RV-Archive.digest.vol-ov
February 01, 2004 - February 10, 2004
Paul,
Please keep us informed as to any findings that arise out of that call.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
| Subject: | RE: Dynon EMI (different scenario) |
<matronicspost@csg-i.com>
>
> There's a couple of very disappointing things about this situation:
>
> 1) in a total electric failure emergency, my backup handheld radio will
most
> likely be rendered useless.
>
> 2) in an otherwise excellent product, those engineering folks at Dynon
have
> completely dropped the ball in not doing thorough Quality Control checks
on
> EMI. Isn't it obvious that in a highly electrified environment such as an
> airplane cockpit, one MUST check for EMI? Is that too much to ask?
>
> I will be giving them a call tomorrow.
>
> Paul
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | r miller <robertpmiller(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | 2 questions fuel sender float, ground wires |
Two questions: 1. I have an older SW fuel tank sender but no float.
Does anyone know what makes a good float or where to get a replacement.
2. Does anyone use ground wires for their wing tip lights or does
everyone use the airframe as the ground path?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com> |
| Subject: | Dynon EMI (different scenario) |
Same here. All testing so far has shown no noise changes with the
remote compass hooked up or not. Hope it stays that way. Good? Lucky?
I'll take either one...
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Checkoway [mailto:dan(at)rvproject.com]
> Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2004 11:31 AM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Dynon EMI (different scenario)
>
>
>
> Here's a data point on the other side of the fence. I have a
> Dynon with the EDC-D10 external compass. I have NO EMI to speak of.
>
> Granted, this is not a complete test, since I'm (a) not
> running the engine and (b) not flying. But I figure if
> there's no noise on the ground running only on the battery,
> any noise that I experience in any other condition would have
> to be due to an independent, external factor.
>
> Anyway, so far so good -- I'm not experiencing the same
> problems that you guys are. Assume it comes down to how it's
> installed & wired?
>
> I reserve the right to complain later as I do more thorough
> testing... 8
> )
>
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Boyce, Ph.D." <matronicspost@csg-i.com>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Dynon EMI (different scenario)
>
>
> <matronicspost@csg-i.com>
> >
> > I know that this issue has been discussed as it relates the
> external
> > compass. However, what about this scenario:
> >
> > I'm building an RV-7A and have all my instruments installed in the
> > panel, including the Dynon D-10 EFIS. I do not have the
> Dynon external
> > compass since the DG on the Dynon and my SIRS brand
> magnetic compass
> > read exactly the same. So far so good.
> >
> > However, given the discussion of the EMI issue, I decided to do a
> > test. I hooked up the Dynon directly to my main battery using
> > alligator clips and
> a
> > 2 lengths of unshielded wire, one for positive and one for
> negative.
> > No other instrument is turned on. So the only electrons
> flowing around
> > are strictly Dynon electrons. When I give
> the
> > Dynon power, my handheld radio exhibits all sorts of noise
> across all
> > channels. It's so loud I cannot even hear AWOS. When I take away the
> power,
> > the noise goes away.
> >
> > Does this mean that I also will have the noise problem on
> my panel COM
> radio
> > when I get to the point of completing it's installation?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
>
>
> ===========
> Matronics Forums.
> ===========
> ===========
> ===========
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | r miller <robertpmiller(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | I'm scratching my head? |
If your airplane is on the verge of stalling the lift closer to the
root disappears as the stall works it way out to the tip right? So
just before a stall at say 6G isn't the bending moment of the wing
greater than a lower angle of attack carrying 6G? An exaggerated
comparison would be a plane supported on its wing tips by saw horses
versus supported by picnic tables.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 questions fuel sender float, ground wires |
Hi R,
!/ Try getting in touch with SW.
2/ Metal aircraft, use local grounding, less wire, less weight, less cost.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "r miller" <robertpmiller(at)comcast.net>
Subject: RV-List: 2 questions fuel sender float, ground wires
>
> Two questions: 1. I have an older SW fuel tank sender but no float.
> Does anyone know what makes a good float or where to get a replacement.
> 2. Does anyone use ground wires for their wing tip lights or does
> everyone use the airframe as the ground path?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob n' Lu Olds" <oldsfolks(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re:Fuel sender floats,ground wires |
The RV aircraft have fibreglas wingtips,so the wingtip lights have to be grounded
to the metal of the airframe. A short groundwire to the spar tip stub or the
end wing rib will accomplish the grounding.
Bob Olds RV-4
A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor
Charleston,Arkansas
oldsfolks(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Chalkie Stobbart+ ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Chalkie Stobbart+
Subject: Canopy and winshield attachment with Sika adhesive.
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/cajole76@ispwest.com.02.01.2004/index.html
o Main Photo Share Index
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
o Submitting a Photo Share
If you wish to submit a Photo Share of your own, please include the
following information along with your email message and files:
1) Email List or Lists that they are related to:
2) Your Full Name:
3) Your Email Address:
4) One line Subject description:
5) Multi-line, multi-paragraph description of topic:
6) One-line Description of each photo or file:
Email the information above and your files and photos to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Chalkie Stobbart ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Chalkie Stobbart
Subject: RV-List article applicable to all RV's and all Plexiglas canopies.
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/chalkboy@mweb.co.za.02.01.2004/index.html
o Main Photo Share Index
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
o Submitting a Photo Share
If you wish to submit a Photo Share of your own, please include the
following information along with your email message and files:
1) Email List or Lists that they are related to:
2) Your Full Name:
3) Your Email Address:
4) One line Subject description:
5) Multi-line, multi-paragraph description of topic:
6) One-line Description of each photo or file:
Email the information above and your files and photos to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/gillies-patty@sc.edu.07.07.2002
regarding:
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/gillies-patty@sc.edu.07.07.2002
Patty, the fuel selector labeling as portrayed in this photo is
ambiguous and potentially dangerous. The co-location of the words OFF
and BOTH is part of the problem. The words are together at the top of
the arc, but they are not really together as the words are separated by
a screw head. To compound the matter, the indicator seems to be pointed
more towards the BOTH sector. There is a vast difference between
airplanes which have the fuel valve position choices BOTH, RIGHT, LEFT,
OFF, and the airplanes which have fuel valve positions labeled RIGHT,
LEFT, OFF. I've flown both sorts of airplanes.
You may have a particular "local knowledge" of this particular
aircraft, but others might fly this aircraft over the years. The
labeling is just too idiosyncratic.
I do not believe I've ever seen an airplane with the labels LEFT,
RIGHT, BOTH OFF. It doesn't make sense and it's a dangerous
precedent. I don't think you'd ever see that in a certificated
airplane. Please read Peter Garrison's article in the current issue of
flying and reflect upon some of the safety issues he brings up.
Kind Regards, Blanton Fortson
http://homepage.mac.com/blanton
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "GMC" <gmcnutt(at)intergate.ca> |
Hi Patty
Very nice labeling and I am sure you are/were proud of it however I second
Blanton, on some future flight with some other pilot should the "OFF"
letters be obscured for some reason (dirt, pax clothing, hurried, panicked
or whatever) some panicked pilot might only notice the "BOTH".
I might also suggest that the left & right ON positions be more accurately
defined, maybe a line between the words at the exact on position, example
below.
LEFT RIGHT
<---- ----->
TANK TANK
and a nice touch would be to paint the fuel selector small pointer white to
match the lettering (white selector on white lettering).
Please do not take this as criticism, it is offered as a suggestion to make
you sleep easier should you ever sell the aircraft.
George in Langley
----------------------
regarding:
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/gillies-patty@sc.edu.07.07.2002
Patty, the fuel selector labeling as portrayed in this photo is
ambiguous and potentially dangerous. The co-location of the words OFF
and BOTH is part of the problem. The words are together at the top of
the arc, but they are not really together as the words are separated by
a screw head. To compound the matter, the indicator seems to be pointed
more towards the BOTH sector. There is a vast difference between
airplanes which have the fuel valve position choices BOTH, RIGHT, LEFT,
OFF, and the airplanes which have fuel valve positions labeled RIGHT,
LEFT, OFF. I've flown both sorts of airplanes.
You may have a particular "local knowledge" of this particular
aircraft, but others might fly this aircraft over the years. The
labeling is just too idiosyncratic.
I do not believe I've ever seen an airplane with the labels LEFT,
RIGHT, BOTH OFF. It doesn't make sense and it's a dangerous
precedent. I don't think you'd ever see that in a certificated
airplane. Please read Peter Garrison's article in the current issue of
flying and reflect upon some of the safety issues he brings up.
Kind Regards, Blanton Fortson
http://homepage.mac.com/blanton
________________________________________________________________________________
athttp://www.matronics.com/photoshare/gillies-patty@sc.edu.07.07.2002
George, you put it much more nicely than I was able to. Thank you. Tone
is important and I sometimes find it difficult to convey difficult
information in this linear text based black and white medium as gently
as you have managed, I hope to learn how to !
Blanton
George writes:
>>Please do not take this as criticism, it is offered as a suggestion
to make you sleep easier should you ever sell the aircraft.<<
Ditto.
Blanton
On Feb 1, 2004, at 10:28 PM, GMC wrote:
>
>
> Hi Patty
>
> Very nice labeling and I am sure you are/were proud of it however I
> second
> Blanton, on some future flight with some other pilot should the "OFF"
> letters be obscured for some reason (dirt, pax clothing, hurried,
> panicked
> or whatever) some panicked pilot might only notice the "BOTH".
> I might also suggest that the left & right ON positions be more
> accurately
> defined, maybe a line between the words at the exact on position,
> example
> below.
>
> LEFT RIGHT
> <---- ----->
> TANK TANK
>
> and a nice touch would be to paint the fuel selector small pointer
> white to
> match the lettering (white selector on white lettering).
>
> Please do not take this as criticism, it is offered as a suggestion to
> make
> you sleep easier should you ever sell the aircraft.
>
> George in Langley
>
> ----------------------
> regarding:
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/gillies-patty@sc.edu.07.07.2002
>
> Patty, the fuel selector labeling as portrayed in this photo is
> ambiguous and potentially dangerous. The co-location of the words OFF
> and BOTH is part of the problem. The words are together at the top of
> the arc, but they are not really together as the words are separated by
> a screw head. To compound the matter, the indicator seems to be pointed
> more towards the BOTH sector. There is a vast difference between
> airplanes which have the fuel valve position choices BOTH, RIGHT, LEFT,
> OFF, and the airplanes which have fuel valve positions labeled RIGHT,
> LEFT, OFF. I've flown both sorts of airplanes.
>
> You may have a particular "local knowledge" of this particular
> aircraft, but others might fly this aircraft over the years. The
> labeling is just too idiosyncratic.
>
> I do not believe I've ever seen an airplane with the labels LEFT,
> RIGHT, BOTH OFF. It doesn't make sense and it's a dangerous
> precedent. I don't think you'd ever see that in a certificated
> airplane. Please read Peter Garrison's article in the current issue of
> flying and reflect upon some of the safety issues he brings up.
>
> Kind Regards, Blanton Fortson
>
> http://homepage.mac.com/blanton
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RE: Dynon EMI (different scenario) |
In a message dated 2/2/2004 7:31:33 AM Eastern Standard Time,
bo124rs(at)hotmail.com writes:
> The comment
> about a handheld not operational, I can take mine and run it all around the
> unit and not break squelch.
>
I have approx 30 - 40 hours on my Dynon now. I have no noise that I am aware
of. I can tell no difference now than before the install. I do not have the
remote compass. The unit came with the compass tape only about 10 degrees
off and I have not done any calibration yet so I can live with that for now.
Len Leggette, RV-8A
Greensboro, NC N910LL
200 hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hopperdhh(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: (irrelevant...) confession of an RV builder |
I shouldn't have mentioned the triple-beam balance. I doubt if the mixing is
what causes the hang-up about fiberglass work. For me, at least, it has to
do with the work being more artistic and less scientific. I like to put things
together that fit in a certain way where fiberglass work is too infinite!
Anyway, its not about me, I was just trying to encourage anyone who is afraid of
that kind of work to just go ahead and get into it. Its usually not as bad
as you have imagined.
Dan N766DH RV-7A almost finished
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cammie Patch" <cammie(at)sunvalley.net> |
This looks just like the fuel selector in the P206 that I fly. I was alarmed
when I first saw it (in the 206), but I haven't heard of any accidents
caused by it. Nevertheless, I wouldn't choose to have it placarded this way.
Cammie
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/gillies-patty@sc.edu.07.07.2002
regarding:
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/gillies-patty@sc.edu.07.07.2002
Patty, the fuel selector labeling as portrayed in this photo is
ambiguous and potentially dangerous. The co-location of the words OFF
and BOTH is part of the problem. The words are together at the top of
the arc, but they are not really together as the words are separated by
a screw head. To compound the matter, the indicator seems to be pointed
more towards the BOTH sector. There is a vast difference between
airplanes which have the fuel valve position choices BOTH, RIGHT, LEFT,
OFF, and the airplanes which have fuel valve positions labeled RIGHT,
LEFT, OFF. I've flown both sorts of airplanes.
--------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Bristol <bj034(at)lafn.org> |
GMC wrote:
>
>
>and a nice touch would be to paint the fuel selector small pointer white to
>match the lettering (white selector on white lettering).
>
This is a very important point, since some installations use the handle
end and some use the pointy end - a little paint on one end would solve
the problem.
Dave rv6, So Cal,EAA Technical Counselor / Flight Advisor
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Your Photos at |
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/gillies-patty@sc.edu.07.07.2002
Cammie, the 206 you fly likely has a BOTH and an OFF which are two
different positions, and if like my 206 those are the only two
positions. One of the problems with Patty's switch is that the words
BOTH OFF were associated with the same switch position which is
apparently the OFF position.
B.
On Feb 2, 2004, at 5:43 AM, Cammie Patch wrote:
>
> This looks just like the fuel selector in the P206 that I fly. I was
> alarmed
> when I first saw it (in the 206), but I haven't heard of any accidents
> caused by it. Nevertheless, I wouldn't choose to have it placarded
> this way.
> Cammie
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/gillies-patty@sc.edu.07.07.2002
>
> regarding:
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/gillies-patty@sc.edu.07.07.2002
>
> Patty, the fuel selector labeling as portrayed in this photo is
> ambiguous and potentially dangerous. The co-location of the words OFF
> and BOTH is part of the problem. The words are together at the top of
> the arc, but they are not really together as the words are separated by
> a screw head. To compound the matter, the indicator seems to be pointed
> more towards the BOTH sector. There is a vast difference between
> airplanes which have the fuel valve position choices BOTH, RIGHT, LEFT,
> OFF, and the airplanes which have fuel valve positions labeled RIGHT,
> LEFT, OFF. I've flown both sorts of airplanes.
>
> --------
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | .........and another |
Saturday January 31, 2004, was a good day in TN.=A0 Under the skilled hand of
CFII and resident TPE (Test Pilot Extraordinaire) Mike Kellems, N51PW joined
the fleet, gracefully sailing into the severe-clear over Hunter Field near
Spring Hill.=A0 Mike reports she trims up hands-off dead level, runs strong, has
no
bad habits and is a genuine grin-generator.=A0 Can't wait for my turn!
Too many folks to thank, especially y'all right here and Matt for making it
so! Gotta mention fellow Nashville area builders Chris Brooks, Marty Emrath
and Tommy Walker, DAR Ed Hasch, Number One Bucking Buddy and inspiration John
DeYager, my dad for encouragement and support, and other family units for their
patience and assistance.
Will get some time in the saddle soon, sort thru the numbers and report
back.....
From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark Phillips - RV-6A - O-320, Catto 3-blade, tip-up & needing a paint
job...oh yeah, and FLYING!!!!!!!!
8-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: I'm scratching my head? |
r miller wrote:
> If your airplane is on the verge of stalling the lift closer to the
> root disappears as the stall works it way out to the tip right? So
> just before a stall at say 6G isn't the bending moment of the wing
> greater than a lower angle of attack carrying 6G? An exaggerated
> comparison would be a plane supported on its wing tips by saw horses
> versus supported by picnic tables.
Two comments... One, as other people have pointed out, it's common
practise to design a wing so that it stalls at the root first. That way
you start to "sink" due to the loss of lift, before you lose aileron
effectiveness. That way when you panic and try to roll the wings level
instead of using the rudder, you won't make things worse. I don't know
what the RV wing does, but my *guess* is that it would do the same thing.
Two, as to whether the bending moment increases when this happens? No,
it doesn't. When the root section of the wing loses lift, you start to
fall out of the sky. So the outer sections of the wings aren't carrying
the same load, redistributed to the outer sections, they're carrying the
same load they were before the stall started.
If you were to pull back further on the stick to maintain your altitude
(and increase the G loading), then yes, the load would increase... But
at the higher G loading more of the wing would stall, and thereby carry
less load, so you'd have to pull back further...
-Rob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Behrent <kbehrent(at)cascadiasoftware.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Dynon EMI (different scenario) |
"Paul Boyce, Ph.D." wrote:
>
> There's a couple of very disappointing things about this situation:
>
> 1) in a total electric failure emergency, my backup handheld radio will most
> likely be rendered useless.
>
> 2) in an otherwise excellent product, those engineering folks at Dynon have
> completely dropped the ball in not doing thorough Quality Control checks on
> EMI. Isn't it obvious that in a highly electrified environment such as an
> airplane cockpit, one MUST check for EMI? Is that too much to ask?
>
> I will be giving them a call tomorrow.
>
> Paul
>
One possible reason why some people are having "noticeable" EMI interference
and others don't is the quaility and vintage of radio(s) that they have
installed.
I say this because I have experienced this when I had a complete panel upgrade
on my Mooney where a complete Garmin stack was put in, but I retained my old,
trusty, Narco Mark 12D+/DME. The GNS430 and the Narco constantly interfered with
each other and both units were sent back to the respective factory on multiple
occassions. What was finally determined, by both manufactures, was noise
filtering capability on both units. The 430 does a pretty good in pre/post
filtering so that the large LCD panel would not interfere with "newer" avionics.
The Narco, on the other hand, has little pre filtering, thus is very reactive to
the lcd screen. It also emits it's own share of emi that the 430 tries to
handle, but fails when conditions are right. The solution, however exceptable
but not perfect, was shielding everything, and doing some rework on the radio
trays to help shield.
The lesson I learned was not to mix new new with old. For what it cost to
minimize the problem, I could have purchased a second 430.
We had the President of Dynon speak at our January EAA monthly meeting and I can
say that he and his engineers are very bright people and they will find a way to
reduce or eliminate the problem. On the other hand, LCD screens will always
emit a certain level of radiation that older generation of radios do not
filter. As glass panels evolve, so does radio filtering. However, don't expect
that your radio(s) are properly filtered to guard againt these emissions.
It would be interesting to study the type of avionics being used by both groups
and see if there are any similarities.
Kevin Behrent
RV-9A - Wings
EAA 326, President
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dr. Kevin P. Leathers" <DrLeathers(at)822heal.com> |
Ebay has an O320 for sale
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category26437&item2457533387
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glenn Brasch" <gbrasch(at)earthlink.net> |
Shows up as an invalid item, like last time..
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr. Kevin P. Leathers" <DrLeathers(at)822heal.com>
Subject: RV-List:
>
> Ebay has an O320 for sale
>
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category26437&item2
457533387
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Harrill <KHarrill(at)osa.state.sc.us> |
| Subject: | Dynon EMI (different scenario) |
Paul,
I have no explanation for what I am about to tell you. I have the Dynon
D-10 with external compass in my RV-6. I now have well over 100 hours on
it. I have experienced no EMI at all. No problem. Nada. I am a happy
customer. Go figure.
Ken Harrill
RV-6, 300 hours
Columbia, SC
<matronicspost@csg-i.com>
>
>I know that this issue has been discussed as it relates the external
>compass. However, what about this scenario:
>
>I'm building an RV-7A and have all my instruments installed in the panel,
>including the Dynon D-10 EFIS. I do not have the Dynon external compass
>since the DG on the Dynon and my SIRS brand magnetic compass read exactly
>the same. So far so good.
>
>However, given the discussion of the EMI issue, I decided to do a test. I
>hooked up the Dynon directly to my main battery using alligator clips and a
>2 lengths of unshielded wire, one for positive and one for negative. No
>other instrument is turned on. So the
>only electrons flowing around are strictly Dynon electrons. When I give the
>Dynon power, my handheld radio exhibits all sorts of noise across all
>channels. It's so loud I cannot even hear AWOS. When I take away the power,
>the noise goes away.
>
>Does this mean that I also will have the noise problem on my panel COM
radio
>when I get to the point of completing it's installation?
>
>Regards,
>
>Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
For some reason the "equals" signs were missing in Kevin's post. Here's
the complete line, let's see if it comes through this time:
<http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=26437&item=2457533387>
-RB4
Glenn Brasch wrote:
>
> Shows up as an invalid item, like last time..
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dr. Kevin P. Leathers" <DrLeathers(at)822heal.com>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>Ebay has an O320 for sale
>>
>>
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category26437&item2
> 457533387
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? |
Ed Holyoke wrote:
> just searched it at 89.99 and it claims 2500 rpm.
> http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=4027
For what it's worth, I bought one of these through KMS tools in
Coquitlam, BC (www.kmstools.com), my local Chicago Pneumatic
distributor. I picked it up on Saturday, for $169 CDN.
As mentioned below, it says 2800rpm on the box. I didn't measure it.
But it's a *very* sweet drill. Small, comfortable, and the trigger
teases just wonderfully. I highly recommend it to anyone looking for a
1/4" palm drill.
Until I saw this one I was considering the $240 US Sioux drill as well,
which would undoubtably be nice, but it's a heck of a lot more money.
> I've bought a lot of tools over the years and it seems that I usually
> end up buying them again if I don't get high quality tools the first
> time. It's not a good way to save money.
Very true. In this case, however, I would say that the Chicago
Pneumatic drill is as good in build quality as the Sioux equivalent.
Mind you, that's only based on a visual comparison of the two.
-Rob
>
> Fellow Listers,
>
> Chicago Pneumatic #CP-7300 1/4" capacity mini air drill 2800 rpm
>
> I have an opportunity to purchase this drill at a nice discount from
> the "normal" price. I checked the biggest tool sellers, Avery and
> Cleaveland, and neither of them sell this exact drill. I'm looking
> for any feedback from someone who uses it. Anyone out there have
> one? Do you like it? Would you buy it again? I'm building my tool
> collection and I'm wondering if it would be worth spending roughly
> $150 more to get the Sioux.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jared Boone <jboone(at)earfeast.com> |
rv7-list(at)matronics.com
| Subject: | Price Reduced: RV7 wing and tail kits |
[A fellow builder talked some sense into me. I'm now asking $5,500 for
my RV7 wing and tail kits.]
Reality has set in, and I've decided that now is not the time for me to
build an airplane. So I'm selling my RV7 tail and wing kits. Here's your
chance to save money on both kits, with some of the work already done,
and avoid the factory lead-time on the wing kit.
I have done about 70% of the metal work on the tail kit, but have not
primed or riveted the pieces yet. A local "Fed" came by and looked at my
work and thought it was outstanding. The wing kit is completely
untouched. I have inventoried the parts and sorted most of the hardware,
and that's it. I ordered the Duckworks landing lights (the square ones,
I think), electric trim, and the capacitive fuel sender.
The parts are located near Portland, OR and are available for
inspection. I would like to sell the kits to someone in the area, and
could even arrange delivery within 100 miles or so. I am asking $5,500
for both kits.
I also have old preview plans (circa 1998) for the -6 and the -8, if
anyone's interested in those.
Thanks!
- Jared Boone
jboone(at)earfeast.com
(503) 320-2066
Portland, OR
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Dynon EMI (different scenario) |
> It would be interesting to study the type of avionics being used by both
groups
> and see if there are any similarities.
NO EMI NOISE with:
- EDC-D10 installed at F-707, shielded 3-conductor wire, shield used as 4th
conductor
- single point of ground, firewall mounted forest of tabs
- only devices not grounded at single point: landing lights + pitot heat
- fuse blocks: battery bus + main bus + e-bus, diode/alternate feed
- belly Comant COM antenna
- belly TED xpdr antenna
- right wing tip Archer VOR antenna
- right wing tip 40" stripped RG-400 marker antenna
- left wing tip Archer COM antenna
- all antennas use RG-400 coax
- Nulite instrument lighting rings (4x)
- Odyssey PC-680, firewall mounted
- contactors firewall mounted, no wire larger than 8AWG in cockpit
- ACS2002
- Garmin GMA-340
- UPSAT GX60
- UPSAT SL30
- Garmin GTX-320A
- Apollo ACU
- Mid-Continent CDI
- Mid-Continent turn coordinator
- shielded headset/mic wires
I'm trying to think if there are any other factors that could, in some
minute way, contribute to this issue. Anyway, that's my setup for what it's
worth.
Oh yeah...mine's a taildragger and it has a tip-up. That MUST be it!!! Or
could it be the type of primer I used? 8-) Just kidding.
I'd be curious to see what's different in settings where EMI noise is a
problem.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lyle Peterson" <lyleap(at)access4less.net> |
| Subject: | eBay O-320 engine |
Go to ebay at this URL - http://pages.ebay.com/
Type in or paste the item number, 2457533387 in this case, in the search
window. Click 'Find It' or press . This will take you directly
to the auction for the item. The item number is at the end of the URL
that isn't working. It is a little tricky to copy from URLs in an email
message. It wants to open the site right away. Start at the end of the
URL and move the cursor to the left. You may get '&item' in the copy
but that is easy to edit out when you paste it.
Lyle
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dr. Kevin P.
Leathers
Subject: RV-List:
Ebay has an O320 for sale
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category26437&i
tem2457533387
=
=
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dr. Kevin P. Leathers" <DrLeathers(at)822heal.com> |
160hp engine
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category26437&item2457533387
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dr. Kevin P. Leathers" <DrLeathers(at)822heal.com> |
Sorry Guys,
I don't know why that happens. I right click on the url and then copy it
then paste it here. Anyway, it's still there. Just type in Lycoming.
Doc
----- Original Message -----
From: "Glenn Brasch" <gbrasch(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List:
>
> Shows up as an invalid item, like last time..
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dr. Kevin P. Leathers" <DrLeathers(at)822heal.com>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List:
>
>
>
> >
> > Ebay has an O320 for sale
> >
> >
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category26437&item2
> 457533387
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dr. Kevin P. Leathers" <DrLeathers(at)822heal.com> |
540 350HP Piper
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category26437&item2458056405
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Gray <dgra1233(at)bigpond.net.au> |
| Subject: | Re: I'm scratching my head? |
IIRC... Usually tapered wings need the washout.
Reynolds number increases with the reduced cord, so pushes the tip
closer to the stall relative to the root. The twist reduces the AoA at
the tip to compensate.
Doug Gray
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Dynon EMI (different scenario) |
Kevin Behrent wrote:
> It would be interesting to study the type of avionics being used by both groups
> and see if there are any similarities.
>
>
> Kevin Behrent
> RV-9A - Wings
> EAA 326, President
Dynon with KX125; EMI present on COM (but not NAV) but has been
suppressed to nearly insignificant level..
Sam Buchanan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Tasker <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? |
I purchased one of these and it is very nice. There is a listing on
ebay (20 pieces available) for $72.50 + 4.95 shipping.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=31482&item=2592755170
I have been using a 3/8 air drill that I had around for years. It is
more powerful, but is much bigger. I wish I had this 1/4" drill when I
started.
Dick Tasker, 90573
finishing up lots of things...
Rob Prior wrote:
>
>Ed Holyoke wrote:
>
>
>>just searched it at 89.99 and it claims 2500 rpm.
>>http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=4027
>>
>>
>
>For what it's worth, I bought one of these through KMS tools in
>Coquitlam, BC (www.kmstools.com), my local Chicago Pneumatic
>distributor. I picked it up on Saturday, for $169 CDN.
>
>As mentioned below, it says 2800rpm on the box. I didn't measure it.
>But it's a *very* sweet drill. Small, comfortable, and the trigger
>teases just wonderfully. I highly recommend it to anyone looking for a
>1/4" palm drill.
>
>Until I saw this one I was considering the $240 US Sioux drill as well,
>which would undoubtably be nice, but it's a heck of a lot more money.
>
>
>
>>I've bought a lot of tools over the years and it seems that I usually
>>end up buying them again if I don't get high quality tools the first
>>time. It's not a good way to save money.
>>
>>
>
>Very true. In this case, however, I would say that the Chicago
>Pneumatic drill is as good in build quality as the Sioux equivalent.
>Mind you, that's only based on a visual comparison of the two.
>
>-Rob
>
>
>
>>
>>Fellow Listers,
>>
>>Chicago Pneumatic #CP-7300 1/4" capacity mini air drill 2800 rpm
>>
>>I have an opportunity to purchase this drill at a nice discount from
>>the "normal" price. I checked the biggest tool sellers, Avery and
>>Cleaveland, and neither of them sell this exact drill. I'm looking
>>for any feedback from someone who uses it. Anyone out there have
>>one? Do you like it? Would you buy it again? I'm building my tool
>>collection and I'm wondering if it would be worth spending roughly
>>$150 more to get the Sioux.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Bell" <rv4bell(at)door.net> |
Hi all you who have painted your RV's,
I am masking off the fuselage and wonder about all those screw holes for the
tail, wing and landing gear fairings. All have plate nuts. I am thinking
about match sticks or something like that. What have you all done? I don't
want any paint on the plate nut threads.
Best regards,
Bruce Bell
Lubbock, Texas
RV4 # 2888
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
> Hi all you who have painted your RV's,
> I am masking off the fuselage and wonder about all those
> screw holes for the tail, wing and landing gear fairings. All
> have plate nuts. I am thinking about match sticks or
> something like that. What have you all done? I don't want any
> paint on the plate nut threads. Best regards, Bruce Bell
> Lubbock, Texas RV4 # 2888
Bruce,
What I found important is to block all holes such as the screw holes or
any other holes. The problem isn't just keeping paint off the threads.
The air from the spray gun tends to jet through the holes, leaving
unusually large amounts of paint around the perimeter of the hole. I'd
just put blue masking tape on the backsides, and not worry about the
paint's affect on the threads. What I described above is a bigger
problem than a little paint in the threads.
A good way might be to get some threaded rod, and cut it into small
lengths. They wouldn't have to be turned in more than a half turn or
so.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 434 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Dynon EMI (different scenario) |
Ok...major update. I feel like a dope now. Did some more testing and I
*do* have plenty of EMI. But it only appears to affect my 2nd radio (SL30).
The effect is on both COM & NAV functionality. Before I go and state things
that aren't true (jeez, I've done enough of that already, sorry), let me
first say that I have not yet flown, and my tests have only been conducted
on the ground.
Here are the on-the-ground results:
- COM1 (GX60) is unaffected, clean.
- COM2 (SL30) is affected slightly...enough to break squelch, otherwise
fine.
- NAV2 (SL30) is heavily affected. With the Dynon off, I can pick up the
local ILS and a VOR 7 miles away. With the Dynon on, the NAV goes flagged
on both freqs and I can't hear the ident anymore.
The ACS2002 screen also seems to play a role in the equation, albeit less
pronounced than the Dynon. It doesn't seem to affect COM much if at all,
but it does affect NAV signal slightly. I spoke with Rob Hickman at
Advanced Control Systems, and he said they have a filter that should fix the
problem.
Anyway, I will keep posting my progress...but please discard my previous "I
have no noise" messages. I was temporarily on the crack. 8-)
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RE: Dynon EMI (different scenario)
> > It would be interesting to study the type of avionics being used by both
> groups
> > and see if there are any similarities.
>
> NO EMI NOISE with:
>
> - EDC-D10 installed at F-707, shielded 3-conductor wire, shield used as
4th
> conductor
> - single point of ground, firewall mounted forest of tabs
> - only devices not grounded at single point: landing lights + pitot heat
> - fuse blocks: battery bus + main bus + e-bus, diode/alternate feed
> - belly Comant COM antenna
> - belly TED xpdr antenna
> - right wing tip Archer VOR antenna
> - right wing tip 40" stripped RG-400 marker antenna
> - left wing tip Archer COM antenna
> - all antennas use RG-400 coax
> - Nulite instrument lighting rings (4x)
> - Odyssey PC-680, firewall mounted
> - contactors firewall mounted, no wire larger than 8AWG in cockpit
> - ACS2002
> - Garmin GMA-340
> - UPSAT GX60
> - UPSAT SL30
> - Garmin GTX-320A
> - Apollo ACU
> - Mid-Continent CDI
> - Mid-Continent turn coordinator
> - shielded headset/mic wires
>
> I'm trying to think if there are any other factors that could, in some
> minute way, contribute to this issue. Anyway, that's my setup for what
it's
> worth.
