RV-Archive.digest.vol-qc

November 16, 2004 - November 26, 2004



________________________________________________________________________________
From: Derrick Aubuchon <n184da(at)volcano.net>
Subject: Re: Pitot Options
Date: Nov 16, 2004
I have 400 hrs on my -4 with a Piper style pitot/static blade,, Since this is the only pitot/static source the airplane has ever know, I have no means to compare except to say that the system appears to be as accurate as any in most speed ranges. Derrick L. Aubuchon RV-4: N184DA Westover -Amador County (O70) n184da(at)volcano.net On Nov 16, 2004, at 11:42 AM, George Neal E Capt AU/PC wrote: > > > Listers - > > > Have any of you installed and flown with a Piper-style blade pitot? > > Or a leading edge tube, as found on the AT-6? > > > Neal > > > > > > Listers - > > > > > > Have any of you installed and flown with a > Piper-style blade > pitot? > > > Or a leading edge tube, as found on the AT-6? > > > > > > Neal > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: George Neal E Capt AU/PC <Neal.George(at)maxwell.af.mil>
Subject: And now for something completely different
Date: Nov 16, 2004
No, Scott, this is Abuse. Argument is just down the hall. Neal ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 16, 2004
From: Scott VanArtsdalen <svanarts(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Pitot Options
I had a buddy that installed a blade type pitot tube on his RV-8. He wasn't happy with the accuracy so he replaced it with a standard pitot. Not RV standard but standard Cessna issue. George Neal E Capt AU/PC wrote: > >Listers - > > >Have any of you installed and flown with a Piper-style blade pitot? > >Or a leading edge tube, as found on the AT-6? > > >Neal > > > > > >Listers - > > > > > >Have any of you installed and flown with a Piper-style blade >pitot? > > >Or a leading edge tube, as found on the AT-6? > > > > > >Neal > > > > > > > -- Scott VanArtsdalen Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky)
Subject: Re: Spin Recovery
Date: Nov 16, 2004
T-37B. lucky -------------- Original message -------------- > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "lucky" > To: > Subject: Re: RV-List: Spin Recovery > > > > > > All and only the EPs (emergency procedures) from the checklist had to be > > committed to wrote memory. They were > > > > TYPED IN BOLD FACE AND ALL CAPS. > > > > HOW'S THIS FOR A BLAST FROM THE PAST? HOW MANY WORDS DOES IT TAKE TO > > REMEMBER THIS TUNE? > > > > WHICH PLANE AND PROCEDURE WAS THIS FOR? > > I'll guess, T-38. > > Dick Sipp > RV4 > RV10 > > > > 1) HAND GRIPS - RAISED. > > 2) TRIGGERS - SQUEEZED. > > > > (HINT, ONLY EJECTION SEAT I KNOW OF WITH PLURAL GRIPS/TRIGGERS) > > > > lucky > > -------------- Original message -------------- > > > >> > >> In a message dated 11/15/2004 2:52:38 PM Central Standard Time, > >> T.gummo(at)verizon.net writes: > >> > >> > Sounds like the Bold Face for the T-37. > >> > >> I just love it when you war heros talk dirty. What the f--- is " Bold > >> Face " > >> ??? > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > All and only the EPs (emergency procedures) from the checklisthad to be > > committed to wrote memory. They were > > > > TYPED IN BOLD FACE AND ALL CAPS. > > > > HOW'S THIS FOR A BLAST FROM THE PAST? HOW MANY WORDS DOES IT TAKE TO > > REMEMBER THIS TUNE? > > > > WHICH PLANE AND PROCEDURE WAS THIS FOR? > > > > 1) HAND GRIPS - RAISED. > > 2) TRIGGERS - SQUEEZED. > > > > (HINT, ONLY EJECTION SEAT I KNOW OF WITH PLURAL GRIPS/TRIGGERS) > > > > lucky > > -------------- Original message -------------- > > > > -- RV-List message posted by: UFOBUCK(at)aol.com > > > > In a message dated 11/15/2004 2:52:38 PM Central Standard Time, > > T.gummo(at)verizon.net writes: > > > > Sounds like the Bold Face for the T-37. > > > > I just love it when you war heros talk dirty. What the f--- is " Bold Face > > " > > ??? > > > > > > e Digests: http://www.matronics.com/digest/rv-list > > > > > > > > > > > > T-37B. lucky -------------- Original message -------------- -- RV-List message posted by: "Richard Sipp" ----- Original Message ----- From: "lucky" <LUCKYMACY(at)COMCAST.NET> To: Subject: Re: RV-List: Spin Recovery -- RV-List message posted by: luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky) All and only the EPs (emergency procedures) from the checklist had to be committed to wrote memory. They were TYPED IN BOLD FACE AND ALL CAPS. HOW'S THIS FOR A BLAST FROM THE PAST? HOW MANY WORDS DOES IT TAKE TO REMEMBER THIS TUNE? WHICH PLANE AND PROCEDURE WAS THIS FOR? I'll guess, T-38. Dick Sipp RV4 RV10 1) HAND GRIPS - RAISED. 2) TRIGGERS - SQUEEZED. (HINT, ONLY EJECTION SEAT I KNOW OF WITH PLURAL GRIPS/TRIGGERS) lucky -------------- Original message -------------- -- RV-List message posted by: UFOBUCK(at)aol.com In a message dated 11/15/2004 2:52:38 PM Central Standard Time, T.gummo(at)verizon.net writes: Sounds like the Bold Face for the T-37. I just love it when you war heros talk dirty. What the f--- is " Bold Face " ??? All and only the EPs (emergency procedures) from the checklisthad to be committed to w rote memory. They were TYPED IN BOLD FACE AND ALL CAPS. HOW'S THIS FOR A BLAST FROM THE PAST? HOW MANY WORDS DOES IT TAKE TO REMEMBER THIS TUNE? WHICH PLANE AND PROCEDURE WAS THIS FOR? 1) HAND GRIPS - RAISED. 2) TRIGGERS - SQUEEZED. (HINT, ONLY EJECTION SEAT I KNOW OF WITH PLURAL GRIPS/TRIGGERS) lucky -------------- Original message -------------- -- RV-List message posted by: UFOBUCK(at)aol.com In a message dated 11/15/2004 2:52:38 PM Central Standard Time, T.gummo(at)verizon.net writes: Sounds like the Bold Face for the T-37. I just love it when you war heros talk dirty. What the f--- is " Bold Face " ??? e Digests: http://www.matronics.com/digest/rv-list onsored entirely through the Contributions ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Forced Landing. (long)
Date: Nov 16, 2004
>Last Saturday morning was a great day to fly. We had to dodge the low >lying thin scudd below us and the Bravo airspace above us. There was a >nice breeze from the south and at 20"/2400rpm we cruised at 185 kt >ground speed. What better flying could you have. The trip home was >another story. > >After and east takeoff (flight of 3) from GXY we turned south and chased >after a newly flying supercharge-Subie-powered RV-7. Prop to 2500 rpm, >full throttle (24.5" at 6000') and the subie in our sites. As we got >near the subie we called him up and he cranked his prop to high rpm. >That slowed our rapid gain on him but we were still closing the range. >Then my lycoming started running rough. > >I shoved the mixture in which helped but it still ran a little rough. >Leaning even a little caused the engine to roughen up more. Mixture back >in. I called lead stating I had a rough engine and could not keep up and >things were getting rougher quickly. I switched tanks, turned the boost >pump on pulled on carb heat. Nothing worked the engine was slowly dying. > Lead pointed us to a friends grass strip 6.5 miles SSE but I did not >think I would make it. (remember that nice south breeze) I was looking >at the fields and roads just in case. I checked the mags (one EI and one >mag) and it ran equally bad on both ignitions. Fuel flow was showing >approximately 14 gph. Now I'm at full throttle 2500rpm and still showing >24.5" MP with an engine that is now starting to shake the airframe a lot >and an IAS of 130 mph down from 190 IAS in the subie chase. I'm now high >6999' one foot below the Bravo airspace and 1500' AGL when I finally see >the grass strip just south of my position. The engine is hardly running >now. I chopped what little power I had and put 99PZ into the steepest >slip she's ever seen. This is were I messed up and I hate to admit it >but I was too fast for the short strip when I passed over the corn on >the north end. I pulled up trading airspeed for altitude and pushed the >throttle in half way. She ran smooth. I came around for another approach >with a much more manageable airspeed, brushed the standing corn on the >north with my wheel pants and landed successfully on terra firma. The >butterflies in my stomach didn't start till I had to do the go-around. > >Now some may question my next move. She ran good on the go-around so I >did a run-up, used all the available strip and swore if I was not off >the ground by the halfway point (1000')I would abort the takeoff. FTG >was 19.5 nautical from where I was with another dirt strip 10 south. I >flew at 18" 2500 rpm all the way back without any problems. A little >fast on the landing with the 16 kt crosswind but other than that it was >a uneventful flight. > >What could be wrong with 99PZ? Some history: > >Oh the engine is a Aerosport O-360-A1A, carburated swinging a Hartzell. >9.2:1 pistons. > >Denver Jackpot air-race. >Soon after departing Rock Springs WYO at low level full throttle 2600 >rpm (97 OAT) I looked at my wife and asked her if the engine seemed >rough? It was hard to tell in the bumpy thermal air. I thought I leaned >too much so I pushed the red knob in and re-leaned and all was well. > >Jackpot to Denver via Bendover Utah. 10000 feet full throttle 2400 rpm >we just rounded the restricted airspace and turned west towards >Wendover. As we crossed the ridge the engine again ran rough, like too >lean. Boost pump on, switch tanks and push the red knob in again. >Smoothed right out and leaned normally after that. A quick low level run >down the salt flats (what fun) and then over the rockpile to Denver. The >engine ran fine the rest of the way home. > >I did a 100 hour on the engine and found nothing out of the ordinary. > >We went to OSH, no problems. > >Labor day saw us to East Texas to visit dad. On the way back while >dodging T-storms the problem again revisited. I checked everything but >the red knob fixed it again. We could lean normally after that and had >and uneventful flight home. > >I checked fuel filters, boost pump flow from both tanks, checked the >carb screen again and replace the intake tube gaskets on the cylinder >head on two cylinders cause the bolts seemed only hand tight. the two >others were fine. Checked the primer ports, lines and valve. no leaks. > >Denver to IA. On upwind leaving the pattern at FTG the engine ran rough >and would not smooth out. Even the red knob did not help. Aborted >mission. Seemed to run smooth as soon as I reduced throttle to land. > >Did valve wobble check. Nothing found. > >Many breakfast flights east and west over the rockpile with no rough >spells. > >Then Saturdays forced landing. 99PZ is officially grounded until >something is fixed. > >Some observations: > >The red knob seems to be directly connected to the problem but lately >does not seem to help. > >All instances were at full throttle. Seems, I say seems, to run good at >partial throttle settings. > >boost pump, tanks carb heat or ignition source makes no change. > >I'm thinking carburetor vent, sticking float or something. > >Any ideas?? > >Gary Zilik >RV-6A N99PZ >700 hours tach time. Holey moley, Gary!! Don't know if you recall, but I had a forced landing just after my phase one test period in my -8 back in 2000. Maybe you could check the archives for my story. Basically, engine went totally rich, would not lean out, and even filled the FAB box with fuel. Luckily had an airport under me at the time and, like you, slipped a loooong way down from around 10k' to airport elevation at maybe 6k'. Pulled carb apart, and found nothing obvious except for some red "fuel resistant" (NOT!!!) rtv residue. It's the only culprit that I and the A&P airport attendant helping me could surmise. We flushed everything out thoroughly, removed every trace of that sealant that some knucklehead used on the finger strainer nut threads (that would be me) and it's been fine ever since. I suspect that something either fouled the carb float operation or there is wear beyond limits in the float mechanism in general. If all the strainers are clear, no chunks of sealant or other debris floating around in the tanks, then a carb kit would be my next move. Man, I'm relieved you're OK and the plane is safe and sound. As in my experience, it will take some time to rebuild the trust in your airplane. It has let you down so take the time and necessary actions to get back on speaking terms. Brian Denk RV8 N94BD RV10 '51 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gordon or Marge Comfort" <gcomfo(at)tc3net.com>
Subject: Lead counter weights
Date: Nov 16, 2004
-----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of George Neal E Capt AU/PC Subject: RE: RV-List: Lead counter weights --> Dave - I filed and filed and filed and whittled and filed, all the while muttering obscenities because the old style seems so much simpler... Neal RV-7 N8ZG (tanks) RV-8 N998GM (emp) >I had a hell of a time shaping the elevator counterweights this past weekend, is there some easy trick to cut this stuff? How accurate does the shape have to be?< A vixen file works pretty well for minor reshaping. A hacksaw with a blade not too fine can also be used. Gordon Comfort N363GC ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Oldsfolks(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 16, 2004
Subject: Re: >Re: Forced Landing (Long)
My RV-4 with Lyc. O-320 E2G gave me the same pucker-upper a few times, with nothing found as the cause. Later I was changing oil for a fly-in trip and found metal(Magnet like a porkupine) in the screen. Engine tear-down showed one intake cam lobe worn down about 1/8". The engine had been stored for several years and probably got a spot of rust on the cam or lifter. After a major o'haul,with new cam & lifters, it never happened again. You might check the travel on the valve train to check for this. That can be done by just removing valve rocker covers. There were two intake lobes on my cam,each operates valves for two cylinders. Bob Olds RV-4 , N1191X A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor Charleston,Arkansas Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "steve zicree" <szicree(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: And now for something completely different
Date: Nov 16, 2004
Wasn't there also one off the east coast a week or so after 9-11? Seems I remember a composite tailfin departure. Steve Zicree ----- Original Message ----- From: "rv6tc" <rv6tc(at)myawai.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: And now for something completely different > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > and can barely remember the last time an air carrier lost one. > > Sept 11, 01. Before that was the AA MD-80 in the thunderstorm in Little > Rock. That is of the major US carriers. There were two commuter crashes > that I'm aware of since. (One was weight and Balance... the other is not > determined) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jerry Grimmonpre" <jerry(at)mc.net>
Subject: Re: Lead counter weights
Date: Nov 16, 2004
Has anyone tried the plumber's lead which comes in long hair-like strands? Just tamp it in with a wood stick and light weight hammer. When the balance arm is filled, pour in a little epoxy to stake it to the sides of the balance arm cavity. Not flying yet ... just my 2 worth ... Jerry 7a ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Hopperdhh(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 16, 2004
Subject: Re: Lead counter weights
In a message dated 11/16/04 3:42:35 PM US Eastern Standard Time, lwalters2(at)cfl.rr.com writes: > Even with a bandsaw, lead is tough to cut. Easier to make a mold, melt > the lead and pour the counterweights. > Linn Dave, If you decide to make your own weights here is some free advice. Worth what you paid for it! I have poured lead for weights back in my auto racing days. Found lead wheel weights at tire dealers. Of course, you can melt down Van's weights too. Make the mold out of sheet aluminum. Smoke the aluminum with a homemade kerosene candle, or an acetylene torch set rich. A small glass bottle with a simple rag wick will smoke like crazy when you light it -- do it outdoors! This keeps the lead from sticking and makes a nice smooth surface. Insulate the mold with fiberglass to keep the lead all molten until you're done pouring. Between pours, cover the mold to keep the heat in. When it is all poured, uncover and it will freeze into one nice solid piece. Not like the weights supplied with the kit. BTW remember to put the trim motor in while you're doing the balance job (if you have electric trim). Preferably, balance the elevators separately since the one with the trim tab will be heavier. I didn't do this, both my elevators have about the same weight. I called Van's. As usual, they said it is not that critical. Make the weights a little too heavy to allow for paint. Dan Hopper RV-7A N766DH (Flying with yuckky delaminating weights) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "R.A.S" <deruiteraircraftservices(at)btinternet.com>
Subject: Avionics repairs
Date: Nov 17, 2004
Hi, Has anyone any experience with Aviation Plus Inc of Miami,Fla? Got a rather hefty quoation for inspection of two gyro's and a turn coordinator. $1645 seems a bit steep for inspection of these three instrum,ents, removed from R44 after a ground rollover, not hard impact damage. Any other suggestions to a 'more' reputable avionics shop in Fla. thanks, marcel ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Figgins" <2004nospam(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Lead counter weights
Date: Nov 16, 2004
I cut the weight to the dimensions on the drawing, sounds like this should not be done until you are ready to balance the elevators to get it right. Dave -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hopperdhh(at)aol.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Lead counter weights In a message dated 11/16/04 3:42:35 PM US Eastern Standard Time, lwalters2(at)cfl.rr.com writes: > Even with a bandsaw, lead is tough to cut. Easier to make a mold, > melt the lead and pour the counterweights. > Linn Dave, If you decide to make your own weights here is some free advice. Worth what you paid for it! I have poured lead for weights back in my auto racing days. Found lead wheel weights at tire dealers. Of course, you can melt down Van's weights too. Make the mold out of sheet aluminum. Smoke the aluminum with a homemade kerosene candle, or an acetylene torch set rich. A small glass bottle with a simple rag wick will smoke like crazy when you light it -- do it outdoors! This keeps the lead from sticking and makes a nice smooth surface. Insulate the mold with fiberglass to keep the lead all molten until you're done pouring. Between pours, cover the mold to keep the heat in. When it is all poured, uncover and it will freeze into one nice solid piece. Not like the weights supplied with the kit. BTW remember to put the trim motor in while you're doing the balance job (if you have electric trim). Preferably, balance the elevators separately since the one with the trim tab will be heavier. I didn't do this, both my elevators have about the same weight. I called Van's. As usual, they said it is not that critical. Make the weights a little too heavy to allow for paint. Dan Hopper RV-7A N766DH (Flying with yuckky delaminating weights) advertising on the Matronics Forums. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Denis Walsh <denis.walsh(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Pitot Options
Date: Nov 16, 2004
It is my belief that if installed back around the inspection plate on the wing bottom, the Piper blades will give excellent airspeed readings. It is ruggeder than Van's but also heavier. However the built in static source on these requires some tweaking to eliminate position errors. I have flown with a Piper style blade on my RV-6A for seven years, 1,400 hours. It is very accurate. I like it, but it is unheated. I took the precaution of installing the standard Van's static ports on my RV-6A, and plumbed both static lines to the panel. I flipped a coin and tested with the Piper pitot, using the Van's fuselage static line. As near as I have been able to tell, the cruise IAS is essentially CAS with no correction. At stall the IAS is that shown by Van. Since this appeared to be perfection, I have never got around to testing using the static line from the Piper blade. Someday I should. I am a little dubious of it since I have noted different angles on the bottom of the blade for different Pipers! Those I knew who used the Piper blade static source have reported airspeed errors on the optimistic side, IE stall speed indicating lower than actual, and cruise speed indicating higher than actual. Hope this helps in your deliberations Denis On Nov 16, 2004, at 12:42 PM, George Neal E Capt AU/PC wrote: > > > Listers - > > > Have any of you installed and flown with a Piper-style blade pitot? > > Or a leading edge tube, as found on the AT-6? > > > Neal > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <szicree(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Lead counter weights
Date: Nov 16, 2004
> I found that the local shotgun supply store had lots of cool stuff for working with molten lead including a sinister looking little cauldron that I was able to use on my stove. If you pour in your kitchen and use a cookie sheet to catch the overflow, make sure you put some plywood or something between it and the vinyl kitchen floor (guess how I know) > From: Hopperdhh(at)aol.com > Date: 2004/11/16 Tue PM 06:52:02 EST > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: Lead counter weights > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com>
Subject: Not quite so self locking nut plates
Date: Nov 16, 2004
The brand of K1000 anchor nuts that Aircraft Spruce stocks take the self locking a little to the extreme when you are using them on thin sheet metal and with 6-32 screws. It is very hard sometimes to not strip out the head of the screw when you can't put a lot of pressure on the screw driver to keep from bending the metal. I have seen some others that don't quite lock the screw as hard. Does anyone know who stocks the ones that don't lock so hard? Brian Kraut Engineering Alternatives, Inc. www.engalt.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Kyle Boatright" <kboatright1(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Not quite so self locking nut plates
Date: Nov 16, 2004
Put a little boe-lube, soap, or wax on the threads of the screw and it'll be easier. KB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> Subject: RV-List: Not quite so self locking nut plates > > The brand of K1000 anchor nuts that Aircraft Spruce stocks take the self > locking a little to the extreme when you are using them on thin sheet > metal > and with 6-32 screws. It is very hard sometimes to not strip out the head > of the screw when you can't put a lot of pressure on the screw driver to > keep from bending the metal. I have seen some others that don't quite > lock > the screw as hard. Does anyone know who stocks the ones that don't lock > so > hard? > > Brian Kraut > Engineering Alternatives, Inc. > www.engalt.com > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Greg Puckett" <rv8er(at)myawai.com>
Subject: Re: And now for something completely different
Date: Nov 16, 2004
Along with all the previously stated influential factors in GA accident rates. Has anyone ever seen data comparing accident rates between GA ops in owner flown A/C vs. having most of your flying in different rental A/C on a regular basis? I've often suspected that accident rates would be lower for GA ops in which the pilot operates the same particular A/C on a regular basis. I however, have never seen any real data to support that suspicion. One of the many reasons I chose to build and maintain my own aircraft was that suspicion that being intimately familiar with the particular aircraft you fly could only help. Just more food for thought, Greg Puckett Elizabeth, CO RV-8 80081 slooooow build ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 16, 2004
From: Bobby Hester <bhester(at)hopkinsville.net>
Subject: Re: Parking Brakes?
