RV-Archive.digest.vol-nz
December 14, 2002 - December 23, 2002
warms up.
Bill
Original Message -----
| From: | "Tracy Crook" <lors01(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate Engines |
>
> >
> > I have no problem with the development of automotive power and encourage
> those who are trying and would be more than willing to bolt one on the
front
> of my aircraft if it could meet my list of qualifications.
> >
> > The installed weight be no heavier than a Lycoming of comparable power.
> > Be able to fly in formation with another same model Lyco RV both using
the
> same manifold pressure.
> > Be able to run a Hartzell constant speed prop.
> > Fit into a cowling that would not take away from the good looks of an
RV.
>
> > Eustace Bowhay Blind Bay, B.C.
>
> I'm to the 'Three out of 4' point now. I thought I could see my way
clear
> to make my RD-1A/B reduction drive work with a Hartzell CS because it
would
> be relatively easy to add a port and get oil through the hollow prop
shaft.
> But I recently read that the oil pressure from governor is around 1200
psi.
>
> I'm not familiar with the plumbing of a Lyc. Can anyone briefly tell me
how
> the high pressure oil from the governor on the accessory case gets through
> the crank to the prop? I can't imagine the oil seals necessary to do
this.
>
> Tracy Crook
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate Engines |
>
--snip--
> Be able to fly in formation with another same model Lyco RV both using the same
manifold pressure.
Eustace:
It's unlikely that any engine other than a Lycoming could satisfy this
requirement, since the relationship between power and manifold pressure is
unique to each engine design. I think the parameter you should use here is
brake mean effective pressure (BMEP), which is what manifold pressure is giving
you a rough indication of.
Here's how some of the alternatives compare to Lycomings, based on numbers
published by Lycoming, Belted Air Power, and Subaru. (You'll want to view this
table with a non-proportional font, such as Courier.)
O-320 O-360 BAP1 BAP2 Egg1 Egg2
----- ----- ---- ---- ----
displ. 320 360 262 262 150 150
RPM 2400 2400 3111 3111 4978 4000
HP 120 135 120 135 120 120
BMEP 124 124 117 131 127 158
For the Lycomings I've used standard cruise conditions ("24-squared").
For the Belted Air Power engine, which is a 4.3-litre Chevy, I've used 8/9 of
rated RPM, which is equivalent to 2400 RPM for a Lycoming. BAP1 is putting out
120 HP to match the O-320, and BAP2 is putting out 135 HP to match the O-360.
The BAP engine "brackets" the Lycomings, in that it doesn't have to work as
hard as the O-320 to keep up with it, but has to work slightly harder than the
O-360 to keep up with it.
For the Eggenfellner Subaru, I've used 8/9 of peak power RPM (4978) for Egg1
and Eggenfellner's recommended cruise RPM (4000) for Egg2. I think Jan would
agree that 4978 RPM is too high for cruise. However, at 4000 RPM the BMEP is
significantly higher than the others just to maintain 120 HP, and is in fact
probably higher than the engine can produce at full throttle and a few thousand
feet of altitude. This is why I say that the Eggenfellner engine is a fine
choice for an RV-9, but perhaps slightly lacking for RV-7s and RV-8s.
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
-6 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Finn Lassen <finnlassen(at)netzero.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Airfoil Diagram & Van's Fuel Valve |
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>>Best advice for that fuel valve from Van's is to throw it directly into
>>>
>>>
>>the nearest trash can and buy something airworthy.
>>
>>
>I cussed my Van's valve for awhile too. After taking it apart and noticing
>the tapered cylinder shape I understood why it got sticky. From then on I
>would lift up slightly on the handle when I turned it and never had a
>problem again. I later eliminated all valves with my EFI fuel system.
>
>Tracy Crook
>
>
No, this should be archived: How to make Van's fuel valve work: pull and
turn.
Finn
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Bristol <bj034(at)lafn.org> |
Boy, now I feel better about auto engines!
> ... an auto engine can last many hundreds of
> hours in aircraft use...
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Meketa" <acgm(at)gvtc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: How do you secure wiring harnesses in the aft fuselage? |
Hello Yall
The term Mil-Spec itself has nothing do with the flammability or quality
of a particular item, just that it meets a certain specification. If my wire
ties are giving off enough fumes to cause a problem I will likely wish
I had a parachute.
George Meketa
RV-8, N444TX, 219.1 hours
----- Original Message -----
From: "Norman" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca>
Subject: Re: RV-List: How do you secure wiring harnesses in the aft
fuselage?
>
> > The plastic wrap makes me a little nervous because of flammability, and
> toxic
> > vapors that could result from a short situation, etc.
> > Electrical tape placed strategically with good flammability ratings
> instead?
> > Robert
>
> I must agree. That is why my plastic cable ties are all Mil Spec.
> I got them at Terminal Town
> http://www.terminaltown.com/index.htm
> The page with the ties is
> http://www.terminaltown.com/Pages/Page8.html
>
> They are made by Thomas&Bates
> The trademark is CATAMOUNT
> I have two sizes. The small are working for almost everything.
> Part # L-5-30-9-C Intermediate Cable Tie
> Length 5.6"
> Width 0.130"
> Tensile Strength 30 lbs / 134N
> Temp Rating 185F / 85C
> Max Wire Bundle 1.25"
> Tool / Setting L-200 / 3-5
> Material Nylon Natural
> Military Standard MS-3367-5-9
>
> Also available are various wire bundling products for high temperature
> areas. Check out this page:
> http://www.terminaltown.com/Pages/Page206.html
>
> I am striving to have every component of my aircraft the best possible.
> Might be one of the reasons that I have been building for 7 years. One of
> the others reasons would be that I have to work over 80 hours a week to
pay
> for it all.
>
>
> Norman Hunger
> RV6A Delta BC
>
>
> >
> > Norman wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > > I'm building and RV-9A and am wondering how you
> > > > are securing the aft fuselage wiring. The wire goes
> > > > through snap bushings on the bulkheads, but how do
> > > > you secure it between the bulkheads? Do you just
> > > > lace it together and let it dangle?
> > >
> > > Does the RV9 use J-stringers to stiffen the fuselage side skins like
my
> > > RV6A?
> > > I bundled my wires in plastic wrap then laid them in the J-stringers.
A
> few
> > > holes and some mil spec plastic tie wraps and they are very secure. I
> used
> > > Van's snap bushings at the bulkheads.
> > >
> > > Norman Hunger
> > > RV6A Delta BC
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson(at)mcleodusa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: References please -- WAS:Alternative Engine Questions |
Jim Jewell wrote:
>
> That "equally ancient V/6" that you refer to has an old Grandfather; The
> General Motors (Possibly Chevrolet back then) V/8 design, Is in some
> respects quite a lot older than many would believe. The first GM push rod
> overhead valve V/8 was a running prototype in 1917. The pushrod rockers
> required frequent manual oiling as they where external to the crankcase and
> oiling system.
> The first GM production V/8 I think was offered publicly in 1955. This was
> the fore runner of most all GM engines produced since then. The 283, 327,
> 305, 350, 400 CID. and others worked hard and have lived long and varied
> lives around the world.
>
> However the term "equally ancient" is at the very least stretching your
> point. The 4.3 Vortec V/6 that much of this alternative engine discussion
> seems to have centered on certainly has an old historic lineage. The Design
> changes that have transpired down through the years have breathed exiting
> new life into that old iron horse.
> A trip to a library or a web search will provide the seeker with a very long
> list of design changes. From the first offering of the V/6 (I'm uncertain as
> to the precise year) in the seventies or eighties to the present. The list
> is long. Many of the changes driven by anti pollution laws, some arising
> from the auto racing industry, a good many due to warranty issues.
>
> Some if not most where subtle changes. Others such as intake manifold runner
> design, exhaust system, combustion chamber modifications, hall effect
> ignition and individual port fuel injection have produced a powerful engine
> with a good record of reliability and endurance. The marine version seems to
> be a popular hard worker that stands up well to conditions simular to those
> in aircraft.
>
> Due to the Aircraft industry certification process the Lycoming design
> started out of the gate much more developed than it's automotive
> counterparts of that era (mid thirties). As the years have passed it to has
> gone through changes. The changes have in the main been borne out of better
> materials, machining and casting proceedures, and refinments driven by in
> the field failure mode discoverys, the dreaded ADs {|:-(!
>
> The fact that the thirties technology stood the test of time so well makes
> this topic very interesting.
> The fact that the automotive technology has come as far as it has is also
> good interesting topic material.
> The arguable parallels of the two that this disscusion has touched on are
> interesting, They come at the time when gasoline and diesel burning internal
> combustion piston engines might be seeing the end of their development
> stage. Some say this technology is nearing the end of its dominance as the
> chosen source of power what we refer to as the modern civilised world.
>
> Yes we are having a discussion here, All in All this discussion has been
> edifying, sometimes humorous, wide ranging and long, This after all is what
> the list is about.
>
> This thread will run it's course and come up again. In the meantime some
> more Experimental builders will create and put hours on their alternatives
> whatever they might choose. This will again result in more information to
> support yet another go around with this worthwhile thread.
>
> Please feel free to correct and or update this email as needed
> I need to learn.
>
> Jim In Kelowna .
>
What web-site do you find all this history?
I am one lycoming driver that is finding this thread very interesting and I hope
it never really "ends".
Phil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary" <rv9er(at)3rivers.net> |
| Subject: | Wheel pant openings |
When cutting the opening in the wheel pants where the tire protrudes, how much
clearance did you guys provide?
Thanks,
Gary
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary" <rv9er(at)3rivers.net> |
| Subject: | Lightspeed hall effect module |
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Lightspeed hall effect module timing (was failure)
Timing is checked at idle. Since the manifold pressure hose is removed
before the timing is checked, RPM does not affect timing setting.
If memory serves me right, Klaus's instructions do discuss setting timing
with a timing light.
Again the LEDs just get you in the ball park.
Carl.
Carl........RPM DOES affect the timing on the lightspeed Plasma II system. It
uses BOTH manifold pressure and RPM to decide where to set the timing. It senses
the RPM by counting the pulses it produces. It also has an RPM output which
can be hooked up to an electronic tachometer.
Gary
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lightspeed hall effect module failure |
> My questions are, why would you report this kind of incident
Because it could help save someone's life.
>and why would the safety board investigate an experiemental
> ignition system?
Because it could help save someone's life.
******
Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA)
RV-6A N47TD - First Flight 18 Dec 99
http://www.geocities.com/timrv6a
******
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Louis Willig <larywil(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: A moderated RV-List |
Gosh, I thought we was just sitting around with some beers having a
discussion.
Perhaps the list could have moderators, long time members who would have the
power to "edit" offensive or inflammatory material. Sometimes people say
things that are meant as harmless and it does not come across that way. For a
well run forum visit www.tractorbynet . It is the most civil, friendly
place on the net. It has moderators but more than that the people are just
good people and the forum is designed to allow a wide variety of topics.
Visit www.usjabiru.com for a look at their 8 cylinder 180/200 horse
engine under going development. It is priced around 15,000 I think, not
JR,
I have been on the list for 6+ years. I have been tempted to jump in when
some people start flaming or get off on a political tangent, but I have
never done so. I found out , early on, that nearly every one of us is
normal and even after a bad day or brain fart we will quickly return to
normal. I guess there are pros and cons to a moderated list. This
particular list has done very well without moderation because the list host
(Matt Dralle) has done his job well. He also has "the button", but has
probably never had to use it.
After many years of watching/listening moderated political debates, I long
to see two candidated on their own. The ensuing screaming and arguing would
probably give us a truer picture of the candidates position and abilities.
Similarly on this list, I get a good feel for what The RV builders think of
a particular subject and I get it fast. The really cool thing about this
list is that people who are smart enough to build an airplane are smart
enough to select what works best for them ( I do not include myself since I
bought my RV-4) When a question is asked and ten responses come back, we
can easily pick out the right from the wrong, and which of the "right" is
most appropriate for us.
In the back of my mind, I know that Matt and the rest of us can control the
chaos and sift thru the posts to get the good stuff out. And there is a lot
of good stuff.
Well, I actually am pounding a few rivets to install my Digitrak. Now if I
could just see those tiny little pins and #24 wire......
-
Louis I Willig
1640 Oakwood Dr.
Penn Valley, PA 19072
610 668-4964
RV-4, N180PF
190HP IO-360, C/S prop
255 exciting Hrs.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kyle Boatright" <kyle.boatright(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel pant openings |
The rule of thumb here is to give a finger width's clearance. I think this
information is also in the archives.
KB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary" <rv9er(at)3rivers.net>
Subject: RV-List: Wheel pant openings
>
> When cutting the opening in the wheel pants where the tire protrudes, how
much clearance did you guys provide?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gary
>
>
> ---
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Lightspeed hall effect module |
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Gary
Subject: RV-List: Lightspeed hall effect module
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Lightspeed hall effect module timing (was failure)
Timing is checked at idle. Since the manifold pressure hose is removed
before the timing is checked, RPM does not affect timing setting.
If memory serves me right, Klaus's instructions do discuss setting timing
with a timing light.
Again the LEDs just get you in the ball park.
Carl.
Carl........RPM DOES affect the timing on the lightspeed Plasma II system.
It uses BOTH manifold pressure and RPM to decide where to set the timing.
It senses the RPM by counting the pulses it produces. It also has an RPM
output which can be hooked up to an electronic tachometer.
Gary
---
I agree - but the timing change between typical idle speeds of 700-1000 RPM
is too small to make a difference.
Carl.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tracy Crook" <lors01(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate Engines |
Thanks for the info Bill. One last question: Where does the O-ring seal at
the prop contact the hub, the face of the flange or the hub pilot (2.25"
projection in center of hub)? The pilot on my redrive is only .25" long and
this may not be enough if the seal is at the pilot.
Tracy
>
> Tracy,
>
> Oil is piped from the governor via an external line to a port at the front
> of the engine. This port is between the two halves of the front main
> bearing. This part of the bearing has a reduced diam. creating a small
> chamber there.Holes in the crank and bearing at this point conduct the oil
> into the hollow crank, then to the prop. There are 3 seals involved (1)
an
> O ring seal where the prop mates to the crankshaft flange, this one never
> gives any trouble unless damaged during installation. (2 & 3), the front
and
> rear halves of the front main bearing. Some leakage occurs there back into
> the case but the governor has enough capacity to overcome normal
clearances.
> If the clearances become too large,the prop will not function once the oil
> warms up.
>
> Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tracy Crook" <lors01(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel pant openings |
Bernie Kerr had an interesting take on this subject that I thought made good
sense. The smaller the gap, the lower the drag so his thought was to raise
the level of the pant opening so that the lower edge of the pant was above
the point where the tire bulges around the contact patch. This requires the
smallest gap and would more than make up for the increased exposure of the
tire. Also results in less 'pant rash' on rough fields or crossing bumps.
Just a theory
Tracy
>
> The rule of thumb here is to give a finger width's clearance. I think
this
> information is also in the archives.
>
> KB
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gary" <rv9er(at)3rivers.net>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Wheel pant openings
>
>
> >
> > When cutting the opening in the wheel pants where the tire protrudes,
how
> much clearance did you guys provide?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wheel pant openings |
Be advised that different tires have different profiles and if you switch
tires you could not have enough space either for the sidewall or the tread.
Also, at least on my RV-8, the tire displaces sideways to the inside on
touchdown and scraped on the wheelpant. Upon switching to a firmer carcass
tire, Goodyear Flight Custom II, this stopped happening.
Randy Lervold
RV-8, 285 hrs.
www.rv-8.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kyle Boatright" <kyle.boatright(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Wheel pant openings
>
> The rule of thumb here is to give a finger width's clearance. I think
this
> information is also in the archives.
>
> KB
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gary" <rv9er(at)3rivers.net>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Wheel pant openings
>
>
> >
> > When cutting the opening in the wheel pants where the tire protrudes,
how
> much clearance did you guys provide?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> > ---
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Andair products fuel line fitting size? |
I bought the Andair fuel valve and Andair gascolator. Both have 3/8"
fittings. I do not have an in-line filter for two reasons: First, the
gascolator has a very fine mesh filter element cylinder that can be
unscrewed from the body and has 3 (or 4, I forget which) mesh sections round
the cylinder. Second, I followed, what I think was a brilliant idea of
Eustace Bowhay and Jim Rowe to mount the gascolator in the space between the
wing root and fuselage side. (As published in the August 96 RVator).Nice and
cool there and at a lower point than available on the firewall. Also, my
installation is BEFORE the Facet fuel-pump, thus preventing tank crud
getting into it. I have easy access to it through a hinged trap-door section
in the bottom portion of the WRF. This was done on my 6-A. The RVator
article says it should work on the 8's but doubt there is enough space to
mount it there on the 4's.
The "proof-of-the-pudding" fuel-flow test, with the A/C set at 17.5 degree
climb angle and 2 1/2 USG in each tank, that little Facet pump supplied fuel
at a rate of 36 USG per hour as measured right at the carb fitting! (Both
tanks).
Cheers!!-------Henry Hore
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
| Subject: | Wheel pant openings |
> Be advised that different tires have different profiles and
> if you switch tires you could not have enough space either
> for the sidewall or the tread. Also, at least on my RV-8, the
> tire displaces sideways to the inside on touchdown and
> scraped on the wheelpant. Upon switching to a firmer carcass
> tire, Goodyear Flight Custom II, this stopped happening.
Not only is what Randy says above true, one must consider flat tires. I
had a good finger width on the nose wheel fairing, yet it got a little
chewed up when I had a flat tire. It probably has about .75" clearance
now.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 237 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
| Subject: | Protection diodes on starter solenoid |
> >
> > Well, That does it. I've gotta throw in my 2 cents worth.
> > Convention of VOLTAGE flow:--Positive to negative
> > Convention of CURRENT flow:--negative to positive
> > A. Voltage flowes the electrons down the wire to the
> appliance.
OK, here is the way to tell how to install the diode: put two diodes on
the solenoid in parallel, one of them one way and the other the other
way. Connect to battery, energize solenoid and look for the one that
smokes. The other one is installed the correct way. Next thing we
know, someone will talk about priming the diodes.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 237 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John" <n1cxo320(at)salidaco.com> |
| Subject: | Fw: lightspeed timing |
Rv-Listers - I asked Klaus about the timing question brought up by a dual
Lightspeed Ignition user (I am one also) and here is Klaus' reply:
John at Salida, CO
----- Original Message -----
From: "Klaus Savier" <klaus(at)lightspeedengineering.com>
Subject: Re: lightspeed timing
> Dear John,
>
> Thanks for letting us know about this. We are not monitoring any lists.
>
> We have always recommended final timing adjustment and test using a strobe
> light please refer to the current manual on the website. It is
technically not
> possible for the LED light to be more than 5 degrees off. I suspect that
the
> user who found it to be way off had removed the cover of the Hall Effect
Module
> and rotated it 30 or 60 degrees when he re-installed it.
>
> I would appreciate it if you could post this information for us.
>
> Regards,
> Klaus Savier.
>
>
> John wrote:
>
> > Klaus,
> >
> > I have been running with dual Hall Effect units for some time now and
have
> > been 'happy." Tonight a posted message on the 'Matronics RV Net' had one
> > dual Hall Effect user stating that the timing as set using the LED
lights
> > resulted in 35 to 50-degree BTDC timing, and this poster strongly
> > recommended setting the units using a timing light. I would appreciate
your
> > comments.
> >
> > His message didn't say at what RPM he set the 25-degrees BTDC or any
other
> > technical info except to say the timing was off by the 35 to 50-degrees
his
> > timing light showed.
> >
> > would appreciate your views.
> >
> > John at Salida, Co
> >
> > n1cxo320(at)salidaco.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy Compton" <rdcompton(at)earthlink.net> |
Has anyone tried putting spades on the ailerons? If so, did you fabricate
them yourself or buy some "off the shelf"? How difficult was the
installation?
On the other hand, even if some could be made to work, would the spades put
unsafe stresses on the structure?
Randy Compton
RV-3 N84VF
Gulf Breeze, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
>
> Has anyone tried putting spades on the ailerons?
Why?
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 237 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Phillips <ripsteel(at)edge.net> |
| Subject: | Experience with Van's Gascolator |
Has anyone using Van's gascolator (was GAS-3, now GAS-4 in the catalog)
had any problems with servicing or leaks? I have seen much discussion
over the merit of using gascolators here on the list for years, but
would prefer hard experience in deciding on whether to use this one.
The Andair is nice, just too pricey for my pocketbook, so if the Van's
unit does the job well, I'd like to know!
Thanks from the PossumWorks in TN
Mark Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KostaLewis" <mikel(at)dimensional.com> |
>> Has anyone tried putting spades on the ailerons?
>Why?
Exactly. You will be hard pressed to find controls as harmonized and
perfectly balanced as those on the RV series. Why add weight and
complexity for something you may not need?
Unless you want to, of course.
Michael
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "WALTER KERR" <kerrjb(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel pant openings |
Bill Davis has done a superb job with the opening on the 8 after destroying
his orignals by dropping into a tortoise gopher hole :>(
Bill actually trace the outer perimeter of the wheel which made a very tight
gap. He put more gap at the rear than the front on the thought that on
landing, the tire bulges more to the rear than the front does. (just another
theory but probably true)
Bill replaced his vans with a sam james pair so we are finally going to get
an apples to apples comparison by a very fair judge:>)
Bernie Kerr
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tracy Crook" <lors01(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Wheel pant openings
>
>
> Bernie Kerr had an interesting take on this subject that I thought made
good
> sense. The smaller the gap, the lower the drag so his thought was to
raise
> the level of the pant opening so that the lower edge of the pant was above
> the point where the tire bulges around the contact patch. This requires
the
> smallest gap and would more than make up for the increased exposure of the
> tire. Also results in less 'pant rash' on rough fields or crossing bumps.
>
> Just a theory
>
> Tracy
>
>
>
> >
> > The rule of thumb here is to give a finger width's clearance. I think
> this
> > information is also in the archives.
> >
> > KB
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Gary" <rv9er(at)3rivers.net>
> > To:
> > Subject: RV-List: Wheel pant openings
> >
> >
> > >
> > > When cutting the opening in the wheel pants where the tire protrudes,
> how
> > much clearance did you guys provide?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Gary
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael McGee <jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Experience with Van's Gascolator |
>
>Has anyone using Van's gascolator (was GAS-3, now GAS-4 in the catalog)
>had any problems with servicing or leaks? I have seen much discussion
>over the merit of using gascolators here on the list for years, but
>would prefer hard experience in deciding on whether to use this one.
>The Andair is nice, just too pricey for my pocketbook, so if the Van's
>unit does the job well, I'd like to know!
>
>Thanks from the PossumWorks in TN
>Mark Phillips
Mine has been working fine since '96.
Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR
13B in gestation mode
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron spades |
>
> Has anyone tried putting spades on the ailerons?
No flames intended here, but, have you ever flown an RV??????
The LAST thing in the world it needs is spades! Have you ever flown an
airplane with spades? Spades are an attempt to make a lesser design fly
like an RV.
At any speed where you should be leaning on the ailerons, they control
forces are very light. As you approach 200 mph they stiffen up a little,
still they are perfectly harmonious and the stiffness only serves to warn
you that you are smokin at speeds far in excess of the manuvering speed and
you might want to push more carefully on all the control surfaces.
Remember, an RV is not a "great aerobatic airplane." It does great
aerobatics, but attempting to expand it's aerobatic envelope might lead to a
bad day.
DO NOT put spades on an RV. That of course is only my opinion..... You can
do what ever you choose. That is why they call it "experimental."
In my humble opinion....
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
P.S. If you want to tackle an RV "problem," figure out how to stop the
aileron rumble at full deflection. (problem is too strong a word, "slight
annoyance" would be better.)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LeastDrag93066(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron spades |
I was told that the aileron spades on one aerobatic biplane slowed it down by
5 knots.
Since the ailerons on my RV-3 only seem to get heavy above the maneuvering
speed, I would guess that you do not want to lighten the ailerons.
If you're looking for additional drag, just put all of the antenna's on the
outside of the aircraft. (The most I've seen on a RV (so far) is nine (9)
external antenna's.)
:-)
Jim Ayers
Less Drag Products, Inc.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Davis" <rvpilot(at)695online.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate Engines |
Tracy,
At the hub pilot. I don't think that .25" is going to do it. If memory
serves, the pilot is .5 to .75" long. Don't have one handy that I can
measure.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tracy Crook" <lors01(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Alternate Engines
>
>
> Thanks for the info Bill. One last question: Where does the O-ring seal
at
> the prop contact the hub, the face of the flange or the hub pilot (2.25"
> projection in center of hub)? The pilot on my redrive is only .25" long
and
> this may not be enough if the seal is at the pilot.
>
> Tracy
>
> >
> > Tracy,
> >
> > Oil is piped from the governor via an external line to a port at the
front
> > of the engine. This port is between the two halves of the front main
> > bearing. This part of the bearing has a reduced diam. creating a small
> > chamber there.Holes in the crank and bearing at this point conduct the
oil
> > into the hollow crank, then to the prop. There are 3 seals involved (1)
> an
> > O ring seal where the prop mates to the crankshaft flange, this one
never
> > gives any trouble unless damaged during installation. (2 & 3), the front
> and
> > rear halves of the front main bearing. Some leakage occurs there back
into
> > the case but the governor has enough capacity to overcome normal
> clearances.
> > If the clearances become too large,the prop will not function once the
oil
> > warms up.
> >
> > Bill
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Miller Robert <rmiller3(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: How do you secure wiring harnesses in the aft fuselage? |
It appears that some confusion exists in some of these notes as to the
expressed point.
So here it is:
Plastic ties are fine.
Plastic wrap is not fine.
Robert "gift for the obvious" Miller
Meketa wrote:
>
> Hello Yall
>
> The term Mil-Spec itself has nothing do with the flammability or quality
> of a particular item, just that it meets a certain specification. If my wire
> ties are giving off enough fumes to cause a problem I will likely wish
> I had a parachute.
>
> George Meketa
> RV-8, N444TX, 219.1 hours
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Norman" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: How do you secure wiring harnesses in the aft
> fuselage?
>
> >
> > > The plastic wrap makes me a little nervous because of flammability, and
> > toxic
> > > vapors that could result from a short situation, etc.
> > > Electrical tape placed strategically with good flammability ratings
> > instead?
> > > Robert
> >
> > I must agree. That is why my plastic cable ties are all Mil Spec.
> > I got them at Terminal Town
> > http://www.terminaltown.com/index.htm
> > The page with the ties is
> > http://www.terminaltown.com/Pages/Page8.html
> >
> > They are made by Thomas&Bates
> > The trademark is CATAMOUNT
> > I have two sizes. The small are working for almost everything.
> > Part # L-5-30-9-C Intermediate Cable Tie
> > Length 5.6"
> > Width 0.130"
> > Tensile Strength 30 lbs / 134N
> > Temp Rating 185F / 85C
> > Max Wire Bundle 1.25"
> > Tool / Setting L-200 / 3-5
> > Material Nylon Natural
> > Military Standard MS-3367-5-9
> >
> > Also available are various wire bundling products for high temperature
> > areas. Check out this page:
> > http://www.terminaltown.com/Pages/Page206.html
> >
> > I am striving to have every component of my aircraft the best possible.
> > Might be one of the reasons that I have been building for 7 years. One of
> > the others reasons would be that I have to work over 80 hours a week to
> pay
> > for it all.
> >
> >
> > Norman Hunger
> > RV6A Delta BC
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Norman wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > I'm building and RV-9A and am wondering how you
> > > > > are securing the aft fuselage wiring. The wire goes
> > > > > through snap bushings on the bulkheads, but how do
> > > > > you secure it between the bulkheads? Do you just
> > > > > lace it together and let it dangle?
> > > >
> > > > Does the RV9 use J-stringers to stiffen the fuselage side skins like
> my
> > > > RV6A?
> > > > I bundled my wires in plastic wrap then laid them in the J-stringers.
> A
> > few
> > > > holes and some mil spec plastic tie wraps and they are very secure. I
> > used
> > > > Van's snap bushings at the bulkheads.
> > > >
> > > > Norman Hunger
> > > > RV6A Delta BC
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Protection diodes on starter solenoid |
In a message dated 12/15/2002 11:07:56 AM Pacific Standard Time,
alexpeterson(at)usjet.net writes:
> OK, here is the way to tell how to install the diode: put two diodes on
> the solenoid in parallel, one of them one way and the other the other
> way. Connect to battery, energize solenoid and look for the one that
> smokes. The other one is installed the correct way. Next thing we
> know, someone will talk about priming the diodes.
Of course you need to prime them. You mean give them a shot of fuel before
startup, right? Whoops! Wrong sense of the word. My god man, don't you
know corroding diodes could kill us all. But make sure it's an epoxy type or
you will have to top coat it within 24hrs. (Place your favorite obligatory
smiley here).
However, sticking a needle in a less humorous vein, diodes are just check
valves for electrons. You always want your catch diodes placed across any DC
relay primary (some are actually install internally in certain relays) in a
"reverse biased" fashion. If you think about it, if you installed it
"forward biased" with +V on the anode (+) and Ground on the cathode (-)
(banded side), it would just burn up quickly as many electrons flow from
negative to positive thru a low internal resistance (producing lots of watts
of heat).
Since all of our aircraft (maybe not the Brits') are negative Ground
(Earth?), determine which terminal of the relay/contactor/solenoid will be at
Ground potential (when +V is attached to the opposite terminal) and attach
the cathode (banded side) this more negative terminal.
-GV (RV-6A N1GV 575hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick DeCramer" <diesel(at)rconnect.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel Pant Openings |
I have NOT fitted my wheel pants yet but I have fitted another set of wheel fairings
to a 600-6 low end tire. I later purchased "Michelin Air" 600-6 tires and
not only would they not fit the the opening but the entire fairing was too
narrow to enclose this beefier tire. My finish kit contained "Aero Trainer" tires,
the same brand which I once equipped my plane (Cessna 170) with while my
wife was learning to fly and could not get them to last until she soloed!! Beware,
tires are not equal just because they have the same size/ply rating.
Dick DeCramer
RV6 N500DD
0-320..baffle kit
Northfield, MN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randall Henderson" <randallh(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron spades |
> If you're looking for additional drag, just put all of the antenna's on
the
> outside of the aircraft. (The most I've seen on a RV (so far) is nine (9)
> external antenna's.)
>
> :-)
>
> Jim Ayers
> Less Drag Products, Inc.
But who's counting, eh Jim?
;-)
Randall Henderson
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Protection diodes on starter solenoid |
You blew it in the last paragraph of your posting, GV.
H.H.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com> |
Something to fly while you build your RV:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1874584378
&category=26428
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
Do not archve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
Don't anyone bid on it. IT'S MINE!!!
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: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com>
Subject: RV-List: B25
>
> Something to fly while you build your RV:
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1874584378
> &category=26428
>
> -
> Larry Bowen
> Larry(at)BowenAero.com
> http://BowenAero.com
> Do not archve
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RGray67968(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Experience with Van's Gascolator |
In a message dated 12/15/02 1:20:47 PM Pacific Standard Time,
ripsteel(at)edge.net writes:
> Has anyone using Van's gascolator (was GAS-3, now GAS-4 in the catalog)
> had any problems with servicing or leaks? I have seen much discussion
> over the merit of using gascolators here on the list for years, but
> would prefer hard experience in deciding on whether to use this one.
> The Andair is nice, just too pricey for my pocketbook, so if the Van's
> unit does the job well, I'd like to know!