>
> Oh yeah...mine's a taildragger and it has a tip-up. That MUST be it!!!
Or
> could it be the type of primer I used? 8-) Just kidding.
>
> I'd be curious to see what's different in settings where EMI noise is a
> problem.
>
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Dynon EMI (different scenario) |
How did you change your testing to realize you had EMI issues?
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Checkoway [mailto:dan(at)rvproject.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 7:25 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: RE: Dynon EMI (different scenario)
>
>
>
> Ok...major update. I feel like a dope now. Did some more
> testing and I
> *do* have plenty of EMI. But it only appears to affect my
> 2nd radio (SL30). The effect is on both COM & NAV
> functionality. Before I go and state things that aren't true
> (jeez, I've done enough of that already, sorry), let me first
> say that I have not yet flown, and my tests have only been
> conducted on the ground.
>
> Here are the on-the-ground results:
>
> - COM1 (GX60) is unaffected, clean.
>
> - COM2 (SL30) is affected slightly...enough to break squelch,
> otherwise fine.
>
> - NAV2 (SL30) is heavily affected. With the Dynon off, I can
> pick up the local ILS and a VOR 7 miles away. With the Dynon
> on, the NAV goes flagged on both freqs and I can't hear the
> ident anymore.
>
> The ACS2002 screen also seems to play a role in the equation,
> albeit less pronounced than the Dynon. It doesn't seem to
> affect COM much if at all, but it does affect NAV signal
> slightly. I spoke with Rob Hickman at Advanced Control
> Systems, and he said they have a filter that should fix the problem.
>
> Anyway, I will keep posting my progress...but please discard
> my previous "I have no noise" messages. I was temporarily on
> the crack. 8-)
>
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: RE: Dynon EMI (different scenario)
>
>
> > > It would be interesting to study the type of avionics
> being used by
> > > both
> > groups
> > > and see if there are any similarities.
> >
> > NO EMI NOISE with:
> >
> > - EDC-D10 installed at F-707, shielded 3-conductor wire,
> shield used
> > as
> 4th
> > conductor
> > - single point of ground, firewall mounted forest of tabs
> > - only devices not grounded at single point: landing lights + pitot
> > heat
> > - fuse blocks: battery bus + main bus + e-bus, diode/alternate feed
> > - belly Comant COM antenna
> > - belly TED xpdr antenna
> > - right wing tip Archer VOR antenna
> > - right wing tip 40" stripped RG-400 marker antenna
> > - left wing tip Archer COM antenna
> > - all antennas use RG-400 coax
> > - Nulite instrument lighting rings (4x)
> > - Odyssey PC-680, firewall mounted
> > - contactors firewall mounted, no wire larger than 8AWG in cockpit
> > - ACS2002
> > - Garmin GMA-340
> > - UPSAT GX60
> > - UPSAT SL30
> > - Garmin GTX-320A
> > - Apollo ACU
> > - Mid-Continent CDI
> > - Mid-Continent turn coordinator
> > - shielded headset/mic wires
> >
> > I'm trying to think if there are any other factors that
> could, in some
> > minute way, contribute to this issue. Anyway, that's my setup for
> > what
> it's
> > worth.
> >
> > Oh yeah...mine's a taildragger and it has a tip-up. That MUST be
> > it!!!
> Or
> > could it be the type of primer I used? 8-) Just kidding.
> >
> > I'd be curious to see what's different in settings where
> EMI noise is
> > a problem.
> >
> > )_( Dan
> > RV-7 N714D
> > http://www.rvproject.com
> >
>
>
> ===========
> Matronics Forums.
> ===========
> ===========
> ===========
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kempthornes <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Chicago Pneumatic air drill ?? |
I just got a nice 1/4" CP drill from Kits Tools in Detroit, Michigan -
under $75.
hal
At 11:44 AM 2/2/2004, you wrote:
>
>Ed Holyoke wrote:
> > just searched it at 89.99 and it claims 2500 rpm.
> > http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=4027
>
>For what it's worth, I bought one of these through KMS tools in
>Coquitlam, BC (www.kmstools.com), my local Chicago Pneumatic
>distributor. I picked it up on Saturday, for $169 CDN.
>
>As mentioned below, it says 2800rpm on the box. I didn't measure it.
>But it's a *very* sweet drill. Small, comfortable, and the trigger
>teases just wonderfully. I highly recommend it to anyone looking for a
>1/4" palm drill.
>
>Until I saw this one I was considering the $240 US Sioux drill as well,
>which would undoubtably be nice, but it's a heck of a lot more money.
>
> > I've bought a lot of tools over the years and it seems that I usually
> > end up buying them again if I don't get high quality tools the first
> > time. It's not a good way to save money.
>
>Very true. In this case, however, I would say that the Chicago
>Pneumatic drill is as good in build quality as the Sioux equivalent.
>Mind you, that's only based on a visual comparison of the two.
>
>-Rob
>
> >
> > Fellow Listers,
> >
> > Chicago Pneumatic #CP-7300 1/4" capacity mini air drill 2800 rpm
> >
> > I have an opportunity to purchase this drill at a nice discount from
> > the "normal" price. I checked the biggest tool sellers, Avery and
> > Cleaveland, and neither of them sell this exact drill. I'm looking
> > for any feedback from someone who uses it. Anyone out there have
> > one? Do you like it? Would you buy it again? I'm building my tool
> > collection and I'm wondering if it would be worth spending roughly
> > $150 more to get the Sioux.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
> Hi all you who have painted your RV's,
> I am masking off the fuselage and wonder about all those screw holes for
the
> tail, wing and landing gear fairings. All have plate nuts. I am thinking
> about match sticks or something like that. What have you all done? I don't
> want any paint on the plate nut threads.
> Best regards,
> Bruce Bell
> Lubbock, Texas
> RV4 # 2888
Small lengths of pipe cleaner stuck in each hole did the trick for me.
Randy Lervold
Vancouver, WA
RV-8 #80500
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Dynon EMI (different scenario) |
This interesting thread on the RV-list probaly has a place on the
Aeroelectric list, also, in case some players aren't monitoring both.
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Behrent" <kbehrent(at)cascadiasoftware.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RE: Dynon EMI (different scenario)
>
> "Paul Boyce, Ph.D." wrote:
>
<matronicspost@csg-i.com>
> >
> > There's a couple of very disappointing things about this situation:
> >
> > 1) in a total electric failure emergency, my backup handheld radio will
most
> > likely be rendered useless.
> >
> > 2) in an otherwise excellent product, those engineering folks at Dynon
have
> > completely dropped the ball in not doing thorough Quality Control checks
on
> > EMI. Isn't it obvious that in a highly electrified environment such as
an
> > airplane cockpit, one MUST check for EMI? Is that too much to ask?
> >
> > I will be giving them a call tomorrow.
> >
> > Paul
> >
>
> One possible reason why some people are having "noticeable" EMI
interference
> and others don't is the quaility and vintage of radio(s) that they have
> installed.
>
> I say this because I have experienced this when I had a complete panel
upgrade
> on my Mooney where a complete Garmin stack was put in, but I retained my
old,
> trusty, Narco Mark 12D+/DME. The GNS430 and the Narco constantly
interfered with
> each other and both units were sent back to the respective factory on
multiple
> occassions. What was finally determined, by both manufactures, was noise
> filtering capability on both units. The 430 does a pretty good in pre/post
> filtering so that the large LCD panel would not interfere with "newer"
avionics.
> The Narco, on the other hand, has little pre filtering, thus is very
reactive to
> the lcd screen. It also emits it's own share of emi that the 430 tries to
> handle, but fails when conditions are right. The solution, however
exceptable
> but not perfect, was shielding everything, and doing some rework on the
radio
> trays to help shield.
>
> The lesson I learned was not to mix new new with old. For what it cost to
> minimize the problem, I could have purchased a second 430.
>
> We had the President of Dynon speak at our January EAA monthly meeting and
I can
> say that he and his engineers are very bright people and they will find a
way to
> reduce or eliminate the problem. On the other hand, LCD screens will
always
> emit a certain level of radiation that older generation of radios do not
> filter. As glass panels evolve, so does radio filtering. However, don't
expect
> that your radio(s) are properly filtered to guard againt these emissions.
>
> It would be interesting to study the type of avionics being used by both
groups
> and see if there are any similarities.
>
>
> Kevin Behrent
> RV-9A - Wings
> EAA 326, President
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Karie Daniel" <karie4(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | RV7 for Flight Simulator |
First of all, I am in no way associated with Flight Factory Simulations! I'm just
a fan of MS Flight Simulator. The link below is to a company who has just released
an RV-7 for MS Flight Simulator. The cost for the aircraft is $19.00 bucks.
The RV-7 comes equipped with a tip-up canopy, 200hp engine and it's a tail
dragger. The flight dynamics are fairly realistic and it has a downloadable
POH that is included in the price.
If you like simulations for practicing approaches, maneuvers or whatever then why
not have an RV-7? I spent some time with it and it's was a kick to show my
family what my airplane will look like........some day.
http://www.flightfactory-simulations.com/
Karie Daniel
Sammamish, WA
RV-7A QB in progress
________________________________________________________________________________
, ,
"John Barker" , "Gary Sobek"
| Subject: | The groundloop from hell |
Guys,
Many of you have seen the notice of an "incident" on Saturday 1/31 in
Vancouver, WA on the FAA web site involving N558RL. And many of you have
sent messages of query and/or condolence to me. I am truly touched, I
genuinely appreciate the concern, thanks so much. Here's the notice in case
you're interested...
http://www1.faa.gov/avr/aai/M_0202_N.txt
Now, what happened? This is a story you won't believe. As most of you know I
had put the plane up for sale. I had immediate interest and had buyers
wanting to send me deposits without seeing the plane in person. I refused
the deposits but made arrangements for the first party who contacted me to
come up this past weekend from Florida and asked the other guys to call back
after Saturday. He flew up on Friday evening. Saturday we spent the day
flying around, or should I say scud running, to local airports in the nasty
NW weather. He turned out to be really good guy, absolutely loved the plane,
and had decided to buy it. We were heading back to Pearson to sit down with
the purchase contract my attorney had drawn up and exchange the check
($100k).
I monitored the ASOS for Pearson as we proceeded inbound which indicated a
10 knot wind 90 degrees to the runway. Upon rolling out on final I could
tell the wind was stronger than that and was gusting. I made an approach at
85 mph, +5 mph from my normal two-up speed and proceeded in. I was flighting
the gusts all the way down and with the extra speed just wasn't comfortable
with the way it was settling, or not settling, down on the runway so I
gassed it and went around. On the next approach I went back down to 80 mph,
my normal two-up speed, hoping to avoid the prolonged float, and made a
solid approach. I held variable right stick and left rudder down through the
flare and got it on the ground solidly and dead straight -- it was done
flying. Still holding full right stick and a bit of left rudder, we were
rolling out straight down the runway -- thought I had nailed it. At
approximately 30 mph groundspeed (later corroborated by my backseater, a
2,000 hour jet-rated pilot and sailboat racer) a gust hit from the right and
the tail started moving left. Full left rudder just wouldn't correct, we
were going too slowly, and by the time I thought about jabbing the throttle
for some additional rudder authority we were almost 90 degrees and sliding
sideways. The pavement was wet and we were sliding -- I was thinking to
myself "sh**, this will damage my wheelpants and I'm gonna have to replace
'em before I can sell it". Then the left (lead) wheel started hopping, dug
into the pavement, pogoed the plane up a bit and collapsed down on the left
wing just as we moved off the pavement onto the grass. As I watched the wing
go down I could see it wrinkle and thought "ok, that wing won't be flying
any more". I was aware of exactly what was happening every nanosecond and
could feel everything. Still, I just couldn't believe it. It was so slow and
benign feeling that I couldn't believe the gear collapsed. We were jostled
around less than light turbulence while flying. After coming to a stop I
just started shutting the ship down normally in checklist sequence. There
was no tension or urgency at all. I smelled no fuel but my backseater said
"hey, we better get outa here. I pulled the canopy back and let him exit
while I finished my shut down and closed the fuel valve -- no fuel smell
though. I exited normally and said to him "now EXACTLY what just happened?".
Well, you know what happened, but I wanted his analysis of the situation to
immediately learn what I had done wrong. He agreed that I had flown a
beautiful approach, flare, and landing, but we simply got hit with a large
gust at precisely the wrong time. Could some combination of rudder, brake,
and throttle have saved it if I was a better pilot? I truly don't know. Here
is the FAA weather metars listed in the above referenced report... WEATHER:
VUOA505 2153Z 17010G17KT 10SM -RA OVC030 7/3 A2993. I landed runway 08, so
the "17010G17KT" had the wind direction at exactly 90 degrees with the wind
at 10 gusting to 17. Hmm, could a 17 knot gust do that? Felt like more than
that to me and my pax both.
The left wing had significant wrinkling in it while it was laying on it,
presumably from dropping down it after the gear folded under. After we
propped it up some of it went away but there's no way I'm flying that wing
again. The wing tip and aileron are crunched, the left landing gear
completely ripped clean by ripping the close tolerance mounting bolts in
tension, quite a sight. Nothing FWF touched the ground. We managed to get
the plane onto a crude trailer and back into my hangar without damaging it
further and prop the left side up on wing jacks (glad I had those!).
Just as we're getting it into the hangar my cell phone starts ringing and I
make the mistake of answering it... it's the FAA wanting to know what
happened. Great. So I proceeded to give them all the info. They asked me to
put all this in a statement and fax it to them, "Monday will be fine". At
this point we had it back home and stabilized in the hangar and I just
wanted to get away from the whole thing and think about it. The prospective
buyer, Peter, and my wife and I went out to dinner than night but I just
felt awful and wanted to crawl up in fetal position in the corner -- two
glasses of wine didn't help. Sunday wasn't much better but I forced myself
to do the FAA statement anyway. Today I had to work and am feeling a bit
better and have already spoken with both the insurance agent and adjuster. I
really don't know what my options are at this point but will spend the next
week or so with inspections and adjusters getting it sorted out. I'll try to
post something once I know what the final scenario is. Oh, he didn't buy the
plane. ;-)
I need to inspect it further to accurately assess the damage both for myself
and for the insurance company. I'll probably have someone from Van's do this
and then attempt to settle up with the insurance company. I do have full
coverage insurance with $80k hull coverage. Hmm, less than market value but
certainly better than nothing.
Guys, be careful out there!!
Randy Lervold
RV-8, 367 hours and not flying any more for awhile.
ps. here are a couple of pics of the ugliness...
http://www.rv-8.com/Pictures/DSCN0007med.jpg
http://www.rv-8.com/Pictures/DSCN0011.JPG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | r miller <robertpmiller(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | scratching my head |
Hi Robert,
=A0
I tried posting this on the rv-list, but I had only been a lurker and
wasn't signed up yet.=A0 Even after signing up and getting confirmation
that I was approved, it still got kicked back.=A0=A0I hope this answers
your question.=A0 If you think it is worthy, please post this for me.=A0
Thanks, Eric U
=A0
I vaguely remembered from my undergrad aircraft design class that
different wing planforms have different stall characteristics.=A0 I also
vaguely remembered that the rectangular, no-taper wing had the best
stall characteristics, as they stalled from the root outward.=A0 This is
one of the reasons that Vans doesn't have washout in their wing
designs=A0(not necessary).=A0 It isn't as efficient as tapered=A0or
elliptical=A0wings, but there are other positives, like stall and ease of
manufacturing.=A0 I found the attached website when searching for the
"proof" of my old memories:
http://www.faatest.com/books/FLT/Chapter17/WingPlanform.htm.=A0 Read
the=A0second to last=A0paragraph in particular, while also noting the nice
pictures.
=A0
Hope this helps,
Eric=A0U
RV-9 emp=A0
=A0
=A0
Eric Uptagrafft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 2/2/2004 1:46:43 PM Pacific Standard Time,
rv4bell(at)door.net writes:
I don't
want any paint on the plate nut threads.
I give up...Why not?
GV (RV-6A N1GV flying 675 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
Folks,
after setting the alignment in well over 1000 cars and a few to many
airplanes to factory specs I can assure you that a slight toe-in is more
stable than slight toe-out if there is any flex in the suspension system
along the lateral axis, ie wheel can track flexing inboard or outboard.
The toe out causes the wheel to want to track, and flex outwards until you
turn enough to side load the wheel inward, it then shifts suddenly to a new
track and tracks inwards quickly shifting the flex inboard from outboard,
then it gets stiff quickly and may rebound outwards if the turning load is
not great. This is a negatively static and negatively dynamic situation
which can quickly result in an overloaded condition in one oscillation.
In a three wheeled vehicle toe should be neutral to very slightly toe-in,
say 1/8 deg. In fact the only reason you want any toe in is to be sure you
don't have a slight toe out. Severe toe out is better than slight toe out as
it then takes a very sharp turn to get the wheel to shift track to an
inboard flexing load.
I would suspect that if folks are experiencing more stability with
additional toe out then they are actually going from a slight toe out to a
significant toe out, rather then from straight or toe in to toe out.
Also, steering inclination and castor greatly effect this. As the vehicle
turns the weight shifts to the outside wheel. This causes that side to
compress some, so it depends on how compression effects SI and castor and if
compression also causes a shift from toe in to toe out or vice-a-versa.
Different landing gear will have different effects so without seeing this
and studying it I can't speak to other systems.
The RV will flex back and slightly outwards as it compresses in the turn.
This shifts the outboard gear towards toe-in, so if it is already at toe-out
then the compression and the side loading will really force it to toe-in,
and its the shift that causes the wheel track to quickly divert. But the
force on the gear will translate into a lag in side loading as it shifts
then a sudden rapid increase in sideloading inwards to the center of the
turn thereby exacerbating the tendancy to ground loop.
Not sure if that makes sense to anybody as I've described it, but I can tell
you that most manufacturers shoot for toe in or straight rather than toe
out.
W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
While assisting a fellow builder with drilling the gear into place on his
RV8 this same discussion arose. After some amount of chatter back and forth
and much head scratching we all decided that straight ahead (zero toe-in
toe-out) would likely be the best choice. At that point we agreed that a
call to Van's was in order.
The call was placed and the word from RV Mecca was to set the alignment
straight ahead with a preference to err toward very slight toe-in.
Thanks Wheeler,
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wheeler North" <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us>
Subject: RV-List: Toe-in
>
> Folks,
>
> after setting the alignment in well over 1000 cars and a few to many
> airplanes to factory specs I can assure you that a slight toe-in is more
> stable than slight toe-out if there is any flex in the suspension system
> along the lateral axis, ie wheel can track flexing inboard or outboard.
> SNIP <
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: Dynon EMI (different scenario) |
| From: | "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart(at)iss.net> |
QXMgSSBzdGF0ZWQgaW4gYSBwcmV2aW91cyBwb3N0LiBJbiA1IGluc3RhbGxhdGlvbnMgSSBoYXZl
IHBlcnNvbmFsbHkgYmVlbiBpbnZvbHZlZCB3aXRoLiAzIGhhZCBjb21wbGV0ZWx5IHVuYWNjZXB0
YWJsZSBsZXZlbHMsIDIgd2VyZSBzbWFsbCwgYnV0IG5vdCBpbnNpZ25pZmljYW50Lg0KMSBzZW50
IGhpcyBiYWNrIGZvciBhIHJlZnVuZCwgdGhlIG90aGVyIDQgd2VyZSBhYmxlIHRvIHJlYWNoIGEg
bGV2ZWwgdGhhdCB3YXMgYXQgbGVhc3QgYmFyZWFibGUsIGJ1dCBzdGlsbCBhbm95aW5nLg0KIA0K
VGhlcmUgYXJlIHRob3NlIHRoYXQgaGF2ZSBpdCwgYW5kIHRob3NlIHRoYXQgZG9udCBrbm93IHRo
ZXkgaGF2ZSBpdCB1bnRpbGwgdGhleSBsaXN0ZW4gZm9yIGl0Lg0KIA0KSW4gTVkgZXhwZXJpbmVj
ZSwgaXQgaXMgbm90IGp1c3QgYSBmZXcgd2l0aCB0aGUgcHJvYmxlbS4gSXQgaGFzIGJlZW4gYWxs
IG9mIGVtLiANCiANCkZvciB0aGUgZ2VudCB3aXRoIHRoZSBvbGQgcmFkaW8gY29tbWVudCwgd2Ug
aGF2ZSBub3QgYmVlbiBhYmxlIHRvIGNvbmZpcm0geW91ciBzdGF0ZW1lbnQuIDIgd2VyZSBicmVh
a2luZyA0MzAgY29tIHNxdWVsY2guIA0KIA0KTWlrZQ0KZG8gbm90IGFyY2hpdmUgc2luY2UgSSBo
YXZlIGJlZW4gb3ZlciB0aGlzIGFscmVhZHkNCiANCiANCiANCg0KCS0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVz
c2FnZS0tLS0tIA0KCUZyb206IG93bmVyLXJ2LWxpc3Qtc2VydmVyQG1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20gb24g
YmVoYWxmIG9mIFNhbSBCdWNoYW5hbiANCglTZW50OiBNb24gMi8yLzIwMDQgMzozOCBQTSANCglU
bzogcnYtbGlzdEBtYXRyb25pY3MuY29tIA0KCUNjOiANCglTdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogUlYtTGlzdDog
UkU6IER5bm9uIEVNSSAoZGlmZmVyZW50IHNjZW5hcmlvKQ0KCQ0KCQ0KDQoJLS0+IFJWLUxpc3Qg
bWVzc2FnZSBwb3N0ZWQgYnk6IFNhbSBCdWNoYW5hbiA8c2J1Y0BoaXdhYXkubmV0Pg0KCQ0KCUtl
dmluIEJlaHJlbnQgd3JvdGU6DQoJPHNuaXA+DQoJPiBJdCB3b3VsZCBiZSBpbnRlcmVzdGluZyB0
byBzdHVkeSB0aGUgdHlwZSBvZiBhdmlvbmljcyBiZWluZyB1c2VkIGJ5IGJvdGggZ3JvdXBzDQoJ
PiBhbmQgc2VlIGlmIHRoZXJlIGFyZSBhbnkgc2ltaWxhcml0aWVzLg0KCT4NCgk+DQoJPiBLZXZp
biBCZWhyZW50DQoJPiBSVi05QSAtIFdpbmdzDQoJPiBFQUEgMzI2LCBQcmVzaWRlbnQNCgkNCgkN
CglEeW5vbiB3aXRoIEtYMTI1OyBFTUkgcHJlc2VudCBvbiBDT00gKGJ1dCBub3QgTkFWKSBidXQg
aGFzIGJlZW4NCglzdXBwcmVzc2VkIHRvIG5lYXJseSBpbnNpZ25pZmljYW50IGxldmVsLi4NCgkN
CglTYW0gQnVjaGFuYW4NCgkNCgkNCglfLT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09
PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQ0KCV8tPSAgICAgICAgICAg
ICAgLSBUaGUgUlYtTGlzdCBFbWFpbCBGb3J1bSAtDQoJXy09IFRoaXMgZm9ydW0gaXMgc3BvbnNv
cmVkIGVudGlyZWx5IHRocm91Z2ggdGhlIENvbnRyaWJ1dGlvbnMNCglfLT0gb2YgTGlzdCBtZW1i
ZXJzLiAgWW91J2xsIG5ldmVyIHNlZSBiYW5uZXIgYWRzIG9yIGFueSBvdGhlcg0KCV8tPSBmb3Jt
IG9mIGRpcmVjdCBhZHZlcnRpc2luZyBvbiB0aGUgTWF0cm9uaWNzIEZvcnVtcy4NCglfLT09PT09
PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09
PT09PT09PT09PQ0KCV8tPSAhISBORVcgISENCglfLT0gQUxMIE5FVyBMSVNUIENIQVQhISBodHRw
Oi8vd3d3Lm1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20vY2hhdA0KCV8tPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09
PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09DQoJXy09IExpc3Qg
UmVsYXRlZCBJbmZvcm1hdGlvbg0KCV8tPSAgUG9zdCBNZXNzYWdlOiAgIHJ2LWxpc3RAbWF0cm9u
aWNzLmNvbQ0KCV8tPSAgVU4vU1VCU0NSSUJFOiAgIGh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9z
dWJzY3JpcHRpb24NCglfLT0gIExpc3QgRkFROiAgICAgICBodHRwOi8vd3d3Lm1hdHJvbmljcy5j
b20vRkFRL1JWLUxpc3QuaHRtDQoJXy09ICBTZWFyY2ggRW5naW5lOiAgaHR0cDovL3d3dy5tYXRy
b25pY3MuY29tL3NlYXJjaA0KCV8tPSAgNy1EYXkgQnJvd3NlOiAgIGh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0cm9u
aWNzLmNvbS9icm93c2UvcnYtbGlzdA0KCV8tPSAgQnJvd3NlIERpZ2VzdHM6IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cu
bWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9kaWdlc3QvcnYtbGlzdA0KCV8tPSAgTGl2ZSBMaXN0IENoYXQ6IGh0dHA6
Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9jaGF0DQoJXy09ICBBcmNoaXZlczogICAgICAgaHR0cDovL3d3
dy5tYXRyb25pY3MuY29tL2FyY2hpdmVzDQoJXy09ICBQaG90byBTaGFyZTogICAgaHR0cDovL3d3
dy5tYXRyb25pY3MuY29tL3Bob3Rvc2hhcmUNCglfLT0gIExpc3QgU3BlY2lmaWM6ICBodHRwOi8v
d3d3Lm1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20vcnYtbGlzdA0KCV8tPSAgT3RoZXIgTGlzdHM6ICAgIGh0dHA6Ly93
d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9lbWFpbGxpc3RzDQoJXy09ICBUcm91YmxlIFJlcG9ydCAgaHR0cDov
L3d3dy5tYXRyb25pY3MuY29tL3Ryb3VibGUtcmVwb3J0DQoJXy09ICBDb250cmlidXRpb25zOiAg
aHR0cDovL3d3dy5tYXRyb25pY3MuY29tL2NvbnRyaWJ1dGlvbg0KCV8tPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09
PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09
DQoJDQoJDQoJDQoJDQoJDQoNCg=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Glasgow" <willfly(at)carolina.rr.com> |
I used old screws to fill the holes before I painted.
Steve Glasgow
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RVEIGHTA(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: .........and another |
Mark, way to go man! Another TN RV flyin' and with a 3 blade Catto, no less.
Walt Shipley
Chuckey, TN RV-8A (3 blade catto)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Possible New Virus Email Scheme |
FYI -
I just received an email that looked like an ebay correspondence. I clicked
on the link and my anti virus software grabbed something.
Should have known since it had "question for seller" listed in the text
describing some toy and I'm not selling anything either. Even though it had
"ebay" in the url, somehow they were attaching a virus I'm guessing.
Anyone know differently? Ever seen this kind of thing before?
Bryan Jones -8
www.LoneStarSquadron.com
Houston, Texas
Check out the coupons and bargains on MSN Offers!
http://shopping.msn.com/softcontent/softcontent.aspx?scmId=1418
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Danielson" <johnd(at)wlcwyo.com> |
| Subject: | The groundloop from hell |
Hi Randy,
My condolences. Luckily I haven't had your experience. I fly out of
Casper Wy., and I would say we average 20 mph winds, with gusts to 30.
Definitely keeps you on your toes.
Good luck with the FAA and insurance company
Regards
John L. Danielson
307-266-2524
johnd(at)wlcwyo.com
WLC, Inc.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Dynon altitude encoder |
| From: | James Gray <n747jg(at)earthlink.net> |
Dynon users,
Can anyone offer advice on using the Dynon altitude encoder. Do I need
to buy an encoder to hook up to my transponder or is the internal encoder in
the Dynon satisfactory?
Jim Gray
N747JG - getting close to wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "C. Rabaut" <crabaut(at)coalinga.com> |
| Subject: | Re: The groundloop from hell |
Randy,
What can we say Bro? I wish ya' the best, but I've played with
Insurance folks before and it ain't pretty. Take care, you WILL get through
this !
Chuck
----- Original Message -----
From: Randy Lervold <randy@rv-8.com>
; ; ; John
Barker ; Gary Sobek
Subject: RV-List: The groundloop from hell
>
> Guys,
>
> Many of you have seen the notice of an "incident" on Saturday 1/31 in
> Vancouver, WA on the FAA web site involving N558RL. And many of you have
> sent messages of query and/or condolence to me. I am truly touched, I
> genuinely appreciate the concern, thanks so much. Here's the notice in
case
> you're interested...
>
> http://www1.faa.gov/avr/aai/M_0202_N.txt
>
> Now, what happened? This is a story you won't believe. As most of you know
I
> had put the plane up for sale. I had immediate interest and had buyers
> wanting to send me deposits without seeing the plane in person. I refused
> the deposits but made arrangements for the first party who contacted me to
> come up this past weekend from Florida and asked the other guys to call
back
> after Saturday. He flew up on Friday evening. Saturday we spent the day
> flying around, or should I say scud running, to local airports in the
nasty
> NW weather. He turned out to be really good guy, absolutely loved the
plane,
> and had decided to buy it. We were heading back to Pearson to sit down
with
> the purchase contract my attorney had drawn up and exchange the check
> ($100k).
>
> I monitored the ASOS for Pearson as we proceeded inbound which indicated a
> 10 knot wind 90 degrees to the runway. Upon rolling out on final I could
> tell the wind was stronger than that and was gusting. I made an approach
at
> 85 mph, +5 mph from my normal two-up speed and proceeded in. I was
flighting
> the gusts all the way down and with the extra speed just wasn't
comfortable
> with the way it was settling, or not settling, down on the runway so I
> gassed it and went around. On the next approach I went back down to 80
mph,
> my normal two-up speed, hoping to avoid the prolonged float, and made a
> solid approach. I held variable right stick and left rudder down through
the
> flare and got it on the ground solidly and dead straight -- it was done
> flying. Still holding full right stick and a bit of left rudder, we were
> rolling out straight down the runway -- thought I had nailed it. At
> approximately 30 mph groundspeed (later corroborated by my backseater, a
> 2,000 hour jet-rated pilot and sailboat racer) a gust hit from the right
and
> the tail started moving left. Full left rudder just wouldn't correct, we
> were going too slowly, and by the time I thought about jabbing the
throttle
> for some additional rudder authority we were almost 90 degrees and sliding
> sideways. The pavement was wet and we were sliding -- I was thinking to
> myself "sh**, this will damage my wheelpants and I'm gonna have to replace
> 'em before I can sell it". Then the left (lead) wheel started hopping, dug
> into the pavement, pogoed the plane up a bit and collapsed down on the
left
> wing just as we moved off the pavement onto the grass. As I watched the
wing
> go down I could see it wrinkle and thought "ok, that wing won't be flying
> any more". I was aware of exactly what was happening every nanosecond and
> could feel everything. Still, I just couldn't believe it. It was so slow
and
> benign feeling that I couldn't believe the gear collapsed. We were jostled
> around less than light turbulence while flying. After coming to a stop I
> just started shutting the ship down normally in checklist sequence. There
> was no tension or urgency at all. I smelled no fuel but my backseater said
> "hey, we better get outa here. I pulled the canopy back and let him exit
> while I finished my shut down and closed the fuel valve -- no fuel smell
> though. I exited normally and said to him "now EXACTLY what just
happened?".
> Well, you know what happened, but I wanted his analysis of the situation
to
> immediately learn what I had done wrong. He agreed that I had flown a
> beautiful approach, flare, and landing, but we simply got hit with a large
> gust at precisely the wrong time. Could some combination of rudder, brake,
> and throttle have saved it if I was a better pilot? I truly don't know.
Here
> is the FAA weather metars listed in the above referenced report...
WEATHER:
> VUOA505 2153Z 17010G17KT 10SM -RA OVC030 7/3 A2993. I landed runway 08,
so
> the "17010G17KT" had the wind direction at exactly 90 degrees with the
wind
> at 10 gusting to 17. Hmm, could a 17 knot gust do that? Felt like more
than
> that to me and my pax both.
