RV-List Archive Browser

RV-Archive.digest.vol-sr
March 26, 2007 - April 16, 2007

> Anyway, this leads me to ask: > > 1) Does anyone have contact information for Jeff Rose? I know he > isn't the front man for the business anymore, and may have sold it > entirely, but he's been very helpful in the past and might have some > insight. The folks currently running Electro didn't have any helpful > suggestions when I spoke with them on the phone. > > 2) Does anyone have an "advance display" they would sell? I'm in the > market if the price is reasonable. > > Thanks, > > KB > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Kyle Boatright" <kboatright1(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Electroair/Rose Ignition
Date: Mar 26, 2007
Nope, different unit. Spendy too. ;-( But thanks for the suggestion. KB ----- Original Message ----- From: Bobby Hester To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 9:46 PM Subject: Re: RV-List: Electroair/Rose Ignition Would it be the same as what Lightspeed offers? The Simpson digital panel meter http://www.lsecorp.com/Products/Accessories.htm Surfing the web with my laptop from Hopkinsville, KY Visit my RV7A website: http://webpages.charter.net/bobbyhester/MyFlyingRV7A.htm Kyle Boatright wrote: One option with the Electroair Ignition, used to be a small rectangular display which showed the number of degrees of advance where the ignition was firing. Unfortunately, my display has a wiring problem inside the display and I don't think I have a very good chance of repairing it, although I will try. No problem, right? Just buy another one... Well, not so fast. They don't sell that unit anymore - apparently, the supplier dried up. So if I can't repair mine, I'm stuck with an oddball hole in my panel (about 1" x 2"). Due to the location of the hole, there really isn't much I can do with the space. This isn't an operational problem (the system works just fine without the digital readout), but it is an aesthetic problem and I *want* to know how the EI is operating... Anyway, this leads me to ask: 1) Does anyone have contact information for Jeff Rose? I know he isn't the front man for the business anymore, and may have sold it entirely, but he's been very helpful in the past and might have some insight. The folks currently running Electro didn't have any helpful suggestions when I spoke with them on the phone. 2) Does anyone have an "advance display" they would sell? I'm in the market if the price is reasonable. Thanks, KB ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Kyle Boatright" <kboatright1(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Electroair/Rose Ignition
Date: Mar 26, 2007
It looks as if one of the voltmeters on the link Bob provided just might work. Sure, it may take a custom mount and a bit of fiddling with capacitors and dip switches, but the wife is out of town next weekend so I may need something to do to keep me out of trouble... ;-) Kyle ----- Original Message ----- From: Bob J. To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 9:37 PM Subject: Re: RV-List: Electroair/Rose Ignition Kyle, any panel mounted voltmeter will do...this is the one I used: http://www.marteltesttools.com/products.php?cat=114&action=detail&id= 73 This might be a bit smaller than the one you had, but if you look around there are many sizes these sorts of voltmeters come in. IIRC 10mV = 1 degree advance, you set up the scaling with a resistor network (two resistors which the instructions for the meter specify.) There are a series of jumpers on the back to set it up so there's no decimal point displayed. So, with a voltmeter if it reads .01V, that means 1 degree advance, 0.20V means 20 degrees advance, etc. With the divider network and the jumpers set up correctly, it the display would show 1 and 20 respectively. Regards, Bob Japundza RV-6 flying F1 under const. On 3/26/07, Kyle Boatright wrote: One option with the Electroair Ignition, used to be a small rectangular display which showed the number of degrees of advance where the ignition was firing. Unfortunately, my display has a wiring problem inside the display and I don't think I have a very good chance of repairing it, although I will try. No problem, right? Just buy another one... Well, not so fast. They don't sell that unit anymore - apparently, the supplier dried up. So if I can't repair mine, I'm stuck with an oddball hole in my panel (about 1" x 2"). Due to the location of the hole, there really isn't much I can do with the space. This isn't an operational problem (the system works just fine without the digital readout), but it is an aesthetic problem and I *want* to know how the EI is operating... Anyway, this leads me to ask: 1) Does anyone have contact information for Jeff Rose? I know he isn't the front man for the business anymore, and may have sold it entirely, but he's been very helpful in the past and might have some insight. The folks currently running Electro didn't have any helpful suggestions when I spoke with them on the phone. 2) Does anyone have an "advance display" they would sell? I'm in the market if the price is reasonable. Thanks, KB http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List http://forums.matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Oshkosh RV BBQ
From: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net>
Date: Mar 26, 2007
So last night I had this dream. We had the annual RV BBQ in Oshkosh, and nobody came. I figure I had this dream because so far, only one person has registered for this year's BBQ. We're trying to solve some of the "traffic" problems from last year's bbq (when about 150 people we weren't expecting showed up), by having people register in advance. So far that hasn't worked so well. Not because people haven't registered -- I know how people are -- but because it's clear to me that if we do it this way (rather than just have people 'loosely' say they're coming or not and then worrying about it on Wednesday night), people are going to wait until the last minute to register. The problem with that I'm mailing stuff out this year and there's no way I can get it done if people wait until the last minute So, if you're interested in attending this year. It would be great if you'd go ahead and register now. You can do so here (http://home.comcast.net/~bcollinsrv7a/eaa/). -------- Bob Collins St. Paul, Minn. RV Builder's Hotline (free!) http://rvhotline.expercraft.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103138#103138 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 27, 2007
From: Chris W <3edcft6(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: TAS and VNE
LessDragProd(at)aol.com wrote: > What I didn't like about the RVator article is the misleading > statement Vne being a TAS. > Part 23 defines Vne as an Equivalent Airspeed (EAS). This is a > calibrated and corrected Indicated Airspeed. If an aircraft is NOT > designed to Part 23, I suppose Vne could be defined anyway they want. :-) I can't see anything misleading about it. The article clearly states that Fluter is a function of TAS, and therefor Vne should also be a TAS number. The article then went on to offer a very plausible explanation on why part 23 didn't use TAS for Vne. Further the article gave empirical evidence as to the fact the TAS, and not IAS or CAS, is the value that is critical to flutter. So what is misleading? -- Chris W KE5GIX "Protect your digital freedom and privacy, eliminate DRM, learn more at http://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm" ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "rtitsworth" <rtitsworth(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: TAS and VNE
Date: Mar 27, 2007
What can be misleading is "assuming" that critical flutter speed (TAS based) is quantitatively related to a published Vne speed. Vne could be based on a structural deformation safety margin (dynamic pressure / IAS related). The critical flutter speed for a given aircraft design could be much higher (some are, some aren't). It's a design parameter that is typically related to the intended operating altitude (envelope). Without "knowing" your critical flutter speed (TAS based), you're at a loss for really understanding your operating envelope. The safe/conservative assumption then is that TAS must remain below the published Vne. However, TAS only = IAS at STP (sea level). At every altitude above that, TAS is > IAS (approx 15% per 10k ft). Thus, if you assume that TAS must remain below Vne, then your IAS must remain below Vne at ANY altitude (unless you're in the pattern at death valley). That may be more conservative than necessary (depending on the aircraft). It also implies that the pilot must continuously convert IAS to TAS (EFIS, E6B, placard chart, or SWAG). The real key is "knowing" the critical flutter speed (TAS) versus "guessing" it's the same (or near) the published Vne. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris W Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 4:24 AM I can't see anything misleading about it. The article clearly states that Fluter is a function of TAS, and therefor Vne should also be a TAS number. The article then went on to offer a very plausible explanation on why part 23 didn't use TAS for Vne. Further the article gave empirical evidence as to the fact the TAS, and not IAS or CAS, is the value that is critical to flutter. So what is misleading? ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Vne dependent on TAS?
From: "Jekyll" <rcitjh(at)aol.com>
Date: Mar 27, 2007
Don't know a term for the event but I have one for the pilot that breaches the "barrier": Flutter Nutter. Jekyll Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103192#103192 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "jbker(at)juno.com" <jbker(at)juno.com>
Date: Mar 27, 2007
Subject: head start to rotary powered RV( for sale)
Sorry about the commercial, but believe this is the best spot to get a plug in for my engine package! You can get a great headstart on building a rotary powered RV and save a bundle of money. Have decided to part my 9A out and build a LSA since medicals or getting tougher as 70 is upon me. Am currently waiting on my special issuance t o arrive and will not plan on filing for a 3rd class next year. Will sell the rotary and am installing a lycoming in the 9A before selli ng it. Do not wish to have the double jeopardy of an alternative engine and homebuilt combination if I sell it with the rotary. The engine installation has had minimum problems once I got past a fault y DPDT switch that was apparently backfeeding 12 volts to electronic con trol and burning the chip which operates off of 5 volts. Flew the 40 hou rs off in minimum time and have about 20 hours on it since. Fuel burn is equivalent to a lycoming if leaned which the flight report in Sport Aviation alludes to. That controller does not allow for leaning . I have over $12K invested and many educational hours involved. Will sell it for $8K. The gear reduction and electronic controller are built by Tracy Crook at RWS inc, the engine is a street ported 13B built by Bruce Turrentine, the engine mount is by Fred Breese, and the prop is a Sense nich. You get the nose gear leg, dual electronic fuel pumps, intake and exhaust manifolds, muffler, radiator (Griffen custom aluminum), oil cool er, Sam James cowl, and many more items. The rotary is coming to SnF so you can see the package there, just call my cell at 772 708 0093 to see it. Email me at jbker(at)juno.co m to see some pictures of installation. Bernie Kerr, 6A 450 hours and sold, 9A rotary with 60 hours
Sorry about the commercial, but believe this is the best spot to get a< /o:p>

