RV-Archive.digest.vol-pd
April 01, 2004 - April 09, 2004
Rob
Rob W M Shipley
N919RV (res) Fuselage .....still! (Nomex most definitely on!)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: BFR and Training in an Experimental |
Mike Robertson wrote:
>
>It is really up to the instructor. Most instructors, if they don't know you
>well, will want full controls at their access just in case. During a BFR
>they are, technically, the PIC if an accident should happen. It really
>comes down to the question of whether or not a BFR is a check or
>instructional. If you go with the instructional mode then the regs say that
>the CFI must have full access to the controls at all times.
>
>Mike R.
>
>
>
>
Hi Mike,
I have been led to believe that Flight Reviews are considered
instructional all the time and full access to controls are
required as you say above. Under what circumstances could a Flight
Review be considered anything different?
Also I have a question about your statement that technically an
instructor is PIC. I believe that if the pilot is
current and an agreement is made ahead of time that the pilot is PIC
then the instructor is not automatically
considered PIC. This would seem to be backed up by the fact that an
instructor can still give Flight Reviews
without a valid medical IF the Flight Review receiving pilot is still
current. This would mean that the instructor
could not be PIC because he does not have a medical.
Looks like it is going to be a good weekend Probably see you around the
airport or at Twin Oaks breakfast
Saturday morning.
Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Re: BFR and Training in an Experimental |
All,
Mr Brown is correct, there is no requirement for any time in type in a
single engine airplane, nor does there need to be. A BFR is a review, not a
checkout. If a checkout is required, then the CFI should have, or should
get, some experience in the specific aircraft.
For a BFR, this is not rocket science here folks, if you check the final for
traffic, make sure you know what taxiway/runway you are on, put the wheels
down before you land, can read the charts, know your airspace ABC's, and
don't put the flaps up till you are stopped on the taxiway, you get a pass.
It is assumed that you can land and take-off in the airplane. If you have
trouble with that, then you need a checkout, not a BFR.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: BFR and Training in an Experimental |
Ask your insurance agent......
No Not Archive
>From: "Ronnie Brown" <romott(at)adelphia.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Re: RV-List: BFR and Training in an Experimental
>Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2004 19:09:21 -0500
>
>
>Subject: Re: RV-List: BFR and Training in an Experimental
>
>
> > Your instructor should at least 5 hours in that plane before he
> > teaches in it. Then its ok. That is what I have found out so far. But
> > the problem for anyone wanting to do this is finding an instructor who
> > will use your plane. Also remember your plane has to have the 40 hours
> > on it before 2 people can go up in it.
>
>
>I'm not sure where the 5 hour requirement came from.
>
>I just got a BFR in my Velocity from a CFI who had never flown in a canard,
>let alone a Velocity. I taught him about Velocities while he gave me a
>very thorough BFR, including reading sectionals, airspace rules, runway
>incursion (from AOPA), stalls, instrument flight, a practice instrument
>approach, emergency engine out, recovery from unusual attitudes, etc. He
>thoroughly enjoyed the Velocity and I got a great BFR.
>
>I have a friend who is getting his instrument rating instruction in his
>Europa from his CFII. There are some DE's who will give the check ride in
>a homebuilt.
>
>I think it is mostly a matter of the individual CFI/CFII and what he/she is
>willing or unwilling to do. (Some folks still don't think homebuilts are
>safe!!!) I'm amazed that the CFI building a RV8 refused to give a BFR to a
>fellow RV'er???? Keep looking.
>
>Ronnie Brown
>Velocity 173 Elite RG
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: BFR and Training in an Experimental |
What you say is mostly true, but it remains up to the instructor as to what
level the "instructional" mode takes.
What you say about the CFI and a medical is also true as we know that we log
PIC time even with the CFI on board unless it is for instruction in
something we are not rated for. But if an accident happens the CFI is still
going to be held accountable whether or not he has a current medical. It
all gets very gray in that area.
Mike R.
>From: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)earthlink.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: BFR and Training in an Experimental
>Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2004 20:15:13 -0800
>
>
>Mike Robertson wrote:
>
> >
> >It is really up to the instructor. Most instructors, if they don't know
>you
> >well, will want full controls at their access just in case. During a BFR
> >they are, technically, the PIC if an accident should happen. It really
> >comes down to the question of whether or not a BFR is a check or
> >instructional. If you go with the instructional mode then the regs say
>that
> >the CFI must have full access to the controls at all times.
> >
> >Mike R.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>Hi Mike,
>I have been led to believe that Flight Reviews are considered
>instructional all the time and full access to controls are
>required as you say above. Under what circumstances could a Flight
>Review be considered anything different?
>Also I have a question about your statement that technically an
>instructor is PIC. I believe that if the pilot is
>current and an agreement is made ahead of time that the pilot is PIC
>then the instructor is not automatically
>considered PIC. This would seem to be backed up by the fact that an
>instructor can still give Flight Reviews
>without a valid medical IF the Flight Review receiving pilot is still
>current. This would mean that the instructor
>could not be PIC because he does not have a medical.
>
>Looks like it is going to be a good weekend Probably see you around the
>airport or at Twin Oaks breakfast
>Saturday morning.
>
>Jerry
>
>
Check out MSN PC Safety & Security to help ensure your PC is protected and
safe. http://specials.msn.com/msn/security.asp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: Finish Drill / Deburr Pre-punched holes? |
> ... We are very unlikely to get much information either, when we pillory the
pioneers. The list punishes non conformists and unfortunately some listers become
nasty about opinions that conflict with their own. This is NOT conducive
to getting useful practical information.
I'm reminded of one of my favorite quotes:
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
--George Bernard Shaw
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: new RV-7 needs left rudder in cruise |
I appreciate the replies. What most people don't seem to be acknowledging
is that while trimming gets the plane to fly straight, there's a cost
associated. Any rudder deflection at all means drag is being induced.
Nothing beats a control surface that is perfectly in trail, at least as far
as efficiency goes. The same concept holds true with elevator trim and the
HS. You hear about people shimming the HS to remove any elevator deflection
& elevator trim deflection at cruise. That's to reduce drag to the minimal
possible amount. A tiny change in HS incidence can result in a major change
in required elevator/trim deflection...there's speed to be gained.
I'll use a trim wedge for now, and I'll play with the fairings before doing
anything permanent...but I ultimately hope to remove all traces of control
surface deflection at max cruise speed by tweaking the incidence of the
stabilizers. Admittedly this will be at one indicated airspeed at one power
setting...but I'll optimize it for what I intend to use most commonly.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: new RV-7 needs left rudder in cruise
>
> Dan,
>
> A local "4-peater" (RV6, RV6A, RV8A, RV7A) recently discovered that he
> needed a little left rudder as well. His philosophy is "put a rivet in
every
> hole and the airplane is gonna be a straight as you need to worry about".
So
> he did NOT make any changes other than taking the "rudder trim" from
EPM.AV
> ( http://www.epm-avcorp.com/ ) that I had bought, sticking it on and
> flying. He says it flies straight now at cruise configuration (all
fairings
> installed).
>
> You may in fact introduce a LOT more errors by changing the offset,
> especially BEFORE all the fairings are on and locked down.
>
> Just an opinion.
>
> James
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Cours <rv-j(at)moriarti.org> |
| Subject: | swivel air adaptors |
Hi, everyone -
I have a newbie question that's totally unrelated to drilling, dimpling,
deburring, FAA regulations, or choice of primer. It's about swivel
adaptors for air hoses.
My (rather young) swivel adaptor has started leaking. Not just little
leaks, but a nice constant spray that would be useful for clearing
aluminum chips off the work bench if it weren't happening all the time.
While there's something tragically heroic in my compressor's futile
attempt to pressurize the garage, it's starting to get a bit annoying,
not to mention noisy. I've already tried replacing the teflon tape and
have determined, through careful experimentation (i.e. I stuck the thing
next to my face and felt the direction of the air) that it's coming from
one of the swivel joints in the adaptor itself, not the spots where it
attaches to the hose or the quick-connect.
So here's my question: should I be looking for a new adaptor, or is it
simply in the nature of swivel adaptors to leak?
thanks,
Jeff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy(at)att.net> |
"RV List"
| Subject: | Annunciator Light Bulb |
Anyone have a source for a CM388 light bulb? These are the 12v, really small light
bulbs for my annunciator panel buttons. A Google search only showed one
hit.... but they wanted $9 for each bulb and you had to buy 4 of em!!!
Any leads to another source would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance,
Jack Lockamy
Camarillo, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DWENSING(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Dielectric grease vs heat sink compound |
In a message dated 4/1/04 7:38:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, jrdial@hal-pc.org
writes:
In regard to the following two responses to Randy's original question,
I would like to qualify the answers as they pertain to the silicone products.
There is a difference between products sold as dielectric grease and heat
sink compound. The temperature stability of the base fluids is different and each
has a different filler which makes it into a grease. The filler that gives
the heat sink products their designed performance would also give different
dielectric values than the product formulated for applications to electrical
applications.
Dielectric greases are not conductive but they do not prevent the flow of
electricity. They help preserve the conductor to conductor contact by excluding
the oxygen as someone else earlier pointed out. Silicone is most often used
because it is inert and has excellent thermal stability.
Dale Ensing
>
> Dielectric grease has a high resistance to conducting electric
> current and would be considered and insulator. It is used for heat sink
> grease among other things and the common kind is a silicon product.
>
>
> I believe the grease your talking about is used mainly on
> transistors
> for heat transfer to the heat sink it's attached to. Usually it is used
> in
> conjunction with some sort of dielectric between the transistor and the
> heat
> sink for electrical isolation.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)QCBC.ORG> |
| Subject: | Re: BFR and Training in an Experimental |
I am probably wrong but I was under the impression that if I was current. I
am the PIC. If I am not current, then the CFI is the PIC during a BFR. The
instruction only comes into play for the ground school.
Don't the instructions for the flight review state that the flight check
shall include so much ground instruction?
Cy Galley
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or sportpilot(at)eaa.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: BFR and Training in an Experimental
>
> It is really up to the instructor. Most instructors, if they don't know
you
> well, will want full controls at their access just in case. During a BFR
> they are, technically, the PIC if an accident should happen. It really
> comes down to the question of whether or not a BFR is a check or
> instructional. If you go with the instructional mode then the regs say
that
> the CFI must have full access to the controls at all times.
>
> Mike R.
>
>
> >From: "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com>
> >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> >Subject: RE: RV-List: BFR and Training in an Experimental
> >Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2004 05:40:49 +0000
> >
> >
> >
> > >The bottom line answer is that "yes" you can. As far as the FARs go
this
> > >is
> > >a case of not what the regs say but of not what they say. The regs do
> >not
> > >say anything about a restriction on which category of aircraft you use
to
> > >get a rating or BFR as long as the yeqrly (annual) condition inspection
> >is
> > >done and there are no discrepancies on the aircraft. This is all
covered
> > >by
> > >FAR Part 91.
> > >
> > >Mike Robertson
> > >Das Fed
> >
> >Mike,
> >
> >I'm currently dealing with this issue. I'm due for my BFR. I asked a
> >local
> >CFI/RV8 builder, who has flown with me a few times before, to do the
review
> >for me. He respectfully declined, saying the flight was supposed to be
> >"instructional" in nature. My RV8 does not have back seat controls
except
> >for the stick. So, he could not "teach" me anything requiring his input
on
> >the controls.
> >
> >My last BFR was done by the local flight school chief instructor. He was
> >more than willing to do it. First time RV flight for him! He never once
> >expressed any concern about the specific requirements of the flight, the
> >airplane, or any other issue. We flew, we talked for an hour on the
> >ground,
> >and he signed me off.
> >
> >So, is the first guy right, or the second guy? Time to rent spam and
just
> >get it over with?
> >
> >Brian Denk
> >RV8 N94BD
> >RV10 '51
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
I am considering changing my HS incidence. Due to a light prop, battery,
and no mags I am light in the nose compared to a standard FWF set up. With
half fuel and just me in my 8a (156knots) the counter weight portion of the
elevator is 1/4~3/8 inch higher than the HS. Vans told me that if the
elevator is perfectly in trail that the plane will be more pitch sensitive
because the elevator is not loaded and may also run out of up trim on
landing. My concern is that I load up the plane and then I am really
running some (excessive?) down trim. So I guess what I am asking is down
trim the norm and if so how much is everyone else using?
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: new RV-7 needs left rudder in cruise |
Dan read my post coming up here shortly about elevator trim.
>
>I appreciate the replies. What most people don't seem to be acknowledging
>is that while trimming gets the plane to fly straight, there's a cost
>associated. Any rudder deflection at all means drag is being induced.
>
>Nothing beats a control surface that is perfectly in trail, at least as far
>as efficiency goes. The same concept holds true with elevator trim and the
>HS. You hear about people shimming the HS to remove any elevator deflection
>& elevator trim deflection at cruise. That's to reduce drag to the minimal
>possible amount. A tiny change in HS incidence can result in a major change
>in required elevator/trim deflection...there's speed to be gained.
>
>I'll use a trim wedge for now, and I'll play with the fairings before doing
>anything permanent...but I ultimately hope to remove all traces of control
>surface deflection at max cruise speed by tweaking the incidence of the
>stabilizers. Admittedly this will be at one indicated airspeed at one power
>setting...but I'll optimize it for what I intend to use most commonly.
>
>)_( Dan
>RV-7 N714D
>http://www.rvproject.com
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com>
>To:
>Subject: RE: RV-List: new RV-7 needs left rudder in cruise
>
>
>>
>> Dan,
>>
>> A local "4-peater" (RV6, RV6A, RV8A, RV7A) recently discovered that he
>> needed a little left rudder as well. His philosophy is "put a rivet in
>every
>> hole and the airplane is gonna be a straight as you need to worry about".
>So
>> he did NOT make any changes other than taking the "rudder trim" from
>EPM.AV
>> ( http://www.epm-avcorp.com/ ) that I had bought, sticking it on and
>> flying. He says it flies straight now at cruise configuration (all
>fairings
>> installed).
>>
>> You may in fact introduce a LOT more errors by changing the offset,
>> especially BEFORE all the fairings are on and locked down.
>>
>> Just an opinion.
>>
>> James
>>
>>
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | A20driver(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: new RV-7 needs left rudder in cruise |
How about putting a shim washer between the engine and mount? a20driver....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: swivel air adaptors |
Jeff,
Time to buy a new one. You can pay $15 to $20 for a Made In The USA item OR you
can get them for $5 from Harbor Freight. See
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=46123
For die grinders and other high speed tools, I prefer a swivel connector with a
"regulator" (OK, it's just a valve) on it. I find that reducing the speed on
my die grinders makes my ScotchBrite pads and wheels last longer. See
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=7535
I save the receipt & the blister pack that these things come in. Why??? Because
at this low price, HF even guarantees them!! I've taken several back to my local
HF store to have them replaced for free.
Charlie Kuss
>
>Hi, everyone -
>
>I have a newbie question that's totally unrelated to drilling, dimpling,
>deburring, FAA regulations, or choice of primer. It's about swivel
>adaptors for air hoses.
>
>My (rather young) swivel adaptor has started leaking. Not just little
>leaks, but a nice constant spray that would be useful for clearing
>aluminum chips off the work bench if it weren't happening all the time.
>While there's something tragically heroic in my compressor's futile
>attempt to pressurize the garage, it's starting to get a bit annoying,
>not to mention noisy. I've already tried replacing the teflon tape and
>have determined, through careful experimentation (i.e. I stuck the thing
>next to my face and felt the direction of the air) that it's coming from
>one of the swivel joints in the adaptor itself, not the spots where it
>attaches to the hose or the quick-connect.
>
>So here's my question: should I be looking for a new adaptor, or is it
>simply in the nature of swivel adaptors to leak?
>
>thanks,
>Jeff
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Burton" <dburton(at)nwlink.com> |
| Subject: | Re: swivel air adaptors |
Here is another good suggestion (IMHO):
http://checkoway.com/url/?s=5d153ab
I really thought that this made a big difference. The hose is light,
flexable and I really like the quick disconect they use. Much nicer then
the cheap ones I've always used in the past...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pcondon" <pcondon(at)mitre.org> |
| Subject: | Engine Woes - Cam profile inspection tool - anyone know of this |
tool ?
Short of what Bill is doing (removing the entire cylinder's) to inspect the
wear and profile of the cam, is there some tool available that would allow
you to remove the rocker, push rod & lifter only, leaving the cylinder on
the case, insert some sort of calibrated rod/dial gauge to measure the throw
of the cam profile, and compare these throws to see if you have a worn or
diminished cam profile ?? I am helping a Pitts builder in locating a
"morning sickness" rough running cylinder. His valve stems are ok in that
the valves freely rotate and ride up & down. There is no binding on the
rocker support (bosses-to-rocker-to boss) either. Pushrod is not bent. Cold,
bleed down lifter gap is within limits too......compression is 76-77/80.
Engine is a O-320-B2C 160 hp parallel valve.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <sjevans(at)cox.net> |
AN960-10L is a washer designation on DWG 15A, RV-7.
What does the L mean.
If its a lock washer, then what type? I cant seem to find this referenced in my
handy-dandy Aircraft Mechanics guide.
Thanks for any info.
Sam Evans
7A QB, working on wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SportAV8R(at)aol.com |
<< remove the rocker, push rod & lifter only, leaving the cylinder on
the case, insert some sort of calibrated rod/dial gauge to measure the throw
of the cam profile, and compare these throws to see if you have a worn or
diminished cam profile >>
If you know a way to get the lifter out without splitting the case, share it with
us :-) Still, your idea may have merit even if the measurement is done at
the rocker arm or pushrod with dry tappets. Is there data, or would we have to
compare one lobe against another and hope they weren't all catastrophically
worn, as happened to me?
-Bill B
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SportAV8R(at)aol.com |
<>
well, now, you did stop short of saying to remove the cam follower, didn't you.
My apologies for my earlier tongue-in-cheek. Just don't pull that lifter out
with a magnet =:0
-Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert E. Lynch" <rv6lynch(at)earthlink.net> |
Sam.
Thats a thin #10 washer.
Have fun.
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Albert Gardner" <spudnut(at)worldnet.att.net> |
It is a thin washer, takes 3 or 4 of them to equal the thickness of a -10
washer. Very useful for making castle nuts line up with the drilled bolt,
and on non-adjustable rivet squeezers.
Albert Gardner
RV-9A 872RV
Yuma, AZ
----- Original Message -----
From: <sjevans(at)cox.net>
> AN960-10L is a washer designation on DWG 15A, RV-7.
> What does the L mean.
> Sam Evans
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Evan and Megan Johnson" <evmeg(at)snowcrest.net> |
| Subject: | Re: swivel air adaptors |
In my experiance they always leak.....I just got a light weight air tubing
kit from Avery. Its not a swivel but light enought that it flexes around
enough that you dont feel it. I like it...try one :)
Evan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Cours" <rv-j(at)moriarti.org>
Subject: RV-List: swivel air adaptors
>
> Hi, everyone -
>
> I have a newbie question that's totally unrelated to drilling, dimpling,
> deburring, FAA regulations, or choice of primer. It's about swivel
> adaptors for air hoses.
>
> My (rather young) swivel adaptor has started leaking. Not just little
> leaks, but a nice constant spray that would be useful for clearing
> aluminum chips off the work bench if it weren't happening all the time.
> While there's something tragically heroic in my compressor's futile
> attempt to pressurize the garage, it's starting to get a bit annoying,
> not to mention noisy. I've already tried replacing the teflon tape and
> have determined, through careful experimentation (i.e. I stuck the thing
> next to my face and felt the direction of the air) that it's coming from
> one of the swivel joints in the adaptor itself, not the spots where it
> attaches to the hose or the quick-connect.
>
> So here's my question: should I be looking for a new adaptor, or is it
> simply in the nature of swivel adaptors to leak?
>
> thanks,
> Jeff
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 4/2/2004 7:28:22 AM Pacific Standard Time, sjevans(at)cox.net
writes:
AN960-10L is a washer designation on DWG 15A, RV-7.
What does the L mean.
========================
L means light series; as in thin.
GV (RV-6A N1GV flying 685 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Annunciator Light Bulb |
In a message dated 4/2/2004 5:21:48 AM Pacific Standard Time,
jacklockamy(at)att.net writes:
Anyone have a source for a CM388 light bulb? These are the 12v, really small
light bulbs for my annunciator panel buttons. A Google search only showed
one hit.... but they wanted $9 for each bulb and you had to buy 4 of em!!!
Any leads to another source would be appreciated.
=================================
See if Ledtronics has an LED replacement for these and buy once.
GV (RV-6A N1GV flying 685 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Evan and Megan Johnson" <evmeg(at)snowcrest.net> |
I just found this out myself....it means thin. This washer should be about
half as thick as the regular ones. Information came from Tom at Vans...he
said something about it deriving from a Latin term.
Cheers....Evan
----- Original Message -----
From: <sjevans(at)cox.net>
Subject: RV-List: AN960-10L
>
> AN960-10L is a washer designation on DWG 15A, RV-7.
>
> What does the L mean.
>
> If its a lock washer, then what type? I cant seem to find this referenced
in my handy-dandy Aircraft Mechanics guide.
>
>
> Thanks for any info.
>
>
> Sam Evans
>
> 7A QB, working on wings
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dean" <dvanwinkle(at)royell.net> |
Sam
The L designation stands for "Light" or thin washer. They are easy to
separate from the standard washers.
Dean Van Winkle
RV-9A
----- Original Message -----
From: <sjevans(at)cox.net>
Subject: RV-List: AN960-10L
>
> AN960-10L is a washer designation on DWG 15A, RV-7.
>
> What does the L mean.
>
> If its a lock washer, then what type? I cant seem to find this referenced
in my handy-dandy Aircraft Mechanics guide.
>
>
> Thanks for any info.
>
>
> Sam Evans
>
> 7A QB, working on wings
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jamesbaldwin(at)attglobal.net |
| Subject: | Re: BFR and Training in an Experimental |
Cy -
No, you are not wrong. You are the PIC if you are current and qualified
in the aircraft used for the BFR. It is also true the CFI, if rated in
the aircraft used for the BFR, doesn't need to be medically certified --
i.e. have a current medical. Many instructors use this regulatory
required event to review those areas of aeronautical knowledge where
individual pilots have some question. In some cases, a demonstration of
a manuver might be required but in most it is sufficient to merely
observe and suggest. If manipulation of the controls is required, it
would be handy to have some, otherwise, who cares. I have given BFRs
with and without controls available with an understanding beforehand as
to the contents of the review. The common thread of a satisfactory and
satisfying ride is one where the pilot's attitude demonstrates an
ongoing willingness and desire to learn. Instruction given during the
ground portion does not require a medical for the CFI either. JBB
Cy Galley wrote:
>
>I am probably wrong but I was under the impression that if I was current. I
>am the PIC. If I am not current, then the CFI is the PIC during a BFR. The
>instruction only comes into play for the ground school.
>Don't the instructions for the flight review state that the flight check
>shall include so much ground instruction?
>
>Cy Galley
>Editor, EAA Safety Programs
>cgalley(at)qcbc.org or sportpilot(at)eaa.org
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com>
>To:
>Subject: RE: RV-List: BFR and Training in an Experimental
>
>
>
>
>>
>>It is really up to the instructor. Most instructors, if they don't know
>>
>>
>you
>
>
>>well, will want full controls at their access just in case. During a BFR
>>they are, technically, the PIC if an accident should happen. It really
>>comes down to the question of whether or not a BFR is a check or
>>instructional. If you go with the instructional mode then the regs say
>>
>>
>that
>
>
>>the CFI must have full access to the controls at all times.
>>
>>Mike R.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>From: "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com>
>>>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>>>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>>>Subject: RE: RV-List: BFR and Training in an Experimental
>>>Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2004 05:40:49 +0000
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The bottom line answer is that "yes" you can. As far as the FARs go
>>>>
>>>>
>this
>
>
>>>>is
>>>>a case of not what the regs say but of not what they say. The regs do
>>>>
>>>>
>>>not
>>>
>>>
>>>>say anything about a restriction on which category of aircraft you use
>>>>
>>>>
>to
>
>
>>>>get a rating or BFR as long as the yeqrly (annual) condition inspection
>>>>
>>>>
>>>is
>>>
>>>
>>>>done and there are no discrepancies on the aircraft. This is all
>>>>
>>>>
>covered
>
>
>>>>by
>>>>FAR Part 91.
>>>>
>>>>Mike Robertson
>>>>Das Fed
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Mike,
>>>
>>>I'm currently dealing with this issue. I'm due for my BFR. I asked a
>>>local
>>>CFI/RV8 builder, who has flown with me a few times before, to do the
>>>
>>>
>review
>
>
>>>for me. He respectfully declined, saying the flight was supposed to be
>>>"instructional" in nature. My RV8 does not have back seat controls
>>>
>>>
>except
>
>
>>>for the stick. So, he could not "teach" me anything requiring his input
>>>
>>>
>on
>
>
>>>the controls.
>>>
>>>My last BFR was done by the local flight school chief instructor. He was
>>>more than willing to do it. First time RV flight for him! He never once
>>>expressed any concern about the specific requirements of the flight, the
>>>airplane, or any other issue. We flew, we talked for an hour on the
>>>ground,
>>>and he signed me off.
>>>
>>>So, is the first guy right, or the second guy? Time to rent spam and
>>>
>>>
>just
>
>
>>>get it over with?
>>>
>>>Brian Denk
>>>RV8 N94BD
>>>RV10 '51
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Darwin N. Barrie" <ktlkrn(at)cox.net> |
It is a thin version. It is called for in several places.
Darwin N. Barrie
Chandler AZ
----- Original Message -----
From: <sjevans(at)cox.net>
Subject: RV-List: AN960-10L
>
> AN960-10L is a washer designation on DWG 15A, RV-7.
>
> What does the L mean.
>
> If its a lock washer, then what type? I cant seem to find this referenced
in my handy-dandy Aircraft Mechanics guide.
>
>
> Thanks for any info.
>
>
> Sam Evans
>
> 7A QB, working on wings
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John D. Heath" <altoq(at)direcway.com> |
L = Light (thin), Don't know why they did it like that , guess they all
ready used "T"
An "L" would be .032" thick, and normal thickness would be .063" thick.
John D
----- Original Message -----
From: <sjevans(at)cox.net>
Subject: RV-List: AN960-10L
>
> AN960-10L is a washer designation on DWG 15A, RV-7.
>
> What does the L mean.
>
> If its a lock washer, then what type? I cant seem to find this referenced
in my handy-dandy Aircraft Mechanics guide.
>
>
> Thanks for any info.
>
>
> Sam Evans
>
> 7A QB, working on wings
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RV-8 off field landing. |
Anyone have the details?
IDENTIFICATION
Regis#: 284DM Make/Model: EXP Description: RV-8F DAVENPORT EXP
Date: 04/01/2004 Time: 1930
Event Type: Incident Highest Injury: Minor Mid Air: N Missing: N
Damage: Unknown
LOCATION
City: COLLEGE PLACE State: WA Country: US
DESCRIPTION
ACFT LANDED IN A WHEAT FIELD UNDER UNKNOWN CIRCUMSTANCES, COLLEGE PLACE, WA
INJURY DATA Total Fatal: 0
# Crew: 1 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 1
Unk:
# Pass: 0 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0
Unk:
# Grnd: Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0
Unk:
WEATHER: METAR KALW 011853Z 22005KT 10SM CLR 12/M02 A3025
OTHER DATA
Activity: Pleasure Phase: Unknown Operation: General Aviation
Departed: WALLA WALLA, WA Dep Date: 04/01/2004 Dep. Time: 1930
Destination: UNK Flt Plan: NONE Wx Briefing: N
Last Radio Cont: UNK
Last Clearance: RY 20 CLRD FOR T/O, RIGHT TURN APPRD
FAA FSDO: SPOKANE, WA (NM13) Entry date: 04/02/2004
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Hansen" <jerry-hansen(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Sun-n-Fun opportunity? |
To those going to Sun-n-Fun - If you are interested in an autopilot for your
RV, stop by Trio Avionics for a "Show Special" on the EZ Pilot. We might be
a bit hard to find as we have been trying to get an indoor booth for the
past year (still none available), but we'll be there.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine Woes - Cam profile inspection tool - |
anyone know of this tool ?
Hi Phil,
Just remove the valve cover. Use a machinist's dial indicator to measure the linear
movement of the push rod end of the rocker arm. There are specs for this,
but you won't need them. Simply measure all the cam lobes this way. If one is
more than approx. .020" lower than the rest, you've got a problem cam lobe.
As Bill discovered, all engines except the H2AD engines require splitting the
cases to change out a lifter. All engines must have the cases split to change
the cam. In reality, if the lifter is spalled, the cam needs re-conditioning or
replacement. There is no easy fix here.
Charlie Kuss
PS Bill's engine looks like the problem lobe was worn over 0.100" judging by his
photos.
>
> Short of what Bill is doing (removing the entire cylinder's) to inspect the
>wear and profile of the cam, is there some tool available that would allow
>you to remove the rocker, push rod & lifter only, leaving the cylinder on
>the case, insert some sort of calibrated rod/dial gauge to measure the throw
>of the cam profile, and compare these throws to see if you have a worn or
>diminished cam profile ?? I am helping a Pitts builder in locating a
>"morning sickness" rough running cylinder. His valve stems are ok in that
>the valves freely rotate and ride up & down. There is no binding on the
>rocker support (bosses-to-rocker-to boss) either. Pushrod is not bent. Cold,
>bleed down lifter gap is within limits too......compression is 76-77/80.
>Engine is a O-320-B2C 160 hp parallel valve.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net> |
Sam
The L means "light". These washers are thinner than the standard washers.
Charlie Kuss
>
>AN960-10L is a washer designation on DWG 15A, RV-7.
>
>What does the L mean.
>
>If its a lock washer, then what type? I cant seem to find this referenced in
my handy-dandy Aircraft Mechanics guide.
>
>
>Thanks for any info.
>
>
>Sam Evans
>
>7A QB, working on wings
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John D. Heath" <altoq(at)direcway.com> |
----- Original Message -----
From: "John D. Heath" <altoq(at)direcway.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: AN960-10L
> Original Post did not mention that the thickness given for "L" is for
steel,
> An aluninum "L" is .016".
>
> John D
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John D. Heath" <altoq(at)direcway.com>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 10:20 AM
> Subject: Re: RV-List: AN960-10L
>
>
> > L = Light (thin), Don't know why they did it like that , guess they all
> > ready used "T"
> > An "L" would be .032" thick, and normal thickness would be .063" thick.
> >
> > John D
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <sjevans(at)cox.net>
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 9:27 AM
> > Subject: RV-List: AN960-10L
> >
> >
> > >
> > > AN960-10L is a washer designation on DWG 15A, RV-7.
> > >
> > > What does the L mean.
> > >
> > > If its a lock washer, then what type? I cant seem to find this
> referenced
> > in my handy-dandy Aircraft Mechanics guide.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks for any info.
> > >
> > >
> > > Sam Evans
> > >
> > > 7A QB, working on wings
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Burton" <dburton(at)nwlink.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 off field landing. |
> Anyone have the details?
No details, but it's interesting that he used a Franklin engine in it. The
owner is listed as David Davenport...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hal / Carol Kempthorne <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: One of lifes little pleasures |
How about the fuel savings, Mike??
hal
At 05:27 AM 4/2/2004, you wrote:
>
>
>Yesterday, I went and bought 8 spark plugs for my Lycoming to get her
>ready for the up and coming very busy month of flying. Between this
>weekends formation clinic in Ohio, SnF, and our 12 ship gaggle to the
>Turks and Caicos, I am really getting her up to snuff.