>
> The left wing had significant wrinkling in it while it was laying on it,
> presumably from dropping down it after the gear folded under. After we
> propped it up some of it went away but there's no way I'm flying that wing
> again. The wing tip and aileron are crunched, the left landing gear
> completely ripped clean by ripping the close tolerance mounting bolts in
> tension, quite a sight. Nothing FWF touched the ground. We managed to get
> the plane onto a crude trailer and back into my hangar without damaging it
> further and prop the left side up on wing jacks (glad I had those!).
>
> Just as we're getting it into the hangar my cell phone starts ringing and
I
> make the mistake of answering it... it's the FAA wanting to know what
> happened. Great. So I proceeded to give them all the info. They asked me
to
> put all this in a statement and fax it to them, "Monday will be fine". At
> this point we had it back home and stabilized in the hangar and I just
> wanted to get away from the whole thing and think about it. The
prospective
> buyer, Peter, and my wife and I went out to dinner than night but I just
> felt awful and wanted to crawl up in fetal position in the corner -- two
> glasses of wine didn't help. Sunday wasn't much better but I forced myself
> to do the FAA statement anyway. Today I had to work and am feeling a bit
> better and have already spoken with both the insurance agent and adjuster.
I
> really don't know what my options are at this point but will spend the
next
> week or so with inspections and adjusters getting it sorted out. I'll try
to
> post something once I know what the final scenario is. Oh, he didn't buy
the
> plane. ;-)
>
> I need to inspect it further to accurately assess the damage both for
myself
> and for the insurance company. I'll probably have someone from Van's do
this
> and then attempt to settle up with the insurance company. I do have full
> coverage insurance with $80k hull coverage. Hmm, less than market value
but
> certainly better than nothing.
>
> Guys, be careful out there!!
>
> Randy Lervold
> RV-8, 367 hours and not flying any more for awhile.
>
> ps. here are a couple of pics of the ugliness...
> http://www.rv-8.com/Pictures/DSCN0007med.jpg
> http://www.rv-8.com/Pictures/DSCN0011.JPG
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dynon altitude encoder |
Hi Jim,
The Dynon internal encoder is all you need to feed your transponder.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Gray" <n747jg(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RV-List: Dynon altitude encoder
>
> Dynon users,
>
> Can anyone offer advice on using the Dynon altitude encoder. Do I
need
> to buy an encoder to hook up to my transponder or is the internal encoder
in
> the Dynon satisfactory?
>
> Jim Gray
> N747JG - getting close to wiring
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Noel & Yoshie Simmons" <noel(at)blueskyaviation.net> |
| Subject: | Dynon altitude encoder |
Jim,
I have installed several and really like this feature. Very precise with no
calibrating necessary like other blind encoders.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of James Gray
Subject: RV-List: Dynon altitude encoder
Dynon users,
Can anyone offer advice on using the Dynon altitude encoder. Do I need
to buy an encoder to hook up to my transponder or is the internal encoder in
the Dynon satisfactory?
Jim Gray
N747JG - getting close to wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: Possible New Virus Email Scheme |
Hi,
There are dozens of scams out there like this. The common
term for this is "phishing".
Basic advice, *never* trust any link sent via E-mail
from E-bay, Amazon, Mastercard, VISA, your bank, the
government, or just about anyone that might ask you
for any personal or financial information. Go to
their web site directly, by typing in the URL in your
browser, not via the link in the E-mail. The link
may look legit, but there are simple tricks they use
to hide the true address.
This is a serious problem, and these crooks will clean
you out quicker than you can squeeze a pop rivet.
For more info, here is a site you can visit:
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/alerts/phishingalrt.htm
Mickey
>I just received an email that looked like an ebay correspondence. I clicked
>on the link and my anti virus software grabbed something.
>
>Should have known since it had "question for seller" listed in the text
>describing some toy and I'm not selling anything either. Even though it had
>"ebay" in the url, somehow they were attaching a virus I'm guessing.
>
>Anyone know differently? Ever seen this kind of thing before?
>
>Bryan Jones -8
>www.LoneStarSquadron.com
>Houston, Texas
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 Wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham(at)hotmail.com> |
Bruce,
Toothpicks and rolled up Scott paper towel pieces worked well for us.
Chuck & Dave Rowbotham
RV-8A
>From: "Bruce Bell" <rv4bell(at)door.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: "rv-list"
>Subject: RV-List: Paint help?
>Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 15:41:42 -0600
>
>
>Hi all you who have painted your RV's,
>I am masking off the fuselage and wonder about all those screw holes for
>the
>tail, wing and landing gear fairings. All have plate nuts. I am thinking
>about match sticks or something like that. What have you all done? I don't
>want any paint on the plate nut threads.
>Best regards,
>Bruce Bell
>Lubbock, Texas
>RV4 # 2888
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Fw: AeroElectric-List: Dynon EMI (different scenario) |
Hope people don't mind if I cross-pollinate lists on this topic. Hopefully
AeroElectric Bob will come up with something slick.
)_( Dan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Dynon EMI (different scenario)
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
>
> Hmmm, funny this should pop up right now in the OBAM aircraft
> community . . . Just yesterday, I was invited to work a project
> involving players I won't name but suffice it to say that there
> are some aspects of the current crop of flat panel displays that
> are needing closer examination.
>
> In some cases, the antagonist flight instrument does meed
> DO-160 emissions requirements but the frequencies of interest
> are so stable and coherent as to offer some problems (albeit
> small ones) to radio receivers on the airplane. Other aspects
> of radiation discovered exceed DO-160 requirements and are
> broad band noises that degrade performance of other systems.
>
> Be advised that this problem is not unique to the low-dollar
> players. If I learn something of this situation that can be
> shared in terms of the simple-ideas, I'll share it with the
> List.
>
> With respect to the anecdotes cited below: The builder might
> get acceptable if not completely quiet performance from the
> hand-held by connecting it to an external antenna remote as
> practical from the cockpit.
>
> It's true that older radios were NOT explored for their
> vulnerabilities to broad band noises typical of microprocessor
> based electronics. If you have one of those battery powered
> short wave receivers, try exploring the environment around
> your desktop or laptop computer over the short wave frequencies.
> This is why computers have the sticker on them that states
> while they're qualified under FCC Part 15 rules for total
> emissions, they MIGHT still interfere with other radio
> based systems. In these cases, it is incumbent upon the
> operator of the antagonist to modify the situation to
> favor the victim.
>
> It's unfortunate that many developmental tasks are not
> fully understood until AFTER a product hits the marketplace.
> The designers and testers cannot anticipate EVERY installation
> variable. It's seldom reflects on the ability or integrity
> of the designers, only in the discovery of NEW questions
> not asked and answered before the product hit the field.
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Friedman" <frankzip(at)charter.net> |
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
| Subject: | RV8 Tail Kit for sale |
Changed projects so RV 8 tail kit for sale. Very little work done. This is a pre
punched kit, however it was before the 4130 parts were powder coated. All 4130
parts were primered.
Included are preview plans, electric trim kit, 18 years of the RVaitor, Avery temporary
assembly pins, 2 construction videos. Vertical stabilizer tip is for
a rear position light. Cost for all of this now would be about $1775.
Buy it now for $1200. plus shipping before I put it on ebay. Bonus, free delivery
within 100 miles of Oshkosh.
Yep guys,I'm in OSH, 8-10 minutes to the airport, the downside, Jan temps, 17 days
below normal and 4-5 inches of snow last night.
Frank at 920-237-3536 or frankzip(at)charter.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Guys, there's another aspect you need to be considering in analyzing gear
leg geometry that I finally have some data on. When building the -8 you set
the gear legs to zero toe with the fuse level by seeing that the axle mounts
are parallel. This translates to the airplane going down the runway with
tail way up in level flight attitude. How often are you in that
configuration? I've noticed that my RV-8 would seem squirlier during the
high-speed part of the rollout once the tail went down and hypothesized that
the toe was changing in one direction or the other as the plane changed
attitude. I intuitively guessed that it was going to a toe-out condition and
that was what was causing it and thought shimming it would be a good
experiment.
I finally got a chance to take some measurements on my pal's -8 who doesn't
have his wheel pants on yet. We set the tail up longerons level, put two
five foot straight edges up against the outside of the wheel, leveled them,
and measured the distance between the front and rear tips. In this condition
the distance matched (good job installing the gear legs Jeff!), as they
should. We then lowered the tail to the ground, re-leveled the straight
edges and measured again. We found the distance between the straight edges
to be wider in the rear by 3/16". Another pal did the trig on it and
computed that to be .18 degrees of toe-in. So my guess that the toe was
changing in the three point attitude was correct but I guessed the wrong
direction. Now, is two tenths of a degree enough to make any difference?
Draw your own conclusions, but my sense is that it is not.
FWIW,
Randy Lervold
RV-8, 367 hours
EAA Technical Counselor
www.rv-8.com
>
> While assisting a fellow builder with drilling the gear into place on his
> RV8 this same discussion arose. After some amount of chatter back and
forth
> and much head scratching we all decided that straight ahead (zero toe-in
> toe-out) would likely be the best choice. At that point we agreed that a
> call to Van's was in order.
> The call was placed and the word from RV Mecca was to set the alignment
> straight ahead with a preference to err toward very slight toe-in.
>
> Thanks Wheeler,
>
> Jim in Kelowna
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Wheeler North" <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Toe-in
>
>
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > after setting the alignment in well over 1000 cars and a few to many
> > airplanes to factory specs I can assure you that a slight toe-in is more
> > stable than slight toe-out if there is any flex in the suspension system
> > along the lateral axis, ie wheel can track flexing inboard or outboard.
> > SNIP <
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RiteAngle3(at)aol.com |
EMI / RF Electronic problems
I have several hundred AOA systems out in the field, during one FAA
certification a company spent 3 months trying to convince me that my system was
in
error, finally it was found that there was an RF leak (very strong) coming from
a
certified electronic instrument, which affected our system, We moved our
logic module to other side of aircraft and problem was resolved ~ this was on a
certified aircraft, electronics all certified and installed at the factory when
built. Two problems have occurred from one type of owner built up kit engine
instruments on one model of airplane. EMI appears to radiate at different
inputs from engine. With better shielding and grounding of these systems these
problems appear to have also been resolved. It is a very tricky problem, and
one very hard to track down. Dynon aren't alone in this, I'm sure that as more
types of electronic instruments are installed the evidence will increase more
and more. I'm sure Dynon are working on this problem ~ and it may be an
installation problem also!
Work with Dynon, I'm sure they will do their best to help you! We all know
Customer Service is the best form of advertisement there is.
Elbie
Elbie Mendenhall
President
EM aviation, LLC
13411 NE Prairie Rd
Brush Prairie WA 98606
Phone & Fax 360-260-0772
www.riteangle.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matthew Brandes" <matthew(at)n523rv.com> |
Does anyone have any experience with the Zolatone Primer/Paints?
Aircraft Spruce sells this and I've looked at the manufacturers website.
(www.zolatoneaim.com <http://www.zolatoneaim.com/> ) It looks like a
nice product, durable textured finish.
The Z91 water based primer goes on first, followed by the color coat.
Many different color combinations.. some too wild for me... but nice.
Matthew Brandes,
Van's RV-9A (Wings/Fuselage)
EAA Chapter 868/91
www.n523rv.com <http://www.n523rv.com/>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
Wheeler North wrote:
> after setting the alignment in well over 1000 cars and a few to many
> airplanes to factory specs I can assure you that a slight toe-in is more
> stable than slight toe-out if there is any flex in the suspension system
> along the lateral axis, ie wheel can track flexing inboard or outboard.
Sorry, I have to object. This is *not* accurate when it comes to
aircraft. The reason this is true in cars is, when you drive a car down
a road at speed, you *want* to be able to turn when you get to a corner.
When you're driving an aircraft down a road, you want that aircraft to
drive in a nice straight line, with *no* turns. Your aircraft is
designed to be self-stabilizing, your car is not.
A more involved discussion:
A nosewheel aircraft has it's center of gravity in front of it's main
wheels, and is self-stabilizing. If it gets into a situation where it's
landing on one wheel, or landing heavily on one side, or starting a
groundloop (yes, you can groundloop a nosewheel aircraft), it will
generally stabilize itself. A little toe-in, however, will help. Why?
Here's an example: Let's say the airplane is yawing to the left on
landing. The weight will shift to the outside wheel, ie. the right.
This wheel is pointing off to the left, as the airplane is yawed to that
side. It is generating a drag force that can be broken into two
components. One runs along the length of the aircraft, and is just a
drag force, working to restore the aircraft's heading. The second force
is lateral to the aircraft, directed across the nose, behind the center
of gravity. This too is a restorative force, that will tend to
straighten the airplane out. If you toe-in the wheel even further, this
lateral force will increase, and the airplane will become even more
stable on the ground. Of course at some point you trade-off tire wear
with toe-in, so usually you only set 1-2 degrees at maximum.
Now, a tailwheel aircraft is the exact opposite. If you have toe-in on
a tailwheel aircraft, and start to yaw, as in our example above, to the
left, the toe-in will cause a lateral force again, but this time it will
be directed *ahead* of the center of gravity. This is a destabilizing
force, which will cause the situation to get worse before it gets better
if it's not corrected. Toe-out will prevent this by allowing the
heavily loaded wheel to roll straight ahead (with small amounts of
toe-out) or even to roll to the outside of the turn, and "pull" the
airplane back straight again.
This all being said, many aircraft are designed with 0 degrees of toe-in
or out. This is quite common, because most landing gear flexes, and in
designing the gear, you can design it to flex in a favorable manner. On
a tailwheel aircraft, it makes sense for the flex to cause the wheels to
toe-out (if you get further out-of-line, you need more restorative
force). On a nosewheel aircraft, it makes sense for the flex to cause
the wheels to toe-in.
> Not sure if that makes sense to anybody as I've described it, but I can tell
> you that most manufacturers shoot for toe in or straight rather than toe
> out.
I hope what i've said makes sense too. And I hope it's clear that the
above statements about cars, when applied to aircraft, aren't correct.
Reference: Stinton, Darrol "The Design of the Aeroplane", Chapter 10
"Choice of Landing Gear"
-Rob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kempthornes <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: EMI & stray RF |
At 10:16 AM 2/3/2004, you wrote:
>
>EMI / RF Electronic problems
>
>Work with Dynon, I'm sure they will do their best to help you! We all know
Excellent advice!! I just installed a Dynon EFIS and so far I'm wild with
enthusiasm. I will not be surprised if there are some problems because
using a freshly developed product like this I am, as they said when I was
at Sun, on the bleeding edge.
If you are not comfortable with this idea, you might be interested in
buying some of the spinning wheel antiques those of us going digital will
have to sell. No data just a feeling, the vacuum system is the most
failure prone system in most small planes and the AI is the most failure
prone instrument.
In a year or so, spinning stuff will be on ebay for $5.
hal kempthorne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Tasker <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
Actually, your friend made an error in his calculations. The toe-in is
actually closer to 1. You calculate the toe-in by taking the
difference between the the two readings (3/16") and dividing by the
distance between the two points (maybe 10" - depends on there you
actually measured) then take the inverse tangent (or inverse sine for
small angles). He calculated the result using the distance between the
two tires, not the distance between the two points on a single tire.
This gives us 0.187/10 = 0.0187. Take the inverse tangent and you get
1.07 which is a significant change from 0.
Dick Tasker, 90573
Randy Lervold wrote:
>
>Guys, there's another aspect you need to be considering in analyzing gear
>leg geometry that I finally have some data on. When building the -8 you set
>the gear legs to zero toe with the fuse level by seeing that the axle mounts
>are parallel. This translates to the airplane going down the runway with
>tail way up in level flight attitude. How often are you in that
>configuration? I've noticed that my RV-8 would seem squirlier during the
>high-speed part of the rollout once the tail went down and hypothesized that
>the toe was changing in one direction or the other as the plane changed
>attitude. I intuitively guessed that it was going to a toe-out condition and
>that was what was causing it and thought shimming it would be a good
>experiment.
>
>I finally got a chance to take some measurements on my pal's -8 who doesn't
>have his wheel pants on yet. We set the tail up longerons level, put two
>five foot straight edges up against the outside of the wheel, leveled them,
>and measured the distance between the front and rear tips. In this condition
>the distance matched (good job installing the gear legs Jeff!), as they
>should. We then lowered the tail to the ground, re-leveled the straight
>edges and measured again. We found the distance between the straight edges
>to be wider in the rear by 3/16". Another pal did the trig on it and
>computed that to be .18 degrees of toe-in. So my guess that the toe was
>changing in the three point attitude was correct but I guessed the wrong
>direction. Now, is two tenths of a degree enough to make any difference?
>Draw your own conclusions, but my sense is that it is not.
>
>FWIW,
>Randy Lervold
>RV-8, 367 hours
>EAA Technical Counselor
>www.rv-8.com
>
>
>
>
>>
>>While assisting a fellow builder with drilling the gear into place on his
>>RV8 this same discussion arose. After some amount of chatter back and
>>
>>
>forth
>
>
>>and much head scratching we all decided that straight ahead (zero toe-in
>>toe-out) would likely be the best choice. At that point we agreed that a
>>call to Van's was in order.
>>The call was placed and the word from RV Mecca was to set the alignment
>>straight ahead with a preference to err toward very slight toe-in.
>>
>>Thanks Wheeler,
>>
>>Jim in Kelowna
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Wheeler North" <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us>
>>To:
>>Subject: RV-List: Toe-in
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Folks,
>>>
>>>after setting the alignment in well over 1000 cars and a few to many
>>>airplanes to factory specs I can assure you that a slight toe-in is more
>>>stable than slight toe-out if there is any flex in the suspension system
>>>along the lateral axis, ie wheel can track flexing inboard or outboard.
>>>SNIP <
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
Scott Bilinski wrote:
>
>
>
> With a car, caster is there for self stabilizing/self centering of the
> steering sheel....right?
That could be, I don't know. I'm not an automotive engineer... 8-) But
aircraft wheels (apart from nosewheels, tailwheels, and some specialized
crosswind gear) don't caster (apart from any flexing in the system).
-Rob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Glasgow" <willfly(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Taildraggers and X wind landings |
Gentlemen,
Is there a best cross wind direction for landing a taildragger?
A right cross wind is best for takeoff, because the wind tends to counter the following
inherent aerodynamic yaw tendencies:
Slipstream effect
Torque reaction
Gyroscopic precession,
Asymmetric blade effect
But, how about landing?
It seems to me that to counter slipstream and torque effect during the last stage
of an approach with a right crosswind, some right rudder might be required,
but unnoticed at power reduction, due to the required left rudder controlling
the slip in the wing down method. This input or lack input might be unanticipated
at touchdown and cause a right yaw.
Additionally, the gyroscopic effect of lowering the tail could cause a right yaw.
Therefore, my conclusion is that, given a choice, a left cross wind might be preferable
to a right cross wind.
Please don=92t think this is criticism of Randy Lervold in any way. I personally
feel he did a wonderful job and was just involved in one of those =93freak
situations=94. Hit by a very strong gust at slow speed.
Randy, we all sympathize with you, and feel your pain.
Steve Glasgow
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Dynon EMI (different scenario) |
> Kevin Behrent wrote:
>
> > It would be interesting to study the type of avionics being used by both
groups
> > and see if there are any similarities.
> >
I can hear the Dynon in the com if I open the squelch and turn it of and on.
I could not tell by listening if it is on or off without the on and off
comparison. VERY minimal noise.
Dynon D-10
Rocky Engine monitor
Rocky Encoder
KX-155 ( a widely known EMI noise generator)
ARnav Star 5000 GPS
Terra digital xponder
ICS ?
100+ hours on my Dynon.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Calhoun" <roncal(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | GPS or Anywheremap |
My Garmin Pilot III that I have mounted in low center of my RV-4 panel needs
repair. I am thinking of replacing it with a Garmin 196 or Anywheremap. I
am leaning toward the Anywhere map since I might subscribe to weather
someday. What would you do?
Ron Calhoun
RV-4 Flying
_
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <klwerner(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS or Anywheremap |
I would do Control Vision's ANYWHEREMAP (but then I am biased as I do have one.)
I flew to OSH'03 behind a Garmin 196, and it is not bad either, but given the choice
. . .
Konrad
----- Original Message -----
From: Ron Calhoun
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 4:33 PM
Subject: RV-List: GPS or Anywheremap
My Garmin Pilot III that I have mounted in low center of my RV-4 panel needs
repair. I am thinking of replacing it with a Garmin 196 or Anywheremap. I
am leaning toward the Anywhere map since I might subscribe to weather
someday. What would you do?
Ron Calhoun
RV-4 Flying
_
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
>
>Folks,
>
>after setting the alignment in well over 1000 cars and a few to many
>airplanes to factory specs I can assure you that a slight toe-in is more
>stable than slight toe-out if there is any flex in the suspension system
>along the lateral axis, ie wheel can track flexing inboard or outboard.
>
How many of those cars had the vast majority of the weight on the
front wheels, and a tiny little wheel in the back?
Your experience in cars only translates to aircraft if your landing
gear has a car-like set of four equal sized tires with roughly equal
weight on each tire.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Reese" <waynereese(at)qwest.net> |
| Subject: | GPS or Anywheremap |
A friend flying a RV-6a replaced his Anywheremap with a 196 because
although the anywhere was neat in the living room, in the bouncing
aircraft it was very difficult for him to use.
My only experience is with the 196, its good.
Wayne
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Calhoun
Subject: RV-List: GPS or Anywheremap
My Garmin Pilot III that I have mounted in low center of my RV-4 panel
needs
repair. I am thinking of replacing it with a Garmin 196 or Anywheremap.
I
am leaning toward the Anywhere map since I might subscribe to weather
someday. What would you do?
Ron Calhoun
RV-4 Flying
_
=
=
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Neil Henderson" <neil.mo51(at)btopenworld.com> |
Listers
I'm about to fit a belly mounted VHF Coms whip aerial. What's the best position.
Can it go anywhere and does it matter if it's close to the Transponder Aerial.
Your input would be most helpful.
Neil Henderson RV9-A nr Aylesbury England
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dynon altitude encoder |
Hooked mine up, works great, 100 hours!
-Mike Kraus
N223RV RV-4 Flying
N213RV RV-10 Empennage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clifford Begnaud" <shoeless(at)barefootpilot.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Taildraggers and X wind landings |
Steve,
I may not qualify as a gentleman, but I'll answer anyway ;-)
I don't have my RV flying yet, so I don't know if this is applicable. On my
Kitfox I have a larger, stiffer spring on the right side to counter-act the
p-factor, torque effect etc on takeoff. When landing, these forces are not
present, so I like the wind from the left because of the stiffer spring on
the right side.
Cliff
>
> Gentlemen,
>
>
> Is there a best cross wind direction for landing a taildragger?
>
>
> A right cross wind is best for takeoff, because the wind tends to counter
the following inherent aerodynamic yaw tendencies:
>
>
> Slipstream effect
>
> Torque reaction
>
> Gyroscopic precession,
>
> Asymmetric blade effect
>
>
> But, how about landing?
>
>
> It seems to me that to counter slipstream and torque effect during the
last stage of an approach with a right crosswind, some right rudder might be
required, but unnoticed at power reduction, due to the required left rudder
controlling the slip in the wing down method. This input or lack input
might be unanticipated at touchdown and cause a right yaw.
>
>
> Additionally, the gyroscopic effect of lowering the tail could cause a
right yaw.
>
>
> Therefore, my conclusion is that, given a choice, a left cross wind might
be preferable to a right cross wind.
>
>
> Please don=92t think this is criticism of Randy Lervold in any way. I
personally feel he did a wonderful job and was just involved in one of those
=93freak situations=94. Hit by a very strong gust at slow speed.
>
>
> Randy, we all sympathize with you, and feel your pain.
>
>
> Steve Glasgow
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
| Subject: | Taildraggers and X wind landings |
>
> Additionally, the gyroscopic effect of lowering the tail
> could cause a right yaw.
>
Actually, this would cause a left yaw. However, at idle power, I suspect
it is trivial.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 435 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Birmingham" <mbirmham(at)flightline.com> |
I have noticed that my gasculator, an ACS 10564, on my RV-6 doesn't flow
well. Shouldn't I be getting more of a steady stream like the wing tanks?
Mike
N267WT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "GMC" <gmcnutt(at)intergate.ca> |
Hi Mike
It's not vented like the wing tanks, kind of like pouring gas out of a jerry
can without opening the cans air vent cap.
If you are worried about fuel flow try it (carefully) with the electric
boost pump on.
George in Langley
-----Original Message-----
I have noticed that my gasculator, an ACS 10564, on my RV-6 doesn't flow
well. Shouldn't I be getting more of a steady stream like the wing tanks?
Mike
N267WT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Bristol <bj034(at)lafn.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Taildraggers and X wind landings |
We're forgetting one very important thing, what happens when you cob the
throttle for the go-around after that botched landing that we all make
now and then especially in a crosswind? I personally will take a
crosswind from the right every time if I have a choice. Been there done
that and I'm not gonna do it again!
Dave RV6, So Cal, EAA Technical Counselor and Flight Advisor
Alex Peterson wrote:
>
>
>
>>Additionally, the gyroscopic effect of lowering the tail
>>could cause a right yaw.
>>
>>
>>
>
>Actually, this would cause a left yaw. However, at idle power, I suspect
>it is trivial.
>
>Alex Peterson
>Maple Grove, MN
>RV6-A N66AP 435 hours
>www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)QCBC.ORG> |
I think it is the other way round. Cars are very stable, Airplanes are very
high center of gravity where a car has a low center of gravity. Tail wheeled
airplanes have the center of Gravity behind the mains. When the TD turns
sharp enough that the CG is outside the main wheels, the weight tends to
tighten the turn which the lightly loaded tail wheel can't resist.
(OverSteer) With Nose wheeled planes, the cg is in front of the mains and cg
weight tends to reduce the turning moment. (UnderSteer). Cars can been
either over or understeer but are much more balanced with a lower center of
gravity so they general slide instead of increasing or decreasing the turn.
Cars also have a much better distribution of weight on all wheels. A lightly
loaded Pick Up is much light a tail dragger and its rear end will come
around much more easily.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Prior" <rv7(at)b4.ca>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Toe-in
>
> Scott Bilinski wrote:
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
> >
> >
> >
> > With a car, caster is there for self stabilizing/self centering of the
> > steering sheel....right?
>
> That could be, I don't know. I'm not an automotive engineer... 8-) But
> aircraft wheels (apart from nosewheels, tailwheels, and some specialized
> crosswind gear) don't caster (apart from any flexing in the system).
>
> -Rob
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | ebay sleezee description indicated that the plans were for |
building so I q
| From: | "Radomir Zaric" <radomirz(at)vitez.net> |
Yeah, that's it. Wish it was explicitly stated somewhere.. Just put
81922 on that blank line and send it back to them.
<brett.morawski@buckeye-express.com>
I don't have a serial # for my kit. My builder # is 81922 - is this the
serial # or do I actually need to send back the form Van's sent me once
(that has a blank line for serial #) that is supposed to be notarized
and
returned to them? They sent me my wing kit without them having received
that form so I figured it's worthless.
Brett Morawski
Toledo
RV8a - wing
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | One Yoke for Squeezer? |
| From: | "" <tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com> |
I know this has been done to death in the archives, but I am looking for some updated
opinions. If I were to only buy one yoke for a pneumatic squeezer, which
have people found to be most valuable? I am assuming the longeron yoke would
be the most versatile. It seems to be $135 at Cleveland...anyone know of a
cheaper spot? I am looking for yokes that fit the 214c style squeezers. For
reference, I am at the wing skeleton stage.
Also, if anyone has a used squeezer they want to get rid of, I would love to take
it off your hands.
Thanks,
Scott
7A Wings
http://sky.prohosting.com/rv7a/
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Karie Daniel" <karie4(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Landing Light - What Wing |
Last summer I bought 2 of the Duckworks landing light kits. After getting the first
one installed I decided one light and cutting a hole in one perfectly good
wing would be enough. After looking at some RV pics lately I've noticed most
kits with only one landing light mount them in the right wing. Mine is in the
left.
Is there a reason when installing only one landing light to install it in the right
wing? Is mounting a single light setup in the left a no no for any obvious
reason that I have overlooked? Should I just install another light in the right
wing now?
Karie Daniel
Sammamish, WA.
RV-7A QB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Custom spark plug wires (LightSpeed) |
I need to make custom spark plug wires for my LightSpeed Plasma II. Does
anybody know of a source for bulk wire & ends that would end up being
cheaper than about $30? That's what it will cost to have Klaus custom-make
'em for me.
The wire that comes with the LightSpeed are MSD 8.5mm Super Conductor. I've
seen MSD sells a bulk universal kit, but I believe it's much more expensive
(not sure).
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Klaus Savier" <klaus(at)lightspeedengineering.com>
Subject: Re: Custom spark plug wires
> Dan,
> The wire is $2.2 per ft and $2.5 per termination. I would need the dims
from
> you.
> Regards,
> Klaus Savier
>
> Dan Checkoway wrote:
>
> > Klaus,
> >
> > I need to make custom length spark plug wires for the Plasma II on my
> > IO-360-A1B6. Can you point me in the right direction? I'm looking for
a
> > kit, if possible, that comes with a length of wire, and eight 90-to-90
ends.
> > Any tips?
> >
> > I heard Jeff Rose sells something like this, but I wanted to check with
you
> > first.
> >
> > )_( Dan
> > RV-7 N714D
> > http://www.rvproject.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Will & Lynda Allen" <linenwool(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Taildraggers and X wind landings |
I agree that at idle power this would be negligible but the applied force
when lowering the tail is on the bottom of the prop and so the resultant
force 90 ahead in the plane of rotation will be on the left side, causing
the plane to yaw to the right.
-Will Allen
North Bend, WA
RV8 wings
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alex Peterson
Subject: RE: RV-List: Taildraggers and X wind landings
>
> Additionally, the gyroscopic effect of lowering the tail
> could cause a right yaw.
>
Actually, this would cause a left yaw. However, at idle power, I suspect
it is trivial.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 435 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: One Yoke for Squeezer? |
Scott,
Yes the longeron yoke is the one you want. Check prices at Avery Tools and P.A.R.T.S.
(Professional Air Riveting Tool Service).
http://www.averytools.com/
http://www.rivettools.com/squeezer_yokes.htm
Charlie Kuss
>
>
>I know this has been done to death in the archives, but I am looking for some
updated opinions. If I were to only buy one yoke for a pneumatic squeezer, which
have people found to be most valuable? I am assuming the longeron yoke would
be the most versatile. It seems to be $135 at Cleveland...anyone know of
a cheaper spot? I am looking for yokes that fit the 214c style squeezers. For
reference, I am at the wing skeleton stage.
>
>Also, if anyone has a used squeezer they want to get rid of, I would love to take
it off your hands.
>
>Thanks,
>Scott
>7A Wings
>http://sky.prohosting.com/rv7a/
>
>Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
>The most personalized portal on the Web!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Landing Light - What Wing |
| From: | Denis Walsh <denis.walsh(at)comcast.net> |
My single light is on the left. I like it there.
> From: "Karie Daniel" <karie4(at)comcast.net>
> Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 20:56:52 -0800
> To: ,
> Subject: RV-List: Landing Light - What Wing
>
>
> Last summer I bought 2 of the Duckworks landing light kits. After getting the
> first one installed I decided one light and cutting a hole in one perfectly
> good wing would be enough. After looking at some RV pics lately I've noticed
> most kits with only one landing light mount them in the right wing. Mine is in
> the left.
>
> Is there a reason when installing only one landing light to install it in the
> right wing? Is mounting a single light setup in the left a no no for any
> obvious reason that I have overlooked? Should I just install another light in
> the right wing now?
>
> Karie Daniel
> Sammamish, WA.
> RV-7A QB
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Birmingham" <mbirmham(at)flightline.com> |
Thanks so much. I will try that today
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of GMC
Subject: RE: RV-List: gasculator
Hi Mike
It's not vented like the wing tanks, kind of like pouring gas out of a jerry
can without opening the cans air vent cap.
If you are worried about fuel flow try it (carefully) with the electric
boost pump on.
George in Langley
-----Original Message-----
I have noticed that my gasculator, an ACS 10564, on my RV-6 doesn't flow
well. Shouldn't I be getting more of a steady stream like the wing tanks?
