there perhaps a problem
> > with the mixture, carb or air filter?
> >
> > Wing twist - find a digital level (Smart Level) and check the
> > incidence of each wing at several stations. Do you have a wing twist?
> >
> > Flaps and ailerons - check the rigging when they are retracted. If
> > they are rigged so that they don't come all the way up to zero, that
> > could slow you down a bit.
> >
> > According to Van's web site, that aircraft should be able to do about
> > 188 mph TAS at 8000 ft. The numbers you mention are certainly well
> > short of that, if the IAS is accurate. 145 mph CAS at 8000 ft,
> > standard day, is about 163 mph TAS.
> >
> > Keep us posted,
> > --
> > Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
> > Ottawa, Canada
> > http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary & Carolyn Zilik <zilik(at)direcpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed problem |
> I was under the impression
> that Sensenich has removed the 2600 RPM restriction on the 160 HP models.
> Only the 180 HP has the 2600 restriction
According to Sensenich (http://www.sensenich.com/direct/vans.htm) the 70CM
series propeller has a placard required to avoid operation above 2600 RPM. The
72FM series propeller restriction is set at 2700 RPM.
Also at http://www.sensenich.com/misc/faq70cm.htm
Q) How important is the 2600 RPM restriction?
A) Extremely important! The propeller has a tenth order, third mode vibration
when operated
above 2600 RPM.
Q) What if I accidentally exceed the 2600 RPM restriction?
A) You absolutely must not exceed the 2600 RPM restriction! We have pitched
the propeller so
that at altitude, you will max out at 2600 full throtle level. Every aircraft
and engine will be a
little different; so a slight pitch adjustment at the local prop shop may be
in order.
Q) I heard a rumor that you are going to remove the 2600 RPM restriction. Any
truth to that?
A) You should assume that the placard will always be there!
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RV7A Empennage Options |
| From: | "" <tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com> |
All,
After "watching" the list for the last three years, I am finally ready to order
the empennage. I resisted for so long on the basis of three things that I promised
to do first: 1) Finish instrument rating, 2) Sell Cherokee, and 3) Finish
garage. The last of the three got close enough this weekend, and I am filling
out the forms. I have chosen the RV7A, and I have a question: What difference
is there in the kit if you check the "no lights in wingtips" option? I
assume that means different fiberglass tips? What lights are they designed to
accomadate? If I am semi-undecided now, is it hard to change one way or another
with either set on down the road? I like the "lights in the wingtips" design...is
there something like that for the tail?
Thanks in advance,Scott
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ken Stribling" <ken(at)soundsuckers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed problem |
I was just curious but I was under the impression that the gps read the
planes airspeed from the satellites and barometer and other factors should
not matter
KEN S.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Calvert" <rv6(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-6A airspeed problem
>
> I may have missed it in earlier posts, but what kind of elevator trim is
> required at cruise? I did notice that she likes to climb and was
wondering
> if she needs a lot of nose down trim. If so, check the incidence at the
> horizontal. I am not an engineer, but I believe a horizontal out of spec
> will cost you airspeed.
>
> Just a thought,
> Jerry Calvert
> N296JC -6
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-6A airspeed problem
>
>
> >
> > All fairings are installed. The airplane is trimmed out, painted,
clean,
> > etc. I'm going to do some extensive GPS tests tomorrow, as well as
noting
> > the MAP and Fuel Flow to make sure that it is inline with engine
> > performance. As far as the prop is concerned, I was under the
impression
> > that Sensenich has removed the 2600 RPM restriction on the 160 HP
models.
> > Only the 180 HP has the 2600 restriction.
> >
> > Paul Besing
> > RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
> > http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
> > Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
> > http://www.kitlog.com
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kevin Horton" <khorto1537(at)rogers.com>
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-6A airspeed problem
> >
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >I am helping a friend fly off the restrictions of his RV-6A. He has
> > > >an O-320 with a Sensenich metal prop sold by Van's. I don't know
> > > >the pitch, but it was ordered from Van's as the prop for the RV-6
> > > >and a 160 HP O-320.
> > > >
> > > >We can't seem to get more than about 145 KIAS out of this airplane.
> > > >Have checked it with GPS, and it is close enough. Here is what we
> > > >have so far:
> > > >
> > > >Max RPM we can get out of it is about 2650. (8000' 75%)
> > > >Manifold pressure is good.
> > > >Climb is very good. 1500 FPM 80 KIAS
> > > >All fairings and pants are installed
> > > >
> > > >Could there be a pitch problem here? 140 KIAS seems pretty slow for
an
> > O-320.
> > > >
> > > >Anyone else flying a Sensenich have this problem? All signs are
> > > >pointing to the prop.
> > > >
> > > >Paul Besing
> > >
> > > Paul,
> > >
> > > I assume all the fairings are installed, but you didn't mention that.
> > > Please confirm.
> > >
> > > Airspeed Accuracy - You say the airspeed was checked with the GPS -
> > > which method did you use? Was this checked at the same time the 145
> > > mph speed was determined, or did you check the airspeed accuracy some
> > > other time? I would like to nail down the accuracy of this speed, to
> > > make sure that we aren't looking at an inaccuracy in the IAS. I like
> > > Doug Gray's method, as modified by the National Test Pilot School.
> > > See:
> > >
> > > http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rvlinks/doug_gray/TASCALC.ZIP
> > > http://www.ntps.com/GPS_SpeedTrack.XLS
> > >
> > > If you want, I would be happy to run the calculations, if you will
> > > gather the data. Go to 8000 ft, with the altimeter set to 29.92.
> > > Record the outside air temperature. Do four runs, every 90 deg
> > > (track or heading - it doesn't matter for this method). Let the
> > > aircraft stabilize on speed. Record the IAS, GPS ground speed, and
> > > GPS track for each run. All runs must be at the same IAS, even if
> > > this means you need to do a very slight climb or descent on some
> > > runs. Reset the altimeter after the tests are complete.
> > >
> > > Prop pitch - if you get 2650 rpm at 8000 ft with full throttle, the
> > > prop pitch is probably not the reason why you are so slow. If 2650
> > > is with less than full throttle, then the prop pitch may be to blame.
> > > Mind you, I think the redline with that prop is 2600 rpm, so you may
> > > need a different pitch to avoid going over redline.
> > >
> > > Tachometer accuracy - find a prop tach, and verify the tach is
accurate.
> > >
> > > Engine - How many hours on the engine? Is there perhaps a problem
> > > with the mixture, carb or air filter?
> > >
> > > Wing twist - find a digital level (Smart Level) and check the
> > > incidence of each wing at several stations. Do you have a wing twist?
> > >
> > > Flaps and ailerons - check the rigging when they are retracted. If
> > > they are rigged so that they don't come all the way up to zero, that
> > > could slow you down a bit.
> > >
> > > According to Van's web site, that aircraft should be able to do about
> > > 188 mph TAS at 8000 ft. The numbers you mention are certainly well
> > > short of that, if the IAS is accurate. 145 mph CAS at 8000 ft,
> > > standard day, is about 163 mph TAS.
> > >
> > > Keep us posted,
> > > --
> > > Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
> > > Ottawa, Canada
> > > http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Not really RV related |
I used an amazon.com gift certificate last year to buy bottom-end Garmin GPS
III Plus, and I've found it quite useful. It's not even an aviation unit, and
of course it has no aviation database. But I enter in the various airports and
waypoints manuall (and share them with a couple of friends), and it makes a
useful little unit I can take in any of the planes I rent, for not much money.
Tedd McHenry
-6 wings
Surrey, BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Pardue" <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed problem |
>
> I was just curious but I was under the impression that the gps read the
> planes airspeed from the satellites and barometer and other factors should
> not matter
>
GPS does not read airspeed at all. GPS is capable of displaying
groundspeed, and from that there are various ways to derive true airspeed.
This is very handy because it lets us figure out if the airspeed system in
the airplane is accurate. This can be done by converting the indicated
airspeed in the airplane to true airspeed by applying the altitude, pressure
and temperature corrections and comparing it to the GPS derived TAS or by
working in reverse from the known TAS.
It is also a very very common misconception that GPS shows heading. It does
not and if the track information that it does display is treated as heading
it can cause problems for ATC. They do expect heading information, both
when they ask and when they give a heading to fly.
Everything you might want to know, and more, about his kind of stuff is on
Kevin Horton's website.
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
You can count on the flight test stuff on this site. He knows what he is
talking about.
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP Flying
http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jaye and Scott Jackson <jayeandscott(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Not really RV related |
Glad to see that "-6 wings" in your post-way to go!
Spirit!
Drive da' boddy!
Determination!
Focus!
Take you meals in that garage-cum-RV nest!
Notice you've got a wife and friends at Christmas-that's what holiays are
for, anyways.
You better not be reading this until tomorrow at work...
Scott
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tedd McHenry" <tedd(at)vansairforce.org>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Not really RV related
>
> I used an amazon.com gift certificate last year to buy bottom-end Garmin
GPS
> III Plus, and I've found it quite useful. It's not even an aviation unit,
and
> of course it has no aviation database. But I enter in the various
airports and
> waypoints manuall (and share them with a couple of friends), and it makes
a
> useful little unit I can take in any of the planes I rent, for not much
money.
>
> Tedd McHenry
> -6 wings
> Surrey, BC
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ya Gotta Wonder |
And good night to you Austin.
Great dreams and good mornings,
From The RV list
----- Original Message -----
From: "Austin" <6430(at)axion.net>
Subject: RV-List: Ya Gotta Wonder
>
> HIT DELETE IF YOU SEEK BUILDING HELP
> ONLY SLIGHTLY RV RELATED..
> Hi listers, you rivet pounding ground bound bunch of dreamers,...with due
> respect,
> Yes, you do gotta wonder what kind of a world you enter when you get the
old
> bird flying and dream of what the hell you are going to do next to throw
gas
> on the fire of the dream that got you thinking about building and flying a
> special hot rod like we have.
> I have flown an RV before and sold the dream machine only that I may
> go on to do more than I thought I could by building another with more
stuff
> and more snot than I think I could handle.
> I do have a few snags to fix...I ain't an electrical genius or any other
> kind if genius, but I have had to work through a few gremlins before I can
> get the hours off and fling myself any place they have fuel....
> So I called my respected and awesome friend, who shall remain
> nameless ere he gets embarrassed by knowing me....suffice to say he is
well
> respected and has mega hours on everything..and is getting grey and hard
of
> hearing from those radials by the day.....anyway, I lay on my sad story
> about snags and how when this is done, I am going clawing for altitude to
> get over the rocks and head out his way and carry on to farther
reaches....
> He says."Great !..tell me when and we will hook up and fly up to the
Arctic
> circle just for the hell of it .....it is no bigee to just keep going
..the
> RV is fast and comfortable..and we can have a great time...."
> Now, I say, you just gotta wonder..this would never happen to me to fly up
> to the Tundra in a magic carpet I built, if it wasn't for these
> airplanes..in company with one of the most respected and fly savvy
wonderful
> guys you could ever hook up with......him and GPS..and the landscape will
> look the same from windshield to past the horizon, where no man lives and
> only Caribou call home....them and the bears....
> Floats would be as useful as wheels up here...cell phones might save your
> a** if you get onto an ice floe that breaks off from the main pack....but
> the sun will either shine forever or not at all, depending on when you go
> there.
> The hoot is, we are both senior citizens who forget to turn the turn
> signal off and younger folk can't wait to pass when we are on the
> road....with an RV, age is only a number....how lucky you 30 ish guys are
> that you have so many more years to enjoy it !!
> There are strips in the far North where it costs $500 to open the
> hangar doors due to heat loss, and maybe $1500 to have some fuel cached
for
> you....but I don't think we will need our parkas and reindeer hide outfits
> when we plan to see the Northern Lights....
> I looked at an airways map today which covers the whole country, coast
> to coast...Man ! that is a long way...I wonder what the fuel bill will
> be...money well spent just the same..
> Some one once told me that a long cross country was just a matter of a
> few short, point to point trips...with that in mind, I know it can be
> done...
> There are many long distance stories about RV flights and most of them
> never written about, but just think a while about the guy who flew around
> the world twice in an RV4, and then almost pole to pole as well....about
> another guy who flew to Costa Rica, and Claudio Tonnini who flew Purple
> Passion down to Argentina..twice...
> None of these guys let graft and red tape get in the way of a dream...
> At least where I am headed one day, the wolves and Caribou only take a
toll
> on each other..no beaurocrats in shoulder brass to rush out and grab a fee
> or stamp your papers....
> I see the fog and mist has lifted, and the sun is peeking out of
the
> Indian Summer sky, and there is daylight left to go fly a while before
early
> dusk ........
> Just up off the field at 1500, I can suddenly see all the red and gold
> of the trees below...better than any other year, and I head off to the
river
> and point her down and watch the speed build and as the river twists and
> sand bars catch the bends and the weary, beaten red bodies of the salmon
> run, I have scarce time to watch it as I climb up over a Hemlock laden
pass
> with the first touches of snow and turn right and down again, still doing
> 200, and there, at once, is the flood plain, green and civilized and safe,
> and radio calls come into the headset to tell me the field below is open
and
> coffee and pie await......
> That's all there is time for as darkness is coming and although I
> can see for 30 miles or so, and the horizon is still pink over black, the
> home field is hard to find because all below is black and there is no
> contrast..no feature to pick out in that time between twilight and when
car
> lights come on.
> I have my strobes on and am trying out my wig-wag landing lights,
and
> I have found the ferry where it crosses the river and head straight South
> from there....home is 3 miles away...
> The tower folks are still there, but not for long, and they tell me they
can
> see my wig-wag very well and there is no other traffic.
> I am cleared straight in and that is always nice and I get set up early
and
> all I have to do is wait and watch speed and descent....I can see a black
> strip and silver roofed hangars and know I am lined up right and soon I
> cross over the road above the roof of a pickup, just putting his lights
on,
> and Vasi lights look pretty and tell me I am high and I stop looking and
> settle just past the numbers and hear " chirp chirp "..sounds like a
decent
> one, and taxi home...
> Cowling feels good and smells good and ticking starts and I say "
Goodnight
> " and head out the gate.........
> There is one flyer left, and he sits above on the lamp post and keeps his
> perch since I am not stopping....he used to fly off when anything
> approached, but now this big Hawk owns the field and is looking for other
> types of movement.....
> The wind sock is swinging a bit and is lit from within, and is so
> different from daytime and because it is a beacon now....pretty lights
> coming on and streams of light flow down the road to where home and hearth
> await....time to fill in the logbook and try to drive a bit slower than
75,
> now that I am on the ground......
> Ya gotta wonder....what can be better than this other than flying in
> company with a pal ??
> Good night all,
> Austin
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: . and engine horsepower mods. |
In a message dated 10/28/2002 11:54:49 AM Pacific Standard Time,
jpoint(at)mindspring.com writes:
> I resolved that I would not do
> ANYTHING which would decrease engine reliability. No fuel system mods,
> no souped up anything. These planes fly great on a box-stock engine.
> Sure, you may get another 5 or even 10 mph by tricking them out, but at
> what cost? It's just not worth the risk, IMHO.
Well...hold on just a second. I agree with you to some degree that there is
an inverse relationship between engine performance and longevity, but that's
a far cry from saying that you can't safely get a little better performance
without your engine stopping.
Was the outage you mentioned actually and directly attributable to something
done to that engine to increase performance or was it just bad karma?
-GV (RV-6A N1GV 572hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Cimino" <jcimino(at)echoes.net> |
| Subject: | S-Tech auto pilot buying |
Where is the best place to purchase an S-Tech 30?
Jim Cimino
RV-8 sn 80039 N7TL 75+ Hrs.
http://www.geocities.com/jcimino.geo/
(570)842-4057
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy Compton" <rdcompton(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: . and engine horsepower mods. |
----- Original Message -----
> Jeff brings up a very good point (and I am also glad he is here to discuss
> it). Many folks do "soup" up their engines, but when I decided to have
> Bart LeLond build up my engine, I told him I wanted the safest, most
> reliable engine he could build. Thus it is a rather plain Jane,
0-360-A1A,
> carb, mags, etc... just standard everything. Just my two cents worth.
>
> Doug Weiler
> Hudson, WI
> Flying RV-4
> Under construction RV-4
Boy, do I concur with Doug here.
I went with all the "trick" stuff at my major overhaul on my stock 150hp
O-320 back in the spring: high-compression pistons, "flow-matched"
cylinders, electronic ignition, "blueprinting", blah,blah,blah; all
"guaranteed" to have that O-320 puttin' out 180hp. Man, I was like a kid
waiting on Christmas! Visions of eye-watering performance was dancing in my
head....
Frankly, ain't seen much of a change in performance at all, other than what
would be expected before/after from an engine that needed an overhaul due to
a badly worn out camshaft. Sure, the overhaul work seems to have been done
well, and the engine runs much smoother gives a bit better climb
performance. But instead of finding that that cool toy under the tree, I
feel like all I got from Santa was clothes. About the only thing I can
absolutely quantify is that I now have an "experimental" engine.
If I could do it over again, I'd save some money by just having my engine
re-built (to new tolerances, of course) the way Lycoming made it in the
first place. I doubt I'd notice any less ooomph out of it, and I'd have a
lot more peace of mind about what I've got up there under the hood. And I'd
still have a certified engine.
Randy Compton
RV-3A N84VF
Gulf Breeze, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert McCallum <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: . and engine horsepower mods. |
Jeff Point wrote:
>
Everything you do to these engines to get more HP is going
> to reduce the life of the engine. I, too had dreams of high compression
> pistons, polished and ported, custom induction, etc. to get the most
> speed out of my bird. Until July 31 this year, when I was involved in
> an engine failure accident at very low altitude (200 feet- take off)
> over very unhospitable terrain (city.) I wasn't flying, just a
> passenger, and except for quick thinking and excellent airmanship on the
> part of the pilot, it could well have been five fatalities. As it was
> we all walked away with minor injuries. After some soul searching, I
> decided to stick with my project, but I resolved that I would not do
> ANYTHING which would decrease engine reliability. No fuel system mods,
> no souped up anything. These planes fly great on a box-stock engine.
> Sure, you may get another 5 or even 10 mph by tricking them out, but at
> what cost? It's just not worth the risk, IMHO.
>
> Jeff Point
> RV-6 finish kit
> Milwaukee WI
Although these statements contain a good deal of truth they are not necessarily
100% true. One thing
to consider is that some "hot-rodding" modifications do as much or more for longevity
and
reliability as they do for HP gains. Things like balancing and minor porting &
polishing make an
engine run smoother and more evenly match the horsepower of each of the cylinders
to one another.
Both good things! If you don't do these mods with the view to achieving the most
HP gain but only to
equalize the stresses within the engine then "modifications" can create increased
reliability and be
a good thing. (with a small HP gain and possibly a slightly improved fuel economy
as a free bonus)
If you modify with the purpose of achieving the most HP possible then Jeff's statements
above apply
and you will definitely end up with a less reliable and shorter lived engine and
you would be well
advised to remain "stock."
--
Bob McC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed problem |
In a message dated 10/28/2002 6:03:55 PM Pacific Standard Time,
ken(at)soundsuckers.com writes:
> I was just curious but I was under the impression that the GPS read the
> planes airspeed from the satellites
Huh?
-GV (RV-6A N1GV 572hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 10/28/2002 3:02:12 PM Pacific Standard Time,
rv8tor(at)lazy8.net writes:
> A fouled or misfiring spark plug will defiantly make the EGT go up (the fuel
> is still burning as it exits the cylinder).
I traded my defiant plugs for compliant ones and that helped.
-GV (RV-6A N1GV 572hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Aronson <aronsond(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | microair 760/T-2000 for sale |
Listers:
I have two Microair units, one each 760 com and one T-2000 transponder for sale.
Both are new, in box. I ordered two of each as my hanger buddy wanted the
same units for his RV-8. He waited and waited and lost interest, ordered a Becker
and is still waiting. These arrived and I will "give them away" for:
760------$675
T-2000--$1400
I'll pay for ground shipping in the USA.
Get back to me
aronsond(at)pacbell.net
Dave Aroson
RV4 N504RV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larygagnon(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | EC 100 checklist |
Does anyone using the Vision Micro System VM1000 with EC100 checklist have a
sample of the items programed into the EC100 for a carburated O360. I can't
find anything in the archives and want to see if I'm forgetting anything.
Thanks in advance.
Larry Gagnon
RV6/O-360 N6LG (getting close)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Amit Dagan" <amitdagan(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | RV7 floor stiffeners, ATC fuse holders |
Listers,
In the past (looked it up in the archives) there were many cases of smoking rivets
in the forward floor area, the ones that hold the floor to the firewall and
stiffeners.
It was attributed to the engine vibrations, and several methods of stiffening the
area even more were raised, including using more rivets, larger (1/8") rivets,
both, more stiffeners, double floor boards etc.
In the RV7, I am not sure that this issue has been adressed, as one still needs
to use 3/32" rivets, same number of stiffeners etc. I DO see that the rivet spacing
is ~1" and not 1.25", and that there is a double floor in the center of
the cabin (between the two inboard stiffeners).
1. Is that enough ?
2. If the answer to 1. is no, has anyone else done anything about this ?
What ? Should I add more stiffeners ? double the floor ?
On a totally different subject, if you like the fuse block idea used by the "Aero
Electric Connection", check out the "new products" at
http://www.pegasusautoracing.com/newproducts.htm
and scroll down to Fuse Blocks for ATC Style Fuses.
They have good prices for single quantities.
And another thing:
Heads up, when you are done drilling the stiffeners to the cabin floor, you might
want to cleco them to the firewall and F-704 bulkhead, and with the floor off
drill the 4 holes for the center section cover (This is the "double floor"
between the two middle stiffeners) with the cover in place of course, for the
nutplates that go there later. I think it is very easy to reach then, rather
then wait untill the floor is riveted.
Ah yes, and don't forget to make and drill and dimple the air-vent support angles
(0.032") to the side skins before you disassemble the forward fuse.
Amit.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV7A Empennage Options |
Yes, that's the tips. There is a blister in the rudder bottom fairing for
an aft tail light. If you choose these, you could easily send them back to
Van's for the standard ones later on. Just keep them in good shape. For
me, I prefer the single nav/strobe/position light in the wingtip. Very
visible, and less wiring. Congrats on your decision to move forward. I
have an empty RV feeling inside that makes me cry sometimes. Especially
since I am flying someone else's RV right now. I want my own again!!
Paul Besing
RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com>
Subject: RV-List: RV7A Empennage Options
>
>
> All,
> After "watching" the list for the last three years, I am finally ready to
order the empennage. I resisted for so long on the basis of three things
that I promised to do first: 1) Finish instrument rating, 2) Sell Cherokee,
and 3) Finish garage. The last of the three got close enough this weekend,
and I am filling out the forms. I have chosen the RV7A, and I have a
question: What difference is there in the kit if you check the "no lights
in wingtips" option? I assume that means different fiberglass tips? What
lights are they designed to accomadate? If I am semi-undecided now, is it
hard to change one way or another with either set on down the road? I like
the "lights in the wingtips" design...is there something like that for the
tail?
> Thanks in advance,Scott
>
> Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
> The most personalized portal on the Web!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mitchf(at)netscape.com (Mitchell Faatz) |
| Subject: | Re: S-Tech auto pilot buying |
Contact John Stark: jts7(at)mindspring.com . Tell him Mitch Faatz sent
ya, and to give me my GI-106A for free. ;) Really though, John will
simply give you the best price. His great service is just a bonus!
Mitch Faatz San Mateo, CA RV-6A finish kit
Jim Cimino wrote:
>
>Where is the best place to purchase an S-Tech 30?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randall Henderson" <randallh(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Not really RV related |
> Sorry for the "not RV" post. ...
> But I'd like to ask the eminently logical bunch of RV builders and flyers
on
> this list which handheld GPS you are using?
> Which model is the best value?
> I don't want to spend much right now....(need the money for my RV 9a
builder's
> fund).
> I apologize again for the off-topic topic.
> Robert
I have a Garmin Pilot III. I really like it. Nice that it can be configured
for horiz or vertical orientation too. I got it after my panel was done so I
made a retro-fit clip on deal for it -- see
http://www.edt.com/homewing/rhproject/instp.html.The color 295 is sweet but
seems just awfully bulky for a handheld. Nice when installed in the panel
though. I do think its important with handhelds to have them up close to
your field of vision. There's just too much button pushing involved with
these things to be doing it all down in your lap.
(Funny how people feel they have to apologize for "not RV related" posts
like this. Seems like since there's likely a GPS in nearly every RV flying,
it would be relevant....Obviously there's a "line" somewhere but IMHO this
question is well this side of it. What I'm wondering though is whether
putting a GPS in my plane is a 'privelige' or a 'right'.... :-} )
Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (~400 hrs)
Portland, OR
www.vanshomewing.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George McNutt" <gmcnutt(at)intergate.ca> |
| Subject: | RV-6A airspeed problem |
> > > >
> > > >I am helping a friend fly off the restrictions of his RV-6A. He has
> > > >an O-320 with a Sensenich metal prop sold by Van's. I don't know
> > > >the pitch, but it was ordered from Van's as the prop for the RV-6
> > > >and a 160 HP O-320.
> > > >
> > > >We can't seem to get more than about 145 KIAS out of this airplane.
> > > >Have checked it with GPS, and it is close enough. Here is what we
> > > >have so far:
> > > >
> > > >Max RPM we can get out of it is about 2650. (8000' 75%)
> > > >Manifold pressure is good.
> > > >Climb is very good. 1500 FPM 80 KIAS
> > > >All fairings and pants are installed
> > > >
> > > >Could there be a pitch problem here? 140 KIAS seems pretty slow for
an O-320.
> > > >
> > > >Anyone else flying a Sensenich have this problem? All signs are
> > > >pointing to the prop.
> > > >
> > > >Paul Besing
> > >
Hi Paul
For comparison info here are some numbers from my preliminary testing.
RV-6A with 160 HP 0-320, (90TT) turning a Sensenich fixed pitch metal prop,
79" pitch.
At 8000' pressure altitude (8300' density altitude) 1500 lbs, I indicate the
following.
Full Throttle RPM is 2570, Manifold Pressure 22.3" which according to Vans
formula is about 75% power, IAS 175 MPH (152KT) this suggests a top speed
(TAS) of 196 MPH however I believe this is optimistic by about 10 MPH.
My climb rate may be lower than yours. During my climb test at 110 MPH (96
KT) we measured 966 FPM (200' to 3100' in 3 min.) temperature ISA +6 and
slightly over the 1750 Lbs gross weight.
Typically I see a climb rate of 1000 FPM at 135 MPH and find that the climb
rate stays nearly the same for speeds between 110 and 140 MPH, higher speeds
let the prop wind up producing more power.
Disclaimer: all the instruments lie a little bit, my OAT is not accurate and
I second guess it against the forecast air temp, also I believe my airspeed
over-reads by 5+ MPH at high speeds, also my testing is near mountains with
subtle rising or subsiding air.
Observe the 2600 RPM limit.
Hope this data helps,
George McNutt
Langley B.C.
Coming up on first 100 hr inspection.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Gray <dgra1233(at)bigpond.net.au> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed problem |
>
> >Climb is very good. 1500 FPM 80 KIAS
Vans quoted RoC is for sea level and is the result of an extrapolation of climb
figures at various altitudes, to sea level. RoC decreases with density altitude
so also needs correction at each point for pressure and temperature. Vy of course
is also a function of aircraft weight and needs also to be evaluated before
embarking on RoC testing. (Another procedure and spreadsheet required.......)
Oh dear...did someone say 'zip it'?
Is this is an off the dial figure? If so, and dependent upon calibration of the
VSI you may have climb performance consistent with Vans published figures. From
an early brochure Vans figures for RoC at sea level for an RV-6 was 1600 fpm at
gross and 2000 fpm at 1160lbs. These figures will drop approx. 100 fpm for each
1000' above sea level.
BTW from Van's graphs Vy seems to be about 110 mph. Without knowing the details
I'll hazard to guess you may yet have another 100 fpm up your sleeve.
> Wing twist - find a digital level (Smart Level) and check the
> incidence of each wing at several stations. Do you have a wing twist?
> Flaps and ailerons - check the rigging when they are retracted. If
> they are rigged so that they don't come all the way up to zero, that
> could slow you down a bit.
Also, check that the slip ball is centered both on the ground (wings level I
hope!!) and when you are doing your speed trials. An out of trim condition can
inadvertently be corrected with yaw adding significantly to drag.
Doug Gray
NB new email address...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: . and engine horsepower mods. |
Vanremog(at)aol.com wrote:
>>I resolved that I would not do
>>ANYTHING which would decrease engine reliability. No fuel system mods,
>>no souped up anything. These planes fly great on a box-stock engine.
>>Sure, you may get another 5 or even 10 mph by tricking them out, but at
>>what cost? It's just not worth the risk, IMHO.
>>
>>
>
>Well...hold on just a second. I agree with you to some degree that there is
>an inverse relationship between engine performance and longevity, but that's
>a far cry from saying that you can't safely get a little better performance
>without your engine stopping.
>
>Was the outage you mentioned actually and directly attributable to something
>done to that engine to increase performance or was it just bad karma?
>
>
>
OK, I'm holding on;) Notice I did not say I would not do anything at
all to the engine (one elec ignition and one mag for example) just
nothing which would decrease reliability. I mentioned fuel system mods-
Van himself has written about how many builders come to grief by
modifying his fuel system design, so I used that as one example.
Another lister mentioned that balancing/ blueprinting an engine could
increase it's lifespan by making it run smoother. This is true, but how
many engines are given such treatment with the goal of increasing engine
reliability? I doubt very many. That usually accompanies high
compression pistons, polished, lapped, ported, etc etc etc. with one
goal in mind. As long as such "tricked out" engines are inspected and
overhauled on a more frequent, as needed basis there will likely be no
problems, but I'd hate to have a post-accident thread down the road, as
we do after accidents, because someone took their souped up engine,
never looked inside it and figured it was good for 2000 hours because
Lycoming said so.