plug in for my e ngine package! You can get a great headstart on building a rotary powere d RV and save a bundle of money.

Have decided to part my 9A out and build a LSA since medicals or getting tougher as 70 i s upon me. Am currently waiting on my special issuance to arrive and wil l not plan on filing for a 3rd class next year.

Will sell the ro tary and am installing a lycoming in the 9A before selling it.

Do not wish to h ave the double jeopardy of an alternative engine and

homebuilt combin ation if I sell it with the rotary.

The engine insta llation has had minimum problems once I got past a faulty DPDT switch th at was apparently backfeeding 12 volts to electronic control and burning the chip which operates off of 5 volts. Flew the 40 hours off in minimu m time and have about 20 hours on it since.

Fuel burn is equ ivalent to a lycoming if leaned which the flight report in Sport Aviatio n alludes to. That controller does not allow for leaning.

I have over $12K invested and many educational hours involved. Will sell it for $8K. The gear reduction and elect ronic controller are built by Tracy Crook at RWS inc, the engine is a st reet ported 13B built by Bruce Turrentine, the engine mount is by Fred B reese, and the prop is a Sensenich. You get the nose gear leg, dual elec tronic fuel pumps, intake and exhaust manifolds, muffler, radiator (Grif fen custom aluminum), oil cooler, Sam James cowl, and many more items.

The rotary is co ming to SnF so you can see the package there, just call my cell at 772 7 08 0093 to see it. Email me at jbker(at)juno.com to see some pictures of installation.