Mike
N267WT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David E. Nelson" <david.nelson(at)pobox.com> |
| Subject: | Re: One Yoke for Squeezer? |
Hi Scott,
Just being on the Emp (HS, VS, and Rudder nearly complete), I've used the
Longeron yoke the most hands down. Followed by the 3-1/3 thin nose yoke.
As for prices, you might also try www.clearairtools.com. I think they were
having a sale/specials some time ago but I don't know if that's still in
effect.
Regards,
/\/elson
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, wrote:
>
>
> I know this has been done to death in the archives, but I am looking for some
> updated opinions. If I were to only buy one yoke for a pneumatic squeezer,
> which have people found to be most valuable? I am assuming the longeron yoke
> would be the most versatile. It seems to be $135 at Cleveland...anyone know
> of a cheaper spot? I am looking for yokes that fit the 214c style squeezers.
> For reference, I am at the wing skeleton stage.
>
> Also, if anyone has a used squeezer they want to get rid of, I would love to
> take it off your hands.
>
> Thanks, Scott 7A Wings http://sky.prohosting.com/rv7a/
>
> Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web!
--
~~ ** ~~ If you didn't learn anything when you broke it the 1st ~~ ** ~~
time, then break it again.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DAVID REEL" <dreel(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing Light - What Wing |
Hi Karie. Love of simplicity motivated me to put a single Duckworth landing light
in the right wingtip of my RV8A. I reasoned that the 55W halogen light would
provide sufficient illumination for very infrequent nighttime operations that
would be conducted to lighted airports. I fly for pleasure, not necessity.
In addition, the level taxi attitude would bring the light closer to the airplane
while the nose high landing attitude would place the light further off
thus eliminating the need for dual taxi/landing lights. The choice of right wing
was motivated by a desire to minimize holes in the wing ribs. The left wing
has the 1/4" pitot line while the right wing has the antenna/landing light
wiring. Symmetry of the airplane would indicate no lighting difference between
left versus right wing locations. If you anticipate frequent nightime operations
where you might be forced into an unlighted field, or your homebase isn't
lighted, you should have as much light as you can get. Not flying yet though
so ....
Dave Reel - RV8A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry2DT(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Randy's insurance |
Hi Randy,
First of all, congrats on you and your passenger walking away, the aircraft
can surely be fixed, even though it's gotta be a blow after those years of
work. It was, and I'm sure will be again, one of the nicest -8's out there. Good
thing the prop or airframe wasn't tweaked...
Please keep us up to speed about the treatment you get from your insurance
company. It's only fair to give them free advertising for the great service I'm
sure they're going to give you. On the very remote chance they might not,
well, I guess we could use that info also. You have to love the internet...
Best Regards,
Jerry Cochran
Wilsonville, OR
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hopperdhh(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Taildraggers and X wind landings |
Right yaw is correct. I just tried this experiment. My bench grinder is not
mounted to a bench. I turned on the grinder and made sure I was looking at
it correctly as far as the rotation being the same as the prop. The right side
of the grinder is like the front of the airplane. You definitely get a big
yaw to the right when you lower the tail, at least on a grinder!
Dan N766DH RV-7A almost done in N. IN
In a message dated 2/4/04 12:46:09 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
linenwool(at)comcast.net writes:
> Subj: RE: RV-List: Taildraggers and X wind landings
> Date: 2/4/04 12:46:09 AM US Eastern Standard Time
> From: linenwool(at)comcast.net
> Reply-to: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent from the Internet
>
>
>
>
> I agree that at idle power this would be negligible but the applied force
> when lowering the tail is on the bottom of the prop and so the resultant
> force 90 ahead in the plane of rotation will be on the left side, causing
> the plane to yaw to the right.
>
> -Will Allen
> North Bend, WA
> RV8 wings
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alex Peterson
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV-List: Taildraggers and X wind landings
>
>
> >
> >Additionally, the gyroscopic effect of lowering the tail
> >could cause a right yaw.
> >
>
> Actually, this would cause a left yaw. However, at idle power, I suspect
> it is trivial.
>
> Alex Peterson
> Maple Grove, MN
> RV6-A N66AP 435 hours
> www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GPS or Anywheremap |
I have the AnywhereMap product but have yet to fly with it. No doubt about
it, it is very feature rich.
One problem I was having on the ground was being able to see the display on
my Ipaq 3950. Even with the screen set to full brightness, the outdoor glare
was just too much for me. Trying to solve the problem by wearing polarized
sunglasses just turns the screen to black--cannot see anything at all. These
PDAs were simply not designed for sunny outdoor use. I was ready to throw in
the towel and find another product until I found a screen overlay which
dramatically reduced the glare. The display is now useable. I highly
recommend the overlay. I can now wear my sunglasses and see the screen.
The screen overlay is made by Boxwave, costs $12.95
http://www.boxwave.com/products/cleartouch/index.htm
Regards,
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RiteAngle3(at)aol.com |
Fellow pilots,
After being a CFI for over 40 years, 25,000 hours my comments are as
follows, which I'm sure many of you will agree with more experience than me:
~~If you can tell the items mentioned below the X-wind is more stable than
the atmosphere will ever be, especially if blowing enough to matter. Wind
tunnel theories are great, but in real life~~things aren't always what they seem
or
what you expect!
Randy did an excellent job as thankfully no one was injured!
Elbie
EAA 38308
Is there a best cross wind direction for landing a taildragger?
A right cross wind is best for takeoff, because the wind tends to counter the
following inherent aerodynamic yaw tendencies:
Slipstream effect
Torque reaction
Gyroscopic precession,
Asymmetric blade effect
But, how about landing?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Stoffel <rickstoffel(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Flying RVs with Disabilities |
Hello all,
I am building an RV-4. I recently met a man who is interested in building an RV-9A,
but only has limited use of his legs due to an earlier case of Polio. He
was wondering about building an RV with hand controls for rudder and brake controls.
I remember reading an article a few years ago (I think it was in Sport
Aviation magazine) concerning a man who had no use of his legs, but was still
able to build and fly an RV-6 using only his hands for all primary controls.
Two questions. Does anyone have the date of that magazine with this article.
Also, does anyone out there have any other knowledge on this topic (i.e. building
an RV with hand controls for the rudders and brakes). Any info you have would
be greatly appreciated - I will pass it on to this man when I get it. Thanks
in advance,
Rick (finishing RV-4 wings)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael McGee <jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying RVs with Disabilities |
At 10:51 2004-02-04, you wrote:
>
>Hello all,
>
>I am building an RV-4. I recently met a man who is interested in building
>an RV-9A, but only has limited use of his legs due to an earlier case of
>Polio. He was wondering about building an RV with hand controls for
>rudder and brake controls. I remember reading an article a few years ago
>(I think it was in Sport Aviation magazine) concerning a man who had no
>use of his legs, but was still able to build and fly an RV-6 using only
>his hands for all primary controls.
>Two questions. Does anyone have the date of that magazine with this
>article. Also, does anyone out there have any other knowledge on this
>topic (i.e. building an RV with hand controls for the rudders and
>brakes). Any info you have would be greatly appreciated - I will pass it
>on to this man when I get it. Thanks in advance,
>
>Rick (finishing RV-4 wings)
His name is Carl Hay, formerly of the Home Wing and EAA chapter 105 in
Portland, OR. You can probably search EAAs web site for an article about
him. I remember the article but not the issue.
It's not any earlier than 1995. P-)
Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR
13B in gestation mode
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying RVs with Disabilities |
Rick:
MAY 1996
61 Climbing Everest Mastering an RV-6 With Hand Controls Only-Carl Hay
The pilot's name is Carl Hay. Here is a photo of his cockpit.
http://www.matronics.com/ftp/Scans/RV/896pnl1.jpg
I took a disabled pilot flying in an RV-4 a couple of years ago. He has full
use of his upper body but limited use of his legs. He felt that he could
manage the -4 with a modification such as Carl's. However, the -6 is a better
candidate for that because it has more room in the cockpit. Carl's system uses
two levers where the center console normally goes, which control brakes and
rudder.
The pilot I flew with is a wheelchair athlete and has tremendous upper body
strength. He was able to get in and out of the -4 without difficulty.
However, a less athletic person might find that unmanagable.
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Blanton Fortson <blanton(at)alaska.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying RVs with Disabilities |
Check out ...
http://www.wheelchairaviators.org/
The hand controls are not much of issue. Many people fly with hand
controls only. The more difficult part with an RV may be entry and
egress. Whether the aircraft is high wing or low wing, a door on the
side of the aircraft is usually easier to get into or out of for a
person with disabilities than an aircraft with a canopy/hatch entry.
I have a friend who flies with hand controls in his V-35 Bonanza. The
trailing edge of the wing is roughly at the height of his wheelchair
cushion. He is able to transfer onto the trailing edge of the wing, and
scoot on his butt up to the door. The doorsill and front seats are
almost flush with the wing so he does not have too much difficulty
inserting his legs into the cockpit and scooting over into the left
seat. He's a T-6 para, I believe. He and the Bonanza are a good fit.
B.
On Feb 4, 2004, at 9:51 AM, Richard Stoffel wrote:
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> I am building an RV-4. I recently met a man who is interested in
> building an RV-9A, but only has limited use of his legs due to an
> earlier case of Polio. He was wondering about building an RV with
> hand controls for rudder and brake controls. I remember reading an
> article a few years ago (I think it was in Sport Aviation magazine)
> concerning a man who had no use of his legs, but was still able to
> build and fly an RV-6 using only his hands for all primary controls.
> Two questions. Does anyone have the date of that magazine with this
> article. Also, does anyone out there have any other knowledge on this
> topic (i.e. building an RV with hand controls for the rudders and
> brakes). Any info you have would be greatly appreciated - I will pass
> it on to this man when I get it. Thanks in advance,
>
> Rick (finishing RV-4 wings)
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Will & Lynda Allen" <linenwool(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill press speeds |
Have many people ordered big tools from Harbor Freight and had good luck? I
ordered the 12 speed 10" drill press that seemed like a really good deal but
when it arrived, the box was in bad shape so I inspected the parts. It
seemed all right except a small dent in the back of the motor so I put it
together. The directions were terrible and I'm positive all the drawings in
the manual were done by a 2 year old. It also referenced parts that didn't
exist, not even in the parts list. After putting it together, the motor
didn't work. I called them and the tech guy went through different options
to solve the problem which the best and fastest was to refund this one and
order a new one and he would send out a label for shipping this back. I
liked the option and he said he would take care of it. So I spent a week
and a half waiting for the label so I could send this drill press back and
when I called to check on it, there was no refund and a new drill press had
not been ordered. To further the delay on this, the drill press is now back
ordered for another 2 weeks so I'm having them just send me a label so I can
at least send this piece of junk back and get a refund and then decide what
to do about still being in need of a drill press.
So since this is my first experience with Harbor Freight, is this typical if
you want the extremely low prices they seem to offer or are they worth
another chance and this was an isolated incident?
Also, the reason I wanted the 12 speed wasn't that I need 12 speeds but
because the lowest speed was 250 RPM, which might come in handy when
drilling steel, or bigger holes. The 5 speeds seem to only go down to 650
RPM. If I were to just go with a 5 speed so I could buy it locally, will I
have trouble cutting thick steel parts at 650 RPM and burn up bits faster or
will it not really be a problem or does the slow 250 RPM come in handy in
other situations that I'm not thinking of?
Thanks,
-Will Allen
North Bend, WA
RV8 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glenn Brasch" <gbrasch(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying RVs with Disabilities |
Bruce Cruikshank of KS Avionics in Hayward California ( www.ksavionics.com
/ ksa1(at)flash.net ) is a Viet Vet who lost both of his legs. He built and
fly's an RV 4, "Cover Girl". I had the honor to meet him and his wife at
OSH 03. I can't remember his set-up, but I am sure he could assist you.
Glenn in Arizona -9A Wings, fuselage ordered.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Stoffel" <rickstoffel(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject: RV-List: Flying RVs with Disabilities
>
> Hello all,
>
> I am building an RV-4. I recently met a man who is interested in building
an RV-9A, but only has limited use of his legs due to an earlier case of
Polio. He was wondering about building an RV with hand controls for rudder
and brake controls. I remember reading an article a few years ago (I think
it was in Sport Aviation magazine) concerning a man who had no use of his
legs, but was still able to build and fly an RV-6 using only his hands for
all primary controls.
> Two questions. Does anyone have the date of that magazine with this
article. Also, does anyone out there have any other knowledge on this topic
(i.e. building an RV with hand controls for the rudders and brakes). Any
info you have would be greatly appreciated - I will pass it on to this man
when I get it. Thanks in advance,
>
> Rick (finishing RV-4 wings)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
| Subject: | Taildraggers and X wind landings |
> Right yaw is correct. I just tried this experiment. My
> bench grinder is not
> mounted to a bench. I turned on the grinder and made sure I
> was looking at
> it correctly as far as the rotation being the same as the
> prop. The right side
> of the grinder is like the front of the airplane. You
> definitely get a big
> yaw to the right when you lower the tail, at least on a grinder!
>
> Dan N766DH RV-7A almost done in N. IN
I stand corrected. Various instructors over the years have been wrong
(I'm a victim). Several have told me that when the (tri-gear) airplane
is rotated on takeoff, that three factors will pull the nose to the
left. First is the twisting airflow hitting the vertical (this
obviously happens during the takeoff roll before rotation also). Second
is the fact that when the airplane is at a larger angle of attack, as is
the case just after rotation, the downward (right hand side) prop blades
are at a larger angle of attack and therefore pull more, causing a
leftward yaw moment. Thirdly, as the nose came up during rotation,
gyroscopic forces will also cause the nose to veer left. This last
factor apparently was incorrect. Indeed, it counteracts the first two
forces somewhat during the actual period of rotation.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 436 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill press |
speeds
With tools, you get what you pay for, in my opinion. Harbour freight is
great for disposable air tools, a few name brand tools, and consumables like
rags and rubber gloves. I don't think I would buy any power tools or shop
tools there. Some things are a great buy, but most of it is junk. I've
seen alot of tawianese oil covered, instructions written on rice paper from
places like that. I know exactly of what you are talking about. That's the
stuff you pretty much want to avoid. I was lucky that I have a H.F. store a
few miles away, so I could see what I was buying.
I do own a couple of harbour freight air tools. What can you expect for a
die grinder that is $20? It lasted my entire RV-6A project and is still
going strong. So, there are indeed some quality cheap tools that even if
they fail, they are disposable at that price.
Paul Besing
RV-6A Sold
RV-10 Soon
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Will & Lynda Allen" <linenwool(at)comcast.net>
Subject: RV-List: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill press
speeds
>
> Have many people ordered big tools from Harbor Freight and had good luck?
I
> ordered the 12 speed 10" drill press that seemed like a really good deal
but
> when it arrived, the box was in bad shape so I inspected the parts. It
> seemed all right except a small dent in the back of the motor so I put it
> together. The directions were terrible and I'm positive all the drawings
in
> the manual were done by a 2 year old. It also referenced parts that didn't
> exist, not even in the parts list. After putting it together, the motor
> didn't work. I called them and the tech guy went through different
options
> to solve the problem which the best and fastest was to refund this one and
> order a new one and he would send out a label for shipping this back. I
> liked the option and he said he would take care of it. So I spent a week
> and a half waiting for the label so I could send this drill press back and
> when I called to check on it, there was no refund and a new drill press
had
> not been ordered. To further the delay on this, the drill press is now
back
> ordered for another 2 weeks so I'm having them just send me a label so I
can
> at least send this piece of junk back and get a refund and then decide
what
> to do about still being in need of a drill press.
>
>
> So since this is my first experience with Harbor Freight, is this typical
if
> you want the extremely low prices they seem to offer or are they worth
> another chance and this was an isolated incident?
>
>
> Also, the reason I wanted the 12 speed wasn't that I need 12 speeds but
> because the lowest speed was 250 RPM, which might come in handy when
> drilling steel, or bigger holes. The 5 speeds seem to only go down to 650
> RPM. If I were to just go with a 5 speed so I could buy it locally, will
I
> have trouble cutting thick steel parts at 650 RPM and burn up bits faster
or
> will it not really be a problem or does the slow 250 RPM come in handy in
> other situations that I'm not thinking of?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> -Will Allen
>
> North Bend, WA
>
> RV8 wings
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Tasker <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill |
press speeds
I haven't ordered anything big from Harbor Freight so I cannot comment
on that issue. However, regarding the speeds of the drill press, you
will want low speeds when you do flycutting to cut large holes in ribs,
etc. 650 RPM is a little too high for comfort when using a flycutter.
Dick Tasker, 90573
fuselage
Will & Lynda Allen wrote:
>
>Have many people ordered big tools from Harbor Freight and had good luck? I
>ordered the 12 speed 10" drill press that seemed like a really good deal but
>when it arrived, the box was in bad shape so I inspected the parts. It
>seemed all right except a small dent in the back of the motor so I put it
>together. The directions were terrible and I'm positive all the drawings in
>the manual were done by a 2 year old. It also referenced parts that didn't
>exist, not even in the parts list. After putting it together, the motor
>didn't work. I called them and the tech guy went through different options
>to solve the problem which the best and fastest was to refund this one and
>order a new one and he would send out a label for shipping this back. I
>liked the option and he said he would take care of it. So I spent a week
>and a half waiting for the label so I could send this drill press back and
>when I called to check on it, there was no refund and a new drill press had
>not been ordered. To further the delay on this, the drill press is now back
>ordered for another 2 weeks so I'm having them just send me a label so I can
>at least send this piece of junk back and get a refund and then decide what
>to do about still being in need of a drill press.
>
>
>So since this is my first experience with Harbor Freight, is this typical if
>you want the extremely low prices they seem to offer or are they worth
>another chance and this was an isolated incident?
>
>
>Also, the reason I wanted the 12 speed wasn't that I need 12 speeds but
>because the lowest speed was 250 RPM, which might come in handy when
>drilling steel, or bigger holes. The 5 speeds seem to only go down to 650
>RPM. If I were to just go with a 5 speed so I could buy it locally, will I
>have trouble cutting thick steel parts at 650 RPM and burn up bits faster or
>will it not really be a problem or does the slow 250 RPM come in handy in
>other situations that I'm not thinking of?
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>
>-Will Allen
>
>North Bend, WA
>
>RV8 wings
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill press |
speeds
Yes indeed. I have a HF store nearby as well so I can check on items that
look too good to be true. It's a great place for wrenches, sockets and such
that you can bend, grind, tweak and adapt to the many unique situations
airplane building places upon us. It's pretty cool to load up a small cart
with hand tools, rags, cutoff discs, screwdrivers, gadgets and doo-dads and
be out the door for under fifty bucks.
For larger power tools, I'd stay away, in general. For bandsaws, bench
grinders and drill presses, I've had good luck with Craftsman. I did buy a
floor standing drill press (variable speed) from a traveling snake oil tool
show. It's clunky, Taiwanese type stuff, but has not let me down yet. It
can be belted down quite slow for running a fly cutter.
Brian Denk
RV8 N94BD
RV10 '51 HS
>
>With tools, you get what you pay for, in my opinion. Harbour freight is
>great for disposable air tools, a few name brand tools, and consumables
>like
>rags and rubber gloves. I don't think I would buy any power tools or shop
>tools there. Some things are a great buy, but most of it is junk. I've
>seen alot of tawianese oil covered, instructions written on rice paper from
>places like that. I know exactly of what you are talking about. That's
>the
>stuff you pretty much want to avoid. I was lucky that I have a H.F. store
>a
>few miles away, so I could see what I was buying.
>
>I do own a couple of harbour freight air tools. What can you expect for a
>die grinder that is $20? It lasted my entire RV-6A project and is still
>going strong. So, there are indeed some quality cheap tools that even if
>they fail, they are disposable at that price.
>
>Paul Besing
Get a FREE online virus check for your PC here, from McAfee.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Becker" <ctbecker(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill press |
speeds
I got their 4.5HP 21 Gal compressor for 169 (including shipping). It came
in the box with the "this side up" pointing down. Needless to say the oil
had leaked out all over the box, the packing material and my concrete patio!
I cleaned it up, added oil and it runs like a champ.
Charles Becker
N474CB - RV8A
Wings on order
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill
press speeds
>
> Yes indeed. I have a HF store nearby as well so I can check on items that
> look too good to be true. It's a great place for wrenches, sockets and
such
> that you can bend, grind, tweak and adapt to the many unique situations
> airplane building places upon us. It's pretty cool to load up a small
cart
> with hand tools, rags, cutoff discs, screwdrivers, gadgets and doo-dads
and
> be out the door for under fifty bucks.
>
> For larger power tools, I'd stay away, in general. For bandsaws, bench
> grinders and drill presses, I've had good luck with Craftsman. I did buy
a
> floor standing drill press (variable speed) from a traveling snake oil
tool
> show. It's clunky, Taiwanese type stuff, but has not let me down yet. It
> can be belted down quite slow for running a fly cutter.
>
> Brian Denk
> RV8 N94BD
> RV10 '51 HS
> >
> >With tools, you get what you pay for, in my opinion. Harbour freight is
> >great for disposable air tools, a few name brand tools, and consumables
> >like
> >rags and rubber gloves. I don't think I would buy any power tools or
shop
> >tools there. Some things are a great buy, but most of it is junk. I've
> >seen alot of tawianese oil covered, instructions written on rice paper
from
> >places like that. I know exactly of what you are talking about. That's
> >the
> >stuff you pretty much want to avoid. I was lucky that I have a H.F.
store
> >a
> >few miles away, so I could see what I was buying.
> >
> >I do own a couple of harbour freight air tools. What can you expect for
a
> >die grinder that is $20? It lasted my entire RV-6A project and is still
> >going strong. So, there are indeed some quality cheap tools that even if
> >they fail, they are disposable at that price.
> >
> >Paul Besing
>
> Get a FREE online virus check for your PC here, from McAfee.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kyle Boatright" <kyle.boatright(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing Light - What Wing |
I have one 55w light in the left wing of my RV-6. My experience is that one
55w light is extremely marginal, and the lack of visibility greatly
increases the pucker factor on night landings. I'd be much more comfortable
flying at night if I was happier with my landing light situation. I plan to
buy the 100w upgrade bulb the next time I run by the auto parts store. My
recommendation is to outfit both wings with lights and go with 100w bulbs in
each wing.
Rationalizing that "I don't need much light because I don't fly much at
night." is a bad way to go. When you need light, you need it. Halfway
measures are not a good choice.
KB
----- Original Message -----
From: "DAVID REEL" <dreel(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Landing Light - What Wing
>
> Hi Karie. Love of simplicity motivated me to put a single Duckworth
landing light in the right wingtip of my RV8A. I reasoned that the 55W
halogen light would provide sufficient illumination for very infrequent
nighttime operations that would be conducted to lighted airports. I fly for
pleasure, not necessity. In addition, the level taxi attitude would bring
the light closer to the airplane while the nose high landing attitude would
place the light further off thus eliminating the need for dual taxi/landing
lights. The choice of right wing was motivated by a desire to minimize
holes in the wing ribs. The left wing has the 1/4" pitot line while the
right wing has the antenna/landing light wiring. Symmetry of the airplane
would indicate no lighting difference between left versus right wing
locations. If you anticipate frequent nightime operations where you might
be forced into an unlighted field, or your homebase isn't lighted, you
should have as much light as you can !
> get. Not flying yet though so ....
>
> Dave Reel - RV8A
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark/Micki Phillips" <mphill(at)gcctv.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill press |
speeds
Ive bought many of tools from many manufactuers and Ive never regretted
buyin a good tool, but Ive always regretted buying a cheap tool. We have a
Harbor Freight Store here and Im not impressed with the precision tools they
offer. The bending brakes, in my opinion, are of inferior quality. Ill go
with expensvie tools that I know I'll be happy with for years to come. Just
my opinion. Flame away.
Mark Phillips
Williamsville,Illinois
RV-6 Fuselage
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill
press speeds
>
> I haven't ordered anything big from Harbor Freight so I cannot comment
> on that issue. However, regarding the speeds of the drill press, you
> will want low speeds when you do flycutting to cut large holes in ribs,
> etc. 650 RPM is a little too high for comfort when using a flycutter.
>
> Dick Tasker, 90573
> fuselage
>
> Will & Lynda Allen wrote:
>
> >
> >Have many people ordered big tools from Harbor Freight and had good luck?
I
> >ordered the 12 speed 10" drill press that seemed like a really good deal
but
> >when it arrived, the box was in bad shape so I inspected the parts. It
> >seemed all right except a small dent in the back of the motor so I put it
> >together. The directions were terrible and I'm positive all the drawings
in
> >the manual were done by a 2 year old. It also referenced parts that
didn't
> >exist, not even in the parts list. After putting it together, the motor
> >didn't work. I called them and the tech guy went through different
options
> >to solve the problem which the best and fastest was to refund this one
and
> >order a new one and he would send out a label for shipping this back. I
> >liked the option and he said he would take care of it. So I spent a week
> >and a half waiting for the label so I could send this drill press back
and
> >when I called to check on it, there was no refund and a new drill press
had
> >not been ordered. To further the delay on this, the drill press is now
back
> >ordered for another 2 weeks so I'm having them just send me a label so I
can
> >at least send this piece of junk back and get a refund and then decide
what
> >to do about still being in need of a drill press.
> >
> >
> >So since this is my first experience with Harbor Freight, is this typical
if
> >you want the extremely low prices they seem to offer or are they worth
> >another chance and this was an isolated incident?
> >
> >
> >Also, the reason I wanted the 12 speed wasn't that I need 12 speeds but
> >because the lowest speed was 250 RPM, which might come in handy when
> >drilling steel, or bigger holes. The 5 speeds seem to only go down to
650
> >RPM. If I were to just go with a 5 speed so I could buy it locally,
will I
> >have trouble cutting thick steel parts at 650 RPM and burn up bits faster
or
> >will it not really be a problem or does the slow 250 RPM come in handy in
> >other situations that I'm not thinking of?
> >
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >
> >-Will Allen
> >
> >North Bend, WA
> >
> >RV8 wings
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dr. Kevin P. Leathers" <DrLeathers(at)822heal.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill press |
speeds
Hi Will,
I bought a metal cutting bandsaw from them. The fit and finish is not
perfect, but it seems to be a serviceable machine so far. Some of my
Bearhawk compadres recommended this particular saw. The instructions were
obviously written by someone for whom English is not the first language. In
your case, I would still try to get a drill press that goes at least as slow
as 500 rpm so that you can use a flycutter etc.
Doc
----- Original Message -----
From: "Will & Lynda Allen" <linenwool(at)comcast.net>
Subject: RV-List: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill press
speeds
>
> SNIP>
> Also, the reason I wanted the 12 speed wasn't that I need 12 speeds but
> because the lowest speed was 250 RPM, which might come in handy when
> drilling steel, or bigger holes. The 5 speeds seem to only go down to 650
> RPM. If I were to just go with a 5 speed so I could buy it locally, will
I
> have trouble cutting thick steel parts at 650 RPM and burn up bits faster
or
> will it not really be a problem or does the slow 250 RPM come in handy in
> other situations that I'm not thinking of?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> -Will Allen
>
> North Bend, WA
>
> RV8 wings
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Randy's insurance |
> Please keep us up to speed about the treatment you get from your insurance
> company. It's only fair to give them free advertising for the great
service I'm
> sure they're going to give you. On the very remote chance they might not,
> well, I guess we could use that info also. You have to love the
internet...
>
> Best Regards,
> Jerry Cochran
> Wilsonville, OR
Will do. I have guys from Van's coming this weekend for an
inspection/assessment for the adjuster, then the adjuster says he's coming
up next week. We'll see.
Randy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Huft <aflyer(at)direcway.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Taildraggers and X wind landings |
Alex, your instructors were correct. So is Dan. When you lift the tail, the
nose goes left. When you lower the tail, nose goes right.
American, non geared engines.
John Huft
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Taildraggers and X wind landings
>
>
> > Right yaw is correct. I just tried this experiment. My
> > bench grinder is not
> > mounted to a bench. I turned on the grinder and made sure I
> > was looking at
> > it correctly as far as the rotation being the same as the
> > prop. The right side
> > of the grinder is like the front of the airplane. You
> > definitely get a big
> > yaw to the right when you lower the tail, at least on a grinder!
> >
> > Dan N766DH RV-7A almost done in N. IN
>
> I stand corrected. Various instructors over the years have been wrong
> (I'm a victim). Several have told me that when the (tri-gear) airplane
> is rotated on takeoff, that three factors will pull the nose to the
> left. First is the twisting airflow hitting the vertical (this
> obviously happens during the takeoff roll before rotation also). Second
> is the fact that when the airplane is at a larger angle of attack, as is
> the case just after rotation, the downward (right hand side) prop blades
> are at a larger angle of attack and therefore pull more, causing a
> leftward yaw moment. Thirdly, as the nose came up during rotation,
> gyroscopic forces will also cause the nose to veer left. This last
> factor apparently was incorrect. Indeed, it counteracts the first two
> forces somewhat during the actual period of rotation.
>
> Alex Peterson
> Maple Grove, MN
> RV6-A N66AP 436 hours
> www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Lundin <rlundin46(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill press |
speeds
My wife works for Enco. They sell machines, tools, and
shop supplies, at very low prices. The web site is
www.use-enco.com. Give them a look. I'll see if I can
talk her into a promotion code. Free shipping discount
something like that. It's another source for tools
etc.
Rick Lundin
RV-8 tail
wings soon
--- "Dr. Kevin P. Leathers"
wrote:
> Leathers"
>
> Hi Will,
>
> I bought a metal cutting bandsaw from them. The fit
> and finish is not
> perfect, but it seems to be a serviceable machine so
> far. Some of my
> Bearhawk compadres recommended this particular saw.
> The instructions were
> obviously written by someone for whom English is not
> the first language. In
> your case, I would still try to get a drill press
> that goes at least as slow
> as 500 rpm so that you can use a flycutter etc.
>
> Doc
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Will & Lynda Allen" <linenwool(at)comcast.net>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Ordering tools online from Harbor
> Freight and drill press
> speeds
>
>
> Allen"
>
> >
> > SNIP>
> > Also, the reason I wanted the 12 speed wasn't that
> I need 12 speeds but
> > because the lowest speed was 250 RPM, which might
> come in handy when
> > drilling steel, or bigger holes. The 5 speeds
> seem to only go down to 650
> > RPM. If I were to just go with a 5 speed so I
> could buy it locally, will
> I
> > have trouble cutting thick steel parts at 650 RPM
> and burn up bits faster
> or
> > will it not really be a problem or does the slow
> 250 RPM come in handy in
> > other situations that I'm not thinking of?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >
> > -Will Allen
> >
> > North Bend, WA
> >
> > RV8 wings
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Contributions
> any other
> Forums.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/chat
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Bristol <bj034(at)lafn.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing Light - What Wing |
There isn't much use for a light in the right wing unless you're sitting
in the right seat. With a tandem airplane it doesn't make much
difference but with side by side seating you need to have it on the
side that you'll be sitting on.
Dave
Karie Daniel wrote:
>
>Last summer I bought 2 of the Duckworks landing light kits. After getting the
first one installed I decided one light and cutting a hole in one perfectly good
wing would be enough. After looking at some RV pics lately I've noticed most
kits with only one landing light mount them in the right wing. Mine is in the
left.
>
>Is there a reason when installing only one landing light to install it in the
right wing? Is mounting a single light setup in the left a no no for any obvious
reason that I have overlooked? Should I just install another light in the right
wing now?
>
>Karie Daniel
>Sammamish, WA.
>RV-7A QB
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Karie Daniel" <karie4(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing Light - What Wing |
Thanks everyone for all of the replies. At least I haven't done anything I
shouldn't have by putting it in the left wing. Given the comments regarding
having one in each wing I might just go ahead and install one in the other
wing for max visibility and redundancy.
Thanks again,
Karie Daniel
RV-7A QB
Sammamish, WA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Bristol" <bj034(at)lafn.org>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Landing Light - What Wing
>
> There isn't much use for a light in the right wing unless you're sitting
> in the right seat. With a tandem airplane it doesn't make much
> difference but with side by side seating you need to have it on the
> side that you'll be sitting on.
>
> Dave
>
> Karie Daniel wrote:
>
> >
> >Last summer I bought 2 of the Duckworks landing light kits. After getting
the first one installed I decided one light and cutting a hole in one
perfectly good wing would be enough. After looking at some RV pics lately
I've noticed most kits with only one landing light mount them in the right
wing. Mine is in the left.