Mickey Coggins wrote: > >Hi Bobby, > >That is useful. Do you have any RV8 installation pictures? >I can kind of see where one might install it, but I'll be >happy to learn from someone else's experience! > >Thanks, >Mickey > > Sorry just RV7A pictures :-) -- Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/ RV7A Slowbuild wings-QB Fuse :-) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com>
Subject: Not quite so self locking nut plates
Date: Nov 16, 2004
I have and they are still pretty tight. Seems kind of defeating the purpose also to make a self locking nut so tight that you have to lubricate it to make it less self locking. I have also tried to un-oval them in a vise and that works when you get it just right. I do have some that are not quite as squashed into the oval shape that work great, but I have no idea where they came from. I imagine I just need to get the right brand, but none of them have a manufacturer written on them. Brian Kraut Engineering Alternatives, Inc. www.engalt.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Kyle Boatright Subject: Re: RV-List: Not quite so self locking nut plates Put a little boe-lube, soap, or wax on the threads of the screw and it'll be easier. KB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> Subject: RV-List: Not quite so self locking nut plates > > The brand of K1000 anchor nuts that Aircraft Spruce stocks take the self > locking a little to the extreme when you are using them on thin sheet > metal > and with 6-32 screws. It is very hard sometimes to not strip out the head > of the screw when you can't put a lot of pressure on the screw driver to > keep from bending the metal. I have seen some others that don't quite > lock > the screw as hard. Does anyone know who stocks the ones that don't lock > so > hard? > > Brian Kraut > Engineering Alternatives, Inc. > www.engalt.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Richard Sipp" <rsipp(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: And now for something completely different
Date: Nov 16, 2004
Steve, You touched on one of the most important factors; training. Part 121 and most corporate aviation depts. undergo extensive simulator training every 6 months to include aircraft malfunctions and real world weather scenarios that caused accidents. Another factor, written standardized procedures used by all pilots in the organization whether it is United Airlines or USAF. Two pilots on a two pilot crew can fly with each other, never having met before, and know exactly what the other is going to do. Two pilots practicing good cockpit resource management continually back each other up, resolve confusion and verify. Example: when given an altitude change, the captain after hearing the copilot's readback sets the altitude selector pointing at it and repeating the altitude. Cockpit checklists are memorized flow patterns. After accomplishing a flow, the other pilot reads the checklist while the first pilot verifies by his response and visual check that all items were completed. Many safety organizations recommend these principals even for single pilot operations, I.E. memorize standard cockpit checklist flows backed up by a written checklist, procedural flows such as preparation for an approach whereby you brief yourself on the approach parameters. Professional flying organizations whether they be military or civilian weed out those who for whatever reason, are not suited for the profession. There are a few who even though they have good stick & rudder skills are just not psychologically suited for the tasks. An ego that cannot accept a correction or input from others has no place in today's aviation environment. Finally, IMHO, the pros are not tempted to perform impromptu low passes, push the airplane to it's limits, exceed theirs or there company's weather and other ops limits, in short they operate to a written conservative standard. Have I ever violated these principals in my RV, yup. But when I do I resolve not to be tempted again and it happens less and less often and never when someone else is in the airplane with me. In summary, don't do nothin dumb. Regards Dick Sipp "Frogman" Team RV Formation Demonstration Team RV4 600 hours RV10 #65 ATP, GV, Fokker 70, Falcon 900 Corporate Training & Standards Retired USAF C130, B-52, KC-135 ----- Original Message ----- From: "steve zicree" <szicree(at)adelphia.net> Subject: RV-List: And now for something completely different ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: Not quite so self locking nut plates
Date: Nov 16, 2004
Hi Brian, It takes a somewhat deft touch to run a tap part way through them, but done right some of the self locking feature can be removed from these little screw ruining nut plates. If the tapping process eliminates the self locking feature? When installing the screws an application of Fuel Lube or something similar will protect against corrosion as well as make the screws somewhat less likely to back out. My opinion; In most applications these units are not all that reliant on the self locking feature anyway. Keep on building, Jim in Kelowna ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> Subject: RE: RV-List: Not quite so self locking nut plates > > I have and they are still pretty tight. Seems kind of defeating the > purpose > also to make a self locking nut so tight that you have to lubricate it to > make it less self locking. I have also tried to un-oval them in a vise > and > that works when you get it just right. > > I do have some that are not quite as squashed into the oval shape that > work > great, but I have no idea where they came from. I imagine I just need to > get the right brand, but none of them have a manufacturer written on them. > > Brian Kraut > Engineering Alternatives, Inc. > www.engalt.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Kyle Boatright > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: Not quite so self locking nut plates > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "steve zicree" <szicree(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Not quite so self locking nut plates
Date: Nov 16, 2004
Brian, I can definitely say that the #6 platenuts that were included in my recently received finishing kit are a bit looser than others I've had. You might give Van's a call. Steve Zicree ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> Subject: RE: RV-List: Not quite so self locking nut plates > > I have and they are still pretty tight. Seems kind of defeating the purpose > also to make a self locking nut so tight that you have to lubricate it to > make it less self locking. I have also tried to un-oval them in a vise and > that works when you get it just right. > > I do have some that are not quite as squashed into the oval shape that work > great, but I have no idea where they came from. I imagine I just need to > get the right brand, but none of them have a manufacturer written on them. > > Brian Kraut > Engineering Alternatives, Inc. > www.engalt.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Kyle Boatright > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: Not quite so self locking nut plates > > > Put a little boe-lube, soap, or wax on the threads of the screw and it'll be > easier. > > KB > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> > To: > Subject: RV-List: Not quite so self locking nut plates > > > > > > The brand of K1000 anchor nuts that Aircraft Spruce stocks take the self > > locking a little to the extreme when you are using them on thin sheet > > metal > > and with 6-32 screws. It is very hard sometimes to not strip out the head > > of the screw when you can't put a lot of pressure on the screw driver to > > keep from bending the metal. I have seen some others that don't quite > > lock > > the screw as hard. Does anyone know who stocks the ones that don't lock > > so > > hard? > > > > Brian Kraut > > Engineering Alternatives, Inc. > > www.engalt.com > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 17, 2004
From: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch>
Subject: Re: Not quite so self locking nut plates
Hi Brian, I bought some torx (6-lobe) screws from http://www.microfasteners.com/ and they are excellent. Do a search for "lobe". Never a problem with getting a screw into or out of a tight situation. Mickey >The brand of K1000 anchor nuts that Aircraft Spruce stocks take the self >locking a little to the extreme when you are using them on thin sheet metal >and with 6-32 screws. It is very hard sometimes to not strip out the head >of the screw when you can't put a lot of pressure on the screw driver to >keep from bending the metal. I have seen some others that don't quite lock >the screw as hard. Does anyone know who stocks the ones that don't lock so >hard? -- Mickey Coggins http://www.rv8.ch/ #82007 QB Wings/Fuselage ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Greg@itmack" <greg(at)itmack.com>
Subject: Re: Not quite so self locking nut plates
Date: Nov 17, 2004
I use candle wax on the screws and they go in like a dream. > > The brand of K1000 anchor nuts that Aircraft Spruce stocks take the self > locking a little to the extreme when you are using them on thin sheet metal > and with 6-32 screws. It is very hard sometimes to not strip out the head > of the screw when you can't put a lot of pressure on the screw driver to > keep from bending the metal. I have seen some others that don't quite lock > the screw as hard. Does anyone know who stocks the ones that don't lock so > hard? > > Brian Kraut > Engineering Alternatives, Inc. > www.engalt.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: Not quite so self locking nut plates
Date: Nov 17, 2004
Hi Brian, It takes a somewhat deft touch to run a tap part way through them, but done right some of the self locking feature can be removed from these little screw ruining nut plates. If the tapping process eliminates the self locking feature? When installing the screws an application of Fuel Lube or something similar will protect against corrosion as well as make the screws somewhat less likely to back out. My opinion; In most applications these units are not all that reliant on the self locking feature anyway. Keep on building, Jim in Kelowna ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> Subject: RE: RV-List: Not quite so self locking nut plates > > I have and they are still pretty tight. Seems kind of defeating the > purpose > also to make a self locking nut so tight that you have to lubricate it to > make it less self locking. I have also tried to un-oval them in a vise > and > that works when you get it just right. > > I do have some that are not quite as squashed into the oval shape that > work > great, but I have no idea where they came from. I imagine I just need to > get the right brand, but none of them have a manufacturer written on them. > > Brian Kraut > Engineering Alternatives, Inc. > www.engalt.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net>
Subject: Re: finishing up sequence of events? Part II
Date: Nov 17, 2004
----- Original Message ----- From: "lucky" <luckymacy(at)comcast.net> Subject: RV-List: finishing up sequence of events? Part II > > OK, it's been a few months since this thread made its rounds. > > I have all the FWF stuff. > > I have the Engine mounted. I have the starter, governor, and exhaust stacks mounted. > > I don't have any of the sensors installed but have them. (((((I would look at the exhausts and consider removing them and drilling for the EGT probes if you have those sensors. I'd position and drill these probes so they are on the inside/under and not outside of the rocker arm cover line. As you do this, be thinking about access for future maintenance.)))))). > > What's the smartest way to finish up between baffling, cowl, engine related sensors, panel and top skin, baggage door? (((((((((((( I pretty much followed the manual on these. They have to be done somewhat together. You want all electronics done before riveting on the top skin and the cowling and baffle must be done before then also. Top Skin is last. You could fit the cowling first however without the baffle first installed. No harm in doing that before the baffles. Then make a first fit of the baffling. You will have to cut baffle down after you find out how much when you reinstall the upper cowling. The engine sensors, beside the inside location EGT, could be installed later after baffle is complete.))))))))) > > I'm thinking that since some of the sensors will have to be removed to do the baffling work then I should probably stop what I'm doing as far as hanging more stuff on the engine, do the cowl and then the baffle then pick back up. OL, I don't have the prop yet but that shouldn't be a big deal, right? (((((((( Not having prop is no big deal. You need to determine how to simulate the prop extension so you can fit the cowling correctly. There should be stuff in the archives on this. I had a CS prop and those deminsions/instrctions worked for me that I found in the archives. Your prop type may be different.))))))))))) > > What say you folks past this stage? (((((((((You have come a long way Lucky. You got some ways to go still. Keep after it.))))))))) > > Thanks, > Lucky (((((((Larry in Indiana with SunSeeker))))))) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 17, 2004
From: Charlie Kuss <chaztuna(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Not quite so self locking nut plates
Brian, Stripping the head off of #4 and #6 Phillips pan head screws is a common problem. As these fasteners age, often the shank of #4 and #6 screws will break off during removal. Early in my project, an A&P, IA friend (he also built an RV4), recommended that I substitute #8 nutplates and screws for the places that Vans uses #6. The rivet hole pattern is the same for #6 and #8 nutplates, so there is no problem with doing this on the newer pre-punched kits. The #8 screws are more durable. Use Boelube, wax or NeverSeize on the threads of your screws and dip the tip of a high quality screw driver in valve lapping compound, prior to installing the screw for the first time will do wonders for you. Charlie Kuss PS If you are a "low drag" freak, the #8 nutplates can be ordered with all three holes dimpled. (MS21049-08K) Then you can use flush screws, as opposed to the pan head screws Vans supplies. > >The brand of K1000 anchor nuts that Aircraft Spruce stocks take the self >locking a little to the extreme when you are using them on thin sheet metal >and with 6-32 screws. It is very hard sometimes to not strip out the head >of the screw when you can't put a lot of pressure on the screw driver to >keep from bending the metal. I have seen some others that don't quite lock >the screw as hard. Does anyone know who stocks the ones that don't lock so >hard? > >Brian Kraut >Engineering Alternatives, Inc. >www.engalt.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 17, 2004
From: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson(at)consolidated.net>
Subject: [Fwd: SEMINAR ANNOUCEMENTS AND DATES]
Here are some Siminars that are being put on by Wick's. Included is a $25 certificate and free lunch... The one at the end concerns The RV empenage.Wick is building a RV8 in the back of their building and it is open for inspection to anyone who wants to stop in. Check with them first though, it may have gotten moved to Metro-East Airport, about 8 or 10 miles away. I thought someone may be interested...open the files with Adobe Acrobat . Phil WICKS ANNOUNCES THE UPCOMING SEMINARS. PLEASE OPEN THE ATTACHED PDF FILE TO VIEW OR PRINT FOR YOUR REFERENCE. HOPE TO SEE YOU THERE!! CALL EARLY FOR RESERVATIONS. THANK YOU WICKS AIRCRAFT SUPPLY 800-221-9425 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 17, 2004
From: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson(at)consolidated.net>
Subject: Re: Pitot Options
George Neal E Capt AU/PC wrote: > >Listers - > > >Have any of you installed and flown with a Piper-style blade pitot? > >Or a leading edge tube, as found on the AT-6? > > >Neal > > I have a Cessna type hanging on the bottom of the 6 that is soon to fly. I have a 1/4 " tube sticking straight out from the leading edge of my Pitt's. It is only about 6 inches long. Van says these are extremely inaccurate. I can't comment on the accuracy, as it is the only thing that has ever been on it. It indicates about the same as all other Pitts of a similar model and power combination, most of which have the longer pitot-static combination tube..... I seldom look at the airspeed and have never checked it for accuracy... > > Phil ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Fiveonepw(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 17, 2004
Subject: Re: Pitot Options
In a message dated 11/17/04 7:39:31 AM Central Standard Time, Neal.George(at)maxwell.af.mil writes: > On the T-6, the pitot tube is mounted in a round tube that projects > straight > forward out of the leading edge out at the wingtip. >>> Gotcha- just curious if you were talking about a heated tube here- FWIW, I relocated my pitot from underwing per plans to the outer wing rib, right on the leading edge and angled down from the chordline about 8 or 9 degrees. This was after about 110 hours and I have seen no difference in any indicated airspeed from liftoff to landing, including stall and top end. It is manually retractable and I also experimented with it at various extension lengths from about 2 to 7 inches and didn't see any difference here either. I usually pull it out about 5". I'll send ya a foto if ya want one... From The PossumWorks in TN Mark Phillips ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 17, 2004
From: Christopher Stone <rv8iator(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: ( Now Bolt Torque )
Bruce... We (myself and another RV-8 builder) are building two -8s side by side in the now wet Northwest. Actually the North end of the Willamette Valley about 30 mi west of Portland, OR. We have one -8 on the gear and a quickbuild fuse waiting for the wings. I have been very pleased with the quality and precision of the fits of parts. The only problems have been self inflicted... Drilling wrong size holes, not throughly reading the instructions etc. If I had it to do over I would change the sequence of assembly of the tank z-brackets/baffle and cleco up the whole assembly to check the fit prior to drilling any holes in the Z-brackets or baffle. I had to slightly elongate (.030) the holes in the spar for the z-brackets to get a perfect fit between wing skins and tank skin since I had already drilled the holes in the z-bracket/baffle/ribs (per the instructions). Chris Stone -----Original Message----- From: BRUCE GRAY <brucerv84us(at)hotmail.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: ( Now Bolt Torque ) Hey Chris, Where are you located? I myself am in the "one done one to go", on my RV8 wings. The first one went together ok no complaints but the second one is flying together with great results. I may have to put in for the fuse. kit sooner than expected. Good luck with yours. Bruce Gray RV8 Wings #81745 >From: Christopher Stone <rv8iator(at)earthlink.net> >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV-List: ( Now Bolt Torque ) >Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:06:57 -0800 (GMT-08:00) > > >Dean... > >The bolt torque issue is one that I have always had a tough time >reconciling. Too many variables. Lubricated threads and head? Or not? >Lock nut or plain nut? Locking nut plate or not... On and on. For small >fasteners the torque required to overcome the locking fastener is generally >as much as the "published" torque value which is ambiguous since the spec >does not usually indicate lubed or dry. > The method that is consistant but tedious is to measure rotation of the >fastener head after it is seated. Knowing the pitch one can calculate the >amount of preload or tension is generated per degree of rotation. (Whith >the help of a stress/strain curve for the material the fastener is made >of). >For fasteners less then 1/4" preload shoud be 90% of material yield >strength. greater then 1/4" 100% of yield strength. (Not ultimate strength) > >All this being said... I usually go by my calibrated wrist to know how >tight is tight. > > >Chris Stone >RV-8 wings (one done one to go) >Mech/Aero Eng. > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Dean <dvanwinkle(at)royell.net> >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV-List: The Real Canopy Open In Flight Question ( Now Bolt >Torque ) > > >Dean > >I was taught that the proper torque for bolts and nuts/nutplates was >determined by adding the torque spec to the amount of torque required to >overcome thread friction of the locking nut/nutplate. Otherwise you will >not attain the desired clamp-up of the fastener. Worst case: Consider >that >torque to overcome thread friction alone exceeds the torque spec for the >fastener. > >Dean Van Winkle >Retired Aeronautical Engineer >RV-9A Fuselage/Finish > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" <dean.psiropoulos(at)verizon.net> >To: >Subject: RV-List: The Real Canopy Open In Flight Question > > > > > > > >From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> > > >Subject: Re: RV-List: The Real Canopy Open In Flight Question > > > > > On a more realistic note, I was installing my Odessey battery tray today >with AN3 bolts and nutplates and a question occurred to me. We have torque >specs for the regular nuts and stop nuts that we use but is there a torque >spec for a bolt that goes into a nutplate? I got out my trusty "Standard >Aircraft Handbook" but no answers there, just specs for standard type nuts. >Any thoughts on this? I just tightend the bolts till the nutdriver >wouldn't >turn anymore, since they're into nutplates they're NOT going to fall out >but, do I need to worry about torquing them? Thanks. > > > > Dean Psiropoulos > > RV-6A N197DM > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Furey" <john(at)fureychrysler.com>
Subject: For Sale
Date: Nov 17, 2004
Sensenich 70x80 for an O-320 with fitted spinner. 280hrs. Perfect condition Complete Vacume System with Gyros, together or seperate 149 tooth Starter- Like New Heated Pitot tube- Like New Many other items John(at)fureychrysler.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net>
Subject: Re: Forced Landing. (long)
Date: Nov 17, 2004
My guesses on cause are 1) carb ice (flying under an overcast at low altitude is where I got my first carb ice incident - if OAT is 65 or less, you are in "prime conditions" - you did pull on carb heat, didn't you, when it started running rough? Seems like I heard you talking about playing with the "mixture" a lot and I don't remember hearing about carb heat) and 2) fuel line heating and vaporization prior to the carb - something not shielded from exhaust heat. The other inputs of "debris" etc causing flooding due to float/valve interference are probably closer to the truth. David Carter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Zilik" <zilik(at)excelgeo.com> Subject: RV-List: Forced Landing. (long) > > Last Saturday morning was a great day to fly. We had to dodge the low > lying thin scudd below us and the Bravo airspace above us. There was a > nice breeze from the south and at 20"/2400rpm we cruised at 185 kt > ground speed. What better flying could you have. The trip home was > another story. > > After and east takeoff (flight of 3) from GXY we turned south and chased > after a newly flying supercharge-Subie-powered RV-7. Prop to 2500 rpm, > full throttle (24.5" at 6000') and the subie in our sites. As we got > near the subie we called him up and he cranked his prop to high rpm. > That slowed our rapid gain on him but we were still closing the range. > Then my lycoming started running rough. > > I shoved the mixture in which helped but it still ran a little rough. > Leaning even a little caused the engine to roughen up more. Mixture back > in. I called lead stating I had a rough engine and could not keep up and > things were getting rougher quickly. I switched tanks, turned the boost > pump on pulled on carb heat. Nothing worked the engine was slowly dying. > Lead pointed us to a friends grass strip 6.5 miles SSE but I did not > think I would make it. (remember that nice south breeze) I was looking > at the fields and roads just in case. I checked the mags (one EI and one > mag) and it ran equally bad on both ignitions. Fuel flow was showing > approximately 14 gph. Now I'm at full throttle 2500rpm and still showing > 24.5" MP with an engine that is now starting to shake the airframe a lot > and an IAS of 130 mph down from 190 IAS in the subie chase. I'm now high > 6999' one foot below the Bravo airspace and 1500' AGL when I finally see > the grass strip just south of my position. The engine is hardly running > now. I chopped what little power I had and put 99PZ into the steepest > slip she's ever seen. This is were I messed up and I hate to admit it > but I was too fast for the short strip when I passed over the corn on > the north end. I pulled up trading airspeed for altitude and pushed the > throttle in half way. She ran smooth. I came around for another approach > with a much more manageable airspeed, brushed the standing corn on the > north with my wheel pants and landed successfully on terra firma. The > butterflies in my stomach didn't start till I had to do the go-around. > > Now some may question my next move. She ran good on the go-around so I > did a run-up, used all the available strip and swore if I was not off > the ground by the halfway point (1000')I would abort the takeoff. FTG > was 19.5 nautical from where I was with another dirt strip 10 south. I > flew at 18" 2500 rpm all the way back without any problems. A little > fast on the landing with the 16 kt crosswind but other than that it was > a uneventful flight. > > What could be wrong with 99PZ? Some history: > > Oh the engine is a Aerosport O-360-A1A, carburated swinging a Hartzell. > 9.2:1 pistons. > > Denver Jackpot air-race. > Soon after departing Rock Springs WYO at low level full throttle 2600 > rpm (97 OAT) I looked at my wife and asked her if the engine seemed > rough? It was hard to tell in the bumpy thermal air. I thought I leaned > too much so I pushed the red knob in and re-leaned and all was well. > > Jackpot to Denver via Bendover Utah. 10000 feet full throttle 2400 rpm > we just rounded the restricted airspace and turned west towards > Wendover. As we crossed the ridge the engine again ran rough, like too > lean. Boost pump on, switch tanks and push the red knob in again. > Smoothed right out and leaned normally after that. A quick low level run > down the salt flats (what fun) and then over the rockpile to Denver. The > engine ran fine the rest of the way home. > > I did a 100 hour on the engine and found nothing out of the ordinary. > > We went to OSH, no problems. > > Labor day saw us to East Texas to visit dad. On the way back while > dodging T-storms the problem again revisited. I checked everything but > the red knob fixed it again. We could lean normally after that and had > and uneventful flight home. > > I checked fuel filters, boost pump flow from both tanks, checked the > carb screen again and replace the intake tube gaskets on the cylinder > head on two cylinders cause the bolts seemed only hand tight. the two > others were fine. Checked the primer ports, lines and valve. no leaks. > > Denver to IA. On upwind leaving the pattern at FTG the engine ran rough > and would not smooth out. Even the red knob did not help. Aborted > mission. Seemed to run smooth as soon as I reduced throttle to land. > > Did valve wobble check. Nothing found. > > Many breakfast flights east and west over the rockpile with no rough > spells. > > Then Saturdays forced landing. 99PZ is officially grounded until > something is fixed. > > Some observations: > > The red knob seems to be directly connected to the problem but lately > does not seem to help. > > All instances were at full throttle. Seems, I say seems, to run good at > partial throttle settings. > > boost pump, tanks carb heat or ignition source makes no change. > > I'm thinking carburetor vent, sticking float or something. > > Any ideas?? > > Gary Zilik > RV-6A N99PZ > 700 hours tach time. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bob 1" <rv3a.1(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Forced Landing. (long)
Date: Nov 17, 2004
> > My guesses on cause are 1) carb ice (flying under an overcast at low > altitude is where I got my first carb ice incident - if OAT is 65 or less, > you are in "prime conditions" - you did pull on carb heat, didn't you, when > it started running rough? Seems like I heard you talking about playing with > the "mixture" a lot and I don't remember hearing about carb heat) and 2) > fuel line heating and vaporization prior to the carb - something not > shielded from exhaust heat. The other inputs of "debris" etc causing > flooding due to float/valve interference are probably closer to the truth. > > David Carter +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ If this is a guessing game, I rule out carb ice because... 1. Lycomings seldom require carb heat due to their inherent design. 2. If pulling the throttle back smoothed things out, it indicates that the fuel system could not deliver sufficient fuel for full throttle operation. My guess is restricted fuel flow....with no idea of the cause. Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us>
Subject: Torque
Date: Nov 17, 2004
I have read numorus manuals that refer to this as "friction torque" or "friction drag torque" (AC 43.13 1B). Measured torque = friction torque + fastener torque / (or *) K factor where k factor is a value for calibration and or for a change in torque arm as when using a crows foot rather than a socket. Friction torque should be measured just prior to the fastener beginning to apply clamping force. RE using a calibrated hand vs torque wrench. If you have automotive experience you are most probably the worst offender(I raise my hand as the king of this bad behavior). The reason is with the exception of reciprocating engines most aircraft fasteners are fine thread, most auto fasteners are coarse thread. Since the torque values are much higher for NCT to get equal clamping force, one's arm doesn't need to be that sensitive to get fairly close. But if you have learned this on NCT, its very tough to unlearn and get good on NFT. I know as I are one having many years in both fields. I tested this one day just to see how good I was. Stayed within 8% using various sizes of NCT, but was all over the place on various sizes of NFT fasteners. Although I never over torqued one I could never consistently get them properly torqued unless I stayed with one type and size. The second I started mixing it up I would invaribly get one too loose. Also, published torque values, like anything, can be wrong. If it seems or feels odd (too loose or tight), do some homework prior to trusting your life on it. I know of this happening several times to which led to fatal accidents. W ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: spin again
Date: Nov 17, 2004
Ive been gone for 5 days and didnt get to add my 2 cents. Actual practice of spins or not, your choice. However, I think at the very least you should "chair fly" the recovery over and over until its completely repeatable without hesitation. I admit I havent tried spinning my 6a yet, and like many others on this list who have been trained by the Air Force in spin recovery, Im not sure if I will due to the lack of consistent recovery techniques. Vans has stated that recovery occurs in 1 1/4 to 1 1/2 rotations with opposite rudder and "toward neutral" elevator. I was always drilled to SLAM the stick to the forward stop but that was in a T-37. For those who have done multiple spin testing in the 6a, how does this sound. Start wit a fwd cg and empty airplane. As you approach stall, push full rudder and hold aft stick. Once she starts a spinnin: 1. Power - idle 2. Ail - neutral 3. Stick - Full aft 4. Confirm spin direction with needle 5. Rudder - abruptly full opposite direction 6. Wait a turn, then abrupt neutral elevator. If that doesnt work, I would try what I was taught and restabilize the spin and apply hard full forward stick to see if it will break the stall I'll wait to hear from those who have spun it before trying. In training, we sat in a cockpit makeup and did this procedure hundreds of times until it was second nature. If you ever end up in an inadvertent spin, you dont want to be in catch up mode. Just force yourself to repeat what you've already practiced. Idle, neutral, aft, spinning left (or right), needle left(or right), hard opposite rudder, wait, then stick forward (still wondering to what extent). So who wants to go with me for some spins? Shemp ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 17, 2004
From: Peter Laurence <dr.laurence(at)mbdi.org>
Subject: Re: For Sale
John, What kind(model) pitot and how much? Please respond to Plaurence@the-beach.net Thanks Peter Laurence 786 210 4867 > Sensenich 70x80 for an O-320 with fitted spinner. 280hrs. Perfect > condition > Complete Vacume System with Gyros, together or seperate > 149 tooth Starter- Like New > Heated Pitot tube- Like New > Many other items > > John(at)fureychrysler.com > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "steve zicree" <szicree(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Wing root mods
Date: Nov 17, 2004
Anybody take a look at the latest entry to the first flights section of Van's website? Any thoughts on the unusual wing root fairings? Steve Zicree ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 17, 2004
From: Bill Dube <bdube(at)al.noaa.gov>
Subject: Re: Torque
>The reason is with the exception of reciprocating engines most aircraft >fasteners are fine thread, most auto fasteners are coarse thread. Since the >torque values are much higher for NCT to get equal clamping force, one's arm >doesn't need to be that sensitive to get fairly close. It turns out that the pitch of the thread drops out of the equation. The clamping force is a function of the diameter, torque, and the surface friction. Surprisingly, the thread pitch is not a factor. T = K x Fi x d where T = torque, K ~ 0.20, Fi = clamping force, d = bolt diameter (Page #378, Mechanical Engineering Design, Shigley and Mitchell, 1983, McGraw Hill) >But if you have learned this on NCT, its very tough to unlearn and get good >on NFT. I know as I are one having many years in both fields. I tested this >one day just to see how good I was. > >Stayed within 8% using various sizes of NCT, but was all over the place on >various sizes of NFT fasteners. Although I never over torqued one I could >never consistently get them properly torqued unless I stayed with one type >and size. The second I started mixing it up I would invaribly get one too >loose. High quality, high-strength bolts typically have smoother threads. This would alter the outcome of your test. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 17, 2004
From: Gerald Richardson <gerric(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
Greetings: I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would like to have the capability of the attitude & directional gyros, plus a few additional goodies, etc. My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this post, merely gather some data to help me decide. Thank you for your comments. Gerald Richardson Medicine Hat, Alberta Canada RV6A 25366 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bob Barrow" <bobbarrow(at)optusnet.com.au>
Subject: No RV7 spin
Date: Nov 18, 2004
I recently asked if anyone had spun an RV7or RV7A with the new rudder (which was apparently transposed from the RV9 to improve rudder authority after less than ideal spin recovery episodes in the RV7 by Vans). There was not one response despite a deluge of emails on spinning everything else from WW11 forward. Surely some-one out there has spun a 7 and can comment. The question of whether the new rudder now provides satisfactory authority to recover from spins should be of concern to all RV7 builders / owners. In discussions on spinning some people discuss it as if it were an option, like...."I don't intend doing spins in my RV". I just trust those people aren't doing any aerobatic manoeuvres...you can fall into a spin from any of them....including simple loops. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky)
Subject: Re: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
Date: Nov 18, 2004
Unless there's been a turnaround, you can't get a Lite G3 yet. They aren't in production when I last checked earlier in the month. Check their discussion boards for further details. Have you considered the GRT EFIS/engine monitor/gps moving map? If you go with them instead of separate systems I think the cost is close to a wash but the end is much more than the sum in my opinion. Much more future growth than either of the above in addition to the already current capabilities. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GRT_EFIS/ for more details. -------------- Original message -------------- > > Greetings: > > I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have > studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of > them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either > of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My > installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would > like to have the capability of the attitude & directional gyros, plus a > few additional goodies, etc. > > My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this > post, merely gather some data to help me decide. > > Thank you for your comments. > > Gerald Richardson > Medicine Hat, Alberta > Canada > > RV6A 25366 > > > > > > Unless there's been a turnaround, you can't get a Lite G3 yet. They aren't in production when I last checked earlier in the month. Check their discussion boards for further details. Have you considered the GRT EFIS/engine monitor/gps moving map? If you go with them instead of separate systems I think the cost is close to a wash but the end is much more than the sum in my opinion. Much more future growth than either of the above in addition to the already current capabilities. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GRT_EFIS/ for more details. -------------- Original message -------------- -- RV-List message posted by: Gerald Richardson Greetings: I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would like to have the capability of the attitude directional gyros, plus a few additional goodies, etc. My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this post, merely gather some data to help me decide. Thank you for your comments. Gerald Richardson Medicine Hat, Alberta Canada RV6A 25366 le-report ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Furey" <john(at)fureychrysler.com>
Subject: For Sale
Date: Nov 17, 2004
Check Aircraft Spruce for the AN-5812 12V Asking $595 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "steve zicree" <szicree(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Torque
Date: Nov 17, 2004
On a coarse bolt, the last little bit of wrench movement creates more additional torque than the same amount of movement applied in the fine bolt case. It might be that knowledge of this from coarse bolt usage could lead a person to be "gun shy" about overtightening, leading to consistent undertightening when using the fine pitch hardware. Just another possible explanation for the test results. Steve Zicree ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Dube" <bdube(at)al.noaa.gov> Subject: Re: RV-List: Torque > > > >The reason is with the exception of reciprocating engines most aircraft > >fasteners are fine thread, most auto fasteners are coarse thread. Since the > >torque values are much higher for NCT to get equal clamping force, one's arm > >doesn't need to be that sensitive to get fairly close. > > It turns out that the pitch of the thread drops out of the > equation. The clamping force is a function of the diameter, torque, and the > surface friction. Surprisingly, the thread pitch is not a factor. > > T = K x Fi x d > > where T = torque, K ~ 0.20, Fi = clamping force, d = bolt diameter > > (Page #378, Mechanical Engineering Design, Shigley and Mitchell, 1983, > McGraw Hill) > > > >But if you have learned this on NCT, its very tough to unlearn and get good > >on NFT. I know as I are one having many years in both fields. I tested this > >one day just to see how good I was. > > > >Stayed within 8% using various sizes of NCT, but was all over the place on > >various sizes of NFT fasteners. Although I never over torqued one I could > >never consistently get them properly torqued unless I stayed with one type > >and size. The second I started mixing it up I would invaribly get one too > >loose. > > High quality, high-strength bolts typically have smoother threads. > This would alter the outcome of your test. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "glaesers" <glaesers(at)wideopenwest.com>
Subject: Re: Wing root mods
Date: Nov 17, 2004
Kinda looks like a Piper Cherokee. Extending the LE like that is a way of improving high AOA characteristics - especially flow past the tail. If you want to see that concept taken to the extreme, look at the F-18. The LE strakes go all the way to the cockpit. They did that to improve the flow over the twin tails at very high AOA, and reduce the stresses on the vertical fin root fitting - which were developing cracks. Dennis Glaeser Anybody take a look at the latest entry to the first flights section of Van's website? Any thoughts on the unusual wing root fairings? Steve Zicree ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <groves(at)epix.net>
Subject: Re: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
Date: Nov 17, 2004
Hi Gerald, Not to sart a war or anything BUT, when I was at oshkosh this year I looked at both of these units and I must say I was much more impressed with the Blue Mountain lite. The dynon would grey out if you rolled it in your hands to fast, where as the BM lite was fine. Both are really nice units but my impressions of each unit was the BM lite was a superior unit. Kirk RV-8 wings > > From: Gerald Richardson <gerric(at)shaw.ca> > Date: 2004/11/17 Wed PM 07:20:47 EST > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A > > > Greetings: > > I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have > studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of > them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either > of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My > installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would > like to have the capability of the attitude & directional gyros, plus a > few additional goodies, etc. > > My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this > post, merely gather some data to help me decide. > > Thank you for your comments. > > Gerald Richardson > Medicine Hat, Alberta > Canada > > RV6A 25366 > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 17, 2004