>
> Thanks from the PossumWorks in TN
> Mark Phillips
>
Hey Mark...........Mr. Possum :
),
I put Vans gascolator on my RV6. It's mounted as low as possible on the right
side firewall. I made a real nice custom bracket the secures the unit and
added a 'brace' which is kind of a bolt in place strap for the bottom of the
cup. It's not going anywhere. I've got a hole the exact size of the fuel
tester in the lower cowl that goes unnoticed. Mine leaked at the 'O' ring
from jump street anytime the facet pump was on. No leak with the pump off. I
tried about 5 different 'O' rings of different sizes and NONE would eliminate
the little dribble when the pump was on. I finally called vans who put me in
contact with the supplier. They told me they only had 1 or 2 cases of the
'dribbles' and said one of the components must be a tad out of round. They
sent me a NEW unit NO CHARGE and FREE SHIPPING about 3 days later. Although
I've never caught any water in 115 hours, I was glad I had it during the 1st
few tanks of gas. I pulled the screen after 10 hours and found a few micro
particles of ??? Not much but I worry about fuel contamination.
Rick Gray RV6 (Ohio) at the Buffalo Farm (Mr. Buffalo) & would do Vans
Gascolator again no questions asked
archive this one
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Moore, Warren" <Warren.Moore(at)tidelandsoil.com> |
| Subject: | gascolator mounting. |
I mounted an Andair gascolator on the lower part my RV4 firewall. This
part of the firwall is angled, so while on the ground the gascolator is
pretty much vertical, but in level flight it will tilted forward about
30deg. Is this ok, or should I bend the mounting
ftange to make it more vertical in normal flight?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________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris <chrisw3(at)cox.net> |
RV-list
| Subject: | Primer and paint question |
I'm not looking to start a debate even though this probably will I just
had a simple question that I think would take a long time to find in the
archives.
I have been reading about some primers that require you to put the top
coat on with in a short time after putting the primer on. I was
wondering why that is and would be such a primer be ok for areas that
were not going to ever get a top coat (the inside stuff)?
--
Chris Woodhouse
3147 SW 127th St.
Oklahoma City, OK 73170
405-691-5206 (home)
chrisw(at)programmer.net
N35 20.492'
W97 34.342'
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tracy Crook" <lors01(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate Engines |
Right Bill. Now I know what direction to go. As Jim suggested, I'll have
to put a threaded extension on the pilot. The hole through the Prop shaft
will make this fairly easy to do.
The governor will be the harder part. I had assumed that engine oil
pressure would be sufficient but that is out. I'll probably fall back on
automotive technology and use a power steering pump for the high pressure
oil.
Thanks to all who offered useful info & suggestions.
Tracy
>
> Tracy,
>
> At the hub pilot. I don't think that .25" is going to do it. If memory
> serves, the pilot is .5 to .75" long. Don't have one handy that I can
> measure.
>
> Bill
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tracy Crook" <lors01(at)msn.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Alternate Engines
>
>
> >
> >
> > Thanks for the info Bill. One last question: Where does the O-ring
seal
> at
> > the prop contact the hub, the face of the flange or the hub pilot (2.25"
> > projection in center of hub)? The pilot on my redrive is only .25" long
> and
> > this may not be enough if the seal is at the pilot.
> >
> > Tracy
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill VonDane" <n8wv(at)vondane.com> |
"vansairforce"
| Subject: | Off Topic - Electric Motor |
I have a Harbor Freight belt sander (as I am sure a lot of you have too) and I
need a new motor... Has any found a good source foe replacement electric motors
that don't cost more then a new tool!?
Thanks...
-Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
| Subject: | greasy electrons |
I think Gus's comment about protection of the switches is important but
slightly off.
The main use of these diodes is to let magnetic energy stored in the coil
releive itself rather than trying to jump across the opening master or
starter switch, causing a life shortening arc.
But, I personally know of several cases where a failed relief diode was
wiping out other integrated circuits, several of which were turned off when
they were wiped out. This was because there was enough capacitance in the
integrated circuit to allow the current surge to backflow and oscillate on
the ground side of the integrated circuit even though it was opened on the
positive side of the circuit. Electrons tend to be very greasy and go
wherever they want, usually when you lest expect it.
Most output drivers for coils used in integrated control circuits use a 70
volt zener doide as a failsafe backup on the outputs and the grounds, but a
circuit not designed to drive coils may not have this protection. In the
spike testing I've done with automotive relays and injector coils I've seen
in excess of 1000 volts, and one multi coil circuit was putting out an
excess of 30 amps for several micro seconds.
So, my point here is do not test fire those solenoids without being sure the
diodes are installed correctly. Or at least pull your expensive toys out
prior to a smoke test of the coils.
W
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Colorado Builders |
| From: | "Gannon, Terence" <Terence.Gannon(at)trican.ca> |
Folks -- anybody who either knows or has an email address for Orlo
Ellison, in Colorado, please contact me off list. He flies (or at least
flew, at one point), a plane called a Lockheed 60. Thank you very much
and sorry for the interruption. Best regards...
Terry in Calgary
RV-6 S/N 24414
"Wings"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Phillips <ripsteel(at)edge.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Off Topic - Electric Motor |
Hi Bill-
My HF sander (4" belt, 6" disc) combo just got replaced after 4 years of hard abuse
because the sprocket on the motor finally stripped out & trashed the belt
etc.- HF told me they couldn't get spares-
bought an almost identical unit from Lowes marketed as a "Delta" that probably
came off the same assembly line and cheerfully paid the $90 or so just because
I get so much use out of it. Send me a
photo of the motor if you can (or model # of the unit and/or motor) and if it's
the same as my old one you can have the motor!
From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark do not achive
Bill VonDane wrote:
>
> I have a Harbor Freight belt sander (as I am sure a lot of you have too) and
I need a new motor... Has any found a good source foe replacement electric motors
that don't cost more then a new tool!?
>
> Thanks...
>
> -Bill
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | panamared2(at)brier.net |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron spades |
There was an article in XX Years of the RVator. Owner put full span
ailerons on his RV-4 and to lessen the stick forces he added spades. He
used the RV for competion aerobatics. He was an aerobatic instructor at a
west coast aerobatic school. He stated that above 155 mph the aircraft was
not too stable in roll axis.
Bob
>Has anyone tried putting spades on the ailerons? If so, did you fabricate
>them yourself or buy some "off the shelf"? How difficult was the
>installation?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick DeCramer" <diesel(at)rconnect.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Chris Primers & topcoats |
Chris...
Contrary to most responses, most primers do NOT provide a good moisture barrier
and require a topcoat (paint) to seal the surface. Most modern primers must
be coated within an allowable time frame to affect a chemical bond with the overcoat
which is the ultimate purpose of using primer. There is another bonding
called a mechanical bond which means scuff sanding the primer so the paint can
adhere to the now rougher primer which works but is not as effective as a chemical
bond. Primers are designed to make paint adhere better and should be
applied according to the manufacturers bulletins to perform well including the
time factor as the chemical makeup varies from brand to brand.
Dick DeCramer
RV6
a novice but experienced painter
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Throttle Quadrants |
| From: | "Phil Jones" <phil.jones(at)medpacs.com> |
Does anyone have any thoughts on putting Throttle Quadrants in a rv7a rather then
Vernier & Push-Pull in the panel? All my flying life I have never like that
I have to use my left hand to fly with and my "good" hand to just control the
engine. Is there any reason(s) (other then the co-pilot would have problem getting
at them) that I might be missing.
Phil Jones
Hartland WI
RV7A right wing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com> |
| Subject: | gascolator mounting. |
I'd just make sure the drain on the gascolator is at the lowest point when
you are sitting 3-point on the ground.
RV-4 N311SV (waiting for airworthiness inspection)
--
Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA
Network Manager
Union Safe Deposit Bank
209-946-5116
-----Original Message-----
From: Moore, Warren [mailto:Warren.Moore(at)tidelandsoil.com]
Subject: RV-List: gascolator mounting.
I mounted an Andair gascolator on the lower part my RV4 firewall. This
part of the firwall is angled, so while on the ground the gascolator is
pretty much vertical, but in level flight it will tilted forward about
30deg. Is this ok, or should I bend the mounting
ftange to make it more vertical in normal flight?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________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joshua Siler" <joshs(at)ninatek.com> |
| Subject: | Throttle Quadrants |
Running all the avionics takes quite a bit of dexterity in an IFR
environment - not a good time to take your hand off the stick to rotate
a couple OBS knobs, set up the GPS, dial in the next frequency, set the
transponder etc. VFR its probably doable.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Phil Jones
Subject: RV-List: Throttle Quadrants
Does anyone have any thoughts on putting Throttle Quadrants in a rv7a
rather then Vernier & Push-Pull in the panel? All my flying life I have
never like that I have to use my left hand to fly with and my "good"
hand to just control the engine. Is there any reason(s) (other then the
co-pilot would have problem getting at them) that I might be missing.
Phil Jones
Hartland WI
RV7A right wing
________________________________________________________________________________
SoCAL-RVlist
| From: | Laird Owens <owens(at)aerovironment.com> |
| Subject: | Aircraft for Sale Web Site |
Thanks to all those who sent along messages.
Mission accomplished.
Laird RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glenn P. Wilkinson" <gpw(at)accucomm.net> |
-Has anyone tried paint stripper for fiberglass? Results, Problems?
-Has anyone used Randolph's water-based polyurethane paint? Results, Problems?
Glenn
654RV
Milledgeville, GA (MLJ)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Throttle Quadrants |
I've heard that the plans for the left-side throttle in a Falco are
quite good, but I haven't seen the layout myself. So far I haven't seen
a left-side throttle arrangement that I liked, there always seems to be
a little slop in the system, or the system is too "tight", or whatever.
So for me it's a single throttle in the middle, although in a
different configuration.
My plan for my RV-7 is to fly it from the right seat. In addition to
that, i'm planning on a center-mounted throttle quadrant, between the
seats. I have a surplus throttle quadrant from an F-104 or -105 that I
plan to use for this. It has a built in "speed brake" switch
(extend-retract) which I plan to wire to the flaps, a PTT, and an IGN
(ignition?) switch.
I haven't worked out the geometry of exactly where it will go yet, but I
expect to mount the pivot point for it either just ahead of or just
behind the forward spar, and have an arm on it long enough to get the
handle up above my legs.
Someday i'll start making marks on drawings and get something mocked up,
when I get that far i'll put something on my website.
-RB4
RV7 Empennage
Phil Jones wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any thoughts on putting Throttle Quadrants in a rv7a rather
then Vernier & Push-Pull in the panel? All my flying life I have never like that
I have to use my left hand to fly with and my "good" hand to just control the
engine. Is there any reason(s) (other then the co-pilot would have problem
getting at them) that I might be missing.
>
> Phil Jones
> Hartland WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Andair products fuel line fitting size? |
My Andair fuel valve uses 3/8 fittings in and out.
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, electrical (still)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Piavis <piavis(at)pacbell.net> |
I procured an older Chicago Pneumatic squeezer model CP-251. This tool was
evidently used for serious aircraft production in the 40's and came with a
huge honkin' c-frame that weighs about 15 lbs (power unit is actually fairly
light), and has a reach depth of about 6 inches. Unfortunately it needs some
really long rivet sets. This tool has a CP-1 yoke frame and will accommodate
a standard c-frame for a newer CP-351 squeezer (heavy duty). Does anyone
have a source for these c-frames? The "standard" c-frame has a 2 1/8" reach
with a Chicago Pneumatic part number P-009530. A local air tool supply wants
almost $400 for a standard c-frame and I think I can have one machined for
half that. Don't confuse this model for the CP-215 model which is generally
the smaller one available from Avery/ Brown etc.
Please reply off line as I only receive the digest.
Thanks,
Jim Piavis
Mountain View, CA
RV-7 waiting on wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Piavis <piavis(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | C-Frame for Rivet Squeezer |
I procured an older Chicago Pneumatic squeezer model CP-251. This tool was
evidently used for serious aircraft production in the 40's and came with a
huge honkin' c-frame that weighs about 15 lbs (power unit is actually fairly
light), and has a reach depth of about 6 inches. Unfortunately it needs some
really long rivet sets. This tool has a CP-1 yoke frame and will accommodate
a standard c-frame for a newer CP-351 squeezer (heavy duty). Does anyone
have a source for these c-frames? The "standard" c-frame has a 2 1/8" reach
with a Chicago Pneumatic part number P-009530. A local air tool supply wants
almost $400 for a standard c-frame and I think I can have one machined for
half that. Don't confuse this model for the CP-215 model which is generally
the smaller one available from Avery/ Brown etc.
Please reply off line as I only receive the digest.
Thanks,
Jim Piavis
Mountain View, CA
RV-7 waiting on wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ed_Cole(at)maximhq.com |
| Subject: | C-Frame for Rivet Squeezer |
Jim,
have you talked with Ace Campbell on this ? He might be able to help .
Ed Cole
Maxim Integrated Products
Bldg. 120 Ext. 6605
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Piavis [SMTP:piavis(at)pacbell.net]
> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 2:16 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: C-Frame for Rivet Squeezer
>
>
> I procured an older Chicago Pneumatic squeezer model CP-251. This tool was
> evidently used for serious aircraft production in the 40's and came with a
> huge honkin' c-frame that weighs about 15 lbs (power unit is actually
> fairly
> light), and has a reach depth of about 6 inches. Unfortunately it needs
> some
> really long rivet sets. This tool has a CP-1 yoke frame and will
> accommodate
> a standard c-frame for a newer CP-351 squeezer (heavy duty). Does anyone
> have a source for these c-frames? The "standard" c-frame has a 2 1/8"
> reach
> with a Chicago Pneumatic part number P-009530. A local air tool supply
> wants
> almost $400 for a standard c-frame and I think I can have one machined for
> half that. Don't confuse this model for the CP-215 model which is
> generally
> the smaller one available from Avery/ Brown etc.
>
> Please reply off line as I only receive the digest.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jim Piavis
> Mountain View, CA
> RV-7 waiting on wings
>
>
>
>
>
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: | "Randy Compton" <rdcompton(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron spades |
> No flames intended here, but, have you ever flown an RV??????
Yes, I have. I own and fly an RV-3.
> The LAST thing in the world it needs is spades! Have you ever flown an
> airplane with spades? Spades are an attempt to make a lesser design fly
> like an RV.
No flames intented here, but have YOU ever flown a plane with spades? I
have, and they are an absolute delight in roll. I really don't think
putting spades on a Pitts or an Extra is done so as to make "a lesser design
fly like an RV."
> At any speed where you should be leaning on the ailerons, they control
> forces are very light. As you approach 200 mph they stiffen up a little,
I find that at 150 knots (about 173mph) the control forces do more than
stiffen up a "little." But then again here I go comparing the forces to
machines like the Pitts, or the F-14, or the A-4.
> still they are perfectly harmonious
At 150 knots the forces are not harmonious. On my -3 anyway the controls
are much more sensitive in pitch than in roll. But if this is what defines
"harmonious", then I need to get back to my Aero 410 Flight Test professor
and set him straight.
>and the stiffness only serves to warn you that you are smokin at speeds far
>in excess of the manuvering speed and you might want to push more carefully
>on all the control surfaces.
About the only thing I agree with you on so far. Yes, at 150 knots I am
above the manuvering speed and caution is advised.
One thing though, everyone seems to be pointing out this natural tendency of
the plane to "warn" about high speed, but this is only in roll. There seems
to be no concern about any warning in pitch...and according to Van at the
Vne of 186kias in an RV-3 there are 17g's available. Seems you'd want some
type of limiting feel here as well...if you want to be consistent with your
opposition to spades based on control feel.
> Remember, an RV is not a "great aerobatic airplane." It does great
> aerobatics, but attempting to expand it's aerobatic envelope might lead to
a
> bad day.
Aha! Another point of agreement.
> DO NOT put spades on an RV. That of course is only my opinion..... You
>can do what ever you choose. That is why they call it "experimental."
No, I probably won't fool with spades. I doubt the airframe would be able
to handle the stress of large stick displacements at higher speeds. Spades
would make it too easy to snap the stick over and turn the horizon into a
blur. Who wants that crap?
> In my humble opinion....
>Tailwinds,
>Doug Rozendaal
"Humble" ?? Oh my, here we go disagreeing again. But no flames intended,
you understand.
Randy Compton
RV-3 N84VF
Gulf Breeze, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kyle Boatright" <kyle.boatright(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Throttle Quadrants |
Check the archives. My Tracy Saylor supplied system works VERY well...
KB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Prior" <rv7(at)b4.ca>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Throttle Quadrants
>
> I've heard that the plans for the left-side throttle in a Falco are
> quite good, but I haven't seen the layout myself. So far I haven't seen
> a left-side throttle arrangement that I liked, there always seems to be
> a little slop in the system, or the system is too "tight", or whatever.
> So for me it's a single throttle in the middle, although in a
> different configuration.
>
> My plan for my RV-7 is to fly it from the right seat. In addition to
> that, i'm planning on a center-mounted throttle quadrant, between the
> seats. I have a surplus throttle quadrant from an F-104 or -105 that I
> plan to use for this. It has a built in "speed brake" switch
> (extend-retract) which I plan to wire to the flaps, a PTT, and an IGN
> (ignition?) switch.
>
> I haven't worked out the geometry of exactly where it will go yet, but I
> expect to mount the pivot point for it either just ahead of or just
> behind the forward spar, and have an arm on it long enough to get the
> handle up above my legs.
>
> Someday i'll start making marks on drawings and get something mocked up,
> when I get that far i'll put something on my website.
>
> -RB4
> RV7 Empennage
>
> Phil Jones wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone have any thoughts on putting Throttle Quadrants in a rv7a
rather then Vernier & Push-Pull in the panel? All my flying life I have
never like that I have to use my left hand to fly with and my "good" hand to
just control the engine. Is there any reason(s) (other then the co-pilot
would have problem getting at them) that I might be missing.
> >
> > Phil Jones
> > Hartland WI
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Galati" <rick07x(at)earthlink.net> |
NASA's latest experiments in wing warping have inspired me. However, after
ruling out a wing warping apparatus on my RV-6A as a little too ambitious, I
have decided to install honeycomb composite canards instead. Please
listers, and you know who you are, don't hesitate to come forward with
dead-on insights as to the optimum surface area, station location,
and angle of incidence values needed for the flight parameters of an RV-6A.
Don't hold back. Coupled with an alternative engine that can run on
the flammable fumes of combustible tie-wrap, I just might be
on to something uncontroversial! Randy, if you are out
there buddy, I feel your pain. --- Rick Galati
--- rick07x(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: gascolator mounting. |
"Van Artsdalen, Scott" wrote:
>
>
> I'd just make sure the drain on the gascolator is at the lowest point when
> you are sitting 3-point on the ground.
>
> RV-4 N311SV (waiting for airworthiness inspection)
I don't think there is any way possible to get a firewall-mounted
gascolator drain (and keep the gascolator within the cowl...) to be the
lowest point in the fuel system of a taildragger RV with the little
wheel on the ground!
I suspect that is why we have sumps on each tank. ;-)
That is also why some builders doubt the value of a gascolator........
Sam Buchanan (RV-6, gascolated due to tradition)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron spades |
Randy:
Have you considered an aerodynamically boosted aileron? It would be quite a
bit more complex to make than a spade, but cleaner in cruise. And you only
have to do one side.
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
-6 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ross Schlotthauer <rdschlotthauer(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Best $300 I ever spent / garage heater |
RVers,
I broke down and spent the best $300 of the project a
couple weeks ago. I have a small unheated hanger that
is attached to the side of my house, sits in a
residential neighborhood, and is commonly referered to
as a "two car garage" by non RV types. I found that
as winter set in here in north Idaho I began to spend
less and less time in the hanger due to quite
uncomfortable temperatures. I really wanted to have
some heat out there but figured it was no use without
insulation. I have essential building equipment on
all walls and in every corner of the hanger and
couldn't stomach the thought of giving up precious
building time insulating. I also have a two car
uninsulated metal rollup door that I figured would be
a hassle to try and insulate.
It was suggested to me by one of my fellow energy
concious Idahoans that I just buy a big heater and
forget about insulation. That mentality appealed to
me greatly so I went down to Lowes home improvement
and bought a 30,000 btu/hour vent free natural gas
heater with a thermostatically controlled blower and
all the plumbing fixins. I set it in the corner by my
gas water heater and furnace and fired it up. In
about 30 minutes it brings my hanger temp from 40
degrees F to 65 degrees F and I have to either turn it
down or work in shorts.
I calculate that I am burning $0.24 per hour worth of
gas when I am running full power on the heater. For
that price I can afford to throw a little heat
outside. I highly recommend the $300 investment to
anyone.
Ross Schlotthauer
RV7 Fuse (in comfort)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com> |
| Subject: | gascolator mounting. |
True, the back of the tanks will be lower sitting on the ground. I just
figured that anything that does get caught in the bottom of the gascolator
will drain easier since one would hope you'd be doing the draining while it
was sitting tail-low on the ground. Of course that will only work for water
and small particles, not for larger objects that might get caught in the
bottom of your gascolator like twigs and deer.
It's what I did on mine. But I haven't flown yet and I'm no expert. I'll
let you know if I find any twigs or deer in my gascolator when I post my
first flight report which should be soon.
For those of you who have no sense of humor, uh, too bad.
--
Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA
Network Manager
Union Safe Deposit Bank
209-946-5116
-----Original Message-----
From: Sam Buchanan [mailto:sbuc(at)hiwaay.net]
Subject: Re: RV-List: gascolator mounting.
"Van Artsdalen, Scott" wrote:
>
>
> I'd just make sure the drain on the gascolator is at the lowest point when
> you are sitting 3-point on the ground.
>
> RV-4 N311SV (waiting for airworthiness inspection)
I don't think there is any way possible to get a firewall-mounted
gascolator drain (and keep the gascolator within the cowl...) to be the
lowest point in the fuel system of a taildragger RV with the little
wheel on the ground!
I suspect that is why we have sumps on each tank. ;-)
That is also why some builders doubt the value of a gascolator........
Sam Buchanan (RV-6, gascolated due to tradition)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com> |
I think you're trying to fit the RV into a mission profile for which it
wasn't designed. I don't know Van all that well but I think I understand
what he designed these planes for and it wasn't hardcore aerobatics. You
may have to stick with the Pitts' and Extra's and so forth.
--
Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA
Network Manager
Union Safe Deposit Bank
209-946-5116
-----Original Message-----
From: Randy Compton [mailto:rdcompton(at)earthlink.net]
Subject: Re: RV-List: Aileron spades
> No flames intended here, but, have you ever flown an RV??????
Yes, I have. I own and fly an RV-3.
> The LAST thing in the world it needs is spades! Have you ever flown an
> airplane with spades? Spades are an attempt to make a lesser design fly
> like an RV.
No flames intented here, but have YOU ever flown a plane with spades? I
have, and they are an absolute delight in roll. I really don't think
putting spades on a Pitts or an Extra is done so as to make "a lesser design
fly like an RV."
> At any speed where you should be leaning on the ailerons, they control
> forces are very light. As you approach 200 mph they stiffen up a little,
I find that at 150 knots (about 173mph) the control forces do more than
stiffen up a "little." But then again here I go comparing the forces to
machines like the Pitts, or the F-14, or the A-4.
> still they are perfectly harmonious
At 150 knots the forces are not harmonious. On my -3 anyway the controls
are much more sensitive in pitch than in roll. But if this is what defines
"harmonious", then I need to get back to my Aero 410 Flight Test professor
and set him straight.
>and the stiffness only serves to warn you that you are smokin at speeds far
>in excess of the manuvering speed and you might want to push more carefully
>on all the control surfaces.
About the only thing I agree with you on so far. Yes, at 150 knots I am
above the manuvering speed and caution is advised.
One thing though, everyone seems to be pointing out this natural tendency of
the plane to "warn" about high speed, but this is only in roll. There seems
to be no concern about any warning in pitch...and according to Van at the
Vne of 186kias in an RV-3 there are 17g's available. Seems you'd want some
type of limiting feel here as well...if you want to be consistent with your
opposition to spades based on control feel.
> Remember, an RV is not a "great aerobatic airplane." It does great
> aerobatics, but attempting to expand it's aerobatic envelope might lead to
a
> bad day.
Aha! Another point of agreement.
> DO NOT put spades on an RV. That of course is only my opinion..... You
>can do what ever you choose. That is why they call it "experimental."
No, I probably won't fool with spades. I doubt the airframe would be able
to handle the stress of large stick displacements at higher speeds. Spades
would make it too easy to snap the stick over and turn the horizon into a
blur. Who wants that crap?
> In my humble opinion....
>Tailwinds,
>Doug Rozendaal
"Humble" ?? Oh my, here we go disagreeing again. But no flames intended,
you understand.
Randy Compton
RV-3 N84VF
Gulf Breeze, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
On Mon, 16 Dec 2002, Rick Galati wrote:
> NASA's latest experiments in wing warping have inspired me.
--snip--
Okay, I take it back: some people can make humour work in email.
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
-6 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron spades |
Isn't this fun!!!!
Here goes!
Randy,
I have NOT flown an RV-3. I own and fly a -4, I have also flown -6, -6A,
and -8. I have flown the Extra-300, and Decathalon with spades. I will
grant you the Extra flies EXTREMELY well. My guess is it would fly very well
at reasonable speeds without the spades.
You may be right, spades might work well on the RV, but I stand by my
comment that the RV is not a great aerobatic airplane. It surprises me that
your -3 is light in pitch and heavy in roll, I have always heard that the -3
was the best flying airplane of the group. All the RV's I have flown have
positive pitch force gradient and, if the CG is correct, the elevator forces
balance well with the aileron forces at moderate speeds.
You are correct there is no stick force warning of increased G available at
higher speeds. The warning is that the pilot gets really heavy in the seat.
6 Gs is a pretty effective warning to most pilots. Aileron stick force is
the only warning to the pilot of the increased stresses caused by large
aileron deflection at high IAS.
The North American T-6 has a 140 kt limitation for full deflection of the
ailerons. I do not know if Van has ever set a limit for the RVs. Your
"Flight Test 410" instructor told you about "Asymetrical G". Ailerons
twisting on the wing lower its G tolerance by at least 30%. It is very
possible that you could break an RV at less than 6 Gs at a moderate airspeed
with a large aileron deflection.
Randy, I agree with most of what you said, including the "humble" part ;-)
but putting spades on an RV is still a bad idea.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Wheel pant access holes for air |
| From: | czechsix(at)juno.com |
Guys,
I mounted my nosewheel fairing on my -8A per plans (riveted the brackets
on) so I drilled a 1" hole in the side for access to fill it with air
without having to take the whole wheel off. On the main wheels I've been
debating....the front half of the wheel pant can be removed for access
but that still involves something like 8 screws, which could be a pain if
you had to do it very often. What experience have you flying RV jocks
had with this? Do you wish you'd put in an access hole? Did you put one
in and wish you hadn't? Has anyone tried the little 1" dia. hinged hole
cover door thingy that Aircraft Spruce sells that opens inward (and if
so, how does it work....once you push it inward to open it, how do you
pull it closed again)??
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D trying to get fiberglass finished up on the wheel pants....
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Seat Belt Weights |
I received my Hooker harnesses for my 7A. They are the 1.75" wide "Sport
Set" with the rotary buckle, lap and shoulder pads, and crotch strap.
The combined weight for both the pilot and passenger sets is 7.8 pounds.
These look like very nice harnesses. There were lots of color choices
including dual colors for the pads. I rigged them up temporarily and they
feel good. I'm going to like the rotary buckle.
The cost was about $500.00, for the two sets, after a 10% discount because I
ordered them at the Copperstate booth. The military buckle sets were much
cheaper but I can't remember by how much.
The only problem so far is that the crotch strap attach kit that Vans sells
for the 7A needed modification.
See
Bob Trumpfheller
RV7A QB N67BT (reserved)
Western Colorado
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel pant access holes for air |
>Guys,
>
>I mounted my nosewheel fairing on my -8A per plans (riveted the brackets
>on) so I drilled a 1" hole in the side for access to fill it with air
>without having to take the whole wheel off. On the main wheels I've been
>debating....the front half of the wheel pant can be removed for access
>but that still involves something like 8 screws, which could be a pain if
>you had to do it very often. What experience have you flying RV jocks
>had with this? Do you wish you'd put in an access hole? Did you put one
>in and wish you hadn't? Has anyone tried the little 1" dia. hinged hole
>cover door thingy that Aircraft Spruce sells that opens inward (and if
>so, how does it work....once you push it inward to open it, how do you
>pull it closed again)??
>
>--Mark Navratil
Mark,
I put a one inch hole in the wheel pants in the front half of each fairing
down low. The tire valve is positioned at about the seven o'clock position
to line up with it. I put a dab of red paint on the tire sidewall to show
me where the stem is so I can roll the plane as needed, then pop a wheel
chock in place to hold it once the paint dab lines up with the hole.
Otherwise, those fairing screws will get buggered up after a few removals
and the chance to ding the paint is always there. Get out the unibit, drill
the holes and snap a chrome wilkey (sp?) plug in them. You'll be glad you
did.
Brian Denk
RV8 N94BD
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oldsfolks(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re:Aileron Spades |
My Rv-4 has 135 MPH manuevering speed . That is MAXIMUM speed at which full
control deflection can be done without strucrural damage.
Van is smart enough to make a great airplane and I believe he is smarter than
a LOT of us ! As Stein said - if you want to fly like an Extra 300 , get an
Extra 300 !!
A fellow bought an RV-3 several years back and was buzzing his girlfriends
house . He reportedly was doing about 200 and rolled it and twisted the wing
off the fuselage . He and the fuselage went into the ground like an arrow .
Those ailerons have terrific leverage at those high speeds . That's what
manuevering speed is all about.
Ig you aren't an aeronautical engineer -- leave the design/redesign to
someone who is qualified.
Bob Olds
A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor
RV-4 , N1191X , Flying Now
Charleston, Arkansas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Weiler" <dougweil(at)pressenter.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Protection diodes on starter solenoid |
> Todd: you are right! (Sorry, Doug ) I thought that the "S" terminal was
> grounded but apparently it is a positive supply from the starter
> push-button, in which case the diode with the banded side connected to
that
> terminal is correct. I am not familiar with the Sky Tech starter as I have
> the old Delco unit which requires the three terminal relay, two of which
are
> heavy duty that connect the battery direct to the starter. Now, the
question
> I have (to try to solve Doug's problem) is about the "I" terminal that
goes
> to the small terminal on the Sky Tech starter---It would seem to me that
> this supplies power to another solenoid inside the starter which makes the
> heavy current connection to the starter motor there---So, is there a
> suppression diode inside for THAT solenoid ?? If not that one could cause
a
> very heavy back-EMF spike that would play "Merry Hell" (as I stated in the
> first post on this subject).
>
> So it would appear that we have two solenoids in series, the first, the
> Van's unit which I agree the coil is correctly dioded, followed by Sky
Tech
> which may not be! Anybody know what's in there?
> If there is no diode then, another one needs to be connected from the
"small
> terminal" (cathode) to ground (Anode) preferably right at the terminal to
> suppress EMI (electro magnetic interference) that could occur if you put
it
> at the "I" terminal.
> Cheers!!-----------Henry (Pierre to GV?)
>
Gee, I have been gone for a couple days and didn't realize I had opened such
a can of worms. Now you know why me and electrons never got along.
Anyway, I may agreed with Henry. There is another solenoid on my SkyTech
starter which I guess is unprotected. Specifically, how should I do this?
Does the diode go right at the terminal on the starter itself?? What side
should I use??