Bernie Kerr, 6A 450 hours and sold, 9A rotary with 60 hours

________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: TAS and VNE
Date: Mar 27, 2007
From: lessdragprod(at)aol.com
Nicely stated. Jim Ayers -----Original Message----- From: rtitsworth(at)mindspring.com Sent: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 6:47 AM Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: TAS and VNE What can be misleading is "assuming" that critical flutter speed (TAS based) is quantitatively related to a published Vne speed. Vne could be based on a structural deformation safety margin (dynamic pressure / IAS related). The critical flutter speed for a given aircraft design could be much higher (some are, some aren't). It's a design parameter that is typically related to the intended operating altitude (envelope). Without "knowing" your critical flutter speed (TAS based), you're at a loss for really understanding your operating envelope. The safe/conservative assumption then is that TAS must remain below the published Vne. However, TAS only = IAS at STP (sea level). At every altitude above that, TAS is > IAS (approx 15% per 10k ft). Thus, if you assume that TAS must remain below Vne, then your IAS must remain below Vne at ANY altitude (unless you're in the pattern at death valley). That may be more conservative than necessary (depending on the aircraft). It also implies that the pilot must continuously convert IAS to TAS (EFIS, E6B, placard chart, or SWAG). The real key is "knowing" the critical flutter speed (TAS) versus "guessing" it's the same (or near) the published Vne. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris W Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 4:24 AM I can't see anything misleading about it. The article clearly states that Fluter is a function of TAS, and therefor Vne should also be a TAS number. The article then went on to offer a very plausible explanation on why part 23 didn't use TAS for Vne. Further the article gave empirical evidence as to the fact the TAS, and not IAS or CAS, is the value that is critical to flutter. So what is misleading? ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "glen matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: Vne dependent on TAS?
Date: Mar 27, 2007
Hi Terry- How's this one: Warrantee void speed? Or, Speed Of Imminent Destruction? >Ted, somehow that doesn't seem quite macho enough. >> BTW, is there a term for exceeding Vne, sort of like the Mach >> number? >Breaking the flutter barrier? glen matejcek aerobubba(at)earthlink.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: RE: Vne dependent on TAS?
Date: Mar 28, 2007
From: "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen(at)dts9000.com>
Vtp......test pilot. Chuck Jensen -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of glen matejcek Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 8:06 PM Subject: RV-List: RE: Vne dependent on TAS? Hi Terry- How's this one: Warrantee void speed? Or, Speed Of Imminent Destruction? >Ted, somehow that doesn't seem quite macho enough. >> BTW, is there a term for exceeding Vne, sort of like the Mach number? >Breaking the flutter barrier? glen matejcek aerobubba(at)earthlink.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com>
Subject: Re: RE: Vne dependent on TAS?
Date: Mar 28, 2007
How about getting to the root - Vk (Killing velocity) Ed Anderson ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen(at)dts9000.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 7:09 AM Subject: RE: RV-List: RE: Vne dependent on TAS? > > Vtp......test pilot. > > Chuck Jensen > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of glen matejcek > Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 8:06 PM > To: RV-List Digest Server > Subject: RV-List: RE: Vne dependent on TAS? > > > > Hi Terry- > > How's this one: Warrantee void speed? Or, Speed Of Imminent > Destruction? > > >>Ted, somehow that doesn't seem quite macho enough. > > >>> BTW, is there a term for exceeding Vne, sort of like the Mach number? > >>Breaking the flutter barrier? > > > > glen matejcek > aerobubba(at)earthlink.net > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Pleasants" <jpleasants(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: RE: Vne dependent on TAS?
Date: Mar 28, 2007
How 'bout: Vflu? Vd (danger) (dumb) (disintegration) ? Vafu (all a'flutter) ? Jim Pleasants do not archieve ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: TAS and VNE
From: "renewhall2" <renewhall2(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Mar 28, 2007
If flutter is based on TAS, how does Spaceshipone go supersonic with a Vne of 195kts? I recall from the Discovery documentary, Rutan said Vne is based on IAS. See excerpt below: "With both engines running (800 lb thrust total) and maximum propellant load, takeoff roll is 500m (1650 ft) for 20 seconds. After pulling up, climb is established at constant airspeed at Vne, or 195 knots. Burnout is, after a maximum of two minutes, still at 195 knots indicated, which equals Mach 0.4. The maximum altitude that can be attained is 1.91 miles (10,000 ft). The maximum climb rate is 52 m/sec (10,000 ft/min). It is likely we will never take the plane to the maximum altitude capability. None of the operating limitations of a standard Long-EZ are exceeded in this airplane, although a steep climb is needed to keep from exceeding Vne with both engines running." From: http://www.xcor.com/products/vehicles/ez-rocket_faq.html#performance -------- Bob Newhall N829RV RV Transition Training Boulder, CO renewhall2.googlepages.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103428#103428 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 28, 2007
From: bertrv6(at)highstream.net
Subject: Hello
Hi: For those experts on avionics... I am having problem with my Radio. I do not have a side tone, on the head sets...Every one can hear me well, and I can hear, but no side tone.. I have checked for loose wires,, that is all... Suggestions, next step.. Thanks Bert rv6a Completing my 40 hrs. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Bryan" <n616tb(at)btsapps.com>
Subject: Hello
Date: Mar 28, 2007
Hi Bert, I had this same problem and no intercom. Have you checked your intercom? For me the problem came down to the wiring for the mic jacks. There were two wires that could be swapped and still allow the ptt to work. If they were backwards there was no sidetone and no intercom. Just my experience. Tim > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list- > server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of bertrv6(at)highstream.net > Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 10:27 AM > To: Rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: Hello > > > > > Hi: > > For those experts on avionics... I am having problem with my Radio. > > I do not have a side tone, on the head sets...Every one can hear me > well, and I can hear, but no side tone.. > I have checked for loose wires,, that is all... > > > Suggestions, next step.. > > Thanks > > Bert > > rv6a > > Completing my 40 hrs. > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: TAS and VNE
Date: Mar 28, 2007
As the speed increases, there are many possible bad things that can occur. Examples: flutter, windscreen loads (either from air loads, or requirements to withstand bird strike by a certain weight bird), wing structural divergence (usually only an issue on aircraft with forward swept wings, such as HFB-320), flight control hinge moments become too high for acceptable control, engine or propeller anomalies (e.g. F-104 max allowable speed was limited by engine compressor inlet temperature, which increased as Mach increased), aircraft static or dynamic stability (e.g. Global Express max allowable speed at high limited by degradation in lateral stability) Each of these bad things will have its own envelope of airspeed, altitude, temperature, etc that you must remain clear of. The aircraft designer will specify a VNE that remains clear of all these bad things. Kevin Horton On 28 Mar 2007, at 11:34, renewhall2 wrote: > > If flutter is based on TAS, how does Spaceshipone go supersonic > with a Vne of 195kts? I recall from the Discovery documentary, > Rutan said Vne is based on IAS. See excerpt below: > > > "With both engines running (800 lb thrust total) and maximum > propellant load, takeoff roll is 500m (1650 ft) for 20 seconds. > After pulling up, climb is established at constant airspeed at Vne, > or 195 knots. Burnout is, after a maximum of two minutes, still at > 195 knots indicated, which equals Mach 0.4. The maximum altitude > that can be attained is 1.91 miles (10,000 ft). The maximum climb > rate is 52 m/sec (10,000 ft/min). It is likely we will never take > the plane to the maximum altitude capability. None of the > operating limitations of a standard Long-EZ are exceeded in this > airplane, although a steep climb is needed to keep from exceeding > Vne with both engines running." > > From: > http://www.xcor.com/products/vehicles/ez-rocket_faq.html#performance > > -------- > Bob Newhall > N829RV > RV Transition Training > Boulder, CO > renewhall2.googlepages.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 28, 2007
From: "Rob Prior" <rv7(at)b4.ca>
Subject: Re: TAS and VNE
On 9:50 2007-03-28 Kevin Horton wrote: > Each of these bad things will have its own envelope of airspeed, > altitude, temperature, etc that you must remain clear of. The > aircraft designer will specify a VNE that remains clear of all these > bad things. You forgot to add... That Vne will be expressed as an INDICATED airspeed. -Rob ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 28, 2007
From: <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: TAS and VNE? (the expert speaks, ha ha)