I hate to sound preachy, but an engine failure right after takeoff will
give you true religion in a hurry. And no, I don't believe the 73 year
old Continental radial had been souped up. The investigation is still
pending, but it definately quit from something. I'm certainly no engine
expert so I won't give my .02, but I just wanted to point out the
alternative view in this thread, which no one had yet mentioned.
Jeff Point
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorto1537(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed problem |
>
>>
>> >Climb is very good. 1500 FPM 80 KIAS
>
>Vans quoted RoC is for sea level and is the result of an
>extrapolation of climb
>figures at various altitudes, to sea level. RoC decreases with
>density altitude
>so also needs correction at each point for pressure and temperature.
>Vy of course
>is also a function of aircraft weight and needs also to be evaluated before
>embarking on RoC testing. (Another procedure and spreadsheet required.......)
>Oh dear...did someone say 'zip it'?
>
>Is this is an off the dial figure? If so, and dependent upon
>calibration of the
>VSI you may have climb performance consistent with Vans published
>figures. From
>an early brochure Vans figures for RoC at sea level for an RV-6 was
>1600 fpm at
>gross and 2000 fpm at 1160lbs. These figures will drop approx. 100
>fpm for each
>1000' above sea level.
>
One more note - VSIs can have errors too, so when doing climb tests
you need to use a stop watch against the altimeter to get the data,
and then correct for temperature. I got into a real fur ball a few
years ago with a guy who published an article in one of the popular
aviation magazines about engine upgrades. He had put a more powerful
engine in his Debonair, and really liked the improved performance,
especially the 5,000 ft/min rate of climb. I sent a letter to the
editor suggesting that they should review the articles before
publishing them, because this piece of info was obviously in error.
The author got very bent out of shape at me, and we had a long and
heated exchange of letters. He eventually sent me a video tape which
showed a sustained climb at an indicated 5,000 ft/min. But way over
in the corner of the screen you could see the altimeter, and I timed
only 1,600 ft/min. He was quite embarrassed when I pointed that out.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
Ottawa, Canada
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kempthornes <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Exhaust Pipe Wrap... |
>
>I've ceramic coated my exhaust, and you can grab and hold onto them about 20
>seconds after the engine is turned off. If you study the theory behind
>this
Where do I find this theory, Jim? I'd like to try to study it.
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK flying!
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <towertoy(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: thermocoupler options for micromonitor |
From: Knicholas2(at)aol.com
Subject: RV-List: thermocoupler options for micromonitor
I built a RMI micromonitor for my 0-320 and now have the options for CHT
sensors. The manufacturer sells the bayonet type thermocoupler but the also
approve a washer type thermocoupler made by Westach. Any opinions? (...I
guess that is a dumb question on THIS list, there are LOTS of opinions
here....) Any recommendations?
Kim Nicholas
RV9A
Seattle
(trying to keep up with Andy....)
From
http://www.lycoming.textron.com/main.jsp?bodyPage=support/publications/keyReprints/operation/moreCylinderHeadTemp.html
In Lycoming engines, all cylinders are drilled to accommodate a CHT bayonet
type thermocouple.
Some operators in the field have been using a spark plug gasket-type
installation in order to get cylinder head temperature readings. Textron
Lycoming Engineering does not currently approve this method of determining
CHT. Not only is the method less accurate than the recommended thermocouple
type, but the temperature readings differ noticeably from the approved
installations.
Dave Toy
In the "thinking of building stage"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randall Henderson" <randallh(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV7 floor stiffeners, ATC fuse holders |
Amit,
The main problem area on the RV-6 was the double row of rivets in the area
of the spar. That was eventually changed from 3/32" to 1/8" rivets and
dimpled skin/c-sunk under skin and spar. I think many problems were also due
to the fact that a lot of people didn't attach the stiffeners to the spar or
firewall or both (a result of really poorly drawn plans that don't clearly
show those attachments). Assuming they are properly tied in fore and aft,
the size rivets used on the stiffeners probably isn't as critical, but on
the other hand why NOT use 1/8" rivets? Anyway I did.
Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (~400 hrs)
Portland, OR
www.vanshomewing.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Allen <fliier(at)yahoo.com> |
In my RV-6A with a 160hp O-320 and a fixed pitch Sensenich I get between 155-160
kts true airspeed, depending on (density) altitude. That is with gear leg and
intersection fairings and the old style wheelpants.
Static RPM is about 2150. The prop typically maxes out at 2600 RPM below 5,000',
and gets slower as altitude increases.
John Allen
---------------------------------
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ya Gotta Wonder |
Thanks Austin
Larry Mac Donald
> >From: "Austin" <6430(at)axion.net>
> >Hi listers, you rivet pounding ground bound bunch of
> dreamers,...with due respect, Yes, you do gotta wonder
what kind of a world you enter when you get the old bird flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Rate of climb - flt test (was RV-6A airspeed problem) |
> One more note - VSIs can have errors too, so when doing climb tests
> you need to use a stop watch against the altimeter to get the data,
> and then correct for temperature. --
> Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
> Ottawa, Canada
> http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
Here's another facet of this "rate of climb" and "change of altitude" thing:
If you are flying on a standard day, i.e., with standard temperature at the
surface, std temp lapse rate (i.e., std temp at every altitude above MSL) ,
and std pressure laps rate, then when the altimeter goes from, e.g., 1000'
to 2000', then you have indeed climbed 1000' (as would be meaured with a
1000' surveyor's chain hung from a helicopter, for example)
If it is hot summer, then none of the temperatures, temp lapse rate, &
pressure lapse rates are standard - as you time a 1000' 'pressure altitude'
change, you are not timing a "real altitude" change - because the atmosphere
has expanded about 10%, for example. If it is expanded 10%, then a 1000'
change in pressure altitude is really a change of 1100' "real" altitude
(change in MSL).
My fighter squadron used to us a "D value chart" and get the winter time
shrinkage factors and summer time expansion factors for the atmosphere in
the altitude range we were using for dive bombing - we then adjusted our
manual dive bombing release altitudes so as to avoid releasing too low in
cold Wisconsin winters and releasing too high in hot anywhere summers.
We'd call Offutt weather every day and get the height of the 850mb level
(about 4500' on a std day) - given that and the bombing range's altimeter
setting, we used a special chart and plotted a line from sfc to 4500' or so.
It sloped left in winter and right in summer (was straight up on a std day
in Spring & Fall). We had to adjust our release altitudes up to 300' in
winter and 200 to 300' in summer to avoid serious bomb impact errors. "D
value" is just D for "delta" or "difference" - the delta or difference of
actual altitude vs indicated altitude.
Rather than try to teach everyone in the home built flight testing community
about D values, I suggest you use the GPS altitude readout. GPS altitude is
independent of pressure altitude - it is the actual altitude above the
theoretical/calculated location of the earth's surface - as close to true
MSL" as you are going to get.
- On a slightly different note - flying in mountainous terrain instead
of flight testing - all instrument pilots have heard the warning, "flying
from high pressure to low, look out below" - as there can be up to a 2000
foot difference (d value) between your indicated altitude (pressure
altitude, what you read on the altimeter with a surface altimeter setting
dialed in) and your actual altitude (tops of mountains are at "actual
altitudes" or "MSL altitudes", not pressure altitudes or indicated
altitudes).
- Now, with GPS, and if you program your display or select the correct
"page" to display, you can see your "actual" or "MSL" altitude, as measured
by the GPS system.
So, just as you can use GPS altitude (as close to true or MSL altitude as
you can get) to avoid mountains, so you can also measure "change in MSL
altitude" (change in true altitude) by using the GPS instead of the
altimeter when flight testing for rate of climb in hot and cold non-standard
days.
David Carter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Galati" <rick07x(at)earthlink.net> |
After considering many options, I have decided that I would like to spring
load the oil access door on my RV-6A upper cowl and hinge it from the
bottom (as opposed to the top of the cowl per drawing) and swing it down
and inward into the engine compartment. I have the Type S cowl which already has
the oil access cutout area already defined on it. Since I have not yet
hung the engine yet which will be an 0-320-D1A on order, I am wondering if
I am opening up to myself possible conflicts with the engine mount or oil filler
neck or any other obstruction by swinging the door inward. Without an
engine in place, it is difficult for me to envision possible conflicts.
Can I go ahead and do this subassembly work now and get it over with or should
I
wait? Any thoughts?
--- Rick Galati
--- rick07x(at)earthlink.net
--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Oil Access Door |
>After considering many options, I have decided that I would like to spring
>load the oil access door on my RV-6A upper cowl and hinge it from the
>bottom (as opposed to the top of the cowl per drawing) and swing it down
>and inward into the engine compartment. I have the Type S cowl which
>already has
>the oil access cutout area already defined on it. Since I have not yet
>hung the engine yet which will be an 0-320-D1A on order, I am wondering if
>I am opening up to myself possible conflicts with the engine mount or oil
>filler
>neck or any other obstruction by swinging the door inward. Without an
>engine in place, it is difficult for me to envision possible conflicts.
>Can I go ahead and do this subassembly work now and get it over with or
>should I
>wait? Any thoughts?
>
>
>--- Rick Galati
>
Will it be latched down in some way so you can still get your arm in there
to reach the firewall/cowl hinge pins? Otherwise, that door will be grabbing
at your arm the whole time. Get the firewall forward installation done,
then check your ergonomics and clearances.
Brian Denk
RV8 N94BD
310 hrs.
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill VonDane" <n8wv(at)hotmail.com> |
What are the ramifications of switching from Aeroshell 20W-50 to Exxon Elite 20W-50?
What other oils are "OK" for use in a Lycosaur? What about automotive synthetic
blends?
-Bill VonDane
RV-8A ~ 74 hours
www.vondane.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JRWillJR(at)aol.com |
Maybe if the FAA would give more advance notice with some means of
identifying boundries for VFR guys. Some of the TFR's have not even had
NOTAMS. How can we be expected to comply? Maybe some semi perment TFR's could
be placed on Sectionals with times of use in the map cover like MOA's. The
real solution lies in getting back to normal, small aircraft Simply do not
represent a real and present danger to national security (no way--no
how---simply, competely rediculous). Yeah, I suppose some evil genious could
put a suitcase nuke in an RV4 (but that is what we have James Bond 007 for)
and fly it to a stadium full of people but is that a realistic threat,
wouldn't it be easier to just put the nuke in a Yugo and drive it to the
target? The whole problem with this TFR thing is that it is an extreme over
reaction. Maybe transponder codes on large aircraft could be tracked--they
are the ones that need to be kept at a distance from "targets" not our bug
smashers. I also fear that eventually someone will get trigger happy and
shoot a family down, that is a whole lot more likely than terrorists using a
C150 to attack a nucleor reactor. Our military guys and equipment probably
also have better things to do than intercept ultralights. We know who the bad
guys are, let's go get them and leave our freedoms intact. We might start
with asking the Malvo's of the world to please leave our country--NOW. Does
anyone remember the Boston Tea Party, it has implications here. Do Not
Archive. JR
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Galati" <rick07x(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re:Oil Access Door |
Good point Brian. I should have mentioned that I have already made
plans for and have partially installed a doubler strap to accommodate
floating nut plates and screws in lieu of the piano hinge option for the
curved portion of the upper cowl/firewall attach. So accessing hinge pins
is not a concern.
--- Rick Galati
--- rick07x(at)earthlink.net
--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KAKlewin(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Freebie...First Come... |
Howdy...
If anyone is looking for a Nomex flight suit..I have one to give away....I was
issued it by the Air Force a few months ago and realized it was too small.
It is the tan desert flight suit (not the standard green one).
It is a size 40 Short...Im 5'9" and its about an inch too short for me...so
would fit someone about 5'8" or smaller and normal build. Only put it on once
to find out it wasn't going to work.
Im currently serving in the middle east, but the first one that replies (off
list please) who this could work for drop me a note. I have access to US post,
but it takes about 10 days to get it to you..sometimes a few days longer.
I would ask for about $10 to cover the shipping.
Let me know if you are interested. Thanks..
Kurt Klewin
RV6A Finishing
Maj, USAFR, Incirlik AB, TU
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Oil Access Door |
Might make the oil filler oil a little low because the door has to clear.
This will make it hard to see the filler hole in poor lighting and more
difficult to insert the oil spout without dumping oil all over the place.
I'd vote no!
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Galati" <rick07x(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RV-List: Oil Access Door
>
>
> After considering many options, I have decided that I would like to spring
> load the oil access door on my RV-6A upper cowl and hinge it from the
> bottom (as opposed to the top of the cowl per drawing) and swing it down
> and inward into the engine compartment. I have the Type S cowl which
already has
> the oil access cutout area already defined on it. Since I have not yet
> hung the engine yet which will be an 0-320-D1A on order, I am wondering
if
> I am opening up to myself possible conflicts with the engine mount or oil
filler
> neck or any other obstruction by swinging the door inward. Without an
> engine in place, it is difficult for me to envision possible conflicts.
> Can I go ahead and do this subassembly work now and get it over with or
should I
> wait? Any thoughts?
>
>
> --- Rick Galati
>
> --- rick07x(at)earthlink.net
>
> --- EarthLink: It's your Internet.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorto1537(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rate of climb - flt test (was RV-6A airspeed |
problem)
>
>
>> One more note - VSIs can have errors too, so when doing climb tests
>> you need to use a stop watch against the altimeter to get the data,
>> and then correct for temperature. --
>> Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
>> Ottawa, Canada
> > http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
>
>
>Rather than try to teach everyone in the home built flight testing community
>about D values, I suggest you use the GPS altitude readout. GPS altitude is
>independent of pressure altitude - it is the actual altitude above the
>theoretical/calculated location of the earth's surface - as close to true
>MSL" as you are going to get.
> - On a slightly different note - flying in mountainous terrain instead
>of flight testing - all instrument pilots have heard the warning, "flying
>from high pressure to low, look out below" - as there can be up to a 2000
>foot difference (d value) between your indicated altitude (pressure
>altitude, what you read on the altimeter with a surface altimeter setting
>dialed in) and your actual altitude (tops of mountains are at "actual
>altitudes" or "MSL altitudes", not pressure altitudes or indicated
>altitudes).
> - Now, with GPS, and if you program your display or select the correct
>"page" to display, you can see your "actual" or "MSL" altitude, as measured
>by the GPS system.
>
>So, just as you can use GPS altitude (as close to true or MSL altitude as
>you can get) to avoid mountains, so you can also measure "change in MSL
>altitude" (change in true altitude) by using the GPS instead of the
>altimeter when flight testing for rate of climb in hot and cold non-standard
>days.
>
>David Carter
David is correct that GPS altitude is probably more accurate than
barometric altitude most of the time, if we are more than a few
thousand feet above the location where the altimeter setting came
from. If our altitude is close to the site where the altimeter
setting came from, the altimeter is likely more accurate than the GPS.
I'm not sure I would agree with the suggestion to time the GPS
altitude change instead of timing the barometric altitude change
though. In my experience, GPS altitude fluctuates quite a bit, so
I'm not sure that timing the rate of change of GPS altitude will lead
to an accurate result. GPS is much less accurate vertically than it
is horizontally. I believe that we can get more accurate results by
timing the rate of barometric altitude change, and then correcting
for non-standard temperature.
Take care,
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
Ottawa, Canada
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Huffaker <bifft(at)xmission.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rate of climb - flt test (was RV-6A airspeed problem) |
version=2.43
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, David Carter wrote:
> Rather than try to teach everyone in the home built flight testing community
> about D values, I suggest you use the GPS altitude readout. GPS altitude is
> independent of pressure altitude - it is the actual altitude above the
> theoretical/calculated location of the earth's surface - as close to true
> MSL" as you are going to get.
> - On a slightly different note - flying in mountainous terrain instead
> of flight testing - all instrument pilots have heard the warning, "flying
> from high pressure to low, look out below" - as there can be up to a 2000
> foot difference (d value) between your indicated altitude (pressure
> altitude, what you read on the altimeter with a surface altimeter setting
> dialed in) and your actual altitude (tops of mountains are at "actual
> altitudes" or "MSL altitudes", not pressure altitudes or indicated
> altitudes).
> - Now, with GPS, and if you program your display or select the correct
> "page" to display, you can see your "actual" or "MSL" altitude, as measured
> by the GPS system.
>
Are GPS's that accurate? I haven't used one in the plane much, but I
had a hiking model that I played with a bit before leaving in a canyon
somewhere in southern utah :(. It would show a difference of about 1000'
or so just sitting at the kitchen table. Comparing altitude with topo
maps showed similar errors. The rate of change for the error would be
fairly slow, so useable for rate measurements, but I wouldn't want to try
to avoid mountains based on it. (Another excuse just to fly VFR around
here).
Brian Huffaker, DSWL (bifft(at)xmission.com)
RV-8A 80091 Delayed by another project.
1/4 Starduster II N23UT flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner(at)wans.net> |
Dear Bill,
Do you mean Aeroshell 15W-50 (Phillips-XC has 20W-50), versus the Exxon
Elite 20W-50?
*Should be O.K., if you are going from an oil with high detergent to an oil
with a lower detergent content, but not the other way around, as it could
loosen up crud that might travel into the oil galleries and block of some
(or all) of the oil flow.
*DO use one of the major brands (Aeroshell / Phillips / Exxon), Single- or
Multi Viscosity is up to you. I'd go the modern Multi Viscosity Route (costs
a little more, but then, how much did my new engine cost?)
*DO NOT use Automotive oil of any kind. Please check in the Archives AS TO
WHY NOT, or talk to Doug Rozendaal (spelling?) about his opinion on the
subject. He really is an Expert on it, that actually earns a living with
it!!
Good Luck on your Quest!
Sincerely,
Konrad Werner
ABQ-NM
Subject: RV-List: Exxon Elite
>
> What are the ramifications of switching from Aeroshell 20W-50 to Exxon
Elite 20W-50?
>
> What other oils are "OK" for use in a Lycosaur? What about automotive
synthetic blends?
>
> -Bill VonDane
> RV-8A ~ 74 hours
> www.vondane.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: TFR solutions |
We should dump tea into TFRs? Maybe we should dress up as Mohawks and
violate TFRs.
In 1773, Britain's East India Company was sitting on large stocks of tea
that it could not sell in England. It was on the verge of bankruptcy. In an
effort to save it, the government passed the Tea Act of 1773, which gave the
company the right to export its merchandise directly to the colonies without
paying any of the regular taxes that were imposed on the colonial merchants,
who had traditionally served as the middlemen in such transactions. With
these privileges, the company could undersell American merchants and
monopolize the colonial tea trade. The act proved inflammatory for several
reasons. First, it angered influential colonial merchants, who feared being
replaced and bankrupted by a powerful monopoly. The East India Company's
decision to grant franchises to certain American merchants for the sale of
their tea created further resentments among those excluded from this
lucrative trade. More important, however, the Tea Act revived American
passions about the issue of taxation without representation. The law
provided no new tax on tea. Lord North assumed that most colonists would
welcome the new law because it would reduce the price of tea to consumers by
removing the middlemen. But the colonists responded by boycotting tea.
Unlike earlier protests, this boycott mobilized large segments of the
population. It also helped link the colonies together in a common experience
of mass popular protest. Particularly important to the movement were the
activities of colonial women, who were one of the principal consumers of tea
and now became the leaders of the effort to the boycott.
Various colonies made plans to prevent the East India Company from landing
its cargoes in colonial ports. In ports other than Boston, agents of the
company were "persuaded" to resign, and new shipments of tea were either
returned to England or warehoused. In Boston, the agents refused to resign
and, with the support of the royal governor, preparations were made to land
incoming cargoes regardless of opposition. After failing to turn back the
three ships in the harbor, local patriots led by Samuel Adams staged a
spectacular drama. On the evening of December 16, 1773, three companies of
fifty men each, masquerading as Mohawk Indians, passed through a tremendous
crowd of spectators, went aboard the three ships, broke open the tea chests,
and heaved them into the harbor.As the electrifying news of the Boston "tea
party" spread, other seaports followed the example and staged similar acts
of resistance of their own.'
----- Original Message -----
From: <JRWillJR(at)aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: TFR solutions
>
> Maybe if the FAA would give more advance notice with some means of
> identifying boundries for VFR guys. Some of the TFR's have not even had
> NOTAMS. How can we be expected to comply? Maybe some semi perment TFR's
could
> be placed on Sectionals with times of use in the map cover like MOA's. The
> real solution lies in getting back to normal, small aircraft Simply do not
> represent a real and present danger to national security (no way--no
> how---simply, competely rediculous). Yeah, I suppose some evil genious
could
> put a suitcase nuke in an RV4 (but that is what we have James Bond 007
for)
> and fly it to a stadium full of people but is that a realistic threat,
> wouldn't it be easier to just put the nuke in a Yugo and drive it to the
> target? The whole problem with this TFR thing is that it is an extreme
over
> reaction. Maybe transponder codes on large aircraft could be tracked--they
> are the ones that need to be kept at a distance from "targets" not our bug
> smashers. I also fear that eventually someone will get trigger happy and
> shoot a family down, that is a whole lot more likely than terrorists using
a
> C150 to attack a nucleor reactor. Our military guys and equipment probably
> also have better things to do than intercept ultralights. We know who the
bad
> guys are, let's go get them and leave our freedoms intact. We might start
> with asking the Malvo's of the world to please leave our country--NOW.
Does
> anyone remember the Boston Tea Party, it has implications here. Do Not
> Archive. JR
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | RV-6A airspeed update |
Ok. I did some more concrete tests today. Here is what I came up with:
2 methods. 3 way and 4 way track for the GPS.
Both came up with 154 KTS Groundspeed. Not as bad as I had thought, but still
about 10 Kts low.
Here is the data on the engine performance:
8000' 22.7"MAP 2600 RPM 8.2GPH
I suspect there are a few possible drag sources here. Perhaps the baffles. Haven't
checked to see how tight they are. Also, he has the Team Rocket wheel pants.
Don't know any performance differences than Van's wheel pants. He had
a pretty heavy wing, and had to do considerable blocking and squeezing of the
ailerons to make them level. One aileron is up a little, and one is down a little.
I imagine there could be a seperate RV-List for the different theories on speed
enhancement of RV's. Too many variables to know off hand. Either way, he has
a 177 MPH RV-6A. I'd like to see closer to 185 or so, but not too far off.
Thanks for all the advice,
Paul Besing
RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rate of climb - flt test (was RV-6A airspeed problem) |
Kevin's observation about GPS being less accurate in the vertical than
horizontal is good info. I have never noticed it vary while I was at a
constant barometric altitude - but wasn't really looking for that, either.
I'll keep a closer watch.
Might be "an individual" thing, or a "day to day" thing - maybe depends on
relative position to satellites, etc? Maybe the "iffy-ness" will go away
when FAA gets off its hindside and implements WAAS so we get really accurate
info.
Meanwhile, might be useful and informative to note both baro altitude change
and GPS altitude change, just to see if they correlate, given that you are
flying on a cold or hot day and know what to expect (less altitude change on
GPS than Baro in winter, more altitude change than Baro in summer).
Anyone wanting a "D Value Chart" e-mail me privately and I'll go dig one out
of my USAF archive boxes in the attic. Two refinements on my original post:
1) "We called the wx man. . ." - now you can access the balloon sounding
data on the internet and look up the height of the 850mb level yourself; 2)
I wasn't precise in saying what you plot: You plot "height (msl altitude)
of the 850 mb level" - it rises above std in summer, sinks below in winter.
Once plotted, the special D Value chart makes it easy to get the error (d
value) to apply to baro altitude anywhere between sfc and the "approx" 4500'
level.
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Horton" <khorto1537(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Rate of climb - flt test (was RV-6A airspeed problem)
>
> >
> >
> >> One more note - VSIs can have errors too, so when doing climb tests
> >> you need to use a stop watch against the altimeter to get the data,
> >> and then correct for temperature. --
> >> Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
> >> Ottawa, Canada
> > > http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
> >
> >
> >Rather than try to teach everyone in the home built flight testing
community
> >about D values, I suggest you use the GPS altitude readout. GPS altitude
is
> >independent of pressure altitude - it is the actual altitude above the
> >theoretical/calculated location of the earth's surface - as close to true
> >MSL" as you are going to get.
> > - On a slightly different note - flying in mountainous terrain
instead
> >of flight testing - all instrument pilots have heard the warning, "flying
> >from high pressure to low, look out below" - as there can be up to a 2000
> >foot difference (d value) between your indicated altitude (pressure
> >altitude, what you read on the altimeter with a surface altimeter setting
> >dialed in) and your actual altitude (tops of mountains are at "actual
> >altitudes" or "MSL altitudes", not pressure altitudes or indicated
> >altitudes).
> > - Now, with GPS, and if you program your display or select the
correct
> >"page" to display, you can see your "actual" or "MSL" altitude, as
measured
> >by the GPS system.
> >
> >So, just as you can use GPS altitude (as close to true or MSL altitude as
> >you can get) to avoid mountains, so you can also measure "change in MSL
> >altitude" (change in true altitude) by using the GPS instead of the
> >altimeter when flight testing for rate of climb in hot and cold
non-standard
> >days.
> >
> >David Carter
>
> David is correct that GPS altitude is probably more accurate than
> barometric altitude most of the time, if we are more than a few
> thousand feet above the location where the altimeter setting came
> from. If our altitude is close to the site where the altimeter
> setting came from, the altimeter is likely more accurate than the GPS.
>
> I'm not sure I would agree with the suggestion to time the GPS
> altitude change instead of timing the barometric altitude change
> though. In my experience, GPS altitude fluctuates quite a bit, so
> I'm not sure that timing the rate of change of GPS altitude will lead
> to an accurate result. GPS is much less accurate vertically than it
> is horizontally. I believe that we can get more accurate results by
> timing the rate of barometric altitude change, and then correcting
> for non-standard temperature.
>
> Take care,
> --
> Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
> Ottawa, Canada
> http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Louis Willig <larywil(at)comcast.net> |
>
>What are the ramifications of switching from Aeroshell 20W-50 to Exxon
>Elite 20W-50?
>
>What other oils are "OK" for use in a Lycosaur? What about automotive
>synthetic blends?
Bill,
Don't even think about using automotive oils in your Lycoming. Period.
Aircraft engines are designed to consume oil when they run. Aircraft oils
are formulated to be consumed and leave a residue that is relatively
harmless. Automotive oil residue (whether natural or synthetic oil) will
leave harmful residues and will kill you or you wallet. Did I say that
gently enough?
Now, the question about Exxon Elite vs. Aeroshell 20W-50 was asked about a
year ago. I think my answer then was a safe one. "No one really knows."
There is not a great deal of history with the Elite. I have been using
Elite for over 200 hours. I used the Aeroshell 20W-50 prior to that. I see
no difference whatsoever. Why? Because it would take a few thousand hours
to see a statistically significant difference. My RV-4 flies about twice
per week. Most other aircraft fly a lot less. I'll bet that the frequency
of flying has a lot more to do with engine health and performance than does
the type of oil. Both of the oils you asked about are considered great
products, and both are premium priced. But the cost of oil is insignificant
over the life of an engine. You will probably spend $1000 over a 2000 hour
engine life for premium oil. Cheap aero oils will still cost $500 for that
same period.....If they even let you get to that TBO.
Both the Elite and the A/S 20W-50 are promoted as appropriate for engines
that fly only occasionally. Neither has any known faults (so far). Both
are great oils and Exxon told me they can be mixed if need be with no problem.
Keep truckin'
Louis
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV7 floor stiffeners, ATC fuse holders |
| From: | Michael D Hilger <rvsixer(at)juno.com> |
writes:
>
> Listers,
> In the past (looked it up in the archives) there were many cases of
> smoking rivets in the forward floor area, the ones that hold the
> floor to the firewall and stiffeners.
> It was attributed to the engine vibrations, and several methods of
> stiffening the area even more were raised, including using more
> rivets, larger (1/8") rivets, both, more stiffeners, double floor
> boards etc.
> In the RV7, I am not sure that this issue has been adressed, as one
> still needs to use 3/32" rivets, same number of stiffeners etc. I DO
> see that the rivet spacing is ~1" and not 1.25", and that there is a
> double floor in the center of the cabin (between the two inboard
> stiffeners).
That double floor in the RV-7 should help with a problem I had. On my
-6, on takeoff as I accelerated through about 110 mph in the climb I
would hear a "pop" and the exhaust note would change slightly. After
landing I would hear another "pop". It turned out the bottom fwd skin was
oil canning in about 10" fwd of the main spar. The change from flat at
the firewall to curved at the spar created the problem. I made a
stiffener and installed it between the inboard stiffeners, attaching it
to those stiffeners. Fixed the problem.
Mike Hilger
RV-6, N207AM, 320 hrs
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jaye and Scott Jackson <jayeandscott(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | vacuum system help |
I've finally adjusted the vacuum regulator so that the suction needle sits in the
middle of the green band at cruise power settings. But the regulator doesn't
seem to be regulating-I get one-to-two inches of vacuum on the ground at runup
and on the peg at eight inches during full power.
One person told me these "Y" style regulators can be rebuilt and another told me
they couldn't. A Forum search didn't reveal any information.
Any ideas?
Scott in Vancouver
40hrs, -6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Laird Owens <owens(at)aerovironment.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed update |
Paul,
Just to flog this a little more, were you taking into account OAT?
When your saying 8000' was that pressure altitude, or density
altitude? If it was hot and your flying at 8000' pressure altitude,
your density altitude (the altitude at which your airplane/engine
really thinks it's at) could be much higher, and the engine not
putting out 75% power.
When I do all my performance testing, I always fly at the density
altitude which I'm trying to get the data. That way I can fly repeat
tests the same way and be pretty sure I have close to the same power
I had on the previous day.
The other thing to think about is repeating the test several times on
different days to average out the possible differences in air mass
movement. If you happened to flying in slightly decending air, your
groundspeeds would show low.
I always fly at least 4 tests before I start to see a trend and
believe the data. You wouldn't believe how hard it is to get GOOD
data. Any data is easy, good data is much tougher.
