RV-Archive.digest.vol-pr
August 19, 2004 - August 30, 2004
> Mr. Hester,
> While driving to the airport this evening, I realized the sketch should
> show the
> transition zone in the middle of the travel. I'll correct it and send
> you the
> update tomorrow.
Actually, you need to show the acceptable range on both sides of
center. For example, the drawing shows the 45 degree angle - what
happens beyond this angle? There should be a travel range shown for
"released" and a range shown for "locked".
Jim Daniels
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Laird Owens <owens(at)aerovironment.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Propeller balance |
If you don't mind heading South, there is a shop at Whiteman, WHP,
(under Burbanks airspace) that will do balancing on homebuilts. I'll
try to get some info for you.
I'll also pass this on to the SoCal list to see what comes up.
Laird RV-6
WHP
On Aug 19, 2004, at 2:54 PM, David L Ahrens wrote:
>
> Hello all, I need some help in finding someone to Dynamic balance my
> propeller and engine. I have a RV-6A with about 75 hrs., 0-320
> engine,conical mounts, sensenich propeller. The local shops do not show
> much interest in doing the work. One doesn't want to touch a homebuilt
> and the other can't work me into his schedule. I live in Bakersfield,
> Ca.
> Anyone have a favorite shop within an hours flight time of Bakersfield?
> Thanks, David Ahrens
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Propeller balance |
Sullivan Propeller Specialties, 510-782-0920, located on the Hayward Airport.
They just did mine and I am totally satisfied.
Cash Copeland
RV6 Hayward, Ca
In a message dated 8/19/2004 3:01:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
daviddla(at)juno.com writes:
Hello all, I need some help in finding someone to Dynamic balance my
propeller and engine. I have a RV-6A with about 75 hrs., 0-320
engine,conical mounts, sensenich propeller. The local shops do not show
much interest in doing the work. One doesn't want to touch a homebuilt
and the other can't work me into his schedule. I live in Bakersfield, Ca.
Anyone have a favorite shop within an hours flight time of Bakersfield?
Thanks, David Ahrens
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bobby Hester <bhester(at)hopkinsville.net> |
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: Re: Parking brake info (PVPV-1)] |
Jim Daniels wrote:
>
>
>
>>Mr. Hester,
>>While driving to the airport this evening, I realized the sketch should
>>show the
>>transition zone in the middle of the travel. I'll correct it and send
>>you the
>>update tomorrow.
>>
>>
>
>Actually, you need to show the acceptable range on both sides of
>center. For example, the drawing shows the 45 degree angle - what
>happens beyond this angle? There should be a travel range shown for
>"released" and a range shown for "locked".
>
>Jim Daniels
>
>
The drawing I received from George R. Happ at Matco Mfg. does show this.
I sent the drawing into the RV-List but it has not showed up yet. So I
put it on my web site:
http://members.hopkinsville.net/bhester/pvpv1page.htm
--
Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
RV7A Slowbuild wings-QB Fuse :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Propeller balance |
In a message dated 8/19/2004 3:01:22 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
daviddla(at)juno.com writes:
I need some help in finding someone to Dynamic balance my
propeller and engine. I have a RV-6A with about 75 hrs., 0-320
engine,conical mounts, sensenich propeller. The local shops do not show
much interest in doing the work. One doesn't want to touch a homebuilt
and the other can't work me into his schedule. I live in Bakersfield, Ca.
Anyone have a favorite shop within an hours flight time of Bakersfield?
==========================================
Dave Morss did mine. He's based at San Carlos (KSQL) and you may be able to
track him down on the web.
GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A C/S, flying 708 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob 1" <rv3a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Saw this engine on Ebay |
>
> Great for a low budget bird:
>
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?viewItem&rd=1&item=2487056705&category=26437
>
> if the link doesn't work, go to ebay and put the item number into the
search
> window:
>
> 2487056705
>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The H2AD series of engines have a less than stellar history.
Let the buyer beware.
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Bibb" <rebibb(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Question for the aerodynamycists |
I am going to install a NACA vent on the side of the forward fuselage on the
RV-4 I am rebuilding. I am thinking of installing it right below the cowl
cheek angled downward so that the longitudinal axis of the vent is parallel
to the logitudnal axis of the cowl cheek extension. My thought is the
pressure will be positive in this area and will result in good positive
airflow into the vent (this will be for fresh air ventilation to the front
cockpit).
I assume that the left side will be best for airflow given the vortex
generated by the propeller but the right side would be best for internal
routing of the scat tubing as there is no throttle and mixture control
cables to avoid.
Does it make an appreciable difference? As in most things the best idea
would be to try it to find out but that is not practical given the hole I
need to cut in the fuselage skin.
I'm looking for opinions and/or experience with this location. Is my
thinking sound or am I missing something?
Net, net - I'd like to install on the right but the left seems like a better
location. Which is best and will either work?
Richard
RV-4 N144KT - rising from he ashes of a 1998 landing in the trees at IGX.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve & Denise" <sjhdcl(at)kingston.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Saw this engine on Ebay |
3.3 DATE_IN_FUTURE_12_24 Date: is 12 to 24 hours after Received: date
Exactly.
Why anybody would build a $60,000 airplane and finish it off with a $4000
engine is
beyond my reasoning.
The most important piece of the puzzle and I see way too many builders
trying to find
the cheapest they can get.
If I have to spend $35,000 to get a good engine either new or a very well
documented
log books then so be it. Wheres the checkbook?
If anyone buys an engine like this the amateur built warning sign should
include the price
paid for the engine in large capital letters.
As the saying goes: If you can't afford a good engine, you can't afford an
airplane.
Ebay is for digital camera batteries, not aircraft engines.
Steve
RV7A #2
70015
71629
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Saw this engine on Ebay
> From: "Jamie Painter" <jdpainter(at)jpainter.org>
>
>
> Just an FYI on this Engine:
>
> It appears to have been involved in the following accident (based on the
> N-number on the aircraft logbook).
>
> http://www2.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id 040803X01125&key=1
>
> On July 4, 2004, about 1700 eastern daylight time, a Cessna 172N, N10DJ,
> received substantial damage during the landing roll out at the Grand
Canyon
> Airport, Wellsboro, Pennsylvania. The certificated private pilot was not
> injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and the airplane was
not
> operating on a flight plan. The local personal flight, which departed
Cherry
> Springs Airport (5G6), Galeton, Pennsylvania, was conducted under 14 CFR
Part
> 91.
>
> According to a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspector, the pilot
> elected to perform a precautionary landing at Grand Canyon Airport due to
> deteriorating weather conditions in the area. While landing on runway 28,
the
> airplane veered off the right side of the runway and impacted a hay bail.
>
> ...
>
> >
> >
> > Great for a low budget bird:
> >
> >
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?viewItem&rd=1&item=2487056705&category=26437
> >
> > if the link doesn't work, go to ebay and put the item number into the
search
> > window:
> >
> > 2487056705
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronnie Brown" <romott(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Saw this engine on Ebay |
Please don't perpetuate the myths about this engine. I ran two of these O320-H2AD
engines to TBO on our 1977 Cessna 172N with ABSOLUTELY NO internal problems.
There were indeed problems with the early engines at a time when these engines
were not flying much due to the oil embargos of the 70's. I also have a
friend with this engine installed on his RV-7A, with over 500 trouble free hours
and he is very happy with it.
See the bottom of page http://www.prime-mover.org/Aviation/C172.ENGINES.html for more info on the truth (not myths) about this engine.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Bibb" <rebibb(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Saw this engine on Ebay |
>
> Exactly.
>
> Why anybody would build a $60,000 airplane and finish it off with a $4000
> engine is
> beyond my reasoning.
>
A couple of reasons. The $3,500 is probably less than the value of the good
parts on the engine. Its less than the cost of a case alone, for example.
The H2D had a bad reputation as early versions had problems (can't remember
what they were but I think CAM and/or lifter related. Later serial numbers
fixed those problems and it became a very reliable engine.
For $3,500 youcould buy this engine and overhaul it by having the parts sent
out for yellow tag inpection and refurb/replace for 5-$15,000 depending on
what needed to be scrapped.
I'd have a hard time buying it sight unseen and would want to at least pull
the cylinders to get a look at the cam and dial the crank but it is a good
deal if anything major is salvageble.
But if you would rather convert cash to an new engine that is also a very
wise choice, maybe even a preferable one.
There has been a lot of talk on how much it cost to build one of these
things. That is inversely proportional to the amount of work you want to do
scrounging for deals on used stuff versus buying brand new out of the box.
Of course new is better, but a flying aircraft can be done safely and a heck
of a lot less cash out the door. Of course this assumes you pay yourself
the kind of wages tyrants the world over pay their minions...
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RV-8 Canopy Track Question |
| From: | Don.Alexander(at)AstenJohnson.com |
08/20/2004 09:12:07 AM
I am in the process of putting my C-804 / C-805 rear slide track together
and have run into a question that I can't seem to find the answer to. The
plans indicate that the 805 should be countersunk on both sides for the AN
426 rivets. I don't understand what this means. How does one go about
driving the rivets on this assembly? I imagine that the shop head of the
rivet somehow nests inside the bottom countersink, but I don't see how to
drive the rivet down into a "funnel" shaped hole.
Don Alexander
RV-8 Half way there...seeing the light at the end of the dark tunnel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill VonDane <bill(at)vondane.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Saw this engine on Ebay |
Agreed... He had three (now just two) H2AD's running on RV's here and have
not had any problems with any of them... Use aeroshell oil (has the
additives) and fly regularly and you will not have any trouble...
-Bill VonDane
RV-8A - Colorado Springs
EAA Tech Counselor
www.vondane.com
www.rv8a.com
www.creativair.com
www.epanelbuilder.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ronnie Brown" <romott(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Saw this engine on Ebay
>
> Please don't perpetuate the myths about this engine. I ran two of these
O320-H2AD engines to TBO on our 1977 Cessna 172N with ABSOLUTELY NO internal
problems. There were indeed problems with the early engines at a time when
these engines were not flying much due to the oil embargos of the 70's. I
also have a friend with this engine installed on his RV-7A, with over 500
trouble free hours and he is very happy with it.
>
> See the bottom of page
http://www.prime-mover.org/Aviation/C172.ENGINES.html for more info on the
truth (not myths) about this engine.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tailgummer(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 Canopy Track Question |
Don, it's reffered to as " double countersinking". Just countersink each
side as usual then select a rivet length shorter than you would use to produce
a
shop head and squeeze. Try it out on scrap to get a feel for the correct
length. The final result is a smooth surface on both sides. It might not be
perfect, but it will work.
John D'Onofrio
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RV8 one piece wings skins |
| From: | "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart(at)iss.net> |
I just found out from Charlie Kuss, builder in Fl., that Vans now can
make for you single piece wing skins, .032 in stead of 025, for the RV8.
I am a little upset (OK A LOT) I did not know about this. Up charge is
some $50 or something, negligible shipping charge change.
Many of you probably know that when you sight down the wing of any RV
with 025 skins, you see the dip between the ribs. Unsightly. Weight
penalty is about 4lbs total for the plane using the 4 new skins. Im no
aerodynamicist but Ill bet that the speed increase is more than
negligible with the lack of distortion using the 032 skins.
I sure would have liked to have known this on the Super 8. I'd of taken
that penalty for strength in a heartbeat. Thought you all would find
this interesting.
I have not spoken to Vans yet about this so I can not confirm the cost
or availability.
I would also be interested in knowing what strength increase could be
expected from a change from 025 to 032 skins if anyone happens to know
(or swag) this off the top of their heads.
Regards,
Michael Stewart
All my list watching did not turn up this info. ARGH!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David E. Nelson" <david.nelson(at)pobox.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 Canopy Track Question |
Hi Don,
This same technique was used to make the TE on the rudder (at least on my 7A).
The plans/instructions walked my through the procedure. The rivet was basically
back riveted to fill in the countersink.
Regards,
/\/elson
Austin, TX
RV-7A - Got the goo, ready to finish the tank
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 Don.Alexander(at)AstenJohnson.com wrote:
>
>
> I am in the process of putting my C-804 / C-805 rear slide track together
> and have run into a question that I can't seem to find the answer to. The
> plans indicate that the 805 should be countersunk on both sides for the AN
> 426 rivets. I don't understand what this means. How does one go about
> driving the rivets on this assembly? I imagine that the shop head of the
> rivet somehow nests inside the bottom countersink, but I don't see how to
> drive the rivet down into a "funnel" shaped hole.
>
> Don Alexander
> RV-8 Half way there...seeing the light at the end of the dark tunnel
>
>
--
~~ ** ~~ If you didn't learn anything when you broke it the 1st ~~ ** ~~
time, then break it again.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV8 one piece wings skins |
MIKE-VANS MADE MINE 6 YEARS AGO-WHAT IS A SUPER 8-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: | Laird Owens <owens(at)aerovironment.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Propeller balance |
David,
Hummingbird Rotorwing Services will do it at Whiteman (WHP).
John Balkin 818 897 1995
$155, and he says he has about a week lead time.
Also one at Cable (CCB).
Mike Hartman
(909) 624-5022
Don't know what his cost or availability is.
Good luck,
Laird
On Aug 19, 2004, at 2:54 PM, David L Ahrens wrote:
>
> Hello all, I need some help in finding someone to Dynamic balance my
> propeller and engine. I have a RV-6A with about 75 hrs., 0-320
> engine,conical mounts, sensenich propeller. The local shops do not show
> much interest in doing the work. One doesn't want to touch a homebuilt
> and the other can't work me into his schedule. I live in Bakersfield,
> Ca.
> Anyone have a favorite shop within an hours flight time of Bakersfield?
> Thanks, David Ahrens
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Birkelbach <phil(at)petrasoft.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Saw this engine on Ebay |
Wow, beyond reasoning? I don't think I'd consider a $4,000 engine much
more than a core but if it's a good core and the crank, cam and case are
good you're only about $8,000 away from a good rebuilt engine. If I had
been able to find an engine for $12,000 then I wouldn't have a $60,000
airplane I'd have a $40,000 airplane.
If it were me I think I'd start looking east. There are about to be a
bunch of perfectly good engines coming out of bent up airplanes in
Florida. A guy here in Houston built a $28,000 RV-6 (8 years ago) and
part of his secret was a hurricane engine.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Panel
http://www.myrv7.com
Steve & Denise wrote:
>
>Exactly.
>
>Why anybody would build a $60,000 airplane and finish it off with a $4000
>engine is
>beyond my reasoning.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Milner" <tldrgred(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Question for the aerodynamycists |
My -4 has one on the left side and works good until backing off the
throttle.
Red Milner
RV-4 N79KM
based @ UES
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Bibb" <rebibb(at)comcast.net>
Subject: RV-List: Question for the aerodynamycists
>
> I am going to install a NACA vent on the side of the forward fuselage on
the
> RV-4 I am rebuilding. I am thinking of installing it right below the cowl
> cheek angled downward so that the longitudinal axis of the vent is
parallel
> to the logitudnal axis of the cowl cheek extension. My thought is the
> pressure will be positive in this area and will result in good positive
> airflow into the vent (this will be for fresh air ventilation to the front
> cockpit).
>
> I assume that the left side will be best for airflow given the vortex
> generated by the propeller but the right side would be best for internal
> routing of the scat tubing as there is no throttle and mixture control
> cables to avoid.
>
> Does it make an appreciable difference? As in most things the best idea
> would be to try it to find out but that is not practical given the hole I
> need to cut in the fuselage skin.
>
> I'm looking for opinions and/or experience with this location. Is my
> thinking sound or am I missing something?
>
> Net, net - I'd like to install on the right but the left seems like a
better
> location. Which is best and will either work?
>
> Richard
> RV-4 N144KT - rising from he ashes of a 1998 landing in the trees at IGX.
>
>
> _____________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Parachutes, any record |
I feel totally confident I could get out in the event of a fire. An -8
canopy can be opened in flight - not sure about any others. What would be
bad enough? Not sure. If there was fire in the cockpit, it wouldn't take
much to get me out. Inside the cowling - probably depends on how hot my
feet are getting and what kind of emergency landing spots are or the ground
below.
As for someone actually able to get out of the plane (RV-8), it is possible
and has happened. Unfortunately, a contributor to the list, Mr. Von
Alexander, exited the plane without a parachute and did not survive. As I
remember the discussions, it wasn't exactly clear as to why he had the
canopy open and was unstrapped. Check the archives here and NTSB records
for more info.
http://www2.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id 001212X19358&key=1
Bryan Jones -8
www.LoneStarSquadron.com
Houston, Texas
> > Bryant: Thnaks for the reply, however, two things, what do you do
>in
>case of fire, as you said, how can one open the canopy in flight, and when
>is
>the fire bad enough to get to this situation?
>
>Second I really would like to know if there is any record anywhere, as to
>has any one ever, to use the word, egressed, from an rv in flight?
>
>
>Thnaks
>
>Bert
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matthew Brandes" <matthew(at)n523rv.com> |
I picked up a used compass that has a low liquid level. What can I use to
replenish/replace it?
Matthew Brandes,
Van's RV-9A (Fuselage)
EAA Chapter 868/91/1329
www.n523rv.com <http://www.n523rv.com/>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hopperdhh(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Compass liquid |
In a message dated 8/20/04 2:56:34 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
matthew(at)n523rv.com writes:
>
>
> I picked up a used compass that has a low liquid level. What can I use to
> replenish/replace it?
>
> Matthew Brandes,
> Van's RV-9A (Fuselage)
> EAA Chapter 868/91/1329
> www.n523rv.com <http://www.n523rv.com/>
>
>
I used "Ultra-pure smokeless and odorless candle and lamp oil" which you can
buy at any of the big home improvement stores. There used to be a compass
factory near here, and they just used a high grade of kerosene. Much cheaper
than AC$pruce.
Dan Hopper
RV-7A (Flying about 37 hours now)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chuck <chuck515tigger(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Compass liquid |
Matthew,
I think I've still got a few compass overhaul kits and a pint of compass fluid
kickin' around. If you're interested I go search. If I find 'em you can have
'em, just reimburse me for the shipping.
Chuck
don't archive
Matthew Brandes wrote:
I picked up a used compass that has a low liquid level. What can I use to
replenish/replace it?
Matthew Brandes,
Van's RV-9A (Fuselage)
EAA Chapter 868/91/1329
www.n523rv.com
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rhett Westerman" <Rhettwesterman(at)cox.net> |
Use Naptha
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Chuck
Subject: Re: RV-List: Compass liquid
Matthew,
I think I've still got a few compass overhaul kits and a pint of compass
fluid kickin' around. If you're interested I go search. If I find 'em you
can have 'em, just reimburse me for the shipping.
Chuck
don't archive
Matthew Brandes wrote:
I picked up a used compass that has a low liquid level. What can I use to
replenish/replace it?
Matthew Brandes,
Van's RV-9A (Fuselage)
EAA Chapter 868/91/1329
www.n523rv.com
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matt Johnson" <matt(at)n559rv.com> |
| Subject: | Floor Standing Pneumatic Dimpler... |
(not processed: message from valid local sender)
One of the guys at Sierra Skypark here in Fresno has a dimpler that is a floor
standing pnuematic dimpler with a foot pedal that he uses to
dimple skins. I noticed that his finished control surfaces has no light distortion
around the rivets at all (showing a slight dimpling that extends
past the rivet head). When you look at his rivets, you would think they were countersunk
in the skin not riveted. My question is, is that from
his technique at dimpling skins or is it because he has the pneumatic dimpler?
My rivets look pretty good, but not that good and I use the
standard bench top one that you pound with the hammer...
By the way, were do you even get a floor unit like that? I looked online and cant
find one.
- Matt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oldsfolks(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Compass liquid |
The Rec. Aviation Homebuilt site on Google had quite a discussion on this
some time back. One party finally settled on Toner for copy machine. He said
it
is slightly more viscous than the original and was clear. Maybe easier on
gaskets too ?
I intend to use it in mine,soon.
Bob Olds RV-4 , N1191X
A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor
Charleston,Arkansas
Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Burton" <dburton(at)nwlink.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Compass liquid |
I'd give a call to an avionics shop and ask them what they use now. We used
to use acid free white kerosene in the past.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthew Brandes" <matthew(at)n523rv.com>
Subject: RV-List: Compass liquid
>
> I picked up a used compass that has a low liquid level. What can I use to
> replenish/replace it?
>
> Matthew Brandes,
> Van's RV-9A (Fuselage)
> EAA Chapter 868/91/1329
> www.n523rv.com <http://www.n523rv.com/>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Kunkel" <rvator(at)socal.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Floor Standing Pneumatic Dimpler... (not processed: |
message from valid local sender)
It's the riveter & you're probably referring to a CP-450 style cold
riveter - 24,000 Lbs. of force @ 90 PSI - rated for 1/2" solid aluminum
rivets. You can probably find a rebuilt one from different dealers for the
$5-6,000 range. If your rivets look pretty good, you might want to save your
money for the next engine core that comes up on Ebay :).
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Johnson" <matt(at)n559rv.com>
Subject: RV-List: Floor Standing Pneumatic Dimpler... (not processed:
message from valid local sender)
>
> One of the guys at Sierra Skypark here in Fresno has a dimpler that is a
floor standing pnuematic dimpler with a foot pedal that he uses to
> dimple skins. I noticed that his finished control surfaces has no light
distortion around the rivets at all (showing a slight dimpling that extends
> past the rivet head). When you look at his rivets, you would think they
were countersunk in the skin not riveted. My question is, is that from
> his technique at dimpling skins or is it because he has the pneumatic
dimpler? My rivets look pretty good, but not that good and I use the
> standard bench top one that you pound with the hammer...
>
> By the way, were do you even get a floor unit like that? I looked online
and cant find one.
>
> - Matt
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Compass liquid |
I used Varsol in mine!
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Burton" <dburton(at)nwlink.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Compass liquid
>
> I'd give a call to an avionics shop and ask them what they use now. We
used
> to use acid free white kerosene in the past.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Matthew Brandes" <matthew(at)n523rv.com>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Compass liquid
>
>
> >
> > I picked up a used compass that has a low liquid level. What can I use
to
> > replenish/replace it?
> >
> > Matthew Brandes,
> > Van's RV-9A (Fuselage)
> > EAA Chapter 868/91/1329
> > www.n523rv.com <http://www.n523rv.com/>
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
Okay guys, let's not get too carried away. If you look at the operation
drawing on the website, you will notice that the operational arc of "on"
and the operational arc of "off" is everything except the middle 45
degrees where it is transitioning.
In other words, all this discussion about 45 or 90 degrees is just
smoke. If you look at the drawing you will see that the valves are
fully open everywhere from about 27 degrees above horizontal to
completely vertical. They are fully closed from about 25 degrees below
horizontal to completely vertical (down).
So, as long as you don't leave the valve in the central position
(approximately +/- 25 degrees) you are fine. With the way it works, you
cannot turn it on when you really want it off. Unless you have some
really funky linkage you can only pull or push to the vertical positions
and all is well. I suppose you could overcenter the lever and have a
problem, but even there, assuming you have the clearance for the lever
movement, the valve would still work properly.
Stops are nice but not really necessary for the proper functioning of
the valve.
Dick Tasker
Wheeler North wrote:
>
>The matco park brake valves have two spring loaded poppet valves (one for
>each side) that are pushed open by two cam lobes on a rotating shaft.
>
>When the cams are pushed on them they are stuck open, when the cam is
>rotated off they act like check valves and allow pressure to build up from
>the master cyls but not return.
>
>If the lever rotates too far it will cause the cam to come back off the
>valves and reengage the parking brake.
>
>If I remember correctly 90degs is too much lever travel, its more like 45
>degs.
>
>As stated in other posts, if the compensating valves in the master cylinders
>don't open up at the top end of the MC piston travel this will also keep the
>brakes on.
>
>W
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eustace Bowhay" <ebowhay(at)jetstream.net> |
| Subject: | Buying a used engine |
0.3 SUBJ_BUY Subject line starts with Buy or Buying
I have bought used engines in the past and have had fairly good luck. From experience
I have set myself some guide lines and will pass them on to the list hoping
it will help someone and maybe save some heart-ache.
I divide the engines into three categories, part time first run that can be put
into service without overhaul, part time second run and high time.
My first choice is first run part time with good logs that can be verified and
the same for second run but must have been overhauled by a reputable overhaul
facility and the logs to include a work sheet and parts list for the overhaul.
The high time engine is a core only and will be overhauled.
The value of the part time engines is based on time on the engine. The value of
the high time engine is a guess, it may make a good core or could be a good boat
anchor.
When I bye a part time engine I take it to a reputable overhaul facility (in my
case this would be Aero Sport Power) and have it checked out and run in their
test stand. For me this is a must, for safety sake and fairness to your passengers
you have to know you have a safe reliable engine up front.
In years gone by I have worked in a engine overhaul facility and understand the
overhaul process, but am a firm believer in getting my engines overhauled in
a good facility. This becomes even more important now with the RV 10 since we
will be carrying three passengers.
Van' choice of the I0 540 for the 10 has to be the very best as it is one of the
most reliable engines ever built.
Eustace Bowhay RV 10 40030 Working on the fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "thomas a. sargent" <sarg314(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | don't want the engine to fall off. |
I'm surprised that the manual says very little about attaching the
Dynafocal II engine mount (for RV-6A) to the fuselage. I could use a
little guidance here.
The pre-drilled bolt holes in my QB fuselage are 1/4", intentionally
undersized for the 3/8" bolts in the engine mount. My plan is to get a
couple sholder bolts that are 1/4" in the threaded section and 3/8" in
the shank and see if I can use those to center the mount on the plane,
or at least find a resaonable compromise position.
Then using the engine mount as a drill guide, drill the holes out to
size with a drill slightly less than 3/8". Then ream the hole out to
3/8". (My mechanical engineer co-workers tell me that reamed holes are
significantly stronger.)
Is this what most folks do? Or am I missing something obvious?
Proceeding carefully here... botching these holes would be REAL BAD.
--
Tom Sargent, RV-6A, Landing gear
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaztuna(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV8 one piece wings skins |
Tom
Was your set pre-punched? I know that Vans has offered 1 piece main skins
with no pre-punching for quite a few years.
Charlie Kuss
>
>MIKE-VANS MADE MINE 6 YEARS AGO-WHAT IS A SUPER 8-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: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: don't want the engine to fall off. |
Hi Tom,
I built the slow built 6a and did pretty much what you describe.
Instead of shoulder bolts I used some bushings on 1/4" bolts. I centered the
mount over the two holes that gave me the best average fit for the rest of
the holes and bolted the engine mount down.
I then used some more bushings to re-center drill the remaining slightly off
center firewall mount holes. Next I used the mount itself as a guide to
drill the fierwall holes to final size.
The reammer sure can't hurt, weather or not it is needed in this case I'll
leave up to the experts to have fun with.{[B-)!
HuH!, quick build EH! (;-)!
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "thomas a. sargent" <sarg314(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RV-List: don't want the engine to fall off.
>
> I'm surprised that the manual says very little about attaching the
> Dynafocal II engine mount (for RV-6A) to the fuselage. I could use a
> little guidance here.
>
> The pre-drilled bolt holes in my QB fuselage are 1/4", intentionally
> undersized for the 3/8" bolts in the engine mount. My plan is to get a
> couple sholder bolts that are 1/4" in the threaded section and 3/8" in
> the shank and see if I can use those to center the mount on the plane,
> or at least find a resaonable compromise position.
>
> Then using the engine mount as a drill guide, drill the holes out to
> size with a drill slightly less than 3/8". Then ream the hole out to
> 3/8". (My mechanical engineer co-workers tell me that reamed holes are
> significantly stronger.)
>
> Is this what most folks do? Or am I missing something obvious?
>
> Proceeding carefully here... botching these holes would be REAL BAD.
>
> --
> Tom Sargent, RV-6A, Landing gear
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV8 one piece wings skins |
>
>
>I would also be interested in knowing what strength increase could be
>expected from a change from 025 to 032 skins if anyone happens to know
>(or swag) this off the top of their heads.
Sure, the outboard wing would be a bit stronger, but the inboard wing
would be the same as before. The extra strength in the outboard wing
is irrelevant, as a chain is only as strong as the weakest link.
If you want one piece wing skins, go ahead. But don't use extra
strength as an argument for the mod.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Bibb" <rebibb(at)comcast.net> |
I am at the stage of drilling the rear wing attachment bolts on my RV-4 and
have discovered I have about a 1/4" wash out in the left wing. Dont know
how I got that and it doesn't matter at this point but I am seeking the
list's collective wisdom on the best remedy for this.
I am thinking that perhaps the best thing to do is to "average" the twist's
effect by lessening the incidence on the side with the twist. In other
words, if the tip has in effect 1/4"more incidence when the root has the
same incidence as the other straight wing I would drill the hole such that
the twisted wing has 1/8" less incidence at the root so that the "average"
along the span is the same. Not optimal, of course but there is no way to
straighten the wing with the skins now on it..
I realize that measuring this is difficult and I may have some measurement
errors as well so I don't want to get too anal on this. Van's instructions
suggest getting the wings square and the sweep alignment within 1/2" or so
is OK (their "get real" statement in the supplementary instructions) but I
am sure I will have some slight rolling moment if the wings are not straight
in incidence. This is a pain and I have no idea how the twist crept into
the wing while riveting the skins.
The twist seems to be gradual along the entire length of the wing panel as
opposed to localized at the tip region.
Thoughts?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "cgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Compass liquid |
Naphtha is another name for white Gasoline. You certainly don't want highly
flammable gas in your compass and cockpit.
Cy Galley
Safety Programs Editor
Always looking for ideas and articles for EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rhett Westerman" <Rhettwesterman(at)cox.net>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Compass liquid
>
> Use Naptha
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Chuck
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Compass liquid
>
>
> Matthew,
>
> I think I've still got a few compass overhaul kits and a pint of
compass
> fluid kickin' around. If you're interested I go search. If I find 'em
you
> can have 'em, just reimburse me for the shipping.