>
>Well I ordered my plugs, got to the register, and they rang up as
>$14.32, I smiled and gladly paid with a twenty, stuck my change in my
>pocket, and wondered out the door. Paused.... Turned back around, and
>bought another 8 just for kicks.
>
>Screw up on their part? No..... NGK's, for my LSE dual electronic
>ignition at Advance Autoparts round the corner.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Oldenburg" <foldenburg(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | swivel air adaptors |
I agree....I use the cheap swivel adaptors from harbor freight and have
not had any issues with them.
- Fred
Frederick W. Oldenburg Jr.
RV-7A Standard Kit - Empennage
http://www.rv.oldsack.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charlie Kuss
Subject: Re: RV-List: swivel air adaptors
Jeff,
Time to buy a new one. You can pay $15 to $20 for a Made In The USA
item OR you can get them for $5 from Harbor Freight. See
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=46123
For die grinders and other high speed tools, I prefer a swivel connector
with a "regulator" (OK, it's just a valve) on it. I find that reducing
the speed on my die grinders makes my ScotchBrite pads and wheels last
longer. See
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=7535
I save the receipt & the blister pack that these things come in. Why???
Because at this low price, HF even guarantees them!! I've taken several
back to my local HF store to have them replaced for free.
Charlie Kuss
>
>Hi, everyone -
>
>I have a newbie question that's totally unrelated to drilling,
dimpling,
>deburring, FAA regulations, or choice of primer. It's about swivel
>adaptors for air hoses.
>
>My (rather young) swivel adaptor has started leaking. Not just little
>leaks, but a nice constant spray that would be useful for clearing
>aluminum chips off the work bench if it weren't happening all the time.
>While there's something tragically heroic in my compressor's futile
>attempt to pressurize the garage, it's starting to get a bit annoying,
>not to mention noisy. I've already tried replacing the teflon tape and
>have determined, through careful experimentation (i.e. I stuck the
thing
>next to my face and felt the direction of the air) that it's coming
from
>one of the swivel joints in the adaptor itself, not the spots where it
>attaches to the hose or the quick-connect.
>
>So here's my question: should I be looking for a new adaptor, or is it
>simply in the nature of swivel adaptors to leak?
>
>thanks,
>Jeff
>
>
=
=
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "son hoang" <son(at)hoangs.com> |
RVers
As a flight instructor and an RV6A builder/owner here is my take:
1. I can not instruct others using my RV6A unless it is for transition training.
To do that I will have to pay high insurance rate and require some special
waivers
2. I can and will instruct others in their own RVs (BFR - IPC- initial training
- instrument rating ) but most insurance companies have very specific requirements
so I want to make sure that I am covered before I do, Nation Air would
not even cover me if I fly/act as PIC in others' experimentals , EAA (Falcon
Insurance) provides covereage when I act as PIC in other experimentals - I paid
higher premium for that privilege.
Son Hoang RV6A -N64SH
CFI- I MEI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Helms" <jhelms(at)i1.net> |
And, the EAA Program is NOT exclusive thru Falcon. NationAir and any other
agent can provide that coverage thru the EAA as long as the individual is an
EAA Member.
Falcon just pays for the advertising... that's why their phone number is
what is listed there.
JT
----- Original Message -----
From: "son hoang" <son(at)hoangs.com>
Subject: RV-List: BFR in RV
RVers
As a flight instructor and an RV6A builder/owner here is my take:
1. I can not instruct others using my RV6A unless it is for transition
training. To do that I will have to pay high insurance rate and require
some special waivers
2. I can and will instruct others in their own RVs (BFR - IPC- initial
training - instrument rating ) but most insurance companies have very
specific requirements so I want to make sure that I am covered before I do,
Nation Air would not even cover me if I fly/act as PIC in others'
experimentals , EAA (Falcon Insurance) provides covereage when I act as PIC
in other experimentals - I paid higher premium for that privilege.
Son Hoang RV6A -N64SH
CFI- I MEI
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: One of lifes little pleasures |
I got my EI with the new engine, so I never had to buy mags. So one EI is
paid for due to the credit from 2 new mags, one EI cost about 8~900.00
which gives me more speed at altitude and saves me 1.0 gal and hour. So in
400 hours its paid for and then sum. Plus automotive spark plugs have been
tested way more than aircraft plugs and are of superior design. I also dont
like 100 year old technology as a ignition source and am lighter in the
nose due to the EI. Everyone has there own idea of what is best. You have
yours, I have mine, and everyone else has there. Both systems are of solid
design but I wanted more effiency and power so the EI fit the bill for me.
If I did not do it when I build the plane I probably never would have same
with the CS composite 3 blade prop.
>
>
>How about the fuel savings, Mike??
>
>hal
>At 05:27 AM 4/2/2004, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>Yesterday, I went and bought 8 spark plugs for my Lycoming to get her
>>ready for the up and coming very busy month of flying. Between this
>>weekends formation clinic in Ohio, SnF, and our 12 ship gaggle to the
>>Turks and Caicos, I am really getting her up to snuff.
>>
>>Well I ordered my plugs, got to the register, and they rang up as
>>$14.32, I smiled and gladly paid with a twenty, stuck my change in my
>>pocket, and wondered out the door. Paused.... Turned back around, and
>>bought another 8 just for kicks.
>>
>>Screw up on their part? No..... NGK's, for my LSE dual electronic
>>ignition at Advance Autoparts round the corner.
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob U." <rv3(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: One of lifes little pleasures |
Hal / Carol Kempthorne wrote:
>
>How about the fuel savings, Mike??
>
I'm not Mike, but...
no practical savings, if one is running a carburetor.
If one is sporting Gami injectors with each cylinder calibrated, there
can be some fuel savings in certain modes of operation. There is info
here on the net that explains when, where and how EI can save fuel.
It's a complex subject and not given to short and quick answers. For the
unvarished truth, just look for INDEPENDENT sources... with no horse in
this EI race. :-)
Bob
================================================
>
>hal
>At 05:27 AM 4/2/2004, you wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>>Yesterday, I went and bought 8 spark plugs for my Lycoming to get her
>>ready for the up and coming very busy month of flying. Between this
>>weekends formation clinic in Ohio, SnF, and our 12 ship gaggle to the
>>Turks and Caicos, I am really getting her up to snuff.
>>
>>Well I ordered my plugs, got to the register, and they rang up as
>>$14.32, I smiled and gladly paid with a twenty, stuck my change in my
>>pocket, and wondered out the door. Paused.... Turned back around, and
>>bought another 8 just for kicks.
>>
>>Screw up on their part? No..... NGK's, for my LSE dual electronic
>>ignition at Advance Autoparts round the corner.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Re: BFR and Training in an Experimental |
All,
Below are clips from the faa.gov FARs that address BFR and flight
instruction. 61.56 says it must include 1 hour of flight training and 1
hour of ground training.
If the pilot is still current to haul pax and within BFR, then the pilot may
be the PIC for this flight, but it is still dual instruction. 61.195 says
that unless it is a multi-engine airplane, helicopter, or powered lift
aircraft, no time in type is required to give instruction. It also says
that the airplane must comply with 91.109.
91.109 says that the airplane must have dual controls. The FAA for awhile
was reading this to mean brakes, but my understanding is they have relented
on that. I am certain, however, they would not see a tandem airplane without
stick, rudder, and throttle in back as a dual control airplane.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
61.56 Flight review.
(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (f) of this section, a flight
review consists of a minimum of 1 hour of flight training and 1 hour of
ground training. The review must include:
61.195 Flight instructor limitations and qualifications.
(f) Training received in a multiengine airplane, a helicopter, or a
powered-lift. A flight instructor may not give training required for the
issuance of a certificate or rating in a multiengine airplane, a helicopter,
or a powered-lift unless that flight instructor has at least 5 flight hours
of pilot-in-command time in the specific make and model of multiengine
airplane, helicopter, or powered-lift, as appropriate.
(g) Position in aircraft and required pilot stations for providing flight
training.
(1) A flight instructor must perform all training from in an aircraft that
complies with the requirements of 91.109 of this chapter.
(2) A flight instructor who provides flight training for a pilot certificate
or rating issued under this part must provide that flight training in an
aircraft that meets the following requirements-
(i) The aircraft must have at least two pilot stations and be of the same
category, class, and type, if appropriate, that applies to the pilot
certificate or rating sought.
(ii) For single-place aircraft, the pre-solo flight training must have been
provided in an aircraft that has two pilot stations and is of the same
category, class, and type, if appropriate.
91.109 Flight instruction; Simulated instrument flight and certain
flight tests.
(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft (except a manned free balloon)
that is being used for flight instruction unless that aircraft has fully
functioning dual controls. However, instrument flight instruction may be
given in a single-engine airplane equipped with a single, functioning
throwover control wheel in place of fixed, dual controls of the elevator and
ailerons when-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Schlotthauer" <rv7maker(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: new RV-7 needs left rudder in cruise |
Dan,
I think your approach is ideal. We can all make our planes fly strait by
kicking in full rudder and countering it with opposite aileron, but it is
draggy as hell. You could be doing the same thing with fairings and trim
tabs unless you establish a baseline without the fairings. Granted you can
only choose one speed and power setting to be in perfect trim, but most fuel
efficint cruise, or max cruise would be two good choices. If you dropped
30K on a motor, then you better go with the latter.
-Ross Schlotthauer
RV-7 Finishing
Fellow dumbass that will
be trimming for max cruise
>From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Re: RV-List: new RV-7 needs left rudder in cruise
>Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2004 22:45:36 -0800
>
>
>I appreciate the replies. What most people don't seem to be acknowledging
>is that while trimming gets the plane to fly straight, there's a cost
>associated. Any rudder deflection at all means drag is being induced.
>
>Nothing beats a control surface that is perfectly in trail, at least as far
>as efficiency goes. The same concept holds true with elevator trim and the
>HS. You hear about people shimming the HS to remove any elevator
>deflection
>& elevator trim deflection at cruise. That's to reduce drag to the minimal
>possible amount. A tiny change in HS incidence can result in a major
>change
>in required elevator/trim deflection...there's speed to be gained.
>
>I'll use a trim wedge for now, and I'll play with the fairings before doing
>anything permanent...but I ultimately hope to remove all traces of control
>surface deflection at max cruise speed by tweaking the incidence of the
>stabilizers. Admittedly this will be at one indicated airspeed at one
>power
>setting...but I'll optimize it for what I intend to use most commonly.
>
>)_( Dan
>RV-7 N714D
>http://www.rvproject.com
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com>
>To:
>Subject: RE: RV-List: new RV-7 needs left rudder in cruise
>
>
>
> >
> > Dan,
> >
> > A local "4-peater" (RV6, RV6A, RV8A, RV7A) recently discovered that he
> > needed a little left rudder as well. His philosophy is "put a rivet in
>every
> > hole and the airplane is gonna be a straight as you need to worry
>about".
>So
> > he did NOT make any changes other than taking the "rudder trim" from
>EPM.AV
> > ( http://www.epm-avcorp.com/ ) that I had bought, sticking it on and
> > flying. He says it flies straight now at cruise configuration (all
>fairings
> > installed).
> >
> > You may in fact introduce a LOT more errors by changing the offset,
> > especially BEFORE all the fairings are on and locked down.
> >
> > Just an opinion.
> >
> > James
> >
> >
>
>
Check out MSN PC Safety & Security to help ensure your PC is protected and
safe. http://specials.msn.com/msn/security.asp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Sears <sears(at)searnet.com> |
| Subject: | O320 parts manual question |
For those who have paid out the big price for a late edition O320 Lycoming
parts manual, I need to know if the supplements include the O320-D3G. If I
look at the engine list in the manual, the D3G is actually a D2A with some
minor changes. I'd like to use the D2A to create a needed parts list for my
D3G; but, I want to be sure there is no supplement that might throw me a
curve. I've got a feeling that my want list will be a large enough curve,
as it is. :-)
Jim Sears in KY
RV-6A N198JS (Scooter)
RV-7A #70317 (Cleaning engine parts and waiting for wings)
EAA Tech Counselor
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Travis Hamblen" <TravisHamblen(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Sterba Prop overhaul... |
I have a Sterba 68x76 wood prop on my RV-6A. I am not a wood worker by any
means and know even less about wood props than wood work in general. With
this in mind I know better than to try to work on my prop myself. I have
tried a couple times to get a hold of Ed Sterba, I sent 2 e-mails and just
left a second phone message for him. I have heard that he offers excellent
customer service, but I just can=92t seem to get a hold of him! I have left
phone messages at 941-778-3103, and sent him e-mail at HYPERLINK
"mailto:ed_sterba(at)excite.com"ed_sterba(at)excite.com but no luck hearing back
from him. If anyone has better numbers to call him at or a better e-mail
address please send it to me.
On another note=85 the Sterba prop has done great so far, but I have noted
what might be a crack, more likely that it is just a minor separation in
some of the layers. Anyway, the possible crack is only about 1 inch long
and does NOT go through the entire blade of the prop. I actually have one
on each prop blade, but neither of them seems to go all the way through the
prop, and both look to follow with the grain of the wood. I have been told
that such cracks can be epoxied (re-glued somehow) and the prop will be as
good as new. I also need to have the prop refinished as the finish is very
thin, almost bare wood, in spots although it still looks GREAT! I need to
have this done professionally, by someone who knows what they are doing.
From what little wood working experience I do have the job looks to be
pretty simple, but yet to complex for me! So supposing I don=92t hear from
Ed Sterba is there anyone you guys can recommend to refinish this prop for
me. Please e-mail me here or offline with any advice on shops that may be
able to do this job as well as any info on how to get a hold of Ed Sterba.
Thanks in advance=85
Travis
RV6A 330 hrs.
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)QCBC.ORG> |
The "L" stands for Light or thin.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or sportpilot(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: <sjevans(at)cox.net>
Subject: RV-List: AN960-10L
>
> AN960-10L is a washer designation on DWG 15A, RV-7.
>
> What does the L mean.
>
> If its a lock washer, then what type? I cant seem to find this referenced
in my handy-dandy Aircraft Mechanics guide.
>
>
> Thanks for any info.
>
>
> Sam Evans
>
> 7A QB, working on wings
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ted Gauthier" <TGauthier(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Microair 760 repair shop |
I am getting an occurrence of strange display characters on my Microair
760. I found a service bulletin SB-003 on Microair Avionics web site.
I would like to get it repaired. Are there any repair shops in the
U.S.?
Thanks,
Ted Gauthier RV-6
125 hours
Pontiac, Michigan
tgauthier(at)comcast.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie & Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sterba Prop overhaul... |
Travis Hamblen wrote:
>
>I have a Sterba 68x76 wood prop on my RV-6A. I am not a wood worker by any
>means and know even less about wood props than wood work in general. With
>this in mind I know better than to try to work on my prop myself. I have
>tried a couple times to get a hold of Ed Sterba, I sent 2 e-mails and just
>left a second phone message for him. I have heard that he offers excellent
>customer service, but I just can=92t seem to get a hold of him! I have left
>phone messages at 941-778-3103, and sent him e-mail at HYPERLINK
>"mailto:ed_sterba(at)excite.com"ed_sterba(at)excite.com but no luck hearing back
>from him. If anyone has better numbers to call him at or a better e-mail
>address please send it to me.
>
>
>On another note=85 the Sterba prop has done great so far, but I have noted
>what might be a crack, more likely that it is just a minor separation in
>some of the layers. Anyway, the possible crack is only about 1 inch long
>and does NOT go through the entire blade of the prop. I actually have one
>on each prop blade, but neither of them seems to go all the way through the
>prop, and both look to follow with the grain of the wood. I have been told
>that such cracks can be epoxied (re-glued somehow) and the prop will be as
>good as new. I also need to have the prop refinished as the finish is very
>thin, almost bare wood, in spots although it still looks GREAT! I need to
>have this done professionally, by someone who knows what they are doing.
>>From what little wood working experience I do have the job looks to be
>pretty simple, but yet to complex for me! So supposing I don=92t hear from
>Ed Sterba is there anyone you guys can recommend to refinish this prop for
>me. Please e-mail me here or offline with any advice on shops that may be
>able to do this job as well as any info on how to get a hold of Ed Sterba.
>
>
>Thanks in advance=85
>
>Travis
>
>RV6A 330 hrs.
>
The phone # is the one I've used recently. Try calling him in the
evening. He doesn't have a phone at his shop.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Microair 760 repair shop |
Hi Ted-
I had to send my radio back to Australia for repair for the same reason-
painless procedure. Had it back in less than two weeks and it works flawlessly
now (with the exception of my audible faux pax!)
Contact them at www.microair.com.au for the entire drill...
By the by- I will be sending my T2000 xpndr back to the same address for
"update" due to the dreaded "NO COMM" error shortly.................
From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark- by golly this here flyin' sho' nuf be FUN! 8-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> |
The L stands for light.
Brian Kraut
Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
www.engalt.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Albert Gardner
Subject: Re: RV-List: AN960-10L
It is a thin washer, takes 3 or 4 of them to equal the thickness of a -10
washer. Very useful for making castle nuts line up with the drilled bolt,
and on non-adjustable rivet squeezers.
Albert Gardner
RV-9A 872RV
Yuma, AZ
----- Original Message -----
From: <sjevans(at)cox.net>
> AN960-10L is a washer designation on DWG 15A, RV-7.
> What does the L mean.
> Sam Evans
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Hansen" <jerry-hansen(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Sun-n-Fun opportunity? |
In response to several RV'er emails responding to the one below, Trio has
decided to offer the show special discount of $100 on autopilots that are
ordered prior to the end of the Sun-n-Fun fly in (April 19). The discount
applies to a complete system, or just the control head (if you already have
a Navaid servo). Purchasers do not need to attend the fly in.
During the show (12th through 19th) there will not be anyone in the office.
However we will be able to get email and our phone will be forwarded to a
cell phone we will carry with us. If you can't get us by phone you can
leave a message. Email info(at)trioavionics.com - Phone 619-448-4619.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jerry Hansen
Subject: RV-List: Sun-n-Fun opportunity?
To those going to Sun-n-Fun - If you are interested in an autopilot for your
RV, stop by Trio Avionics for a "Show Special" on the EZ Pilot. We might be
a bit hard to find as we have been trying to get an indoor booth for the
past year (still none available), but we'll be there.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KIMSEYCO(at)aol.com |
it means it is half standard thickness. normal thickness for most washers is
.032
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bobby Hester <bhester(at)hopkinsville.net> |
sjevans(at)cox.net wrote:
>
>AN960-10L is a washer designation on DWG 15A, RV-7.
>
>What does the L mean.
>
>If its a lock washer, then what type? I cant seem to find this referenced in
my handy-dandy Aircraft Mechanics guide.
>
>
>Thanks for any info.
>
>
>Sam Evans
>
>7A QB, working on wings
>
>
Sam you've had a hunderd people answer your question (give you a fish)
but what they have failed to do was tell you how to find out what things
like that mean (teach you how to fish).
Go to: http://www.aircraft-spruce.com/ and click on order a free
catalog. It has all the part numbers that you'll be finding and
descriptions of what they are. I keep one on my bench in the hanger and
one here at home.
--
Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
RV7A Slowbuild wings-QB Fuse :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: O320 parts manual question |
Jim
Contact Mattituck. Mahlon recently posted that 320 parts manuals were available
from them for $20 plus shipping. I just bought a 360 parts manual from them
for $30.
Charlie Kuss
>
>For those who have paid out the big price for a late edition O320 Lycoming
>parts manual, I need to know if the supplements include the O320-D3G. If I
>look at the engine list in the manual, the D3G is actually a D2A with some
>minor changes. I'd like to use the D2A to create a needed parts list for my
>D3G; but, I want to be sure there is no supplement that might throw me a
>curve. I've got a feeling that my want list will be a large enough curve,
>as it is. :-)
>
>Jim Sears in KY
>RV-6A N198JS (Scooter)
>RV-7A #70317 (Cleaning engine parts and waiting for wings)
>EAA Tech Counselor
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie & Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
"Lassen, Finn " ,
"Mars, Sam " , "Powell, Ken" ,
"Powell, ken " ,
"Presson, Bill " ,
"Richardson, Coley " ,
"Roberts, Monty" , RV list ,
"rv7-list(at)matronics.com" ,
Sanders Herb ,
"Scott, Jonathan " ,
"Stall, Kendall " ,
thorplist
| Subject: | Party time at Slobovia Outernational Airport!! |
Greetings Fellow Aviators,
The Lower Slobovia Outernational Garden Club would like to extend to You
and Yours a cordial invitation to our next effort to cultivate more
frequent pilotage, higher flour bombing accuracy, and an increased
consumption of non plant food matter.
We will be serving lunch to you on Saturday, June 5, 2004.
I'll make available sheet metal tools & aluminum for anyone wanting
their 1st exposure to metal work. For those interested in alternative
engines, I'll try ot hav a Mazda rotary opened up for inspection.
Formation flight teams are invited to attend & demonstrate their skills.
(Mike Stewart, are you listening?) Plaques will be awarde for flour
bombing, longest distance flown, & other categories & as determined by
our totally biased judges.
Anyone wishing to arrive on Friday and/or stay until Sunday is welcome
to do so. Just throw a bedrool in your plane/car & we will find yo a
place to sleep that's out of the heat. There are lots of spare bedrooms,
hangar apartments, floor space, etc. available with the sponsoring
families. We will do continental breakfast stuff in the morning & poll
the participants for evening meal decisions. Some of our pilots actually
consider themselves multitalented & encourage you to bring your musical
instrument of choice for some homegrown music in the evening.
Now for the details:
Disclaimer: Slobovia is a private airport. Pilots operate at their own risk.
You can get complete info about our airport at airnav.com
http://www.airnav.com/airport/MS71
FAA Identifier: MS71
Lat/Long: 32-29-42.508N / 090-17-34.325W
32-29.70847N / 090-17.57208W
32.4951411 / -90.2928681
(estimated)
Elevation: 250 ft. / 76 m (estimated)
Variation: 03E (1985)
From city: 1 mile N of POCAHONTAS, MS (10 miles N of Jackson MS)
Airport Operations
Airport use: Private use. Permission required prior to landing
Activation date: 11/1988
Sectional chart: MEMPHIS
<http://www.airnav.com/ad/click/taHR0cDovL3d3dy5hdnNob3.uY29tL3NlY3Rpb25hbGNoYXJ0cy5odG1sP3Jl+LZj05MyBhdnNob3..>
Control tower: no
ARTCC: MEMPHIS CENTER
FSS: GREENWOOD FLIGHT SERVICE STATION [1-800-WX-BRIEF]
Attendance: UNATNDD
Wind indicator: yes
Segmented circle: no
Lights: RDO REQ
Beacon: unknown
Airport Communications
UNICOM: 122.75
WX ASOS at HKS (10 nm S): 120.625 (601-354-4037)
WX ASOS at JAN (16 nm SE): PHONE 601-932-2822
Nearby radio navigation aids
VOR radial/distance VOR name Freq Var
JAN
<http://www.airnav.com/cgi-bin/navaid-info?id=JAN&type=VORTAC&name=JACKSON>r258/6.4
JACKSON VORTAC
112.60
05E
Runway Information
Runway 15/33
Dimensions: 3540 x 80 ft. / 1079 x 24 m
Surface: turf
RUNWAY 15 RUNWAY 33
Traffic pattern: left
left
Obstructions: 70 ft. trees, 200 ft. from runway
none
If you need driving directions or more info, feel free to email me at
cengland(at)netdoor.com
or call at 601-879-9596.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV7(at)Gunsite.to" <RV&(at)Gunsite.to> |
| Subject: | Women Building RVs |
I am trying to identify any women building an RV, particularly those with
websites. Would appreciate any help I can get.
Anyone know of any?
Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael McGee <jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Women Building RVs |
RV-9A -- Amarylis Khat, Toledo, Oregon (just moved from Portland). She
doesn't have a web site and I don't know if her email is working yet.
A woman in Seattle built a -4 several years ago, don't remember her name.
Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR
13B in gestation mode
At 21:45 2004-04-02, you wrote:
>
>I am trying to identify any women building an RV, particularly those with
>websites. Would appreciate any help I can get.
>
>Anyone know of any?
>
>Thanks.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DAVID REEL" <dreel(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator trim |
Pitch sensitivity to elevator movements is not related to whether the elevator
rests in trail with respect to the horizontal stabilizer at some speed, say cruise.
As the center of lift moves closer to the center of mass, the plane will
have more and more pitch sensitivity until it becomes unstable when the center
of lift moves ahead of the center of mass. The plane you are building sounds
like it will have a rearward center of mass and hence have higher pitch sensitivity
in all flight coditions. So you are unlikely to run out of trim or elevator
authority. In fact, I'd worry more about suceptability to overstressing
the airplane at high speed from your own control stick movement. But it's
also true that you'll experience less 'pitch stability drag' because your airplane
is less stable with a rearward CG so less corrective down force is required
from the HS-elevator combination. Of course, when the elevator is in trail
at any flight condition, the corrective force is being most efficiently generated
so there is a drag reduction of secondary magnitude.
Dave Reel - RV8A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John D. Heath" <altoq(at)direcway.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Women Building RVs |
I know One , Kathleen(at)rv7.us , She has a web site, but I've lost
the address. She started about two mounths ago.
John D
----- Original Message -----
From: "RV7(at)Gunsite.to" <RV&(at)Gunsite.to>
Subject: RV-List: Women Building RVs
>
> I am trying to identify any women building an RV, particularly those with
> websites. Would appreciate any help I can get.
>
> Anyone know of any?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Altimeter Adjustment |
Can you easily adjust the altimeter? I noticed a small screw next to the
pressure adjustment knob, unscrewed it and it does not appear to be anything in
there to adjust. I know on a VSI there is a small adjustment, just wondering if
there is any adjustment on the altimeter.
Blah, blah, blah, I don't need to be spammed, I know they are adjusted at the
factory, I know they can be off at one altitude and very accurate at others,
and I even have a the calibration sheet for my altimeter. Just wonding if
they can be adjusted or not. Thanks
-Mike Kraus
N223RV RV-4 Flying
N213RV RV-10 Empennage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KIMSEYCO(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Altimeter Adjustment |
the screw you are talking about is used by the instrument shop to adjust the
altimeter to the correct baro setting and should only be adjusted so far if my
failing memory is serving me ok. best to talk to an instrument shop about it.
just what is it that you need to adjust? is your a/c certified ifr? if so and
you adjust the screw it will invaladate the cert and it can be screwed up. be
careful out their. tom kimsey warner robins,ga
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "C J Heitman" <cjh(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | EIS4000 - What limit to use for Shock Cooling Alarm? |
I know many pilots flying behind a Lycoming feel that shock cooling isn't a
big issue, but for those with a Grand Rapids EIS4000 engine monitor, what
maximum CHT Change Rate (degrees F/minute) did you program for the shock
cooling alarm?
I don't want to abuse my IO-320 but I also don't want to see too many
inadvertent alarms.
Chris Heitman
Dousman WI
RV-9A N94ME
http://my.execpc.com/~cjh/rv9a.html
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)QCBC.ORG> |
| Subject: | Re: Altimeter Adjustment |
One backs off the screw just above and to the left of the setting knob until
it can be gently raised to permit the release of setting knob. You then pull
out on the adjusting knob to dis-engage the hands from the window indicator.
The lock screw has a very large head but a very small shank that lifts out a
locking pin. Do not over tighten as it is brass and all that has to happen
is for the head to be in the recess to lock the pin. Our flying club had to
buy a new altimeter when the tech broke the screw.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or sportpilot(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: <N223RV(at)aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: Altimeter Adjustment
>
> Can you easily adjust the altimeter? I noticed a small screw next to the
> pressure adjustment knob, unscrewed it and it does not appear to be
anything in
> there to adjust. I know on a VSI there is a small adjustment, just
wondering if
> there is any adjustment on the altimeter.
>
> Blah, blah, blah, I don't need to be spammed, I know they are adjusted at
the
> factory, I know they can be off at one altitude and very accurate at
others,
> and I even have a the calibration sheet for my altimeter. Just wonding if
> they can be adjusted or not. Thanks
>
> -Mike Kraus
> N223RV RV-4 Flying
> N213RV RV-10 Empennage
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: EIS4000 - What limit to use for Shock Cooling Alarm? |
CRIS-30;F PER MINUTE-LYC HAS TWO SERVICE DOCUMENTS-ONE SAYS 20F THE OTHER
SAYS 40F PER MINUTE-TOM
Tom Whelan
Whelan Farms Airport
President EAA Chapter 1097
wfact01(at)aol.com
249 Hard Hill Road North
PO Box 426
Bethlehem, CT 06751
Tel: 203-266-5300
Fax: 202-266-5140
EAA Technical/Flight Advisor
RV-8 540 LYC (Engine Runs, Taxi-Tests)
S-51 Mustang Turbine (Under Construction)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Altimeter Adjustment |
In a message dated 4/3/2004 6:17:26 AM Pacific Standard Time, N223RV(at)aol.com
writes:
Can you easily adjust the altimeter? I noticed a small screw next to the
pressure adjustment knob, unscrewed it and it does not appear to be anything
in
there to adjust. I know on a VSI there is a small adjustment, just wondering
if
there is any adjustment on the altimeter.
Blah, blah, blah, I don't need to be spammed, I know they are adjusted at the
factory, I know they can be off at one altitude and very accurate at others,
and I even have a the calibration sheet for my altimeter. Just wonding if
they can be adjusted or not.
==========================
Yes, they can and it's all in the archives.
GV (RV-6A N1GV flying 685 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob <panamared3(at)brier.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Spinner mounting problem. |
I had the same problem, but the distances was more like a 1/4", I ordered
every spinner front plate that Vans makes, non worked. I talked to Vans
about this and their response was that all prop makers were supposed to
standardize their prop thickness. And of course, I was the only person who
ever had this problem!
I tried numerous fixes. The one that worked, was a cut down front
plate. I cut off the flange and then fiberglassed a new fiberglass flange
onto it. This fit perfectly, and I have not had any problems since. Best
of all no wobble.
Personally, I would not do surgery on the prop.
Bob
RV6 NightFighter
> Thought I would run by those in the know a problem I'm having installing
> the
>spinner. Seems at the 4-3/8" wood prop thickness is to much for proper
>installation. I can get the spinner on but it is stressed and so are the
>spinner
>plates. Even bowed slightly. It would fit in a relaxed state if I did the
>following. The front spinner plate needs to be about .100" closer to the
>back
>spinner plate. The only way I can figure to do this is to thin the
>thickness of the
>prop hub by removing from the front portion of the prop where the spinner
>plate mounts by .100". I'm considering using a pin router just to do the
>surface
>on the front of the hub. This would keep the surface parallel to the rear and
>not cause any wobble. The front spinner plate is about 8.5" diameter. I would
>then round off the routed portion that extends to the blades so there
>would be
>no 90 degree angle, just a smooth return to full thickness. What are your
>comments about this method I'm considering? Mentioned this to Ed Sterba
>and he
>thought it would be an acceptable fix. Anyone else have a problem like this?
>Thanks for your input.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry G RV-7 N697RV <edge540t(at)direcway.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Women Building RVs |
Kathleen's RV-7A Builder's Site
http://www.rv7.us/a_home.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: "John D. Heath" <altoq(at)direcway.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Women Building RVs
>
>
> I know One , Kathleen(at)rv7.us , She has a web site, but I've lost
> the address. She started about two mounths ago.
>
> John D
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "RV7(at)Gunsite.to" <RV&(at)Gunsite.to>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Women Building RVs
>
>
> >
> > I am trying to identify any women building an RV, particularly those
with
> > websites. Would appreciate any help I can get.