From: Scott VanArtsdalen <svanarts(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS Lite, Dynon D10A, and GRT Horizon here: http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really leaned me toward Blue Mountain. Gerald Richardson wrote: > >Greetings: > >I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have >studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of >them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either >of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My >installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would >like to have the capability of the attitude & directional gyros, plus a >few additional goodies, etc. > >My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this >post, merely gather some data to help me decide. > >Thank you for your comments. > >Gerald Richardson >Medicine Hat, Alberta >Canada > >RV6A 25366 > > > > -- Scott VanArtsdalen Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Schaefer" <dschaefer1(at)kc.rr.com>
Subject: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
Date: Nov 17, 2004
I hate to disagree with the comparison and possibly anger someone, BUT the GRT unit does indeed have Ground Speed, Track and an HSI. Having flown behind one for a bunch of hours now I can guarantee it. If you'd like pictures just let me know. The only concern I found with the EFIS Lite is I believe it only had a 24nm zoom range which is only 8 min in an RV! Regards, David Schaefer N142DS -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS Lite, Dynon D10A, and GRT Horizon here: http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really leaned me toward Blue Mountain. Gerald Richardson wrote: > >Greetings: > >I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have >studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of >them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either >of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My >installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would >like to have the capability of the attitude & directional gyros, plus a >few additional goodies, etc. > >My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this >post, merely gather some data to help me decide. > >Thank you for your comments. > >Gerald Richardson >Medicine Hat, Alberta >Canada > >RV6A 25366 > > > > -- Scott VanArtsdalen Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 17, 2004
From: Scott VanArtsdalen <svanarts(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
Geez, give me some credit. I DID say the comparrison was quck and dirty. :-) My understanding was that the groundspeed and track were only available if you interfaced with an external GPS. Or am I mistaken? If so maybe I should change it to show "built in" GPS. That's really what I meant. Thanks for the correction, David. Now, I wonder how many people *I* will anger by having the wrong info on my web page? Aw, who the (expletive of your choice) cares? >:-) David Schaefer wrote: > >I hate to disagree with the comparison and possibly anger someone, BUT the >GRT unit does indeed have Ground Speed, Track and an HSI. Having flown >behind one for a bunch of hours now I can guarantee it. If you'd like >pictures just let me know. > >The only concern I found with the EFIS Lite is I believe it only had a 24nm >zoom range which is only 8 min in an RV! > >Regards, > >David Schaefer >N142DS > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com >[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A > > >I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS Lite, Dynon D10A, >and GRT Horizon here: >http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm > >I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the >Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a >bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I >really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few >other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really >leaned me toward Blue Mountain. > >Gerald Richardson wrote: > > > >> >>Greetings: >> >>I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have >>studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of >>them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either >>of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My >>installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would >>like to have the capability of the attitude & directional gyros, plus a >>few additional goodies, etc. >> >>My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this >>post, merely gather some data to help me decide. >> >>Thank you for your comments. >> >>Gerald Richardson >>Medicine Hat, Alberta >>Canada >> >>RV6A 25366 >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- Scott VanArtsdalen Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 ________________________________________________________________________________ DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=O4AE3aC1A5Pv4YgVCsjNQsfXOdWuBs9xqmFoCYW+CGOrokq4oveh9RNPyMIXdcRAlSXOQnV6wUl3LQxH27xjQz+yNM+SimbwPT0NphivqvjqKiKy4ubWH8FOTUq7UrsD7uNz1baKfAdnn4F1YA8BzpNnEyjZVzt53rdOYRRCx+U;
Date: Nov 17, 2004
From: Skylor Piper <skylor4(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: No RV7 spin
Dan Checkoway has done some spin testing on his -7. I believe he has the small rudder, but don't quote me on that... http://www.rvproject.com/20040405.html Skylor RV-8 Under Construction --- Bob Barrow wrote: > > > I recently asked if anyone had spun an RV7or RV7A > with the new rudder (which was apparently transposed > from the RV9 to improve rudder authority after less > than ideal spin recovery episodes in the RV7 by > Vans). > > There was not one response despite a deluge of > emails on spinning everything else from WW11 > forward. > > Surely some-one out there has spun a 7 and can > comment. The question of whether the new rudder now > provides satisfactory authority to recover from > spins should be of concern to all RV7 builders / > owners. > > In discussions on spinning some people discuss it as > if it were an option, like...."I don't intend doing > spins in my RV". I just trust those people aren't > doing any aerobatic manoeuvres...you can fall into a > spin from any of them....including simple loops. > > > > Click on the > this > by the > Admin. > _-> > Contributions > any other > Forums. > > 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 > > > > > > __________________________________ http://my.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HCRV6(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 18, 2004
Subject: Re: Lead counter weights
In a message dated 11/16/04 8:43:32 AM Pacific Standard Time, bdube(at)al.noaa.gov writes: << I had a hell of a time shaping the elevator counterweights this past >weekend, is there some easy trick to cut this stuff? Band saw. Pocket knife. >> Or you could do it the original way, melt the lead and pour it into the elevator horns. Works great. Harry Crosby Pleasanton, California RV-6, flying!!! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: No RV7 spin
Date: Nov 17, 2004
> Dan Checkoway has done some spin testing on his -7. I > believe he has the small rudder, but don't quote me on > that... Yeah, I spun my RV-7 during Phase I, and I have the older, smaller (RV-8 style) rudder. I was perfectly happy with how responsive it was. I didn't reply to this thread originally because Bob wanted to know if any builders out there had spun their RV-7[A] with the *new* rudder. Since I have the old rudder I didn't respond. But... Bob wrote: > The question of whether the new rudder now > provides satisfactory authority to recover from > spins should be of concern to all RV7 builders / > owners. Bob, you seem to be seeking confirmation that the new rudder helps spin recovery. Van's themselves did find that the larger rudder provided more authority in spin recovery. I encourage you to review Van's service bulletin on the matter -- http://www.vansaircraft.com/pdf/sb02-6-1.pdf Quoting it: "We did find that the RV-7 spin recovery characteristics easily met FAA requirements* for normal category* aircraft, but not those of aerobatic category aircraft*. (The AEROBATIC category requires that the aircraft be able to recover from a 6-turn spin within 1 1/4 rotations. A NORMAL category aircraft is required to recover from a 1-turn spin within 1 additional rotation.)" "The RV-7 spin recovery characteristics were also found to be adequate for operations within the recommended limits specified in Section 15 of the RV-7 Construction Manual. Service experience with the RV-6/6A fleet indicates that safe operation, including "Sport Aerobatics", is possible without meeting the exact spin recovery requirements of aerobatic category aircraft." ...here's what you're looking for, clear as day: "Testing the RV-7 (N137RV) reconfigured with an RV-9/9A rudder showed improved spin recovery qualities. With this larger rudder, RV-7 spin recovery qualities are equal to or better than those of the standard RV-6/6A, which have been service proven through fleet experience." "Flown within the recommended limitations of Section 15 of the Construction Manual, either the original or the enlarged RV-7 rudder will provide adequate authority for spin recovery." ...and then in the "CONCLUSION" paragraphs, what you're looking for is reiterated clearly: "The substitution of an RV-9 rudder on an RV-7 improved spin recovery. With the larger rudder, the RV-7 will have better spin recovery from whatever flight condition the pilot may encounter." From the horse's mouth! )_( Dan RV-7 N714D http://www.rvproject.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bob Barrow" <bobbarrow(at)optusnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: No RV7 spin
Date: Nov 18, 2004
Thanks Dan, yes I had read the Vans Service Bulletin. But now that there are probably quite a few RV7 and RV7A flying I thought it would be good to get some real world feedback on spin recovery with the new rudder. Surely some-one out there can enlighten us with their experience. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: No RV7 spin > >> Dan Checkoway has done some spin testing on his -7. I >> believe he has the small rudder, but don't quote me on >> that... > > Yeah, I spun my RV-7 during Phase I, and I have the older, smaller (RV-8 > style) rudder. I was perfectly happy with how responsive it was. > > I didn't reply to this thread originally because Bob wanted to know if any > builders out there had spun their RV-7[A] with the *new* rudder. Since I > have the old rudder I didn't respond. But... > > Bob wrote: >> The question of whether the new rudder now >> provides satisfactory authority to recover from >> spins should be of concern to all RV7 builders / >> owners. > > Bob, you seem to be seeking confirmation that the new rudder helps spin > recovery. Van's themselves did find that the larger rudder provided more > authority in spin recovery. I encourage you to review Van's service > bulletin on the matter -- http://www.vansaircraft.com/pdf/sb02-6-1.pdf > > Quoting it: > > "We did find that the RV-7 spin recovery characteristics easily met FAA > requirements* for normal category* aircraft, but not those of aerobatic > category aircraft*. (The AEROBATIC category requires that the aircraft be > able to recover from a 6-turn spin within 1 1/4 rotations. A NORMAL > category > aircraft is required to recover from a 1-turn spin within 1 additional > rotation.)" > > "The RV-7 spin recovery characteristics were also found to be adequate for > operations within the recommended limits specified in Section 15 of the > RV-7 > Construction Manual. Service experience with the RV-6/6A fleet indicates > that safe operation, including "Sport Aerobatics", is possible without > meeting the exact spin recovery requirements of aerobatic category > aircraft." > > ...here's what you're looking for, clear as day: > > "Testing the RV-7 (N137RV) reconfigured with an RV-9/9A rudder showed > improved spin recovery qualities. With this larger rudder, RV-7 spin > recovery qualities are equal to or better than those of the standard > RV-6/6A, which have been service proven through fleet experience." > > "Flown within the recommended limitations of Section 15 of the > Construction > Manual, either the original or the enlarged RV-7 rudder will provide > adequate authority for spin recovery." > > ...and then in the "CONCLUSION" paragraphs, what you're looking for is > reiterated clearly: > > "The substitution of an RV-9 rudder on an RV-7 improved spin recovery. > With > the larger rudder, the RV-7 will have better spin recovery from whatever > flight condition the pilot may encounter." > > From the horse's mouth! > > )_( Dan > RV-7 N714D > http://www.rvproject.com > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 18, 2004
From: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch>
Subject: Re: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
Hi Scott, Cool comparison. Pretty much matches my evaluation as well. One thing you might add to the chart, if you are so inclined, is the screen size, and perhaps the screen brightness in NITs - if you can get the suppliers to give you this info. Thanks, Mickey >I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS Lite, Dynon D10A, >and GRT Horizon here: >http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm > >I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the >Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a >bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I >really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few >other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really >leaned me toward Blue Mountain. -- Mickey Coggins http://www.rv8.ch/ #82007 QB Wings/Fuselage ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <sears(at)searnet.com>
Subject: Re: Lead counter weights
Date: Nov 18, 2004
> and double nut a bolt (or two) into the open space. Pour the liquid lead in > and then use a drill to remove as much as need to balance. Every local > plumbing shop has lead, heater, pot & laddle. May not have used them in a > while but they will have one and someone with okum and the skill to melt & > fill. Actually, this is easy to do. I used a coffee can, and maybe a propane torch to heat it, for my -6A's weights. A friend gave me the lead. Just be sure you melt lead in a well vented area. I understand the fumes from the lead aren't good for us. Before pouring the contents into the counter balance arm, line the area for the weight with aluminum foil to make the shape and contain the liquid lead. When you're ready to balance the control surfaces, you can drill out the extra lead, as has already been stated. You might be able to use used tire weights for the lead, if you're really trying to do it on the cheap. Not sure about their melting point, though. Jim Sears in KY ________________________________________________________________________________
From: luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky)
Subject: Re: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
Date: Nov 18, 2004
I think what's missing most is the significance of being able to have a display big enough to do split screens. For me it would be at the top of the list if one was designing a single MFD panel. You can see examples at: http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/GRT_EFIS/lst GRT's does do more than you originally listed but those curious can go their website and read more. They also have a comparison chart for what they believe is critical in system to system comparisons and that's the accuracy/stability of their roll/pitch info. So far, theirs is the hands down winner in the under $10K in my opinion. -------------- Original message -------------- > > Geez, give me some credit. I DID say the comparrison was quck and > dirty. :-) My understanding was that the groundspeed and track were > only available if you interfaced with an external GPS. Or am I > mistaken? If so maybe I should change it to show "built in" GPS. > That's really what I meant. Thanks for the correction, David. > > Now, I wonder how many people *I* will anger by having the wrong info on > my web page? Aw, who the (expletive of your choice) cares? >:-) > > David Schaefer wrote: > > > > >I hate to disagree with the comparison and possibly anger someone, BUT the > >GRT unit does indeed have Ground Speed, Track and an HSI. Having flown > >behind one for a bunch of hours now I can guarantee it. If you'd like > >pictures just let me know. > > > >The only concern I found with the EFIS Lite is I believe it only had a 24nm > >zoom range which is only 8 min in an RV! > > > >Regards, > > > >David Schaefer > >N142DS > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > >[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen > >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > >Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A > > > > > >I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS Lite, Dynon D10A, > >and GRT Horizon here: > >http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm > > > >I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the > >Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a > >bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I > >really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few > >other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really > >leaned me toward Blue Mountain. > > > >Gerald Richardson wrote: > > > > > > > >> > >>Greetings: > >> > >>I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have > >>studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of > >>them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either > >>of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My > >>installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would > >>like to have the capability of the attitude & directional gyros, plus a > >>few additional goodies, etc. > >> > >>My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this > >>post, merely gather some data to help me decide. > >> > >>Thank you for your comments. > >> > >>Gerald Richardson > >>Medicine Hat, Alberta > >>Canada > >> > >>RV6A 25366 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > Scott VanArtsdalen > Van Arts Consulting Services > 3848 McHenry Ave > Suite #155-184 > Modesto, CA 95356 > 209-986-4647 > Ps 34:4,6 > > > > > > I think what's missing most is the significance of being able to have a display big enough to do split screens.For meit would be at the top of the list if one was designing a single MFD panel. You can see examples at: http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/GRT_EFIS/lst GRT's does do more than youoriginally listed but those curious can go their website and read more. They also have a comparison chart for what they believe is critical in system to system comparisons and that's the accuracy/stability of their roll/pitch info. So far, theirs is the hands down winner inthe under $10K inmy opinion. -------------- Original message -------------- -- RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen Geez, give me some credit. I DID say the comparrison was quck and dirty. :-) My understanding was that the groundspeed and track were only available if you interfaced with an external GPS. Or am I mistaken? If so maybe I should change it to show "built in" GPS. That's really what I meant. Thanks for the correction, David. Now, I wonder how many people *I* will anger by having the wrong info on my web page? Aw, who the (expletive of your choice) cares? :-) David Schaefer wrote: -- RV-List message posted by: "David Schaefer" I hate to disagree with the comparison and possibly anger some one, BUT the GRT unit does indeed have Ground Speed, Track and an HSI. Having flown behind one for a bunch of hours now I can guarantee it. If you'd like pictures just let me know. The only concern I found with the EFIS Lite is I believe it only had a 24nm zoom range which is only 8 min in an RV! Regards, David Schaefer N142DS -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A -- RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS L ite, Dynon D10A, and GRT Horizon here: http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really leaned me toward Blue Mountain. Gerald Richardson wrote: -- RV-List message posted by: Gerald Richardson Greetings: I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would like to have the capability of the attitude directional gyros, plus a few additional goodies, etc. My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this post, merely gather some data to help me decide. Thank you for your comments. Gerald Richardson Medicine Hat, Alberta Canada RV6A 25366 -- Scott VanArtsdal en Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 il Forum - atronics.com/emaillists ________________________________________________________________________________
From: George Neal E Capt AU/PC <Neal.George(at)maxwell.af.mil>
Subject: Lead counter weights
Date: Nov 18, 2004
Wheel weights and lead shot are both great as a stock for casting your own counterbalances. Wheel weights can be had for free in any parking lot, or begged or bought for nearly nothing at your local tire shop. Lead shot from the reloading store looks expensive, but you'll be surprised how many uses you'll find for a half-empty bag of shot. If memory serves, both contain arsenic as a hardening agent - keep your hands out of your mouth. Neal RV-7 N8ZG (tanks) RV-8 N998GM (Emp) > You might be able to use used tire weights for the lead < ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Patrick Kelley" <webmaster(at)flion.com>
Subject: Lead counter weights
Date: Nov 18, 2004
I had already bought the Van's molded weights, so I used them for stock. They may not have fit, but they were the right weight. All the local gun and sporting shops were out of cauldrons when I was ready to do the weights, so I went to Target and bought a milk steaming cup - it's what they use at Starbucks to froth milk for your latte. Not only is it less likely to burn through than a can, it also has a handle to make it easier to work with. I only put foil in the corners and, as I poured, I heated the elevator. What happens is that the lead will pour like mercury and won't fill all the corners or bond to the elevator. Heating the lead and elevator together lets it flow into the recesses around the bolt heads and corners and also 'stick' better to the aluminum surfaces. Think of it like heating the work to let solder flow. Patrick Kelley - RV-6A - baggage skins going in -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of sears(at)searnet.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Lead counter weights > and double nut a bolt (or two) into the open space. Pour the liquid lead in > and then use a drill to remove as much as need to balance. Every local > plumbing shop has lead, heater, pot & laddle. May not have used them in a > while but they will have one and someone with okum and the skill to melt & > fill. Actually, this is easy to do. I used a coffee can, and maybe a propane torch to heat it, for my -6A's weights. A friend gave me the lead. Just be sure you melt lead in a well vented area. I understand the fumes from the lead aren't good for us. Before pouring the contents into the counter balance arm, line the area for the weight with aluminum foil to make the shape and contain the liquid lead. When you're ready to balance the control surfaces, you can drill out the extra lead, as has already been stated. You might be able to use used tire weights for the lead, if you're really trying to do it on the cheap. Not sure about their melting point, though. Jim Sears in KY ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 18, 2004
From: SportAV8R(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
I hesitate to ask this, but - Did you include a comparison column for "Developer's attitude"? After reading up on the "Aircraft Wiring for Dummies" fiasco, I felt I had to wipe BM (sorry!) off my candidate list (even if the product itself is very good). To me, GRT looks like the best choice under 25k, if it's within one's price range. Little doubt that's what I'll be installing when the funds come in. My 2 cents only... -BB I suppose JPI makes okay stuff, too, but I have a LONG memory for people taking cheap shots at Matt 'Lectric Bob, and homebuilders' intelligence in general. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 18, 2004
From: Scott Vanartsdalen <svanarts(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
Great suggestion I'll see what I can do. Coggins Hi Scott, Cool comparison. Pretty much matches my evaluation as well. One thing you might add to the chart, if you are so inclined, is the screen size, and perhaps the screen brightness in NITs - if you can get the suppliers to give you this info. Thanks, Mickey >I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS Lite, Dynon D10A, >and GRT Horizon here: >http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm > >I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the >Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a >bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I >really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few >other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really >leaned me toward Blue Mountain. -- Mickey Coggins http://www.rv8.ch/ #82007 QB Wings/Fuselage -- 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 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 18, 2004
From: Scott Vanartsdalen <svanarts(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
Those are good points. I pretty much got all I could find off of GRT's website. I've had a couple of people telling me it will do much more but I can't seem to find out what "more" is. If you know I'd be glad to put it in there. My main reason in comparing these three particular EFIS's is small size. Something that can fitin the panel of an RV-4 without dominating it. lucky wrote: I think what's missing most is the significance of being able to have a display big enough to do split screens. For me it would be at the top of the list if one was designing a single MFD panel. You can see examples at: http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/GRT_EFIS/lst GRT's does do more than you originally listed but those curious can go their website and read more. They also have a comparison chart for what they believe is critical in system to system comparisons and that's the accuracy/stability of their roll/pitch info. So far, theirs is the hands down winner in the under $10K in my opinion. -------------- Original message -------------- > > Geez, give me some credit. I DID say the comparrison was quck and > dirty. :-) My understanding was that the groundspeed and track were > only available if you interfaced with an external GPS. Or am I > mistaken? If so maybe I should change it to show "built in" GPS. > That's really what I meant. Thanks for the correction, David. > > Now, I wonder how many people *I* will anger by having the wrong info on > my web page? Aw, who the (expletive of your choice) cares? >:-) > > David Schaefer wrote: > > > > >I hate to disagree with the comparison and possibly anger someone, BUT the > >GRT unit does indeed have Ground Speed, Track and an HSI. Having flown > >behind one for a bunch of hours now I can guarantee it. If you'd like > >pictures just let me know. > > > >The only concern I found with the EFIS Lite is I believe it only had a 24nm > >zoom range which is only 8 min in an RV! > > > >Regards, > > > >David Schaefer > >N142DS > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > >[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen > >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > >Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A > > > > > >I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS Lite, Dynon D10A, > >and GRT Horizon here: > >http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm > > > >I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the > >Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a > >bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I > >really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few > >other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really > >leaned me toward Blue Mountain. > > > >Gerald Richardson wrote: > > > > > > > >> > >>Greetings: > >> > >>I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have > >>studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of > >>them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either > >>of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My > >>installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would > >>like to have the capability of the attitude & directional gyros, plus a > >>few additional goodies, etc. > >> > >>My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this > >>post, merely gather some data to help me decide. > >> > >>Thank you for your comments. > >> > >>Gerald Richardson > >>Medicine Hat, Alberta > >>Canada > >> > >>RV6A 25366 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > Scott VanArtsdalen > Van Arts Consulting Services > 3848 McHenry Ave > Suite #155-184 > Modesto, CA 95356 > 209-986-4647 > Ps 34:4,6 > > > > > > I think what's missing most is the significance of being able to have a display big enough to do split screens.For meit would be at the top of the list if one was designing a single MFD panel. You can see examples at: http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/GRT_EFIS/lst GRT's does do more than youoriginally listed but those curious can go their website and read more. They also have a comparison chart for what they believe is critical in system to system comparisons and that's the accuracy/stability of their roll/pitch info. So far, theirs is the hands down winner inthe under $10K inmy opinion. -------------- Original message -------------- -- RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen Geez, give me some credit. I DID say the comparrison was quck and dirty. :-) My understanding was that the groundspeed and track were only available if you interfaced with an external GPS. Or am I mistaken? If so maybe I should change it to show "built in" GPS. That's really what I meant. Thanks for the correction, David. Now, I wonder how many people *I* will anger by having the wrong info on my web page? Aw, who the (expletive of your choice) cares? :-) David Schaefer wrote: -- RV-List message posted by: "David Schaefer" I hate to disagree with the comparison and possibly anger some one, BUT the GRT unit does indeed have Ground Speed, Track and an HSI. Having flown behind one for a bunch of hours now I can guarantee it. If you'd like pictures just let me know. The only concern I found with the EFIS Lite is I believe it only had a 24nm zoom range which is only 8 min in an RV! Regards, David Schaefer N142DS -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A -- RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS L ite, Dynon D10A, and GRT Horizon here: http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really leaned me toward Blue Mountain. Gerald Richardson wrote: -- RV-List message posted by: Gerald Richardson Greetings: I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would like to have the capability of the attitude directional gyros, plus a few additional goodies, etc. My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this post, merely gather some data to help me decide. Thank you for your comments. Gerald Richardson Medicine Hat, Alberta Canada RV6A 25366 -- Scott VanArtsdal en Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 il Forum - atronics.com/emaillists -- 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 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 18, 2004
From: Scott Vanartsdalen <svanarts(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
:-) Sorry, I couldn't find that on any of the manufacturer's websites or trust me it would be there. :-) :-) I'm trying to be as objective as possible. But I do definately want people's experiences with support of their chosen product when my time comes to purchase. SportAV8R(at)aol.com wrote: I hesitate to ask this, but - Did you include a comparison column for "Developer's attitude"? After reading up on the "Aircraft Wiring for Dummies" fiasco, I felt I had to wipe BM (sorry!) off my candidate list (even if the product itself is very good). To me, GRT looks like the best choice under 25k, if it's within one's price range. Little doubt that's what I'll be installing when the funds come in. My 2 cents only... -BB I suppose JPI makes okay stuff, too, but I have a LONG memory for people taking cheap shots at Matt 'Lectric Bob, and homebuilders' intelligence in general. -- 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: JTAnon(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 18, 2004
Subject: Canopy Protection
Does anyone have a source/supplier for the protective plastic sheeting on the canopy? I'm talking about the film on the canopy when you first get it. I'm not interested in the spray or brush on type (I believe it's called Spray-Lat). John McDonnell (RV7A Slider - The $1,000 cut was successful) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "steve zicree" <szicree(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Lead counter weights
Date: Nov 18, 2004
Gun stores sell lead shot in a little tiny size that make measuring and melting a snap. Very cheap too. ----- Original Message ----- From: <sears(at)searnet.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: Lead counter weights > > > > and double nut a bolt (or two) into the open space. Pour the liquid lead > in > > and then use a drill to remove as much as need to balance. Every local > > plumbing shop has lead, heater, pot & laddle. May not have used them in a > > while but they will have one and someone with okum and the skill to melt & > > fill. > > Actually, this is easy to do. I used a coffee can, and maybe a propane > torch to heat it, for my -6A's weights. A friend gave me the lead. Just be > sure you melt lead in a well vented area. I understand the fumes from the > lead aren't good for us. Before pouring the contents into the counter > balance arm, line the area for the weight with aluminum foil to make the > shape and contain the liquid lead. When you're ready to balance the control > surfaces, you can drill out the extra lead, as has already been stated. You > might be able to use used tire weights for the lead, if you're really trying > to do it on the cheap. Not sure about their melting point, though. > Jim Sears in KY > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: PSPRV6A(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 18, 2004
Subject: Re: RV-List Digest: 42 Msgs - 11/17/04
Anchor nut torque: Anchor nuts can be easily conditioned to have a bit less torque. Get a socket type set screw of the same size. Grease it and run it thru the anchor nut. This is easier AFTER it has been rivetted in place. Set scews have a slightly larger effective diameter than standard screws. This will usually reduce screw torque to a reasonable level. Paul & Eric Petersen, RV6A 90% done ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Forced Landing. (long)
Date: Nov 18, 2004
Was your primer in and locked? Finctioning properly? Leaking? Manual, electric? Guess you would have figured this out by now, but you should keep it on the troubleshooting radar or rule it out. 2 cents Bryan Jones > > > > > My guesses on cause are 1) carb ice (flying under an overcast at low > > altitude is where I got my first carb ice incident - if OAT is 65 or >less, > > you are in "prime conditions" - you did pull on carb heat, didn't you, >when > > it started running rough? Seems like I heard you talking about playing >with > > the "mixture" a lot and I don't remember hearing about carb heat) and 2) > > fuel line heating and vaporization prior to the carb - something not > > shielded from exhaust heat. The other inputs of "debris" etc causing > > flooding due to float/valve interference are probably closer to the >truth. > > > > David Carter >+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >If this is a guessing game, I rule out carb ice because... > >1. Lycomings seldom require carb heat due to their inherent design. >2. If pulling the throttle back smoothed things out, it indicates that the >fuel system could not deliver sufficient fuel for full throttle operation. > >My guess is restricted fuel flow....with no idea of the cause. > > >Bob > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: spin again
Date: Nov 18, 2004
Another 2 cents from the cheap seats here in Houston... Having done a little freelance instruction (civillian), it's my opinion that pulling the power on a (single) propeller driven AC is the one big item to be done first. It'll stop the rotation itself a lot fo the time. If you're already at low power, the do as shown below. Last - IMVHO, pilots need to see the picture of a spin 4-6 times before they can grasp what's happening. Before this time, the senses and visula overwhelm the brain. Get some spin training in something to the point you develop situational awareness and can recover. One last comment - re. the item 3 below (stick back [before spin recovery]), I am inclined to question that action for light GA aircraft. I'll have to try it next time I'm out though. Bryan >Ive been gone for 5 days and didnt get to add my 2 cents. > >Actual practice of spins or not, your choice. However, I think at the very >least you should "chair fly" the recovery over and over until its >completely >repeatable without hesitation. I admit I havent tried spinning my 6a yet, >and like many others on this list who have been trained by the Air Force in >spin recovery, Im not sure if I will due to the lack of consistent recovery >techniques. Vans has stated that recovery occurs in 1 1/4 to 1 1/2 >rotations with opposite rudder and "toward neutral" elevator. I was always >drilled to SLAM the stick to the forward stop but that was in a T-37. For >those who have done multiple spin testing in the 6a, how does this sound. > >Start wit a fwd cg and empty airplane. As you approach stall, push full >rudder and hold aft stick. Once she starts a spinnin: > >1. Power - idle >2. Ail - neutral >3. Stick - Full aft >4. Confirm spin direction with needle >5. Rudder - abruptly full opposite direction >6. Wait a turn, then abrupt neutral elevator. If that doesnt work, I >would >try what I was taught and restabilize the spin and apply hard full forward >stick to see if it will break the stall > >I'll wait to hear from those who have spun it before trying. > >In training, we sat in a cockpit makeup and did this procedure hundreds of >times until it was second nature. If you ever end up in an inadvertent >spin, you dont want to be in catch up mode. Just force yourself to repeat >what you've already practiced. Idle, neutral, aft, spinning left (or >right), needle left(or right), hard opposite rudder, wait, then stick >forward (still wondering to what extent). > >So who wants to go with me for some spins? > >Shemp > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Wayne Pedersen" <wayne(at)pedersentransport.com>
Subject: gluing canopy to frame
Date: Nov 18, 2004
I am just about ready to glue my canopy to the tip up frame on my RV7a. To those of you who have ventured into this area I need to know if you glued the sides of the canopy to the rails and then riveted the canopy skirts on OR did you rivet the canopy skirts and then wedged the glue and canopy into the slot ? I would prefer to glue the canopy and rivet after but have a fear that the vibration from riveting may cause too much stress on the canopy. If you have any other helpful tips I am all ears (or is that eyes?) Thanks Wayne Southern AB RV7a canopy --- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kathleen(at)rv7.us
Subject: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
Date: Nov 18, 2004