>
> Chuck
>
> don't archive
>
> Matthew Brandes wrote:
>
> I picked up a used compass that has a low liquid level. What can I use to
> replenish/replace it?
>
> Matthew Brandes,
> Van's RV-9A (Fuselage)
> EAA Chapter 868/91/1329
> www.n523rv.com
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV8 one piece wings skins |
CHARLIE-Yes they were pre punched-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: | "Kyle Boatright" <kboatright1(at)comcast.net> |
Once upon a time, someone from Van's (perhaps Bill Benedict, when he used to
post to the list), suggested choosing a reference point at 2/3 span to set
incidence. A good search of the archives might (or might not) find this
note.
KB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Bibb" <rebibb(at)comcast.net>
Subject: RV-List: Wing Twist
>
> I am at the stage of drilling the rear wing attachment bolts on my RV-4
and
> have discovered I have about a 1/4" wash out in the left wing. Dont know
> how I got that and it doesn't matter at this point but I am seeking the
> list's collective wisdom on the best remedy for this.
>
> I am thinking that perhaps the best thing to do is to "average" the
twist's
> effect by lessening the incidence on the side with the twist. In other
> words, if the tip has in effect 1/4"more incidence when the root has the
> same incidence as the other straight wing I would drill the hole such that
> the twisted wing has 1/8" less incidence at the root so that the "average"
> along the span is the same. Not optimal, of course but there is no way to
> straighten the wing with the skins now on it..
>
> I realize that measuring this is difficult and I may have some measurement
> errors as well so I don't want to get too anal on this. Van's
instructions
> suggest getting the wings square and the sweep alignment within 1/2" or so
> is OK (their "get real" statement in the supplementary instructions) but I
> am sure I will have some slight rolling moment if the wings are not
straight
> in incidence. This is a pain and I have no idea how the twist crept into
> the wing while riveting the skins.
>
> The twist seems to be gradual along the entire length of the wing panel as
> opposed to localized at the tip region.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Streit <wooody04(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Compass liquid |
kerosene is "liquid" used in compasses
Matthew Brandes wrote:
>
>I picked up a used compass that has a low liquid level. What can I use to
>replenish/replace it?
>
>Matthew Brandes,
>Van's RV-9A (Fuselage)
>EAA Chapter 868/91/1329
>www.n523rv.com <http://www.n523rv.com/>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bluecavu(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Question for the aerodynamycists |
>I am going to install a NACA vent on the side of the forward fuselage on the
RV-4 I am rebuilding.=A0 I am thinking of installing it right below the cowl
cheek angled downward so that the longitudinal axis of the vent is parallel
to the logitudnal axis of the cowl cheek extension.=A0 My thought is the
pressure will be positive in this area <
I have one there on my -4 on the left side for the reasons you stated. Works
*very* well (you could style your hair in front of it). I am thinking of
adding another on the right side -but haven't gotten around to it. My vent is level
with the longitudinal axis of the fuse (I squared it to the lower cowl/fuse
line as I recall). It also looks good this way -as the vent angle goes the
opposite direction from the cheek angles.
Scott
N4ZW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Skylor Piper <skylor4(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV8 one piece wings skins |
--- Kevin Horton wrote:
> Sure, the outboard wing would be a bit stronger, but
> the inboard wing
> would be the same as before. The extra strength in
> the outboard wing
> is irrelevant...snip...
> Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
> Ottawa, Canada
> http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
Are you sure about that? The two RV-8's that had
in-flight structural failures (that I know about) had
the wings fail right at the inboard edge of the aileron.
__________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kyle Boatright" <kboatright1(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV8 one piece wings skins |
Two?
I think we're all aware of the factory aircraft crashing, but what was the
other one?
KB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Skylor Piper" <skylor4(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV8 one piece wings skins
>
>
> --- Kevin Horton wrote:
>
> > Sure, the outboard wing would be a bit stronger, but
> > the inboard wing
> > would be the same as before. The extra strength in
> > the outboard wing
> > is irrelevant...snip...
>
> > Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
> > Ottawa, Canada
> > http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
>
> Are you sure about that? The two RV-8's that had
> in-flight structural failures (that I know about) had
> the wings fail right at the inboard edge of the aileron.
>
>
> __________________________________
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV8 one piece wings skins |
Skylor Piper wrote:
>
>
>--- Kevin Horton wrote:
>
>
>
>>Sure, the outboard wing would be a bit stronger, but
>>the inboard wing
>>would be the same as before. The extra strength in
>>the outboard wing
>>is irrelevant...snip...
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
>>Ottawa, Canada
>>http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
>>
>>
>
>Are you sure about that? The two RV-8's that had
>in-flight structural failures (that I know about) had
>the wings fail right at the inboard edge of the aileron.
>
>
>
>
>
Skylor what were the deaails of the second in flight failure?
Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Pat Long ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Pat Long
Subject: Vernatherm
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/PGLong@aol.com.08.21.2004/index.html
o Main Photo Share Index
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
o Submitting a Photo Share
If you wish to submit a Photo Share of your own, please include the
following information along with your email message and files:
1) Email List or Lists that they are related to:
2) Your Full Name:
3) Your Email Address:
4) One line Subject description:
5) Multi-line, multi-paragraph description of topic:
6) One-line Description of each photo or file:
Email the information above and your files and photos to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Bobby Hester ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Bobby Hester
Subject: Matco Parking Brake
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/bhester@hopkinsville.net.08.21.2004/index.html
o Main Photo Share Index
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
o Submitting a Photo Share
If you wish to submit a Photo Share of your own, please include the
following information along with your email message and files:
1) Email List or Lists that they are related to:
2) Your Full Name:
3) Your Email Address:
4) One line Subject description:
5) Multi-line, multi-paragraph description of topic:
6) One-line Description of each photo or file:
Email the information above and your files and photos to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Compass liquid |
| From: | Bruce Green <mailindex(at)juno.com> |
Years ago, I used some baby oil. Didn't freeze and damped the compass
somewhat.
>
> The Rec. Aviation Homebuilt site on Google had quite a discussion on
> this
> some time back. One party finally settled on Toner for copy
> machine. He said it
> is slightly more viscous than the original and was clear. Maybe
> easier on
> gaskets too ?
> I intend to use it in mine,soon.
>
>
> Bob Olds RV-4 , N1191X
> A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor
> Charleston,Arkansas
> Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
You definitely should use a reference point further out than
mid-span. A left-to-right difference in incidence will have more
effect on the outboard wing than the inboard wing, as it has a longer
moment to work with. I don't feel like crunching the math, but
Kyle's 2/3 span number feels correct intuitively to me.
Kevin Horton
>
>Once upon a time, someone from Van's (perhaps Bill Benedict, when he used to
>post to the list), suggested choosing a reference point at 2/3 span to set
>incidence. A good search of the archives might (or might not) find this
>note.
>
>KB
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Richard Bibb" <rebibb(at)comcast.net>
>To:
>Subject: RV-List: Wing Twist
>
>
>>
>> I am at the stage of drilling the rear wing attachment bolts on my RV-4
>and
>> have discovered I have about a 1/4" wash out in the left wing. Dont know
>> how I got that and it doesn't matter at this point but I am seeking the
>> list's collective wisdom on the best remedy for this.
>>
>> I am thinking that perhaps the best thing to do is to "average" the
>twist's
>> effect by lessening the incidence on the side with the twist. In other
>> words, if the tip has in effect 1/4"more incidence when the root has the
>> same incidence as the other straight wing I would drill the hole such that
>> the twisted wing has 1/8" less incidence at the root so that the "average"
>> along the span is the same. Not optimal, of course but there is no way to
>> straighten the wing with the skins now on it..
>>
>> I realize that measuring this is difficult and I may have some measurement
>> errors as well so I don't want to get too anal on this. Van's
>instructions
>> suggest getting the wings square and the sweep alignment within 1/2" or so
>> is OK (their "get real" statement in the supplementary instructions) but I
>> am sure I will have some slight rolling moment if the wings are not
>straight
>> in incidence. This is a pain and I have no idea how the twist crept into
>> the wing while riveting the skins.
>>
>> The twist seems to be gradual along the entire length of the wing panel as
>> opposed to localized at the tip region.
>>
> > Thoughts?
>>
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | RV8 one piece wings skins |
WELL SAID KEVIN!!!! I see this all to often in a growing number of
homebuilders lately. For example (and one I see quite a bit).....If AWG16
wire is sufficient to the wingtip, why don't I go ahead and run AWG14, AWG12
or even AWG10 wire out there?!?!? If I need AWG18 for master relay power,
why not run AWG16 or AWG14?!? Far too many people are making "improvements"
based on something they hear 3rd hand, or just simply assume that "if some
is good, more must be better, and most must be best"!
I'm really not harping here, just relating a fact that I'm seeing more and
more in the past year or two. Airplane structures, systems, electronics,
etc.. are not simple "linear equations" where more of everything is better,
sometimes yes, but certainly not always.
Now I'm not saying you should abandon any improvements. Certainly there are
a some areas where people have learned by experience that additional metal,
thicker wire, etc.. are better. That being said, just because you "heard it
from some old guy who used to work on airplanes in the 40's", doesn't mean
it applies to these RV's exactly. Another reason I see people doing
"things" is that they saw or heard of someone else doing it and think by
association that therefore it must be good. Once again, sometimes yes, but
not always.
Anyway, just be smart about it and happy building. Lot's of smart people
out there building lot's of nice airplane. Many of them better than mine
(but not all)!!
Cheers,
Stein Bruch
RV6's, Minneapolis
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Kevin Horton
Subject: RE: RV-List: RV8 one piece wings skins
Well, the problem is we don't know what was going on in that
accident, so it is very hard to know what loads the wing experienced.
How fast were they going, what was the aircraft weight and CG, how
many g were pulled, were the ailerons deflected, etc. Yes, maybe
thicker lower wing skins could have allowed that part of the wing to
carry the loads that were applied to it. Or maybe not. And even if
that part of the wing could carry those loads, we have now changed
the way the loads are distributed on the wing, so we don't know where
the weak link is, and how much load the weakest part of the wing
could carry before it fails.
I'm aware of at least two incidents where RV-8s have had landing gear
box failure during landing, and one case where an RV-8A had a nose
wheel leg collapse. Should builders arbitrarily beef up the landing
gear box and nose landing gear legs too? Where does it end?
A heavier aircraft is less safe than a lighter aircraft, as the stall
speed is higher, which means the lowest possible touchdown speed is
higher. The structure of the heavier aircraft has to carry higher
loads for a given manoeuvre, so it is more likely to fail.
The best answer is to carefully design the aircraft to be just strong
enough to withstand the design loads, and to operate the aircraft so
the design loads are not exceeded. Just adding structure on the
"That Looks About Right" principle just changes the stress
distribution, and puts higher loads somewhere else.
I'm not a structures engineer, so all the above is worth what you
paid for it. I do have a mechanical engineering degree, but have
never really used it in anger.
Kevin Horton
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | RV8 one piece wings skins |
When was the second RV-8 structural (in-flight) failure??
IMVHO, as a non-practicing engineer, I believe there would be some small
structural benefit from single piece and/or thicker wing skins. But I also
couldn't agree more that lighter airplanes are better all the way around -
more efficient, faster, less damage with hard or crash landings.
I feel very comfortable flying my -8 the way I do with standard lap-jointed
skins.
2
Bryan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Compass liquid |
In a message dated 8/21/2004 11:57:47 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
mailindex(at)juno.com writes:
Years ago, I used some baby oil. Didn't freeze and damped the compass
somewhat.
=============================================
I've always wondered whether DOT 5 brake fluid wouldn't be the most ideal
compass fluid.
GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A C/S, flying 708 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Camping at Copperstate |
In a message dated 8/21/2004 5:04:12 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
svanarts(at)yahoo.com writes:
Anyone on the list ever tent camped at Copperstate? How's access to food?
(It's dismal if you arrive early at OSH) What's the weather like that time of
year? Would I be better off in a hotel?
============================================
Weather is still warm. The grounds there were messy due to blowing dirt and
hay last year. We had a motel in Casa Grande and would recommend this
again, although they indicated that they were going to be planting grass thruout.
GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A C/S, flying 708 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Camping at Copperstate |
Hot and cool. Could be too hot, depending on the year. They do NOT have
grass throughout. Most of it is dead, but they are trying to bring it back.
I'd recommend the motels in Casa Grande as well. I fly over (and land at)
PRA just about every day. I'll keep checking it out.
Paul Besing
RV-6A Sold (RV-10 Soon)
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Kitlog Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <Vanremog(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Camping at Copperstate
>
>
> In a message dated 8/21/2004 5:04:12 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> svanarts(at)yahoo.com writes:
>
> Anyone on the list ever tent camped at Copperstate? How's access to
food?
> (It's dismal if you arrive early at OSH) What's the weather like that
time of
> year? Would I be better off in a hotel?
>
>
> ============================================
>
> Weather is still warm. The grounds there were messy due to blowing dirt
and
> hay last year. We had a motel in Casa Grande and would recommend this
> again, although they indicated that they were going to be planting grass
thruout.
>
>
> GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A C/S, flying 708 hrs)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DOUGPFLYRV(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Fortune Magazine - Nice article on Vans! |
In a message dated 8/12/2004 1:31:21 PM Central Standard Time, jhelms(at)i1.net
writes:
http://www.fortune.com/fortune/smallbusiness/roi/articles/0,15114,654762,00.
html
HAS ANYONE DOWNLOADED THIS ARTICLE ? I AM UNABLE TO LOCATE IT ON THE
WEBSITE. WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE A COPY OFF LIST.
THANKS,
DOUG PRESTON
DOUGPFLYRV(at)AOL.COM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "cgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fortune Magazine - Nice article on Vans! |
After the down load fails, select the address, right arrow and type ".html"
on the end without the quotes.
Works fine.
----- Original Message -----
From: <DOUGPFLYRV(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Fortune Magazine - Nice article on Vans!
>
> In a message dated 8/12/2004 1:31:21 PM Central Standard Time,
jhelms(at)i1.net
> writes:
>
http://www.fortune.com/fortune/smallbusiness/roi/articles/0,15114,654762,00.
> html
> HAS ANYONE DOWNLOADED THIS ARTICLE ? I AM UNABLE TO LOCATE IT ON THE
> WEBSITE. WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE A COPY OFF LIST.
>
> THANKS,
>
> DOUG PRESTON
> DOUGPFLYRV(at)AOL.COM
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Gary Gunn ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Gary Gunn
Subject: Grand Canyon
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/ggunn@qwest.net.08.22.2004/index.html
o Main Photo Share Index
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
o Submitting a Photo Share
If you wish to submit a Photo Share of your own, please include the
following information along with your email message and files:
1) Email List or Lists that they are related to:
2) Your Full Name:
3) Your Email Address:
4) One line Subject description:
5) Multi-line, multi-paragraph description of topic:
6) One-line Description of each photo or file:
Email the information above and your files and photos to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "thomas a. sargent" <sarg314(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Flight Grip stick grips |
Has any one on the list installed Flight Grip stick grips in their
plane? Even if you just checked one out at Oshkosh, I'd be interested
to hear opinions about how it fit your hand and how the switches felt, etc..
Thanks,
--
Tom Sargent, RV-6A, Landing gear
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DOUGPFLYRV(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Fortune Magazine - Nice article on Vans! |
Thanks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
"'owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com '"(at)matronics.com
In my opinion the most important aspect of setting the wing is to be dang
sure there is proper edge distance on the rear spar flanges.
Having measured a number of aurplanes and RVs for general rigging I can
assure that its amazing what will fly relatively straight. A 1/4" washout
won't do anything, most likely.
If it does introduce anything it would be most likely only be noticed during
a stall, translated to a general preference to go one way over the other.
If you ran your riveting process from one end to the other, then that is
what probably introduced the shift, as the metal surrounding the rivet holes
is stretched, and will introduce accumlative shift over a long run.
The worst case would be to do one side (top or bottom) one way, then the
other side the opposite way, then do something different on the other wing.
As a general rule though, during rigging shoot for symetry, and average out
where its not possible to get exact symetry. Using the span point of 1/2 or
2/3s will do, and I doubt one could ever tell the difference in performance
effects using one vs the other.
Get it close without going nutso on it, as you will need to make final
adjustments by flying it rather than measuring things no matter how much you
measure it now.
Just think about the difference in relative angle of wind on the left side
vs the right side in the prop influence area, yet they all seem to fly just
fine even if they are perfectly symetrical.
Robust structure is far more important on these aircraft than is precise
rigging.
W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
"'owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com '"(at)matronics.com
| Subject: | engine timing vs CHTs/EGTs |
Well,
once again the list provided a useful jog to my rapidly degrading mental
faculties. After a recent discussion with Andre B. re his fuel injection
problems he reminded me of an old Lycoming service letter which allows most
of the IO-360s to have their timing retarded to 20 degs from the normal
factory setting of 25 degs used for most Lycoming engines. Although the SL
doesn't fully explain this, it is an option for those engine installations
where detonation and cooling are an issue.
For some strange reason this finally gelled in my head with the previous
thirty years of experience floating around in there and answered the
question I have had in my head as to why many RVs have such a wide range of
CHTs from one aircraft to the next given they all have the same relative
engines(mostly).
Years ago I worked in a shop where we had this strange little Mercedes two
seater with a big ass engine in it. The engine was fairly high time and the
owner was always complaining about how hot the thing ran. So we eventually
went through everything including a complete teardown overhaul, reteardown
and I finally ended up calling up the old guy in Germany who said the timing
specs for that engine were wrong and to back them off two degrees. I whined
about this until as it couldn't possibly have that much effect. He promtly
reminded me who the old guy was and told me to just shut up and do it. Dang
old guy was right, two degrees of timing retard had a major effect on the
operating temperature of that engine.
Then later on I had a few customers who regularly got stuck in border
traffic so I retarded their timing a few degrees and voila, same thing,
cooler temps.
So, having had several conversations with many of you about CHTs being kinda
cold, or hot, once this re-epiphany fired from my left neuron to my right
neuron I decided to give it a try.
At 26 degs BTDC my CHTs are about 440 during a long climb out, and on a hot
day will go beyond 450 if I don't drop the nose. EGTs tend to stay about
1250 when leaned to short of peak.
After a couple of initial flights yesterday with the timing set at 22.5 degs
BTDC my CHTs were in the 325 to 350 range and the EGTs were up around 1425.
Now this jives with what I would think would happen as the heat, being
started later, is now getting more rejection through the exhaust, but I am
very suprised at how much change occured between a shift of 3.5 degrees.
Since I have the cheapo CHT/EGT gauge with the funcky switches I am not very
confident in any hard numbers I am listing here, but the relative change
does seem to be significant.
Now, with all that said one might then want to discuss the effect retarding
or advancing timing will have on power. In general retarding timing away
from that maximum point where the engine will begin to misfire or detonate
will reduce power as it shifts the maximum centroid of pressure away from
that optimum range where the pressure cycle will be fully utilized
converting to the most rotational power into the crankshaft. (energy
conversion cyclically changes from 0% at 0degsTDC to 100% at 90degsATDC)
But this would only be noticed at full power since aircraft engines don't
vary timing with engine RPM or load as cars do. Well I didn't notice any
loss at full blast going down the runway, which is the only time I ever plow
around at that power setting. In fact it seemed to me that the engine was
running a tad bit smoother so may have actually felt a little more powerful.
(truely a subjective comment based upon not one schred of empirical
evidence)
In truth what has happened is this. There is some RPM value to which
Lycoming's setting of 25 degs causes the most efficeint conversion of
pressure into torque, (I would guess roughly 2300 to 2400 RPM) By changing
the timing one is just shifting where this occurs on the RPM scale. Since
reciprocating engines will vary power output with changes in timing at max
RPM, but if you don't fly at that RPM much, than your power really won't be
effected by a small change in timing. You might notice a slight change in
control knob position for a known MAP/RPM setting, but if you set it to that
MAP/RPM it will still produce the same power as before, or at least so close
that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. I'm thinking the same will
be true for fuel efficiency, but will have to fly awhile to prove that.
So,
if your CHTS are very low, or too hgh, check your timing and try moving it
few degrees(retard for cooler, advanced for hotter). I would not recommend
going over 25 degs though as these aircooled engines are low RPM, large
piston, thermally critical assemblies, just looking for a detonation to
happen.
The last thing I want to say is that I played with getting the timing exact
between the mags vs being about a deg off from each other. Although I never
flew with them at very different settings, it did ground run noticeably
smoother with them set as close to each other as possible. (one degree off
was amazingly rougher at 1500 RPM)
So if some of y'all with them fancy recording engine things wanted to try
this I would love to see the hard EGT/CHT data from say 25 degs vs 22.5 degs
at max effort and cruise climb. (I know its a total pain to get the cowl off
and change this a few times, particularly if the gasket tears as it did on
my left mag, but if you're in there tinkering, it would be way cool to see
hard accurate data)
W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Vanartsdalen <svanarts(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Camping at Copperstate |
Ah... Never trust a picture on a website. I'll be there too. Shuttling between
Holiday Inn and the airport. Thanks for the 411.
Besing"
Hot and cool. Could be too hot, depending on the year. They do NOT have
grass throughout. Most of it is dead, but they are trying to bring it back.
I'd recommend the motels in Casa Grande as well. I fly over (and land at)
PRA just about every day. I'll keep checking it out.
Paul Besing
RV-6A Sold (RV-10 Soon)
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Kitlog Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
----- Original Message -----
From:
Subject: Re: RV-List: Camping at Copperstate
>
>
> In a message dated 8/21/2004 5:04:12 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> svanarts(at)yahoo.com writes:
>
> Anyone on the list ever tent camped at Copperstate? How's access to
food?
> (It's dismal if you arrive early at OSH) What's the weather like that
time of
> year? Would I be better off in a hotel?
>
>
> ============================================
>
> Weather is still warm. The grounds there were messy due to blowing dirt
and
> hay last year. We had a motel in Casa Grande and would recommend this
> again, although they indicated that they were going to be planting grass
thruout.
>
>
> GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A C/S, flying 708 hrs)
>
>
--
Scott VanArtsdalen
RV-4 N311SV, FLYING!!
When a man does all he can
though it succeeds not well,
blame not him that did it."
-- George Washington
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaztuna(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: engine timing vs CHTs/EGTs |
Wheeler,
What the hell is wrong with you! You one of them damned radicals who
actually thinks that one repeatable test is worth a thousand expert
opinions??? :-) You hit the nail on the head, as usual.
Charlie Kuss
>
>Well,
>
>once again the list provided a useful jog to my rapidly degrading mental
>faculties. After a recent discussion with Andre B. re his fuel injection
>problems he reminded me of an old Lycoming service letter which allows most
>of the IO-360s to have their timing retarded to 20 degs from the normal
>factory setting of 25 degs used for most Lycoming engines. Although the SL
>doesn't fully explain this, it is an option for those engine installations
>where detonation and cooling are an issue.
>
>For some strange reason this finally gelled in my head with the previous
>thirty years of experience floating around in there and answered the
>question I have had in my head as to why many RVs have such a wide range of
>CHTs from one aircraft to the next given they all have the same relative
>engines(mostly).
>
>Years ago I worked in a shop where we had this strange little Mercedes two
>seater with a big ass engine in it. The engine was fairly high time and the
>owner was always complaining about how hot the thing ran. So we eventually
>went through everything including a complete teardown overhaul, reteardown
>and I finally ended up calling up the old guy in Germany who said the timing
>specs for that engine were wrong and to back them off two degrees. I whined
>about this until as it couldn't possibly have that much effect. He promtly
>reminded me who the old guy was and told me to just shut up and do it. Dang
>old guy was right, two degrees of timing retard had a major effect on the
>operating temperature of that engine.
>
>Then later on I had a few customers who regularly got stuck in border
>traffic so I retarded their timing a few degrees and voila, same thing,
>cooler temps.
>
>So, having had several conversations with many of you about CHTs being kinda
>cold, or hot, once this re-epiphany fired from my left neuron to my right
>neuron I decided to give it a try.
>
>At 26 degs BTDC my CHTs are about 440 during a long climb out, and on a hot
>day will go beyond 450 if I don't drop the nose. EGTs tend to stay about
>1250 when leaned to short of peak.
>
>After a couple of initial flights yesterday with the timing set at 22.5 degs
>BTDC my CHTs were in the 325 to 350 range and the EGTs were up around 1425.
>
>Now this jives with what I would think would happen as the heat, being
>started later, is now getting more rejection through the exhaust, but I am
>very suprised at how much change occured between a shift of 3.5 degrees.
>
>Since I have the cheapo CHT/EGT gauge with the funcky switches I am not very
>confident in any hard numbers I am listing here, but the relative change
>does seem to be significant.
>
>Now, with all that said one might then want to discuss the effect retarding
>or advancing timing will have on power. In general retarding timing away
>from that maximum point where the engine will begin to misfire or detonate
>will reduce power as it shifts the maximum centroid of pressure away from
>that optimum range where the pressure cycle will be fully utilized
>converting to the most rotational power into the crankshaft. (energy
>conversion cyclically changes from 0% at 0degsTDC to 100% at 90degsATDC)
>
>But this would only be noticed at full power since aircraft engines don't
>vary timing with engine RPM or load as cars do. Well I didn't notice any
>loss at full blast going down the runway, which is the only time I ever plow
>around at that power setting. In fact it seemed to me that the engine was
>running a tad bit smoother so may have actually felt a little more powerful.
>(truely a subjective comment based upon not one schred of empirical
>evidence)
>
>In truth what has happened is this. There is some RPM value to which
>Lycoming's setting of 25 degs causes the most efficeint conversion of
>pressure into torque, (I would guess roughly 2300 to 2400 RPM) By changing
>the timing one is just shifting where this occurs on the RPM scale. Since
>reciprocating engines will vary power output with changes in timing at max
>RPM, but if you don't fly at that RPM much, than your power really won't be
>effected by a small change in timing. You might notice a slight change in
>control knob position for a known MAP/RPM setting, but if you set it to that
>MAP/RPM it will still produce the same power as before, or at least so close
>that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. I'm thinking the same will
>be true for fuel efficiency, but will have to fly awhile to prove that.
>
>So,
>
>if your CHTS are very low, or too hgh, check your timing and try moving it
>few degrees(retard for cooler, advanced for hotter). I would not recommend
>going over 25 degs though as these aircooled engines are low RPM, large
>piston, thermally critical assemblies, just looking for a detonation to
>happen.
>
>The last thing I want to say is that I played with getting the timing exact
>between the mags vs being about a deg off from each other. Although I never
>flew with them at very different settings, it did ground run noticeably
>smoother with them set as close to each other as possible. (one degree off
>was amazingly rougher at 1500 RPM)
>
>So if some of y'all with them fancy recording engine things wanted to try
>this I would love to see the hard EGT/CHT data from say 25 degs vs 22.5 degs
>at max effort and cruise climb. (I know its a total pain to get the cowl off
>and change this a few times, particularly if the gasket tears as it did on
>my left mag, but if you're in there tinkering, it would be way cool to see
>hard accurate data)
>
>W
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Calvert" <rv6(at)cox.net> |
I am asking this for a friend who is having problems with his Navaid. He has the
Navaid coupled to a Garmin 296. When he is intercepting a course, he feels
a bump in the stick when he reaches the new course line, but instead of turning
on course, it stays on heading and doesn't make the turn.
Has anyone had this problem and resolved it?
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok
RV6 N296JC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Albert Gardner" <spudnut(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Navaid problem |
I'm using a ControlVision to drive my Navaid. If I have the Navaid trim knob
set so that I'm offset from the center line of the course, at an
intersection the Navaid will sometimes turn the wrong way to intercept the
new leg or seem ottherwise confused but if I hold the stick for a few
moments it will work OK. Is this your case or will it never intercept the
new leg?
Albert Gardner
RV-9A 872RV
Yuma, AZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Calvert" <rv6(at)cox.net>
Subject: RV-List: Navaid problem
>
> I am asking this for a friend who is having problems with his Navaid. He
has the Navaid coupled to a Garmin 296. When he is intercepting a course,
he feels a bump in the stick when he reaches the new course line, but
instead of turning on course, it stays on heading and doesn't make the turn.
>
> Has anyone had this problem and resolved it?
>
> Jerry Calvert
> Edmond Ok
> RV6 N296JC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tim Bryan" <rv6flyer(at)improvementteam.com> |
| Subject: | Wheel Fairings - Balancing Act |
Hello Listers,
Today I decided to start on my main wheel fairings. (RV-6) I have raised
the tail so the plane is in level flight. I snapped a chalk line on the
floor right down the center of the fuselage using a plumb at the tail and
one at the front center of the firewall. I have a couple of questions about
this process.
First I am wishing I had done this prior to installing the engine because of
the weight. Without the wings installed the plane doesn't seem too terribly
stable when the tail is lifted this high. I attached some weight at the
tail and tied it down to my lifted plateform. Should be OK. On the other
hand, in front the manual says to lift the plane so the main wheels are off
the ground 0-1/16th of an inch so the the mains will swing into "no load"
free position. I have a cherry picker connected to the engine hook only for
stability as I raised the tail but can I effectively and safely pick up the
front of the plane with this hook?
Second, using my chalk line and trying to get a measurement of the center
line on the wheel pants while they are resting unattached on a 1" block of
wood sitting on the tire and the tail resting on a coffee can at 8 5/8" off
the floor seems like a pretty shakey way to get these things within the 1/4"
the plans call for. Does somebody have a suggestion for an easier way to
accomplish this process?
Trying to get this accomplished reasonably without having a wreck. Any
ideas, comments, etc. would be appreciated.
Tim Bryan
RV-6 N616TB
Getting Done This Year!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Navaid problem |
Jerry Calvert wrote:
>
> I am asking this for a friend who is having problems with his Navaid.
> He has the Navaid coupled to a Garmin 296. When he is intercepting a
> course, he feels a bump in the stick when he reaches the new course
> line, but instead of turning on course, it stays on heading and
> doesn't make the turn.