> >
> > Anyone know of any?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John D. Heath" <altoq(at)direcway.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Altimeter Adjustment |
Set the altemeterto field elevation
Turn the screw out far enough to clear the face of the insturment
Slide it away from the knob, Wiggle as required, turn it in to hold it in
place
Pull the Knob out to the stop
Turn the Knob to adjust only the Kolsmans window to the altemeter setting
Slide the screw back to it's original position and secure it
Now You Know
John D
----- Original Message -----
From: <Vanremog(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Altimeter Adjustment
>
> In a message dated 4/3/2004 6:17:26 AM Pacific Standard Time,
N223RV(at)aol.com
> writes:
> Can you easily adjust the altimeter? I noticed a small screw next to the
> pressure adjustment knob, unscrewed it and it does not appear to be
anything
> in
> there to adjust. I know on a VSI there is a small adjustment, just
wondering
> if
> there is any adjustment on the altimeter.
>
> Blah, blah, blah, I don't need to be spammed, I know they are adjusted at
the
> factory, I know they can be off at one altitude and very accurate at
others,
> and I even have a the calibration sheet for my altimeter. Just wonding if
> they can be adjusted or not.
> ==========================
>
> Yes, they can and it's all in the archives.
>
>
> GV (RV-6A N1GV flying 685 hrs)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oldsfolks(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Party Time at Outer Slobovia Outernational Airport |
Tom;
I have dropped flour bombs from my RV-4 by tying a cord(Nylon or such) to
something on the right side near the panel. Lead the cord out under the canopy
rail next to the panel,around the bomb and back inside. Secure the end of the
cord so you can release it at the proper time. Then Practice,practice,practice
to get the timing right.
I have also dropped a roll of toilet tissue this way for ribbon cutting
contests. Have trophies to prove it works !!
Bob Olds -- RV-4 , N1191X
oldsfolks(at)aol.com
A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor
Charleston,Arkansas
Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Altimeter Adjustment |
I have one that needs adjustment also. But mine is off by 900 feet.
That's why I like my GPS.
Brett
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Altimeter Adjustment |
BOB-SOME PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BAROMETRIC ALTITUDE
(ALTIMETER) AND TRUE ALTITUDE (GPS)-TOM
Tom Whelan
Whelan Farms Airport
President EAA Chapter 1097
wfact01(at)aol.com
249 Hard Hill Road North
PO Box 426
Bethlehem, CT 06751
Tel: 203-266-5300
Fax: 202-266-5140
EAA Technical/Flight Advisor
RV-8 540 LYC (Engine Runs, Taxi-Tests)
S-51 Mustang Turbine (Under Construction)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Altimeter Adjustment |
>
>
>Brett Ray wrote:
>
>>
>>I have one that needs adjustment also. But mine is off by 900 feet.
>>That's why I like my GPS.
>>
>>Brett
>>
>
>ARRGH.
>Perhaps you have just explained a 'head on near miss' crusing at 4500 ft
>that came my way last year.
>
>Bob
Yeah, there can be a few hundred feet difference between GPS altitude
and barometric altitude. The error in GPS altitude varies with the
satellite geometry, and barometric altitude is affected by the
atmosphere temperature profile. But, all the other traffic is
setting their cruise altitudes using barometric altitude. So anyone
who decides to set cruise altitude using GPS altitude may be cruising
at different altitudes than everyone else. I doubt it would put them
1,000 ft out, but they could easily end up 500 ft out and mix it up
with the IFR traffic.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)QCBC.ORG> |
| Subject: | Re: Altimeter Adjustment |
Shouldn't they be the same if the altimeter is set correctly?
----- Original Message -----
From: <WFACT01(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Altimeter Adjustment
>
> BOB-SOME PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BAROMETRIC ALTITUDE
> (ALTIMETER) AND TRUE ALTITUDE (GPS)-TOM
>
> Tom Whelan
> Whelan Farms Airport
> President EAA Chapter 1097
> wfact01(at)aol.com
> 249 Hard Hill Road North
> PO Box 426
> Bethlehem, CT 06751
> Tel: 203-266-5300
> Fax: 202-266-5140
> EAA Technical/Flight Advisor
> RV-8 540 LYC (Engine Runs, Taxi-Tests)
> S-51 Mustang Turbine (Under Construction)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob U." <rv3(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Altimeter Adjustment - TCAS |
Kevin Horton wrote:
>>>
>>>I have one that needs adjustment also. But mine is off by 900 feet.
>>>That's why I like my GPS.
>>>
>>>Brett
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>ARRGH.
>>Perhaps you have just explained a 'head on near miss' crusing at 4500 ft
>>that came my way last year.
>>
>>Bob
>>
>>
>
>Yeah, there can be a few hundred feet difference between GPS altitude
>and barometric altitude. The error in GPS altitude varies with the
>satellite geometry, and barometric altitude is affected by the
>atmosphere temperature profile. But, all the other traffic is
>setting their cruise altitudes using barometric altitude. So anyone
>who decides to set cruise altitude using GPS altitude may be cruising
>at different altitudes than everyone else. I doubt it would put them
>1,000 ft out, but they could easily end up 500 ft out and mix it up
>with the IFR traffic.
>
True 'nuff.....
But, I just couldn't resist an opportunity to be my devilish lil' self.
:-)
However, that near miss involved a T-6 that NEVER SAW ME as we passed
within 50 feet of each other as I zipped out of the way. Us RV-3's are
real small critters and are extremely difficult to see under many
lighting conditions. Time for full blow TCAS.... or maybe one of the
affordable stripped units for some semblance of additional safety beyond
'see and be seen'? Any thoughts or experience with the sub $1000 units,
anyone?
Bob
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bluecavu(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Spinner mounting problem. |
I cut my front plate.
What I did was to remove portions of the flange leaving four 'legs' or 'tabs'
that extended out to pick up four screws in the spinner and bent the
legs/tabs back just as much as was needed over the edge of the prop hub. Imagine
a
front plate that looks like an 'X' superimposed on an 'O'. Been working well now
for over 200 hours (and I turn about 3000 rpm at WOT).
Another tip for assembling spinners/plates if they have a gelcoat and are not
translucent... Rig yourself up a small lightbulb on a cord
(decorative/chandelier bulbs work well -solder the wires to the bulb to keep it
compact and
cover with tape or proseal) stick the bulb inside the spinner and let it backlight
the plate holes through the fiberglass.
Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Altimeter Adjustment |
They'll be the same if you are on the ground at the airport that the
altimeter setting came from, and if the satellite geometry at that
moment happens to provide good GPS altitude accuracy.
GPS is only about one-third as accurate in altitude as it is in
location. So depending on the satellite geometry, you could easily
have a few hundred feet of error in the GPS altitude.
See:
http://gpsinformation.net/main/altitude.htm
http://www.prairie.mb.ca/faq/03.htm
Barometric altitude is affected by temperature. If the temperature
is colder than standard the barometric altitude will tend to read
higher than it should, with the amount of the error being zero at the
ground (assuming you are at the airport where the altimeter setting
came from), and increasing with altitude. The amount of the error is
about 4 feet per thousand feet per degree C that the temperature
differs from standard. So, if the temperature is about 30 deg C
below standard, the barometric altitude will be in error about 120 ft
per 1,000 ft. So, if you are at 4,000 ft above the altitude of the
airport where the altimeter setting comes from, your barometric
altitude will read about 480 ft too high. So even if your GPS
altitude was bang on, it would put you about 480 ft different from
the barometric altitudes that everyone else was using.
If the temperatures are above standard, the sense of the error is
reversed, i.e. the barometric altimeter reads too low.
See:
<http://williams.best.vwh.net/smxgigpdf/smxgig2000.pdf>
<http://www2.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIM/Chap7/aim0702.html> - scroll down to
"7-2-3. Altimeter Errors"
<http://www.atlasaviation.com/feature%20articals/featured-article-2004/lies_your_barometric_altimeter_t.htm>
<http://www.bluecoat.org/reports/Long_98_Cold.pdf>
Kevin Horton
Engineering Test Pilot
>
>Shouldn't they be the same if the altimeter is set correctly?
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <WFACT01(at)aol.com>
>To:
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Altimeter Adjustment
>
>
>>
>> BOB-SOME PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BAROMETRIC ALTITUDE
>> (ALTIMETER) AND TRUE ALTITUDE (GPS)-TOM
>>
> > Tom Whelan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Howell <jehowell(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Fuel Tank Access Plate Question.... |
Greetings all...
I am currently preparing my first fuel tank for assembly. I have gone
with the capacitive fuel sender option. As part of this, a different
fuel tank access plate is provided (T-411 instead of T-408). This
plate has none of the cut outs for the resistive fuel sender (since
it's not being used) and the fuel pickup tube. My question is simple -
I assume that I have to cut out, in the same location as on the stock
T-408, a hole for the fuel pickup tube assembly. Is this correct?
I'm not going with flop tubes, rather I will be using the standard
van's offered fuel pickup.
Seems simple, but I'm worried that I'm missing something and couldn't
find any help in the archives...
Thanks all,
Jerry
RV-7A
Wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
| Subject: | Altimeter Adjustment - TCAS |
Bob,
The current issue of Aviation Consumer rates the two $1000 or less traffic
gadgets. They were pretty much a toss-up. Neither was considered great,
both were thought to be better than nothing.
Terry
However, that near miss involved a T-6 that NEVER SAW ME as we passed
within 50 feet of each other as I zipped out of the way. Us RV-3's are
real small critters and are extremely difficult to see under many
lighting conditions. Time for full blow TCAS.... or maybe one of the
affordable stripped units for some semblance of additional safety beyond
'see and be seen'? Any thoughts or experience with the sub $1000 units,
anyone?
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Evan and Megan Johnson" <evmeg(at)snowcrest.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tank Access Plate Question.... |
Yep...just lay the standard plate right on top and mark the location with a
sharpie. Dont forget the anti-rotation bracket.
Evan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Howell" <jehowell(at)tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: RV-List: Fuel Tank Access Plate Question....
>
> Greetings all...
>
> I am currently preparing my first fuel tank for assembly. I have gone
> with the capacitive fuel sender option. As part of this, a different
> fuel tank access plate is provided (T-411 instead of T-408). This
> plate has none of the cut outs for the resistive fuel sender (since
> it's not being used) and the fuel pickup tube. My question is simple -
> I assume that I have to cut out, in the same location as on the stock
> T-408, a hole for the fuel pickup tube assembly. Is this correct?
>
> I'm not going with flop tubes, rather I will be using the standard
> van's offered fuel pickup.
>
> Seems simple, but I'm worried that I'm missing something and couldn't
> find any help in the archives...
>
> Thanks all,
> Jerry
> RV-7A
> Wings
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dj Merrill <deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Altimeter Adjustment - TCAS |
Bob U. wrote:
>or maybe one of the
>affordable stripped units for some semblance of additional safety beyond
>'see and be seen'? Any thoughts or experience with the sub $1000 units,
>anyone?
>
>
I have one of the Surecheck 110 units that I picked
up on Ebay for $200. This is one generation old, and
is not their latest offering. It works. The numerical
distance indicator is not accurate, but generally when it
tells me there is something closer than 2 miles, which is
(I believe) the threshold when the voice warning starts,
there is traffic nearby. I've had occasional
false reports, but generally the traffic really
is there. I'd say it was worth the $$ I paid for it.
The latest generation are better, and can even tell you
if the traffic is above or below you and by how much.
However, they are a lot more expensive, too. :-)
-Dj
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Women Building RVs |
| From: | "Frank van der Hulst (Staff WG)" <F.vanderHulst(at)ucol.ac.nz> |
Louise Coats built RV-6 ZK-RVL, flying here in New Zealand. She's
apparently working on another.
She doesn't have a website AFAIK.
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: | "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy(at)att.net> |
I'm attempting to locate a suitable location to mount my new Dynon OAT Probe.
The Dynon OAT probe came supplied with an 8' pre-wired cable and instructions that
specify... "the OAT probe must be mounted at a distance such that you do not
have to extend the supplied cabling to reach the EDC-D10 remote compass module....".
I have the remote compass mounted on the upper portion of aft bulkhead
F-707 (one bulkhead aft of bagagge compartment bulkhead).
There is NO way I can reach the wing or wing root fairing with only 8' feet of
cable. Won't even reach the NACA vent on the forward side of the fuse as a back-up
location. The best location I can see for my set-up would be to install
the probe high, and underneath the H/S (horizontal stabiler). My concern is
that the probe may be affected by exhaust gases (heat) even tucked-up under the
H/S. Would the probe reading be effective under the H/S?
The only other alternative I see is to extend the length of the cable to reach
an area under the wing.
Does anyone know if the cable can be extended without affecting the probe? I don't
understand why it can't be lengthened, but then again... I'm not an electrical
engineer.
Any suggestions?
Thanks,
Jack Lockamy
Camarillo, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | One of lifes little pleasures |
| From: | "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart(at)iss.net> |
All things being equal, I am running about .85gph better under EI.
But all things are not equal. Runs smoother, starts better.
Michael Stewart
Quality Assurance
404.236.3363
GO ISS!
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hal / Carol
Kempthorne
Subject: Re: RV-List: One of lifes little pleasures
How about the fuel savings, Mike??
hal
At 05:27 AM 4/2/2004, you wrote:
>
>
>Yesterday, I went and bought 8 spark plugs for my Lycoming to get her
>ready for the up and coming very busy month of flying. Between this
>weekends formation clinic in Ohio, SnF, and our 12 ship gaggle to the
>Turks and Caicos, I am really getting her up to snuff.
>
>Well I ordered my plugs, got to the register, and they rang up as
>$14.32, I smiled and gladly paid with a twenty, stuck my change in my
>pocket, and wondered out the door. Paused.... Turned back around, and
>bought another 8 just for kicks.
>
>Screw up on their part? No..... NGK's, for my LSE dual electronic
>ignition at Advance Autoparts round the corner.
=
=
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dynon OAT Probe |
>
>I'm attempting to locate a suitable location to mount my new Dynon OAT Probe.
>
>The Dynon OAT probe came supplied with an 8' pre-wired cable and
>instructions that specify... "the OAT probe must be mounted at a
>distance such that you do not have to extend the supplied cabling to
>reach the EDC-D10 remote compass module....". I have the remote
>compass mounted on the upper portion of aft bulkhead F-707 (one
>bulkhead aft of bagagge compartment bulkhead).
>
>There is NO way I can reach the wing or wing root fairing with only
>8' feet of cable. Won't even reach the NACA vent on the forward
>side of the fuse as a back-up location. The best location I can see
>for my set-up would be to install the probe high, and underneath the
>H/S (horizontal stabiler). My concern is that the probe may be
>affected by exhaust gases (heat) even tucked-up under the H/S.
>Would the probe reading be effective under the H/S?
>
>The only other alternative I see is to extend the length of the
>cable to reach an area under the wing.
>
>Does anyone know if the cable can be extended without affecting the
>probe? I don't understand why it can't be lengthened, but then
>again... I'm not an electrical engineer.
>
>Any suggestions?
>
>Thanks,
>Jack Lockamy
Jack,
I suspect that a location under the HS would probably work. The
exhaust gases should be fairly well mixed with the ambient air by the
time they get that far aft. Assuming your engine rotates clockwise
as viewed from the cockpit, the right side is probably a better
choice than the left. I think the prop wash would tend to push the
exhaust gases to the left of centreline.
Having the probe under the HS should also help shade it from the sun.
Sun shining on the metal around the probe could cause it to over
read, assuming that the heat from the skin is conducted into the
probe.
Let us know how it works out.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Rv-List Aerodynamic Drag |
| From: | smoothweasel(at)juno.com |
Does anyone out there have a formula handy that will figure how much drag
is induced by a surface that is flat on the front and protruding into the
air stream? Someone looked at my plane today and said that I would see a
significant(3-4 MPH) gain on my cruise speed if I would upgrade to a 13
in. spinner.......i have a 12 in. one and so it leaves a half in. exposed
"flat area" around the circumference of it. I have figured that I have
around 19sq. in. exposed to the air stream. I also understand that a
13in. spinner will cause a very slight more drag than the 12in. Is the
guy right on his assumption or would it be insignificant???
Weasel Graber
-4 waiting....................FAA!!!!
Brooksville MS.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dynon OAT Probe |
I mounted mine on the right side about 2-3 inches under the horizontal stab.
Seems to work good, but don't have much to reference it to. Sure would have
been nice if they put 25' on it so you could put it out under the wing.....
-Mike Kraus
N223RV RV-4 Flying
N213RV RV-10 Empennage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ken Simmons" <ken(at)truckstop.com> |
| Subject: | Wing skin overlap |
Not sure how to ask this question so it was difficult to search the archives.
I'm looking over the wing real good before putting the bottom skin on. I noticed
a problem with the most foward section of where the two skins overlap on the
top skin. I must have chamfered too much because the outboard skin(the one on
top) has curled up.
Any ideas on how to fix this? My only thought is to drill out the rivet and use
some adhevise to hold the skin down. When that is dry reinstall the rivet.
Thanks.
Ken
RV-8
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Wing skin overlap |
> Not sure how to ask this question so it was difficult to
> search the archives.
>
> I'm looking over the wing real good before putting the bottom
> skin on. I noticed a problem with the most foward section of
> where the two skins overlap on the top skin. I must have
> chamfered too much because the outboard skin(the one on top)
> has curled up.
>
> Any ideas on how to fix this? My only thought is to drill out
> the rivet and use some adhevise to hold the skin down. When
> that is dry reinstall the rivet.
>
> Thanks.
> Ken
> RV-8
Ken, use pro-seal if you go that route. Even then, the relentless
desire of that little corner to want to peel up will be tough to
overcome. Can you put another rivet in there?
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 452 hours
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Great Touch Up Gun |
| From: | <EricHe(at)FlexSolPackaging.com> |
Hi, I'm painting a friends 6a and used this as an excuse to buy an airbrush. I
wanted it to shoot clear on the mask lines before shooting the contrasting color
(to eliminate any bleed under problems). The air brush was just too slow for
something as big as an RV fuselage. So then I found and bought one of these
guns on ebay. I figured for 20 bucks could I go wrong? Turns out, the thing works
great. Shoots like a big air brush but still gives good coverage, and you
can crank open the needle and really lay a beautiful fine coat of paint. The thing
atomizes single stage urethane very well. It paints much faster than an airbrush
too. This guy will sell them outright for $19.95 so you can skip the whole
auction thing. I've bought two now and he's a good guy to deal with. Thought
I'd share.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=43987&item=2472031127
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dynon OAT Probe |
Mike, does it look like the 10' wire/coax lead in to the OAT can be cut off
easily so it could be extended?
I am considering mounting mine under the HS. (I mounted the remote compass
under the fairing of the fuselage and VS.) But I think the wing would be a
better location if the lead in can be longer. (I will have a GPS, so I am
not real sure that have TAS is all that important.) What is its real value
of having TAS from the Dynon in this case?
Indiana Larry, RV7 TipUp
TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
JeffRose Flightline Interiors
Firewall Forward, Wiring with Nuckoll's Knowledge
((((((((((((()))))))))))))))))
----- Original Message -----
From: <N223RV(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Dynon OAT Probe
>
> I mounted mine on the right side about 2-3 inches under the horizontal
stab.
> Seems to work good, but don't have much to reference it to. Sure would
have
> been nice if they put 25' on it so you could put it out under the
wing.....
>
> -Mike Kraus
> N223RV RV-4 Flying
> N213RV RV-10 Empennage
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pcondon" <pcondon(at)mitre.org> |
| Subject: | Altimeter Adjustmen t- Why not to use GPS altitude in the ATC |
environment
The NAS (National Airspace System) that the ATC controllers use to control
and separate air traffic also use NAS reporting stations that have
barometric pressure readings at various places within the area of airspace
the monitor (Sectors for EnRoute airspace)
Your Mode-c transponder reply to TCAS AND ground based radar
interrogations and rely on baro. Data (pressure) to yield a "altitude".
Likewise your fellow pilot uses and relies on these same factors. You fly in
a shared airspace environment with certain "agreements" based on altitude
which boils down to safety and separation.
Using your GPS derived absolute height from the ground may be accurate BUT
everyone else is using another (baro.) system to get altitude. Even with its
errors...if everyone uses the "error prone" system then the error is evenly
distributed between all users and hence safety is assured.
If you go buzzing along with GPS altitude, then other pilots, controllers
and TCAS equipped aircraft are all at more "risk" as well as your self.
BTW, ATC RADAR suffers from this same problem as altitude here. There is
known error with radar. This error effects all targets equally (at given
distances and altitudes). Position data gained from GPS and used or mixed
with ATC RADAR is equally "at risk" due to the mixing of data inputs from
two source and being displayed on a single PAD or radar screen by the
controller.
(20 year ATC engineering contractor for the FAA)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SportAV8R(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | wheel bearing specification |
Anyone know the callout for the nose wheel bearings in the 6A (and probably same
for the 7A & 8A)?
I've got one making loud whirring noises on rollout, and I know it's needing replacement.
If I can get the part # while at work today, I can have one on hand
when I tear into it tonight; saves a day or 2 of downtime to know what size
I need.
Thanks in advance.
-Bill B
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Donald Mei" <don_mei(at)hotmail.com> |
Has anyone done a real honest-to-god decision analysis of the TruTrak vs.
Trio Avionics autopilot decision.
I've read all the reviews on the list and prettymuch every one with a
TruTrak is happy with their decision, and everyone with a Trio is happy with
their decision. It seems that they are both very good products. But that
doesn't mean that one product isn't superior to another in specific areas.
I know no one's actually done it, but I'd like to see a side by side
comparison of which one actually FLYS better.
Thoughts??
So far in favor of the Navaid I've got:
1) Founded by the inventor of the autopilot (practically)
2) Established company with solid financial underpinnings i.e. Safe to say
they'll be around a while.
3) Proven performance
4) 100% of purchase price applied towards any upgrade
In favor of the Trio
1) Nice, useful display
Unknown as far as comparison is concerned
1) Reliability
2) Performance in turbulence
Any and all comparisons are appreciated, including "I looked at the XXX and
decided to purchase the YYY because of . . ."
Don
"All of us need to be reminded that the federal government did not create
the states; the states created the federal government!"---Ronald Reagan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Sun & Fun Flight Information |
Anyone flying to Sun & Fun, there is now a nice pictorial covering the procedures
and approaches. For those that have never flown into Sun & Fun before , it
should be a great help compared to that available the first time I went. There
is also a video of the route from Lake Parker to Lakeland as well - as well
as the official NOTAM.
URL is http://www.faa.gov/fsdo/orl/snfland/arrivalphotos/index.htm
Ed Anderson
RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John D. Heath" <altoq(at)direcway.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel bearing specification |
Timken Bearing P/N: LM-67000L-A
John D
----- Original Message -----
From: <SportAV8R(at)aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: wheel bearing specification
>
> Anyone know the callout for the nose wheel bearings in the 6A (and
probably same for the 7A & 8A)?
>
> I've got one making loud whirring noises on rollout, and I know it's
needing replacement. If I can get the part # while at work today, I can
have one on hand when I tear into it tonight; saves a day or 2 of downtime
to know what size I need.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> -Bill B
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John D. Heath" <altoq(at)direcway.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
Look at this Web site http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal/
John D
----- Original Message -----
From: "Donald Mei" <don_mei(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: RV-List: Autopilot Itch
>
> Has anyone done a real honest-to-god decision analysis of the TruTrak vs.
> Trio Avionics autopilot decision.
>
> I've read all the reviews on the list and prettymuch every one with a
> TruTrak is happy with their decision, and everyone with a Trio is happy
with
> their decision. It seems that they are both very good products. But that
> doesn't mean that one product isn't superior to another in specific areas.
>
> I know no one's actually done it, but I'd like to see a side by side
> comparison of which one actually FLYS better.
>
> Thoughts??
>
> So far in favor of the Navaid I've got:
> 1) Founded by the inventor of the autopilot (practically)
> 2) Established company with solid financial underpinnings i.e. Safe to
say
> they'll be around a while.
> 3) Proven performance
> 4) 100% of purchase price applied towards any upgrade
>
> In favor of the Trio
> 1) Nice, useful display
>
> Unknown as far as comparison is concerned
> 1) Reliability
> 2) Performance in turbulence
>
> Any and all comparisons are appreciated, including "I looked at the XXX
and
> decided to purchase the YYY because of . . ."
>
> Don
>
>
> "All of us need to be reminded that the federal government did not create
> the states; the states created the federal government!"---Ronald Reagan
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Photos of Dual LSE ignition installation? |
| From: | czechsix(at)juno.com |
Guys,
Does anyone have pics of how they installed coils and ignition leads for a dual
Lightspeed ignition system for the BOTTOM plugs? I've seen lots of pics for
the top plugs installation, but none for the lower ones. I'm thinking of hanging
the coils just ahead of the sump, but that puts them close to the exhaust
and means I have to run the coax from the igntion box around the sump to get to
the coils. Perhaps it would be better to hang the coils behind the acc. case??
Any input/advice on how others have done this would be appreciated...
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D finishing...
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Photos of Dual LSE ignition installation? |
I placed the coil for the lower plugs on engine center line in front of the
sump as high as possible, basically above the pipes. I locally wrapped the
exhaust with high temp heat wrap stuff. I then fabricated a heat shield
that has 1/4 inch thick ceramic material for additional protection. The
shield was long enough and wide enough that any heat rising up from the
pipes after engine shut off would be diverted around the coil location. By
the way I highly recommend using the RG 400 from the start. 97 hours to
date and no problems.......well no problems after I replaced the RG-58 at
about the 30 hr mark.
>
>
>Guys,
>
>Does anyone have pics of how they installed coils and ignition leads for a
>dual Lightspeed ignition system for the BOTTOM plugs? I've seen lots of
>pics for the top plugs installation, but none for the lower ones. I'm
>thinking of hanging the coils just ahead of the sump, but that puts them
>close to the exhaust and means I have to run the coax from the igntion box
>around the sump to get to the coils. Perhaps it would be better to hang the
>coils behind the acc. case?? Any input/advice on how others have done this
>would be appreciated...
>
>Thanks,
>
>--Mark Navratil
>Cedar Rapids, Iowa
>RV-8A N2D finishing...
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "lucky macy" <luckymacy(at)hotmail.com> |
vansairforce(at)yahoogroups.com
| Subject: | RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58 |
Speaking of not using RG-58, here's what a professional EMI engineer told me
at work. We were discussing a RADALT issue we have on a aircraft.
"When in doubt, use RG-393 or better for RADALT applications. Also use a
swept elbow if you have to turn a corner. Do not use mitered elbows as the
pulse will get distorted from a non-linear group delay at the corner.
The advantage of RG-400 over RG-58 is double shielding with better optical
coverage and better quality Teflon dielectric centers.
RG-393 is 0.23 dB/ft at 4300 MHz (rated at about 50 W CW@ 4300). RG-400 is
twice the loss.
I'd also use RG-393 for GPS but RG-400 will still work."
lucky
----Original Message Follows----
From: rickrv6(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: [rv8list] Re: light speed ignition questions
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 17:34:10 EST
Mark,
Take a look at this article written by Bob Nuckolls:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
He provides an even different alternative to RG cable.
Rick McBride
In a message dated 4/3/04 3:37:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
redbeardmark(at)yahoo.com writes:
> Jerry,
> My LSE Plasma II+ replaces the right-side mag and goes to the top
> plugs. Don't know about using it on the bottom plugs. Don't know
> about the impulse vs. non-impulse issue either.
>
> The coax cables which run from the E/I unit to the coils are RG58.
> An astute fellow builder suggested that I replace the RG58 with RG400
> because of heat from the engine (which I am in the process of
> doing). Klaus at LSE said that RG400 would be optimum. Looking
> forward to testing the engine this June.
>
> Mark Andrews N598X
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Persistent heartburn? Check out Digestive Health & Wellness for information
and advice. http://gerd.msn.com/default.asp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Mader" <davemader(at)bresnan.net> |
| Subject: | wing skin to fuse skin fit |
Though probably not as big an issue on a pre-punch, how has anybody dealt
with the
fuse skin/wing skin joint. My wingskin, when I fitted it up to the
fuselage,was approx. 1/4"
higher than the skin on the bottom of the fuselage. I could have lowered
the wing to have a
better fit, but then wouldn't have had the edge distance that I liked on the
rear spar.
How has anybody else dealt with this mismatch, if they had it? When I push
the fuse skin up
to meet the wing I get slight waviness. Has anyone found a way to deal with
this?
Dave Mader
2nd slow build 6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | RV get togethers at Sun-N-Fun ?? |
Rvers,
Any plans for get togethers - besides Van's Banquet - at S-N-F ??
Weather permitting we'll be on-site (Camping - HBC) by Tuesday.
Chuck & Dave Rowbotham
RV-8A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58 |
When using RG-XXX in the engine compartment for your GPS antenna or EI, the
RG-400 has a much higher center conductor insulator melting point than the
RG-58.
RG-58 = WWII technology.
>
>Speaking of not using RG-58, here's what a professional EMI engineer told me
>at work. We were discussing a RADALT issue we have on a aircraft.
>
>"When in doubt, use RG-393 or better for RADALT applications. Also use a
>swept elbow if you have to turn a corner. Do not use mitered elbows as the
>pulse will get distorted from a non-linear group delay at the corner.
>
>The advantage of RG-400 over RG-58 is double shielding with better optical
>coverage and better quality Teflon dielectric centers.
>
>RG-393 is 0.23 dB/ft at 4300 MHz (rated at about 50 W CW@ 4300). RG-400 is
>twice the loss.
>
>I'd also use RG-393 for GPS but RG-400 will still work."
>
>lucky
>
>
>----Original Message Follows----
>From: rickrv6(at)aol.com
>To: rv8list(at)yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [rv8list] Re: light speed ignition questions
>Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 17:34:10 EST
>
>Mark,
>
>Take a look at this article written by Bob Nuckolls:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
>
>He provides an even different alternative to RG cable.
>
>Rick McBride
>
>In a message dated 4/3/04 3:37:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>redbeardmark(at)yahoo.com writes:
>
> > Jerry,
> > My LSE Plasma II+ replaces the right-side mag and goes to the top
> > plugs. Don't know about using it on the bottom plugs. Don't know
> > about the impulse vs. non-impulse issue either.
> >
> > The coax cables which run from the E/I unit to the coils are RG58.
> > An astute fellow builder suggested that I replace the RG58 with RG400
> > because of heat from the engine (which I am in the process of
> > doing). Klaus at LSE said that RG400 would be optimum. Looking
> > forward to testing the engine this June.
> >
> > Mark Andrews N598X
> >
> >
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>Persistent heartburn? Check out Digestive Health & Wellness for information
>and advice. http://gerd.msn.com/default.asp
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "lucky macy" <luckymacy(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58 |
yeah but 393 might be even better than 400 for that reason too
----Original Message Follows----
From: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 11:34:19 -0800
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
When using RG-XXX in the engine compartment for your GPS antenna or EI, the
RG-400 has a much higher center conductor insulator melting point than the
RG-58.
RG-58 = WWII technology.
>
>Speaking of not using RG-58, here's what a professional EMI engineer told
me
>at work. We were discussing a RADALT issue we have on a aircraft.
>
>"When in doubt, use RG-393 or better for RADALT applications. Also use a
>swept elbow if you have to turn a corner. Do not use mitered elbows as
the
>pulse will get distorted from a non-linear group delay at the corner.
>
>The advantage of RG-400 over RG-58 is double shielding with better optical
>coverage and better quality Teflon dielectric centers.