Thanks
Doug Weiler
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wheel pant access holes for air |
> I mounted my nosewheel fairing on my -8A per plans (riveted the brackets
> on) so I drilled a 1" hole in the side for access to fill it with air
> without having to take the whole wheel off. On the main wheels I've been
> debating....the front half of the wheel pant can be removed for access
> but that still involves something like 8 screws, which could be a pain if
> you had to do it very often. What experience have you flying RV jocks
> had with this? Do you wish you'd put in an access hole? Did you put one
> in and wish you hadn't? Has anyone tried the little 1" dia. hinged hole
> cover door thingy that Aircraft Spruce sells that opens inward (and if
> so, how does it work....once you push it inward to open it, how do you
> pull it closed again)??
>
> --Mark Navratil
> Cedar Rapids, Iowa
> RV-8A N2D trying to get fiberglass finished up on the wheel pants....
Mark, I don't have a nosewheel ("don't need no nosewheel" comment avoided
here :-) ), but did install those 1" hinged door covers from Spruce on my
main wheelpants and am very glad I did. If you haven't painted yet
definitely install them.
Randy Lervold
RV-8, 285 hrs
www.rv-8.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Karie Daniel" <karied4(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Throttle Quadrants |
I plan on installing these in my RV-7A,
http://www.metronet.com/~dreeves/djm/djmmfg.htm
Looks like a quality piece of work that will fit nicely in a 7.
Karie Daniel
Maple Valley, WA.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Prior" <rv7(at)b4.ca>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Throttle Quadrants
>
> I've heard that the plans for the left-side throttle in a Falco are
> quite good, but I haven't seen the layout myself. So far I haven't seen
> a left-side throttle arrangement that I liked, there always seems to be
> a little slop in the system, or the system is too "tight", or whatever.
> So for me it's a single throttle in the middle, although in a
> different configuration.
>
> My plan for my RV-7 is to fly it from the right seat. In addition to
> that, i'm planning on a center-mounted throttle quadrant, between the
> seats. I have a surplus throttle quadrant from an F-104 or -105 that I
> plan to use for this. It has a built in "speed brake" switch
> (extend-retract) which I plan to wire to the flaps, a PTT, and an IGN
> (ignition?) switch.
>
> I haven't worked out the geometry of exactly where it will go yet, but I
> expect to mount the pivot point for it either just ahead of or just
> behind the forward spar, and have an arm on it long enough to get the
> handle up above my legs.
>
> Someday i'll start making marks on drawings and get something mocked up,
> when I get that far i'll put something on my website.
>
> -RB4
> RV7 Empennage
>
> Phil Jones wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone have any thoughts on putting Throttle Quadrants in a rv7a rather
then Vernier & Push-Pull in the panel? All my flying life I have never like
that I have to use my left hand to fly with and my "good" hand to just control
the engine. Is there any reason(s) (other then the co-pilot would have problem
getting at them) that I might be missing.
> >
> > Phil Jones
> > Hartland WI
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris <chrisw3(at)cox.net> |
RV-list
| Subject: | fittings for fuel or whatever. |
Has anyone seen or used this method of tube connection before. I was
wondering if they work as well as flaring the tube.
http://www.pressureconnections.com/products/steel/pages/34.pdf
--
Chris Woodhouse
3147 SW 127th St.
Oklahoma City, OK 73170
405-691-5206 (home)
chrisw(at)programmer.net
N35 20.492'
W97 34.342'
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Happy RV Holidays! |
Here is a link I hope you enjoy (~12 meg download):
http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/greetings.mpg
You can either watch it stream or download it for viewing; should be
playable with Windows Media Player, Real Player, or Quicktime.
Happy Holidays,
Sam Buchanan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Borduas" <eborduas(at)lycos.com> |
| Subject: | Re: A moderated RV-List |
>things that are meant as harmless and it does not come across that way. For
a
>well run forum visit www.tractorbynet . It is the most civil, friendly
>place on the net. It has moderators but more than that the people are just
I've experienced moderated list and I didn't much like them, since I noticed
that the direction of the list is in many cases influenced by the views of
the moderators.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Irvine <wgirvine(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Alternate engines |
Since so many people are unhappy with Lycoming
engines, how would you guys feel about the
following...?
A horizontally-opposed, direct-drive, water-cooled, 6
cylinder engine. 375 CID, 200 HP (maybe a bit more),
fuel-injected, with governor pad and hollow crankshaft
for use with a Hartzell CS prop, 2 standard aircraft
magneto drive pads, 2 vacuum pump pads, 2 spark plugs
per cylinder, belt-driven 60amp alternator. This
engine uses a Continental-type "bed" mount, so would
require a new engine mount, but would fit inside the
existing RV engine cowl.
And of course, it would require a radiator mounted
somewhere. I think on an RV, this would best be done
with either a P-51 style belly scoop, or two
under-wing scoops like a Spitfire.
Any comments?
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: gascolator mounting. |
In a message dated 12/16/2002 5:02:02 PM Pacific Standard Time,
sbuc(at)hiwaay.net writes:
> I don't think there is any way possible to get a firewall-mounted
> gascolator drain (and keep the gascolator within the cowl...) to be the
> lowest point in the fuel system of a taildragger RV with the little
> wheel on the ground!
This is indeed the myth that refuses to die, Sam. I have repeatedly tried to
kill it on this list, but to no avail.
Now, let's all say this together and tell your friends "A gascolator is a
simple gravity water separator that can still do it's job, despite not being
the absolute lowest point in the fuel system".
-GV (RV-6A N1GV 575hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate engines |
All this and only 6 grand I betcha!{;-)!
I like the cooling placement. C of G, high low air pressure flow I'd go
there.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Irvine" <wgirvine(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: RV-List: Alternate engines
>
> Since so many people are unhappy with Lycoming
> engines, how would you guys feel about the
> following...?
>
> A horizontally-opposed, direct-drive, water-cooled, 6
> cylinder engine. 375 CID, 200 HP (maybe a bit more),
> fuel-injected, with governor pad and hollow crankshaft
> for use with a Hartzell CS prop, 2 standard aircraft
> magneto drive pads, 2 vacuum pump pads, 2 spark plugs
> per cylinder, belt-driven 60amp alternator. This
> engine uses a Continental-type "bed" mount, so would
> require a new engine mount, but would fit inside the
> existing RV engine cowl.
>
> And of course, it would require a radiator mounted
> somewhere. I think on an RV, this would best be done
> with either a P-51 style belly scoop, or two
> under-wing scoops like a Spitfire.
>
> Any comments?
> Bill
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate engines |
Bill:
> how would you guys feel about the
> following...?
I give up, what is it?
How much does it weigh? How much does it cost? How available are parts?
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
-6 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Blowj...er, a job you do by blowing... |
| From: | "Gannon, Terence" <Terence.Gannon(at)trican.ca> |
Listers -- I thought I would pass along a little tip that I 'discovered'
last night. I don't know if the newer kits still require this, but when
you're setting up the leading edge ribs so that you can drill the
leading edge skin to them, you can use a threaded rod through the
forward-most tooling hole, and then put wing nut on either side to
secure the rib. Problem is that it seems to take forever to get that
rod and all the wing nuts into place. Finally figured out a quick an
easy way to do this. Hooked up my air compressor, set it for about 25
lbs., and then use a nozzle to blow on one side to the wing nut -- spins
them on and off pronto. Turned a one hour, really boring job into a
five minute, really fun one. I'd make up some clever quip about blowing
wingnuts, but I'm sure you're all making up your own jokes by now,
anyway.
It's the little things, isn't it?
Terry in Calgary
RV-6 S/N 24414
"Right Wing"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate engines |
Bill Irvine wrote:
> A horizontally-opposed, direct-drive, water-cooled, 6
> cylinder engine. 375 CID, 200 HP (maybe a bit more),
> fuel-injected, with governor pad and hollow crankshaft
> for use with a Hartzell CS prop, 2 standard aircraft
> magneto drive pads, 2 vacuum pump pads, 2 spark plugs
> per cylinder, belt-driven 60amp alternator. This
> engine uses a Continental-type "bed" mount, so would
> require a new engine mount, but would fit inside the
> existing RV engine cowl.
Sounds excellent! What's it weigh? What would a firewall-forward
package cost?
> And of course, it would require a radiator mounted
> somewhere. I think on an RV, this would best be done
> with either a P-51 style belly scoop, or two
> under-wing scoops like a Spitfire.
So much for a simple firewall-forward installation. I'm all for
experimenting with engines, but to make major structural changes to
incorportate wing- or fuselage-mounted radiator ducts may be asking for
trouble. Just a thought.
-RB4
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: A mind blower |
| From: | Michael Stephan <mstephan(at)shr.net> |
I couldn't get the link to work until I modified it a little. Here is my
version.
http://mbz.portage.net/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=share;action=display;num1039208683
--
Michael Stephan
RV-8 builder
> From: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net>
> Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 23:30:39 -0800
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: A mind blower
>
> YaBB.cgi?boardshare;actiondisplay;num1039208683
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oldsfolks(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re:fittings for fuel or whatever |
Sorru Chris ; I don't like the look of the " Bite into the tubing " part. Too
much chance of weanening the tubing at a critical point .
NOT secure enough for MY airplane !
Bob Olds
RV-4 , N1191X , Flying Now
Charleston, Arkansas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Irvine <wgirvine(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Alternate engine |
> A horizontally-opposed, direct-drive, water-cooled,
6
> cylinder engine. 375 CID, 200 HP (maybe a bit
more),
> fuel-injected, with governor pad and hollow
> crankshaft for use with a Hartzell CS prop, 2
> standard aircraft magneto drive pads, 2 vacuum pump
> pads, 2 spark plugs per cylinder, belt-driven 60amp
> alternator. This engine uses a Continental-
> type "bed" mount, so would require a new engine
> mount, but would fit inside the existing RV engine
> cowl...
Since some of you are interested, I'll explain a bit
more.... No, it's not a Porsche. (Good grief,
Lycoming parts are expensive, but Porsche prices are
positively breathtaking.) Unfortunately, this engine
exists only in my head and on my drafting table. If I
think there is a market for it, I'll produce it. I
know it sounds like a daunting task, but without going
into a long boring story of my experience, let me say
that yes, I can do it.
My idea is to make a simple, reliable, totally
conventional engine designed specifically for
aircraft. Nothing radical, nothing new... crankshaft
going 'round and 'round, pistons going up and down,
etc. The general layout would be very similar to a
Continental IO-470, except water-cooled. I am
absolutely convinced the key to reliability and
durability of any aircraft engine is water-cooling.
It's all a matter of temperature control. An
air-cooled engine must be designed to operate at temps
that range from ambient to about 400F. With a
properly designed cooling system, a water-cooled
engine operates from ambient to about 200F. This
means that the clearances can be smaller, which, for a
lot of reasons, is better.
Notice that I said "a properly designed cooling
system." This will take a little work. It's not hard
to do; the principles are well know, it just has to be
done right. You can't just stick a radiator out where
some air will hit it and expect it to work. That's
why I think the belly scoop or under-wing scoops would
work the best. I'm opposed to radiators inside the
engine cowling because of maintenance issues, but as
the boys at Belted Power have shown, it can indeed
work.
How much will it weigh? Probably more than a Lycoming
IO-360, but not by much. Maybe another 10-20 pounds.
Will the airplane be heavier with water-cooling? Yes,
absolutely. You lose the cooling fins (2 lbs?) but
gain a water jacket, water, a pump, a radiator
w/ducting and plumbing. I would guess a minimum
weight gain of 50 lbs, but a maximum of 100 lbs. So
you must be willing to add weight to have a better
engine. But it will also be smoother (6 cylinders),
more durable, and more reliable. And just think how
easy it will be to pre-heat... with an electric
in-block heater, you just plug the airplane into the
wall overnight. And with all that hot water, the
cockpit heat would be enough to melt your shoes!
Let me emphasize that this is a direct-drive engine;
no PSRU. Yes, you can get considerably more power by
running higher revs with a PSRU, but for right now, I
like the simplicity of direct drive.
How much will it cost? A lot. I don't see how I
could sell it for less than $25,000. And yes, parts
will be readily available at a reasonable price.
So, is anybody interested? Or should I start with the
8-cylinder, 500 CID, 300 HP version? :-)
Bill
wgirvine(at)yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mstewart(at)qa.butler.com |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate engine |
Bill,
I would be hard pressed(ok would'nt) to may more, and add significant weight
for an unproven design.
I know zippo, zero about the complexities of engines. But I am a risk taker.
It is clear many folks will roll the dice if there is an upside, and for
most it must be significant. I applaud those rolling the dice. What would
compel someone to roll this dice?
What is the significant upside of this design? Cost? No, Weight? no, power?
no, reliability? No(not air proven)
Mike Stewart
>
> A horizontally-opposed, direct-drive, water-cooled,
6
> cylinder engine. 375 CID, 200 HP (maybe a bit
more),
> fuel-injected, with governor pad and hollow
> crankshaft for use with a Hartzell CS prop, 2
> standard aircraft magneto drive pads, 2 vacuum pump
> pads, 2 spark plugs per cylinder, belt-driven 60amp
> alternator. This engine uses a Continental-
> type "bed" mount, so would require a new engine
> mount, but would fit inside the existing RV engine
> cowl...
Since some of you are interested, I'll explain a bit
more.... No, it's not a Porsche. (Good grief,
Lycoming parts are expensive, but Porsche prices are
positively breathtaking.) Unfortunately, this engine
exists only in my head and on my drafting table. If I
think there is a market for it, I'll produce it. I
know it sounds like a daunting task, but without going
into a long boring story of my experience, let me say
that yes, I can do it.
My idea is to make a simple, reliable, totally
conventional engine designed specifically for
aircraft. Nothing radical, nothing new... crankshaft
going 'round and 'round, pistons going up and down,
etc. The general layout would be very similar to a
Continental IO-470, except water-cooled. I am
absolutely convinced the key to reliability and
durability of any aircraft engine is water-cooling.
It's all a matter of temperature control. An
air-cooled engine must be designed to operate at temps
that range from ambient to about 400F. With a
properly designed cooling system, a water-cooled
engine operates from ambient to about 200F. This
means that the clearances can be smaller, which, for a
lot of reasons, is better.
Notice that I said "a properly designed cooling
system." This will take a little work. It's not hard
to do; the principles are well know, it just has to be
done right. You can't just stick a radiator out where
some air will hit it and expect it to work. That's
why I think the belly scoop or under-wing scoops would
work the best. I'm opposed to radiators inside the
engine cowling because of maintenance issues, but as
the boys at Belted Power have shown, it can indeed
work.
How much will it weigh? Probably more than a Lycoming
IO-360, but not by much. Maybe another 10-20 pounds.
Will the airplane be heavier with water-cooling? Yes,
absolutely. You lose the cooling fins (2 lbs?) but
gain a water jacket, water, a pump, a radiator
w/ducting and plumbing. I would guess a minimum
weight gain of 50 lbs, but a maximum of 100 lbs. So
you must be willing to add weight to have a better
engine. But it will also be smoother (6 cylinders),
more durable, and more reliable. And just think how
easy it will be to pre-heat... with an electric
in-block heater, you just plug the airplane into the
wall overnight. And with all that hot water, the
cockpit heat would be enough to melt your shoes!
Let me emphasize that this is a direct-drive engine;
no PSRU. Yes, you can get considerably more power by
running higher revs with a PSRU, but for right now, I
like the simplicity of direct drive.
How much will it cost? A lot. I don't see how I
could sell it for less than $25,000. And yes, parts
will be readily available at a reasonable price.
So, is anybody interested? Or should I start with the
8-cylinder, 500 CID, 300 HP version? :-)
Bill
Mike Stewart
Bill,
I would be hard pressed(ok would'nt) to may more, and add significant weight
for an unproven design.
I know zippo, zero about the complexities of engines. But I am a risk taker.
It is clear many folks will roll the dice if there is an upside, and for most
it must be significant. I applaud those rolling the dice. What would compel
someone to roll this dice?
What is the significant
upside of this design? Cost? No, Weight? no, power? no, reliability?
No(not air proven)
Mike Stewart
-- RV-List message posted by: Bill Irvine wgirvine(at)yahoo.com
A horizontally-opposed,
direct-drive, water-cooled,
6
cylinder engine.
375 CID, 200 HP (maybe a bit
more),
fuel-injected,
with governor pad and hollow
crankshaft for use with a Hartzell CS prop, 2
standard aircraft magneto drive pads, 2 vacuum pump
pads, 2 spark plugs per cylinder, belt-driven 60amp
alternator. This engine uses a Continental-
type bed mount, so would require a new engine
mount, but would fit inside the existing RV engine
cowl...
Since some of you are interested, I'll explain a bit
more.... No, it's not a Porsche. (Good grief,
Lycoming parts are expensive, but Porsche prices are
positively breathtaking.) Unfortunately, this engine
exists only in my head and on my drafting table. If I
think there is a market for it, I'll produce it. I
know it sounds like a daunting task, but without going
into a long boring story of my experience, let me say
that yes, I can do it.
My idea is to make a simple, reliable, totally
conventional engine designed specifically for
aircraft. Nothing radical, nothing new... crankshaft
going 'round and 'round, pistons going up and down,
etc. The general layout would be very similar to a
Continental IO-470, except water-cooled. I am
absolutely convinced the key to reliability and
durability of any aircraft engine is water-cooling.
It's all a matter of temperature control. An
air-cooled engine must be designed to operate at temps
that range from ambient to about 400F. With a
properly designed cooling system, a water-cooled
engine operates from ambient to about 200F. This
means that the clearances can be smaller, which, for a
lot of reasons, is better.
Notice that I said a properly designed cooling
system. This will take a little work. It's not hard
to do; the principles are well know, it just has to be
done right. You can't just stick a radiator out where
some air will hit it and expect it to work. That's
why I think the belly scoop or under-wing scoops would
work the best. I'm opposed to radiators inside the
engine cowling because of maintenance issues, but as
the boys at Belted Power have shown, it can indeed
work.
How much will it weigh? Probably more than a Lycoming
IO-360, but not by much. Maybe another 10-20 pounds.
Will the airplane be heavier with water-cooling? Yes,
absolutely. You lose the cooling fins (2 lbs?) but
gain a water jacket, water, a pump, a radiator
w/ducting and plumbing. I would guess a minimum
weight gain of 50 lbs, but a maximum of 100 lbs. So
you must be willing to add weight to have a better
engine. But it will also be smoother (6 cylinders),
more durable, and more reliable. And just think how
easy it will be to pre-heat... with an electric
in-block heater, you just plug the airplane into the
wall overnight. And with all that hot water, the
cockpit heat would be enough to melt your shoes!
Let me emphasize
that this is a direct-drive engine;
no PSRU. Yes, you can get considerably more power by
running higher revs with a PSRU, but for right now, I
like the simplicity of direct drive.
How much will
it cost? A lot. I don't see how I
could sell it for less than $25,000. And yes, parts
will be readily available at a reasonable price.
So, is anybody
interested? Or should I start with the
8-cylinder, 500 CID, 300 HP version? :-)
Bill
Mike Stewart
________________________________________________________________________________
I just used some stripper on the oil pan for installing heat strips and it
said not for use on fiberglass!!
Len Leggette RV-8A
N901LL
Greensboro, N.C.
24 hours !!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
Here are some seat belt details. All prices USD. Canadians see the bottom for the
best domestic deal.
This post could use more details. Help!
HOOKER - Sport Set 1.75" wide
http://www.hookerharness.com/
3.9 lbs per seat $312.50 per seat with military latches and $499 with the rotary
buckles.
Available from Team Rocket at
http://www.teamrocketaircraft.com/TeamRocketAircraftcgi/hazel.exe?CLIENT45712279&SEARCH_LOGIC%2B&SEARCH_KEY_CAT&SEARCH_LOGIC%2B&SEARCH_KEY_PRICE&SEARCH_LOGIC%2B&SEARCH_COMP%3A&SEARCH_KEY_KEYWORDShooker&SEARCH_LOGIC%2B&PIXON&DETON&SEARCH_MAXHITS10&SUBMIT_ACTION_SEARCHBegin+Search&client45712279
Huge link Batman! If it doesn't work goto
http://www.teamrocketaircraft.com/
and do a catalog search for "Hooker".
Note that these belts are available in three widths, 1.75", 2", and 3". The 3"
are likely to be considerably heavier.
They come in two colors of your choice and are undiputably the best looking belts
out there. Mega colors available. Best looking is to take your aircraft color
as the main color and detail with grey.
Has anyone with the Simpson belts tried taking the name advertising off them? Because
they would look alright otherwise. I just don't like the huge brand name
on each strap.
SCROTCH
http://www.schroth.com/index.html
$415 per seat from http://www.wingsandwheels.com/index.html
They quoted 3 lbs per seat for the 4 belt sytem, no word on which latches were
used.
PACIFIC AERO HARNESS
These are the ones that Van used to sell but he has gone out of buisness recently
due to supplier cost increases. His 5 point belts weighed 4.5 lbs. Webpage
not available anymore.
SIMPSON - available in 2" or 3" - an old post on the RV List said the 3" were too
wide for RV's and that 2" would be better, more comphy and lighter. Vince,
how do yours feel?
http://www.simpsonracing.com/Shop/ShowProduct.asp?category83&Product89
$99 per seat
These have the military style buckle. Note we need the floor mount Y Harness.
RACEQUIP
http://racequip.com/ushop/index.cgi?IDD5EIVA&taskshow&catHARNESSES
$85 per seat
Best deal for Canadians:
http://www.leafracewear.com/pricing.htm#26
Caltalog available on request.
Military buckles 5 strap part #70049 $79 USD or $125 Canadian per seat
Camlocks part #75049 $179 USD or $270 Canadian per seat. "V" type
These belts are available in 7 colors and the slip on shoulder pads are an option.
These belts are apparently 3" wide but I'm not completely sure. Most race
cars these days use nothing but 3". I would try asking if 2" are available, might
save some more dough.
Home page at http://www.leafracewear.com/
Great pricing on lots of stuff.
Another great reasonably priced Canadian supply house is
http://www.guyons.com/
They stock every single item to build a complete race car and are located in Edmonton
Alberta. Huge catalog available but I think you have to own a race car
to get one. No price list, they want the phone calls.
I would like to see some discussion on what style of belt RVers should buy when
ordering from race car supply houses. I am looking at "V" types but I could be
wrong. There are also "H" types. Perhaps different RV models are better suited
to a particular style.
Norman Hunger
RV6A Delta BC
CASCAR Sportsman #96 team owner/driver (working twards 2004 Super Series, just
need another quarter mil or so)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Blowj...er, a job you do by blowing... |
Hi Terry (and listers), I used 1/4" threaded rod also, but I used several
pieces cut to the distance between each rib, put a nut and washer about 1/2"
down one end of the piece and installed a threaded hex-nipple on the other
end. The standard H/Ware store nipple is 1 3/4" long and threaded
right-through. It's a snap to install the nut and washer end through the
tooling hole on one side of the rib and then insert a washer and a nipple on
the other, followed by the next section of threaded rod, etc, etc. (All in
series that way).
It's easy to take apart also, as I had to do after trial-fitting and
strapping down the leading edge! Those pesky ribs will twist off-line with
the pre-punched holes in the skin, and to hold them perpendicular to the
skin, I cut some pieces of 1/8" thk x 3/4" wide steel strapping long enough
to span the rib, and drilled the 1/4" hole accordingly. I used one of those
straps each side of each rib. When the nuts or nipples were tightened, those
ribs didn't move!
Cheers!!-------------Henry Hore.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate engine |
On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Bill Irvine wrote:
> So, is anybody interested? Or should I start with the
> 8-cylinder, 500 CID, 300 HP version? :-)
Bill:
This really belongs on the engines list (it's just flame bait over here), but
here's my two cents.
Your concept is likely to work better in a larger-displacement,
higher-horsepower application. To be successfull in the market it will have to
be designed to fit existing airframes and use existing props, which means you
will be limited to Lycoming-style RPMs, even though the water cooling would
allow you to rev higher with equal or better reliability. If you make a
larger-displacement engine you'll pay less relative weight penalty for water
cooling, relative to a Lycoming (you might even come out ahead).
While we're spit-balling, how about this? Make a Chevy-style aluminum block
with a Lycoming-style output main bearing, and build a custom crankshaft to
match, with a build-in prop flange. Bore and stroke are standard GM, 4.125"
and 3.75", for a displacement of 401 cubic inches. Everthing except the block
and crank is stock GM HO parts (or aftermarket, if you prefer). Invert the
whole works and run it direct drive, as Steve Wittman did with the Buick 215
(yes, I know he had some teething problems). You'd get about 200 HP at 2700
RPM.
You could hang any prop made for a Lycoming off it.
BMEP (cylinder pressure) would be the same as a Lycoming. Piston speed and
conn rod forces would be lower than a Lycoming. Bearing wear index would be
WAY lower. TBO would easily match a Lycoming.
On the auxiliary end you'd run a KSE housing with direct drive to the water
pump, and the oil pump driven directly from the camshaft. Ignition would be
dual-redundant electronic, as used on the Falconer V12 in the Thunder Mustang.
If you wanted to get really carried away you could make custom, dual-plug heads
strictly for the feel-good value, but there's no need for it.
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
-6 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael McGee <jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Happy RV Holidays! |
>
>Here is a link I hope you enjoy (~12 meg download):
>
>http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/greetings.mpg
>
>You can either watch it stream or download it for viewing; should be
>playable with Windows Media Player, Real Player, or Quicktime.
>
>Happy Holidays,
>
>Sam Buchanan
Nice bit o' work Sam.
Happy Holidays to you as well.
MGM
Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR
13B in gestation mode
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris <chrisw3(at)cox.net> |
RV-list
Why would I want parallel valves or non parallel valves? What is the
difference?
--
Chris Woodhouse
3147 SW 127th St.
Oklahoma City, OK 73170
405-691-5206 (home)
chrisw(at)programmer.net
N35 20.492'
W97 34.342'
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Phillips <ripsteel(at)edge.net> |
| Subject: | Spacing Tip Ribs (wuz sumthin' about a blowj...) |
So many ways to slay the dragon....
...and here's another: Chuck one long 1/4" threaded rod in your cordless
drill- start it into the first rib, put on a washer, then nut. Clamp a cleco
clamp around the nut to act as a weight and keep the nut from turning as you run
the drill. Spin it up to the next rib (go slow and make sure the nut don't
spin), add another nut with cleco clamp and washer, go through the rib & repeat
as neccessary. When all the nuts & washers are installed, just adjust to match
rivet lines & tighten the nuts. Taking it out is even cooler- reverse the drill
and it all comes apart in about 30 seconds! (uh, loosen the nuts about an inch
away from the ribs first!) It's not a bad idea to run one nut all the way down
the rod to make sure the threads are clean first.
Kinda fun too! If ya want a picture, I can send ya one...
From the PossumWorks in TN
Mark
Elsa & Henry wrote:
>
> Hi Terry (and listers), I used 1/4" threaded rod also, but I used several
> pieces cut to the distance between each rib, put a nut and washer about 1/2"
> down one end of the piece and installed a threaded hex-nipple on the other
> end. The standard H/Ware store nipple is 1 3/4" long and threaded
> right-through. It's a snap to install the nut and washer end through the
> tooling hole on one side of the rib and then insert a washer and a nipple on
> the other, followed by the next section of threaded rod, etc, etc. (All in
> series that way).
> It's easy to take apart also, as I had to do after trial-fitting and
> strapping down the leading edge! Those pesky ribs will twist off-line with
> the pre-punched holes in the skin, and to hold them perpendicular to the
> skin, I cut some pieces of 1/8" thk x 3/4" wide steel strapping long enough
> to span the rib, and drilled the 1/4" hole accordingly. I used one of those
> straps each side of each rib. When the nuts or nipples were tightened, those
> ribs didn't move!
> Cheers!!-------------Henry Hore.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
| Subject: | Spacing Tip Ribs (wuz sumthin' about a blowj...) |
Here's another variation on the theme. I don't remember if it was my idea
or someone else's, so apologies to the inventor if there was one. Instead
of nuts on the threaded rod, use plastic tie wraps. That way you can put
the threaded rod through all the tooling holes and then cinch the tie wraps
around the rod. They will work like a nut, so you can screw them along the
rod to cinch the rib in place. For me, it wasn't quite as slick as it
sounds, but it did the job. You might figure out something to cinch between
the tie wrap and the rod that would grip the threads a little better. Also,
a washer between the tie wrap and the rib might be an improvement. You can
just snip the tie wraps off and pull the rod out when you are done.
Wing nuts and the air hose might be more fun.
Terry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael McGee <jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel valves |
>
>Why would I want parallel valves or non parallel valves? What is the
>difference?
>
>--
>Chris Woodhouse
..about 40 pounds, 20 hp, 10(+/-5) mph, and $10,000?
MGM
Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR
13B in gestation mode
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Orear" <jorear(at)new.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Spacing Tip Ribs (wuz sumthin' about a blowj...) |
Here's another variation for those of you that are ex-rc builders:
I used 3/16" music wire and wheel collars on each side of the tip ribs.
Makes for very accurate adjustments, and is extremely quick an easy to set
up.
Regards,
Jeff Orear
RV6A
fuselage
Peshtigo, WI
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Spacing Tip Ribs (wuz sumthin' about a blowj...)
>
> Here's another variation on the theme. I don't remember if it was my idea
> or someone else's, so apologies to the inventor if there was one. Instead
> of nuts on the threaded rod, use plastic tie wraps. That way you can put
> the threaded rod through all the tooling holes and then cinch the tie
wraps
> around the rod. They will work like a nut, so you can screw them along
the
> rod to cinch the rib in place. For me, it wasn't quite as slick as it
> sounds, but it did the job. You might figure out something to cinch
between
> the tie wrap and the rod that would grip the threads a little better.
Also,
> a washer between the tie wrap and the rib might be an improvement. You can
> just snip the tie wraps off and pull the rod out when you are done.
> Wing nuts and the air hose might be more fun.
>
> Terry
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Spacing Fuel Tank and Tip Ribs |
Try this:
Just use a non threaded rod or straighten out enough of one of the supplied
fuel or brake line coils. Cut short lengths of rubber hose (fuel line etc.)
split the short lengths length wise so they can be installed or removed with
ease. Use screw type fuel line clamps to adjust and hold.
Of all the ways to do this task that I have seen posted incuding the way I
did mine (with pvc tubing and stainless tie wire) this shows promise as the
overall best! the cost of the clamps is minimal and you might use a few
elsewhere anyhow.
There are times when this list really shines this to me is one of them!
Thanks all,
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Spacing Tip Ribs (wuz sumthin' about a blowj...)
>
> Here's another variation on the theme. I don't remember if it was my idea
> or someone else's, so apologies to the inventor if there was one. Instead
> of nuts on the threaded rod, use plastic tie wraps. That way you can put
> the threaded rod through all the tooling holes and then cinch the tie
wraps
> around the rod. They will work like a nut, so you can screw them along
the
> rod to cinch the rib in place. For me, it wasn't quite as slick as it
> sounds, but it did the job. You might figure out something to cinch
between
> the tie wrap and the rod that would grip the threads a little better.
Also,
> a washer between the tie wrap and the rib might be an improvement. You can
> just snip the tie wraps off and pull the rod out when you are done.
> Wing nuts and the air hose might be more fun.