FLUTTER: BUT WHY DOES ALTITUDE AFFECT IT? Simply put there is thinner air and it provides LESS Dampening. Period, end of story. There is no debate TAS and VNE are related or more accurately: Your Flutter margins go down with altitude. OR you could say. Vne goes down with altitude. But what is it and how do we determine it? Well it would help to have an engineering degree but I can explain away some of the mystery. Engineers use terms like, natural frequency, stiffness, forcing function and dampening. I'll explain with a example below. Flutter is a sub part of vibration. There are 100's of flutter MODES or types. To explain it is easy. To analyze and determine the dampening, forcing function and natural frequency of a structural system (flight controls) can be a challenge for even the best engineers. Computers help but we are talking about physical things. The computers answer is only as good as the data you give it. How is Flutter margins or speed calculated? Very carefully. That is why they use wind tunnels and flight test. I actually know a test pilot that broke a factory plane in HALF in a Vne Dive Test due to flutter. It was an existing design that went through some mods. Technically FLUTTER is special field of vibration engineering dynamic response or Aeroelasticity. The math gets pretty involved but with computers they can solve the theoretical. However a computer MODEL answer is only as good as the data you give it. When it comes to flutter flight test still rules. Now they use FEM and CFD (computers): FEM= Finite Element modeling CFD= Computational Fluid Dynamics In the end Flutter is an illusive thing that must be in the end tested on the plane in flight. Boeing does this and adds shakers to the wing. On a long flexible winged jet the whole wing can flutter. They excite the wing and dive it to Vne PLUS an additional margin. Some times extra material and strength (stiffness) is added to the final design just for flutter margins. Not until the test pilot does this do they really know. However w/ the new computer tools predictions and initial designs are much better. YOUR RV AND FLUTTER Before you fly passengers you should do a Vne test as Van suggest. Wear a Chute and Helmet. Go up dive. Plan the dive where you are level or just slightly climbing again when you let go of the stick. THAN you WRAP the stick! Wrap meaning give it a hit or quick yank. You repeat the test over and increase the speed up to 1.10 of your final Vne. Of course Vne is based on TAS. Repeat with aft CG and different wts. You may want to omit the WRAP and just have the death grip on the stick. Holding the stick increases the flutter speed because you are damping the control. RV's relatively tight or stiff push pull roller/ball bearing flt controls is Goodness. A sloppy cable control system is not as good for control surface flutter dampening. So what is flutter. Well it is a DYNAMIC instability that is effected by air density, structural stiffness, control stiffness and of course the geometry of control THINGS THAT AFFECT FLUTTER Ways to increase or change flutter speed: Stiffer structure Counter balance Add flt cont'l mass Aerodynamic changesFrom: Larry Pardue <n5lp(at)warpdriveonline.com>
Subject: Re: TAS and VNE
Date: Mar 28, 2007
On Mar 28, 2007, at 11:18 AM, Rob Prior wrote: > > On 9:50 2007-03-28 Kevin Horton wrote: >> Each of these bad things will have its own envelope of airspeed, >> altitude, temperature, etc that you must remain clear of. The >> aircraft designer will specify a VNE that remains clear of all these >> bad things. > > You forgot to add... That Vne will be expressed as an INDICATED > airspeed. > > -Rob Maybe, but not necessarily a constant IAS. I have a PW-5 glider where VNE is expressed as a fixed figure in IAS up to a certain altitude. Above that altitude there is a table indicating what the different VNE is in IAS at that altitude. Larry Pardue ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: TAS and VNE
Date: Mar 28, 2007
On 28 Mar 2007, at 13:18, Rob Prior wrote: > > On 9:50 2007-03-28 Kevin Horton wrote: >> Each of these bad things will have its own envelope of airspeed, >> altitude, temperature, etc that you must remain clear of. The >> aircraft designer will specify a VNE that remains clear of all these >> bad things. > > You forgot to add... That Vne will be expressed as an INDICATED > airspeed. Not necessarily, but it should be expressed in some way such that the pilot has an indicator in the cockpit that he can use to comply with the limitation. Yes, in type certificated aircraft the only indicator that the pilot has is an airspeed indicator, that reads in IAS. Some other aircraft have max allowable speeds that are expressed as indicated mach number at high altitudes. The SR-71 has a max allowable speed that is expressed as EAS. There is no point in providing a limitation if the pilot has no means at his disposal to comply with the limitation. The last time I checked Van didn't require that RVs be equipped with air data computers that provide a true airspeed indication. I have no idea how Van's expects pilots to comply with a VNE in TAS. Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) Ottawa, Canada http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 28, 2007
From: Richard Seiders <seiders(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: TAS and VNE
Kevin, my 6A is equipped with an airspeed indicator that has ability to determine TAS by setting the temp/alt in window provided. I purchased it from Van's when building my RV. Dick At 04:52 PM 3/28/2007, you wrote: > >On 28 Mar 2007, at 13:18, Rob Prior wrote: > >> >>On 9:50 2007-03-28 Kevin Horton wrote: >>>Each of these bad things will have its own envelope of airspeed, >>>altitude, temperature, etc that you must remain clear of. The >>>aircraft designer will specify a VNE that remains clear of all these >>>bad things. >> >>You forgot to add... That Vne will be expressed as an INDICATED >>airspeed. > >Not necessarily, but it should be expressed in some way such that the >pilot has an indicator in the cockpit that he can use to comply with >the limitation. Yes, in type certificated aircraft the only >indicator that the pilot has is an airspeed indicator, that reads in >IAS. Some other aircraft have max allowable speeds that are >expressed as indicated mach number at high altitudes. The SR-71 has >a max allowable speed that is expressed as EAS. > >There is no point in providing a limitation if the pilot has no means >at his disposal to comply with the limitation. The last time I >checked Van didn't require that RVs be equipped with air data >computers that provide a true airspeed indication. I have no idea >how Van's expects pilots to comply with a VNE in TAS. > >Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) >Ottawa, Canada >http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: TAS and VNE
Date: Mar 28, 2007
Is the red line on the Vans-supplied ASI on the IAS scale, or the TAS scale? Kevin On 28 Mar 2007, at 19:47, Richard Seiders wrote: > > Kevin, my 6A is equipped with an airspeed indicator that has > ability to determine TAS by setting the temp/alt in window > provided. I purchased it from Van's when building my RV. > Dick > > > At 04:52 PM 3/28/2007, you wrote: > >> >> On 28 Mar 2007, at 13:18, Rob Prior wrote: >> >>> >>> On 9:50 2007-03-28 Kevin Horton wrote: >>>> Each of these bad things will have its own envelope of airspeed, >>>> altitude, temperature, etc that you must remain clear of. The >>>> aircraft designer will specify a VNE that remains clear of all >>>> these >>>> bad things. >>> >>> You forgot to add... That Vne will be expressed as an INDICATED >>> airspeed. >> >> Not necessarily, but it should be expressed in some way such that the >> pilot has an indicator in the cockpit that he can use to comply with >> the limitation. Yes, in type certificated aircraft the only >> indicator that the pilot has is an airspeed indicator, that reads in >> IAS. Some other aircraft have max allowable speeds that are >> expressed as indicated mach number at high altitudes. The SR-71 has >> a max allowable speed that is expressed as EAS. >> >> There is no point in providing a limitation if the pilot has no means >> at his disposal to comply with the limitation. The last time I >> checked Van didn't require that RVs be equipped with air data >> computers that provide a true airspeed indication. I have no idea >> how Van's expects pilots to comply with a VNE in TAS. >> >> Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) >> Ottawa, Canada >> http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 >> >> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jerry2DT(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 28, 2007
Subject: Digitrak Op Manual?
Listers, Does anyone happen to have a current PDF of Trutrak's "Digitrak Operating Manual"? There website must be down, I've gotten the "404 error" message on two diff computers now in trying to get a download. I have the older manual, but need the later one that covers the Garmin 296 setup. If you have it, could you email same to me? Much appreciated. Do not archive. Jerry Cochran ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 28, 2007
Subject: Re: TAS and VNE? (the expert speaks, ha ha)
In a message dated 3/28/2007 10:53:22 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com writes: Engineers use terms like, natural frequency, stiffness, forcing function and dampening. ============================================== Only if he/she intends to bring out a hose to wet something down. Otherwise a real engineer would use the term damping. ;o) GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A, C/S, Flying 840hrs, Silicon Valley, CA) ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 29, 2007
From: "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net>
Subject: Re: Digitrak Op Manual?
I think that this is what you want: <http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/documents/handheldgpsconfig.pdf>http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/documents/ handheldgpsconfig.pdf Or you can go to: http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/documents to browse all the documents in a FTP type format. I believe that the reason you may not be able to get to them directly is that they have converted the entire site to use Flash - the main page tells you that, but other pages you may have saved or gotten from a Google search give a 404 error because they do not exist anymore. I HATE that as I do not have or want Flash installed (just more software to go bad or screw up my system). Trutrak management, if you are listening - "GET RID OF THE *_FLASH ONLY_* WEB SITE!!!!" Dick Tasker Jerry2DT(at)aol.com wrote: > Listers, > > Does anyone happen to have a current PDF of Trutrak's "Digitrak > Operating Manual"? There website must be down, I've gotten the "404 > error" message on two diff computers now in trying to get a download. > > I have the older manual, but need the later one that covers the Garmin > 296 setup. > > If you have it, could you email same to me? Much appreciated. Do not > archive. > > Jerry Cochran -- Please Note: No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however, that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced. -- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Michael D. Cencula" <matronics(at)cencula.com>
Subject: Purge valve return line
Date: Mar 29, 2007
Listers, Hopefully you guys with an AFP system can help out. :-) I'm planning on installing an IO-360 in my -7A (eventually...sigh) and may consider using one of the AFP systems. I've heard it's beneficial to install return lines to the tanks (getting ready to rivet them up), but I've got a few questions: 1. How is an AFP system with return lines connected up? 2. Does it matter where the return line should be located as it runs back into the tank (top / bottom)? 3. Is there anything else I need to be aware of during the build phase in order to ease installation of an AFP system? Thanks, Mike Cencula ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 29, 2007