>
>RG-393 is 0.23 dB/ft at 4300 MHz (rated at about 50 W CW@ 4300). RG-400
is
>twice the loss.
>
>I'd also use RG-393 for GPS but RG-400 will still work."
>
>lucky
>
>
>----Original Message Follows----
>From: rickrv6(at)aol.com
>To: rv8list(at)yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [rv8list] Re: light speed ignition questions
>Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 17:34:10 EST
>
>Mark,
>
>Take a look at this article written by Bob Nuckolls:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
>
>He provides an even different alternative to RG cable.
>
>Rick McBride
>
>In a message dated 4/3/04 3:37:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>redbeardmark(at)yahoo.com writes:
>
> > Jerry,
> > My LSE Plasma II+ replaces the right-side mag and goes to the top
> > plugs. Don't know about using it on the bottom plugs. Don't know
> > about the impulse vs. non-impulse issue either.
> >
> > The coax cables which run from the E/I unit to the coils are RG58.
> > An astute fellow builder suggested that I replace the RG58 with RG400
> > because of heat from the engine (which I am in the process of
> > doing). Klaus at LSE said that RG400 would be optimum. Looking
> > forward to testing the engine this June.
> >
> > Mark Andrews N598X
> >
> >
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>Persistent heartburn? Check out Digestive Health & Wellness for
information
>and advice. http://gerd.msn.com/default.asp
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Tax headache? MSN Money provides relief with tax tips, tools, IRS forms and
more! http://moneycentral.msn.com/tax/workshop/welcome.asp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Nellis" <mike(at)bmnellis.com> |
| Subject: | wing skin to fuse skin fit |
I cut a notch on the bottom overlapped skin and now the skin lays flat in
the corner. You can see some pics here.
http://www.bmnellis.com/WingSkinning4.htm
Mike Nellis
RV-6 Fuselage N699BM
1947 Stinson 108-2 NC9666K
http://bmnellis.com
*** -----Original Message-----
*** From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
*** [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Mader
*** Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 1:10 PM
*** To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
*** Subject: RV-List: wing skin to fuse skin fit
***
***
***
*** Though probably not as big an issue on a pre-punch, how
*** has anybody dealt with the fuse skin/wing skin joint. My
*** wingskin, when I fitted it up to the fuselage,was approx.
*** 1/4" higher than the skin on the bottom of the fuselage. I
*** could have lowered the wing to have a better fit, but then
*** wouldn't have had the edge distance that I liked on the
*** rear spar. How has anybody else dealt with this mismatch,
*** if they had it? When I push the fuse skin up to meet the
*** wing I get slight waviness. Has anyone found a way to deal
*** with this?
***
*** Dave Mader
*** 2nd slow build 6
***
***
*** =============
*** Matronics Forums.
*** =============
*** =============
*** =============
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58 |
Guys....
RG-393 is NOT the way to go for a number of reasons. Here's a couple:
#1) RG-393 is a variante of RG-225, which used to be RG-87.
#2) RG-393 is OVER DOUBLE the size of RG-400/RG58 variants, nearly 1/2"
thick!!!!
#3) Regular BNC connectors will NOT work on this cable, you have to buy
special ones. You think the BNC connectors for RG400 are expensive ar
$2-4.00, while try tripling or quadrupling that price!!
#4) That fat wire is not easy to route around corner. Instead of a 4" bend
radius, you're now talking 8-12" for a bend.
#5) It's REALLY expensive compared to even RG-400.
#6) Temperature ranges for the cables are IDENTICAL. They are both "Type
IX" - Mil-C-17 cables, with a temperature range of -55oC to +200oC.
#7) It's over 3 times as heavy. RG-400 weights 5lbs per 1K', RG-393 weighs
over 16Lbs per 1K'.
Anyway, given the properties are nearly identical, there is no good reason
to use something as foreign as RG-393. If you ever need to work on it,
no-one will have connectors, crimpers, extra wire, etc.. for you, you'll
have to get it from a ham outfit, etc..
On the surface, there may appear to be lots of superior RG coax cables.
After all, there are hundreds of them. That being said, there is lot's of
people a whole lot smarter than me to have done the research and concluded
that RG-400 is the best to use. While it may be tempting to re-invent the
wheel, logic dictates there is no reason to do so.
This is not a personal attack on anyone, just my usual statement of facts.
Hope this helps,
Stein Bruch
RV6's, Minneapolis
http://www.steinair.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of lucky macy
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58
yeah but 393 might be even better than 400 for that reason too
----Original Message Follows----
From: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 11:34:19 -0800
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
When using RG-XXX in the engine compartment for your GPS antenna or EI, the
RG-400 has a much higher center conductor insulator melting point than the
RG-58.
RG-58 = WWII technology.
>
>Speaking of not using RG-58, here's what a professional EMI engineer told
me
>at work. We were discussing a RADALT issue we have on a aircraft.
>
>"When in doubt, use RG-393 or better for RADALT applications. Also use a
>swept elbow if you have to turn a corner. Do not use mitered elbows as
the
>pulse will get distorted from a non-linear group delay at the corner.
>
>The advantage of RG-400 over RG-58 is double shielding with better optical
>coverage and better quality Teflon dielectric centers.
>
>RG-393 is 0.23 dB/ft at 4300 MHz (rated at about 50 W CW@ 4300). RG-400
is
>twice the loss.
>
>I'd also use RG-393 for GPS but RG-400 will still work."
>
>lucky
>
>
>----Original Message Follows----
>From: rickrv6(at)aol.com
>To: rv8list(at)yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [rv8list] Re: light speed ignition questions
>Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 17:34:10 EST
>
>Mark,
>
>Take a look at this article written by Bob Nuckolls:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
>
>He provides an even different alternative to RG cable.
>
>Rick McBride
>
>In a message dated 4/3/04 3:37:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>redbeardmark(at)yahoo.com writes:
>
> > Jerry,
> > My LSE Plasma II+ replaces the right-side mag and goes to the top
> > plugs. Don't know about using it on the bottom plugs. Don't know
> > about the impulse vs. non-impulse issue either.
> >
> > The coax cables which run from the E/I unit to the coils are RG58.
> > An astute fellow builder suggested that I replace the RG58 with RG400
> > because of heat from the engine (which I am in the process of
> > doing). Klaus at LSE said that RG400 would be optimum. Looking
> > forward to testing the engine this June.
> >
> > Mark Andrews N598X
> >
> >
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>Persistent heartburn? Check out Digestive Health & Wellness for
information
>and advice. http://gerd.msn.com/default.asp
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Tax headache? MSN Money provides relief with tax tips, tools, IRS forms and
more! http://moneycentral.msn.com/tax/workshop/welcome.asp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frederick Oldenburg <foldenburg(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole kits? |
I'm building an RV-7A with the newer, all CNC matched hole kits. So far on my empennage,
I've been fluting the ribs on the horizontal and vertical stabilizers.
It won't be long before I'm on to the wings (hopefully!) One of the things
I've been wondering about is whether fluting is really necessary with the CNC
matched hole kits.
I understand the purpose of fluting on the older, non-matched hole kits, but it
seems like the rib is "pulled into line" with the gentle flexing that occurs
when you are clecoing parts together before riveting. On the newer kits, no jigging
is required, because the accuracy of the CNC match holes automagically make
everything line up. So why flute ribs that already have matching holes?
Just want to get some opinions on this.....
Thanks,
Fred
Fred Oldenburg
RV-7A - Empennage
http://www.rv.oldsack.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jamesbaldwin(at)attglobal.net |
| Subject: | Re: Photos of Dual LSE ignition installation? |
Dual electronic ignition sounds like the way to go to me but I'd like to ask what
the electrical system looks like for failure of the alt or a battery. Thanks.
JBB
Scott Bilinski wrote:
>
> I placed the coil for the lower plugs on engine center line in front of the
> sump as high as possible, basically above the pipes. I locally wrapped the
> exhaust with high temp heat wrap stuff. I then fabricated a heat shield
> that has 1/4 inch thick ceramic material for additional protection. The
> shield was long enough and wide enough that any heat rising up from the
> pipes after engine shut off would be diverted around the coil location. By
> the way I highly recommend using the RG 400 from the start. 97 hours to
> date and no problems.......well no problems after I replaced the RG-58 at
> about the 30 hr mark.
>
> >
> >
> >Guys,
> >
> >Does anyone have pics of how they installed coils and ignition leads for a
> >dual Lightspeed ignition system for the BOTTOM plugs? I've seen lots of
> >pics for the top plugs installation, but none for the lower ones. I'm
> >thinking of hanging the coils just ahead of the sump, but that puts them
> >close to the exhaust and means I have to run the coax from the igntion box
> >around the sump to get to the coils. Perhaps it would be better to hang the
> >coils behind the acc. case?? Any input/advice on how others have done this
> >would be appreciated...
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >--Mark Navratil
> >Cedar Rapids, Iowa
> >RV-8A N2D finishing...
> >
> >
>
> Scott Bilinski
> Eng dept 305
> Phone (858) 657-2536
> Pager (858) 502-5190
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Waltner <swaltner(at)mac.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole kits? |
You still need to flute the parts. I think you're a little confused on what is
actually happening when you flute a rib. The rib is formed from a flat piece of
metal that has the lightening holes cut, and all holes stamped. It then has
the flanges bent onto it. You'll notice that the flanges for the airfoil surface
are bent along a curved surface. As you get further away from the center of
the bend (ie: towards the edge of the flange), there is more material there.
You basically have two concentric circles (well, curved objects), and the outside
one (the line along the outside of the flange bend) is longer. This extra
has to go somewhere, so when the rib is originally shaped it deforms the part
so that it bows away from the side with the flange.
By fluting a part, you are putting a fold in the outside curve on the original
part. The flutes make the distance along the outside edge of the flute longer
and this "absorb" the excess material in the outer edge of the flange, which will
straighten out the part. Put your un-fluted part on the table (flanges up)
and you will notice a gap underneath the center of the part (because the part
is bowing away from the flange). When the part is properly fluted, the holes
along the flanges will be in a nice straight line, and the part will lay flat
on the table. The important thing is that the flanges are at 90 degrees to the
web of the part (they won't be when you first receive the kit) and that the holes
are in a nice straight line (to match the holes in the skin which are in
a nice straight line). If you tried to cleco an un-fluted part onto your skins,
the stamped holes would not line up since the holes on the rib would be on a
curved line and the skin's holes are in a straight !
line.
Steve
On Monday, April 05, 2004, at 03:21PM, Frederick Oldenburg
wrote:
>
>I'm building an RV-7A with the newer, all CNC matched hole kits. So far on my
empennage, I've been fluting the ribs on the horizontal and vertical stabilizers.
It won't be long before I'm on to the wings (hopefully!) One of the things
I've been wondering about is whether fluting is really necessary with the CNC
matched hole kits.
>
>I understand the purpose of fluting on the older, non-matched hole kits, but it
seems like the rib is "pulled into line" with the gentle flexing that occurs
when you are clecoing parts together before riveting. On the newer kits, no jigging
is required, because the accuracy of the CNC match holes automagically
make everything line up. So why flute ribs that already have matching holes?
>
>Just want to get some opinions on this.....
>
>Thanks,
>
>Fred
>
>
>Fred Oldenburg
>RV-7A - Empennage
>http://www.rv.oldsack.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Photos of Dual LSE ignition installation? |
I have a standard system with no back up alt or battery. I know I am good
for at
least 1 hr if not 2 (depending) before I need to land. Thats 180 miles +.
Should
be somewhere to land and call my boss to let him kow I wont be in the next day.
Almost looking forward to that. I love small towns and hangin with the locals.
Although I just might spring for the alt that plugs into the vac pump pad. It
puts out 8 amps. Thats enough to eaisly keep me going.
>
>Dual electronic ignition sounds like the way to go to me but I'd like to ask
>what
>the electrical system looks like for failure of the alt or a battery. Thanks.
>JBB
>
>Scott Bilinski wrote:
>
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>>
>> I placed the coil for the lower plugs on engine center line in front of the
>> sump as high as possible, basically above the pipes. I locally wrapped the
>> exhaust with high temp heat wrap stuff. I then fabricated a heat shield
>> that has 1/4 inch thick ceramic material for additional protection. The
>> shield was long enough and wide enough that any heat rising up from the
>> pipes after engine shut off would be diverted around the coil location. By
>> the way I highly recommend using the RG 400 from the start. 97 hours to
>> date and no problems.......well no problems after I replaced the RG-58 at
>> about the 30 hr mark.
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >Guys,
>> >
>> >Does anyone have pics of how they installed coils and ignition leads for a
>> >dual Lightspeed ignition system for the BOTTOM plugs? I've seen lots of
>> >pics for the top plugs installation, but none for the lower ones. I'm
>> >thinking of hanging the coils just ahead of the sump, but that puts them
>> >close to the exhaust and means I have to run the coax from the igntion box
>> >around the sump to get to the coils. Perhaps it would be better to hang
the
>> >coils behind the acc. case?? Any input/advice on how others have done this
>> >would be appreciated...
>> >
>> >Thanks,
>> >
>> >--Mark Navratil
>> >Cedar Rapids, Iowa
>> >RV-8A N2D finishing...
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Scott Bilinski
>> Eng dept 305
>> Phone (858) 657-2536
>> Pager (858) 502-5190
>>
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Most efficient climb |
So your going on a long X-country What is the most efficient climb? Blast
right on up to altitude and go, or, do a long cruise climb, somewhere in
between, what speed? Has anyone really crunched the numbers and figured
this out. I figured one of you test pilot types know this stuff. Oh, the
whole point is to get from point A to point B (this case 700 miles) the
fastest at 8k feet, depending on the wind of course while using the least
amount of fuel.
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole kits? |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frederick Oldenburg" <foldenburg(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RV-List: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole kits?
>
> I'm building an RV-7A with the newer, all CNC matched hole kits. So far on
my empennage, I've been fluting the ribs on the horizontal and vertical
stabilizers. It won't be long before I'm on to the wings (hopefully!) One of
the things I've been wondering about is whether fluting is really necessary
with the CNC matched hole kits?
YES, it is still necessary to do this. You want the plane of the
ribs to be flat and straight. If you don't flute, the ribs will be
bent/curved, straining all the rest of their lives with the wing skins.
That stress could lead to other bad things, like cracks.
>
> I understand the purpose of fluting on the older, non-matched hole kits,
but it seems like the rib is "pulled into line" with the gentle flexing that
occurs when you are clecoing parts together before riveting. On the newer
kits, no jigging is required, because the accuracy of the CNC match holes
automagically make everything line up. So why flute ribs that already have
matching holes?
THE cnc process does many great things. But it does not releve
stretched metal that has been bent around corners like the ribs have been.
That is the issue here.
>
> Just want to get some opinions on this.....
>
> Thanks,
>
> Fred
>
>
> Fred Oldenburg
> RV-7A - Empennage
((((((((())))))))))
Indiana Larry, RV7 TipUp
TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
JeffRose Flightline Interiors
Firewall Forward, Wiring with Nuckolls Nowledge
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frederick Oldenburg <foldenburg(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole |
kits?
I think I undertand what you are saying, and you're right, they don't line up exactly
out of the box. With some gentle flexing they do. The holes in the rib(s)
line up exactly with the ones in the skin. For example, if you start putting
clecos in a line of matched holes, starting at one end, the rib will pull itself
into line as you continue on down the line.
At least this is my experience with the empennage ribs (for the verrtical & horizontal
stabs). I undertand that on the wing ribs, there is more bowing than on
the emp ribs. Some of my empennage ribs layed perfectly flat on the bench right
out of the box....and some did not....but they all were able to be clecoed
together and then clecoed to the skin with no fluting. I did flute them, after
I test fit them and then disassembled (mostly because the instructions said
to do so).
I'm wondering if, in your example where a rib is bowed, if you could not start
clecoing in the center of the rib (where there is the least amount of variation)
and work your way outward. It seels like the rib will pull into line this way
with some gentle flexing.
- Fred
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Waltner <swaltner(at)mac.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole kits?
You still need to flute the parts. I think you're a little confused on what is
actually happening when you flute a rib. The rib is formed from a flat piece of
metal that has the lightening holes cut, and all holes stamped. It then has
the flanges bent onto it. You'll notice that the flanges for the airfoil surface
are bent along a curved surface. As you get further away from the center of
the bend (ie: towards the edge of the flange), there is more material there.
You basically have two concentric circles (well, curved objects), and the outside
one (the line along the outside of the flange bend) is longer. This extra
has to go somewhere, so when the rib is originally shaped it deforms the part
so that it bows away from the side with the flange.
By fluting a part, you are putting a fold in the outside curve on the original
part. The flutes make the distance along the outside edge of the flute longer
and this "absorb" the excess material in the outer edge of the flange, which will
straighten out the part. Put your un-fluted part on the table (flanges up)
and you will notice a gap underneath the center of the part (because the part
is bowing away from the flange). When the part is properly fluted, the holes
along the flanges will be in a nice straight line, and the part will lay flat
on the table. The important thing is that the flanges are at 90 degrees to the
web of the part (they won't be when you first receive the kit) and that the holes
are in a nice straight line (to match the holes in the skin which are in
a nice straight line). If you tried to cleco an un-fluted part onto your skins,
the stamped holes would not line up since the holes on the rib would be on a
curved line and the skin's holes are in a straight !
line.
Steve
On Monday, April 05, 2004, at 03:21PM, Frederick Oldenburg
wrote:
>
>I'm building an RV-7A with the newer, all CNC matched hole kits. So far on my
empennage, I've been fluting the ribs on the horizontal and vertical stabilizers.
It won't be long before I'm on to the wings (hopefully!) One of the things
I've been wondering about is whether fluting is really necessary with the CNC
matched hole kits.
>
>I understand the purpose of fluting on the older, non-matched hole kits, but it
seems like the rib is "pulled into line" with the gentle flexing that occurs
when you are clecoing parts together before riveting. On the newer kits, no jigging
is required, because the accuracy of the CNC match holes automagically
make everything line up. So why flute ribs that already have matching holes?
>
>Just want to get some opinions on this.....
>
>Thanks,
>
>Fred
>
>
>Fred Oldenburg
>RV-7A - Empennage
>http://www.rv.oldsack.com
Fred Oldenburg
RV-7A - Empennage
http://www.rv.oldsack.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
> -----Original Message-----
> Subject: RV-List: Autopilot Itch
> Has anyone done a real honest-to-god decision analysis of the
> TruTrak vs. Trio Avionics autopilot decision
Part of the answer to your question depends on the mission you are
asking of the unit. For the IFR pilot, if budget is an issue, I would
opt for a stand alone altitude hold. As far as I know, TruTrak is the
only one offering this option. If you are only interested in tracking
GPS, then I would think any of the three, TruTrak, Trio or Navaid would
be fine.
Since I built an IFR bird, I decided early on that I wanted altitude
hold and tracking of GPS and Nav (VOR) capability. TruTrak was the only
one offering this when I bought the unit three years ago. I was
comfortable with the purchase because it was developed by Jim Younkin.
I have the DFC250 and must say am very, very impressed with the unit.
"Control Wheel Steering" will hold the current flight condition.
Steering can be accomplished by turning the dial to the desired heading.
Vertical speeds can be adjusted and desired altitude can be selected,
intercepted and held. In GPS Steering mode, it intersects and tracks
whatever flight plan is in the GPS. In ILS mode, it intercepts glide
paths, locks on and tracks right down the center of the glide path. It
also does backcourses.
I have found the control interface to be easy and intuitive. I am
currently getting my IFR rating currency with an instructor. He didn't
allow me to use the autopilot the first 6 hours under the hood. When he
let me use it, I found that it did not add any workload associated with
entering and changing modes, altitudes or headings. (I wish I could say
the same for the GX-60 GPS. I am still learning the fastest way to
change approaches etc while under the hood in high workload situations.)
The switch on my Infinity grip allows swift engagement and
disengagement.
As with all decisions on your homebuilt, the primary question that needs
to be answered is, "What is your mission?" The second is, "How much
money do you want to spend?"
I am thrilled with my TruTrak DFC250. It does everything as advertised
and was easy to install.
Ross Mickey
RV-6A
N9PT
50 hours and counting
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Donald Mei" <don_mei(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
Re: Look at this Web site http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal/ - John D
Sam discusses the benefits of the Trio over the Navaid, but does not discuss
a direct comparison with the Trutrak.
As far as I am concerned, no one in their right mind would buy a Navaid if
they are starting a project now. So thats not the real question.
Trutrak has proven to be far superior to Navaid. Trio seems to be far
superior to the Navaid and I trust time will prove this out.
So, maybe Sam can give us some description of his decision making process in
choosing the trio?? I suspect it may be that at the time, only the Trio was
capable of using Navaid servos. Well Trutrak has adapted and now they offer
a way to use the navaid servos also. So we're back to square 1.
Help!!
Don
"All of us need to be reminded that the federal government did not create
the states; the states created the federal government!"---Ronald Reagan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Travis Hamblen" <TravisHamblen(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Wood Stick Grips for sale (from Vans) |
I have two wood stick grips with the push to talk switches in the top and
wires coming out the bottom. They are from Vans and are in EXCELLENT SHAPE!!
They are $50.00 each from Vans plus shipping. I will sell them to you for
$30.00 each which INCLUDES SHIPPING! I want to sell both, but may consider
selling 1 at a time. This is a 40% savings over Vans! E-mail me to purchase,
I can accept credit cards, otherwise we can work out the payment
arrangements.
Travis
TravisHamblen(at)cox.net
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dynon OAT Probe |
If Dynon says that you should not extend this lead, there may be a
very good reason for it. If this is a thermocouple lead, then you
need to know what you are doing, or you may greatly affect its
accuracy.
Kevin Horton
>
>Mike, does it look like the 10' wire/coax lead in to the OAT can be cut off
>easily so it could be extended?
>
>I am considering mounting mine under the HS. (I mounted the remote compass
>under the fairing of the fuselage and VS.) But I think the wing would be a
>better location if the lead in can be longer. (I will have a GPS, so I am
>not real sure that have TAS is all that important.) What is its real value
>of having TAS from the Dynon in this case?
>
>Indiana Larry, RV7 TipUp
>TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
>JeffRose Flightline Interiors
>Firewall Forward, Wiring with Nuckoll's Knowledge
>((((((((((((()))))))))))))))))
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <N223RV(at)aol.com>
>To:
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Dynon OAT Probe
>
>
>>
>> I mounted mine on the right side about 2-3 inches under the horizontal
>stab.
>> Seems to work good, but don't have much to reference it to. Sure would
>have
>> been nice if they put 25' on it so you could put it out under the
>wing.....
>>
>> -Mike Kraus
>> N223RV RV-4 Flying
>> N213RV RV-10 Empennage
> >
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Harvey Sigmon" <rv6hes(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
What is everybody using as a backup for turn and bank when you remove the
control head of the Navaid, on my install I used the Navaid and Altrac.
Works fine especially since I use the Garmin 196, my last trip is was off
about 14 feet. Not bad for a piece of junk, as you say.
Harvey Sigmon N602RV
----- Original Message -----
From: "Donald Mei" <don_mei(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: RV-List: Re: Autopilot Itch
>
> Re: Look at this Web site http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal/ - John
D
>
> Sam discusses the benefits of the Trio over the Navaid, but does not
discuss
> a direct comparison with the Trutrak.
>
> As far as I am concerned, no one in their right mind would buy a Navaid if
> they are starting a project now. So thats not the real question.
>
> Trutrak has proven to be far superior to Navaid. Trio seems to be far
> superior to the Navaid and I trust time will prove this out.
>
> So, maybe Sam can give us some description of his decision making process
in
> choosing the trio?? I suspect it may be that at the time, only the Trio
was
> capable of using Navaid servos. Well Trutrak has adapted and now they
offer
> a way to use the navaid servos also. So we're back to square 1.
>
> Help!!
>
> Don
>
> "All of us need to be reminded that the federal government did not create
> the states; the states created the federal government!"---Ronald Reagan
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
Donald Mei wrote:
>
>As far as I am concerned, no one in their right mind would buy a Navaid if
>they are starting a project now. So thats not the real question.
>
>
>Don
>
>
I happen to like my Navaid very much thank you. I wonder why anyone in
their right mind
would buy a RV with a wheel hanging off the nose? :-)
Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie & Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole |
kits?
If you haven't gotten your wing kit yet, the problem might not be
obvious. The ribs in the tail don't have much curvature at the nose, at
least where you must put rivets. The tightest 'radius' of the curve on
the tail parts is (wild guess) probably something close to 4 feet. The
sharpest part of the curve on the top of a wing's nose rib has a radius
in the area that you will have to rivet that's probably less than 1
foot. This makes the distortion much worse than what you see in the
tail. If you finish the bend of the flange to 90 degrees without
fluting, then sit a straightedge on the side of the rib running from the
nose to the spar flange, you could probably slide a 3/8" (or larger)
drill bit between the rib & the straightedge. That's a bit much to try
to pull into position without fluting.
Does that help?
Charlie
Frederick Oldenburg wrote:
>
>I think I undertand what you are saying, and you're right, they don't line up
exactly out of the box. With some gentle flexing they do. The holes in the rib(s)
line up exactly with the ones in the skin. For example, if you start putting
clecos in a line of matched holes, starting at one end, the rib will pull itself
into line as you continue on down the line.
>
>At least this is my experience with the empennage ribs (for the verrtical & horizontal
stabs). I undertand that on the wing ribs, there is more bowing than
on the emp ribs. Some of my empennage ribs layed perfectly flat on the bench right
out of the box....and some did not....but they all were able to be clecoed
together and then clecoed to the skin with no fluting. I did flute them, after
I test fit them and then disassembled (mostly because the instructions said
to do so).
>
>I'm wondering if, in your example where a rib is bowed, if you could not start
clecoing in the center of the rib (where there is the least amount of variation)
and work your way outward. It seels like the rib will pull into line this
way with some gentle flexing.
>
>- Fred
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Steve Waltner <swaltner(at)mac.com>
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole kits?
>
>
>You still need to flute the parts. I think you're a little confused on what is
actually happening when you flute a rib. The rib is formed from a flat piece
of metal that has the lightening holes cut, and all holes stamped. It then has
the flanges bent onto it. You'll notice that the flanges for the airfoil surface
are bent along a curved surface. As you get further away from the center of
the bend (ie: towards the edge of the flange), there is more material there.
You basically have two concentric circles (well, curved objects), and the outside
one (the line along the outside of the flange bend) is longer. This extra
has to go somewhere, so when the rib is originally shaped it deforms the part
so that it bows away from the side with the flange.
>
>By fluting a part, you are putting a fold in the outside curve on the original
part. The flutes make the distance along the outside edge of the flute longer
and this "absorb" the excess material in the outer edge of the flange, which
will straighten out the part. Put your un-fluted part on the table (flanges up)
and you will notice a gap underneath the center of the part (because the part
is bowing away from the flange). When the part is properly fluted, the holes
along the flanges will be in a nice straight line, and the part will lay flat
on the table. The important thing is that the flanges are at 90 degrees to the
web of the part (they won't be when you first receive the kit) and that the
holes are in a nice straight line (to match the holes in the skin which are in
a nice straight line). If you tried to cleco an un-fluted part onto your skins,
the stamped holes would not line up since the holes on the rib would be on
a curved line and the skin's holes are in a straight !
> line.
>
>Steve
>
>On Monday, April 05, 2004, at 03:21PM, Frederick Oldenburg
wrote:
>
>
>>
>>I'm building an RV-7A with the newer, all CNC matched hole kits. So far on my
empennage, I've been fluting the ribs on the horizontal and vertical stabilizers.
It won't be long before I'm on to the wings (hopefully!) One of the things
I've been wondering about is whether fluting is really necessary with the CNC
matched hole kits.
>>
>>I understand the purpose of fluting on the older, non-matched hole kits, but
it seems like the rib is "pulled into line" with the gentle flexing that occurs
when you are clecoing parts together before riveting. On the newer kits, no
jigging is required, because the accuracy of the CNC match holes automagically
make everything line up. So why flute ribs that already have matching holes?
>>
>>Just want to get some opinions on this.....
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Fred
>>
>>
>>Fred Oldenburg
>>RV-7A - Empennage
>>http://www.rv.oldsack.com
>>
>>
>
>
>Fred Oldenburg
>RV-7A - Empennage
>http://www.rv.oldsack.com
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
Jerry Springer wrote:
>
> Donald Mei wrote:
>
>
>>As far as I am concerned, no one in their right mind would buy a Navaid if
>>they are starting a project now. So thats not the real question.
>>
>>
>>Don
>>
>>
>
> I happen to like my Navaid very much thank you. I wonder why anyone in
> their right mind
> would buy a RV with a wheel hanging off the nose? :-)
>
> Jerry
Jerry, like you I have flown many satisfactory miles with a Navaid.
However, I think if you flew with an EZ-Pilot you would be *very*
impressed, probably enough to seriously consider retiring your trusty
Navaid. :-)
There really is no comparison between the Navaid, the EZ-Pilot and the
DigiTrak when it comes to preciseness, feature set and performance in
turbulence. I have never flown the DigiTrak, but I have no reason to
think it is not a fine performing unit. The solid-state sensors and
digital platform of the EZ-Pilot and DigiTrak is greatly superior to the
mechanical analog system of the Navaid as regards performance,
programming, and features.
The lightweight Navaid servo, however, even though it is a "mature"
product, performs very nicely with the EZ-Pilot, and I suspect it would
also be very satisfactory with the Navaid compatible model of the DigiTrak.
To answer the inquiry as to why I selected the EZ-Pilot as the
replacement for my Navaid, yes, the ability to use the already installed
Navaid servo was a major factor. At the time I installed the EZ-Pilot,
TruTrak had not yet "seen the light" and released their Navaid version
of the DigiTrak. It seems the appearance of the EZ-Pilot got their full
attention. ;-)
If I was to start from square one, I would stay with the EZ-Pilot, not
because the DigiTrak is not a fine product, but primarily because the
EZ-Pilot offers such an advanced display and a huge feature set. Also,
the Trio Avionics guys are *very* aggressively pursuing enhancements to
their already impressive system.
We are fortunate to have not only the "old" Navaid as a workable wing
leveler, but new advanced systems such as the EZ-Pilot and DigiTrak.
There is no telling what these manufacturers and others will unveil in
the next few years!
Sam Buchanan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Sipp" <rsipp(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
While I could certainly be mistaken, I think one of the major differences in
the TruTrak and Trio products is that the TruTrak does not depend on an
external GPS for it attitude information. Loose your GPS signal and the
TruTrak can still control the airplane. From reviewing the Trio web sight
it appears that an external GPS is required to provide or at least augment
the attitude reference.
Dick Sipp
RV4
RV10
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV6 Flyer" <rv6_flyer(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Most efficient climb |
After reaching a safe altitude, (1,000 AGL) I go for max speed and about a
300 FPM rate of climb. (Prop is pulled back to 2,600 at 1,000 AGL if there
are no MOUNTAINS to clear.) Burns more fuel I think but have no hard
numbers. The speed keeps everything cool and you cover the most forward
distance in the shortest time.
Just my humble opinion.
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,451 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
http://SoCAL_WVAF.rvproject.com
Subject: RV-List: Most efficient climb
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
So your going on a long X-country What is the most efficient climb? Blast
right on up to altitude and go, or, do a long cruise climb, somewhere in
between, what speed? Has anyone really crunched the numbers and figured
this out. I figured one of you test pilot types know this stuff. Oh, the
whole point is to get from point A to point B (this case 700 miles) the
fastest at 8k feet, depending on the wind of course while using the least
amount of fuel.