Have fun.
Laird
RV-6 630hrs
SoCal
>
>Ok. I did some more concrete tests today. Here is what I came up with:
>
>2 methods. 3 way and 4 way track for the GPS.
>
>Both came up with 154 KTS Groundspeed. Not as bad as I had thought,
>but still about 10 Kts low.
>
>Here is the data on the engine performance:
>
>8000' 22.7"MAP 2600 RPM 8.2GPH
>
>I suspect there are a few possible drag sources here. Perhaps the
>baffles. Haven't checked to see how tight they are. Also, he has
>the Team Rocket wheel pants. Don't know any performance differences
>than Van's wheel pants. He had a pretty heavy wing, and had to do
>considerable blocking and squeezing of the ailerons to make them
>level. One aileron is up a little, and one is down a little.
>
>I imagine there could be a seperate RV-List for the different
>theories on speed enhancement of RV's. Too many variables to know
>off hand. Either way, he has a 177 MPH RV-6A. I'd like to see
>closer to 185 or so, but not too far off.
>
>Thanks for all the advice,
>
>Paul Besing
>RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
>http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
>Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
>http://www.kitlog.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Sears" <sears(at)searnet.com> |
| Subject: | Fw: RE: RV9-List: Drill and dimple vs just dimple (was:New Builder |
introduction)
I got this from Scott McDaniels, today. I know it's more of the same; but,
it's nice to have a comment from an employee of Van's. I'll make a couple
of comments below; but, it's good reading material for those of you who are
interested in this thread and wanted an opinion from the source.
> Hi Jim, I was cruising the archives of the RV list and saw your post.
> I am responding to you directly because I am not a current subscriber of
> the RV-list.
>
> The current construction manual does not say you don't have to drill. If
> you read the manual for the kit you are helping your friend with I think
> you will find just the opposite. Driving dimple dies through the
> prepunch holes (even if you deburr first) is a very bad idea. I'm sure
> you have noticed that the dimple die pilot doesn't fit in the undersized
> hole. That means when you drive it home it is stretching the material to
> make the hole larger (high probability of cracking) and the other problem
> is that without final sizing the hole with a drill you are leaving the
> ragged interior of the hole which would normally get removed by the
> drilling process. This means that all of the hole interiors have a
> surface finish similar to what the outer skin edges have before they have
> been smoothed/deburred (more potential for cracks).
>
> I assure you that if we at Van's felt it an acceptable practice to just
> dimple and then rivet the prepunched skins as supplied, we would punch
> the holes to full size, and we would suggest it in the construction
> manual.
>
> Please reconsider using the non drilling process, and pass the word to
> other builders who may not be considering all of the issues related to
> doing so.
>
> Give me a call at work if you need more info.
>
> Scott McDaniels
>
Scott used to be a subscriber; but, he got off some time ago. Actually, Van
should have someone checking the list every day to catch things like this
thread. It would sure help iron out some of our questions and would also
help them correct problems. I know I've seen some problems that were still
active five years after I reported them to Van's. Not good.
You folks know that Van did advertise, or reported in the RVator, that they
built the wings without ever picking up a drill. Well, folks, that tells me
it's OK to do that if they don't say it's not when they advertise it that
way. Maybe they did; but, I don't ever remember their doing it. Granted,
the manual says to match drill; but, that's most likely told in the first
few sections that a second time builder is not even going to look at. In
fact, I'm betting a second, or more, timer is most likely going to just use
the drawings to get started without ever looking at the manual. I'm just
using the manual on the -9A to make sure I don't leave any parts out.
That's it. We just got the finishing kit, today; and, we're ready for it.
As for the dimple set's going through the hole, this is not a forced fit.
It almost drops through the hole. I can push it in with very little
pressure. As I said, I could tell no difference between holes/dimples I'd
match drilled and ones I hadn't. I was using my sense of touch for the
test, though. Maybe they have a better sense of touch than I do? Sure, I
know they've probably done some testing; but, I can say I've never seen the
skins crack on any RV, etc.
As for my friend's RV-9A, it's a quick build that has left much of the
building to Van's. We have done very little of the drilling and dimpling.
With that, I'm not worried about what dimpling we've done without match
drilling. As I said, another friend's RV-7A was built with no match
drilling. I don't think he's going to ground his airplane and redo all of
the rivet holes. He's going flying as soon as he's sure he's ready for the
lift off. I'm expecting it at any time.
I appreciate Scott's input on the subject and have passed it along to you.
However, we got some good input on both sides of the discussion with
documentation to back up each side. As for me, I'm not sure what I'll do on
my next project. I may match drill. I may not. There is obviously good
support for each method. You chose the method that gives you the warmest
fuzzy.
This is important enough to archive, I think.
Jim Sears in KY
RV-6A N198JS
EAA Tech Counselor
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorto1537(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rate of climb - flt test (was RV-6A airspeed |
problem)
>
>Kevin's observation about GPS being less accurate in the vertical than
>horizontal is good info. I have never noticed it vary while I was at a
>constant barometric altitude - but wasn't really looking for that, either.
>I'll keep a closer watch.
>
I've got a hand held Lowrance Air Map 100. I played with it quite a
bit in our driveway when I was learning to use it. Usually it seemed
to be fairly accurate on altitude. However, there was one occasion
when I saw the altitude vary by about 600 ft over a period of less
than a minute. I don't know how often such a variation could be
expected to occur, as I stopped watching the altitude once I started
flying with it.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
Ottawa, Canada
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary & Carolyn Zilik <zilik(at)direcpc.com> |
None that I know of.. I use to run Aeroshell 15W-50 and have since switched to
Phillips
20W-50. Price was my reason for switching. If bought in the gallon jugs the Phillips
oil is
only $1.87 qt. I dump two gallons in at oil change time and then 25 hours later
drain the 6
remaining quarts out. Since I also change the filter at 25 hr intervals an oil
change runs
about 30 bucks. Some of the locals change the filter at 50 hr intervals and the
oil at 25
hrs, just another way to save money.
Gary
Bill VonDane wrote:
>
> What are the ramifications of switching from Aeroshell 20W-50 to Exxon Elite
20W-50?
>
> What other oils are "OK" for use in a Lycosaur? What about automotive synthetic
blends?
>
> -Bill VonDane
> RV-8A ~ 74 hours
> www.vondane.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
Maybe it couldn't see the satellites from the kitchen table?
Actually, an excellent article in an AOPA Air Safety Foundation publication
about GPS says "...vertical accuracy is only about a sixth of its horizontal
accuracy. When WAAS comes online, vertical accuracy will be greatly
improved." In another place in the article, it says that horizontal
accuracy with SA off (normal now) is 100 to 330 feet, so we are talking
about vertical accuracy of maybe 600 to 1980 feet. Of course if it is
consistently off by the same amount during the climb, the rate of climb
numbers would be good.
Terry
Are GPS's that accurate? I haven't used one in the plane much, but I
had a hiking model that I played with a bit before leaving in a canyon
somewhere in southern utah :(. It would show a difference of about 1000'
or so just sitting at the kitchen table. Comparing altitude with topo
maps showed similar errors. The rate of change for the error would be
fairly slow, so useable for rate measurements, but I wouldn't want to try
to avoid mountains based on it. (Another excuse just to fly VFR around
here).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sally and George" <aeronut58(at)hotmail.com> |
I know lots of guys change oil at 25 hour intervals, but my Lycoming manual says
50 hours with a full-flow filter.
Any factual data, or is it all religious beliefs?
George Kilishek
N888GK
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary & Carolyn Zilik
Subject: Re: RV-List: Exxon Elite
None that I know of.. I use to run Aeroshell 15W-50 and have since switched to
Phillips
20W-50. Price was my reason for switching. If bought in the gallon jugs the Phillips
oil is
only $1.87 qt. I dump two gallons in at oil change time and then 25 hours later
drain the 6
remaining quarts out. Since I also change the filter at 25 hr intervals an oil
change runs
about 30 bucks. Some of the locals change the filter at 50 hr intervals and the
oil at 25
hrs, just another way to save money.
Gary
Bill VonDane wrote:
>
> What are the ramifications of switching from Aeroshell 20W-50 to Exxon Elite
20W-50?
>
> What other oils are "OK" for use in a Lycosaur? What about automotive synthetic
blends?
>
> -Bill VonDane
> RV-8A ~ 74 hours
> www.vondane.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kyle Boatright" <kyle.boatright(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Oil Access Door |
You will have interference with the filler neck unless you really cut it
short. If you cut it short, you'll make an even bigger mess when you go to
add oil... Even with a long filler neck, I get a spill most of the time if
I don't use a funnel...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Galati" <rick07x(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RV-List: Oil Access Door
>
>
> After considering many options, I have decided that I would like to spring
> load the oil access door on my RV-6A upper cowl and hinge it from the
> bottom (as opposed to the top of the cowl per drawing) and swing it down
> and inward into the engine compartment. I have the Type S cowl which
already has
> the oil access cutout area already defined on it. Since I have not yet
> hung the engine yet which will be an 0-320-D1A on order, I am wondering
if
> I am opening up to myself possible conflicts with the engine mount or oil
filler
> neck or any other obstruction by swinging the door inward. Without an
> engine in place, it is difficult for me to envision possible conflicts.
> Can I go ahead and do this subassembly work now and get it over with or
should I
> wait? Any thoughts?
>
>
> --- Rick Galati
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George McNutt" <gmcnutt(at)intergate.ca> |
Anyone have avionics advice on the following, - it seems that my Comm radio
is being picked up and re-radiated by the ELT which then shuts down the GPS.
The Avionics Equipment installed is: - UPSAT SL60 GPS/COMM, Narco Nav 122D
VOR/ILS, ACK E-01 ELT.
Antennae locations are: - COMM on bottom under baggage compartment, ELT on
top aft fuselage, GPS antennae just aft of the sliding canopy track and
VOR/ILS cats whiskers on top of vertical stab.
All antennae wires have good separation except the VOR and GPS.
During initial installation tests of the GPS/COMM the ELT might not have
been installed, the GPS/COMM tests went fine. Later, when I did practice ILS
approaches at a local airport using tower frequency 121.0 I noticed that I
would occasionally get a RAIM warning or a "unable to compute position"
message. It finally dawned that I had a harmonic problem bothering the GPS,
ground tests confirmed the problem.
Disconnecting the ELT coax antennae at the ELT seemed to cure problem so I
speculat that the ELT is picking up the COMM radio, then re-radiating the
signal (harmonic) and bothering the GPS. The ELT manufacturer thought it
might be the telephone cable to the remote switch but disconnecting that
wire has no effect on the problem.
I purchased a TED 4-70-54 notch filter yesterday and put it in the ELT
antennae line at the ELT, ground testing seemed to indicate a major
improvement but flight tests today confirm there is still a problem.
My next plan is to try moving the notch filter around, should it be at the
ELT antennae, COMM transmitter or?
On the bright side - we had a clear sky with strong outflow winds today and
the NavAid did a great job of tracking the localizer, 13 degrees of drift,
and light turbulence, nice to see - keep pounding those rivets!
George McNutt
Langley B.C.
6-A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy Compton" <rdcompton(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Refinishing wood props |
Dear fellow Listers:
Anyone know of a shop that does good work, and in a fairly timely fashion,
on refinishing a wood prop? The prop itself is in good shape mechanically,
it's just starting to look a little...ok, maybe more than a little... worse
for wear.
Thanks,
Randy Compton
RV-3A N84VF
Gulf Breeze, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: RE: RV9-List: Drill and dimple vs just dimple (was:New |
Builder introduction) match drilling
Hi Jim,
Thank you for forwarding Scott's unsolicited informative email.
Scott obviously sent it out of his concerns arising out of the recent emails
in the archives.
However it seems to me that the subject and tone of Scott's email might also
have been meant to telegraph Vansaircraft's point of view all the while
avoiding any direct contact etc. Legal circumstances etc.could be involved I
suppose.
His email sets it out well and clear enough for me:
I quote; "Driving dimple dies through the pre-punch holes (even if you
de-burr first) is a very bad idea". Scott then goes on to background that
statement very clearly and concisely.
Again I quote "Please reconsider using the non drilling process, and pass
the word to other builders who may not be considering all of the issues
related to doing so.
It's clear to me that match drilling is firmly stated as a must step that is
clearly indicated in the builder's instruction manual.
In light of the fact that it is also an industry standard Scotts email
should suffice to clear away any confusion created in the past by this at
times confusing thread.
Thank you for putting this information at the list's disposal.
Happy building,
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Sears" <sears(at)searnet.com>
Subject: RV-List: Fw: RE: RV9-List: Drill and dimple vs just dimple (was:New
Builder introduction)
>
> I got this from Scott McDaniels, today. I know it's more of the same;
but,
> it's nice to have a comment from an employee of Van's. I'll make a couple
> of comments below; but, it's good reading material for those of you who
are
> interested in this thread and wanted an opinion from the source.
>
> > Hi Jim, I was cruising the archives of the RV list and saw your post.
> > I am responding to you directly because I am not a current subscriber of
> > the RV-list.
> >
> > The current construction manual does not say you don't have to drill.
If
> > you read the manual for the kit you are helping your friend with I think
> > you will find just the opposite. Driving dimple dies through the
> > prepunch holes (even if you deburr first) is a very bad idea . I'm sure
> > you have noticed that the dimple die pilot doesn't fit in the undersized
> > hole. That means when you drive it home it is stretching the material
to
> > make the hole larger (high probability of cracking) and the other
problem
> > is that without final sizing the hole with a drill you are leaving the
> > ragged interior of the hole which would normally get removed by the
> > drilling process. This means that all of the hole interiors have a
> > surface finish similar to what the outer skin edges have before they
have
> > been smoothed/deburred (more potential for cracks).
> >
> > I assure you that if we at Van's felt it an acceptable practice to just
> > dimple and then rivet the prepunched skins as supplied, we would punch
> > the holes to full size, and we would suggest it in the construction
> > manual.
> >
> > > >
> > Give me a call at work if you need more info.
> >
> > Scott McDaniels
> >
>
> Scott used to be a subscriber; but, he got off some time ago. Actually,
Van
> should have someone checking the list every day to catch things like this
> thread. It would sure help iron out some of our questions and would also
> help them correct problems. I know I've seen some problems that were
still
> active five years after I reported them to Van's. Not good.
>
> You folks know that Van did advertise, or reported in the RVator, that
they
> built the wings without ever picking up a drill. Well, folks, that tells
me
> it's OK to do that if they don't say it's not when they advertise it that
> way. Maybe they did; but, I don't ever remember their doing it. Granted,
> the manual says to match drill; but, that's most likely told in the first
> few sections that a second time builder is not even going to look at. In
> fact, I'm betting a second, or more, timer is most likely going to just
use
> the drawings to get started without ever looking at the manual. I'm just
> using the manual on the -9A to make sure I don't leave any parts out.
> That's it. We just got the finishing kit, today; and, we're ready for it.
>
> As for the dimple set's going through the hole, this is not a forced fit.
> It almost drops through the hole. I can push it in with very little
> pressure. As I said, I could tell no difference between holes/dimples I'd
> match drilled and ones I hadn't. I was using my sense of touch for the
> test, though. Maybe they have a better sense of touch than I do? Sure,
I
> know they've probably done some testing; but, I can say I've never seen
the
> skins crack on any RV, etc.
>
> As for my friend's RV-9A, it's a quick build that has left much of the
> building to Van's. We have done very little of the drilling and dimpling.
> With that, I'm not worried about what dimpling we've done without match
> drilling. As I said, another friend's RV-7A was built with no match
> drilling. I don't think he's going to ground his airplane and redo all of
> the rivet holes. He's going flying as soon as he's sure he's ready for
the
> lift off. I'm expecting it at any time.
>
> I appreciate Scott's input on the subject and have passed it along to you.
> However, we got some good input on both sides of the discussion with
> documentation to back up each side. As for me, I'm not sure what I'll do
on
> my next project. I may match drill. I may not. There is obviously good
> support for each method. You chose the method that gives you the warmest
> fuzzy.
>
> This is important enough to archive, I think.
>
> Jim Sears in KY
> RV-6A N198JS
> EAA Tech Counselor
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
Hi George,
The most accurate way to establish a user defined oil change interval is a
series of lab analysis to establish a recommended average oil change
frequency cycle.
Most seem to settle for the less reliable thumb and finger and color test
taken from the dip stick.
Except in very extreme environmental cases, such as desert or arctic like
conditions etc., it's doubtful that using Lycoming's standard guidelines
will get you in any trouble. More frequent oil changes are optional.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sally and George" <aeronut58(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Exxon Elite
>
> I know lots of guys change oil at 25 hour intervals, but my Lycoming
manual says 50 hours with a full-flow filter.
>
> Any factual data, or is it all religious beliefs?
>
> George Kilishek
> N888GK
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gary & Carolyn Zilik
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Exxon Elite
>
>
> None that I know of.. I use to run Aeroshell 15W-50 and have since
switched to Phillips
> 20W-50. Price was my reason for switching. If bought in the gallon jugs
the Phillips oil is
> only $1.87 qt. I dump two gallons in at oil change time and then 25 hours
later drain the 6
> remaining quarts out. Since I also change the filter at 25 hr intervals an
oil change runs
> about 30 bucks. Some of the locals change the filter at 50 hr intervals
and the oil at 25
> hrs, just another way to save money.
>
> Gary
>
>
> Bill VonDane wrote:
>
> >
> > What are the ramifications of switching from Aeroshell 20W-50 to Exxon
Elite 20W-50?
> >
> > What other oils are "OK" for use in a Lycosaur? What about automotive
synthetic blends?
> >
> > -Bill VonDane
> > RV-8A ~ 74 hours
> > www.vondane.com
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Sipp" <rsipp(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: . and engine horsepower mods. |
To muddy the modification discussion waters further:
I have just recieved Revision 7 (Oct 02) to the Hartzell Propeller Owner's
Manual. Page 1-4 Par 3 (Airframe or Engine Modifications) contains a
discussion regarding modifications.
This full page is essentially a discussion of how propellers are tested with
individual airframe and engine combinations to determine vibration
characteristics prior to certification. It goes on to caution that airframe
or engine modifications must be approved by the propeller manufacturer
before being used on the aircraft. Among the sighted engine modifications
are: "increased compression ratio, increased rpm, altered ignition timing,
electronic ignition, full authority digital electronic controls (fadec), or
tuned induction or exhaust." It is interesting that Unison gained approval
for electronically controlled ignition on numerous certified applications
while Hartzell says the modification must be appoved by them. It seems clear
that Hartzell is going to some lengths to protect themselves and therefor
must have some concerns. Hmmmm.
Certainly, with our experimental certification, we are free to make these
modifications, but as others have said the laws of physics still apply.
There are, no doubt, a substantial number of RV and other experimentals
using engines modified to one degree or another. So far, separated
propeller blades do not seem to be raining down from the sky. The RV
accident in Australia is the only recent one I have heard of. It seems the
difficult question, without specific testing, is which modifications
decrease vibration margins and which do not have a detremental or even
positive effect.
Dick Sipp
RV4 N250DS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Sipp" <rsipp(at)earthlink.net> |
The last two issues of The Aviation Consumer compared the major aviation oil
products for both wear and corrosion protection characteristics.
Bottom line, Exon Elite and Shell multi-grade semi-synthetics were rated
best and nearly equal. They gave a slight edge to the Shell product.
Aviation Consumer cautioned against never using automotive oils in an
aircraft engine.
Exon responed questioning the validity of the test methods used.
Dick Sipp
RV4 N250DS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Bundy" <ebundy(at)velocitus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: vacuum system help |
It sounds like a bad regulator. I know the Rapco "Y" style regulators can't
be rebuilt. I bought the Rapco kit that included the whole system and it
worked fine when I installed it. The next flight it read really low. So I
adjusted the regulator until it was back in the green again. The next
flight it read really high. I finally got tired of playing with it and
called Rapco. They said they thought the regulator was probably the culprit
and sent me another one the next day. It worked great and has worked great
ever since. I asked them if they wanted me to send the old one back and
they told me to just destroy it (so it wouldn't accidentally end up on
another airplane) because it was non-rebuildable.
Mine reads 4.5" at idle and just a smidge over 5" at full throttle. It's
just slightly under 5" at cruise.
Ed Bundy RV6A 500+ hours
Boise, ID
> I've finally adjusted the vacuum regulator so that the suction needle sits
in the middle of the green band at cruise power settings. But the regulator
doesn't seem to be regulating-I get one-to-two inches of vacuum on the
ground at runup and on the peg at eight inches during full power.
> One person told me these "Y" style regulators can be rebuilt and another
told me they couldn't. A Forum search didn't reveal any information.
> Any ideas?
> Scott in Vancouver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randall Henderson" <randallh(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV7 floor stiffeners, ATC fuse holders |
[snip]
> That double floor in the RV-7 should help with a problem I had.
....
I missed that part about the double floor. Thats standard on the -7? How
about that! I guess I was ahead of my time. Floor vibration was in fact the
reason I put in my own double floor in the -6. Lots about this in the
archives but the gist is without the single floor there's a fair bit of HF
vibration going on in that belly skin.The double floor not only helps from a
comfort/fatigue standpoint but also helps avoid that old working rivet
problem. Given that, bigger rivets in the stiffeners may not be needed, but
again I doubt it would hurt to use them.
Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (~400 hrs)
Portland, OR
www.vanshomewing.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randall Henderson" <randallh(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV7 floor stiffeners, ATC fuse holders |
[snip]
> That double floor in the RV-7 should help with a problem I had.
....
I missed that part about the double floor. Thats standard on the -7? How
about that! I guess I was ahead of my time. Floor vibration was in fact the
reason I put in my own double floor in the -6. Lots about this in the
archives but the gist is without the single floor there's a fair bit of HF
vibration going on in that belly skin.The double floor not only helps from a
comfort/fatigue standpoint but also helps avoid that old working rivet
problem. Given that, bigger rivets in the stiffeners may not be needed, but
again I doubt it would hurt to use them.
Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (~400 hrs)
Portland, OR
www.vanshomewing.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jaye and Scott Jackson <jayeandscott(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: vacuum system help |
Not the news I was hoping for but an answer nonetheless.
Thanks, Ed.
Scott in Vancouver
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Bundy" <ebundy(at)velocitus.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: vacuum system help
>
> It sounds like a bad regulator. I know the Rapco "Y" style regulators
can't
> be rebuilt. I bought the Rapco kit that included the whole system and it
> worked fine when I installed it. The next flight it read really low. So
I
> adjusted the regulator until it was back in the green again. The next
> flight it read really high. I finally got tired of playing with it and
> called Rapco. They said they thought the regulator was probably the
culprit
> and sent me another one the next day. It worked great and has worked
great
> ever since. I asked them if they wanted me to send the old one back and
> they told me to just destroy it (so it wouldn't accidentally end up on
> another airplane) because it was non-rebuildable.
>
> Mine reads 4.5" at idle and just a smidge over 5" at full throttle. It's
> just slightly under 5" at cruise.
>
> Ed Bundy RV6A 500+ hours
> Boise, ID
>
> > I've finally adjusted the vacuum regulator so that the suction needle
sits
> in the middle of the green band at cruise power settings. But the
regulator
> doesn't seem to be regulating-I get one-to-two inches of vacuum on the
> ground at runup and on the peg at eight inches during full power.
> > One person told me these "Y" style regulators can be rebuilt and another
> told me they couldn't. A Forum search didn't reveal any information.
> > Any ideas?
> > Scott in Vancouver
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Aronson <aronsond(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | Microair 760 and T-2000 sale |
Listers:
The 760 has been sold.... The Transponder is still available to the
first person with a check. Thanks to all that showed interest. This
list is great and FAST!
Dave Aronson
RV4 N504RV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Phillips <ripsteel(at)edge.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS for Altitude hold (was Rate of climb - flt test) |
This being the case, is there a technical or practical argument against using GPS
altitude data to drive an altitude hold device? Obviously useful course (or
track or heading, but I don't want to start that up again !) data derived from
GPS can keep the nose pointed toward a destination, why not do the same to
control pitch trim? I sure don't possess the technical savvy to attempt such a
device, but those who do might profit from such an offering. I had high hopes
for the EZ-trim but it appears to be experiencing growing pains- any new
developments here?
From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark Phillips
Kevin Horton wrote:
> David is correct that GPS altitude is probably more accurate than
> barometric altitude most of the time, if we are more than a few
> thousand feet above the location where the altimeter setting came
> from. If our altitude is close to the site where the altimeter
> setting came from, the altimeter is likely more accurate than the GPS.
>
> I'm not sure I would agree with the suggestion to time the GPS
> altitude change instead of timing the barometric altitude change
> though. In my experience, GPS altitude fluctuates quite a bit, so
> I'm not sure that timing the rate of change of GPS altitude will lead
> to an accurate result. GPS is much less accurate vertically than it
> is horizontally. I believe that we can get more accurate results by
> timing the rate of barometric altitude change, and then correcting
> for non-standard temperature.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BrownScottA(at)aol.com |
Listers,
Are there any guys out there that will be travelling soon from Fla to or thru
the mid Texas area that wouldn't mind having their gas paid for? My father
and I need a ride to the San Angelo, TX area and are wondering if we could
get a ride there. We will pick up the tab.
Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <wstucklen1(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Low Voltage Warning & Aux Batt management module |
Bob,
Any chance you might make the .DWG file available for the Low Voltage Warning
& Aux Batt management Module. I'd like to include it in my wiring documentation
for the new plane...
Are the PCB's available yet? IF so, where can I acquire one or more?
Fred Stucklen
RV-6A N925RV
2006 Hrs of safe flying!
Working on 2'd RV-6A (Slow Build Version)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oldsfolks(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Refinishing wood props |
I refinished my own Pacesetter wood prop.
I sanded the entire prop evenly over the whole surface, with special
attention to getting down far enough te remove any cracks in the finish,even
if it meant sanding all the prop this much.
I used three even coats of exterior Varithane ,being sure to keep it stirred
all the time. There are ultraviolet inhibitors that must be kept in
suspension to get them on the surface.
I must cure for several days in a warm,dry place before use.
Good Luck,
RV-4 , N1191X , Flying Now
Charleston, Arkansas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Aircraft Technical Book Company" <winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com> |
I had a somewhat similar problem when I first set up. My com antenna is a
copper strip attached to the canopy. The GPS antenna was mounted on top of
the glare shield, only a couple inches from the com strip. Whenever I'd key
the radio, the signal would overload the GPS which would then shut down and
need to re-set itself. Moving the GPS antenna eliminated the problem. I
now have it mounted to the back of the roll bar. Works fine.
Hope that helps
Andy
>
> Anyone have avionics advice on the following, - it seems that my Comm
radio
> is being picked up and re-radiated by the ELT which then shuts down the
GPS.
>
> The Avionics Equipment installed is: - UPSAT SL60 GPS/COMM, Narco Nav 122D
> VOR/ILS, ACK E-01 ELT.
> Antennae locations are: - COMM on bottom under baggage compartment, ELT on
> top aft fuselage, GPS antennae just aft of the sliding canopy track and
> VOR/ILS cats whiskers on top of vertical stab.
> All antennae wires have good separation except the VOR and GPS.
>
> During initial installation tests of the GPS/COMM the ELT might not have
> been installed, the GPS/COMM tests went fine. Later, when I did practice
ILS
> approaches at a local airport using tower frequency 121.0 I noticed that I
> would occasionally get a RAIM warning or a "unable to compute position"
> message. It finally dawned that I had a harmonic problem bothering the
GPS,
> ground tests confirmed the problem.
>
> Disconnecting the ELT coax antennae at the ELT seemed to cure problem so I
> speculat that the ELT is picking up the COMM radio, then re-radiating the
> signal (harmonic) and bothering the GPS. The ELT manufacturer thought it
> might be the telephone cable to the remote switch but disconnecting that
> wire has no effect on the problem.
>
> I purchased a TED 4-70-54 notch filter yesterday and put it in the ELT
> antennae line at the ELT, ground testing seemed to indicate a major
> improvement but flight tests today confirm there is still a problem.
>
> My next plan is to try moving the notch filter around, should it be at the
> ELT antennae, COMM transmitter or?
>
> On the bright side - we had a clear sky with strong outflow winds today
and
> the NavAid did a great job of tracking the localizer, 13 degrees of drift,
> and light turbulence, nice to see - keep pounding those rivets!
>
> George McNutt
> Langley B.C.
> 6-A
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wiethe, Philip (P.J.)" <pwiethe(at)ford.com> |
| Subject: | Re: . and engine horsepower mods. |
FWIW - Do an internet search on "cryogenic treating". Even though this
process has not been approved by the aircraft engine manufacturers (why
would they want to reduce their overhaul business), I am having it done on
my engine parts.
Phil
8A wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SCOTT MORGAN <sdmorgan(at)prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV trip in need |
Good morning Scott,
When did you need a ride to San Angelo and what is your departure point?
Regards,
Scott Morgan
League City, TX
Listers,
Are there any guys out there that will be travelling soon from Fla to or thru
the mid Texas area that wouldn't mind having their gas paid for? My father
and I need a ride to the San Angelo, TX area and are wondering if we could
get a ride there. We will pick up the tab.
Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dwpetrus(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | engine start and taxi test yesterday |
rph(at)lainternet.com, cjohnson(at)jpjcpa.com, SIDLOVE(at)INU.NET,
rentmoor(at)rochelle.net, capetrus(at)hotmail.com, claypetrus(at)msn.com,
PRYORE(at)aol.com, RV-LIST(at)matronics.com, CSELF(at)PLYMOUTH.COM,
DerFlieger(at)aol.com, miketerry(at)kjlo.com, WALLB(at)OIBANK.COM
Cranked the engine on the RV8A airplane for the first time yesterday. After
some minor adjustments I did some taxi testing. The engine ran great and the
airplane handled properly on the ground. It is extremely powerful and will
slide the airplane across the tarmac with the brakes locked at 3/4 throttle.