From: Bruce Swayze <swayze(at)europa.com>
Subject: Left Elevator - rivets don't fit
Hi Everybody, I'm working on the left elevator for my RV-7A, and I ran into a frustrating problem with some of the blind rivets required. There are 4 blind rivets on the top and 4 on the bottom of the skin, that hold the skin to the outboard end of the E-606PP Trim Spar. This is the aft spar on the elevator that carries the trim tab, and these are the rivets forward and to the left of the little tabs that you bend over on the skin surfaces. The rivets called for are MK-319-BS blind rivets. They have brass-colored shafts. I tried every one of the rivets included with my empennage kit, and none of them will fit in a #40 dimpled hole. I tried a #30 hole in a piece of scrap, and it's way too big. Nothing about this is mentioned on the drawings or in the plans. All the other holes in this part are #40, and the standard AN326AD3-3.5 rivets fit just fine. Am I missing something? Did I get a bum batch of pop rivets? Or do I drill out the holes a little bit bigger? If so, what size? I'm wondering if anyone else ran into this. Thanks. Bruce Swayze RV-7A Empennage -- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 29, 2007
From: Rick Galati <rick6a(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Left Elevator - rivets don't fit
Bruce; Most pulled or blind rivets by their very nature are not as strong as solid rivets. To give them all the help they can get blind rivets should be inserted into a prepared holes that are very close to their diameter. You ran into a typical situation that is easily resolved by investing in a cheap digital micrometer and a drill index chart. Enclosed is a copy of my favorite chart. I find I refer to both tools often for one task or another. If you measured the MK-319-BS, you would find it mics out at approximately .110-.111 in diameter. The dimpling operation opened up the material just a bit. Therefore the correct drill to accept a MK-319-BS is 7/64." Rick Galati RV-6A "Darla!" RV-8 Fuselage [QUOTE]The rivets called for are MK-319-BS blind rivets. They have brass-colored shafts. I tried every one of the rivets included with my empennage kit, and none of them will fit in a #40 dimpled hole. I tried a #30 hole in a piece of scrap, and it's way too big. Nothing about this is mentioned on the drawings or in the plans. All the other holes in this part are #40, and the standard AN326AD3-3.5 rivets fit just fine. Am I missing something?[/QUOTE] ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 29, 2007
Subject: Purge valve return line
From: James H Nelson <rv9jim(at)juno.com>
Mike, I have the purge system in my IO-360. I ran my return line back to the feed line on the right tank before the selector valve. This way any returning fuel will go to the right tank. However, if I knew what I know now, I would have run the return line to the tank. Reason? any vapor / bubbles would go into the tank and be vented. Recirculating the hot fuel back into the line prior to the valve lets it cool before I use it. Thus, I think it will be fine. Just a matter of degrees. I ran my return line back along side the feed lines. This way I could secure them together. Run the feed lines with smooth bends. I had to shorten the line from the fire wall to the engine pump. I also put a 45 deg. fitting on the inlet to the pump. This way the feed line makes a "single plane" (geometric) turn. Other wise the hose must turn upward and then 90 deg to the center of the fuselage to get to the fuel pump. A 45 deg fitting at the inlet will not impede the fuel on the suction side. Putting a 90 deg on the outlet is no problem as it is under pressure. My outlet line (that goes down to the air meter) was fitted with a 45 deg. fitting that attached to the "T" fitting on the outlet of the engine pump. the lower end of the line had a 90 deg. fitting where it attaches to the air meter. The 45 deg. up at the fuel pump allowed the line to avoid the tri gear bracing. You can check these out at my web site www.websites.expercraft.com/jimn Jim Nelson ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: Purge valve return line
Date: Mar 29, 2007
http://www.rvproject.com/20030516.html http://www.rvproject.com/20030519.html Some photos from those and other pages on my site (www.rvproject.com). Ignore the arrows, they're probably other stuff, but the photos show where I put the purge return fitting on the firewall and how I plumbed it. http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030516_afp_purge_tee.jpg http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030518_keeper_rivets.jpg http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030518_heat_box_mounted.jpg http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030518_view_inside.jpg http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030519_tee_installed.jpg http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030519_snap_bushing_and_tubing.jpg http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030519_tubing_to_firewall.jpg http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030522_fuel_line_installed.jpg )_( Dan RV-7 N714D (1238 hours) www.rvproject.com / www.weathermeister.com / www.weighmyplane.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael D. Cencula" <matronics(at)cencula.com> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 12:11 AM Subject: RV-List: Purge valve return line > > > Listers, > > Hopefully you guys with an AFP system can help out. :-) > > I'm planning on installing an IO-360 in my -7A (eventually...sigh) and may > consider using one of the AFP systems. I've heard it's beneficial to > install > return lines to the tanks (getting ready to rivet them up), but I've got a > few questions: > > 1. How is an AFP system with return lines connected up? > 2. Does it matter where the return line should be located as it runs back > into > the tank (top / bottom)? > 3. Is there anything else I need to be aware of during the build phase in > order to ease installation of an AFP system? > > Thanks, > > Mike Cencula > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Bryan" <n616tb(at)btsapps.com>
Subject: GX 60 rebooting
Date: Mar 29, 2007
I am having a problem with my gps rebooting with no apparent reason. I am getting ready to call Garmin to see what they have to say, but wonder if anybody else has had a similar situation. On my last fly day I put in just over 4 hours with 5 landings. The gps restarted 4 times. Thanks Tim ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: GX 60 rebooting
Date: Mar 29, 2007
Tim, My GX60 had the exact same issue at first. Turned out to be a defective data card! My advice would be...try another card before you bother sending it in. Off-list, I'm going to send you the email I sent to John Stark when I first had this problem (3 years ago). It may sound very familiar... ;-) )_( Dan RV-7 N714D (1238 hours) www.rvproject.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Bryan" <n616tb(at)btsapps.com> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 7:46 AM Subject: RV-List: GX 60 rebooting > > > I am having a problem with my gps rebooting with no apparent reason. I am > getting ready to call Garmin to see what they have to say, but wonder if > anybody else has had a similar situation. On my last fly day I put in > just > over 4 hours with 5 landings. The gps restarted 4 times. > Thanks > Tim > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 29, 2007
From: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: GX 60 rebooting
I'll be following this because I have one too... Not flying yet - so I haven't had the opportunity to experience what you've seen. I did need to have the software upgraded and the battery replaced though...... -----Original Message----- >From: Tim Bryan <n616tb(at)btsapps.com> >Sent: Mar 29, 2007 10:46 AM >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: RV-List: GX 60 rebooting > > >I am having a problem with my gps rebooting with no apparent reason. I am >getting ready to call Garmin to see what they have to say, but wonder if >anybody else has had a similar situation. On my last fly day I put in just >over 4 hours with 5 landings. The gps restarted 4 times. >Thanks >Tim > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Vince-Himsl" <vhimsl(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Left Elevator - rivets don't fit
Date: Mar 29, 2007
I use 7/64, #33 or #34 (mostly #34). Start out small and progress to larger. Skin thickness, dimpling, etc. make a difference. The #40(many prefer a #41) and #30 are for standard rivets. The blind 'Pop' rivets are thicker. You will find a drill bit gauge (flat plate with holes in it) for numbered bits to be most useful. With the gauge you can put the pop rivet (screws, pins, etc.) in each of the holes to find the right bit. Saves a lot of time! It is even quicker than walking the extra five feet to my builders log to search for the page where I wrote down the drill bit size the last time I needed it. Also get a chart that shows all the drill bits, both numbered and fractional together so you understand relationship say between a 1/8th and a #30. 7/64" = .1094 #35 = .1100 #34 = .1110 #33 = .1130 #32 = .1160 #31 = .1200 1/8" = .1250 #30 = .1285 #29 = .1360 You might want to pick up drill bit #'s 11, 12, 19, 21, 27, 29, 'D', 33, 34, 35, 36, and 37. They're for bolts, screws, other...Can't remember all the reasons, but I have them and they look well used. When I first started, pop rivets were to be avoided at all cost. Now, pop rivets are my friends. Lost track of dings caused trying to avoid using them. Regards, Vince H. RV8 - VSB finish Moscow, ID -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Swayze Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 3:11 AM Subject: RV-List: Left Elevator - rivets don't fit Hi Everybody, I'm working on the left elevator for my RV-7A, and I ran into a frustrating problem with some of the blind rivets required. There are 4 blind rivets on the top and 4 on the bottom of the skin, that hold the skin to the outboard end of the E-606PP Trim Spar. This is the aft spar on the elevator that carries the trim tab, and these are the rivets forward and to the left of the little tabs that you bend over on the skin surfaces. The rivets called for are MK-319-BS blind rivets. They have brass-colored shafts. I tried every one of the rivets included with my empennage kit, and none of them will fit in a #40 dimpled hole. I tried a #30 hole in a piece of scrap, and it's way too big. Nothing about this is mentioned on the drawings or in the plans. All the other holes in this part are #40, and the standard AN326AD3-3.5 rivets fit just fine. Am I missing something? Did I get a bum batch of pop rivets? Or do I drill out the holes a little bit bigger? If so, what size? I'm wondering if anyone else ran into this. Thanks. Bruce Swayze RV-7A Empennage -- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 29, 2007