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
Richard Sipp wrote:
>
>
> While I could certainly be mistaken, I think one of the major differences in
> the TruTrak and Trio products is that the TruTrak does not depend on an
> external GPS for it attitude information. Loose your GPS signal and the
> TruTrak can still control the airplane. From reviewing the Trio web sight
> it appears that an external GPS is required to provide or at least augment
> the attitude reference.
>
> Dick Sipp
> RV4
> RV10
Dick, both the TruTrak and EZ-Pilot use GPS in the attitude solution.
And, both systems are capable of remarkable wing-leveler performance
without GPS input. However, without GPS, both system's performance will
degrade over time and headings will require manual input after a
significant time without GPS data. As far as I can tell, there is no
appreciable difference in the way both systems integrate GPS.
I can tell you from first-hand knowledge that Trio has recently enhanced
the no-GPS performance of the EZ-Pilot in a substantial manner. I really
don't understand how the little box can maintain its balance so well
without any outside assistance, but it can! :-)
Sam
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Most efficient climb |
>
>So your going on a long X-country What is the most efficient climb? Blast
>right on up to altitude and go, or, do a long cruise climb, somewhere in
>between, what speed? Has anyone really crunched the numbers and figured
>this out. I figured one of you test pilot types know this stuff. Oh, the
>whole point is to get from point A to point B (this case 700 miles) the
>fastest at 8k feet, depending on the wind of course while using the least
>amount of fuel.
>
>Scott Bilinski
Scott - I think the only way to answer this question is via a series
of flight tests. Otherwise we are just guessing. The flight tests
wouldn't be too hard to do if you have a fuel flow system with a fuel
remaining or a fuel used function.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "lucky macy" <luckymacy(at)hotmail.com> |
vansairforce(at)yahoogroups.com
| Subject: | RE: [rv8list] RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58 |
#1) RG-393 is a military version of RG-224.
#2) RG-393 .360" dia. RG-400 0.171" dia.
#3) Use TNC connectors (made for RG-393) for 4 GHz signals. BNC usually
deteriorates above 2 GHz.
#4) Instead of a 4" bend radius, you're now talking 6" for a bend.
#5) RG-393 is 6.50 $/ft, RG-400 is 1.85 $/ft.
#6) Temperature ranges for the cables are IDENTICAL. They are both "Type IX"
- Mil-C-17 cables, with a temperature range of -55oC to +200oC.
#7) RG-400 weighs .050 lb/ft, RG-393 weighs 0.175 lb/ft..
#8) RG-393 is really neat of you want the RADALT to work properly.
----Original Message Follows----
From: "lucky macy" <luckymacy(at)hotmail.com>
vansairforce(at)yahoogroups.com
Subject: [rv8list] RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 14:08:01 -0400
Speaking of not using RG-58, here's what a professional EMI engineer told me
at work. We were discussing a RADALT issue we have on a aircraft.
"When in doubt, use RG-393 or better for RADALT applications. Also use a
swept elbow if you have to turn a corner. Do not use mitered elbows as the
pulse will get distorted from a non-linear group delay at the corner.
The advantage of RG-400 over RG-58 is double shielding with better optical
coverage and better quality Teflon dielectric centers.
RG-393 is 0.23 dB/ft at 4300 MHz (rated at about 50 W CW@ 4300). RG-400 is
twice the loss.
I'd also use RG-393 for GPS but RG-400 will still work."
lucky
----Original Message Follows----
From: rickrv6(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: [rv8list] Re: light speed ignition questions
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 17:34:10 EST
Mark,
Take a look at this article written by Bob Nuckolls:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
He provides an even different alternative to RG cable.
Rick McBride
In a message dated 4/3/04 3:37:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
redbeardmark(at)yahoo.com writes:
> Jerry,
> My LSE Plasma II+ replaces the right-side mag and goes to the top
> plugs. Don't know about using it on the bottom plugs. Don't know
> about the impulse vs. non-impulse issue either.
>
> The coax cables which run from the E/I unit to the coils are RG58.
> An astute fellow builder suggested that I replace the RG58 with RG400
> because of heat from the engine (which I am in the process of
> doing). Klaus at LSE said that RG400 would be optimum. Looking
> forward to testing the engine this June.
>
> Mark Andrews N598X
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Persistent heartburn? Check out Digestive Health & Wellness for information
and advice. http://gerd.msn.com/default.asp
Limited-time offer: Fast, reliable MSN 9 Dial-up Internet access FREE for 2
months!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DOUGPFLYRV(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Most efficient climb |
In a message dated 4/5/2004 11:53:34 PM Central Standard Time,
rv6_flyer(at)hotmail.com writes:
So your going on a long X-country What is the most efficient climb? Blast
right on up to altitude and go, or, do a long cruise climb, somewhere in
between, what speed? Has anyone really crunched the numbers and figured
this out.
I climb according to headwinds or tailwinds.
Doug Preston
RV8
N127EK
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
I don't have an autopilot yet but I am leaning towards the TruTrack over the EZ-pilot
based on the installation. TruTrack supplies all the brackets and fittings
needed along with installation drawings. With the EZ-pilot you have to come
up with your own mounts and installation. I figure it is a weekend of down
time rather than two. From what I have read both systems perform great.
Alan Kritzman
Cedar Rapids, IA
RV-8 130 hour without an autopilot
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve&Anita Nyman" <nyman(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Blue Mountain EFIS |
Hi Y'all,
I haven't read anything lately about BMA's EFIS One or Lite. Has anyone installed
and flown one of these units yet? Any comments?
Steve
7QB
MEM
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dynon OAT Probe |
| From: | "Lockamy, Jack L" <jack.lockamy(at)navy.mil> |
Larry,
The Dynon OAT probe cable I received was only 8 FT long. Thus it eliminated any
chance of running the probe under either wing in my case (remote mag compass
module located in aft fuse on F-707 bulkhead).
Based on replies I received when I first posted this thread, and a bit of head
scratching on my part, last night I installed the probe under the H/S.... right
side, approx 8" back from the leading edge and 3" down. Again, I have not flown
yet so I can't say whether or not this location will be suitable, however
the probe is shaded from direct sun-light, easily accessible, and hopefully will
not be affected by exhaust heat. Seemed like the best location for my particular
setup....
As for the other part of your post, I purchased the probe so I would have access
to ALL the features in the Dynon EFIS. As you know, without the Dynon OAT probe,
you will be limited to displaying IAS only. True airspeed and density altitude
will now be available to me at a glance. I agree TAS is not a real important
number when you have ground speed from a GPS, but having the Dynon calculate
density altitude is data I'm sure I will find extremely useful.
FWIW...I'm also using the Grand Rapids EIS-4000 engine monitor with their OAT probe
that will be mounted under the right wing. No, the two are not compatible....
I asked! I installed this option not knowing if/when Dynon would be releasing
their probe. Now I will be able to compare the two. I believe the Dynon
Configuration software will allow adjustments to their OAT probe readings.
Modern technology is a WONDERFUL thing! :-)
Jack Lockamy
RV-7A N174JL reserved
Full IFR panel completed
starting canopy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LeastDrag93066(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Dynon OAT Probe |
In a message dated 04/06/2004 7:47:43 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
jack.lockamy(at)navy.mil writes:
I agree TAS is not a real important number when you have ground speed from a
GPS
Actually, by comparing TAS with the GPS ground speed during your climb, you
can see the headwing/tailwind component as you climb.
If you have a headwind at the altitude you had chosen to fly, and you pasted
through a more favorable tailwind at a lower altitude (or a lessor headwind),
you can decide if you want to drop back down to that lower altitude.
You can also monitor the headwind/tailwind component during your flight.
A GPS and the TAS on a MicroEncoder allows this, also.
Jim Ayers
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
For me it comes down to this.
I have a Navaid, and I plan to upgrade to the Trutrak because of the Turn
Coordinator presentation. The performance of the Navaid is not perfect, but
perfectly adequate. I am certain the Trio and Trutrak are nearly perfect.
I looked at the Trio, but the Turn Coordinator presentation on the New
Trutrak and the fact that Jim Younkin is behind it, makes it an easy choice
for me.
It would be VERY Difficult to fly partial panel in any turbulence at all
with the Navaid. Having said that, if the Navaid, or any autopilot, was
working, I would turn it on and fly the airplane with the GPS or the turn
knob on the Navaid.
An added benefit of the Trutrak is the ability to fly a heading, the Navaid
will wander if left unattended and not coupled to the GPS, but that feature
is not worth the upgrade price, the Turn Coordinator presentation is. If
the Dynon quit, and I was in turbulence, I would probably pay $10,000 for a
better backup.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hal / Carol Kempthorne <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Most efficient climb |
At 03:55 PM 4/5/2004, you wrote:
For the most efficient ( fast with economy ) travel I make use of
altitudes. I've found myself going east to Oshkosh at 17,500 and coming
back at 1000 AGL. It is hard to ignore the winds aloft. Had my RV been
IFR capable, I'd have been higher still.
hal
>So your going on a long X-country What is the most efficient climb? Blast
>right on up to altitude and go, or, do a long cruise climb, somewhere in
>between, what speed? Has anyone really crunched the numbers and figured
>this out. I figured one of you test pilot types know this stuff. Oh, the
>whole point is to get from point A to point B (this case 700 miles) the
>fastest at 8k feet, depending on the wind of course while using the least
>amount of fuel.
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK - Three trips to OSH now.
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
| From: | Michael Stephan <mstephan(at)shr.net> |
TruTrak has a new product coming out, should be on sale now or at Sun-N-Fun,
that puts the digitrack (single axis autopilot) in the same unit as the turn
coordinator, or pictorial turn coordinator, as Jim calls it. This he did in
response to the navaid replacement senario, where a turn coordinator is
needed to replace the navaid one. The website has more info.
http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/
--
Michael Stephan
> From: "Harvey Sigmon" <rv6hes(at)comcast.net>
> Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 20:22:24 -0400
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Autopilot Itch
>
> What is everybody using as a backup for turn and bank when you remove the
> control head of the Navaid, on my install I used the Navaid and Altrac.
> Works fine especially since I use the Garmin 196, my last trip is was off
> about 14 feet. Not bad for a piece of junk, as you say.
> Harvey Sigmon N602RV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
| Subject: | Blue Mountain EFIS |
I know of three that are flying in RV's, one in an RV-9 and two in RV-8's.
There are many flying in other aircraft. Check their website
(http://www.bluemountainavionics.com) for lots more detail. There was a
hint of a new model to be announced at Sun N' Fun.
I am installing the BMA EFIS/one in my RV-8A and continue to be pleased with
my decision 18 months ago to go with them. They continue to improve what
they have and add to the capabilities. They now have an integral 2-axis
autopilot capable of flying your flight plan, HITS (highway in the sky)
capability, something almost like synthetic vision where the terrain is
shown color coded on the moving map (I think the new Garmin 296 has this)
and on the artificial horizon of the attitude indicator. They also have put
together a package of engine sensors to work with Lycomming and Van's
aircraft, and you can now buy the whole thing from Van's.
The latest upgrade for me was a switch from a DVD drive to hold the charts
and terrain info and update the system software to a little Compact Flash
card just like the one in my Cannon digital camera. Along with this change
came the ability to download engine sensor, air data, and GPS position
recorded every 5 seconds and analyze it with a PC program.
Terry
RV-8A #80729 wiring
Seattle
Hi Y'all,
I haven't read anything lately about BMA's EFIS One or Lite. Has anyone
installed and flown one of these units yet? Any comments?
Steve
7QB
MEM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
I didn't mention this in my post about the Blue Mountain EFIS/one, but it
has a little arrow and number on the screen that shows the wind direction
and speed derived from the GPS, TAS and magnetic heading.
Terry
In a message dated 04/06/2004 7:47:43 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
jack.lockamy(at)navy.mil writes:
I agree TAS is not a real important number when you have ground speed from a
GPS
Actually, by comparing TAS with the GPS ground speed during your climb, you
can see the headwing/tailwind component as you climb.
If you have a headwind at the altitude you had chosen to fly, and you pasted
through a more favorable tailwind at a lower altitude (or a lessor
headwind),
you can decide if you want to drop back down to that lower altitude.
You can also monitor the headwind/tailwind component during your flight.
A GPS and the TAS on a MicroEncoder allows this, also.
Jim Ayers
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Weed <rv8a_builder(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Fradulent engine builder |
I am looking for information on a supposed engine builder named Steven Scott Woosley
from Plant City, Florida. He claims to be an aircraft/airboat engine builder,
but has defrauded multiple individuals. Anyone with information, please
email me.
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Travis Hamblen" <TravisHamblen(at)cox.net> |
How can I tell if I have Standard Flat-Top Wingtips on my RV-6A instead of
the Sheared Wing Tips? I was planning on installing the Airtech Wingtip
Lens Kit from Vans, but they say that they can=92t be installed on the Sheared
wingtips. Any advice on determining the type of wingtip I have would be
greatly appreciated! Also, who sells the best (most easy to install) light
kit for the wingtip landing light kit?
Thanks in advance=85
Travis Hamblen
RV-6A 330 hrs @ VGT
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
Pretty simple - a carpenter's square would be flush against both the
root/open side and the top. The "flat-top" of the tip is an straight
extension of the upper wing surface, in fact you fit it by laying a straight
edge across the wing and tip. If it's not that and came from Van's it's a
sheared tip.
Regards,
Greg Young - Houston (DWH)
RV-6 N6GY ...project Phoenix
Navion N5221K - just an XXL RV-6A
>
>
>
> How can I tell if I have Standard Flat-Top Wingtips on my
> RV-6A instead of the Sheared Wing Tips? I was planning on
> installing the Airtech Wingtip Lens Kit from Vans, but they
> say that they can=92t be installed on the Sheared wingtips.
> Any advice on determining the type of wingtip I have would be
> greatly appreciated! Also, who sells the best (most easy to
> install) light kit for the wingtip landing light kit?
>
>
> Thanks in advance=85
>
> Travis Hamblen
>
> RV-6A 330 hrs @ VGT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gabe A Ferrer" <ferrergm(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Engine Shake During Shutdown |
Does anyone know of a way to reduce the magnitude of the Lycoming engine shakes
during engine shutdown?
It just seems unnecessary for the engine to do this.
It's annoying and the vibration may harm the engine accessories.
My O-360 A1A has done it from the first time that I ran it.
Gabe A Ferrer
RV6 NN2GX 108 hours
South Florida
Email: ferrergm(at)bellsouth.net
Cell: 561 758 8894
Night Phone: 561 622 0960
Fax: 561 622 0960
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
>
>How can I tell if I have Standard Flat-Top Wingtips on my RV-6A instead of
>the Sheared Wing Tips? I was planning on installing the Airtech Wingtip
>Lens Kit from Vans, but they say that they can=92t be installed on the Sheared
>wingtips. Any advice on determining the type of wingtip I have would be
>greatly appreciated! Also, who sells the best (most easy to install) light
>kit for the wingtip landing light kit?
>
>
>Thanks in advance=85
>
>Travis Hamblen
>
The outboard edge of the Standard Flat-Top wingtips is parallel to
the aircraft centreline, except where it curves to meet the leading
edge. The outboard edge of the Sheared Wing Tips is not parallel the
aircraft centreline. Also, the top of the standard wing tips is
flat, if you look from the front.
If that doesn't make sense, look at the three-view of the RV-6 on
Van's web site and compare it to the three-view of the RV-7. The
RV-6 three-view shows standard wing tips. The RV-7 three-view shows
sheared wing tips.
http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/rv-6int.htm
http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/rv-7int.htm
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Neal E Capt AU/PC <Neal.George(at)maxwell.af.mil> |
Travis -
Check Van's web site. Under the "Aircraft Models" section, the pictures
show two RV-6s with the old-style flat top tips, while the RV-7 is pictured
with the new sheared tips.
Neal E. George
RV-7 N8ZG
Tail
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
| Subject: | Engine Shake During Shutdown |
A few months ago a friend's Cessna 182 amphib started exhibiting what seemed
like abnormal shaking during startup and shutdown. On inspection we found a
cracked motor mount (the steel tube frame; not the rubber cushions).
Terry
>
>>Does anyone know of a way to reduce the magnitude of the Lycoming engine
>>shakes during engine shutdown?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Most efficient climb |
On this question of what is the best climb rate, it should also be a concern
that we are flying in a system where others are flying other, and opposite,
headings according to the hemispheric rule. If we climb more slowly, we are
spending more time is the other pilot's air space regarding altitude.
Accordingly, it seems we should not make this necessarily the most efficient
climb rate, but one that regards safety also. Something to consider as it
applies to long slow descents too.
Larry in Indiana
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LML Klingmuller" <l_klingmuller(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | FOR SALE: Total LASAR Ignition System |
On e-Bay I have for sale a LASAR system consisting of
-controller (new) ,
-right and left magnetos (one new, one used),
-low voltage harness (used),
-LASAR timing tool (used)
-plus 3 manuals/publications.
Unison Industries prices for the 5 major items (excluding manuals) is $2,993.-
To see the price list go to >>www.unisonindustries.com, then >>PRODUCTS, then >> PRODUCT CATALOG, then>> LASAR PRICE LIST.
To find the the e-bay listing search in the automobile section for:
1) LASAR or
2) LYCOMING MAGNETOS (plural).
Make a reasonable offer to me directly (e-mail, not on the RV list) and I will
sell to you without going through e-Bay.
Lothar K.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie & Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Most efficient climb |
Scott Bilinski wrote:
>
>So your going on a long X-country What is the most efficient climb? Blast
>right on up to altitude and go, or, do a long cruise climb, somewhere in
>between, what speed? Has anyone really crunched the numbers and figured
>this out. I figured one of you test pilot types know this stuff. Oh, the
>whole point is to get from point A to point B (this case 700 miles) the
>fastest at 8k feet, depending on the wind of course while using the least
>amount of fuel.
>
>
>Scott Bilinski
>Eng dept 305
>Phone (858) 657-2536
>Pager (858) 502-5190
>
Van wrote an article about this several years ago; I think it was in the
RVator. My flaky memory is telling me that he mentioned something around
120 mph instead of the expected ~90 mph. The idea was that the low
aspect ratio wing causes (induced?) drag to go up more when you get down
in the 90 mph range. He pointed out that if you climb at calculated
'best climb' using traditional techniques (1.? x stall), then try the
same throttle setting but climb at ~120 mph, you will see the same
*rate* of climb but will cover a lot more territory on the way to cruise
altitude.
I don't remember if he mentioned whether fp or c/s made a difference in
these numbers.
I can say that I've tried it on 2 different fp -4's & my neighbor has
tried it in his fp -8, and the effect was easy to see.
Kevin, can you give a sanity check on this?
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Denis Walsh <denis.walsh(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Most efficient climb |
120 MPH IAS is a good climb speed for enroute. In addition to the
reasons cited by Charlie, I would add that this speed also gives the
best visibility during the climb. A slower speed gives you a really
big blind spot under the nose, which requires more clearing turns which
really slows down the rate of climb, not to mention ground speed to
destination direction.
Denis
On Apr 6, 2004, at 7:00 PM, Charlie & Tupper England wrote:
>
>
> Scott Bilinski wrote:
>
>> <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>>
>> So your going on a long X-country What is the most efficient climb?
>> Blast
>> right on up to altitude and go, or, do a long cruise climb, somewhere
>> in
>> between, what speed? Has anyone really crunched the numbers and
>> figured
>> this out. I figured one of you test pilot types know this stuff. Oh,
>> the
>> whole point is to get from point A to point B (this case 700 miles)
>> the
>> fastest at 8k feet, depending on the wind of course while using the
>> least
>> amount of fuel.
>>
>>
>> Scott Bilinski
>> Eng dept 305
>> Phone (858) 657-2536
>> Pager (858) 502-5190
>>
> Van wrote an article about this several years ago; I think it was in
> the
> RVator. My flaky memory is telling me that he mentioned something
> around
> 120 mph instead of the expected ~90 mph. The idea was that the low
> aspect ratio wing causes (induced?) drag to go up more when you get
> down
> in the 90 mph range. He pointed out that if you climb at calculated
> 'best climb' using traditional techniques (1.? x stall), then try the
> same throttle setting but climb at ~120 mph, you will see the same
> *rate* of climb but will cover a lot more territory on the way to
> cruise
> altitude.
>
> I don't remember if he mentioned whether fp or c/s made a difference in
> these numbers.
>
> I can say that I've tried it on 2 different fp -4's & my neighbor has
> tried it in his fp -8, and the effect was easy to see.
>
> Kevin, can you give a sanity check on this?
>
> Charlie
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Travis Hamblen" <TravisHamblen(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Interiors by Becky Orndorff |
I am starting to think about overhauling/redoing my interior. I absolutely
love the seats by Becky Orndorff, but wanted some feedback on her interior
products. I understand that she ships you the fabrics with the general
outline for needed cuts and so on. I am a fairly handy guy and I am sure I
can do an at least average job. My question is for anyone that has used her
product is just how straight forward is it and does her video help? Any
input from experience, even some pictures of your finished product would be
GREATLY appreciated!
Travis Hamblen
RV-6A 330hrs @ VGT
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus (http://www.grisoft.com).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob W M Shipley" <rob(at)robsglass.com> |
| Subject: | Fw: Off-line reply to your - Finish Drill / Deburr Pre-punched |
holes?
Everyone please note that Scott McDaniels has gone to the trouble to give us an
unofficial Van's view of this topic and afford him a courteous reception - unless
you wish to ensure that he won't contribute again.
I received this directly from Scott today.
Subject: Off-line reply to your - Finish Drill / Deburr Pre-punched holes?
Hi Rob,
I am not currently a subscriber on the list but I do cruise the archives on occasion
to see what the latest hot topic is.
I saw yours and thought I would take a moment to reply, but I didn't even have
time to read the other responses so sorry if this is some what redundant.
I also am not sure how much of the below is yours or if some is pasted in but I
will answer some of the questions to hopefully finally put to bed some of the
confusion and miss information about what has been done in the past at Van's
in regards to assembling without drilling.
I work in the proto shop at Vans and have been there about 8 years, so I have been
involved in the evolution to the current level of P.P. holes in all of the
kits.
>Too many experts and not enough pragmatism.
>Tedd McHenry kindly posted the links for the mil rivet specs. There's a problem
here not addressed by those who feel Van's recommendations are akin to a quick
spritz with holy water. Follow directions and you will NOT meet these specs.
Regardless of what the specs are, if you build to the recommendations in the manual
then you are building to the same standard
as was used to build test items that were static loaded to verify that the structures
met the loads that they were designed too.
If you feel better starting with a hole size that is a few thousandths smaller
then go for it. I don't think any one at Van's has a problem with that as long
as you are using dimple dies that have a pilot that is not stretching the holes
when you insert it (the pilot is a clearance fit to the hole).
>Charlie England's post echoes my own experiences. Match drill, deburr and
dimple and your hole will be oversize on the thinner skins by as much as twice
the allowed tolerance.
See my response above... all the testing was done with parts constructed this way.
If you do not feel good about it the use a smaller hole.
>You can't buy #41 dimple dies and everyone has done it this way for years so it
works. If you match drill with a #41 instead of a #40 it works better, i.e.
the hole is tighter, you need less swell from the rivet and the recommended rivet
size is more likely to work.
This has nothing to do with recommended rivet size. They are spec.ed by what we
used that did work when building the proto parts. Some times sizes are called
out wrong
(we're not perfect) but it is surely not because the hole is a few thousandths
bigger than a Mil. spec calls for.
> I'm sure the theoreticians out there won't like
this suggestions much, however no one at EAA, AOPA and the guys at Vans considered
it a bad idea, when I discussed it with them.
And I have no problem with it either unless you are using dimple dies with a pilot
that doesn't fit the hole. I do have a problem with Not final sizing the
hole from what is punched, but just slamming dimple dies into them.
>Paul Parashak is concerned about "one of the surest ways to accelerate metal failures
is to introduce a flaw. These miniscule cracks and stress areas that are
left in are prime areas for crack propagation." I cannot believe that he has
ever examined the holes which the average builder drills and deburrs. Look
at one with a magnifying glass. They are ugly to varying degrees but definitely
ugly. Cy Galley has a good grasp of the reality of drilling and deburring.
"If you are getting so anal about drilling, I would propose that you use a
chucking reamer instead of a drill. At least that way you will get a round smooth
hole. You don't get smooth or round with a drill bit."
If irregularities around the hole are significant, many riveted aluminium monocoque
planes would not have remained flying for as long, (or longer), than many
of us have been alive .
How many of those airplanes are 100% flush riveted on the exterior? Not many.
When you dimple, you are stretching the material. If you had to force the dimple
pilot into the hole before dimpling you stretched it even more. Now if all
of this was done on holes that had never been up sized, you have a strong potential
for cracking. The punching process leaves a hole edge condition that
is the same as a sheared edge on a skin at best. Some times it is worse because
of a punch tool that is getting slightly dull or has a little more clearance
that when it was new.
It is for this reason that it is recommended in the manual that the holes be final
sized. True, it may not a perfect hole but that is ok. That is what made
riveted construction of aircraft so desirable.
>He also makes the very pertinent observation that presumably
all the lightening holes are punched by Van's. I haven't heard any suggestions
from Van's or our list experts regarding the necessity of enlarging
these to remove the work hardened edge and the attendant stress risers.
Not true! Builders are told to deburr the edges of all parts (this would include
lightening holes).
In our shop we use a small scotch bright wheel in a die grinder to deburr/smooth
all lightening holes and we assume builders are doing similar.
>Vans has not totally dismissed the idea of dimpling the punched hole without match
drilling. Charlie England's discussion with Van "I asked Van, his own self,
face to face, in person, at OSH last summer when they were going to go ahead
&punch the holes 'full size' &save us all some build time. His answer (his *only*
answer) was that there was enough variation in drilling patterns that they
preferred to continue the match drilling thing for now."
I think you are reading more into this than you should. That in no way means that
we would punch them full size if we were confident that the would all line
up properly.
>I also had asked Van's about the rumour I'd heard that they had experimented with
this by building a wing or wings without drilling and was told it was true
but too early to make any comments. I didn't think to ask them what plane they
were for or if they would fly them. I'll ask Ken K. next time I see him.
There was never an "Experiment". It was a time saving short cut only when building
structures that we were using for static testing. It was mentioned in an
RVator only to describe how well the pre punch design work was going and to describe
how well the parts fit. It was never intended to present a process that
should be used to assemble the kit.
We have never done this on any structures that we intended to fly. The cracking
issue is related to the life of the structure with thousands of load cycles.
The structures we did this on only had to last through 1 or 2 load cycles.
>Van is most certainly not reluctant to tackle issues he considers dangerous for
example his stand on not using engines larger than the O 320 in a 9. He is also
notoriously conservative and yet he has not made any attempt to take on this
topic in a similar forthright fashion. This is surprising if, as our theorists
believe, this is a serious problem in practice. I wonder why.
>There are many discrepancies between our practice and theory - hole condition,
size etc. and it would seem that little is known about dimpling and riveting punched
holes in practice. I have read nothing about actual stress cracks seen
in aircraft riveted together without match drilling
Lets see... I have not seen a large campaign calling for an outsider evaluation
of the wing engineering on any of the RV models, do builders acccept on blind
faith that the wings are designed properly but they will not acccept it when
the manual suggests that they final size all of the holes before dimpling?
In my opinion, the absolute bottom line is this... No one at Van's, or probably
anywhere else can tell you with absolute certainty that you will or will not
have cracking problems on your RV 10 or 15 years from now. We have no experience
or data to prove it one way or the other. This is something that would not
likely happen right away. There are probably RV's now flying that were build
without drilling. The owner/builders may even be preaching to everyone that
"They haven't had any problems". That information of no value. Tell us after
the airplane is 10 years old.
I doubt very much that if Van's endorsed skipping the drilling, and 10 years from
now a bunch of RV's started to have cracking problems, I doubt those owners
would consider it much a consolation for Van's to say "Sorry, I guess we were
wrong. From now on we recommend builders don't do that any more".
So, If anyone is willing to experiment, and take a chance, to save maybe 20 hours
of work ( a very small amount considering the total number of hours most builders
expend) on the construction of there RV , then go for it. Just realize
that no mater how many experts you talk to, or how many other builders have
already done it, only time will tell wether you made the right decision.
I hope at least some of this is of some value but I have to close with the standard
disclaimer dribble...
This is my own personal opinion and does not necessarily match the policy's or
opinions of my employer.
P.S. feel free to share this as you wish, as long as you promise to refrain from
flaming me without a chance to respond since I'm not on the list :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Most efficient climb |
> I've found that a hard climb will cause the engine to warm up
> significantly. I'm not really sure about this and may be
> totally wrong; but, I also get the notion that when I put
I have found the only way to keep the engine from overheating (without
this technique I'll see 425F +) on long climbs in the summer is to keep
the throttle full, mixture full rich, prop back to around 2500 when the
MAP drops to about 27" or so. I put the pitch angle around 120 knots
(this does obscure the forward view with essentially full power). Full
rich delivers about 16gph at sea level to an O360, but this fuel hog
phase only takes several minutes given the climb rates of these planes.
I burn perhaps 1 to 1.5 gallons to get to altitudes like 8k', but the
engine stays much, much cooler doing this sort of climb. And yes, I'm
aware that I don't have peak power using these settings, but engine
temperatures are much more important to me.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 452 hours
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ollie Washburn" <ollie-6a(at)prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine Shake During Shutdown |
Gabe, this has worked for me on all the Lycs I've had .Run the eng at about
1000 rpm, pull the mixture and as the engine is shutting down, close the
throttle all the way.
Ollie 6A FL.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gabe A Ferrer" <ferrergm(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: RV-List: Engine Shake During Shutdown
>
> Does anyone know of a way to reduce the magnitude of the Lycoming engine
shakes during engine shutdown?
>
> It just seems unnecessary for the engine to do this.
>
> It's annoying and the vibration may harm the engine accessories.
>
> My O-360 A1A has done it from the first time that I ran it.
>
> Gabe A Ferrer
> RV6 NN2GX 108 hours
> South Florida
> Email: ferrergm(at)bellsouth.net
> Cell: 561 758 8894
> Night Phone: 561 622 0960
> Fax: 561 622 0960
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hal / Carol Kempthorne <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Strapdown inertial navigation systems WAS: Autopilot Itch |
At 10:15 PM 4/5/2004, you wrote:
> I really don't understand how the little box can maintain its balance so
> well
>without any outside assistance, but it can! :-)
GPS is not needed to keep the wings level. I doubt that it is needed to
hold a heading either.
Solid state accelerometers and magnetometers have gotten really
cheap. Analog Devices said in a press release in the fall of 2002 that
they had shipped over 100 million of one of their ADXL202E two axis
accelerometers! These now sell for under $20. That's how my Dynon is made
and why it is so cheap. Trio too?
These kinds of parts are combined to create AHRS - attitude heading
reference systems. Look how nicely the Dynon EFIS indicates attitude. It
shouldn't be too hard for Dynon to include autopilot functionality in their
next version. It could even be a three axis machine. GPS not needed for
these functions.
It is hard on the brain, trying to understand how our aircraft's attitude
can be maintained without the usual spinning wheels. Grandpa probably had
trouble understanding how the digital watch could tell time without a
pendulum too.
We are in the age of computers with eyes, ears, arms and legs. Next thing
you know, we will just start the engine, punch in the destination code and
the systems will do the rest.
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK - Three trips to OSH now.