Still have many details to finish before the first flight, but it should fly
before the end of the year.
Wayne Petrus
RV8A finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
Wed, Oct 30 2002
Diesels In The Sky
By ANN Correspondent Pete Combs
When you think "diesel," you think 18-wheelers. Mercedes that seem to last
forever. Generators. Airplanes.
Airplanes? Yup.
By the end of the year, Superior Air Parts hopes to have FAA certification
for the Centurion TAE 125, a 135-hp diesel engine being retrofitted into
Cessna 172s and Piper PA-28s. The Centurion is built by Thielert TAE, a
manufacturer based in Lichtenstein, Germany, and is already certified by the
JAA in Europe and the LBA in Germany.
"We anticipate FAA approval in the very near future," says Superior's Terry
Wood, as AOPA Expo wrapped up Saturday afternoon.
The Centurion TAE 125 is a 1.7 liter engine that boasts a revolutionary
engine management system. Forget fiddling with the mixture. No more complex
prop controls.
This engine employs FADEC (Full Authority Digital Engine Control). It's all
digital. And every time you go in for an oil change or any other sort of
engine maintenance, the A&P downloads data from the engine's onboard
computer and sends it off in an e-mail to the factory. "There's just one
lever to control the engine," boasts Wood. "There are two CPUs in the engine
for redundancy."
Wood predicts the TAE 125 will last a lot longer than the average 2000 hour
time between overhauls for most normally aspirated aircraft prop engines. In
fact, there is no TBO.
"There is a 2400 hour TBR," says Wood. That's "To Be Replaced." This $20,000
engine is, for all intents and purposes, disposable. Replacing it, Wood
claims, is cheaper than overhauling a $23,000 Lycoming IO-360.
"People are starved for new technology," he says.
"Lycoming and Continental [the two biggest manufacturers of general aviation
piston engines] are based on 1940s technology."
Superior claims there are other big-time advantages to this engine. The
company says there are fewer emissions. Instead of running on 100LL, the
only leaded gasoline still made in America, the TAE 125 runs on diesel fuel
or Jet-A. "The 1.7 runs at 2300 rpm at cruise, versus 2800 rpm [sounds like
a fast cruise to me --ed.] for normally-aspirated engines. There's less
noise," says Wood.
As Aero-News reported last Summer, Diamond Aircraft is planning to offer
Theilert diesels in its forthcoming new DA-42 Twinstar, as well as in its
single-engine four-place aircraft.
FMI: www.superior-air-parts.com
----
Bob Hassel
Email: bob @ hassel-usa.com
URL: http://www.hassel-usa.com
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety - Benjamin Franklin
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV trip in need |
You know I hate to be a party pooper or a rule monger but you guys know that
taking any sort of compensation for a ride is considered to be a very bad
thing by the FAA, mmmmkay? That includes covering gas. If they find out
they'll come down on you like a load of bricks. (This rule was brought
about not by the FAA but by the IRS leaning on the FAA - wouldn't want
anyone making money they don't know about!)
Marcus
----- Original Message -----
From: "SCOTT MORGAN" <sdmorgan(at)prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV trip in need
>
>
> Good morning Scott,
> When did you need a ride to San Angelo and what is your departure point?
> Regards,
> Scott Morgan
> League City, TX
BrownScottA(at)aol.com
>
> Listers,
>
> Are there any guys out there that will be travelling soon from Fla to or
thru
> the mid Texas area that wouldn't mind having their gas paid for? My father
> and I need a ride to the San Angelo, TX area and are wondering if we could
> get a ride there. We will pick up the tab.
>
> Scott
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BrownScottA(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV trip in need |
Marcus,
Sharing expenses is not illegal in any way shape or form. The expense of
owning and operating an RV far exceeds gas. I hardly think that it illegal.
Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV trip in need |
You can share the operating expenses. It doesn't say "how much" share you
have to do. If one person buys 99% of the gas, and the other buys 1% of the
gas, that is still technically "sharing" the operating expenses.
Paul Besing
RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marcus Ward" <marcus@f-64.org>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV trip in need
>
> You know I hate to be a party pooper or a rule monger but you guys know
that
> taking any sort of compensation for a ride is considered to be a very bad
> thing by the FAA, mmmmkay? That includes covering gas. If they find out
> they'll come down on you like a load of bricks. (This rule was brought
> about not by the FAA but by the IRS leaning on the FAA - wouldn't want
> anyone making money they don't know about!)
>
> Marcus
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "SCOTT MORGAN" <sdmorgan(at)prodigy.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: RV trip in need
>
>
> >
> >
> > Good morning Scott,
> > When did you need a ride to San Angelo and what is your departure point?
> > Regards,
> > Scott Morgan
> > League City, TX
> BrownScottA(at)aol.com
> >
> > Listers,
> >
> > Are there any guys out there that will be travelling soon from Fla to or
> thru
> > the mid Texas area that wouldn't mind having their gas paid for? My
father
> > and I need a ride to the San Angelo, TX area and are wondering if we
could
> > get a ride there. We will pick up the tab.
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Armstrong <armstrbc(at)ucsub.colorado.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: RV trip in need |
i talked to a FSDO guy in denver about that. he said that while that is
technically correct, an FAA inspector pursuing a violation is much more
likely to believe you are "sharing expenses" if you split it closer to
evenly. remember, even their own rules are still open to their own
interpretation.
brian armstrong
englewood, co
--
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Paul Besing wrote:
>
> You can share the operating expenses. It doesn't say "how much" share you
> have to do. If one person buys 99% of the gas, and the other buys 1% of the
> gas, that is still technically "sharing" the operating expenses.
>
> Paul Besing
> RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
> http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
> Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
> http://www.kitlog.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Marcus Ward" <marcus@f-64.org>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: RV trip in need
>
>
> >
> > You know I hate to be a party pooper or a rule monger but you guys know
> that
> > taking any sort of compensation for a ride is considered to be a very bad
> > thing by the FAA, mmmmkay? That includes covering gas. If they find out
> > they'll come down on you like a load of bricks. (This rule was brought
> > about not by the FAA but by the IRS leaning on the FAA - wouldn't want
> > anyone making money they don't know about!)
> >
> > Marcus
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "SCOTT MORGAN" <sdmorgan(at)prodigy.net>
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: RV-List: RV trip in need
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Good morning Scott,
> > > When did you need a ride to San Angelo and what is your departure point?
> > > Regards,
> > > Scott Morgan
> > > League City, TX
> > BrownScottA(at)aol.com
> > >
> > > Listers,
> > >
> > > Are there any guys out there that will be travelling soon from Fla to or
> > thru
> > > the mid Texas area that wouldn't mind having their gas paid for? My
> father
> > > and I need a ride to the San Angelo, TX area and are wondering if we
> could
> > > get a ride there. We will pick up the tab.
> > >
> > > Scott
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave von Linsowe" <davevon(at)tir.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A airspeed update |
I would really like to see a list devoted to speed enhancements of the
RV's!!!
I just finished reading "Speed with Economy" by Kent Paser. If you haven't
read it and want to go faster, it's a must read!
Kent started with a stock Mustang II and methodically made improvements that
raised the cruise speed 60mph and lowered his fuel consumption. His O-320
powered Mustang will blow the doors off any RV and nearly match a Rocket.
I realize speed isn't everything, just that if Van was satisfied with the
Playboy none of us would be flying RV's and that all airplanes are
compromises that can be improved upon in one way or another. And if we
share what works and what doesn't we can reduce the cost and time it takes
to dial in the improvements. It took Kent 23 years...
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: RV-List: RV-6A airspeed update
>
> Ok. I did some more concrete tests today. Here is what I came up with:
>
> 2 methods. 3 way and 4 way track for the GPS.
>
> Both came up with 154 KTS Groundspeed. Not as bad as I had thought, but
still about 10 Kts low.
>
> Here is the data on the engine performance:
>
> 8000' 22.7"MAP 2600 RPM 8.2GPH
>
> I suspect there are a few possible drag sources here. Perhaps the
baffles. Haven't checked to see how tight they are. Also, he has the Team
Rocket wheel pants. Don't know any performance differences than Van's wheel
pants. He had a pretty heavy wing, and had to do considerable blocking and
squeezing of the ailerons to make them level. One aileron is up a little,
and one is down a little.
>
> I imagine there could be a seperate RV-List for the different theories on
speed enhancement of RV's. Too many variables to know off hand. Either
way, he has a 177 MPH RV-6A. I'd like to see closer to 185 or so, but not
too far off.
>
> Thanks for all the advice,
>
> Paul Besing
> RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
> http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
> Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
> http://www.kitlog.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Aronson <aronsond(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV trip in need |
Marcus:
I believe you are mistaken. A passenger may "share expenses" with the pilot/AC
owner. This doesn't emply a commercial ticket is necessary. FAR 61.118 (b)
states:
"A private pilot may share the operating expenses of a flight with his
passengers." The gender mistake is taken as He/She.......
Now this is stated out of my FAR that is two years out of date but I haven't
heard anything about a major change in the FAA's position. Is there someone who
can quote from the most recent FAR.
Dave Aronson
RV4 N504RV
Marcus Ward wrote:
>
> You know I hate to be a party pooper or a rule monger but you guys know that
> taking any sort of compensation for a ride is considered to be a very bad
> thing by the FAA, mmmmkay? That includes covering gas. If they find out
> they'll come down on you like a load of bricks. (This rule was brought
> about not by the FAA but by the IRS leaning on the FAA - wouldn't want
> anyone making money they don't know about!)
>
> Marcus
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "SCOTT MORGAN" <sdmorgan(at)prodigy.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: RV trip in need
>
> >
> >
> > Good morning Scott,
> > When did you need a ride to San Angelo and what is your departure point?
> > Regards,
> > Scott Morgan
> > League City, TX
> BrownScottA(at)aol.com
> >
> > Listers,
> >
> > Are there any guys out there that will be travelling soon from Fla to or
> thru
> > the mid Texas area that wouldn't mind having their gas paid for? My father
> > and I need a ride to the San Angelo, TX area and are wondering if we could
> > get a ride there. We will pick up the tab.
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Camille Hawthorne" <cammie(at)sunvalley.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV trip in need |
I believe the verbage in the regs says "prorata share". In other words, the
pilot must pay at least his/her percentage of the cost. ie. three occupants,
33%. That can mean rental cost or, if the aircraft is privately owned, fuel,
oil, or airport expenses only. (FAR 61.113 (c)) I would be very careful with
this one. If anything unusual happened it might read like one of those
reports where all the dirt pertaining to the accident aircraft/pilot is
reported even though a totally unrelated maintenance issue was the cause.
There are other forms of compensation, I'd explore those options. (Need a
new part?)
Now, if the passengers are associated with a federal election campaign,
that's a different story......(FAR 91.321)
Sorry to bring this up, but I've heard lots of stories.
Cammie Hawthorne, CFII
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV trip in need
>
> You can share the operating expenses. It doesn't say "how much" share you
> have to do. If one person buys 99% of the gas, and the other buys 1% of
the
> gas, that is still technically "sharing" the operating expenses.
>
> Paul Besing
> RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
> http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
> Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
> http://www.kitlog.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Marcus Ward" <marcus@f-64.org>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: RV trip in need
>
>
> >
> > You know I hate to be a party pooper or a rule monger but you guys know
> that
> > taking any sort of compensation for a ride is considered to be a very
bad
> > thing by the FAA, mmmmkay? That includes covering gas. If they find
out
> > they'll come down on you like a load of bricks. (This rule was brought
> > about not by the FAA but by the IRS leaning on the FAA - wouldn't want
> > anyone making money they don't know about!)
> >
> > Marcus
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "SCOTT MORGAN" <sdmorgan(at)prodigy.net>
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: RV-List: RV trip in need
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Good morning Scott,
> > > When did you need a ride to San Angelo and what is your departure
point?
> > > Regards,
> > > Scott Morgan
> > > League City, TX
> > BrownScottA(at)aol.com
> > >
> > > Listers,
> > >
> > > Are there any guys out there that will be travelling soon from Fla to
or
> > thru
> > > the mid Texas area that wouldn't mind having their gas paid for? My
> father
> > > and I need a ride to the San Angelo, TX area and are wondering if we
> could
> > > get a ride there. We will pick up the tab.
> > >
> > > Scott
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Aircraft Technical Book Company" <winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com> |
A local non-profit group has an annual silent auction as a fund raiser.
Recently I was asked to donate a sight seeing ride in my -6A to be bid on as
part of the auction. The highest bidder makes the donation to the
non-profit, and I then give the ride. I receive no compensation or shared
expenses, either from the winning bidder or from the non-profit.
Is this legal?
Andy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Camille Hawthorne" <cammie(at)sunvalley.net> |
| Subject: | Need flaring tool |
Anyone have a 37 degree flaring tool for sale? Or even better, one that I
can borrow in the Boise area?
Please respond offline.
Cammie
cammie(at)sunvalley.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: legal ride??? |
It would be in Canada. I suspect the US regs are similar enough in
spirit, if not in wording. Nobody is "making money" at this, someone is
making a donation to a non-profit society, and you're taking a friend
for a ride.
Now, if the non-profit group was called "Andy's RV-6A Club" and had only
one member (Andy), that might be a little questionable... 8-)
-RB4
Aircraft Technical Book Company wrote:
>
> A local non-profit group has an annual silent auction as a fund raiser.
> Recently I was asked to donate a sight seeing ride in my -6A to be bid on as
> part of the auction. The highest bidder makes the donation to the
> non-profit, and I then give the ride. I receive no compensation or shared
> expenses, either from the winning bidder or from the non-profit.
>
> Is this legal?
>
> Andy
________________________________________________________________________________
Yes, I believe there is an exception for this arrangement - there better be, I've
been doing it this way!
Todd Wenzel
Delafield, WI USA
RV-8AQB - Finish Kit
N900TW - Reserved
TWenzel@Heartland-Software.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Aircraft Technical Book Company [mailto:winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com]
Subject: RV-List: legal ride???
-->
A local non-profit group has an annual silent auction as a fund raiser. Recently
I was asked to donate a sight seeing ride in my -6A to be bid on as part of
the auction. The highest bidder makes the donation to the non-profit, and I then
give the ride. I receive no compensation or shared expenses, either from
the winning bidder or from the non-profit.
Is this legal?
Andy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner(at)wans.net> |
| Subject: | Re: legal ride??? |
Andy,
YES, Absolutely!!
You are a private pilot giving a ride without being compensated for it in
any way, shape or form!
(The resulting RV-Grin is not considered compensation)
Konrad
----- Original Message -----
From: "Aircraft Technical Book Company" <winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com>
Subject: RV-List: legal ride???
>
> A local non-profit group has an annual silent auction as a fund raiser.
> Recently I was asked to donate a sight seeing ride in my -6A to be bid on
as
> part of the auction. The highest bidder makes the donation to the
> non-profit, and I then give the ride. I receive no compensation or shared
> expenses, either from the winning bidder or from the non-profit.
>
> Is this legal?
>
> Andy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joshua Siler" <joshs(at)ninatek.com> |
I believe FAR 61.118 allows it explicitly.
Regards,
Josh
http://www.PilotDaily.com
Daily news for general aviation pilots.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Aircraft
Technical Book Company
Subject: RV-List: legal ride???
A local non-profit group has an annual silent auction as a fund raiser.
Recently I was asked to donate a sight seeing ride in my -6A to be bid
on as
part of the auction. The highest bidder makes the donation to the
non-profit, and I then give the ride. I receive no compensation or
shared
expenses, either from the winning bidder or from the non-profit.
Is this legal?
Andy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Helms" <jhelms(at)i1.net> |
| Subject: | Re: legal ride??? |
Are you really asking if it is LEGAL? I don't see how it would not be... I
think what you may actually be asking is would it covered under your
insurance policy.
If so, you would have to ask your insurance agent specifically for an
answer. I am not aware of any companies that would exclude coverage for a
ride like that. So long as you are not being compensated for it.
Under most policies, you could even accept $ for gas and oil and the like
under most policies (must be equally shared by occupants.) The only thing
most policies exclude would be fixed costs (maintenance/engine fund, hangar
costs, insurance, etc.)
John "JT" Helms
Branch Manager
NationAir Insurance Agency
Pleasure and Business Branch
----- Original Message -----
From: "Todd Wenzel" <TWenzel@heartland-software.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: legal ride???
<TWenzel@Heartland-Software.com>
Yes, I believe there is an exception for this arrangement - there better be,
I've been doing it this way!
Todd Wenzel
Delafield, WI USA
RV-8AQB - Finish Kit
N900TW - Reserved
TWenzel@Heartland-Software.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Aircraft Technical Book Company [mailto:winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com]
Subject: RV-List: legal ride???
-->
A local non-profit group has an annual silent auction as a fund raiser.
Recently I was asked to donate a sight seeing ride in my -6A to be bid on as
part of the auction. The highest bidder makes the donation to the
non-profit, and I then give the ride. I receive no compensation or shared
expenses, either from the winning bidder or from the non-profit.
Is this legal?
Andy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joshua Siler" <joshs(at)ninatek.com> |
| Subject: | RE: legal ride?? |
You're right. Good catch - I found it referenced from Angel Flight here
http://www.angelflight.org/articles/af00_010b.html , as well as a couple
other links (search for 61.118 on google). Must be typo.
Josh
http://www.PilotDaily.com
Daily news for general aviation pilots.
-----Original Message-----
From: Aircraft Technical Book Company [mailto:winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com]
Subject: legal ride??
What is 61.118? According to the 2003 FARs, that number is still
blank - reserved for future rules.
Andy
I believe FAR 61.118 allows it explicitly.
Regards,
Josh
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MeangreenRV4(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 10/29/2002 11:51:51 AM Pacific Standard Time,
n8wv(at)hotmail.com writes:
>
> What are the ramifications of switching from Aeroshell 20W-50 to Exxon
> Elite 20W-50?
>
> What other oils are "OK" for use in a Lycosaur? What about automotive
> synthetic blends?
>
> -Bill VonDane
> RV-8A ~ 74 hours
> www.vondane.com
>
I use Aero Shell 50 wt plus and I haven't used the multi viscosity oils such
as Exxon or Shell but from what I have been told by the ones that have used
it, unless you live were it gets very cold the multi viscosity oils will
turn a perfectly good engine into a great boat anchor. This is from pilots
that fly every week. I would call a Lycoming engine shop and ask them their
opinion.
Hope this helps
Tim Barnes
Meangreen RV-4
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com> |
Sounds similar to Young Eagles to me....
-
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 Todd Wenzel
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 11:49 AM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV-List: legal ride???
>
>
> --> <TWenzel@Heartland-Software.com>
>
> Yes, I believe there is an exception for this arrangement -
> there better be, I've been doing it this way!
>
> Todd Wenzel
> Delafield, WI USA
> RV-8AQB - Finish Kit
> N900TW - Reserved
> TWenzel@Heartland-Software.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aircraft Technical Book Company
> [mailto:winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com]
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: legal ride???
>
>
> -->
>
> A local non-profit group has an annual silent auction as a
> fund raiser. Recently I was asked to donate a sight seeing
> ride in my -6A to be bid on as part of the auction. The
> highest bidder makes the donation to the non-profit, and I
> then give the ride. I receive no compensation or shared
> expenses, either from the winning bidder or from the non-profit.
>
> Is this legal?
>
> Andy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "zilik(at)direcpc.com" <zilik(at)direcpc.com> |
Wow, this is really good information. No wonder I climb so slow, I got a
boat anchor in the front and I did'nt know it.
Gary
>I use Aero Shell 50 wt plus and I haven't used the multi viscosity oils
such
>as Exxon or Shell but from what I have been told by the ones that have
used
>it, unless you live were it gets very cold the multi viscosity oils will
>turn a perfectly good engine into a great boat anchor. This is from pilots
>that fly every week. I would call a Lycoming engine shop and ask them
their
>opinion.
>Hope this helps
>Tim Barnes
>Meangreen RV-4
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
Most aviation oils don't use detergents, they use dispersants, which are
very different. The idea is to keep things suspended so that it either gets
trapped by the filter or tossed during oil changes, rather than sticking to
the inside.
Common detergents found in automotive oils are ash based which, when
introduced into the combustion chamber in small amounts, increase detonation
= very bad.
I only have my experience's from overhauling numerous automotive and
aircraft engines where thin multi grade oils were used extensively. The rate
of camshaft/lifter wear was far higher in these engines. Now that said,
these engines were operating exclusively in the south south west west where
it is normally 80 and above.
In colder climates the multigrades are critical for the warmup phase. Best
case to make TBO is to use single weight oils with a pre-heater and a
pre-oiler, and fly it for at least one hour every day ;{)
But do be aware, Multigrade oils are the specific viscosity of the lower
number. They then have viscosity index enhancers that cause to oil to thin
at a lower rate with increases in temperature. So at operating temperatures
they "act" like the higher viscosity. This is an act that usually works ok
at best, until the oil is old, either time wise or use wise.
The idea of using 25 hr vs 50 hr is based upon the fact that oil really
begins to get contaminted and certain features such as dispersants,
anti-corrosive agents, and viscosity index enhancers begin to break down
after about 25 hours, and are really failing after 50 hours. This is
accelerated greatly in those areas where ambient temps are higher, and oil
temps above 200-210 are common. So, do you want to change your oil before
its worn out, or after its worn out.
Additionally many folks don't collect 25 hours in 3 months so they ought not
to be using the 50 hours "engine time" criteria for oil changes.
Also, changing the filter, or the oil without the other is a waste of both
given the cost and time is so low to just do it all every time.
On a final note, although there is a lot of evidence that most engine wear
occurs during start/warmup, there is now also a lot of evidence that
micro-corrosion due to contaminants, including moisture, plays a major
factor in this. The simplest way to remove those contaminants is to drain
them out as often as you can afford.
W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy Compton" <rdcompton(at)earthlink.net> |
----- Original Message -----
From: <MeangreenRV4(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Exxon Elite
> I use Aero Shell 50 wt plus and I haven't used the multi viscosity oils
such
> as Exxon or Shell but from what I have been told by the ones that have
used
> it, unless you live were it gets very cold the multi viscosity oils will
> turn a perfectly good engine into a great boat anchor. This is from pilots
> that fly every week. I would call a Lycoming engine shop and ask them
their
> opinion.
>
> Hope this helps
>
> Tim Barnes
> Meangreen RV-4
Interesting, but now I'm really confused.
Just had my engine overhauled, and ECI recommends Phillips X/C 20W-50, says
it's good from break-in to TBO. And since it's completely mineral based, if
you have to have some work done on a cylinder in the future you won't need
to run a "break-in" oil.
They also say it gives just as good a coating protection from corrosion on
the innards while the engine just sits as 50W, but it flows quicker on
start-up and thereby reduces wear as compared to a single weight.
So, I think I'll follow ECI's recommendation and just keep my fingers
crossed.
Randy Compton
RV-3A N84VF
Gulf Breeze, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorto1537(at)rogers.com> |
>
>
>Anyone have avionics advice on the following, - it seems that my Comm radio
>is being picked up and re-radiated by the ELT which then shuts down the GPS.
>
>The Avionics Equipment installed is: - UPSAT SL60 GPS/COMM, Narco Nav 122D
>VOR/ILS, ACK E-01 ELT.
>Antennae locations are: - COMM on bottom under baggage compartment, ELT on
>top aft fuselage, GPS antennae just aft of the sliding canopy track and
>VOR/ILS cats whiskers on top of vertical stab.
>All antennae wires have good separation except the VOR and GPS.
>
>During initial installation tests of the GPS/COMM the ELT might not have
>been installed, the GPS/COMM tests went fine. Later, when I did practice ILS
>approaches at a local airport using tower frequency 121.0 I noticed that I
>would occasionally get a RAIM warning or a "unable to compute position"
>message. It finally dawned that I had a harmonic problem bothering the GPS,
>ground tests confirmed the problem.
>
>Disconnecting the ELT coax antennae at the ELT seemed to cure problem so I
>speculat that the ELT is picking up the COMM radio, then re-radiating the
>signal (harmonic) and bothering the GPS. The ELT manufacturer thought it
>might be the telephone cable to the remote switch but disconnecting that
>wire has no effect on the problem.
>
>I purchased a TED 4-70-54 notch filter yesterday and put it in the ELT
>antennae line at the ELT, ground testing seemed to indicate a major
>improvement but flight tests today confirm there is still a problem.
>
>My next plan is to try moving the notch filter around, should it be at the
>ELT antennae, COMM transmitter or?
>
>On the bright side - we had a clear sky with strong outflow winds today and
>the NavAid did a great job of tracking the localizer, 13 degrees of drift,
>and light turbulence, nice to see - keep pounding those rivets!
>
>George McNutt
>Langley B.C.
>6-A
>
George,
I used to get involved in flight tests of IFR GPS installations a few
years ago. I saw several cases where there was interference from the
COM to the GPS. My recollection (which could be wrong) is that a
couple of these problem cases were fixed by improving the bonding
between the COM antenna and the air frame (i.e. make sure there is a
very low resistance electrical bond between the antenna and the
skin). I don't understand how this would help - I am simply saying
that I recall that it was useful.
Let us know how you get this resolved.
Good luck,
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
Ottawa, Canada
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Schrimmer <mschrimmer(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | RV7 floor stiffeners |
I missed that part about the double floor. Thats standard on the -7?
Does the 9A fuselage also have the double floor or is it just part of the 7
to handle the extra horsepower?
Mark Schrimmer
RV-9A Wings
Irvine, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Schrimmer <mschrimmer(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | Drill and dimple vs just dimple |
You folks know that Van did advertise, or reported in the RVator, that they
built the wings without ever picking up a drill. Well, folks, that tells me
it's OK to do that if they don't say it's not when they advertise it that
way. Maybe they did; but, I don't ever remember their doing it.
Jim,
I believe the story explained that the reason a prototype set of RV-9A wings
was built without using a drill was to test the accuracy of the pre-punched
holes. The same story also recommended that builders use a drill to minimize
the possibility of cracks forming.
Mark Schrimmer
RV-9A Wings
Irvine, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Schrimmer <mschrimmer(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | Calibrated airspeed (Was RV-6A airspeed problem) |
the number read off the ASI face is the "indicated a/s", which has to
be corrected for both instrument error and pitot and (mostly) static port
position error to get "calibrated A/S"
Jim,
What is the procedure for calibrating an airspeed indicator? Is this
typically done during the first few test flights?
Mark Schrimmer
RV-9A Wings
Irvine, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorto1537(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS for Altitude hold (was Rate of climb - flt test) |
Two issues to wrestle with:
1. ATC wants us at particular barometric altitudes, which will not be
the same as actual altitudes. So if we wanted to fly at 6,000 ft on
our altimeter, we need to understand that the GPS altitude will
differ from that. But, it should be practical to level off at the
desired altitude using the altimeter, then tell your GPS altitude
hold gizmo to memorize the current GPS altitude and hold it. The
difference between GPS altitude and barometric altitude would slowly
vary with time, as the satellite geometry changed (which would make
the GPS altitude move up and down) and you travelled to areas with
different local pressures and temperatures (which would make the
barometric altitude move up and down). So you might have to reset
the GPS altitude hold reference once in a while.
2. There is a certain amount of noise in the GPS altitude calculation
- i.e. even if the actual altitude is constant, the GPS altitude may
move up and down a bit. The amount of noise probably varies with
different GPS units, satellite geometry, etc. I did an experiment
with my hand held GPS a couple of nights ago - I went out in my
driveway and stood there for a few minutes and watched the GPS
altitude display. It varied in a range of about 30 ft total. If the
altitude hold function was trying to keep the GPS altitude constant
the aircraft would be moving up and down over a 30 ft range which
might not be comfortable. I don't know whether a more expensive GPS
box would have less noise in its GPS altitude or not. So this
altitude noise may or may not be a problem.
For extra points you could mount GPS antennae on the nose and tail,
and use differential GPS techniques to develop an attitude hold
function. The attitude information could be used to damp the system
response to noise in the GPS altitude, and attitude hold would be a
nice extra piece of functionality anyway. The use of differential
techniques to calculate attitude has been done in a research setting,
but I don't think anyone was developed an actual product that works
this way. See:
http://einstein.stanford.edu/gps/PDF/att_and_displ_4ga_akb96.pdf
Kevin Horton
>
>This being the case, is there a technical or practical argument
>against using GPS
>altitude data to drive an altitude hold device? Obviously useful course (or
>track or heading, but I don't want to start that up again !) data
>derived from
>GPS can keep the nose pointed toward a destination, why not do the same to
>control pitch trim? I sure don't possess the technical savvy to
>attempt such a
>device, but those who do might profit from such an offering. I had high hopes
>for the EZ-trim but it appears to be experiencing growing pains- any new
>developments here?
>
>From The PossumWorks in TN
>Mark Phillips
>
>Kevin Horton wrote:
>
>> David is correct that GPS altitude is probably more accurate than
>> barometric altitude most of the time, if we are more than a few
>> thousand feet above the location where the altimeter setting came
>> from. If our altitude is close to the site where the altimeter
>> setting came from, the altimeter is likely more accurate than the GPS.
>>
>> I'm not sure I would agree with the suggestion to time the GPS
>> altitude change instead of timing the barometric altitude change
>> though. In my experience, GPS altitude fluctuates quite a bit, so
>> I'm not sure that timing the rate of change of GPS altitude will lead
>> to an accurate result. GPS is much less accurate vertically than it
>> is horizontally. I believe that we can get more accurate results by
>> timing the rate of barometric altitude change, and then correcting
> > for non-standard temperature.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorto1537(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Calibrated airspeed (Was RV-6A airspeed problem) |
>
>the number read off the ASI face is the "indicated a/s", which has to
>be corrected for both instrument error and pitot and (mostly) static port
>position error to get "calibrated A/S"
>
>
>Jim,
>
>What is the procedure for calibrating an airspeed indicator? Is this
>typically done during the first few test flights?