From: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: GX 60 rebooting
Good hint Dan - I had to get spare datacards because of the Jepp load size. -----Original Message----- >From: Dan Checkoway <dan(at)rvproject.com> >Sent: Mar 29, 2007 10:18 AM >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV-List: GX 60 rebooting > > >Tim, > >My GX60 had the exact same issue at first. Turned out to be a defective >data card! My advice would be...try another card before you bother sending >it in. > >Off-list, I'm going to send you the email I sent to John Stark when I first >had this problem (3 years ago). It may sound very familiar... ;-) > >)_( Dan >RV-7 N714D (1238 hours) >www.rvproject.com > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Tim Bryan" <n616tb(at)btsapps.com> >To: >Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 7:46 AM >Subject: RV-List: GX 60 rebooting > > >> >> >> >> I am having a problem with my gps rebooting with no apparent reason. I am >> getting ready to call Garmin to see what they have to say, but wonder if >> anybody else has had a similar situation. On my last fly day I put in >> just >> over 4 hours with 5 landings. The gps restarted 4 times. >> Thanks >> Tim >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 29, 2007
From: Dave Nellis <truflite(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Left Elevator - rivets don't fit
My guess is that you have the wrong rivet. I just looked at my elevator and found an aluminum rivet and a steel pin. The rivet I ended using there is a MK319BS. Dave --- Bruce Swayze wrote: > > > Hi Everybody, > I'm working on the left elevator for my RV-7A, and I > ran into a > frustrating problem with some of the blind rivets > required. There are > 4 blind rivets on the top and 4 on the bottom of the > skin, that hold > the skin to the outboard end of the E-606PP Trim > Spar. This is the > aft spar on the elevator that carries the trim tab, > and these are the > rivets forward and to the left of the little tabs > that you bend over > on the skin surfaces. The rivets called for are > MK-319-BS blind > rivets. They have brass-colored shafts. I tried > every one of the > rivets included with my empennage kit, and none of > them will fit in a > #40 dimpled hole. I tried a #30 hole in a piece of > scrap, and it's > way too big. Nothing about this is mentioned on the > drawings or in > the plans. All the other holes in this part are #40, > and the standard > AN326AD3-3.5 rivets fit just fine. Am I missing > something? Did I get > a bum batch of pop rivets? Or do I drill out the > holes a little bit > bigger? If so, what size? I'm wondering if anyone > else ran into this. Thanks. > > Bruce Swayze > RV-7A Empennage > > > -- > > > > > browse > Subscriptions page, > FAQ, > > Web Forums! > > > > > Be a PS3 game guru. Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! Games. http://videogames.yahoo.com/platform?platform=120121 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "glen matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: TAS and VNE
Date: Mar 29, 2007
Hi Rob et al- While it's true that Vne is published in IAS, there are some mitigators that we need to keep in mind. First, the roots of the certification rules go back to a simpler time. This leads to an airspeed indicator, not a TAS indicator, being req'd to be installed by the regs and V speeds being IAS. These speeds are guaranteed accurate only when operating at SL and ISA. Some speeds, such as indicated stall speeds, by their nature continue to be accurate with a change in altitude. However, that particular data point has nothing to do with the certification process. Likewise, the fact that many of us can read TAS directly off of our panels has nothing to do with the process or intent of determining Vne. Another point is that our planes might just have a flutter onset speed in the many hundreds of knots. It could well be that at any max altitude an RV might reasonably be expected to operate, the flutter margin decreases from 200 to 100 knots. Then again, high alt ops at published indicated Vne could make the margin negative. We just don't know, although the Flyin' Tiger would lead me to suspect that this is never going to be a real concern for a properly built and maintained RV. To make an extreme illustration, if we were to operate an RV-8 at it's published Vne of 200 KIAS in a standard atmosphere at, say, 67,000 feet (Plz don't ask how we got there- it's still in development...) we would be at the published Vne limit. We would also be slightly in excess of Mach 1. Now, I don't have any personal experience to draw upon here, but I'm guessing something bad would happen to the plane and, by extension, it's occupants. Clearly, operating at Vne at SL is okay, so there is going to be some transition altitude where it ceases to be okay. The most important point to be taken from all this is that we don't know what the limiting factor is under any given set of conditions, only that Van's has published a value for Vne at SL ISA. It is logical to assume that there is a good pad built into that number, but we have no idea what that pad is, what the "real" Vne could be, or how it is affected by conditions. Hence, anyone exceeding those published limits is truly playing test pilot and should proceed with proper respect for the potential outcome. FWIW- >On 9:50 2007-03-28 Kevin Horton wrote: >> Each of these bad things will have its own envelope of airspeed, >> altitude, temperature, etc that you must remain clear of. The >> aircraft designer will specify a VNE that remains clear of all these >> bad things. > >You forgot to add... That Vne will be expressed as an INDICATED airspeed. > >-Rob glen matejcek aerobubba(at)earthlink.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ernie & Margo" <ekells(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: TAS and VNE
Date: Mar 29, 2007
Kevin & the List: Please note Van's ASI has the RED line on the IAS scale (doesn't move). I have the Vans-supplied ASI. The fixed face shows Knots and Miles. The instrument has an adjusting knob which rotates a "disk" behind the face. The window at the top of the disk has a scale which rotates. This causes the window at the bottom of the disk to offset the fixed speed scale on the face. SO, you would adjust the top window to align the altitude factor (5 for 5,000) opposite the fixed scale for temperature (+30 to -30). Look at the needle - the fixed "black" scale shows IAS, the "white" disk shows TAS. Spoken without my plane here so I burned some brain cells trying to think this through. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Horton" <khorton01(at)rogers.com> > > Is the red line on the Vans-supplied ASI on the IAS scale, or the TAS > scale? > > Kevin > > On 28 Mar 2007, at 19:47, Richard Seiders wrote: > >> >> Kevin, my 6A is equipped with an airspeed indicator that has ability to >> determine TAS by setting the temp/alt in window provided. I purchased it >> from Van's when building my RV. >> Dick >> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: LessDragProd(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 29, 2007
Subject: Re: TAS and Vne & Flutter at Altitude
I was told that the MU-2 has an airspeed indicator that shows the critical airspeed for that flight altitude. The critical airspeed is shown as a moving (red?) line on the IAS indicator. Another method I've heard of using is an indicated airspeed to a fairly low altitude like 10,000' and a limiting Mach number above that altitude. Part 23 identifies a maximum operating airspeed (Vmo) and a maximum operating Mach number (Mmo) as airspeed limits. Where Vmo is an IAS? And Mmo as a fixed Mach number is a varying TAS? (Mach 1 being about 760 knots TAS at sea level to about 660 knots TAS at 35,000?) The RMI Microencoder in my RV-3 can provide a Mach number readout. I haven't tried it, but if I remember correctly, I can input a set point for an audio alarm and/or flashing display to the Mach number. BTW, I estimated a limiting Mach number of about 0.26 for 230 mph TAS at 10,000'. Anyone have a better number? The Dynon D-10 & D-10A provides a TAS readout when their OAT is used. I understand that there is no provision at this time for an alarm on the TAS. Anyone have information on their flight system and the ability to set an alarm on TAS or Mach number? Regards, Jim Ayers ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Bryan" <n616tb(at)btsapps.com>
Subject: GX 60 rebooting
Date: Mar 29, 2007
Agreed, I am going to pursue getting a bigger new card also. Tim > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list- > server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ralph E. Capen > Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 8:38 AM > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: GX 60 rebooting > > > Good hint Dan - I had to get spare datacards because of the Jepp load > size. > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Dan Checkoway <dan(at)rvproject.com> > >Sent: Mar 29, 2007 10:18 AM > >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > >Subject: Re: RV-List: GX 60 rebooting > > > > > >Tim, > > > >My GX60 had the exact same issue at first. Turned out to be a defective > >data card! My advice would be...try another card before you bother > sending > >it in. > > > >Off-list, I'm going to send you the email I sent to John Stark when I > first > >had this problem (3 years ago). It may sound very familiar... ;-) > > > >)_( Dan > >RV-7 N714D (1238 hours) > >www.rvproject.com > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Tim Bryan" <n616tb(at)btsapps.com> > >To: > >Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 7:46 AM > >Subject: RV-List: GX 60 rebooting > > > > > >> > >> > >> > >> I am having a problem with my gps rebooting with no apparent reason. I > am > >> getting ready to call Garmin to see what they have to say, but wonder > if > >> anybody else has had a similar situation. On my last fly day I put in > >> just > >> over 4 hours with 5 landings. The gps restarted 4 times. > >> Thanks > >> Tim > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "jbker(at)juno.com" <jbker(at)juno.com>
Date: Mar 29, 2007
Subject: Skytech starter for sale
A friend ask me to post this note to list. 149 tooth skytech starter almost new. $200 Call Rob Kermanj, 772 460 3709
A friend ask me to post this note to list.