>
> Has anyone had this problem and resolved it?
My Navaid *usually* worked quite well at tracking a course if the nose
of the plane was pointed nearly at the waypoint when the autopilot was
engaged and the trims set properly, but it never was able to
consistently intercept a course. From my 450 hrs of experience with the
Navaid, I found reliable course intercepts was beyond the capabilities
of my Navaid.
There is a way to absolutely fix this problem, but it involves leaving
the Navaid at home......... :-)
Sam Buchanan (RV-6, AlTrak and EZ-Pilot autopilots)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel Fairings - Balancing Act |
In a message dated 8/22/2004 8:08:45 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
rv6flyer(at)improvementteam.com writes:
Today I decided to start on my main wheel fairings. (RV-6) I have raised
the tail so the plane is in level flight. I snapped a chalk line on the
floor right down the center of the fuselage using a plumb at the tail and
one at the front center of the firewall. I have a couple of questions about
this process.
First I am wishing I had done this prior to installing the engine because of
the weight. Without the wings installed the plane doesn't seem too terribly
stable when the tail is lifted this high. I attached some weight at the
tail and tied it down to my lifted platform. Should be OK. On the other
hand, in front the manual says to lift the plane so the main wheels are off
the ground 0-1/16th of an inch so the mains will swing into "no load"
free position. I have a cherry picker connected to the engine hook only for
stability as I raised the tail but can I effectively and safely pick up the
front of the plane with this hook?
==================================
I would encourage you to use cables or straps to some other portion of the
engine mount rather than risk carrying to much mass with the engine hook.
Some rope or nylon straps would be better and more stabilizing as you can
connect to several more outboard members.
GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A C/S, flying 710 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Skylor Piper <skylor4(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV8 one piece wings skins |
It's been awhile since I've read the report of the
"other" structural failure, and I must admit that I
don't recall all the details. I'll see if I can find
it this week.
I do recall that it was an RV-8 in California on its
way to a fly in several years ago. I believe it was
VFR into IMC by a non IFR pilot, and a witness saw it
come spinning out of the clouds without part of a
wing. Like N58RV, the wing failed around the inboard
end of the aileron (I recall).
I agree with Kevin's point of view that you can't
arbitrarily install a heavier one piece skin and
expect that will strengthen the wing under all
conditions. Lighter planes are definitely better.
My only point was that there "may" be some benefit of
the heavier one piece skin, at list in the two
instances where the wing failed mid span. Ultimately,
the answer to the that question lies with a
knowledgeable structural engineer or the aircraft
designer.
Skylor
--- Jerry Springer wrote:
>
>
> Skylor Piper wrote:
>
>
> >
> >
> >--- Kevin Horton wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Sure, the outboard wing would be a bit stronger,
> but
> >>the inboard wing
> >>would be the same as before. The extra strength
> in
> >>the outboard wing
> >>is irrelevant...snip...
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >>Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
> >>Ottawa, Canada
> >>http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Are you sure about that? The two RV-8's that had
> >in-flight structural failures (that I know about)
> had
> >the wings fail right at the inboard edge of the
> aileron.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> Skylor what were the deaails of the second in flight
> failure?
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
> Contributions
> any other
> Forums.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/chat
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV8 one piece wings skins |
Skylor Piper wrote:
>
>It's been awhile since I've read the report of the
>"other" structural failure, and I must admit that I
>don't recall all the details. I'll see if I can find
>it this week.
>
>
http://www2.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id 031009X01690&key=1
If this is the one you are referring to I do not believe wing skins
would have made a difference, nor was it in anyway the fault
of the aircraft. If you read the entire report the wings were still
attached and both wing leading edges were crushed back.
I really hate it when misinformation gets spread around about the
airplanes we build and fly.
If you have other information I would love to see the report.
Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Calvert" <rv6(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Navaid problem |
The virtues of early technology!
Thanks Sam,
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok
RV6 N296JC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Buchanan" <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Navaid problem
>
> Jerry Calvert wrote:
>
> >
> > I am asking this for a friend who is having problems with his Navaid.
> > He has the Navaid coupled to a Garmin 296. When he is intercepting a
> > course, he feels a bump in the stick when he reaches the new course
> > line, but instead of turning on course, it stays on heading and
> > doesn't make the turn.
> >
> > Has anyone had this problem and resolved it?
>
>
> My Navaid *usually* worked quite well at tracking a course if the nose
> of the plane was pointed nearly at the waypoint when the autopilot was
> engaged and the trims set properly, but it never was able to
> consistently intercept a course. From my 450 hrs of experience with the
> Navaid, I found reliable course intercepts was beyond the capabilities
> of my Navaid.
>
> There is a way to absolutely fix this problem, but it involves leaving
> the Navaid at home......... :-)
>
> Sam Buchanan (RV-6, AlTrak and EZ-Pilot autopilots)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Calvert" <rv6(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Navaid problem |
It never intercepts the course. Just a twitch in the stick as it goes by
the course.Thanks for the input.
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok
RV6 N29JC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Albert Gardner" <spudnut(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Navaid problem
>
> I'm using a ControlVision to drive my Navaid. If I have the Navaid trim
knob
> set so that I'm offset from the center line of the course, at an
> intersection the Navaid will sometimes turn the wrong way to intercept the
> new leg or seem ottherwise confused but if I hold the stick for a few
> moments it will work OK. Is this your case or will it never intercept the
> new leg?
> Albert Gardner
> RV-9A 872RV
> Yuma, AZ
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jerry Calvert" <rv6(at)cox.net>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Navaid problem
>
>
> >
> > I am asking this for a friend who is having problems with his Navaid.
He
> has the Navaid coupled to a Garmin 296. When he is intercepting a course,
> he feels a bump in the stick when he reaches the new course line, but
> instead of turning on course, it stays on heading and doesn't make the
turn.
> >
> > Has anyone had this problem and resolved it?
> >
> > Jerry Calvert
> > Edmond Ok
> > RV6 N296JC
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re:2nd RV8 breakup?? |
In a message dated 8/23/2004 1:59:48 AM Central Daylight Time,
rv-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
From: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV8 one piece wings skins
Skylor Piper wrote:
>
>It's been awhile since I've read the report of the
>"other" structural failure, and I must admit that I
>don't recall all the details. I'll see if I can find
>it this week.
>
>
http://www2.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id 031009X01690&key=1
If this is the one you are referring to I do not believe wing skins
would have made a difference, nor was it in anyway the fault
of the aircraft. If you read the entire report the wings were still
attached and both wing leading edges were crushed back.
I really hate it when misinformation gets spread around about the
airplanes we build and fly.
If you have other information I would love to see the report.
Jerry
Hi All:
This accident involved my friends Earnest & Marketta Woodard (Falcon 2). I
heard nothing of any structural problems, and I seriously doubt any were a
factor -- it was yet another case of VFR flight into IMC....ugh...
Jerry: If you're going to be the 'Misinformation Cop', you'll have a lot of
job security.
Regards
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronnie Brown" <romott(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Navaid problem |
The Navaid Autopilot course tracking mode is a relatively simple automatic controller
having only gain control - no integral or derivative control incorporated.
It took me a while to figure this out, but here's the deal:
The error correction output of the Navaid for course deviation is proportional
to the amount of error off course. It does not have any thing to get you completely
back on course over time (integral control does this).
You have to do provide your own "integral control" with the trim knob. At first,
I thought my Navaid was not doing a very good job of tracking course. But
after using the trim knob to eliminate course deviation, I have found the Navaid
does an excellent job. It just isn't as sophisticated as newer autopilots.
But it does do a good job if you understand how to use it.
The Navaid manual also states that it is not designed to intercept a course, you
have to point your plane in the desired heading before engaging the course tracking
mode.
Try using the trim knob (left knob) more, you'll be a lot happier with your Navaid.
Oh and by the way, the accuracy of GPS makes the Navaid appear less capable - if
you were only tracking VOR's and didn't see the course error with such great
accuracy (1 degree), you'd not notice the problem so much.
Ronnie Brown
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Skylor Piper <skylor4(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV8 one piece wings skins |
No, this was not the accident that I was referring.
In fact, the texas crash involved a plane that both of
my parents had flown in, but that was before it was
sold to the owners involved in the accident.
--- Jerry Springer wrote:
>
>
> Skylor Piper wrote:
>
>
> >
> >It's been awhile since I've read the report of the
> >"other" structural failure, and I must admit that I
> >don't recall all the details. I'll see if I can
> find
> >it this week.
> >
> >
>
http://www2.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id 031009X01690&key=1
>
>
> If this is the one you are referring to I do not
> believe wing skins
> would have made a difference, nor was it in anyway
> the fault
> of the aircraft. If you read the entire report the
> wings were still
> attached and both wing leading edges were crushed
> back.
> I really hate it when misinformation gets spread
> around about the
> airplanes we build and fly.
>
> If you have other information I would love to see
> the report.
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
> Contributions
> any other
> Forums.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/chat
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Skylor Piper <skylor4(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV8 one piece wings skins |
OK, this will teach me to "keep my mouth shut" until I
have all my facts together. The accident that I was
referring to was an RV-3, and the wing separated at
the fuselage. Oh well...
--- Skylor Piper wrote:
>
>
> It's been awhile since I've read the report of the
> "other" structural failure, and I must admit that I
> don't recall all the details. I'll see if I can
> find
> it this week.
>
> I do recall that it was an RV-8 in California on its
> way to a fly in several years ago. I believe it was
> VFR into IMC by a non IFR pilot, and a witness saw
> it
> come spinning out of the clouds without part of a
> wing. Like N58RV, the wing failed around the
> inboard
> end of the aileron (I recall).
>
> I agree with Kevin's point of view that you can't
> arbitrarily install a heavier one piece skin and
> expect that will strengthen the wing under all
> conditions. Lighter planes are definitely better.
>
> My only point was that there "may" be some benefit
> of
> the heavier one piece skin, at list in the two
> instances where the wing failed mid span.
> Ultimately,
> the answer to the that question lies with a
> knowledgeable structural engineer or the aircraft
> designer.
>
> Skylor
>
> --- Jerry Springer wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Skylor Piper wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >--- Kevin Horton wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>Sure, the outboard wing would be a bit stronger,
> > but
> > >>the inboard wing
> > >>would be the same as before. The extra strength
> > in
> > >>the outboard wing
> > >>is irrelevant...snip...
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
> > >>Ottawa, Canada
> > >>http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >Are you sure about that? The two RV-8's that had
> > >in-flight structural failures (that I know about)
> > had
> > >the wings fail right at the inboard edge of the
> > aileron.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > Skylor what were the deaails of the second in
> flight
> > failure?
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> >
> >
> > Contributions
> > any other
> > Forums.
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/chat
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> > http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm
> > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________
>
>
>
> Contributions
> any other
> Forums.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/chat
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV8 one piece wings skins |
Can you be more specific? A accident like you mentioned would have been all
over the E-mail lists.
>
>No, this was not the accident that I was referring.
>In fact, the texas crash involved a plane that both of
>my parents had flown in, but that was before it was
>sold to the owners involved in the accident.
>--- Jerry Springer wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Skylor Piper wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > >It's been awhile since I've read the report of the
> > >"other" structural failure, and I must admit that I
> > >don't recall all the details. I'll see if I can
> > find
> > >it this week.
> > >
> > >
> >
>http://www2.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id 031009X01690&key=1
> >
> >
> > If this is the one you are referring to I do not
> > believe wing skins
> > would have made a difference, nor was it in anyway
> > the fault
> > of the aircraft. If you read the entire report the
> > wings were still
> > attached and both wing leading edges were crushed
> > back.
> > I really hate it when misinformation gets spread
> > around about the
> > airplanes we build and fly.
> >
> > If you have other information I would love to see
> > the report.
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> >
> >
> > Contributions
> > any other
> > Forums.
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/chat
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> > http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm
> > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>__________________________________
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matthew Brandes" <matthew(at)n523rv.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Compass liquid |
Thanks for all the responses. I'm kind of surprised at the number of
responses and options. I found some compass fluid at ACS but if Chuck can
find his overhaul kits, I'll take his offer.
Thanks!
Matthew Brandes,
Van's RV-9A (Fuselage)
EAA Chapter 868/91/1329
www.n523rv.com <http://www.n523rv.com/>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Navaid problem |
Ronnie Brown wrote:
>
> The Navaid manual also states that it is not designed to intercept a
> course, you have to point your plane in the desired heading before
> engaging the course tracking mode.
>
> Try using the trim knob (left knob) more, you'll be a lot happier
> with your Navaid.
The advice to use the Navaid trim knob properly is indeed crucial to
getting the Navaid to track accurately. A feature that I found few
Navaid users that I've talked with using is the ability of the unit to
track an offset course. Usually you must have the trim set just right to
get the Navaid to hold a tight course, but it the trim is intentionally
cranked to one side after the Navaid is tracking properly, it will track
a parallel course offset up to a mile or so.
This is helpful if you are approaching a area you wish to avoid flying
over (power plant, tower, C172, etc) but don't want to disengage the
Navaid and have to set it up again. Just rack the trim full over and the
unit will wander off in that direction and eventually return to the
original heading while flying a parallel course to the original
courseline. After passing the 172, recenter the trim and the Navaid will
return, more or less, to the original course.
The Navaid generally works quite well for simply tracking a course, but
it's kinda like the old analog TV set; you must tweak the tuning knob
just right and some chewing gum foil on the rabbit ears sometimes helps
as well. :-)
The feature set and performance of the digital autopilots is far beyond
what the venerable Navaid is capable of providing. Technology marches on!
Sam Buchanan
http://thervjournal.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "cgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: RV8 one piece wings skins |
Van has already modified the RV-3 spar to prevent such happenings.
Cy Galley
Safety Programs Editor
Always looking for ideas and articles for EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "Skylor Piper" <skylor4(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV8 one piece wings skins
>
> OK, this will teach me to "keep my mouth shut" until I
> have all my facts together. The accident that I was
> referring to was an RV-3, and the wing separated at
> the fuselage. Oh well...
> --- Skylor Piper wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > It's been awhile since I've read the report of the
> > "other" structural failure, and I must admit that I
> > don't recall all the details. I'll see if I can
> > find
> > it this week.
> >
> > I do recall that it was an RV-8 in California on its
> > way to a fly in several years ago. I believe it was
> > VFR into IMC by a non IFR pilot, and a witness saw
> > it
> > come spinning out of the clouds without part of a
> > wing. Like N58RV, the wing failed around the
> > inboard
> > end of the aileron (I recall).
> >
> > I agree with Kevin's point of view that you can't
> > arbitrarily install a heavier one piece skin and
> > expect that will strengthen the wing under all
> > conditions. Lighter planes are definitely better.
> >
> > My only point was that there "may" be some benefit
> > of
> > the heavier one piece skin, at list in the two
> > instances where the wing failed mid span.
> > Ultimately,
> > the answer to the that question lies with a
> > knowledgeable structural engineer or the aircraft
> > designer.
> >
> > Skylor
> >
> > --- Jerry Springer wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Skylor Piper wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >--- Kevin Horton wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>Sure, the outboard wing would be a bit stronger,
> > > but
> > > >>the inboard wing
> > > >>would be the same as before. The extra strength
> > > in
> > > >>the outboard wing
> > > >>is irrelevant...snip...
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
> > > >>Ottawa, Canada
> > > >>http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >Are you sure about that? The two RV-8's that had
> > > >in-flight structural failures (that I know about)
> > > had
> > > >the wings fail right at the inboard edge of the
> > > aileron.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Skylor what were the deaails of the second in
> > flight
> > > failure?
> > >
> > > Jerry
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Contributions
> > > any other
> > > Forums.
> > >
> > > http://www.matronics.com/chat
> > >
> > > http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> > > http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm
> > > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> > > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________
> >
> >
> >
> > Contributions
> > any other
> > Forums.
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/chat
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> > http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm
> > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | excess cylinder flashing |
| From: | "Frazier, Vincent A" <VFrazier(at)usi.edu> |
Guys,
Online chatter has accused excess cylinder flashing of causing high
CHT's. Some have said that they used several hours and several drill
bits to clean it out. Here's how I did it. Takes about an hour to do.
http://www.usi.edu/science/chemistry/vfrazier/Engine%20and%20Prop.htm
I can't say if it helps cooling, but it certainly looks like it would.
Vince Frazier
3965 Caborn Road
Mount Vernon, IN 47620
812-464-1839 work
812-985-7309 home
F-1H Rocket, N540VF
http://www.usi.edu/science/chemistry/vfrazier/page1.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oldsfolks(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re:Wheel Fairings-Balancing Act |
When I did the main gear fairings on our RV-4 I used wing jacks to lift the
plane. My jacks lift via 3/8" bolts, screwed into the wing tie-down fittings
,and they sit in a pipe socket welded atop the jack. ( NO slipping here) I
placed the tailwheel on a table, with appropiate blocking, to level the plane.
I
had to put weight on the horizontal stabilizer to keep the tail down. Place
the weight close to the verticle fin.
With the plane supported off the floor and level I had the proper flight
attitude for aligning the fairings.
I can email pic's of my jacks if that would help.
Bob Olds RV-4 , N1191X
A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor
Charleston,Arkansas
Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Furey" <john(at)fureychrysler.com> |
| Subject: | excess cylinder flashing |
I agree with all that is said. I used a dremmel with a file in the
chuck-same rules apply. No scientific data but I think I could back up a 20
degree drop on the worst ones.
John Furey
RV6A O-320
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "sdellangelo(at)netzero.com" <sdellangelo(at)netzero.com> |
| Subject: | Anybody with experience with both Trutrak and Trio? |
I am looking to install either the pictoral pilot (the 3 1/8" one with the ball
incorporated into it, which they claimed at Oshkosh would be out soon for "another
$50") or the EZ pilot II. Can anybody who has experience with both give
me any pros or cons one way or the other between them. I know the EZ pilot is
~$300 cheaper. Both look to come with installation hardware (the tru trak stuff
"looks" nicer and the setup would be at the wing bellcrank, and the EZ pilot
would attach to the control tube probably under the seats?). I definitely
want the turn coordinator function to backup the Dynon, but they both do that
and both have (will have) a ball.
How about the performance difference or anything else?
Thanks,
Scott DellAngelo
#90598 fuselage
Plainfield, IL
Only $14.95/ month -visit www.netzero.com to sign up today!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Anybody with experience with both Trutrak and Trio? |
-----Original Message-----
Subject: RV-List: Anybody with experience with both Trutrak and Trio?
Both look to come with installation hardware (the tru trak stuff "looks"
nicer and the setup would be at the wing bellcrank, and the EZ pilot
would attach to the control tube probably under the seats?).
Scott DellAngelo
Scott,
TruTrak now has an under the seat installation. Call them for details.
Ross Mickey
N9PT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Anybody with experience with both Trutrak and Trio? |
sdellangelo(at)netzero.com wrote:
>
>
>
> I am looking to install either the pictoral pilot (the 3 1/8" one
> with the ball incorporated into it, which they claimed at Oshkosh
> would be out soon for "another $50") or the EZ pilot II. Can anybody
> who has experience with both give me any pros or cons one way or the
> other between them. I know the EZ pilot is ~$300 cheaper. Both look
> to come with installation hardware (the tru trak stuff "looks" nicer
> and the setup would be at the wing bellcrank, and the EZ pilot would
> attach to the control tube probably under the seats?). I definitely
> want the turn coordinator function to backup the Dynon, but they both
> do that and both have (will have) a ball.
>
> How about the performance difference or anything else?
>
> Thanks, Scott DellAngelo #90598 fuselage Plainfield, IL
Even though I can't address the request for a comparison between the
pictorial pilot and the EZ-Pilot since I have never flown the TruTrak
unit, there are a couple of other issues raised in the above post that
are worthy of comment.
The EZ-Pilot servo can be mounted in a variety of locations since it is
a Navaid servo that has faithfully served the experimental market many
years in a wide range of installations. The servo can be located under
seat pans, at mid-wing, or at the wing tip. Fabricating mounting
hardware and actuating stuff for servo installations is fairly simple
and limited only by the builder's imagination. The TruTrak servo is a
step-motor which is considerably heavier than the EZ-Pilot unit but it
likewise is suitable for various locations in the plane, even though I
would be reluctant to mount it at the wing tip due to the weight of the
servo.
No doubt what I am now about to state will be subject to disagreement by
many pilots, but in my opinion the presence or lack of a turn
coordinator display (analog or digital) in a panel with an autopilot is
vastly overblown. I can assure you that if the Dynon were to go belly-up
in my RV-6 while I was flying on instruments, whether or not I have a
T/C in the panel will be the last of my concerns. Before you can say
"Vertigo" I will have the autopilot flying the plane (if it isn't
already) and will let the EZ-Pilot direct the plane to any vectors I
input. There is NO WAY I am going to rely on flying partial panel via a
T/C when there is a functioning autopilot on board!!!!
I frequently conduct practice flights using just the AnywhereMap, the
AlTrak, and the EZ-Pilot for all maneuvers except takeoffs and very
short final. It is easy to conduct 500 fpm climbs and descents while the
EZ-Pilot holds heading, and the AlTrak will hold altitude while the
EZ-Pilot changes headings. I can even shoot a "virtual" ILS approach
into ANY paved runway using the AnyWhereMap system (keeping in mind
possible obstructions near the airport) and letting the autopilot slide
the plane down final. This is not condoned by any experimental
single-axis autopilot manufacturer, but I practice it so I can receive
full benefit of ALL the equipment in the panel should things get ugly.
During all the above, the turn coordinator is a non-issue. So if having
a T/C display is still important to you, so be it. But if there is an
operable autopilot in the panel, I just can't see where the presence of
a T/C display is a factor. Remember, if you have staked your flight on
an autopilot based T/C, it will be dead if the autopilot is off-line.
But if the electrical system is well-designed, it is unlikely both the
EFIS and autopilot will expire simultaneously.
Sam Buchanan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LeastDrag93066(at)aol.com |
Hi All,
The first propellers ordered from MT Propellers are just now starting to be
delivered.
I can still accept addition propeller orders for an MT Propeller at the
special price.
MT Propeller manufactures a very nice electric CS propeller for the solid
crankshaft Lycoming. There are electric CS propellers designed for the
Lycoming 320, 360 and 540 engine.
MT Propeller custom designs their propeller for the engine/airframe and
expected performance. They have electric CS propellers available to match the
alternative engines which have the standard SAE (and some other) propeller
flanges.
Of course, hydraulic CS propellers are also available.
2 blade CS propellers.
3 blade CS propellers.
(2nd order harmonic removed. Much smoother running than 2 blade.)
4 blade CS propeller.
(John Harmon said that the four blade MT Propeller he tried was the
smoothest running propeller he has ever flown. And he had previously flown the
3
blade MT Propeller.)
Regards,
Jim Ayers
_jim(at)lessdrag.com_ (mailto:jim(at)lessdrag.com)
RV-3 LOM M332A engine 3 blade electric CS MT propeller
Less Drag Products, Inc.
_www.lessdrag.com_ (http://www.lessdrag.com)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | UHMW temperature rating |
Howdy,
Does anyone know what the temperature rating for UHMW tape (the kind
used for flaps) is? I'd like to use some on the cowl, where it is
rubbing on the camlocks, but I don't know if it'll take the heat.
Thanks
Jeff Point
RV-6
Milwaukee WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: UHMW temperature rating |
I wouldn't hesitate at least to test it at first on an inconspicuous spot.
According to McMaster's web site, the UHMW polyethylene tape they sell (go
to http://www.mcmaster.com and enter "76445A761" in the Find box) is
rated -40F to +220F. I don't know if this is comparable to the stuff Van's
sells.
One of these days I want to temp probe my cowl after shutdown on a hot day
in the sun and see how high those under-cowl temps get.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Point" <jpoint(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: RV-List: UHMW temperature rating
>
> Howdy,
>
> Does anyone know what the temperature rating for UHMW tape (the kind
> used for flaps) is? I'd like to use some on the cowl, where it is
> rubbing on the camlocks, but I don't know if it'll take the heat.
>
> Thanks
> Jeff Point
> RV-6
> Milwaukee WI
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: UHMW temperature rating |
Mine is holding up just fine, exactly where you want to use it, 190 Hrs,
going strong.
>
>Howdy,
>
>Does anyone know what the temperature rating for UHMW tape (the kind
>used for flaps) is? I'd like to use some on the cowl, where it is
>rubbing on the camlocks, but I don't know if it'll take the heat.
>
>Thanks
>Jeff Point
>RV-6
>Milwaukee WI
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | UHMW temperature rating |
Hi Jeff,
I believe the UHMW tape that I sell has a temp range of: -40oF to 225oF.
My tape sheets say that should be accurate for most UHWM tape, but I can't
say for sure. I think Van's sells the same stuff I do. I have UHMW tape
all over the place (it's the best thing since sliced cheese) to keep
anything that "rubs" from making a mark. I also have some on my cowl along
the camlock strips, as well as the intersection fairings, canopy slider
tracks, flaps, etc..
Hope this helps!
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 Jeff Point
Subject: RV-List: UHMW temperature rating
Howdy,
Does anyone know what the temperature rating for UHMW tape (the kind
used for flaps) is? I'd like to use some on the cowl, where it is
rubbing on the camlocks, but I don't know if it'll take the heat.
Thanks
Jeff Point
RV-6
Milwaukee WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us> |
io-360-a1b6d
Not sure, but this is the one excluded, and the last 6 refers to a 6th order
counterweight and the D refers to a dual magneto. I expect the counter
weight was found to be needed with the dual mag to prevent some harmonic
problem, to which changing the timing negatively impacted the fix.
But that is a guess on my part as I wasn't there when they designed this
one.
W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Donald Mei" <don_mei(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | H2AD series engines |
Steve,
Your thought:
**Why anybody would build a $60,000 airplane and finish it off with a $4000
engine is beyond my reasoning. **
Is a little ignorant of the financial realities for some builders. There
are RV builders whose total aircraft budget is roughly equivalent to the
total cost of an AEIO-360 .
There's fewer of these kinds of builders than there used to be, but they are
out there. (I would even venture that if Van himself were a builder, that
is the way he'd think - light, cheap and simple) In fact, one of the
attractions of the RV series, historically has been that you could build a
nice simple VFR airplane for $35K that handled great and cruised at 150 kts.
The problems with the O320-H2AD are well documented, as are the fixes to
those problems. Espescially with the choices we have in the Experimental
class, this may be a good base for someone who is handy and on a budget.
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: | Laird Owens <owens(at)aerovironment.com> |
| Subject: | Re: UHMW temperature rating |
The UHMW is good for most applications under the cowl, but it's the
adhesive that gives up first.
I put some on the baffles where they rub on the cylinder. After I
pulled the engine some repairs, the UHMW was still on the baffles
(worse for the wear) but the adhesive was a mess to clean off.
I wouldn't hesitate to use it as a rub strip anywhere on the cowl.
Laird RV-6 950hrs
SoCal
On Aug 23, 2004, at 1:55 PM, Dan Checkoway wrote:
>
> I wouldn't hesitate at least to test it at first on an inconspicuous
> spot.
> According to McMaster's web site, the UHMW polyethylene tape they sell
> (go
> to http://www.mcmaster.com and enter "76445A761" in the Find box) is
> rated -40F to +220F. I don't know if this is comparable to the stuff
> Van's
> sells.
>
> One of these days I want to temp probe my cowl after shutdown on a hot
> day
> in the sun and see how high those under-cowl temps get.
>
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Point" <jpoint(at)mindspring.com>
> To: "RV List" ;
> Subject: RV-List: UHMW temperature rating
>
>
>>
>> Howdy,
>>
>> Does anyone know what the temperature rating for UHMW tape (the kind
>> used for flaps) is? I'd like to use some on the cowl, where it is
>> rubbing on the camlocks, but I don't know if it'll take the heat.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Jeff Point
>> RV-6
>> Milwaukee WI
>>
>>
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: io-360-a1b6d |
> io-360-a1b6d
>
> Not sure, but this is the one excluded, and the last 6 refers to a 6th
order
> counterweight and the D refers to a dual magneto. I expect the counter
> weight was found to be needed with the dual mag to prevent some harmonic
> problem, to which changing the timing negatively impacted the fix.
Not quite...the "D" only means dual mag and is irrespective of
counterweights. Likewise the "6" is independent of mag style, and just
means the crankshaft is "equipped with one 6.3 order and one 8th order
counterweights." (I'm quoting the TCDS)
You can find the dual mag on some "D" model engines that don't have the "6"
counterweights, i.e. the -E1AD or -E1BD.
What the "6" model counterweights achieve is *no RPM operating limitations*
on a typical Hartzell prop. Take a look at the Hartzell TCDS and you'll see
that a Hartzell C2YK or C2YR with the "7666" series blade has the following
placards required:
IO-360-A1A or -A1B: "Avoid continuous operation between 2000 and 2250 RPM"
IO-360-A1B6 or -A1B6D: "none"
The counterweights have more to do with propeller dynamics than anything
else, to the best of my knowledge.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shemp" <shempdowling(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Anybody with experience with both Trutrak and Trio? |
What about FAR's? What qualifies for your turn and bank?
Shemp
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Buchanan" <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Anybody with experience with both Trutrak and Trio?
>
> sdellangelo(at)netzero.com wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > I am looking to install either the pictoral pilot (the 3 1/8" one
> > with the ball incorporated into it, which they claimed at Oshkosh
> > would be out soon for "another $50") or the EZ pilot II. Can anybody
> > who has experience with both give me any pros or cons one way or the
> > other between them. I know the EZ pilot is ~$300 cheaper. Both look
> > to come with installation hardware (the tru trak stuff "looks" nicer
> > and the setup would be at the wing bellcrank, and the EZ pilot would
> > attach to the control tube probably under the seats?). I definitely
> > want the turn coordinator function to backup the Dynon, but they both
> > do that and both have (will have) a ball.
> >
> > How about the performance difference or anything else?