>
> Terry
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel valves |
20 horsepower
Sorry could not resist. (smartass answers must be contagious) The angle
valve engines have hemispherical combustion chambers.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
>
> Why would I want parallel valves or non parallel valves? What is the
> difference?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gordon or Marge Comfort" <gcomfo(at)tc3net.com> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel valves |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris" <chrisw3(at)cox.net>
Subject: RV-List: parallel valves
> Why would I want parallel valves or non parallel valves? What is the
> difference?
--
> Chris Woodhouse
Chris: As has been said by others, a big difference is horsepower. In the
360 series engines, the angle valve (hemispherical combustion chamber) units
are rated about 20hp higher. I believe all angle valve 360's are fuel
injected but the parallel valve 360's come both ways (F.I. vs carbureted).
In the 540 engines the angle valve cylinders are found on the 300hp and up
engines. There is another major difference in the engines. The crankshafts
on the angle valves mostly have counterweights and thus can use props that
the parallels cannot, or at least with fewer restrictions. Angle valve
engines are significantly heavier.
Gordon Comfort
N363GC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie and Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate engine |
Tedd McHenry wrote:
>
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Bill Irvine wrote:
>
>
>>So, is anybody interested? Or should I start with the
>>8-cylinder, 500 CID, 300 HP version? :-)
>
>
> Bill:
>
> This really belongs on the engines list (it's just flame bait over here), but
> here's my two cents.
>
> Your concept is likely to work better in a larger-displacement,
> higher-horsepower application. To be successfull in the market it will have
to
> be designed to fit existing airframes and use existing props, which means you
> will be limited to Lycoming-style RPMs, even though the water cooling would
> allow you to rev higher with equal or better reliability. If you make a
> larger-displacement engine you'll pay less relative weight penalty for water
> cooling, relative to a Lycoming (you might even come out ahead).
>
> While we're spit-balling, how about this? Make a Chevy-style aluminum block
> with a Lycoming-style output main bearing, and build a custom crankshaft to
> match, with a build-in prop flange. Bore and stroke are standard GM, 4.125"
> and 3.75", for a displacement of 401 cubic inches. Everthing except the block
> and crank is stock GM HO parts (or aftermarket, if you prefer). Invert the
> whole works and run it direct drive, as Steve Wittman did with the Buick 215
> (yes, I know he had some teething problems). You'd get about 200 HP at 2700
> RPM.
>
> You could hang any prop made for a Lycoming off it.
>
> BMEP (cylinder pressure) would be the same as a Lycoming. Piston speed and
> conn rod forces would be lower than a Lycoming. Bearing wear index would be
> WAY lower. TBO would easily match a Lycoming.
>
> On the auxiliary end you'd run a KSE housing with direct drive to the water
> pump, and the oil pump driven directly from the camshaft. Ignition would be
> dual-redundant electronic, as used on the Falconer V12 in the Thunder Mustang.
> If you wanted to get really carried away you could make custom, dual-plug heads
> strictly for the feel-good value, but there's no need for it.
>
> Tedd McHenry
> Surrey, BC
> -6 wings
>
It's already been done. There's been a vendor at OSH & SNF for years displaying
Chevy-derived engines in this configuration. There's a TravelAir biplane replica
flying with one, but I believe that one is run upright. The nose looks a lot
like the original plane looks with the original V-8.
The weight is the show stopper on the current RV's. If you can concede the extra
100 pounds projected for the hypothetical new engine, you can fly with an iron
block marine version V-6 for about 1/3 the money, & have a proven core engine.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie and Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate engine |
Bill Irvine wrote:
>
>>A horizontally-opposed, direct-drive, water-cooled,
>
> 6
>
>>cylinder engine. 375 CID, 200 HP (maybe a bit
>
> more),
>
>>fuel-injected, with governor pad and hollow
>>crankshaft for use with a Hartzell CS prop, 2
>>standard aircraft magneto drive pads, 2 vacuum pump
>>pads, 2 spark plugs per cylinder, belt-driven 60amp
>>alternator. This engine uses a Continental-
>>type "bed" mount, so would require a new engine
>>mount, but would fit inside the existing RV engine
>>cowl...
>
>
> Since some of you are interested, I'll explain a bit
> more.... No, it's not a Porsche. (Good grief,
> Lycoming parts are expensive, but Porsche prices are
> positively breathtaking.) Unfortunately, this engine
> exists only in my head and on my drafting table. If I
> think there is a market for it, I'll produce it. I
> know it sounds like a daunting task, but without going
> into a long boring story of my experience, let me say
> that yes, I can do it.
>
> My idea is to make a simple, reliable, totally
> conventional engine designed specifically for
> aircraft. Nothing radical, nothing new... crankshaft
> going 'round and 'round, pistons going up and down,
> etc. The general layout would be very similar to a
> Continental IO-470, except water-cooled. I am
> absolutely convinced the key to reliability and
> durability of any aircraft engine is water-cooling.
> It's all a matter of temperature control. An
> air-cooled engine must be designed to operate at temps
> that range from ambient to about 400F. With a
> properly designed cooling system, a water-cooled
> engine operates from ambient to about 200F. This
> means that the clearances can be smaller, which, for a
> lot of reasons, is better.
>
> Notice that I said "a properly designed cooling
> system." This will take a little work. It's not hard
> to do; the principles are well know, it just has to be
> done right. You can't just stick a radiator out where
> some air will hit it and expect it to work. That's
> why I think the belly scoop or under-wing scoops would
> work the best. I'm opposed to radiators inside the
> engine cowling because of maintenance issues, but as
> the boys at Belted Power have shown, it can indeed
> work.
>
> How much will it weigh? Probably more than a Lycoming
> IO-360, but not by much. Maybe another 10-20 pounds.
> Will the airplane be heavier with water-cooling? Yes,
> absolutely. You lose the cooling fins (2 lbs?) but
> gain a water jacket, water, a pump, a radiator
> w/ducting and plumbing. I would guess a minimum
> weight gain of 50 lbs, but a maximum of 100 lbs. So
> you must be willing to add weight to have a better
> engine. But it will also be smoother (6 cylinders),
> more durable, and more reliable. And just think how
> easy it will be to pre-heat... with an electric
> in-block heater, you just plug the airplane into the
> wall overnight. And with all that hot water, the
> cockpit heat would be enough to melt your shoes!
>
> Let me emphasize that this is a direct-drive engine;
> no PSRU. Yes, you can get considerably more power by
> running higher revs with a PSRU, but for right now, I
> like the simplicity of direct drive.
>
> How much will it cost? A lot. I don't see how I
> could sell it for less than $25,000. And yes, parts
> will be readily available at a reasonable price.
>
> So, is anybody interested? Or should I start with the
> 8-cylinder, 500 CID, 300 HP version? :-)
>
> Bill
> wgirvine(at)yahoo.com
Sorry Bill, but it fails both the money test & (even more important) the weight
test. Either will stop sales. The Powersport rotary makes 215 hp, is almost
turbine-smooth, & weighs less than an IO360 installed. BUT it costs as much as
Lyc so even adventurous homebuilders say, "Why gamble for the same money?"
Can you bring in the 500CID at less than O520 weight & at overhauled O470 prices?
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie and Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel valves |
Michael McGee wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Why would I want parallel valves or non parallel valves? What is the
>>difference?
>>
>>--
>>Chris Woodhouse
>
>
> ..about 40 pounds, 20 hp, 10(+/-5) mph, and $10,000?
> MGM
>
> Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR
> 13B in gestation mode
>
And a small but noticable improvement in fuel efficiency.
(According to Van's, the cowl for the -7 will fit the angle valve engine. -4 &
-6 cowls won't. -9: N/A (hopefully)
Are you sure about the 40 lbs? I would have guessed it was more like 15 or 20 lbs.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oldsfolks(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Spacing Fuel Tank and Tip Ribs |
I didn't use the time consuming ways to space the nose ribs . I drew the
rivet lines on the outside of the skin and drew a red line down the center of
the rib flange . Then drill just through the skin and use a 36" welding rod
to move the rib to where the red line is visible . Drill a hole and cleco it.
After a couple of holes are clecoed , you can just drill the others.
This has worked on two of our RV-4's and a few others too.
An old time friend ( Loyde Foster ) taught me this , and other time saving
tricks.
Less time building -- more time flying !
Bob Olds
RV-4 , N1191X , Flying Now
Charleston, Arkansas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Keith and Jean Williams" <kandjwilliams(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Wheel pant access holes for air |
Mark,
Been flying since 1999 using approx. 1" holes in side of wheel pants with
stainless snap-in hole fillers and the air fitting extension from Cleaveland
Tool in Ankeny. It is somewhat of a pain to align the holes with the valve
stem when I do it alone (trying to see in there with flashlight, etc.). No
problem with helper. Either way, easier than pulling the pant, in my
opinion.
When I replaced tires and tubes a year ago I used the Michelin "Air Stop" (I
think that's what they are called) tubes. They are much better at holding
air than the normal ones. Makes this question much less of a problem.
Keith Williams
RV6, Moline IL
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
czechsix(at)juno.com
Subject: RV-List: Wheel pant access holes for air
Guys,
I mounted my nosewheel fairing on my -8A per plans (riveted the brackets
on) so I drilled a 1" hole in the side for access to fill it with air
without having to take the whole wheel off. On the main wheels I've been
debating....the front half of the wheel pant can be removed for access
but that still involves something like 8 screws, which could be a pain if
you had to do it very often. What experience have you flying RV jocks
had with this? Do you wish you'd put in an access hole? Did you put one
in and wish you hadn't? Has anyone tried the little 1" dia. hinged hole
cover door thingy that Aircraft Spruce sells that opens inward (and if
so, how does it work....once you push it inward to open it, how do you
pull it closed again)??
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D trying to get fiberglass finished up on the wheel pants....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LeastDrag93066(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Constant Speed Prop - Cruise vs maximum speed |
Hi All,
Given a choice between maximum speed and optimum cruise performance, which
would you choose?
I ask this question, because it seems that some of the people on this list
are mainly interested in going faster (fastest). :-)
Background - open to discussion, of course.
Even a constant speed prop is designed to be optimum at a specific RPM and
airspeed.
For example;
A constant speed "cruise" prop for an RV might have its peak efficiency from
2400 to 2500 RPM for a 200 mph true air speed.
A constant speed "maximum speed" prop for an RV might have its peak
efficiency at 2700 RPM for a 230 mph true airspeed.
An RV with the constant speed "maximum speed" prop could be expected to have
a slightly higher fuel consumption at a given cruise speed, and a slightly
lower climb rate than an RV with a constant speed "cruise" prop.
An RV with a constant speed "cruise" prop would have a lower maximum speed
than an RV with a constant speed "maximum speed" prop.
Jim Ayers
RV-3 N47RV sn 50
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bobby Hester <bhester(at)apex.net> |
| Subject: | Fusealge about to ship! |
My QB fusealge is going to ship in a couple weeks, it was due to ship in
Feb.. What kind of things do I need to know?
I am having it delivered to the factory were I work and I'll use a
couple fork lifts to sit it on a trailer to take it to the hanger. Vans
site says the crate is 16 feet long, so I'll have to make some more
room. I guess to get inside one just starts taking the ends, sides and
top off. Can the gear be mounted to the fusealge or is there alot to do
first? I plan on painting the inside most likly the same gray as Vans,
is that something that will be one of the first things to do? No big
rush really, I'm still finishing up the second tank.
--
Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
RV7A Working on the wings :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Constant Speed Prop - Cruise vs maximum speed |
Your points are well made. Maximum cruise performance (the most speed on the
least power at cruise power settings) would be my personal preference.
Randy Lervold, RV-8
no not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: <LeastDrag93066(at)aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: Constant Speed Prop - Cruise vs maximum speed
>
> Hi All,
>
> Given a choice between maximum speed and optimum cruise performance, which
> would you choose?
> I ask this question, because it seems that some of the people on this list
> are mainly interested in going faster (fastest). :-)
>
> Background - open to discussion, of course.
> Even a constant speed prop is designed to be optimum at a specific RPM and
> airspeed.
>
> For example;
> A constant speed "cruise" prop for an RV might have its peak efficiency
from
> 2400 to 2500 RPM for a 200 mph true air speed.
> A constant speed "maximum speed" prop for an RV might have its peak
> efficiency at 2700 RPM for a 230 mph true airspeed.
>
> An RV with the constant speed "maximum speed" prop could be expected to
have
> a slightly higher fuel consumption at a given cruise speed, and a slightly
> lower climb rate than an RV with a constant speed "cruise" prop.
> An RV with a constant speed "cruise" prop would have a lower maximum speed
> than an RV with a constant speed "maximum speed" prop.
>
> Jim Ayers
> RV-3 N47RV sn 50
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Constant Speed Prop - Cruise vs maximum speed |
>
> Given a choice between maximum speed and optimum cruise performance, which
> would you choose?
Optimum cruise performance, for me. I expect to spend a lot more time there.
But which would give better vertical penetration for aeros? That might be a
swing factor for me.
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
-6 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LeastDrag93066(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Constant Speed Prop - Cruise vs maximum speed |
In a message dated 12/17/2002 8:56:37 PM Pacific Standard Time,
tedd(at)vansairforce.org writes:
> Optimum cruise performance, for me. I expect to spend a lot more time
> there.
>
> But which would give better vertical penetration for aeros? That might be
> a
> swing factor for me.
>
> Tedd McHenry
> Surrey, BC
> -6 wings
>
A "cruise" prop would be better for this than the "maximum speed" prop.
Although an "aerobatic", or a "climb", constant speed prop would be the best.
Jim Ayers
RV-3 N47RV sn 50 Maroon Marauder
so far - 2 for "cruise" prop, 0 for "maximum speed" prop
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick DeCramer" <diesel(at)rconnect.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Plexi drill bits |
Norman...
Lost your plexi drill bit? You can drill plexiglass with a normal twist bit but
you should grind the tip flutes so they have a flat rake to them with no sharp
corner. Another way is put the bit in your drill and drill into a small hole
or chip in the cement floor which will dull the bit nicely. That will take
off all the sharp edges so it will not catch on the plexiglass and cause a crack
as the bit will tend to melt its way through the plastic.
Dick DeCramer
RV6 N500DD
Northfield, MN
finishing Baffles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "H.Ivan Haecker" <baremetl(at)gvtc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel pant access holes for air |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith and Jean Williams" <kandjwilliams(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Wheel pant access holes for air
>
> Mark,
>
> Been flying since 1999 using approx. 1" holes in side of wheel pants with
> stainless snap-in hole fillers and the air fitting extension from
Cleaveland
> Tool in Ankeny. It is somewhat of a pain to align the holes with the
valve
> stem when I do it alone (trying to see in there with flashlight, etc.).
No
> problem with helper. Either way, easier than pulling the pant, in my
> opinion.
>
>If you make the hole in the side of the wheel pant directly below the axle,
then you can paint a small indiscrete white line on the inside of the tire
that is alligned with the valve stem. Place this line on the tire where it
will show below the wheel pant. When you wish to add air, simply move the
plane by the prop while watching the tire and when the line on the tire
shows up and is vertical, the valve stem will be lined up with the hole.
Ivan Haecker -4 868hrs.
ps I know, some will say don't move the plane by the prop, especially if
its a constant speed one, but this is only how I do it and I wouldn't dream
of trying to force anyone to do it this way and if you do and your prop
falls off on the next flight.I apologize in advance.This is said in jest.
Don't shoot!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Starn" <jhstarn(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel pant access holes for air |
Tom and I used the standard size 1 1/2" stainless cover availble anythere
they sell plumbing stuff (Wal-Mart) and the "truck" tire/tube extention from
our local NAPA store. We made a ring cut out of alum scrap that matched the
plug, riveted it to the inside of the pant. The thickness of the ring and
the pant materials made for a tight fit for the cover. We used chrome valve
stem covers (5/16" six point type) that makes it easier to see, remove and
check the pressure as a one man operation. Lots of landings and HRII speed,
everythings still intact. A small paint mark on the side of tire would solve
the location of the stem problem. Line up the stem and the hole, mark the
tire at the lowest part of the rim. (We used a yellow "paint stick", NAPA
also, to make the dot.) Archive, this might save a re-invent of the
wheel. KABONG
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith and Jean Williams" <kandjwilliams(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Wheel pant access holes for air
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel pant access holes for air |
H.Ivan Haecker wrote:
> ps I know, some will say don't move the plane by the prop, especially if
> its a constant speed one, but this is only how I do it and I wouldn't dream
> of trying to force anyone to do it this way and if you do and your prop
> falls off on the next flight.I apologize in advance.This is said in jest.
I suspect this might start another flamewar, but why wouldn't you move
your airplane by it's prop? Isn't that how the airplane is used to
being moved?
Of course you should never move a prop without checking the switches,
that your limbs are clear of it, etc., but there's no reason you
shouldn't move the airplane by grabbing the root of the blades on either
side of the hub and giving it a pull... Or am I missing something?
-RB4
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Weiler" <dougweil(at)pressenter.com> |
| Subject: | Constant Speed Prop - Cruise vs maximum speed |
>
> Whats the max RPM it is recommended to run a O-360 for the run of it's
life
> bearing in mind a cruise altitude of say 6000 to 8000 feet? Translate that
> into the max speed and that's what I want. Of course if it were possible
to
> go just a little bit slower but have a much lower fuel burn then that
would
> make more sense. Otherwise max speed please.
>
> I don't have any RV time but I've read a thousand times how they climb
close
> to 2000 feet a minute with a O-360 CS. It would seem to my inexperienced
> brain that one would still have good climbing ability even if one traded
> some climb for cruise speed.
>
> Norman Hunger
> RV6A Delta BC
I race my 180 hp with CS prop RV-4 with several of my local flying buddies.
I am just a little faster than a friend's RV-6, 180 hp with the Sensenich FP
prop. He and I are evenly matched for speed when I run at 22" and 2375 rpm
at, say, 6000', and he is running 24" and 2600 rpm.
There is no substitute to a CS prop for climb. I can easily climb 3000 fpm
at 120 msp IAS (solo) on a nice cold Wisconsin day. It is a kick!
Doug Weiler
Hudson, WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com> |
| Subject: | WTB: Landoll Harmonic Balancer WTS: Pneumatic Rivet Sqeezer |
Good morning/day/evening to you where ever you are!
I was wondering if anyone had one of Mark Landoll's harmonic balancers they
might want to part with. I'm going to be needing some weight on the nose of
my RV-4 if I'm going to be able to haul anyone of any size. These
lightweight starters and alternators are great but they sure don't do much
for my CG situation.
Also, I am selling my pneumatic rivet squeezer that I bought from Cleveland.
They are selling for $565, I'll take $250 or best REASONABLE offer. I'll
pay shipping.
--
Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA
Network Manager
Union Safe Deposit Bank
209-946-5116
WTB: Landoll Harmonic Balancer WTS: Pneumatic Rivet Sqeezer
Good morning/day/evening to you where ever you are!
I was wondering if anyone had one of Mark Landoll's harmonic balancers they might
want to part with. I'm going to be needing some weight on the nose of my RV-4
if I'm going to be able to haul anyone of any size. These lightweight starters
and alternators are great but they sure don't do much for my CG situation.
Also, I am selling my pneumatic rivet squeezer that I bought from Cleveland. They
are selling for $565, I'll take $250 or best REASONABLE offer. I'll pay shipping.
--
Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA
Network Manager
Union Safe Deposit Bank
209-946-5116
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LeastDrag93066(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Constant Speed Prop - Cruise vs maximum speed |
Hi All,
The early results are interesting.
5 for "cruise" prop
0 for "maximum speed" prop
1 comment without an obvious choice.
Could this actually be a historical point on the RV-list;
where there is conscientious? :-)
Jim Ayers
RV-3 N47RV sn 50 Constant Speed "Cruise" Prop being installed
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Plexi Drill Bits (and plexi drilling, Tip-up) |
In an off-list reply to Norman, earlier, re canopy plexi drilling, I stated
the reasons why so many builders have had trouble with their plexi drilling
at the front just before the curvature around the corner on the C-602* nose
skin: The problem is, that skin does not have a joggle to match the one in
the WD-625A* frame side panel, in which a trimmed plexi nests, so the plexi
bulges out as it goes over the step there. My solution was to cut a slot,
about 2 1/2" to 3" long in the C-602 skin, just below the plexi trim line
following around the corner so that the skin and plexi will continue
smoothly around the corner. The slot will be covered by the fiberglass
fairing anyway. Worked great!
Re drills: Under no circumstances should a drill bit with standard rake be
used on plexi.! It will dig in and form curly swarf and pull itself through!
An invitation to a crack to happen! If you don't have a proper plexi drill,
grind the point so that there is no rake and try it on a piece of scrap. The
drill should produce plexi dust, not curls, as it penetrates. If you still
get curls, you are probably pushing too hard or the rake removal is not
proper.
Cheers!!---------Henry
(*) The part no's are the ones in my 1995 RV6-A Tip-up kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Irvine <wgirvine(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Alternate engine |
> A horizontally-opposed, direct-drive, water-cooled,
> 6-cylinder engine. 375 CID, 200 HP (maybe a bit
> more), fuel-injected....
Thanks for all the thoughts and feedback. So, do I
understand correctly, weight and cost are the single
most important aspects of a new engine? You wouldn't
buy an engine that was more reliable, more durable and
cheaper to overhaul if is was heavier and cost more?
Does everyone feel this way? Personally, I'd take the
100 lb hit if it meant I could climb in my plane, hit
the button and fly away, time after time, for 1500
hours without tearing the engine apart. But maybe
that's just me.
Someone asked how my engine compares to the Cool Jugs.
The Cool Jugs are a great idea, I just carried it a
step further and intergrated the cylinders with the
block.
Someone else asked why I don't just take a Chevy V-6,
make a custom crank that will accept a prop and invert
the engine. Well, there are enormous oil-control
problems with an inverted engine. Plus, there are
many airplanes designed for a horizontally-opposed
engine that don't have the room for an inverted
engine. But most importantly, inverted engines just
look goofy. A lot of our decisions are emotional.
(How else can you explain buying a Corvette instead of
a mini-van? The mini-van is far more practical, but
not nearly as much fun.) And, to me, an inverted-V
engine just looks goofy. I don't think many people
would buy it.
BTW, another commented that this belongs on the
engines list. I put it here because the RV market is
the largest potential market, and I wanted your
opinions. I'm not interested in what some guy
building an ultra-light thinks about a 200 HP engine.
Someone else asked "why take the gamble?" Exactly.
I've seen new engines for sale at OSH, and when I
asked, "Where's your test plane? How many hours do
you have on your engine?" I got blank stares or a
mumbled "Ah, we're working on that...." The key to
making this project a commercial success is, when
someone askes those same questions, to be able to
point and say, "There's the test plane and we have
over 1000 trouble-free hours on the engine so far.
Want to go for a ride?"
The problem I have is I don't have time to build a new
engine AND a new RV-7/8/10. So, does anyone want to
volunteer their plane to be the test plane, in
exchange for a free engine? Any takers? C'mon guys,
you all bitch and moan about how unreliable and
ancient Lycomings are; here's your chance to use a
modern, reliable engine. Who's gonna step up to the
plate and swing?
Some drive a Yugo, some drive a Ferrari...
Bill
wgirvine(at)yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kempthornes <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Constant Speed Prop - Cruise vs maximum speed |
>
>There is no substitute to a CS prop for climb. I can easily climb 3000 fpm
>at 120 msp IAS (solo) on a nice cold Wisconsin day. It is a kick!
Sure there is! Try a fixed pitch prop pitched to give the same speed and
climb at an even greater rate due to lower induced drag.
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK flying!
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kempthornes <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Constant Speed Prop - Cruise vs maximum speed |
>
>Whats the max RPM it is recommended to run a O-360 for the run of it's life
>bearing in mind a cruise altitude of say 6000 to 8000 feet?
I don't know just now where to look for this information but longevity is
more related to percent of full power than to just RPM. Long life of the
engine comes from asking less of it. Flying high and slow is the best
economy of both fuel and engine. Often, flying high is also the best for
speed - usually when going east as the winds are strong up there.
When I worked for Simpson Timber I would too frequently be called on to go
to Whitecourt, Alberta in the company Lear 24. It was fast. Many of those
trips were over too soon. If we enjoy flight, why go so fast?
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Seat Belt Data |
| From: | czechsix(at)juno.com |
Norman, not that it matters, but I just received the LAST set of RV-8 Pac Aero
5 point harnesses and they are virtually identical in every way to the Hookers
as far as I can tell (1.75" belt width, military latches, etc) EXCEPT they don't
have the pads. They weigh 3 lbs 9 oz (or 3.56 lbs) for each seat....I just
took them out of the box a couple weeks ago and weighed them with a DIGITAL
scale.
Where did you get the 4.5 lbs number? That doesn't sound like it could be right
to me....even if my scale was off a bit I'd say they have to be lighter than
the Hookers which, as I said, appear identical except for the addition of four
pads per seat (which will only weigh a few ounces and would make the Hooker
claim of 3.9 lbs per seat seem to be in line with what I've measured on the Pac
Aeros).
One question relevant to this noble effort on your part to document harness weights...have
you considered the differences in RV model? Maybe it's negligible
but it might be interesting to confirm whether an RV-8 harness and RV-6/7/9 harness
have the same weights...
Best regards,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D finishing...fiberglass....
From: "Norman" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca>
Subject: RV-List: Seat Belt Data
Here are some seat belt details. All prices USD. Canadians see the bottom for the
best domestic deal.
This post could use more details. Help!
PACIFIC AERO HARNESS
These are the ones that Van used to sell but he has gone out of buisness recently
due to supplier cost increases. His 5 point belts weighed 4.5 lbs. Webpage
not available anymore.
Norman Hunger
RV6A Delta BC
CASCAR Sportsman #96 team owner/driver (working twards 2004 Super Series, just
need another quarter mil or so)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Dynon Pitot/AOA probe info, FYI |
| From: | czechsix(at)juno.com |
Guys, I got this info from Dynon and just thought I'd pass it on to the List, FYI,
in case anyone's interested...
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D finishing...
--------------------------------------------------
Mark,
1. The AOA/Pitot Probe does not include a static port. We recommend you
use the static system recommended by the designer of your plane.
2. There is no audio output from the EFIS-D10 at this time. It is on our
list of possible future enhancements.
3. We anticipate the AOA/pitot probe will be available several months
behind the EFIS-D10. We may release an unheated version somewhat earlier if
there is interest.
Thank you for you continued patience and interest.
Gillian C. Torode
Business Manager
Dynon Development Inc.
19501 144th Ave NE
Suite C-500
Woodinville, WA 98072
(425)402-4404 Phone (425)984-1751 Fax
-----Original Message-----
From: menavrat(at)rockwellcollins.com [mailto:menavrat(at)rockwellcollins.com]
Subject: Pitot/AOA questions
Hi Gillian, a few questions on your pitot/AOA system:
1) Does your pitot have a static port too? Your website description is a
bit confusing....it says there's a pitot port and another port to measure
changing air pressure for AOA, and doesn't specifically mention a static
port but sort of implies that it's there or is somehow derived from the
other two ports ("Pressures from these ports on the pitot are sensed with
silicon-based semiconductor pressure sensors and analyzed by the EFIS-D10
to translate the pressure data into angle of attack, airspeed, and
altitude."
Just wondering if I need seperate static ports or if I can hook up my
static system to your probe?
2) Is there a way to drive an aural tone to warn of impending stall due to
high AOA? This seems to be one of the greatest advantages of an AOA system
but on your wiring diagram I don't see anything clearly indicating an audio
output....
3) Are you planning to have the pitot/AOA probe available at the same time
as the EFIS D-10, or do you plan to phase it in later when you've got more
flight test data? I have an RV-8 if it makes any difference....
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A finishing....with hole in panel for D-10....
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Solution to stripped threads in Nosewheel fork |
| From: | czechsix(at)juno.com |
Guys, I thought I'd post the solution to the stripped threads in the forward bracket
attach points on the nosewheel fork in case anyone else can benefit. I
was going to use helicoils, but ran into a couple issues, the first being the
cost....helicoils use a special, non-standard tap and special installation tool.
My local ACE Hardware store charges about $40 for the tap and inst. tool,
which was a bit more than I could stomach for a one-time repair, and I couldn't
find anyone who had a set to borrow. In addition, a couple guys I talked to
who have lots of experience on cars said that helicoils work ok for a one-time
fix but if it's something you need to remove and install on an ongoing basis,
they don't hold up too well.
What was recommended to me is a type of threaded insert that has standard external
threads (so you can use a standard--read "much less expensive"--tap) and internal
threads to match whatever you originally had in the hole you are repairing.
McMaster-Carr (www.mcmaster.com) sells a wide variety of these. I ended
up using P/N 90259A147 which is self-locking (comes with a micro-encapsulated
epoxy that activates when you screw it in) and costs a whopping $1.26 each.
The internal threads are 3/8 X 24 (same as the nosewheel fork) and the external
threads are 1/2 x 13. No special tools required, I bought a 1/2 X 13 tap at
ACE Hardware for $5, tapped the holes, and screwed the inserts in using the
original 3/8 X 24 bolts that came with the nosewheel kit.
Given what I've experienced if I were to build another nosedragger today I'd probly
just go ahead and put the inserts in to begin with...much more robust than
the threaded aluminum.
FWIW.
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D finishing...
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Reserved N-number |
Is any one on the list interested in having N7QB? I have had this N-number
reserved for many years and have decided not to renew it. Thought it would
be nice to see on one of the new RV7's. For a donation to the RV-list it's
yours.
Cash Copeland
RV6 N46FC
Hayward, Ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Karen and Robert Brown" <bkbrown(at)wmca.net> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel valves |
I'm struggling with this one myself. All my A&P relatives say it is dirt simple
to build a parallel valve, fuel injected 360 to put out 200HP (by flow porting
and running 9 or 10:1 pistons). These same people all tell me that this will
not reduce the life of the engine, nor put any undue stress on it. It WILL
allow one to save about 40 lbs of weight. My uncle commented that it seemed
many more angle valve 360's come to him with cracked cylinders than the parallel
valve versions...not sure what that means in terms of making my engine choice.
I spent an afternoon talking with the engine builders Ly-Con's engine shop in Visalia,
CA a few months ago, and they confirm that most of the high compression
parallel valve360's they build have had no problem at all making TBO, certainly
no problem related to upping the compression to dyno out at 200-210HP.
So what's the answer? If what I'm hearing is true, then a parallel valve, fuel
injected 360 with a forward facing induction system and high compression pistons
is the way to go.
I can't see why I'd want to pay 10k more for an engine that weighs 40 lbs more
and puts out THE SAME POWER.
I welcome real world experience on this question...I need to order an engine.
Bob Brown
RV7A- fuselage wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel valves |
I'm certainly not trying to convince you of anything, but here's what I went
with...
In my case I wanted as much power as I could get while still staying within
the general guidelines of a certificated-ish engine (although mine will be
an experimental engine). I ended up having Bart take a 200hp angle valve
IO-360-A1B6 core and build it with Airflow Performance injection and a
single Lightspeed Plasma II. Supposedly that configuration has dyno'd out
to around 220hp.
Swapping the right mag for the Lightspeed, having no vacuum pump, a
lightweight alternator & starter, and using a Whirlwind 150 composite prop
(to shave about 20 pounds off the Hartzell aluminum config), my powerplant
will weigh in roughly the same as a stock 180hp powerplant, but it will be
producing close to 40hp more, performing better (theoretically) at altitude,
etc.
Plus it will have the counterweighted crankshaft. If you take the 180hp
core and add a c-weighted crank, you're adding several pounds there. Check
the TCDS and you'll see what I mean.
Worth the extra $10k? For me, yes. Haven't flown it yet, but we'll see.