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dynon OAT Probe |
| From: | "Lockamy, Jack L" <jack.lockamy(at)navy.mil> |
Laird,
Last night I successfully 'calibrated' the Dynon OAT probe. The EFIS will allow
increases/decreases in the displayed temperature (Celsius ONLY). I really wish
Dynon had given the user the option to select Celsius or Fahrenheit. My plan
is to set the Dynon OAT after engine start based on the ATIS info (if available)
and then see how far off the Grand Rapids may/may not be.
When there's no ATIS information available.... I'll wet my finger, stick it up
in the air, and take a wild ass guess! (At least that's how my grandfather showed
me how to do it...) :-)
Take care,
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Donald Mei" <don_mei(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine Shake During Shutdown |
I do the following procedure just as a means to assist keeping the engine
clean, but it results in a very smooth, immediate shut down with no shake.
(I understand that it may not actually help keep the engine clean, but it
was recommended by Lycoming and it seems to make a lot of sense)
With the engine at a slightly elevated idle, slowly bring the mixture back
until some roughness is detected. Leave it there for a few seconds, then
pull to idle cut off.
The engine will shut down as if you had turned off the key.
Don Mei
(Back on 100LL since they put alcohol in auto fuel)
"All of us need to be reminded that the federal government did not create
the states; the states created the federal government!"---Ronald Reagan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave" <dave(at)coltnet.net> (by way of Matt Dralle <nospam(at)matronics.com>) |
| Subject: | Question for the Engine Guru's on the list |
)
I have the opportunity to purchase an IO-360-B4A engine that has all the
accessories and is running but absolutely no logs and the present owner
doesn't know the history. It does not have a data plate, the IO-360-B4A
is
stamped on the sump where the data plate would go. It is a wide deck,
parallel valve, rear induction 180 hp (probably solid crank haven't pulled
the prop off to check) with a bendix servo fuel injection, Electro system
mags (?) oil cooler, vacuum pump and all gyros (RC Allen TSOed ) Pretty
much a full panel of old analog gauges and monitors, an old escort II
radio and
a Narco ID-825 CDI with GS and the well weathered assembled
but defiantly not airworthy fuselage of one of those plastic airplanes.
They want to sell it as a package.
How much is something like this worth? Is the fuel injection a plus?
I would like use the engine as a core to overhaul and put in an -8.
Would I be able to keep the rear induction or would I need to
change out the sump?
Thanks for your time!!
Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Question for the Engine Guru's on the list |
I am no engine guru, but from what I have read here, if the cylinders and crank
are serviceable the price for a good rebuildable core is about 8k. Maybe a
little more with all those accessories. That sump could be a problem with it
facing the rear. New sumps are $$.
>Dralle )
>
>
> I have the opportunity to purchase an IO-360-B4A engine that has all the
> accessories and is running but absolutely no logs and the present owner
> doesn't know the history. It does not have a data plate, the IO-360-B4A
>is
> stamped on the sump where the data plate would go. It is a wide deck,
> parallel valve, rear induction 180 hp (probably solid crank haven't pulled
> the prop off to check) with a bendix servo fuel injection, Electro system
> mags (?) oil cooler, vacuum pump and all gyros (RC Allen TSOed ) Pretty
> much a full panel of old analog gauges and monitors, an old escort II
>radio and
> a Narco ID-825 CDI with GS and the well weathered assembled
> but defiantly not airworthy fuselage of one of those plastic airplanes.
> They want to sell it as a package.
>
> How much is something like this worth? Is the fuel injection a plus?
> I would like use the engine as a core to overhaul and put in an -8.
> Would I be able to keep the rear induction or would I need to
> change out the sump?
>
> Thanks for your time!!
>
> Dave
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interiors by Becky Orndorff |
It was very straightforward. Probably had 20 hours in installing everything
from firewall back to the baggage area. Turned out very nice for a novice
such as myself. I'd highly recommend her interior.
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: "Travis Hamblen" <TravisHamblen(at)cox.net>
Subject: RV-List: Interiors by Becky Orndorff
>
> I am starting to think about overhauling/redoing my interior. I
absolutely
> love the seats by Becky Orndorff, but wanted some feedback on her interior
> products. I understand that she ships you the fabrics with the general
> outline for needed cuts and so on. I am a fairly handy guy and I am sure
I
> can do an at least average job. My question is for anyone that has used
her
> product is just how straight forward is it and does her video help? Any
> input from experience, even some pictures of your finished product would
be
> GREATLY appreciated!
>
>
> Travis Hamblen
>
> RV-6A 330hrs @ VGT
>
>
> --
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus (http://www.grisoft.com).
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael McGee <jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com> |
| Subject: | Most efficient climb |
At 05:13 2004-04-07, you wrote:
>
>
> > I've found that a hard climb will cause the engine to warm up
> > significantly. I'm not really sure about this and may be
> > totally wrong; but, I also get the notion that when I put
>
>I have found the only way to keep the engine from overheating (without
>this technique I'll see 425F +) on long climbs in the summer is to keep
>the throttle full, mixture full rich, prop back to around 2500 when the
>MAP drops to about 27" or so. I put the pitch angle around 120 knots
>(this does obscure the forward view with essentially full power). Full
>rich delivers about 16gph at sea level to an O360, but this fuel hog
>phase only takes several minutes given the climb rates of these planes.
>I burn perhaps 1 to 1.5 gallons to get to altitudes like 8k', but the
>engine stays much, much cooler doing this sort of climb. And yes, I'm
>aware that I don't have peak power using these settings, but engine
>temperatures are much more important to me.
>
>Alex Peterson
>Maple Grove, MN
>RV6-A N66AP 452 hours
As we used to tell our jump plane pilots and you'll hear from a lot of old
timers -
".. fuel is cheaper than cylinders."
Mike McGee
VAF Home Wing/EAA Chapter 105 Flyin Coordinator
June 19th, 2004
Scappoose, OR
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | stupid whining complaint |
Why are some replys below the original message? Im genreally reading these
on my laptop with no mouse. Most messages I can keep my pointer over the
delete button, read the majority of the message if appl, and then toss it.
Maybe some browsers automatically put the reply below the original but it
would sure be nice if you can change it.
Do not arcive please
Jeff Dowling
RV-6A, N915JD
58 hours
Chicago/Louisville
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Buchanan" <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Autopilot Itch
>
> Richard Sipp wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > While I could certainly be mistaken, I think one of the major
differences in
> > the TruTrak and Trio products is that the TruTrak does not depend on an
> > external GPS for it attitude information. Loose your GPS signal and the
> > TruTrak can still control the airplane. From reviewing the Trio web
sight
> > it appears that an external GPS is required to provide or at least
augment
> > the attitude reference.
> >
> > Dick Sipp
> > RV4
> > RV10
>
>
> Dick, both the TruTrak and EZ-Pilot use GPS in the attitude solution.
> And, both systems are capable of remarkable wing-leveler performance
> without GPS input. However, without GPS, both system's performance will
> degrade over time and headings will require manual input after a
> significant time without GPS data. As far as I can tell, there is no
> appreciable difference in the way both systems integrate GPS.
>
> I can tell you from first-hand knowledge that Trio has recently enhanced
> the no-GPS performance of the EZ-Pilot in a substantial manner. I really
> don't understand how the little box can maintain its balance so well
> without any outside assistance, but it can! :-)
>
> Sam
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "C. Rabaut" <crabaut(at)coalinga.com> |
| Subject: | Was - Off-line reply to your - Finish Drill / Deburr Pre-punched |
holes? ...Now RV-15 "the Jet"
Wow.... so the "rumors" are TRUE !!!
I just read Scott McDaniels' statement "> In my opinion, the absolute
bottom line is this... No one at Van's, or probably anywhere else can tell
you with absolute certainty that you will or will not have cracking problems
on your RV 10 or 15 years from now. "
Did you get that? "....on your RV 10 or 15 ... "
So Vans is going to make an RV-15 (years from now).
*I heard it's gonna be a 2 Seat, tandem, twin jet. I'm sending in my
deposit right now!
----- Original Message -----
From: Rob W M Shipley <rob(at)robsglass.com>
Subject: RV-List: Fw: Off-line reply to your - Finish Drill / Deburr
Pre-punched holes?
>
>
> Everyone please note that Scott McDaniels has gone to the trouble to give
us an unofficial Van's view of this topic and afford him a courteous
reception - unless you wish to ensure that he won't contribute again.
>
> I received this directly from Scott today.
> Subject: Off-line reply to your - Finish Drill / Deburr Pre-punched holes?
>
>
> Hi Rob,
> I am not currently a subscriber on the list but I do cruise the archives
on occasion to see what the latest hot topic is.
> I saw yours and thought I would take a moment to reply, but I didn't even
have time to read the other responses so sorry if this is some what
redundant.
> I also am not sure how much of the below is yours or if some is pasted in
but I will answer some of the questions to hopefully finally put to bed
some of the confusion and miss information about what has been done in the
past at Van's in regards to assembling without drilling.
>
> I work in the proto shop at Vans and have been there about 8 years, so I
have been involved in the evolution to the current level of P.P. holes in
all of the kits.
>
>
> >Too many experts and not enough pragmatism.
>
> >Tedd McHenry kindly posted the links for the mil rivet specs. There's a
problem
> here not addressed by those who feel Van's recommendations are akin to a
quick
> spritz with holy water. Follow directions and you will NOT meet these
specs.
>
> Regardless of what the specs are, if you build to the recommendations in
the manual then you are building to the same standard
> as was used to build test items that were static loaded to verify that the
structures met the loads that they were designed too.
> If you feel better starting with a hole size that is a few thousandths
smaller then go for it. I don't think any one at Van's has a problem with
that as long as you are using dimple dies that have a pilot that is not
stretching the holes when you insert it (the pilot is a clearance fit to the
hole).
>
> >Charlie England's post echoes my own experiences. Match drill, deburr
and
> dimple and your hole will be oversize on the thinner skins by as much as
twice
> the allowed tolerance.
>
> See my response above... all the testing was done with parts constructed
this way.
> If you do not feel good about it the use a smaller hole.
>
> >You can't buy #41 dimple dies and everyone has done it this way for years
so it
> works. If you match drill with a #41 instead of a #40 it works better,
i.e.
> the hole is tighter, you need less swell from the rivet and the
recommended rivet
> size is more likely to work.
>
> This has nothing to do with recommended rivet size. They are spec.ed by
what we
> used that did work when building the proto parts. Some times sizes are
called out wrong
> (we're not perfect) but it is surely not because the hole is a few
thousandths bigger than a Mil. spec calls for.
>
> > I'm sure the theoreticians out there won't like
> this suggestions much, however no one at EAA, AOPA and the guys at Vans
considered
> it a bad idea, when I discussed it with them.
>
> And I have no problem with it either unless you are using dimple dies with
a pilot that doesn't fit the hole. I do have a problem with Not final
sizing the hole from what is punched, but just slamming dimple dies into
them.
>
> >Paul Parashak is concerned about "one of the surest ways to accelerate
metal failures
> is to introduce a flaw. These miniscule cracks and stress areas that are
> left in are prime areas for crack propagation." I cannot believe that he
has
> ever examined the holes which the average builder drills and deburrs.
Look
> at one with a magnifying glass. They are ugly to varying degrees but
definitely
> ugly. Cy Galley has a good grasp of the reality of drilling and
deburring.
> "If you are getting so anal about drilling, I would propose that you use a
> chucking reamer instead of a drill. At least that way you will get a round
smooth
> hole. You don't get smooth or round with a drill bit."
> If irregularities around the hole are significant, many riveted aluminium
monocoque
> planes would not have remained flying for as long, (or longer), than many
> of us have been alive .
>
> How many of those airplanes are 100% flush riveted on the exterior? Not
many. When you dimple, you are stretching the material. If you had to
force the dimple pilot into the hole before dimpling you stretched it even
more. Now if all of this was done on holes that had never been up sized,
you have a strong potential for cracking. The punching process leaves a
hole edge condition that is the same as a sheared edge on a skin at best.
Some times it is worse because of a punch tool that is getting slightly dull
or has a little more clearance that when it was new.
> It is for this reason that it is recommended in the manual that the holes
be final sized. True, it may not a perfect hole but that is ok. That is
what made riveted construction of aircraft so desirable.
>
> >He also makes the very pertinent observation that presumably
> all the lightening holes are punched by Van's. I haven't heard any
suggestions
> from Van's or our list experts regarding the necessity of enlarging
> these to remove the work hardened edge and the attendant stress risers.
>
> Not true! Builders are told to deburr the edges of all parts (this would
include lightening holes).
> In our shop we use a small scotch bright wheel in a die grinder to
deburr/smooth all lightening holes and we assume builders are doing similar.
>
> >Vans has not totally dismissed the idea of dimpling the punched hole
without match
> drilling. Charlie England's discussion with Van "I asked Van, his own
self,
> face to face, in person, at OSH last summer when they were going to go
ahead
> &punch the holes 'full size' &save us all some build time. His answer (his
*only*
> answer) was that there was enough variation in drilling patterns that they
> preferred to continue the match drilling thing for now."
>
> I think you are reading more into this than you should. That in no way
means that we would punch them full size if we were confident that the would
all line up properly.
>
> >I also had asked Van's about the rumour I'd heard that they had
experimented with
> this by building a wing or wings without drilling and was told it was true
> but too early to make any comments. I didn't think to ask them what plane
they
> were for or if they would fly them. I'll ask Ken K. next time I see him.
>
> There was never an "Experiment". It was a time saving short cut only when
building structures that we were using for static testing. It was mentioned
in an RVator only to describe how well the pre punch design work was going
and to describe how well the parts fit. It was never intended to present a
process that should be used to assemble the kit.
> We have never done this on any structures that we intended to fly. The
cracking issue is related to the life of the structure with thousands of
load cycles. The structures we did this on only had to last through 1 or 2
load cycles.
>
> >Van is most certainly not reluctant to tackle issues he considers
dangerous for
> example his stand on not using engines larger than the O 320 in a 9. He
is also
> notoriously conservative and yet he has not made any attempt to take on
this
> topic in a similar forthright fashion. This is surprising if, as our
theorists
> believe, this is a serious problem in practice. I wonder why.
>
> >There are many discrepancies between our practice and theory - hole
condition,
> size etc. and it would seem that little is known about dimpling and
riveting punched
> holes in practice. I have read nothing about actual stress cracks seen
> in aircraft riveted together without match drilling
>
> Lets see... I have not seen a large campaign calling for an outsider
evaluation of the wing engineering on any of the RV models, do builders
acccept on blind faith that the wings are designed properly but they will
not acccept it when the manual suggests that they final size all of the
holes before dimpling?
>
> In my opinion, the absolute bottom line is this... No one at Van's, or
probably anywhere else can tell you with absolute certainty that you will or
will not have cracking problems on your RV 10 or 15 years from now. We have
no experience or data to prove it one way or the other. This is something
that would not likely happen right away. There are probably RV's now flying
that were build without drilling. The owner/builders may even be preaching
to everyone that "They haven't had any problems". That information of no
value. Tell us after the airplane is 10 years old.
> I doubt very much that if Van's endorsed skipping the drilling, and 10
years from now a bunch of RV's started to have cracking problems, I doubt
those owners would consider it much a consolation for Van's to say "Sorry, I
guess we were wrong. From now on we recommend builders don't do that any
more".
> So, If anyone is willing to experiment, and take a chance, to save maybe
20 hours of work ( a very small amount considering the total number of hours
most builders expend) on the construction of there RV , then go for it.
Just realize that no mater how many experts you talk to, or how many other
builders have already done it, only time will tell wether you made the right
decision.
>
> I hope at least some of this is of some value but I have to close with the
standard disclaimer dribble...
> This is my own personal opinion and does not necessarily match the
policy's or opinions of my employer.
>
> P.S. feel free to share this as you wish, as long as you promise to
refrain from flaming me without a chance to respond since I'm not on the
list :-)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | Question for the Engine Guru's on the list |
Hi Dave,
I have the exact same engein on my RV6, which I bought used (750SNEW) and I
now have 200+hrs trouble free hrs on it.
Here are some things about that engine:
1) I believe the -B4A's didn't originally have rear facing induction. Mine
is original and the FI servo is mounted vertically on the sump, and all the
paperwork I have says that's the way it should be, so it appears someone may
have swapped sumps, and probably hence the lack of a data plate on your
sump.
2) The -B4A does indeed have a solid crank (aerobatic), so no C/S prop on
this engine (no problem, I have the metal sensenich and love it). If a c/s
is in your future, plan on $2-5K for a hollow crank.
3) Mags are Slicks by default, but E.I. is a good option (I hear, and will
do this summer).
4) The FI (Bendix system) is just fine and have been proven for many years.
One thing to see how new it is, take a look at the servo and look at the
rubber diaphrams. You can see them sandwiched on the servo...if they are
black, they are the old type rubber and need replaced. If they are orange,
they are the newer style and probably indicates an overhaul or new in the
last 10 years. Also, if you can look at the throat of it, you can get an
indication of time/condition. How do the impact tube look, is the throat
clean or dirty?? Check the Throttle/Mixture are bushings for movement and
check over the mixture adjustment arm. All can be indicators of time, as
the throttle/mixture arm bushings all wear with time....
5) There is a minor but pesky 50hr AD on the crank flange of this engine if
you are doing aerobatics above the utility category. Meaning, if you fly
the engine above 4G's, you need to do a 50hr visual inspection on the
flange. Not a big deal, as my wifferdills are under that in the -6 most of
the time, so I do the inspection on a less regular basis.
6) The oil pump AD applies to this engine (Easy fix, new impellers).
7) If you're no going to install the inverted oil system, you'll need to
"de-modify" the sump for regular use. It's not hard, but you have to
replace the oil pickup with a finger strainer, block the forward and back
oil pick openings, etc... You'll probably want to replace the rear-facing
sump anyway.
8) Speaking of rear facing sumps. Look closely and see if there is a
"non-machined" pad on the front of it. If so, you can simply take it to a
machine shop and have the forward faced opening cut. Many rear-facing sumps
have this provision already cast in, and just need to be machined. Then you
put a block on the reat opening and....poof, a forward facing servo!
9) Does it have a Vernitherm or Viscosity Valve?? Check to see...many of
the aerobatic/Pitts drivers used these engines with oil wide open, always
flowing unrestriced through the cooler...
10) Last indicator of engine health. Look at the oil pressure adjustment
bolt on the right rear of the engine...See how far it's screwed in. If
there is decent amount of bolt showing, the engine probably hasn't been
adjusted to death. If the castle nut/bolt head is screwed all the way down
near the case, then the engine has probably been "adjusted/tinkered" to
continually compensate for growing internal clearances and continued
decrease in pressure. Not common, but a dead giveaway that someone is
trying to "slip one past you" by falsely keeping the oil pressures high!
Now for cost.....I bought mine 4 years ago for $9.5K off a hurricane flipped
pitts, with 750SNEW, and all accessories, including the inverted oil system
(I bolted it on and I'm still flying). The difference is I have all
paperwork since the engine was new in 1986. Today, I would be more hesitant,
due to the fact that a brand new ECI kit can be had for around $14.5. That
being said, the accessories are worth quite a bit..... The FI system is
worth between $1500-3500 hrs depending on time/condition, mags between
$200-$600 for the pair, Vacuum pump should be treated as a core and
overhauled by you at a cost of $100-300.00 for peace of mind. The gyros
could be worth anywhere from $100-600.00+ (each) each depending on
appearance, history, time, etc.. Values for accessories vary wildly, but a
with no history or knowledge of time, I can guarantee they won't bring or be
worth as much, even if they only have a few hours on them, because no-one
knows.
If I were you, I wouldn't be afraid to buy this engine as a "core" and
re-build it. New cylinders are around $850.00 ea, and the bottom end can be
real cheap or real expensive depending on status of the journals, cam, etc..
Overall, this is a good engine, dynafocal mount, and like all -360's, fairly
bullet proof.
All said and done, You want to make sure when you're finished, the overhaul
comes in cheaper (with accessories) than buying a new Aerosport or ECI
engine for $17-22K. Therefore, I'd probably be comfortable around the $8-9K
range +/-, given the fact you have no history, logs, data plate, etc.. so
everything is pretty much an unknown. Then you put $5-$8K for overhaul of
the engine/accessories, and you have a fresh engine still cheaper than a new
one. Note...overhaul costs can also vary wildly depending on the engine
internal condition, who is doing the o/h (you or a shop) and parts used (Lyc
verses ECI/Superior).
Cheers,
Stein Bruch
RV6's, Minneapolis
http://www.steinair.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dave (by way of
Matt Dralle )
Subject: RV-List: Question for the Engine Guru's on the list
Dralle )
I have the opportunity to purchase an IO-360-B4A engine that has all the
accessories and is running but absolutely no logs and the present owner
doesn't know the history. It does not have a data plate, the IO-360-B4A
is
stamped on the sump where the data plate would go. It is a wide deck,
parallel valve, rear induction 180 hp (probably solid crank haven't
pulled
the prop off to check) with a bendix servo fuel injection, Electro system
mags (?) oil cooler, vacuum pump and all gyros (RC Allen TSOed ) Pretty
much a full panel of old analog gauges and monitors, an old escort II
radio and
a Narco ID-825 CDI with GS and the well weathered assembled
but defiantly not airworthy fuselage of one of those plastic airplanes.
They want to sell it as a package.
How much is something like this worth? Is the fuel injection a plus?
I would like use the engine as a core to overhaul and put in an -8.
Would I be able to keep the rear induction or would I need to
change out the sump?
Thanks for your time!!
Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Tasker <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: stupid whining complaint |
First, I agree with you 110%. However, the customary news group
"etiquette" specifies that the reply be below the original message.
This is so you can read what came before and then read the reply. Makes
some sense if you are just "tuning in" to a discussion, but is a real
pain if you are continually getting the messages. Of course, that same
etiquette says that you should snip all of the previous communication
except what is specifically relevant to the reply - which mostly doesn't
happen.
So, I doubt that we will be able to change anything as much as I agree
with you. Most email can be set up to put the reply before or after the
original message.
I either answer at the top or interleave my reply within the previous
message as appropriate.
Dick Tasker
Jeff Dowling wrote:
>
>Why are some replys below the original message? Im genreally reading these
>on my laptop with no mouse. Most messages I can keep my pointer over the
>delete button, read the majority of the message if appl, and then toss it.
>Maybe some browsers automatically put the reply below the original but it
>would sure be nice if you can change it.
>
>Do not arcive please
>
>Jeff Dowling
>RV-6A, N915JD
>58 hours
>Chicago/Louisville
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob U." <rv3(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine Shake During Shutdown |
Donald Mei wrote:
>
>I do the following procedure just as a means to assist keeping the engine
>clean, but it results in a very smooth, immediate shut down with no shake.
>(I understand that it may not actually help keep the engine clean, but it
>was recommended by Lycoming and it seems to make a lot of sense)
>
>With the engine at a slightly elevated idle, slowly bring the mixture back
>until some roughness is detected. Leave it there for a few seconds, then
>pull to idle cut off.
>
>
>The engine will shut down as if you had turned off the key.
>
>Don Mei
>
======================================
Hmmmm.
Interesting..... this "as if you had turned off the key".
This is the proper procedure for certain engines without an idle cut off
carb.
Engines shut down this manner have survive just fine over the decades.
Any comments?
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael McGee <jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com> |
| Subject: | Re: stupid whining complaint |
At 11:00 2004-04-07, you wrote:
>
>Why are some replys below the original message? Im genreally reading these
>on my laptop with no mouse. Most messages I can keep my pointer over the
>delete button, read the majority of the message if appl, and then toss it.
>Maybe some browsers automatically put the reply below the original but it
>would sure be nice if you can change it.
>
>Do not arcive please
>
>Jeff Dowling
>RV-6A, N915JD
>58 hours
>Chicago/Louisville
On some email lists it's expected that you put your reply at the end so the
thread is in chronological order (lest you suffer the wrath of the list
admin). It then becomes a matter of habit. All my email progs default the
reply to the top of the message.
Mike McGee
VAF Home Wing/EAA Chapter 105 Flyin Coordinator
June 19th, 2004
Scappoose, OR
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LeastDrag93066(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Question for the Engine Guru's on the list |
In a message dated 04/07/2004 11:22:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
stein(at)steinair.com writes:
2) The -B4A does indeed have a solid crank (aerobatic), so no C/S prop on
this engine (no problem, I have the metal sensenich and love it). If a c/s
is in your future, plan on $2-5K for a hollow crank.
Please correct this statement.
No HYDRAULIC C/S prop ...
An electric C/S prop will bolt on just fine.
Electric governor, MT Propeller and spinner price = hydraulic governor, MT
Propeller and spinner price.
Jim Ayers
Less Drag Products, Inc.
An OEM distributor for MT Propeller.
Custom designed electric C/S propellers available.
www.lessdrag.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frederick Oldenburg <foldenburg(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Rudder Stiffener Confusion |
I studied RV-7(A) drawing 7 for quite some time and I'm still somewhat confused
as to what it is I need to do to properly trim the rudder stiffeners.
Here is my understanding of what I need to do so far:
Each set of two stiffeners (R-915 A through H) comes in a single piece that you
cut in the center to form two stiffeners. You're then supposed to trim the front
of each individual piece to shorten the stiffener, consistent with the length
of the match holes in the skin.
The stiffeners need to be trimmed to taper with the rudder's shape (i.e. the side
without the holes is tapered). I understand that there are guide holes for
this (the little half-holes on the edge of the material). but are all the tapers
in the stiffeners supposed to be the same length no matter how long the individual
stiffener? Also, there seems to be a guide hole on the edge of the material
but I'm confused as to where to start on the other side (the radius corner??)
Thanks,
Fred
Fred Oldenburg
RV-7A - Empennage
http://www.rv.oldsack.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "glennpaulwilkinson" <gpww(at)alltel.net> |
| Subject: | trim tab position |
Hey guys!
Can someone tell me the best position on rudder for the placement of the trim tab
on an RV-4....above or below the horizontal stab?
Glenn
654RV @ OKZ
36 Hrs
archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dj Merrill <deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: stupid whining complaint |
Jeff Dowling wrote:
>
>Why are some replys below the original message? Im genreally reading these
>on my laptop with no mouse. Most messages I can keep my pointer over the
>delete button, read the majority of the message if appl, and then toss it.
>Maybe some browsers automatically put the reply below the original but it
>would sure be nice if you can change it.
>
>
It is completely dependant upon the e-mail client used when
replying to the message. Mine, for example, is configured to
reply below the message. That makes more sense to me, then
someone can read the text above, and have a context
to understand what I am repying to without scrolling down
to the bottom of the message, then back up to the top
to read my reply. Others are different - diversity is fine... :-)
-Dj
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John" <n1cxo320(at)salidaco.com> |
Every once in a while someone on this list mentions good service or products
they have received.
Today I am goiing to shock some of you....my nomination for the Good Guy in
the FAA is Denver FSDO Inspector Scott Christenson....he used his own time
to give a a revised operating limitation change when the policy of that
office was that they were too overloaded to handle experimentals. (a
legitimate situation.) He went out of his way to help me, and he's coming
down tomorrow for an inspection of a commercial operator here at our
airport, and I hope he will allow me to take him to lunch...
Now and then you run into someone decent. Scott fits that bill.
FWIW
John at Salida, CO
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oldsfolks(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | >> RE: Stupid Whining Complaint |
I agree about repeating the message you are commenting on.
If you read Matt's instructions ( Apparently NO ONE does) he says to NOT
repeat lines or whole messages since the archives are getting overwhelming. I
read his instructions - see RV-4 List,if you can't find them here.
Bob Olds -- RV-4 , N1191X
oldsfolks(at)aol.com
A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor
Charleston,Arkansas
Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matthew Brandes" <matthew(at)n523rv.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Engine Shake During Shutdown |
Gabe,
There was a discussion about prop indexing a month or so ago that supposedly
helped the shaking problem. Search the archives for 'prop index' and you'll
see a bunch of messages.
Matthew Brandes,
Van's RV-9A (Wings/Fuselage)
EAA Chapter 868/91/1329
www.n523rv.com <http://www.n523rv.com/>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: trim tab position |
There is alot of dirty air coming off the canopy so below the stab? Just a
guess.
>
>Hey guys!
>Can someone tell me the best position on rudder for the placement of the
>trim tab on an RV-4....above or below the horizontal stab?
>
>Glenn
>654RV @ OKZ
>36 Hrs
>
>
>archive
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Crosley, Rich" <RCROSLEY(at)HRTEXTRON.TEXTRON.COM> |
| Subject: | Neat Airport Web Site |
Check out http://www.airnav.com/airports/
You can put in a city name and it will give you all the near by airports,
fuel, fbos, nav aids, all kinds of data. Check it out
Rich Crosley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Strapdown inertial navigation systems WAS: Autopilot Itch |
> Solid state accelerometers and magnetometers have gotten really
> cheap. Analog Devices said in a press release in the fall of
> 2002 that
> they had shipped over 100 million of one of their ADXL202E two axis
> accelerometers! These now sell for under $20. That's how my
> Dynon is made
> and why it is so cheap. Trio too?
I suspect these things do not use accelerometers to handle the plane's
pitch and roll. More likely, they use solid state gyros, which can be
thought of as a little tuning fork. So that I can describe it, say the
tines of the fork are pointed forward in the plane, and are made to
vibrate in an up and down fashion (this would be the roll axis "gyro").
If the plane is rolling one way or the other, the tines no longer
vibrate directly toward and away from each other, but develop a little
twist (during the actual rolling motion only). Then, built into the
side of a tine of the fork is a small strain gauge. This small strain
gauge detects the tine's twist. So, if you are still with me, these
solid state gyros simply put out a voltage which is proportional to the
roll rate, so many volts/degree/second. Electronics then simply
integrate the stream of voltage to determine roll position. Quite
elegant.
BTW, automobiles use these in stability augmentation systems, to look
for over or under steer.
Alex Peterson, traumatized by not know where to put my comments, top or
bottom.....
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 452 hours
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom & Cathy Ervin" <tcervin(at)valkyrie.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Interiors by Becky Orndorff |
Travis;
I have installed a "Becky Orndorff" Interior Kit in our RV6A-QB. Becky even
personalized our kit with some inserts that I made and sent to Becky for
installation in the Seat Back covers and special fabric for the Stick Boots.
Becky's kits are excellent and her video will be extremely helpful for those
RV builders who are "Fabric Challenged". I would recommend adding the foam
insulation kit to your overall interior kit, if you do not already have this
on the interior walls of your fuselage. Everything is pre-drawn on the
fabric and foam...all you do is cut & glue! I installed her firewall
insulation kit as well. Everything is of exceptional quality, including the
written instructions that come with your kit!
But...unless you are of smaller stature...you will have problems glueing the
fabric on the walls directly below your instrument panel. If you aren't
small...take up yoga to improve your flexibility! Above all, take your time
between each piece....measure twice, cut once!
Sorry, we don't have pictures that can be attached to this e-mail, but you
are welcome to come to 10G (Holmes County Airport, Ohio) and have a look!
Cathy & Tom Ervin
6A-QB
Tom is starting the fiberglass work on the front cowl...are we done
yet???????
----- Original Message -----
From: "Travis Hamblen" <TravisHamblen(at)cox.net>
Subject: RV-List: Interiors by Becky Orndorff
>
> I am starting to think about overhauling/redoing my interior. I
absolutely
> love the seats by Becky Orndorff, but wanted some feedback on her interior
> products. I understand that she ships you the fabrics with the general
> outline for needed cuts and so on. I am a fairly handy guy and I am sure
I
> can do an at least average job. My question is for anyone that has used
her
> product is just how straight forward is it and does her video help? Any
> input from experience, even some pictures of your finished product would
be
> GREATLY appreciated!
>
>
> Travis Hamblen
>
> RV-6A 330hrs @ VGT
>
>
> --
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus (http://www.grisoft.com).