> >
> >Is there a reason when installing only one landing light to install it in
the right wing? Is mounting a single light setup in the left a no no for any
obvious reason that I have overlooked? Should I just install another light
in the right wing now?
> >
> >Karie Daniel
> >Sammamish, WA.
> >RV-7A QB
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)QCBC.ORG> |
| Subject: | Re: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill press |
speeds
I have found that their import drills and reamers to work very well. I also
bought some tooling for my lathe that is very good. Their dial calipers are
excellent.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter soon to be Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Lundin" <rlundin46(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill
press speeds
>
> My wife works for Enco. They sell machines, tools, and
> shop supplies, at very low prices. The web site is
> www.use-enco.com. Give them a look. I'll see if I can
> talk her into a promotion code. Free shipping discount
> something like that. It's another source for tools
> etc.
> Rick Lundin
> RV-8 tail
> wings soon
>
>
> --- "Dr. Kevin P. Leathers"
> wrote:
> > Leathers"
> >
> > Hi Will,
> >
> > I bought a metal cutting bandsaw from them. The fit
> > and finish is not
> > perfect, but it seems to be a serviceable machine so
> > far. Some of my
> > Bearhawk compadres recommended this particular saw.
> > The instructions were
> > obviously written by someone for whom English is not
> > the first language. In
> > your case, I would still try to get a drill press
> > that goes at least as slow
> > as 500 rpm so that you can use a flycutter etc.
> >
> > Doc
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Will & Lynda Allen" <linenwool(at)comcast.net>
> > To:
> > Subject: RV-List: Ordering tools online from Harbor
> > Freight and drill press
> > speeds
> >
> >
> > Allen"
> >
> > >
> > > SNIP>
> > > Also, the reason I wanted the 12 speed wasn't that
> > I need 12 speeds but
> > > because the lowest speed was 250 RPM, which might
> > come in handy when
> > > drilling steel, or bigger holes. The 5 speeds
> > seem to only go down to 650
> > > RPM. If I were to just go with a 5 speed so I
> > could buy it locally, will
> > I
> > > have trouble cutting thick steel parts at 650 RPM
> > and burn up bits faster
> > or
> > > will it not really be a problem or does the slow
> > 250 RPM come in handy in
> > > other situations that I'm not thinking of?
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > >
> > > -Will Allen
> > >
> > > North Bend, WA
> > >
> > > RV8 wings
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > Contributions
> > any other
> > Forums.
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/chat
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> > http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm
> > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Will & Lynda Allen" <linenwool(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill press |
speeds
Had a look and I'll keep it in mind for future reference but I didn't see
what I was looking for in a drill press.
Thanks though :)
-Will
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Lundin
Subject: Re: RV-List: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill
press speeds
My wife works for Enco. They sell machines, tools, and
shop supplies, at very low prices. The web site is
www.use-enco.com. Give them a look. I'll see if I can
talk her into a promotion code. Free shipping discount
something like that. It's another source for tools
etc.
Rick Lundin
RV-8 tail
wings soon
--- "Dr. Kevin P. Leathers"
wrote:
> Leathers"
>
> Hi Will,
>
> I bought a metal cutting bandsaw from them. The fit
> and finish is not
> perfect, but it seems to be a serviceable machine so
> far. Some of my
> Bearhawk compadres recommended this particular saw.
> The instructions were
> obviously written by someone for whom English is not
> the first language. In
> your case, I would still try to get a drill press
> that goes at least as slow
> as 500 rpm so that you can use a flycutter etc.
>
> Doc
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Will & Lynda Allen" <linenwool(at)comcast.net>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Ordering tools online from Harbor
> Freight and drill press
> speeds
>
>
> Allen"
>
> >
> > SNIP>
> > Also, the reason I wanted the 12 speed wasn't that
> I need 12 speeds but
> > because the lowest speed was 250 RPM, which might
> come in handy when
> > drilling steel, or bigger holes. The 5 speeds
> seem to only go down to 650
> > RPM. If I were to just go with a 5 speed so I
> could buy it locally, will
> I
> > have trouble cutting thick steel parts at 650 RPM
> and burn up bits faster
> or
> > will it not really be a problem or does the slow
> 250 RPM come in handy in
> > other situations that I'm not thinking of?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >
> > -Will Allen
> >
> > North Bend, WA
> >
> > RV8 wings
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Contributions
> any other
> Forums.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/chat
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill VonDane" <bill(at)vondane.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing Light - What Wing |
You can install mine in both wings without cutting the leading edges...
www.creativair.com
-Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "Karie Daniel" <karie4(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Landing Light - What Wing
Thanks everyone for all of the replies. At least I haven't done anything I
shouldn't have by putting it in the left wing. Given the comments regarding
having one in each wing I might just go ahead and install one in the other
wing for max visibility and redundancy.
Thanks again,
Karie Daniel
RV-7A QB
Sammamish, WA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
| Subject: | Taildraggers and X wind landings |
> Alex, your instructors were correct. So is Dan. When you lift
> the tail, the nose goes left. When you lower the tail, nose
> goes right.
>
> American, non geared engines.
>
> John Huft
John, my instructors were wrong. What was said is that when one rotates
on takeoff, the nose will veer left from the gyroscopic precession of
the prop, adding a third left yawing component. Rotation implies tail
comes down. There would appear to be two components pulling left and
one pulling right during the rotation.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 436 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
""
| Subject: | EMI solution for Dynon? |
http://www.4emi.com
Has anybody seen or played with these? Sure seems like an incredibly
elegant way to go -- IF it works!
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Will & Lynda Allen" <linenwool(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill press |
speeds
Sorry list, my bad....... this was just suppose to go to Richard Lundin....
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Will & Lynda Allen
Subject: RE: RV-List: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill
press speeds
Had a look and I'll keep it in mind for future reference but I didn't see
what I was looking for in a drill press.
Thanks though :)
-Will
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Lundin
Subject: Re: RV-List: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill
press speeds
My wife works for Enco. They sell machines, tools, and
shop supplies, at very low prices. The web site is
www.use-enco.com. Give them a look. I'll see if I can
talk her into a promotion code. Free shipping discount
something like that. It's another source for tools
etc.
Rick Lundin
RV-8 tail
wings soon
--- "Dr. Kevin P. Leathers"
wrote:
> Leathers"
>
> Hi Will,
>
> I bought a metal cutting bandsaw from them. The fit
> and finish is not
> perfect, but it seems to be a serviceable machine so
> far. Some of my
> Bearhawk compadres recommended this particular saw.
> The instructions were
> obviously written by someone for whom English is not
> the first language. In
> your case, I would still try to get a drill press
> that goes at least as slow
> as 500 rpm so that you can use a flycutter etc.
>
> Doc
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Will & Lynda Allen" <linenwool(at)comcast.net>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Ordering tools online from Harbor
> Freight and drill press
> speeds
>
>
> Allen"
>
> >
> > SNIP>
> > Also, the reason I wanted the 12 speed wasn't that
> I need 12 speeds but
> > because the lowest speed was 250 RPM, which might
> come in handy when
> > drilling steel, or bigger holes. The 5 speeds
> seem to only go down to 650
> > RPM. If I were to just go with a 5 speed so I
> could buy it locally, will
> I
> > have trouble cutting thick steel parts at 650 RPM
> and burn up bits faster
> or
> > will it not really be a problem or does the slow
> 250 RPM come in handy in
> > other situations that I'm not thinking of?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >
> > -Will Allen
> >
> > North Bend, WA
> >
> > RV8 wings
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Contributions
> any other
> Forums.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/chat
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
Folks,
I installed the new LCD version of the EZ pilot to beta test it in my 6
today and got a chance to fly it for a few minutes. The conditions were
fairly smooth but big white and black clouds with 5/8 coverage, and no haze
so it was really bright when in the sun.
The LCD works very well, the unit is very readable in cloud, sunlight,
sunlight ahead, sunlight behind, etc. In fact it works so well I found
myself relying on the TC data with my eye landing on it easily, and I
realized that I hadn't been doing that with the other one, or much with the
Navaid, which is also somewhat weak in sunlight.
It is contrast adjustable by turning the unit on with the display button
engaged, although I found that leaving it at the default "center" setting
worked fine.
The unit is far more usable as a flight instrument than it was before as
well as being a superior A/P vs. the Navaid.
I also found it was really easy to swap out for those of you with Navaids if
you can get a hand behind it. I released the mount screws took the old unit
out and then put the EZ pilot in turned around to tighten the connector
screws through the 3.125 hole, then screwed it in place. They include a
direct adaptor cable to work with your existing servo installation.
W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
Rob,
Possibly you missed the point about dynamic flexing. I have tested this by
physically moving wheel alignment from toe in to toe out and back to see
what this does on several different airplanes, both tail draggers and nose
draggers.
The vector analysis breaks down for several reasons. One it depends a lot on
which type of aircraft you are talking about because the gear move to
different places as weight is added, and the force vector will shift and
rebound very differently depending on the type of suspension, ie flat
spring, round spring, oleo, rubber puck or bungee and direction of flexing
relative to the dynamic CG vector. Also this vector analysis only deals with
static balance IE the desire to return to straight ahead.
But this problem is really one of dynamic balance ie the desire to alter
oscillation rate, in this case the desire to increase or reduce the
oscillation rate of the dynamic CG vector from left to right. Statically
excessive toe in or toe out merely causes drag which is good for a nose gear
and bad for a tail dragger as you have described. But dynamically although
toe out causes the plane and heavy wheel to run away from its CG vector
causing a desire to stay straight ahead, the accumlative pull and gear flex
causes it to suddenly rebound thereby pointing CG vector to the other side
rapidly rather than controllably keeping it loaded in one direction until
the user changes it. (this is kinda tough to visiualize which is why I was
trying to avoid going there, you rotor heads will know this as ground
resonance) Straight ahead or slight toe in will prevent that unpredictable
rebound. This is felt as if the aircraft is hopping from one foot to the
other quickly, almost like rapid rudder movements with a little roll back
and forth. The whole airplane gets into it rather than the wheels getting
wiggley. Usually when a pilot squacks "squirrley" this is what I look for,
ie: large toe out as evidenced by sharp ridges on the outboard edges of the
tire tread ribs.
Ground loops are almost always the result over controlling to slowly (which
often starts as not enough input to late and digresses to too much input for
too long or too late). The lag and then sudden increase of input on top of
the aircraft dynamically rebounding due to toe out usually only takes one
oscillation to incur a full loop. (And yes I are one who has ground looped
more than once, and my heart and the pit of my stomach really go out to you
Randy, if you need any parts or a helping hand chirp up, I'm sure a lot of
us already builts would love the chance to jump in and help out)
Very slight toe out can also exacerbate this because of the lag caused by
the wheel shifting its track from toe out to toe in as it is side loaded if
the aircraft's gear geometery allow this, which the RVs do. It then gets
stiff and the users input from the tail is now felt very amplified but
again, too late.
The easiest way to see this aspect is to use your arm and fist to emulate
the RV gear and wheel. As weight is added that gear will flex backwards and
outwards. As it does this it will move it towards toe-in. If it is toed out,
then there will be a desire to pull further outwards which will then move
more towards toe in. if it gets to toe in or develops enough strain then the
wheel track will snap back in due to gear and tire flex and toe-in. It will
then move to toe out since it was orginally set there and repeat, usually
getting worse very fast. This is what causes the side to side wheel shimy
sometimes felt, and gets particularly rapid during hard braking. The braking
effect is because braking tries to cause toe out as the wheel is pulled
straight back, but added weight due to braking is trying to cause toe in as
the gear is pushed outwards, and the gear and tire start bouncing against
each other along with the aerodynamic forces on the wheel pant. If one of
those pulses times with shift in dynamic CG vector than they will be
additive which is really bad.
Hope I didn't get too crazy here, I can assure you I have tested and cured
this more times than I care to admit, and it seems to hold true for most
aircraft.
W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
To beat this sucker some more...
Cars are designed to be stable, so they go straight down the road. This is
acutally required by both Federal and some state's laws. Most aircraft are
also designed to be stable as well, as required by the FARs, Part 23, both
on the ground and in the air. We then add devices to unstabilize them so
they may be pointed in the direction of our choice.
In a car and an aircraft you have toe, camber, possibly castor, offset and
steering inclination (or rake for you motorcycle buffs)
Toe is the parallelness of the wheels to the longitudinal centerline (wheel
fronts in or out)
Camber is the perpendicularness of the wheel to the road (wheel tops in or
out)
castor, offset and SI relate to wheels that are meant to be steered rather
than fixed on an axle
Castor is the amount the steering pivot is angled inboard or outboard and
comes into play when you have two steerable wheels on a common axle.
SI or rake is the amount the steering pivot is angled fore and aft.
Offset is the amount the axle is offset fore or aft of the pivot point.
These latter two apply to all dual and single steerable wheels.
Ride height in and of itself doesn't effect any of this, but you usually
have to screw up all of this to change ride height, so if ride height is
off, so usually is everything else.
So the fixed gear axles on any car or aircraft are effected by camber and
toe.
Since most aircraft only have one steerable wheel, this is only effected by
SI/rake and offset, whereas cars are also effected by castor.
Positive static stability is the desire to not drift, to stay straight
ahead, to not roll, or pitch, and to return to balance when unstabilized.
Positive dynamic stability is the desire to dampen the drift oscillation
during each cycle and rebound.
In any system there can be any combination of positive, negative or neutral
static and dynamic stability. The factors affecting this are mass, motion,
or ability to move, rotate, etc., the mass location relative to the motion
or ability to move, and finally the external and internal forces acting upon
the mass such as airflow, road load, hookes law of springs, air pressure in
struts or tires, etc.
By and large the design engineers have figured out that for most three and
four wheeled vehicles the following holds true with respect to stability and
effect.
Excessive toe out creates straight ahead static stability, dynamic
instability and scrubs tires very rapidly.
Excessive toe in creates straight ahead static instability, dynamic
stability and scrubs tires very rapidly.
Minor toe out still creates dynamic instability.
Minor toe in still creates dynamic stability.
But neither of the last two effect static stability much, nor do they eat
tires too rapidly.
Camber mostly effects traction even when the camber angle is being moved out
of the perpendicular plain as in a steerable wheel with castor and SI.
Castor by itself mostly effects camber and if combined correctly with
SI/rake causes the wheel to dig in, bottoms away from the direction of the
turn, as it is turned. This does create a static force causing it to want to
stay straight ahead because the turning of the wheel has to raise the
vehicle slightly.
Steering inclination, like castor, by itself, effects camber, but if you add
forward offset with aft SI it adds a powerful static force for centering. It
can also effect the lifting effect castor has so that the outboard wheel
lifts and the inboard wheel lowers. But it causes static instability without
offset.
Aft SI/rake with forward offset is why the Harley Choppers were so stable on
the freeway but couldn't turn around in a stadium parking lot. Nose gear
often make use of this combination as well. But too much fwd offset will
then create a mass pendulum creating dynamic instability.
Tail wheels also utilize this, but they have to be very careful because
forward SI/rake and rearward offset are the same ingredients needed for
control surface flutter, ie dynamic instability due to center of mass aft of
the hinge line, even though it creates a static straight ahead stability.
This is why bigger tail wheels may have shimmy dampers.
Since I have helped design and install several of those $100K lasar guided
alignment systems recently mentioned, and I have taught both car alignment,
and aircraft rigging courses many times and have been adjusting both for a
long time, and I have tested what I am saying, and I have watched the result
of doing it wrong many times, and I have watched engineers test what I am
saying, I feel fairly confident that if you have either no, or slight toe-in
with the weight on the wheels, with the aircraft in the leveled position,
and its an RV, you will have the best ground handling characteristics with
reasonable tire life that you can get from and RV. (was that a run on
sentence or what), annnnddd, as a final testimony to what I have said in the
last few posts, my RV-6, which a few of you can testify to, seems to handle
very nicely, just got 500 hours of tire life out of the last set of McCreary
semi cheapos, and it is set to 1/8 deg toe-in for each wheel in the
previously mentioned adjusting configuration.
But if you want to believe that aircraft are so special that the laws of
physics for them are different than for cars, go for it. Toe 'em out. We're
always looking for a few good parts.
W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Calhoun" <roncal(at)earthlink.net> |
Wheeler,
I tried to pick out of your explanation what is causing my rv-4 tires to
wear excessively on the outside. It runs straight and true. The wear is
the only problem. My tires do appear to have excessive camber, even with
full weight on them. My flying friends say I just have not made enough hard
landings. What say ye?
Ron
RV-4 Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)QCBC.ORG> |
You have left out the effect of Center of Gravity and the dynamic controls
in 3 axis instead of just the 2 of automotive.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wheeler North" <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us>
Subject: RV-List: More on toe
>
> To beat this sucker some more...
>
> Cars are designed to be stable, so they go straight down the road. This is
> acutally required by both Federal and some state's laws. Most aircraft are
> also designed to be stable as well, as required by the FARs, Part 23, both
> on the ground and in the air. We then add devices to unstabilize them so
> they may be pointed in the direction of our choice.
>
> In a car and an aircraft you have toe, camber, possibly castor, offset and
> steering inclination (or rake for you motorcycle buffs)
>
> Toe is the parallelness of the wheels to the longitudinal centerline
(wheel
> fronts in or out)
> Camber is the perpendicularness of the wheel to the road (wheel tops in or
> out)
>
> castor, offset and SI relate to wheels that are meant to be steered rather
> than fixed on an axle
> Castor is the amount the steering pivot is angled inboard or outboard and
> comes into play when you have two steerable wheels on a common axle.
>
> SI or rake is the amount the steering pivot is angled fore and aft.
> Offset is the amount the axle is offset fore or aft of the pivot point.
> These latter two apply to all dual and single steerable wheels.
>
> Ride height in and of itself doesn't effect any of this, but you usually
> have to screw up all of this to change ride height, so if ride height is
> off, so usually is everything else.
>
> So the fixed gear axles on any car or aircraft are effected by camber and
> toe.
>
> Since most aircraft only have one steerable wheel, this is only effected
by
> SI/rake and offset, whereas cars are also effected by castor.
>
> Positive static stability is the desire to not drift, to stay straight
> ahead, to not roll, or pitch, and to return to balance when unstabilized.
>
> Positive dynamic stability is the desire to dampen the drift oscillation
> during each cycle and rebound.
>
> In any system there can be any combination of positive, negative or
neutral
> static and dynamic stability. The factors affecting this are mass, motion,
> or ability to move, rotate, etc., the mass location relative to the motion
> or ability to move, and finally the external and internal forces acting
upon
> the mass such as airflow, road load, hookes law of springs, air pressure
in
> struts or tires, etc.
>
> By and large the design engineers have figured out that for most three and
> four wheeled vehicles the following holds true with respect to stability
and
> effect.
>
> Excessive toe out creates straight ahead static stability, dynamic
> instability and scrubs tires very rapidly.
> Excessive toe in creates straight ahead static instability, dynamic
> stability and scrubs tires very rapidly.
> Minor toe out still creates dynamic instability.
> Minor toe in still creates dynamic stability.
> But neither of the last two effect static stability much, nor do they eat
> tires too rapidly.
>
> Camber mostly effects traction even when the camber angle is being moved
out
> of the perpendicular plain as in a steerable wheel with castor and SI.
>
> Castor by itself mostly effects camber and if combined correctly with
> SI/rake causes the wheel to dig in, bottoms away from the direction of the
> turn, as it is turned. This does create a static force causing it to want
to
> stay straight ahead because the turning of the wheel has to raise the
> vehicle slightly.
>
> Steering inclination, like castor, by itself, effects camber, but if you
add
> forward offset with aft SI it adds a powerful static force for centering.
It
> can also effect the lifting effect castor has so that the outboard wheel
> lifts and the inboard wheel lowers. But it causes static instability
without
> offset.
>
> Aft SI/rake with forward offset is why the Harley Choppers were so stable
on
> the freeway but couldn't turn around in a stadium parking lot. Nose gear
> often make use of this combination as well. But too much fwd offset will
> then create a mass pendulum creating dynamic instability.
>
> Tail wheels also utilize this, but they have to be very careful because
> forward SI/rake and rearward offset are the same ingredients needed for
> control surface flutter, ie dynamic instability due to center of mass aft
of
> the hinge line, even though it creates a static straight ahead stability.
> This is why bigger tail wheels may have shimmy dampers.
>
> Since I have helped design and install several of those $100K lasar guided
> alignment systems recently mentioned, and I have taught both car
alignment,
> and aircraft rigging courses many times and have been adjusting both for a
> long time, and I have tested what I am saying, and I have watched the
result
> of doing it wrong many times, and I have watched engineers test what I am
> saying, I feel fairly confident that if you have either no, or slight
toe-in
> with the weight on the wheels, with the aircraft in the leveled position,
> and its an RV, you will have the best ground handling characteristics with
> reasonable tire life that you can get from and RV. (was that a run on
> sentence or what), annnnddd, as a final testimony to what I have said in
the
> last few posts, my RV-6, which a few of you can testify to, seems to
handle
> very nicely, just got 500 hours of tire life out of the last set of
McCreary
> semi cheapos, and it is set to 1/8 deg toe-in for each wheel in the
> previously mentioned adjusting configuration.
>
> But if you want to believe that aircraft are so special that the laws of
> physics for them are different than for cars, go for it. Toe 'em out.
We're
> always looking for a few good parts.
>
> W
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Taildraggers and X wind landings |
Rotation is not where people get in trouble, it is raising and lowering the
tail. This is one of the prime elements of the endless 3 point vs Wheel
landing debate. In a trike, The gyroscopic effect is not that great because
the pitch change at rotation should be very small and fairly slow. Raising
and lowering the tail is a large pitch change which can be done at a brisk
rate which exacerbates the problem.
Alex is correct, when you rotate, lower the tail, the nose goes right, but
by then you have enough airspeed that the rudder and vertical stabilizer is
very effective. If you do "lose it" you just pull back a little more and
fly away.
A right crosswind is definitely best for takeoff, P-factor is the biggie in
a tailwheel airplane. Gyroscopic effect is a fairly small contributor here,
. On landing in a small airplane with a large propeller(s), like the
Mustang, T-6, or the Twin Beech, you notice a definite right turning
tendency while lowering the tail.
As a direct result of this phenomenon, Left wings for a T-6 are about 3 to 4
times more money than right wings. (I will resist the obvious political pun)
Rushing the tail down aggravates this problem. The pitch change rate is
high and the increase in AOA results in less weight on the wheels. People
learning in the T-6 get spooked when the runway disappears over the nose and
try to rush the tail down for tailwheel steering. A well timed gust from
the right and the next thing you know, you are farming. (BTDT)
At the risk of starting the dreaded 3 pt vs Wheel Landing debate, 3 point
take-offs and landings will, all but, totally negate gyroscopic effect, but
P-Factor will be greater in a 3 point take off. That all said, I mostly T/O
& land on the wheels.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
>
> John, my instructors were wrong. What was said is that when one rotates
> on takeoff, the nose will veer left from the gyroscopic precession of
> the prop, adding a third left yawing component. Rotation implies tail
> comes down. There would appear to be two components pulling left and
> one pulling right during the rotation.
>
> Alex Peterson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | r miller <robertpmiller(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Ordering Harbor Freight Tools |
I live near a Harbor Freight store. You often get less than you pay
for. Unless you can see the stuff I think your taking a gamble. You
should only buy stuff from them when it is on sale, as the sales rotate
through their stock all the time. I got some mics and they were like
15 and they are pretty good, but you can't count on it. The prices
can be so low that the stuff is just disposable anyway.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
"'rv-list(at)matronics.com'"
woops,
late night emails are a bad idea, I definately was using the terms SI and
Castor reversed. thx John,
RE lateral offset and independant non steerable suspension, I was trying not
to add to many factors, nor did I add the effects of tire wear, worn
suspension etc.
But the basic rules of static force and dynamic force apply to all vehicles
as they are all a chunk of mass hurtling down the road, with tires fore and
aft. Just because it has wings or three wheels doesn't change the physics of
it.
And in all the vehicles I have ever test driven/flown with toe out, they are
squirrely for the reasons I tried to describe (ie: eliminating the toe out
fixed the problem). This is even true with rear axle toe out, but it is
canceled by the front wheel(s) overriding that dynamic instability.
Some of the old german cars would get rear axle toe out and they would
wiggle their asses ever so slightly, much like german girls and also very
much like a nose dragger with the mains toed out. I have never rigged a
three or four wheel vehicle that intentionally had toe-out specs from the
manufacturer, but there may be cases of this, particularly if the vehicle
changes weight a large amount thereby flexing the steering geometery.
Longitudinal offset does compensate for road crown, among other things. It
creates a centering action, but only if coupled with aft rake or castor
(correctly stated, duh)
The common starting point is the above relationship of static force and
dynamic force as it applies to a mass in motion. So far I believe Newton has
never been proven wrong, but who knows in this new day of "anything goes".
Who knows, maybe Britney can rip off Michael Jacksons jock strap in the
world series.
thanks for catching that,
W
-----Original Message-----
From: John D. Heath [mailto:altoq(at)direcway.com]
Subject: Re: RV-List: More on toe
Almost, not quite.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wheeler North" <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us>
Subject: RV-List: More on toe
>
> To beat this sucker some more...
>
> Cars are designed to be stable, so they go straight down the road. This is
> acutally required by both Federal and some state's laws. Most aircraft are
> also designed to be stable as well, as required by the FARs, Part 23, both
> on the ground and in the air. We then add devices to unstabilize them so
> they may be pointed in the direction of our choice.
Most cars are designed to satisfy the same minds that promote sliding to the
scene of the accident with all four wheels locked up, thereby removing any
control from the driver.
> In a car and an aircraft you have toe, camber, possibly castor, offset and
> steering inclination (or rake for you motorcycle buffs)
>
> Toe is the parallel of the wheels to the longitudinal centerline
(wheel
> fronts in or out)
> Camber is the perpendicular of the wheel to the road (wheel tops in or
> out)
>
> castor, offset and SI relate to wheels that are meant to be steered rather
> than fixed on an axle
Offset is designed into vehicles, with four wheels or more, to help
compensate for road crown (Which is not built into roads on purpose any
more).
Some Ridged rear axel cars and most independent rear suspension cars do have
Camber. All independent rear suspension cars have toe in or out and some
have caster. Some cars have active rear steer and some have designed in bump
steer.
> Castor is the amount the steering pivot is angled inboard or outboard and
> comes into play when you have two steer wheels on a common axle.
Castor is the amount the steering pivot or axis is angled fore and aft.
> SI or rake is the amount the steering pivot is angled fore and aft.
> Offset is the amount the axle is offset fore or aft of the pivot point.
> These latter two apply to all dual and single steerable wheels.
SI is the amount the steering axis is angled inboard or outboard.
Rake is the amount the axel is offset fore or aft of the pivot axis.
> Ride height in and of itself doesn't effect any of this, but you usually
> have to screw up all of this to change ride height, so if ride height is
> off, so usually is everything else.
> So the fixed gear axles on any car or aircraft are effected by camber and
> toe.
>
> Since most aircraft only have one steerable wheel, this is only effected
by
> SI/rake and offset, whereas cars are also effected by castor.
Steerable wheels on aircraft are much like motor cycles, the steering axis
is tipped fore or aft, so they do have caster.
The axel is most often aft of the steering axis. so they do have rake.
> By and large the design engineers have figured out that for most three and
> four wheeled vehicles the following holds true with respect to stability
and
> effect.
>
> Excessive toe out creates straight ahead static stability, dynamic
> instability and scrubs tires very rapidly.
> Excessive toe in creates straight ahead static instability, dynamic
> stability and scrubs tires very rapidly.
> Minor toe out still creates dynamic instability.
> Minor toe in still creates dynamic stability.
> But neither of the last two effect static stability much, nor do they eat
> tires too rapidly.
I don't know if this is what the design engineers have figured out. Any of
this might be true in a particular circumstance. More times than you would
believe, good design is sacrificed for the sake of a good marketable
product.
> Since I have helped design and install several of those $100K lasar guided
> alignment systems recently mentioned, and I have taught both car
alignment,
> and aircraft rigging courses many times and have been adjusting both for a
> long time, and I have tested what I am saying, and I have watched the
result
> of doing it wrong many times, and I have watched engineers test what I am
> saying,
I would like to say here that I am not in question of anyone's competence or
lack of experience. However, a sweep solution to all alignment and stability
problems for all aircraft of type,is not within my grasp. My experience
tells me
that regardless of how you arrive at design settings for caster, camber,
etc, you must have that common starting point.
Then you must make further adjustment to achieve the desired serviceability
and stability. Excessive is just that, excessive.A requirement for an
excessive amount of adjustment suggest that execution of the design is poor
or that structural limits have been exceeded.
> I feel fairly confident that if you have either no, or slight
>toe-in
> with the weight on the wheels, with the aircraft in the leveled position,
> and its an RV, you will have the best ground handling characteristics with
> reasonable tire life that you can get from and RV. (was that a run on
> sentence or what), annnnddd, as a final testimony to what I have said in
the
> last few posts, my RV-6, which a few of you can testify to, seems to
handle
> very nicely, just got 500 hours of tire life out of the last set of
McCreary
> semi cheapos, and it is set to 1/8 deg toe-in for each wheel in the
> previously mentioned adjusting configuration.
>
> But if you want to believe that aircraft are so special that the laws of
> physics for them are different than for cars, go for it. Toe 'em out.
Can't agree more.
>
> W
>
John D.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ordering tools online from Harbor Freight and drill press |
speeds
In a message dated 2/4/04 1:17:42 PM Pacific Standard Time,
linenwool(at)comcast.net writes:
<< does the slow 250 RPM come in handy in other situations that I'm not
thinking of? >>
Unless you really like living dangerously, don't even think of using a
flycutter at higher speed than 250 RPM. Just MHO of course.
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, moving to hangar soon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
(delete now if you don't like long discussions... 8-)
Wheeler North wrote:
> Possibly you missed the point about dynamic flexing. I have tested this by
> physically moving wheel alignment from toe in to toe out and back to see
> what this does on several different airplanes, both tail draggers and nose
> draggers.
Of course, all of this analysis depends on the static case, where you're
making a smooth landing on a smooth paved strip. If you're landing on a
bumpy grass strip, and your gearleg is "bouncy", your wheel could be
oscillating from toed-in to toed-out, and cambered-in to cambered-out,
at the same time. Still, you have to be able to analyze it, so you work
with the assumed "mean" position of the wheel. Which will be the static
case.
> Also this vector analysis only deals with
> static balance IE the desire to return to straight ahead.
Isn't that the goal? To prevent a groundloop?
> But dynamically although
> toe out causes the plane and heavy wheel to run away from its CG vector
> causing a desire to stay straight ahead, the accumlative pull and gear flex
> causes it to suddenly rebound thereby pointing CG vector to the other side
> rapidly rather than controllably keeping it loaded in one direction until
> the user changes it.
I don't think so. As the heavy wheel runs away from it's CG vector, the
heaviness decreases, and it reaches a static state. Of course there
will be an oscillation around the static point, but it will approach
that static point as the plane settles and both wheels get on the
ground. During this time, the lateral force is oscillating between
stabilizing (which is good) and no force at all (or maybe slight
destabilizing, if the wheel oscillates to a toed-in alignment).
But if your wheels are toed-in, the heavy wheel will be fighting your
ability to land smoothly from the time it hits. The lateral force will
be oscillating between destabilizing (which is bad) and no force at all
(or maybe slight stabilizing, if the wheel oscillates to toed-out).
> this is kinda tough to visiualize which is why I was
> trying to avoid going there
Yeah, and I tried to stay out of this discussion as long as possible
before diving headlong into it as well... But i'm in it now. 8-)
> Usually when a pilot squacks "squirrley" this is what I look for,
> ie: large toe out as evidenced by sharp ridges on the outboard edges of the
> tire tread ribs.
Are you sure we're talking about the same thing? Toe-out or toe-in, the
wheel could still be contacting the ground at the center of it's tread.
Are you thinking camber, ie. the top of the tire further out than the
bottom, and not toe-in/out, ie. the front of the tire further in/out
than the rear?
> Ground loops are almost always the result over controlling to slowly (which
> often starts as not enough input to late and digresses to too much input for
> too long or too late). The lag and then sudden increase of input on top of
> the aircraft dynamically rebounding due to toe out usually only takes one
> oscillation to incur a full loop.