I know, we're comparing apples to oranges. But it's food for thought
nonetheless.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D (fuselage)
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Karen and Robert Brown" <bkbrown(at)wmca.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: parallel valves
>
> I'm struggling with this one myself. All my A&P relatives say it is dirt
simple to build a parallel valve, fuel injected 360 to put out 200HP (by
flow porting and running 9 or 10:1 pistons). These same people all tell me
that this will not reduce the life of the engine, nor put any undue stress
on it. It WILL allow one to save about 40 lbs of weight. My uncle
commented that it seemed many more angle valve 360's come to him with
cracked cylinders than the parallel valve versions...not sure what that
means in terms of making my engine choice.
>
> I spent an afternoon talking with the engine builders Ly-Con's engine shop
in Visalia, CA a few months ago, and they confirm that most of the high
compression parallel valve360's they build have had no problem at all making
TBO, certainly no problem related to upping the compression to dyno out at
200-210HP.
>
> So what's the answer? If what I'm hearing is true, then a parallel valve,
fuel injected 360 with a forward facing induction system and high
compression pistons is the way to go.
>
> I can't see why I'd want to pay 10k more for an engine that weighs 40 lbs
more and puts out THE SAME POWER.
>
> I welcome real world experience on this question...I need to order an
engine.
>
> Bob Brown
> RV7A- fuselage wiring
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Norman" <jnorman(at)intermapsystems.com> |
Rob,
What you are describing is exactly what Bart Lallond built for me. Every
part is new, except a one-run block. 9.5:1 pistons, Air Flow Performance
fuel injection (forward facing), Lightspeed Engineering electronic ignition
(right side only, Slick magneto on the left), Melenium cylinders, etc.
I told Bart "Build me what you would build yourself". This is what I got.
He told me the same thing you have heard from the guys at Lycon...don'
believe there to be an issue about getting the engine to TBO. The only
concern Bart noted was that if we can't get AvGas, then the high comp
pistons will have to be changed... I would recommend Bart to anyone.
jim
Tampa
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Karen and Robert
Brown
Subject: Re: RV-List: parallel valves
I'm struggling with this one myself. All my A&P relatives say it is dirt
simple to build a parallel valve, fuel injected 360 to put out 200HP (by
flow porting and running 9 or 10:1 pistons). These same people all tell me
that this will not reduce the life of the engine, nor put any undue stress
on it. It WILL allow one to save about 40 lbs of weight. My uncle
commented that it seemed many more angle valve 360's come to him with
cracked cylinders than the parallel valve versions...not sure what that
means in terms of making my engine choice.
I spent an afternoon talking with the engine builders Ly-Con's engine shop
in Visalia, CA a few months ago, and they confirm that most of the high
compression parallel valve360's they build have had no problem at all making
TBO, certainly no problem related to upping the compression to dyno out at
200-210HP.
So what's the answer? If what I'm hearing is true, then a parallel valve,
fuel injected 360 with a forward facing induction system and high
compression pistons is the way to go.
I can't see why I'd want to pay 10k more for an engine that weighs 40 lbs
more and puts out THE SAME POWER.
I welcome real world experience on this question...I need to order an
engine.
Bob Brown
RV7A- fuselage wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Flight Simulator controls (marginally RV related) |
Alright all you Flight Simulator junkies: can you recommend
your favorite input devices such as control wheels/sticks and
rudder pedals. My daughter (14 years old) is into airplanes
and we recently upgraded our computer to handle a copy of
FS2002 she bought. I'm looking for some input devices for
a Christmas present for her.
Thanks,
Doug Medema
RV-6A N276 (reserved) finishing up!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve J Hurlbut" <sjhdcl(at)kingston.net> |
| Subject: | Stainless/Chrome Landing gear plugs |
Can someone give me a part number for Aircraft Spruce (or page number) for
some chrome plugs (or
stainless, or whatever) that would go in the side of the fiberglass wheel
pants for access to the main bolts?
I already have the spring loaded 1" camloc doors for the tire pressure.
Steve
RV7A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Starn" <jhstarn(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate engine |
Many years ago (1968) a good friend and member of our Corvette club sold his
'67 427 tri power 425/450HP Corvette and bought a very used '65 VW bug
because it got better gas milage than the 'vette. We took the number of
miles he drove in a year, figured out the savings for a year by driving the
VW. Gas was cheaper then and he was going to save a little more than $300.00
a year. $300.00.... thats less than a $1.00 a day. I told him "I wouldn't
drive that piece of s--t for $10.00 a day" and that the resale value of the
'vette would only go up. Have you priced a '67 Corvette lately, its value
is now between $35,000 and $65,000 or more than $1,000.00 a year. Bottom
line: Drive/fly what you love, going cheap only costs more in the long run.
KABONG
---- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Irvine" <wgirvine(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: RV-List: Alternate engine
>
> > A horizontally-opposed, direct-drive, water-cooled,
> > 6-cylinder engine. 375 CID, 200 HP (maybe a bit
> > more), fuel-injected....
>
> Thanks for all the thoughts and feedback. So, do I
> understand correctly, weight and cost are the single
> most important aspects of a new engine? You wouldn't
> buy an engine that was more reliable, more durable and
> cheaper to overhaul if is was heavier and cost more?
> Does everyone feel this way? Personally, I'd take the
> 100 lb hit if it meant I could climb in my plane, hit
> the button and fly away, time after time, for 1500
> hours without tearing the engine apart. But maybe
> that's just me.
>
> Someone asked how my engine compares to the Cool Jugs.
> The Cool Jugs are a great idea, I just carried it a
> step further and intergrated the cylinders with the
> block.
>
> Someone else asked why I don't just take a Chevy V-6,
> make a custom crank that will accept a prop and invert
> the engine. Well, there are enormous oil-control
> problems with an inverted engine. Plus, there are
> many airplanes designed for a horizontally-opposed
> engine that don't have the room for an inverted
> engine. But most importantly, inverted engines just
> look goofy. A lot of our decisions are emotional.
> (How else can you explain buying a Corvette instead of
> a mini-van? The mini-van is far more practical, but
> not nearly as much fun.) And, to me, an inverted-V
> engine just looks goofy. I don't think many people
> would buy it.
>
> BTW, another commented that this belongs on the
> engines list. I put it here because the RV market is
> the largest potential market, and I wanted your
> opinions. I'm not interested in what some guy
> building an ultra-light thinks about a 200 HP engine.
>
> Someone else asked "why take the gamble?" Exactly.
> I've seen new engines for sale at OSH, and when I
> asked, "Where's your test plane? How many hours do
> you have on your engine?" I got blank stares or a
> mumbled "Ah, we're working on that...." The key to
> making this project a commercial success is, when
> someone askes those same questions, to be able to
> point and say, "There's the test plane and we have
> over 1000 trouble-free hours on the engine so far.
> Want to go for a ride?"
>
> The problem I have is I don't have time to build a new
> engine AND a new RV-7/8/10. So, does anyone want to
> volunteer their plane to be the test plane, in
> exchange for a free engine? Any takers? C'mon guys,
> you all bitch and moan about how unreliable and
> ancient Lycomings are; here's your chance to use a
> modern, reliable engine. Who's gonna step up to the
> plate and swing?
>
> Some drive a Yugo, some drive a Ferrari...
>
> Bill
> wgirvine(at)yahoo.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tracy Crook" <lors01(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate engine |
> Bill
> wgirvine(at)yahoo.com
> The key to
> making this project a commercial success is, when
> someone askes those same questions, to be able to
> point and say, "There's the test plane and we have
> over 1000 trouble-free hours on the engine so far.
> Want to go for a ride?"
Been there, done that! :-)
And the Mazda 13B rotary installation weighs the same as a Lyc O - 320.
I agree with those who think the 100 pound increase is a non-starter, even
if it has the advantage of direct drive.
I also agree with whoever said that it is the added accessories that are the
major reliability concern on an alternative engine. I believe that the
rotary is equal or better than the Lycoming in reliability, it is the
reduction drive that I think about when I'm flying my plane. Which brings
me to the real point of this post.
Every known failure mode of my reduction drive will manifest itself by the
presence of metal chips (steel) in the oil return line from the drive. This
happens long before a possible catestrophic failure. If I had a good chip
detector, it would increase my confidence level during flight at least 500%.
I found one source of chip detectors (used in helicopter transmissions) but
the price was way beyond reasonable. Anyone out there aware of any at
reasonable prices? If not, I'll have to add this to my list of things to
design.
Tracy Crook
13B powered RV-4 , 1300+ hrs.
20B powered RV-8, Getting ready for final cut on canopy.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Knicholas2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Placement of ELT remote |
I am installing my Ameri-King ELT which has a small remote panel with lights
and switch. Is there any "rule" that says that this HAS to be on the
instrument panel? Can it be mounted soemwhere else? My panel is pretty
crowded so I am thinking of putting it in the center support post between the
seats. So whattdaya think?
Kim Nicholas
RV9A - finishing......
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Placement of ELT remote |
I was thinking of putting mine in the same place. I think that I remember
reading somewhere that it had to be "within reach of the pilot" in order to
reset or manually activate.
I guess I better check the regs again - unless someone else quotes it here
first...
Ralph Capen
RV6A
> Knicholas2(at)aol.com
>
> I am installing my Ameri-King ELT which has a
> small remote panel with lights
> and switch. Is there any "rule" that says that
> this HAS to be on the
> instrument panel? Can it be mounted soemwhere
> else? My panel is pretty
> crowded so I am thinking of putting it in the
> center support post between the
> seats. So whattdaya think?
>
> Kim Nicholas
> RV9A - finishing......
>
>
> Month --
> Gifts!)
> Click on the
> about this
> your generous
> the Contributions
> ads or any other
> Forums.
> latest messages.
> other List members.
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> Digests:http://www.matronics.com/digest/rv-list
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ross Schlotthauer <rdschlotthauer(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel valves |
Bob,
I am by no means an engine guru but in talking with
folks that should know, the big difference between
fuel injecting the parallel valve engine and
IO-360-A1B6 is the counterweighted crank. I have been
told the crank is where the 40 pounds is at and that
makes alot of sense to me. Those counterweights
smooth out four cylinders firing out 200 hp. The 180
hp parallel engine is not nearly as smooth running,
much less a modififed 200 hp version.
This is what I have been told.
Ross Schlotthauer
RV7 fuse
--- Karen and Robert Brown wrote:
> Brown"
>
> I'm struggling with this one myself. All my A&P
> relatives say it is dirt simple to build a parallel
> valve, fuel injected 360 to put out 200HP (by flow
> porting and running 9 or 10:1 pistons). These same
> people all tell me that this will not reduce the
> life of the engine, nor put any undue stress on it.
> It WILL allow one to save about 40 lbs of weight.
> My uncle commented that it seemed many more angle
> valve 360's come to him with cracked cylinders than
> the parallel valve versions...not sure what that
> means in terms of making my engine choice.
>
> I spent an afternoon talking with the engine
> builders Ly-Con's engine shop in Visalia, CA a few
> months ago, and they confirm that most of the high
> compression parallel valve360's they build have had
> no problem at all making TBO, certainly no problem
> related to upping the compression to dyno out at
> 200-210HP.
>
> So what's the answer? If what I'm hearing is true,
> then a parallel valve, fuel injected 360 with a
> forward facing induction system and high compression
> pistons is the way to go.
>
> I can't see why I'd want to pay 10k more for an
> engine that weighs 40 lbs more and puts out THE SAME
> POWER.
>
> I welcome real world experience on this question...I
> need to order an engine.
>
> Bob Brown
> RV7A- fuselage wiring
>
>
>
> Click on the
> this
> generous
> _->
> Contributions
> any other
> Forums.
>
> latest messages.
> List members.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm
> Digests:http://www.matronics.com/digest/rv-list
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Seat Belt Data |
Jim, just climb on your scale and your weight,-- =X, then have someone hand
you the harness, now total weight-- =Y;---Y-X = Harness weight! "Elementary
my dear Watson"
Cheers!!--Henry.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joshua Siler" <joshs(at)ninatek.com> |
| Subject: | Placement of ELT remote |
I flew a Piper Archer the other day that had the ELT switch mounted on
the wall near the pilot's armrest.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Knicholas2(at)aol.com
Subject: RV-List: Placement of ELT remote
I am installing my Ameri-King ELT which has a small remote panel with
lights
and switch. Is there any "rule" that says that this HAS to be on the
instrument panel? Can it be mounted soemwhere else? My panel is pretty
crowded so I am thinking of putting it in the center support post
between the
seats. So whattdaya think?
Kim Nicholas
RV9A - finishing......
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Blomgren" <jackanet(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | S-curved Stick for -8 |
Have any -8 builders reformed their front stick a la Llyle Hefel's design?
If so, please share dimensions and bending method. Particularly, can the
stick material be successfully bent cold using some electrical conduit
bender (or press with shaped blocks), or is (red) heat required for the
correct method and a better product?
Thanks,
Jack Blomgren
Minnesota Wing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stainless/Chrome Landing gear plugs |
Steve, check in the aviation (plumbing) department of your local Home
Depot or Lowes; you are looking "hole plugs", should be an assortment of
sizes in a blister pack.
You may need to tweak the spring tangs on the plugs to accommodate the
thickness of the fiberglass.
Sam Buchanan
========================
Steve J Hurlbut wrote:
>
>
> Can someone give me a part number for Aircraft Spruce (or page number) for
> some chrome plugs (or
> stainless, or whatever) that would go in the side of the fiberglass wheel
> pants for access to the main bolts?
>
> I already have the spring loaded 1" camloc doors for the tire pressure.
>
> Steve
> RV7A
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | Placement of ELT remote |
I mounted mine in the the right cabin deck on the passenger side. Fits in
there nice and neatly, looks like it was supposed to go there!
Cheers,
Stein Bruch, Rv6 Flying-Minneapolis
RV7 Empennage.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Knicholas2(at)aol.com
Subject: RV-List: Placement of ELT remote
I am installing my Ameri-King ELT which has a small remote panel with lights
and switch. Is there any "rule" that says that this HAS to be on the
instrument panel? Can it be mounted soemwhere else? My panel is pretty
crowded so I am thinking of putting it in the center support post between
the
seats. So whattdaya think?
Kim Nicholas
RV9A - finishing......
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Placement of ELT remote |
| From: | Don R Jordan <dons6a(at)juno.com> |
Kim:
I installed mine behind the copilot seat. & got by with it. you need to
be able to reach it or install the control.
I can't reach it in flight, so will install the control one of these
days.
You know they play reverse the wires , if you cut your cable.
Don Jordan - RV6A - N6DJ
Arlington, Tx
**************************************************
>
> I am installing my Ameri-King ELT which has a small remote panel
> with lights
> and switch. Is there any "rule" that says that this HAS to be on
> the
> instrument panel? Can it be mounted somewhere else? My panel is
> pretty
> crowded so I am thinking of putting it in the center support post
> between the
> seats. So whattdaya think?
>
> Kim Nicholas
> RV9A - finishing......
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Stainless/Chrome Landing gear plugs |
| From: | Don R Jordan <dons6a(at)juno.com> |
Your local hardware store shold have them.
Don Jordan - RV6A - N6DJ
Arlington, Tx
writes:
>
>
> Can someone give me a part number for Aircraft Spruce (or page
> number) for
> some chrome plugs (or
> stainless, or whatever) that would go in the side of the fiberglass
> wheel
> pants for access to the main bolts?
>
> I already have the spring loaded 1" camloc doors for the tire
> pressure.
>
> Steve
> RV7A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Noel & Yoshie Simmons" <noel(at)blueskyaviation.net> |
| Subject: | Placement of ELT remote |
Try this on for size. Its is creative so the FAA may not like it but here
it goes.
How about eliminating it and adding a placard saying to check 121.5 before
shut down.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Knicholas2(at)aol.com
Subject: RV-List: Placement of ELT remote
I am installing my Ameri-King ELT which has a small remote panel with lights
and switch. Is there any "rule" that says that this HAS to be on the
instrument panel? Can it be mounted soemwhere else? My panel is pretty
crowded so I am thinking of putting it in the center support post between
the
seats. So whattdaya think?
Kim Nicholas
RV9A - finishing......
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kyle Boatright" <kyle.boatright(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stainless/Chrome Landing gear plugs |
In my Home Despot and Lowe's, these plugs were in the trays marked
"specialty fasteners" in the hardware section.
KB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Buchanan" <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Stainless/Chrome Landing gear plugs
>
> Steve, check in the aviation (plumbing) department of your local Home
> Depot or Lowes; you are looking "hole plugs", should be an assortment of
> sizes in a blister pack.
>
> You may need to tweak the spring tangs on the plugs to accommodate the
> thickness of the fiberglass.
>
> Sam Buchanan
>
> ========================
>
> Steve J Hurlbut wrote:
> >
> >
> > Can someone give me a part number for Aircraft Spruce (or page number)
for
> > some chrome plugs (or
> > stainless, or whatever) that would go in the side of the fiberglass
wheel
> > pants for access to the main bolts?
> >
> > I already have the spring loaded 1" camloc doors for the tire pressure.
> >
> > Steve
> > RV7A
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate engine |
Bill Irvine wrote:
>>A horizontally-opposed, direct-drive, water-cooled,
>>6-cylinder engine. 375 CID, 200 HP (maybe a bit
>>more), fuel-injected....
>
> Thanks for all the thoughts and feedback. So, do I
> understand correctly, weight and cost are the single
> most important aspects of a new engine? You wouldn't
> buy an engine that was more reliable, more durable and
> cheaper to overhaul if is was heavier and cost more?
No. I would buy the engine that can give me the lowest total cost of
ownership, and meet my performance requirements. My performance
requirements include weight equal to or less than (but not much less
than) an I/O-360, so if it's 100# more, it's off my list. Total cost of
ownership will include expected cost of overhauls, so it overhauls are
dirt cheap then a higher up-front cost of the engine may be acceptable.
But I have a hard time seeing how a brand-new-to-market engine, with
custom compoents, will be cheap to overhaul or maintain. The parts
availability may not be there.
> The problem I have is I don't have time to build a new
> engine AND a new RV-7/8/10. So, does anyone want to
> volunteer their plane to be the test plane, in
> exchange for a free engine? Any takers? C'mon guys,
> you all bitch and moan about how unreliable and
> ancient Lycomings are; here's your chance to use a
> modern, reliable engine. Who's gonna step up to the
> plate and swing?
If you can make an engine that'll produce 180HP, weigh no more than an
I/O-360, be safe for Acro, and convince me that your engineering will
make the total cost of ownership lower than a Lycoming, then you're on.
I'll have an RV-7 ready in oh, let's say about 5 years just to be safe,
which may be how long it'll take you to build an engine that will do all
that... 8-)
-RB4
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: S-curved Stick for -8 |
We tried and couldn't get the curves without collapsing the tube. I
purchased two more stick blanks and some day will try it again but this time
with cuts and welds. The geometry is very tricky because if the handle is to
be raised enough to be comfortable then it must be back quite a ways in
order to move all the way forward without hitting the panel. That will put
it right up against your belly and I'm afraid guys with larger mid-sections
might not be able to make it work. Anway, we plan to experiment with it
further hopefully. The standard position does indeed put the stick too low
and far forward for proper ergonomics, but you do get used to it. I have
nearly 300 hours in in now and have stopped complaining about it... besides,
no one would listen. ;-)
There's been quite a bit of discussion on this which should be in the
archives.
Randy Lervold
RV-8, 285 hrs
www.rv-8.com
Home Wing VAF
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Blomgren" <jackanet(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: RV-List: S-curved Stick for -8
>
> Have any -8 builders reformed their front stick a la Llyle Hefel's design?
> If so, please share dimensions and bending method. Particularly, can the
> stick material be successfully bent cold using some electrical conduit
> bender (or press with shaped blocks), or is (red) heat required for the
> correct method and a better product?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jack Blomgren
> Minnesota Wing
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Patrick Kelley" <webmaster(at)flion.com> |
| Subject: | Best $300 I ever spent / garage heater |
I just bought a cheap 1000w halogen light; keeps my garage warm and I
can see what I'm doing now...
Patrick Kelley - RV-6A - on hold for the holidays
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ross
Schlotthauer
Subject: RV-List: Best $300 I ever spent / garage heater
RVers,
I broke down and spent the best $300 of the project a
couple weeks ago. I have a small unheated hanger that
is attached to the side of my house, sits in a
residential neighborhood, and is commonly referered to
as a "two car garage" by non RV types. I found that
as winter set in here in north Idaho I began to spend
less and less time in the hanger due to quite
uncomfortable temperatures. I really wanted to have
some heat out there but figured it was no use without
insulation. I have essential building equipment on
all walls and in every corner of the hanger and
couldn't stomach the thought of giving up precious
building time insulating. I also have a two car
uninsulated metal rollup door that I figured would be
a hassle to try and insulate.
It was suggested to me by one of my fellow energy
concious Idahoans that I just buy a big heater and
forget about insulation. That mentality appealed to
me greatly so I went down to Lowes home improvement
and bought a 30,000 btu/hour vent free natural gas
heater with a thermostatically controlled blower and
all the plumbing fixins. I set it in the corner by my
gas water heater and furnace and fired it up. In
about 30 minutes it brings my hanger temp from 40
degrees F to 65 degrees F and I have to either turn it
down or work in shorts.
I calculate that I am burning $0.24 per hour worth of
gas when I am running full power on the heater. For
that price I can afford to throw a little heat
outside. I highly recommend the $300 investment to
anyone.
Ross Schlotthauer
RV7 Fuse (in comfort)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Bristol <bj034(at)lafn.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Placement of ELT remote |
Kim,
TSO C91a states the following:
"ELT remote controls should be located in view of and accessible
from the pilots normal seated position."
Also,
"A visual monitor should be in the pilots forward field of view
and be visible under normal daylight ambient light conditions."
Also of interest.
"ELT remote controls should enable selection of at least the
following functions:
MANUAL ON Transmitter manually selected ON.
ARMED Transmitter enabled such that activation will
occur in response to a correct crash sensor input. ELT
must be in this position during flight.
RESET Operating Transmitter deactivated and
returned to the ARMED condition.
Note: The OFF function should not be available at the remote
control.
An aural or visual monitor should be provided to alert the pilot
when the ELT has been activated and is transmitting.
An aural monitor should provide a distinct signal which is
plainly audible from within and outside the aircraft with the
engines not running.
To facilitate locating ELT following a crash, a placard identifying
the location of the ELT in the aircraft, for example ELT INSIDE
should be installed in the immediate vicinity of the ELT on the
external surface of the aircraft. Lettering at least 25mm high in a
colour contrasting with the aircraft paintwork would be suitable
identification."
So, it sounds to me like the remote should be on the instrument panel. And
actually, most panels have some otherwise wasted real estate that will suffice
-
the remote for the AK-450 is really quite small.
Dave RV6, So Cal
Knicholas2(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> I am installing my Ameri-King ELT which has a small remote panel with lights
> and switch. Is there any "rule" that says that this HAS to be on the
> instrument panel? Can it be mounted soemwhere else? My panel is pretty
> crowded so I am thinking of putting it in the center support post between the
> seats. So whattdaya think?
>
> Kim Nicholas
> RV9A - finishing......
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Sipp" <rsipp(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel valves |
On 12/18 Bob offered:
> So what's the answer? If what I'm hearing is true, then a parallel valve,
fuel injected 360 with a forward facing induction system and high
compression pistons is the way to go.
>
> I can't see why I'd want to pay 10k more for an engine that weighs 40 lbs
more and puts out THE SAME POWER.
>
> I welcome real world experience on this question...I need to order an
engine.
While the engine itself may be fine in this configuration we still have the
un-answered question of what impact (pun intended) the engine would have on
a Hartzell CS prop. Remember, Hartzell says all bets are off with even
minor modification to an untested modified engine prop combination.
Dick Sipp
N250DS RV-4
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross A. Scroggs" <rscroggs(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Placement of ELT remote |
Kim,
I have the same ELT in my J3 Cub. If memory serves me, the manual says
the remote module
has to be visible to the pilot. If I was to install it on my instrument
panel (J3 ???) I wouldn't be able
to reach it, so I installed it under the rear seat where I sit. The manual
doesn't say that the pilot has
to be able to see it while sitting, just to be able to see it. So every
time I get out of the plane, I just
look under the seat and make sure it hasn't been triggered. I can really
see it if I just lean forward
a little.
Just use common sense when installing it and you won't have any trouble.
Ross Scroggs, A&P
RV-4 #3911
Conyers, Ga.
----- Original Message -----
From: <Knicholas2(at)aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: Placement of ELT remote
>
> I am installing my Ameri-King ELT which has a small remote panel with
lights
> and switch. Is there any "rule" that says that this HAS to be on the
> instrument panel? Can it be mounted soemwhere else? My panel is pretty
> crowded so I am thinking of putting it in the center support post between
the
> seats. So whattdaya think?
>
> Kim Nicholas
> RV9A - finishing......
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flight Simulator controls (marginally RV related) |
There is a nice RV-6 and RV-6A for FS2K2 at flightsim.com. There, now
it's RV related. And a subjective and unsubstantiated opinion stated as
fact to follow, so it's RV-List related. ;)
The best non-forcefeedback stick I have used (and I have owned several)
is the Gravis Blackhawk Digital. One of the cheaper ones at about $30,
best feel, built in throttle and trim (coolie) hat, several buttons
which can be programmed for any function, and way more reliable than
anything else I have owned. Highly recommended. And she (and you) will
love FS2K2, especially if you ever used the older versions.
Jeff Point
RV-6 finish kit and FS junkie
Milwaukee WI
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James E. Clark" <jclark(at)conterra.com> |
| Subject: | Alternate engine |
Tracy + List,
Doesn't one of the "remote oil filter" companies offer a chip detector for
their unit?
Don't know how good or cost effective it is but I do remember talking to
them a few years ago about it. Their point was similar about the engine.
IIRC, it was the one with the "stronger/beefier" of the remote mounts.
James
<<>>
>
> Been there, done that! :-)
>
> And the Mazda 13B rotary installation weighs the same as a Lyc O - 320.
> I agree with those who think the 100 pound increase is a non-starter, even
> if it has the advantage of direct drive.
>
> I also agree with whoever said that it is the added accessories
> that are the
> major reliability concern on an alternative engine. I believe that the
> rotary is equal or better than the Lycoming in reliability, it is the
> reduction drive that I think about when I'm flying my plane. Which brings
> me to the real point of this post.
>
> Every known failure mode of my reduction drive will manifest itself by the
> presence of metal chips (steel) in the oil return line from the
> drive. This
> happens long before a possible catestrophic failure. If I had a good chip
> detector, it would increase my confidence level during flight at
> least 500%.
> I found one source of chip detectors (used in helicopter
> transmissions) but
> the price was way beyond reasonable. Anyone out there aware of any at
> reasonable prices? If not, I'll have to add this to my list of things to
> design.
>
> Tracy Crook
> 13B powered RV-4 , 1300+ hrs.
> 20B powered RV-8, Getting ready for final cut on canopy.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James E. Clark" <jclark(at)conterra.com> |
| Subject: | Placement of ELT remote |
On my "certified" plane it is NOT on the panel. It is to my left (forward
and above the arm rest).
I am not sure but I *think* the issue is one of being in clear view of and
operable by the pilot.
James
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> Knicholas2(at)aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 4:24 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: Placement of ELT remote
>
>
> I am installing my Ameri-King ELT which has a small remote panel
> with lights
> and switch. Is there any "rule" that says that this HAS to be on the
> instrument panel? Can it be mounted soemwhere else? My panel is pretty
> crowded so I am thinking of putting it in the center support post
> between the
> seats. So whattdaya think?
>
> Kim Nicholas
> RV9A - finishing......
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave" <davevon(at)tir.com> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel valves--choices |
Is there a reason you didn't mention going with one of the composite C/S
props? They don't seem to have the same vibration issues that Hartzell has.
They're also lighter and claim higher speeds.
Dave
RV-6
The need for speed
> Electronic ignition--I wanted it until I found out that Hartzell was
seeing
> some very real differences in vibration analysis using these ignitions. I
> think the greater danger is the unknown compatibility with Sensenich. So,
> depending on your prop choice electronic ignition still has advantages in
> starting, smoothness, power, fuel consumption and compatibility with auto
> fuel (adjustable in flight etc on some versions). I chose to go with mags,
I
> can always add electronic later.
> My question, how will a 190 horsepower parallel valve engine with a
Hartzell
> perform compared to the angle valve 200 horse. I also think, without dyno
> info to support that a front induction would add about another 5 horses
over
> the already improved Superior bottom induction. That is just a guess based
on
> a few things I am not going into. So then it would be 195 horses but then
I
> think we are pushing the Senenich prop into unknown territory though I
> suspect the Hartzell would be OK. I don't think engine smoothness would be
> affected by pulling 10 or so additional horses above the base 180 and
neither
> would TBO.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Huft" <rv8tor(at)lazy8.net> |
This would be the ADC remote filter system
http://www.globalav.com.au/adc-recip.html
I haven't tried one, but the skywagon guys are very fond of them.
John RV8 Pagosa Springs, CO
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of James E. Clark
Subject: RE: RV-List: Alternate engine
Tracy + List,
Doesn't one of the "remote oil filter" companies offer a chip detector for
their unit?
Don't know how good or cost effective it is but I do remember talking to
them a few years ago about it. Their point was similar about the engine.
IIRC, it was the one with the "stronger/beefier" of the remote mounts.
James
<<>>
>
> Been there, done that! :-)
>
> And the Mazda 13B rotary installation weighs the same as a Lyc O - 320.
> I agree with those who think the 100 pound increase is a non-starter, even
> if it has the advantage of direct drive.
>
> I also agree with whoever said that it is the added accessories
> that are the
> major reliability concern on an alternative engine. I believe that the
> rotary is equal or better than the Lycoming in reliability, it is the
> reduction drive that I think about when I'm flying my plane. Which brings
> me to the real point of this post.
>
> Every known failure mode of my reduction drive will manifest itself by the
> presence of metal chips (steel) in the oil return line from the
> drive. This
> happens long before a possible catestrophic failure. If I had a good chip
> detector, it would increase my confidence level during flight at
> least 500%.
> I found one source of chip detectors (used in helicopter
> transmissions) but
> the price was way beyond reasonable. Anyone out there aware of any at
> reasonable prices? If not, I'll have to add this to my list of things to
> design.
>
> Tracy Crook
> 13B powered RV-4 , 1300+ hrs.
> 20B powered RV-8, Getting ready for final cut on canopy.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wheel pant access holes for air |
Has anyone used the extension air stems sold by or Cleveland for use with the
wheelpants? Are they suppose to be put on permanently or just screwed in
when you are adding air?
Len Leggette RV-8A
N901LL
Greensboro, N.C.
24 hours !!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Huft" <rv8tor(at)lazy8.net> |
| Subject: | parallel valves--choices |
I went with a parallel valve 360, built up by Lycon.
You can read about the details at www.lazy8.net/rv8.html
The engine turned 223 HP on the dyno at 2700 rpm. 10:1 pistons, port and
polish, Bendix fuel injection, 4 into 1 exhaust. I have only flown 28 hours
so can't speak to longevity. With the 3-blade MT prop, it is the smoothest
4-banger I have flown.
Ken Tunnel, owner of Lycon, told me that my engine is 2/3 of what Sean
Tucker flies, a souped up parallel valve 540. Lycon has a lot of experience
with these engines in Reno racers and aerobatic show performers.