So, why didn't you compare the Blue Mountain Sport? It is sized and priced like the GRT, but a somewhat different product in that it focuses on navigation rather than engine instruments as it's additional feature set and it has terrain data? Just curious.... Kathleen Evans www.rv7.us -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott Vanartsdalen Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A Those are good points. I pretty much got all I could find off of GRT's website. I've had a couple of people telling me it will do much more but I can't seem to find out what "more" is. If you know I'd be glad to put it in there. My main reason in comparing these three particular EFIS's is small size. Something that can fitin the panel of an RV-4 without dominating it. lucky wrote: I think what's missing most is the significance of being able to have a display big enough to do split screens. For me it would be at the top of the list if one was designing a single MFD panel. You can see examples at: http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/GRT_EFIS/lst GRT's does do more than you originally listed but those curious can go their website and read more. They also have a comparison chart for what they believe is critical in system to system comparisons and that's the accuracy/stability of their roll/pitch info. So far, theirs is the hands down winner in the under $10K in my opinion. -------------- Original message -------------- > > Geez, give me some credit. I DID say the comparrison was quck and > dirty. :-) My understanding was that the groundspeed and track were > only available if you interfaced with an external GPS. Or am I > mistaken? If so maybe I should change it to show "built in" GPS. > That's really what I meant. Thanks for the correction, David. > > Now, I wonder how many people *I* will anger by having the wrong info on > my web page? Aw, who the (expletive of your choice) cares? >:-) > > David Schaefer wrote: > > > > >I hate to disagree with the comparison and possibly anger someone, BUT the > >GRT unit does indeed have Ground Speed, Track and an HSI. Having flown > >behind one for a bunch of hours now I can guarantee it. If you'd like > >pictures just let me know. > > > >The only concern I found with the EFIS Lite is I believe it only had a 24nm > >zoom range which is only 8 min in an RV! > > > >Regards, > > > >David Schaefer > >N142DS > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > >[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen > >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > >Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A > > > > > >I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS Lite, Dynon D10A, > >and GRT Horizon here: > >http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm > > > >I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the > >Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a > >bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I > >really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few > >other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really > >leaned me toward Blue Mountain. > > > >Gerald Richardson wrote: > > > > > > > >> > >>Greetings: > >> > >>I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have > >>studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of > >>them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either > >>of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My > >>installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would > >>like to have the capability of the attitude & directional gyros, plus a > >>few additional goodies, etc. > >> > >>My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this > >>post, merely gather some data to help me decide. > >> > >>Thank you for your comments. > >> > >>Gerald Richardson > >>Medicine Hat, Alberta > >>Canada > >> > >>RV6A 25366 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > Scott VanArtsdalen > Van Arts Consulting Services > 3848 McHenry Ave > Suite #155-184 > Modesto, CA 95356 > 209-986-4647 > Ps 34:4,6 > > > > > > I think what's missing most is the significance of being able to have a display big enough to do split screens.For meit would be at the top of the list if one was designing a single MFD panel. You can see examples at: http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/GRT_EFIS/lst GRT's does do more than youoriginally listed but those curious can go their website and read more. They also have a comparison chart for what they believe is critical in system to system comparisons and that's the accuracy/stability of their roll/pitch info. So far, theirs is the hands down winner inthe under $10K inmy opinion. -------------- Original message -------------- -- RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen Geez, give me some credit. I DID say the comparrison was quck and dirty. :-) My understanding was that the groundspeed and track were only available if you interfaced with an external GPS. Or am I mistaken? If so maybe I should change it to show "built in" GPS. That's really what I meant. Thanks for the correction, David. Now, I wonder how many people *I* will anger by having the wrong info on my web page? Aw, who the (expletive of your choice) cares? :-) David Schaefer wrote: -- RV-List message posted by: "David Schaefer" I hate to disagree with the comparison and possibly anger some one, BUT the GRT unit does indeed have Ground Speed, Track and an HSI. Having flown behind one for a bunch of hours now I can guarantee it. If you'd like pictures just let me know. The only concern I found with the EFIS Lite is I believe it only had a 24nm zoom range which is only 8 min in an RV! Regards, David Schaefer N142DS -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A -- RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS L ite, Dynon D10A, and GRT Horizon here: http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really leaned me toward Blue Mountain. Gerald Richardson wrote: -- RV-List message posted by: Gerald Richardson Greetings: I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would like to have the capability of the attitude directional gyros, plus a few additional goodies, etc. My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this post, merely gather some data to help me decide. Thank you for your comments. Gerald Richardson Medicine Hat, Alberta Canada RV6A 25366 -- Scott VanArtsdal en Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 il Forum - atronics.com/emaillists -- 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 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 18, 2004
From: Bill VonDane <bill(at)vondane.com>
Subject: Re: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
it will do engine monitoring too I believe... -Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: <Kathleen(at)rv7.us> Subject: RE: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A So, why didn't you compare the Blue Mountain Sport? It is sized and priced like the GRT, but a somewhat different product in that it focuses on navigation rather than engine instruments as it's additional feature set and it has terrain data? Just curious.... Kathleen Evans www.rv7.us -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott Vanartsdalen Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A Those are good points. I pretty much got all I could find off of GRT's website. I've had a couple of people telling me it will do much more but I can't seem to find out what "more" is. If you know I'd be glad to put it in there. My main reason in comparing these three particular EFIS's is small size. Something that can fitin the panel of an RV-4 without dominating it. lucky wrote: I think what's missing most is the significance of being able to have a display big enough to do split screens. For me it would be at the top of the list if one was designing a single MFD panel. You can see examples at: http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/GRT_EFIS/lst GRT's does do more than you originally listed but those curious can go their website and read more. They also have a comparison chart for what they believe is critical in system to system comparisons and that's the accuracy/stability of their roll/pitch info. So far, theirs is the hands down winner in the under $10K in my opinion. -------------- Original message -------------- > > Geez, give me some credit. I DID say the comparrison was quck and > dirty. :-) My understanding was that the groundspeed and track were > only available if you interfaced with an external GPS. Or am I > mistaken? If so maybe I should change it to show "built in" GPS. > That's really what I meant. Thanks for the correction, David. > > Now, I wonder how many people *I* will anger by having the wrong info on > my web page? Aw, who the (expletive of your choice) cares? >:-) > > David Schaefer wrote: > > > > >I hate to disagree with the comparison and possibly anger someone, BUT the > >GRT unit does indeed have Ground Speed, Track and an HSI. Having flown > >behind one for a bunch of hours now I can guarantee it. If you'd like > >pictures just let me know. > > > >The only concern I found with the EFIS Lite is I believe it only had a 24nm > >zoom range which is only 8 min in an RV! > > > >Regards, > > > >David Schaefer > >N142DS > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > >[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen > >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > >Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A > > > > > >I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS Lite, Dynon D10A, > >and GRT Horizon here: > >http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm > > > >I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the > >Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a > >bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I > >really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few > >other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really > >leaned me toward Blue Mountain. > > > >Gerald Richardson wrote: > > > > > > > >> > >>Greetings: > >> > >>I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have > >>studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of > >>them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either > >>of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My > >>installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would > >>like to have the capability of the attitude & directional gyros, plus a > >>few additional goodies, etc. > >> > >>My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this > >>post, merely gather some data to help me decide. > >> > >>Thank you for your comments. > >> > >>Gerald Richardson > >>Medicine Hat, Alberta > >>Canada > >> > >>RV6A 25366 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > Scott VanArtsdalen > Van Arts Consulting Services > 3848 McHenry Ave > Suite #155-184 > Modesto, CA 95356 > 209-986-4647 > Ps 34:4,6 > > I think what's missing most is the significance of being able to have a display big enough to do split screens.For meit would be at the top of the list if one was designing a single MFD panel. You can see examples at: http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/GRT_EFIS/lst GRT's does do more than youoriginally listed but those curious can go their website and read more. They also have a comparison chart for what they believe is critical in system to system comparisons and that's the accuracy/stability of their roll/pitch info. So far, theirs is the hands down winner inthe under $10K inmy opinion. -------------- Original message -------------- -- RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen Geez, give me some credit. I DID say the comparrison was quck and dirty. :-) My understanding was that the groundspeed and track were only available if you interfaced with an external GPS. Or am I mistaken? If so maybe I should change it to show "built in" GPS. That's really what I meant. Thanks for the correction, David. Now, I wonder how many people *I* will anger by having the wrong info on my web page? Aw, who the (expletive of your choice) cares? :-) David Schaefer wrote: -- RV-List message posted by: "David Schaefer" I hate to disagree with the comparison and possibly anger some one, BUT the GRT unit does indeed have Ground Speed, Track and an HSI. Having flown behind one for a bunch of hours now I can guarantee it. If you'd like pictures just let me know. The only concern I found with the EFIS Lite is I believe it only had a 24nm zoom range which is only 8 min in an RV! Regards, David Schaefer N142DS -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A -- RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS L ite, Dynon D10A, and GRT Horizon here: http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really leaned me toward Blue Mountain. Gerald Richardson wrote: -- RV-List message posted by: Gerald Richardson Greetings: I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would like to have the capability of the attitude directional gyros, plus a few additional goodies, etc. My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this post, merely gather some data to help me decide. Thank you for your comments. Gerald Richardson Medicine Hat, Alberta Canada RV6A 25366 -- Scott VanArtsdal en Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 il Forum - atronics.com/emaillists -- 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 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: spin again
From: Scott.Fink(at)microchip.com
Date: Nov 18, 2004
11/18/2004 03:46:26 PM, Serialize complete at 11/18/2004 03:46:26 PM I'm not an instructor, but I have spun 3 different aircraft, and all of my spins have been intentional (mostly). One concen I have with going stick full aft in a light GA aircraft is that if you are wrong and you are really in a spiral, going stick full aft will tighten the spiral and probably remove the wings. Once I had spin training, being able to tell that the G's were very high and I was in a spiral was obvious, but early on I may not have been able to tell in the excitment of the moment. Scott "RV_8 Pilot" Sent by: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com 11/18/2004 01:16 PM Please respond to rv-list To: rv-list(at)matronics.com cc: Subject: RE: RV-List: spin again One last comment - re. the item 3 below (stick back [before spin recovery]), I am inclined to question that action for light GA aircraft. I'll have to try it next time I'm out though. Bryan >rudder and hold aft stick. Once she starts a spinnin: > >1. Power - idle >2. Ail - neutral >3. Stick - Full aft >4. Confirm spin direction with needle >5. Rudder - abruptly full opposite direction >6. Wait a turn, then abrupt neutral elevator. If that doesnt work, I >would >try what I was taught and restabilize the spin and apply hard full forward >stick to see if it will break the stall > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 18, 2004
From: Scott VanArtsdalen <svanarts(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
Come sit in my RV-4 some time and you'll understand. My opinion is that in an RV-4, less is more. Kathleen(at)rv7.us wrote: > >So, why didn't you compare the Blue Mountain Sport? It is sized and priced >like the GRT, but a somewhat different product in that it focuses on >navigation rather than engine instruments as it's additional feature set and >it has terrain data? Just curious.... > >Kathleen Evans >www.rv7.us > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com >[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott Vanartsdalen >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A > > >Those are good points. I pretty much got all I could find off of GRT's >website. I've had a couple of people telling me it will do much more but I >can't seem to find out what "more" is. If you know I'd be glad to put it in >there. > >My main reason in comparing these three particular EFIS's is small size. >Something that can fitin the panel of an RV-4 without dominating it. > >lucky wrote: > >I think what's missing most is the significance of being able to have a >display big enough to do split screens. For me it would be at the top of the >list if one was designing a single MFD panel. You can see examples at: > >http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/GRT_EFIS/lst > >GRT's does do more than you originally listed but those curious can go their >website and read more. They also have a comparison chart for what they >believe is critical in system to system comparisons and that's the >accuracy/stability of their roll/pitch info. So far, theirs is the hands >down winner in the under $10K in my opinion. >-------------- Original message -------------- > > > >> >>Geez, give me some credit. I DID say the comparrison was quck and >>dirty. :-) My understanding was that the groundspeed and track were >>only available if you interfaced with an external GPS. Or am I >>mistaken? If so maybe I should change it to show "built in" GPS. >>That's really what I meant. Thanks for the correction, David. >> >>Now, I wonder how many people *I* will anger by having the wrong info on >>my web page? Aw, who the (expletive of your choice) cares? >:-) >> >>David Schaefer wrote: >> >> >> >>> >>>I hate to disagree with the comparison and possibly anger someone, BUT >>> >>> >the > > >>>GRT unit does indeed have Ground Speed, Track and an HSI. Having flown >>>behind one for a bunch of hours now I can guarantee it. If you'd like >>>pictures just let me know. >>> >>>The only concern I found with the EFIS Lite is I believe it only had a >>> >>> >24nm > > >>>zoom range which is only 8 min in an RV! >>> >>>Regards, >>> >>>David Schaefer >>>N142DS >>> >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com >>>[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott >>> >>> >VanArtsdalen > > >>>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >>>Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A >>> >>> >>>I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS Lite, Dynon D10A, >>>and GRT Horizon here: >>>http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm >>> >>>I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the >>>Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a >>>bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I >>>really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few >>>other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really >>>leaned me toward Blue Mountain. >>> >>>Gerald Richardson wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>Greetings: >>>> >>>>I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have >>>>studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of >>>>them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either >>>>of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My >>>>installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would >>>>like to have the capability of the attitude & directional gyros, plus a >>>>few additional goodies, etc. >>>> >>>>My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this >>>> >>>> > > > >>>>post, merely gather some data to help me decide. >>>> >>>>Thank you for your comments. >>>> >>>>Gerald Richardson >>>>Medicine Hat, Alberta >>>>Canada >>>> >>>>RV6A 25366 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>-- >>Scott VanArtsdalen >>Van Arts Consulting Services >>3848 McHenry Ave >>Suite #155-184 >>Modesto, CA 95356 >>209-986-4647 >>Ps 34:4,6 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >I think what's missing most is the significance of being able to have a >display big enough to do split screens.For meit would be at the top of the >list if one was designing a single MFD panel. You can see examples at: > >http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/GRT_EFIS/lst > >GRT's does do more than youoriginally listed but those curious can go their >website and read more. They also have a comparison chart for what they >believe is critical in system to system comparisons and that's the >accuracy/stability of their roll/pitch info. So far, theirs is the hands >down winner inthe under $10K inmy opinion. >-------------- Original message -------------- > >-- RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen > >Geez, give me some credit. I DID say the comparrison was quck and >dirty. :-) My understanding was that the groundspeed and track were >only available if you interfaced with an external GPS. Or am I >mistaken? If so maybe I should change it to show "built in" GPS. >That's really what I meant. Thanks for the correction, David. > >Now, I wonder how many people *I* will anger by having the wrong info on >my web page? Aw, who the (expletive of your choice) cares? :-) > >David Schaefer wrote: > >-- RV-List message posted by: "David Schaefer" > >I hate to disagree with the comparison and possibly anger some >one, BUT the >GRT unit does indeed have Ground Speed, Track and an HSI. Having flown >behind one for a bunch of hours now I can guarantee it. If you'd like >pictures just let me know. > >The only concern I found with the EFIS Lite is I believe it only had a 24nm >zoom range which is only 8 min in an RV! > >Regards, > >David Schaefer >N142DS > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com >[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A > >-- RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen > >I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS L >ite, Dynon D10A, >and GRT Horizon here: >http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm > >I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the >Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a >bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I >really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few >other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really >leaned me toward Blue Mountain. > >Gerald Richardson wrote: > > >-- RV-List message posted by: Gerald Richardson > >Greetings: > >I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have >studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both >of >them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either >of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My >installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would >like to have the capability of the attitude directional gyros, plus a >few additional goodies, etc. > >My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this >post, merely gather some data to help me decide. > >Thank you for your comments. > >Gerald Richardson >Medicine Hat, Alberta >Canada > >RV6A 25366 > > > > -- Scott VanArtsdalen Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 18, 2004
From: Louis Willig <larywil(at)comcast.net>
Subject: SPINS in an RV
Hi gang, Most of us have been following this thread for the past week, and most of us have learned a few things from these discussions. However, no one has yet mentioned the name of Herman Dierks. I have never met Herman, but we corresponded several years ago when I first decided to try spinning my -4. Herman is a very serious and competent IAC aerobatic competitor. He owned an RV-4 and actually did a study on the spin characteristics of his aircraft. I think that everyone on this list who has an interest in spins in an RV should read his posts of March 12, 1996 and March 18, 1996. You mmight want to read them twice. They are loaded with information. The two things I took away from his post are (1) the RV-4 enters and recovers from spins using standard techniques. Its spin rate is faster and it take a little longer to recover, but it is pretty standard. And (2), keep the stick back when giving anti-spin rudder. Popping the stick will increase the spin rate appreciably, and probably put you into an inverted spin. A recent post mentioned that pulling the stick back might pull the wings off if you are in a spiral instead of a spin. My first thought about this statement is that you had to have had the stick pretty far back to get into the spin ( we're talking now about practice of standard spins and recovery), therefore you are not pulling the stick back. You are simply keeping it back. In a conversation with Herman several years ago, He said that keeping the stick back keeps the nose up a little and keeps the spin rate down. By the way, Herman's test showed that the decent rate in a spinning RV-4 is about 100 mph or about 9000 ft/ min. Lastly, there is another expert on this list. Matt ( Big D) Dralle. Matt's archives retain Herman Dierks' post. So I was able to bring them up. Here they are: From: <mailto:dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>dierks(at)austin.ibm.com Subject: <http://www.matronics.com/searching/getmsg_script.cgi?INDEX=11922402?KEYS=spins_&_rv-4?LISTNAME=RV?HITNUMBER=79?SERIAL=1651471345?SHOWBUTTONS=NO>Some accurate statistics on Spins in RV-4 Date: Mar 12, 1996 A few weeks back, there was a discussion of spins in RV's. One of the notes posted by Rolf Hankers indicated up to 15,000 ft/min descent rate based on 500 ft. loss per turn and 1.5 to 2 seconds per turn based on his RV-4 test solo. Joe Larson posted a note a few days later questioning the '15,000 feet/minute' as being too high a rate and wondering if this was a spiral and not a spin. I had posted some general info on some initial spin tests but I had not collected any real quantifiable performance numbers. My RV-4 is still in test flight mode and my Pitts is in maintance mode so I decided to to collect some real numbers to determine who was correct. The following numbers were collected in my RV-4 solo with 1/4 fuel. My plane has the Sensenich fixed pitch metal prop and O-320-E2D (150 HP). I did a total of six 10 turn spins to the left. I did 3 on Saturday and went back and did 4 or 5 more on Sunday. Starting altitude, 6,000 AGL. Finish altitude, 2,500 AGL Lost altitude is 3,500 ft. Turns 10 turns Recovery 1.5 turns Total turns then is 11.5 Time per turn 2.0 seconds Altitude loss per turn 300 Ft. This all happened in a little over 30 seconds from start of the rudder kick to straight and level. Spins were normal entry, power-off stall, full rudder at stall. The stick was kept full back and with neutral aileron for the duration of the spin (i.e. no aileron input). The airspeed indicator was setting on 0 (zero), I.E, too low to read. The G-meter was reading 1 G. My ROC only goes to +/- 2,000 FPM and it was pegged at -2,000. I timed the rotation rate on turns 4 thru 7 at 6.17 seconds. That works out to just a hair over 2.0 seconds per rotation. The altimeter showed about 300 ft. loss per rotation. That also correlates quite well with the 3,500 ft/11.5 turns = 304 ft per turn. There is also some altitude loss during recovery so the average loss per turn would be somewhat less than 300 ft./turn. So, in 6 seconds, you loose 900 ft. Therefore in 60 seconds you would loose 9,000 ft. It looks like the descent rate is 9,000 ft/min. Its quite a wild ride, that is descending at over 100 MPH straight down. So, the 2 seconds per turn that Rolph posted is quite close. The 500 ft. per turn loss appears to be way too high per my measurements. One thing I noticed is that at the end of the first half-turn, the aircraft is 'tucked' inverted about 15 to 10 degrees. The reason for this is that the plane still has some forward momentum (you stall at 45 mph or so) so after one half turn, the air is hitting the bottom side of the horizontal stabilizer and this pushes the tail back and pitches the plane over in what would be called a 'tucked' or negative down line in aerobatic terms. This may be a little frightning to someone not use to doing spins. At the end of the first turn, the nose is back up some as the forward airspeed is then pushing on the top of the HS. Also, it takes quite a while to get the spin stopped (1.5 turns or so). You have to hold the opposite rudder and simply wait. If someone gets confused, it could lead to problems if they put back in pro-spin rudder. So, what can be concluded from all of this? 1) The aircraft spins and recovers fine. 2) The descent rate is quite high and any ground impact in a spin would be a major problem. 3) The recovery time and consume quite a bit of altitude if the spin is fully developed. We have all heard of the theory of putting a plane into a spin to get down through some clouds if we were caught 'IFR on top' (but VFR rated). Yes, that could be done as the spin is a stable configuration. However, you would need a minimum of 1,000 feet celing in order to have much of a chance of recovering with some margin for error. Also, a spin can progress into a high speed spiral or dive if full elevator is not maintained. The high turn rate in clouds would probably give vertigo. 4) I think everyone should have spin training. This is even more of a reqirement if you plan to do any aerobatics. There are a lot of manuvers that can result in a spin of done improperly. If you have not been thru some spin training with an instructor, you will probably panic. I recall back in 1968 (yikes) when I was learning to fly in a Luscombe 8A and a stall turned into a spin. It scared the cr*p out of me. My instructor showed me the ropes on how to spin. That Luscome was a nice spinning aircraft. These older planes did not have 'wash out' in the wings and they would fall off into a spin very easy. All the modern trainers have the angle-of-attack washed out at the tips to keep the tips/ailerons flying. Therefore many pilots don't really know what a plane without washout will do. I think the RV wing is straignt (no twist or washout) so it is not as forgiving as your C152, C172, etc. If you have some training, then if you ever get into an unplanned spin you should be able to recover (and not panic). 5) Lastly, doing spins should be done with caution, especially anything over one or two turns. There was a good article in IAC Sport Aerobatics a few yrs back (I could not find the article last nite) that discussed how seven turns in a spin is a magic number. If the pilot is not conditioned, they will typically loose it above 7 turns. It recommended working up to any advanced spins 1/2 or 1 turn at a time. I can say I felt like a one armed paper hanger trying to do the spins, stay oriented, and count the number of turns and then collect some meaningfull data at the same time. Kind of like rubbing your stomach and patting your head at the same time. I wanted to know how many turns I was doing and that means staying oriented and counting the rotations with visual contact outside the plane. Collecting the data from inside requires focusing on the instruments. I found I could really only collect one usefull piece of information at a time, like time the rate or measure the altitude lost per turn. So, it took a number of spins to collect the data and to get a couple of samples to verify it. 6) I would still like to get some power-on spin info to see what that does to the spin rate and descent rate. Well, I was just going to post a short note on the stats and here it a few pages already plugging up the internet. Herman From: <mailto:dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>dierks(at)austin.ibm.com Subject: <http://www.matronics.com/searching/getmsg_script.cgi?INDEX=12187866?KEYS=spins_&_rv-4?LISTNAME=RV?HITNUMBER=76?SERIAL=1651471345?SHOWBUTTONS=NO>Update to Some accurate statistics on Spins in RV-4 Date: Mar 18, 1996 As I noted in my last posting on the spin results, I wanted to see what adding full power would do to the spin rate and sink rate. In general, adding power will 'flatten' the spin as it causes the nose to raise up. I let the first 3 turns spin with power off and then brought up full power on the third turn. I timed the next 3 turns at 6.8 seconds. The nose comes up a little and the rate slows a little. This compares to 6.2 seconds for 3 turns with power-off so it only slows the turn down about .2 second per turn. I did not get a good reading on the sink rate. After 4 turns with full power, I cut the power back to idle. This causes the nose to to drop again and the rotation rate increases for about 2 turns until the plane is back in equilibrium again. The RV4 behaved very similar to the Pitts as I have done similar spin tests with the Pitts. In looking back over the original data, I see that it takes right at 30 seconds for the 10 turn spin plus 1.5 turns to recover and consumes 3,500 ft of altitude. This would work out to 7,000 ft/min descent rate. That is probably a better statistic as it averages 11.5 turns. In the cockpit, the rate appeared to be very close to 300 ft per 2 second turn which translates to 9,000 ft/second. I expect one can not read the altimeter to +/- 50 ft in these conditions so 50 ft in 2 seconds would be an error of 1,500 ft/min. So, lets just say the rate is 7,000 ft/min minimum. (I added these changes to the attached note below). One other interesting think happened in the last set of spins this week end. I did two spins at idle power just as I had done the previous week. This time however, the engine quit both times after about 4 or 5 turns. The only think I know that was different is that I was on the Left fuel tank this time (and on the Right tank last time). Also the plane was close to full fuel where before it had about 1/4 fuel. The spins were to the left so the left wing is down. Thinking back on this, I suspect it was not getting fuel as in the left wing down for a left spin, the pickup tube may have been sucking air. The one thing that conflicts with this however is that I was able to do a full power spin when I bought up the power in the 3rd turn. Maybe bringing up the power flattened the spin enough to cause it to suck fuel. The tank was at least 3/4 full. If I ever do this again, I will check the fuel pressure next time it happens. It also took about 2 turns to recover with the prop stopped. Then a bump of the starter refired the engine (thankfully). Herman > > A few weeks back, there was a discussion of spins in RV's. > One of the notes posted by Rolf Hankers indicated up to > 15,000 ft/min descent rate based on 500 ft. loss per turn and > 1.5 to 2 seconds per turn based on his RV-4 test solo. > Joe Larson posted a note a few days later questioning the > '15,000 feet/minute' as being too high a rate and wondering if > this was a spiral and not a spin. > I had posted some general info on some initial spin tests but > I had not collected any real quantifiable performance numbers. > > My RV-4 is still in test flight mode and my Pitts is in maintance mode > so I decided to to collect some real numbers to determine who was correct. > The following numbers were collected in my RV-4 solo with 1/4 fuel. > My plane has the Sensenich fixed pitch metal prop and O-320-E2D (150 HP). > > I did a total of six 10 turn spins to the left. I did 3 on Saturday and > went back and did 4 or 5 more on Sunday. > > Starting altitude, 6,000 AGL. > Finish altitude, 2,500 AGL > Lost altitude is 3,500 ft. in 30 seconds (this would be 7,500 ft/min) > Turns 10 turnsk > Recovery 1.5 turns > Total turns then is 11.5 > Time per turn 2.0 seconds Altitude loss per turn 300 Ft. (as observed in the cockpit) > This all happened in a little over 30 seconds from start of the rudder kick to > straight and level. Spins were normal entry, power-off stall, full rudder > at stall. The stick was kept full back and with neutral aileron for > the duration of the spin (i.e. no aileron input). > > The airspeed indicator was setting on 0 (zero), I.E, too low to read. > The G-meter was reading 1 G. > My ROC only goes to +/- 2,000 FPM and it was pegged at -2,000. > I timed the rotation rate on turns 4 thru 7 at 6.17 seconds. > That works out to just a hair over 2.0 seconds per rotation. > The altimeter showed about 300 ft. loss per rotation. > That also correlates quite well with the 3,500 ft/11.5 turns = 304 ft > per turn. There is also some altitude loss during recovery so > the average loss per turn would be somewhat less than 300 ft./turn. > > So, in 6 seconds, you loose 900 ft. Therefore in 60 seconds you > would loose 9,000 ft. It looks like the descent rate is 9,000 ft/min. > Its quite a wild ride, that is descending at over 100 MPH straight down. > > So, the 2 seconds per turn that Rolph posted is quite close. > The 500 ft. per turn loss appears to be way too high per my measurements. > > One thing I noticed is that at the end of the first half-turn, > the aircraft is 'tucked' inverted about 15 to 10 degrees. > The reason for this is that the plane still has some forward momentum > (you stall at 45 mph or so) so after one half turn, the air is > hitting the bottom side of the horizontal stabilizer and this pushes > the tail back and pitches the plane over in what would be called > a 'tucked' or negative down line in aerobatic terms. > This may be a little frightning to someone not use to doing spins. > At the end of the first turn, the nose is back up some as the > forward airspeed is then pushing on the top of the HS. > > Also, it takes quite a while to get the spin stopped (1.5 turns or so). > You have to hold the opposite rudder and simply wait. If someone gets > confused, it could lead to problems if they put back in pro-spin rudder. > > So, what can be concluded from all of this? > 1) The aircraft spins and recovers fine. > 2) The descent rate is quite high and any ground impact in a spin > would be a major problem. > 3) The recovery time and consume quite a bit of altitude if the spin > is fully developed. We have all heard of the theory of putting > a plane into a spin to get down through some clouds if we were > caught 'IFR on top' (but VFR rated). Yes, that could be done as > the spin is a stable configuration. However, you would need a > minimum of 1,000 feet celing in order to have much of a chance > of recovering with some margin for error. > Also, a spin can progress into a high speed spiral or dive if > full elevator is not maintained. The high turn rate in clouds > would probably give vertigo. > 4) I think everyone should have spin training. This is even more > of a reqirement if you plan to do any aerobatics. > There are a lot of manuvers that can result in a spin of done > improperly. If you have not been thru some spin training with > an instructor, you will probably panic. > I recall back in 1968 (yikes) when I was learning to fly in > a Luscombe 8A and a stall turned into a spin. It scared the > cr*p out of me. My instructor showed me the ropes on how to > spin. That Luscome was a nice spinning aircraft. These older > planes did not have 'wash out' in the wings and they would fall > off into a spin very easy. All the modern trainers have the > angle-of-attack washed out at the tips to keep the tips/ailerons flying. > Therefore many pilots don't really know what a plane without washout > will do. I think the RV wing is straignt (no twist or washout) > so it is not as forgiving as your C152, C172, etc. > If you have some training, then if you ever get into an unplanned > spin you should be able to recover (and not panic). > 5) Lastly, doing spins should be done with caution, especially anything > over one or two turns. There was a good article in IAC Sport > Aerobatics a few yrs back (I could not find the article last nite) > that discussed how seven turns in a spin is a magic number. > If the pilot is not conditioned, they will typically loose it above > 7 turns. It recommended working up to any advanced spins 1/2 or > 1 turn at a time. > I can say I felt like a one armed paper hanger trying to do the > spins, stay oriented, and count the number of turns and then collect > some meaningfull data at the same time. Kind of like rubbing your > stomach and patting your head at the same time. I wanted to know > how many turns I was doing and that means staying oriented and > counting the rotations with visual contact outside the plane. > Collecting the data from inside requires focusing on the instruments. > I found I could really only collect one usefull piece of information > at a time, like time the rate or measure the altitude lost per > turn. So, it took a number of spins to collect the data and to > get a couple of samples to verify it. > > 6) I would still like to get some power-on spin info to see what that > does to the spin rate and descent rate. > > > Well, I was just going to post a short note on the stats and here > it a few pages already plugging up the internet. > > Herman ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Fenstermacher" <dfenstermacher(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: spin again
Date: Nov 18, 2004
I meant aft and up > [Original Message] > From: <Scott.Fink(at)microchip.com> > To: > Date: 11/18/2004 5:46:29 PM > Subject: RE: RV-List: spin again > > > I'm not an instructor, but I have spun 3 different aircraft, and all of my > spins have been intentional (mostly). One concen I have with going stick > full aft in a light GA aircraft is that if you are wrong and you are > really in a spiral, going stick full aft will tighten the spiral and > probably remove the wings. > > Once I had spin training, being able to tell that the G's were very high > and I was in a spiral was obvious, but early on I may not have been able > to tell in the excitment of the moment. > > Scott > > > "RV_8 Pilot" > Sent by: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > 11/18/2004 01:16 PM > Please respond to rv-list > > > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > cc: > Subject: RE: RV-List: spin again > > > One last comment - re. the item 3 below (stick back [before spin > recovery]), > I am inclined to question that action for light GA aircraft. I'll have to > > try it next time I'm out though. > > Bryan > > > >rudder and hold aft stick. Once she starts a spinnin: > > > >1. Power - idle > >2. Ail - neutral > >3. Stick - Full aft > >4. Confirm spin direction with needle > >5. Rudder - abruptly full opposite direction > >6. Wait a turn, then abrupt neutral elevator. If that doesnt work, I > >would > >try what I was taught and restabilize the spin and apply hard full > forward > >stick to see if it will break the stall > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Schaefer" <dschaefer1(at)kc.rr.com>
Subject: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
Date: Nov 18, 2004
Quick and dirty is good and no one around here takes much very seriously! :-) You are correct you need GPS. Greg and company are working on an internal GPS that will solve the problem. It's a ways off however. Regards, David Schaefer N142DS RV-6A -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A Geez, give me some credit. I DID say the comparrison was quck and dirty. :-) My understanding was that the groundspeed and track were only available if you interfaced with an external GPS. Or am I mistaken? If so maybe I should change it to show "built in" GPS. That's really what I meant. Thanks for the correction, David. Now, I wonder how many people *I* will anger by having the wrong info on my web page? Aw, who the (expletive of your choice) cares? >:-) David Schaefer wrote: > >I hate to disagree with the comparison and possibly anger someone, BUT the >GRT unit does indeed have Ground Speed, Track and an HSI. Having flown >behind one for a bunch of hours now I can guarantee it. If you'd like >pictures just let me know. > >The only concern I found with the EFIS Lite is I believe it only had a 24nm >zoom range which is only 8 min in an RV! > >Regards, > >David Schaefer >N142DS > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com >[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A > > >I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS Lite, Dynon D10A, >and GRT Horizon here: >http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm > >I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the >Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a >bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I >really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few >other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really >leaned me toward Blue Mountain. > >Gerald Richardson wrote: > > > >> >>Greetings: >> >>I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have >>studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of >>them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either >>of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My >>installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would >>like to have the capability of the attitude & directional gyros, plus a >>few additional goodies, etc. >> >>My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this >>post, merely gather some data to help me decide. >> >>Thank you for your comments. >> >>Gerald Richardson >>Medicine Hat, Alberta >>Canada >> >>RV6A 25366 >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- Scott VanArtsdalen Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us>
Subject:
Date: Nov 18, 2004
Why are the airlines crashing less than G.A. ? Because they are required to crash less so therefore spend the money it takes to accomplish this. You want an eye opener, start following air freighter accidents/incidents. The Ground Loop is another method to minimize personal damage when landing in an unsatisfactory place. Plant it and slam in rudder. I know of this being done in a canyon in a Cessna 180, and the pilot walked away. The gist is to hit at a normal approach angle, then eleminate velocity quickly rather than suddenly. But, as said earlier, one must must really wind up their huevos to pull this off. W ________________________________________________________________________________ DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=u6VcmRDuzmfTMrcPr6vQOyPQdbsEysJtER198LJZGZQ3JrmDFw1sJcNhtOm8FBSOBGn8pkRHDwn75za9+2Jj4WJ1vZCtWa4lOvAV3o1uyU7+IEfr8BSkpWVEsF6af8PD3Ul0cuknzhVhTsWd5vCT8zcbmazuUScwFIRGIC8ftaw;
Date: Nov 18, 2004
From: Dan DeNeal <rv6apilot(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: How did my Mode C report what my Altimeter was not showing?