When your "heavy" wheel is pointing across the axis of your CG's
velocity vector, you're asking for a groundloop. If your wheels are
toed-in, you *start* your touchdown in this state. No amount of dynamic
vibration or oscillation will change the fact that you have a
destabilizing force acting against your landing stability. When your
wheels are toed-out, you start your touchdown in a quasi-stable state.
Your CG is still behind your wheels, which is unstable, but you're
making use of the physics of the situation to gain every little bit of
help that you can in order to keep the airplane straight on landing.
> Very slight toe out can also exacerbate this because of the lag caused by
> the wheel shifting its track from toe out to toe in as it is side loaded if
> the aircraft's gear geometery allow this, which the RVs do.
You say it, but it's not clear that this happens. At least, it's not
clear that it would happen on a toed-out gear, but wouldn't on a toed-in
gear. If it's toed-out to start with and oscillates between in and out,
then the same should be true if it was toed-in to start with. Toed in
is less stable.
> The easiest way to see this aspect is to use your arm and fist to emulate
> the RV gear and wheel. As weight is added that gear will flex backwards and
> outwards. As it does this it will move it towards toe-in.
This may be a good thing to measure on an RV, as I can't see this no
matter how hard I try to configure it in my head. When I simulate it
using a wire, the static loading case (aircraft not moving) doesn't show
any real change in toe-in or toe-out, but if anything it's a slight
toe-out. When you add the landing load, which is a drag force applied
to the wheel, it causes the gearleg to flex to the back, twisting the
axle to the outside, increasing the toe-out. So as near as I can tell,
the heavy wheel on an RV will *always* have toe-out, unless you set it
with *lots* of toe-in to start with.
Maybe this is exactly what's intended... With a slight "preload" of
toe-in, in the case of a crosswind, one-wheel landing the gear flexes to
give you toe-out, which stabilizes you. Once wheels are flat on the
ground, and the speed has dropped, you go back to neutral or slight
toe-in (but by that point it won't matter, as the danger of a groundloop
is lessened, unless a dastardly gust comes out of nowhere...).
> Hope I didn't get too crazy here, I can assure you I have tested and cured
> this more times than I care to admit, and it seems to hold true for most
> aircraft.
I can't argue with practical experience. Theory often falls down hard
when shown that "it just doesn't work that way." But even when that
happens, it's usually pretty simple to show that the reason the theory
doesn't hold is because it's faulty. If it were just me, i'd bow to the
practical experience of you and others who can explain quite eloquently
what you've seen in practise. But every design textbook I can find says
that toe-out (or neutral) is the "best" alignment for taildraggers. I
would have expected that 50 years later someone would have found new
theory to explain why the old theory is wrong.
-Rob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: One Yoke for Squeezer? |
I have 3 yokes on my pneu squeezer - one with about a 2" reach, one with
maybe 4" (deeper) reach, and a "no hole yoke" for getting into tight spots.
David
----- Original Message -----
From: <tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com>
Subject: RV-List: One Yoke for Squeezer?
>
>
> I know this has been done to death in the archives, but I am looking for
some updated opinions. If I were to only buy one yoke for a pneumatic
squeezer, which have people found to be most valuable? I am assuming the
longeron yoke would be the most versatile. It seems to be $135 at
Cleveland...anyone know of a cheaper spot? I am looking for yokes that fit
the 214c style squeezers. For reference, I am at the wing skeleton stage.
>
> Also, if anyone has a used squeezer they want to get rid of, I would love
to take it off your hands.
>
> Thanks,
> Scott
> 7A Wings
> http://sky.prohosting.com/rv7a/
>
> Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
> The most personalized portal on the Web!
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
Wheeler North wrote:
> Toe is the parallelness of the wheels to the longitudinal centerline (wheel
> fronts in or out)
> Camber is the perpendicularness of the wheel to the road (wheel tops in or
> out)
Ah, okay, disregard previous message's question as to whether you and I
were on the same page with respect to toe-in vs. camber. We are.
> Positive static stability is the desire to not drift, to stay straight
> ahead, to not roll, or pitch, and to return to balance when unstabilized.
Correct. But toe-in will destablilize this condition on a tailwheel.
Neutral toe-in/out will be neutrally stable. And toe-out will stabilize it.
> Positive dynamic stability is the desire to dampen the drift oscillation
> during each cycle and rebound.
Also correct. But whether you have a toed-out wheel that drifts out
until it has no more traction, then "pops" in again, or whether you have
a toed-in wheel that drifts in until it bounces the plane into the air,
then "pops" out again, is irrelevant.
> Excessive toe out creates straight ahead static stability, dynamic
> instability and scrubs tires very rapidly.
> Excessive toe in creates straight ahead static instability, dynamic
> stability and scrubs tires very rapidly.
I agree in both cases, except for the dynamic instability. There must
be reference material on this somewhere... Does anyone know where?
> Minor toe out still creates dynamic instability.
> Minor toe in still creates dynamic stability.
I only partly agree. I would say that the above is true on a nosewheel
aircraft, and that the opposite is true on a tailwheel aircraft.
> But if you want to believe that aircraft are so special that the laws of
> physics for them are different than for cars, go for it. Toe 'em out. We're
> always looking for a few good parts.
Sorry, but you've already claimed that your suggestion of toe-in works
despite the theoretical explanations to the contrary... So don't try
playing the "laws of physics" card now.
I'm all for saying that airplanes behave the laws of physics. What i'd
like to see are the laws that say that toe-in makes a tailwheel airplane
stable, when aircraft designers are being taught (with physics) that
toe-out is required.
Hopefully this will be resolved before I get to my fuselage kit... 8-)
-Rob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Prior <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
Wheeler North wrote:
> But the basic rules of static force and dynamic force apply to all vehicles
> as they are all a chunk of mass hurtling down the road, with tires fore and
> aft. Just because it has wings or three wheels doesn't change the physics of
> it.
But whether it's steered from the front of the vehicle or rear, *does*
change the physics of it. Tailwheel aircraft have fixed forward wheels
and rear steering, but even three-wheeled cars (with two wheels in
front) have front steering. We need to stop using cars as an analogy,
the mission profile for their wheels doesn't apply here. Cars don't get
a "heavy wheel" due to a crosswind landing (unless you're Molt Taylor or
one of the Dukes of Hazzard with Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane on your
tail... but I digress). Airplanes do.
> The common starting point is the above relationship of static force and
> dynamic force as it applies to a mass in motion. So far I believe Newton has
> never been proven wrong, but who knows in this new day of "anything goes".
I agree completely. But so far, the textbooks (ie. the laws-of-physics
explanations) are favoring toe-out for a tailwheel aircraft. So far all
i've seen is anecdotal evidence that toe-in is more stable, and I can
find lots of anecdotal evidence to the contrary with a quick google
search. Can we find some laws-of-physics explanations that show that
we're more stable with toe-in? I gave one previously that says we're
more stable with toe-out, here it is again:
Reference: Stinton, Darrol "The Design of the Aeroplane", Chapter 10
"Choice of Landing Gear"
I admit that I don't *know* the correct answer here. But if toe-in is
better, i'd like to understand *why* it's better, not just hear "because
it just works." Plenty of people say toe-out "just works" too.
> Who knows, maybe Britney can rip off Michael Jacksons jock strap in the
> world series.
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeuuuck. I think one "wardrobe malfunction" per millenium is
enough, thanks...
-Rob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BELTEDAIR(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Moving an RV... |
How about getting Van to design folding wings?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oldsfolks(at)aol.com |
BOY !! There sure some long winded guys on here !
See Van's plans and construction manual. He has designed and sold all these
great planes we love to fly,so he MUST have something on the ball .
I just leveled my RV-4,clamped a long piece of 2" X 2" angle to both axles
and drilled the gear leg anchor holes. NO toe IN or OUT. It has worked fine for
our RV-4's - 700 hrs on one & 56 hrs. on another.
Bob Olds A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor
RV-4 , N1191X , Flying Now
Charleston, Arkansas
"Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Garrett" <bgarrett920(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Web references on toe-in/toe-out |
The debate on toe-in vs. toe-out got me curious enough to do a Google search
to see what others are saying.
What I found were interesting and conflicting opinions that have led me to
the following hypotheses (some of which I'm more confident than others):
a) toe settings are likely much more important in tail-draggers than trikes,
b) toe requirements might not be the same for the two gear types,
c) I don't imagine I want much of either one, and
d) while there may be a correct answer in theory to this issue(if so, I
don't have it), toe settings are probably dependent on enough other things
(camber, COG, airplane attitude and alignment, ???) all of which are
influenced in construction and dynamically through airplane loading and
ground operations, as to preclude there being a single correct 'real-world'
answer.
Just my opinion, which may change before I'm flying but I think if I were
there now I'd try to set toe to complement whatever camber exists to balance
each other as a starting point and then adjust once flying if the plane
doesn't handle well on the ground. Of course with a trike I don't think
it's a big a concern for me either.
Below I've included links to the sites I found useful and quotes from those
that seemed concise enough.
Bill
http://www.mindspring.com/~cramskill/toe_in.htm
An article written by an R/C builder explaining why he believes toe-in works
for tail-dragger R/C planes.
http://www.cessna120-140.org/Library/serviceletter/SL_Cessna_56.htm
Cessna's specs for toe-in for Cessna tail-draggers (140, 170, 195)
http://www.warbuddies.homestead.com/files/Setting-Toe.htm
Website for WAR replica builders (Source of quote - The following was taken
from Frank J. O'Brien's book "HOMEBUILTS, A Handbook for the First-Time
Builder, TAB Books, Inc.):
"Something that is not talked about in either the plans or the construction
manual is the toe-in adjustment for the wheels. This is a fairly critical
procedure, because if any toe-out is present, the aircraft will be very
difficult to control while taxiing and during the takeoff and landing roll."
(Refers later in the article specifically to the WAR Corsair)
http://www.ndrcc.com/Newsletters/jan04.pdf
From an R/C airplane newsletter:
"I used to correspond with a high-level engineer at British Aerospace, and
his rule was Trike gear: Toe In, Taildragger,Toe Out. But I caught him on a
lot of stuff, so I always took what he said with about a pound of salt.
Empirically, I find that on a low-wing taildragger with wide stance, toe-in
helps. Conversely, on a high-wing with narrow stance (Cub), toe-out is the
only way to get it off the ground. There are three significant factors:
Height of the CG, width of the wheels, and distance the wheels are in front
of the CG."
http://www.ez.org/cp55-p10.htm
From the EZ website:
"When you built your EZ or your Defiant, you should have set the axles on
the main gear such that your main wheels were toed in about 1/4' on each
side . . . Once you have the correct toe-in set, you will notice an
improvement in tracking, shorter take-off and less tire wear"
http://members.eaa.org/home/homebuilders/testing/articles/Stage%201_%20Makin
g%20Preparations%20For%20Flight%20Testing.html
From a 1989 Tony Bingelis article in Sport Aviation on preparing for the
first flight:
"6. RECHECK THE WHEEL ALIGNMENT - Toe-in or a cocked wheel could lead to
dangerous runway control problems. Strive for a zero toe-in/toe-out, or a
neutral alignment. If you have to deviate slightly - opt for a bit of
toe-out rather than toe-in."
http://david.gall.com/files/Airplane/quickie1.txt
From a Quickie report:
"Granted, there's been much discussion over the years about wheel alignment
on Q-birds. For the most part it has centered on toe-in vs. toe-out, with
toe-out emerging as the apparent winner. However, there's more to wheel
alignment than just toe. Equally important is camber . . . In general, a
cambered rolling pneumatic-tired wheel produces a lateral force in the
direction of the tilt. . . . From this simple rule of thumb, it can be seen
that static negative camber will require toe-out to keep the wheels from
fighting each other." (A much more thorough discussion is given in the
article.)
http://www.sportflight.com/kfb/sampiss.htm
From a Kitfox Newsletter regarding a taildragger Kitfox:
"A call to Skystar verified they are designed to be parallel or slightly
equally toed-out. . . . I finally corrected the alignment to 0.8 degrees of
toe-out for both wheels. I have read several articles on aircraft wheel
alignment. There are two schools of thought on this issue: one says toe-in
is best and the other says toe-out is best. Both schools present a
reasonable rationale."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Moving an RV... |
Hi Kurt,
Last summer things got very hot in this area. Due to forest fires in the
immediate area we were forced to find a means to move my partially built
6A.(wiring).
A call to a local towing company brought a 'Tilt bed' flat deck that suited
the job very well The 6A winched up the ramp with the wheel pants in place
without a problem. The horizontal stab was not installed.
We brought the bird back the same way a few weeks later.
These low bed tilt flat deck trucks are wider to accommodate bent wrecks.
Tied down as it was by a professional it traveled very well
Good luck,
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: <RV6AOKC(at)aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: Moving an RV...
>
> Well things are almost all done....tons of little stuff...but tired of
paying
> $150 a month for a hanger with no plane in it. Im ready to move my 6A.
I
> have called around to several rental places, trailer manufacturers, and
the
> like and can't seem to find a trailer to fit my 6A gear span...(about
85"). Most
> trailers are around 69" I guess. I called my old chapter and they don't
loan
> their "RV Transporter" out anymore (thanks to someone I am sure).
> Anyway...any other Ideas? I need to go about 23 miles, mostly freeway and
live in a
> large city (OKC), where I would think there would be some trailer
resources. If
> you have any advice on companies I could call or maybe how to get a 6A on
a
> 69in trailer....let me know. Thanks....
>
> Kurt in OKC
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hopperdhh(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Web references on toe-in/toe-out |
I'm there now and I guess I'm a little confused. How do I change toe? Van's
drills one hole for you which essentially defines toe and camber. All you
can do is enlarge the other hole to match the gearleg and the first hole. I
think it would get pretty messy putting washers or shims between the gear
weldments and the spar. I'm building an RV-7A. Is the arrangement different on
the
other Vans airplanes?
Dan N766DH almost finished
In a message dated 2/5/04 6:54:29 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
bgarrett920(at)comcast.net writes:
> Just my opinion, which may change before I'm flying but I think if I were
> there now I'd try to set toe to complement whatever camber exists to balance
> each other as a starting point and then adjust once flying if the plane
> doesn't handle well on the ground. Of course with a trike I don't think
> it's a big a concern for me either.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Dube <bdube(at)al.noaa.gov> |
| Subject: | Should I cancel my wing kit? :-) |
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3075250452&category=4672
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Walker" <ron(at)walker.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Web references on toe-in/toe-out |
A primary advantage to building a match hole kit! These "issues" are a non
issue for us!
I think they are talking about an RV4 - they even have to make jigs and
other complicated stuff ;o)
Ron
----- Original Message -----
From: <Hopperdhh(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Web references on toe-in/toe-out
>
>
> I'm there now and I guess I'm a little confused. How do I change toe?
Van's
> drills one hole for you which essentially defines toe and camber. All you
> can do is enlarge the other hole to match the gearleg and the first hole.
I
> think it would get pretty messy putting washers or shims between the gear
> weldments and the spar. I'm building an RV-7A. Is the arrangement
different on the
> other Vans airplanes?
>
> Dan N766DH almost finished
>
> In a message dated 2/5/04 6:54:29 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
> bgarrett920(at)comcast.net writes:
>
> > Just my opinion, which may change before I'm flying but I think if I
were
> > there now I'd try to set toe to complement whatever camber exists to
balance
> > each other as a starting point and then adjust once flying if the plane
> > doesn't handle well on the ground. Of course with a trike I don't think
> > it's a big a concern for me either.
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ordering Harbor Freight Tools |
| From: | "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com> |
I wasn't going to contribute to this thread but while out in the shop tonight I
had need for a #27 drill bit. I view tools as having multiple levels - first
is the basic capability, second is when you start increasing relative quality
and/or precision. A year or so ago I purchased a zillion piece drill bit set
from Harbor Freight that has fractional sizes from 1/16 - 1/2 in 1/64 increments,
lettered sizes a-z, and numbered sizes 1-60. Although these are certainly
not the highest quality bits, and I don't use them for everyday building, it
is REALLY nice to have the RIGHT bit when you need the odd size. This is something
that I wouldn't have bought at a "high quality" tool store because of
the cost. But for the $25-30 that I spent for the set it has been well worth
it. Another good find was a small cutoff saw that I've used for longerons and
stiffners.
Would I buy a ratchet and sockets from them for everyday use? Probably not. Would
I buy a C-clamp or spare die grinder? You bet!
BTW, you also see those drill bit sets on Ebay frequently. Go to tools and do a search on "titanium" - they are titanium nitride coated bits. Here's one from tonight: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2376898115&category=11704
Bob RV-10 #105
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob W M Shipley" <rob(at)robsglass.com> |
"Charles Becker" wrote
I got their 4.5HP 21 Gal compressor for 169 (including shipping). It came
in the box with the "this side up" pointing down.................
That's how my fuselage kit was delivered by AFS! I have a photo of the proud delivery
guy standing next to it on my driveway. Smiling - until I showed him
the big red arrows.
Rob
Rob W M Shipley
N919RV (res) Fuselage .....still!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kempthornes <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ordering Harbor Freight Tools |
Hi y'all
Like most, some stuff I bought from HF has been good, some not so good.
Tools are commonly made in other lands and sold here in the USA. Many of
these are the exact same thing you get from the USA company. I don't
believe that tools made in China and sold under famous USA names are made
in special factories while the ones that look just like them are made in
straw huts. I don't know where to get facts, tho.
On the other hand, some 'knock-offs' ARE probably made on the same line but
with poorer quality materials. In tools this is commonly the use of cheap
alloys of steel. Today I noticed that my HF pliers have gotten to where
the jaws don't meet as they are bent! Another source of cheap tools is as
old as manufacturing - they are the rejects of quality control.
Price does not guarantee quality. If we were real manufacturers we would
do 'incoming inspection' on things we buy. When we would buy we would
specify performance objectives and when purchased material was defective,
we'd send it back. The vendor would then sell it to Radio Shack etc.
When I buy a cheap tool, I try to make sure it will meet my needs. Maybe I
only need a right angle drill for a few dozen holes and $45 is a lot less
than $195. At the same time, fine tools are a joy in themselves. (Except
slippery chromed wrenches)
All this applies to most everything we buy. And some that is given to us.
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK - Three trips to OSH now.
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ordering Harbor Freight Tools |
I have the same set of bits. I think they are great for needing special
sizes as you mentioned, but NOT for everyday drilling on your project. The
quality is not very good, and they do dull quite easily. But, they are the
right size, and if you only need some odd size once or twice, it's worth it.
Paul Besing
RV-6A Sold
RV-10 Soon
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com>
Subject: RV-List: Re: Ordering Harbor Freight Tools
>
> I wasn't going to contribute to this thread but while out in the shop
tonight I had need for a #27 drill bit. I view tools as having multiple
levels - first is the basic capability, second is when you start increasing
relative quality and/or precision. A year or so ago I purchased a zillion
piece drill bit set from Harbor Freight that has fractional sizes from
1/16 - 1/2 in 1/64 increments, lettered sizes a-z, and numbered sizes 1-60.
Although these are certainly not the highest quality bits, and I don't use
them for everyday building, it is REALLY nice to have the RIGHT bit when you
need the odd size. This is something that I wouldn't have bought at a "high
quality" tool store because of the cost. But for the $25-30 that I spent
for the set it has been well worth it. Another good find was a small cutoff
saw that I've used for longerons and stiffners.
>
> Would I buy a ratchet and sockets from them for everyday use? Probably
not. Would I buy a C-clamp or spare die grinder? You bet!
>
> BTW, you also see those drill bit sets on Ebay frequently. Go to tools
and do a search on "titanium" - they are titanium nitride coated bits.
Here's one from tonight:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2376898115&category=11704
>
> Bob RV-10 #105
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Moving an RV... |
In a message dated 2/5/2004 11:25:18 PM Eastern Standard Time,
lwalters2(at)cfl.rr.com writes:
> Well things are almost all done....tons of little stuff...but tired of
> paying
> gt;$150 a month for a hanger with no plane in it.nbsp; Im ready to move my
> 6A.nbsp;nbsp; I
> gt;have called around to several rental places, trailer manufacturers, and
> the
> gt;like and can't seem to find a trailer to fit my 6A gear span...(about
> 85").nbsp; Most
> gt;trailers are around 69" I guess.nbsp; I called my old chapter and they
> don't loan
> gt;their "RV Transporter" out anymore (thanks to someone I am sure).nbsp;
> nbsp;
> gt;Anyway...any other Ideas?nbsp; I need to go about 23 miles, mostly
> freeway and live in a
> gt;large city (OKC), where I would think there would be some trailer
> resources.nbsp; If
> gt;you have any advice on companies I could call or maybe how to get a 6A
> on a
> gt;69in trailer....let me know.nbsp; Thanks....
>
Moved mine about 30 miles on a flat bed tilt back wrecker.nbsp; The guy was
very careful loading and securing the plane.nbsp; He really enjoyed the
experience of hauling something other than a car.nbsp; Cost was approx $100.
Len Leggette, RV-8A
Greensboro, NCnbsp; N910LL
202 hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hopperdhh(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: This way up. |
My wings came with the arrows pointing down and two big "bites" taken out of
the bottom (now the top) of the box, with a lot of loose parts which fell out
of the box.nbsp; Guess what!nbsp; I was really lucky, everything was there
and there was no damage to the contents.
When I went to the truck terminal to get my $5500 constant speed prop from
nearby Ohio, it was standing in the warehouse on end.nbsp; The box said "DO NOT
STAND ON END."nbsp; Again no apparent damage.
Hey, these guys are professionals.nbsp; That's what they do for a living.
nbsp; I guess they do it with their eyes closed.
Dan N766DHnbsp; RV-7A to fly this Spring
--gt; RV-List message posted by: "Rob W M Shipley" lt;rob(at)robsglass.comgt;
>
>
> "Charles Becker" wrote
> I got their 4.5HP 21 Gal compressor for 169 (including shipping).nbsp; It
> came
> in the box with the "this side up" pointing down.................
>
> That's how my fuselage kit was delivered by AFS!nbsp; I have a photo of the
> proud delivery guy standing next to it on my driveway.nbsp; Smiling - until
> I showed him the big red arrows.
>
> Rob
> Rob W M Shipley
> N919RV (res) Fuselage .....still!
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "steve blackwell" <n10557(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Dynon EMI (different scenario) |
As a full time CFI I often get asked questions about the things I carry in
my flight bag.
The short answer -
1# A garmin 295 (to find my way to an airport when its ifr and the electric
failure)
2# A handheld radio ( to turn on the runway lights at night if the electric
fails)
will your handheld work well enough to turn on the lights?
RV8 (builder) Steve
><matronicspost@csg-i.com>
>
>There's a couple of very disappointing things about this situation:
>
>1) in a total electric failure emergency, my backup handheld radio will
>most
>likely be rendered useless.
>
>2) in an otherwise excellent product, those engineering folks at Dynon have
>completely dropped the ball in not doing thorough Quality Control checks on
>EMI. Isn't it obvious that in a highly electrified environment such as an
>airplane cockpit, one MUST check for EMI? Is that too much to ask?
>
>I will be giving them a call tomorrow.
>
>Paul
>
>
Optimize your Internet experience to the max with the new MSN Premium
Internet Software. http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200359ave/direct/01/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Great find on glare shield end cap/cover |
I found a great piece of moulding for sliding on the glare shield/fore head cutter. Its a pretty heavy duty piece with some metal in it to keep a round shape. It fit perfectly and looks great. Its called Jiffy Trim and I got it at a local fabric shop in Louisville, www.Baerfabrics.com It was $2.75 for a yard. Best money I havent spent in a while.
If you cant find it, they said they would ship. Comes in black and white.
Jeff Dowling
RV-6A, N915JD
9 hours
Chicago/Louisville
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Great find on glare shield end cap/cover |
In a message dated 2/6/2004 10:26:20 AM Eastern Standard Time,
DWENSING(at)aol.com writes:
> gt;heavy duty piece with some metal in it to keep a round shape.nbsp; It
> fit
> gt;perfectly and looks great.nbsp; Its called Jiffy Trim and I got it at a
> gt;local fabric shop in Louisville, www.Baerfabrics.com
>
> Jeff,
> Could not find it on their web site even searching the name Jiffy Trim. Is
> there more to the name?
> Dale Ensing
>
I used a piece of large round welt material that we use at my furniture
manufacturing plant.nbsp; Just had the sewers cover it with black material.nbsp;
Used the welt cord that was large enough to cover up the fiberglass work done
on the outside.nbsp;
I am happy with it ..
Len Leggette, RV-8A
Greensboro, NCnbsp; N910LL
202 hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Flying RVs with Disabilities |
I believe the SportAviation article was around April of 1998. I too had polio
and have limited use of my legs, but enough that I can fly with standard
controls although I do need wear Sperry's boating shoes. I spoke to the fellow
who
built that RV6A and he helped convince me to go ahead and build one too. I am
5 years (Feb 14th) into the process and hope to fly May or June this year.
If your friend would like to contact me I would be happy to talk with him and
would try and find the magazine if he would like.
Kind regards,
Dave Burnham
Lincolnshire, IL
djb6a(at)cs.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Great find on glare shield end cap/cover |
Jeff,
How about giving us the part number for this item?
Charlie Kuss
>
>I found a great piece of moulding for sliding on the glare shield/fore head cutter. Its a pretty heavy duty piece with some metal in it to keep a round shape. It fit perfectly and looks great. Its called Jiffy Trim and I got it at a local fabric shop in Louisville, www.Baerfabrics.com It was $2.75 for a yard. Best money I havent spent in a while.
>
>If you cant find it, they said they would ship. Comes in black and white.
>
>Jeff Dowling
>RV-6A, N915JD
>9 hours
>Chicago/Louisville
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
The best part of a grass strip is tire slide, the tires slide a lot so
effects of toe in or out are minimized.
Yes and no, a ground loop is almost always caused by poor control
techniques, or excessive landing conditions (cross wind). Alignment will add
to this, but a good landing in stable conditions will overcome poor
alignment if its not too whacked out.
<
I don't think so. As the heavy wheel runs away from it's CG vector, the
heaviness decreases, and it reaches a static state. Of course there
will be an oscillation around the static point, but it will approach
that static point as the plane settles and both wheels get on the
ground. During this time, the lateral force is oscillating between
stabilizing (which is good) and no force at all (or maybe slight
destabilizing, if the wheel oscillates to a toed-in alignment).
>
As the heavy wheel runs away it also drags the aircraft with it, turning it,
or at least shifting its inertia to the opposite side. This causes the
aircraft to then jump to the other wheel and it repeats in reverse. This is
ususally a dynamically negatively stable oscillation, IE get worse each
cycle.
Picture the extreme, a penguin sliding on ice. As it leans to the left that
flipper, which is toed out, begins to dig in and add drag and trys to move
outwards, this spins the penguin to the left and now its inertia is pointing
to the right side. Load then shifts from the left to the right and the right
flipper digs in.
>
But if your wheels are toed-in, the heavy wheel will be fighting your
ability to land smoothly from the time it hits. The lateral force will
be oscillating between destabilizing (which is bad) and no force at all
(or maybe slight stabilizing, if the wheel oscillates to toed-out).
<
Yes, this is true for severe toe in (greater than 5 degs) but slight toe in
(less than one deg) has very little effect on static stablility. The
controllability of the aircraft easily overcomes this, and there is no force
trying to make the aircraft hop back and forth left to right, which is very
difficult to control.
> Usually when a pilot squacks "squirrley" this is what I look for,
> ie: large toe out as evidenced by sharp ridges on the outboard edges of
the
> tire tread ribs.
>
Are you sure we're talking about the same thing? Toe-out or toe-in, the
wheel could still be contacting the ground at the center of it's tread.
Are you thinking camber, ie. the top of the tire further out than the
bottom, and not toe-in/out, ie. the front of the tire further in/out
than the rear?
<
Yes I'm sure, Camber causes one side of the tire to wear, toe causes the
tire to scrubb laterally across the ribs. The direction of lateral scrubb
will always be from rounded tread groove corners to sharp feathered groove
corners. If rounded is inboard its toed out, if rounded is outboard its toed
in.
>
You say it, but it's not clear that this happens. At least, it's not
clear that it would happen on a toed-out gear, but wouldn't on a toed-in
gear. If it's toed-out to start with and oscillates between in and out,
then the same should be true if it was toed-in to start with. Toed in
is less stable.
>
It will do this in reverse, but when toed in, the wheel that is shifting
track won't be the heavy wheel.
If you are leaning on the left wheel and the right wheel shifts track its
not a big deal, but if the left one does it will be a bigger deal partly
because of load shift, and partly because your outboard wheel track will
have just moved to a tighter radius thereby increasing side loading at an
unpredictible rate.
>
This may be a good thing to measure on an RV, as I can't see this no
matter how hard I try to configure it in my head. When I simulate it
using a wire, the static loading case (aircraft not moving) doesn't show
any real change in toe-in or toe-out, but if anything it's a slight
toe-out. When you add the landing load, which is a drag force applied
to the wheel, it causes the gearleg to flex to the back, twisting the
axle to the outside, increasing the toe-out. So as near as I can tell,
the heavy wheel on an RV will *always* have toe-out, unless you set it
with *lots* of toe-in to start with.
Maybe this is exactly what's intended... With a slight "preload" of
toe-in, in the case of a crosswind, one-wheel landing the gear flexes to
give you toe-out, which stabilizes you. Once wheels are flat on the
ground, and the speed has dropped, you go back to neutral or slight
toe-in (but by that point it won't matter, as the danger of a groundloop
is lessened, unless a dastardly gust comes out of nowhere...).
>
The RV gear project outwards and aftwards quite a bit, particularly in the
three point position. As the wheels are weighted the axles move backwards
and outwards and the wheel base gets wider. Its the wider that increases toe
in. Imagine worse case by grabbing the gear ankles and pushing each towards
the wing tips. The axles tips would move fwd and upwards.
>
I can't argue with practical experience. Theory often falls down hard
when shown that "it just doesn't work that way." But even when that
happens, it's usually pretty simple to show that the reason the theory
doesn't hold is because it's faulty. If it were just me, i'd bow to the
practical experience of you and others who can explain quite eloquently
what you've seen in practise. But every design textbook I can find says
that toe-out (or neutral) is the "best" alignment for taildraggers. I
would have expected that 50 years later someone would have found new
theory to explain why the old theory is wrong.
-Rob
<
Not too sure about the old books, but most automotive books I've read call
for slight toe-in. As far as I know the physics don't change just because
you took the wings off.
W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oldsfolks(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: >Re:Great find on glare shield,etc. |
I found my edge cover for my RV-4 glare shield in my parts collection. I cut
a slot in one side of 3/8" aluminum tubing and used pop rivets to attach it at
ends & middle. Painted same color as plane interior.
Bob Olds A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor
RV-4 , N1191X , Flying Now
Charleston, Arkansas
"Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
From: "Ron Calhoun" <roncal(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: RV-List: More on toe
Wheeler,
I tried to pick out of your explanation what is causing my rv-4 tires to
wear excessively on the outside. It runs straight and true. The wear is
the only problem. My tires do appear to have excessive camber, even with
full weight on them. My flying friends say I just have not made enough hard
landings. What say ye?
Ron
RV-4 Flying
<>>><<>><
Try some hard landings... :{) no?
Sounds like camber, But I would have to see them to tell if toe is also
involved. Camber will cause them to wear on the side, or off center, and toe
will cause them to wear fast, and scrubb laterally. See previous recent
post.
I rotate/flip my tires so the wear side evens out every once in a while, say
100 hours.
W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LarryLicking(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Great find on glare shield end cap/cover |
Several guys around here have used Style Guard truck door edge molding found
at Pep Boys. It comes in 46" length, is cheap, and looks very good.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)QCBC.ORG>
Subject: Re: RV-List: More on toe
You have left out the effect of Center of Gravity and the dynamic controls
in 3 axis instead of just the 2 of automotive.,
Cy,
I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at so I'll mull it around on
paper here.
Its not really a 3 axis issue for most of the landing/takeoff run. At least
I've never heard of an airplane that airlooped close to the runway. And I
think I have been talking about the CG throughout most of this.
The RVs tend to either be on the ground or in the air, but they don't spend
much time doing both, at least such that the third axis of motion
complicates things a lot.