> >
> > Thanks, Scott DellAngelo #90598 fuselage Plainfield, IL
>
>
> Even though I can't address the request for a comparison between the
> pictorial pilot and the EZ-Pilot since I have never flown the TruTrak
> unit, there are a couple of other issues raised in the above post that
> are worthy of comment.
>
> The EZ-Pilot servo can be mounted in a variety of locations since it is
> a Navaid servo that has faithfully served the experimental market many
> years in a wide range of installations. The servo can be located under
> seat pans, at mid-wing, or at the wing tip. Fabricating mounting
> hardware and actuating stuff for servo installations is fairly simple
> and limited only by the builder's imagination. The TruTrak servo is a
> step-motor which is considerably heavier than the EZ-Pilot unit but it
> likewise is suitable for various locations in the plane, even though I
> would be reluctant to mount it at the wing tip due to the weight of the
> servo.
>
> No doubt what I am now about to state will be subject to disagreement by
> many pilots, but in my opinion the presence or lack of a turn
> coordinator display (analog or digital) in a panel with an autopilot is
> vastly overblown. I can assure you that if the Dynon were to go belly-up
> in my RV-6 while I was flying on instruments, whether or not I have a
> T/C in the panel will be the last of my concerns. Before you can say
> "Vertigo" I will have the autopilot flying the plane (if it isn't
> already) and will let the EZ-Pilot direct the plane to any vectors I
> input. There is NO WAY I am going to rely on flying partial panel via a
> T/C when there is a functioning autopilot on board!!!!
>
> I frequently conduct practice flights using just the AnywhereMap, the
> AlTrak, and the EZ-Pilot for all maneuvers except takeoffs and very
> short final. It is easy to conduct 500 fpm climbs and descents while the
> EZ-Pilot holds heading, and the AlTrak will hold altitude while the
> EZ-Pilot changes headings. I can even shoot a "virtual" ILS approach
> into ANY paved runway using the AnyWhereMap system (keeping in mind
> possible obstructions near the airport) and letting the autopilot slide
> the plane down final. This is not condoned by any experimental
> single-axis autopilot manufacturer, but I practice it so I can receive
> full benefit of ALL the equipment in the panel should things get ugly.
>
> During all the above, the turn coordinator is a non-issue. So if having
> a T/C display is still important to you, so be it. But if there is an
> operable autopilot in the panel, I just can't see where the presence of
> a T/C display is a factor. Remember, if you have staked your flight on
> an autopilot based T/C, it will be dead if the autopilot is off-line.
> But if the electrical system is well-designed, it is unlikely both the
> EFIS and autopilot will expire simultaneously.
>
> Sam Buchanan
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Anybody with experience with both Trutrak and Trio? |
Shemp wrote:
>
> What about FAR's? What qualifies for your turn and bank?
>
> Shemp
The Navaid, DigiTrak and EZ-Pilot all have turn coordinator displays.
My point was that if forced into a partial panel situation, I would let
the autopilot keep the shiny side up instead of hand flying with a turn
coordinator.
Sam Buchanan
==============================
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sam Buchanan" <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Anybody with experience with both Trutrak and Trio?
>
>
>
>>
>>sdellangelo(at)netzero.com wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>I am looking to install either the pictoral pilot (the 3 1/8" one
>>>with the ball incorporated into it, which they claimed at Oshkosh
>>>would be out soon for "another $50") or the EZ pilot II. Can anybody
>>>who has experience with both give me any pros or cons one way or the
>>>other between them. I know the EZ pilot is ~$300 cheaper. Both look
>>>to come with installation hardware (the tru trak stuff "looks" nicer
>>>and the setup would be at the wing bellcrank, and the EZ pilot would
>>>attach to the control tube probably under the seats?). I definitely
>>>want the turn coordinator function to backup the Dynon, but they both
>>>do that and both have (will have) a ball.
>>>
>>>How about the performance difference or anything else?
>>>
>>>Thanks, Scott DellAngelo #90598 fuselage Plainfield, IL
>>
>>
>>Even though I can't address the request for a comparison between the
>>pictorial pilot and the EZ-Pilot since I have never flown the TruTrak
>>unit, there are a couple of other issues raised in the above post that
>>are worthy of comment.
>>
>>The EZ-Pilot servo can be mounted in a variety of locations since it is
>>a Navaid servo that has faithfully served the experimental market many
>>years in a wide range of installations. The servo can be located under
>>seat pans, at mid-wing, or at the wing tip. Fabricating mounting
>>hardware and actuating stuff for servo installations is fairly simple
>>and limited only by the builder's imagination. The TruTrak servo is a
>>step-motor which is considerably heavier than the EZ-Pilot unit but it
>>likewise is suitable for various locations in the plane, even though I
>>would be reluctant to mount it at the wing tip due to the weight of the
>>servo.
>>
>>No doubt what I am now about to state will be subject to disagreement by
>>many pilots, but in my opinion the presence or lack of a turn
>>coordinator display (analog or digital) in a panel with an autopilot is
>>vastly overblown. I can assure you that if the Dynon were to go belly-up
>>in my RV-6 while I was flying on instruments, whether or not I have a
>>T/C in the panel will be the last of my concerns. Before you can say
>>"Vertigo" I will have the autopilot flying the plane (if it isn't
>>already) and will let the EZ-Pilot direct the plane to any vectors I
>>input. There is NO WAY I am going to rely on flying partial panel via a
>>T/C when there is a functioning autopilot on board!!!!
>>
>>I frequently conduct practice flights using just the AnywhereMap, the
>>AlTrak, and the EZ-Pilot for all maneuvers except takeoffs and very
>>short final. It is easy to conduct 500 fpm climbs and descents while the
>>EZ-Pilot holds heading, and the AlTrak will hold altitude while the
>>EZ-Pilot changes headings. I can even shoot a "virtual" ILS approach
>>into ANY paved runway using the AnyWhereMap system (keeping in mind
>>possible obstructions near the airport) and letting the autopilot slide
>>the plane down final. This is not condoned by any experimental
>>single-axis autopilot manufacturer, but I practice it so I can receive
>>full benefit of ALL the equipment in the panel should things get ugly.
>>
>>During all the above, the turn coordinator is a non-issue. So if having
>>a T/C display is still important to you, so be it. But if there is an
>>operable autopilot in the panel, I just can't see where the presence of
>>a T/C display is a factor. Remember, if you have staked your flight on
>>an autopilot based T/C, it will be dead if the autopilot is off-line.
>>But if the electrical system is well-designed, it is unlikely both the
>>EFIS and autopilot will expire simultaneously.
>>
>>Sam Buchanan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <groves(at)epix.net> |
Hello everyine!!
I was wondering can you get gretz pitot tubes unheated?
Thanks,
Kirk RV-8 Wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Knight <knightair(at)lv.rmci.net> |
| Subject: | Knight Aircraft Interiors/Upholstery |
RV Builders:
I have been in the upholstery business for 30 years and have been making
upholstery products for kitplanes for 18 years. I have interior kits
available for RV-4, RV-6, RV-6A, and RV-8. I also have cabin covers and
other items. I am the supplier of upholstery products for several kitplane
manufacturers. A list of other kitplane interior products available upon
request.
For more information, call Knight Aircraft Interiors, Inc., at (702)
207-6681 or e mail me at knightair(at)lv.rmci.net. If you e-mail for
information, please mention either "Knight" or "Upholstery" in your
reference line so I can give your request my immediate attention. Photos
available upon request.
Sincerely,
KNIGHT AIRCRAFT INTERIORS, INC.
"Fly by Knight" Upholstery Products
Sam Knight
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: UHMW temperature rating |
In a message dated 8/23/2004 1:12:37 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
jpoint(at)mindspring.com writes:
Does anyone know what the temperature rating for UHMW tape (the kind
used for flaps) is? I'd like to use some on the cowl, where it is
rubbing on the camlocks, but I don't know if it'll take the heat.
=======================================
We have found that the loop (soft) side of self-stick Velcro is really good
as an anti-chafe strip. It was the only material that would hold up to the
constant vibration and didn't come unstuck, even in high temp areas.
GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A C/S, flying 710 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com> |
| Subject: | Attachment showing up in RV List (or do I have a virus)???????? |
Anyone else out there getting mail from the RV-List with an "attachment"?
Hope I don't have a virus or something. (Should be protected by virus
protection s/w)
James
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gordon and Marge" <gcomfo(at)tc3net.com> |
| Subject: | Question for the aerodynamycists |
Subject: RV-List: Question for the aerodynamycists
I am going to install a NACA vent on the side of the forward fuselage on
the RV-4 I am rebuilding. I am thinking of installing it right below
the cowl cheek angled downward so that the longitudinal axis of the vent
is parallel to the logitudnal axis of the cowl cheek extension. My
thought is the pressure will be positive in this area and will result in
good positive airflow into the vent (this will be for fresh air
ventilation to the front cockpit).
Does it make an appreciable difference? As in most things the best
idea
would be to try it to find out but that is not practical given the hole
I need to cut in the fuselage skin.
I'm looking for opinions and/or experience with this location. Is my
thinking sound or am I missing something?
Net, net - I'd like to install on the right but the left seems like a
better location. Which is best and will either work?
Richard
RV-4 N144KT - rising from he ashes of a 1998 landing in the trees at
IGX.
Richard: I cannot say which side is best, but I can tell you that the
right side works very well. Mine is located on the right, vertical
placement is about midway between the cowl cheek extension and the wing,
inclined roughly paralleling the cheek extension and the incoming air
will blow a chart out of your hands at speeds above the stall. Not much
flow on the ground.
Gordon Comfort
N363GC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Finn Lassen <finn.lassen(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Your Big Mistake - Your Big Chance |
I started this thread and I'm actually still waiting for an answer to my
questions of "how strong are the tiedown hardpoints on an RV-3?", how
strong winds will they handle (assuming ropes and ground anchors stay put)?
Finn
Robert Hansen wrote:
>
>There is good information on this list much of the time, but it seems too
>often loaded down with the chit chat of folks who want to use it as a forum
>to offer opinions that have nothing to do with RVs. Like many others, I
>hate it that I have to wade through tons of, "Hurricane and tie-down"
>dribble to find RV stuff.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Parlow" <ericparlow(at)hotmail.com> |
Looking for info on RVs, more specifically RV-8s, at KTOA.
Or surrounding airports: KSMO, KLGB, KHHR.
I'm considering moving there and RV's / Airports will weigh heavily into my
decision.
ERic--
RV-8 Wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Your Big Mistake - Your Big Chance |
>
>I started this thread and I'm actually still waiting for an answer to my
>questions of "how strong are the tiedown hardpoints on an RV-3?", how
>strong winds will they handle (assuming ropes and ground anchors stay put)?
>
>Finn
>
Finn,
Your original post said "I think only two 3/16" bolts hold the
tie-down pipe to the spar web." Wicks catalog gives a rated strength
in shear of 2,125 lb for an AN3 bolt. It isn't clear at first glance
whether this is an allowable design strength (i.e. it is acceptable
to have normal design loads up to this value), or whether it is a
guaranteed ultimate strength. Some other references give lower
values, so I assume that 2,125 is an ultimate strength, and the other
references are providing allowable design loads.
Assuming 2,125 lb is an ultimate strength, two bolts would be 4,250
lb, but that assumes that the load is shared equally between the two
bolts. In practice I suspect the lower bolt would get more than 50%
of the load, as the tie-down pipe might stretch a bit. So you
probably shouldn't count on the bolts taking more than 3,000 lb load,
maybe even less. This assumes that the load is perfectly aligned
with the tie down pipe. A misaligned load would probably increase
the stress on the lower bolt even further.
The limiting factor might be somewhere else. Depending on the thread
size of the hole, and material of the tie down ring, you might find
that it breaks first. Or, depending on the material and cross
sectional area of the tie down pipe, perhaps it is the weak link.
Or, maybe the spar itself will be the first thing damaged (hopefully
not - a good design would have something else fail before the spar
incurred damaging loads).
What is the thread size and pitch of the tie down hole? What is the
material and cross sectional area of the tie down pipe? What is the
spar material and dimensions where the tie down pipe attaches to it?
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | "Super RV-8" web sites or drawings? |
| From: | "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart(at)iss.net> |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________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Safety wiring bolts for wheel pants |
I finished installing my wheel pants last night and have one question:
The plans say to safety wire the bolt head that holds the outside
bracket to the large axle nut. However, the bolts supplied in my
wheel pants kit don't have drilled heads. Also, the bolts go into
a nutplate that has the usual anti-vibration crimp. Do I need to
buy new drilled head bolts or is the nutplate crimp sufficient?
Have others received drilled head bolts or are regular un-drilled
bolts now standard?
Thanks,
Doug Medema
RV-6A N276DM
I finished installing my wheel pants last night and have one question:
The plans say to safety wire the bolt head that holds the outside
bracket to the large axle nut. However, the bolts supplied in my
wheel pants kit don't have drilled heads. Also, the bolts go into
a nutplate that has the usual anti-vibration crimp. Do I need to
buy new drilled head bolts or is the nutplate crimp sufficient?
Have others received drilled head bolts or are regular un-drilled
bolts now standard?
Thanks,
Doug Medema
RV-6A N276DM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Blomgren" <jackanet(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Aluminum matching paints |
Painting Gurus,
Say you only wanted to paint your RV's fairings, tips, pants, skirt, you
know, the glass parts, to sort of fool the non-RV world that it's all
aluminum, what paint would you choose, and maybe why? I see PPG has all
those "Mist" names for what-- on the computer screen-- look to be
aluminum-like paints for Audi, Jaguar, Mercedes, etc.. But some of you must
already have worked out this not-as-easy-as-it-looks problem. [No pun
intended] Thanks,
Jack -8
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Skylor Piper <skylor4(at)yahoo.com> |
Eric,
The RV population at Torrance is growing rapidly.
I'm building an 8 QB with my father, and there is
another flying 8A based there. There are also several
6's and 4's on the field, and at least 1 F1 Rocket
under construction.
Skylor Piper
RV-8 QB Under Construction
N808SJ Reserved
--- Eric Parlow wrote:
>
>
> Looking for info on RVs, more specifically RV-8s,
> at KTOA.
>
> Or surrounding airports: KSMO, KLGB, KHHR.
>
> I'm considering moving there and RV's / Airports
> will weigh heavily into my
> decision.
>
> ERic--
> RV-8 Wings
>
>
>
> Contributions
> any other
> Forums.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/chat
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris W <1qazxsw23edcvfr45tgbnhy67ujm(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Tie Down Strength |
Finn Lassen wrote:
>
>I started this thread and I'm actually still waiting for an answer to my
>questions of "how strong are the tiedown hardpoints on an RV-3?", how
>strong winds will they handle (assuming ropes and ground anchors stay put)?
>
>
I'm not sure there is an answer to you question, but I can make a
guess. According to the McMaster catalog a plain steel 3/8 inch eyebolt
has a load rating of 1,300 lbs. Since on the RV the eyebolt is screwed
into aluminum alloy threads, and a good aluminum alloy is close to the
strength of a plain unalloyed steel, I would tend the think the load
ratting would be at most that of the plain steel eyebolt, 1,300 lbs.
Now the question becomes how much wind do you need to produce 1300 lbs
of lift on each wing with the plane in tail wheel attitude. Just a wild
guess here but I am pretty sure that it would be less than 100 mph.
Of course if you attach some kind of stall strip to the top of the wing
it would help. That brings up an idea I had for people who commonly tie
down their RV in high winds. Why not modify the tie down hard point so
you can screw into it from the bottom and top of the wing, then add a
second one some distance away from the first. It would then be very
easy to bolt an aluminum angle or just a 2 x 4 to the top of the wing to
kill the lift from strong winds.
--
Chris W
Bring Back the HP 15C
http://hp15c.org
Not getting the gifts you want? The Wish Zone can help.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tim Bryan" <rv6flyer(at)improvementteam.com> |
Hi Eric,
Check out this fantastic tool that Dan put together. It is at:
http://www.rvproject.com/registry/rvfinder.jsp
Tim Bryan
RV-6
N616TB
-------Original Message-------
From: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Date: 08/24/04 09:28:25
Subject: RV-List: RVs at KTOA
Looking for info on RVs, more specifically RV-8s, at KTOA.
Or surrounding airports: KSMO, KLGB, KHHR.
I'm considering moving there and RV's / Airports will weigh heavily into my
decision.
ERic--
RV-8 Wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Weiler" <dcw(at)nomadwi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Safety wiring bolts for wheel pants |
I do not have these bolts safetied and have never had them come loose. You
are going into a locking nutplate anyway.
Doug Weiler
RV-4 120 hours.. still in the paint shop in Tuscaloosa.
>
> I finished installing my wheel pants last night and have one question:
> The plans say to safety wire the bolt head that holds the outside
> bracket to the large axle nut. However, the bolts supplied in my
> wheel pants kit don't have drilled heads. Also, the bolts go into
> a nutplate that has the usual anti-vibration crimp. Do I need to
> buy new drilled head bolts or is the nutplate crimp sufficient?
> Have others received drilled head bolts or are regular un-drilled
> bolts now standard?
>
> Thanks,
> Doug Medema
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | "Super RV-8" web sites or drawings? |
local>
Hi Alan,
Michael Stewart has some good information on the web here:
http://www.mstewart.net/michael/rv/
Mickey
>A quick search through archives didn't yeild anything...
>
>I've heard mention of the Super -8. Is there a web site/sites or drawings
>on what this entails?
>
>- Alan
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | EZ Pilot Display Choice |
For those that have used them, which display (LCD or VFD) is more readable
in an RV cockpit?
Rick Grenwis
RV6A QB - Panel - CoSpgs, CO
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ollie Washburn" <ollie-6a(at)prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Re: EZ Pilot Display Choice |
Rick, I have RV6A with the sun shade and I first had the LCD as many RVers
said that was best with all the light in the RV.However with the sun shade
my poor old eyes couldn't see the display so I called them and they put the
vfd display in for me which while not perfect is much better than before.
Ollie
----- Original Message -----
From: <Grenwis(at)aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: EZ Pilot Display Choice
>
> For those that have used them, which display (LCD or VFD) is more readable
> in an RV cockpit?
>
> Rick Grenwis
> RV6A QB - Panel - CoSpgs, CO
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Louis Willig <larywil(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Safety wiring bolts for wheel pants |
At 11:41 AM 8/24/2004, you wrote:
>
>I finished installing my wheel pants last night and have one question:
>The plans say to safety wire the bolt head that holds the outside
>bracket to the large axle nut. However, the bolts supplied in my
>wheel pants kit don't have drilled heads. Also, the bolts go into
>a nutplate that has the usual anti-vibration crimp. Do I need to
>buy new drilled head bolts or is the nutplate crimp sufficient?
>Have others received drilled head bolts or are regular un-drilled
>bolts now standard?
Doug,
The hex head bold that held the wheel pant onto the outside bracket on my
RV-4 used to come loose all the time. I disregarded it one time too many,
and upon landing one day, the bolt fell out completely, and the wheel pant
was twisted around by the tire and the backing plate was destroyed. I have
a new backing plate and repaired the cosmetic damage to the wheel pant, BUT
I now use a simple split lock washer. 350 additional hours and no problem.
I don't know where you would secure a safety wire to.
Louis
-
Louis I Willig
1640 Oakwood Dr.
Penn Valley, PA 19072
610 668-4964
RV-4, N180PF
190HP IO-360, C/S prop
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: EZ Pilot Display Choice |
What is a VFD display?
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ollie Washburn" <ollie-6a(at)prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: EZ Pilot Display Choice
>
> Rick, I have RV6A with the sun shade and I first had the LCD as many RVers
> said that was best with all the light in the RV.However with the sun shade
> my poor old eyes couldn't see the display so I called them and they put
the
> vfd display in for me which while not perfect is much better than before.
> Ollie
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Grenwis(at)aol.com>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: EZ Pilot Display Choice
>
>
> >
> > For those that have used them, which display (LCD or VFD) is more
readable
> > in an RV cockpit?
> >
> > Rick Grenwis
> > RV6A QB - Panel - CoSpgs, CO
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Safety wiring bolts for wheel pants |
My kit came with bolts to be safeywired.
Indiana Larry, RV7 TipUp "SunSeeker"
The sincerest satisfactions in life come in doing and not dodging duty; in
meeting and solving problems, in facing facts, in being a dependable person.
- Richard L. Evans
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Weiler" <dcw(at)nomadwi.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Safety wiring bolts for wheel pants
>
> I do not have these bolts safetied and have never had them come loose.
You
> are going into a locking nutplate anyway.
>
> Doug Weiler
> RV-4 120 hours.. still in the paint shop in Tuscaloosa.
>
>
> >
> > I finished installing my wheel pants last night and have one question:
> > The plans say to safety wire the bolt head that holds the outside
> > bracket to the large axle nut. However, the bolts supplied in my
> > wheel pants kit don't have drilled heads. Also, the bolts go into
> > a nutplate that has the usual anti-vibration crimp. Do I need to
> > buy new drilled head bolts or is the nutplate crimp sufficient?
> > Have others received drilled head bolts or are regular un-drilled
> > bolts now standard?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Doug Medema
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | linn walters <lwalters2(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Safety wiring bolts for wheel pants |
To answer the question that Louis posed: Drill a hole in the wheel pant
near the bolt and put a cotter pin in there with the loop on the
inside. Safety the bolt to the cotter pin.
Linn
Louis Willig wrote:
>
>At 11:41 AM 8/24/2004, you wrote:
>
>
>>
>>I finished installing my wheel pants last night and have one question:
>>The plans say to safety wire the bolt head that holds the outside
>>bracket to the large axle nut. However, the bolts supplied in my
>>wheel pants kit don't have drilled heads. Also, the bolts go into
>>a nutplate that has the usual anti-vibration crimp. Do I need to
>>buy new drilled head bolts or is the nutplate crimp sufficient?
>>Have others received drilled head bolts or are regular un-drilled
>>bolts now standard?
>>
>>
>
>Doug,
>
>The hex head bold that held the wheel pant onto the outside bracket on my
>RV-4 used to come loose all the time. I disregarded it one time too many,
>and upon landing one day, the bolt fell out completely, and the wheel pant
>was twisted around by the tire and the backing plate was destroyed. I have
>a new backing plate and repaired the cosmetic damage to the wheel pant, BUT
>I now use a simple split lock washer. 350 additional hours and no problem.
>I don't know where you would secure a safety wire to.
>
>Louis
>
>
>-
>Louis I Willig
>1640 Oakwood Dr.
>Penn Valley, PA 19072
>610 668-4964
>RV-4, N180PF
>190HP IO-360, C/S prop
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | linn walters <lwalters2(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Safety wiring bolts for wheel pants |
I apologize for the multiple posts ...... but put the cotter pin loop on
the OUTSIDE.
'Course you probably already knew that! ;-)
Linn
linn walters wrote:
>
>To answer the question that Louis posed: Drill a hole in the wheel pant
>near the bolt and put a cotter pin in there with the loop on the
>inside. Safety the bolt to the cotter pin.
>Linn
>Louis Willig wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>At 11:41 AM 8/24/2004, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>I finished installing my wheel pants last night and have one question:
>>>The plans say to safety wire the bolt head that holds the outside
>>>bracket to the large axle nut. However, the bolts supplied in my
>>>wheel pants kit don't have drilled heads. Also, the bolts go into
>>>a nutplate that has the usual anti-vibration crimp. Do I need to
>>>buy new drilled head bolts or is the nutplate crimp sufficient?
>>>Have others received drilled head bolts or are regular un-drilled
>>>bolts now standard?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Doug,
>>
>>The hex head bold that held the wheel pant onto the outside bracket on my
>>RV-4 used to come loose all the time. I disregarded it one time too many,
>>and upon landing one day, the bolt fell out completely, and the wheel pant
>>was twisted around by the tire and the backing plate was destroyed. I have
>>a new backing plate and repaired the cosmetic damage to the wheel pant, BUT
>>I now use a simple split lock washer. 350 additional hours and no problem.
>>I don't know where you would secure a safety wire to.
>>
>>Louis
>>
>>
>>-
>>Louis I Willig
>>1640 Oakwood Dr.
>>Penn Valley, PA 19072
>>610 668-4964
>>RV-4, N180PF
>>190HP IO-360, C/S prop
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "cgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Attachment showing up in RV List (or do I have a virus)???????? |
If you have an attachment then the sending address is spoofed. All
attachments on the Matronics list are stripped.
----- Original Message -----
From: "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com>
Subject: RV-List: Attachment showing up in RV List (or do I have a
virus)????????
>
> Anyone else out there getting mail from the RV-List with an "attachment"?
>
> Hope I don't have a virus or something. (Should be protected by virus
> protection s/w)
>
> James
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Minnesota Wing Campin/Flyin |
Just a reminder to all of you - our fall picnic/flyin/campin is only a
little more than two weeks away. The date of the picnic is Saturday,
September 11th. For those interested, there will be camping also Friday
and Saturday nights. We are holding it a beautiful 3800' grass strip
just into Wisconsin from Minneapolis. For details see:
http://www.pressenter.com/~dougweil/mnwing/id18.htm
This is a really fun group, and we hope to see you there!!!
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 516 hours
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Noel & Yoshie Simmons" <noel(at)blueskyaviation.net> |
"rvyahoo"
| Subject: | 153MC flies today |
Had a great day today, took RV-6A 153MC off the ground for the fist time
today. Subsequently put 7 hours on it with out a hitch, god I love VAN'S
stuff.
O-360-A1A
Holy Cowl with plenum
NACA scoop for oil cooler
Fixed pitch
basic panel
after 4 RV's I still get that RV grin
:>)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Sincerely,
Noel Simmons
Blue Sky Aviation, Inc.
Phone & Fax: 406-538-6574
noel(at)blueskyaviation.net
<http://www.blueskyaviation.net/> www.blueskyaviation.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Bristol <bj034(at)lafn.org> |
on zoot.lafn.org
Eric,
You left out CPM. We've got a 6, 6A, 3 - 4's and a just minted Rocket.
The 8's seem to be at TOA... maybe they need the longer runway? 8 > )
Dave RV6
Eric Parlow wrote:
>
>Looking for info on RVs, more specifically RV-8s, at KTOA.
>
>Or surrounding airports: KSMO, KLGB, KHHR.
>
>I'm considering moving there and RV's / Airports will weigh heavily into my
>decision.
>
>ERic--
>RV-8 Wings
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dean Psiropoulos" <deanpsir(at)easystreet.com> |
| Subject: | Navaid VS EZ Pilot! |
Ok Sam Buchanan:
After not bothering to respond to the email I sent you off list, you've
finally answered part of my questions to you. Specifically that the Navaid
works "OK" if you understand how it operates and use it to its full
potential. Great, that's good to hear. NOW..could you please tell me and
the rest of the people on the list about the EZ Pilot electronics that
you've mated to your Navaid servo???? You say that the digital autopilots
are light years beyond the Navaid, great generalization, everybody else says
that too!!! How bout some good solid opinion on the EZ Pilot II by someone
who's used it quit a bit lately??? Don't worry about stirring up a hornets
nest with the Tru Track people, I'm counting on that to get the rest of the
information I'm seeking. Now come on.cough it up!!!!
Dean Psiropoulos
RV-6A N197DM
Panel and wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Bertsch <noms1reqd(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: H2AD series engines |
I had an O-320H2AD engine in my C-172. I had it overhauled and ran it for 2400
hours with absolutely no significant problems. The only thing that gave me problems
was the dual mag, which is a pain to work on and I don't think is a good
idea. The engine compression was still in the mid to low 70's when I sold
it. It was a great engine. We used Aeroshell 15w-50 which is required by AD
(or you can use the Lyc additive). But I believe the real key is the plane flew
frequently and never sat for more than 2 or 3 days without being flown.
Jeff Bertsch
lonestarsquadron.com
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com> |
| Subject: | Attachment showing up in RV List (or do I have a virus)???????? |
Thanks.
It seems to have stopped after a few emails.
Hmmmm,
James
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of cgalley
> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 8:56 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Attachment showing up in RV List (or do I have a
> virus)????????
>
>
> If you have an attachment then the sending address is spoofed. All
> attachments on the Matronics list are stripped.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Attachment showing up in RV List (or do I have a
> virus)????????
>
>
>
> >
> > Anyone else out there getting mail from the RV-List with an
> "attachment"?
> >
> > Hope I don't have a virus or something. (Should be protected by virus
> > protection s/w)
> >
> > James
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | linn walters <lwalters2(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: H2AD series engines |
Jeff Bertsch wrote:
>
>I had an O-320H2AD engine in my C-172. I had it overhauled and ran it for 2400
hours with absolutely no significant problems. The only thing that gave me
problems was the dual mag, which is a pain to work on and I don't think is a good
idea.
>
Aha! I'm a little slow. Couldn't figure out what all the fuss was
about with the dual mag ..... it's missing the 's'!!! Until the
electronic ignitions came along they all had dual mags :-D . I thought
it was a typo! I've known them as 'siamese mags' ..... and there really
is still two. And I agree ..... not my first choice .... nor second ;-)
. However, they still have a good track record for failures ..... can't
really compare them with separate mags ...... no data ...... but AFAIK,
after the initial problems were addressed, the O-320-H2AD is just as
solid as it's bretheren.
Linn
> The engine compression was still in the mid to low 70's when I sold it. It
was a great engine. We used Aeroshell 15w-50 which is required by AD (or you
can use the Lyc additive). But I believe the real key is the plane flew frequently
and never sat for more than 2 or 3 days without being flown.
>
>Jeff Bertsch
>lonestarsquadron.com
>
>
>---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shemp" <shempdowling(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Navaid VS EZ Pilot! |
I cant reply about the ez pilot but I sure can add some praise for the
venerable old Nav-aid. Once I got the servo arm length adjusted to match
the trim knob, it has worked great. I so far haven't found a need for using
a course intercept function yet. The only feature that I would say is
better in the new digital a/p's is the pictorial display for your turn
coordinator if you ever really get in a pinch. However, considering the
amount of planes out there now with some kind of EFIS and a backup vacuum
system, I dont see the need to upgrade to one of the new systems. If you're
starting from scratch, you'll have to weigh the cost differences yourself.