I was flying over the top of Champaign, Illinois airspace at 6,500 msl heading 173 degrees. I was in touch with Champaign when they advised me of another airplane at my altitude and at my 2:00 o'clock. They then advised the other plane where I was and that I was at 6,800 msl. Why am I off? My altimeter says 6,500. I then realized I had forgotten to set barimetric pressure when I had lifted off from Danville, Illinois just 5 minutes earlier. I called Champaign and asked them for barimetric pressure and after correcting my altimeter it showed I was at 6,800 msl !!! My question is how did Champaign know my exact altitude? Does Mode C always know what your correct altitude is? If so why can't they make an altimeter that is always correct??? Dan DeNeal rv6a N256GD ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: How did my Mode C report what my Altimeter was not showing?
Date: Nov 18, 2004
Your transponder only reports pressure altitude. They apply a correction for barometric pressure there in the tower or facility. This way everyone reports the same, and don't have to worry about people's equipment reporting different altitudes if the pressure changes. Paul Besing RV-6A Sold RV-10 Soon http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software http://www.kitlog.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan DeNeal" <rv6apilot(at)yahoo.com> Subject: RV-List: How did my Mode C report what my Altimeter was not showing? > > > I was flying over the top of Champaign, Illinois airspace at 6,500 msl heading 173 degrees. I was in touch with Champaign when they advised me of another airplane at my altitude and at my 2:00 o'clock. They then advised the other plane where I was and that I was at 6,800 msl. > > Why am I off? My altimeter says 6,500. I then realized I had forgotten to set barimetric pressure when I had lifted off from Danville, Illinois just 5 minutes earlier. I called Champaign and asked them for barimetric pressure and after correcting my altimeter it showed I was at 6,800 msl !!! > > My question is how did Champaign know my exact altitude? Does Mode C always know what your correct altitude is? > > If so why can't they make an altimeter that is always correct??? > > Dan DeNeal > > rv6a N256GD > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jaye Murray and Scott Jackson" <jayeandscott(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: How did my Mode C report what my Altimeter was not showing?
Date: Nov 18, 2004
I recall reading years ago that their is a software program that adjusts all the Mode C returns to reflect local air pressure corrections at each centre. perhaps a controller on the list would be more knowledgeable? Scott in VAncouver ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan DeNeal" <rv6apilot(at)yahoo.com> Subject: RV-List: How did my Mode C report what my Altimeter was not showing? > > > I was flying over the top of Champaign, Illinois airspace at 6,500 msl > heading 173 degrees. I was in touch with Champaign when they advised me > of another airplane at my altitude and at my 2:00 o'clock. They then > advised the other plane where I was and that I was at 6,800 msl. > > Why am I off? My altimeter says 6,500. I then realized I had forgotten to > set barimetric pressure when I had lifted off from Danville, Illinois just > 5 minutes earlier. I called Champaign and asked them for barimetric > pressure and after correcting my altimeter it showed I was at 6,800 msl > !!! > > My question is how did Champaign know my exact altitude? Does Mode C > always know what your correct altitude is? > > If so why can't they make an altimeter that is always correct??? > > Dan DeNeal > > rv6a N256GD > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jaye Murray and Scott Jackson" <jayeandscott(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: How did my Mode C report what my Altimeter was not showing?
Date: Nov 18, 2004
On a slightly different tack, and for those of you who fly hard IFR, without GPS that displays altitude( must be a rapidly-shrinking group), in England to fly IFR in a little airplane two separate altimeters are required. The gentlemen who sold me his T210 years ago had two altimeters in it, after having the sole one he bought it with freeze on him one day during descent for an IFR approach here in the Coast RAnge Mountains; something that still gives him nightmares. I noticed that a business in Calgary is using eBay to sell a matchbox-sized, c-cell powered, digital altimeter; thin enough to stick onto a panel in the vicinity of the stock altimeter, and we could take advantage of being experimentals to back up our altimeters with it until we can afford a GPS that will display altitude. It lists for about 100USD, IIRC. No affiliation with them, etc. Scott in VAncouver ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan DeNeal" <rv6apilot(at)yahoo.com> Subject: RV-List: How did my Mode C report what my Altimeter was not showing? > > > I was flying over the top of Champaign, Illinois airspace at 6,500 msl > heading 173 degrees. I was in touch with Champaign when they advised me > of another airplane at my altitude and at my 2:00 o'clock. They then > advised the other plane where I was and that I was at 6,800 msl. > > Why am I off? My altimeter says 6,500. I then realized I had forgotten to > set barimetric pressure when I had lifted off from Danville, Illinois just > 5 minutes earlier. I called Champaign and asked them for barimetric > pressure and after correcting my altimeter it showed I was at 6,800 msl > !!! > > My question is how did Champaign know my exact altitude? Does Mode C > always know what your correct altitude is? > > If so why can't they make an altimeter that is always correct??? > > Dan DeNeal > > rv6a N256GD > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 19, 2004
From: Jim Oke <wjoke(at)shaw.ca> showing?
Subject: Re: How did my Mode C report what my Altimeter was not
showing? The principle of the altitude encoder in a Mode C installation is that it reads (detects) the static pressure acting on the aircraft, uses this pressure to compute an altitude as if it was an altimeter set to 29.92 inches and then transmits this altitude via the transponder to the ground radar antenna. The ground radar system then takes this information, applies the local altimeter setting and then comes up with an indicated altitude that the aircraft is at to display on the controller's scope. If the pilot's altimeter is working correctly AND the local altimeter setting is set then the pilot's indicated altitude should be the same as that on the controller's display. The transponder's altitude encoder need have no connection (electrical or via static ports, etc.) to the altimeter for this to happen. So the ATC guy always knows your altitude unless your aircraft is suffering from some sort of static problem which affects the pressure being detected by the altitude encoder. That's why an annual static system & mode C check is usually required. There are occasions when it is desirable to set something besides the local altimeter setting so that's why the system is designed to have the altimeter's reading depend on the pilot setting the altimeter. In theory once the ATC radar system knows the altitude of your aircraft, this information could be transmitted back via some sort of uplink and displayed in the aircraft but no one has bothered to come up with such a system. For instance, if you flew out of radar coverage (due altitude or location) you would have no altitude coming in and you would need a backup altimeter in any case. Jim Oke RV-6A Wpg., MB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan DeNeal" <rv6apilot(at)yahoo.com> Subject: RV-List: How did my Mode C report what my Altimeter was not showing? > > > I was flying over the top of Champaign, Illinois airspace at 6,500 msl > heading 173 degrees. I was in touch with Champaign when they advised me > of another airplane at my altitude and at my 2:00 o'clock. They then > advised the other plane where I was and that I was at 6,800 msl. > > Why am I off? My altimeter says 6,500. I then realized I had forgotten to > set barimetric pressure when I had lifted off from Danville, Illinois just > 5 minutes earlier. I called Champaign and asked them for barimetric > pressure and after correcting my altimeter it showed I was at 6,800 msl > !!! > > My question is how did Champaign know my exact altitude? Does Mode C > always know what your correct altitude is? > > If so why can't they make an altimeter that is always correct??? > > Dan DeNeal > > rv6a N256GD > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jaye Murray and Scott Jackson" <jayeandscott(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: How did my Mode C report what my Altimeter was not showing?
Date: Nov 18, 2004
The transponder's altitude encoder need have no > connection (electrical or via static ports, etc.) to the altimeter for > this > to happen. > Jim: Not a connection to the altimeter, per se, but it should be connected to the static system-usually through a "T"off the altimeter or VSI-to avoid transmitting the error inherent in transmitting an altitude sensed inside the cockpit. Scott in Vancouver > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky)
Subject: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
Date: Nov 19, 2004
When I ordered my GRT, internal gps was available but optional (something like $450) but I opted not to use it. Todd told me that I didn't lose any functionality including driving my Trio autopilot by using an external GPS. Also, anywhere in their literature where they specifiy TruTruck you can think of your Trio and not worry about functionality loss. So I opted to sacrifice some panel space by using a small Lawrence 500. I can set it up to either have the lawrence or the GRT EFIS drive the autopilot. It gives me some redundany just in case. Further, I can use the handy sized Lawrence in my car or boat so once I get to some place in my plane I'm not familiar with my GPS isn't stuck inside my Lawrence.... -------------- Original message -------------- > > Quick and dirty is good and no one around here takes much very seriously! > :-) You are correct you need GPS. Greg and company are working on an > internal GPS that will solve the problem. It's a ways off however. > > Regards, > David Schaefer > N142DS RV-6A > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A > > > Geez, give me some credit. I DID say the comparrison was quck and > dirty. :-) My understanding was that the groundspeed and track were > only available if you interfaced with an external GPS. Or am I > mistaken? If so maybe I should change it to show "built in" GPS. > That's really what I meant. Thanks for the correction, David. > > Now, I wonder how many people *I* will anger by having the wrong info on > my web page? Aw, who the (expletive of your choice) cares? >:-) > > David Schaefer wrote: > > > > >I hate to disagree with the comparison and possibly anger someone, BUT the > >GRT unit does indeed have Ground Speed, Track and an HSI. Having flown > >behind one for a bunch of hours now I can guarantee it. If you'd like > >pictures just let me know. > > > >The only concern I found with the EFIS Lite is I believe it only had a 24nm > >zoom range which is only 8 min in an RV! > > > >Regards, > > > >David Schaefer > >N142DS > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > >[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen > >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > >Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A > > > > > >I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS Lite, Dynon D10A, > >and GRT Horizon here: > >http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm > > > >I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the > >Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a > >bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I > >really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few > >other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really > >leaned me toward Blue Mountain. > > > >Gerald Richardson wrote: > > > > > > > >> > >>Greetings: > >> > >>I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have > >>studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of > >>them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either > >>of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My > >>installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would > >>like to have the capability of the attitude & directional gyros, plus a > >>few additional goodies, etc. > >> > >>My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this > >>post, merely gather some data to help me decide. > >> > >>Thank you for your comments. > >> > >>Gerald Richardson > >>Medicine Hat, Alberta > >>Canada > >> > >>RV6A 25366 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > Scott VanArtsdalen > Van Arts Consulting Services > 3848 McHenry Ave > Suite #155-184 > Modesto, CA 95356 > 209-986-4647 > Ps 34:4,6 > > > > > > When I ordered my GRT, internal gps was available but optional (something like $450) but I opted not to use it. Todd told me that I didn't lose any functionality including driving my Trio autopilot by using an external GPS.Also, anywherein their literature where they specifiy TruTruck you canthink of your Trio and not worry about functionality loss.So I opted to sacrifice some panel space by using a small Lawrence 500. I can set it up to either have the lawrence or the GRT EFIS drive the autopilot. It gives me some redundany just in case. Further, I can use the handy sized Lawrence in my car or boat so once I get to some place in my plane I'm not familiar with my GPS isn't stuck inside my Lawrence.... -------------- Original message -------------- -- RV-List message posted by: "David Schaefer" Quick and dirty is good and no one around here takes much very seriously! :-) You are correct you need GPS. Greg and company are working on an internal GPS that will solve the problem. It's a ways off however. Regards, David Schaefer N142DS RV-6A -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A -- RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen Geez, give me some credit. I DID say the comparr ison was quck and dirty. :-) My understanding was that the groundspeed and track were only available if you interfaced with an external GPS. Or am I mistaken? If so maybe I should change it to show "built in" GPS. That's really what I meant. Thanks for the correction, David. Now, I wonder how many people *I* will anger by having the wrong info on my web page? Aw, who the (expletive of your choice) cares? :-) David Schaefer wrote: -- RV-List message posted by: "David Schaefer" I hate to disagree with the comparison and possibly anger someone, BUT the GRT unit does indeed have Ground Speed, Track and an HSI. Having flown behind one for a bunch of hours now I can guarantee it. If you'd like pictures just let me know. The only concern I found with the EFIS Lite is I believe it only had a 24nm zoom range which is only 8 min in an RV! Regards, David Schaefer N142DS -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott VanArtsdalen To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A -- RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen I posted a quick and dirty comparisson of the BM EFIS Lite, Dynon D10A, and GRT Horizon here: http://www.geocities.com/svanarts/efis.htm I'm starting to lean toward the BM Lite. You get a lot more than the Dynon for only a few bucks more. The GRT unit does more and has a
bigger screen but it's kind of spendy for me. The Dynon unit is nice, I really like the built in AOA but getting GPS, moving map, and a few other nice features for only a couple of hundred bucks more has really leaned me toward Blue Mountain. Gerald Richardson wrote: -- RV-List message posted by: Gerald Richardson Greetings: I am nearing the stage where I will require an EFIS system, I have studied both of the above products and am quite impressed with both of them. I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts or comments on either of them such as brightness, operation, reliability, etc. My installation will be in an RV6A and the flying will be VFR. I would like to have th e capability of the attitude directional gyros, plus a few additional goodies, etc. My desire is not to set up a challenge between these instruments in this post, merely gather some data to help me decide. Thank you for your comments. Gerald Richardson Medicine Hat, Alberta Canada RV6A 25366 -- Scott VanArtsdalen Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 Please Support Your Lists This Month -- ============= ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JEllis9847(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 19, 2004
Subject: Re:gluing canopy to frame
I just completed gluing (and bolting) the canopy to the tip up frame on my 9A and debated the same question. Here's what I did. I drilled #40 pilot holes through the side frame only, not through the plexi or the side skirts. I made eight clamps, four for each side, from 2" x 4" x 1/8" aluminum tubing by cutting one of the 2" sides off the tubing and threading a 5/16 bolt into one of the 4" side of the tubing. Each clamp was about three inches long and sits under the frame with the open end of the "U" facing up. After preparing the contact area of both the side frames and the Plexiglas with Sika cleaner and Sika primer I applied a layer of Sikaflex 295UV to the side frame. With the canopy in its final position I used the clamps to hold the Plexiglas sides to the adhesive coated frame for 12 hours. I then back drilled through the frame into the Plexiglas with a #40 plastic drill, countersunk the outside of the Plexiglas for a #6 CS bolt, and then reamed through both the side frame and the Plexiglas for bolt clearance. I loosely bolted the canopy sides to the frame as shown in the plans (but not through the side skirts). I then used the same adhesive to glue the side skirts to the bolted frame and plastic held in place with clecos until it cured. Finally I riveted the side skirts to the frame. I was able to squeeze all but the aft three or four rivets with a longeron yoke. These had to be set with gun and bar. If you clamp the canopy frame to the main longeron it reduces the vibration stress on the Plexiglas when you rivet. The addition of the bolts may, in fact, not be unnecessary. The bond that the Sikaflex creates between the plastic and the aluminum is incredibly strong. The plastic will break or the aluminum will bend before the bond will let go. Hope this helps. Jim Ellis RV 9-A Tip Up finishing canopy ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 19, 2004
From: N13eer(at)aol.com
Subject: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
For anyone looking for an external GPS to drive a GRT, take a look at the Garmin GPS-18. It is designed to hook to a laptop so it does not have a display. It looks like an antenna but it contains all the electronics. The -18 is a smaller WAAS version of the GPS-35 that has been around for years. You can find them for around $150 so I see no reason to buy the GRT internal GPS. Hope this helps someone, Alan Kritzman Cedar Rapids, IA Lucky wrote: When I ordered my GRT, internal gps was available but optional (something like $450) but I opted not to use it. Todd told me that I didn't lose any functionality including driving my Trio autopilot by using an external GPS. Also, anywhere in their literature where they specifiy TruTruck you can think of your Trio and not worry about functionality loss. So I opted to sacrifice some panel space by using a small Lawrence 500. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 19, 2004
From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
N13eer(at)aol.com wrote: > > For anyone looking for an external GPS to drive a GRT, take a look at > the Garmin GPS-18. It is designed to hook to a laptop so it does not > have a display. It looks like an antenna but it contains all the > electronics. The -18 is a smaller WAAS version of the GPS-35 that > has been around for years. You can find them for around $150 so I > see no reason to buy the GRT internal GPS. If the GPS18 is as good as the GPS35, it will be a fine receiver. I have been using the GPS35 for nearly three years and it has proved to be rock solid. Here is a link to the GPS18 for $84.95: http://www.gpscity.com/gps/brados/3361.3.3617845596012577063/OEM18PC.html Sam Buchanan http://thervjournal.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 20, 2004
From: Jim Oke <wjoke(at)shaw.ca> showing?
Subject: Re: How did my Mode C report what my Altimeter was not
showing? Hi Scott; Yes, you are quite right that the same static pressure should be fed to both the cockpit reading altimeter and the mode C altitude encoder and usually with a tee off the static system. As I think we both know, "big" airplanes have a number of static ports scattered about and calibrated (at considerable effort and expense) to provide closely matched altitude readings via an ADC or carefully selected location. Jim in the 'Peg RV-3, RV-6A ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jaye Murray and Scott Jackson" <jayeandscott(at)telus.net> Subject: Re: RV-List: How did my Mode C report what my Altimeter was not showing? > > > > The transponder's altitude encoder need have no >> connection (electrical or via static ports, etc.) to the altimeter for >> this >> to happen. >> > Jim: > Not a connection to the altimeter, per se, but it should be connected to > the > static system-usually through a "T"off the altimeter or VSI-to avoid > transmitting the error inherent in transmitting an altitude sensed inside > the cockpit. > Scott in Vancouver >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: GRENIER(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 19, 2004
Subject: RV-4 with -8 tail
A few days ago someone sent me a message asking about my experience with installing an RV-8 tail to my -4. I messed up and deleated the message. If you still interested please re-send and this time I'll be more careful Ray Grenier N-20RG flying ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Donald Mei" <don_mei(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Dynon vs. Blue Mountain EFIS
Date: Nov 19, 2004
Just some thoughts. I own a Dynon and am very pleased with it. However here are the reasons, I bought it, and would still buy it over the BM unit if I were buying today. A bit of background info. I am a VFR pilot, I purchased the dynon as a "bacon saver", since I love to fly at night. Also, I am not building a new airplane. I was a retrofit customer. 1) Dynon comes with a built in battery backup. No need to rewire aircraft in a "Nuckols" kind of way for redundancy. 2) Company Integrity - BMI released product that was clearly not ready for production. They lost no opportunity when I spoke with them at Sun - n - Fun to badmouth everyone but themself. Greg Richter is clearly brilliant. But that doesn't change the bad taste my discussions left in my mouth. In contrast, Dynon folks humbly plowed ahead with product development and didn't release their product until they felt it was ready. When I asked them about Grand Rapids and BMI products, they praised the products, but pointed out that whiile their competitors were more capable, they were (at the time) significantly more expensive and required a panel built around their products. 3) Free support and updates - BMI requires you to pay for software updates, Dynon does not. I'm sure I'll think of other things. Just to be fair, there are some nice advantages to the BMI: 1) seems to have a higher quality AHRS than the Dynon 2) Certainly more versatile with moving map etc. 3) great little knob for setting things like barometric pressure In summary, if I was building an IFR airplane, I'd give consideration to a couple of BMI devices or a single GRT device. I'd probably choose them over the Dynon. But that was not what I was trying to achieve. My '4 was a light and simple airplane with no gyros, and no vacume system. I wanted to keep it that way. The Dynon allowed me to install a complete attitude/airspeed/altitude/heading system for the price of a single electrically driven attitude indicator. I was also able to install it in about 2 hours on a saturday after spending about another 2 hours making up the harness at home. Hope this helps. Don ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: SPINS in an RV
Date: Nov 19, 2004
> reduce power, let go of the stick, rudder to stop rotation, then fly out. I > recall that the "let go of the stick" allowed the elevator to float to > neutral and also prevented people from inadvertently holding back pressure Not exactly. The idea is that in the spin, the relative airflow over the tail is coming from below -- which can "lock" the elevators full up unless you physically move the stick to neutralize them. The airflow is what's keeping the elevators up and preventing "on its own" recovery from the stall. Simply letting go of the stick, you may find that the stick stays full aft without your explicit involvement. Thus arises the need to take action and move the stick forward and neutralize the elevators (in addition to applying rudder opposite to the direction of the spin). YMMV )_( Dan RV-7 N714D http://www.rvproject.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: spin again
From: Scott.Fink(at)microchip.com
Date: Nov 19, 2004
11/19/2004 09:38:13 AM, Serialize complete at 11/19/2004 09:38:13 AM Yup, that is what I thought. There has been discussion that in a spin you would already have the stick all the way back, and that would be right in a correctly entered intentional spin. My concern was in an unintentional spin or spiral, the stick may not be fully back and if you are actually in a spiral you could break the plane. I agree that spin training is very beneficial and a heck of a lot of fun. When I someday finish my -6 I AM going to spin it (probably a lot). Scott "David Fenstermacher" Sent by: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com 11/18/2004 06:19 PM Please respond to rv-list To: rv-list(at)matronics.com cc: Subject: RE: RV-List: spin again I meant aft and up > [Original Message] > From: <Scott.Fink(at)microchip.com> > To: > Date: 11/18/2004 5:46:29 PM > Subject: RE: RV-List: spin again > > > I'm not an instructor, but I have spun 3 different aircraft, and all of my > spins have been intentional (mostly). One concen I have with going stick > full aft in a light GA aircraft is that if you are wrong and you are > really in a spiral, going stick full aft will tighten the spiral and > probably remove the wings. > > Once I had spin training, being able to tell that the G's were very high > and I was in a spiral was obvious, but early on I may not have been able > to tell in the excitment of the moment. > > Scott > > > "RV_8 Pilot" > Sent by: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > 11/18/2004 01:16 PM > Please respond to rv-list > > > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > cc: > Subject: RE: RV-List: spin again > > > One last comment - re. the item 3 below (stick back [before spin > recovery]), > I am inclined to question that action for light GA aircraft. I'll have to > > try it next time I'm out though. > > Bryan > > > >rudder and hold aft stick. Once she starts a spinnin: > > > >1. Power - idle > >2. Ail - neutral > >3. Stick - Full aft > >4. Confirm spin direction with needle > >5. Rudder - abruptly full opposite direction > >6. Wait a turn, then abrupt neutral elevator. If that doesnt work, I > >would > >try what I was taught and restabilize the spin and apply hard full > forward > >stick to see if it will break the stall > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Kevin Shannon" <kshannon(at)seanet.com>
Subject: Blue Mountain/GRT/Dynon thread
Date: Nov 19, 2004
?? The BM EFIS sport screen is slightly smaller than the GRT according to their websites. 6.25 X 4.3 (BM) VS 7.25 X 4.75 (GRT). I am building an -8 so size is also a consideration for me. Come sit in my RV-4 some time and you'll understand. My opinion is that in an RV-4, less is more. Kathleen(at)rv7.us wrote: > >So, why didn't you compare the Blue Mountain Sport? It is sized and >priced like the GRT, but a somewhat different product in that it >focuses on navigation rather than engine instruments as it's additional >feature set and it has terrain data? Just curious.... > >Kathleen Evans >www.rv7.us > Kevin Shannon ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 19, 2004
From: Scott VanArtsdalen <svanarts(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Dynon vs. Blue Mountain EFIS
Very good reasons. That's why I've been leaning toward a Dynon unit myself. Then when I did the comparisson the BMA Lite began to have more appeal for me. Of course, if it isn't shipping to customers then none of the features are very useful. :-) My philosophy on my RV-4 is exacly the same as yours. Light, simple, day/night VFR machine and panel space is a HUGE consideration for me as well. Donald Mei wrote: > >Just some thoughts. I own a Dynon and am very pleased with it. > >However here are the reasons, I bought it, and would still buy it over the >BM unit if I were buying today. A bit of background info. I am a VFR >pilot, I purchased the dynon as a "bacon saver", since I love to fly at >night. Also, I am not building a new airplane. I was a retrofit customer. > >1) Dynon comes with a built in battery backup. No need to rewire aircraft >in a "Nuckols" kind of way for redundancy. > >2) Company Integrity - BMI released product that was clearly not ready for >production. They lost no opportunity when I spoke with them at Sun - n - >Fun to badmouth everyone but themself. Greg Richter is clearly brilliant. >But that doesn't change the bad taste my discussions left in my mouth. In >contrast, Dynon folks humbly plowed ahead with product development and >didn't release their product until they felt it was ready. When I asked >them about Grand Rapids and BMI products, they praised the products, but >pointed out that whiile their competitors were more capable, they were (at >the time) significantly more expensive and required a panel built around >their products. > >3) Free support and updates - BMI requires you to pay for software updates, >Dynon does not. > >I'm sure I'll think of other things. > >Just to be fair, there are some nice advantages to the BMI: > >1) seems to have a higher quality AHRS than the Dynon >2) Certainly more versatile with moving map etc. >3) great little knob for setting things like barometric pressure > >In summary, if I was building an IFR airplane, I'd give consideration to a >couple of BMI devices or a single GRT device. I'd probably choose them over >the Dynon. > >But that was not what I was trying to achieve. My '4 was a light and simple >airplane with no gyros, and no vacume system. I wanted to keep it that way. > The Dynon allowed me to install a complete >attitude/airspeed/altitude/heading system for the price of a single >electrically driven attitude indicator. I was also able to install it in >about 2 hours on a saturday after spending about another 2 hours making up >the harness at home. > >Hope this helps. > >Don > > > > -- Scott VanArtsdalen Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 19, 2004
From: Scott VanArtsdalen <svanarts(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A
Andrew, You really need to come sit in my RV-4 and tell me where all that stuff is going to go! :-) Andrew Douglas wrote: > >That's why I like the EFIS/Lite G3. If I were equipping a panel, I'd buy two >of them and stack them...have one do the AI thing, and have the other >display an HSI. In addition, install the regular pitot-static instruments >and TC, for the old, reliable and well-proven six-pack. > > That's a great desing philosophy for a guy who's going to do IFR work and has sufficient funds to afford all that stuff. I'm a VFR pilot in a VFR airplane on a canned tuna budget. So, one is sufficient in my case. I'll not start the whole "land without an airspeed indicator" thread again. :-) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 19, 2004