149 tooth skytech starter almost new. $200

Call Rob Kermanj, 772 460 3709

________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 29, 2007
From: <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Vne dependent on TAS?
Small planes have a ONE SIZE (Speed) FITS ALL, Vne, since we don't fly very high our flutter margin does not change much and there is some FAT to use or cover our butts, in theory, BUT getting near or into the TEENS, watch out diving at indicated Vne speed. As long as the flutter margin has enough FAT in it, it can handle all operational altitudes. However FLY high in any GA plane to its MAX Service ceiling, say at min weight and dive to Vne, you might be playing with fire. Larry's glider analogy is a case where at normal lower altitudes, the one Vne fits all works. IT WORKS and simplifies the pilots work load while maintaining safety. However because gliders can really fly high (in the 20's or 30's or higher) they need a correction to Vne as they climb to high altitudes, most likely for flutter margin or protection. Some say we should have an indication all the time in our RV's. Well Jets have that. They have a moving Vne/Vmo indicator. Light planes don't fly high enough, so there is a sufficient sea level flutter margin to handle the higher altitudes it can fly, But add a turbo engine you may have a problem. IN JETS, they have a MACH / TRUE AIRSPEED indicator. The Vne is a poll actually moves in flight. Behind that moving Vne / Vmo limit is an air data computer. If you want to have one limit SPEED you would use MACH number. M = TAS/Speed of sound = Speed of Object thru medium (TAS) / Speed of sound (in medium) "The speed of sound in air depends pretty much solely on the temperature of the air: the colder the air, the slower the speed of sound. Air gets steadily colder with altitude, thus the higher you go, the slower the speed of sound. That means without going any faster, an airplane gets closer to the speed of sound as it gets higher. It's sort of like you get closer to the speed limit as you drive towards town, not because you're accelerating, but because the speed limit decreases towards your speed". Jets use both indicated and MACH speed indicators. At lower altitudes its indicated kts. It changes over from measuring speed in Knots to MACH at 20,000 to 25,000 feet. Above +20,000 we fly by Mach and have limits based on Mach speed. Usually in the 0.82-0.86M range. However you can feel "high speed" buffet if you push the Vne at altitude. Buffet is not really flutter but unstable airflow over the control surfaces as it approaches supersonic speeds. Strangely STALL SPEED (TAS) goes up with altitude. So you have to fly faster and faster (TAS) to avoid stall! But you also have to lower your max speed due to flutter. YOU CAN SEE THEM COMING TOGETHER! Jets fly so high they can get both High Speed Buffet and Stall at the same time! This is called the coffin corner. Most commercial jets have Ceilings of about 39,000-45,000 feet. Some of the top of the line bizz jets have higher service ceilings. Again Vne is a moving target as you climb FOR ALL PLANES. Like Jets, little planes lose flutter margin as they climb into less dense air, but since we rarely climb above say 18,000 feet, ONE SIZE FITS ALL.. As long as there a conservative Vne and flutter margins to cover it, a single Vne is all that is needed for most normally aspirated planes. As was pointed out Vne is not necessarily a flutter margin, it is most likely a structural limit. It is harder to break the plane at altitude because there is less air pressure and stall is more likely before load factor is an issue. On the other stability, control and flutter take over at altitude. If you take it to an extreme (space) at some point the wings and control surfaces do nothing. We can make our own Vne card. (Assume Vne=210 mph IAS sea level) At 10,000 feet TAS to indicated is about 12% (Vne 187 IAS) At 16,000 feet TAS to indicated is about 27%. (Vne 165 IAS) (super conservative but it works) Once you get to 10,000 feet to 12,000 feet you are starting to get into your flutter margin by flying INDICATED speed Vne. For example diving at 210 mph at 16,000 feet gives you 262 mph, or 52 mph over Vne. Practically speaking MOST RV'er I know fly in the 8,000-12,500 feet range. I have some high flying O2 sucking buddies that fly in the teens, but its less common. Bottom line flutter is REAL and not to be messed with. In the RVator a RV-4 pilot (who also was a fighter pilot) was flying real high, say low teens, and dove to get under a cloud deck. Well his airspeed was below Vne (indicated). He felt flutter in the elevator and slowed down. When he got on the ground and calculated the TAS he was like +40 mph above Vne (TAS) I recall. He felt the elevator flutter. Thanks to a good design and strength he was able to slow and stabilize the plane. He found his planes limit. Because RV's are home made and every elevator and counter weight is different you can bet so will flutter speed be different. RV's have been turned into 260hp clip wing "Harmon Rockets" and fly 240-250 mph tas all the time. I would say GOOD for us 4-banger RV drivers, we know there is some margin since they planes are basically the same, but we EAT that margin when we climb. Once you get mid teens, WATCH IT. Harmon guys need to really watch it since they can fly higher and faster with the higher HP. A new Harmon Rocket and new pilot to flying it was lost in California recently in turbulent conditions. It came down I recall in some pieces. You can imagine flying fast in turbulence well above what the original RV Vne might be a recipe for disaster. --------------------------------- Don't be flakey. Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile and always stay connected to friends. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jerry2DT(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 29, 2007
Subject: Re: Digitrak Op Manual?
Thanks Dale & Richard, Yes it was the "Flash" deal as one of you mentioned. Thanks mucho, PDF received. Jerry C. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 29, 2007
From: Richard Seiders <seiders(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: TAS and VNE
It's on the IAS scale. That is the indicator I am using most of the time. I use the TAS scale only when flying at or above 4000msl. Dick At 08:56 PM 3/28/2007, you wrote: > >Is the red line on the Vans-supplied ASI on the IAS scale, or the TAS >scale? > >Kevin > >On 28 Mar 2007, at 19:47, Richard Seiders wrote: > >> >>Kevin, my 6A is equipped with an airspeed indicator that has >>ability to determine TAS by setting the temp/alt in window >>provided. I purchased it from Van's when building my RV. >>Dick >> >> >>At 04:52 PM 3/28/2007, you wrote: >> >>> >>>On 28 Mar 2007, at 13:18, Rob Prior wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>On 9:50 2007-03-28 Kevin Horton wrote: >>>>>Each of these bad things will have its own envelope of airspeed, >>>>>altitude, temperature, etc that you must remain clear of. The >>>>>aircraft designer will specify a VNE that remains clear of all >>>>>these >>>>>bad things. >>>> >>>>You forgot to add... That Vne will be expressed as an INDICATED >>>>airspeed. >>> >>>Not necessarily, but it should be expressed in some way such that the >>>pilot has an indicator in the cockpit that he can use to comply with >>>the limitation. Yes, in type certificated aircraft the only >>>indicator that the pilot has is an airspeed indicator, that reads in >>>IAS. Some other aircraft have max allowable speeds that are >>>expressed as indicated mach number at high altitudes. The SR-71 has >>>a max allowable speed that is expressed as EAS. >>> >>>There is no point in providing a limitation if the pilot has no means >>>at his disposal to comply with the limitation. The last time I >>>checked Van didn't require that RVs be equipped with air data >>>computers that provide a true airspeed indication. I have no idea >>>how Van's expects pilots to comply with a VNE in TAS. >>> >>>Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) >>>Ottawa, Canada >>>http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 >>> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Vent line thru F-902 RV-9A
From: "jlfernan" <jlfernan(at)bellsouth.net>
Date: Mar 29, 2007
I'm having trouble picturing where to drill the hole thru the F-902 for the AN fitting for the fuel vent line. I'm building a quickbuild and there is no pilot hole and all the rivet holes are filled. If someone could post a photo it could make my life easier. -------- Jorge Fernandez N214JL Reserved 9A QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103768#103768 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike Kraus" <n223rv(at)wolflakeairport.net>
Subject: AFP Purge Valve Cable Connection
Date: Mar 29, 2007
I have a few ideas on how to route and connect the Airflow Performance Purge Valve cable but were wondering how others hooked it up? Does anyone have any pictures of the attachment of the purge valve cable to the valve? Thanks -Mike ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 29, 2007
From: Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: AFP Purge Valve Cable Connection
I would also be interested in how and where they penetrated the firewall. Larry #356 Mike Kraus wrote: > I have a few ideas on how to route and connect the Airflow Performance > Purge Valve cable but were wondering how others hooked it up? Does > anyone have any pictures of the attachment of the purge valve cable to > the valve? > > Thanks > -Mike > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "T.C. Chang" <tc1234c(at)roadrunner.com>
Subject: Vent line thru F-902 RV-9A
Date: Mar 29, 2007