It may be worth the extra bucks to get current technology.
Shemp
RV-6a/ 100 hours
Chicago/ Louisville
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dean Psiropoulos" <deanpsir(at)easystreet.com>
Subject: RV-List: Navaid VS EZ Pilot!
>
> Ok Sam Buchanan:
>
>
> After not bothering to respond to the email I sent you off list, you've
> finally answered part of my questions to you. Specifically that the
Navaid
> works "OK" if you understand how it operates and use it to its full
> potential. Great, that's good to hear. NOW..could you please tell me and
> the rest of the people on the list about the EZ Pilot electronics that
> you've mated to your Navaid servo???? You say that the digital autopilots
> are light years beyond the Navaid, great generalization, everybody else
says
> that too!!! How bout some good solid opinion on the EZ Pilot II by
someone
> who's used it quit a bit lately??? Don't worry about stirring up a
hornets
> nest with the Tru Track people, I'm counting on that to get the rest of
the
> information I'm seeking. Now come on.cough it up!!!!
>
>
> Dean Psiropoulos
>
> RV-6A N197DM
>
> Panel and wiring
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Attachment showing up in RV List (or do I have a virus)???????? |
James is not the only one - since yesterday, all the messages from the
list have a text attachment, which is simply a copy of the message.
This has happened in the past, no clue what is going on. Other emails I
have received, not from the list, also have the attachment occasionally,
so it is likely not anything the list is generating. No clue.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 516 hours
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/
>
> If you have an attachment then the sending address is
> spoofed. All attachments on the Matronics list are stripped.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Attachment showing up in RV List (or do I
> have a virus)????????
>
>
> > -->
> >
> > Anyone else out there getting mail from the RV-List with an
> > "attachment"?
> >
> > Hope I don't have a virus or something. (Should be
> protected by virus
> > protection s/w)
> >
> > James
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Galati <rick6a(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum matching paints |
Judging from the underwhelming response to your interesting query I too must, (for
the moment at least) conclude attaining such a polished look with paint is
not quite as easy as we may want.
Like you Jack, I have often wondered about the very same issue. AirVenture past,
I approached an RV with some fairings that seemed to sport the closest match
I had ever seen that attained the look of polished aluminum. I tipped my cap
to the builder but was a bit crestfallen to discover the shiny new fairings were
indeed aluminum!
Bear with me for a brief wild-eyed and quixotic moment. Has anyone ever successfully
CLAD the fairings with some suitable material......maybe something sharing
similiar qualities with the shiny self adhesive heat reflective shielding
some of us apply to the interior of the lower cowl? Does some shrinkable and
long lasting material exist (perhaps known within in the RC world) that can be
successfully applied to the complex surfaces of fiberglass fairings that matches
the look of polished aluminum, but will over the long term, withstand the
environment in which it will serve? To date, I have simply not observed a paint
application that convincingly matches the look of polished aluminum. I only
want to do this once. Short of carving form blocks, mastering 3003 alloy, dollys,
and an english wheel, what's a simple homebuilder to do?
Rick Galati RV-6A "finishing"
Painting Gurus,
Say you only wanted to paint your RV's fairings, tips, pants, skirt, you
know, the glass parts, to sort of fool the non-RV world that it's all
aluminum, what paint would you choose, and maybe why? I see PPG has all
those "Mist" names for what-- on the computer screen-- look to be
aluminum-like paints for Audi, Jaguar, Mercedes, etc.. But some of you must
already have worked out this not-as-easy-as-it-looks problem. [No pun
intended] Thanks,
Jack -8
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frazier, Vincent A" <VFrazier(at)usi.edu> |
SNIP
Michael Stewart has some good information on the web here:
http://www.mstewart.net/michael/rv/ SNIP
From the website above:
SNIP The Rockets are sexy and look great, but... I dont like the
steel tube round gear. Wiggly wobblySNIP
Ahem, the Rocket gear is not steel tube. Nor is it any more wiggly,
wobbly than an RV-4, 6,or 7 gear. Wood stiffeners are required and will
add about 37 cents to the cost of this project.
SNIP But, if you fly the plane within the standard RV envelope for acro,
and cruise around at 220, then it has been demonstrated you will
probably not die. Your results may vary. SNIP
All I can say is that no Rocket has ever shed its wings. Why would
anyone want to put a 6 cylinder on an RV-8? Geez, put on an IO-360 and
live with the measely 200HP.
Super sixers, I hope your wings always arrive at the same place as your
airframe. This is a penny-wise, pound-foolish project if I ever saw
one. If money is your motivation to do this, then buy a SLOW BUILD
Harmon kit from John and the cost will still be as cheap as an RV.
Sorry for the flames... but better to have flames online than at the
crash site!!!
Vince Frazier
F-1H Rocket, N540VF
http://www.usi.edu/science/chemistry/vfrazier/page1.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Navaid VS EZ Pilot! |
Dean Psiropoulos wrote:
>
> Ok Sam Buchanan:
>
>
> After not bothering to respond to the email I sent you off list, you've
> finally answered part of my questions to you.
Good morning, Dean!
I don't know what happened to the email you sent me since I never
received it, but I am glad some (or maybe all as you will see shortly)
of your questions have been answered.
Specifically that the Navaid
> works "OK" if you understand how it operates and use it to its full
> potential. Great, that's good to hear.
The Navaid does indeed work well most of the time once you figure it out
but the key is "full potential". The full potential of the analog Navaid
falls way short of the capabilities of the digital units. This isn't a
slam against Navaid or its manufacturer, just a reflection of analog vs
digital technology.
NOW..could you please tell me and
> the rest of the people on the list about the EZ Pilot electronics that
> you've mated to your Navaid servo???? You say that the digital autopilots
> are light years beyond the Navaid, great generalization, everybody else says
> that too!!! How bout some good solid opinion on the EZ Pilot II by someone
> who's used it quit a bit lately???
Dean, an archive search of the list will pull up several posts I have
made concerning the EZ-Pilot. Or you can just hit this page on my web
site to see some of the earliest posts:
http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal/EZ_Pilot.htm
Hopefully you will consider these posts to be "good solid information". :-)
The Navaid servo, even though designed many years ago, works beautifully
with the digital control heads. It is an elegantly simple design that
has proved to be reliable in many, many experimental planes. However,
its days are numbered since all the digital manufacturers have either
released their own modern servos or soon will. But for pilots who
already have a Navaid installation, the old servo will deliver fine
performance with the new autopilots that are designed to interface with it.
Don't worry about stirring up a hornets
> nest with the Tru Track people, I'm counting on that to get the rest of the
> information I'm seeking. Now come on.cough it up!!!!
I'm not worried in the least about stirring up the TruTrak folks; they
are very capable of presenting their line of fine equipment on their
own. Remember, I am a TruTrak customer since I fly their excellent
AlTrak. TruTrak approached me about doing some beta testing of their
Navaid version of the DigiTrak but since I already had the EZ-Pilot
installed and was very pleased with it and the fine support of Trio
Avionics I didn't see any point in getting in the middle of a
competitive situation.
Dean, you can download the installation and user manuals of both the
EZ-Pilot and the DigiTrak from the respective websites. There are no
secrets or black magic involved with these units; the info is right out
in the open to anybody who does their homework. I'm not sure what other
information you are seeking but I think a careful reading of the manuals
will answer your questions. If not, don't hesitate to reply and I and
other autopilot users, regardless of brand, will attempt to fill in the
gaps.
Now.....maybe I coughed up a bib-full..... ;-)
Sam Buchanan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Parlow" <ericparlow(at)hotmail.com> |
Tim,
Thanks for the link.
I had forgotten about it.
I found 20 within 25 miles!
ERic-
RV-8 Wings
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Tim Bryan" <rv6flyer(at)improvementteam.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RVs at KTOA
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:44:49 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Hi Eric,
Check out this fantastic tool that Dan put together. It is at:
http://www.rvproject.com/registry/rvfinder.jsp
Tim Bryan
RV-6
N616TB
-------Original Message-------
From: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Date: 08/24/04 09:28:25
Subject: RV-List: RVs at KTOA
Looking for info on RVs, more specifically RV-8s, at KTOA.
Or surrounding airports: KSMO, KLGB, KHHR.
I'm considering moving there and RV's / Airports will weigh heavily into my
decision.
ERic--
RV-8 Wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "cgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: H2AD series engines |
NO! The dual MAG (no s) is a single unit with two mags inside. One drive but
two mags (2000 series Bendix)
Cy Galley - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair
Safety Programs Editor - TC
EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "linn walters" <lwalters2(at)cfl.rr.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: H2AD series engines
>
> Jeff Bertsch wrote:
>
> >
> >I had an O-320H2AD engine in my C-172. I had it overhauled and ran it
for 2400 hours with absolutely no significant problems. The only thing that
gave me problems was the dual mag, which is a pain to work on and I don't
think is a good idea.
> >
> Aha! I'm a little slow. Couldn't figure out what all the fuss was
> about with the dual mag ..... it's missing the 's'!!! Until the
> electronic ignitions came along they all had dual mags :-D . I thought
> it was a typo! I've known them as 'siamese mags' ..... and there really
> is still two. And I agree ..... not my first choice .... nor second ;-)
> . However, they still have a good track record for failures ..... can't
> really compare them with separate mags ...... no data ...... but AFAIK,
> after the initial problems were addressed, the O-320-H2AD is just as
> solid as it's bretheren.
> Linn
>
> > The engine compression was still in the mid to low 70's when I sold it.
It was a great engine. We used Aeroshell 15w-50 which is required by AD (or
you can use the Lyc additive). But I believe the real key is the plane flew
frequently and never sat for more than 2 or 3 days without being flown.
> >
> >Jeff Bertsch
> >lonestarsquadron.com
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Attachment showing up in RV List (or do I have a virus)???????? |
On my computer, I get an "html attachment" IF the sender sent his e-mail in
HTML format (to show color, photos, etc). That is due to a setting in
Inbox-Outlook Express e-mail pgm - click Format, and see if Plain Text has a
dot to left of it. That blocks display of the html content. If you click
"HTML" then any e-mail sent in html format will display normally.
However, none of the e-mails I get from RV-list or AeroElectric list have
this "html attachment" because I believe Matt does not allow attachments and
I suppose he sends out all the e-mails in txt format.
I keep HTML turned off as a security precaution due to a security
vulnerability of Microsoft's e-mail pgm wherein malicious code can be
embedded in an HTML format e-mai.
So, I suspect that the address is spoofed and it is malicious e-mail, as
someone below explained.
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Attachment showing up in RV List (or do I have a
virus)????????
>
> James is not the only one - since yesterday, all the messages from the
> list have a text attachment, which is simply a copy of the message.
> This has happened in the past, no clue what is going on. Other emails I
> have received, not from the list, also have the attachment occasionally,
> so it is likely not anything the list is generating. No clue.
>
> Alex Peterson
> Maple Grove, MN
> RV6-A N66AP 516 hours
> http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/
>
>
> >
> > If you have an attachment then the sending address is
> > spoofed. All attachments on the Matronics list are stripped.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com>
> > To:
> > Subject: RV-List: Attachment showing up in RV List (or do I
> > have a virus)????????
> >
> >
> > > -->
> > >
> > > Anyone else out there getting mail from the RV-List with an
> > > "attachment"?
> > >
> > > Hope I don't have a virus or something. (Should be
> > protected by virus
> > > protection s/w)
> > >
> > > James
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart(at)iss.net> |
All good points Vince. Let me work em.
1. Perhaps "steel tube" was the wrong choice of words. I was trying to
differentiate between the flat stock 8 gear that does not shake the
plane at any speeds, and the solid tube steel round gear of the F-1
which exhibits the same gear leg shake as does the other RV series
planes of the same design. The F-1 does have longer gear which I think
exacerbates the problem. Having flown next to, section take off and
landed with, played airborn next to the F-1, I have experienced this for
myself.
2. You said " Why would anyone want to put a 6 cylinder on an RV-8?
Geez, put on an IO-360 and live with the measely 200HP." My response is
I don't want to live with 200. I want to live with 260 and have the many
attributes of the 8 which I listed on my website that clearly spell out
my reasons for doing such a thing so I wont rehash them here.
3. You said " If money is your motivation to do this, then buy a SLOW
BUILD
Harmon kit from John and the cost will still be as cheap as an RV." My
response is I want the attributes of the 8, not 4, plain and simple.
And I don't want to slow build a Harmon 4.
5. You said "All I can say is that no Rocket has ever shed its wings."
And you are correct. Although the sample size if small.
4. And finally you said " Sorry for the flames... but better to have
flames online than at the crash site!!!" No flames seen and all good
comments Vince. I do respect your thoughts and they are all very worthy
of consideration of my self and others risk/reward management. This
Super 8 is not for the masses.
Kind Regards,
Mike Stewart
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Frazier,
Vincent A
Subject: RV-List: super 8
SNIP
Michael Stewart has some good information on the web here:
http://www.mstewart.net/michael/rv/ SNIP
From the website above:
SNIP The Rockets are sexy and look great, but... I dont like the
steel tube round gear. Wiggly wobblySNIP
Ahem, the Rocket gear is not steel tube. Nor is it any more wiggly,
wobbly than an RV-4, 6,or 7 gear. Wood stiffeners are required and will
add about 37 cents to the cost of this project.
SNIP But, if you fly the plane within the standard RV envelope for acro,
and cruise around at 220, then it has been demonstrated you will
probably not die. Your results may vary. SNIP
All I can say is that no Rocket has ever shed its wings. Why would
anyone want to put a 6 cylinder on an RV-8? Geez, put on an IO-360 and
live with the measely 200HP.
Super sixers, I hope your wings always arrive at the same place as your
airframe. This is a penny-wise, pound-foolish project if I ever saw
one. If money is your motivation to do this, then buy a SLOW BUILD
Harmon kit from John and the cost will still be as cheap as an RV.
Sorry for the flames... but better to have flames online than at the
crash site!!!
Vince Frazier
F-1H Rocket, N540VF
http://www.usi.edu/science/chemistry/vfrazier/page1.html
=
=
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Irwin" <rv6eric(at)myacc.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum matching paints |
Hey guys. I came across a paint product that is being marketed to
custom motorcycle builders that you might be interested in. This
company has a paint with a chrome finish and one with an aluminum finish
(plus a lot of other cool paints). I have never seen it myself, but you
can check out some pictures on their web site. Here is a link directly
to the page with their chrome paints: http://www.alsacorp.com/chrome.htm
Maybe this can give you the finish you are looking for. If you end up
trying it, let me know how it works out.
Eric
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick Galati
Subject: RV-List: Re: Aluminum matching paints
Judging from the underwhelming response to your interesting query I too
must, (for the moment at least) conclude attaining such a polished look
with paint is not quite as easy as we may want.
Like you Jack, I have often wondered about the very same issue.
AirVenture past, I approached an RV with some fairings that seemed to
sport the closest match I had ever seen that attained the look of
polished aluminum. I tipped my cap to the builder but was a bit
crestfallen to discover the shiny new fairings were indeed aluminum!
Bear with me for a brief wild-eyed and quixotic moment. Has anyone ever
successfully CLAD the fairings with some suitable material......maybe
something sharing similiar qualities with the shiny self adhesive heat
reflective shielding some of us apply to the interior of the lower cowl?
Does some shrinkable and long lasting material exist (perhaps known
within in the RC world) that can be successfully applied to the complex
surfaces of fiberglass fairings that matches the look of polished
aluminum, but will over the long term, withstand the environment in
which it will serve? To date, I have simply not observed a paint
application that convincingly matches the look of polished aluminum. I
only want to do this once. Short of carving form blocks, mastering 3003
alloy, dollys, and an english wheel, what's a simple homebuilder to do?
Rick Galati RV-6A "finishing"
Painting Gurus,
Say you only wanted to paint your RV's fairings, tips, pants, skirt, you
know, the glass parts, to sort of fool the non-RV world that it's all
aluminum, what paint would you choose, and maybe why? I see PPG has all
those "Mist" names for what-- on the computer screen-- look to be
aluminum-like paints for Audi, Jaguar, Mercedes, etc.. But some of you
must
already have worked out this not-as-easy-as-it-looks problem. [No pun
intended] Thanks,
Jack -8
=
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
=
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot(at)hotmail.com> |
>SNIP The Rockets are sexy and look great, but... I dont like the
>steel tube round gear. Wiggly wobblySNIP
I've heard comments about the longer, tubular/round stock gear legs on F-1's
and HR's being more bouncy or spongy than std RV's.
>Ahem, the Rocket gear is not steel tube. Nor is it any more wiggly,
>wobbly than an RV-4, 6,or 7 gear. Wood stiffeners are required and will
>add about 37 cents to the cost of this project.
That is the point - these all have tubular/round stock gear legs. and the
Rocket legs are even longer.
>Why would anyone want to put a 6 cylinder on an RV-8?
For the same reasons Mike mentioned, plus a few others. O-540's are
relatively cheap per hp (for now), particularly as compared to -360's. the
weight of a -540/hp is attractive also IMO. I've already built an -8, so
installing a -540 would be relatively painless as compared to building a
Harmon Rocket or a much more expensive F-1 Rocket.
>Geez, put on an IO-360 and live with the measely 200HP.
I don't follow this point.
>This is a penny-wise, pound-foolish project if I ever saw
>one. If money is your motivation to do this, then buy a SLOW BUILD
>Harmon kit from John and the cost will still be as cheap as an RV.
>Sorry for the flames... but better to have flames online than at the
>crash site!!!
The overall risk of a -540 powered RV is probably higher than that of a -320
or -360 powered plane, but I believe it could be well managed.
Seems to me there are roughly four factors to consider with a -540 powered
RV.
1. Additional torque - not a major issue except when low, slow or in a
botched takeoff/landing adding power. But still not a significant airframe
issue.
2. Additional thrust - The additional thrust force on the airframe itself
is not a significant issue either. Additional - yes, but not enough to
cause concern IMO.
3. Additional dynamic flight loads - This one is the only one which would
cause me concern. The Vne would be something that concerned me. But as
Mike says - there are quite a few others pushing the RV envelope which might
help raise the confidence level with this item. When doing acro, the load
factors and entry speeds would have to be looked at closely. I'm pretty
conservative with my acro, not regularly seeing anything more than about 3.2
g's anyway. You'd have to look at the motor mount and fuselage attachment
to be sure the -540 and RV combo would be suitable at your chosed load
factor. But most of this answers could be reverse engineered from the load
factors RV's are seeing with -360's on the firewall.
4. Additional weight - The engine and prop would probably add 75 or 100-lbs
over a 200-hp combo, just guessing. This is going to change stall speeds,
maneuvering speeds, dynamics of flying, etc. Landings would have to be
rethought a little, reducing the rough field and short field landing
capability somewhat. changed speeds could be determined pretty accurately
versus current when you know the new weight.
Good discussions, particularly since I'd like to make this conversion one fo
these days myself.
Bryan Jones -8
www.LoneStarSquadron.com
Houston, Texas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tim Bryan" <rv6flyer(at)improvementteam.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Navaid VS EZ Pilot! |
Listers and Dean,
I spoke with Trio last week and was told the Navaid servo is what ships when
you purchase the EZ pilot. It isn't a matter of matting the Navaid servo
just because you have it. If you purchase a new EZ Pilot, you will still be
using a Navaid servo. I don't know about the future of their own servos.
Tim Bryan
RV-6 N616TB
-------Original Message-------
From: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Date: 08/25/04 07:10:32
Subject: Re: RV-List: Navaid VS EZ Pilot!
Dean Psiropoulos wrote:
com>
>
> Ok Sam Buchanan:
>
>
> After not bothering to respond to the email I sent you off list, you've
> finally answered part of my questions to you.
Good morning, Dean!
I don't know what happened to the email you sent me since I never
received it, but I am glad some (or maybe all as you will see shortly)
of your questions have been answered.
Specifically that the Navaid
> works "OK" if you understand how it operates and use it to its full
> potential. Great, that's good to hear.
The Navaid does indeed work well most of the time once you figure it out
but the key is "full potential". The full potential of the analog Navaid
falls way short of the capabilities of the digital units. This isn't a
slam against Navaid or its manufacturer, just a reflection of analog vs
digital technology.
NOW..could you please tell me and
> the rest of the people on the list about the EZ Pilot electronics that
> you've mated to your Navaid servo???? You say that the digital autopilots
> are light years beyond the Navaid, great generalization, everybody else
says
> that too!!! How bout some good solid opinion on the EZ Pilot II by
someone
> who's used it quit a bit lately???
Dean, an archive search of the list will pull up several posts I have
made concerning the EZ-Pilot. Or you can just hit this page on my web
site to see some of the earliest posts:
http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal/EZ_Pilot.htm
Hopefully you will consider these posts to be "good solid information". :-)
The Navaid servo, even though designed many years ago, works beautifully
with the digital control heads. It is an elegantly simple design that
has proved to be reliable in many, many experimental planes. However,
its days are numbered since all the digital manufacturers have either
released their own modern servos or soon will. But for pilots who
already have a Navaid installation, the old servo will deliver fine
performance with the new autopilots that are designed to interface with it.
Don't worry about stirring up a hornets
> nest with the Tru Track people, I'm counting on that to get the rest of
the
> information I'm seeking. Now come on.cough it up!!!!
I'm not worried in the least about stirring up the TruTrak folks; they
are very capable of presenting their line of fine equipment on their
own. Remember, I am a TruTrak customer since I fly their excellent
AlTrak. TruTrak approached me about doing some beta testing of their
Navaid version of the DigiTrak but since I already had the EZ-Pilot
installed and was very pleased with it and the fine support of Trio
Avionics I didn't see any point in getting in the middle of a
competitive situation.
Dean, you can download the installation and user manuals of both the
EZ-Pilot and the DigiTrak from the respective websites. There are no
secrets or black magic involved with these units; the info is right out
in the open to anybody who does their homework. I'm not sure what other
information you are seeking but I think a careful reading of the manuals
will answer your questions. If not, don't hesitate to reply and I and
other autopilot users, regardless of brand, will attempt to fill in the
gaps.
Now.....maybe I coughed up a bib-full..... ;-)
Sam Buchanan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Navaid VS EZ Pilot! |
Tim Bryan wrote:
>
> Listers and Dean,
>
> I spoke with Trio last week and was told the Navaid servo is what ships when
> you purchase the EZ pilot. It isn't a matter of matting the Navaid servo
> just because you have it. If you purchase a new EZ Pilot, you will still be
> using a Navaid servo. I don't know about the future of their own servos.
Whoa here!
Let me nip this in the bud before it gets out of hand. I may have made
an inference where it was unintended. I am privy to no information as to
the future availability of the Navaid servo, but have heard absolutely
nothing about its immediate demise. My point was about the inevitable
replacement of analog servos with digital. The change will certainly
occur eventually, but for now, the Navaid/Trio servo works fine, and
pilots who install it should expect many years of reliable service.
Sam Buchanan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DAVID REEL" <dreel(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum matching paints |
I didn't see any replies to this do I'll take a shot. If you take a piece of polished
aluminum to your local Sherwin Williams or other auto paint store, they
will have a device that can mix a custom color to match. This approach is used
with excellent results to match faded paints for collision damage repair.
That said, everyone I've talked to advises me against this course because of
the problems keeping bare aluminum looking good and the difficulty of reproducing
the same shinyness. I'd paint the whole thing some aluminum color you like
to keep from emphasizing the fiberglass parts.
Dave Reel - RV8A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Japundza <bjapundza(at)yahoo.com> |
>I've heard comments about the longer, tubular/round
>stock gear legs on F-1's
>and HR's being more bouncy or spongy than std RV's.
Absolutely not true. I recently had Mark Frederick's
F1 and flew it for a dozen or so hours and found it
handled better on the ground, had a better ride on the
ground, and had LESS of a tendency to bounce compared
to my -6. In fact it took some getting used to not
knowing that you've actually touched down, you can
grease it in that smooth. I have several friends with
HR2's and have closely observed gear movement. It is
more noticeable because these airplanes have longer
wheelpants, but in reality the movement you see is
just slightly more than you see on RV's. In formation
you will see a little movement of the gear in the
bumps when flying with a rocket, but only if you're
looking for it. I've never really looked for it with
RV's.
In my experience the ti gear on the rockets is leaps
and bounds better (no pun intended) than the gear on
any RV-4-6-8 I've flown, and that's coming from my
experience, not conjecture. As you could probably
tell I like it. :)
Why would anyone want a big motor?...efficiency.
195kts three-way gps runs burning 10.5gph running
2100rpm 23". Climbs from 700msl to 10.5K in under
five minutes running max 340cht in the climb on a hot
day. With a friend flying my 180c/s RV-6 next to me
in the F1 at the same speed I was burning 1 gph less
in the F1 running ROP.
The super-8's in my area don't do nearly as well as
the rockets, but they do better than the 200hp RV's.
My only beef with the super 8 is that it is not
supported by Van's.
Regards,
Bob Japundza
RV-6 flying, F1 under const.
Indy
__________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Attachment showing up in RV List (or do I have a |
virus)????????
David's assertions below are right on the mark. If you receive a message
from the "RV-List" that has an attachment, then it is a spoof and not from
Matronics. It likely has a virus, too, and should be deleted immediately.
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Admin
At 07:17 AM 8/25/2004 Wednesday, you wrote:
>
>On my computer, I get an "html attachment" IF the sender sent his e-mail in
>HTML format (to show color, photos, etc). That is due to a setting in
>Inbox-Outlook Express e-mail pgm - click Format, and see if Plain Text has a
>dot to left of it. That blocks display of the html content. If you click
>"HTML" then any e-mail sent in html format will display normally.
>
>However, none of the e-mails I get from RV-list or AeroElectric list have
>this "html attachment" because I believe Matt does not allow attachments and
>I suppose he sends out all the e-mails in txt format.
>
>I keep HTML turned off as a security precaution due to a security
>vulnerability of Microsoft's e-mail pgm wherein malicious code can be
>embedded in an HTML format e-mai.
>
>So, I suspect that the address is spoofed and it is malicious e-mail, as
>someone below explained.
>
>David
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net>
>To:
>Subject: RE: RV-List: Attachment showing up in RV List (or do I have a
>virus)????????
>
>
>
> >
> > James is not the only one - since yesterday, all the messages from the
> > list have a text attachment, which is simply a copy of the message.
> > This has happened in the past, no clue what is going on. Other emails I
> > have received, not from the list, also have the attachment occasionally,
> > so it is likely not anything the list is generating. No clue.
> >
> > Alex Peterson
> > Maple Grove, MN
> > RV6-A N66AP 516 hours
> > http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/
> >
> >
> > >
> > > If you have an attachment then the sending address is
> > > spoofed. All attachments on the Matronics list are stripped.
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com>
> > > To:
> > > Subject: RV-List: Attachment showing up in RV List (or do I
> > > have a virus)????????
> > >
> > >
> > > > -->
> > > >
> > > > Anyone else out there getting mail from the RV-List with an
> > > > "attachment"?
> > > >
> > > > Hope I don't have a virus or something. (Should be
> > > protected by virus
> > > > protection s/w)
> > > >
> > > > James
> >
> >
>
>
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
All,
This is an excellent discussion, exactly the kind that needs to occur in a
forum like this.
The RVs are great designs. Everything in the design of an airplane is a
compromise. Most elements in the design of an airplane are inter-related.
Aspect ratio vs spar strength vs wing area vs stall speed etc.....
My question is in flying a Super-8, what do you give up???? And how do you
operate it within it's enevelope?
I have a helluva time operating my IO-320 -4 within it's envelope. I blow
the recommended aerobatic gross weight nearly every time I fly. I give up
G-loading, I use +4/-2 as my aerobatic limits.
It is hard to stay below redline in a descent. I try not to break the
redline, but still hear my RMencoder bitching at me about Vne more
frequently than I should. There is really nothing I can give up to raise
Vne. I would have to redesign the airplane.
If operated at +4/-2 (at aerobatic gross weight) and with a healthy respect
for Vno and Vne a Super-8 might work fine, but a Super-8 is going to be a
challenge to fly within those limits.
I did a presentation at the MN RV forum called "The Wing Removal Lever, and
how Not to use it" It studied the V-N diagram of the RV-8. At Vne the RV-8
has 18 G available......... Twice its failure limit......... These are
not fragile airplanes, but because the stall speed is so low, they awesome
power available to break themselves.
A Super-8 would be a GREAT airplane for high altitude cruise, becasue more
displacement is a much easier cheaper and safer solution than a turbo
charger. But a Super-8 is not an idiot proof airplane, and needs to be
flown carefully.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kathleen (rv7)" <Kathleen(at)rv7.us> |
| Subject: | Aluminum matching paints |
You can try 20209 MONOKOTE CHROME. It can be laid up over your fairings and
can be shrunk with a heat gun. It is very chrome like and may be too
reflective to match the polished aluminum unless you have the gloss level
way up there. I don't think the aluminum Monokote looks like anything other
than brushed aluminum...
Kathleen Evans
Folsom, CA
www.rv7.us
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of DAVID REEL
Subject: Re: RV-List: Aluminum matching paints
I didn't see any replies to this do I'll take a shot. If you take a piece
of polished aluminum to your local Sherwin Williams or other auto paint
store, they will have a device that can mix a custom color to match. This
approach is used with excellent results to match faded paints for collision
damage repair. That said, everyone I've talked to advises me against this
course because of the problems keeping bare aluminum looking good and the
difficulty of reproducing the same shinyness. I'd paint the whole thing
some aluminum color you like to keep from emphasizing the fiberglass parts.
Dave Reel - RV8A
advertising on the Matronics Forums.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart(at)iss.net> |
I was hoping you would weigh in Bob since you clearly have lots of
experience around all these items.