From: Scott VanArtsdalen <svanarts(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: RV-4 with -8 tail
Why not just post it? I have an RV-4 and I'd be interested in hearing about that too. Or maybe post it to the RV4-List so we don't bore the rest of the crowd. GRENIER(at)aol.com wrote: > >A few days ago someone sent me a message asking about my experience with >installing an RV-8 tail to my -4. I messed up and deleated the message. If you >still interested please re-send and this time I'll be more careful > >Ray Grenier >N-20RG flying > > > > -- Scott VanArtsdalen Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 19, 2004
From: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Subject: Re: SPINS in an RV
All this talk about spin recovery, has anyone looked in the manual to see what Van's has said about spin recovery? I know its there in my 8 manual but dont remember what it says exactly. Maybe someone has a few minutes can look it up.......Dan? > > > reduce power, let go of the stick, rudder to stop rotation, then fly out. >I > > recall that the "let go of the stick" allowed the elevator to float to > > neutral and also prevented people from inadvertently holding back pressure > >Not exactly. The idea is that in the spin, the relative airflow over the >tail is coming from below -- which can "lock" the elevators full up unless >you physically move the stick to neutralize them. The airflow is what's >keeping the elevators up and preventing "on its own" recovery from the >stall. Simply letting go of the stick, you may find that the stick stays >full aft without your explicit involvement. Thus arises the need to take >action and move the stick forward and neutralize the elevators (in addition >to applying rudder opposite to the direction of the spin). > >YMMV > >)_( Dan >RV-7 N714D >http://www.rvproject.com > > Scott Bilinski Eng dept 305 Phone (858) 657-2536 Pager (858) 502-5190 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Kosta Lewis" <mikel(at)dimensional.com>
Subject: High Fuel Pressure
Date: Nov 19, 2004
I have for years been running between 3-5 to 6 pounds of fuel pressure depending on I don't know what. Lately I have noticed it keeps at the high end, 5.5 to 6 at cruise, with a slight increase (needle width) with adding the boost pump. At idle, it inches towards 7 to 8, which is redline. No change with fuel tank selection, no change in climb power, take off performance, fuel consumption. No fuel flow meter, so don't know that. Fuel line to the carburetor is clear; screens are clear; nothing in the gascolator screen or sump. I would assume if there was a blockage before or in the fuel pump(s) the pressure would be low. Nothing blocking the lines from the pumps to the carb. No leaky fuel lines. Only recent change: fuel selector valve (nylon innards) that now is very smooth, as opposed to the old one (brass) that had to be lubed every 10 or so hours. Hmmmmm. Ideas? Michael ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "George Steube" <at6c(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: 24 volt batteries
Date: Nov 19, 2004
I would like to use a 24 volt system on the RV-8 I am building. I am looking for a sealed battery that will fit in Van's batteries tray. I also plan to firewall mount the battery tray. Any suggestions. Thanks. George ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 19, 2004
From: Bill Dube <bdube(at)al.noaa.gov>
Subject: Re: 24 volt batteries
> >I would like to use a 24 volt system on the RV-8 I am building. I am >looking for a sealed battery that will fit in Van's batteries tray. I also >plan to firewall mount the battery tray. You will have a hard time finding a 24 volt battery. Two 12 volt batteries will be much easier to find. The Hawker Genisis is a pretty good choice. Here is a link: http://www.dmstech.co.uk/hawker.htm Also, the SVR brand are quite good: http://www.svrbatteries.com/battery_page.php?bid=1&vid=-1 I doubt if you will find high-current lightweight batteries in the correct size to fit the stock battery box. It's tough to find the high-current batteries at all. You will likely end up building a custom battery box. > Any suggestions. Thanks. >George > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 19, 2004
From: Bill Dube <bdube(at)al.noaa.gov>
Subject: Re: 24 volt batteries
> >George Steube wrote: > > > > >I would like to use a 24 volt system on the RV-8 I am building. > > >Why??? The battery is heavier Actually, the battery will not be heavier. Your starter will require a fixed amount of horsepower. A 24 volt starter takes twice the volts but half the amps. The battery will have twice as many plates, but each will have half the surface area. It all comes out in the wash. > and things like light bulbs, equipment >(like a T&B) etc. are going to be more expensive. This is very true. > Please tell me what >benefit a 24V system is?? Thinner wire is lighter. Motors are lighter. Alternator "should" be lighter. Relays are lighter. With used avionics, 24 volt is often less expensive. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: RE: GPS18
Date: Nov 19, 2004
Did you notice that it has an integrated magnetic base? I wonder if you can find a place on the glareshield far enough away from the compass or maybe one could dig out the magnet (probably voiding the warrantee). Ed Holyoke -----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: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A N13eer(at)aol.com wrote: > > For anyone looking for an external GPS to drive a GRT, take a look at > the Garmin GPS-18. It is designed to hook to a laptop so it does not > have a display. It looks like an antenna but it contains all the > electronics. The -18 is a smaller WAAS version of the GPS-35 that > has been around for years. You can find them for around $150 so I > see no reason to buy the GRT internal GPS. If the GPS18 is as good as the GPS35, it will be a fine receiver. I have been using the GPS35 for nearly three years and it has proved to be rock solid. Here is a link to the GPS18 for $84.95: http://www.gpscity.com/gps/brados/3361.3.3617845596012577063/OEM18PC.htm l Sam Buchanan http://thervjournal.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us>
"'owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com '"(at)matronics.com
Subject: torque
Date: Nov 19, 2004
Bill, interesting that this is published so. I still don't agree though in spite of that. First the specs for the two always bear out my statement that coarse threads need more rotational torque to get equivalent clamping force. Second, a screw is an inclined plane wrapped around a rod. If one changes the threads per inch one is changing the ratio of the vector forces on the inclined plane by changing the length of the incline, where horizontal force is measured in rotational torque, and vertical force is measured as clamping force. If one inch of vertical distance has 28 threads wrapped around a 1/4" rod rather than 20 wraps then it will be a ratio of 1:1/4Pi x 28 vs 1:1/4Pi x 20. Not sure how this book arrived at this but one can easily test it. Take two equal bolts, one coarse and one fine and torque them on a stack of washers to various equal settings and measure the stretch. I may test this for fun and to set up a lab demo, but I can assure you that I have found fine threads much easier to twist off and fail the bolt, more than I care to admit. The reason the engine manufacturer uses coarse thread studs is the fine threads in aluminum are not physically strong enough at their bases. The advantage of studs is that since they are force fit they load the aluminum threads into compression, so for them to fail they need to be pulled hard enough to over come that compression and then overcome the shear strength of the thread. Hence the rule, never replace a stud with a bolt. They are also one of the more rare applications where studs of two thread sizes are commonly used. The coarse portion goes into the aluminum case and the fine goes into the steel nut. W From: Bill Dube <bdube(at)al.noaa.gov> Subject: Re: RV-List: Torque >The reason is with the exception of reciprocating engines most aircraft >fasteners are fine thread, most auto fasteners are coarse thread. Since the >torque values are much higher for NCT to get equal clamping force, one's arm >doesn't need to be that sensitive to get fairly close. It turns out that the pitch of the thread drops out of the equation. The clamping force is a function of the diameter, torque, and the surface friction. Surprisingly, the thread pitch is not a factor. T = K x Fi x d where T = torque, K ~ 0.20, Fi = clamping force, d = bolt diameter (Page #378, Mechanical Engineering Design, Shigley and Mitchell, 1983, McGraw Hill) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Wheeler North <wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us>
"'owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com '"(at)matronics.com
Subject: Fuel pressure
Date: Nov 20, 2004
Miguel, this is the second time I have heard of this, in the last case the FP needed to be replaced. The unit was installed with an Ellison carb and the excessive pressure caused it to run very rough. (I'm guessing rich, but I didn't get to see it run) The only thing we could think of was either the diaphrams stiffened up or the spring that sits between the lever and the diaphram plate got guued up enough to not be as springy. In any event a new pump fixed the rough running. If you have an M/S carb the rough running shouldn't happen, but I don't know what the rest of the failure pattern is for the pump, as it was changed out right then. The other note was that the change wasn't gradual. One flight it was OK and the next flight it started up just south of Vans, and they landed in Salem. Certainly would consider a different gauge for an instrument check. Also passed this by a good ole boy in Schellville who made a living for many years rebuilding things like fuel pumps and he had never heard of it. If you keep flying that pump, make sure the boost is solid and can flow bypass the engine pump. W PS, sorry for talking about an RV problem, I'll try to avoid that in the future. :{O Lets see,,, RVs spin better with a tailwheel, interior primer, tip up cigar holder, but to recover you must nuke a fat gay whale for Jesus while singing galic ballads in hebrew and while attempting the Heimlich manuver on your knee that is opposite the direction of spin. And they pay people to train you how to do this. From: "Kosta Lewis" <mikel(at)dimensional.com> Subject: RV-List: High Fuel Pressure I have for years been running between 3-5 to 6 pounds of fuel pressure depending on I don't know what. Lately I have noticed it keeps at the high end, 5.5 to 6 at cruise, with a slight increase (needle width) with adding the boost pump. At idle, it inches towards 7 to 8, which is redline. No change with fuel tank selection, no change in climb power, take off performance, fuel consumption. No fuel flow meter, so don't know that. Fuel line to the carburetor is clear; screens are clear; nothing in the gascolator screen or sump. I would assume if there was a blockage before or in the fuel pump(s) the pressure would be low. Nothing blocking the lines from the pumps to the carb. No leaky fuel lines. Only recent change: fuel selector valve (nylon innards) that now is very smooth, as opposed to the old one (brass) that had to be lubed every 10 or so hours. Hmmmmm. Ideas? Michael ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Donald Mei" <don_mei(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Dynon vs. Blue Mountain EFIS
Date: Nov 20, 2004
I just want to clarify something from my earlier post. It implied that the person from BMA doing the badmouthing was Greg Richter. It wasn't, it was someone else. Not sure who. Also, while BMA may have released less than production ready stuff. I don't know of anyone who was actually "screwed" by them. I know several people who suffered through the frustration of getting everything right, but as far as I know everyone was eventually taken care of. I used to work in the s/w business. There were a lot of brilliant people who could create great stuff. Greg is one of those people. I'm guessing he misjudged the amount of additional effort and expertise necessary to go from a one-off in his Cozy to a fully reliable, fully supported, efficient to build, production enviornment. Just trying to be fair. Don ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 20, 2004
From: "Ken Simmons" <ken(at)truckstop.com>
Subject: Oil analysys
Does anyone have recommendations for oil analysis companies? The mechanic that just did a pre-purchase inspection on an RV that I'm buying recommended AOA. Vans sells a kit for Aviation Laboratories. Aircraft Spruce sells kits for both. Thanks. Ken ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 20, 2004
From: N13eer(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: RE: GPS18
Ed, I got the GPS 18 as a test unit from a friend that works at Garmin so I did not have to worry about the warranty. But I split the case and removed the four magnets so I could mount it just in front of the compass. I was surprised how strong those little magnets were. You definitely don't want them near your compass. Alan Kritzman Cedar Rapids, IA In a message dated 11/19/2004 9:50:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, "Ed Holyoke" writes: > >Did you notice that it has an integrated magnetic base? I wonder if you >can find a place on the glareshield far enough away from the compass or >maybe one could dig out the magnet (probably voiding the warrantee). > >Ed Holyoke > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com >[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sam Buchanan >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV-List: Blue mountain EFIS Lite G3 vs. Dynon EFIS-D10A > > >N13eer(at)aol.com wrote: >> >> For anyone looking for an external GPS to drive a GRT, take a look at >> the Garmin GPS-18. It is designed to hook to a laptop so it does not >> have a display. It looks like an antenna but it contains all the >> electronics. The -18 is a smaller WAAS version of the GPS-35 that >> has been around for years. You can find them for around $150 so I >> see no reason to buy the GRT internal GPS. > > >If the GPS18 is as good as the GPS35, it will be a fine receiver. I have > >been using the GPS35 for nearly three years and it has proved to be rock > >solid. > >Here is a link to the GPS18 for $84.95: > >http://www.gpscity.com/gps/brados/3361.3.3617845596012577063/OEM18PC.htm >l > >Sam Buchanan >http://thervjournal.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com>
Subject: Re: Dynon vs. Blue Mountain EFIS
Date: Nov 20, 2004
Don, Your clarification more closely parallels my experience with Blue Mountain. I would be willing to bet that the guy who did the badmouthing was their one-time general manager. I bought before he came on board and was relieved to see him leave. Besides the bad taste it leaves, I don't trust people who badmouth their competition. I have never heard Greg Richter do that. My experience with Blue Mountain has been mostly good. On the plus side, my EFIS/one is a much more refined product now than it was when I bought it a couple of years ago. They have continued to improve the software (which I think was excellent to begin with), adding some features and improving others. They now can sell a package of engine sensors, which wasn't the case when I started with them. On the other hand, I really liked their open and free-wheeling discussion board, until I had one of my rare posts that was less than complimentary of Greg's book Aircraft Wiring for Smart People removed from the discussion board. My post was to point to the location of Bob Nuckoll's devastating paragraph-by-paragraph review of Greg's book, so it is understandable if not acceptable to me that my post was removed. Up until that point, I had great confidence in Greg's integrity. And I have been waiting for almost a week now to get a return authorization number from them to ship my CPU back for repair. Somehow I screwed up a software update and they tell me it has to go back to Tennessee to be restored, but they seem to be too busy getting their latest generation of the EFIS/lite out the door to deal with me. To be fair, I did tell them it's not a big deal because I am a long ways from flying yet. Terry RV-8A wiring Seattle -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Donald Mei Subject: RV-List: Re: Dynon vs. Blue Mountain EFIS I just want to clarify something from my earlier post. It implied that the person from BMA doing the badmouthing was Greg Richter. It wasn't, it was someone else. Not sure who. Also, while BMA may have released less than production ready stuff. I don't know of anyone who was actually "screwed" by them. I know several people who suffered through the frustration of getting everything right, but as far as I know everyone was eventually taken care of. I used to work in the s/w business. There were a lot of brilliant people who could create great stuff. Greg is one of those people. I'm guessing he misjudged the amount of additional effort and expertise necessary to go from a one-off in his Cozy to a fully reliable, fully supported, efficient to build, production enviornment. Just trying to be fair. Don ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 20, 2004
From: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch>
Subject: Re: Dynon vs. Blue Mountain EFIS
>... but they seem to be too busy getting >their latest generation of the EFIS/lite out the door to deal with me. ... That's good to hear! :-) I called a couple of weeks ago to see if the EFIS/Lite G3 is shipping, and they said if I ordered then, it would go out in about 2-4 weeks. Does anyone know if the new EFIS/Lite G3 is actually shipping? I probably won't "need" it for another couple of months, and I want to order as late as possible. Thanks, Mickey -- Mickey Coggins http://www.rv8.ch/ #82007 QB Wings/Fuselage ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "GEORGE INMAN" <ghinman(at)allstream.net>
Subject: Torquing pipe thread elbows for fuel line
Date: Nov 20, 2004
Questions for those who have done their fuel lines. When screwing in an elbow to a pipe thread connection What do you do if the elbow does not face the right direction when torqued? Back it of or torque it more? Also does anyone put sealer compound on the threads? GEORGE H. INMAN ghinman(at)allstream.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 20, 2004
From: Chris W <1qazxsw23edcvfr45tgbnhy67ujm(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Torquing pipe thread elbows for fuel line
GEORGE INMAN wrote: > Questions for those who have done their fuel lines. > When screwing in an elbow to a pipe thread connection > What do you do if the elbow does not face the right direction > when torqued? Back it of or torque it more? > Also does anyone put sealer compound on > the threads? > > I know some won't like this idea because it adds one more fitting in the mix, but over all I think it is much better solution and less likely to leak in the long run. I use a straight NPT to 37 degree flair fitting then use a 37 degree swivel elbow so I can face it anyway I need to. This method lets you tighten the NPT fitting the correct amount with out worrying about having to turn it in another 180 or 270 degrees to get it where I want it. The 37 degree flair fitting with two tapers forced together make a very tight seal, much better than a pipe thread in my opinion. An advantage to this is you can remove or readjust the swivel elbow as much as you need to, where a pipe fitting should be tightened once and never moved, if it must be removed, it should be replaced. The only disadvantage I have found to this system is it takes a little more room, and sometimes clearance can be a problem. In my perfect world, we would use SAE O-Ring boss fittings instead of pipe threads. Chris W gifts they want this holiday season ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: [VAF Mailing List] Oil analysys
Date: Nov 20, 2004
I use AOA and always used it on the old (non-RV) planes. Here's an example of what they give you: http://www.rvproject.com/20041027.html )_( Dan RV-7 N714D http://www.rvproject.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken Simmons" <ken(at)truckstop.com> Subject: [VAF Mailing List] Oil analysys > > > Does anyone have recommendations for oil analysis companies? The mechanic that just did a pre-purchase inspection on an RV that I'm buying recommended AOA. Vans sells a kit for Aviation Laboratories. Aircraft Spruce sells kits for both. > > Thanks. > Ken > > > Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! > http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM > > Online help on this group at: > http://help.yahoo.com/help/groups/ > > > <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vansairforce/ > > <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > vansairforce-unsubscribe(at)yahoogroups.com > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Oldsfolks(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 20, 2004
Subject: Re: > Re: Torqueing pipe thread fittings
I always use thread lube on these fittings. " Parker Fuel Lube " is the standard of the industry,but there are others. Just put it on the male half of the joint,so you don't get it into the line - it plugs things up in there. The fuel lube prevents seizing and lets you adjust the angle easier,plus it seals against leaks. Bob Olds RV-4 , N1191X A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor Charleston,Arkansas Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 20, 2004
has ... In a message dated 11/20/2004 8:20:49 AM Pacific Standard Time, ken(at)truckstop.com writes: Does anyone have recommendations for oil analysis companies? The mechanic that just did a pre-purchase inspection on an RV that I'm buying recommended AOA. Vans sells a kit for Aviation Laboratories. Aircraft Spruce sells kits for both. ================================================ Blackstone Labs is the ticket! http://www.blackstone-labs.com -N1GV ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "LARRY ADAMSON" <rvhi03(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: Torquing pipe thread elbows for fuel line
Date: Nov 20, 2004
----- Original Message ----- From: GEORGE INMAN To: list rv matronics Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 2:07 PM Subject: RV-List: Torquing pipe thread elbows for fuel line Questions for those who have done their fuel lines. When screwing in an elbow to a pipe thread connection What do you do if the elbow does not face the right direction when torqued? Back it of or torque it more? Also does anyone put sealer compound on the threads? I use a pipe thread compound (Rectorseal #5) for the fuel lines, brake lines, and oil lines. Been using this product for years in the HVAC business & I trust it! Put on pipe threads only, and don't use for metal to metal flare fittings. FWIW, my brake lines have not leaked in 3 years with this product. As to backing off a thread, I'd only back off slightly. As to additional torque, it's a question of how tight you figure it already is. You can always back the elbow out, put some new pipe compound on & try again. Results will vary. L.Adamson RV6A ---end of finish ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Wayne Pedersen" <wayne(at)pedersentransport.com>
Subject: gas struts pull canopy frame fwd
Date: Nov 20, 2004
I just finished installing the gas struts on my -7a tip up canopy. Worked great until I noticed that the pressure from the struts in the closed position pulled the canopy frame 3/16's of an inch forward ! This movement ruins all the trimming filling etc and there must be an easy solution. I have yet to install the canopy. I plan on installing the canopy without the struts hooked up and when the canopy is in it permanent position will it hold the frame in the proper place ? Thanks for the help Wayne S.Alberta RV 7a canopy --- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 20, 2004
From: "thomas a. sargent" <sarg314(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: gas struts pull canopy frame fwd
Wayne: Have you installed the canopy stiffener kit yet? I recommend it. It works pretty good. Failing that I do know one builder who installed some nylon blocks just forward of the canopy frame on each side to take the force when the canopy is closed. Mine hasn't been on enough to tell, but I don't think I need the nylon blocks. Wayne Pedersen wrote: > >I just finished installing the gas struts on my -7a tip up canopy. Worked >great until I noticed that the pressure from the struts in the closed >position pulled the canopy frame 3/16's of an inch forward ! > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 20, 2004
From: "thomas a. sargent" <sarg314(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Air Flow Performance bracket interference
I just positioned my IO-360--B2B (still on the engine hoist) up against the engine mount on my 6A. So, it's close to, but not at, its final, mounted position. It looks like there is going to be some interference with the 6A engine mount tubes and the AFP throttle and mixture cable mounting brackets. In fact I vaguely recall the guys at AFP mentioning to me a few years ago that there would be a minor problem here. I realize I have to wait until the engine is mounted to make any adjustments, but what is necesary? Do I just grind away the interfering portions of the brackets? Does any one have any pictures of what they did with their 6A + IO360 + AFP configuration? Thanks __ Tom Sargent RV-6A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Air Flow Performance bracket interference
Date: Nov 20, 2004
> interference > with the 6A engine mount tubes and the AFP throttle and mixture cable > mounting brackets. In fact I vaguely recall the guys at AFP > mentioning > to me a few years ago that there would be a minor problem here. > > I realize I have to wait until the engine is mounted to make any > adjustments, but what is necesary? Do I just grind away the > interfering > portions of the brackets? Does any one have any pictures > of what they > did with their 6A + IO360 + AFP configuration? > > Thanks > > __ > Tom Sargent > RV-6A Tom, I recall the same thing. I cut away as necessary, and I also fashioned a strut to stiffen the AFP bracket. Seems like this strut went up to a sump mount bolt. Alex Peterson RV6-A 553 hours Maple Grove, MN http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 20, 2004
From: Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: gas struts pull canopy frame fwd
I noticed the same thing. What I did was to put a 1/4 inch bolt in the tooling holes bulkhead forward of the panel, with the heads facing aft. Put nuts on the bolt on either side of the bulkhead, so you can adjust how far aft the head is. When the canopy closes it will contact the bolt heads and prevent it from being pulled forward. It does take some trial and error to get the bolts adjusted right. I wish I had a picture to make this more clear, next time I'm at the airport I can take one if this doesn't make any sense. Jeff Point RV-6 Milwaukee WI > > ________________________________________________________________________________ DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=jHWUbE4jPIpCPdjXvvBnPwFmX5kDdEnDn3BdSu8A2I86Vboj2USnf0jMs7CGE9tL+CtorGxmBlzsdDqj8dz612WcMAxF4GwJsg3+KSSc5tFVRmvoEohUDivmhtQ+qRiiGALmkB0CinlYhoRd80wIMwAi62lCpauRIDXmGM9NCEg;
Date: Nov 20, 2004
From: Skylor Piper <skylor4(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Torquing pipe thread elbows for fuel line
Excellent idea! I absolutely DETEST pipe threads! Your idea is a great way to get the correct torque on the pipe fitting, & use a real fitting to give you the proper elbow orientation!!! Skylor RV-8 QB Under Construction N808SJ Reserved --- Chris W <1qazxsw23edcvfr45tgbnhy67ujm(at)cox.net> wrote: > > I know some won't like this idea because it adds one > more fitting in the > mix, but over all I think it is much better solution > and less likely to > leak in the long run. I use a straight NPT to 37 > degree flair fitting > then use a 37 degree swivel elbow so I can face it > anyway I need to. > This method lets you tighten the NPT fitting the > correct amount with out > worrying about having to turn it in another 180 or > 270 degrees to get it > where I want it. The 37 degree flair fitting with > two tapers forced > together make a very tight seal, much better than a > pipe thread in my > opinion. An advantage to this is you can remove or > readjust the swivel > elbow as much as you need to, where a pipe fitting > should be tightened > once and never moved, if it must be removed, it > should be replaced. The > only disadvantage I have found to this system is it > takes a little more > room, and sometimes clearance can be a problem. In > my perfect world, we > would use SAE O-Ring boss fittings instead of pipe > threads. > > Chris W > __________________________________ http://my.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net>
Subject: Re: gas struts pull canopy frame fwd
Date: Nov 21, 2004
I had the same problem. I redrilled the holes through the aluminum braces that the plastic blocks are mounted in. I did this redrilling after riveting on 1/8" plates on both sides to hold the load of the mounting screws that hold the block in place. Had to move it about an 1/8" as I recall. It was a lot of extra work but it is very solid now after it is all done. I also installed the optional reinforcement kit for the canopy frame but that is worthwhile and needed anyway. 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 flying a virgin plane never flown before. - Richard L. Evans & Larry R Helming ----- Original Message ----- Subject: RV-List: gas struts pull canopy frame fwd > > I just finished installing the gas struts on my -7a tip up canopy. Worked > great until I noticed that the pressure from the struts in the closed > position pulled the canopy frame 3/16's of an inch forward ! This movement > ruins all the trimming filling etc and there must be an easy solution. > > I have yet to install the canopy. I plan on installing the canopy without > the struts hooked up and when the canopy is in it permanent position will > it hold the frame in the proper place ? > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Edward Cole" <edwardmcole(at)comcast.net>
Subject: gas struts pull canopy frame fwd
Date: Nov 21, 2004
I did the same thing, only instead of bolts I got a couple of felt lined furniture feet from Home Depot. Ed Cole RV6A N2169D Flying RV6A N648RV Finishing -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Point Subject: Re: RV-List: gas struts pull canopy frame fwd I noticed the same thing. What I did was to put a 1/4 inch bolt in the tooling holes bulkhead forward of the panel, with the heads facing aft. Put nuts on the bolt on either side of the bulkhead, so you can adjust how far aft the head is. When the canopy closes it will contact the bolt heads and prevent it from being pulled forward. It does take some trial and error to get the bolts adjusted right. I wish I had a picture to make this more clear, next time I'm at the airport I can take one if this doesn't make any sense. Jeff Point RV-6 Milwaukee WI > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "JOHN STARN" <jhstarn(at)verizon.net>
"rocket-list"
Subject: "sunny" So. Calif...