>
>Mark Schrimmer
>RV-9A Wings
>Irvine, CA
>
Mark,
I've got quite a bit of info on the Flight Test Links part of my web
site that deals with this issue. The old version of that page is at:
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/ftlinks.html
I'm working on a new version of that page at:
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/links.php
See the Flight Test - Pitot-Static Cals section. In particular see:
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rvlinks/ssec.html
Short version follows:
The total error in the airspeed indication is the sum of a number of errors:
1. instrument error - the errors due to imperfections in the instrument itself.
2. static source position error - the static source is not located in
a position that has the same pressure as the ambient pressure. This
error will also affect the altimeter.
3. pitot source position error - the pitot source may be poorly
located so that it is not sensing the correct pitot pressure.
4. errors due to leaks in the pitot or static system.
The leaks should be found by a good leak check.
Most people who do flight testing to determine the airspeed error
don't really care about figuring out how much of the airspeed error
is due to each source - they only want to know what the total amount
of error is. This is probably OK for VFR flying, but for IFR I would
want to know what the static source error was because this would
affect the accuracy of the altimeter, which could be an issue during
approaches. Also, if you every have to change the airspeed indicator
you would want to do the flight tests again because you wouldn't know
how the instrument error of the new ASI compared to the old one.
It is possible to use a water manometer to determine the instrument
error. See:
http://www.eaa1000.av.org/technicl/instcal/instcal.htm
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rvlinks/asi.zip
The pitot source error is normally negligible. Once you know the
total error from flight tests, and the instrument error, you can
calculate the static source error, which lets you figure out the
effect on the altimeter.
If anyone wants to do the proper testing I am prepared to work with
them to help them do a good test and to analyze the data.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
Ottawa, Canada
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BrownScottA(at)aol.com |
Guys, this is ridiculous...sorry that I asked.
Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Drill and dimple vs just dimple |
My recollection from the first time this discussion came up: The
article to which you refer had Van talking about the first RV-7 or -9
wing ever made. ie. The prototype. They didn't bother with the
drilling for two reasons: One, to save time (which everyone seems to
want to save now), and two, because the wing was only going to be used
for static load tests, which I believe it was. It was never intended to
be used on an aircraft.
One of Van's engineers has sent an email that was copied to the forum,
that says explicitly that "thou shalt drill and deburr before dimpling."
I know that "did you match drill the holes before riveting?" will become
one of the questions on my checklist if I ever buy a finished RV from
someone. If the answer is "no," I won't be buying.
-RB4
Mark Schrimmer wrote:
>
> You folks know that Van did advertise, or reported in the RVator, that they
> built the wings without ever picking up a drill. Well, folks, that tells me
> it's OK to do that if they don't say it's not when they advertise it that
> way. Maybe they did; but, I don't ever remember their doing it.
>
> Jim,
>
> I believe the story explained that the reason a prototype set of RV-9A wings
> was built without using a drill was to test the accuracy of the pre-punched
> holes. The same story also recommended that builders use a drill to minimize
> the possibility of cracks forming.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James E. Clark" <jclark(at)conterra.com> |
| Subject: | Drill and dimple vs just dimple |
I don't have the article before me but didn't they also imply that they were
doing a "worst-case build" for wing testing? Or was that another wing that
they tested using "less than optimal" constuction techniques?
Again, just asking for clarification.
James
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Mark Schrimmer
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 6:18 PM
> To: rv-list-matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: Drill and dimple vs just dimple
>
>
> You folks know that Van did advertise, or reported in the RVator,
> that they
> built the wings without ever picking up a drill. Well, folks,
> that tells me
> it's OK to do that if they don't say it's not when they advertise it that
> way. Maybe they did; but, I don't ever remember their doing it.
>
> Jim,
>
> I believe the story explained that the reason a prototype set of
> RV-9A wings
> was built without using a drill was to test the accuracy of the
> pre-punched
> holes. The same story also recommended that builders use a drill
> to minimize
> the possibility of cracks forming.
>
> Mark Schrimmer
> RV-9A Wings
> Irvine, CA
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Schrimmer <mschrimmer(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | Re: legal ride??? |
I was wrong.
The FAR that were listed are correct and they state standard and that means
factory certified. Experimental is a special airworthiness.
Further you must be a commercial rated pilot AND in a drug testing program.
The EAA in order to fly Young Eagles got a waiver from the drug testing
requirement and cannot accept donations.
Cy,
This appears to mean you can't give a Young Eagles ride in a homebuilt and
you have to have a commercial license. Is this correct, or did I miss
something?
Mark Schrimmer
RV-9A Wings
Irvine, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | adrianchick <adrianchick(at)comcast.net> |
what is the best way to deal with dings from the rivet gun on the top wing
surface? Filler? What kind?
Adrian Chick
rv6a finished wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com> |
| Subject: | Re: legal ride??? |
My chapter's YE person told me I just need to be an EAA member and a
current pilot to give YE rides. No mention of Comm. rating or drug
tests.....
-
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 Mark
> Schrimmer
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 7:42 PM
> To: rv-list-matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: Re: legal ride???
>
>
>
> I was wrong.
>
> The FAR that were listed are correct and they state standard
> and that means factory certified. Experimental is a special
> airworthiness.
>
> Further you must be a commercial rated pilot AND in a drug
> testing program. The EAA in order to fly Young Eagles got a
> waiver from the drug testing requirement and cannot accept donations.
>
> Cy,
>
> This appears to mean you can't give a Young Eagles ride in a
> homebuilt and you have to have a commercial license. Is this
> correct, or did I miss something?
>
> Mark Schrimmer
> RV-9A Wings
> Irvine, CA
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: legal ride??? |
No you are mixing apples and oranges.
Since there aren't any donations, Young Eagles doesn't require a commercial
nor standard certification. The EAA has a waiver for the drug testing
program which would have been required for anyone giving rides.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Schrimmer" <mschrimmer(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: RV-List: Re: legal ride???
>
> I was wrong.
>
> The FAR that were listed are correct and they state standard and that
means
> factory certified. Experimental is a special airworthiness.
>
> Further you must be a commercial rated pilot AND in a drug testing
program.
> The EAA in order to fly Young Eagles got a waiver from the drug testing
> requirement and cannot accept donations.
>
> Cy,
>
> This appears to mean you can't give a Young Eagles ride in a homebuilt and
> you have to have a commercial license. Is this correct, or did I miss
> something?
>
> Mark Schrimmer
> RV-9A Wings
> Irvine, CA
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com> |
| Subject: | Control stick, S-bend |
I'm thinking of putting an 'S' bend in the forward stick. I though I
saw a diagram of the dimensions on where to place the bends, but I don't
remember where. Anybody know?
I assume the powder-coat will chip off during the bending....?
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: legal ride??? |
In a message dated 10/30/02 5:56:15 PM Eastern Standard Time,
cgalley(at)qcbc.org writes:
>
> The FAR that were listed are correct and they state standard and that means
> factory certified. Experimental is a special airworthiness.
>
> Further you must be a commercial rated pilot AND in a drug testing program.
> The EAA in order to fly Young Eagles got a waiver from the drug testing
> requirement and cannot accept donations.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Helms" <jhelms(at)i1.net>
>
Do you guys have anything better to do???....how about building airplanes. I
have never seen so much BS on any topic!
Scott Morrow
RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
Used stuff called Super=Fil...Two part,light and fluffy and sands out
(feathers) nicely.. Got mine locally (seattle) but wicks or aircraft spruce
has it.. Also works for filling fiberglass parts and enclosing the ends of
rudder and elevator openings when used with a fiberglassed in plate. hope
this helps
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary" <rv9er(at)3rivers.net> |
| Subject: | floor stiffeners |
Amit.....one thing that Van's suggests on the floor stiffeners is to be sure and
dimple rather than machine countersink those holes. Due to the thickness of
the floor skin, some have opted to machine countersink, but Van's discourages
it.
The other thing I did on my -9A is to install sound deading insulation in the floor.
With a thin carpet on top, it comes out about even with the tops of the
stiffeners. Hopefully this will cut down on the drumming of the floor. We'll
see when I fly.
You might ask the techs at Van's whether they have seen any smoking rivets on the
7's or 9's.
Good idea on drilling the nutplate holes in the stiffeners before riveting the
floor. That would be easier.
Gary
From: "Amit Dagan" <amitdagan(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: RV-List: RV7 floor stiffeners, ATC fuse holders
Listers,
In the past (looked it up in the archives) there were many cases of smoking rivets
in the forward floor area, the ones that hold the floor to the firewall and
stiffeners.
It was attributed to the engine vibrations, and several methods of stiffening the
area even more were raised, including using more rivets, larger (1/8") rivets,
both, more stiffeners, double floor boards etc.
In the RV7, I am not sure that this issue has been adressed, as one still needs
to use 3/32" rivets, same number of stiffeners etc. I DO see that the rivet spacing
is ~1" and not 1.25", and that there is a double floor in the center of
the cabin (between the two inboard stiffeners).
1. Is that enough ?
2. If the answer to 1. is no, has anyone else done anything about this ?
What ? Should I add more stiffeners ? double the floor ?
On a totally different subject, if you like the fuse block idea used by the "Aero
Electric Connection", check out the "new products" at
http://www.pegasusautoracing.com/newproducts.htm
and scroll down to Fuse Blocks for ATC Style Fuses.
They have good prices for single quantities.
And another thing:
Heads up, when you are done drilling the stiffeners to the cabin floor, you might
want to cleco them to the firewall and F-704 bulkhead, and with the floor off
drill the 4 holes for the center section cover (This is the "double floor"
between the two middle stiffeners) with the cover in place of course, for the
nutplates that go there later. I think it is very easy to reach then, rather
then wait untill the floor is riveted.
Ah yes, and don't forget to make and drill and dimple the air-vent support angles
(0.032") to the side skins before you disassemble the forward fuse.
Amit.
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill VonDane" <n8wv(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Control stick, S-bend |
Larry...
I have some info on my website, not sure if it will help though...
http://www.vondane.com/tt&i/index.htm#bentcontrolsticks
-Bill VonDane
RV-8A ~ 74 hrs
www.vondane.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com>
Subject: RV-List: Control stick, S-bend
I'm thinking of putting an 'S' bend in the forward stick. I though I
saw a diagram of the dimensions on where to place the bends, but I don't
remember where. Anybody know?
I assume the powder-coat will chip off during the bending....?
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Amit Dagan" <amitdagan(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | double floor for RV-7 |
[snip]
That double floor in the RV-7 should help with a problem I had.
....
I missed that part about the double floor. Thats standard on the -7? How
about that!
[snip]
Sorry if I wasn't clear:
Only the section between the two inboard floor stiffener is "doubled".
This is done by a cover that runs from the fuel selector box, covering the fuel
line, to the fire wall, where the auxiliary fuel pump is located.
The cover is attached with screws and nutplates to the firewall recess, floor stiffeners
and fuel selector valve box.
Hope this clarifies it.
Amit.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oldsfolks(at)aol.com |
On our RV-4 I used "Evercoat 'RAGE" auto body microlite filler on all the
little metal dings. It has microballons to make it light and works well on
all the fibreglas filling . It sands nice and is really handy to get at your
local auto parts store. At about 28 bucks a gallon , maybe cheaper too.
RV-4 , N1191X , Flying Now
Charleston, Arkansas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob W M Shipley" <Rob(at)RobsGlass.com> |
| Subject: | Boston tea party musings .... |
RV-List message posted by: "Marcus Ward"
"In 1773, Britain's East India Company was sitting on large stocks of tea
that it could not sell in England."
How do you like taxation now there is representation? Heh! Heh!
Rob ( the expat )
Rob W M Shipley.
RV9A fuselage. N919RV resvd.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fuel Cap Deal Instructions |
| From: | "Brandon Dixon" <dixon(at)cs.ua.edu> |
Sorry that you were disappointed. I got my caps back, and I was
pleased. Maybe your "trophy shop" could have done the job just as well.
I was glad to send mine to a shop that I KNEW would do the job right. I
didn't have to explain to Steve Davis what I needed, or get him to do it
again on new caps after a screw up.
You can polish the caps to make them look like the photo on Paul's
website, just a little elbow grease.
Brandon Dixon
RV-7A
Finish Kit (Well ... almost)
-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne R. Couture [mailto:commando@cox-internet.com]
Subject: Re: RV-List: Fuel Cap Deal Instructions
<commando@cox-internet.com>
Hey folks,
Just an update on the fuel caps I received back from Steve this
week.
Unfortunately, I was not impressed. They did not look anything like the
picture Paul posted to this list a few weeks ago and more like something
I
could have had done at a local trophy shop for a lot less money.
I enjoy this list mostly for the information it provides on
suppliers
for RV related items. I just don't think this was such a great deal.
Sorry
Steve.
Wayne
RV-8a
working on cabin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bobby Hester <bhester(at)apex.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Cap Deal Instructions |
"Wayne R. Couture" wrote:
>
> Hey folks,
> Just an update on the fuel caps I received back from Steve this week.
> Unfortunately, I was not impressed. They did not look anything like the
> picture Paul posted to this list a few weeks ago and more like something I
> could have had done at a local trophy shop for a lot less money.
> I enjoy this list mostly for the information it provides on suppliers
> for RV related items. I just don't think this was such a great deal. Sorry
> Steve.
>
> Wayne
> RV-8a
> working on cabin
Mine looked just like the picture he posted except for the text being turned the
right direction, like Paul said.
I had mine done back in the spring and love the way they look, and the cost was
just right! I'll try to remember to put a picture on my site so everyone can
decide for their self.
Here is the link Paul had in his message:
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing/wings.htm it looks as though he may have
colored the letters to make them more visable.
Can you show us a picture of your caps, so we can see how they are different?
--
Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
RV7A Working on the wings :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike" <mike(at)bmnellis.com> |
| Subject: | Fuel Cap Deal Instructions |
I, too, am happy with how mine came out. Take a look at this picture to see
how you can highlight the text to improve (in my opinion) the look of the
caps. I will polish these caps later.
Mike Nellis
RV-6 Fuselage N699BM
1947 Stinson 108-2 NC9666K
http://bmnellis.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bobby Hester
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 11:16 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Fuel Cap Deal Instructions
>
>
> "Wayne R. Couture" wrote:
>
> <commando@cox-internet.com>
> >
> > Hey folks,
> > Just an update on the fuel caps I received back from Steve
> this week.
> > Unfortunately, I was not impressed. They did not look anything like the
> > picture Paul posted to this list a few weeks ago and more like
> something I
> > could have had done at a local trophy shop for a lot less money.
> > I enjoy this list mostly for the information it provides
> on suppliers
> > for RV related items. I just don't think this was such a great
> deal. Sorry
> > Steve.
> >
> > Wayne
> > RV-8a
> > working on cabin
>
> Mine looked just like the picture he posted except for the text
> being turned the
> right direction, like Paul said.
>
> I had mine done back in the spring and love the way they look,
> and the cost was
> just right! I'll try to remember to put a picture on my site so
> everyone can
> decide for their self.
>
> Here is the link Paul had in his message:
> http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing/wings.htm it looks as though he may have
> colored the letters to make them more visable.
>
> Can you show us a picture of your caps, so we can see how they
> are different?
>
>
> --
> Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
> Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
> RV7A Working on the wings :-)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Oke <wjoke(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Calibrated airspeed (Was RV-6A airspeed problem) |
Mark;
If you take your ASI to an instrument lab they will hook it up to a very
accurate manometer and apply xx.xxx inches of water (or mercury) pressure to
it and convert this pressure to an airspeed reading. See Kevin Horton's
response - he has a nice page with all the mathematical intricacies of this
worked out.
The "quick and dirty" way would be to take a second ASI and tee the pitot
side into your ASI and use some method of applying pressure (squeeze bulb,
rolled up tubing, etc.) and see if the resulting readings agree. If they do,
good. If not, then you know one or the other is bad and further
investigation is needed. It is probably a good idea to do this before a
first flight to make sure that your ASI is in the ball park - especially if
you are going to base your flying technique on information (such as approach
speeds) from other builders.
Doing an inflight calibration to assess the pitot and static errors is
actually a long drawn out process and can take a long series of flights to
accomplish. Sometimes a "tower fly-by" is done - the idea being that if your
fly precisely level with a feature (tower) of a known altitude, the
altimeter should read the known altitude - if it doesn't (and the altimeter
has been checked and precisely calibrated on it own) then the error is
assumed to be in the static system. Alternatively, fly formation with
another aircraft with a known altimeter - static error and see if the
readings agree. Sometimes a "trailing bomb" (actually a weighted body with a
static line running back to the aircraft) is towed inflight - the idea being
that the test static source will be well clear of the aircraft's pressure
flow field and be an accurate static pressure value. Any difference between
the "bomb" static pressure and the aircraft's static pressure should then be
due to static error in the aircraft.
Often a test aircraft will be set up with a very long pitot tube extending
well forward of the aircraft into presumably undisturbed air to get a "good"
pitot pressure to compare with the aircraft's pitot system.
Kevin also suggests a GPS based method to sort out the difference between
CAS and IAS which is what most of us are interested in. One this is known
and ASI error is known then you can work back and figure out the static
pressure error for various airspeeds (and weights - often the error is
dependant on angle of attack which changes with weight, etc. not a big
factor for RV size aircraft though).
Jim Oke
RV-6A
Winnipeg, MB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Schrimmer" <mschrimmer(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: RV-List: Calibrated airspeed (Was RV-6A airspeed problem)
>
> the number read off the ASI face is the "indicated a/s", which has to
> be corrected for both instrument error and pitot and (mostly) static port
> position error to get "calibrated A/S"
>
>
> Jim,
>
> What is the procedure for calibrating an airspeed indicator? Is this
> typically done during the first few test flights?
>
> Mark Schrimmer
> RV-9A Wings
> Irvine, CA
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JRWillJR(at)aol.com |
Modern synthetic oils and auto oils in general whether synthetic or not are
not formulated to suspend lead in leaded fuels. The lead will precipitate out
and form harmful deposits. Mobil discovered that even in a supposed Aviation
formulation of Mobil 1 that this would happen. Synthetic oils could be
engineered that could work with leaded fuels but the market is so small and
the demise of 100LL being on the horizon that it would not be profitable.
What if you run only unleaded auto fuel? well, I suspect Mobil 1 would work
just fine but since these engines cost so much dinero and the consequences of
failure so dramatic and the need to have a reliable engine to out manuver
patroling F16's in No Fly Zones I would stick with an Aviation product. Do
Not Archive. JR
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Sears" <sears(at)searnet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Drill and dimple vs just dimple |
> I know that "did you match drill the holes before riveting?" will become
> one of the questions on my checklist if I ever buy a finished RV from
> someone. If the answer is "no," I won't be buying.
>
> -RB4
Since I know of two airplanes that have either not been match drilled, or
havn't been totally match drilled, I'll have two examples to form my own
conclusions from. As for not buying one for that reason, I'm not sure I'd
be that picky. I'd be more worried about such things as systems
installations, engine installations, etc. I've seen some of that kind of
thing that worries me a lot more than holes not being match drilled. In
fact, some of those installations can get downright scarey. Some have
killed some of our members. Now, if I see cracks forming all over the
place, that's a different matter. With the low number of hours we put on
our aircraft per year, I don't think that's going to be an issue.
Jim Sears in KY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorto1537(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Calibrated airspeed (Was RV-6A airspeed problem) |
>
>the number read off the ASI face is the "indicated a/s", which has to
>be corrected for both instrument error and pitot and (mostly) static port
>position error to get "calibrated A/S"
>
>
>Jim,
>
>What is the procedure for calibrating an airspeed indicator? Is this
>typically done during the first few test flights?
>
>Mark Schrimmer
>RV-9A Wings
>Irvine, CA
>
Second attempt - the first one still hasn't shown up after 11 hours.
Mark,
I've got quite a bit of info on the Flight Test Links part of my web
site that deals with this issue. The old version of that page is at:
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/ftlinks.html
I'm working on a new version of that page at:
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/links.php
See the Flight Test - Pitot-Static Cals section. In particular see:
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rvlinks/ssec.html
Short version follows:
The total error in the airspeed indication is the sum of a number of errors:
1. instrument error - the errors due to imperfections in the instrument itself.
2. static source position error - the static source is not located in
a position that has the same pressure as the ambient pressure. This
error will also affect the altimeter.
3. pitot source position error - the pitot source may be poorly
located so that it is not sensing the correct pitot pressure.
4. errors due to leaks in the pitot or static system.
The leaks should be found by a good leak check.
Most people who do flight testing to determine the airspeed error
don't really care about figuring out how much of the airspeed error
is due to each source - they only want to know what the total amount
of error is. This is probably OK for VFR flying, but for IFR I would
want to know what the static source error was because this would
affect the accuracy of the altimeter, which could be an issue during
approaches. Also, if you every have to change the airspeed indicator
you would want to do the flight tests again because you wouldn't know
how the instrument error of the new ASI compared to the old one.
It is possible to use a water manometer to determine the instrument
error. See:
http://www.eaa1000.av.org/technicl/instcal/instcal.htm
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rvlinks/asi.zip
The pitot source error is normally negligible. Once you know the
total error from flight tests, and the instrument error, you can
calculate the static source error, which lets you figure out the
effect on the altimeter.
If anyone wants to do the proper testing I am prepared to work with
them to help them do a good test and to analyze the data.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
Ottawa, Canada
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Gray <dgra1233(at)bigpond.net.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Calibrated airspeed (Was RV-6A airspeed problem) |
Kevin Horton wrote:
>
> If anyone wants to do the proper testing I am prepared to work with
> them to help them do a good test and to analyze the data.
>
Hey guys this is a generous offer and a golden opportunity to have a highly
qualified test pilot advise and crunch your flight test numbers. If we were in
the commercial world you might buy an engine for what this offer is worth.
Thanks Kevin,
Doug Gray
RV6 Fuselage, goes on forever...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorto1537(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS for Altitude hold (was Rate of climb - flt test) |
Second attempt - the first one still hasn't shown up after 11 hours.
Two issues to wrestle with:
1. ATC wants us at particular barometric altitudes, which will not be
the same as actual altitudes. So if we wanted to fly at 6,000 ft on
our altimeter, we need to understand that the GPS altitude will
differ from that. But, it should be practical to level off at the
desired altitude using the altimeter, then tell your GPS altitude
hold gizmo to memorize the current GPS altitude and hold it. The
difference between GPS altitude and barometric altitude would slowly
vary with time, as the satellite geometry changed (which would make
the GPS altitude move up and down) and you travelled to areas with
different local pressures and temperatures (which would make the
barometric altitude move up and down). So you might have to reset
the GPS altitude hold reference once in a while.
2. There is a certain amount of noise in the GPS altitude calculation
- i.e. even if the actual altitude is constant, the GPS altitude may
move up and down a bit. The amount of noise probably varies with
different GPS units, satellite geometry, etc. I did an experiment
with my hand held GPS a couple of nights ago - I went out in my
driveway and stood there for a few minutes and watched the GPS
altitude display. It varied in a range of about 30 ft total. If the
altitude hold function was trying to keep the GPS altitude constant
the aircraft would be moving up and down over a 30 ft range which
might not be comfortable. I don't know whether a more expensive GPS
box would have less noise in its GPS altitude or not. So this
altitude noise may or may not be a problem.
For extra points you could mount GPS antennae on the nose and tail,
and use differential GPS techniques to develop an attitude hold
function. The attitude information could be used to damp the system
response to noise in the GPS altitude, and attitude hold would be a
nice extra piece of functionality anyway. The use of differential
techniques to calculate attitude has been done in a research setting,
but I don't think anyone was developed an actual product that works
this way. See:
http://einstein.stanford.edu/gps/PDF/att_and_displ_4ga_akb96.pdf
Kevin Horton
>
>This being the case, is there a technical or practical argument
>against using GPS
>altitude data to drive an altitude hold device? Obviously useful course (or
>track or heading, but I don't want to start that up again !) data
>derived from
>GPS can keep the nose pointed toward a destination, why not do the same to
>control pitch trim? I sure don't possess the technical savvy to
>attempt such a
>device, but those who do might profit from such an offering. I had high hopes
>for the EZ-trim but it appears to be experiencing growing pains- any new
>developments here?
>
>From The PossumWorks in TN
>Mark Phillips
>
>Kevin Horton wrote:
>
>> David is correct that GPS altitude is probably more accurate than
>> barometric altitude most of the time, if we are more than a few
>> thousand feet above the location where the altimeter setting came
>> from. If our altitude is close to the site where the altimeter
>> setting came from, the altimeter is likely more accurate than the GPS.
>>
>> I'm not sure I would agree with the suggestion to time the GPS
>> altitude change instead of timing the barometric altitude change
>> though. In my experience, GPS altitude fluctuates quite a bit, so
>> I'm not sure that timing the rate of change of GPS altitude will lead
>> to an accurate result. GPS is much less accurate vertically than it
>> is horizontally. I believe that we can get more accurate results by
>> timing the rate of barometric altitude change, and then correcting
> > for non-standard temperature.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Nolan" <JimNolan(at)kconline.com> |
Just a note to express my satisfaction with the TruTrak Digitrak
Autopilot. It will track anything that my gps has in it and it doesn't care
if it's 180 degrees in back of you. It'll turn around and be locked on
within a couple miles going at a speed of 160. It's great for Radar vectors
to an approach because it has the magnetic headings stored in memory. ATC
tells me what direction to take, I lean on the direction button, stop it
when I get to the direction they want and go back to reading my approach
plate until they give me another heading.
You never re-level the airplane because that's stored in memory also. I
turn mine on after liftoff while in a turn and it'll keep a standard rate
turn going, then, level the wings and intercept the radial to my gps
destination. It's also nice to know that with the gps off, the heading
displayed in track mode of the autopilot is the actual magnetic heading
you're on. It's easier to see the readout on the autopilot than it is to see
the direction the whiskey compass has.
I have a 2001 APOLLO, so on a VOR approach, you have to be close to the
published inbound coarse for the autopilot to lock on. If you get too far
off coarse the GPS will quit delivering information to the autopilot. The
GPS automatically decreases course width from 5mi. to 1mi to .3mi. as you
get further into the approach. If you stray out of these coarse widths the
GPS information to the autopilot is cut off. I guess they don't want you
shooting an approach to a particular airport if your not there. There isn't
anything wrong with the autopilot, it's just that the signal to it is gone,
so it reverts back to track mode. It's really a good thing that it does.
Another benefit was the ability to talk to Jim and Chuck at Trutak and
have them be patient with me while I was learning how to use the Digitrak.
It's not that the Digitrak is hard to understand, it's just that as I get
older I need more pictures to help me understand things.
Hope this has been helpful to those considering an autopilot.
Jim Nolan
N444JN
Warsaw, In.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Garrett Bray" <braygarrett(at)hotmail.com> |
One way to avoid dings in the top wing skins is to rivet them on first using
the back riveting method, then rivet the bottom skins on by the "reach
inside with bucking bar until your arm bleeds" method. The dings caused are
then not visible except to very short people. Thats how I did it. Also there
is probably some info in the archives about the method to do the last
inboard ribs without using pop rivets. It worked well for me.
Gary Bray
RV-6
Get a speedy connection with MSN Broadband. Join now!
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gannon, Terence" <Terence.Gannon(at)trican.ca> |
While it is just possible that I haven't had all my synapses connecting
for the last couple of years, and somehow the RV-10 has been kitted and
completed by a few people already while I was 'sleeping', how is that
anybody was planning on giving Scott **and his father** a ride anyway?
I suspect that if you manage to get through the whether or not it's
LEGAL to give him a ride, and whether or not you're INSURED to give him
a ride, you might just get nailed on a bad weight and balance
calculation, or, at the very least, the lack of one seatbelt. Just a
thought...;-)
Cheers...
Terry in Calgary
RV-6 S/N 24414
"Fuselage Inventory"
-----Original Message-----
From: BrownScottA(at)aol.com [mailto:BrownScottA(at)aol.com]
Subject: RV-List: RV trip in need
Listers,
Are there any guys out there that will be travelling soon from Fla to or
thru
the mid Texas area that wouldn't mind having their gas paid for? My
father
and I need a ride to the San Angelo, TX area and are wondering if we
could
get a ride there. We will pick up the tab.
Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Cap Deal Instructions |
Strange that you didn't like them. Last time we did them everyone was
really impressed! Also, most trophy shops can't engrave with letters like
that. They only engrave little brass plates with very shallow engraving,
almost like an electric pencil type engraver you can get at Wal Mart.
As for the letters are concerned, here is how it is done:
Take some laquer paint and paint over and inside the letters. Then take
some laquer thinner and soak it into the top of an old phone book. Rub the
cap around flat on the phone book, and you will be left with paint inside
the letters.
Or, if this sounds to messy for you, get a black china pencil (grease
pencil) and color them in. Then use alcohol to rub off the excess. We used
to do this in the aerospace industry with launch control panels and such.
Grease pencil stays inside the letters without a problem.
As far as polishing is concerned, I used a micro mesh kit. You can get it
from spruce. Basically it is steps of sandpaper starting at 1200 and going
to 6000. A little polishing compound and you are done. The only problem
with this process is, this alluminum will oxidize. It will not stay shiny
for too long. It will dull over time.
The other option is you could paint them, then fill with black grease
pencil. This looks really nice, actually.
I'm sorry if it appeared that Steve was going to polish and paint them. I
guess I should have been more clear that he was just engraving them. It's
only $24, so I don't know what else should be done for that price.
Paul Besing
RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bobby Hester" <bhester(at)apex.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Fuel Cap Deal Instructions
>
> "Wayne R. Couture" wrote:
>
<commando@cox-internet.com>
> >
> > Hey folks,
> > Just an update on the fuel caps I received back from Steve this
week.
> > Unfortunately, I was not impressed. They did not look anything like the
> > picture Paul posted to this list a few weeks ago and more like something
I
> > could have had done at a local trophy shop for a lot less money.
> > I enjoy this list mostly for the information it provides on
suppliers
> > for RV related items. I just don't think this was such a great deal.
Sorry
> > Steve.