I have absolutely no issue with the bounce factor personally. It was the
taxi wobble, shake, braking shimmy noticeable in the all the rv tail
draggers and more noticeable in the various "rockets."
Bob what is the issue around the "Unsupported by Vans" that bothers you?
Vans does not support all kinds of things. Why is that a factor? I have
as a top 3 list of reasons why I chose the Super 8 the fact that IS a
Vans plane first. What would you like them to support that they don't
already? The idea? You know that's never happening.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Japundza
Subject: RE: RV-List: super 8
>I've heard comments about the longer, tubular/round
>stock gear legs on F-1's
>and HR's being more bouncy or spongy than std RV's.
Absolutely not true. I recently had Mark Frederick's
F1 and flew it for a dozen or so hours and found it
handled better on the ground, had a better ride on the
ground, and had LESS of a tendency to bounce compared
to my -6. In fact it took some getting used to not
knowing that you've actually touched down, you can
grease it in that smooth. I have several friends with
HR2's and have closely observed gear movement. It is
more noticeable because these airplanes have longer
wheelpants, but in reality the movement you see is
just slightly more than you see on RV's. In formation
you will see a little movement of the gear in the
bumps when flying with a rocket, but only if you're
looking for it. I've never really looked for it with
RV's.
In my experience the ti gear on the rockets is leaps
and bounds better (no pun intended) than the gear on
any RV-4-6-8 I've flown, and that's coming from my
experience, not conjecture. As you could probably
tell I like it. :)
Why would anyone want a big motor?...efficiency.
195kts three-way gps runs burning 10.5gph running
2100rpm 23". Climbs from 700msl to 10.5K in under
five minutes running max 340cht in the climb on a hot
day. With a friend flying my 180c/s RV-6 next to me
in the F1 at the same speed I was burning 1 gph less
in the F1 running ROP.
The super-8's in my area don't do nearly as well as
the rockets, but they do better than the 200hp RV's.
My only beef with the super 8 is that it is not
supported by Van's.
Regards,
Bob Japundza
RV-6 flying, F1 under const.
Indy
__________________________________
=
=
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Garey Wittich <gareywittich2000(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | "Need Extra Hands" in building a RV-8A QB - Santa Monica, Calif |
rv8-list(at)matronics.com, rv9-list(at)matronics.com, rv-list(at)matronics.com
Greetings:
Any Builders who live in the Santa Monica, Calif area.
Building a RV-8A QB in my garage 5 minutes from Santa
Monica Airport and "need extra hands". Willing to
help somebody with their project TOO. My wife does
not want to get involved and the local EAA Chapter is
all composite builders. At the rate I am making
progress it will take me 5 life times to complete
!!!!!
Thanks,
Garey Wittich (310) 392-1682
__________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Skylor Piper <skylor4(at)yahoo.com> |
> -----Original Message-----
>
>
> Why would anyone want a big motor?...efficiency.
> 195kts three-way gps runs burning 10.5gph running
> 2100rpm 23". Climbs from 700msl to 10.5K in under
> five minutes running max 340cht in the climb on a
> hot
> day. With a friend flying my 180c/s RV-6 next to me
> in the F1 at the same speed I was burning 1 gph less
> in the F1 running ROP.
>
I'm going to ask a somewhat obvious question here:
Why is the IO-540 more efficient than the 360? Pardon
my ignorance, but this doesn't make that much sense to
me. The parallel valve 540's and 360's use the same
cylinders (right?). For a given horsepower smaller
engines are usually more efficient, especially when
the two are of nearly identical designs. It should
also take the same amount of horsepower to fly similar
airframes at the same speed (actually slightly more
for a Super 8 vs. standard 8 because of more weight
and drag).
Perhaps the larger engine can turn a larger prop, and
gain some efficiency there, but I still don't see this
as making a significant difference in this case.
Maybe the F1 is just a more efficient airframe than
the -6. In this case, I think those hoping for an
increase in efficiency by going to a Super 8 are going
to be disappointed.
Comments?
_______________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Laird Owens <owens(at)aerovironment.com> |
| Subject: | Re: "Need Extra Hands" in building a RV-8A QB - Santa Monica, |
Calif
Garey,
You should also post your note at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SoCAL-RVlist/
Lots of folks on our SoCal list that might be able to help.
I always wondered why I started to itch every time I drove by Santa
Monica......
Laird - Simi Valley
RV-6 @ Whiteman
On Aug 25, 2004, at 12:04 PM, Garey Wittich wrote:
>
>
> Greetings:
>
> Any Builders who live in the Santa Monica, Calif area.
> Building a RV-8A QB in my garage 5 minutes from Santa
> Monica Airport and "need extra hands". Willing to
> help somebody with their project TOO. My wife does
> not want to get involved and the local EAA Chapter is
> all composite builders. At the rate I am making
> progress it will take me 5 life times to complete
> !!!!!
>
> Thanks,
> Garey Wittich (310) 392-1682
>
>
> __________________________________
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Albert Gardner" <spudnut(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Need Compass |
I put the OAT probe from my EI gage in the NACA vent and the readings always
agree with those reported from other planes so it works for me.
Albert Gardner
RV-9A 872RV
Yuma, AZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Weyant" <cweyant(at)chuckdirect.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Need Compass
>
> I've found, in my Grumman AA1a, that the OAT sensor located in the NACA
vent
> on the side of the fuselage, is inaccurate in flight. Seems it gets
radiant
> heat from the engine and registers about 20 degrees too high. Could this
be
> a problem with the RV NACA vent install?
> Chuck
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Japundza <bjapundza(at)yahoo.com> |
>I have absolutely no issue with the bounce factor
>personally. It was the taxi wobble, shake, braking
>shimmy noticeable in the all the rv tail draggers
>and more noticeable in the various "rockets."
My opinion here is that the more freedom of movement
allowed at the axle, the less stress will be
transmitted to the airframe where the gearleg joins.
The wheel is free to move in more than one axis so it
can absorb/rebound loads. With the flat design, you
essentially only have one axis of movement (up/down)
and rely on a rigid attachment to the airframe
(gearbox) to provide dampening of any loads at the
axle (fore/aft).
>Bob what is the issue around the "Unsupported by
>Vans" that bothers you? Vans does not support all
>kinds of things. Why is that a factor? I have as a
>top 3 list of reasons why I chose the Super 8 the
>fact that IS a Vans plane first. What would you like
>them to support that they don't already? The idea?
>You know that's never happening.
Yes you are correct that they don't like lots of
things and in some respects I don't blame them given
the legal environment in our country. On the other
hand, if this sort of experimentation never happened
(super 8's, rockets, etc.), we'd all be flying stits
playboys right now. That 'e' word written in 2" high
letters is a great thing, isn't it? I don't in any
way put anyone down for hanging a 540 on an -8. But
there are some unknowns with the wing being operated
at higher gross weights and higher airspeeds that
limit the advantages you gain with hanging a big motor
up front. I'm pretty certain Van's won't give you any
analysis on that. Unless you know those limits,
you'll have to operate somewhere well under what you
think those limits are, that's gonna take some fun
factor out of the equation.
Regards,
Bob Japundza
RV-6 180c/s flying "weenie motor"
F1 under const.
Indy
__________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
, ,
,
1.7 SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS Similar addresses in recipient list
Hi Guys,
I was almost convinced the Garmin GNS 430 hooked to a Dynon and a
Digitrack A/P was the almost perfect base to a light weight IFR setup
for an RV-7, then I see that BMA has come out with the EFIS Lite G3
which has the GPS, and an electronic version of the VOR/GS receiver that
can be driven by an SL30 Navcom. Apparently this system drives a BMA 2
axis autopilot.
Looking at all of this gives me aN IFR panel for about $11k including
the transponder and 2 axis A/P. The similar setup using the GNS 430
comes in at about $14.5K with single axis A/P.
Anyone have any experience or thoughts on this set up?
I haven't started IFR training yet so I'm fumbling a little on all the
requirements...Not sure about the "indicator lights" (marker beacon?)
that are apparently built into the Nav head that the GNS 430 would
drive.
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
>
>I don't in any
>way put anyone down for hanging a 540 on an -8. But
>there are some unknowns with the wing being operated
>at higher gross weights and higher airspeeds that
>limit the advantages you gain with hanging a big motor
>up front. I'm pretty certain Van's won't give you any
>analysis on that. Unless you know those limits,
>you'll have to operate somewhere well under what you
>think those limits are, that's gonna take some fun
>factor out of the equation.
Just curious - has anyone done static load testing on the HR wing?
If so, who did it and what gross weight and g did the testing
simulate?
Also, how do the HR and F-1 wing designs compare?
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Japundza <bjapundza(at)yahoo.com> |
>Just curious - has anyone done static load testing
>on the HR wing? If so, who did it and what gross
>weight and g did the testing simulate?
It is my understanding that John Harmon had an
engineering evaluation done on the HR wing sometime in
the mid-90's. I don't know if any static load testing
has been done. To that end I don't know if its ever
been done on the RV-4 either. There's never been a
in-flight failure that I'm aware of.
>Also, how do the HR and F-1 wing designs compare?
Nearly identical.
Regards,
Bob
__________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
Used to be, but not anymore...
The F-1 wing couldn't be further from an RV wing if you tried. The new EVO wing
is a tapered wing, both in chord and span. It's really an amazing piece of
work and comes finished from Tearm Rocket/HPA...the work looks top notch from
what I've seen, and I really scrutinzed it at OSH. If you saw it at OSH you'd
know what I mean. Also, it "apparantly" has resulted in higher cruise speed
and slightly lowered stall speed. Plus....it looks like a piece of a rocket!!
Last thing...about that gear argument. They really aren't that similar, other
than being tapered rods. The rockets are Titanium, machined flat for a lot of
the length, and attache via a tapered cone (like the CNC Morris Taper bits),
and the Van's are steel (or can be AL2 on the -8's).
If and when I build something with a 6 banger on the front, I'd love a rocket.
That being said, the $46K entry price is a lot more than the Van's planes...so
that -10 is also pretty attractive at $10K less (slow build vs. fast build).
Cheers,
Stein Bruch
Minneapolis
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Bob Japundza <bjapundza(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:36:18 -0700 (PDT)
>
>>Also, how do the HR and F-1 wing designs compare?
>
>Nearly identical.
>
>Regards,
>Bob
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Hansen" <jerry-hansen(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: RV8-List: IFR instruments |
Many newer digital autopilots aimed at the experimental market find their
best reference for navigation in a properly configured GPS data stream. The
NMEA 0183 data stream and the AVLINK data stream (from Garmin and others)
adhere to strict standards. Such digital autopilots are designed to accept
data that adheres to these standards, and they typically work remarkably
well when using such precise digital data.
EFIS systems must also get their navigation information from outside
sources, such as GPS. They may then process this information and provide an
output for use by autopilots. If you are going to attach an autopilot to
these systems, you MUST know what processes are being performed to the NMEA
0183 or AVLINK data streams once the EFIS digests it and provides an output
to an autopilot.
Some EFIS systems can get a little tricky in their "Heading" mode. When you
select a heading on the EFIS, they might create a "phantom" waypoint some
distance ahead of the aircraft at the heading that was selected. They then
put this in the data stream, replacing the GPS BTW (Bearing to Waypoint)
data with BTW of the phantom waypoint. The autopilot will then track to
this course if the data is in the correct format. There can be some unknown
parameters here... how far away is the "phantom" waypoint - is the autopilot
capable of tracking to the output data as configured - are all of the
required data passed through from the NMEA information (typically the RMB
and RMC sentences) - and a whole host of other questions that must be
addressed by the EFIS and autopilot manufacturers to assure fail safe
operation.
This is not to say that these systems won't work together. Just a "heads
up" to prompt questions that might be asked of potential suppliers of such
equipment - to be sure that you don't find yourself in a dark cumulus cloud
someday with these questions left unanswered. Check with the systems
manufacturers to get absolute assurance of compatibility. Remember that
many of the EFIS and autopilot systems that are directed to experimental
aircraft are not "certified" and therefore have not been subjected to the
rigorous testing that is demanded by certification. This should create a
huge question mark above your head.
Jerry
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv8-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv8-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tony Johnson
Subject: RE: RV8-List: IFR instruments
--> RV8-List message posted by: "Tony Johnson"
Frank,
I am also interested in learning more about the BMA EFIS lite 3. I do have
some concerns about using it for IFR applications.
Let me preface this by saying that I am no expert, and I am not even IFR
rated at this point. It is my understanding that for a GPS to be approved
for IFR it must have a left-right indication and annunciators. The G3 seems
to have the left-right indication, but I did not see any indication that it
had the annuciators. That would add about $750 to the package. The other
issue is that I think, but do not know, that a GPS used for IFR work would
have to be certified (or meet the TSO requirements) for IFR, either enroute
or approach even in an experimental aircraft. I have not seen any
indication that the G3 meets these requirements.
The G3 is an impressive unit, although it lacks some of the features of the
dynon, it has adds more. I did not see any indication that the G3 has AOA
information, OAT, or density altitude.
It does have winds aloft information, both speed and direction.
I am wondering if it will interface with a NAVAID, and take VOR info from a
NARCO Nav radio. I emailed BMA today with those questions. I will be
interested in the observations and knowledge of other listers.
Tony Johnson
RV8A Orlando
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv8-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv8-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank
George (Corvallis)
rv8-list(at)matronics.com; rv9-list(at)matronics.com; rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV8-List: IFR instruments
--> RV8-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
Hi Guys,
I was almost convinced the Garmin GNS 430 hooked to a Dynon and a
Digitrack A/P was the almost perfect base to a light weight IFR setup
for an RV-7, then I see that BMA has come out with the EFIS Lite G3
which has the GPS, and an electronic version of the VOR/GS receiver that
can be driven by an SL30 Navcom. Apparently this system drives a BMA 2
axis autopilot.
Looking at all of this gives me aN IFR panel for about $11k including
the transponder and 2 axis A/P. The similar setup using the GNS 430
comes in at about $14.5K with single axis A/P.
Anyone have any experience or thoughts on this set up?
I haven't started IFR training yet so I'm fumbling a little on all the
requirements...Not sure about the "indicator lights" (marker beacon?)
that are apparently built into the Nav head that the GNS 430 would
drive.
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Anglin" <jlanglin44(at)earthlink.net> |
I almost have my HR II finished - the last thing I will have to buy is
paint. I have less than $55K in it. I would like to see anyone build an
IFR RV of any kind for less than that. I bought the 4 kit and John's kit
and if that is what you call an entry price it's nowhere near $46K. Plus it
is a better looking plane than the F 1 IMHO.
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: super 8
>
> Used to be, but not anymore...
>
> The F-1 wing couldn't be further from an RV wing if you tried. The new
EVO wing is a tapered wing, both in chord and span. It's really an amazing
piece of work and comes finished from Tearm Rocket/HPA...the work looks top
notch from what I've seen, and I really scrutinzed it at OSH. If you saw it
at OSH you'd know what I mean. Also, it "apparantly" has resulted in higher
cruise speed and slightly lowered stall speed. Plus....it looks like a
piece of a rocket!!
>
> Last thing...about that gear argument. They really aren't that similar,
other than being tapered rods. The rockets are Titanium, machined flat for
a lot of the length, and attache via a tapered cone (like the CNC Morris
Taper bits), and the Van's are steel (or can be AL2 on the -8's).
>
> If and when I build something with a 6 banger on the front, I'd love a
rocket. That being said, the $46K entry price is a lot more than the Van's
planes...so that -10 is also pretty attractive at $10K less (slow build vs.
fast build).
>
> Cheers,
> Stein Bruch
> Minneapolis
>
>
> ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
> From: Bob Japundza <bjapundza(at)yahoo.com>
> Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:36:18 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> >>Also, how do the HR and F-1 wing designs compare?
> >
> >Nearly identical.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Bob
> >
> >
> >
> >__________________________________
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | A peek into the future?? |
This is not related to RV-dom in its present form, but who knows what we
will have in the panel a decade from now?
What would our electronic flight instruments look like if they were not
mimicking mechanical gyros? What if there was a way to portray all
flight parameters in a format that didn't require an instrument scan?
The following link is to a study that is investigating these questions.
I do not make any claims to understand even half of what is discussed in
the paper, but I find it fascinating to consider how our flight
instruments may appear at some time in the future. Maybe those
instrument panels on Star Trek weren't that outrageous after all!
http://www.ihmc.us/research/projects/OZ_UCAV/downloads/OzHumanCenteredComputing.pdf
No doubt if something along the lines of the above study ever happens,
it will be available commercially first in the realm of experimental
aviation.
Sam Buchanan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Temporary hangar space in Birmingham |
Doug, check with Doug Preston. He is a corporate pilot and TVRVBGer
based at Bessemer and he may be able to find room for you.
dougpflyrv(at)aol.com
Sam
===========================
Doug Weiler wrote:
>
> Fellow Listers:
>
> There is a chance that I may be in desperate need of hangar space for my
> RV-4 in the Birmingham, AL area from Aug 29 - Sep 3. My recourse is to
> hangar with one of the big FBO's at the BHM airport which could get rather
> pricey. Anyone have any ideas?
>
> Please contact off list or call my cell at 651-398-1184
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Doug Weiler, pres MN Wing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jaye and Scott Jackson" <jayeandscott(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: A peek into the future?? |
The ultimate goal would be to make all flying, including night, in-cloud,
etc., just like day, CAVU flying.
How the environment outside is detected and generated, either by radar,
infrared sensors, or GPS/terrain database interface, with the resulting
image projected either on a head-up display, or holographically, remains to
be seen.
Flight directors, then, become not unlike driving along a winding, coastal
road, with rises and falls, with the commanded path looking either like a
road with a centreline, or a series of windows to steer through.
Surrounded here by coastal mountains on three sides, imagine flying through
a mountain pass in the dark, or solid cloud......
Scott in Vancouver
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Buchanan" <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: RV-List: A peek into the future??
>
> This is not related to RV-dom in its present form, but who knows what we
> will have in the panel a decade from now?
>
> What would our electronic flight instruments look like if they were not
> mimicking mechanical gyros? What if there was a way to portray all
> flight parameters in a format that didn't require an instrument scan?
>
> The following link is to a study that is investigating these questions.
> I do not make any claims to understand even half of what is discussed in
> the paper, but I find it fascinating to consider how our flight
> instruments may appear at some time in the future. Maybe those
> instrument panels on Star Trek weren't that outrageous after all!
>
>
http://www.ihmc.us/research/projects/OZ_UCAV/downloads/OzHumanCenteredComputing.pdf
>
> No doubt if something along the lines of the above study ever happens,
> it will be available commercially first in the realm of experimental
> aviation.
>
> Sam Buchanan
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
| Subject: | A peek into the future?? |
Sam,
I read through that report last night after reading about it on the Blue
Mountain discussion board. My first reaction was to wonder what all those
weird symbols were all about, but it's pretty hard to deny the results of
their experiments. In essence, they found that using the Oz symbols,
inexperienced pilots were much more capable of controlling the airplane
(actually, flight simulator) under varying conditions of turbulence and
distraction (reading text) than they were with conventional instrumentation.
I can easily imagine a time in the near future when part of the start-up
process for your EFIS system is to choose Oz or conventional symbology. It
would seem that it would be a relatively simple matter with a glass cockpit
to choose how you wanted the information presented.
Oh, and Greg at Blue Mountain is onto it.
Terry
RV-8 still wiring
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Sam Buchanan
Subject: RV-List: A peek into the future??
This is not related to RV-dom in its present form, but who knows what we
will have in the panel a decade from now?
What would our electronic flight instruments look like if they were not
mimicking mechanical gyros? What if there was a way to portray all
flight parameters in a format that didn't require an instrument scan?
The following link is to a study that is investigating these questions.
I do not make any claims to understand even half of what is discussed in
the paper, but I find it fascinating to consider how our flight
instruments may appear at some time in the future. Maybe those
instrument panels on Star Trek weren't that outrageous after all!
http://www.ihmc.us/research/projects/OZ_UCAV/downloads/OzHumanCenteredComput
ing.pdf
No doubt if something along the lines of the above study ever happens,
it will be available commercially first in the realm of experimental
aviation.
Sam Buchanan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "sheldon barrett" <sheldonb(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Any RV builders/flyers in New Zealand? |
Going to New Zealand Oct 3rd to Oct 15th..
Was wondering if there are any RV guys/gals there for a looksee visit monitoring
the list?
Sheldon Barrett RV6A (Champ RV6 at LOE3).
sheldon(at)frontiernet.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Weiler" <dcw(at)nomadwi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Temporary hangar space in Birmingham |
Thanks Sam
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Buchanan" <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: RV-List: Temporary hangar space in Birmingham
>
> Doug, check with Doug Preston. He is a corporate pilot and TVRVBGer
> based at Bessemer and he may be able to find room for you.
>
> dougpflyrv(at)aol.com
>
> Sam
>
> ===========================
>
> Doug Weiler wrote:
>
> >
> > Fellow Listers:
> >
> > There is a chance that I may be in desperate need of hangar space for my
> > RV-4 in the Birmingham, AL area from Aug 29 - Sep 3. My recourse is to
> > hangar with one of the big FBO's at the BHM airport which could get
rather
> > pricey. Anyone have any ideas?
> >
> > Please contact off list or call my cell at 651-398-1184
> >
> > Many thanks,
> >
> > Doug Weiler, pres MN Wing
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | more Rocket/Super 8 comments |
| From: | "Frazier, Vincent A" <VFrazier(at)usi.edu> |
He he he.... I have to laugh because the Rocket list never gets this
much action on any topic. LOL
Also Michael Stewart has been a real gentleman throughout this thread.
We had emailed back and forth several times yesterday before my
pea-brain made the connection that it was his website comments that I
was tromping on! Some guys aren't so gracious and I take my hat off to
Michael for putting up with our well intended barbs.
I would not have any qualms about the Super 8s (or Super 6s either)if
some simple strengthening mods were done. It would be very easy to copy
what John Harmon has done on the Rocket and apply that to the RV
airframe. Most of the mods would involve a relatively simple increase
in skin thickness. Adding length to the tail would get a bit more
involved but is still reasonably straightforward.
For anyone who doesn't know what John Harmon did to Rocketize an RV-4,
here's a brief overview:
the wings are shortened about 7" per side and the rib spacing is
decreased,
the tail is lengthened about 7" with 4" of that length added between the
seats,
several skins in the forward fuselage are thickened,
a different cowl, motor mount, canopy, and several widened bulkheads are
needed due to widening of the fuselage. (Obviously the 8 wouldn't need
to be widened.)
And, of course, a big IO-540-C4B5 motor and HUGE Hartzell prop are
installed...don't kid yourself here... this is why it's a 1200# Rocket
and not a 950# RV-4 anymore. Please do the math for yourself.... 250#
difference and most of it is on the nose!
The gear geometry on the Rockets is changed to accommodate the weight on
the nose, with the Harmons tending to be more nose heavy on the ground.
The F-1 wheels are slightly farther forward to put more weight on the
tail. I'd be leary of simply leaving the RV-8 gear "as is" while adding
all of that weight up front. But I have no knowledge of the Super 8s
ground manners. Perhaps Bob J. will chime in again.
I've had the opportunity to ride in 3 different Harmons. The gear never
misbehaved whatsoever. Bob Japundza had a very good description of the
titanium gear yesterday. (I hate to say it in public, but I have a high
regard for Bob's opinions. He usually has it right.) Incidentally, the
titatium gear legs are without a doubt, the single most expensive part
of the entire airframe. I think I paid $850 apiece!!! If money makes
it good, these gear legs must be awesome! ;-)
There was discussion of cost also. My half breed Harmon/F1 Rocket has a
0-time Lyc and brand new prop, fully painted and upholstered, Grand
Rapids EFIS based panel with brand new avionics, etc, etc,... ALL new
everything, and I have all of the receipts to prove that I've not popped
the $50,000 barrier yet. I have taken exactly 5 years of spare time to
build it.
So, IMHO, a Super 8 with the Rocket mods listed above, and a Rocket gear
instead of the gear towers crowding your thighs would be "da bomb".
There's even a turtledeck mod for the RV-8 that a local RV-8 builder
(and others) have done. Looks nice.
Regards,
Vince Frazier
F-1H Rocket, N540VF
http://www.usi.edu/science/chemistry/vfrazier/page1.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot(at)hotmail.com> |
>I understand paint will not stick to the stainless so
Sure it will. Just needs to be clean and have an anchor pattern.
>sheet of 24 gold plate plate, gold foil, gold whatever. Remember, my
>firewall is already attached awaiting the install of my engine mount for
>the
>rotary but only after figuring out how to "gold" the firewall.
I'm not thinking very creatively this morning, so I can't offer much advice
on making it gold right now. But you do realize that nice, shiny stainless
steel will reflect radiant energy (heat) better than any color, helping to
keep your feet cool.
If I just had to have it gold, I'd buff the outer surface of the firewall or
maybe use a portable grit blaster to rough it up a little. Clean
it/degrease it really well, then shoot it with a gold metallic flake
automotive paint (urethane, acrylic). IMO, it's a little late for
electroplating.
2 cents
Bryan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | 153MC flies today |
Noel,
CONGRATULATIONS and WELL DONE - Again !!!!!
Chuck & Dave Rowbotham
RV-8A
>From: "Noel & Yoshie Simmons" <noel(at)blueskyaviation.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: "Rv-List(at)Matronics. Com" , "rvyahoo"
>
>Subject: RV-List: 153MC flies today
>Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 20:28:35 -0600
>
>
>
>Had a great day today, took RV-6A 153MC off the ground for the fist time
>today. Subsequently put 7 hours on it with out a hitch, god I love VAN'S
>stuff.
>
>O-360-A1A
>Holy Cowl with plenum
>NACA scoop for oil cooler
>Fixed pitch
>basic panel
>
>after 4 RV's I still get that RV grin
>:>)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Noel Simmons
>Blue Sky Aviation, Inc.
>Phone & Fax: 406-538-6574
>noel(at)blueskyaviation.net
> <http://www.blueskyaviation.net/> www.blueskyaviation.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | A peek into the future?? |
One issue I've never seen debated is the risk management/tolerance of these
systems, be it OZ, SATS, HITS or ??. The NASA SATS program seemingly wants
to hand the airplane keys to anyone checked out on a Game Boy. Great concept
- make it super easy to fly in all weather and the flying population will
grow enough to support the ground infrastructure. Except what happens when
the electrowizzies die and the "pilot/console operator" has never flown
anything else? The old timers (and FAA?) will say everyone needs to be able
to fly the old way, partial panel, needle-ball-airspeed, just like Lindy.
That destroys the benefit of the shallow learning curve. It's kind of a bank
loan approach - you only get the benefits if you don't need them. Accepting
that an occasional SATS airplane will fall out of the sky is likely not
politically (or insurance) acceptable. Maybe the answer is in higher
redundancy or recovery chutes ala Cirrus (OMG I can't believe I wrote that)
or anti-gravity belts or something else. Personally, I'd like to see the
OZ/SATS/HITS concepts flourish. I won't have any steam gauges in the Phoenix
and I'll manage the risk. But I'd sure like to hear how the visionaries
propose to manage the risk for their ab initio OZ/SATS pilots. If anyone has
seen such a discussion please pass it along.
Regards,
Greg Young - Houston (DWH)
RV-6 N6GY ...project Phoenix
Navion N5221K - just an XXL RV-6A
> In essence, they found that using the Oz symbols,
> inexperienced pilots were much more capable of controlling
> the airplane (actually, flight simulator) under varying
> conditions of turbulence and distraction (reading text) than
> they were with conventional instrumentation.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SportAV8R(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Looking for an RV'er with mode s |
>>Looking for real world RV experience with this mode S stuff.
Prices are down to almost reasonableness now and I am wanting to pull
the trigger. <<
Here's a related plea: someone tell me who makes a serial-altitude-data transponder
that would be compatible with the Dynon "new model." Google is not proving
much help... I want to pull some triggers of my own on a glass panel overhaul,
but ditching my almost new Garmin GTX-320 xpdr isn't appealing; I'm even thinking
of going over to the dark side and looking at BMA, Grand Rapids, & so
forth.
-Bill B
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: Looking for an RV'er with mode s |
Hi,
I'm not flying with a mode s, but I wonder why you want
to spend more money so "big brother" can track you? Rhetorical
question, BTW.
If you want to get the truth of mode s, this is a good
place to start:
http://www.collisionavoidance.org/
Mickey
>...
>Prices are down to almost reasonableness now and I am wanting to pull
>the trigger. Someone please push me over the edge so's I have a good
>excuse and can hold you accountable later:-)
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ken Simmons" <ken(at)truckstop.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Looking for an RV'er with mode s |
The GTX 327 is one. That's what I have and plan on using. They're not bad on the
used market. That's how I got mine. This is the transponder Doug Medema at
Dynon is using so he made sure this one was compatible.
Ken
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: SportAV8R(at)aol.com
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:39:20 -0400
>
>>>Looking for real world RV experience with this mode S stuff.
>
>Prices are down to almost reasonableness now and I am wanting to pull
>the trigger. <<
>
>Here's a related plea: someone tell me who makes a serial-altitude-data transponder
that would be compatible with the Dynon "new model." Google is not proving
much help... I want to pull some triggers of my own on a glass panel overhaul,
but ditching my almost new Garmin GTX-320 xpdr isn't appealing; I'm even
thinking of going over to the dark side and looking at BMA, Grand Rapids, & so
forth.
>
>-Bill B
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Looking for an RV'er with mode s |
SportAV8R(at)aol.com wrote:
> Here's a related plea: someone tell me who makes a
> serial-altitude-data transponder that would be compatible with the
> Dynon "new model." Google is not proving much help... I want to pull
> some triggers of my own on a glass panel overhaul, but ditching my
> almost new Garmin GTX-320 xpdr isn't appealing; I'm even thinking of
> going over to the dark side and looking at BMA, Grand Rapids, & so
> forth.
Couldn't you just buy an altitude encoder for your existing xsponder?