Date: Nov 21, 2004
If you recall we at APV brag about the 360 days we have sunny (windy at times but sunny) weather. Well today is one of the 4-5 days a year where we have less than perfect weather. Yes Georgia today it's snowing in Apple Valley. Not a lot & it melts soon after contact with the ground but the sky is heavy overcast gray with wet snow. Got to find something to do inside 'cause it's 31 degrees outside. KABONG (GBA & GWB) 8*) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 21, 2004
From: JEllis9847(at)aol.com
Subject: Using Sikaflex for Canopy Installation
Gluing the tip up canopy on my 9A has been a real learning experience that I'd like to share with everyone. Several builders have sent me questions about the procedure since a note that I posted to the List a few days ago. Guess that there are several people that would like to know more. I highly recommend the Sikaflex 295UV. (Comes in black or white.) Black is recommended. You will need two or three 10.5 ounce tubes plus one pint of the Sika 209 Primer and one pint of the Sika 229 Cleaner. One pint of each would probably do two canopies. On the front canopy edge I taped, cleaned, and primed about 3/4" on the inside and the outside of Plexiglas. I also primed the edge. I set the canopy down into a bead of adhesive on the cowl. If I did it again I would position the canopy and run a bead of adhesive along the outside edge and let it set overnite. A gap of about 1/8" between the plastic and the cowl skin is a good thing. You can use rubber garden hose washers to maintain the gap. Just be sure not to glue them in. After the adhesive sets you can pull them out and add more adhesive in their place. You can then go back later and run a bead of adhesive on the inside. I built up a fairing about 1 1/4" wide around the whole front edge with the Sikaflex using a curved squeegee and vinyl electrical tape as a guide. The great thing is the adhesive sands very well with 220 grit open coat paper. No fiberglass! You can also paint the fairing for UV protection but be sure to wait until it has fully cured...about two weeks. Ask me how I know. The manufacturer recommends epoxy or polyurethane paint. Something that has some flex to it after it drys is a good idea to prevent cracking. The only screws through the plastic canopy are in the frame sides. I used only adhesive on the canopy bow..no screws. All you see is the jet black primer showing through on the outside..Looks pretty cool! My best advice is don't use too much adhesive at a time. You can always go back and add more where you need it two hours or two weeks later. After starting out with two tubes of the adhesive and doing the front, sides, and roll bar I have a little less than 1/4 tube left. I think it might be barely enough to do the rear window, but since it will be several weeks before I can install the rear window I will probably order a third tube. Once opened I'm not sure how much moisture and, therefore, setting will occur inside the tube. The Sika 226 Cleaner is mainly isopropyl alcohol but, importantly, it also contains a bonding agent for the primer. It's about $10.00 a pint. You wipe it on the scuffed surface of the plexi and aluminum with a lint free cloth and let it dry for 10 minutes before applying the Sika 209 Primer. The primer is about $30.00 a pint. Apply the black primer with a soft brush..flow out a thin even coat with no voids particularly on the Plexiglas because places you miss will show through on the other side. Let the primer dry for at least 20 minutes but no more than 2 hours before applying the adhesive. You can clean the Primer from brushes with lacquer thinner. The unset adhesive cleans up easily with paint thinner but nothing I have found will remove the cured adhesive except sanding. This adhesive is really tough stuff. It cures like very hard, tough rubber...you almost can't pull it apart and the bond it makes to Plexiglas is incredible. For more info go to www.sikaindustry.com Look up Marine Applications. You should find a material data sheet and an applications guide in that location. Jim Ellis finishing canopy RV-9A tip up ________________________________________________________________________________
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
Subject:
Date: Nov 22, 2004
Hello! Does anybody have any tips concerning balancing of a lycoming engine or links to comprehensive information on this subject? While performing a corrosion test on my O-320 with assisstance from a couple of friends(mechanics) a problem concerning balancing occured. The previous owner have balanced the connecting rods. My friends think it looks as if they=B4ve used a rough technique when taking off material from the rods. But they are not sure if it is ok. The engine has run 850 hours trouble free hours since balancing. When I=FFou read the Lycoming manual they do not recommend internal balancing, but now that it is done: - How critical is it? - Principles for where and how much material can be taken off the rod? - What techniques should be used? Thanks in advance, hoping for some help as I fell pretty lost!! Tobias Dagoo RV-4 SE-XIO Stockholm Sweden Ps have some pics for anybody interested. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 22, 2004
From: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch>
Subject: Re: Using Sikaflex for Canopy Installation
Hi Jim, Thanks for your note on this. I've got one quick question related to these two comments: >... >My best advice is don't use too much adhesive at a time. You can >always go back and add more where you need it two hours or two weeks later. > >... Let the primer dry for at least >20 minutes but no more than 2 hours before applying the adhesive. Isn't there a problem if you don't put the glue on the primer within the two hours? Probably not a big deal. A friend of mine that built a glastar used a glue called silpruf, which is designed to glue the windows in skyscrapers. He says all the glastar people use this. One nice thing about it is that it is not UV sensitive, so does not require the primer step. Comes in "aluminium" color as well as black and white. Best regards, Mickey -- Mickey Coggins http://www.rv8.ch/ #82007 QB Wings/Fuselage ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JEllis9847(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 22, 2004
Subject: Re: Using Sikaflex for Canopy Installation
Hi Mickey, Sorry for the confusion. If you want to apply additional adhesive to metal or Plexiglas anytime after two hours you should reclean the previously primed area with Sika 226 Cleaner and reprime with Sika 209 Primer. The primer is a very thin polyurethane paint that dries very quickly. I found that if you just want to build up additional adhesive on top of existing adhesive you can scuff the old adhesive with Scotchbrite and clean with isopropyl alcohol. Wait 10 minutes and apply the added adhesive. The resulting joint between the old and new adhesive is undetectable. The effects of UV need to be considered. Sika recommends blocking direct sunlight on the adhesive with opaque band much like to see on car windshields (for the same reason). The Sikaflex 295UV is designed specifically to bond with plastic...plus is has the advantage of being sandable and paintable. I not sure that Silpruf has these properties but may work just as well. Hope this helps clear up the confusion. Jim Ellis finishing canopy RV-9A tip up ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 22, 2004
From: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch>
Subject: Re: Using Sikaflex for Canopy Installation
Hi Jim, Thanks for the info. I'm not sure if silpruf is sandable - that's a good consideration. I've ordered some and I'll check it out. Where did you pick up your sikaflex, primer, and cleaner? Thanks, Mickey At 16:55 22-11-04, JEllis9847(at)aol.com wrote: -----Start of Original Message----- > >Hi Mickey, > >Sorry for the confusion. If you want to apply additional adhesive to metal >or Plexiglas anytime after two hours you should reclean the previously primed >area with Sika 226 Cleaner and reprime with Sika 209 Primer. The primer is a >very thin polyurethane paint that dries very quickly. > >I found that if you just want to build up additional adhesive on top of >existing adhesive you can scuff the old adhesive with Scotchbrite and clean with >isopropyl alcohol. Wait 10 minutes and apply the added adhesive. The resulting >joint between the old and new adhesive is undetectable. > >The effects of UV need to be considered. Sika recommends blocking direct >sunlight on the adhesive with opaque band much like to see on car windshields >(for the same reason). > >The Sikaflex 295UV is designed specifically to bond with plastic...plus is >has the advantage of being sandable and paintable. I not sure that Silpruf has >these properties but may work just as well. > >Hope this helps clear up the confusion. > >Jim Ellis >finishing canopy RV-9A tip up -- Mickey Coggins http://www.rv8.ch/ #82007 QB Wings/Fuselage ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chris Good" <chrisjgood(at)lycos.com>
Date: Nov 22, 2004
Subject: Re: High Fuel Pressure
Kosta, I reported high fuel pressure readings a couple of months ago, also typically at idle power. I first checked the breather, as I saw a report that a breather blockage could cause a high fuel pressure reading. Then I checked & cleaned the sensor contacts. No change. Finally I replaced the sensor. This was on a GRT EIS-4000. Readings have been normal for the last couple of weeks. I guess after 4.5 yrs & 800 hrs, the sensor just needed replacing. Regards, Chris Good. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kosta Lewis" <mikel(at)dimensional.com> Subject: RV-List: High Fuel Pressure Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 10:37:33 -0700 > > > I have for years been running between 3-5 to 6 pounds of fuel pressure > depending on I don't know what. Lately I have noticed it keeps at the > high end, 5.5 to 6 at cruise, with a slight increase (needle width) with > adding the boost pump. At idle, it inches towards 7 to 8, which is > redline. No change with fuel tank selection, no change in climb power, > take off performance, fuel consumption. No fuel flow meter, so don't > know that. Fuel line to the carburetor is clear; screens are clear; > nothing in the gascolator screen or sump. I would assume if there was a > blockage before or in the fuel pump(s) the pressure would be low. > Nothing blocking the lines from the pumps to the carb. No leaky fuel > lines. Only recent change: fuel selector valve (nylon innards) that now > is very smooth, as opposed to the old one (brass) that had to be lubed > every 10 or so hours. Hmmmmm. Ideas? > > Michael > > > > > > > -- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HCRV6(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 22, 2004
Subject: Re: Torquing pipe thread elbows for fuel line
George: 1) NEVER adjust a pipe thread fitting by backing it out. 2) ALWAYS use thread sealant on metal pipe threads carrying fuel, oil or hydraulic fluid. The sealant also acts as a lubricant that will generally let you tighten a fitting enough to get it to the correct position. Nylon fittings for air and vacuum lines do not require sealant. Harry Crosby Pleasanton, California RV-6, flying!!! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JEllis9847(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 22, 2004
Subject: Using Sikaflex to Install Canopy
Hi Mickey, I purchased the Sikaflex 295UV adhesive, the Sika 226 cleaner, and the Sika 209 primer from Jamestown Distributors. Their phone number is 800 423-0030 (also 401 253-3840) . They are a boat builder supply store located in Rhode Island. I have had good service from them, and they sell this stuff in less than case lots. They also take credit card orders over the phone. They also have a web page www.jamestowndistributors.com Because some of these items are flammable they have to be shipped by ground so it could take a while to receive depending upon where you live. If you get some let me know what you think about it. Jim Ellis finishing canopy RV9-A tip up ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 22, 2004
From: Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: New Dynon Software
FYI: The much awaited new version of the Dynon D-10 software just showed up on their website: http://www.dynonavionics.com/docs/EFIS_D10_downloads.html Haven't had a chance to fly it yet, but I've heard that it takes care of the "leaning" issue pretty well. Jeff Point RV-6 Milwaukee WI ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Alderman" <kenalder(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: QB fuselage and wing
Date: Nov 22, 2004
I am a new sub and wannabe RV-9Aer. Trying to calculate avail space, i.e., garage w/loft and small workshop, 12'x16' (plan to extend 4 or 5 ft). Will greatly appreciate stand-alone length of QB fuselage and length, width, thickness of stand-alone QB wing. Thanks. Ken Alderman in Simpsonville, SC. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com>
Subject: QB fuselage and wing
Date: Nov 23, 2004
Ken, If you can make it over to Columbia, SC some time, you can see a finished RV9A and an RV6A "QB" under construction. James 803-238-2113 If it's Saturday around noon, we've headed out for BBQ so come early and join us!! :-) > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of David Alderman > Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 11:58 PM > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: QB fuselage and wing > > > I am a new sub and wannabe RV-9Aer. Trying to calculate avail > space, i.e., > garage w/loft and small workshop, 12'x16' (plan to extend 4 or 5 > ft). Will > greatly appreciate stand-alone length of QB fuselage and length, width, > thickness of stand-alone QB wing. Thanks. Ken Alderman in > Simpsonville, SC. > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Hopperdhh(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 23, 2004
Subject: Re: torque
Wheeler and Bill, I think you are both right! Look at it this way: Say you are going to make two 1/4 inch bolts. I know you don't want to make your own bolts, but this is just to make a point. You take a couple of blank 1/4 inch unthreaded bolts made of the same material with a hex head on them. (I don't know where you got these!) You take a threading die and cut some 1/4-28 threads on one, and cut some 1/4-20 threads on the other one. You will notice that you had to cut away more of the material on the coarse threaded one. This weakened it, so it is not capable of as much clamping force as the fine threaded bolt. Yes, it is true that it would take more torque to get the same clamping force. The reason the torque ratings are about the same for both bolts, is that the coarse bolt would be overstressed if it were torqued enough to make the same clamping force as the fine threaded bolt. Hope this helps, Dan Hopper Shade tree mechanic for 48 years. Engineer for 30 years. RV-7A N766DH (Flying since July '04) In a message dated 11/20/04 2:44:15 AM US Eastern Standard Time, wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us writes: > Subj: RV-List: torque > Date: 11/20/04 2:44:15 AM US Eastern Standard Time > From: wnorth(at)sdccd.cc.ca.us > Reply-to: rv-list(at)matronics.com > To: rv-list-digest(at)matronics.com, apos;owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com& > apos;@matronics.com > Sent from the Internet > > > > > Bill, interesting that this is published so. I still don't agree though in > spite of that. > > First the specs for the two always bear out my statement that coarse threads > need more rotational torque to get equivalent clamping force. > > Second, a screw is an inclined plane wrapped around a rod. If one changes > the threads per inch one is changing the ratio of the vector forces on the > inclined plane by changing the length of the incline, where horizontal force > is measured in rotational torque, and vertical force is measured as clamping > force. > > If one inch of vertical distance has 28 threads wrapped around a 1/4" rod > rather than 20 wraps then it will be a ratio of 1:1/4Pi x 28 vs 1:1/4Pi x > 20. > > Not sure how this book arrived at this but one can easily test it. Take two > equal bolts, one coarse and one fine and torque them on a stack of washers > to various equal settings and measure the stretch. I may test this for fun > and to set up a lab demo, but I can assure you that I have found fine > threads much easier to twist off and fail the bolt, more than I care to > admit. > > The reason the engine manufacturer uses coarse thread studs is the fine > threads in aluminum are not physically strong enough at their bases. The > advantage of studs is that since they are force fit they load the aluminum > threads into compression, so for them to fail they need to be pulled hard > enough to over come that compression and then overcome the shear strength of > the thread. > > Hence the rule, never replace a stud with a bolt. They are also one of the > more rare applications where studs of two thread sizes are commonly used. > The coarse portion goes into the aluminum case and the fine goes into the > steel nut. > > W > > From: Bill Dube <bdube(at)al.noaa.gov> > Subject: Re: RV-List: Torque > > > > >The reason is with the exception of reciprocating engines most aircraft > >fasteners are fine thread, most auto fasteners are coarse thread. Since the > > >torque values are much higher for NCT to get equal clamping force, one's > arm > >doesn't need to be that sensitive to get fairly close. > > It turns out that the pitch of the thread drops out of the > equation. The clamping force is a function of the diameter, torque, and the > surface friction. Surprisingly, the thread pitch is not a factor. > > T = K x Fi x d > > where T = torque, K ~ 0.20, Fi = clamping force, d = bolt diameter > > (Page #378, Mechanical Engineering Design, Shigley and Mitchell, 1983, > McGraw Hill) > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Figgins" <2004nospam(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: elevator
Date: Nov 23, 2004
I am just finishing the left elevator and last night bent the tabs at the cutout where the trim tab fits, the bend does not look very good as I could not position the wood blocks properly due to the stiffeners, the net result is the bend is not sharp an not quite at 90 degrees to the trailing edge. Not sure what I can do apart from buying new skin and stiffeners and starting over. I thought about cutting this area out and making an end cap rib and riveting it in position. Anyone else screwed this area up and fixed it? Strikes me this would have been easier to do first before the stiffeners were installed and the sharp skin bend made but I was following the directions. Dave (irritated on last elevator waiting for wings) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 23, 2004
From: Christopher Stone <rv8iator(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Using Sikaflex for Canopy Installation
Jim... I have not been able to find a source for the Sikaflex 295. Nothing on their website about dealers (that I could find). Where did you get yours? A canopy in my future... Chris Stone RV-8 Newberg OR -----Original Message----- From: JEllis9847(at)aol.com Subject: RV-List: Re: Using Sikaflex for Canopy Installation Hi Mickey, Sorry for the confusion. If you want to apply additional adhesive to metal or Plexiglas anytime after two hours you should reclean the previously primed area with Sika 226 Cleaner and reprime with Sika 209 Primer. The primer is a very thin polyurethane paint that dries very quickly. I found that if you just want to build up additional adhesive on top of existing adhesive you can scuff the old adhesive with Scotchbrite and clean with isopropyl alcohol. Wait 10 minutes and apply the added adhesive. The resulting joint between the old and new adhesive is undetectable. The effects of UV need to be considered. Sika recommends blocking direct sunlight on the adhesive with opaque band much like to see on car windshields (for the same reason). The Sikaflex 295UV is designed specifically to bond with plastic...plus is has the advantage of being sandable and paintable. I not sure that Silpruf has these properties but may work just as well. Hope this helps clear up the confusion. Jim Ellis finishing canopy RV-9A tip up ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Trainnut01(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 23, 2004
Subject: Re: elevator
I made an end rib for the elevator and two for the trim tab. Looks great, but its not flying yet. Carroll Jernigan RV7A Installing the wings this weekend. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Evan and Megan Johnson" <evmeg(at)snowcrest.net>
Subject: titanium tie down bolts
Date: Nov 23, 2004
Anybody have a good source for titanium lifting eyes? I bought the cast steel eye bolts from Vans for the tie downs, and while they are cheap, they are also very heavy. I spent a little time on the internet looking for titanium replacments and the only ones I have found have been super expensive. Any other nifty solutions? Or are you guys all using the cast steel? Thanks.... Evan www.evansaviationproducts.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michael Schipper <mike(at)learningplanet.com>
Subject: Re: QB fuselage and wing
Date: Nov 23, 2004
Hi Ken, I am building a slow-build -9A, but I have completed to the point of a QuickBuild kit, so I went out with my tape measure and came up with the following numbers: The fuselage is 174" long and 47" wide, without the engine mount or empennage attached. The wings are 134" long each, without the fiberglass tips installed, and they are 8" thick at the spar, so count on at least 24" if you stand them on end. Hope this helps, Mike Schipper www.my9a.com On Nov 22, 2004, at 10:58 PM, David Alderman wrote: > > I am a new sub and wannabe RV-9Aer. Trying to calculate avail space, > i.e., > garage w/loft and small workshop, 12'x16' (plan to extend 4 or 5 ft). > Will > greatly appreciate stand-alone length of QB fuselage and length, width, > thickness of stand-alone QB wing. Thanks. Ken Alderman in > Simpsonville, SC. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 23, 2004
From: Bill Dube <bdube(at)al.noaa.gov>
Subject: Re: torque
> >Wheeler and Bill, > >I think you are both right! Look at it this way: Say you are going to make >two 1/4 inch bolts. I know you don't want to make your own bolts, but >this is >just to make a point. You take a couple of blank 1/4 inch unthreaded bolts >made of the same material with a hex head on them. (I don't know where >you got >these!) You take a threading die and cut some 1/4-28 threads on one, and cut >some 1/4-20 threads on the other one. You will notice that you had to cut >away more of the material on the coarse threaded one. This weakened it, >so it >is not capable of as much clamping force as the fine threaded bolt. Yes, >it is >true that it would take more torque to get the same clamping force. > >The reason the torque ratings are about the same for both bolts, is that the >coarse bolt would be overstressed if it were torqued enough to make the same >clamping force as the fine threaded bolt. While it is true that a fine thread bolt has a greater root diameter (and thus a greater strength) it is not true that the clamping force is greater for a given torque. If you do the math for the relationship between the torque and the clamping force, (and you include the friction between the nut and the threads,) you will discover that the thread pitch drops out of the equation. It turns out that the friction dominates. Modest changes in the mechanical advantage caused by thread pitch are washed out by the thread friction. The clamping force directly increases the thread friction force. This translates directly to the torque force. You can prove this to yourself. Torque a bolt to the standard setting. Next, carefully use the torque wrench to loosen the bolt. Measure how much torque it takes to start to move the bolt backwards. It will take very nearly the same torque to break it free as it did to tighten it. This is because it is all about friction. The pitch, even reversed, doesn't make a significant difference. It is like pushing a major appliance up a mountain road (with no wheels.) The weight of the appliance sets the friction force and thus determines how hard you must push to make it move. Because the friction is so high, there is not any noticeable difference in pushing effort between a slight hill and a modestly steep hill. The slope matters ever so slightly because the friction is so large. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: elevator
Date: Nov 23, 2004
Dave, You are not the first person that htis has happened to. some try to re-bend the tabs. And there are several that have cut them off , made a small end cap rib and riveted it in, myself included. I used the smal wedge shaped particle board blocks that cam with the empenage kit as a form and hammered out a new end rib after I tried to re-bend the tab and it didn't come out the way I wanted. Once the new rib was made and riveted in it looked like it belonged there. Good luck, and wlecome to the first of many questions that will pop up along the way. Mike Robertson >From: "David Figgins" <2004nospam(at)earthlink.net> >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >To: , , > >Subject: RV-List: elevator >Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 06:36:55 -0700 > > >I am just finishing the left elevator and last night bent the tabs at the >cutout where the trim tab fits, the bend does not look very good as I could >not position the wood blocks properly due to the stiffeners, the net result >is the bend is not sharp an not quite at 90 degrees to the trailing edge. >Not sure what I can do apart from buying new skin and stiffeners and >starting over. I thought about cutting this area out and making an end cap >rib and riveting it in position. >Anyone else screwed this area up and fixed it? >Strikes me this would have been easier to do first before the stiffeners >were installed and the sharp skin bend made but I was following the >directions. > >Dave (irritated on last elevator waiting for wings) > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 23, 2004
From: Bill Dube <bdube(at)al.noaa.gov>
Subject: Re: elevator
> >I am just finishing the left elevator and last night bent the tabs at the >cutout where the trim tab fits, the bend does not look very good as I could >not position the wood blocks properly due to the stiffeners, the net result >is the bend is not sharp an not quite at 90 degrees to the trailing edge. >Not sure what I can do apart from buying new skin and stiffeners and >starting over. I thought about cutting this area out and making an end cap >rib and riveting it in position. I made a block that clecoed to the rear spar. Seemed to make the job go better. You can snip out the tabs and replace them with a rib that you fashion yourself. Also, when you make the trim tab itself, I found it MUCH easier to bend the end over with a hand seamer BEFORE you bend the trailing edge and put the skin in place. >Anyone else screwed this area up and fixed it? I was not overjoyed with the appearance of mine, but it is acceptable. >Strikes me this would have been easier to do first before the stiffeners >were installed and the sharp skin bend made but I was following the >directions. Probably would be. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: elevator
Date: Nov 23, 2004
There is a tip in the RV-ator covering this. If you review this thing before you move to the next step you'll probably find a lot of good info. Shemp And now we can buy the new and improved version :) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Dube" <bdube(at)al.noaa.gov> Subject: Re: RV-List: elevator > >> >>I am just finishing the left elevator and last night bent the tabs at the >>cutout where the trim tab fits, the bend does not look very good as I >>could >>not position the wood blocks properly due to the stiffeners, the net >>result >>is the bend is not sharp an not quite at 90 degrees to the trailing edge. >>Not sure what I can do apart from buying new skin and stiffeners and >>starting over. I thought about cutting this area out and making an end cap >>rib and riveting it in position. > > I made a block that clecoed to the rear spar. Seemed to make the > job go better. You can snip out the tabs and replace them with a rib that > you fashion yourself. > > Also, when you make the trim tab itself, I found it MUCH easier to > bend the end over with a hand seamer BEFORE you bend the trailing edge and > put the skin in place. > >>Anyone else screwed this area up and fixed it? > > I was not overjoyed with the appearance of mine, but it is > acceptable. > >>Strikes me this would have been easier to do first before the stiffeners >>were installed and the sharp skin bend made but I was following the >>directions. > > Probably would be. > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: titanium tie down bolts
Date: Nov 23, 2004
>Anybody have a good source for titanium lifting eyes? I bought the cast >steel eye bolts from Vans for the tie downs, and while they are cheap, they >are also very heavy. I spent a little time on the internet looking for >titanium replacments and the only ones I have found have been super >expensive. Any other nifty solutions? Or are you guys all using the cast >steel? Thanks.... > >Evan >www.evansaviationproducts.com Cast steel. Install and fughedaboudit. Not worth the calories to save a few ounces. Bought a set at LOE4 from a guy who chrome plated a bunch of them. Cost $14/pair if I remember correctly. Look cool! Brian Denk RV8 N94BD RV10 '51 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: titanium tie down bolts
Date: Nov 23, 2004
Randy Simpson (Ti Tie downs) was working on them. >From: "Evan and Megan Johnson" <evmeg(at)snowcrest.net> >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >To: >Subject: RV-List: titanium tie down bolts >Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 08:01:20 -0800 > > > >Anybody have a good source for titanium lifting eyes? I bought the cast >steel eye bolts from Vans for the tie downs, and while they are cheap, they >are also very heavy. I spent a little time on the internet looking for >titanium replacments and the only ones I have found have been super >expensive. Any other nifty solutions? Or are you guys all using the cast >steel? Thanks.... > >Evan >www.evansaviationproducts.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "james frierson" <tn3639(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: pre-punch question
Date: Nov 23, 2004
I am considering becoming a repeat offender having built a -6A pre pre-punch. From searching the archives it is apparent that no jigs, other than maybe the wings, are needed.The question I have is are the rivet hole the right size or do you have to pre-assemble everything and run the correct size drill thru them? It sure would be nice to be able to take the parts out of the box, debur, dimple, prime and assemble with no pre-assembly. Ethier way will be much better than the pre-historic nothing pre-punch days.... Scott Frierson RV6A Flying ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: pre-punch question
Date: Nov 23, 2004
Scott, The pre-punched holes are undersize. Bummer EH! {[;-)! Jim in Kelowna ----- Original Message ----- From: "james frierson" <tn3639(at)hotmail.com> Subject: RV-List: pre-punch question > > I am considering becoming a repeat offender having built a -6A pre > pre-punch. From searching the archives it is apparent that no jigs, other > than maybe the wings, are needed.The question I have is are the rivet hole > the right size or do you have to pre-assemble everything and run the > correct > size drill thru them? It sure would be nice to be able to take the parts > out > of the box, debur, dimple, prime and assemble with no pre-assembly. Ethier > way will be much better than the pre-historic nothing pre-punch days.... > > Scott Frierson > RV6A Flying > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 23, 2004
From: Chris W <1qazxsw23edcvfr45tgbnhy67ujm(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: titanium tie down bolts
Evan and Megan Johnson wrote: > >Anybody have a good source for titanium lifting eyes? I bought the cast steel eye bolts from Vans for the tie downs, and while they are cheap, they are also very heavy. I spent a little time on the internet looking for titanium replacments and the only ones I have found have been super expensive. Any other nifty solutions? Or are you guys all using the cast steel? Thanks.... > > McMaster.com has them for about $36 each, the item number is 3103T31 Chris W gifts they want this holiday season ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Aircraft Technical Book Company" <winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com>
Subject: Interesting paint scheme book
Date: Nov 23, 2004
Want some fun selecting a paint scheme for your RV? Flying Colors is a really neat full color hard bound book of old military paint schemes from the 1910s to the mid 1970s . There are over 1300 historic examples, many with multi view drawings and detail of interesting nose art and insignias. Even if you don't copy one directly, its sure to give you some great ideas. They are all for your perusal - except the Spad chicken on page 16. That one's mine. This book is now out of print except for the last 18 copies we just picked up from the publisher. The price is $14.95 and I've got no idea why its so cheap. Check it out at this web address. http://www.buildersbooks.com/flying_colors.htm Thanks and happy Thanksgiving, Andy Builder's Bookstore www.buildersbooks.com 800 780-4115 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 23, 2004
From: Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: pre-punch question
There was a virtual flame-fest here a while back about this issue. Let me say 1st that Van's tech guys recommend drilling/reaming the holes with a #40 bit before debur/dimple. Now, here's an exercise for you that I don't believe anyone has 'published' yet. Find the approved range of hole diameters for a -3 rivet. Now go to your kit & measure the diameter of the pre-punched holes (drill bits from a complete drill index can be used for this). Next, drill a piece of scrap (without a backing, as would be the case when drilling skins to ribs) with a #40 bit, debur with a standard 3 flute debur tool & dimple. Then take a prepunched scrap piece (the tail stiffeners in the -7 will have some punched scrap), debur with a single flute debur tool & dimple. Examine both with a magnifying glass & report back with what you see. Last, let me repeat that Van recommends match drilling with a #40 bit. Charlie Jim Jewell wrote: > >Scott, > >The pre-punched holes are undersize. Bummer EH! {[;-)! > >Jim in Kelowna > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "james frierson" <tn3639(at)hotmail.com> >To: >Subject: RV-List: pre-punch question > > > > >> >>I am considering becoming a repeat offender having built a -6A pre >>pre-punch. From searching the archives it is apparent that no jigs, other >>than maybe the wings, are needed.The question I have is are the rivet hole >>the right size or do you have to pre-assemble everything and run the >>correct >>size drill thru them? It sure would be nice to be able to take the parts >>out >>of the box, debur, dimple, prime and assemble with no pre-assembly. Ethier >>way will be much better than the pre-historic nothing pre-punch days.... >> >>Scott Frierson >>RV6A Flying >> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: plaurence@the-beach.net
Date: Nov 23, 2004
Subject: Re: elevator
Dave, I messed up the bend also. I didn't like the looks of the one piece trim tab skin next to the two piece elevator skin with the AEX wedge traing edge. I ordered .020 material with some AEX wedge and remade the trim tab utilizing the original tab as a rivet template. Made ribs at rhe ends using the .020 material. Now it looks the way I think Van should have designed to begin with. Peter On 23 Nov 2004 at 6:36, David Figgins wrote: > <2004nospam(at)earthlink.net> > > I am just finishing the left elevator and last night bent the tabs at > the cutout where the trim tab fits, the bend does not look very good > as I could not position the wood blocks properly due to the > stiffeners, the net result is the bend is not sharp an not quite at 90 > degrees to the trailing edge. Not sure what I can do apart from buying > new skin and stiffeners and starting over. I thought about cutting > this area out and making an end cap rib and riveting it in position. > Anyone else screwed this area up and fixed it? Strikes me this would > have been easier to do first before the stiffeners were installed and > the sharp skin bend made but I was following the directions. > > Dave (irritated on last elevator waiting for wings) > > > advertising on the Matronics Forums. > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Amit Dagan" <amitdagan(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Two deals to look at
Date: Nov 24, 2004
1. The Telex Stratus 50-D is offered at $ 689.00 (free shipping). This is BEFORE the $ 100 rebate offer through 12/31 from Telex. Details at http://www.spinnerspilotshop.com/ then go to this week's special. 2. Only availbale from Sporty's, AvMap GeoPilot GPS has a large, color 5.6" diagonal display in an ultra-sleek 6"x4"x1" design. check it out at Sporty's. This is similar to the AvMap EKP series, in a different package. Price: $895.00 Good price for a large size color display. Use your AOPA FBO rebate credit card and save $44.75 !! Enjoy, have a good Thanksgiving, and may all your wishes come true. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "jacklockamy" <jacklockamy(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Ellison TBI installation...
Date: Nov 23, 2004
Does anyone have any photos or instructions to assist me in installing an Ellison EFS-4 TBI on an Lycoming 0-320? Specifically, the orientation of how the TBI is mounted and how the control cables (Throttle and Mixture) are run/connected. Thanks in advance, Jack Lockamy Camarillo, CA -7A FWF ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "D Paul Deits" <pdeits(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Control stick grips
Date: Nov 23, 2004
What controls do listers recommend on the stick grips. Plane is RV7A with electric ailerons, stabilizer, and flaps; autopilot,comm(maybe two), etc. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 24, 2004
Subject: Re: Control stick grips
In a message dated 11/23/2004 9:07:03 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, pdeits(at)comcast.net writes: What controls do listers recommend on the stick grips. ================================= Just push to talk, trim and ... uh .. machine guns. GV (RV-6A N1GV, Flying 725hrs) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <sears(at)searnet.com>
Subject: Re: pre-punch question (matched holes)
Date: Nov 24, 2004
> I am considering becoming a repeat offender having built a -6A pre > pre-punch. From searching the archives it is apparent that no jigs, other > than maybe the wings, are needed.The question I have is are the rivet hole > the right size or do you have to pre-assemble everything and run the correct > size drill thru them? It sure would be nice to be able to take the parts out > of the box, debur, dimple, prime and assemble with no pre-assembly. Ethier > way will be much better than the pre-historic nothing pre-punch days.... > I'm a repeat offender with a -6A flying; and, I helped Jim Render build his QB-9A. Believe me, the newer kits are much better. My -7A is a delight to work on, except for the tanks I'm building now. I still haven't learned how to keep the sealer off of me and everything else I get around. :-) The matched hole question continues to come up. Charlie England told you about the flame fest that went on, a while back. I was one of the participants in that when I challenged the reason for match drilling. The other side of the argument was saying one had to match drill because the holes in the punch process are pretty ugly and can crack later. Even though they were correct about the ugliness of the holes, Van never mentions that in the manual, that I could find. His reason for it is alignment. If everything matches, it seemed logical that one could skip the match drilling. With that said, let me suggest that you match drill the holes, as instructed in the manual. Now that I've gotten well into my kit, there is no way I could have done it without the matched drill process and feel good about it. The holes don't line up perfectly, as one would think. The holes are also undersized; so, dimpling without drilling would put extra strain on those holes during the dimpling process. Yeah, it took me a lot longer to do this than some of our faster builders; but, I still did it and am glad I did. This is from a guy who might have taken that shortcut if he could have felt good about it. Not so. As for the drills test Charlie suggested, Pat Patterson and I did try testing three sizes. I found that the #41 works best for me and was suggested some time ago as a better one to use than a #40. Either works well; but, I prefer the #41. Oh, yeah. I also deburred all holes before dimpling. Then, I cleaned out the dimpled holes a little with a debur tool before I set the rivets. That extra work should make my opponents in that discussion really happy. :-) As for jigs, you're going to read about those who built their kits with no jigs. Fine. I'm not going to challenge those who have built without them because they may have done just fine without them; but, I've found that jigs are necessary for me. I was lucky to find a tail kit near completion and bought it. It had a few things that I had to redo; but, it was pretty straight. The elevators do have a tiny bit of twist that I don't like; but, they'll be just fine, as is. The rudder was different. It had quite a bit. Did the builder use a jig? I'd say not. I was fortunate enough to be able to get the replacement rudder for free because the one I purchased didn't have the larger rudder. I found that I had to build the rudder in a simple jig to keep it from twisting. I also put the wings in a jig and found that they don't stay straight with the punched holes, either. I had to twist them back straight and match drilled with the structure held firmly in a jig. I plan on using a simple jig, and the plump bobs method on the ailerons and flaps, as well. The fuse may be a different matter; but, I'm having my doubts, at the moment. We'll see. Let's just say I haven't tossed out my old -6A fuselage jig, yet. :-) Jim Sears in KY RV-6A N198JS (Scooter) RV-7A #70317 (Building wings, fuse to ship this month) EAA Tech Counselor ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Control stick grips
Date: Nov 24, 2004
> What controls do listers recommend on the stick grips. > > Plane is RV7A with electric ailerons, stabilizer, and flaps; > autopilot,comm(maybe two), etc. PTT, elevator trim. You may have to decide between aileron trim and autopilot disconnect and control wheel steering, if your a/p is so equipped, depending on how many buttons your stick has. Better to not put the flaps on the stick, though. Alex Peterson RV6-A 554 hours Maple Grove, MN http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry Simpson" <simpsonl(at)tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Stick Grip Controls
Date: Nov 24, 2004
PTT (Comm), Pitch, Roll, Flaps, Ident, Landing, Strobes. pdeits(at)comcast.net> What controls do listers recommend on the stick grips. Plane is RV7A with electric ailerons, stabilizer, and flaps; autopilot,comm(maybe two), etc. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky)
Subject: Control stick grips
Date: Nov 24, 2004
I say to put the flaps on the stick. I like not having to take your hands off of stick and throttle during pattern work. Just put that switch top right if you are flying with your right hand on the stick (hardest to reach accidentally). The newer Ray Allen g307 or whatever it's called with the coolie hat trim button allows you to wire direct to the trim servos without having to mess with relays. Further, the airshow flap positioning system (sold by van) allows you to move the flaps with a simple button click without having to hold the buttom down the whole time plus it moves the flaps up and down to pre-set 10, 20, and 40 degrees without you having to guess where your flaps are at any given time doing it manually and w/o a flap setting indicator. -------------- Original message -------------- > > > > What controls do listers recommend on the stick grips. > > > > Plane is RV7A with electric ailerons, stabilizer, and flaps; > > autopilot,comm(maybe two), etc. > > PTT, elevator trim. You may have to decide between aileron trim and > autopilot disconnect and control wheel steering, if your a/p is so equipped, > depending on how many buttons your stick has. > > Better to not put the flaps on the stick, though. > > Alex Peterson > RV6-A 554 hours > Maple Grove, MN > > http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/ > > > > > > I say to put the flaps on the stick. I like not having to take your hands off of stick and throttle during pattern work. Just put that switch top right if you are flying with your right hand on the stick (hardest to reach accidentally). The newer Ray Allen g307 or whatever it's called with the coolie hat trim button allows you to wire direct to the trim servos without having to mess with relays. Further, the airshow flap positioning system (sold by van) allows you to move the flaps with a simple button click without having to hold the buttom down the whole time plus it moves the flaps up and down to pre-set 10, 20, and 40 degrees without you having to guess where your flaps are at any given time doing it manually and w/o a flap setting indicator. -------------- Original message -------------- -- RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" What controls do listers recommend on the stick grips. Plane is RV7A with electric ailerons, stabilizer, and flaps; autopilot,comm(maybe two), etc. PTT, elevator trim. You may have to decide between aileron trim and autopilot disconnect and control wheel steering, if your a/p is so equipped, depending on how many buttons your stick has. Better to not put the flaps on the stick, though. Alex Peterson RV6-A 554 hours Maple Grove, MN http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/ ====================================== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ken Brooks" <kenbrooks(at)charter.net>
Subject: Control stick grips
Date: Nov 24, 2004
In a message dated 11/23/2004 9:07:03 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, pdeits(at)comcast.net writes: "What controls do listers recommend on the stick grips?" We all love to say "Here's what I have...", so here's what I have: Infinity Stick Grips with 1. trigger finger PTT 2. coolie hat 4-way electric trim 3. left of trim coolie is mini-toggle for flaps (using Van's flap positioning system). Momentary down for 10-20-40, momentary up for full up 4. right of coolie is engine start button. After ground start, we have panel toggle to disable "stick start button." 5. mid-grip on left is momentary autopilot disconnect button 6. bottom back side under pinkie finger is mini-toggle mounted side- side for (push with pinkie) taxi light on, center is all off, (pull with pinkie) taxi and landing light on. You just need to think through the possible functions and decide which you'd most like to have. This is as individual as anything else associated with the building process, but fun to ponder. As always, YMMV. Ken Brooks RV8QB N1903P - resvd Fiberglassing Forever - Yuck! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <quinn.talley(at)cox.net>
Subject: Phoenix RV 10 Builders?