So for say a 600 ft ground landing run, lets say you wheel land it and then
stick it forward, you're a car with wings after 15-20 feet at the most. In a
good three point plop, you're a car with wings after 5ft
During takeoff there is a big fan helping to keep things pulled straight
ahead, and again with an RV you go from being a weighted wheeled vehicle to
"what wheels" fairly quickly. This is also one arguement for doing wheel
takeoffs rather than three point takeoffs. One transitions from loaded mains
to flying in about one second with a wheel takeoff.
I will also add the the three axis effects that apply to an aircraft also
apply to car and in fact may be worse for a car. The only difference is an
aircraft has wings and inertia causing the vertical axis of force and
movement, whereas the car only has inertia. But the car has a lot more
opportunity for its inertia to be propelled vertically given that most roads
are far worse than most runways. And the aircraft's wings usually are
helping to stabilize things as they begin to generate good lift.
Am I still on the same page here??? I guess I got myself confused because
I'm not clear what you were getting at Cy. ;{O
W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kempthornes <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: >Re:Great find on glare shield,etc. |
I'd hate to hit my head on that but I guess it is better than the original
design.
hal
Stiiiill working on an updated panel with Trio and Dynon.
At 06:54 PM 2/6/2004, you wrote:
>
>I found my edge cover for my RV-4 glare shield in my parts collection. I cut
>a slot in one side of 3/8" aluminum tubing and used pop rivets to attach
>it at
>ends & middle. Painted same color as plane interior.
>
>
>Bob Olds A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor
>RV-4 , N1191X , Flying Now
>Charleston, Arkansas
>"Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers"
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Great find on glare shield end cap/cover |
For what its worth, if you have some leftover of the marine-type rudder cable
cover -- not fancy but it slides on nicely and looks pretty good.
Dave Bockelman
F1 Rocket
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Oke <wjoke(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Great find on glare shield end cap/cover |
My solution was about 6 ft of 3/8" rubber fuel line (lawn tractor grade
stuff) stretched out and slit lengthwise with an Exacto knife. Slipped
neatly over the glareshield edge and holds itself in place although I did
add a bit of silicon goo at the ends. A good match to the matte black on top
of the glareshield and reasonable protection for those seated in the
cockpit.
Jim Oke
Wpg., MB
RV-6A
----- Original Message -----
From: <LarryLicking(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Great find on glare shield end cap/cover
>
> Several guys around here have used Style Guard truck door edge molding
found
> at Pep Boys. It comes in 46" length, is cheap, and looks very good.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
I dunno, that coyote usually didn't fare to well after using those ACME
products.
From: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Moving an RV...
Wiley Coyote revisited,
How about an 'Acme instant' RV, throw a pellet on the ground add water and
(( POW )) your ready to fly!.... Tap water will do!!! No filtered Coor's
thank you very much!. Use that for the Acme instant fuel for extra octane.
Jim in Kelowna
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
What started the discussion was the fact that Vans did a really bad job of
factory drilling my gear mounts on a RV-6.
And yes the -As are different in that they are independant of each other. So
I wouldn't trust Vans ability to align this, I would check it yourself via
the board method, and then check it again as I described too many posts ago,
right before you fly it.
Or buy tires and live with it...
But if you want it right, its becoming clear that the design books are
written by someone who has never flown an airplane, but most of the
maintenance documentation for many aircraft will give you some good advice.
Have an engineer design it then hire a mechanic to make it useable.
W
From: Hopperdhh(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: Web references on toe-in/toe-out
I'm there now and I guess I'm a little confused. How do I change toe?
Van's
drills one hole for you which essentially defines toe and camber. All you
can do is enlarge the other hole to match the gearleg and the first hole. I
think it would get pretty messy putting washers or shims between the gear
weldments and the spar. I'm building an RV-7A. Is the arrangement
different on
the
other Vans airplanes?
Dan N766DH almost finished
In a message dated 2/5/04 6:54:29 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
bgarrett920(at)comcast.net writes:
> Just my opinion, which may change before I'm flying but I think if I were
> there now I'd try to set toe to complement whatever camber exists to
balance
> each other as a starting point and then adjust once flying if the plane
> doesn't handle well on the ground. Of course with a trike I don't think
> it's a big a concern for me either.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | linn walters <lwalters2(at)cfl.rr.com> |
Wheeler North wrote:
>
>
>making a smooth landing on a smooth paved strip.
>
Now, how often does that happen?
> If you're landing on a
>bumpy grass strip, and your gearleg is "bouncy", your wheel could be
>oscillating from toed-in to toed-out, and cambered-in to cambered-out,
>at the same time.
>
Kinda like a tapered steel gear leg???
> Still, you have to be able to analyze it, so you work
>with the assumed "mean" position of the wheel. Which will be the static
>case.
>
Now gear has personality! "yeah, my gear is only a little mean .....
not as mean as yours."
>The best part of a grass strip is tire slide, the tires slide a lot so
>effects of toe in or out are minimized.
>
Not really true! But then it could have been exhilarated pilots doing
donuts and showing off. well, everyone was watching!
>Yes and no, a ground loop is almost always caused by poor control
>techniques, or excessive landing conditions (cross wind). Alignment will add
>to this, but a good landing in stable conditions will overcome poor
>alignment if its not too whacked out.
>
Ah, so that's what that rudder does!!!
><
>I don't think so. As the heavy wheel runs away from it's CG vector, the
>heaviness decreases, and it reaches a static state. Of course there
>will be an oscillation around the static point, but it will approach
>that static point as the plane settles and both wheels get on the
>ground. During this time, the lateral force is oscillating between
>stabilizing (which is good) and no force at all (or maybe slight
>destabilizing, if the wheel oscillates to a toed-in alignment).
>
Huh?
>As the heavy wheel runs away it also drags the aircraft with it, turning it,
>or at least shifting its inertia to the opposite side. This causes the
>aircraft to then jump to the other wheel and it repeats in reverse. This is
>ususally a dynamically negatively stable oscillation, IE get worse each
>cycle.
>
If true, then taildraggers would slalom down the runway instead of doing
donuts.
>Picture the extreme, a penguin sliding on ice. As it leans to the left that
>flipper, which is toed out, begins to dig in and add drag and trys to move
>outwards, this spins the penguin to the left and now its inertia is pointing
>to the right side. Load then shifts from the left to the right and the right
>flipper digs in.
>
Oh God! Now we're all going to watch animal planet! Who, in his right
mind, has been studying the toe in/out of a penguins flipper???? C'mon now!
>But if your wheels are toed-in, the heavy wheel will be fighting your
>ability to land smoothly from the time it hits. The lateral force will
>be oscillating between destabilizing (which is bad) and no force at all
>(or maybe slight stabilizing, if the wheel oscillates to toed-out).
>
Here we go again. KISS. If the wheels are toed in, and the turn is
initiated (however it happens), then the CG transfers a little more to
the outside and the gear flexes more and the tire starts to wheelbarrow
and more weight is transferred to that side and you've just been dumped
in Mr. Toads Wild Ride.
><
>Yes, this is true for severe toe in (greater than 5 degs) but slight toe in
>(less than one deg) has very little effect on static stablility.
>
The only static stability we can talk about in this thread (and it's
been a long one!) is in the hangar with the doors closed. A landing is
about as dynamic as it gets.
> The
>controllability of the aircraft easily overcomes this, and there is no force
>trying to make the aircraft hop back and forth left to right, which is very
>difficult to control.
>
The controllability is why we're here. At the point where everything
goes to crap, you're in between controllabiility from rudder and
ailerons and controllability due to weight on the gear. I've never seen
an airplane of any configuration 'hop back and forth' so maybe I've been
missing something all these years.
>>Usually when a pilot squacks "squirrley" this is what I look for,
>>ie: large toe out as evidenced by sharp ridges on the outboard edges of
>>
>>
>the tire tread ribs.
>
I'm not a tire expert so I'll let this one pass. I've never seen this
phenomenon.
>Are you sure we're talking about the same thing? Toe-out or toe-in, the
>wheel could still be contacting the ground at the center of it's tread.
> Are you thinking camber, ie. the top of the tire further out than the
>bottom, and not toe-in/out, ie. the front of the tire further in/out
>than the rear?
>
In my discussions about my Pitts gear, it became apparent that camber
plays a huge part in the groundloop scenario once the activity is
esstablished.
><
>Yes I'm sure, Camber causes one side of the tire to wear, toe causes the
>tire to scrubb laterally across the ribs. The direction of lateral scrubb
>will always be from rounded tread groove corners to sharp feathered groove
>corners. If rounded is inboard its toed out, if rounded is outboard its toed
>in.
>
Your stuck thinking in a static gear situation, and that doesn't exist
in the ground-loop or handling problems scenario.
>You say it, but it's not clear that this happens. At least, it's not
>clear that it would happen on a toed-out gear, but wouldn't on a toed-in
>gear. If it's toed-out to start with and oscillates between in and out,
>then the same should be true if it was toed-in to start with. Toed in
>is less stable.
>
True, and if you visualize the toe-in/out radically, you might see the
picture. As long as equal weight is placed on ecah of the mains,
nothing happens ..... the gear finally gets to a stable position and the
tires scrub a little. Once things start to get out of hand (more weight
and gear flexing on one side) you find out how the gear is aligned.
>It will do this in reverse, but when toed in, the wheel that is shifting
>track won't be the heavy wheel.
>
Not true. This wheel gets increasing weight due to shifting CG.
>If you are leaning on the left wheel and the right wheel shifts track its
>not a big deal, but if the left one does it will be a bigger deal partly
>because of load shift, and partly because your outboard wheel track will
>have just moved to a tighter radius thereby increasing side loading at an
>unpredictible rate.
>
Ah, some glimmer of the problem.
>This may be a good thing to measure on an RV, as I can't see this no
>matter how hard I try to configure it in my head. When I simulate it
>using a wire, the static loading case (aircraft not moving) doesn't show
>any real change in toe-in or toe-out, but if anything it's a slight
>toe-out. When you add the landing load, which is a drag force applied
>to the wheel,
>
Not that much drag ..... unless you've got the brakes on. The tire is
rolling ..... or should be!!
> it causes the gearleg to flex to the back,
>
I'm missing something here. There is no vector to the back. The force
vector is to the outside on the heavy side.
> twisting the axle to the outside, increasing the toe-out. So as near as I can
tell,
>the heavy wheel on an RV will *always* have toe-out, unless you set it
>with *lots* of toe-in to start with.
>
You forget the increase in caster which is far, far, more than any
change in toe-in/out.
>Maybe this is exactly what's intended... With a slight "preload" of
>toe-in, in the case of a crosswind, one-wheel landing the gear flexes to
>give you toe-out, which stabilizes you. Once wheels are flat on the
>ground, and the speed has dropped, you go back to neutral or slight
>toe-in (but by that point it won't matter, as the danger of a groundloop
>is lessened, unless a dastardly gust comes out of nowhere...).
>
Again the effects of caster are ignored. Tip up the wing of your little
plastic airplane and see what happens to the caster.
>The RV gear project outwards and aftwards quite a bit, particularly in the
>three point position. As the wheels are weighted the axles move backwards
>and outwards and the wheel base gets wider. Its the wider that increases toe
>in. Imagine worse case by grabbing the gear ankles and pushing each towards
>the wing tips. The axles tips would move fwd and upwards.
>
>
>
>I can't argue with practical experience. Theory often falls down hard
>when shown that "it just doesn't work that way." But even when that
>happens, it's usually pretty simple to show that the reason the theory
>doesn't hold is because it's faulty. If it were just me, i'd bow to the
>practical experience of you and others who can explain quite eloquently
>what you've seen in practise. But every design textbook I can find says
>that toe-out (or neutral) is the "best" alignment for taildraggers. I
>would have expected that 50 years later someone would have found new
>theory to explain why the old theory is wrong.
>
Well, I concur with this paragraph. The problem here is that I've lost
track, due to the vagaries of email, just who said what in this email
>-Rob
><
>
>Not too sure about the old books, but most automotive books I've read call
>for slight toe-in. As far as I know the physics don't change just because
>you took the wings off.
>
The suspension on a car is as far removed from an aircraft suspension as
it can get. It's like the Penguin problem above.
>W
>
Wheeler, and Bob, Please don't take offense at my comments ..... none
was meant. I'm not here to change anyones mind, but my experience and
thought tell me that toe-in is not a good thing, and that caster has a
lot to do with suirrely landings.
Linn
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)QCBC.ORG> |
The loading on the steerable wheel is a real variable as it might not be
able to counteract any of the turning moments with a light load or less.
The loading of the wheels and the direction they go down the runway while
turning due to the center of gravity being so much higher in an airplane can
change. The aerodynamics of the plane may or may not have loading on the
wheels. This is not the case in a car to any great extent when traveling at
landing speeds. If there are any aerodynamic devices, they are fixed and do
not change like in a plane. The high center of gravity also changes the
braking loads on the plane wheels much more than in a car.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wheeler North" <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us>
Subject: RV-List: toe
>
> From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)QCBC.ORG>
> Subject: Re: RV-List: More on toe
>
>
> You have left out the effect of Center of Gravity and the dynamic controls
> in 3 axis instead of just the 2 of automotive.,
>
> Cy,
>
> I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at so I'll mull it around on
> paper here.
>
> Its not really a 3 axis issue for most of the landing/takeoff run. At
least
> I've never heard of an airplane that airlooped close to the runway. And I
> think I have been talking about the CG throughout most of this.
>
> The RVs tend to either be on the ground or in the air, but they don't
spend
> much time doing both, at least such that the third axis of motion
> complicates things a lot.
>
> So for say a 600 ft ground landing run, lets say you wheel land it and
then
> stick it forward, you're a car with wings after 15-20 feet at the most. In
a
> good three point plop, you're a car with wings after 5ft
>
> During takeoff there is a big fan helping to keep things pulled straight
> ahead, and again with an RV you go from being a weighted wheeled vehicle
to
> "what wheels" fairly quickly. This is also one arguement for doing wheel
> takeoffs rather than three point takeoffs. One transitions from loaded
mains
> to flying in about one second with a wheel takeoff.
>
> I will also add the the three axis effects that apply to an aircraft also
> apply to car and in fact may be worse for a car. The only difference is an
> aircraft has wings and inertia causing the vertical axis of force and
> movement, whereas the car only has inertia. But the car has a lot more
> opportunity for its inertia to be propelled vertically given that most
roads
> are far worse than most runways. And the aircraft's wings usually are
> helping to stabilize things as they begin to generate good lift.
>
> Am I still on the same page here??? I guess I got myself confused because
> I'm not clear what you were getting at Cy. ;{O
>
> W
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Coldenhoff <rv9a_000(at)deru.com> |
bert murillo wrote:
> I bought the seats from Van's, so I could have
> them upholstered.
>
> That was a bad idea, wish I had go direct to any
> of the people, that do this for the rv's...
I don't have an answer to your questions, however if
you can't find anyone else, take a look at:
www.classicaerodesigns.com
In addition to selling complete seat sets for RVs, he
will also upholster the Van's seat foam.
--
Tim Coldenhoff
www.deru.com/~rv9a
90338 - electrical/finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Build Wings Together or Separate? |
| From: | "" <tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com> |
Those with experience going both routes...is it as big time saver to build both
wings at the same time? Anyone have an estimate on the number of clecos required
per wing? I don't think I can get both wings on one stand, and I am trying
to understand if I should make the additional investment.
Thanks,
Scott
7A Wings
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Calvert" <rv6(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | What size is GPS coax? |
I need to shorten my Garmin 295 remote antenna wire. Garmin says it is ok to shorten
it, but I cannot find a BNC to fit this small of a wire.
Guess I will have to special order it. Anyone know what size coax this is? {ie.,
RF58, RG6, etc.}
Thanks,
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok
RV6 N296JC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com> |
| Subject: | What size is GPS coax? |
A typical BNC should do. See an example here:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry Calvert [mailto:rv6(at)cox.net]
> Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2004 12:40 AM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: What size is GPS coax?
>
>
>
> I need to shorten my Garmin 295 remote antenna wire. Garmin
> says it is ok to shorten it, but I cannot find a BNC to fit
> this small of a wire.
>
> Guess I will have to special order it. Anyone know what size
> coax this is? {ie., RF58, RG6, etc.}
>
> Thanks,
> Jerry Calvert
> Edmond Ok
> RV6 N296JC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | New ASI calibration spreadsheet |
Listers,
A long time ago I created a spreadsheet to use when calibrating an
airspeed indicator. It worked, but it wasn't perfectly obvious how
it was to be used, especially when dealing with different units. An
unnamed lister contacted me a few days ago wondering why my
spreadsheet said his ASIs were both reading 15% out. :)
I have created a new ASI calibration spreadsheet which hopefully will
make it harder to screw up the units. It also creates a couple of
pretty graphs to look at. You can find it in Excel 4 and Excel 95
versions at:
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rvlinks/asi2.zip
You'll probably also want EAA Chapter 1000's info on how to make and
use a water manometer:
http://www.eaa1000.av.org/technicl/instcal/instcal.htm
And there is lots more info on how to calibrate pitot-static systems,
etc on my web site at:
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rvlinks/ssec.html
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/phplinks/index.php?PID=47
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Build Wings Together or Separate? |
In a message dated 2/8/2004 12:12:02 AM Eastern Standard Time,
tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com writes:
> Those with experience going both routes...is it as big time saver to build
> both wings at the same time? Anyone have an estimate on the number of clecos
> required per wing? I don't think I can get both wings on one stand, and I
> am trying to understand if I should make the additional investment.
>
> Thanks,
> Scott
> 7A Wings
>
Scott:
I built mine both at the same time. I just set up the two wing jigs about 3
- 4 feet apart and worked on each item at the same time. It took me 6 months
to complete the two wings.
I am getting ready to start another 8 and will do it the same.
Len Leggette, RV-8A
Greensboro, NC N910LL
203 hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dschaefer1(at)kc.rr.com |
| Subject: | MT Prop Controller |
I have a MT prop governor and the MT control cable bracket on an RV6A. Where is
everyone running the control cable through the firewall to make the bend into
the bracket? If you have a picture it would be much appreciated.
Additionally, does anyone have the cut-out for the spinner for the new Hartzell
prop?
Thanks
David Schaefer
RV6-A Finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Curt" <choffman9(at)cinci.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Build Wings Together or Separate? |
I built both of mine at the same time. I think there is a time savings in
that when you are doing a certain task and have the tools handy, you just do
it twice with the same set up time. Not much investment difference other
than more clecoes. You obviously use twice as many. Not sure how many but
certainly hundreds. I'll probably sell some when I am done with the
fuselage.
The other thing for me- there are some tedious sections of doing the wings,
e.g. smoothing all the edges, fluting the flanges, etc. I was afraid if I
didn't do them all at once I would get one wing done and quit : ) This way,
when you're done with your wings- you are done with the wings totally.
Anyway, if you have room, I would always recommend doing both at once.
Curt
----- Original Message -----
From: <tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com>
Subject: RV-List: Build Wings Together or Separate?
>
>
> Those with experience going both routes...is it as big time saver to build
both wings at the same time? Anyone have an estimate on the number of
clecos required per wing? I don't think I can get both wings on one stand,
and I am trying to understand if I should make the additional investment.
>
> Thanks,
> Scott
> 7A Wings
>
>
> Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
> The most personalized portal on the Web!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rich Crosley" <dirtrider(at)qnet.com> |
I bought Van's seats and took them in to local upholstery places. I got two
estimates and went with the guy I liked best. Cost $400. He did a great
job and was impressed with the quality of the foam. I probably didn't same
much but I am happy with the results. The shop I went to did reupholstered
furniture, not just cars,
Rich Crosley
Palmdale, CA
RV-8, engine, paint
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: .........and another |
In a message dated 2/3/04 7:39:03 AM Central Standard Time, RVEIGHTA(at)aol.com
writes:
> Mark, way to go man! Another TN RV flyin' and with a 3 blade Catto, no
> less.
Hi Walt- you flyin' yet? If you are, then you know what a terrific prop you
got! I may have sold Craig two more as my test pilot and another pilot from
Tullahoma both want one for their -4's after seeing how it performs on my 150hp
-6A.
And where the heck is Chuckey, anyway? I live in Columbia and the plane is
at Lewisburg for sea trials. Will move plane to Smyrna for hangaring soon.
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Build Wings Together or Separate? |
Hi Scott,
I did both my RV6-A wings together and would do it again that way. On top of
the 350 or so Avery supplied clecoes I borrowed an extra 100 3/32' Clecoes
and got the job done, another hundred would not have been be too many.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: <tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com>
To:
Subject: RV-List: Build Wings Together or Separate?
>
>
> Those with experience going both routes...is it as big time saver to
build
both wings at the same time? Anyone have an estimate on the number of
clecos required per wing? I don't think I can get both wings on one stand,
and I am trying to understand if I should make the additional investment.
>
> Thanks,
> Scott
> 7A Wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Build Wings Together or Separate? |
Hi Scott,
I did both my RV6-A wings together and would do it again that way. On top of
the 350 or so Avery supplied clecoes I borrowed an extra 100 3/32' Clecoes
and got the job done, another hundred would not have been be too many.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: <tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com>
To:
Subject: RV-List: Build Wings Together or Separate?
>
>
> Those with experience going both routes...is it as big time saver to
build
both wings at the same time? Anyone have an estimate on the number of
clecos required per wing? I don't think I can get both wings on one stand,
and I am trying to understand if I should make the additional investment.
>
> Thanks,
> Scott
> 7A Wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cammie Patch" <cammie(at)sunvalley.net> |
| Subject: | Build Wings Together or Separate? |
I like to build everything at the same time for the most part. The wings
were a little difficult due to having one stand, but I built a holder on the
back of my workbench, and swapped them around occasionally. I have found
that it is best to build the left component first (so the plans match) then
the right one before I forget things.
Cammie
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com
Subject: RV-List: Build Wings Together or Separate?
Those with experience going both routes...is it as big time saver to build
both wings at the same time? Anyone have an estimate on the number of
clecos required per wing? I don't think I can get both wings on one stand,
and I am trying to understand if I should make the additional investment.
Thanks,
Scott
7A Wings
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy(at)att.net> |
Bert,
Sell your foam seats..... and give Abby Erdmann at Flightline Interiors (http://my.execpc.com/~erdmannb/) a call.
I just received my complete interior package from her this week(seats, carpet,
sidepanels, etc.). It looks awesome and the quality of her work is the best I
have seen in any RV.... period.
Oh.... and her 'turn-around' was very timely.... less than month from the time
I placed the order.
Can't say enough nice things about Abby.... give her a call and you will see what
I mean.
Jack Lockamy
Camarillo, CA
RV-7A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | O320B3B Engine conical mount (RV9A) |
| From: | Joe Wiza <planejoel(at)juno.com> |
I think I have another tear jerker hear. I purchase a newly overhauled
lyco O320B3B (with conical mount) engine for my RV9A, which I paid
several hundred dollars up front for to Vans. The bottom engine mount
butts up against the engine frame. The lower cotter pins won't fit
through the lower mounting bolts (Close}. Also the holes in the throttle
and mixture bracket would require they go through the engine mount. I
can't see any other way to mount this. Has anyone experienced this?
thanks ahead. Will call Vans monday for possible solution, Possibly move
engine ahead a 1/4" with washers ( erg remove engine)
RV9A Mounting Engine
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson(at)consolidated.net> |
| Subject: | Re: O320B3B Engine conical mount (RV9A) |
Joe Wiza wrote:
>
> I think I have another tear jerker hear. I purchase a newly overhauled
> lyco O320B3B (with conical mount) engine for my RV9A, which I paid
> several hundred dollars up front for to Vans. The bottom engine mount
> butts up against the engine frame. The lower cotter pins won't fit
> through the lower mounting bolts (Close}. Also the holes in the throttle
> and mixture bracket would require they go through the engine mount. I
> can't see any other way to mount this. Has anyone experienced this?
> thanks ahead. Will call Vans monday for possible solution, Possibly move
> engine ahead a 1/4" with washers ( erg remove engine)
>
> RV9A Mounting Engine
This is probably not a tear jerker....... give a little more information and
you will get some good solutions from different people.
1. bolts.....
Do the cotter pins not fit because the slots in the nuts are not quite lined
up with the holes in the bolts? Are the bolts too long and interfereing with
something on the engine?
2.Engine Control Cables.....
Are they on a collision course with the cross tube that is part of the mount
because of their hole locations in the firewall?
Think positive. all will work out...............
Phil in Illinois
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Any listers in San Juan |
I'll be in SJU a lot the next 2 months. Anybody down here?
Jeff Dowling
RV-6A, N915JD
9 hours
Chicago/Louisville
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RVEIGHTA(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: .........and another |
Mark, yep, I'm flyin' - got about 70 hours on thuh bird now. You can see my
plane in the Feb issue of Sport Aviator. It's the first plane shown.
Chuckey is in north east tennessee. 'Bout 10 miles east of Greeneville. I
live in a fly-in community which is almost due east of the greeneville airport
(GCY). Maybe you can come up and see us sometime.
Yeah, I LOVE my Catto prop. Very quiet, sexy lookin' and I'm seein' 202mph
at 8000'.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Great find on glare shield end cap/cover |
Try http://www.atrim.com/Page97.html
I'm not sure whether this is the same product, but they have a couple of
different things that might work. Also check their complete index and
how-to section. Looks like they may have some other useful things.
Jim Hasper - RV-7 just starting empennage (setting up shop in Franklin,
Tennessee)
In a message dated 2/6/04 9:42:27 AM Eastern Standard Time,
shempdowling(at)earthlink.net writes:
(clip)
> heavy duty piece with some metal in it to keep a round shape.nbsp; It
fit
> perfectly and looks great.nbsp; Its called Jiffy Trim and I got it at a
> local fabric shop in Louisville, www.Baerfabrics.com
Could not find it on their web site even searching the name Jiffy Trim.
Is
there more to the name?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
| Subject: | .........and another |
>
>
>
> Mark, yep, I'm flyin' - got about 70 hours on thuh bird now.
> You can see my
> plane in the Feb issue of Sport Aviator. It's the first plane shown.
>
> Chuckey is in north east tennessee. 'Bout 10 miles east of
> Greeneville. I
> live in a fly-in community which is almost due east of the
> greeneville airport
> (GCY). Maybe you can come up and see us sometime.
>
> Yeah, I LOVE my Catto prop. Very quiet, sexy lookin' and I'm
> seein' 202mph
> at 8000'.
Do you want all 1000+ of us to come and see you sometime?
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 436 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Great find on glare shield end cap/cover |
| From: | "Frank van der Hulst (Staff WG)" <F.vanderHulst(at)ucol.ac.nz> |
FWIW, I used a piece of old TV antenna -- it's a tube rolled from
aluminium strip. The beauty (apart from the price!) is that there's
already slot in one side of the tube to fit it onto the glareshield
edge. I am still figuring out how to make it stay in place, however.
-----Original Message-----
From: DvdBock(at)aol.com [mailto:DvdBock(at)aol.com]
Subject: Re: RV-List: Great find on glare shield end cap/cover
For what its worth, if you have some leftover of the marine-type rudder
cable
cover -- not fancy but it slides on nicely and looks pretty good. Dave
Bockelman F1 Rocket
Learn real skills for the real world - Apply online
at http://www.ucol.ac.nz or call 0800 GO UCOL
(0800 46 8265) or txt free 3388 for more information
and make a good move to UCOL Universal College of
Learning.
Enrol with a public institute and be certain of your
future
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Build Wings Together or Separate? |
| From: | "Frank van der Hulst (Staff WG)" <F.vanderHulst(at)ucol.ac.nz> |
I built both wings at the same time, using two arms off a central pair
of posts. I'd do the same again, but with the wings on separate sets of
posts.
Go to http://www.matronics.com/rv-list/bunnys-guide/rv/bunny/, then to
Wings and Skinning in the Index.
From that page:
On reflection, I think the ideal jig would be set up on 3 posts in an
A-configuration. Put the root ends of both wings at the apex of the A
(not sure whether it'd be better to have the upper or lower surface
inside the A). Put a work-bench at the cross-bar of the A. As with the
empennage jig, the posts aren't really important. What is important is
to get the cross-arms in the right place and firm, and to have access to
both sides of the wings.
Frank
Learn real skills for the real world - Apply online
at http://www.ucol.ac.nz or call 0800 GO UCOL
(0800 46 8265) or txt free 3388 for more information
and make a good move to UCOL Universal College of
Learning.
Enrol with a public institute and be certain of your
future
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Pardue" <n5lp(at)warpdriveonline.com> |
Listers:
Just got back from the Soaring Society of America convention in Atlanta.
Van and Diane were in attendance. Great time. Wouldn't you like to hear
about how to soar about 2,000 miles along the Andes Mountains in Argentina,
in one day?
Anyway I noticed some of the conversation was about last summer's Return to
Kitty Hawk Race coast to coast glider race, which Van participated in. You
see Van had some mechanical problems with his nice new German glider. What
caused the buzz was that all these little RV airplanes were buzzing around
all over delivering parts and help to Van, an advantage none of the other
competitors had. Some people were kind of wondering what was up with that.
Why were all these people helping this quiet guy?
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP Flying
http://n5lp.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hopperdhh(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Great find on glare shield end cap/cover |
As soon as I saw the original post, I called and ordered 4' 1" Jiffy Trim
over the phone. They were very good to deal with. Will let you know how I like
it when it arrives. Thanks for the tip.
Dan N766DH RV-7A to fly this spring
In a message dated 2/8/04 1:49:12 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
shempdowling(at)earthlink.net writes:
> >Jeff,
> >Could not find it on their web site even searching the name Jiffy Trim. Is
> >there more to the name?
> >Dale Ensing
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oldsfolks(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: >Re: O-320 B3B Conical engine mount |
Joe;
I have an O-320 B3A Lycoming in my RV-4. I don't remember any problems like
you mention. Please explain a little more on the problems,as sugested in the
other post.
I can look mine over and try to help if I get more specific answers.
Bob Olds A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor
RV-4 , N1191X , Flying Now
Charleston, Arkansas
"Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oldsfolks(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: >Re:Build Wings Together or Seperate |
I built both wings at the same time for our RV-4. I had two sets of posts
about 6 feet apart.
As others said,it is more convenient to do on one and turn around and do on
the other.
I only had 300 3/32" and 200 1/8" clecoes,so a little juggling is called
for,but it worked.
I built seperate on our first RV-4 , but I like the together much more.
Bob n' Lu Olds
oldsfolks(at)aol.com
Charleston,Arkansas
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: >Re:Build Wings Together or Seperate |
| From: | Denis Walsh <denis.walsh(at)comcast.net> |
I did mine separately but would go for both at once next time. Many
advantages. I heard a rumor that when Geo Orndorff was doing his second
wing on his second RV, he had to replay his own tape to see how to do
something!, This certainly happened to me, anyway.
Just don't put them too close together. The time will come when you want to
get some old guy like me to help and he won't be able to squat between them.
Denis
> From: Oldsfolks(at)aol.com
> Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 20:20:08 EST
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: >Re:Build Wings Together or Seperate
>
>
> I built both wings at the same time for our RV-4. I had two sets of posts
> about 6 feet apart.
> As others said,it is more convenient to do on one and turn around and do on
> the other.
> I only had 300 3/32" and 200 1/8" clecoes,so a little juggling is called
> for,but it worked.
> I built seperate on our first RV-4 , but I like the together much more.
>
>
> Bob n' Lu Olds
> oldsfolks(at)aol.com
> Charleston,Arkansas
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
Sam, Mike and Jerry,
I finally had the chance to fly the LCD version in really smooth air today.
No head/tail winds that I could detect. I could steer by leaning.
Chuck and I had it set at 4 4 and 7 for the trk/crs and pullin. It was
hunting somewhat, so I went back to 3 3 and 7. It got much better and
tracked darned near perfect, with only an occasional correction.
When we had set it to 4 and 4 in moderate rough air it corrected it from .02
to .01 nm or less off track. So it may be that 3 and 3 (factory defaults)is
a better overall setting given that .02 or 121 ft is more than fine enough
for rough air tracking. I haven't since flown it any time in rough air, but
if it likes the 4/4 for rough air it only takes a minute to adjust, and it
can be adjusted in trk mode.
Then we got to Camarillo. Rwy 08 wind 060 to 090 at 28 kts gusting to 38.
How the heck those two WX conditions can happen within 30nm and 5000ft of
each other is beyond me, but thank you God, both were fun.
It was one short landing and takeoff, and the Chicken Fried Steak was
delicious.