Sam Buchanan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot(at)hotmail.com> |
I've never painted a firewall but we've painted stainless piping and vessels
regularly here in the petrochem plants. why paint a perfect good, new piece
of SS piping or vessel? It keeps the atmospheric contaminants from causing
external environmental and chloride stress corrosion cracking.
Also, you might (just guessing here) be able to offset some of the loss of
reflectivity by adding bulk/thickness to the layer of paint being applied in
order to provide some degree of thermal insulation. For example, apply
generous amount of primer then a couple of build or top coats. Might even
help a little with noise. I'm shooting from the hip on this one. Don't
forget - it'll also add weight and probably (!) be more flammable than
polished stainless steel.
Bryan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy Lervold" <randy(at)romeolima.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall color |
> Just want to make sure..........................paint WILL stick to
> stainless??
Dana, I painted the BACK of my firewall with Concept, after thoroughly
Scotchbriting it, and it stuck just fine for 368 hrs.
Randy Lervold
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com |
| Subject: | RE: more Rocket/Super 8 comments |
Tromping on? I surely did not see it that way. I put my thoughts out
there for all to see, and debate. It is quite fun if you ask me. Ego's
get left at the door. This is serious business and lightweights should
stay home.
I expect the S8 to weigh in at 60lbs heavier than my 6A does. How am I
gonna do that? Well the current S8's weigh in at 1250 empty. That is
60lbs over my heavy 6A which is loaded to the gills with stuff that I
love. And these 1250lbs numbers are on the std gear. I have the Grove
gear (sitting idlely waiting on the fuse to arrive next week) shaving
18lbs. I hope to not eat up all that savings with the increase weight of
smoke system, big tanks, and the ever tantalizing glass cockpit, but I
might. IF I get in at <=1250 Ill be one happy happy camper. That is the
power to weight Im after.
And thanks to all that have chimed in on the S8 issue. One of the best
threads I have seen in quite some time. Bring it on. Keep it coming.
Mike Stewart
S8 mounting tips.
-----Original Message-----
From: Frazier, Vincent A [mailto:VFrazier(at)usi.edu]
Subject: more Rocket/Super 8 comments
He he he.... I have to laugh because the Rocket list never gets this
much action on any topic. LOL
Also Michael Stewart has been a real gentleman throughout this thread.
We had emailed back and forth several times yesterday before my
pea-brain made the connection that it was his website comments that I
was tromping on! Some guys aren't so gracious and I take my hat off to
Michael for putting up with our well intended barbs.
I would not have any qualms about the Super 8s (or Super 6s either)if
some simple strengthening mods were done. It would be very easy to copy
what John Harmon has done on the Rocket and apply that to the RV
airframe. Most of the mods would involve a relatively simple increase
in skin thickness. Adding length to the tail would get a bit more
involved but is still reasonably straightforward.
For anyone who doesn't know what John Harmon did to Rocketize an RV-4,
here's a brief overview:
the wings are shortened about 7" per side and the rib spacing is
decreased,
the tail is lengthened about 7" with 4" of that length added between the
seats,
several skins in the forward fuselage are thickened,
a different cowl, motor mount, canopy, and several widened bulkheads are
needed due to widening of the fuselage. (Obviously the 8 wouldn't need
to be widened.)
And, of course, a big IO-540-C4B5 motor and HUGE Hartzell prop are
installed...don't kid yourself here... this is why it's a 1200# Rocket
and not a 950# RV-4 anymore. Please do the math for yourself.... 250#
difference and most of it is on the nose!
The gear geometry on the Rockets is changed to accommodate the weight on
the nose, with the Harmons tending to be more nose heavy on the ground.
The F-1 wheels are slightly farther forward to put more weight on the
tail. I'd be leary of simply leaving the RV-8 gear "as is" while adding
all of that weight up front. But I have no knowledge of the Super 8s
ground manners. Perhaps Bob J. will chime in again.
I've had the opportunity to ride in 3 different Harmons. The gear never
misbehaved whatsoever. Bob Japundza had a very good description of the
titanium gear yesterday. (I hate to say it in public, but I have a high
regard for Bob's opinions. He usually has it right.) Incidentally, the
titatium gear legs are without a doubt, the single most expensive part
of the entire airframe. I think I paid $850 apiece!!! If money makes
it good, these gear legs must be awesome! ;-)
There was discussion of cost also. My half breed Harmon/F1 Rocket has a
0-time Lyc and brand new prop, fully painted and upholstered, Grand
Rapids EFIS based panel with brand new avionics, etc, etc,... ALL new
everything, and I have all of the receipts to prove that I've not popped
the $50,000 barrier yet. I have taken exactly 5 years of spare time to
build it.
So, IMHO, a Super 8 with the Rocket mods listed above, and a Rocket gear
instead of the gear towers crowding your thighs would be "da bomb".
There's even a turtledeck mod for the RV-8 that a local RV-8 builder
(and others) have done. Looks nice.
Regards,
Vince Frazier
F-1H Rocket, N540VF
http://www.usi.edu/science/chemistry/vfrazier/page1.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Was Mode S, now Dynon serial output. |
| From: | "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart(at)iss.net> |
That is exactly what they(Dynon) recommend. From their website:
Altitude Encoder Output
The new EFIS-D10A outputs altitude encoder data via serial
communications using an ASCII formatted message. The change from
parallel gray code used by the EFIS-D10 model was to free up connection
pins for other features and be compatible with newer transponders coming
out on the market.
Dynon does not have a listing of serial equipped/compatible transponders
available in the market. You'll need to purchase an altitude encoder if
the transponder you currently own or are considering only accepts a
parallel input. There are no serial to parallel converters that we know
about.
The new EFIS-D10A provides a setup menu that allows you to select from
one of 4 possible protocols and an altimeter resolution of either 10 or
100 feet. The combination of these two selections should make the
EFIS-D10A compatible with most serial input capable transponders.
Protocol 1
Used By
Garmin AT (formerly UPS Aviation Technologies)
Baud rate
1200
Format
#AL, space, +/-sign, five altitude bytes, the letter "T" and the number
"25", two checksum bytes, and a carriage return
Example message
# AL +05200T+25D7[CR]
Protocol 2
Used By
Magellan
Baud rate
1200
Format
$MGL, +/- sign, five altitude digits, T+25, checksum, carriage return
Example message
$MGL+05200T+25D7[CR]
Protocol 3
Used By
Northstar, Garmin
Baud rate
2400
Format
ALT, space, five altitude bytes, carriage return
Example message
ALT 05200[CR]
Protocol 4
Used By
Trimble, Garmin
Baud rate
9600
Format
ALT, space, five altitude bytes, carriage return
Example message
ALT 05200[CR]
When purchasing a new transponder or looking to see if your existing
unit is compatible, please check with your owners manual, manufacturer's
representative or local avionics shop - please do not call Dynon.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sam Buchanan
Subject: Re: RV-List: Looking for an RV'er with mode s
SportAV8R(at)aol.com wrote:
> Here's a related plea: someone tell me who makes a
> serial-altitude-data transponder that would be compatible with the
> Dynon "new model." Google is not proving much help... I want to pull
> some triggers of my own on a glass panel overhaul, but ditching my
> almost new Garmin GTX-320 xpdr isn't appealing; I'm even thinking of
> going over to the dark side and looking at BMA, Grand Rapids, & so
> forth.
Couldn't you just buy an altitude encoder for your existing xsponder?
Sam Buchanan
=
=
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John" <n1cxo320(at)salidaco.com> |
| Subject: | What's a fair price? |
I am replacing my Orndorff RV6A seat cushions and seat backs with Oregon
Aero units. A friend offered to buy the Orndorff seats, but I am not settled
on what a fair price would be. I only paid $300 for them 9 years ago, and
they are in like-new condition. I see Orndorff now gets $600 for them...same
units.
What you consider a fair price...I don't want to take advantage of a friend,
nor do I want to "give" them away.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Was Mode S, now Dynon serial output. |
The Garmin/UPSAT SL-70 takes both serial and gray code inputs. Has serial
output too which goes to my GX-60. I still mourn the buyout:-(
Greg
>
> Yup, been there, read that... not exactly helpful! It's been
> a pain trying to research the input compatibility of various
> transponders online. No mention in Garmin's web pages about
> the input of the GTX series, but I know from the install
> manual that my GTX 320 is parallel only. I was just hoping
> for a research shortcut, since Dynon says not to bother them
> with this inquiry.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Bibb" <rebibb(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GA Scare Piece |
There is a very scary trend occuring that seems to be gaining momentum -
namely attacks like this on General Aviation.
To wit:
Aviation Week has an article on the DC area ADIZ and the wonderful job the
Customs and Immigration people are doing keeping all the nasty little planes
from being a threat to our sacred national capital. Included was the gem
that these security folks want a 60 mile radius (its now 30) permanent ADIZ
in DC where they require folks wanting to fly into it to land at "gateway"
airports for search and clearance before being allowed to fly into the ADIZ.
Also, TSA Inspectors would be located at all of these airports and the users
would pay a fee to support this force.
WTOP radio, a Washington DC area all news radio station has a terrorism
expert on this morning talking about the grave threat of attack via GA....to
their credit WTOP is inviting him back to ask him some questions tommorow
after being besieged commetns debunking his analysis from local aviators and
will have AOPA on as well for a counter view.
The Boston Globe thing....
This is scary because the tactics remind me of those who oppose guns. No
matter where you are on the gun issue you have to admit that the opposition
to guns uses a tactic that, at times, seems to want to make the gun owners
the problem and that if we just eliminated them the problem would go away.
Luckily for gun owners they have the NRA to fight for them and they are a
much larger segment of the populace. Not taking a side in that issue here
just pointing out the similarities to the issue we face.
Do not think it does not effect you because you are not in DC because if
they suceed in getting these sort of draconian measures in place here in the
name of security how long do you think it will be before the Senator
Schumer's and the Mayor Daley's of the world start clamoring for the same
level of protection for their cities.
If you think they (these security types) will never get what they want
consider this:
In DC they recently closed streets around the Capitol Building and set up
checkpoints (like Nazi Germany!) based on some intelligence they got that AL
Queda was planning on blowing up buildings in DC. After the fact they
admited the intelligence was vague and there was no specific information.
The relevent point is they did it in the middle of the night and didnt
inform a single elected official (not the Mayor or the Speaker of the House,
no one) they were going to do it. City officails are livid and have been
calling for them to open back the streets as it plays havoc with local
traffic to no avail. When the time comes they will make the same kind of
airspace grab and nothing will be done about it.
BTW - the streets are stilled closed.....
I am not some sort of right wing or left wing nut but this scares the hell
out of me. If we continue this way we are letting the damn terrorists win
by default.
Sorr this is not directly RV related but it effects your right to fly in a
very real way.
Write your Congressman and send money to AOPA - they are the only ones
fighting for us...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Skylor Piper <skylor4(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GA Scare Piece |
ALL of us as Aviators need to stand up for our rights.
The reason that vans haven't become targets after
multiple world trade center attack attempts and
Oklahoma City is because the pure number of people
that rely on vans is huge, especially compared to the
size of the GA population.
On the other hand, GA is a relatively easy target for
the media and public, because the number of people
affected is only a tiny percentage of the population.
That is why it is important for Aviators to be very
vocal (but not obnoxious or unreasonable) about
supporting our rights and educating the general
public. In a addition, it's important to support our
most influential advocacy group, AOPA!
Skylor
--- Richard Bibb wrote:
>
>
> There is a very scary trend occuring that seems to
> be gaining momentum -
> namely attacks like this on General Aviation.
>
_______________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "BRUCE GRAY" <brucerv84us(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | What's a fair price? |
Fair would be sell them for the same price you payed. Consider you using the
seat's for 9 year's for free.
>From: "John" <n1cxo320(at)salidaco.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: RV-List: What's a fair price?
>From: contains numbers mixed in with letters
>
>
>I am replacing my Orndorff RV6A seat cushions and seat backs with Oregon
>Aero units. A friend offered to buy the Orndorff seats, but I am not
>settled
>on what a fair price would be. I only paid $300 for them 9 years ago, and
>they are in like-new condition. I see Orndorff now gets $600 for
>them...same
>units.
>
>What you consider a fair price...I don't want to take advantage of a
>friend,
>nor do I want to "give" them away.
>
>John
>
>
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Bibb" <rebibb(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GA Scare Piece |
> Come on. It's the Boston Globe. Fit for fish wrap and hampster cage
lining.
>
The problemis it gets picked up and repeated over and over. The WTOP radio
piece was because they read the Globe thing, saw a good (as in sensational)
item to report on, called the "expert" and he was more than willing to fill
the drive time airways around the nations capital with this drivel letting
literally several million commuters hear this crap and be scared about
little planes. You know its crap, I know its crap, but some innocent out
there is now thinking they better ban those little planes from coming
anywhere near a stadium lest 90,000 God fearing NFL fans be put at risk.
Unfortunately the logical argument against this sort of thing gets lost in
the shuffle, sort of like the correction to the story where you are accused
of beating your wife gets put on page 24 in fine print. The "damage" has
already been done.
I'm not try9ing to be alarmist but to approriate those immortal words for a
new application - "Houston, we ahve a problem..."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Bibb" <rebibb(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: What's a fair price? |
Hmm - what a willing buyer and a willing seller agree it to be. I'd ask him
to make an offer and if it seems oK take it - if not counter. Sounds like
the american, well not exactly american as its practiced in every corner of
the globe, way.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GA Scare Piece |
Come ya'all.
nough of this useless bandwidth. Let's all keep the subject about building airplanes.
And if you insist, at least don't take up Matt's drive space
.
DO NOT ARCHIVE!
Peter Laurence
On 26 Aug 2004 at 19:11, Richard Bibb wrote:
>
>
> > Come on. It's the Boston Globe. Fit for fish wrap and hampster
> > cage
> lining.
> >
> The problemis it gets picked up and repeated over and over. The WTOP
> radio
> piece was because they read the Globe thing, saw a good (as in
> sensational) item to report on, called the "expert" and he was more
> than willing to fill the drive time airways around the nations capital
> with this drivel letting literally several million commuters hear this
> crap and be scared about little planes. You know its crap, I know its
> crap, but some innocent out there is now thinking they better ban
> those little planes from coming anywhere near a stadium lest 90,000
> God fearing NFL fans be put at risk. Unfortunately the logical
> argument against this sort of thing gets lost in the shuffle, sort of
> like the correction to the story where you are accused of beating your
> wife gets put on page 24 in fine print. The "damage" has already been
> done.
>
> I'm not try9ing to be alarmist but to approriate those immortal words
> for a new application - "Houston, we ahve a problem..."
>
>
> advertising on the Matronics Forums.
> http://www.matronics.com/chat
> ===
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Cimino" <jcimino(at)echoes.net> |
Does anyone know how to get in touch with Lyle Hefel? A good friend of mine is
interested in buying an -8 and heard he might be willing to sell his. He called
Lyle's phone number and left a few messages for him, but has not heard back.
If anyone can help, I would sure appreciate it.
James Cimino
RV-8 SN 80039
100+ Hours
570-842-4057
http://www.geocities.com/jcimino.geo/
________________________________________________________________________________
Can anyone point me to a cad 3 view drawing of a RV9A?
Thanks
peter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Elrod3794(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Temporary hangar space in Birmingham |
Doug I have space in my hanger at Bessemer (eky)call me.
mike at 205 3691103 or
Bob at 205 5414103
m. elrod
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "cgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
Lyle is building a new house and is quite busy. You might try
rvbuilder(at)dubuque.net
Cy Galley
Safety Programs Editor
Always looking for ideas and articles for EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Cimino" <jcimino(at)echoes.net>
Subject: RV-List: Lyle Hefel
>
> Does anyone know how to get in touch with Lyle Hefel? A good friend of
mine is interested in buying an -8 and heard he might be willing to sell
his. He called Lyle's phone number and left a few messages for him, but has
not heard back. If anyone can help, I would sure appreciate it.
> James Cimino
> RV-8 SN 80039
> 100+ Hours
> 570-842-4057
> http://www.geocities.com/jcimino.geo/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: GA Scare Piece |
In a message dated 8/26/2004 3:23:40 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
RV8ter(at)aol.com writes:
Folks that read that pathetic excuse of a news paper have long since given
up
their common sense and that rag merely reflects their liberal stupidity.
====================================
Unfortunately the liberals have no monopoly on stupidity. Just choose your
subject matter (religion, sex, violence, guns,energy, immigration, drugs,
corporate finance, etc.) and there is certainly stupidity aplenty across the
board.
GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A C/S, flying 710 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BrooksRV6(at)webtv.net (Chris Brooks) |
After 10+ years of construction RV-6 Ser. 22935 N164CB flew from MQY in
Smyrna TN today. It may not look like much, but at least it doesn't fly
too bad. Both wings are heavy, and you have to hold right rudder going
up and left rudder coming down :-) The planes not bent, and my pants are
still dry so I consider the flight a success.
Chris Brooks
DNA
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RV-7A Tipup Install suggestion |
| From: | Sebastian Trost <sebastian.trost(at)sbcglobal.net> |
Been a lurker and massive user of Dan Checkoway and Walter Tondu's web sites
and this forum to speed my progress, but I think I have a good suggestion
for aligning the tipup canopy frame I haven't read before.
I used Dan's notes on interference to trim the alum spacers to allow the
frame to move forward. I had a really hard time getting the skin to sit flat
and flush to the subpanel flange. I couldn't get the duct tape to hold well
enough to keep the skin in place. I decided to use tape for the top center
portion of the skin. Then I put a ratcheting tiedown strap around the
entire fuselage along the forward part of the canopy frame skin. After
snugging it down, I was able to make some final adjustments to the skin to
get it evenly aligned relative to the forward top skin. The strap kept the
skin flush to the flanges and also kept the alignment in place. I was able
to drill the splice plate and hinge flange with no problem with this setup.
I hope this idea helps someone else. I have certainly saved a lot of time
with the Matronics forum. Many thanks to all!
Sebastian Trost
RV-7A Tipup QB
Working on Canopy
Cameron Airpark, CA (O61)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronnie Brown" <romott(at)adelphia.net> |
I urge all of us to respond to this threat against our GA freedoms by the sensationalist
media. This tripe will lead to more TFR's, restricted areas, security
at our small airports (have you noticed the miles of fences being put up around
the mid size airports?????). Eventually we will lose the freedom to fly
our airplanes anywhere.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/08/26/analysts_warn_of_small_plane_terrorism_threat/
Take a few minutes and let the editor (unfortunately, Karen Schaler, the writer
doesn't have the guts to list her email address) know what you think of this
piece of journalism.
letter(at)globe.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham(at)hotmail.com> |
Chris,
CONGRATULATIONS and WELL DONE !!
Chuck & Dave Rowbotham
RV-8A
>From: BrooksRV6(at)webtv.net (Chris Brooks)
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: First Flight
>Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:58:21 -0500
>
>
>After 10+ years of construction RV-6 Ser. 22935 N164CB flew from MQY in
>Smyrna TN today. It may not look like much, but at least it doesn't fly
>too bad. Both wings are heavy, and you have to hold right rudder going
>up and left rudder coming down :-) The planes not bent, and my pants are
>still dry so I consider the flight a success.
>Chris Brooks
Get ready for school! Find articles, homework help and more in the Back to
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hal / Carol Kempthorne <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
At 06:29 AM 8/27/2004, you wrote:
>
>Take a few minutes and let the editor (unfortunately, Karen Schaler, the
>writer doesn't have the guts to list her email address) know what you
>think of this piece of journalism.
I read the piece. Wasn't Karen just reporting on what some commission
said? I didn't see anything like editorializing on her part. What will we
say to her? Should we damn her for reporting something we didn't want to hear?
Would it matter if we found out she is a very religious pilot with a BUSH
button? Let's get some facts.
hal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Galati <rick6a(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Nationair insurance news |
For something over 4 years of building now, I have been virtually "self insured"
all along including the potentially risky move to the airport. Very recently,
I installed a Garmin stack (thank you, John Stark) which in one fell swoop
dramatically increased the total investment in my unfinished RV-6A. After insistent
prodding (nagging) from my wife, I finally called the AOPA inquiring about
"builders insurance." Hard to believe, but after the initial telephone inquiry,
it took the AOPA more than 2 weeks to get back with the news that such
coverage was unfamiliar and not available through their good offices. Upon the
recommendation of a fellow RV builder, I called Nationair which happens to
be located right here (I had no idea) in River City and immediately secured 80K
in non-motion Vanguard coverage for $413. Recently hired Aaron Wedge handled
the whole thing. Relatively small premium, considerable coverage, and some
welcomed peace of mind, especially considering all t
he late
afternoon thunderstorms we've had around here lately.
Rick Galati RV-6A "finishing" N307R (reserved) "Darla"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Darwin Barrie" <ktlkrn(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Looking for an RV'er with mode s |
Oh, give me a break about the "big brother" paranoia. I am putting in a 330 for
the collision avoidance so I can live to see another fly-in. I live in a very
congested area and the safety benefits far out weigh the costs. I have nothing
to hide so I don't care if they track me or not. Secondly, how long until they
are mandatory? If you don't live in a congested area don't even consider it.
GOTTA GO, there's a black helicopter landing out back. Oh no, black Suburbans with
guys in suits!!!!
Darwin N. Barrie
Chandler AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart(at)iss.net> |
Well believe it or not, I actually did get a response from an RV guy who
actually has a flying airplane(RV), and mode S. I thought the list might
find it interesting. Since he did not reply to the lis, I have kept him
anonymous.
Yep got that GNS430 and the GTX330 and I think its the best $2000 I
spent
since that hooker in Vegas. We can go up for a demo at GEZ, I'm planning
on
being there tomorrow. The 330 is really great for crowded airspace (your
around
ATL right?) and during formation it provides real peace of mind for
protection.
While the mode S can transmit N # it doesn't have to...my has never
beeen
program to do that. Its a better system then the airlines TCAS because
you also
get a vector line of traffic movement.
Course when you don't want to be tracked, there is always the stby
button. I cant think of a good reason during normal flight why I would
not want to have this in my airplane. Now when I have my hotdog hat on,
that's what the power switch is for I guess. I am as fearful of big
brother as the next guy believe me (well maybe not as bad as some of
you), but for my every days runnings around under my busy class B, and
the handful of hours I fly cross country, this sure seems like cheap
tcas to me.
Regards
Michael Stewart
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Bibb" <rebibb(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: GA Scare Piece |
The sin in this case was not presenting both sides of the argument and
taking the yet incomplete report out of context. Journalists have a
responsibility to get the facts straight before scaring the hell out of
everybody.
See: http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2004/040827security.html for the
rest of the story....
> I read the piece. Wasn't Karen just reporting on what some commission
> said? I didn't see anything like editorializing on her part. What will
we
> say to her? Should we damn her for reporting something we didn't want to
hear?
>
> Would it matter if we found out she is a very religious pilot with a BUSH
> button? Let's get some facts.
>
> hal
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Bibb" <rebibb(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Nationair insurance news |
Not unless you got a rider on the policy.....
----- Original Message -----
From: <dfiggins(at)es.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: Nationair insurance news
>
> As long as I am building in my garage I assume I am covered by my
> homeowners policy, is this a valid assumption?
>
> Dave Figgins RV-7A empennage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Nationair insurance news |
In a message dated 8/27/04 1:01:15 PM Central Daylight Time, dfiggins(at)es.com
writes:
> As long as I am building in my garage I assume I am covered by my
> homeowners policy, is this a valid assumption?
Not from most homeowners policies. Call Aaron Wedge @ 877-475-5860 for VERY
reasonable rates & great service- "builders" policy upgraded to "flying" in
January '04! (I too was dissapointed our RV-list resident agent wouldn't be
handling my policy, but that's the price you pay for success!) No commision,
just a happy Nation Air customer...........
Mark Phillips -6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cory Emberson" <bootless(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Nationair insurance news |
Dave,
Unfortunately, it's not a valid assumption. Builders coverage varies from
one company/underwriter to another. And it can be complex. For instance,
with Rotorway's agent of choice (Willis Caroon in Texas), they offer
coverage for physical damage during construction, and third-party liability
insurance one it's flying. But if someone watches you build and cracks their
head on part of the project, your insurance won't coverage them. Generally,
homeowner's insurance won't cover the project even if you're building it in
your garage.
How did I find all this out? The upcoming Kitplanes magazine
(October) has an article I wrote about insuring homebuilts. I had to admit
that the subject of insurance generally makes my eyes glaze over, but the
people who provided information, including JT Helms (thank you!) made it
interesting and understandable.
thanks,
Cory
>
> As long as I am building in my garage I assume I am covered by my
> homeowners policy, is this a valid assumption?
>
> Dave Figgins RV-7A empennage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Prior" <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Nationair insurance news |
On 10:59 27/08/2004 wrote:
> As long as I am building in my garage I assume I am covered by my
> homeowners policy, is this a valid assumption?
As you'll hear about any insurance question that starts with "am I
covered...", the answer is "it depends".
Some builders have discussed their projects with their insurers and found
them to be quite amenable to insuring it. In some cases additional
coverage was added to cover the increased equity in the tools or in the kit
materials. Others found that their existing coverage was adequate for
their tools, and that the kit parts were covered under "contents."
Other builders were told flat out that their complete homeowner's policy
was null and void the day they mentioned they were building an aircraft in
the basement. I still don't know what those people did to work out their
insurance.
If you don't tell your insurer that you're building, you run the risk of
being denied coverage in the event of the claim for not providing full
disclosure. If you do tell them, you run the risk of having coverage
denied up front because you are building. So unless you can self-insure
(as some do), you're better off discussing the situation up-front with your
insurer and making sure you're covered.
If you're concerned about having your coverage pulled if you bring up the
topic, shop around first and find one or two insurers who *will* cover you
while you're building. Then you're in a much stronger bargaining position
with your current insurer if they try to pull your coverage. And you have
a place to go if it doesn't work out.
-Rob
(currently building under normal homeowner's coverage only)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Nationair insurance news |
| From: | <dfiggins(at)es.com> |
Interesting set of comments, obviously my assumption is invalid but I
fail to see the difference between building a plane in the garage from
building a hot-rod or dragster or boat etc in the garage with respect to
the comment about "invalidating" the entire home owners policy. At this
point the major investment is in tools which I think would be covered
but I guess I need to make some calls.
Thanks
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Prior
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: Nationair insurance news
On 10:59 27/08/2004 wrote:
> As long as I am building in my garage I assume I am covered by my
> homeowners policy, is this a valid assumption?
As you'll hear about any insurance question that starts with "am I
covered...", the answer is "it depends".
Some builders have discussed their projects with their insurers and
found them to be quite amenable to insuring it. In some cases
additional coverage was added to cover the increased equity in the tools
or in the kit materials. Others found that their existing coverage was
adequate for their tools, and that the kit parts were covered under
"contents."
Other builders were told flat out that their complete homeowner's policy
was null and void the day they mentioned they were building an aircraft
in the basement. I still don't know what those people did to work out
their insurance.
If you don't tell your insurer that you're building, you run the risk of
being denied coverage in the event of the claim for not providing full
disclosure. If you do tell them, you run the risk of having coverage
denied up front because you are building. So unless you can self-insure
(as some do), you're better off discussing the situation up-front with
your insurer and making sure you're covered.
If you're concerned about having your coverage pulled if you bring up
the topic, shop around first and find one or two insurers who *will*
cover you while you're building. Then you're in a much stronger
bargaining position with your current insurer if they try to pull your
coverage. And you have a place to go if it doesn't work out.
-Rob
(currently building under normal homeowner's coverage only)
=
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
=
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Bibb" <rebibb(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Nationair insurance news |
Think of it as a fur coat. Such items are not covered either unless you add
them specifically to the policy. It will not invalidate your policy if you
dont but if your house burns to the ground they won't pay for the plane....
----- Original Message -----
From: <dfiggins(at)es.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: Nationair insurance news
>
> Interesting set of comments, obviously my assumption is invalid but I
> fail to see the difference between building a plane in the garage from
> building a hot-rod or dragster or boat etc in the garage with respect to
> the comment about "invalidating" the entire home owners policy. At this
> point the major investment is in tools which I think would be covered
> but I guess I need to make some calls.
> Thanks
>
> Dave
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Prior
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: Nationair insurance news
>
>
> On 10:59 27/08/2004 wrote:
> > As long as I am building in my garage I assume I am covered by my
> > homeowners policy, is this a valid assumption?
>
> As you'll hear about any insurance question that starts with "am I
> covered...", the answer is "it depends".
>
> Some builders have discussed their projects with their insurers and
> found them to be quite amenable to insuring it. In some cases
> additional coverage was added to cover the increased equity in the tools
> or in the kit materials. Others found that their existing coverage was
> adequate for their tools, and that the kit parts were covered under
> "contents."
>
> Other builders were told flat out that their complete homeowner's policy
> was null and void the day they mentioned they were building an aircraft
> in the basement. I still don't know what those people did to work out
> their insurance.
>
> If you don't tell your insurer that you're building, you run the risk of
> being denied coverage in the event of the claim for not providing full
> disclosure. If you do tell them, you run the risk of having coverage
> denied up front because you are building. So unless you can self-insure
> (as some do), you're better off discussing the situation up-front with
> your insurer and making sure you're covered.
>
> If you're concerned about having your coverage pulled if you bring up
> the topic, shop around first and find one or two insurers who *will*
> cover you while you're building. Then you're in a much stronger
> bargaining position with your current insurer if they try to pull your
> coverage. And you have a place to go if it doesn't work out.
>
> -Rob
> (currently building under normal homeowner's coverage only)
>
>
> =
> direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
> =
> =
> =
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Aircraft Technical Book Company" <winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com> |
| Subject: | new books and cheap old ones |
Here's a couple new items and some discounted old ones. Order these by
return e-mail or phone at 800 780-4115. These are all first come first
serve, so call or e-mail back by Monday if you want one.