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dj Merrill <deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: stupid whining complaint |
Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) wrote:
>Problem with your position Charlie, is we have ALREADY READ the posts
>below. True Charlie we don't read the last chapters first, but we have
>already read the other chapters in this case.
>
>
>
To counter that, we (at least I) get a lot of e-mail, many from lists.
If there isn't something at the top of the message to give me some
context as to
what the email is about, it is confusing. It doesn't make sense to
scroll to the bottom of the message to find out what it is about, and
then go back to the top to read the reply.
Some of you may be able to keep a few dozen different
conversations in mind at the same time, but not my tired brain... :-)
-Dj
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Davis" <rvpilot(at)access4less.net> |
| Subject: | Re: trim tab position |
Glenn,
You will find that the trim tab is much more effective when placed in the
clean air above the horiz. stab.
Bill RV-8 N48WD Tiger-Kat
----- Original Message -----
From: "glennpaulwilkinson" <gpww(at)alltel.net>
Subject: RV-List: trim tab position
>
> Hey guys!
> Can someone tell me the best position on rudder for the placement of the
trim tab on an RV-4....above or below the horizontal stab?
>
> Glenn
> 654RV @ OKZ
> 36 Hrs
>
>
> archive
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Dube <bdube(at)al.noaa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Stiffener Confusion |
>
>I studied RV-7(A) drawing 7 for quite some time and I'm still somewhat
>confused as to what it is I need to do to properly trim the rudder stiffeners.
messed up several before I got it right.
First, cut, label, and shape all the "regular" stiffeners and set
them in position. Get them out of the way so you don't mix them up with the
ones you are going to cut down.
Triple check before you trim anything. After you mark the
stiffeners for trimming, actually set them in position to confirm that the
holes are going to line up, then trim the longest one and check to be sure
you have done that one correctly before you trim any of the others. (If you
mess up the longest one, you might be able to trim it further and use it
for a shorter one.)
The instructions don't make it 100% clear which end you are
supposed to trim or where you are supposed to measure from. Once you
finally figure it out, the instructions make perfect sense. But by then it
doesn't matter, does it? :-)
I seem to remember that you are supposed to trim the front of the
stiffener. (I could very well be wrong.) The back taper thus stays "stock."
I cut the stiffeners center to center on the guide holes then
rounded the corners to the point where the guide holes vanished. Seemed to
fit OK.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Strapdown inertial navigation systems WAS: Autopilot Itch |
| From: | "Frank van der Hulst (Staff WG)" <F.vanderHulst(at)ucol.ac.nz> |
Last year I used 3D magnetometers and ADXL's accelerometers to measure
ocean wave parameters using a floating buoy (for my Master's thesis, now
complete). In many ways, the problems (notably the lack of reliable
absolute references) are the same as attitude measurement in an
aircraft, except that the aircraft situation is worse.
For my ocean waves, I could assume a long-term average acceleration,
velocity, and displacement of 0. In aircraft, such an assumption (whilst
true for the *very* long term), isn't useful for determining attitude in
the short-term. In cars, the problem is simplified somewhat since the
car is (almost certainly) approximately upright, and has a more-or-less
constant 1G pull more-or-less downwards.
Essentially, to determine attitude from a rate gyro such as you
describe, you must integrate the measured rotations. Every time you
measure, you get an error, so your calculated attitude becomes less and
less accurate as time goes by. Therefore you need to periodically reset
the attitude to a known position. This of course applies to mechanical
rate gyros as well, where (for example) the pilot must reset the heading
gyro to the compass about once every 20 minutes, whilst in
straight-and-level (non-accelarating) flight.
I'd like to know exactly how Dynon does it. Does the pilot fly S&L and
press a button to tell the Dynon that its now a good time to reset? Or
does it determine S&L by some other means? Does it have 3D magnetometers
(which introduces a whole host of other problems due to the variations
in the Earth's magnetic field) to measure attitude, or does it have some
other sensor? Maybe use GPS?
Incidentally, there's been some interesting work done on attitude
determination using GPS eg
http://www.geomatics.ucalgary.ca/research/GPSRes/attitude.html and
http://waas.stanford.edu/~wwu/papers/gps/PDF/att_for_aircraft_rch1998.pd
f. Whilst this is used in bulldozers and such-like, it's still in the
multi-thousand dollar price-bracket (ie not my price bracket!)
Frank
-----Original Message-----
> Solid state accelerometers and magnetometers have gotten really
> cheap. Analog Devices said in a press release in the fall of
> 2002 that
> they had shipped over 100 million of one of their ADXL202E two axis
> accelerometers! These now sell for under $20. That's how my
> Dynon is made
> and why it is so cheap. Trio too?
I suspect these things do not use accelerometers to handle the plane's
pitch and roll. More likely, they use solid state gyros, which can be
thought of as a little tuning fork. So that I can describe it, say the
tines of the fork are pointed forward in the plane, and are made to
vibrate in an up and down fashion (this would be the roll axis "gyro").
If the plane is rolling one way or the other, the tines no longer
vibrate directly toward and away from each other, but develop a little
twist (during the actual rolling motion only). Then, built into the
side of a tine of the fork is a small strain gauge. This small strain
gauge detects the tine's twist. So, if you are still with me, these
solid state gyros simply put out a voltage which is proportional to the
roll rate, so many volts/degree/second. Electronics then simply
integrate the stream of voltage to determine roll position. Quite
elegant.
BTW, automobiles use these in stability augmentation systems, to look
for over or under steer.
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: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Most efficient climb |
>
>Scott Bilinski wrote:
>
>>
>>So your going on a long X-country What is the most efficient climb? Blast
>>right on up to altitude and go, or, do a long cruise climb, somewhere in
>>between, what speed? Has anyone really crunched the numbers and figured
>>this out. I figured one of you test pilot types know this stuff. Oh, the
>>whole point is to get from point A to point B (this case 700 miles) the
>>fastest at 8k feet, depending on the wind of course while using the least
>>amount of fuel.
>>
>>
>>Scott Bilinski
>>Eng dept 305
>>Phone (858) 657-2536
>>Pager (858) 502-5190
>>
>Van wrote an article about this several years ago; I think it was in the
>RVator. My flaky memory is telling me that he mentioned something around
>120 mph instead of the expected ~90 mph. The idea was that the low
>aspect ratio wing causes (induced?) drag to go up more when you get down
>in the 90 mph range. He pointed out that if you climb at calculated
>'best climb' using traditional techniques (1.? x stall), then try the
>same throttle setting but climb at ~120 mph, you will see the same
>*rate* of climb but will cover a lot more territory on the way to cruise
>altitude.
>
>I don't remember if he mentioned whether fp or c/s made a difference in
>these numbers.
>
>I can say that I've tried it on 2 different fp -4's & my neighbor has
>tried it in his fp -8, and the effect was easy to see.
>
>Kevin, can you give a sanity check on this?
This is all quite plausible, especially for an aircraft with a
fixed-pitch prop, as long as we allow that the rate of climb will
vary a bit, and not be _exactly_ the same. The engine at full
throttle would make more rpm, and hence more power, the faster the
climb speed. This would tend to provide a flatter top to the rate of
climb vs speed curve. An aircraft with a constant-speed prop would
have a less flat top to the rate of climb vs speed curve. Very
detailed and exacting climb tests would show that there was one
optimum speed for any given weight, and the rate of climb would
decrease at higher speeds, although there would be a range of speeds
where the rate of climb would be _roughly_ the same.
The rules of thumb that say the best rate of climb speed is 1.? x the
stall speed only work if the aircraft in question is similar to the
aircraft the rule of thumb was built around. The RV's low aspect
ratio wing means that rules of thumb developed for the likes of
Cessnas may not work for us. Fixed-pitch RVs also have higher pitch
props than a Cessna, as the cruise speed is so much higher. This
also helps screw up rules of thumb that deal with performance.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Strapdown inertial navigation systems WAS: Autopilot Itch |
| From: | "Frank van der Hulst (Staff WG)" <F.vanderHulst(at)ucol.ac.nz> |
> Oh darn .... thought I had something there. There are small "ring
laser
> gyro's" out there, but I haven't the faintest idea how they work!!!
A laser beam is passed many times around a fixed path within an
enclosure. If the enclosure rotates, the duration from the moment of
laser emission to eventual reception will vary. In a Ring Laser
Gyroscope, mirrors inside the enclosure form the laser beam path. In a
Fibre Optic Gyroscope, a coil of optical-fibre creates the path.
These devices are still very pricey.
Frank
(alternating replies before and after the original message :-)
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: | RVEIGHTA(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Question for the Engine Guru's on the list |
I have an IO-360 B4A in my RV-8A and it has a solid crankshaft. The Bendix
injection is mounted on the bottom of the sump, though.
Walt Shipley N314TS 85 hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RVEIGHTA(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: trim tab position |
Get some 200mph duct tape and tape the sucker on and test in different
locations. On my 8A I can get by with a shorter trim tab if I place it above the
horizontal stab by about 6-8".
Walt Shipley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oldsfolks(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: >Re:Trim Tab Position |
I hate those ugly tabs hanging out behind control surfaces so I use a wedge
about 1" wide of the correct length to make the compensation correctly. A
metal wedge painted to match the surface is barely noticeable. I put mine on the
rudder at its' widest point for the most leverage;meaning it could be shorter.
To get the correct size,make the wedge of wood ,and duct tape it on to try
until you get the correct size.
Bob Olds -- RV-4 , N1191X
oldsfolks(at)aol.com
A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor
Charleston,Arkansas
Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hopperdhh(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Question for the Engine Guru's on the list |
Stein and fellow Listers,
Be careful with rear facing sump engines. I started with an IO-360-C1E6 with
a rear facing sump. I had the front pads machined and the FI servo moved to
the front. When I tried to put it on the RV-7A engine mount it wouldn't go
due to the entire sump being about 2 inches further aft than an -A1A sump. I
had to forget the modified -C1E6 sump and the $300 invested in moving the servo
to the front, and go with an -A1A sump. I think that makes the engine an
-A1B6 according to Vans table. I still don't know how to tell the FAA guy what
I
did. Can I get a new data plate?
Dan Hopper
RV-7A (getting pretty close)
In a message dated 4/7/04 1:22:59 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
stein(at)steinair.com writes:
>
> 8) Speaking of rear facing sumps. Look closely and see if there is a
> "non-machined" pad on the front of it. If so, you can simply take it to a
> machine shop and have the forward faced opening cut. Many rear-facing sumps
> have this provision already cast in, and just need to be machined. Then you
> put a block on the reat opening and....poof, a forward facing servo!
>
>
> Cheers,
> Stein Bruch
> RV6's, Minneapolis
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | G B <microsys(at)alltel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Stiffener Confusion |
I did this yesterday on my RV9.
I kept moving the stiffeners one hole at a time, and found out that the holes only
exactly line up one way. Yes, they may appear to line up one hole off, but not
really if
you look carefully. Once the holes lined up, it was clear which end must be cut
off.
I reread the instructions several times, but actually playing with it helped.
I was disappointed there was not a profile drawing of one cut stiffener!
Glen
HS, VS done
Bill Dube wrote:
>
> >
> >I studied RV-7(A) drawing 7 for quite some time and I'm still somewhat
> >confused as to what it is I need to do to properly trim the rudder stiffeners.
>
> messed up several before I got it right.
>
> First, cut, label, and shape all the "regular" stiffeners and set
> them in position. Get them out of the way so you don't mix them up with the
> ones you are going to cut down.
>
> Triple check before you trim anything. After you mark the
> stiffeners for trimming, actually set them in position to confirm that the
> holes are going to line up, then trim the longest one and check to be sure
> you have done that one correctly before you trim any of the others. (If you
> mess up the longest one, you might be able to trim it further and use it
> for a shorter one.)
>
> The instructions don't make it 100% clear which end you are
> supposed to trim or where you are supposed to measure from. Once you
> finally figure it out, the instructions make perfect sense. But by then it
> doesn't matter, does it? :-)
>
> I seem to remember that you are supposed to trim the front of the
> stiffener. (I could very well be wrong.) The back taper thus stays "stock."
>
> I cut the stiffeners center to center on the guide holes then
> rounded the corners to the point where the guide holes vanished. Seemed to
> fit OK.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hopperdhh(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Stiffener Confusion |
Very good reply Glen. I would like to add a few things. I just finished my
RV-9 replacement rudder for my early RV-7A.
1. Be sure to trim the stiffeners enough that they don't touch the opposite
skin near the trailing edge. This will be automatic if you draw your line
toward the center of the marker holes.
2. Use a 30 degree triangle (drafting type) to set the forward angles --
although not critical.
3. As was posted earlier, round the corners with a file until the marker
holes disappear.
4. Use Pro-Seal on the trailing edge, let it cure plenty long. AND
alternate rivet directions to keep the trailing edge straight. I didn't use Pro-Seal
and my trailing edge is "wavy." Alternating rivet directions kept this from
becoming a big curve though! But, I think Pro-Seal would have kept the
aluminum from opening up at the trailing edge. It's also possible that I countersunk
too much.
5. Just before you close up the trailing edge use some Pro-Seal to "glue"
the left and right stiffeners together. This will prevent the skin from
cracking which was a problem on some RV-6s.
I'm definitely not an expert, but this is what I wish I had done. I will do
it better next time!
Hope all this helps you get a good job. Take your time.
Dan Hopper
RV-7A (almost done)
In a message dated 4/7/04 10:26:39 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
microsys(at)alltel.net writes:
>
>
> I did this yesterday on my RV9.
>
> I kept moving the stiffeners one hole at a time, and found out that the
> holes only
> exactly line up one way. Yes, they may appear to line up one hole off, but
> not
> really if
> you look carefully. Once the holes lined up, it was clear which end must be
> cut
> off.
>
> I reread the instructions several times, but actually playing with it
> helped.
>
> I was disappointed there was not a profile drawing of one cut stiffener!
>
> Glen
> HS, VS done
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com> |
| Subject: | trim tab position |
How about a 3" piece of angle taped to the underside of the HS instead.
Out of sight. Perfectly aligned with the slip stream it has zero trim
effect. Cocked slightly to either side, it would provide some trim.
Probably more effective on the left side. Has anyone tried it?
-
Larry Bowen, RV-8 FAB ...
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: RVEIGHTA(at)aol.com [mailto:RVEIGHTA(at)aol.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 10:08 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: trim tab position
>
>
>
>
> Get some 200mph duct tape and tape the sucker on and test in
> different
> locations. On my 8A I can get by with a shorter trim tab if I
> place it above the
> horizontal stab by about 6-8".
>
> Walt Shipley
________________________________________________________________________________
I have checked the archives and found very little information so here goes.
I am considering a Catto prop for my RV-6 and would like to hear from anyone
who has had first hand experience with these propellers, no rumors please, just
the facts as you know them (Scott, thanks for your previous reply). Reply on
or off the list.
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, final assembly
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim and Bev Cone" <jimnbev(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Blue Mountain EFIS |
I have an EFIS One and a Dynon installed and running in my nearly completed RV-7A.
It really looks great and even though my Apollo CNX-80 will not get a signal
in my hangar, the EFIS One does. The EFIS One just keeps adding feature after
feature after feature and the company is very responsive to builder suggestions.
Sometimes they add a new feature or improve an old one in just one day
after a good idea is suggested! The next great thing is HITS (highway in the
sky) only better. They call it their Chelton Killer. Their digital autopilot
is much better than any rate based system and is cheaper to boot. Up to 32
engine instruments can be displayed with alarms for high, low, rate change, and
fail. Maps include VFR, IFR Low and High, Airports only, and Airways only.
It also displays checklists. The ADI and HSI has wind info, TAS, Altitude above
the ground, artificial vision behind the ADI, and Terrain above your altitude
shows up in red. There are other features too numerous to mention here.
All are well thought out and executed. Do I love this thing? You bet I do!
It beats the glass cockpit that I flew in B-767's by a mile and is much easier
to use.
I also like my Dynon.
Jim Cone
3-Peat Offender
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Strapdown inertial navigation systems WAS: Autopilot Itch |
Well I am not sure how Dynon does it, but here are what my thoughts were.
As it was mentioned rate gyros have to be integrated to get position and
have errors, thus they need to be reset.
So lets start the game on the ground, we turn the key on/master on. The
first thing we need to know is if the plane is level. Now the old mechanical
gyros would assume so, but I will bet Dynon doesn't. So the first step is to
measure the angle of the plane. There are two simple ways to do this one is
the magnometer which measures earth's magnetic field, however if you are
near a hanger this could be off. The second is an inclinometer, these
devices work similar to capacitive fuel level sensors. That is imagine you
have two level sensors in box with fluid. Now tilting box results in one
sensor reading higher then the other, thus you have a simple inclinometer.
Ok back to the problem so on the ground we will measure the pitch and roll
using two inclinometers. Now we can reset our rate gyros and life is good,
note we are assuming plane is upright which is a fair assumption on the
ground...
Now we take off and the rate gyros have errors in them so at some point we
need to reset them. Well if we assume that we still have the inclinometer
then we could reset them when the inclinometers are level. However this will
not work as that we could be in a banked turn which could throw the
inclinometers off. That is they could think plane is level when we are
really turning. For example a standard rate turn will throw the
inclinometers off.
So now we to know when we can reset the gyros, which will be basically when
we only have gravity vector (and lift hopefully) acting on the plane. So we
look at the gyros and say yes there is some error but does it say all forces
are zero, if so then it might be a good time to reset. Now if we also look
at our magnometer (aka compass sensors) and see if we have been flying
straight then we can be fairly sure it is a good time to reset. That is we
are not in a long banked turn.
Well this works well as long as we are upright, which is not a fair
assumption in the air. Therefore we need to have a sensor, a simple mercury
switch that tells us if we are upright are not. Actually the inclinometers
may have this feature included.
Well this would work quite well depending on the error rate of the gyros,
well if we also had the velocity of the plane we could compensate for some
of the gyro errors. That is if we know we are going 100knts and turning we
can get an idea of what the gyros should read. So lets add air speed into
the mix as well.
Now we have all this data coming in and we want to process it to give
results, and we would like to have a "continuous" reset feature of the
gyros. To do this we take all the inputs we have:
3-axis rate Gyros
Inclinometers
3-axis Magnometers (aka magnetic field sensors)
Mercury switch (inverted sensor)
Air speed
Then we derive equations for our outputs, then we apply these equations
using a signal processing method called a Kalman filter. This will basically
keep the system reset all the time and provide us with our outputs. We also
add some sanity checks to see if the data is in left field and basically
ship the product. That is the magic is actually in the filtering algorithm
for the data.
Now I am not in any way associated with Dynon so this is just a guess. I
would also guess that they use temperature inside their box as well to
compensate the gyros but again this is only a WAG.
If someone wants to pay me to do it I will even make an attempt to see if
this system would actually work. :)
Regards,
Trampas Stern
www.sterntech.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hopperdhh(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Question for the Engine Guru's on the list |
No problem Stein,
In fact, you may have made my day. Looking at my engine mount it does look
like it is only the nose gear mount that gets in the way. I was thinking that
it wouldn't work on any RV.
I am 60 years old, and a fairly low time pilot with no tail dragger time.
When the decision had to be made, I just didn't feel like taking on the risk of
ground loops, etc., along with the performance of an RV. Maybe next time!
Dan Hopper
RV-7A (getting close)
In a message dated 4/7/04 11:32:05 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
stein(at)steinair.com writes:
>
> Oh, one last thing to keep this all light hearted - If you'd only gone with
> a Taildragger, that pesky nose gear most likely wouldn't have been in the
> way!!! No sump interference, no FAB interference, no Slot &cover in the
> cowl, no nosewheel shimmy, and no flat nose tires (OK, I better stop before
> the war starts again)!
>
> Cheers,
> Stein Bruch
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eustace Bowhay" <ebowhay(at)jetstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Question for the Engine Guru's on the list |
Hi Dave:
The value really depends on the condition of the crankshaft and
unfortunately this can only be determined at teardown. I have purchased
engines like this in the past but only on the basis that the owner guarantee
the crank is serviceable.
Eustace Bowhay Blind Bay, B.C.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave (by way of Matt Dralle <nospam(at)matronics.com>)"
Subject: RV-List: Question for the Engine Guru's on the list
Dralle )
>
>
> I have the opportunity to purchase an IO-360-B4A engine that has all
the
> accessories and is running but absolutely no logs and the present owner
> doesn't know the history. It does not have a data plate, the
IO-360-B4A
> is
> stamped on the sump where the data plate would go. It is a wide deck,
> parallel valve, rear induction 180 hp (probably solid crank haven't
pulled
> the prop off to check) with a bendix servo fuel injection, Electro
system
> mags (?) oil cooler, vacuum pump and all gyros (RC Allen TSOed )
Pretty
> much a full panel of old analog gauges and monitors, an old escort II
> radio and
> a Narco ID-825 CDI with GS and the well weathered assembled
> but defiantly not airworthy fuselage of one of those plastic airplanes.
> They want to sell it as a package.
>
> How much is something like this worth? Is the fuel injection a plus?
> I would like use the engine as a core to overhaul and put in an -8.
> Would I be able to keep the rear induction or would I need to
> change out the sump?
>
> Thanks for your time!!
>
> Dave
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Galati <rick6a(at)yahoo.com> |
I was asked to pose this question by a friend who does not go on-line. Reworking
the exhaust system on his airplane, he wants to know the optimum torque value
applied to exhaust stud nuts on an 0-320 when using crush gaskets. He says Lycoming
will not provide this specific information referring him to the exhaust
system manufacturer (which has proved unsucessful) and AC43 merely provides
a generic torque value that most people simply refer to.
This gentleman is a retired flight test engineer and tends to obsess. I said I
would pose the question on forums such as this one and see what I could come
up with. What information can I relay to him?
Rick Galati RV-6A "finishing"
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "C. Rabaut" <crabaut(at)coalinga.com> |
| Subject: | RV-4 Tail Kit for Sale |
Hi Guys & Gals,
This gentleman (Joe Fox) has an RV-4 tail kit for sale. Give him a call,
or email his son "Dave".
Chuck
From: Dave Fox
To: crabaut(at)coalinga.com
Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2004 9:41 AM
Subject: Barnstormers Listing: RV-4 or RV-6 kit or airframe WANTED
Hello Chuck, I saw your ad on barnstormers for the RV-4 or 6 kits. My father
has the empennage kit for the RV-4 in the box. He is 83 and will never build
it and I am pretty sure he is willing to part with it. If you are interested
his name is Joe Fox in Morton, Illinois(outside of Peoria). Phone 309-266-5195.
Thanks for your time. Sincerely, David Fox, Anchorage, Alaska
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frederick Oldenburg <foldenburg(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Stiffener Confusion |
Thanks to all who replied....I posted some pics on my website that document how
I trimmed the stiffeners:
http://www.rv.oldsack.com/weblog.php?id=D20040407
I think I got it right...hopefully :)
- Fred
-----Original Message-----
From: Hopperdhh(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: Rudder Stiffener Confusion
Very good reply Glen. I would like to add a few things. I just finished my
RV-9 replacement rudder for my early RV-7A.
1. Be sure to trim the stiffeners enough that they don't touch the opposite
skin near the trailing edge. This will be automatic if you draw your line
toward the center of the marker holes.
2. Use a 30 degree triangle (drafting type) to set the forward angles --
although not critical.
3. As was posted earlier, round the corners with a file until the marker
holes disappear.
4. Use Pro-Seal on the trailing edge, let it cure plenty long. AND
alternate rivet directions to keep the trailing edge straight. I didn't use Pro-Seal
and my trailing edge is "wavy." Alternating rivet directions kept this from
becoming a big curve though! But, I think Pro-Seal would have kept the
aluminum from opening up at the trailing edge. It's also possible that I countersunk
too much.
5. Just before you close up the trailing edge use some Pro-Seal to "glue"
the left and right stiffeners together. This will prevent the skin from
cracking which was a problem on some RV-6s.
I'm definitely not an expert, but this is what I wish I had done. I will do
it better next time!
Hope all this helps you get a good job. Take your time.
Dan Hopper
RV-7A (almost done)
In a message dated 4/7/04 10:26:39 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
microsys(at)alltel.net writes:
>
>
> I did this yesterday on my RV9.
>
> I kept moving the stiffeners one hole at a time, and found out that the
> holes only
> exactly line up one way. Yes, they may appear to line up one hole off, but
> not
> really if
> you look carefully. Once the holes lined up, it was clear which end must be
> cut
> off.
>
> I reread the instructions several times, but actually playing with it
> helped.
>
> I was disappointed there was not a profile drawing of one cut stiffener!
>
> Glen
> HS, VS done
>
>
Fred Oldenburg
RV-7A - Empennage
http://www.rv.oldsack.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joe Hine" <joehine(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | trim tab position |
On my 4 I just started with a wedge of balsa wood, attached with two sided
tape. Started long...cut progressively to the right length and then painted
to match the rudder. Stays on with the double sided tape. I have mine
below the horizontal stab, and although it might not be as effective there
it is much less noticeable.
Joe Hine
C-FYTQ
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of RVEIGHTA(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: trim tab position
Get some 200mph duct tape and tape the sucker on and test in different
locations. On my 8A I can get by with a shorter trim tab if I place it above
the
horizontal stab by about 6-8".
Walt Shipley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Noel & Yoshie Simmons" <noel(at)blueskyaviation.net> |
I flew an RV-9A with a Catto prop for a while. I will be putting one on my
RV-10.
Sincerely,
Noel Simmons
Blue Sky Aviation, Inc.
Phone & Fax: 406-538-6574
noel(at)blueskyaviation.net
www.blueskyaviation.net <http://www.blueskyaviation.net>
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of HCRV6(at)aol.com
Subject: RV-List: Catto Props
I have checked the archives and found very little information so here goes.
I am considering a Catto prop for my RV-6 and would like to hear from anyone
who has had first hand experience with these propellers, no rumors please,
just
the facts as you know them (Scott, thanks for your previous reply). Reply
on
or off the list.
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, final assembly
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "JOHN STARN" <jhstarn(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: << X PRIZE SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT - 04.08.04 >> |
Not too shabby for a "homebuilt". KABONG (GBA)
The "CLICK HERE" 's don't work. Can you supply a link that does. Do Not
Archive
Hot on the heels of receiving it's FAA licence, the American SpaceShipOne
team had a perfect rocket-powered flight today, April 8, reaching an
altitude of 105,000 ft.
The engine burned for 40 seconds and reached a speed of approximately Mach
2, making it the first privately built space vehicle to accomplish this
feat.
The mission of the non-profit X PRIZE Foundation is to create a future in
which the general public will personally participate in space travel and its
benefits. But all of this requires an investment. Be a part of history. Give
to the X PRIZE.
> CLICK HERE to Become a General Member for the low cost
of $20
> CLICK HERE to Become a Senior Associate.
> CLICK HERE to help the X PRIZE via a secure donation to
PayPal!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
http://www.miramarcollege.net/programs/avim/faculty/north/efisd10/oat/index.
htm
is a link to the D-10 OAT installation I have done, it includes a link to a
spreadsheet showing the data from tests at 3500, 5500, 7500, and 9500 ft TAS
vs IAS Vans steam gauge vs D-10 with OAT/TAS/DA.
I installed mine in the inspection panel behind the aoa/pitot, so the wire
length was ok since my EDC-010 is in the wing leading edge.
Although this was done with a test version of their software, the latest
build, 1.09.00 includes these features.
I have also proved that the RV-6 side mounted NACA vent OAT is about four to
five degrees hotter than the wing OAT. They are both equal on the ground,
but differ in cruise flight.
W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael McGee <jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com> |
You're putting a fixed pitch prop on an IO-540? In a -10?
Mike
Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR
13B in gestation mode
At 12:29 2004-04-08, you wrote:
>
>
>I flew an RV-9A with a Catto prop for a while. I will be putting one on my
>RV-10.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Noel Simmons
>Blue Sky Aviation, Inc.
>Phone & Fax: 406-538-6574
>noel(at)blueskyaviation.net
>www.blueskyaviation.net <http://www.blueskyaviation.net>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of HCRV6(at)aol.com
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: Catto Props
>
>
>I have checked the archives and found very little information so here goes.
>I am considering a Catto prop for my RV-6 and would like to hear from anyone
>who has had first hand experience with these propellers, no rumors please,
>just
>the facts as you know them (Scott, thanks for your previous reply). Reply
>on
>or off the list.
>
>Harry Crosby
>Pleasanton, California
>RV-6, final assembly
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Photos of Dual LSE ignition installation? |
In a message dated 4/5/04 1:35:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, czechsix(at)juno.com
writes:
> Guys,
>
> Does anyone have pics of how they installed coils and ignition leads for a
> dual Lightspeed ignition system for the BOTTOM plugs? I've seen lots of pics
> for the top plugs installation, but none for the lower ones. I'm thinking of
> hanging the coils just ahead of the sump, but that puts them close to the
> exhaust and means I have to run the coax from the igntion box around the sump
> to get to the coils. Perhaps it would be better to hang the coils behind the
> acc. case?? Any input/advice on how others have done this would be
> appreciated...
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Mark Navratil
> Cedar Rapids, Iowa
> RV-8A N2D finishing...
Mark,
I hung the two coils on the engine mount using adel clamps. This required
longer leads which Klaus made up for free (exchange). It's pretty straight
forward but I can send pics if you like.
Rick McBride
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Request engine rebuilder recommendation |
| From: | JEREMY C ROBINSON <k2akwjere(at)juno.com> |
Request a recommendation for/against Tom Waters, AIR-TEC INC,
Orlando, FL.
I am finishing up RV-6 kit # 23833 originally bought and started by
another builder.
He purchased an AIR-TEC engine in 1998 which I have installed in
the RV-6. It is a 160HP fuel injected Lycoming O-320. It has an
O-360 crankcase with O-320 cylinders.
Questions:
1. In 1998 was there a shortage of O-320 crankcases? In your
opinion, does it add or subtract anything using an O-360 crankcase?
2. What has been your experience with AIR-TEC engines, good
or bad?
Jeremy Robinson
k2akwjere(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com> |
I'm surprised they only have the temp available in Celsius.....
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wheeler North [mailto:wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us]
> Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2004 4:14 PM
> To: 'rv-list(at)matronics.com'
> Subject: RV-List: Dynon OAT
>
>
>
> http://www.miramarcollege.net/programs/avim/faculty/north/efis
> d10/oat/index.
> htm
>
> is a link to the D-10 OAT installation I have done, it
> includes a link to a spreadsheet showing the data from tests
> at 3500, 5500, 7500, and 9500 ft TAS vs IAS Vans steam gauge
> vs D-10 with OAT/TAS/DA.
>
> I installed mine in the inspection panel behind the
> aoa/pitot, so the wire length was ok since my EDC-010 is in
> the wing leading edge.
>
> Although this was done with a test version of their software,
> the latest build, 1.09.00 includes these features.
>
> I have also proved that the RV-6 side mounted NACA vent OAT
> is about four to five degrees hotter than the wing OAT. They
> are both equal on the ground, but differ in cruise flight.
>
> W
>
>
> ===========
> Matronics Forums.
> ===========
> ===========
> ===========
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Stuart B McCurdy <sturdy(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale |
I am posting for a friend. The telephone numbers are mine. Call me or
reply by email direct to me. I fly this airplane and the engine is
strong and smooth. Stu McCurdy
1995 RV-4, 0-320-E2A, 160 hp, 425 TTAF, 332 hrs Mattituck overhaul, VFR
night, KLX 135 COMM/GPS, KT76A Mode C, Sensenich, $45,000. TX (512)
388-7399/ 512- 635-5171(c).