The thing I didn't realize, though, is that port and polish doesn't help at
cruise rpm. Looking at the full dyno print-out, my engine only produces 5 HP
more than a stock motor at 2400 rpm, and then the curve gets steeper from
there. So, if you want cruise speed, go for the angle valve engine. For all
out performance though, and especially climb performance, it is good to
loose the 40 lbs. (yes, it really is 40), and still have the ponies.
Of course, Lycon will still get you 245 out of the angle valve engine.
Pay up!
John Huft, RV8, Pagosa springs, CO 28 hours, waiting out the snow storm.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dave
Subject: Re: RV-List: parallel valves--choices
Is there a reason you didn't mention going with one of the composite C/S
props? They don't seem to have the same vibration issues that Hartzell has.
They're also lighter and claim higher speeds.
Dave
RV-6
The need for speed
> Electronic ignition--I wanted it until I found out that Hartzell was
seeing
> some very real differences in vibration analysis using these ignitions. I
> think the greater danger is the unknown compatibility with Sensenich. So,
> depending on your prop choice electronic ignition still has advantages in
> starting, smoothness, power, fuel consumption and compatibility with auto
> fuel (adjustable in flight etc on some versions). I chose to go with mags,
I
> can always add electronic later.
> My question, how will a 190 horsepower parallel valve engine with a
Hartzell
> perform compared to the angle valve 200 horse. I also think, without dyno
> info to support that a front induction would add about another 5 horses
over
> the already improved Superior bottom induction. That is just a guess based
on
> a few things I am not going into. So then it would be 195 horses but then
I
> think we are pushing the Senenich prop into unknown territory though I
> suspect the Hartzell would be OK. I don't think engine smoothness would be
> affected by pulling 10 or so additional horses above the base 180 and
neither
> would TBO.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel pant access holes for air |
>
>Has anyone used the extension air stems sold by or Cleveland for use with
>the
>wheelpants? Are they suppose to be put on permanently or just screwed in
>when you are adding air?
>
>Len Leggette RV-8A
>N901LL
>Greensboro, N.C.
>24 hours !!
Len,
Even if they could stay on without hitting the wheelpants, you do not want
to add the additional (albeit small) amount of weight to a reasonably
balanced spinning mass. That tube stem is aligned with the red spot on the
tire for a reason.
Enjoying your airplane? Yeah I know, silly question. :)
Brian Denk
RV8 N94BD
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Norman" <jnorman(at)intermapsystems.com> |
| Subject: | Wheel pant access holes for air |
The latter.
When you need air, screw it on and inflate. Can't see how to do this any
other way without taking the wheel pant off.
You MUST have one of these.
jim
Tampa
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Lenleg(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: Wheel pant access holes for air
Has anyone used the extension air stems sold by or Cleveland for use with
the
wheelpants? Are they suppose to be put on permanently or just screwed in
when you are adding air?
Len Leggette RV-8A
N901LL
Greensboro, N.C.
24 hours !!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel valves--choices |
Congratulations, JR, you're now a step ahead of the "which engine is
best" thread... 8-)
Can you (or anyone else, perhaps) answer a question for me, though:
JRWillJR(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Aerobatic--you need that if you want sustained inverted capability.
I was under the impression that there's two things (engine-wise) that
you need for sustained inverted flight: Inverted Fuel System, and
Inverted Oil System.
Since these are low-wing aircraft, fuel should gravity feed quite well
when inverted, if you have a flop tube in one tank. As for oil, there
are a few systems on the market for retrofitting Lycoming engines.
Neither of these would seem (to me) to require the "A" model engines,
since they can both be taken care of independently of the engine. Is
there something else the "A" model gets you that wouldn't be there
otherwise?
-RB4
RV7 Empennage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ken - Design Department" <ken(at)soundsuckers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Blowj...er, a job you do by blowing... |
I Haven't been following this thread that much but when I did my tanks I
just cut a piece of 3/4 " plastic pipe to go in between the ribs and put a
nut on each end of the tank to squeeze it all together,
I used a pipe cuter to get square edges so ribs would stay straight.
2 minute job to assemble and disassemble
Ken
>
> Listers -- I thought I would pass along a little tip that I 'discovered'
> last night. I don't know if the newer kits still require this, but when
> you're setting up the leading edge ribs so that you can drill the
> leading edge skin to them, you can use a threaded rod through the
> forward-most tooling hole,
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frazier, Vincent A" <VFrazier(at)usi.edu> |
SNIP We tried and couldn't get the curves without collapsing the tube. I
purchased two more stick blanks and some day will try it again but this time
with cuts and welds. The geometry is very tricky because if the handle is to
be raised enough to be comfortable then it must be back quite a ways in
order to move all the way forward without hitting the panel. That will put
it right up against your belly and I'm afraid guys with larger mid-sections
might not be able to make it work. Anway, we plan to experiment with it
further hopefully. The standard position does indeed put the stick too low
and far forward for proper ergonomics, but you do get used to it. I have
nearly 300 hours in in now and have stopped complaining about it... besides,
no one would listen. ;-)
There's been quite a bit of discussion on this which should be in the
archives.
Randy Lervold RV-8, 285 hrs SNIP
My buddy, who wants to remain nameless, cut and welded the stick to curve back
and lengthened it slightly. Then cut a 1"+ tall crescent, with about a 19" radius
as measured from the stick base, out of the bottom of the instrument panel.
Reinforced of course. It's awesome. Van should incorporate the change immediately
as the stock RV-8 stick is much to low and too far forward, IMHO.
I suppose that it wouldn't work for pot bellied, panel stuffing IFRers. But the
stock stick certainly isn't comfortable for potbellied pilots either.
Vince
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave" <davevon(at)tir.com> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel valves--choices |
Depending on how much and what kind of acro you're going to do, you may want
to consider an aerobatic prop and governor. The reason being, our standard
prop and governors are setup to go to fine pitch at low pressure and the
aerobatic setup will go to high pitch to prevent an over speed during low
oil pressure events. Knife edge is usually bad for this.
The inverted fuel system must also include some type of fuel injection or
throttle body. A carburetor with a float won't properly deliver fuel to the
engine while inverted.
Dave
RV-6, former Pitts driver
The need for speed...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Prior" <rv7(at)b4.ca>
Subject: Re: RV-List: parallel valves--choices
>
> Congratulations, JR, you're now a step ahead of the "which engine is
> best" thread... 8-)
>
> Can you (or anyone else, perhaps) answer a question for me, though:
>
> JRWillJR(at)aol.com wrote:
> >
> > Aerobatic--you need that if you want sustained inverted capability.
>
> I was under the impression that there's two things (engine-wise) that
> you need for sustained inverted flight: Inverted Fuel System, and
> Inverted Oil System.
>
> Since these are low-wing aircraft, fuel should gravity feed quite well
> when inverted, if you have a flop tube in one tank. As for oil, there
> are a few systems on the market for retrofitting Lycoming engines.
>
> Neither of these would seem (to me) to require the "A" model engines,
> since they can both be taken care of independently of the engine. Is
> there something else the "A" model gets you that wouldn't be there
> otherwise?
>
> -RB4
> RV7 Empennage
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pat Hatch" <pat_hatch(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel pant access holes for air |
Len,
Or you could get a real long inflator (I think they are for trucks, I bought
mine in an auto parts store). A little easier I think than screwing in the
extenders.
Pat Hatch
RV-4, N17PH, 700 hrs
O-320, Hartzell C/S
RV-6, N44PH, 40 hrs
O-360, Hartzell C/S
Vero Beach, FL
----- Original Message -----
From: <Lenleg(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Wheel pant access holes for air
>
> Has anyone used the extension air stems sold by or Cleveland for use with
the
> wheelpants? Are they suppose to be put on permanently or just screwed in
> when you are adding air?
>
> Len Leggette RV-8A
> N901LL
> Greensboro, N.C.
> 24 hours !!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Irvine <wgirvine(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Alternate engine |
> I've seen new engines for sale at OSH, and when I
> asked, "Where's your test plane? How many hours do
> you have on your engine?" I got blank stares or a
> mumbled "Ah, we're working on that...."
It just occurred to me that when I said this, someone
might have gotten the idea that I was implying that
Tracy Crook was one of these people. If ANYONE got
this idea, I want to apologize to Tracy.
I think what Tracy is doing is brilliant, and as far
as I know, he is the only guy that can point to his
plane and say, "Wanna go for a ride?" I like an
engineer that "puts his money where his mouth is."
The only reason I didn't consider a rotary engine is
because it doesn't fit into my long-range plans. But
if I were building an RV, I would seriously consider
one of Tracy's engines.
Ok, with that out of the way, let me again say thanks
for all the comments and opinions, both on- and
off-list. Wow, I had no idea you guys were so serious
about saving weight! I should have gotten a clue when
I read the thread on weighing seat belts. When I
first saw that, my first thought was,
"who-the-hell-cares what a seat belt weighs?" But now
I see that you guys are dead-on obsessed with saving
weight, and that adding another 100 pounds to your
airplane would not be attractive. In my defense,
understand that I fly a Cessna 310, and with full fuel
(100 gal) I can still put 1000 lbs in the cabin. So
you can see why I originally thought that adding 100
lbs wouldn't be a big deal. Thanks for the education.
Some people were disappointed that my engine wouldn't
be any cheaper than a Lycoming. Well, all I can say
is: you get what you pay for. You can buy oats before
they've gone thru the horse, or you can save money and
buy oats after they've gone thru the horse. :-)
Bill
working on the SIOL-500
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BELTEDAIR(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel pant access holes for air |
Go to ACS and order P/N A6914-1024-1 Inspection plate drill the hole mark the
wheel with a small yellow or your favorite color, use an extended air chuck
and get the job done.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel valves--choices |
>
> Since these are low-wing aircraft, fuel should gravity feed quite well
> when inverted, if you have a flop tube in one tank.
Rob:
I wouldn't count on that. When you take into account angle of incidence and
the higher AOA required to run an asymmetrical wing upside down I think you'll
find there's not much height difference between the tanks and the carb on an
RV. The carb might even be higher.
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
-6 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Aural tone with AOA (was Dynon Pitot/AOA probe info, FYI) |
Gillian,
I read the info below on the RV-list. I'm building an RV-6. I am going to
have an AOA on it. I flew fighters with AOA in USAF and really like AOA -
the ones I flew did NOT have aural. The F-4 DID have aural - was a steady
tone at "best maneuvering AOA" for dogfighting and changed (increased in
pitch?) as you approached stall AOA. You should really include some type of
aural tone - head OUT of the cockpit is the best way to fly, not having to
look in at the gage (or EFIS).
As for human factors and how/what to implement, you'll have to have the
patience of Job and the widsom of Solomon to get it right for the varied
viewpoints of your customers. If 2 or 3 different "implementations" seem to
be dominant, you'd be far ahead on time and money to give the user the
option of which of the 2 or 3 he buys - or, better yet, make it user
selectable, so user can try each and then stick with the one he likes.
Believe me, there will be no "right answer", i.e., no single tone or system
that will please anywhere near all the pilots.
For myself, I'd probably like a some type of aural indication at AOA
corresponding to level flt descent at final approach speed of 1.3 X Vstall.
If the aircraft has flaps, you'll need to have a flap switch in the circuit
to make the tone come on at 1.3 X clean stall or 1.3 X full flaps stall
speed.
I'm not sure how the tone should change when AOA increases from "final
approach AOA" towards "stall AOA".
- Perhaps the tone could be 2 beeps per second at some medium audio
frequency (pitch) at "final approach" AOA and simply increase linearly in
both 'number of beeps per second' and audio frequency of tone (pitch) until
it was a solid tone of some irritatingly higher pitch at stall.
Some might want a "kill switch" to kill the tone if it bothered them or if
they simply didn't want it any more.
- A lot of guys are putting button switches on stick and throttle for
various things - this might be a candidate, otherwise, the switch could be
my the display.
That's the first time in my life I've ever thought my way through this
topic. It would be interesting to see what others might suggest. Nothing
wrong with soliciting suggestions from your users, posting them to a web
document on your site for people to read and comment on via e-mails, which
you could save in a folder on your hard drive for future sorting out/use.
David Carter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wiethe, Philip (P.J.)" <pwiethe(at)ford.com> |
| Subject: | Alternate engines - motorcycle? |
I think an interesting path might be an 'aircraft-ised', increased
displacement version of Honda's 1800cc liquid cooled, injected, flat 6 that
is in their Goldwing motorcycle. This engine is very light weight and
compact, but only puts out 118hp, so it would need more displacement.
Phil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Truitt <Jim.Truitt(at)usdoj.gov> |
| Subject: | RV-8A curved stick |
I too, was inspired by the ergonomics of Lyle Hefel's interior.
I had a friend custom "build" a front stick grip for my 8A - haven't flown
yet. By "build" I mean he cut and welded the stick in two places. I doubt
you can bend the stick to useable dimensions without collapsing the tube
(we didn't try).
My friend (and most knowledgable builder assistant) used a unique and
inexpensive process to obtain the exact geometry for my stick. I'm using
an Infinity stick grip and I wanted the ergonomics to be just right with the
cant and tilt of the grip, as well as the curvature of the stick. He had a
piece of PVC plastic plumbing pipe , same diameter as the front stick.
We heated it with a torch and slowly bent it in a vise when it became
soft. We did this until we had the right curves. Once you remove the
heat, the PVC hardens again within a few seconds. Just be careful not
to burn through the plastic.
To obtain the right stick height, he drilled multiple holes in the bottom of
the PVC, spaced about 1/2 to 3/4 inches apart. Each time we changed
the curvature by heating, I sat in the plane and tried it out. The process
was fast and easy with two people. When the right dimensions were
obtained, he used the PVC as the template to cut and reweld the metal
stick.
In addition, we have cut a semi-circular section out of the lower center
instrument panel for stick clearance. I did this because another friend
recently completed his RV-8A and I found his stick to be too short for my
comfort. The height of the stick was dictated by the height of the panel.
Even with the S curve in the stick, it would still hit the panel. So we used
the PVC stick template to draw a line matching the curvature of the stick
when swung from side to side, then cut the panel taking a little extra for
clearance. It may sound ugly, but it looks pretty good with the layout of
the instruments and avionics. I like it and several other people who have
sat in the plane like it.
Flying it will be the true test, of course.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie and Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Projects for sale? |
I'll be traveling by car from Mississippi through Atlanta to Greensboro NC this
weekend. The return path after Christmas can be changed if needed.
If anyone has an RV-6/7 project for sale near this path, I'd love to take a look.
Thanks,
Charlie
cengland(at)netdoor.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Truitt <Jim.Truitt(at)usdoj.gov> |
| Subject: | RV-8A curved stick |
I too, was inspired by the ergonomics of Lyle Hefel's interior.
I had a friend custom "build" a front stick grip for my 8A - haven't flown
yet. By "build" I mean he cut and welded the stick in two places. I doubt
you can bend the stick to useable dimensions without collapsing the tube
(we didn't try).
My friend (and most knowledgable builder assistant) used a unique and
inexpensive process to obtain the exact geometry for my stick. I'm using
an Infinity stick grip and I wanted the ergonomics to be just right with the
cant and tilt of the grip, as well as the curvature of the stick. He had a
piece of PVC plastic plumbing pipe , same diameter as the front stick.
We heated it with a torch and slowly bent it in a vise when it became
soft. We did this until we had the right curves. Once you remove the
heat, the PVC hardens again within a few seconds. Just be careful not
to burn through the plastic.
To obtain the right stick height, he drilled multiple holes in the bottom of
the PVC, spaced about 1/2 to 3/4 inches apart. Each time we changed
the curvature by heating, I sat in the plane and tried it out. The process
was fast and easy with two people. When the right dimensions were
obtained, he used the PVC as the template to cut and reweld the metal
stick.
In addition, we have cut a semi-circular section out of the lower center
instrument panel for stick clearance. I did this because another friend
recently completed his RV-8A and I found his stick to be too short for my
comfort. The height of the stick was dictated by the height of the panel.
Even with the S curve in the stick, it would still hit the panel. So we used
the PVC stick template to draw a line matching the curvature of the stick
when swung from side to side, then cut the panel taking a little extra for
clearance. It may sound ugly, but it looks pretty good with the layout of
the instruments and avionics. I like it and several other people who have
sat in the plane like it.
Flying it will be the true test, of course.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kempthornes <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: References please -- WAS:Alternative Engine |
Questions
>
>It is a fact. The 0-360 can make full rated power for it's 2000 hour TBO.
It isn't at all a fact, JR. TBO is based on the use of maximum continuous
power (or less) most of the time. Maximum continuous power is 75%, not
full rated power.
You, as an A&P, should know better.
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK flying!
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dr. Kevin P. Leathers" <DrLeathers(at)822heal.com> |
| Subject: | Fw: [VAF Mailing List] vinyl graphic decals |
----- Original Message -----
From: Dr. Kevin P. Leathers
Subject: Fw: [VAF Mailing List] vinyl graphic decals
----- Original Message -----
From: Dr. Kevin P. Leathers
Subject: Re: [VAF Mailing List] vinyl graphic decals
I have used vinyl graphics and stripes extensively on planes, boats, and autos,
as well as on the windows of my medical clinic. The modern materials are guaranteed
not to peel or fade in the sun for 8 years. They are also easily replaced
in the event of damage. I've been using Prism Graphics of Seattle WA for over
8 years for many different projects. They are the best! Their number is 206-282-1801.
Ask for Brad, and mention my name! You can also visit them at www.prismvinyl.com
DOC
----- Original Message -----
From: build9a <eckdahl(at)dellmail.com>
To: vansairforce(at)yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 11:17 AM
Subject: [VAF Mailing List] vinyl graphic decals
For those of you who are already flying; How do the vinyl graphics
stripes hold up. Are you satisfied or would you use paint rather than
the vinyl graphics decals next time? thanks, je 90508 (fuselage)
Online help on this group at:
http://help.yahoo.com/help/groups/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | Fw: [VAF Mailing List] vinyl graphic decals |
Hi Keith,
I'm not so sure I would recommend this. I'm all for Vinyl Graphics, as they
look great, are quick, easy, and relatively inexpensive. Putting the clear
coat over the vinyl could create a mess either now or in the futre for
several reasons;
1) You need to make sure the Vinyl doesn't react with the clear coat.
2) ALL vinyl degrades eventually. The new stuff lasts 5-8 years, but still
needs replaced sooner or later.
3) Clear coating will still not get rid of the edges. You can't "wet sand"
vinyl edges.
4) If you want smooth edges or are worried about peeling, use some "edge
sealer" made specifically for that purpose.
5) Trying to clean up the paint job now or in the future could be
problematic. I can't imagine trying to replace the vinyl with a coat of
paint over them.
I too have applied lots of Vinyl N-Numbers, decals, stripes etc.. on
everything from Aeronca's to 747's. It works great, and one of the benefits
is the easy removal and replacement. As a side note about edge sealer, I was
involved in putting on vinyl graphics for an Airline's 747-400 covered with
children's art. We used over 55 gallons of edge sealer!
Just my opinion, take it for what it's worth.
Cheers,
Stein Bruch
RV6, Minneapolis
My father is just now painting his RV-3. He is using vinyl for the trim and
N-numbers. He intends to apply at least one clear coat over the vinyl.
Keith Vasey
RV-8 (finish)
Seattle
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chuck Weyant" <chuck(at)chuckdirect.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Plexi Drill Bits |
Why take a chance? The Plexi Bits at Home Depot are like three bucks. The
canopy is substantially more
Chuck Weyant (Puttin' in the Panel)
>
> Take a regular drill bit and grind the tip at about a 60 angle. That will
> keep it from bitting the plexi and cracking it.
>
> Wayne
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary" <rv9er(at)3rivers.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Placement of ELT remote |
If you got the prepunched panel for your -9A, there are already holes for the ELT
remote just above the flight instruments.
Gary
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Bristol <bj034(at)lafn.org> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel valves--choices |
>
> I thought it was in the latest issue of Sport Aviation --- there is a
> company flying a turboprop powered RV3 or RV4. They hope to be on the
> market next year!
>
And, of course this mod comes with air to air refueling capabilities or a fuel
trailer to tow behind your airplane!
: - )
Dave, RV6, SO Cal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorto1537(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: References please -- WAS:Alternative Engine |
Questions
>
>>
>>It is a fact. The 0-360 can make full rated power for it's 2000 hour TBO.
>
>It isn't at all a fact, JR. TBO is based on the use of maximum continuous
>power (or less) most of the time. Maximum continuous power is 75%, not
>full rated power.
>
>You, as an A&P, should know better.
>
>K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
Hal,
Check the Type Certificate Data Sheets for the O-320 and O-360.
Maximum Continuous Power is the same as Takeoff Power for these
engines.
Note: I still question JR's statement that the engine can make full
rated power for the full TBO period. Lots of people have stated
various "facts" about how TBO is determined, but no one has been able
to back their "facts" up with a reference, so I think most of these
"facts" are only "beliefs".
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (baffles, induction air, oil cooler)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James E. Clark" <jclark(at)conterra.com> |
Yes!
Those are the guys. Their product seemed to be a bit more "substantial" than
the other one (that probably works just as well).
The other company is something like Airwolf but I do not think they have a
chip detector.
James
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of John Huft
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 9:56 AM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV-List: chip detector
>
>
> This would be the ADC remote filter system
>
> http://www.globalav.com.au/adc-recip.html
>
> I haven't tried one, but the skywagon guys are very fond of them.
>
> John RV8 Pagosa Springs, CO
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of James E. Clark
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV-List: Alternate engine
>
>
> Tracy + List,
>
> Doesn't one of the "remote oil filter" companies offer a chip detector for
> their unit?
>
> Don't know how good or cost effective it is but I do remember talking to
> them a few years ago about it. Their point was similar about the engine.
>
> IIRC, it was the one with the "stronger/beefier" of the remote mounts.
>
>
> James
>
> <<>>
>
> >
> > Been there, done that! :-)
> >
> > And the Mazda 13B rotary installation weighs the same as a Lyc O - 320.
> > I agree with those who think the 100 pound increase is a
> non-starter, even
> > if it has the advantage of direct drive.
> >
> > I also agree with whoever said that it is the added accessories
> > that are the
> > major reliability concern on an alternative engine. I believe that the
> > rotary is equal or better than the Lycoming in reliability, it is the
> > reduction drive that I think about when I'm flying my plane.
> Which brings
> > me to the real point of this post.
> >
> > Every known failure mode of my reduction drive will manifest
> itself by the
> > presence of metal chips (steel) in the oil return line from the
> > drive. This
> > happens long before a possible catestrophic failure. If I had
> a good chip
> > detector, it would increase my confidence level during flight at
> > least 500%.
> > I found one source of chip detectors (used in helicopter
> > transmissions) but
> > the price was way beyond reasonable. Anyone out there aware of any at
> > reasonable prices? If not, I'll have to add this to my list of
> things to
> > design.
> >
> > Tracy Crook
> > 13B powered RV-4 , 1300+ hrs.
> > 20B powered RV-8, Getting ready for final cut on canopy.
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Flight Simulator Control |
Paul Besing wrote:
>
> The Microsoft Force Feedback Pro is really good too. Great for a multitude
> of games, including Flight Simulators. It has little motors inside that
> simulate stick forces. You land, it shakes a little.
Well, maybe when *you* land... 8-)
I had one of these joysticks for a while, and really liked it as a
joystick. I was less impressed with Microsoft's Flight Simulator,
though. I had FS2000 at the time, and a computer more than powerful
enough to run it, but still it never seemed realistic enough for my
tastes. It was a little too jerky in motion, and the delay between
control input and visual and tactile feedback was too long.
In the end I sold the joystick to a co-worker who now likes it a lot
with FS2002, so maybe it's better.
-RB4
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Meketa" <acgm(at)gvtc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seat Belt Data |
Norman
The $312.50 and $499.00 is for a pair of harnesses. I recieved 15% off
list price ($297.50 pr.military latches) at OSH from Hooker. I am sure
that they can be purchased directly from them without pads for less. Great
quality at a great price.
Hints: 1. If you want pull tabs on your shoulder belts you may have to ask
2. My crotch and lap belts would slowly work loose. Hooker
installed
springs in the adjusters to prevent this (pilot lap and
crotch, copilot
crotch only). You have to ask for them. No more loosening with
springs installed.
3. They have lots of colors and will sent you samples of any
material.
Do not trust the computer pics.
4. Order earlier than actually needed in project. Sometimes
materials
are on backorder or they get busy on some large contract
order.
George Meketa
RV-8 Hooker Equipped, Cessna 140 too.
> HOOKER - Sport Set 1.75" wide
> http://www.hookerharness.com/
> 3.9 lbs per seat $312.50 per seat with military latches and $499 with the
rotary buckles.
> Available from Team Rocket at
>> http://www.teamrocketaircraft.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate engines - motorcycle? |
In a message dated 12/19/2002 10:40:04 AM Pacific Standard Time,
pwiethe(at)ford.com writes:
> I think an interesting path might be an 'aircraft-ised', increased
> displacement version of Honda's 1800cc liquid cooled, injected, flat 6 that
> is in their Goldwing motorcycle. This engine is very light weight and
> compact, but only puts out 118hp, so it would need more displacement.
Interesting. My '85 water cooled fuel injected 1000cc BMW K bike puts out
around 90 hp (if memory serves) and it will do 140mph for as long as you have
the hair to hold the throttle open and not miss a beat. It does throw off a
good deal of heat though. With a similar ratio of hp/displacement, the wing
engine should be able to pull 162 hp.
-GV (RV-6A N1GV 575hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: [VAF Mailing List] vinyl graphic decals |
In a message dated 12/19/2002 5:58:14 PM Pacific Standard Time,
kyle.boatright(at)adelphia.net writes:
> Solvents can
> turn vinyl into goo. That's why we don't use RTV (Room Temperature Vinyl)
> near our fuel systems. Eventually the gasoline dissolves it.
Unfortunately RTV stands for "Room Temperature Vulcanizing", a form of
Silicone Rubber that has just about zero relationship to vinyl. The
admonition still stands, however. RTV should not be used around liquid
gasoline because large and/or small chucks of the RTV can be dislodged that
end up clogging small orifices. Disolution isn't really the issue here.
-GV (RV-6A N1GV 575hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George McNutt" <gmcnutt(at)intergate.ca> |
Subject: RE: RV-List: chip detector
Hi Tracey
Metal Chip Detectors are used on jet engines however it seems to me that
they should also be used on large (read expensive) diesel engine and
transmission applications.
Check with someone who handles large equipment, like mining trucks or large
marine applications.
George McNutt
6A - Langley, B.C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Plexi Drill Bits |
Great info, I didn't know they had plexi drill bits at Home Depot. Norman
> Why take a chance? The Plexi Bits at Home Depot are like three bucks. The
> canopy is substantially more
> Chuck Weyant (Puttin' in the Panel)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Gray <dgra1233(at)bigpond.net.au> |
| Subject: | Re: [VAF Mailing List] vinyl graphic decals |
>
> ... RTV stands for "Room Temperature Vulcanizing", a form of
> Silicone Rubber...... RTV should not be used around liquid
> gasoline because large and/or small chucks of the RTV can be dislodged that
> end up clogging small orifices. Disolution isn't really the issue here.
Fuels attack RTV by penetration - the fuel molecules penetrate by diffusion
into the Silicone Rubber molecules, this causes the RTV to swell and become
brittle. In accelerated aging trials conducted at my workplace we saw RTV
swell to 2-3 times it's original size within days of immersion (at 60 degrees
C) in a product very similar (in fraction) to the fuels we use.
Doug Gray
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kyle Boatright" <kyle.boatright(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: [VAF Mailing List] vinyl graphic decals |
My mistake. Obviously a bad choice of examples. I still wouldn't spray a
clear coat over vinyl striping...
KB
----- Original Message -----
From: <Vanremog(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: [VAF Mailing List] vinyl graphic decals
>
> In a message dated 12/19/2002 5:58:14 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> kyle.boatright(at)adelphia.net writes:
>
> > Solvents can
> > turn vinyl into goo. That's why we don't use RTV (Room Temperature
Vinyl)
> > near our fuel systems. Eventually the gasoline dissolves it.
>
> Unfortunately RTV stands for "Room Temperature Vulcanizing", a form of
> Silicone Rubber that has just about zero relationship to vinyl. The
> admonition still stands, however. RTV should not be used around liquid
> gasoline because large and/or small chucks of the RTV can be dislodged
that
> end up clogging small orifices. Disolution isn't really the issue here.
>
> -GV (RV-6A N1GV 575hrs)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
| Subject: | Re: References please -- WAS:Alternative Engine Questions |
> It is not my responsibility to do the research for you.
You're making the claim. If you want to be believed I suggest you do the
research. That's up to you.
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Re: chip detector |
The ADC chip detector is a slick unit, it has an O-ring seal so you can
easily clear it with a 1/4 turn and only a "drip" of oil running out.
I have never flown a flat motor with a chip detector, but lots of round
ones. I view a chip detector as a "yellow" light not a "red" one. Yellow
means caution and red means warning. In round engines they do go off with
some regularity, especially on new engines. A piece of metal that is almost
too small to see will find it's way to the magnet and close the circuit. If
you clear the light and it lights again right away, then digging into the
filter or the screen is required.
If I landed immediately everytime it lit up, I would find the device
annoying. If oil temp and pressure are normal I press on and clear it at
the next landing. It is a great tool and I appreciate flying airplanes that
have them. Mount the thing somewhere that is easily accessible. Uncowling
everytime it lights would become tedious.
HO HO HO
Doug Rozendaal
________________________________________________________________________________
I have a small crack in my canopy. I drilled a stop hole and ordered a can of
Weld-on from ACS. Now I need some instructions. Has anyone used this stuff
successfully? How do you apply it? I have a small hypo needle, but it is made
out of plastic, won't it melt? Any step-by-step help will be greatly
appreciated.
Ray Grenier
RV-4 being painted
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Vinyl graphics life expectancy? |
| From: | czechsix(at)juno.com |
On the subject of vinyl graphics....I'm interested in using some on my -8A paint
scheme and am wondering what the realistic life expectancy is for vinyl on an
airplane that is hangared. I've seen the numbers from 3M and other manufacturers
that their graphics can last up to 8-9 years outside on signs, with disclaimers
that greater UV exposure will shorten their lifespan (i.e. any application
on horizontal surface wil have shorter life than on a vertical surface due
to more sunlight, etc.).
So...UV obviously plays a part but do temperature extremes also affect the longevity,
or can I expect vinyl on a hangared airplane to last almost indefinitely?
Any experts out there?
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D fiberglass...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Vinyl graphics life expectancy? |
It seems to me that the 8-9 years probably refers to graphics that are
always in the sun. How many hours will the airplane actually be exposed to
the sun? Say you fly 100 hours per year, and you have trips that leave the
airplane outside for a total of 2 or 3 weeks. You are talking about sun
exposure of 1 month total per year. I am sure if they quote 8-9 years, and
your airplane is actually out in the sun for 3 weeks total in a year, it
would last MUCH longer than 8-9 years.
Also, on the subject of clear coat, I wouldn't do it. So what if you have a
seam on the edge? Most paint jobs aren't clear coated over the edges
anyway. 2 feet away and you can't even tell.
I think graphics are a great way to enhance your airplane. With quality
graphics and a good design, it could be a very professional appearance.
I'm not a vinyl expert in any way, so take this as opinion only.
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: <czechsix(at)juno.com>
Subject: RV-List: Vinyl graphics life expectancy?