W
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 2/9/04 6:59:24 AM Eastern Standard Time, mstewart(at)iss.net
writes:
> Thanks for the update W.
> Mine arrives this week with the new screen and software updates. I look
> forward to testing it out this weekend.
> Mike
>
Mike:
Were you able to send it back for the new face and updates?
Len Leggette, RV-8A
Greensboro, N.C. N910LL
205 hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
Pictures are posted for the first get together of the Southeast RV Squadron
(SERV) on our website: www.bowenaero.com/serv
Just go to view pictures and then events. Had a good turnout for BBQ at
Stantons in Bennettsville, SC. Have to thank all the Mid-Atlantic guys for their
inspiration ... these guys are the most active RV guys around ... always
something going on !!!
Anyone with an interest is welcome to join our group. You can learn more at
the website.
Len Leggette, RV-8A
Greensboro, N.C. N910LL
205 hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronnie Brown" <romott(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Mag Timing Slipped? |
I am doing my first condition inspection and all is looking great except:
When I checked my Slick mag timing, I found it at 32 degrees BTDC. Since
our Cessna 172 in 10 years never had the timing reset except for the 500
hour mandatory inspections of the Bendix dual mag, this has me scratching my
head. The timing on the Jeff Rose has not changed.
The retaining bolts were tight, an internal inspection of the mag reveals
nothing (however, I have not checked the internal timing yet) , and I KNOW
the timing was set correctly (25 degrees BTDC) on this Lycoming IO360. I
had a low static RPM - 2100 rpms - so we checked everything before changing
the prop. Any worn parts in the gearing would cause the timing to be more
retarded.
Is it reasonable to think that the points could wear enough to cause the
timing to move that much in only 120 hours?
Or any other ideas?
THANKS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frazier, Vincent A" <VFrazier(at)usi.edu> |
Bert,
You built the rest of the plane. You can sew your own seats. It's not
that hard to do. It's a fun challenge.
http://www.usi.edu/science/chemistry/vfrazier/upholstery.htm
Vince
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
Vincent Himsl wrote:
>
> We thought the cost of pre made seats a monumental rip-off till she started
> doing them. Still we figure will save at least $400.00 off the $800.00+ we
> figured buying them would cost...oh and this includes the extra materials
> for the sides, etc. Downside...a lot of time.
>
> Of great help is "Creating Seats for the RV-6A" by Lori Millsap which is
> posted on the Tennessee Valley RV Builders Group Web Site. She doesn't use
> the Van's foam but everything else is relevant.
Here is the link:
http://www.tvrvbg.org/interior.htm
Sam Buchanan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Japundza <bjapundza(at)yahoo.com> |
Larry, on the leg of the sailplane race from St. Louis to Indy Van called a mutual
friend of ours looking to get some help with repairs to the flywheel on his
Ventus. That friend called me to come help the next morning. They ended up
doing a late-night attempt at repairs but the flywheel required a special puller
which we did not have. We ended up making a tool to pull the flywheel on
a lathe and got him all fixed up the next day. Long story short we got permission
to land at the airport the leg was starting on (it was closed to all but
the sailplanes) to deliver the tool, removed the flywheel, repaired the flywheel
while they were driving the leg (no thermals and some weather scrubbed the
leg) and got the flywheel to him by that evening in Dayton, OH. Van and his wife
were very friendly and he explained quite a bit of the sailplane stuff to
me, enough that it has stoked my interest; it was pretty neat to see a sailplane
race being a flatlander. I don't think it would h
ave been
any different if it was someone else, its a race and things break, most of the
RV guys I run around with would be happy to help anyone in that sort of circumstance.
Regards, Bob
RV-6 flying, F1 under const.
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Logbook entry for aerobatics |
Since I'm nearing the end of my 25 hour Phase 1 flight test
period, I had Terry Burch take my plane up and do the basic
aerobatic maneuvers I hope to do in the future (after some
training!) My understanding is I need to log the fact that
these maneuvers were flown as part of Phase 1. Can anyone
tell me the proper logbook entry language or point me to
somewhere that will have the correct logbook entry language?
Thanks,
Doug Medema
RV-6A N276DM 23.2 hours.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tim Bryan" <Tim(at)bryantechnology.com> |
| Subject: | Seats another question |
Hi all,
I also bought the seat foams from Van's. At this point, I do not know who
will do the upholstry work. I had planned on getting it done by a local
shop. I did not receive ANY instruction sheet with mine and quite frankly
didn't know it existed till mentioned here.
My question is this: If I put the bottom cushions in then the back it
sticks way up past the top of the seat. If I put the back in first it fits
nice but the bottom does not. Are we supposed to modify these foams to fit?
What is supposed to go in first, the bottom or the back?
Thanks for any help.
Tim Bryan
RV-6 N616TB
Redmond, Oregon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Great find on glare shield end cap/cover |
Here are the part numbers.
Black = 11397
White = 11405
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charlie Kuss" <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Great find on glare shield end cap/cover
>
> Jeff,
> How about giving us the part number for this item?
> Charlie Kuss
>
> >
> >I found a great piece of moulding for sliding on the glare shield/fore
head cutter. Its a pretty heavy duty piece with some metal in it to keep a
round shape. It fit perfectly and looks great. Its called Jiffy Trim and I
got it at a local fabric shop in Louisville, www.Baerfabrics.com It was
$2.75 for a yard. Best money I havent spent in a while.
> >
> >If you cant find it, they said they would ship. Comes in black and
white.
> >
> >Jeff Dowling
> >RV-6A, N915JD
> >9 hours
> >Chicago/Louisville
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
| Subject: | Logbook entry for aerobatics |
I would think a statement that lists the maneuvers performed along with
the entry airspeed for each would suffice.
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 dmedema(at)att.net
Subject: RV-List: Logbook entry for aerobatics
Since I'm nearing the end of my 25 hour Phase 1 flight test
period, I had Terry Burch take my plane up and do the basic
aerobatic maneuvers I hope to do in the future (after some
training!) My understanding is I need to log the fact that
these maneuvers were flown as part of Phase 1. Can anyone
tell me the proper logbook entry language or point me to
somewhere that will have the correct logbook entry language?
Thanks,
Doug Medema
RV-6A N276DM 23.2 hours.
=
=
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Logbook entry for aerobatics |
Doug,
Check you limitations. Mine had the wording the FAA wanted me to use writen into
them. It said something like no acro unless it is performed during phase I
and the following entry is made it the aircraft logbook...
If it is not there let me know and I will send you a copy of the exact wording.
Alan Kritzman
Cedar Rapids, IA
N8EM 120 hours
In a message dated 2/9/2004 11:20:55 AM Eastern Standard Time, dmedema(at)att.net
writes:
Can anyone
tell me the proper logbook entry language or point me to
somewhere that will have the correct logbook entry language?
Thanks,
Doug Medema
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve & Denise" <sjhdcl(at)kingston.net> |
I have Van's seat belts SBH-6 and shoulder harness and I'm finding
them a bit too small.
I have my seat back in the center hinge pin as per plans and my seat
cushions are from Becki Orndorff. They're plush but not to the
extreme. I can do up my seat belt fine but I have only about 1-2
inches of extra strap on each side. This is when I'm outfitted for
Canadians winters as well.
I'm not at all a big guy either. 5' 10", 170 lbs. Mind you my waste
has grown since I've started building my airplane and maybe now that
I'm flying I'll lose a little.
If I'm going to take some friends flying, I hate to say the belts
will be too small.
Anybody else experience this?
I have asked Van's for the vendor contact and they will not sell
extra material.
Any suggestions besides moving the seat and rudder petals (i.e. pain
in the arse).
Steve
RV7A
27.0 hours
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
ADVERTISEMENT
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe(at)yahoogroups.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vince Himsl" <vhimsl(at)turbonet.com> |
| Subject: | Seats another question |
You need to put a pillow case on the foam to protect it, put it in the plane and
sit on it till it settles. Then you will
have a better idea as to how it works. I am guessing that the seats were designed
to fit right when sat in. If they fit
perfect before you sat in them, they might compress to where they were too small.
You can always cut but adding on is
impossible. Also, you will be pulling the upholstery pretty tight in final assembly.
Still I found the seat backs about an inch too long and there is an annoying gap
between the foam bottom and the foam back.
My wife has only completed the front seat bottom (RV8) and when the back is done,
will report back to list. For all I know,
that too may 'self correct'.
I am assuming that the seat backs go all the way down to the floor and the bottoms
butt against them. Otherwise the backs
would be always falling forward.
This seat thread highlites the problem of building something that changes shape
when you upholster it, install it, and
finally sit in it. But...
I believe all these seat concerns and questions could be largely eliminated by
greatly improved assembly instructions from
Van's Aircraft.
Regards,
Vince Himsl
RV8 - FB (forever built) Finish
"Aerosport and LightSpeed, but still procrastinating on the canopy"
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Bryan
Subject: RV-List: Seats another question
Hi all,
I also bought the seat foams from Van's. At this point, I do not know who
will do the upholstry work. I had planned on getting it done by a local
shop. I did not receive ANY instruction sheet with mine and quite frankly
didn't know it existed till mentioned here.
My question is this: If I put the bottom cushions in then the back it
sticks way up past the top of the seat. If I put the back in first it fits
nice but the bottom does not. Are we supposed to modify these foams to fit?
What is supposed to go in first, the bottom or the back?
Thanks for any help.
Tim Bryan
RV-6 N616TB
Redmond, Oregon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Japundza <bjapundza(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Mag Timing Slipped? |
Ronnie, most certainly without lube on the cam the plastic cam follower could wear quickly. Or the points adjustment screw could be loose. Or there could be some arcing across the points (bad condenser) which could cause some buildup of crap on the points and thus they would open later. Educate yourself on the internals of your mag by having a look inside; I'd bet that is the culprit. To set the e-gap on a slick mag you need to get some special tools. Check www.sacskyranch.com for the tools. Have fun.
Regards, Bob
RV-6 flying, F1 under const.
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Garrett Bray" <braygarrett(at)hotmail.com> |
>From: "Steve & Denise" <sjhdcl(at)kingston.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: "RV List"
>Subject: RV-List: Seat belts
>Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 14:21:16 -0500
>
>
>I have Van's seat belts SBH-6 and shoulder harness and I'm finding
>them a bit too small.
I had the same problem, made "extenders" from 4130 steel and bolted them to
the seat belt brackets and then bolted the belts to the extenders. I added
about 3" as I recall. I'm 5'9" and 170 lbs.
Gary Bray
1998 RV-6
Keep up with high-tech trends here at "Hook'd on Technology."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "GMC" <gmcnutt(at)intergate.ca> |
Hi Tim
Here is how I made my seats, may give you and others some ideas.
1) find comfortable (for you) car seat, copy the contours of the bottom
cushion and lumbar area onto cardboard.
2) Seat backs, - use layered foam, base 3/4" high density foam (similar to
conforfoam), middle 1" medium & top egg crate foam. I purchased foams at
local foam shop.
3) glue base & middle layer together, use spray on contact cement (buy two
cans).
4) cut & shape lumbar cross pieces to match cardboard pattern, if desired
triangular edge strips can be added around perimeter. Glue on top of middle
layer.
5) then add top layer of egg crate foam.
6) Seat Bottoms - to fill the floor pan area. Get a sheet of 2" thick
styrofoam (blue) building insulation. This is used standing on edge, eight
pieces laminated together to make width of cushion. Reason for using it on
edge is so you can easily shape individual pieces (band saw) to match your
cardboard car seat pattern, seat back and floor pan shape before laminating
them together (liquid nails).
7) glue the sandwiched foam layers on top of laminated styrofoam (bottom
foams same or thicker than backrest).
8) take to automotive hot rod upholstery person for covering, about $300.
9) this made a firm seat cushion which I prefer. Makes for easier entry &
exit, better footing than stepping on a really soft cushion.
10) bottom cushion goes against metal backrest, sew velcro on bottom of seat
cushion and some industrial strength velcro glues on floor.
11) have an extra flap of material sewn on top of backrest seat cushion that
will be used to attach to top of backrest with five metal snap buttons. This
will keep cushion in place as you slide down into seat (possibly lots of
pressure here).
12) if using fabric consider having zippers installed so covers can be
removed for cleaning.
13) make cushions easy to remove, you will be under the instrument panel
many times in the future!
Advantages - comfortable for me, wife says a bit firm but I think mine are
about same as a Boeing cockpit seat.
They float. Standing up well at 240 hrs but are getting dirty.
Disadvantage - no booster cushion means it only fits my short size, I have a
temporary thinner bottom cushion for tall guys, it is made from gymnasium
exercise matt foam.
George in Langley
Hi all,
I also bought the seat foams from Van's. At this point, I do not know who
will do the upholstry work. I had planned on getting it done by a local
shop. I did not receive ANY instruction sheet with mine and quite frankly
didn't know it existed till mentioned here.
My question is this: If I put the bottom cushions in then the back it
sticks way up past the top of the seat. If I put the back in first it fits
nice but the bottom does not. Are we supposed to modify these foams to fit?
What is supposed to go in first, the bottom or the back?
Thanks for any help.
Tim Bryan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | linn walters <lwalters2(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mag Timing Slipped? |
Ronnie Brown wrote:
>
>I am doing my first condition inspection and all is looking great except:
>
>When I checked my Slick mag timing, I found it at 32 degrees BTDC. Since
>our Cessna 172 in 10 years never had the timing reset except for the 500
>hour mandatory inspections of the Bendix dual mag, this has me scratching my
>head. The timing on the Jeff Rose has not changed.
>
>The retaining bolts were tight, an internal inspection of the mag reveals
>nothing (however, I have not checked the internal timing yet) , and I KNOW
>the timing was set correctly (25 degrees BTDC) on this Lycoming IO360. I
>had a low static RPM - 2100 rpms - so we checked everything before changing
>the prop. Any worn parts in the gearing would cause the timing to be more
>retarded.
>
>Is it reasonable to think that the points could wear enough to cause the
>timing to move that much in only 120 hours?
>
>Or any other ideas?
>
>THANKS
>
I'm going to stick my neck out and say that the timing should have been
checked after the first 10 hrs. especially with a new mag. I'll say
that the 12 degree change is significant, but not to worry. Reset the
mag and check again in 10 hrs. There may be significant wear somewhere
that's not apparent and another check would alert you to a change in the
mag. I also think you should have detected the change earlier than
waiting for the annual conditional inspection. Now that a year has
passed, most all data points hould be stable, but with a new engine and
airplane ...... be alert for changes and especially data points off from
the norm.
Linn
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Nels Hanson <pa201950(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | RVs around Asheville,NC |
Any RV guys around Asheville,NC? I am supposed to fly
out there this Saturday for a wedding. I'm planning on
flying into AVL sometime Sat.morning and the wedding
in the evening,and then flying out Sunday PM back
toward the Chicago area. Any hanger space that could
hold an RV-6 Sat. night available?
__________________________________
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Knight <knightair(at)lv.rmci.net> |
| Subject: | Knight Upholstery for RV |
RV Builders:
I have been in the upholstery business for 30 years and have been making
upholstery products for kitplanes for 18 years. I have interior kits
available for RV-4, RV-6, RV-6A, and RV-8. I also have cabin covers and
other items. I am the supplier of upholstery products for several kitplane
manufacturers. A list of other kitplane interior products available upon
request.
For more information, call Knight Aircraft Interiors, Inc., at (702)
207-6681 or e mail me at knightair(at)lv.rmci.net. If you e-mail for
information, please mention either "Knight" or "Upholstery" in your
reference line so I can give your request my immediate attention. Photos
available upon request.
Sincerely,
KNIGHT AIRCRAFT INTERIORS, INC.
"Fly by Knight" Upholstery Products
Sam Knight
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Dynon -- they're workin' on it |
At the request of another builder, I'm posting a recent update from my web
site here on the list. I'm probably repeating things that have already been
discovered and stated by other builders (Sam, Paul, Kevin, etc.). Anyway,
here's what I wrote last week for what it's worth... (Dynon, since you're
listening, please correct me if I've misrepresented you in any way, for
which I apologize in advance!)
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
------------------------------------------------------
February 3, 2004
I spoke on the phone with Dynon engineering today. What I was told is that
they are well aware of the issue and they're working on the fix as we speak.
As best as they could describe it to me, the problem originates in the
remote compass (EDC-D10), is transmitted to the EFIS head via the connecting
wires, and then the EFIS head bleeds interference into the rest of the
system by way of the wires connecting to the power bus(es). I spoke at
length with one engineer about the likely form of the fix, which is probably
going to be a filter that plugs inline with the existing connector.
Essentially, the filter will plug into the EFIS, and the existing wire
harness will plug into the filter. When the engineer mentioned that the
filter may come in the form of a right-angle connector, I very strongly
endorsed it -- that's an ideal physical form. Due to the already deep nature
of the instrument, and its proximity to the sub-panel, a right-angle
connector would definitely improve things (wires go straight down rather
than through the sub-panel). In any case, the engineer assured me that this
issue is Dynon's top priority to resolve. I asked if Dynon would be
proactive about contacting customers when the fix is ready (which he said
may be a month from now), and he said that it will most likely be handled on
a those-who-call-in basis, because the problem isn't necessarily widespread.
Again, it only seems to be a factor on installations using the EDC-D10
remote compass.
Ironically, I spoke with Dynon about their new OAT offering. They're going
to charge something like $65 for the new OAT probe. Here's the irony...the
OAT probe requires the external compass to be installed. The reason is
because they've "run out of pins" on the EFIS head (predictably, there's
only that one connector back there). So if you thought you were going to get
away without the remote compass, think again. Think you can get away without
OAT? Well, it's not just OAT. OAT provides the Dynon a means of
automatically calculating true airspeed, density altitude, etc. Kinda
useful! Will I be installing the OAT? Jeez, for 65 bucks it seems like it
would be worth it to have on-screen automatic true airspeed. But...in my
case I've already got an OAT probe and digital reading on the ACS2002. No,
the probe is not compatible, for whatever reason. So it'll be a toss-up for
me as to whether I install a second OAT probe just to get the true airspeed
and density altitude readout. We shall see. Let's first see how Dynon
responds to the EMI issue.
Now to some testing that I did. I had my suspicions about the radios, the
antennas, the buses, etc., so I did my best to isolate the issue in my own
installation. I basically tried every combination of antenna, bus, and
isolation of power. The only thing that made a difference was removing the
Dynon's main and keep-alive power sources. When those two wires were
disconnected (I just pulled the fuses, it was easy), the COM issue almost
disappeared. The NAV issue was definitely reduced, but the ILS signal still
managed to be flagged intermittently. Could be that I'm on the ground in a
closed hangar...but it did come back to life when I flipped the Dynon off.
So power isolation does make a difference, but it doesn't resolve the issue
completely (nor is it a viable solution). Swapping antennas didn't make
diddly worth of difference. Dimming the display doesn't do squat (as I
mentioned it's the remote compass feeding EMI, not radiation from the
display, as far as I know).
Well, I wasted a morning toying around with the Dynon and stuff, and my
conclusion (if you can call it that) is that I'm waiting for Dynon to come
out with "the fix," and I have every bit of confidence that Dynon will
resolve this issue. Since I won't be leaping into IMC with this brand new
homebuilt plane right off the bat regardless of whether or not the panel is
operating perfectly, there's plenty of time for this to be resolved.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pat Hatch" <pat_hatch(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Cowl Fitting & Plastic Disk |
Hopefully this will help other builders. I am attaching a link to some pictures
that illustrate a neat way to fit your cowl without mounting your prop. This
is not a new idea, but the clear plastic disk is better than the plywood method.
Why? Because you can see through it to adjust and center the cowl better,
and it is much more stable than wood. The diameter of the disk is the same
as the back of the spinner and the spacers offset the disk the correct distance
from the prop flange. This is my third RV cowl fitting and this clear disk takes
it to a new level. A friend, Dave von Linsowe, also on this list, made this
up and mine is the second cowl installation using his method. Check it out:
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-pathatch
Go to RV-7 Project, Engine Installation, Page 3.
Pat Hatch
RV-4
RV-6
RV-7 QB (Building)
Vero Beach, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: Dynon -- they're workin' on it |
Dan:
Thanks for the report.
I've had nothing but good interactions with the folks at Dynon. A great
crew. I hope they can come up with a fix.
Regards,
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Dynon remote compass location |
| From: | James Gray <n747jg(at)earthlink.net> |
Can anyone recommend a best location for the Dynon remote compass on an
RV-8.
Thanks,
Jim Gray
N747JG - wiring soon
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Van's Seat Cushion Set For Sale |
Builders,
My plans for finishing the interior of my 7A have changed and I'm selling my
Van's seat cushion set (RV-6,7,9), still in new condition. Email me direct if
you're interested in saving some $ on cushions. Thanks.......................
Dave
N567A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Logbook entry for aerobatics |
Doug,
There should be a statement in your Operating Limitations about this under
the Phase I flight testing.
If not then it should go something like: " I certify that the following
aerobatic manuvers have been test flown and that the aircraft is
controllable throughout the manuvers' normal range of speed, and is safe for
operation. The flight-tested aerobatic manuvers are: _______, ______, and
_____."
This can also be done after completing Phase I by placing the aircraft back
into Phase I via logbook entry, doing the manuver(s) to make sure it is ok,
then signing off the logbook with the manuvers done and placing the aircraft
back into Phase II.
If you have any questions about this drop me a line directly and I will be
glad to help out.
Mike Robertson
Das Fed
>From: dmedema(at)att.net
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: Logbook entry for aerobatics
>Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 16:20:55 +0000
>
>
>Since I'm nearing the end of my 25 hour Phase 1 flight test
>period, I had Terry Burch take my plane up and do the basic
>aerobatic maneuvers I hope to do in the future (after some
>training!) My understanding is I need to log the fact that
>these maneuvers were flown as part of Phase 1. Can anyone
>tell me the proper logbook entry language or point me to
>somewhere that will have the correct logbook entry language?
>
>Thanks,
>Doug Medema
>RV-6A N276DM 23.2 hours.
>
>
Let the advanced features & services of MSN Internet Software maximize your
online time. http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200363ave/direct/01/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Brame <charleyb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Composite instrument panel |
There used to be a web site showing a neat composite instrument panel
for the RV-6. I believe the panel was made by Laird Owen and shown on
his site, but my memory fails me. The site is no longer available or I
can't find it. I've got two different builder friends that are interested.
Was it Laird Owen?
Is the panel still available?
Is the web site still up under a different address?
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dynon remote compass location |
Jim,
I mounted my compass module one bulkhead aft of the baggage compartment. I mounted
it as high as I could and also tied it into the aft screw in the slider track.
There is nothing steel close to this location when the canopy is closed.
The compass does swing about 20 degrees when the canopy opens and closes but
so far this has not been an issue in flight. :) I also used brass screws for
all the mounting including aft screw in the slider rail.
Alan Kritzman
Cedar Rapids, IA
RV-8
In a message dated 2/10/2004 5:16:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, James Gray
writes:
>
>Can anyone recommend a best location for the Dynon remote compass on an
>RV-8.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jim Gray
> N747JG - wiring soon
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill VonDane <bill(at)vondane.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dynon remote compass location |
I was thinking of making a bracket that mounted to the rear baggage
compartment rear bulkhead cover...
Know what I mean? LOL
-Bill VonDane
EAA Tech Counselor
RV-8A ~ N8WV ~ Colorado Springs
www.vondane.com
www.creativair.com
www.epanelbuilder.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Gray" <n747jg(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RV-List: Dynon remote compass location
Can anyone recommend a best location for the Dynon remote compass on an
RV-8.
Thanks,
Jim Gray
N747JG - wiring soon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim and Bev Cone" <jimnbev(at)olypen.com> |
I added a 4130 steel link to the attachment end to extend each side 2 inches.
I also riveted a small loop of Nylon strap material to the loose end of the belt
so that it was easier to pull tight when adjusting the belt.
Jim Cone
3-peat offender
RV-6A, RV-6A, RV-7A nearing completion
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Colt Seavers" <rv7maker(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dynon remote compass location |
Bill,
Why not mount it to your left Airleron trailing edge and get that sucker way
out!
More LOL.
Ross Schlotthauer
RV-7 Finishing
www.experimentalair.com
>From: Bill VonDane <bill(at)vondane.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Dynon remote compass location
>Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:30:55 -0700
>
>
>I was thinking of making a bracket that mounted to the rear baggage
>compartment rear bulkhead cover...
>
>Know what I mean? LOL
>
>
>-Bill VonDane
>EAA Tech Counselor
>RV-8A ~ N8WV ~ Colorado Springs
>www.vondane.com
>www.creativair.com
>www.epanelbuilder.com
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "James Gray" <n747jg(at)earthlink.net>
>To:
>Subject: RV-List: Dynon remote compass location
>
>
>Can anyone recommend a best location for the Dynon remote compass on an
>RV-8.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jim Gray
> N747JG - wiring soon
>
>
overload! http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200362ave/direct/01/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Darwin N. Barrie" <ktlkrn(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Composite instrument panel |
I just tried the link to Planes, wings and things where Laird Owens had a
link to his panel, but the site is dead. I think Laird monitors the list and
could provide you with information.
Darwin N. Barrie
Chandler AZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Brame" <charleyb(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RV-List: Composite instrument panel
>
> There used to be a web site showing a neat composite instrument panel
> for the RV-6. I believe the panel was made by Laird Owen and shown on
> his site, but my memory fails me. The site is no longer available or I
> can't find it. I've got two different builder friends that are interested.
>
> Was it Laird Owen?
>
> Is the panel still available?
>
> Is the web site still up under a different address?
>
> Charlie
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dynon remote compass location |
I put mine on the shelf inside the baggage compartment. I have had no
issues with metal in my baggage compartment. It is accurate to less than 5
degrees and I have never calibrated it.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
----- Original Message -----
From: <N13eer(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Dynon remote compass location
>
> Jim,
> I mounted my compass module one bulkhead aft of the baggage compartment.
I mounted it as high as I could and also tied it into the aft screw in the
slider track. There is nothing steel close to this location when the canopy
is closed. The compass does swing about 20 degrees when the canopy opens
and closes but so far this has not been an issue in flight. :) I also used
brass screws for all the mounting including aft screw in the slider rail.
>
> Alan Kritzman
> Cedar Rapids, IA
> RV-8
>
> In a message dated 2/10/2004 5:16:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, James Gray
writes:
>
> >
> >Can anyone recommend a best location for the Dynon remote compass on an
> >RV-8.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jim Gray
> > N747JG - wiring soon
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Meske <rmeske@gcfn.org> (SquirrelMail authenticated user rmeske) by www.gcfn.org with HTTP; Tue, |
10 Feb 2004 15:49:44.-0500(at)matronics.com (EST)
| Subject: | Re: Composite instrument panel |
There's a neat carbon fiber one at www.aircraftextras.com
Rich
>
> There used to be a web site showing a neat composite instrument panel
> for the RV-6. I believe the panel was made by Laird Owen and shown on
> his site, but my memory fails me. The site is no longer available or I
> can't find it. I've got two different builder friends that are
> interested.
>
> Was it Laird Owen?
>
> Is the panel still available?
>
> Is the web site still up under a different address?
>
> Charlie
>
>
--
Rich
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Laird Owens <owens(at)aerovironment.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Composite instrument panel |
Hi Charlie,
Your memory isn't failing. The web site got pulled off the air.
I bummed a page off a friends web site, but he shut it down in
January. I've wanted to update it and add some customer panel
pictures, but I haven't had time (and I'm not very web savvy, so I'm
not sure what to do).
I still make the panels for the 6,7,and 9 with slider canopies when I
get an order.
Have them get in touch with me via email at:
owens(at)aerovironment.com
I can answer questions and send some pics if they like.
Regards,
Laird Owens
RV-6 SoCal
>
>There used to be a web site showing a neat composite instrument panel
>for the RV-6. I believe the panel was made by Laird Owen and shown on
>his site, but my memory fails me. The site is no longer available or I
>can't find it. I've got two different builder friends that are interested.
>
>Was it Laird Owen?
>
>Is the panel still available?
>
>Is the web site still up under a diffe-rent address?
>
>Charlie
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com> |
Made an interesting discovery today while chasing down the source of EMI
from my Dynon. Like many, I have a distinct noise in the headsets,
which goes away when the Dynon is turned off. My electric system is the
main bus/ essential bus, per Lectric Bob. Both the Dynon and Comm are
on the essential bus. While futzing around, I turned the E bus switch
on while leaving the power master on. The noise instantly decreased
about 80%. The battery is getting rather tired from so much ground use,
and the voltage at the Dynon was showing 10.4V. When the E bus was
switched on, the voltage increased by 0.7V (the amount dropped by the
diode feeding the E bus.) Intrigued, I hooked up the battery charger
and tried it again. The voltage at the Dynon was now 12.5V with the E
bus and battery switches on, and the remaining noise decreased by about
half, to a level I consider pretty close to acceptable. In addition,
the strobe noise I was experiencing also disappeared.
For those experiencing EMI on the ground (not yet flying, like me) you
may want to give this a try. I have not had a chance to test this with
the engine running yet, perhaps in a day or two I will have time to do so.
My theory as to why this is, and it is an uneducated SWAG- the noise
filter circuits inside all of the boxes (Dynon, radio and strobe
supplies) are not functioning because of the low voltage, while the
units themselves appear to work. What does anyone think of that?
Jeff Point
RV-6 getting very close
Milwaukee WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | linn walters <lwalters2(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Logbook entry for aerobatics |
Mike Robertson wrote:
>
>Doug,
>
>There should be a statement in your Operating Limitations about this under
>the Phase I flight testing.
>If not then it should go something like: " I certify that the following
>aerobatic manuvers have been test flown and that the aircraft is
>controllable throughout the manuvers' normal range of speed, and is safe for
>operation. The flight-tested aerobatic manuvers are: _______, ______, and
>_____."
>
>This can also be done after completing Phase I by placing the aircraft back
>into Phase I via logbook entry, doing the manuver(s) to make sure it is ok,
>then signing off the logbook with the manuvers done and placing the aircraft
>back into Phase II.
>
>If you have any questions about this drop me a line directly and I will be
>glad to help out.
>
>Mike Robertson
>Das Fed
>
>
What about a Pitts S-1 (I built) that is 23 years old? I never put any
comments in the logs about maneuvers besides first flight info. Is this
a 'newer' guideline and is my Pitts grandfathered?
I appreciate the help!
Linn Walters
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dynon remote compass location |
| From: | "Bill VonDane" <bill(at)vondane.com> |
Where do you mean exaclty? Cuz there's a HUGE steel pipe in that aileron!
-Bill
>
> Bill,
>
> Why not mount it to your left Airleron trailing edge and get that sucker
> way
> out!
>
> More LOL.
>
> Ross Schlotthauer
> RV-7 Finishing
> www.experimentalair.com
>
>>From: Bill VonDane <bill(at)vondane.com>
>>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: RV-List: Dynon remote compass location
>>Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:30:55 -0700
>>
>>
>>I was thinking of making a bracket that mounted to the rear baggage
>>compartment rear bulkhead cover...
>>
>>Know what I mean? LOL
>>
>>
>>-Bill VonDane
>>EAA Tech Counselor
>>RV-8A ~ N8WV ~ Colorado Springs
>>www.vondane.com
>>www.creativair.com
>>www.epanelbuilder.com
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "James Gray" <n747jg(at)earthlink.net>
>>To:
>>Subject: RV-List: Dynon remote compass location
>>
>>
>>
>>Can anyone recommend a best location for the Dynon remote compass on an
>>RV-8.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jim Gray
>> N747JG - wiring soon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Leesafur(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | hole for wing tie down |
Dear RV Builders:
For those of you that have built an older RV can you tell me if you have
had any problems with the hole in the spar for the wing tie down; like
cracking? I had a friend of mine come check my work although not an RV builder
he is
a AP and works on much bigger aircraft. He was concerned about the hole in the
spar flange.
What do you think? http://www.angelfire.com/mech/rv-3/pics.html
Lee
Anoka MN
RV-3 wing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Martin" <niceez(at)cableone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List: Dynon and EMI |
I really appreciate that point as I am getting ready to purchase the Dynon
EFIS. Wonder how it will be affected when the 24 volt battery is low.
Hmmm..... Interesting.
- Dale
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Point" <jpoint(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Dynon and EMI
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jeff Point
February 01, 2004 - February 10, 2004
RV-Archive.digest.vol-ov