Date: Nov 24, 2004
Hi, I'm a novice RV builder working on the RV10 and looking for a Phoenix-area RV10 builders group. Are there any RV10 builders or builders groups in Phoenix? Would love to connect. Quinn Talley 40295 Tail Cone ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: Control stick grips
Date: Nov 24, 2004
Be careful putting flaps on the stick. I inadvertently hit the flaps while looking at a flight guide at 190MPH! Items I think shouldn't be on there: -Engine start. You start it once per flight. It's not that hard to reach up to the panel. Yeah, if you start a taildragger you need to hold the stick back, but taildraggers have been started for 100 years without having a starter on the stick. -Ident-How often are you asked to ident? I'm a CFI in Phoenix, and I fly everyday. I might get asked to ident 3-5 times a week. -Landing light. Items that should be on there: PTT Autopilot disconnect/engage Electric trim (although I now prefer manual, but that's a different discussion!) I had all kinds of dreams of what should be on my Infinity stick grip. I had flaps, trim and PTT. It was alot of wiring, and because of my inadvertent flap operation at 190MPH, I wouldn't do that again. Another thing to consider is inadvertently hitting the wrong switch when you are unfamiliar. I would most definately, put a disconnect switch for the passeger side to make the stick dormant when you don't have someone flying from that side. Also, the wiring becomes VERY complex when you start adding more features. Especially when you have to include relays and such to run higher current items. Paul Besing RV-6A Sold RV-10 Soon http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software http://www.kitlog.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "D Paul Deits" <pdeits(at)comcast.net> Subject: RV-List: Control stick grips > > What controls do listers recommend on the stick grips. > > Plane is RV7A with electric ailerons, stabilizer, and flaps; autopilot,comm(maybe two), etc. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 24, 2004
From: Finn Lassen <finn.lassen(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: The Real Canopy Open In Flight Question
No need to sacrifice the airplane, just the canopy, and maybe a passenger. Make sure the pilot wears goggles! Of course if the canopy hits and mangles the tail section the pilot had better wear a chute too! Finn DEAN PSIROPOULOS wrote: >I've got an idea Sam. A while back Van retired one of the very early RV-6s they had used as a demo ride for years. "Ol Blue" as she was affectionately called, is still tucked away in his personal hangar. Maybe we could get him to sacrifice her for a real world experiment on this canopy jettison thing!? You'd have to find someone willing to put thier tush on the line to do the test (one time only). Hmmm??? Naaaa..... too risky! Stilllllllll........ :-) > > ________________________________________________________________________________ DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=lao2eJB4iUP9tzjWR8SBOKgYrrqvA+pXjBAXiALEeSUTR8xTlpYYDdjvaMOt+gf4LohacSIx0pfjZiDTqcUUxOGVmPdhqnb6Ij8EFQBgWGvOsyDbhuuzi3miE/87r13DpryKSYFm6qadvQLRGovtxvZatYzK+x42IG6oAkR7gEU;
Date: Nov 24, 2004
From: mark phipps <skydive80020(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Ol Blue
Ol Blue is still flying daily for transition training with Mike Seager. She has over 3600 hours, on her third engine and still feels and flys like a new airplane. Mark Phipps, N242RP Finn Lassen wrote: No need to sacrifice the airplane, just the canopy, and maybe a passenger. Make sure the pilot wears goggles! Of course if the canopy hits and mangles the tail section the pilot had better wear a chute too! Finn DEAN PSIROPOULOS wrote: >I've got an idea Sam. A while back Van retired one of the very early RV-6s they had used as a demo ride for years. "Ol Blue" as she was affectionately called, is still tucked away in his personal hangar. Maybe we could get him to sacrifice her for a real world experiment on this canopy jettison thing!? You'd have to find someone willing to put thier tush on the line to do the test (one time only). Hmmm??? Naaaa..... too risky! Stilllllllll........ :-) > > --------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2004
From: Jim Oke <wjoke(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: pre-punch question (matched holes)
I recently purchased an RV-8 preview plans set (I'm think of becoming a triple offender myself) and the manual now includes some advice from Vans on hole preparation. This wording is on page 5-4 of an RV-8 manual, page dated 31 Mar 04: "Caution: Although the pre-punched parts are precision manufactured, resist the temptation to simply dimple the parts without first match drilling. Drilling removes the shear marks left by the punch process and guarantees the hole spacing is perfect on your parts. Removing the shear marks is important because if left alone, the skin can crack around the hole due to the stretching caused by the dimple dies. this cracking may not appear for several years after many hours of vibrations and flight cycles." So the hole alignment and hole quality/stress relief arguments seem to have it. Jim Oke Wpg., MB RV-3, RV-6A ----- Original Message ----- From: <sears(at)searnet.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: pre-punch question (matched holes) > > >> I am considering becoming a repeat offender having built a -6A pre >> pre-punch. From searching the archives it is apparent that no jigs, other >> than maybe the wings, are needed.The question I have is are the rivet >> hole >> the right size or do you have to pre-assemble everything and run the > correct >> size drill thru them? It sure would be nice to be able to take the parts > out >> of the box, debur, dimple, prime and assemble with no pre-assembly. >> Ethier >> way will be much better than the pre-historic nothing pre-punch days.... >> > > I'm a repeat offender with a -6A flying; and, I helped Jim Render build > his > QB-9A. Believe me, the newer kits are much better. My -7A is a delight > to > work on, except for the tanks I'm building now. I still haven't learned > how > to keep the sealer off of me and everything else I get around. :-) > > The matched hole question continues to come up. Charlie England told you > about the flame fest that went on, a while back. I was one of the > participants in that when I challenged the reason for match drilling. The > other side of the argument was saying one had to match drill because the > holes in the punch process are pretty ugly and can crack later. Even > though > they were correct about the ugliness of the holes, Van never mentions that > in the manual, that I could find. His reason for it is alignment. If > everything matches, it seemed logical that one could skip the match > drilling. With that said, let me suggest that you match drill the holes, > as > instructed in the manual. Now that I've gotten well into my kit, there is > no way I could have done it without the matched drill process and feel > good > about it. The holes don't line up perfectly, as one would think. The > holes are also undersized; so, dimpling without drilling would put extra > strain on those holes during the dimpling process. Yeah, it took me a lot > longer to do this than some of our faster builders; but, I still did it > and > am glad I did. This is from a guy who might have taken that shortcut if > he > could have felt good about it. Not so. > > As for the drills test Charlie suggested, Pat Patterson and I did try > testing three sizes. I found that the #41 works best for me and was > suggested some time ago as a better one to use than a #40. Either works > well; but, I prefer the #41. Oh, yeah. I also deburred all holes before > dimpling. Then, I cleaned out the dimpled holes a little with a debur > tool > before I set the rivets. That extra work should make my opponents in that > discussion really happy. :-) > > As for jigs, you're going to read about those who built their kits with no > jigs. Fine. I'm not going to challenge those who have built without them > because they may have done just fine without them; but, I've found that > jigs > are necessary for me. I was lucky to find a tail kit near completion and > bought it. It had a few things that I had to redo; but, it was pretty > straight. The elevators do have a tiny bit of twist that I don't like; > but, > they'll be just fine, as is. The rudder was different. It had quite a > bit. > Did the builder use a jig? I'd say not. I was fortunate enough to be > able > to get the replacement rudder for free because the one I purchased didn't > have the larger rudder. I found that I had to build the rudder in a > simple > jig to keep it from twisting. I also put the wings in a jig and found > that > they don't stay straight with the punched holes, either. I had to twist > them back straight and match drilled with the structure held firmly in a > jig. I plan on using a simple jig, and the plump bobs method on the > ailerons and flaps, as well. The fuse may be a different matter; but, I'm > having my doubts, at the moment. We'll see. Let's just say I haven't > tossed out my old -6A fuselage jig, yet. :-) > > Jim Sears in KY > RV-6A N198JS (Scooter) > RV-7A #70317 (Building wings, fuse to ship this month) > EAA Tech Counselor > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: MnwPeeps(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 24, 2004
Subject: Wounded bird
Hello, all - I am in serious need of a builder/A&P-type who can work on my 6A. It's near Portsmouth, NH, and needs a new nose gear, new prop spinner, either new or overhauled Sensenich, and possibly more. I could use some help ASAP. Please reply to mnwpeeps(at)aol.com Thanks - Don ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 24, 2004
From: "Rob Prior" <rv7(at)b4.ca>
Subject: Re: Control stick grips
On 5:47 24/11/2004 "Ken Brooks" wrote: > We all love to say "Here's what I have...", so here's what I have: Good suggestion, Ken. Here's my configuration, with the caveat that it hasn't been built/flown yet. Throttle: 1. Thumb PTT. 2. Thumb operated flap switch. Down (momentary) - Neutral - Up (locking) 3. Index Finger Engine Start (see Stick Grip #5). (I may have index finger and thumb backwards, I'd have to look at my throttle again... It's a surplus throttle from an F-100, -104, or -105, depending on who you talk to). Stick Grip: 1. Coolie hat 4-way trim. 2. Location TBD - Momentary button for COM frequency flip-flop. 3. Location TBD - Toggle switch for up-down COM tuning. 4. Location TBD - On-off pushbutton for smoke system (separate "arm smoke" switch on dashboard). 5. Location TBD - Engine Start (see Throttle #3). The two engine start switches will be in series, so each will act as an interlock for the other. It's unlikely i'd hit both at the same time by accident, and it lets me have both hands on the controls at startup. The philosophy is that controlling the Amount of power is done with the left hand, and controlling the Direction of that power is done with the right hand. The stick grip points the nose, and "directs" where my comm traffic will go. The throttle says how fast i'll get where my nose is pointed, and whether or not my voice will get there too. 8-) By this philosophy I should have the smoke system on the throttle too, but I've only got two buttons and one switch on the throttle... So unless I get motivated to design my own, i'll stick with this layout. -Rob ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Hull, Don" <Donald.C.Hull(at)nasa.gov>
Subject: Control stick grips
Date: Nov 24, 2004
PTT...and nothing else. It's the KISS principle. Don -----Original Message----- From: D Paul Deits [mailto:pdeits(at)comcast.net] Subject: RV-List: Control stick grips What controls do listers recommend on the stick grips. Plane is RV7A with electric ailerons, stabilizer, and flaps; autopilot,comm(maybe two), etc. advertising on the Matronics Forums. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Figgins" <2004nospam(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: [VAF Mailing List] elevator
Date: Nov 24, 2004
Thanks everyone for the input (nice to know I am not alone 8>) ) I have decided to go the cap rib route for the elevator and the tab Dave _____ From: David Brand [mailto:dbrandx(at)yahoo.com] Subject: Re: [VAF Mailing List] elevator Dave, I`ve always thought a separate little rib there, as you`ve mentioned, is a good idea. I managed to finesse mine into a pretty fair rendition of "per the plans", although for me the tricky part was trimming the bent down flange so that the inner one didn`t bottom out on the skin surface. It would be nice if Van provided a max dimension here. I don`t know, maybe he does, now. Not when my plans were drawn in late `96. If you look at enough RVs at the different fly-ins, you`ll eventually come across examples of the rib method. I`ve seen a couple three over the years. In fact, I think "Franklinstein" (the RV-8 prototype) is one example. Dave Brand 80254 N254LF --- David Figgins wrote: > > I am just finishing the left elevator and last night bent the tabs at > the > cutout where the trim tab fits, the bend does not look very good as I > could > not position the wood blocks properly due to the stiffeners, the net > result > is the bend is not sharp an not quite at 90 degrees to the trailing > edge. > Not sure what I can do apart from buying new skin and stiffeners and > starting over. I thought about cutting this area out and making an end > cap > rib and riveting it in position. > Anyone else screwed this area up and fixed it? > Strikes me this would have been easier to do first before the stiffeners > were installed and the sharp skin bend made but I was following the > directions. > > Dave (irritated on last elevator waiting for wings) > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > __________________________________ http://my.yahoo.com Online help on this group at: http://help.yahoo.com/help/groups/ ADVERTISEMENT <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129aalkfn/M=298184.5639630.6699735.3001176/D=gr oups/S=1705340085:HM/EXP=1101382898/A=2434970/R=0/SIG=11edksnhv/*http://www. netflix.com/Default?mqso=60185402> click here <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5639630.6699735.3001176/D=groups/S:HM/A=2434970/rand=227950474> _____ * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vansairforce/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: vansairforce-unsubscribe(at)yahoogroups.com <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ben Cunningham" <benandginny(at)insightbb.com>
Subject: Re: Control stick grips
Date: Nov 24, 2004
Rob, >... It's a surplus throttle from an F-100, -104, or -105, > depending on who you talk to).<< Where did you find your surplus throttle ? ? ? Ben Cunningham RV7 finish kit ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 24, 2004
From: "Rob Prior" <rv7(at)b4.ca>
Subject: Re: Control stick grips
On 10:03 24/11/2004 "Ben Cunningham" wrote: > .com> > > ... It's a surplus throttle from an F-100, -104, or -105, > > depending on who you talk to).<< > > Where did you find your surplus throttle ? ? ? Whoops, I forgot to include that tidbit, but I did intend to... You really can find anything on eBay. In fact, Item #: 4506720924 - F-100 Throttle Quadrant <http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=4506720924&category=26439&sspagename=WDVW> Item #: 2286814010 - F-16 Throttle (this is pretty cool) <http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=67587&item=2286814010&rd=1> Item #: 2287678657 - Grumman A-6 Throttle Quadrant <http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=14050&item=2287678657&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW> I bought two of the F-100 style for about $100 total, as I recall (yes, the other one is spoken for). They're used, but functional. Search for "throttle quadrant", "F- Throttle", or even by specific model ("F-16 Throttle", for example). They all come up from time to time. -Rob ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HCRV6(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 24, 2004
Subject: Re: titanium tie down bolts
In a message dated 11/23/04 7:52:59 AM Pacific Standard Time, evmeg(at)snowcrest.net writes: << Anybody have a good source for titanium lifting eyes? I bought the cast steel eye bolts from Vans for the tie downs, and while they are cheap, they are also very heavy. >> I'm with you Evan. I would pay a reasonable price for Titanium tie down rings if some enterprising soul with the proper equipment would make some. Harry Crosby Pleasanton, California RV-6, flying!!! ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 24, 2004
From: Thomas Wimmer <thomas.wimmer(at)web.de>
Subject: RVs in the Mojave/Lancaster,CA area
Hello, my name is Thomas, I'm from germany, interested in the RVs and am currently staying in lancaster (studying in mojave). Are any RVs out there which I can google at and perhaps get a ride in? Never flown in an RV, but eager to. I have been lurking quite some time in this list and keeping track of some building processes (especially Dan C.'s website is really interesting). So if anyone is interested in showing me their project, please contact me. Thomas ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 24, 2004
Subject: RV 6/7/8 Towbar
From: James Ashford <jashford(at)ashcreekwireless.com>
Listers, Does anyone know of a source for tow-bars designed for an RV 7? Jim Ashford RV 7, N 713RV 90% done, 30 % to go ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Kyle Boatright" <kboatright1(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: RV 6/7/8 Towbar
Date: Nov 24, 2004
$100 says the answer is in the archives. KB ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Ashford" <jashford(at)ashcreekwireless.com> Subject: RV-List: RV 6/7/8 Towbar > > > Listers, > > Does anyone know of a source for tow-bars designed for an RV 7? > > Jim Ashford > RV 7, N 713RV > 90% done, 30 % to go > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: PSPRV6A(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 24, 2004
Subject: Re: RV-List Digest: 24 Msgs - 11/23/04, Tie-down fittings
The tie-down fittings Van sells are NOT cast, they are forged steel. A trifle of the weight can be eliminated by careful polishing. Their weight is hardly worth worrying about. Put lightening holes in the baggage floor ribs and you can save an ounce or two. Paul & Eric Petersen, RV6A 90% done ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com>
Subject: RV 6/7/8 Towbar
Date: Nov 24, 2004
I got one of these and am happy with it. http://www.rv-8.com/IdeasProducts.htm#IDEA:%20Tailwheel%20dragger - Larry Bowen Larry(at)BowenAero.com http://BowenAero.com > -----Original Message----- > From: James Ashford [mailto:jashford(at)ashcreekwireless.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 4:01 PM > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: RV 6/7/8 Towbar > > --> > > Listers, > > Does anyone know of a source for tow-bars designed for an RV 7? > > Jim Ashford > RV 7, N 713RV > 90% done, 30 % to go > > > ======== > ======== > Matronics Forums. > ======== > ======== > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: RVs in the Mojave/Lancaster,CA area
Date: Nov 24, 2004
Thomas, There's a handful of RVs based out there near Lancaster (including the famous Paul "Rosie" Rosales), and tons more in the LA basin (Chino, Cable, Whiteman, etc.). Depending on how long you'll be in town, you might consider joining the SoCal-RVlist Yahoo group. Lots of active fliers & builders. We should be able to get you the ride of a lifetime if you want to come with us on a fly-out sometime. Here's the link to the SoCal group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SoCal-RVlist/ )_( Dan RV-7 N714D http://www.rvproject.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas Wimmer" <thomas.wimmer(at)web.de> Subject: RV-List: RVs in the Mojave/Lancaster,CA area > > Hello, > > my name is Thomas, I'm from germany, interested in the RVs and am > currently staying in lancaster (studying in mojave). > > Are any RVs out there which I can google at and perhaps get a ride in? > Never flown in an RV, but eager to. > > I have been lurking quite some time in this list and keeping track of > some building processes (especially Dan C.'s website is really interesting). > > So if anyone is interested in showing me their project, please contact me. > > > Thomas > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 24, 2004
From: Bill Dube <bdube(at)al.noaa.gov>
Subject: Re: titanium tie down bolts
Why is everyone obsessed with titanium? What would be wrong with tie downs made from 7075 Aluminum? The mount in the wing is just 6061-T6 (~40ksi) The mild steel in the recommended hardware store eye-bolt is likely to be 50 ksi. Typical 7075 is going to have over 70 ksi yield strength and will weigh about half as much as the steel part. If you do the math, it would take nearly 8 tons to break a 7075 aluminum hold down (with a 3/8" threaded shaft.). The rope will break first. Next, the spar will buckle. Next, the four 10-32 bolts holding the mount in place will shear. If the ring is too thin, won't it cut through the rope? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 24, 2004
From: richard dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: RV 6/7/8 Towbar
Jim, I have been happy with a towbar for my -6A from Stan VanGrunvsen whose email address is: stanvan(at)pacifier.com for $104. RHDudley\ -6A at airport re-assembling James Ashford wrote: > >Listers, > >Does anyone know of a source for tow-bars designed for an RV 7? > >Jim Ashford >RV 7, N 713RV >90% done, 30 % to go > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Hopperdhh(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 24, 2004
Subject: Re: titanium tie down bolts
In a message dated 11/24/04 8:29:47 PM US Eastern Standard Time, 1qazxsw23edcvfr45tgbnhy67ujm(at)cox.net writes: > > If you do the math, it would take nearly 8 tons to break a 7075 > aluminum > >hold down (with a 3/8" threaded shaft.). The rope will break first. Next, > >the spar will buckle. Next, the four 10-32 bolts holding the mount in place > > >will shear. > > I did the math and only got 3.87 tons. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com>
Subject: Wheel Pants (Tailwheel)
Date: Nov 24, 2004
I've fit the wheel pants per the plans, with the plane in level attitude. When I set the tail back down, I have what seems to be very little clearence between the ground and the aft half of the fairing. The aft corner is only 1.6" above the ground, and there is maybe .75" clearance near the tire. Will this survive a firm landing or an unkept grass strip? I guess raising the fairing higher than the 1" above the top of the tire is the answer. What have others done? - Larry Bowen, RV-8, 27.5 hrs Larry(at)BowenAero.com http://BowenAero.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 24, 2004
From: "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net>
Subject: Re: titanium tie down bolts
I am not sure what math you are using, but according to the formulas in the machinists handbook, a 3/8" bolt with 18 TPI made of 7075 Al with 70ksi yield strength gives an ultimate yield of approximately 6000 lbs. Normally parts like these are rated at 1/4 the ultimate yield which means a rating of 1500 lbs - well under 8 tons. All that said, titanium and the garden variety steel tiedown rings are not much more than that, so an aluminum tiedown would work likely just fine. In fact, I have toyed with the idea of fabricating streamlined tie downs for my 9A so I don't have to remove them for that little extra top speed :-) . Probably never do it, but if I ever have a few hours with nothing to do... Dick Tasker Bill Dube wrote: > > Why is everyone obsessed with titanium? What would be wrong with tie downs >made from 7075 Aluminum? > > The mount in the wing is just 6061-T6 (~40ksi) The mild steel in the >recommended hardware store eye-bolt is likely to be 50 ksi. Typical 7075 is >going to have over 70 ksi yield strength and will weigh about half as much >as the steel part. > > If you do the math, it would take nearly 8 tons to break a 7075 aluminum >hold down (with a 3/8" threaded shaft.). The rope will break first. Next, >the spar will buckle. Next, the four 10-32 bolts holding the mount in place >will shear. > > If the ring is too thin, won't it cut through the rope? > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Kosta Lewis" <mikel(at)dimensional.com>
Subject: RV 6/7/8 Towbar
Date: Nov 24, 2004
Look up Skyline Aviation at www.dragger.com makers of the Tail Dragger-Dragger. I have used the one recommended for the RV series (low profile) for years and couldn't do without it. Makes putting the RV in a small space in the hangar a breeze. Michael ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2004
From: Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: RV 6/7/8 Towbar
Delux Cessna towbar. Sam has a write-up on his website: http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal/airport.html#towbar I got mine from Wag-Aero, pretty much the same thing. http://store.wagaero.com/*ws4d-db-query-Show.ws4d?*ws4d-db-query-Show***HEG-DE-082082083085089085-1377***-eProducts***-***shopping(directory)***.ws4d?shopping/results(S).html Jeff Point RV-6 Milwaukee WI > > ________________________________________________________________________________ DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=hqhnzDdVZaEzFuc7boaIq7VlJuH2Ei4RamcNt6UtCvk2JprISM8jXLLGLBVcW/Zo6DYjHdtp/ifGuDAGQUi2RVfx8nblnp2T4WmeTXZAY2H9XxmoiBjHWqivDNbn1/1B3TeLq9lRnV8ROtUo3RkR7kdQxNbcWvVqrKjtIyWeyMk;
Date: Nov 25, 2004
From: Dale Mitchell <dfm4290(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: titanium tie down bolts
My math finds the tie downs bolts will be riped out of the airplane. JMHO Dale Mitchell --- Hopperdhh(at)aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 11/24/04 8:29:47 PM US Eastern > Standard Time, > 1qazxsw23edcvfr45tgbnhy67ujm(at)cox.net writes: > > > > If you do the math, it would take nearly 8 > tons to break a 7075 > > aluminum > > >hold down (with a 3/8" threaded shaft.). The rope > will break first. Next, > > >the spar will buckle. Next, the four 10-32 bolts > holding the mount in place > > > > >will shear. > > > > > I did the math and only got 3.87 tons. > > > > Click on the > this > by the > Admin. > _-> > Contributions > any other > Forums. > > 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: "Kyle Boatright" <kboatright1(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Wheel Pants (Tailwheel)
Date: Nov 25, 2004
Larry, My wheelpants are pretty low and I mounted 'em per the directions. If I had it to do over again, I'd raise 'em a half inch or so, despite losing a mph or two. I've seen too many aircraft (not mine yet) with damaged wheelpants from grass strips or hard landings. Also, remember that even paved surfaces have irregularities like centerline reflectors. By the way, if your clearance is that small now, think about the clearance when you have a slightly low tire, and make a hard landing at a high weight... KB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com> Subject: RV-List: Wheel Pants (Tailwheel) > > I've fit the wheel pants per the plans, with the plane in level attitude. > When I set the tail back down, I have what seems to be very little > clearence > between the ground and the aft half of the fairing. The aft corner is > only > 1.6" above the ground, and there is maybe .75" clearance near the tire. > Will this survive a firm landing or an unkept grass strip? I guess > raising > the fairing higher than the 1" above the top of the tire is the answer. > What have others done? > > - > Larry Bowen, RV-8, 27.5 hrs > Larry(at)BowenAero.com > http://BowenAero.com > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2004
From: Thomas Velvick <tomvelvick(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List Digest: 45 Msgs - 11/24/04
Hi Quinn Check out www.eaa538.org/azwing or http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AZ_RVList/ Regards, Tom Velvick Peoria, AZ N53KT rv-4 N7053L rv-4 rv-6a wiring and engine At 12:57 AM 11/25/04, you wrote: >From: <quinn.talley(at)cox.net> >Subject: RV-List: Phoenix RV 10 Builders? > > >Hi, I'm a novice RV builder working on the RV10 and looking for a Phoenix-area >RV10 builders group. Are there any RV10 builders or builders groups in >Phoenix? >Would love to connect. > >Quinn Talley >40295 >Tail Cone --- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2004
From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: Wheel Pants (Tailwheel)
Dan Checkoway wrote: > >>had it to do over again, I'd raise 'em a half inch or so, despite losing a >>mph or two. > > > Is there any concrete proof out there that having the wheel pants lower, > covering more of the tire, actually provides a speed increase? > > I'd be surprised if the difference is even measurable on the 10ths of a knot > scale. Correct me if I'm wrong! ..........but it sure *looks* faster......... ;-) Holiday Greetings, Sam Buchanan http://thervjournal.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com>
Subject: Wheel Pants (Tailwheel)
Date: Nov 25, 2004
Thanks for all the input on the wheel pants. Looks like I have some re-work ahead of me to raise them up a little. Better to do it now than after things are painted..... - Larry Bowen Larry(at)BowenAero.com http://BowenAero.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Curt Reimer" <cgreimer(at)mts.net>
Subject: Weight Shift Control
Date: Nov 25, 2004
Not sure if anyone else has tried this. I guess this comes under the heading of silly but fun things to do in your RV. When properly trimmed out, in very smooth air, I find I can control the airplane by shifting my weight from side to side. Turning right is easiest, since I can lean way over on the passenger's side for greater moment. Turning left I kind of scrunch against the left cabin wall and wait. Slowly but surely, the left wing will dip and initiate a turn. Mind you, at 260 lbs I have a lot of weight to shift, so your results may vary. cheers, Curt ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "jbker(at)juno.com" <jbker(at)juno.com>
Date: Nov 26, 2004
Subject: Wheel pants drag and height
I think the best compromise on height is to raise them until you can put minimum gap clearance. It is the leakage into and out of the pants that causes the largest contributor to drag IMHO. Bill Davis did a beautiful job of fitting the sides right up against the lower part of the outer rim. You do not have to allow for flat or slack tires in this position. You are also at a point where you are crossing the tire fore and aft that does not deflect much so you can tighten the gap safely there also. I am considering adding a single layer of FG to close it further and it will be sacrificed with a slack tire landing. Bernie Kerr, now running rotary engine on 9A, have not taxied yet. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "glaesers" <glaesers(at)wideopenwest.com>
Subject: Re: titanium tie down bolts
Date: Nov 26, 2004
I was thinking about retractable tie-down rings instead of the screw-in type. I did a bunch of searching and couldn't find anything available, so I started doodling myself. Here is an initial concept: http://www.wideopenwest.com/~glaesers/TieDown.html Has anyone seen or done anything similar on an RV? I'm not building yet, so I haven't figured out where, or how, I would mount this. But since tie-downs are being discussed, I figured I'd toss this out for comments. Dennis Glaeser ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Mader" <davemader(at)bresnan.net>
Subject: vacuum gauges for sale
Date: Nov 26, 2004
To any of you guys that are still using vacuum and would like some very nice instruments, I have an R.C. Allen artificial horizon, (new in 2001/ $590) and an R.C. Allen


November 16, 2004 - November 26, 2004

RV-Archive.digest.vol-qc