> >
> > Wayne
> > RV-8a
> > working on cabin
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Calibrated airspeed (Was RV-6A airspeed problem) |
Kevin:
I am in the process right now trying to calibrate my two airspeed indicators
... one from Vans and the Rky Mtn uEncoder. I used the blood pressure bulb
method last night and I am getting two different readings.
At 35 in Hg on the blood pressure gauge I am getting 126 knots on the Vans
gauge and 162 knots on the uEncoder. Not sure why I am getting such a big
difference.
Len Leggette RV-8A
N901LL (res)
Greensboro, N.C.
Flying !!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | rivet dings and tricks |
| From: | "Frazier, Vincent A" <VFrazier(at)usi.edu> |
********what is the best way to deal with dings from the rivet gun on the top wing
surface? Filler? What kind?***********
Gosh, I'd really like to hop into the discussion about whether Scott is gonna be
somebody's Prison Daisy for reimbursing somebody for gas, but I think I'll address
Adrian's question instead.
If the skin is simply recessed a bit from normal riveting, don't be afraid to use
a block of wood (or long rivet set) and a hammer to tap it out from the back
side. You can really improve the looks of your bird with this simple technique.
If you've made a real live dent and it's just in the skin, but not over a flange,
you can dolly it out a bit with your bucking bar and flush rivet set. If the
dent is still offensive, drill a hole right in the middle of it where the dent
is worst, take a scrap of .063 and match drill and countersink it, rivet it
behind the dent. Use 2 rivets if necessary. The 063 will hold the skin flat
and the dimpling operation will soak up some of the dent. Obviously this fix
is not for the faint of heart, but it works.
If somebody questions you later about the unusual placement of those rivets...
tell them that those rivets hold the " altitude compensation solenoid for your
beta version flight data transducing oscillator" or just beat them senseless.
;-)
A neat trick to help make really flat rivet lines is to put a thin layer of JBWeld
between your skins, cleco every hole, and drive the rivets after it sets.
The JBWeld (3M makes a similar product) acts as a perfect shim to suck up any
misfitting between the sheets. I can sense lots of flames coming.... no, I'm
not advocating using JBWeld to make up for stupid building mistakes, only as
a device to make properly fitting parts fit better.
Filler... no thanks. I worked hard to put those dents there and there they will
stay!
Vince
F-1H Rocket
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve J Hurlbut" <sjhdcl(at)kingston.net> |
| Subject: | Firewall fuel fittings |
Is there any concern mounting aluminum fuel fittings on the firewall?
I know this is the standard in most aircraft and I've done it before on
another aircraft but
the stainless steel firewall holes are very sharp and may cause some
chaffing
on the fuel fittings. Any concerns from others here?
Steve Hurlbut
RV7A
Subaru
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jordan, Mel" <jordan_mel(at)ti.com> |
| Subject: | N6JX first flight |
I am very pleased to report that RV-6A N6JX flew for the first time this
morning at KTUS (Tucson). N6JX is a QB kit, 60289, and the first builders
log entry was on Oct. 15, 1998, so four years and 2K hours later, I have an
airplane!! The plane flew great, no heavy wing, rudder half ball out at
cruise, absolutely no squawks on the plane, systems or engine. After a
post flight inspection, it will be ready to go again. N6JX has a new Lyc.
O-360-A1A from Van's equipped with airflow performance Fuel Injection.
Hartzell CS prop, Garmin GNC300XL and GTX327 radios, full gyro panel and
Digitrak autopilot. She doesn't have paint or wheel pants yet, so speed
was not yet up to par (145kts indicated), but she climbed like a rocket in
the cool desert morning. What a kick. The tower was great and let me
orbit right over the airport for the half hour duration of the flight. Did
slow flight with half and full flaps and generally checked out handling,
which was delightful. Landing was just like Mike Seager taught me, simple
and easy. Everything was simply perfect! I had a lot of help from fellow
builders here; Greg Johnson (RV-6), Gene Gaddis (RV-8), Alan Thomas (RV-6),
and Paul Conn (Fairchild 24).
It was definitely worth the time and effort. This has to be one of the best
feelings a person can experience, having this machine you built take flight
and carry you into such a beautiful blue sky. I think I'll go do it again
after lunch!
Mel Jordan
RV-6A N6JX
Tucson, AZ
n6jx(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
rv7-list(at)matronics.com, rv8-list(at)matronics.com, rv9-list(at)matronics.com,
rv-list(at)matronics.com
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | How To Wire a "Dual-Rate" Electric Trim System... |
Hi Listers,
I've recently received a number of requests from builders regarding how to
wire up a "dual-rate" system for their electric trim installation. The
concept is that in cruse configuration the trim speed would be slow and
during flaps down configuration the trim speed would be fast.
I've draw up a schematic diagram that shows how to accomplish this using
two Matronics Governor MkIII units, a 12v relay, and an extra switch.
With the flaps up, the "fast" Governor MkIII is switched in, and when the
flaps are down, the "slow" Governor MkIII is switched in. I would
recommend using the highest quality, sealed relay available for this
installation.
Here is the Dual-Rate PDF document:
http://www.matronics.com/GovernorMkIII/DualRate-GovernorMkIII-Installation.pdf
and here is the Governor MkIII website:
http://www.matronics.com/GovernorMkIII
If you have any questions on the wiring diagram, feel free to email me
directly at: dralle(at)matronics.com
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
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
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: N6JX first flight |
Congrats Mel .. know how you feel ... I just flew my 8A last Sunday !!!
Len Leggette RV-8A
N901LL (res)
Greensboro, N.C.
Flying !!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | P M Condon <pcondon(at)mitre.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Cap Deal Instructions (Bad Work) |
My caps were done poorly also. Looks like a grade-school helper did it.
Took a long time to get done and didn't look professional. Poor letter
edge defination, inconsistant depth, vise/tooling marks and poor letter
allignment. Better then using a electric buzz pencil, but not by much.
Very disappointed.
<commando@cox-internet.com>
Hey folks,
Just an update on the fuel caps I received back from Steve this
week.
Unfortunately, I was not impressed. They did not look anything like the
picture Paul posted to this list a few weeks ago and more like something
I
could have had done at a local trophy shop for a lot less money.
I enjoy this list mostly for the information it provides on
suppliers
for RV related items. I just don't think this was such a great deal.
Sorry
Steve.
Wayne
RV-8a
working on cabin
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary" <rv9er(at)3rivers.net> |
They also tested that wing to destruction in the shop. No flight time was ever
put on it.
Gary
From: Mark Schrimmer <mschrimmer(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: RV-List: Drill and dimple vs just dimple
You folks know that Van did advertise, or reported in the RVator, that they
built the wings without ever picking up a drill. Well, folks, that tells me
it's OK to do that if they don't say it's not when they advertise it that
way. Maybe they did; but, I don't ever remember their doing it.
Jim,
I believe the story explained that the reason a prototype set of RV-9A wings
was built without using a drill was to test the accuracy of the pre-punched
holes. The same story also recommended that builders use a drill to minimize
the possibility of cracks forming.
Mark Schrimmer
RV-9A Wings
---
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Fuel cap labelling regs? |
Can somebody point me in the right direction...I'm looking for the FAR that
states exactly how fuel filler caps should be labelled or placarded, and all
I could find was mention in Part 23 that the word "Avgas" and the minimum
acceptable octane must be specified. But I'm not sure if this applies to
amateur-built aircraft. Plus, it looks like Steve Davis' engraving doesn't
even say "Avgas" on it (I was basing that off this photo for reference:
http://bmnellis.com/images/DCP01408.JPG).
With all the confusion over the quality of having fuel caps engraved, I'm
wondering if it's 100% required that the fuel caps be labelled in some form.
I assume so, but what's the reg, and what's the simplest way of
accomplishing this?
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D (fuselage)
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cole, Ed" <Ed_Cole(at)maximhq.com> |
| Subject: | Fuel Cap Deal Instructions (Bad Work) |
As I recall, the last time Steve did these he also painted the lettering.
This was a couple of years ago, max. Mine looked great when they were
returned.
I believe the price was the same at the time.
Ed Cole
RV6A N2169D Flying
RV6A N648RV Finishng
> -----Original Message-----
> From: P M Condon [SMTP:pcondon(at)mitre.org]
> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 11:05 AM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Fuel Cap Deal Instructions (Bad Work)
>
>
>
> My caps were done poorly also. Looks like a grade-school helper did it.
> Took a long time to get done and didn't look professional. Poor letter
> edge defination, inconsistant depth, vise/tooling marks and poor letter
> allignment. Better then using a electric buzz pencil, but not by much.
> Very disappointed.
>
>
> <commando@cox-internet.com>
>
> Hey folks,
> Just an update on the fuel caps I received back from Steve this
> week.
> Unfortunately, I was not impressed. They did not look anything like the
> picture Paul posted to this list a few weeks ago and more like something
> I
> could have had done at a local trophy shop for a lot less money.
> I enjoy this list mostly for the information it provides on
> suppliers
> for RV related items. I just don't think this was such a great deal.
> Sorry
> Steve.
>
> Wayne
> RV-8a
> working on cabin
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>
>
>
>
Maxim Home Page:
http://www.maxim-ic.com
Products Page:
http://www.maxim-ic.com/MaximProducts/products.htm
New Products:
http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/new_products.cfm
Datasheets:
http://dbserv.maxim-ic.com/l_datasheet3.cfm
The information contained in this message is confidential
and may be legally privileged. The message is intended
solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination,
or reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Phillips <ripsteel(at)edge.net> |
| Subject: | Brake Fluid Reservoir Loc. on a tip-up |
Howdy List-
Anyone installed their reservoir on the rear of the subpanel so it can
be accessed when the canopy is open? I see one less hole in the
firewall, more space on firewall, easier to check level and detect leaks
(why is my sock wet?) & the vent could be run off with a little tube to
somewhere... Other pros & cons, please!
From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel cap labelling regs? |
Dan,
From a legal standpoint FAR Part 23 does not apply, BUT....your local
inspector/DAR should not/will not issue your aircraft an Airworthiness
Certificate unless somewhere in the near vicinity of the fuel filler cap
(not necessarily on the cap itself) is the word "AVGAS", the minimum fuel
octane and the tanks fuel capacity, in gallons. The closest FARs for this
are 23.1557(c)(1), and parts of 23.1555(d) in that most inspectors will
accept the fuel quantity to be marked near the fuel filler instead of at the
fuel selector, as stated in the FAR.
Mike Robertson
Das Fed
RV-8A, 6A and 9A
>From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: ,
>Subject: RV-List: Fuel cap labelling regs?
>Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 11:48:05 -0800
>
>
>Can somebody point me in the right direction...I'm looking for the FAR that
>states exactly how fuel filler caps should be labelled or placarded, and
>all
>I could find was mention in Part 23 that the word "Avgas" and the minimum
>acceptable octane must be specified. But I'm not sure if this applies to
>amateur-built aircraft. Plus, it looks like Steve Davis' engraving doesn't
>even say "Avgas" on it (I was basing that off this photo for reference:
>http://bmnellis.com/images/DCP01408.JPG).
>
>With all the confusion over the quality of having fuel caps engraved, I'm
>wondering if it's 100% required that the fuel caps be labelled in some
>form.
>I assume so, but what's the reg, and what's the simplest way of
>accomplishing this?
>
>)_( Dan
>RV-7 N714D (fuselage)
>http://www.rvproject.com
>
>
Choose an Internet access plan right for you -- try MSN!
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorto1537(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Calibrated airspeed (Was RV-6A airspeed problem) |
>
>Kevin:
>
>I am in the process right now trying to calibrate my two airspeed indicators
>... one from Vans and the Rky Mtn uEncoder. I used the blood pressure bulb
>method last night and I am getting two different readings.
>
>At 35 in Hg on the blood pressure gauge I am getting 126 knots on the Vans
>gauge and 162 knots on the uEncoder. Not sure why I am getting such a big
>difference.
>
>Len Leggette RV-8A
Len,
We may have a units problem here. 35 inches of mercury would be over
700 knots. 35 mm of mercury would be about 168 kt. 162 kt would be
about 32.4 in Hg. I'm not sure how accurate the gauge on the blood
pressure cuff is, so it is pretty hard to say whether the uEncoder is
accurate or not, but the Van's gauge certainly appears suspect.
I think you would get better accuracy from a water manometer, as long
as you can be sure to get all the little air bubbles out.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (cowling, wing tip lights)
Ottawa, Canada
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
> I believe the story explained that the reason a prototype set of RV-9A wings
> was built without using a drill was to test the accuracy of the pre-punched
> holes. The same story also recommended that builders use a drill to minimize
> the possibility of cracks forming.
That is exactly the story I got from an engineer at Van's who was involved in
the testing.
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
-6 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorto1537(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS Accuracy Discussion - skip if you don't care to |
read about it
>
>>it's a matter of satellite constellation geometry. all the
>>satellites are above the horizon. that means that position measurement in
>>the vertical is really only measured from one side.
>
>True, but what's the probablility that *all* the satellites are near the
>horizon? Low. Actually, you stand a better chance of picking up the
>satellites from ~30 elev up to 90, giving you little horiz vs verical
>preference in my thinking.
>
>Lets assume one's directly overhead two are 60 and two are 30 above the
>horizon, which is not that untypical from what I've observed. In this case,
>the horizontal position would be almost as accurate as the vertical.
>
>Maybe I'm not seeing it, but I believe it's just basic geometry. In a very
>simplified manner of discussion, you have 100% of the vertical component
>from the 90, 86% of the 2 at 60 and 50% of the 2 at 30. I know, I
>know... your measuring time differences, not distances. But it just seems
>to me that horizontal is no more accurate than vertical, on average.
>
>if I'm still missing the boat, send me a link to something I can read.
>
>Bryan Jones -8
>Pearland, Texas
>
Bryan,
First, there is no question that the vertical accuracy of GPS is
worse than the horizontal accuracy. There have been many, many
studies which collected GPS data, and they always clearly show that
this is the case. So there is no point in trying to argue otherwise.
GPS accuracy data:
One years worth of data of horizontal and vertical accuracy:
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/dmilbert/handacc/accur.htm
More accuracy data - another GPS receiver:
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/dmilbert/handacc/accur2.htm
But, it is always instructive to try to understand why something is
the way it is. I am not confident enough of my understanding of the
issues vis-a-vis vertical vs horizontal accuracy to want to try to
offer a better explanation than zilik(at)direcpc.com posted. So, I
goggled the net, and found the following for your reading pleasure:
Relatively simple explanation of why vertical accuracy is less than horizontal:
http://www.eomonline.com/Common/Archives/May97/gilbert.htm
How GPS accuracy is described:
http://www.romdas.com/technical/gps/gps-acc.htm
More than you ever wanted to know about GPS:
http://www.edu-observatory.org/gps/gps.html
Happy reading,
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (baffles, induction air, oil cooler)
Ottawa, Canada
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike" <mike(at)bmnellis.com> |
| Subject: | Fuel cap labeling regs? |
Hi Mike,
What are the Subaru guys going to do who don't run AVGAS in their auto
engines?
Mike Nellis
RV-6 Fuselage N699BM
1947 Stinson 108-2 NC9666K
http://bmnellis.com
>
> Dan,
>
> From a legal standpoint FAR Part 23 does not apply, BUT....your local
> inspector/DAR should not/will not issue your aircraft an Airworthiness
> Certificate unless somewhere in the near vicinity of the fuel filler cap
> (not necessarily on the cap itself) is the word "AVGAS", the minimum fuel
> octane and the tanks fuel capacity, in gallons. The closest FARs
> for this
> are 23.1557(c)(1), and parts of 23.1555(d) in that most inspectors will
> accept the fuel quantity to be marked near the fuel filler
> instead of at the
> fuel selector, as stated in the FAR.
>
> Mike Robertson
> Das Fed
> RV-8A, 6A and 9A
>
>
> >From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
> >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> >To: ,
> >Subject: RV-List: Fuel cap labelling regs?
> >Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 11:48:05 -0800
> >
> >
> >Can somebody point me in the right direction...I'm looking for
> the FAR that
> >states exactly how fuel filler caps should be labelled or placarded, and
> >all
> >I could find was mention in Part 23 that the word "Avgas" and the minimum
> >acceptable octane must be specified. But I'm not sure if this applies to
> >amateur-built aircraft. Plus, it looks like Steve Davis'
> engraving doesn't
> >even say "Avgas" on it (I was basing that off this photo for reference:
> >http://bmnellis.com/images/DCP01408.JPG).
> >
> >With all the confusion over the quality of having fuel caps engraved, I'm
> >wondering if it's 100% required that the fuel caps be labelled in some
> >form.
> >I assume so, but what's the reg, and what's the simplest way of
> >accomplishing this?
> >
> >)_( Dan
> >RV-7 N714D (fuselage)
> >http://www.rvproject.com
> >
> >
>
>
> Choose an Internet access plan right for you -- try MSN!
> http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Brake Fluid Reservoir Loc. on a tip-up |
Never thought about that, but sure makes sense to me. Just be real careful
when filling or back bleeding the brakes so you don't ruin your interior!
Also, brake fluid is a no-no around paint, so be sure the area isn't
painted, or you are just real careful with the brake fluid.
Paul Besing
RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Phillips" <ripsteel(at)edge.net>
Subject: RV-List: Brake Fluid Reservoir Loc. on a tip-up
>
> Howdy List-
>
> Anyone installed their reservoir on the rear of the subpanel so it can
> be accessed when the canopy is open? I see one less hole in the
> firewall, more space on firewall, easier to check level and detect leaks
> (why is my sock wet?) & the vent could be run off with a little tube to
> somewhere... Other pros & cons, please!
>
> >From The PossumWorks in TN
> Mark
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Brake Fluid Reservoir Loc. on a tip-up |
Hi Mark,
I'm trying to remember who it was that was offering a valve that was claimed
to be effective for those negative G situations.
Maybe someone out there will know.
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Phillips" <ripsteel(at)edge.net>
Subject: RV-List: Brake Fluid Reservoir Loc. on a tip-up
>
> Howdy List-
>
> Anyone installed their reservoir on the rear of the subpanel so it can
> be accessed when the canopy is open? I see one less hole in the
> firewall, more space on firewall, easier to check level and detect leaks
> (why is my sock wet?) & the vent could be run off with a little tube to
> somewhere... Other pros & cons, please!
>
> From The PossumWorks in TN
> Mark
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fuel-cap labelling |
Greetings! I'm new to the Rv list subscription so bear with me if I don't
know the ropes and correct protocol (yet). I'm Henry Hore and have an RV6-A
that first flew in June this year. I have my RV in my own hangar at Cornwall
Regional (CYCC) Ontario.
I thought I would contribute what is required in Canada re Dan Chekoway's
query on fuel cap labeling: The type of fuel and octane, plus the tank capacity
in liters must be placarded next to the cap. I also have the capacity shown
in USG.
Reading the comments about cap engraving ,today, I would like to tell
what I did.- I have done all my labeling using a Brother P-touch "handy" labeler,
using the transparent "TZ" laminated tape. All my labels on the instrument
panel, canopy opening instructions, "ELT HERE" etc,, were done with
this unit and they look great. I have 2 labels by the fuel caps: The one behind
the cap (rear):
AVGAS 100LL ONLY and the one in front: CAPACITY 71.9 LIT- 19 USG. My final
inspector liked it
H. Hore. elsa-henry@darlor-watch.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Brake Fluid Reservoir Loc. on a tip-up |
Alex Peterson is the guy who's producing these. alexpeterson(at)usjet.net
)_( Dan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Brake Fluid Reservoir Loc. on a tip-up
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> I'm trying to remember who it was that was offering a valve that was
claimed
> to be effective for those negative G situations.
> Maybe someone out there will know.
>
> Jim
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Phillips" <ripsteel(at)edge.net>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Brake Fluid Reservoir Loc. on a tip-up
>
>
> >
> > Howdy List-
> >
> > Anyone installed their reservoir on the rear of the subpanel so it can
> > be accessed when the canopy is open? I see one less hole in the
> > firewall, more space on firewall, easier to check level and detect leaks
> > (why is my sock wet?) & the vent could be run off with a little tube to
> > somewhere... Other pros & cons, please!
> >
> > From The PossumWorks in TN
> > Mark
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "sdavis12" <sdavis12(at)midsouth.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Cap Deal Instructions (Bad Work) |
Listers,
If someone has a problem with the caps, Please contact me direct and at
least give me a chance to correct the problem, Mr. Condon and Mr. Couture
even a grade school helper would do that!. Most of the intelligent people I
know would have enough sense to know that the caps were not in the best
shape when they came from vans, anything I did wouldn't change that fact. If
it took to long I apologize, some people were nice enough to e-mail me and
ask If I would wait till they got theirs here for me to do, so I waited,
can't win them all. But I never advertised that they were going to come back
to you looking like a chrome bumper, those of you who polished theirs I'm
sure wouldn't do it for 12 bucks each.
----- Original Message -----
From: "P M Condon" <pcondon(at)mitre.org>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Fuel Cap Deal Instructions (Bad Work)
>
>
> My caps were done poorly also. Looks like a grade-school helper did it.
> Took a long time to get done and didn't look professional. Poor letter
> edge defination, inconsistant depth, vise/tooling marks and poor letter
> allignment. Better then using a electric buzz pencil, but not by much.
> Very disappointed.
>
>
> <commando@cox-internet.com>
>
> Hey folks,
> Just an update on the fuel caps I received back from Steve this
> week.
> Unfortunately, I was not impressed. They did not look anything like the
> picture Paul posted to this list a few weeks ago and more like something
> I
> could have had done at a local trophy shop for a lot less money.
> I enjoy this list mostly for the information it provides on
> suppliers
> for RV related items. I just don't think this was such a great deal.
> Sorry
> Steve.
>
> Wayne
> RV-8a
> working on cabin
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel cap labeling regs? |
Or the turbine or diesel engine people?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike" <mike(at)bmnellis.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Fuel cap labeling regs?
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> What are the Subaru guys going to do who don't run AVGAS in their auto
> engines?
>
> Mike Nellis
> RV-6 Fuselage N699BM
> 1947 Stinson 108-2 NC9666K
> http://bmnellis.com
>
>
> >
> > Dan,
> >
> > From a legal standpoint FAR Part 23 does not apply, BUT....your local
> > inspector/DAR should not/will not issue your aircraft an Airworthiness
> > Certificate unless somewhere in the near vicinity of the fuel filler cap
> > (not necessarily on the cap itself) is the word "AVGAS", the minimum
fuel
> > octane and the tanks fuel capacity, in gallons. The closest FARs
> > for this
> > are 23.1557(c)(1), and parts of 23.1555(d) in that most inspectors will
> > accept the fuel quantity to be marked near the fuel filler
> > instead of at the
> > fuel selector, as stated in the FAR.
> >
> > Mike Robertson
> > Das Fed
> > RV-8A, 6A and 9A
> >
> >
> > >From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
> > >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> > >To: ,
> > >Subject: RV-List: Fuel cap labelling regs?
> > >Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 11:48:05 -0800
> > >
> > >
> > >Can somebody point me in the right direction...I'm looking for
> > the FAR that
> > >states exactly how fuel filler caps should be labelled or placarded,
and
> > >all
> > >I could find was mention in Part 23 that the word "Avgas" and the
minimum
> > >acceptable octane must be specified. But I'm not sure if this applies
to
> > >amateur-built aircraft. Plus, it looks like Steve Davis'
> > engraving doesn't
> > >even say "Avgas" on it (I was basing that off this photo for reference:
> > >http://bmnellis.com/images/DCP01408.JPG).
> > >
> > >With all the confusion over the quality of having fuel caps engraved,
I'm
> > >wondering if it's 100% required that the fuel caps be labelled in some
> > >form.
> > >I assume so, but what's the reg, and what's the simplest way of
> > >accomplishing this?
> > >
> > >)_( Dan
> > >RV-7 N714D (fuselage)
> > >http://www.rvproject.com
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Choose an Internet access plan right for you -- try MSN!
> > http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner(at)wans.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Brake Fluid Reservoir Loc. on a tip-up |
Mark,
I thought about that idea a while back, and will incorporate a version of it
in my Tipper as well. You might want to put a clear hose from the Aluminum
Reservoir to a very small plastic "catch"-tank in case the reservoir
overflows (or you are briefly inverted). Clear tube will give you signs of a
arising problem, (or after the fact), but it should keep any spills
contained and therefore doesn't ruin your interior.
Konrad
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Brake Fluid Reservoir Loc. on a tip-up
>
> Never thought about that, but sure makes sense to me. Just be real
careful
> when filling or back bleeding the brakes so you don't ruin your interior!
> Also, brake fluid is a no-no around paint, so be sure the area isn't
> painted, or you are just real careful with the brake fluid.
>
> >
> > Howdy List-
> >
> > Anyone installed their reservoir on the rear of the subpanel so it can
> > be accessed when the canopy is open? I see one less hole in the
> > firewall, more space on firewall, easier to check level and detect leaks
> > (why is my sock wet?) & the vent could be run off with a little tube to
> > somewhere... Other pros & cons, please!
> >
> > >From The PossumWorks in TN
> > Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard V. Reynolds" <rvreynolds(at)macs.net> |
| Subject: | RV-9A Cowl Fitting |
RV-9A with O-320-D1A engine w/ Hartzell C/S Propeller w/ new epoxy
honeycomb cowl
For the initial fitting of the cowl without the propeller install, we
added a 9.0 inch diameter by 1.5 inch thick "plug" to forward face of
the engine starter ring gear. Vans Dwg C4 says the aft face of the C/S
hub to which the rear spinner bulkhead mounts is 2.25 inches forward of
the forward face of the engine starter ring gear. The flange of the rear
spinner bulkhead is 5/8 inch (.625) and the minimum clearance between
the spinner and the cowl is 1/8 inch (.125). Thus, the "plug" should be
2.25 -.625 -.125 = 1.50 inches thick.
The forward face of the cowl should be flush to the forward face of the
plug to obtain equal spinner clearance (1/8 inch).
With the forward face of the lower cowl mounted flush to the forward
face of the plug, the right aft side of the cowl overlaps the fuselage
bulkhead approximately 1.0 inches more than the left aft side and the
right side hinge is very close to the raised honeycomb. Yes, we know
there is an approximate 1.25 degree right thrust angle.
If we decide to increase the spinner/cowl clearance, the interference
with the honeycomb will be exasperated.
I did not have this problem on my RV-6A cowl (ordered in 1998)
The cowl is marked "RV-6 320 ".
Do we have a "bad" cowl?
Richard Reynolds, helping a RV-9A builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "C. Rabaut" <crabaut(at)coalinga.com> |
"Dog Fighter-Terry Burch" , ,
"Alex Peterson" ,
| Subject: | Brake Fluid Reservoir Loc. on a tip-up |
Mark,
How ya' doin' down there at "The Possum Works"? Funny ya'll mentioning
the brake fluid reservoir. I was just talking/emailing with a fellow pilot
about them. That's a good idea of yours, mounting it on the rear of the
subpanel (for easy access), but if I might suggest a GREAT little stocking
stuffer you could ask Old Saint Nick for.... the "Reservoir Dog" from Alex
Peterson. Yep, you'll never have to worry about "why is my sock wet?"
ever again. This handy dandy little cap/valve stops that red (pink or
clear) caustic chemicals from dripping out; EVEN when you gets upside down.
Now some of us don't wanna do flip flops or fancy smancy maneuvers, rolls, &
loops, etc... ( though I ain't met that "someone" yet) but you know that
even in steep turns and bounced landings that red stuff sloshes. So if ya'
looking to keep your bird free from them kinda problems, contact Alex {off
list at Alexpeterson(at)usjet.net } and he'll make you one too.
Chuck
p.s. There're "inexpensive", and I don't get nothin' for sayin' this... I
just enjoy the one I installed (can you say 3 minute installation) and I
like seeing one of our own list members succeed.
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Phillips <ripsteel(at)edge.net>
Subject: RV-List: Brake Fluid Reservoir Loc. on a tip-up
>
> Howdy List-
>
> Anyone installed their reservoir on the rear of the subpanel so it can
> be accessed when the canopy is open? I see one less hole in the
> firewall, more space on firewall, easier to check level and detect leaks
> (why is my sock wet?) & the vent could be run off with a little tube to
> somewhere... Other pros & cons, please!
>
> From The PossumWorks in TN
> Mark
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bobby Hester <bhester(at)apex.net> |
RV-List
| Subject: | RV7A - Slider - Painted - picture |
Hey guys wait untill you see this! It is Pat Patterson's RV7A, with
sliding canopy, all painted up like Van's RV7. You can see it at the
bottom of my home page! My server has a access limit so if you can
access it check back later. It really makes me want to get mine done
because it looks just like mine should.
--
Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
RV7A Working on the wings :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve J Hurlbut" <sjhdcl(at)kingston.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Brake Fluid Reservoir Loc. on a tip-up |
The reservoir dog.
Here is the guys email:
Alex Peterson
Peterson Innovation, LLC
17650 82nd Way North
Maple Grove, MN 55311
alexpeterson(at)usjet.net
612-418-9710
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Brake Fluid Reservoir Loc. on a tip-up
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> I'm trying to remember who it was that was offering a valve that was
claimed
> to be effective for those negative G situations.
> Maybe someone out there will know.
>
> Jim
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Phillips" <ripsteel(at)edge.net>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Brake Fluid Reservoir Loc. on a tip-up
>
>
> >
> > Howdy List-
> >
> > Anyone installed their reservoir on the rear of the subpanel so it can
> > be accessed when the canopy is open? I see one less hole in the
> > firewall, more space on firewall, easier to check level and detect leaks
> > (why is my sock wet?) & the vent could be run off with a little tube to
> > somewhere... Other pros & cons, please!
> >
> > From The PossumWorks in TN
> > Mark
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner(at)wans.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel-cap labelling |
Dear Henry,
A very warm "Welcome" to the RV-List! And Congratulations to finishing your
RV-6A and flying it already!
Happy Halloween!