>
> On the subject of vinyl graphics....I'm interested in using some on my -8A
paint scheme and am wondering what the realistic life expectancy is for
vinyl on an airplane that is hangared. I've seen the numbers from 3M and
other manufacturers that their graphics can last up to 8-9 years outside on
signs, with disclaimers that greater UV exposure will shorten their lifespan
(i.e. any application on horizontal surface wil have shorter life than on a
vertical surface due to more sunlight, etc.).
>
> So...UV obviously plays a part but do temperature extremes also affect the
longevity, or can I expect vinyl on a hangared airplane to last almost
indefinitely? Any experts out there?
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Mark Navratil
> Cedar Rapids, Iowa
> RV-8A N2D fiberglass...
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Sears" <sears(at)searnet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: open slider in flight |
Although I'm not sure why Van doesn't approve the open cockpit in flight, I
can only guess why. First, the attach points on the canopy appear to be
much weaker than what the Cheetah I owned had. The track mechanism for the
Cheetah was fairly robust, when compared to that of Van's. Even with that,
there was a 113 knot speed limit and an opening limit of about 8-10 inches.
At that setting, the canopy was more apt to close in flight than to go full
aft. It was pretty noisy, at best. Denis may have hit the nail on the head
with the point about dampening the tail. I think the Grumman had the same
problem with the canopy full aft. However, I do know that some did fly
their Grummans with the canopy full aft, at times. I don't know if they
did it during takeoff and landing, however. Personally, I can only admit to
having had my RV-6A's canopy open in flight once. That was when I forgot to
lock it shut before takeoff. It did a lot better than I did. OTOH, it's a
tip up. :-)
Jim Sears in KY
RV-6A N198JS
EAA Tech Counselor
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Christmas in N. Carolina... |
Mark:
If you want to fly in a non painted, no wheel pants, no gear leg fairings
....BRAND SPANKING NEW AIRPLANE .... I am always looking for somewhere to
fly.
I am off next week and could plan a flight.
Len Leggette RV-8A
N901LL
Greensboro, N.C.
24 hours !!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JRWillJR(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: open slider in flight |
In a message dated 12/20/2002 1:46:35 PM Central Standard Time,
DrLeathers(at)822heal.com writes:
> Something to think about along this line is that the tipping slider
> conversion, which is becoming more popular, might allow a guy to just
> remove
> the main canopy, leaving the front sheild in place. This would eliminate
> that air scoop and speed braking effect, wouldn't it?
>
When the Thorp T18 was first on the market it was envisioned as an open
cockpit. I think that idea was gone with the wind the first time it was
tried.
The Grumman/Yankee AA1 series could be flown with the canopy open aprox 20
percent. There was a mark on the rail if I remember placarding that point.
The canopy was somewhat difficult to open in flight and would tend to creep
forward. I suppose the main advantage of this would be to clear smoke. I took
off a night once in very humid condition and my canopy/windscreen fogged
over, I was on instruments till I slid the canopy back, the fresh air melted
the condensation away. No, I don't have the TC in hand, I don't have any
pictures proving it. I do have about 1900 hours of AA1/AA1C time. Another
time whilst on a floor sack bombing run I told my wife to toss the bag out
NOW---she threw it out and it came back in bursting in the baggage
compartment. This led to a few exciting moments while I wiped caked floor
from my sweating face and eyes and glasses. I suspect the RV canopy could be
slid back in a similar fashion if there was a locking detent to stop it at 15
to 20 percent. Yeah, the tip up slider would be interesting--it slides back
and then tips back and then ejects--that could get real interesting--maybe
someone might want to try it out? The AA1C canopy did not seem anymore
rigid/strong than the RV6/7/9 canopy but I cannot say. I think the glass was
thicker, I hit a turkey buzzard in New Mexico and it actually slightly bent
my prop causing a strange buzzing which resulted in an unplanned landing. The
prop was not visibly bent upon visual inspection. The bird bounced off the
windscreen with a loud k-thunk. The glass did not break like in the photos I
have seen of the RV bird strike. (yes, I know it is not glass--it is plexi) .
I had my spinner come off my Kitfox after a low level buzz of a friends
living room, his eyes were bigger than his big screen TV. It hit the prop,
bounced forward and went back into the prop a second time tearing off a blade
tip and then careening off the windscreen. That also led to an unplanned
landing. I saw the initial impact mark of the spinner at about 12 inches from
the center, the second impact was what removed a blade tip. The Lexan 1/8
inch windscreen held up fine. There was a slight milky spot that went away. I
don't have any proof of that either but I do have the prop blade as a
souvenir. I will not go into my other prop incident with the "black wonder
prop" as that always results in much hard feelings, but it was exciting. Do
Not Archive. JR
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kempthornes <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Full power & TBO WAS: References-Alternative |
Engine etc
I scolded JR about the term 'maximum continuous power' but TCDS (type
certificate) # E-286 lists it as 180 hp.
My apologies JR.
I searched the FAA for the acronym 'TBO' and could not find it. I believe
this is a non-government term. I wish could cite a reference for the
statement I saw once that went something like, "manufacturers determine TBO
for their engines based on their customer's experiences" but I cannot. I
wonder if manufacturers can't have their own definition of 'maximum
continuous power' too.
Richard Finch in his book, "Auto Engines for Experimental Aircraft", 4th
edition, has some information about certification testing but it does not
appear to be entirely accurate. Anyone getting into this discussion ought
to look at this book though.
I looked for the requirements for a manufacturer to get an
engine certified. I find this FAR:
Sec. 33.49
Endurance test.
(a) General. Each engine must be subjected to an endurance test that
includes a total of 150 hours of operation (except as provided in paragraph
(e)(1)(iii) of this section) and, depending upon the type and contemplated
use of the engine, consists of one of the series of runs specified in
paragraphs (b) through (e) of this section, as applicable. The runs must be
made in the order found appropriate by the Administrator for the particular
engine being tested. During the endurance test the engine power and the
crankshaft rotational speed must be kept within 1a5e9078.jpg3 percent of
the rated values. During the runs at rated takeoff power and for at least
35 hours at rated maximum continuous power, one cylinder must be operated
at not less than the limiting temperature, the other cylinders must be
operated at a temperature not lower than 50 degrees F below the limiting
temperature, and the oil inlet temperature must be maintained within
1a5e908c.jpg10 degrees F of the limiting temperature. An engine that is
equipped with a propeller shaft must be fitted for the endurance test with
a propeller that thrust-loads the engine to the maximum thrust which the
engine is designed to resist at each applicable operating condition
specified in this section. Each accessory drive and mounting attachment
must be loaded. During operation at rated takeoff power and rated maximum
continuous power, the load imposed by each accessory used only for an
aircraft service must be the limit load specified by the applicant for the
engine drive or attachment point.
(b) Unsupercharged engines and engines incorporating a gear-driven
single-speed supercharger. For engines not incorporating a supercharger and
for engines incorporating a gear-driven single-speed supercharger the
applicant must conduct the following runs:
(1) A 30-hour run consisting of alternate periods of 5 minutes at rated
takeoff power with takeoff speed, and 5 minutes at maximum best economy
cruising power or maximum recommended cruising power.
(2) A 20-hour run consisting of alternate periods of 1 1/2 hours at rated
maximum continuous power with maximum continuous speed, and 1/2 hour at 75
percent rated maximum continuous power and 91 percent maximum continuous speed.
(3) A 20-hour run consisting of alternate periods of 1 1/2 hours at rated
maximum continuous power with maximum continuous speed, and 1/2 hour at 70
percent rated maximum continuous power and 89 percent maximum continuous speed.
(4) A 20-hour run consisting of alternate periods of 1 1/2 hours at rated
maximum continuous power with maximum continuous speed, and 1/2 hour at 65
percent rated maximum continuous power and 87 percent maximum continuous speed.
(5) A 20-hour run consisting of alternate periods of 1 1/2 hours at rated
maximum continuous power with maximum continuous speed, and 1/2 hour at 60
percent rated maximum continuous power and 84.5 percent maximum continuous
speed.
(6) A 20-hour run consisting of alternate periods of 1 1/2 hours at rated
maximum continuous power with maximum continuous speed, and 1/2 hour at 50
percent rated maximum continuous power and 79.5 percent maximum continuous
speed.
(7) A 20-hour run consisting of alternate periods of 2 1/2 hours at rated
maximum continuous power with maximum continuous speed, and 2 1/2 hours at
maximum best economy cruising power or at maximum recommended cruising power.
While this testing seems fairly severe it hardly suggests that the engine
can be run at full rated power for a full 2000 hours. Apparently, it is
not necessary to make all test runs without intervening shutdowns. Many
owners of a pickup truck and big fifth wheel travel trailer can attest to
having made longer full power runs.
As to high costs of testing, what are the items that cost? Surely the
engine was salvageable. ;-) Fuel at what 25 cents a gallon and labor at $5
a day??? These engines are expensive because of no competition.
Anyway, it all proves little. One engine will grind along happily for more
than 2000 hours while another will have a defective crankshaft snap in
under a hundred.
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK flying!
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | davepetrv6(at)comcast.net |
| Subject: | Re: Alternate engine |
Tracy - there are some chip detectors out there , here's one .
http://www.globalav.com.au/oil_fil-new.html. There have to be others in the automotive
world
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
| Subject: | RV Flying - inspirational LONG |
DELETE now if you don't want to read airplane babble....
About 14 months have passed since my RV6A first took flight, and the
amount of pure joy one can experience in 237 hours of flight is truly
astonishing! While smiles several hours before and after flights in the
RV are the norm, some things bring out slightly wider smiles.
For example, there are the frequent situations like this: =93Anoka tower,
Cessna 1234J, 5 miles east, landing=94, =93Cessna 1234J, Anoka tower, enter
left base for 27, #2 behind the Piper=94. Then I call: =93Anoka tower,
experimental 66AP, 7 miles southeast, landing=94, =93Experimental 66 alpha
pop, enter left base 27, #2 behind the Piper, Cessna 1234J, you=92ll now
be #3 behind the experimental for 27=94. Then comes various exchanges
between the Cessna and the tower to explain that, even though the
=93little experimental=94 is two miles behind, he will beat you there, don=92t
worry, it will work out. I really think the guys in the tower get a big
charge out of this.
Then there was the time last winter, when I was doing full stop landings
after dark to polish the edge, when a Comanche came into the pattern
stating to the tower that they had only two green lights on the gear.
They made several passes near the tower in the hopes the great guys
staffing the tower that night could see something. They could not. I
stopped on a taxiway, and they flew a hundred feet or so nearly above
me, but still nothing but blackness and nav lights. I offered to fly up
and have a look from behind, hoping my landing lights would illuminate
things enough to be able to see. The various rules about this
formation flight were discussed and agreed upon, and I taxied into
position on the runway. When the stricken aircraft was about =BC mile
behind me and 1000=92 feet above, I shoved in the throttle. Everything
was working out just perfectly, and the Comanche asked if 120 knots was
ok, and I said =93just maintain 120 kias=94. I don=92t think they could quite
believe that I could ever climb AND catch them, but in a few seconds I
was where I wanted to be, about 300 feet behind and level. We switched
to another frequency the tower gave us to use while we orbited, and I
slowly moved to about 100 feet behind, and slightly inside. Again they
asked if 120 knots was ok, and I didn=92t have the heart to tell them that
the plane might overheat at this low airspeed. I tweaked the elevator
and rudder to scan the lights onto their plane, and could definitely
ascertain that both mains were at least down. I called the tower, and
said I=92d done what I could and would like to land. They said to go
ahead and enter right base for 09. I told the tower I=92d love to, just
as soon as I could figure out where I was. Since I had watched only
their plane for a couple orbits, it took a few seconds to get
orientated. The Comanche continued to orbit, both to burn fuel and to
give the crash trucks time to get positioned. The pilots of the
Comanche were incredibly professional and calm sounding during the whole
ordeal. After I put my plane away, I watched the Comanche coming in on
a shallow final, hopeful for a good outcome. When they were over the
threshold, the pilot shut the engine down and the plane whistled by, and
made the mother of all greasers, rolling to a silent stop on the runway.
All ended well, probably only a bad switch. They later told me thanks
again, and that knowing that the gear appeared down had really given
them a better feeling than not knowing anything.
One gorgeous Sunday morning this past summer, I was flying a northwest
heading enroute to retrieve my youngest son from a weekend stay with my
parents, about 120 nautical miles, or 45 minutes, from my home base.
The winds aloft were strong out of the northwest, so on the way up I
flew at about 500=92. No populated areas along the route, just a few
antennae and crows to worry about. Looks like 150 knots ground speed,
so only about 10 knot headwind here. Oh, there=92s my sister=92s house,
which just happens to be exactly on the path, about a third of the way
there. Oops, I see a church steeple ahead, better go around them since
they are probably worshipping. I wonder what those cows down there
think about us, they seem to be looking up at us. I=92m always noticing
fields and country roads, not much time from here if the engine packs it
in. Getting close now, better climb to a respectable pattern altitude,
let=92s try 800=92. Wheels rumble on the grass, keep the nosewheel off as
long as possible, wow, what fun this is. I hop out and greet and thank
the folks, and the youngest son and I climb back in, while my parents
head to church. We=92re off in a couple hundred feet, and climb up to
7500=92 for the return trip. Air is smooth, and with a 195 knot ground
speed, who says there are no free lunches?
Keep pounding those rivets and sanding fiberglass, it is really worth
it!
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 237 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | F1 down in Houstin |
This is being reported in the rec.aviation.homebuilt NG.
No details but understand it was a fatal.
Sympathy and thoughts for the family.
Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
Empennage kit arrived today so I guess I'm officially a builder now :)
-David N207DT Reserved
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kempthornes <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Full power & TBO WAS: References-Alternative |
Engine etc
I scolded JR about the term 'maximum continuous power' but TCDS (type
certificate) # E-286 lists it as 180 hp. My apologies JR.
I searched the FAA for the acronym 'TBO' and could not find it. I believe
this is a non-government term. I wish could cite a reference for the
statement that went something like, "manufacturers determine TBO for their
engines based on their customer's experiences" but I cannot. I wonder if
manufacturers can't have their own definition of 'maximum continuous power'
too.
Richard Finch in his book, "Auto Engines for Experimental Aircraft", 4th
edition, has some information about certification testing but it is not
entirely accurate from what I can find. Anyone getting into this
discussion ought to glance at this book.
I looked for the requirements for a manufacturer to get an
engine certified. I find this:
Sec. 33.49
Endurance test.
(a) General. Each engine must be subjected to an endurance test that
includes a total of 150 hours of operation (except as provided in paragraph
(e)(1)(iii) of this section) and, depending upon the type and contemplated
use of the engine, consists of one of the series of runs specified in
paragraphs (b) through (e) of this section, as applicable. The runs must be
made in the order found appropriate by the Administrator for the particular
engine being tested. During the endurance test the engine power and the
crankshaft rotational speed must be kept within 3 percent of the rated
values. During the runs at rated takeoff power and for at least 35 hours at
rated maximum continuous power, one cylinder must be operated at not less
than the limiting temperature, the other cylinders must be operated at a
temperature not lower than 50 degrees F below the limiting temperature, and
the oil inlet temperature must be maintained within 10 degrees F of the
limiting temperature. An engine that is equipped with a propeller shaft
must be fitted for the endurance test with a propeller that thrust-loads
the engine to the maximum thrust which the engine is designed to resist at
each applicable operating condition specified in this section. Each
accessory drive and mounting attachment must be loaded. During operation at
rated takeoff power and rated maximum continuous power, the load imposed by
each accessory used only for an aircraft service must be the limit load
specified by the applicant for the engine drive or attachment point.
(b) Unsupercharged engines and engines incorporating a gear-driven
single-speed supercharger. For engines not incorporating a supercharger and
for engines incorporating a gear-driven single-speed supercharger the
applicant must conduct the following runs:
(1) A 30-hour run consisting of alternate periods of 5 minutes at rated
takeoff power with takeoff speed, and 5 minutes at maximum best economy
cruising power or maximum recommended cruising power.
(2) A 20-hour run consisting of alternate periods of 1 1/2 hours at rated
maximum continuous power with maximum continuous speed, and 1/2 hour at 75
percent rated maximum continuous power and 91 percent maximum continuous speed.
(3) A 20-hour run consisting of alternate periods of 1 1/2 hours at rated
maximum continuous power with maximum continuous speed, and 1/2 hour at 70
percent rated maximum continuous power and 89 percent maximum continuous speed.
(4) A 20-hour run consisting of alternate periods of 1 1/2 hours at rated
maximum continuous power with maximum continuous speed, and 1/2 hour at 65
percent rated maximum continuous power and 87 percent maximum continuous speed.
(5) A 20-hour run consisting of alternate periods of 1 1/2 hours at rated
maximum continuous power with maximum continuous speed, and 1/2 hour at 60
percent rated maximum continuous power and 84.5 percent maximum continuous
speed.
(6) A 20-hour run consisting of alternate periods of 1 1/2 hours at rated
maximum continuous power with maximum continuous speed, and 1/2 hour at 50
percent rated maximum continuous power and 79.5 percent maximum continuous
speed.
(7) A 20-hour run consisting of alternate periods of 2 1/2 hours at rated
maximum continuous power with maximum continuous speed, and 2 1/2 hours at
maximum best economy cruising power or at maximum recommended cruising power.
While this testing seems fairly severe it hardly suggests that the engine
can be run at full rated power for a full 2000 hours. It does not appear
to be necessary to make all test runs without intervening shutdowns. Many
owners of a pickup truck and big fifth wheel travel trailer can attest to
having made longer full power runs. In fact, most aren't even
memorable. I once drove a rented Geo Metro full tilt for more than two
hours at altitudes under 1000 feet with the 'balls to the wall'. Didn't
seem to faze it.
It all proves little. One engine will grind along happily for more than
2000 hours while another will have a defective crankshaft snap in under a
hundred.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Roy Glass or Mary Poteet <rlglass(at)alaska.net> |
| Subject: | LASAR ignition wiring |
How does one wire the p-leads for a LASAR ignition? I want to use toggle
switches for each magneto and a push-button starter. The blue and green
wires from the LASAR low voltage control harness do not appear to be
shielded and do not go directly to a magneto, instead they go to the
controller box. I realize that each magneto needs to be grounded to be
"off," but how does one do this with a LASAR? Should I use a shielded
p-lead wire with the primary wire attached to terminal 3 of a
single-pole switch and the wire's shielding connected to both terminal 2
AND to panel ground? The other end of each shielded wire would not be
grounded to a magneto or engine ground (single-point ground, but with a
short length of shielded wire). The other end of the primary wire would
be spliced to the blue or green harness wire. Is there a better way? Is
a shielded p-lead even needed with the LASAR? Should I shorten the
non-shielded harness wires to reduce the chance of noise or leave them
be (about 6 feet long) and just use a short length of shielded wire to
get past the firewall? Lots of questions, and I haven't even gotten to
the CHT part yet. Can someone direct me to a wiring diagram for the
LASAR using toggle switches instead of a key switch?
Roy Glass, RV-6, fwf, Anchorage, Alaska
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Huft" <rv8tor(at)lazy8.net> |
| Subject: | LASAR ignition wiring |
The blue and green wires are simply grounded to turn the mags off, and left
open to turn the mags on. The magic box senses the ground and turns the mags
off. There is not the usual noise on these wires, because they are not
P-leads at all. You can cut these wires to whatever length is convienent.
The cables from the majic box to the mags are pre-prepared, and are not to
be messed with.
John, RV8 Pagosa Springs, CO 28 hours flying with LASAR.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Roy Glass or
Mary Poteet
Subject: RV-List: LASAR ignition wiring
How does one wire the p-leads for a LASAR ignition? I want to use toggle
switches for each magneto and a push-button starter. The blue and green
wires from the LASAR low voltage control harness do not appear to be
shielded and do not go directly to a magneto, instead they go to the
controller box. I realize that each magneto needs to be grounded to be
"off," but how does one do this with a LASAR? Should I use a shielded
p-lead wire with the primary wire attached to terminal 3 of a
single-pole switch and the wire's shielding connected to both terminal 2
AND to panel ground? The other end of each shielded wire would not be
grounded to a magneto or engine ground (single-point ground, but with a
short length of shielded wire). The other end of the primary wire would
be spliced to the blue or green harness wire. Is there a better way? Is
a shielded p-lead even needed with the LASAR? Should I shorten the
non-shielded harness wires to reduce the chance of noise or leave them
be (about 6 feet long) and just use a short length of shielded wire to
get past the firewall? Lots of questions, and I haven't even gotten to
the CHT part yet. Can someone direct me to a wiring diagram for the
LASAR using toggle switches instead of a key switch?
Roy Glass, RV-6, fwf, Anchorage, Alaska
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tracy Crook" <lors01(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: chip detector & QB plans |
Just what I was looking for Doug, I ordered a chip detector from ADC
yesterday. And thanks for the real-life operational characteristics.
I haven't had any 'metal chip' problems with my reduction drive after the
initial development work (see Gear Drive Development on my website for gory
details www.rotaryaviation.com ) but I was getting tired of tearing down
the drive for regular inspections. With the ADC detector installed I can
eliminate them and fly with a lot more confidence. Now have over 400 hours
on the latest design with no signs of wear & tear.
I'm delighted with my -8 QB kit but can't believe the QB 'instructions' for
the fuselage. From memory they read something like "Start at the tail and
work forward." Yes, you do get the regular kit instructions as well but I
literally spent as much time digging out the isolated parts of the
instructions required than I did actually doing the work. OK, got that
off my chest, now I feel better.
Tracy
>
> The ADC chip detector is a slick unit, it has an O-ring seal so you can
> easily clear it with a 1/4 turn and only a "drip" of oil running out.
>
> I have never flown a flat motor with a chip detector, but lots of round
> ones. I view a chip detector as a "yellow" light not a "red" one. Yellow
> means caution and red means warning. In round engines they do go off with
> some regularity, especially on new engines. A piece of metal that is
almost
> too small to see will find it's way to the magnet and close the circuit.
If
> you clear the light and it lights again right away, then digging into the
> filter or the screen is required.
>
> If I landed immediately everytime it lit up, I would find the device
> annoying. If oil temp and pressure are normal I press on and clear it at
> the next landing. It is a great tool and I appreciate flying airplanes
that
> have them. Mount the thing somewhere that is easily accessible. Uncowling
> everytime it lights would become tedious.
>
> HO HO HO
> Doug Rozendaal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kempthornes <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Full power & TBO WAS: References-Alternative |
Engine etc
>
>Why this discussion even started or what question people are hoping to have
>answered, I've yet to figure out.
My interest in this discussion is a better engine for the fine RV series
of airplane.
Another personal need is to have something more interesting to discuss with
y'all than "how do I bang this rivet".
I hope the discussion is helping to dispel some myths such as:
Auto engines can't fly. Smithsonian Institution Magazine article
of several years ago.
The four cylinder Lycoming has been tested to run 2000 hours at
full rated power.
Liquid cooling doesn't work in airplanes. P-51 Mustang, Wright
Bros. and many, many others.
The four cylinder Lycoming cannot be improved upon. ??
Aircraft engines are certified thru inflight testing.
Others???
Next, it would be nice to have the discussion continue in a rational way to
lay down the requirements that we have for our **IDEAL** engine to put in
our ideal airplanes. We are leading the world, Van and us, in the
development of light aircraft and their systems. Manufacturers ignore the
experimental market at their peril. Some already make things that they
market "for experimentals only" which gives them someplace to test and
improve product before going for a TSO or PMA. Lycoming would do well to
develop a better engine for us instead of just 'milking the cow'.
The Lycoming is adequate but adequate is not enough.
Merry Christmas!!!
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK flying!
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kempthornes <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LASAR ignition wiring |
>
>How does one wire the p-leads for a LASAR ignition? I want to use toggle
>switches for each magneto and a push-button starter.
Hiya Roy,
My system is still all magneto but this probably is okay by the LASAR. My
system does not use the clumsy, low quality and heavy aircraft
switch. Instead it uses two double pole triple throw toggle micro
switches. Cheaper, lighter and much higher reliability. Bob Nuckolls book
shows how to wire them. There may be a diagram in the archives.
How they work is pretty cool. The down position for each switch is off
which grounds both mags. Put left switch all the way up to unground the
left mag and operate the starter - no need for a push button. This up
position is momentary, that is, spring loaded. Release the left switch
which goes to center position which leaves the engine running on the left
mag. Now, move the right switch to the center position (or full up) to
unground that mag.
Two round trips to Oshkosh and still no problems!
I suppose you'll be having a white Christmas??
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "WALTER KERR" <kerrjb(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aural tone with AOA (was Dynon Pitot/AOA probe info, FYI) |
>
>I'm not sure how the tone should change when AOA increases from "final
>approach AOA" towards "stall AOA".
> - Perhaps the tone could be 2 beeps per second at some medium audio
>frequency (pitch) at "final approach" AOA and simply increase linearly in
>both 'number of beeps per second' and audio frequency of tone (pitch) until
>it was a solid tone of some irritatingly higher pitch at stall.
>
>
I'm not sure that going to a very high frequency as one progresses toward
stall is good. Being in the over 65 category and having worked around jet
engines before everyone realized how you would suffer great hearing loss
means that instead of getting louder, it would simply fade away as frequency
increased.
bernie kerr
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JOHNTMEY(at)aol.com |
Listers, I haven't been following RV list but an item crossed over to the
Rocket List, which I do follow.... item: "sliding canopy" and "canopy open in
flight". My project is stuck on that.
My HRocketII project is well along but I'm being slowed down by the canopy...
I have the Frederick slider kit with sloped windshield option. None of this
is installed yet but I have cardboard and foam chunks taped-on trying to
change the design to fit my goals. I want a slider for the front pit..
openable (with usual limits) in flight. I am trying to rig the canopy so
that is rolls back on a robust track system limited to about 22 inches
travel... access to the rear pit requires that the canopy then open via
secondary system, likely the RV4 tilt (not to be done in-flight!). Yep, I
know Pitts/Christen does it on the bipes, but haven't studied that too much.
Anyone in DEN area want to "consult" or lend a hand on this
engineering/fabrication drill ? Will trade time, firewood, $$ or whatever.
I need to get this hangar queen airborne !
John Meyers Golden, CO johntmey(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dean Pichon" <DeanPichon(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Plexi repair. |
Hi Ray,
Syringes are generally made of polypropylene (PP) and will not be affected by the
solvents used to weld acrylic. The plungers tips (usually black) are either
thermoplastic or thermoset rubber. These materials may swell when exposed to
solvents. Some syringes are "tip-less" and rely on an interference fit for
the seal. These are great for solvents.
Most needles are steel, but if yours is really plastic, it's likely to be either
PP or PTFE (Teflon). Neither are affected by most solvents. Test a little
bit.
Dean Pichon
----- Original Message -----
From: GRENIER(at)aol.com
Subject: RV-List: Plexi repair.
I have a small crack in my canopy. I drilled a stop hole and ordered a can of
Weld-on from ACS. Now I need some instructions. Has anyone used this stuff
successfully? How do you apply it? I have a small hypo needle, but it is made
out of plastic, won't it melt? Any step-by-step help will be greatly
appreciated.
Ray Grenier
RV-4 being painted
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Huft" <rv8tor(at)lazy8.net> |
| Subject: | LASAR ignition wiring |
With LASAR, both mags must be 'hot' (ungrounded) to start. Neither mag has
an impulse coupling, that is taken care of by the magic box.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of kempthornes
Subject: Re: RV-List: LASAR ignition wiring
>
>How does one wire the p-leads for a LASAR ignition? I want to use toggle
>switches for each magneto and a push-button starter.
Hiya Roy,
My system is still all magneto but this probably is okay by the LASAR. My
system does not use the clumsy, low quality and heavy aircraft
switch. Instead it uses two double pole triple throw toggle micro
switches. Cheaper, lighter and much higher reliability. Bob Nuckolls book
shows how to wire them. There may be a diagram in the archives.
How they work is pretty cool. The down position for each switch is off
which grounds both mags. Put left switch all the way up to unground the
left mag and operate the starter - no need for a push button. This up
position is momentary, that is, spring loaded. Release the left switch
which goes to center position which leaves the engine running on the left
mag. Now, move the right switch to the center position (or full up) to
unground that mag.
Two round trips to Oshkosh and still no problems!
I suppose you'll be having a white Christmas??
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aural tone with AOA (was Dynon Pitot/AOA probe info, FYI) |
Bernie, Al:
With Jim's Frantz's AOA - We tied the audio directly to the headset jacks.
It works great - I have no trouble hearing the Push - Push - Push in my
headset. I also spent 4 years working around jet engines in the USAF.
Chuck & Dave Rowbotham
RV-8A 160 hrs
>From: "WALTER KERR" <kerrjb(at)msn.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Aural tone with AOA (was Dynon Pitot/AOA probe info,
>FYI)
>Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 12:26:53 -0500
>
>
> >
> >I'm not sure how the tone should change when AOA increases from "final
> >approach AOA" towards "stall AOA".
> > - Perhaps the tone could be 2 beeps per second at some medium audio
> >frequency (pitch) at "final approach" AOA and simply increase linearly in
> >both 'number of beeps per second' and audio frequency of tone (pitch)
>until
> >it was a solid tone of some irritatingly higher pitch at stall.
> >
> >
>
>I'm not sure that going to a very high frequency as one progresses toward
>stall is good. Being in the over 65 category and having worked around jet
>engines before everyone realized how you would suffer great hearing loss
>means that instead of getting louder, it would simply fade away as
>frequency
>increased.
>
>bernie kerr
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Vinyl graphics life expectancy? |
Mark,
We highly recommend Woodward Sign (TX) - Phil Fox co-owner work with us to
size the decals. The cost was also reasonable. We installed them on 6/2001
and they still look great.
Chuck 7 Dave Rowbotham
RV-8A
>From: czechsix(at)juno.com
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: Vinyl graphics life expectancy?
>Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:56:43 GMT
>
>
>On the subject of vinyl graphics....I'm interested in using some on my -8A
>paint scheme and am wondering what the realistic life expectancy is for
>vinyl on an airplane that is hangared. I've seen the numbers from 3M and
>other manufacturers that their graphics can last up to 8-9 years outside on
>signs, with disclaimers that greater UV exposure will shorten their
>lifespan (i.e. any application on horizontal surface wil have shorter life
>than on a vertical surface due to more sunlight, etc.).
>
>So...UV obviously plays a part but do temperature extremes also affect the
>longevity, or can I expect vinyl on a hangared airplane to last almost
>indefinitely? Any experts out there?
>
>Thanks,
>
>--Mark Navratil
>Cedar Rapids, Iowa
>RV-8A N2D fiberglass...
>
>
http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_advancedjmf_3mf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aural tone with AOA (was Dynon Pitot/AOA probe info, FYI) |
----- Original Message -----
From: "WALTER KERR" <kerrjb(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Aural tone with AOA (was Dynon Pitot/AOA probe info,
FYI)
>
>
> >
> >I'm not sure how the tone should change when AOA increases from "final
> >approach AOA" towards "stall AOA".
> > - Perhaps the tone could be 2 beeps per second at some medium audio
> >frequency (pitch) at "final approach" AOA and simply increase linearly in
> >both 'number of beeps per second' and audio frequency of tone (pitch)
until
> >it was a solid tone of some irritatingly higher pitch at stall.
> >
> >
>
> I'm not sure that going to a very high frequency as one progresses toward
> stall is good. Being in the over 65 category and having worked around jet
> engines before everyone realized how you would suffer great hearing loss
> means that instead of getting louder, it would simply fade away as
frequency
> increased.