Additional specs:
-Completed 1995
-Lycoming 0-320-E2A, 160hp, carburated
-Full Panel, AI,DG,ASI,Alt,VVI,T&B
-New vacuum pump
-Quad EGT/CHT/OilP/OilT gauge, (4 CHT selector)
-Horizon Electronic tach with total hours readout
-King KLX-135 Comm/GPS
-King KT-76A Transponder
-PC1000 Intercom
-headsets, not included
-Sensenich fixed-pitch metal prop
-Rear rudder pedals, stick
-Hooker harnesses
-Standard wheelpants
-160KTAS at 75 percent power
-Limited aerobatics capable
-Warm cabin heat
-Three fresh air vents
-Plane purchased from builder.
-Compressions 75/73/74/75
-Fresh Annual, due 4/05
-Complete, impeccable records and logbooks
-Blue and white, red trim paint; good condition
-Plane hangered at KGTU, Georgetown, TX; always hangered. No hail damage.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pat Hatch" <pat_hatch(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Torque question |
Rick, Larry Vetterman calls for a torque value of 100 to 140 inch pounds for
his exhaust nuts. He uses blow proof gaskets which are re-usable.
Pat Hatch
RV-4
RV-6
RV-7 Finishing Kit
Vero Beach, FL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Galati" <rick6a(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: RV-List: Torque question
>
> I was asked to pose this question by a friend who does not go on-line.
Reworking the exhaust system on his airplane, he wants to know the optimum
torque value applied to exhaust stud nuts on an 0-320 when using crush
gaskets. He says Lycoming will not provide this specific information
referring him to the exhaust system manufacturer (which has proved
unsucessful) and AC43 merely provides a generic torque value that most
people simply refer to.
> This gentleman is a retired flight test engineer and tends to obsess. I
said I would pose the question on forums such as this one and see what I
could come up with. What information can I relay to him?
>
> Rick Galati RV-6A "finishing"
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Anglin" <jlanglin44(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale |
I have an O-320E2A in my -4 and it's only 150 HP. I'd like it to be 160 but
I heard the bearings won't take the high compression pistons. If this can
be done would you ask your friend if he knows how they got 160 hp. out of
his E2A so I can get it out of mine?
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stuart B McCurdy" <sturdy(at)att.net>
Subject: RV-List: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale
snip
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | More fuel tank questions |
| From: | "" <tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com> |
Listers,
Although I saw no mention of it in the plans, do we need to be sealing the vent
line, fuel pickup, and fuel drain fittings somehow? I saw in the archives that
some sealed them with proseal, but others said they would never come apart
if that was done. Is FUel lube the right thing to use? If so, which fittings
should this go on? This seems like great info for the instructions.
Thanks,
Scott
7A Wings
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Exhaust Nut Torque question |
In a message dated 4/8/2004 9:34:11 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
rick6a(at)yahoo.com writes:
I was asked to pose this question by a friend who does not go on-line.
Reworking the exhaust system on his airplane, he wants to know the optimum torque
value applied to exhaust stud nuts on an 0-320 when using crush gaskets. He says
Lycoming will not provide this specific information referring him to the
exhaust system manufacturer (which has proved unsuccessful) and AC43 merely
provides a generic torque value that most people simply refer to.
This gentleman is a retired flight test engineer and tends to obsess. I said
I would pose the question on forums such as this one and see what I could
come up with. What information can I relay to him?
==================================
Rick-
IMO, there really is no one optimum torque value one could state, considering
the variables (exhaust system flange strength, gasket crush force required
and such). You obviously want a torque that doesn't cause distress to the
flange or studs (5/16", IIRC). Tony Bingelis in his book "ON ENGINES" recommends
a
torque range of 160 to 180 lb-in (13 to 15 lb-ft) but I have a range of 100
to 140 lb-in (8 to 12 lb-ft) listed in my POH, and I got that from somewhere
else (maybe Larry Vetterman's instructions).
I would try around 10 lb-ft to start, then inspect for leaks and retorque
after 10 or so hours at operational temps.
GV (RV-6A N1GV flying 685 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Jordan" <mkejrj(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Request engine rebuilder recommendation |
Jeremy,
If this is the same AIR-TEC from Florida that sold me an engine about 10
years ago I suggest extreme caution. The engine I purchased was represented
to be 200 HP and overhauled with new cylinders & internals(
pistons,rings,valves,springs, etc.) and the lower end rebuilt to overhaul
standards. The engine I received looked good to my uneducated eye on receipt
but I was concerned in that there was no Data plate and the log book
contained only one entry to the effect that the engine was rebuilt for an
experimental aircraft. An A&P friend removed one cylinder to inspect and
found old parts bead blasted to look new and reinstalled. The cylinder bore
was miked and found to be worn and just passable. My friend called the
engine" a paint can overhaul".I contacted Lycoming with the serial number
which was still readable and they advised it was 180 HP.The FAA advised the
log book with the one line entry was not in violation since the engine was
for Experimental use.
My lawyer advised I had a good case but that action would have to be brought
in Florida and that the legal bill could be in excess of the engine cost.
Luck was with me in one regard. Air-Tec , at my request, put all their
initial representations and offers in a letter sent via Snail Mail. The USPS
advised that the situation described could be Mail Fraud and to send the
case to them.
I contacted Air-Tec and outlined the above and they agreed to a full refund.
The gent I corresponded with was a Dick Waters at Air-Tec.
Alls well that ends well so they say but I had a rough few months. I suggest
caution .
Dick Jordan
----- Original Message -----
From: "JEREMY C ROBINSON" <k2akwjere(at)juno.com>
Subject: RV-List: Request engine rebuilder recommendation
>
> Request a recommendation for/against Tom Waters, AIR-TEC INC,
> Orlando, FL.
> I am finishing up RV-6 kit # 23833 originally bought and started by
> another builder.
> He purchased an AIR-TEC engine in 1998 which I have installed in
> the RV-6. It is a 160HP fuel injected Lycoming O-320. It has an
> O-360 crankcase with O-320 cylinders.
> Questions:
> 1. In 1998 was there a shortage of O-320 crankcases? In your
> opinion, does it add or subtract anything using an O-360 crankcase?
> 2. What has been your experience with AIR-TEC engines, good
> or bad?
> Jeremy Robinson
> k2akwjere(at)juno.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com> |
Fun is the filtered air box!
The length of the FAB is determined by the ability to get the lower cowl
on and off, right? But I can't go too short, or there will be no room
for the carb heat door, right? The plans say 16.5" to start, but that
looks to be too long. It's best to have the prop on for a true cowl
on/off test, right?
Thanks,
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale) |
This Brings up a good point....
You can slap the 160hp pistons in most any O-320, and many people have with
no problems, but -
1) The narrow deck cases that aren't using hold-down plates have been known
to crack at the cylinder bases with the higher compression pistons. You
can't simply just "add" hold down plates to a narrow deck engine that didn't
originally use them without putting longer thru-bolts(-360 ones) in the
case.
2) The main bearings didn't change much in the cases, but the nose and
flange bearings are a bit beefier in the original 160hp ones.
3) Most of the wide deck engines have no worries about throwing in the 160hp
pistons (which are standard -360 pistons).
So, it's very feasable to get 160hp out of most any old -320 (and it's been
done to most every series), but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a great
idea! FYI, I know an engine builder who does some racing engines for the
"fast glass" crowd, and has done a number of -320's that dyno'd at
190-200hp, and -360's with 230-250hp!! These engines get into radical cam
grinding, different lifters, over 10:1 pistons, ported and flowed heads,
etc...I wouldn't want to guess about the TBO though! I've personally seen
one of those engines running 10.5:1 pistons with the cylinder blown clean
off the engine!
Cheers,
Stein Bruch
RV6's, Minneapolis
http://www.steinair.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jim Anglin
Subject: Re: RV-List: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale
I have an O-320E2A in my -4 and it's only 150 HP. I'd like it to be 160 but
I heard the bearings won't take the high compression pistons. If this can
be done would you ask your friend if he knows how they got 160 hp. out of
his E2A so I can get it out of mine?
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stuart B McCurdy" <sturdy(at)att.net>
Subject: RV-List: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale
snip
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Karie Daniel" <karie4(at)comcast.net> |
I'm thinking of taking a job in Austin Texas. I would be taking my project and
finishing it there. I would like to know if there are any airparks in the Austin
area? I've found a few on the web but any specific info (RV friendly, other
builders in the area) would be great. I would be working in the downtown Austin
area so I'm not looking for a big commute but would be willing if the home/airpark
were right.
Thanks,
Karie Daniel
Sammamish, WA
RV-7A QB In Progress
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Boss" <bossone(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Austin Tx Info |
Contact Chris Boultinghouse sonexbuilder(at)yahoo.com
he lives in Austin. I know that Georgetown recently expanded the airport
there (just North of Austin). I an not sure what was done with the main
airport as it was moved to the ex Air Force Base.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Karie Daniel" <karie4(at)comcast.net>
Subject: RV-List: Austin Tx Info
>
> I'm thinking of taking a job in Austin Texas. I would be taking my project
and finishing it there. I would like to know if there are any airparks in
the Austin area? I've found a few on the web but any specific info (RV
friendly, other builders in the area) would be great. I would be working in
the downtown Austin area so I'm not looking for a big commute but would be
willing if the home/airpark were right.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Karie Daniel
> Sammamish, WA
> RV-7A QB In Progress
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: More fuel tank questions |
Clean your parts that go together to be sure oil, dirt are missing. Put
fuel lube on the male side of threaded parts before tightening. Put it on
threads only and not too much or it might get inside where the fuel will
flow. Once tightened, then you can cover the outside with Proseal. Proseal
should not be needed in accessible areas. But it good insurance especially
inside the tanks where you can't easily retighten it a bit if it develops a
slow leak.
Indiana Larry, RV7 TipUp
TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
JeffRose Flightline Interiors
Firewall Forward, Wiring w/Nuckoll's Knowledge
----- Original Message -----
From: <tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com>
Subject: RV-List: More fuel tank questions
>
>
> Listers,
>
> Although I saw no mention of it in the plans, do we need to be sealing the
vent line, fuel pickup, and fuel drain fittings somehow? I saw in the
archives that some sealed them with proseal, but others said they would
never come apart if that was done. Is FUel lube the right thing to use? If
so, which fittings should this go on? This seems like great info for the
instructions.
>
> Thanks,
> Scott
> 7A Wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV6 Flyer" <rv6_flyer(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale |
Jim:
Get a copy of the Lycoming Parts manual. Going from memory, only one of the
150 HP engines that has a smaller two piece nose bearing is not suitable for
an 160 upgrade. The only two differences is the piston part number (.032"
taller for more compression) and the wrist pin has a thicker wall thickness.
There are several STCs out here for the upgrade. You do not neeed the
upgrade on your EXPERIMENTAL only on a certificated airplane.
My NARROW Deck O-320 left the factory in 1961. It has over 4,400 hours on
it since new.
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,451 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
http://SoCAL_WVAF.rvproject.com
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Jim Anglin" <jlanglin44(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2004 20:02:23 -0700
I have an O-320E2A in my -4 and it's only 150 HP. I'd like it to be 160 but
I heard the bearings won't take the high compression pistons. If this can
be done would you ask your friend if he knows how they got 160 hp. out of
his E2A so I can get it out of mine?
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill VonDane" <bill(at)vondane.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale |
My O32-E3D is a wide deck 320 with the two piece front main bearings... I
have seen both styles now and don't see how anyone can say the one pieces is
any stronger, and my A&P / IA buddy agrees... In fact, he says the two
piece arrangement may in fact be stronger.....and I should have no trouble
with the higher compression pistons...
I believe the one piece bearing is designed to provide oil for a C/S
prop.....and I don't believe there is any more bearing surface than with the
two separate bearings.....of course I could be wrong...
There are STCs for installing the 8.5:1 pistons in O320s... My engine has
one, and so do several others... I found it at one time in the lycoming
site, and probably could again...
I am installing the ECI 9:1 pistons and the performance CAM from
ASI.....which should give me about 170 HP...
-Bill VonDane
EAA TC / working on my A&P
RV-8A - Colorado Springs
www.vondane.com
www.creativair.com
www.epanelbuilder.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "RV6 Flyer" <rv6_flyer(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale
Jim:
Get a copy of the Lycoming Parts manual. Going from memory, only one of the
150 HP engines that has a smaller two piece nose bearing is not suitable for
an 160 upgrade. The only two differences is the piston part number (.032"
taller for more compression) and the wrist pin has a thicker wall thickness.
There are several STCs out here for the upgrade. You do not neeed the
upgrade on your EXPERIMENTAL only on a certificated airplane.
My NARROW Deck O-320 left the factory in 1961. It has over 4,400 hours on
it since new.
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,451 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
http://SoCAL_WVAF.rvproject.com
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Jim Anglin" <jlanglin44(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2004 20:02:23 -0700
I have an O-320E2A in my -4 and it's only 150 HP. I'd like it to be 160 but
I heard the bearings won't take the high compression pistons. If this can
be done would you ask your friend if he knows how they got 160 hp. out of
his E2A so I can get it out of mine?
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Glaser <airplane(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale |
Check ram conversions and art matteson at amr&d
RV6 Flyer wrote:
>
>Jim:
>
>Get a copy of the Lycoming Parts manual. Going from memory, only one of the
>150 HP engines that has a smaller two piece nose bearing is not suitable for
>an 160 upgrade. The only two differences is the piston part number (.032"
>taller for more compression) and the wrist pin has a thicker wall thickness.
> There are several STCs out here for the upgrade. You do not neeed the
>upgrade on your EXPERIMENTAL only on a certificated airplane.
>
>My NARROW Deck O-320 left the factory in 1961. It has over 4,400 hours on
>it since new.
>
>Gary A. Sobek
>"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
>1,451 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
>http://SoCAL_WVAF.rvproject.com
>
>
>----Original Message Follows----
>From: "Jim Anglin" <jlanglin44(at)earthlink.net>
>To:
>Subject: Re: RV-List: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale
>Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2004 20:02:23 -0700
>
>
>I have an O-320E2A in my -4 and it's only 150 HP. I'd like it to be 160 but
>I heard the bearings won't take the high compression pistons. If this can
>be done would you ask your friend if he knows how they got 160 hp. out of
>his E2A so I can get it out of mine?
>Jim
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David E. Nelson" <david.nelson(at)pobox.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Austin Tx Info |
Hi Karie,
There's Break Away Park up in Cedar Park and that'd be a pretty long commute to
get to downtown. Also, the houses in that area are a little pricey if I recall
correctly.
Regards,
/\/elson
Austin, TX
RV-7A - Emp
On Thu, 8 Apr 2004, Karie Daniel wrote:
>
> I'm thinking of taking a job in Austin Texas. I would be taking my project
> and finishing it there. I would like to know if there are any airparks in the
> Austin area? I've found a few on the web but any specific info (RV friendly,
> other builders in the area) would be great. I would be working in the
> downtown Austin area so I'm not looking for a big commute but would be
> willing if the home/airpark were right.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Karie Daniel
> Sammamish, WA
> RV-7A QB In Progress
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
~~ ** ~~ If you didn't learn anything when you broke it the 1st ~~ ** ~~
time, then break it again.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Steve Davis - Panel Pilot |
I have been trying to get in contact with Steve Davis - The Panel Pilot
in Tennessee. He has not returned my emails and the phone number on his
web site is disconnected. Does anybody know if he is still around? He
did a great job on my panel.
Ross Mickey
N9PT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bluecavu(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Legal IFR panel w/ Dynon? |
Ok...
so how are the feds approaching the panels you guys (gals?) are putting
together using the newer EFIS systems like the Dynon?
Are you getting grief from the feds concerning TSO's etc? I've heard some
feds will *not* sign off on an IFR panel using anything non-TSO'd.
As far as a panel for legal IFR goes... It is my understanding that due to
rules on failures (i.e. no one single-point failure can compromise the ability
of the pilot to remain oriented in IMC) the Dynon could only be used when
there are secondary references for the 'IFR-required' instrument functions. In
other words, do you all still have a regular steam-guage
altimeter/airspeed/compass/and gyro of some sort (T&B?) for backup? Are you using
peanut backup
instruments? Two Dynons?
I'm really curious as I plan on building an IFR panel for my -4 soon, and
plan to include a Dynon (complimented by my existing altimeter, airspeed,
compass, and Navaid AP/T&B)... and was hoping this could be approved. A non-vacuum
full-gyro panel with backup -awesome! Truthfully, with the backup battery, IMHO,
this would be a much 'safer' panel than most GA aircraft have (because of the
propensity of vacuum pump failure and mechanical attitude indicator failure
-both nasty for crapping-out) and every bit as safe as the ones I use in the
turbine aircraft I fly for a living.
Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joe Hine" <joehine(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale |
I have the same engine as Bill and I installed the 160hp pistons and pins
when I rebuilt the engine. 200+ hours so far with no problems.
Joe Hine
C-FYTQ
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bill VonDane
Subject: Re: RV-List: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale
My O32-E3D is a wide deck 320 with the two piece front main bearings... I
have seen both styles now and don't see how anyone can say the one pieces is
any stronger, and my A&P / IA buddy agrees... In fact, he says the two
piece arrangement may in fact be stronger.....and I should have no trouble
with the higher compression pistons...
I believe the one piece bearing is designed to provide oil for a C/S
prop.....and I don't believe there is any more bearing surface than with the
two separate bearings.....of course I could be wrong...
There are STCs for installing the 8.5:1 pistons in O320s... My engine has
one, and so do several others... I found it at one time in the lycoming
site, and probably could again...
I am installing the ECI 9:1 pistons and the performance CAM from
ASI.....which should give me about 170 HP...
-Bill VonDane
EAA TC / working on my A&P
RV-8A - Colorado Springs
www.vondane.com
www.creativair.com
www.epanelbuilder.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "RV6 Flyer" <rv6_flyer(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale
Jim:
Get a copy of the Lycoming Parts manual. Going from memory, only one of the
150 HP engines that has a smaller two piece nose bearing is not suitable for
an 160 upgrade. The only two differences is the piston part number (.032"
taller for more compression) and the wrist pin has a thicker wall thickness.
There are several STCs out here for the upgrade. You do not neeed the
upgrade on your EXPERIMENTAL only on a certificated airplane.
My NARROW Deck O-320 left the factory in 1961. It has over 4,400 hours on
it since new.
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,451 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
http://SoCAL_WVAF.rvproject.com
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Jim Anglin" <jlanglin44(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2004 20:02:23 -0700
I have an O-320E2A in my -4 and it's only 150 HP. I'd like it to be 160 but
I heard the bearings won't take the high compression pistons. If this can
be done would you ask your friend if he knows how they got 160 hp. out of
his E2A so I can get it out of mine?
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Legal IFR panel w/ Dynon? |
> Ok...
>
> so how are the feds approaching the panels you guys (gals?)
> are putting
> together using the newer EFIS systems like the Dynon?
>
> Are you getting grief from the feds concerning TSO's etc?
> I've heard some
> feds will *not* sign off on an IFR panel using anything non-TSO'd.
The "feds" do not sign off on such things. The list of requirements for
IFR flight are in the FAR's, but the airworthiness certificate does not,
or at least did not as of 2001, "certify" that an experimental was IFR
capable. The only mention in my certificate is prohibing such
operations during the test phase. It is up to us as builders/flyers to
self certify for IFR flight (some of which includes needing some TSOable
equipment, IIRC).
I can't recite the specific areas in the FAR's, but how they relate to
experimental aircraft IFR use has been thoroughly covered in the
archives. It is worth going to the on-line FAR's and digging around to
gain a general familiarity with the requirements.
An archive search for IFR & robertson coughed up 103 messages on the RV
list today, listen well to what Mike Robertson has to say in these
messages (thanks Mike).
Also, do a google search for aim0101.html, it is a good read which
clarifies how gps is used/not used in IFR. Dig about 60% of the way
through it for gps IFR stuff.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 454 hours
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Legal IFR panel w/ Dynon? |
Scott,
The underlying issue was discussed extensively in the recent past. This
has to do with what the FAA authorizes at the time of the inspection.
In essence, they give you an airworthiness certificate that states,
"After completion of phase I flight testing, unless appropriately
equipped for night and/or instrument flight as listed in 14CFR, Part
91.205 (b through e), this aircraft is to be operated under day only
VFR."
It is then up to you to determine if your aircraft is "appropriately
equipped."
Ross Mickey
N9PT
-----Original Message-----
Subject: RV-List: Legal IFR panel w/ Dynon?
Ok...
so how are the feds approaching the panels you guys (gals?) are putting
together using the newer EFIS systems like the Dynon?
Are you getting grief from the feds concerning TSO's etc? I've heard
some
feds will *not* sign off on an IFR panel using anything non-TSO'd.
As far as a panel for legal IFR goes... It is my understanding that due
to
rules on failures (i.e. no one single-point failure can compromise the
ability
of the pilot to remain oriented in IMC) the Dynon could only be used
when
there are secondary references for the 'IFR-required' instrument
functions. In
other words, do you all still have a regular steam-guage
altimeter/airspeed/compass/and gyro of some sort (T&B?) for backup? Are
you using peanut backup
instruments? Two Dynons?
I'm really curious as I plan on building an IFR panel for my -4 soon,
and
plan to include a Dynon (complimented by my existing altimeter,
airspeed,
compass, and Navaid AP/T&B)... and was hoping this could be approved. A
non-vacuum
full-gyro panel with backup -awesome! Truthfully, with the backup
battery, IMHO,
this would be a much 'safer' panel than most GA aircraft have (because
of the
propensity of vacuum pump failure and mechanical attitude indicator
failure
-both nasty for crapping-out) and every bit as safe as the ones I use in
the
turbine aircraft I fly for a living.
Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Steve Davis - Panel Pilot |
steve(at)kitlog.com
panelcut(at)aol.com
901-726-6184
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: RV-List: Steve Davis - Panel Pilot
>
> I have been trying to get in contact with Steve Davis - The Panel Pilot
> in Tennessee. He has not returned my emails and the phone number on his
> web site is disconnected. Does anybody know if he is still around? He
> did a great job on my panel.
>
> Ross Mickey
> N9PT
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kitt <rv7a(at)spazmoid.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Legal IFR panel w/ Dynon? |
> so how are the feds approaching the panels you guys (gals?) are putting
> together using the newer EFIS systems like the Dynon?
>
> Are you getting grief from the feds concerning TSO's etc? I've heard some
> feds will *not* sign off on an IFR panel using anything non-TSO'd.
>
> As far as a panel for legal IFR goes... It is my understanding that due to
> rules on failures (i.e. no one single-point failure can compromise the ability
I looked into this very question for a little while. There is a good
document on the EAA web site. There is/was a good discussion about it on
the Blue Mountain Avionics web site a while ago too.
http://members.eaa.org/home/homebuilders/faq/Equipping%20a%20Homebuilt%20for%20IFR%20operations.html
Basically, it is up to the builder to 'certify' that the equipment
installed in the airplane is IFR capable, so long as the minimum
requirements of the FARs are followed. For instance, you can use a
non-certified AI and, as the builder, decide that it is suitable for IFR
use. However, you must still follow the minimum equipment needed for IFR
flight as stated in the FARs.
The biggest issue that I found was with IFR GPS. While the FAR/AIM
states that IFR GPS must *meet* the requirements of C129, I couldn't find
anything that states that the equipment has to be *built* that way.
However, if you've ever read C129, most experimental aircraft builders
wouldn't be able to do all of the 'shake and bake' tests required.
http://av-info.faa.gov/tso/Tsocur/C129a.doc
If I (as I am) were building an IFR-capable experimental aircraft, I
would choose my instruments and electronics carefully. Non-certified may
be just fine, and I will undoubtedly use some in my aircraft. However, I
will be purchasing and installing a GPS with existing C129 compliance.
There is no way that I could sufficiently meet the requirements of the
TSO.
YMMV... and I'm not a lawyer or aviation expert...
-Kitt
--
It's Me! --> kitt(at)spazmoid.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Art Glaser <airplane(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale |
Check Ram Conversions and Art Matteson at AMR&D
Joe Hine wrote:
>
>I have the same engine as Bill and I installed the 160hp pistons and pins
>when I rebuilt the engine. 200+ hours so far with no problems.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy(at)att.net> |
"RV List"
| Subject: | FOR SALE: BRAND NEW... Sensenich Metal Prop 70CM7S9-0 (80") |
For sale: Brand new, still in the box, never installed, Sensenich Metal Prop 70CM7S9-0
(80). Includes 2-1/4" spacer and 7/16" prop mounting bolts.
There is currently an 8-12 week wait to get one of these props from Van's/Sensenich
and it will cost you $1935 plus shipping.
PRICE.... $1800/OBO (and no waiting).
Buyer to pay for shipping and insurance (if desired).
Contact me at: jacklockamy(at)att.net or (805) 482-3060.
Located in Camarillo, CA 93010
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Davis" <rvpilot(at)access4less.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale) |
One other difference also-
The 150 HP 0-320's all have straight bore cylinders. The 160 HP higher
compression ones have choke ground cylinders.
Bill RV-8 N48WD Tiger-Kat
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com>
Subject: RE:160HP O-320, (was RV-List: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale)
>
> This Brings up a good point....
>
> You can slap the 160hp pistons in most any O-320, and many people have
with
> no problems, but -
>
> 1) The narrow deck cases that aren't using hold-down plates have been
known
> to crack at the cylinder bases with the higher compression pistons. You
> can't simply just "add" hold down plates to a narrow deck engine that
didn't
> originally use them without putting longer thru-bolts(-360 ones) in the
> case.
>
> 2) The main bearings didn't change much in the cases, but the nose and
> flange bearings are a bit beefier in the original 160hp ones.
>
> 3) Most of the wide deck engines have no worries about throwing in the
160hp
> pistons (which are standard -360 pistons).
>
> So, it's very feasable to get 160hp out of most any old -320 (and it's
been
> done to most every series), but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a great
> idea! FYI, I know an engine builder who does some racing engines for the
> "fast glass" crowd, and has done a number of -320's that dyno'd at
> 190-200hp, and -360's with 230-250hp!! These engines get into radical cam
> grinding, different lifters, over 10:1 pistons, ported and flowed heads,
> etc...I wouldn't want to guess about the TBO though! I've personally seen
> one of those engines running 10.5:1 pistons with the cylinder blown clean
> off the engine!
>
> Cheers,
> Stein Bruch
> RV6's, Minneapolis
>
> http://www.steinair.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jim Anglin
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale
>
>
> I have an O-320E2A in my -4 and it's only 150 HP. I'd like it to be 160
but
> I heard the bearings won't take the high compression pistons. If this can
> be done would you ask your friend if he knows how they got 160 hp. out of
> his E2A so I can get it out of mine?
> Jim
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stuart B McCurdy" <sturdy(at)att.net>
> To: "rv-list"
> Subject: RV-List: 1995 RV-4, 160hp For Sale
>
>
> snip
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Amit Dagan" <amitdagan(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Alternator belt size |
If there is anybody out there with an 0-360 (9 and 3/4" pully) and Vans
60Amp aternator,
could you please tell me which size belt you found best fits this combo?
Thanks,
Amit.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Amit Dagan" <amitdagan(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Glareshield vinyl - good/bad ? |
I purchased Cleaveland Aircraft Tool gareshield material (vinyl), but has
since heard that it may out-gas and be bad for the canopy. Is there any body
out there with actual bad experience, or is this just theoretical ?
Thanks,
Amit.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "" <tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com> |
Karie,
Breakaway Park is the main one I konw of, but it is not cheap. I think Lakeway
has a "community" airport, but it is not close to downtown either.
Austin has a very large RV population. Most people in town keep their planes out
at Georgetown, as they have added a bunch of hangars. It's probably a 35 minute
drive from downtown.
You might also check the EAA 187 website (link on Vans). The roster lists all
of the members, and you can see what everyone is building.
Scott Haskins
Pflugerville (Austin), TX
7A Wings
--- On Fri 04/09, Karie Daniel < karie4(at)comcast.net > wrote:
From: Karie Daniel [mailto: karie4(at)comcast.net]
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2004 22:21:33 -0700
Subject: RV-List: Austin Tx Info
I'm thinking of taking a job in Austin Texas. I would be taking my project and
finishing it there. I would like to know if there are any airparks in the Austin
area? I've found a few on the web but any specific info (RV friendly, other
builders in the area) would be great. I would be working in the downtown Austin
area so I'm not looking for a big commute but would be willing if the home/airpark
were right.
Thanks,
Karie Daniel
Sammamish, WA
RV-7A QB In Progress
L NEW LIST CHAT!! http://www.matronics.com/chat
=================
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Governor from travellair |
| From: | "Mills, Trevor R" <MillsTR(at)az1.bp.com> |
In my search for the right engine at the right price, I found one out of a travellair
(O-360 A1A)
coming from a twin it has a governor on it, can anyone tell me if it is OK for
one of Vans hartzell's.
as this would sweeten the deal for me.
Thanks
Trevor Mills 80605
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Karie Daniel" <karie4(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Austin Tx Info |
Thanks to everyone who replied with information about Austin. Sounds like a
strong flying/building RV community. I really appreciate all the links and
airport info, thanks again.
Karie Daniel
Sammamish, WA
RV-7A QB
----- Original Message -----
From: <tx_jayhawk(at)excite.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Austin Tx Info
>
>
> Karie,
>
> Breakaway Park is the main one I konw of, but it is not cheap. I think
Lakeway has a "community" airport, but it is not close to downtown either.
>
> Austin has a very large RV population. Most people in town keep their
planes out at Georgetown, as they have added a bunch of hangars. It's
probably a 35 minute drive from downtown.
>
> You might also check the EAA 187 website (link on Vans). The roster lists
all of the members, and you can see what everyone is building.
>
> Scott Haskins
> Pflugerville (Austin), TX
> 7A Wings
>
>
> --- On Fri 04/09, Karie Daniel < karie4(at)comcast.net > wrote:
> From: Karie Daniel [mailto: karie4(at)comcast.net]
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2004 22:21:33 -0700
> Subject: RV-List: Austin Tx Info
>
>
> I'm thinking of taking a job in Austin Texas. I would be taking my project
and finishing it there. I would like to know if there are any airparks in
the Austin area? I've found a few on the web but any specific info (RV
friendly, other builders in the area) would be great. I would be working in
the downtown Austin area so I'm not looking for a big commute but would be
willing if the home/airpark were right.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Karie Daniel
> Sammamish, WA
> RV-7A QB In Progress
>
>
> L NEW LIST CHAT!! http://www.matronics.com/chat
> =================
>
>
> Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
> The most personalized portal on the Web!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Harvey Sigmon" <rv6hes(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Governor from travellair |
Trevor: I have been down this avenue before, bad news the governor for the
twin engine has provisions for feathering the prop, when you start the
engine as oil pressure comes up the blade angle will go to an extreme angle
and the engine will lug and shake. Hope this helps.
Harvey Sigmon RV-6A N602RV
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mills, Trevor R" <MillsTR(at)az1.bp.com>
Subject: RV-List: Governor from travellair
>
> In my search for the right engine at the right price, I found one out of a
travellair (O-360 A1A)
> coming from a twin it has a governor on it, can anyone tell me if it is OK
for one of Vans hartzell's.
> as this would sweeten the deal for me.
>
> Thanks
> Trevor Mills 80605
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Governor from travellair |
Hi Trevor,
Weather the governor fills your need or not it can likely be used to tradein
or barter for the one you require.
The best of luck,
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
April 01, 2004 - April 09, 2004
RV-Archive.digest.vol-pd