Sincerely,
Konrad Werner
ABQ-NM-USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Elsa & Henry" <elsa-henry@darlor-watch.com>
Subject: RV-List: Fuel-cap labelling
<elsa-henry@darlor-watch.com>
>
> Greetings! I'm new to the Rv list subscription so bear with me
if I don't know the ropes and correct protocol (yet). I'm Henry Hore and
have an RV6-A that first flew in June this year. I have my RV in my own
hangar at Cornwall Regional (CYCC) Ontario.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel filler port labeling regs? |
In a message dated 10/31/2002 11:54:52 AM Pacific Standard Time,
dan(at)rvproject.com writes:
> With all the confusion over the quality of having fuel caps engraved, I'm
> wondering if it's 100% required that the fuel caps be labeled in some form.
> I assume so, but what's the reg, and what's the simplest way of
> accomplishing this?
There are standard appliques available that surround the filler cap area on
the wing tank. There are two types; type 1 is available from ACS and is a
multilayer vinyl applique with a thin transparent coverlayer, Type 2 is a
single layer vinyl applique I have found in the local flight accessories
store (the Airport Shoppe at RHV has them).
I went thru four of the ACS ones before I found the other type. The
multilayer has a tendency to get air under the edge then starts to shed the
clear layer. The now exposed markings are sticky with adhesive and not
fuel/solvent resistant. The single layer type looks much better and outlasts
the other about 5/1.
-GV (RV-6A N1GV 572hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Brake Fluid Reservoir Location |
| From: | "Martin Hone" <martin.hone(at)tradergroup.com.au> |
Hi Mark,
I didn't like the look of the Van's brake reservoir on the firewall, so I ditched
it in favour of a Ducati 996 front brake reservoir and mounted it above the
pilot's rudder pedals, which, along with the master and starter relays etc, is
accessed by a hatch built into the top skin of my RV6. The Ducati reservoir
is opaque so I can easily check the level, and has a floating type of seal that
moves with the fluid level and won't let the fluid leak when inverted.
As far as potential for damage to upholstery and paint is concerned, I could use
Dot 5 brake fluid, which I believe from a previous post, is compatible with
the brake seals, or use Auto Trans Fluid.
My AUD$0.02 worth
Martin in Oz
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ted Lumpkin" <tlump(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Where to Buy Paint |
I know this seems like a silly question, but where can I buy paint for
finishing my RV-4. I was going to buy Randolph paints from Aircraft Spruce,
but their color choice is way too limited. I have looked at the Dupont and
Sherwin Williams websites but they don't seem to have simple color charts.
I know every color under the sun is available, but I was looking to buy a
standard color from a paint color chart?
Where have you guys purchased your paint?
Ted
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sally and George" <aeronut58(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Where to Buy Paint |
Ted:
In the Dallas area, Sherwin Williams is one good source. They have charts
showing every auto make and model color for at least the last 10 years, and
can mix your choice on the spot in polyurethane, lacquer or enamel. If the
color you want isn't in their book, chances are it doesn't exist in the
visible spectrum.
George Kilishek
>From: "Ted Lumpkin" <tlump(at)attbi.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: "RV List"
>Subject: RV-List: Where to Buy Paint
>Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 21:50:35 -0800
>
>
> I know this seems like a silly question, but where can I buy paint for
>finishing my RV-4. I was going to buy Randolph paints from Aircraft
>Spruce,
>but their color choice is way too limited. I have looked at the Dupont and
>Sherwin Williams websites but they don't seem to have simple color charts.
>I know every color under the sun is available, but I was looking to buy a
>standard color from a paint color chart?
>
> Where have you guys purchased your paint?
>
>Ted
>
>
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
Representation?
What's that?
Oh yeah, I'm a Republican living in California, duh, I forgot.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
The Philips XC is not pure mineral oil, can't be a multi-grade and be pure
mineral oil. It is also an ashless dispersant oil.
http://seweb1.phillips66.com/Lube/PRODUCTS.NSF/Products/0C30DC6094AF8A958625
64F3005D39AF?OpenDocument
ECI is recommending this for break-in according to the recent post, but
Lycoming and Contenintal don't, not sure about Superior.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Phillips <ripsteel(at)edge.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel cap labeling regs? |
Or plan to use mogas? If the tank is labelled for 100LL Avgas, will I be
refused a fill-up at the BP station?
Cy Galley wrote:
> Or the turbine or diesel engine people?
>
> > What are the Subaru guys going to do who don't run AVGAS in their auto
> > engines?
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Cap Deal Instructions |
After looking at the picture of Paul's caps again(I had deleted them) I see
that painting them made them appear deeper. I will do as you sugjest and
I'm sure they will be just fine!
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Fuel Cap Deal Instructions
> snip
> Strange that you didn't like them.
Paul Besing
> RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
> http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
> Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
> http://www.kitlog.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bobby Hester" <bhester(at)apex.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Fuel Cap Deal Instructions
>
>
> >
> > "Wayne R. Couture" wrote:
> >
> <commando@cox-internet.com>
> > >
> > > Hey folks,
> > > Just an update on the fuel caps I received back from Steve this
> week.
> > > Unfortunately, I was not impressed. They did not look anything like
the
> > > picture Paul posted to this list a few weeks ago and more like
something
> I
> > > could have had done at a local trophy shop for a lot less money.
> > > I enjoy this list mostly for the information it provides on
> suppliers
> > > for RV related items. I just don't think this was such a great deal.
> Sorry
> > > Steve.
> > >
> > > Wayne
> > > RV-8a
> > > working on cabin
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham(at)hotmail.com> |
BTW the Cessna Owners group recommends XC for Lycoming break-in. Our
experience with IO-360 (chrome cyl) was to start with staight 80 or 100
Aeroshell mineral and then switch to XC after the oil use stablized.
Chuck & Dave Rowbotham
RV-8A
>From: Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: "'RV-List Digest Server '"
>Subject: RV-List: Phillips
>Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 23:23:19 -0800
>
>
>The Philips XC is not pure mineral oil, can't be a multi-grade and be pure
>mineral oil. It is also an ashless dispersant oil.
>
>http://seweb1.phillips66.com/Lube/PRODUCTS.NSF/Products/0C30DC6094AF8A958625
>64F3005D39AF?OpenDocument
>
>ECI is recommending this for break-in according to the recent post, but
>Lycoming and Contenintal don't, not sure about Superior.
>
>
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Where to Buy Paint |
You need to find a Sherwin Williams Automotive paint store. Call your local
directory assistance and ask for the Automotive paint store. There is
probably only one or two in your area. They don't advertise, and are
usually located in an industrial area. They are there for body shops and
such. But, when you go in, they have all you can imagine for painting your
airplane.
Paul Besing
RV-6A Sold (Waiting on the RV-10)
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Lumpkin" <tlump(at)attbi.com>
Subject: RV-List: Where to Buy Paint
>
> I know this seems like a silly question, but where can I buy paint for
> finishing my RV-4. I was going to buy Randolph paints from Aircraft
Spruce,
> but their color choice is way too limited. I have looked at the Dupont
and
> Sherwin Williams websites but they don't seem to have simple color charts.
> I know every color under the sun is available, but I was looking to buy a
> standard color from a paint color chart?
>
> Where have you guys purchased your paint?
>
> Ted
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: N6JX first flight |
Mel,
CONGRATULATIONS and WELL DONE !!!!
Chuck & Dave Rowbotham
RV-8A
>From: "Jordan, Mel" <jordan_mel(at)ti.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: "'rv-list(at)matronics.com'"
>Subject: RV-List: N6JX first flight
>Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 11:30:46 -0600
>
>
>I am very pleased to report that RV-6A N6JX flew for the first time this
>morning at KTUS (Tucson). N6JX is a QB kit, 60289, and the first builders
>log entry was on Oct. 15, 1998, so four years and 2K hours later, I have an
>airplane!! The plane flew great, no heavy wing, rudder half ball out at
>cruise, absolutely no squawks on the plane, systems or engine. After a
>post flight inspection, it will be ready to go again. N6JX has a new Lyc.
>O-360-A1A from Van's equipped with airflow performance Fuel Injection.
>Hartzell CS prop, Garmin GNC300XL and GTX327 radios, full gyro panel and
>Digitrak autopilot. She doesn't have paint or wheel pants yet, so speed
>was not yet up to par (145kts indicated), but she climbed like a rocket in
>the cool desert morning. What a kick. The tower was great and let me
>orbit right over the airport for the half hour duration of the flight. Did
>slow flight with half and full flaps and generally checked out handling,
>which was delightful. Landing was just like Mike Seager taught me, simple
>and easy. Everything was simply perfect! I had a lot of help from fellow
>builders here; Greg Johnson (RV-6), Gene Gaddis (RV-8), Alan Thomas (RV-6),
>and Paul Conn (Fairchild 24).
>
>It was definitely worth the time and effort. This has to be one of the
>best
>feelings a person can experience, having this machine you built take flight
>and carry you into such a beautiful blue sky. I think I'll go do it again
>after lunch!
>
>
>Mel Jordan
>RV-6A N6JX
>Tucson, AZ
>
>n6jx(at)earthlink.net
>
>
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | water manometers |
| From: | "Frazier, Vincent A" <VFrazier(at)usi.edu> |
SNIP I think you would get better accuracy from a water manometer, as long
as you can be sure to get all the little air bubbles out. SNIP
To get all the little bubbles out all you need to do is boil the water for a few
minutes prior to use. Boiling will drive out the dissolved gases that will
otherwise form those zillion little bubbles in your manometer. This is a common
lab practice.
Of course you still have to watch for the bigger bubbles that you might form in
your manometer by mechanical action.
Manometer: a device for measuring WHAT!? Sorry, a little pun there based on that
somewhat misleading name. ;-)
Vince
F-1H Rocket
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | brake reservoir dribbles |
| From: | "Frazier, Vincent A" <VFrazier(at)usi.edu> |
Aircraft Spruce sells a little reservoir that mounts directly on the brake cylinder.
P/N A-600, $10.95 each and you'll need 2 for most installations.
If you've already got Van's reservoir mounted, too bad, you could have eliminated
several pesky brake fluid supply lines.
To keep 5606 fluid dribbles from making a mess, get an eye dropper bulb that will
fit over the fritted brake reservoir cap, make a small hole in it. Make sure
the hole won't seal itself. When the brake fluid reservoir burps, most of
the fluid will stay inside the bulb and get drawn back in.
Seemed to work for me, but obviously won't keep you from overfilling it during
brake bleeding operations.
Most already know this, but I see it regularly, DON'T put automotive brake fluid
in your airplane unless you want to crash into something! Most aircraft brake
systems use Mil-H-5606 hydraulic fluid. Double check if you're not sure.
Automotive (Dot 3,etc) fluids can soften your brake seals causing stained shorts
at best, bent metal at worst!
Vince
F-1H Rocket
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MeangreenRV4(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 10/30/2002 11:39:43 AM Pacific Standard Time,
zilik(at)direcpc.com writes:
>
> Wow, this is really good information. No wonder I climb so slow, I got a
> boat anchor in the front and I did'nt know it.
>
> Gary
>
Why Gary I am damm glad to help ya
Tim Barnes
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike" <mike(at)bmnellis.com> |
| Subject: | Brake Fluid Reservoir Location |
A motorcycle reservoir is not a bad way to go. I don't know that I'd pick
the most expensive model out there by going with a Ducati reservoir but any
clear reservoir would probably work. It would be about $33 plus shipping to
get one. You would have to design a mounting bracket though. Here is the
one that fits my Yamaha YZF1000 and it's clear so it can be checked at a
glance.
http://216.37.204.206/xtremepowersports/Yamaha_OEM/YamahaMC.asp?Type=13&A=16
0&B=29
Mike Nellis
RV-6 Fuselage N699BM
1947 Stinson 108-2 NC9666K
http://bmnellis.com
>
>
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> I didn't like the look of the Van's brake reservoir on the
> firewall, so I ditched it in favour of a Ducati 996 front brake
> reservoir and mounted it above the pilot's rudder pedals, which,
> along with the master and starter relays etc, is accessed by a
> hatch built into the top skin of my RV6. The Ducati reservoir is
> opaque so I can easily check the level, and has a floating type
> of seal that moves with the fluid level and won't let the fluid
> leak when inverted.
> As far as potential for damage to upholstery and paint is
> concerned, I could use Dot 5 brake fluid, which I believe from a
> previous post, is compatible with the brake seals, or use Auto
> Trans Fluid.
>
> My AUD$0.02 worth
>
> Martin in Oz
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Fuel cap labeling regs? |
OOps,..I guess I should have gone a bit further. The wording of the
placarding of the fuel cap area will be dictated by the type of engine
installed. But being an experimentor with an experimental aircraft you can
pretty much put what you want around there provided you have some type of
minimum fuel Quality (Octane) and the tanks capacity.
Mike Robertson
Das Fed
>From: "Mike" <mike(at)bmnellis.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: RE: RV-List: Fuel cap labeling regs?
>Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 17:35:54 -0600
>
>
>Hi Mike,
>
>What are the Subaru guys going to do who don't run AVGAS in their auto
>engines?
>
>Mike Nellis
>RV-6 Fuselage N699BM
>1947 Stinson 108-2 NC9666K
>http://bmnellis.com
>
>
> >
> > Dan,
> >
> > From a legal standpoint FAR Part 23 does not apply, BUT....your local
> > inspector/DAR should not/will not issue your aircraft an Airworthiness
> > Certificate unless somewhere in the near vicinity of the fuel filler cap
> > (not necessarily on the cap itself) is the word "AVGAS", the minimum
>fuel
> > octane and the tanks fuel capacity, in gallons. The closest FARs
> > for this
> > are 23.1557(c)(1), and parts of 23.1555(d) in that most inspectors will
> > accept the fuel quantity to be marked near the fuel filler
> > instead of at the
> > fuel selector, as stated in the FAR.
> >
> > Mike Robertson
> > Das Fed
> > RV-8A, 6A and 9A
> >
> >
> > >From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
> > >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> > >To: ,
> > >Subject: RV-List: Fuel cap labelling regs?
> > >Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 11:48:05 -0800
> > >
> > >
> > >Can somebody point me in the right direction...I'm looking for
> > the FAR that
> > >states exactly how fuel filler caps should be labelled or placarded,
>and
> > >all
> > >I could find was mention in Part 23 that the word "Avgas" and the
>minimum
> > >acceptable octane must be specified. But I'm not sure if this applies
>to
> > >amateur-built aircraft. Plus, it looks like Steve Davis'
> > engraving doesn't
> > >even say "Avgas" on it (I was basing that off this photo for reference:
> > >http://bmnellis.com/images/DCP01408.JPG).
> > >
> > >With all the confusion over the quality of having fuel caps engraved,
>I'm
> > >wondering if it's 100% required that the fuel caps be labelled in some
> > >form.
> > >I assume so, but what's the reg, and what's the simplest way of
> > >accomplishing this?
> > >
> > >)_( Dan
> > >RV-7 N714D (fuselage)
> > >http://www.rvproject.com
> > >
> > >
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy Compton" <rdcompton(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Ted Hendrickson props |
Fellow "Listers":
Anyone out there know what happened to Ted Hendrickson props? Are they made
under another name?
Thanks,
Randy Compton
RV-3A N84VF
Gulf Breeze, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pete Bodie" <rv6apjb(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | RV6A Wing attachment question |
I am finally getting to the point of attaching the wings on my RV6A.
My question is;
Should I support the fuselage when I remove the tempory spar or will the rest
of the bolts in the main gear bracket support it until I get the wing installed
and bolted?
I will be working on one side at a time.
If I should support the fuslage where is the best location.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
| Subject: | Lightspeed Ignition vs mags |
I think something is being overlooked here - Lightspeed has two ways to
install one is with a unit that goes into where a mag would go that
provides the timing info. The other way is drill small holes in the
flywheel and replace the material with magnets, and then mount a sensor on
the engine block to pick up the magnets rotation. The reason you would use
the former is to make the installation simple. The reason you wouldn't is
that you have yet another moving part that needs to be inspected every 50
hours, like your mags need. The latter method has no moving parts (other
than the flywheel you need anyway) and therefore is more reliable and a lot
more maintainable - that's what is hard to beat. It is completely your choice.
My experience with customer support is that Klaus has answered my questions
both times I called.
As for performance of Lightspeed vs. mags, all you have to do is a "mag
check" - I have one mag on the left, and Lightspeed on the right. When
operating with one mag, there is the usual RPM drop. When operating with
just Lightspeed and no mag, there is no RPM drop - the Lightspeed is
completely burning the fuel mixture by itself. It does this at a lot less
than 7000 ft.
Gary Liming
>
> > Thanks for the info Randy. That is interesting for me. I have been
>thinking of
> > an electronic ignition on one side.
> > I like the one from Chattanooga better because it has a machined part to
>go in
> > the mag hole instead of the way Light Speed does it. It looks a little
>more
> > "designed".
> >
> > Then when I weigh everything, a trusty old mag, new out of the box is
>about half
> > price of one of the electronic thingy's. They are pretty reliable for a
>couple
> > thousand hours... Hard to beat.
> >
> > Phil
>
>As you can see, some folks have a great experience with Lightspeed and it's
>owner. Mine has been otherwise. I installed the Lightspeed as part of a
>major overhaul. If I had it do over, I'd have gone with mags on both sides.
>Since I don't routinely fly above 7500 feet msl, I haven't observed any
>quantifiable pereformance gain.
>
>And I still stand by my observation that Lightspeed's customer support
>stinks. Twice I tried to obtain a smidgen of info from them; both times the
>response was "go to the web." Ain't practical when one is hanging over the
>edge of the airplane tinkering with the innards. Probably took him longer
>to tout the virtues of the web than it would to have just answered my
>question.
>
>Randy Compton
>RV-3A N84VF
>Gulf Breeze, FL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | 2002 List Fund Raiser - Please Support Your Lists... |
Dear Listers,
During November of each year, I have a voluntary Email List Fund Raiser to
support the continued operation, development, maintenance and upgrade of
the Email Forums sponsored here. Your Contributions go directly into
improvements in the systems that support the Lists and to pay for the
Internet connectivity primarily dedicated to supporting the Lists.
The traffic on the Lists continues to grow and the numbers are nothing
short of impressive! Here are some statistics that show much traffic the
Lists generated last year alone:
11/01/2001 - 10/31/2002
Web server hits: 8,700,000 (727,000/mo)
Incoming Email Posts: 51,259 (4,271/mo) *
* This number is multiplied by the total number of email addresses
subscribed to the given List. The actual number of email message processed
is in the 50,000,000 range for last year!!
The new Internet provider, Speakeasy, has been providing extremely fast and
reliable service over the last year, and this has certainly been a
refreshing change from previous providers!
There were a couple of new features added at the tail-end of last year
including the new List Browse Feature ( http://www.matronics.com/listbrowse
), and the List Photoshare which have been both very popular. Many people
have written to say how much they enjoy the on-line browsing capability of
current week's messages. The 184 new Photoshares (
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare ) added over the last year attests to
its acceptance and appreciation in the community as well.
I have upgraded both the email and web server OS systems recently to the
latest - well almost the latest - version of Redhat Linux and Kernel
2.4.19, both of which have been working very well and quite reliably.
What does the future hold? Well, something pretty exciting I'm
hoping... I am currently evaluating a new, commercially available software
package that runs under Linux and provides a complete web-based Email List
service akin to what those other guys use. The difference will be that
there won't be any annoying advertisements and popup ads on the Matronics
system!! The system will continue to be dedicated to furthering Lists
activities and not trying to sell you something you don't want. My hope is
to keep most if not all of the current functionality in place and add the
new software system over the top. Some of the system will be replaced
(like majordomo), but the lists will work much like they do today - only
BETTER! As I mentioned, I am currently in the evaluation stage of this and
have yet to select a final product. Suffice to say some facelifts are
definitely on the way!
Unlike many of the other "list servers" on the web these days, I have a
strict no-commercial-advertisement policy on the Matronics Lists and
associated List websites. I have been approached by a number of vendors
recently with advertising deals that have been very tempting. However, my
commitment to providing a grass-roots, non-commercial environment
prevails! Commercialism on the Internet seems to be increasing
exponentially every year with more and more SPAM and pop up ads, not to
mention the ever increasing Virus attacks. My goal with the Matronics List
Service is to provide my members with a commercial-free, safe, and
high-performance system in which to share information, ideas, and
camaraderie.
I recoup my upgrade, maintenance, and operating costs by having a List Fund
Raiser once a year during November. During this time, I ask List members
to donate a small amount of money to support the continued operation of the
Lists over the upcoming year. Contributions in the $20, $30, and $50 range
are common. This year I have completely revamped the Contribution website,
and have added the ability to use PayPal to make your Contribution in
addition to the traditional Visa/MC and Personal Check Options. Its easier
and faster than ever before to make your Contribution!! For those who are
accustomed to using PayPal to make Internet purchases, will appreciate the
ease and speed of using this handy method of payment to make their List
Contribution.
The best news this year, however, is that I have a couple of fantastic Gift
offers to support the List Fund Raiser! Andy Gold of The Builder's
Bookstore ( http://www.buildersbooks.com ) will be generously donating a
FREE Jeppesen Flight Bag to anyone making a $50 or more List Contribution
during the Fund Raiser! This is a great bag and something you'll surely
what to get your hands on. Thanks Andy, for this great incentive!!
In addition to the great Flight Bag, I will also be offering a FREE
Matronics List Archive CDROM for a $50 or greater Contribution! This is a
complete set of archives for all Email Lists currently hosted by
Matronics. The Archives date back to the beginning of the each List. In
the case of the RV-List, for example, this includes archives all the way
back to 1990! That's about 133Mb alone! Also included on the CD is a copy
of Chip Gibbion's Windows Archive Search Utility and a precompiled
search-index for each archive on the CD.
Better yet?! You can get BOTH the Flight Bag AND the Archive CD for a
Contribution of $75 or more which is actually LESS than the combined retail
price on the two items!!! How can you go wrong? Get some great stuff AND
support your Lists at the same time!
Over the next month I'll be posting a few reminder messages about the List
Fund Raiser, and I ask for your patience and understanding during the
process. Remember that the Lists are *completely* funded through the
generous Contributions of its members. That's it! There's no support from
a bloated advertising budget or deep pockets somewhere. Its all made
possible through YOUR support!
I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who supports the
List this year. Your generosity contributes directly to the quality of the
experience here.
To make your List Contribution using a Visa or MasterCard, PalPal, or with
a Personal Check, please go to the URL link below. Here you can find
additional details on this year's great free Gifts as well as additional
information on the various methods of payment.
SSL Secure Contribution Web Site:
http://www.matronics.com/contributions
Again, I would like to thank everyone who supports the Lists this
year! Your Contributions truly make it all possible!!
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
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
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paulbaird(at)aol.com |
Scott,
You are right it is ridiculous. You better drive. No one cares who
buys the gas for your car.
Paul
PS the feds don't have the resources to care who paid for the gas (with
cash!)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "3 rotor" <rv8r300(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lightspeed Ignition vs mags |
inspect every 50 hours? gosh, i'm 800 hours overdue, of course they're
Slicks so you just throw them away. I do change the oil every 50 hrs....
kevin
> that you have yet another moving part that needs to be inspected every 50
> hours, like your mags need.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "3 rotor" <rv8r300(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV6A Wing attachment question |
run some hardware store bolts thru the engine mount holes to a couple of 2x4
legs, put the tail on a stool, leave the gear off until the wing get some
bolts in it. I don't understand how you thought you could attach the wing
with the gear on since the gear socket attaches to the wing spar. kevin
> My question is;
> Should I support the fuselage when I remove the tempory spar or will the
rest of the bolts in the main gear bracket support it until I get the wing
installed and bolted?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bobby Hester <bhester(at)apex.net> |
RV-List
| Subject: | Proseal use in cold weather |
Ok, I am ready to start sealing my second tank. It is looks like the
temps are going to be between 36-58 degrees F through the coming week.
Is it ok to proseal in those temps? I'll be in my hanger with a karosene
heater, but it does not help much. I do realize that it will take longer
to cure, but is there any reason not to do it in these temps?
--
Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
RV7A Working on the wings :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV6 Flyer" <rv6_flyer(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lightspeed Ignition vs mags |
I have old 1961 vintage Bendix SL20 and SL21 mags. I overhauled both of
them 1,200 hours ago. The only inspection required if all the ADs are
complied with is 500 hours. I did pull the impulse coupled mag at 100 hours
to do the 100 hour inspection that was required with the old riveted impulse
coupling and replaced it with the snap ring coupling at that time. Now the
inspection is required every 500 hours. At the 500 hour inspection, found
no adjustments needed. At 1,000 hours, I did adjust the points. Relubricate
the bearings both times but they looked as good before as they did after.
Total time mags and engine over 4,300 hours the last time I looked in the
engine log.
What kind of mag do you have that needs 50 hour inspection? What does the
inspection consist of?
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,210 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
http://SoCAL_WVAF.rvproject.com
----Original Message Follows----
From: "3 rotor" <rv8r300(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Lightspeed Ignition vs mags
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 20:05:15 -0800
inspect every 50 hours? gosh, i'm 800 hours overdue, of course they're
Slicks so you just throw them away. I do change the oil every 50 hrs....
kevin
> that you have yet another moving part that needs to be inspected every 50
> hours, like your mags need.
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/2monthsfree.asp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sally and George" <aeronut58(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Proseal use in cold weather |
Bobby:
I did one of my tanks in weather about that cold and it worked okay. I did,
however, take the completed tank into my house where it could cure at 70
degrees F or so. I don't know how long it would take to cure at 50 degrees
or lower, but I suspect it would be a long time.
George Kilishek
N888GK
100 hours and no leaks in fuel tanks
>From: Bobby Hester <bhester(at)apex.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: RV7and7A , RV-List
>
>Subject: RV-List: Proseal use in cold weather
>Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 23:04:51 -0600
>
>
>Ok, I am ready to start sealing my second tank. It is looks like the
>temps are going to be between 36-58 degrees F through the coming week.
>Is it ok to proseal in those temps? I'll be in my hanger with a karosene
>heater, but it does not help much. I do realize that it will take longer
>to cure, but is there any reason not to do it in these temps?
>
>--
>Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
>Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
>RV7A Working on the wings :-)
>
>
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Gummo" <t.gummo(at)verizon.net> |
I got the manual.
I don't have the writer to go with Adobe Reader so I had to copy and pass it
into MS Word a page at a time. Only then did I think I should ask if you
have it in Word format. :-(
There are a couple of things I will have to think about as they are
different than I am used to.
Tom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Norman" <jnorman(at)intermapsystems.com> |
| Subject: | Airport Problems |
OK Listers, here's a new problem...
I'm putting my wings on my plane in a hanger that I rent. I have been based
at this airport for almost 8 years (I have an Archer).
The airport manager (without ANY warnings) shows up yesterday with eviction
papers giving me 5 days to clean out the hangar. Why? Because we are
"building an airplane" at the airport and this is not allowed. Of course,
my plane was "built" at home, painted in a shop, and transported to the
airport ready to bolt together. Its done except for wings, ailerons, and
flaps.
Also, of course, there are a dozen or more experimentals at this airport.
Some, being built from scratch at the airport.
Bottom line, after begging (and other distasteful measures) I was allowed to
keep the hangar, but only for a "completed" airplane. They gave me 24 hours
to get rid of the plane "parts". I have complied with this (what a pain in
the butt). They even demanded that a work bench and all tools be removed.
Their issue "insurance". "What happens if your plane falls on you and you
get crushed and hold us liable?" Of course, of the $419 a month I pay for a
hangar, $23.00 goes to "insurance" (its a line item). My plane is insured
with builder's insurance (John Helms, are you reading this?). (I think
there may be some more underlying issues, but I can't put my finger on them
yet).
Questions: 1) Has anybody heard of this before? 2) When is the plane a
plane? When it has wings but not flaps? Wings and flaps but not ailerons?
Fuselage and wings, but no avionics? They are quoting a clause that says
"no airplane repairs shall be undertaken in areas not designated for such
repairs, except for routine maintenance".
Need some advice here... don't want to set a precedence for this airport
that may spread.
jim
Tampa
Vandenberg Airport VDF (near Sun-N-Fun, so don't come here on your way to
Sun-n-Fun).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bobby Hester <bhester(at)apex.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Proseal use in cold weather |
Sally and George wrote:
>
>Bobby:
>
>I did one of my tanks in weather about that cold and it worked okay. I did,
>however, take the completed tank into my house where it could cure at 70
>degrees F or so. I don't know how long it would take to cure at 50 degrees
>or lower, but I suspect it would be a long time.
>
>George Kilishek
>N888GK
>100 hours and no leaks in fuel tanks
>
>
Didn't the smell about kill you?
--
Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
RV7A Working on the wings :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Balch <kbalch1(at)attbi.com> |
"rv8list(at)yahoogroups.com"
Well, the time has come to either conclude the sale of my RV, or give in
and paint it this winter in the hope of selling it next year.
I won't bore the list with the details, as everyone has seen them
before, other than to say that it's still flying great. N118KB will go,
as is, to the first guy who ponies up $96,000.
Please email me off-list with any questions.
Ken Balch
RV-8 N118KB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Ahearn" <dahearn(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Technical education |
Listers ....
Were can I learn more about the A&P rating?
I've been curious what goes into the A&P rating. While I recognize it's not necessary
for what I'm about to embark upon, it seems to me that all this effort
I intend to put into my airplane might allow me to apply work towards an A&P.
Any advise or links greatly appreciated
Dan
Highland Village, TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
| Subject: | Airport Problems |
Jim,
This is classic police state mentality - have enough laws so that the
"authorities" can bust anyone they want. This worked well in the 30's
in various countries, and we are going fast towards that here in the US.