>
> bernie kerr
>
Bernie,
I'm 62, flew T-37s and fighters, and have tinitus. The Air Force testing
stopped at an upper limit of 4000 Hz or so - I knew my "internal noises"
were much higher than than. A couple of years ago I stumbled onto the Beep
command in Basic, wrote a 5 line Basic program that printed a line on the
screen telling me to "Enter frequency", then played that frequency/tone on
the basic computer speaker using the Beep command (which has parameters),
played it for 3 seconds, then shut off and looped back to "Enter frequency".
I found that I had multiple high pitched tones in my head, starting at 6400,
that were maybe 60 HZ wide, where speaker's amplitude would about blend with
my "internal" tones. Then would be OK until a few hundred Hz higher,
another band, etc, all the way up to about 8400 Hz - at the point and above,
I heard nothing from computer - my "head noises" drowned it out.
My point is, you (I) can run cockpit alerting tones in the 1000 Hz to 3000
Hz area, well below most people's tinitis. Each person can test his own
"internal noises" with such a basic program.
David Carter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "WALTER KERR" <kerrjb(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aural tone with AOA (was Dynon Pitot/AOA probe info, FYI) |
Charlie and David,
Yep, I have my PS AOA tied directly to the headset and I can hear the push
angle push very clearly W/O the engine running, but only faintly hear it
thru my Lightspeed noise canceling headset when at power. Jim F. has told me
how to go internally and step volume up higher than the outside adjustment
screw. Interestingly I can hear the RM microencoder beep beep even though it
is not coming thru the headset. It is set at 70 knots, so it will come on
before stall except in the worst of circumstances. My AOA lights are visible
in my perephial(sp) vision and on my 9A I am going to put them on top of the
glare shield rather than under it in my C/L of vision.
Bernie
>From: "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham(at)hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Aural tone with AOA (was Dynon Pitot/AOA probe info,
>FYI)
>Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 21:47:44 +0000
>
>
>Bernie, Al:
>
>With Jim's Frantz's AOA - We tied the audio directly to the headset jacks.
>It works great - I have no trouble hearing the Push - Push - Push in my
>headset. I also spent 4 years working around jet engines in the USAF.
>
>Chuck & Dave Rowbotham
>RV-8A 160 hrs
>
>
> >From: "WALTER KERR" <kerrjb(at)msn.com>
> >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> >Subject: Re: RV-List: Aural tone with AOA (was Dynon Pitot/AOA probe
>info,
> >FYI)
> >Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 12:26:53 -0500
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > >I'm not sure how the tone should change when AOA increases from "final
> > >approach AOA" towards "stall AOA".
> > > - Perhaps the tone could be 2 beeps per second at some medium
>audio
> > >frequency (pitch) at "final approach" AOA and simply increase linearly
>in
> > >both 'number of beeps per second' and audio frequency of tone (pitch)
> >until
> > >it was a solid tone of some irritatingly higher pitch at stall.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >I'm not sure that going to a very high frequency as one progresses toward
> >stall is good. Being in the over 65 category and having worked around jet
> >engines before everyone realized how you would suffer great hearing loss
> >means that instead of getting louder, it would simply fade away as
> >frequency
> >increased.
> >
> >bernie kerr
> >
> >
>
>
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 3 months FREE*.
http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_smartspamprotection_3mf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Geoff Evans" <gwevans(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Elevator horn washers |
I just finished mounting my elevators today, and I have a question about the AN4
bolt through the elevator horns.
First, the drawing shows a -14A bolt here, but that's just a smidge too short.
I'll have to use a -15A bolt to have any threads at
all sticking out of the nut. Did anyone else encounter this problem? (The preview
plans drawing shows a -12A bolt, so maybe Van's
doesn't really know what length it's actually supposed to be.)
Second, the drawing also says to use a *maximum* of 3 AN960 washers on each side
of the VA-146 bearing. In order to fill the gaps
and keep the bolt from pulling the horns together (and keep the elevator travel
as smooth as it is without torquing the nut), I
have to use 4 washers on one side (3 AN960s and 1 AN960L thin washer). Does anyone
know why the drawing says to use a maximum of 3
washers per side? I'd much rather put in whatever is required in order to fill
the gap and keep the elevator travel smooth.
Thanks.
-Geoff Evans
RV-8 QB -- moving on to the wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary" <rv9er(at)3rivers.net> |
| Subject: | Re: open slider in flight |
If you really need to do this, I would just take it off, on a tandem slider only.
I have seen an RV-8 fly with the slider removed temporarily. No apparent
problems except the back seat passenger got the sh#@t beat out of him from the
air blast. A side-by-side without the canopy might be a real bad idea. The
original T-18 was intended to be open cockpit. That idea was scrapped after they
tried it.
No doubt Van would strongly object, to say the least.
Gary
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve J Hurlbut" <sjhdcl(at)kingston.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator horn washers |
Exactly the same for me. Larger bolt and more washers are required. Do what
works.
Steve
RV7A
panel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Geoff Evans" <gwevans(at)attbi.com>
Subject: RV-List: Elevator horn washers
>
> I just finished mounting my elevators today, and I have a question about
the AN4 bolt through the elevator horns.
>
> First, the drawing shows a -14A bolt here, but that's just a smidge too
short. I'll have to use a -15A bolt to have any threads at
> all sticking out of the nut. Did anyone else encounter this problem? (The
preview plans drawing shows a -12A bolt, so maybe Van's
> doesn't really know what length it's actually supposed to be.)
>
> Second, the drawing also says to use a *maximum* of 3 AN960 washers on
each side of the VA-146 bearing. In order to fill the gaps
> and keep the bolt from pulling the horns together (and keep the elevator
travel as smooth as it is without torquing the nut), I
> have to use 4 washers on one side (3 AN960s and 1 AN960L thin washer).
Does anyone know why the drawing says to use a maximum of 3
> washers per side? I'd much rather put in whatever is required in order to
fill the gap and keep the elevator travel smooth.
>
> Thanks.
> -Geoff Evans
> RV-8 QB -- moving on to the wings
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator horn washers |
In a message dated 12/21/2002 4:26:31 PM Pacific Standard Time,
gwevans(at)attbi.com writes:
> the drawing also says to use a *maximum* of 3 AN960 washers on each side of
> the VA-146 bearing. In order to fill the gaps
> and keep the bolt from pulling the horns together (and keep the elevator
> travel as smooth as it is without torquing the nut), I
> have to use 4 washers on one side (3 AN960s and 1 AN960L thin washer). Does
> anyone know why the drawing says to use a maximum of 3
> washers per side?
AN bolts (heck, all bolts) are designed to be used in shear, not in bending.
The washers will just rack with the bolt bending if you overload this joint.
The farther you get from a pure shear application the less predictable is
their performance. When the engineers at Van's took a vote, the consensus
likely came out to be three per side as their comfort zone, but it's just a
WAG. If you really wanted to do better, you would use a single spacer of the
appropriate length (,250") each side.
-GV (RV-6A N1GV 575hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV Flying - inspirational LONG |
Alex:
I recently had a similar experience already in my newly flying 8A.
I was approx 20 miles inbound for landing when I heard another plane (Cessna)
call for landing close to my psoition. The tower called out traffic which I
then located. The Cessna could not find me and told the controller.
The controller came back saying "Experimental is no longer a factor ... he is
passing you now at about 50 knots faster". Oh yes !!!! I landed, fueled up,
started taxing back to my hanger and the Cessna was on final !!!!
Love my RV !!!!
Len Leggette RV-8A
N901LL
Greensboro, N.C.
31 hours !!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | PeterHunt1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Stiffening tip-up canopy - yes or no |
I am at the point of deciding whether or not to stiffen my tip-up canopy and
need some advice. I am installing gas shocks to open my tip-up canopy.
Should I also stiffen the canopy or is that not necessary with the gas
shocks? If I do stiffen the canopy I plan to follow Sam's idea of plywood
(instead of foam) and fiberglass in the Wd-616A channel. What say ye of
experience? Is stiffening the canopy important?
Pete Hunt
RV-6 N216PH (reserved)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV Flying - inspirational LONG |
>
>Alex:
>
>I recently had a similar experience already in my newly flying 8A.
>
>I was approx 20 miles inbound for landing when I heard another plane
>(Cessna)
>call for landing close to my psoition. The tower called out traffic which
>I
>then located. The Cessna could not find me and told the controller.
>
>The controller came back saying "Experimental is no longer a factor ... he
>is
>passing you now at about 50 knots faster". Oh yes !!!! I landed, fueled
>up,
>started taxing back to my hanger and the Cessna was on final !!!!
>
>Love my RV !!!!
>
>Len Leggette RV-8A
And to add to these grin generating flights...
While #2 for landing on a long final, I hear the following from tower:
"Experimental 94BD, could you give me a 360? You're overtaking a KING AIR."
Love it!
Drill 'em, pound 'em and sand 'em folks. You're building a WONDERFUL
airplane.
Brian Denk
RV8 N94BD
down to fix VAL radio.
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 3 months FREE*.
http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_virusprotection_3mf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "rv6tc" <rv6tc(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stiffening tip-up canopy - yes or no |
yes.... you need to stiffen the canopy frame. I did foam and fiberglass,
don't know about other methods, but it does need to be stiffened.
Keith Hughes
RV-6 Finish
Denver
----- Original Message -----
From: <PeterHunt1(at)aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: Stiffening tip-up canopy - yes or no
>
> Should I also stiffen the canopy or is that not necessary with the gas
> shocks?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KostaLewis" <mikel(at)dimensional.com> |
>I was approx 20 miles inbound for landing when I heard another plane
>(Cessna) call for landing close to my psoition. The tower called out
>traffic which I then located. The Cessna could not find me and told
the >controller.
With this in mind, I have changed the way I call in to report position
to an uncontrolled airport. I usually report 10 miles out. These
aircraft are FAST and saying you are 10 miles out really means nothing,
unless someone else is 10 miles out and needs to know you are in their
neighborhood.
I have now added how soon I can be expected in the pattern area: "Erie
traffic, Experimental 232 Suzie Q; we are 10 miles northwest at 65
hundred inbound; we'll be landing Erie in four minutes." When they hear
"Experimental" they don't know if you are a Flybaby or a Lancair or
what. And even if they know what kind of airplane you are, now they know
when they can start looking for you in the pattern. And anything helps.
IMHO
Michael
You builders: file this and keep building. You'll be up here some day
soon.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stiffening tip-up canopy - yes or no |
I won't say yea or nay, just that I have gas struts and NO stiffners. Has worked
great since 1989. Only thing that I well say is that the stiffners do allow you
to be able to finish the raw edges of the canopy frame if you so choose.
Jerry Springer|RV-6 Flying
rv6tc wrote:
>
> yes.... you need to stiffen the canopy frame. I did foam and fiberglass,
> don't know about other methods, but it does need to be stiffened.
>
> Keith Hughes
> RV-6 Finish
> Denver
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <PeterHunt1(at)aol.com>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Stiffening tip-up canopy - yes or no
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>>Should I also stiffen the canopy or is that not necessary with the gas
>>shocks?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV6 Flyer" <rv6_flyer(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying comment |
>I was approx 20 miles inbound for landing when I heard another plane
>(Cessna) call for landing close to my psoition. The tower called out
>traffic which I then located. The Cessna could not find me and told
the >controller.
I typically will report in, RV 157GS EXPERIMENTAL 10 miles out, will be
overhead in 3 minutes. I always use RV 157GS then EXPERIMENTAL for the
initial call. Only use RV 7GS or RV 157GS there after.
Many times ATC will report traffic 12 o'clock your overtaking them by 40
knots. Have had a contol tower ask me to reduce airspeed 10 knots when I
was 6 miles out.
Recently had a departing student report "CCB Traffic, Cessna 123 turning
left crosswind rwy 24, CCB." I report just after, "CCB traffic, RV 7GS left
crosswind over 6 for Downwind 24 inside the Cessna CCB." The student called
back asking my position and I responded that I had them in sight, no factor
and that we are indicating 120 knots. (Turn to downwind drops airspeed to
80 KIAS for flaps.) I was just exiting the runway as they called turing
final. Gas was already flowing into my airplane as they exited the runway.
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,225 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
http://SoCAL_WVAF.rvproject.com
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 3 months FREE*.
http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_virusprotection_3mf
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: LASAR ignition wiring |
In a message dated 12/21/2 2:15:19 AM, rlglass(at)alaska.net writes:
<>
Don't forget to mount the toggle switches so that the closed position is with
the toggle down (unlike all the other switches) so the mag is grounded when
in the off position. It's an easy thing to overlook. Ask me how I know.
Pat Allender - 98 Hr. with LASAR and toggle switches on RV-4
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Stiffening tip-up canopy - yes or no |
Don't know if it needs to be or not. I seem to have read many times that it
needs to be and how to go about doing it.
I filled mine in with foam and glassed it smooth then filled it smoother.
Installed a couple of defrost fans flush with the new surface. They are
positioned to draw air from behind the panel and blow onto the bubble. Tests
are showing they move alot of air, I might put them on a reostat to tune
them down.
1 I feel there will be plenty of warm air there from the radios and
electronics to use as a defroster
2 If I need more warm air for defrost, the area behind the panel can be
heat soaked by adding more cabin heat which enters the cabin below and
behind the panel.
3 If there is an avionics cooling problem I now have a meathod of
exhausting the area
I then covered it all in upolstery to get a nice finished look. On of my
dislikes of the tip up canopy is the "homebuilt" look when open. I am
attempting to get away from that by doing a full cover interior for the
whole frame including the sidewalls. The canopy frame bow that sits in front
of the roll bar is white painted to match the roll bar. It mounts two of the
LED map lights that Van used to sell. They are controlled off the stick and
also act as back up panel lights. My roll bar also has a finished look by
filling in the gap, it is smooth on all sides and painted white.
Norman Hunger
RV6A Tip Up
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
I report as 'Experimental Glasair 53BG, 20 west, 250 knots, landing'.
That usually brings a request to slow to 160 knots.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of KostaLewis
Subject: RV-List: Flying comment
>I was approx 20 miles inbound for landing when I heard another plane
>(Cessna) call for landing close to my psoition. The tower called out
>traffic which I then located. The Cessna could not find me and told
the >controller.
With this in mind, I have changed the way I call in to report position
to an uncontrolled airport. I usually report 10 miles out. These
aircraft are FAST and saying you are 10 miles out really means nothing,
unless someone else is 10 miles out and needs to know you are in their
neighborhood.
I have now added how soon I can be expected in the pattern area: "Erie
traffic, Experimental 232 Suzie Q; we are 10 miles northwest at 65
hundred inbound; we'll be landing Erie in four minutes." When they hear
"Experimental" they don't know if you are a Flybaby or a Lancair or
what. And even if they know what kind of airplane you are, now they know
when they can start looking for you in the pattern. And anything helps.
IMHO
Michael
You builders: file this and keep building. You'll be up here some day
soon.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying comment |
I don't recall who it was that said this, and it may not be true, but here
goes.
I heard that due to the large number of RV's flying, there was a
communication from the FAA to all controllers what an RV was, and that RV's
could report as "Anywhere tower, RV2388X" instead of reporting "Experimental
2388X" or "Experimental RV 2388X". This communication was to let
controllers know who weren't familiar with an RV that they are commonplace
enough to eliminate the "Experimental" from the call sign, so not be
confused with a much slower experimental.
Even if it is not true, I think that this is happening more and more
everyday. Gotta love them RV's.
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: "KostaLewis" <mikel(at)dimensional.com>
Subject: RV-List: Flying comment
>
> >I was approx 20 miles inbound for landing when I heard another plane
> >(Cessna) call for landing close to my psoition. The tower called out
> >traffic which I then located. The Cessna could not find me and told
> the >controller.
>
> With this in mind, I have changed the way I call in to report position
> to an uncontrolled airport. I usually report 10 miles out. These
> aircraft are FAST and saying you are 10 miles out really means nothing,
> unless someone else is 10 miles out and needs to know you are in their
> neighborhood.
>
> I have now added how soon I can be expected in the pattern area: "Erie
> traffic, Experimental 232 Suzie Q; we are 10 miles northwest at 65
> hundred inbound; we'll be landing Erie in four minutes." When they hear
> "Experimental" they don't know if you are a Flybaby or a Lancair or
> what. And even if they know what kind of airplane you are, now they know
> when they can start looking for you in the pattern. And anything helps.
>
> IMHO
>
> Michael
>
> You builders: file this and keep building. You'll be up here some day
> soon.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Calvert" <rv6(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stiffening tip-up canopy - yes or no |
Pete,
I ordered the 3 aluminum canopy reinforcement pieces that are now used on
the -7's & -9's and put them on my -6. Much easier that messing with
fiberglass and easy to install and they really firm up the canopy.
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok
-6 N296JC(res)
----- Original Message -----
From: <PeterHunt1(at)aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: Stiffening tip-up canopy - yes or no
>
> I am at the point of deciding whether or not to stiffen my tip-up canopy
and
> need some advice. I am installing gas shocks to open my tip-up canopy.
> Should I also stiffen the canopy or is that not necessary with the gas
> shocks? If I do stiffen the canopy I plan to follow Sam's idea of plywood
> (instead of foam) and fiberglass in the Wd-616A channel. What say ye of
> experience? Is stiffening the canopy important?
>
> Pete Hunt
> RV-6 N216PH (reserved)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Abwaldal(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Stiffening tip-up canopy - yes or no |
Hi Pete
I too did the three pieces of rv-7 canopy stiffening process and it really
worked good. Easy to install; just follow instructions. Don't remember the
cost. But well worth it. I've done tons of fiberglass and epoxy in the past
and would rather have something that has mechanical attachment. I would
recomend it to anybody.
Art B. Waldal
Rv-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RGray67968(at)aol.com |
Folks,
I thought a few of you may like to read a post to the Mid Atlantic and TEAM
RV Yahoo Groups. When I was building, stuff like this kept me down in the
basement working harder than ever (Thanks Big Time to Paul Rosales - aka
SoCal Rosie for his travel stories)! Delete or Enjoy - The choice is yours
:
). Happy Holidays to ALL
Rick Gray RV6 Ohio at the Buffalo Farm (1st flight in August, 121 hrs) lots
of loops and rolls
Mike,
Had a great time today.........thanks BIG TIME for all your help and
support. You put a great deal into this sport.........I recognize
this and appreciate ALL your efforts. Guys like me are reaping the
benefits of your efforts and willingness to share your knowledge.
Thanks Mike!!
Later.
Rick at the Buffalo Farm - come on up dude and you can stay at our
house and I'll let you ride the 'little Buffalo' -- smile
Sporty's.....NO......TEAM RV......YES,
Hey guys,
Thought I give you a little travel report from today's flight. The
wind was blowing BIG TIME here in Ohio today (and my passenger for
the planned ride to Sporty's
http://www.sportys.com/shoppilot/
gets airsick real easy).....so we decided to head south for
some 'nicer' wx. Hmmmmmm, isn't TEAM RV
http://www.mstewart.net/michael/rv/teamrv/index.htm
down in Georgia(?).......isn't that an RV in my hangar(?).......you
bet!!! Well, what are we waiting for........??
We had the airport to ourselves. Wheels up at 0640 from Parkersburg
(PKB) (don't ya' just love turning on the lights on 2 huge runways
with the click of mic button - smile).
Climbed to 8500' with Charleston Center till they dumped us somewhere
over North Carolina. Head winds kept our ground speed to 160mph but
they steadily increased to about 195 as we neared Lawrenceville, Ga.
(LZU). Smooth 20 deg cold air over the mountains, the sun rising off
to the left, and a full moon off to the right.......this is why I
built my plane (69 deg in cockpit and Yanni on the CD didn't hurt
either...grin). LZU Ok'd us for the overhead approach and a few
minutes later we were on the ground with my good buddy Mike Stewart
and new friend Steve McDonald (RV4). 2.3 hours and we're in
Georgia....somebody pinch me. Hey.....look over there! Here come some
more RV's. Mike briefed the flight......safety, Lead, Wingmen, #2,
fingertip, safety, squawk, check in, #6, safety,
questions?....safety, let's go. Before I knew it we were taxiing out
as a 6 ship (Mike/lead/RV6A, Steve/RV4, Greg Bitzer/Wingman/RV6,
Danny Kight/Wingman/RV6, Ken ?/RV6, and myself/RV6)in route to
Moontown, Alabama (3M5)
http://www.airnav.com/airport/3M5
to meet up with the Tennessee RV bunch. Great opportunity for this
new guy to get some much needed formation practice. Clay Smith (RV4)
joined up about half way into the 1 hour flight to Moontown. Upon
arrival, TEAM RV made a few beautiful passes for the crowd on the
2100' grass strip which included an echelon, diamond, arrow, and the
big finale....... a STARBURST (you had to be there).....this was
spectacular!! RV's 'shooting' all over the sky!! Trailing behind
in 'loose' formation gave me a birds eye view of some awesome
precision formation work. What a display!! Upon reforming from the
Starburst Mike called the TEAM back into trail for the landing and
formation taxi, turn, & shutdown on the 'flight line'. Lots of well
deserved compliments from the crowd!! Hmmm, I wonder why - these
guys practice often and are really good. With 10 or so RV's already
on the field, our arrival just about doubled the count. Needless to
say we got to see lots of cool airplanes and flybys. The wx was
severe clear and about 60 deg. Sweet. We hung out for a couple hours
revisiting with folks we met down at SERFI
http://www.serfi.org/
(Dennis Milsap/Robin Hunt and others)in October and of
course....making new friends. Oh yea, even Mr Sam Buchanan was
there....big smile and hand shake from Sam.......if you're asking
yourself 'who's Sam?'.....you probably don't have an RV.
http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal/
These folks meet at Moontown every 3rd Saturday.....a great bunch
with great southern hospitality.....it doesn't get any better.
We departed as a single ship for PKB. The 425 statute mile trip home
from Alabama was just 2 hours 2 minutes with an average groundspeed
of 210mph. Sweet ride at about 7500'.......UNTIL we started descending
to PKB. ATIS report wasn't promising and a quick call on 123.7
verified that the winds were still waiting for us. 26 gusting to 34
out of 25. The turbulent descent really tested the Dramamine my
buddy 'Gary' took a few hours before, but the sick sacks stayed in
the center console....:
). My choices were 21 and 28 (I like having
a 'choice' :
)). I decided on 28 and we were cleared to land. I
wouldn't have enjoyed this moment in my Kitfox but the RV handled it
no problem. A short taxi to the pumps to top off the tanks......a few
moments later N856RG was back in the hanger. Total time on the hobbs
today was 6.6 hours.....not bad for a spur of the
moment.....er....uh...dare I say....pick up WAM - don't cha love it!
Fuel burn was 8.3 on the way down and 7.9 on the way back. The 7.9
was among the lower end of my fuel burns so far.....but it did
include the hour formation hop from Lawrenceville to Moontown at
about 2300rpm. I'm running an O-360 fixed pitch. I typically avg 8.1
to 8.3 at altitude - and lean to 20 deg rich of peak. Some folks do
better, but these are my numbers.
Let's see, rise at 4:45 am, wheels up at 6:40, Ohio to Georgia in 2.3
hours, formation w/TEAM RV (well, loose for me) to Moontown Alabama,
chit chat with good ol' boy Sam Buchanan, and back home to Ohio by
about 2:45.......I love my RV. Keep poundin' them rivets. Or keep
painting 'em, (over & over till you get one you like) as it applies
to you.....Zack :
)
Oh yea.... a plug for my new 'Jantzi' steering link....this baby is a
nice addition to my 6 and is a 'keeper'.......don't leave home
without one!
http://www.iwantarocket.com/ click on 'Products'
I'll be in flying to Jersey for the Holidays......if you folks have
something going on be sure to post.
Hope your Saturday was a good one.....Happy Holidays to the MARV
group!!!
Rick Gray RV6 Ohio at the Buffalo Farm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
Vanremog(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 12/22/2002 4:17:55 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> RGray67968(at)aol.com writes:
>
> > Thought I give you a little travel report from today's flight. The
> > wind was blowing BIG TIME here in Ohio today (and my passenger for
> > the planned ride to Sporty's
>
> Good story, but the part about having to listen to Yanni on CD brought tears
> to my eyes ;
>
> -GV (RV-6A N1GV 575hrs)
The Yanni may be questionable, but the sound of SEVEN beautiful RVs
reverberating off the hills surrounding quaint little Moontown
International was memorable indeed!! :-) The starburst was quite a
finale (hmmmm, it did kinda remind me of how our local gaggle sometimes
arrives in the pattern at breakfast, but we don't
*intentionally*....."starburst"...).
In spite of obviously suffering from culture shock due to his rapid
transport from the frozen North to laid back and balmy Alabamy, Rick
seemed to handle his aborted flight to Sportys in fine fashion. Be sure
to take a look at Rick's plane at a flyin if you get the chance...it is
a beauty!
Rick, since you know your way to the South now, don't hesitate to
return; just get started earlier so we can escort you to one of our
weekly breakfasts. :-)
Sam Buchanan
Tennessee Valley RV Builders Group (actually based in north Alabama)
http://www.tvrvbg.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rjcaptjoel(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Flying comment |
I try to use a land mark when calling in a position report.
"Antique Aeronca---Experimental RV 4----Canadair Regional Jet ten miles out
over I-25, straight in runway 29 Jeff co. or over Erie tower, or Near Platte
Valley, landing Van Air.
Granted, those not familiar to the area may not know the land marks, but how
many strangers are flying these days any way?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <ktlkrn(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying comment |
The owner of the RV that is being built in my hangar is an ATC. I'll ask
him. I have also heard Lancairs and Glasairs communicate without the
"experimental" tag. Should apply to RV's for sure then.
Darwin N. Barrie
Chandler AZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Flying comment
>
> I don't recall who it was that said this, and it may not be true, but here
> goes.
>
> I heard that due to the large number of RV's flying, there was a
> communication from the FAA to all controllers what an RV was, and that
RV's
> could report as "Anywhere tower, RV2388X" instead of reporting
"Experimental
> 2388X" or "Experimental RV 2388X". This communication was to let
> controllers know who weren't familiar with an RV that they are commonplace
> enough to eliminate the "Experimental" from the call sign, so not be
> confused with a much slower experimental.
>
> Even if it is not true, I think that this is happening more and more
> everyday. Gotta love them RV's.
>
>
> 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: "KostaLewis" <mikel(at)dimensional.com>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Flying comment
>
>
> >
> > >I was approx 20 miles inbound for landing when I heard another plane
> > >(Cessna) call for landing close to my psoition. The tower called out
> > >traffic which I then located. The Cessna could not find me and told
> > the >controller.
> >
> > With this in mind, I have changed the way I call in to report position
> > to an uncontrolled airport. I usually report 10 miles out. These
> > aircraft are FAST and saying you are 10 miles out really means nothing,
> > unless someone else is 10 miles out and needs to know you are in their
> > neighborhood.
> >
> > I have now added how soon I can be expected in the pattern area: "Erie
> > traffic, Experimental 232 Suzie Q; we are 10 miles northwest at 65
> > hundred inbound; we'll be landing Erie in four minutes." When they hear
> > "Experimental" they don't know if you are a Flybaby or a Lancair or
> > what. And even if they know what kind of airplane you are, now they know
> > when they can start looking for you in the pattern. And anything helps.
> >
> > IMHO
> >
> > Michael
> >
> > You builders: file this and keep building. You'll be up here some day
> > soon.
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
| Subject: | Re: slightly off topic - what's latin for "flying machine" |
?
> I was wondering if anyone knows what is Latin for "A Flying Machine" ?
One transliteration would be "fabrica volitilis."
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
-6 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joe Kramer" <JRKramer(at)cox.net> |
Would AL Renner in Nebraska contact Joe in Arizona regarding his RV8
kit! 623-202-8223
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Nolan" <jimnolan(at)insightbb.com> |
F.Y.I.
I've always used the term ( experimental N444JN ) when addressing ATC. After
I got my instrument ticket, I used the same term a couple of times. ATC has
never addressed me as experimental. I never use that term anymore. They let
me know I was an RV4, not an experimental.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Calvert" <rv6(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stiffening tip-up canopy - yes or no |
The cost of the 3-piece canopy stiffner was a little over $20.
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok
-6 N296JC(res)
----- Original Message -----
From: <Abwaldal(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Stiffening tip-up canopy - yes or no
>
> Hi Pete
> I too did the three pieces of rv-7 canopy stiffening process and it
really
> worked good. Easy to install; just follow instructions. Don't remember the
> cost. But well worth it. I've done tons of fiberglass and epoxy in the
past
> and would rather have something that has mechanical attachment. I would
> recomend it to anybody.
>
> Art B. Waldal
> Rv-6
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net> |
Hi Listers,
My question is regarding the material(s) used for filling the space
under the actual seat cushions. A review of the archives did not yield
very much.
The top layers of the seat clearly need to be some sort of foam with the
most attractive (and most expensive) being Tempurfoam. However, the
space beneath the foam which is of the order of 5" (RV-6A) can be a much
firmer material and possibly rigid. An attractive material because of
its easy fabrication and lightness is the common insulation foam used in
home construction. However, this is polystyrene which will not meet a
simple flammability test. When exposed to a flame, it melts and will
burn.
However, in the location under the cushions, is fire resistance an
important consideration? In thinking about how that area could be
exposed to flame, it would seem that, in order for that material to
reach high enough temperatures, the occupants would already been done in
by flames and whether or not the seat bottoms burn would become moot.
I would be interested in any insights, experiences you have had as well
as the material selections you have made (for those who made their
seats). For those who purchased seats, do you know what the materials
are in your seat bottoms?
Thanks in advance.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all.
Regards,
Richard Dudley
-6A FWF
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Nightingale Michael" <NightingaleMichaelV(at)JohnDeere.com> |
"'rv-list(at)matronics.com'"
| Subject: | FW: Garmin 196 on Experimental Panel builder |
>
>
> Does anyone on the List have access to someone at The Experimental Panel
> builder site? I've Emailed them 4 times in the last two months about
> adding the Garmin 196 to GPS Group, but the 196 is still a no show.
>
>
> Thanks
> Mike Nightingale
> RV-9A 90259
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SSPRING83(at)aol.com |
Hi Len,
l agree with you about announcing yourself ahead of time when arriving
at an airport, (controlled, or uncontrolled) but for the benefit of the
lowtimers and others it might be better to say " will be entering the pattern
in 4 minutes" when you will be landing depends on how much other traffic is
there ahead of you.
Just my 2 cents worth and please don,t archive this
George Spring Chester Ct. -4 4375J
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Plexi repair. |
Thanks dean for the info. I think the seringe I have a black plunger so I
will have to ask Gale about the tipless kind. Do you know how to apply the
solvent? Start at the spop hole and run down the crack? From the inside or
outside? Should the crack be prepared in any way? I have a few pieces of
plexi to practice on - tried to create a crack and couldn't do it. How come
its so easy on the canopy??? Painting still going on -- had shipping
problems getting the materials. Thanks again, Ray
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave" <davevon(at)tir.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stiffening tip-up canopy - yes or no |
What are the part numbers of the stiffeners for the 7?
Thanks,
Dave
RV-6
The need for speed-->
>
> The cost of the 3-piece canopy stiffner was a little over $20.
>
> Jerry Calvert
> Edmond Ok
> -6 N296JC(res)
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Stiffening tip-up canopy - yes or no
>
>
> >
> > Hi Pete
> > I too did the three pieces of rv-7 canopy stiffening process and it
> really
> > worked good. Easy to install; just follow instructions. Don't remember
the
> > cost. But well worth it. I've done tons of fiberglass and epoxy in the
December 14, 2002 - December 23, 2002
RV-Archive.digest.vol-nz