Thanks
Andy
Builder's Bookstore
www.buildersbooks.com
800 780-4115
1] JEPPESEN INSTRUMENT TEXTBOOK
Revision 6 of the big Jeppesen Instrument/Commercial Manual was just
released today. The price is $84.49. However, we have about a dozen left
of revision 5 which is less than a year old. (little has changed) On
Monday afternoon we will return our old #5s to Jeppesen. So if you want to
grab one before then, we'll discount the price to $60. (a $25 savings)
2] The FAA's AIRPLANE FLYING HANDBOOK
Revised about a week ago and twice the size of the old one. This is
everything the FAA thinks you ought to know about flying your airplane in
easy to understand full color graphics. We got a special "new release"
price on our opening order, so also till Monday, the RV list price for this
book is $20, instead of the normal $29.95.
3] HOW TO PAINT AN AIRPLANE.
By Ron Alexander. Finally an up to date and easy to understand book on
painting a homebuilt (with a nice RV on the cover) It's produced by
SportAir Workshops and EAA $19.95
...and a couple of one left of bargain basement items
Advanced Composites $15.00 (was $29.95)
Physics for Aviation $10.00 (slightly damaged, was $22.00)
Everything Explained for Pilots $25.00 (normally $59.95)
an evaluation copy of something we're not going to carry
Stress Without Tears $15.00 (normally $25.00)
another evaluation copy of something we're not going to carry
Introduction To Aircraft Maintenance $15.00 (normally $44.50)
an "prototype" edition of a new A&P General Textbook
Airplane PDQ software $25.00 (normally $99.95)
the previous edition from 2002
FAR/AIM 2003 on CD $10.00
also includes current AC 43.13
Getting Started in Electronics $10.00
An evaluation copy of something we're not going to carry
Simplified Aircraft Design For Homebuilders $20.00
an evaluation copy of a design book thats too expansive at $60, bot a good
deal at $20
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "S Hamer" <s.hamer(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Navaid Autopilot |
I have a new Navaid Autopilot I'm considering selling in order to upgrade to one
of the newer models available from Trio or Digitrak. Mine has never been used
though it has been installed. I have the external Smart Coupler which may
or may not be of use to whoever may buy the unit. The prices haven't changed
since I bought this one, they're $1300 the last I looked. The external Smart
Coupler was around $200.
If anyone wants it, make me an offer. If the offer is good enough it may entice
me to spend the extra money to upgrade.
Hey Gummo, if you buy it I'll deliver it for nothing on my next walk.
Steve Hamer
Apple Valley, Ca
s.hamer(at)verizon.net
(760)486-5950
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Nationair insurance news |
In a message dated 8/27/04 11:01:12 AM Pacific Daylight Time, dfiggins(at)es.com
writes:
<< As long as I am building in my garage I assume I am covered by my
homeowners policy, is this a valid assumption? >>
Not if your homeowners insurance is like any that I have ever had. Better
check the fine print>
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, final assembly
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob 1" <rv3a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Nationair insurance news |
> So he hired someone to take care of that part of the program that he felt
he
> could off-load to a subordinate.
>
> So, I think it is simply a sign of success (a good thing!) and JT is still
> there.
>
> I have spoken to BOTH JT and the person that handles my policies. JT was
> just the same phone call away and the new (additional person ... sorry I
> don't remember his name at the moment) was very helpful and responsive.
>
>
> James
================================
AFAIK.....
Aaron is a_replacement_for the fine gal that handled my policies before
succumbing to cancer.
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Glenn Brasch <gbrasch(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Vans Shipping a Crate to you in the Future? |
VERY long story short. Van's current "discount" shipper, Bullet Freight
just shipped a QB fuselage to me. They told Van's, who in turn told me,
the had a terminal where I live, in Tucson. They do not, nor do they
share an inter-line terminal with any other company here. Nor do they
own a terminal in Phoenix, which they also say they do. At the last
minute, I had to arrange a terminal, workers, fork lifts, and further
delivery of the crate to my shop. Anne at Van's was great, she called
the logistics company and had the extra money taken off the bill before
I finished writing my letter of complaint. The moral is: pay very close
attention to detail and ask a lot of question about your shipment before
hand. After the fact, Anne confirmed Bullet Freight's brochure showed 3
terminals in Arizona, which don't exist.
Glenn in Tucson, -9A about to start fuselage.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: First Flight |
In a message dated 8/28/2004 7:51:36 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
shempdowling(at)earthlink.net writes:
How can both wings be heavy?
================================================
If they're both built of lead?
GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A C/S, flying 710 hrs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernest Kells" <ernest.kells(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Production Status of the XCOM760 |
I would like to have a status report from someone who has successfully
installed and fully tested an XCOM760. Unit must truly be from "regular
production" - - not a factory/lab or other prototype.
I have been following this product for nearly a year. I know that they have
had rollout problms with suppliers, etc. They haven't finalised the
software update capability yet - although it is probably not an issue.
I retired from the computer industry - I am used to the 100% completion
rule. Thanks for any help.
Ernest Kells - RV-9A O235-N2C, Wood Prop
95% Complete - Preparing for Paint
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy Compton" <thecomptons(at)bellsouth.net> |
Listers:
I'm familiar with the rear spar mod, CN-1, 1-4, for early 80's and older
RV-3's, which when reworked allowed for the "A" designation. What I'm
trying to find out is when/if this mod was incorporated into the RV-3 kit.
In other words, was there a certain time after which all RV-3 kits sold had
the fork-type rear spar and carry-through attach structure and no retro-work
was needed?
I've searched the archives and have found little help, although I did read a
post about the "A" designation later being dropped. Is that because the
kits being produced had the upgraded structure?
Thanks.
Randy Compton
Gulf Breeze, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Amit Dagan" <amitdagan(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | The RV takes to the sky!! |
First album:
http://checkoway.com/url/?s=43f9eb3f
Second album:
http://checkoway.com/url/?s=d23319d
Enjoy!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BBreckenridge(at)att.net |
| Subject: | Rozendaal/Oct.Kitplanes RV-4 & Corsair |
Doug;
Thanks for a great article! The title caught my eye on the front cover so well,
I don't have any clue what else is in the latest issue!!
Bruce Breckenridge
40018 Slowwwwbuilddd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)vansairforce.org> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-3 vs. RV-3A |
> In other words, was there a certain time after which all RV-3 kits sold had
> the fork-type rear spar and carry-through attach structure and no retro-work
> was needed?
Here are some quotes from Van's RVator that shed some light on the situation.
"We have prepared modification kits which we are sending out to all RV-3 owners
requesting it. Modification kits for Type II RV-3s have already been sent out.
We are now in the process of designing a new spar for use on all future RV-3s,
and for retro-fit on under construction RV-3s." [1996]
"We are now working on redrawing the wing plans and getting the new spar into
production." [1998]
"RV-3B wing kits are being prepared for market and we will again be able to
offer complete RV-3 kits. The new kits have a redesigned, simplified, and
strengthened main spar and 30 gallon wing tanks." [1999]
---
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oldsfolks(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re:RV-3 vs. RV3A |
Why not do the obvious and call Van's or email them ?????????
Bob Olds RV-4 , N1191X
A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor
Charleston,Arkansas
Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Heinrich Gerhardt" <hgerhardt(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-List homeowner's insurance |
My homeowner's policy (AAA Insurance) covers my airplane within my
city-owned hangar! That is, only as long as the airplane is being
constructed and is deemed unairworthy. Reason why is that until the
time the airplane is flying, in their eyes it's just a collection of
parts that are considered my personal property and that is covered no
matter where it's stored. My city even stipulated that my insurance has
to cover the "city council members and all the officers of the city" as
part of the policy, so I got AAA to add that phrase to my homeowner's
policy.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Suffoletto" <rsuffoletto(at)hotmail.com> |
I wasn't able to find anything on this in the archives. I'm looking for suggestions
on how to route the wiring from behind the panel through or behind the spare
on a RV-7A. I'd like to keepthem out of view as best I can. I don't have a
great number of wires, just antenna andlights and flaps... Any photo's or suggestions
would be appreciated.
Thanks
Richard
Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and more!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "james frierson" <tn3639(at)hotmail.com> |
I used the center piece for the throttle and elevator trim and was able to
hide all the wiring including the 1/4" pitot polyflow behind it.
Scott
RV6-A Slider
N162RV
Flying..... 17hrs
>From: "Richard Suffoletto" <rsuffoletto(at)hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: Wire routing
>Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 08:14:04 -0700
>
>
>
>
>I wasn't able to find anything on this in the archives. I'm looking for
>suggestions on how to route the wiring from behind the panel through or
>behind the spare on a RV-7A. I'd like to keepthem out of view as best I
>can. I don't have a great number of wires, just antenna andlights and
>flaps... Any photo's or suggestions would be appreciated.
>
>
>Thanks
>
>
>Richard
>
>
> Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools
>and more!
>
>
Get ready for school! Find articles, homework help and more in the Back to
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Orear" <jorear(at)new.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wire routing |
Richard:
You can route your wires through a conduit mounted on the firewall stiffener
adjacent to the firewall recess with adel clamps and then under the center
floor cover.
At the Spar, drill another hole similar to the one that is predrilled for
the trim cable to pass through, only do it in the other wing spar. I ran my
conduit under the floor cover and then just through the hole in the spar.
Keeps the wires bundled nicely.
I will send you what pictures I have to you directly.
Regards,
Jeff Orear
RV6A N782P (reserved)
firewall forward
Peshtigo, WI
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Suffoletto" <rsuffoletto(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: RV-List: Wire routing
>
>
> I wasn't able to find anything on this in the archives. I'm looking for
suggestions on how to route the wiring from behind the panel through or
behind the spare on a RV-7A. I'd like to keepthem out of view as best I can.
I don't have a great number of wires, just antenna andlights and flaps...
Any photo's or suggestions would be appreciated.
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
> Richard
>
>
> Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools
and more!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michel" <rv8ter(at)rogers.com> |
I purchased my RV 3 kit in 1979 and was confused with the extra ribs and
angles that were different from what was required in the plans. When I
inquired to Van's they said oh! Silly us we forgot to put the updated
instruction for the extra ribs and angles that we included in the kit.
Michel
RV3 & RV8
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Randy Compton
Subject: RV-List: RV-3 vs. RV-3A
Listers:
I'm familiar with the rear spar mod, CN-1, 1-4, for early 80's and older
RV-3's, which when reworked allowed for the "A" designation. What I'm
trying to find out is when/if this mod was incorporated into the RV-3 kit.
In other words, was there a certain time after which all RV-3 kits sold had
the fork-type rear spar and carry-through attach structure and no retro-work
was needed?
I've searched the archives and have found little help, although I did read a
post about the "A" designation later being dropped. Is that because the
kits being produced had the upgraded structure?
Thanks.
Randy Compton
Gulf Breeze, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
rv7-list(at)matronics.com, rv10-list(at)matronics.com, rv8-list(at)matronics.com,
rv3-list(at)matronics.com, rv4-list(at)matronics.com
| From: | Richard Scott <rscott(at)cascadeaccess.com> |
| Subject: | Van's Homecoming-- Where to eat |
1.70 SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS Similar addresses in recipient list
Scrumptous breakfast both Saturday & Sunday will be served right at
Van's--pancakes, eggs, ham, sausage, bacon, coffee & orange juice. And
lunch on Saturday, burgers, corn on the cob.
Served by EAA Chapter 902. Don't miss out!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ed " <ed_88(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Liability when you sell an RV? |
From: "ed \240" <ed_88@hotmai...
So one of the reasons they say that homebuilt planes are so much
cheaper is that the builder is on the hook instead of vans for liability
reasons. So I assume that means if you sell your plane, that anyone who ever
touches it after you can sue you if they are in an accident? Has a
homebuilder ever actually been sued in a situation like this?
Any thoughts on how to protect yourself? I imagine having the buyer sign
something saying he understands it is a homebuilt wouldn't help. If nothing
else he could sell it to a 3rd party who never signed such paperwork.
Given all the insurance related talk recently I was wondering if this
is something that people are thinking about.
--Eddie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Calvert" <rv6(at)cox.net> |
Today featured a clear blue sky and a northerly breeze. A little bumpy, but the
fun of flying the RV6 overshadowed that. I base at Sundance Airpark in Oklahoma
City and was heading back in and made a mid field cross-wind at 175mph to
check the sock(ok, showing off).....oh what the heck...a low pass(more showing
off) to wrap up a good day. Swing around into a left downwind for 35 and set
up for a smooth descending left turn to final. We're looking good...a little
head wind... but GPS indicating 204mph ground speed...pull up...yee haw! Not
bad for 160hp fixed pitch metal prop!
I park in front of the hanger and another RVer who was watching comes over grinning
and says...Looks and sounds great in flight...do you have 200hp?
Nope, 160hp.
He says ....NO WAY!
I grin and say, YES WAY.
I am having fun!
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok
N296JC RV6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Liability when you sell an RV? |
> So one of the reasons they say that homebuilt planes are so much
>cheaper is that the builder is on the hook instead of vans for liability
>reasons. So I assume that means if you sell your plane, that anyone who
>ever
>touches it after you can sue you if they are in an accident? Has a
>homebuilder ever actually been sued in a situation like this?
>
> Any thoughts on how to protect yourself? I imagine having the buyer
>sign
>something saying he understands it is a homebuilt wouldn't help. If nothing
>else he could sell it to a 3rd party who never signed such paperwork.
>
> Given all the insurance related talk recently I was wondering if
>this
>is something that people are thinking about.
>
>
>--Eddie
>
Oh certainly. There are disclaimer forms, basically a hold harmless release
that is commonly used. I think EAA has one and I have a copy stached away
on my harddrive somewhere. It basically tries to completely separate the
builder from any and all possible liability once the airplane changes hands.
It's only a piece of paper though, and I'm sure it could be whittled away
by a savvy shyster to next to nothing if pursued hard enough.
I'll be dealing with this soon enough when I sell my RV8. Yikes.
Brian Denk
RV8 N94BD
RV10 '51 tailcone/empennage rigging time.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Bristol <bj034(at)lafn.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Liability when you sell an RV? |
on zoot.lafn.org
Ed,
A few years ago when my wife was selling her Mustang II, she contacted
EAA on this subject and their answer was that there had never been a
"successful suit" against a homebuilder.
The lawyers are looking for "deep pockets" and homebuilders generally
don't have them. If they squeezed me for every penny I have they
wouldn't get enough to make it worth their time.
Dave -6 So Cal
EAA Technical Counselor
ed wrote:
>
>
> So one of the reasons they say that homebuilt planes are so much
>cheaper is that the builder is on the hook instead of vans for liability
>reasons. So I assume that means if you sell your plane, that anyone who ever
>touches it after you can sue you if they are in an accident? Has a
>homebuilder ever actually been sued in a situation like this?
>
> Any thoughts on how to protect yourself? I imagine having the buyer sign
>something saying he understands it is a homebuilt wouldn't help. If nothing
>else he could sell it to a 3rd party who never signed such paperwork.
>
> Given all the insurance related talk recently I was wondering if this
>is something that people are thinking about.
>
>
>--Eddie
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | grass runway length for RV's? |
| From: | czechsix(at)juno.com |
Guys,
For those of you with experience flying RV's off grass strips, what would
you consider the minimum safe runway length? I know, it depends on a
variety of factors, so in this case lets assume no obstacles at either
end higher than 6' (i.e. a cornfield in August) and no higher terrain or
obstacles beyond that, relatively level & smooth runway surface,
operating at gross weight with 180hp / CS, on a hot/humid day (say 95 F)
at 880' msl, with no headwind. Maybe throw in a bit of dew or post-rain
moisture on the grass to reduce braking effectiveness, and this would be
about the worst case scenario for me here in Iowa. Would 1700' be
adequate under these conditions? I imagine takeoff would be a non-event,
so landing and getting stopped without too much pucker factor would be my
main concern....
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D finishing....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Vanartsdalen <svanarts(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: grass runway length for RV's? |
Sounds like plenty to me. See how short you can land at your home airport. I
bet it's less than 1700 feet.
Guys,
For those of you with experience flying RV's off grass strips, what would
you consider the minimum safe runway length? I know, it depends on a
variety of factors, so in this case lets assume no obstacles at either
end higher than 6' (i.e. a cornfield in August) and no higher terrain or
obstacles beyond that, relatively level & smooth runway surface,
operating at gross weight with 180hp / CS, on a hot/humid day (say 95 F)
at 880' msl, with no headwind. Maybe throw in a bit of dew or post-rain
moisture on the grass to reduce braking effectiveness, and this would be
about the worst case scenario for me here in Iowa. Would 1700' be
adequate under these conditions? I imagine takeoff would be a non-event,
so landing and getting stopped without too much pucker factor would be my
main concern....
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D finishing....
--
Scott VanArtsdalen
RV-4 N311SV, FLYING!!
When a man does all he can
though it succeeds not well,
blame not him that did it."
-- George Washington
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jaye and Scott Jackson" <jayeandscott(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: grass runway length for RV's? |
Years ago, I practiced spot landing with maximum effort stops on a grass
runway prior to going into a one-way, 1700' strip with tall trees at one end
and a fruit orchard on the approach end, plus it was uphill( a plus) with
the wind above the trees occasionally a tailwind for departure( not a plus).
The first time I actually landed on the strip I had been practicing for, in
a 180 hp, fixed-pitch wooden prop RV-4, two-up( owner in the back), it sure
looked short while we were on final, but the slope contributed to that
appearance.
We actually aimed for the treetops on the approach end as the lift of the
wings will keep our flight path slightly above that, and practically drove
the machine right onto the ground with only a slight flare to preclude a
bounce.A wheel landing was used to eliminate float, followed by raising the
tail to kill the lift while coming on the brakes moderately until an overrun
was not in the cards, and we used less than half the runway.
This was at sea level, on a summer day, which on the Pacific Coast means
around 20C. Add a little lift from the extra bouyancy of both of us holding
our breaths during the latter stages of teh approach and landing.....
The departure was equally impressive due to the performance of these
machines, and that's without a constant-speed prop. Taxi up against the tall
trees, swing the tail almost into the trunks, full power, minimum-drag
attitude for acceleration, hold it level after liftoff for a little extra
airspeed when encountering that slight tailwind at the treetop level and
there's plenty of room left.
Which is a long way of saying that you should be fine within the parameters
you describe. Walk off the distance on a longer runway, then perhaps
practice to see how it feels and performs for you before committing
yourself.
SCott in VAncouver
----- Original Message -----
From: <czechsix(at)juno.com>
Subject: RV-List: grass runway length for RV's?
>
> Guys,
>
> For those of you with experience flying RV's off grass strips, what would
> you consider the minimum safe runway length? I know, it depends on a
> variety of factors, so in this case lets assume no obstacles at either
> end higher than 6' (i.e. a cornfield in August) and no higher terrain or
> obstacles beyond that, relatively level & smooth runway surface,
> operating at gross weight with 180hp / CS, on a hot/humid day (say 95 F)
> at 880' msl, with no headwind. Maybe throw in a bit of dew or post-rain
> moisture on the grass to reduce braking effectiveness, and this would be
> about the worst case scenario for me here in Iowa. Would 1700' be
> adequate under these conditions? I imagine takeoff would be a non-event,
> so landing and getting stopped without too much pucker factor would be my
> main concern....
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Mark Navratil
> Cedar Rapids, Iowa
> RV-8A N2D finishing....
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Mader" <davemader(at)bresnan.net> |
| Subject: | new near vision procedure |
Guys,
> After 10 years of keeping reading glasses by my easy chair, around my
neck, in my pocket, &
> losing on the average of one pair per week, I was excited to hear about
this new procedure
> for the improvement of near vision. The procedure is fairly new and was
just approved by
> the FDA in Feb. So excited, in fact, that I went to one of the few places
in the country that
> does the procedure and had a preliminary consult. Everything sounded good
and I was
> ready to proceed.
> This procedure is CK (conductive keratoplasty) It uses, as I understand
it, radiofrequency energy
> instead of a laser and reshapes the cornea to help your near vision.
> All is well and I am ready to do it when last night I get a call from my
brother, who is a commercial
> pilot, and he tells me that his doctor said that if this procedure is ever
done you will never get
> a pilots license renewed. He said to try and find out if this is true. I
thought I would post the question
> here and see if anybody knows if this is true or not.
> Anybody familiar with this procedure or it's consequences as far as a
license renewal??
>
> Dave Mader
> 2nd slowbuild 6
> rebuilding the engine
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Oke <wjoke(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-3 vs. RV-3A |
Randy;
As a point of reference, I purchased my RV-3 kits in fall 1980 (gosh, that's
24 years ago now!) and there were no CN-1 related materials or components in
the kits. No surprise, since CN-1 was issued in Feb of 1982. Reading the
text of CN-1 there is mention of several mishaps between July 1978 and March
1981 which led to the Van's aircraft detailed analysis of the RV-3 wing
structure and the eventual issue of CN-1.
One of the issues Van's had to deal with was an FAA document (which was
enclosed with CN-1) that placed a blanket prohibition on aerobatics on "any
RV-3 designated model aircraft". About the only around this blanket ban was
to redesignate the aircraft as a different model of aircraft presumably
after incorporating certain wing modifications and apply for a new
airworthiness certificate as a type other than an RV-3. This was, in fact,
the solution proposed by the FAA. CN-1 was essentially a recommended mod or
set of actions to designate an existing RV-3 to an RV-3A to work around this
FAA prohibition.
As you may be aware, CN-1 laid out four methods for modifying the root rib
depending on the exact nature of the root rib. The changeover date of Sept
1980 is mentioned as when .032 thickness root ribs were supplied vice the
earlier .020 root ribs. An RV-3 owner/builder was expected to decide which
version of the mod to incorporate depending on nature of the root rib
installed and the state of completion of the wing, etc. At the same time the
aft spar carry through structure was changed from a 1 x 1 x 1/8 angle to a
11/4 x 11/4 x 3/6 angle; the earlier small angle required some additional
reinforcement via a bolted on angle. The larger angle was OK but the aft
spar still required a doubler plate to put the spar bolt in double shear
vice single shear.
Keep in mind that in those days, Vans kits were rather basic compared to
what they are now and a lot more "components" were actually supplied as raw
sheet for the builder to cut out. The directions and plans were also a lot
simpler and so an RV-3 kit may well have included a set of CN-1 instructions
and some stock vice detailed plans and pre-cut parts.
Sometime later on, Vans started introducing nosewheel versions of his
aircraft line which used the "A" designator, the RV-6A being the first in
perhaps 1987 or so. That would be when the RV-3A designator sort of faded
away.
I still fly my RV-3 with the CN-1 wing mods incorporated in the later stages
of construction but the authorities in Canada didn't care much whether I
called it an RV-3 or RV-3A so I didn't bother complicating the issue.
Jim Oke
Winnipeg, Man.
RV-3, C-FIZM
RV-6A, C-GKGZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Compton" <thecomptons(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: RV-List: RV-3 vs. RV-3A
>
> Listers:
>
> I'm familiar with the rear spar mod, CN-1, 1-4, for early 80's and older
> RV-3's, which when reworked allowed for the "A" designation. What I'm
> trying to find out is when/if this mod was incorporated into the RV-3 kit.
> In other words, was there a certain time after which all RV-3 kits sold
had
> the fork-type rear spar and carry-through attach structure and no
retro-work
> was needed?
>
> I've searched the archives and have found little help, although I did read
a
> post about the "A" designation later being dropped. Is that because the
> kits being produced had the upgraded structure?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Randy Compton
> Gulf Breeze, FL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Shenk <dshenk3(at)bresnan.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Van's Homecoming |
I may get a chance to get to Portland this weekend and go the homecoming
for the first time. My question is how Saturday and Sunday compare with
respect to amount of activity and to how many RV's are likely to be
available for inspection (read: get a much needed dose of
inspiration!). I suspect I will have to leave fairly early Sunday and
wondering how much of the event I'll miss.
Any info appreciated and you can let me know off list. Thanks. Do
not archive.
dshenk3(at)bresnan.net rv6a quickbuild kit but slowbuild technique!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "cgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: grass runway length for RV's? |
Just go over to Amana and practice! You can always go to the Colony Inn
between attempts and increase your gross!
Cy Galley - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair
Safety Programs Editor - TC
EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: <czechsix(at)juno.com>
Subject: RV-List: grass runway length for RV's?
>
> Guys,
>
> For those of you with experience flying RV's off grass strips, what would
> you consider the minimum safe runway length? I know, it depends on a
> variety of factors, so in this case lets assume no obstacles at either
> end higher than 6' (i.e. a cornfield in August) and no higher terrain or
> obstacles beyond that, relatively level & smooth runway surface,
> operating at gross weight with 180hp / CS, on a hot/humid day (say 95 F)
> at 880' msl, with no headwind. Maybe throw in a bit of dew or post-rain
> moisture on the grass to reduce braking effectiveness, and this would be
> about the worst case scenario for me here in Iowa. Would 1700' be
> adequate under these conditions? I imagine takeoff would be a non-event,
> so landing and getting stopped without too much pucker factor would be my
> main concern....
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Mark Navratil
> Cedar Rapids, Iowa
> RV-8A N2D finishing....
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rvsearey(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: grass runway length for RV's? |
Mark,
I flew my RV-4 off a 1400' private grass runway (1000' elev) all the
time I had it. You are right, takeoff is no problem at any weight. Landing is
no problem either as long as you are experienced in short field procedures
and don't get excessive speed on final. There were a couple of times I did a
go-around because I let the speed get too high and then floated down the runway.
In my 4 I calculated that 70mph was a good short field speed for me based on
what MY stall speed was. Yours may be different.
Dan Decker
RV-4 built, flown and regrettably sold
SeaRey getting inspected today
RV-7 ordered and waiting
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dean Pichon" <deanpichon(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Results of Annual Inspection on my -4 |
I just finished the 3rd annual inspection on my -4 and thought I make a
quick post summarizing the more interesting findings. Thankfully, there
were few interesting findings. The aircraft now has 221 hours. It has a
180hp A1A with Lasar ignition and Performance Airflow fuel injection. The
prop is a CS Hartzell.
The airframe presented no problems save for the rudder which now has small
cracks on 3 of the forward rivets on 3 skin stiffeners on the starboard
side. My rudder has an 0.016 skin and has RTV in the trailing edge per
Van's original recommendation. I have stop-drilled the cracks and have
started a new rudder with an 0.020 skin. On these stiffeners, I will use
ProSeal in addition to rivets.
Both the fuel injection system and the electronic ignition continue to
perform flawlessly. I can't tell that I save any fuel or gain any power
with the Lasar system - I'm just happy to have everything working.
Again, I found a severly cracked plate that mounts the airbox to the air
induction/fuel metering system. This same part was found cracked and
replaced at last year's annual. My current hypothesis is that the lower
cowl pre-loads the airbox via the rubber snout at the air intake. I have
cut away a small portion of the snout in an attempt to relieve the preload
without sacraficing seal quality. Clearly, I will have to keep an eye on
this.
I also noticed I have lost a single eyelet on one of the hinge strips on the
cowl. At this point, I will simply keep an eye on the eyelets, as I don't
have a good long-term strategy.
The tires still have another year of tread remaining. I have 2 years on
these Aero Trainers and will end up with 3 years if they make it to the next
annual. The brake pads are still the orginal set. Some wear is evident,
but still well above the minimum thickness requirement. I usually land on
long, paved runways, so the brakes don't get much hard use.
I have 3 years on the orginal Concorde gel cell and see no reason to replace
it. For the first time, I had a compression test done on the engine. I
don't have tools and have never done one, so I had the field FBO do this for
me. The lowest cylinder was 76psi.
All told, this annual cost me 6 quarts of oil, one oil filter, and an airbox
mouting plate. Plus about 3 days of my labor with my Dad's help. The
rudder cost, however, has yet to tallied.
Dean Pichon
Bolton, MA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Aircraft Technical Book Company" <winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com> |
My -6A elevators, after about 200 hours, have developed about 1/2 of play (1/4"
up and down) relative to each other at the trailing edge. I'm guessing at the
number, as I haven't actually measured it yet. I find this when, on pre-flight,
I grap both trailing edges, and pull one up while pushing the other down.
Has anyone else noticed this "problem"? I'm not sure what could cause this other
than a slight (very slight) elongation of the hole in the control horns. Perhaps
there is a better way to tie the 2 horns together than just the single
bolt from the push/pull tube bearing.
Andy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pat Hatch" <pat_hatch(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: elevator play |
Andy,
If the bolt between the horns was loose or not torqued properly, this could
cause the play you described. This would be the first thing I check.
Pat
----- Original Message -----
From: "Aircraft Technical Book Company" <winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com>
Subject: RV-List: elevator play
>
> My -6A elevators, after about 200 hours, have developed about 1/2 of play
(1/4" up and down) relative to each other at the trailing edge. I'm
guessing at the number, as I haven't actually measured it yet. I find this
when, on pre-flight, I grap both trailing edges, and pull one up while
pushing the other down.
>
> Has anyone else noticed this "problem"? I'm not sure what could cause
this other than a slight (very slight) elongation of the hole in the control
horns. Perhaps there is a better way to tie the 2 horns together than just
the single bolt from the push/pull tube bearing.
>
> Andy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: elevator play |
Its the bolt that goes through both elevator horns, most likely. I sure
would not fly until it is fixed.
>
>
>My -6A elevators, after about 200 hours, have developed about 1/2 of play
>(1/4" up and down) relative to each other at the trailing edge. I'm
>guessing at the number, as I haven't actually measured it yet. I find
>this when, on pre-flight, I grap both trailing edges, and pull one up
>while pushing the other down.
>
>Has anyone else noticed this "problem"? I'm not sure what could cause
>this other than a slight (very slight) elongation of the hole in the
>control horns. Perhaps there is a better way to tie the 2 horns together
>than just the single bolt from the push/pull tube bearing.
>
>Andy
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
August 19, 2004 - August 30, 2004
RV-Archive.digest.vol-pr