I suspect most airports have such laws as you shared below. However,
since there are thousands of experimental and certificated airplanes
being built, assembled, etc., in this country at public airports in
public hangers, most airport managers don't play rent-a-cop like yours
is. Legally you may have no option, but AOPA's legal advisors might be
able to help. EAA should be brought into the loop for sure, as this has
large implications for all homebuilders. Is it likely that some FBO is
playing hardball? If you had proof, there might be some market
pressures that could be brought to bear. Can you get an A&P to write a
letter saying that your assembly is quite routine, which it obviously
is? It must be routine, since it is necessary and has happened thousands
of times. It is obviously not a repair either. Play the words, shove
them back in his face.
Good luck, keep the list posted.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 221 hours at a friendly Anoka County Airport ANE in
Minneapolis
They are quoting a clause that says "no airplane
> repairs shall be undertaken in areas not designated for such
> repairs, except for routine maintenance".
>
> Need some advice here... don't want to set a precedence for
> this airport that may spread.
>
> jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Calhoun" <roncal(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Airport Problems |
Jim, if you have to go, so should all the other builders. Is this what the
airport wants?
Ron Calhoun
RV4 Installling wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gert <gert(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Proseal use in cold weather |
Hi Bobby
I did mine in low temps, it takes a looong time to cure so the tanks
will have to be undisturbed a looong time...if you want to move them to
a warmer place do it as soon as possible with the proseal as plyable as
possible.
Clean your parts **thoroughly**, and then even better. kerosine heaters
do cause an minute oily film to built on things left in the
neighbourhood. If you can smell anything when the kerosine heater is
running, it's leaving a residu. if ya can't smell it, it is probably
still contaminating.
Proseal just does not adhere consistently to contaminated parts and just
because you cleaned all parts yesterday before you went to bed, that
does not mean a film has started to build overnite sufficient to make
your tank leak down the line.
Be safe and reclean all parts directly prior to use........
I did find the quality of kerosine has a tremendous effect here
Gert
Bobby Hester wrote:
>
> Ok, I am ready to start sealing my second tank. It is looks like the
> temps are going to be between 36-58 degrees F through the coming week.
> Is it ok to proseal in those temps? I'll be in my hanger with a karosene
> heater, but it does not help much. I do realize that it will take longer
> to cure, but is there any reason not to do it in these temps?
>
>
--
is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Lightspeed Ignition vs mags |
Slick and Bendix both recommend 500 hour inspections.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: "3 rotor" <rv8r300(at)attbi.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Lightspeed Ignition vs mags
>
> inspect every 50 hours? gosh, i'm 800 hours overdue, of course they're
> Slicks so you just throw them away. I do change the oil every 50 hrs....
> kevin
>
> > that you have yet another moving part that needs to be inspected every
50
> > hours, like your mags need.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson(at)mcleodusa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Airport Problems |
Jim Norman wrote:
>
> OK Listers, here's a new problem...
>
> I'm putting my wings on my plane in a hanger that I rent. I have been based
> at this airport for almost 8 years (I have an Archer).
>
> The airport manager (without ANY warnings) shows up yesterday with eviction
> papers giving me 5 days to clean out the hangar. Why? Because we are
> "building an airplane" at the airport and this is not allowed. Of course,
> my plane was "built" at home, painted in a shop, and transported to the
> airport ready to bolt together. Its done except for wings, ailerons, and
> flaps.
>
> Also, of course, there are a dozen or more experimentals at this airport.
> Some, being built from scratch at the airport.
>
> Bottom line, after begging (and other distasteful measures) I was allowed to
> keep the hangar, but only for a "completed" airplane. They gave me 24 hours
> to get rid of the plane "parts". I have complied with this (what a pain in
> the butt). They even demanded that a work bench and all tools be removed.
>
> Their issue "insurance". "What happens if your plane falls on you and you
> get crushed and hold us liable?" Of course, of the $419 a month I pay for a
> hangar, $23.00 goes to "insurance" (its a line item). My plane is insured
> with builder's insurance (John Helms, are you reading this?). (I think
> there may be some more underlying issues, but I can't put my finger on them
> yet).
>
> Questions: 1) Has anybody heard of this before? 2) When is the plane a
> plane? When it has wings but not flaps? Wings and flaps but not ailerons?
> Fuselage and wings, but no avionics? They are quoting a clause that says
> "no airplane repairs shall be undertaken in areas not designated for such
> repairs, except for routine maintenance".
>
> Need some advice here... don't want to set a precedence for this airport
> that may spread.
>
> jim
> Tampa
> Vandenberg Airport VDF (near Sun-N-Fun, so don't come here on your way to
> Sun-n-Fun).
>
I thought for a minute you were going to say you were in Illinois. The small
city owned airprts around here pull the same stuff. Usually it is dictated to
them from Illinois Deptartment of Transportation, Aeronautics..
The State wants to have the final say so in small airport management, I guess so
they can justify their Fat State Paychecks.......
Phil, Litchfield, IL building RV-6, flying Pitt's S1S
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Aircraft Technical Book Company" <winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Technical education |
Dan,
If you are looking for info on whats involved in getting the rating itself
then either call your local FSDO office or speak to the staff at a nearby
part 147 AMT school.
If you are looking for self study material (textbooks, test aids, ect.) then
click into our "other" web catalog http://ACtechbooks.com.
Also if you are looking for a nearby school, also click into the link above,
and then into the "Part 147 Schools" link on the top of the page. It will
display all the certificated schools by state and city with contact info.
Andy
>
> Listers ....
>
> Were can I learn more about the A&P rating?
>
> I've been curious what goes into the A&P rating. While I recognize it's
not necessary for what I'm about to embark upon, it seems to me that all
this effort I intend to put into my airplane might allow me to apply work
towards an A&P.
>
> Any advise or links greatly appreciated
>
> Dan
> Highland Village, TX
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Airport Problems |
Phil,
I don't think you comments about the Illinois Aeronautical Department are
true. I am based at Moline, Illinois and have no problems and neither do
any of the other many experimentals based as our class C airport. We have
built, assembled, and test flown several in just this last year. Everything
from a RV-4 to an L-29 Jet. No insurance requirement either. It all
depends on the airport commissioner or board.
Cy Galley
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson(at)mcleodusa.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Airport Problems
>
> Jim Norman wrote:
>
> >
> > OK Listers, here's a new problem...
> >
> > I'm putting my wings on my plane in a hanger that I rent. I have been
based
> > at this airport for almost 8 years (I have an Archer).
> >
> > The airport manager (without ANY warnings) shows up yesterday with
eviction
> > papers giving me 5 days to clean out the hangar. Why? Because we are
> > "building an airplane" at the airport and this is not allowed. Of
course,
> > my plane was "built" at home, painted in a shop, and transported to the
> > airport ready to bolt together. Its done except for wings, ailerons,
and
> > flaps.
> >
> > Also, of course, there are a dozen or more experimentals at this
airport.
> > Some, being built from scratch at the airport.
> >
> > Bottom line, after begging (and other distasteful measures) I was
allowed to
> > keep the hangar, but only for a "completed" airplane. They gave me 24
hours
> > to get rid of the plane "parts". I have complied with this (what a pain
in
> > the butt). They even demanded that a work bench and all tools be
removed.
> >
> > Their issue "insurance". "What happens if your plane falls on you and
you
> > get crushed and hold us liable?" Of course, of the $419 a month I pay
for a
> > hangar, $23.00 goes to "insurance" (its a line item). My plane is
insured
> > with builder's insurance (John Helms, are you reading this?). (I think
> > there may be some more underlying issues, but I can't put my finger on
them
> > yet).
> >
> > Questions: 1) Has anybody heard of this before? 2) When is the plane a
> > plane? When it has wings but not flaps? Wings and flaps but not
ailerons?
> > Fuselage and wings, but no avionics? They are quoting a clause that
says
> > "no airplane repairs shall be undertaken in areas not designated for
such
> > repairs, except for routine maintenance".
> >
> > Need some advice here... don't want to set a precedence for this airport
> > that may spread.
> >
> > jim
> > Tampa
> > Vandenberg Airport VDF (near Sun-N-Fun, so don't come here on your way
to
> > Sun-n-Fun).
> >
>
> I thought for a minute you were going to say you were in Illinois. The
small
> city owned airprts around here pull the same stuff. Usually it is dictated
to
> them from Illinois Deptartment of Transportation, Aeronautics..
> The State wants to have the final say so in small airport management, I
guess so
> they can justify their Fat State Paychecks.......
>
> Phil, Litchfield, IL building RV-6, flying Pitt's S1S
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Airport Problems |
Jim,
We are fighting this in northern VA right now. The good news is if the
airport gets any federal money, they cannot do what they did to you. Here
is a note from the EAA we received when we asked for help.
Good luck,
Carl Froehlich
RV-8A (flying)
Vienna, VA
Now to the basics:
FAA AC 150/5190-5, dated June 10, 2002,
http://www.faa.gov/arp/ACs/5190-5a1.pdf
FAA Order 5190-6A, http://www.faa.gov/arp/publications/orders/5190-6a.pdf
FAA Order 5100.38A - assurances extract -
http://www.faa.gov/arp/pdf/assrnap.pdf
Any airport developed under FAA granted federal funds signs a "grant of
assurance" (FAA Order 5100.38A) that says two things:
1st. Grant 22a - "It will make its airport available as an airport for
public use on fair and reasonable terms and without unjust discrimination,
to all types, kinds, and classes of aeronautical activities."; and
2nd Grant 22f - "It will not exercise or grant any right or privilege which
operates to prevent any person, firm, or corporation operating aircraft on
the airport from performing any services on its own aircraft with its own
employees (including, but not limited to maintenance, repair, and fueling)
that it may choose to perform."
FAA Order 5190.6A, paragraph 3-9(e)(1) - Restrictions on Self-Service - "Any
unreasonable restriction imposed on the owners or operators of aircraft
regarding the servicing of their own aircraft and equipment may be construed
as a violation of this policy. Where no attempt has been made to perform
such services for others, aircraft owners should be permitted to fuel, wash,
repair, paint and otherwise take care of their own aircraft. A restriction
which has the effect of diverting such business to a commercial operator
amounts to an exclusive monopoly of an aeronautical activity contrary to
law.":
plus paragraph 3-9(3) - ..."With respect to fuel, the aircraft owner may
assert the right to obtain fuel where he pleases and bring it onto the
airport to service his own aircraft...This policy also applies to aircraft
owners who have obtained FAA STC 's authorizing the use of auto gas in their
aircraft and who wish to self service their aircraft with mogas."
FAA AC 150/5190-5 paragraph 1-2 Agency Policy - "An exclusive rights
violation occurs when the airport sponsor excludes others, either
intentionally or unintentionally, from participating in an on-airport
aeronautical activity."
Bottom line - By the Airport management refusing to recognize the rights of
the experimental amateur-built aircraft owners right to perform all his/her
own maintenance per FAR 65.104 and failing to recognize that FAR 43.1(b)
specifically excludes the owners of amateur-built aircraft from complying
with all the maintenance procedures of FAR 43 the airport owner is
"intentionally creating an exclusive rights violation" by requiring all
experimental amateur-built aircraft owners to use A&P mechanics.
One thing the airport needs to be made aware of is that because FAR 43.1(b)
specifically excludes owners of experimental amateur-built aircraft from the
maintenance requirements of FAR 43 - that in effect moves all experimental
amateur-built aircraft maintenance into the "self-service" side of the
on-airport maintenance issue. And FAA Order 5190.6A grants owners of
aircraft the right to perform self-maintenance on their aircraft...
For you, the self-maintenance rules does not automatically dedicate that you
can bring a independent A&P on the airport to complete your annual condition
inspections and major repairs to your experimental amateur-built aircraft.
However, if the on-airport A&P's (at the FBO's, etc.) refuse to work on
amateur-built aircraft, then the airport managers have to requirement to
allow you to hire someone to do that work for you (FAA Order 5190.6A, para
3-9(e)(1)).
Hope that helps.
Randy
Randy Hansen
EAA Government & Industry Relations Specialist
rhansen(at)eaa.org
920-426-6522
888-322-4636, extension 6522
920-426-6560 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jim Norman
Subject: RV-List: Airport Problems
OK Listers, here's a new problem...
I'm putting my wings on my plane in a hanger that I rent. I have been based
at this airport for almost 8 years (I have an Archer).
The airport manager (without ANY warnings) shows up yesterday with eviction
papers giving me 5 days to clean out the hangar. Why? Because we are
"building an airplane" at the airport and this is not allowed. Of course,
my plane was "built" at home, painted in a shop, and transported to the
airport ready to bolt together. Its done except for wings, ailerons, and
flaps.
Also, of course, there are a dozen or more experimentals at this airport.
Some, being built from scratch at the airport.
Bottom line, after begging (and other distasteful measures) I was allowed to
keep the hangar, but only for a "completed" airplane. They gave me 24 hours
to get rid of the plane "parts". I have complied with this (what a pain in
the butt). They even demanded that a work bench and all tools be removed.
Their issue "insurance". "What happens if your plane falls on you and you
get crushed and hold us liable?" Of course, of the $419 a month I pay for a
hangar, $23.00 goes to "insurance" (its a line item). My plane is insured
with builder's insurance (John Helms, are you reading this?). (I think
there may be some more underlying issues, but I can't put my finger on them
yet).
Questions: 1) Has anybody heard of this before? 2) When is the plane a
plane? When it has wings but not flaps? Wings and flaps but not ailerons?
Fuselage and wings, but no avionics? They are quoting a clause that says
"no airplane repairs shall be undertaken in areas not designated for such
repairs, except for routine maintenance".
Need some advice here... don't want to set a precedence for this airport
that may spread.
jim
Tampa
Vandenberg Airport VDF (near Sun-N-Fun, so don't come here on your way to
Sun-n-Fun).
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV6A Wing attachment question |
To Pete Bodie: I put my wings on this spring and found it to be a ?#&~#*!*
of a job! In answer to your questions, you can't have any bolts going
through the F104 bulkhead, otherwise you can't slide the wings in. I built a
very strong saw-horse out of two layers of 3/4" ply-wood with a 10" wide
cross-member to support the fuselage right under the firewall, slotted to
clear the exhaust pipes.
The legs and cross-member were biscuit-glued together. It has to be strong,
because when your assistants (at least 2) are pushing the wing in and you
are trying to get that first bolt installed, considerable side pressure will
be exerted to the fuselage. You don't want your saw-horse to collapse!! The
tail is supported by a stand, (adjustable height) I built earlier during
the fuselage building process and is on a platform with casters. Hopefully
you made your spar spacers blocks a few thou wider than your wing spars!!!
Smear some anti-seize compound on the spar stubs to help their sliding-in.
The first bolt to install is one of the 3/8" ones that go through the
splice-plates. Then install the two " ones at the out-board end.Then your
assistants can relax while you install the rest of them!! (With the
occasional jiggle to help the job)
Installing the nuts and torquing them is a BIG job! Especially the ones
under the weldment top flange that supports the leg-tube. Be prepared to
"modify" some of your wrenches for this. I found that a double-offset
(3/8") ring-wrench was OK to reach that pesky bolt right in the corner near
the leg-tube, but it was too long to clear the side of the fuselage, so I
put a torch to it and put a 90 bend it half way down. I also suggest that
you fashion an aluminum strip with a releasable clip arrangement on the end
to hold a nut while starting the thread by rotating the bolt.
It took me 10 very long days to bolt and torque the 72 of them and working
in a confined space at 75 years of age was no joke!
Cheers!-- Henry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George McNutt" <gmcnutt(at)intergate.ca> |
| Subject: | Airport Problems |
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jim Norman
Subject: RV-List: Airport Problems
OK Listers, here's a new problem...
I'm putting my wings on my plane in a hanger that I rent. I have been based
at this airport for almost 8 years (I have an Archer).
The airport manager (without ANY warnings) shows up yesterday with eviction
papers giving me 5 days to clean out the hangar. Why? Because we are
"building an airplane" at the airport and this is not allowed. Of course,
my plane was "built" at home, painted in a shop, and transported to the
airport ready to bolt together. Its done except for wings, ailerons, and
flaps.
Also, of course, there are a dozen or more experimentals at this airport.
Some, being built from scratch at the airport.
Bottom line, after begging (and other distasteful measures) I was allowed to
keep the hangar, but only for a "completed" airplane. They gave me 24 hours
to get rid of the plane "parts". I have complied with this (what a pain in
the butt). They even demanded that a work bench and all tools be removed.
Their issue "insurance". "What happens if your plane falls on you and you
get crushed and hold us liable?" Of course, of the $419 a month I pay for a
hangar, $23.00 goes to "insurance" (its a line item). My plane is insured
with builder's insurance (John Helms, are you reading this?). (I think
there may be some more underlying issues, but I can't put my finger on them
yet).
Questions: 1) Has anybody heard of this before? 2) When is the plane a
plane? When it has wings but not flaps? Wings and flaps but not ailerons?
Fuselage and wings, but no avionics? They are quoting a clause that says
"no airplane repairs shall be undertaken in areas not designated for such
repairs, except for routine maintenance".
Need some advice here... don't want to set a precedence for this airport
that may spread.
jim
Tampa
Vandenberg Airport VDF (near Sun-N-Fun, so don't come here on your way to
Sun-n-Fun).
---------------------------------
Hi Jim
Read your rental/lease agreement very carefully, what does it say? Are all
aircraft in hangars required to have a current CofA?
Are there commercial maintenance operations on the airport, do they take
parts off and put them back on, do they have the same rental/lease
agreements as you??
If there are commercial operations are they paying the same (proportional)
lease rates as you?
Do the commercial operations pay the same (proportional) insurance fees?
Our airport CYNJ has different (double) rates for commercial leases.
What does the lease/rental agreement say about termination? And is the
workbench permanently attached to the building (illegal modification to
building ) or on wheels (temporary aircraft related acessory). It should all
be there in the lease fine print.
Depending on these and other questions do you have grounds to sue (or at
least threaten) for breach of contract?? Did I say read the rental/lease
agreement very very carefully??
One option might be to rent space in a commercial hangar to get the wings
and tail on, then surely it would be ok to have a assembled aircraft without
a current CofA in your hangar.
George McNutt
Langley BC
Beautiful sunney day, going flying!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gert <gert(at)execpc.com> |
rv-list
Hi Folks
I just bought a used io-360-a1b and want to store it for a while, I have
it sitting on a engine stand, flange down. I expect to be at least a
year away from starting it.
I took the fuel injector part off of the sump and capped the sump air
inlet, I also took off the magneto's, starter, alternator and fuel pump
and made aluminum plates to cover those holes.
would it be advisable to plug the open end of the crank shaft??
will oil seep out past the collar into the crank cavety??
should I take out the valve push rods so as to aliviate having at least
one valve half open and the tappet pushing on the cam lobe ??
I am thinking of pouring the engine full of oil to prevent rust from
forming as I am not sure I can control the humidety in my detached
garage and would like to preserve the camshaft.
for storage only, can I fill the engine with just cheap car oil, got
gallons of that stuff so would be convienent.
how much oil goes in approximately??
anybody found unexpected leakage points....I found one so far, the nose
seal leaks a bit :-( and am planning to replace this before I pour the
storage oil in.
ah, questions, questions, questions ..............
Thanks
Gert
--
is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV6A Wing attachment question |
Looking at my posting as displayed in the RV listing, apparently a couple of
"ALT" characters I used were not recognized by the e-mail processing down
stream: The out-board bolts referred to are the 1/4" ones and the bend in
the ring-wrench is 90 degrees. Pressing and holding "ALT" then typing "172"
(on the numeric key-pad) produces a nice compact 1/4 when the keys are
released. Similarly, "ALT 167" produces the nice small "o" degree sign. Try
it!
Henry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson(at)mcleodusa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Airport Problems |
Cy Galley wrote:
>
> Phil,
> I don't think you comments about the Illinois Aeronautical Department are
> true. I am based at Moline, Illinois and have no problems and neither do
> any of the other many experimentals based as our class C airport. We have
> built, assembled, and test flown several in just this last year. Everything
> from a RV-4 to an L-29 Jet. No insurance requirement either. It all
> depends on the airport commissioner or board.
>
> Cy Galley
> Editor, EAA Safety Programs
> cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson(at)mcleodusa.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Airport Problems
>
>
> >
> > Jim Norman wrote:
> >
>
> > >
> > > OK Listers, here's a new problem...
> > >
> > > I'm putting my wings on my plane in a hanger that I rent. I have been
> based
> > > at this airport for almost 8 years (I have an Archer).
> > >
> > > The airport manager (without ANY warnings) shows up yesterday with
> eviction
> > > papers giving me 5 days to clean out the hangar. Why? Because we are
> > > "building an airplane" at the airport and this is not allowed. Of
> course,
> > > my plane was "built" at home, painted in a shop, and transported to the
> > > airport ready to bolt together. Its done except for wings, ailerons,
> and
> > > flaps.
> > >
> > > Also, of course, there are a dozen or more experimentals at this
> airport.
> > > Some, being built from scratch at the airport.
> > >
> > > Bottom line, after begging (and other distasteful measures) I was
> allowed to
> > > keep the hangar, but only for a "completed" airplane. They gave me 24
> hours
> > > to get rid of the plane "parts". I have complied with this (what a pain
> in
> > > the butt). They even demanded that a work bench and all tools be
> removed.
> > >
> > > Their issue "insurance". "What happens if your plane falls on you and
> you
> > > get crushed and hold us liable?" Of course, of the $419 a month I pay
> for a
> > > hangar, $23.00 goes to "insurance" (its a line item). My plane is
> insured
> > > with builder's insurance (John Helms, are you reading this?). (I think
> > > there may be some more underlying issues, but I can't put my finger on
> them
> > > yet).
> > >
> > > Questions: 1) Has anybody heard of this before? 2) When is the plane a
> > > plane? When it has wings but not flaps? Wings and flaps but not
> ailerons?
> > > Fuselage and wings, but no avionics? They are quoting a clause that
> says
> > > "no airplane repairs shall be undertaken in areas not designated for
> such
> > > repairs, except for routine maintenance".
> > >
> > > Need some advice here... don't want to set a precedence for this airport
> > > that may spread.
> > >
> > > jim
> > > Tampa
> > > Vandenberg Airport VDF (near Sun-N-Fun, so don't come here on your way
> to
> > > Sun-n-Fun).
> > >
> >
> > I thought for a minute you were going to say you were in Illinois. The
> small
> > city owned airprts around here pull the same stuff. Usually it is dictated
> to
> > them from Illinois Deptartment of Transportation, Aeronautics..
> > The State wants to have the final say so in small airport management, I
> guess so
> > they can justify their Fat State Paychecks.......
> >
> > Phil, Litchfield, IL building RV-6, flying Pitt's S1S
> >
> >
>
I think I am referring more to the small town airports. The larger towns like
yours seem to have a hold on their property, I can cite many instances of little
town airports letting IDOT aeronautics dictate to them. ... Phil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Balch <kbalch1(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Technical education |
Hi Dan,
I'm currently attending a Part 147 AMT school in pursuit of my A&P.
Please contact me off-list with specific questions and I'll be happy to
address them directly.
Regards,
Ken Balch
RV-8 N118KB
Dan Ahearn wrote:
>
>Listers ....
>
>Were can I learn more about the A&P rating?
>
>I've been curious what goes into the A&P rating. While I recognize it's not necessary
for what I'm about to embark upon, it seems to me that all this effort
I intend to put into my airplane might allow me to apply work towards an A&P.
>
>Any advise or links greatly appreciated
>
>Dan
>Highland Village, TX
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Knicholas2(at)aol.com |
Would any of you guys out there with access to such information look up and
tell me of any AD's or service bulletins on a Lycoming 0-320E2D please.
Thank you!
Kim Nicholas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Airport Problems |
Then get some help from the FAA and EAA. I hope you saw the FAA orders list
in Carl Froehlich's message. He lists Randy Hansen is the contact man at EAA
govt(at)eaa.org. I know Randy and he will provide great help.
Just one more membership benefit of belonging to the EAA.
Cy Galley
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
P.S. I think if I moved to Lacon, Illinois Marshal County Airport, I would
not have your perceived State interference. Neil Pobanz does not behave in
that manner. He is the FBO at that airport, the American Bonanza Tech, and
works for us at EAA AirVenture.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson(at)mcleodusa.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Airport Problems
>
> Cy Galley wrote:
>
> >
> > Phil,
> > I don't think you comments about the Illinois Aeronautical Department
are
> > true. I am based at Moline, Illinois and have no problems and neither
do
> > any of the other many experimentals based as our class C airport. We
have
> > built, assembled, and test flown several in just this last year.
Everything
> > from a RV-4 to an L-29 Jet. No insurance requirement either. It all
> > depends on the airport commissioner or board.
> >
> > Cy Galley
> > Editor, EAA Safety Programs
> > cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson(at)mcleodusa.net>
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: RV-List: Airport Problems
> >
Club"
> >
> > >
> > > Jim Norman wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > >
> > > > OK Listers, here's a new problem...
> > > >
> > > > I'm putting my wings on my plane in a hanger that I rent. I have
been
> > based
> > > > at this airport for almost 8 years (I have an Archer).
> > > >
> > > > The airport manager (without ANY warnings) shows up yesterday with
> > eviction
> > > > papers giving me 5 days to clean out the hangar. Why? Because we
are
> > > > "building an airplane" at the airport and this is not allowed. Of
> > course,
> > > > my plane was "built" at home, painted in a shop, and transported to
the
> > > > airport ready to bolt together. Its done except for wings,
ailerons,
> > and
> > > > flaps.
> > > >
> > > > Also, of course, there are a dozen or more experimentals at this
> > airport.
> > > > Some, being built from scratch at the airport.
> > > >
> > > > Bottom line, after begging (and other distasteful measures) I was
> > allowed to
> > > > keep the hangar, but only for a "completed" airplane. They gave me
24
> > hours
> > > > to get rid of the plane "parts". I have complied with this (what a
pain
> > in
> > > > the butt). They even demanded that a work bench and all tools be
> > removed.
> > > >
> > > > Their issue "insurance". "What happens if your plane falls on you
and
> > you
> > > > get crushed and hold us liable?" Of course, of the $419 a month I
pay
> > for a
> > > > hangar, $23.00 goes to "insurance" (its a line item). My plane is
> > insured
> > > > with builder's insurance (John Helms, are you reading this?). (I
think
> > > > there may be some more underlying issues, but I can't put my finger
on
> > them
> > > > yet).
> > > >
> > > > Questions: 1) Has anybody heard of this before? 2) When is the
plane a
> > > > plane? When it has wings but not flaps? Wings and flaps but not
> > ailerons?
> > > > Fuselage and wings, but no avionics? They are quoting a clause that
> > says
> > > > "no airplane repairs shall be undertaken in areas not designated for
> > such
> > > > repairs, except for routine maintenance".
> > > >
> > > > Need some advice here... don't want to set a precedence for this
airport
> > > > that may spread.
> > > >
> > > > jim
> > > > Tampa
> > > > Vandenberg Airport VDF (near Sun-N-Fun, so don't come here on your
way
> > to
> > > > Sun-n-Fun).
> > > >
> > >
> > > I thought for a minute you were going to say you were in Illinois. The
> > small
> > > city owned airprts around here pull the same stuff. Usually it is
dictated
> > to
> > > them from Illinois Deptartment of Transportation, Aeronautics..
> > > The State wants to have the final say so in small airport management,
I
> > guess so
> > > they can justify their Fat State Paychecks.......
> > >
> > > Phil, Litchfield, IL building RV-6, flying Pitt's S1S
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> I think I am referring more to the small town airports. The larger towns
like
> yours seem to have a hold on their property, I can cite many instances of
little
> town airports letting IDOT aeronautics dictate to them. ... Phil
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Will & Lynda Allen" <linenwool(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Builders Bench plans |
I heard there are some plans for a re-configurable building bench out there
somewhere. Can someone point me in the right direction? I need more work
bench space in my garage already. (sorry wife, you'll have to park outside
now, must build airplane!) :)
Thanks,
Will Allen
RV8 emp.
North Bend, WA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Bundy" <ebundy(at)velocitus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: engine storage |
Filling the engine with oil is a great way to keep things in good shape.
The cheapest car oil you can find is fine (clean of course) and I seem to
remember putting in most of 3 cases (!) before that sucker finally filled
up. Put a pan or something underneath it because oil will find it's way out
during storage.
Ed Bundy RIVA 500+ hours
Boise, ID
> for storage only, can I fill the engine with just cheap car oil, got
> gallons of that stuff so would be convienent.
>
> how much oil goes in approximately??
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 0-320 E2D ad's? |
Go to:
http://www2.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/MainFram
e?OpenFrameSet
If the URL wraps in email and you can't click on it, use this one instead:
http://checkoway.com/url/?s=c051945
Click on "ADs by Make" on the left side, then click "T". Click the blue
triangle next to "Textron Lycoming, AVCO Corporation". Click "More Data..."
at the end of the page a couple of times, then click the blue triangle next
to "O-320-E2D".
Here's the heading list, for what it's worth:
98-17-11 10/19/98 Crankshafts
98-02-08 03/30/98 Crankshaft
96-09-10 07/15/96 Oil pump
95-26-02 01/24/96 Aviation Gasoline
87-10-06 R1 09/01/89 Rocker Arm Assembly
75-08-09 R3 08/18/77 Oil Pump Drive Shaft
73-23-01 R4 01/13/77 Piston Pin Assembly
66-20-04 08/27/66 Oil Filter Adapter Gasket
64-16-05 07/10/64 AC Pumps
63-23-02 R1 08/06/68 Exhaust Valves
59-10-07 Upon Receipt Cylinder Baffle Clamps
55-02-02 Upon Receipt Gasket
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D (fuselage)
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <Knicholas2(at)aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: 0-320 E2D ad's?
>
> Would any of you guys out there with access to such information look up
and
> tell me of any AD's or service bulletins on a Lycoming 0-320E2D please.
>
> Thank you!
>
> Kim Nicholas
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
| Subject: | Airport Problems |
Who owns the hangars - the airport or the FBO? To whom do you pay your
rent?
Bruce
Glasair III
-----Original Message-----
October 28, 2002 - November 02, 2002
RV-Archive.digest.vol-ns