Jorge, You may find a picture at: http://picasaweb.google.com/tc1234c/Engine/photo#5047521864364184754 I don't remember that the exact location is critical. Ted ------------------------------------------ T.C. Chang http://tc1234c.googlepages.com/ tc1234c(at)roadrunner.com RV-9A, Lycoming (ECI) O320-D2A, 160 hp, Carb, Dual Mag, Sensenich FP GRT dual DU H1, TT DigiFlight II VSGV, 130 Hobbs 3/25/2007 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jlfernan Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 7:07 PM Subject: RV-List: Vent line thru F-902 RV-9A I'm having trouble picturing where to drill the hole thru the F-902 for the AN fitting for the fuel vent line. I'm building a quickbuild and there is no pilot hole and all the rivet holes are filled. If someone could post a photo it could make my life easier. -------- Jorge Fernandez N214JL Reserved 9A QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=103768#103768 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Michael D. Cencula" <matronics(at)cencula.com>
Subject: Re: Left Elevator - rivets don't fit
Date: Mar 29, 2007
Here's a picture of the correct rivet to use.: http://www.our7a.com/20061007.html Others are correct, the holes need drilled out to 7/64. Mike On Thursday March 29 2007 06:10 am, Bruce Swayze wrote: > > Hi Everybody, > I'm working on the left elevator for my RV-7A, and I ran into a > frustrating problem with some of the blind rivets required. There are > 4 blind rivets on the top and 4 on the bottom of the skin, that hold > the skin to the outboard end of the E-606PP Trim Spar. This is the > aft spar on the elevator that carries the trim tab, and these are the > rivets forward and to the left of the little tabs that you bend over > on the skin surfaces. The rivets called for are MK-319-BS blind > rivets. They have brass-colored shafts. I tried every one of the > rivets included with my empennage kit, and none of them will fit in a > #40 dimpled hole. I tried a #30 hole in a piece of scrap, and it's > way too big. Nothing about this is mentioned on the drawings or in > the plans. All the other holes in this part are #40, and the standard > AN326AD3-3.5 rivets fit just fine. Am I missing something? Did I get > a bum batch of pop rivets? Or do I drill out the holes a little bit > bigger? If so, what size? I'm wondering if anyone else ran into this. > Thanks. > > Bruce Swayze > RV-7A Empennage ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Michael D. Cencula" <matronics(at)cencula.com>
Subject: Re: Purge valve return line
Date: Mar 29, 2007
Thanks, Dan. I had actually already read you site (great site) prior to making my posting. Your statement of: "Had I known I would be installing the system from the get-go I would have installed return lines all the way into the tanks." from http://www.rvproject.com/20030519.html is what got me thinking about this. I looked at the scanned AFP manual on your site, but neither of the two system drawings show dedicated return lines going back to the tanks (unless I'm misreading them). Hence, question #1. The drawing on page 7 of that .pdf seems to be your setup. I could just pop an extra fitting in the cover plate of the tank, but should it be at the bottom, or near the top? If I end up not using it, I suppose I could just cap it off. Mike On Thursday March 29 2007 09:15 am, Dan Checkoway wrote: > > http://www.rvproject.com/20030516.html > http://www.rvproject.com/20030519.html > > Some photos from those and other pages on my site (www.rvproject.com). > Ignore the arrows, they're probably other stuff, but the photos show where > I put the purge return fitting on the firewall and how I plumbed it. > > http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030516_afp_purge_tee.jpg > http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030518_keeper_rivets.jpg > http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030518_heat_box_mounted.jpg > http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030518_view_inside.jpg > http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030519_tee_installed.jpg > http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030519_snap_bushing_and_tubing.jpg > http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030519_tubing_to_firewall.jpg > http://rvimg.com/images/2003/20030522_fuel_line_installed.jpg > > )_( Dan > RV-7 N714D (1238 hours) > www.rvproject.com / www.weathermeister.com / www.weighmyplane.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael D. Cencula" <matronics(at)cencula.com> > To: > Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 12:11 AM > Subject: RV-List: Purge valve return line > > > > > > > Listers, > > > > Hopefully you guys with an AFP system can help out. :-) > > > > I'm planning on installing an IO-360 in my -7A (eventually...sigh) and > > may consider using one of the AFP systems. I've heard it's beneficial to > > install > > return lines to the tanks (getting ready to rivet them up), but I've got > > a few questions: > > > > 1. How is an AFP system with return lines connected up? > > 2. Does it matter where the return line should be located as it runs back > > into > > the tank (top / bottom)? > > 3. Is there anything else I need to be aware of during the build phase in > > order to ease installation of an AFP system? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Mike Cencula > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 30, 2007
From: SCOTT SPENCER <aerokinetic(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: TAS and Vne
>>>>I was told that the MU-2 has an airspeed indicator that shows the critical airspeed for that flight altitude. The critical airspeed is shown as a moving (red?) line on the IAS indicator. <<< Ain't just the MU-2... as also stated by another lister, ALL jets I know of, and most of the faster turboprops have the Vne marking on the airspeed indicator expressed as a *moving needle* (that the airspeed needle can still pass over -don't ask me how I know) commonly called a 'barber pole', because it's typically painted red and white like, well... a barber pole. ;) It changes position with altitude/air density to reflect the Vne (indicated) at the present situation. Just for an example... Yesterday, like most days I fly it, I was sitting in the Gulfstream at altitude seeing the airspeed 'bumping the pole' as they say, at M.80 ( i.e. we were *at* Vne) and the indicated airspeed (and the barber pole) was somewhere in the lower 200's. Our true was around 430 knots or so according to the ADC. We were at FL390 as I recall... sounds about right anyway. If we had gone higher or lower the numbers would have been different... to an absolute limitation for this aircraft (GIIB) of M.85 at high altitude or 367 KCAS at low altitude. That's why the need for a 'moving redline'/barber pole So you can tell all your friends that the Vne on a Gulfstream bizjet is at around 230KIAS (give or take) in cruise flight... and blow their minds... but of course that number only applies at around 40,000 feet or so... on certain days. Some restrictions apply. Void where prohibited. And yes, flutter is real. And it's an aero-elasticity/natural-frequency sort of thing as stated by some already... and it can kill you as stated by many. And Vans knows what they are talking about. Scott N4ZW ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jon Croke" <Jon(at)joncroke.com>
Subject: New RV Rudder build video DVD
Date: Mar 30, 2007
For those of you who might want to get a friend interested in RV building... HomebuiltHELP is announcing the release of a new instructional video DVD: RV Rudder Workshop. As you might imagine, it is for the beginner, demonstrating the use of tools, riveting, and then assembling an RV7 rudder from start to finish. This topic has been done before on video, but this one has a more polished presentation and attention to practical details. Info available at http://homebuilthelp.com/RVRudder.htm Thank you! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "glen matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: envelopes and gauges, was TAS and Vne & Flutter at Altitude
Date: Mar 30, 2007
The following is non-RV related techno-mumbo-jumbo, so go ahead and delete now rather than scolding later if one isn't interested.... Hi Jim- >I was told that the MU-2 has an airspeed indicator that shows the critical >airspeed for that flight altitude. The critical airspeed is shown as a moving > (red?) line on the IAS indicator. The Vmo/Mmo pointer on such an airspeed indicator moves so as to respect whatever the pertinent limit is, be it V or M. The pointer has diagonal red and white stripes to differentiate it from a conventional fixed red line, and is referred to as a "barber pole" in common parlance. >Another method I've heard of using is an indicated airspeed to a fairly low >altitude like 10,000' and a limiting Mach number above that altitude. > >Part 23 identifies a maximum operating airspeed (Vmo) and a maximum >operating Mach number (Mmo) as airspeed limits. Where Vmo is an IAS? And Mmo >as a >fixed Mach number is a varying TAS? (Mach 1 being about 760 knots TAS at sea >level to about 660 knots TAS at 35,000?) Consider a graph of altitude (vert axis) vs IAS (horiz axis). We plot the various airspeed limits on the graph to build an airspeed envelope. First, we make a vertical line at Vs. Next we make another vertical line at Vne. These two lines along with the zero alt line make up three side of our airspeed operating envelope. Last we have Mmo, or max operating Mach. Recall that Mach (the speed of sound) is dependant upon air temperature, with higher temps yielding a higher speed of sound. If we were to plot Mach on our graph, it would be a line that started out high on the left (higher alt and lower speed) and angled down towards the right (lower altitude and higher speed). If our limiting Mach is less than 1, it will be represented by a line below the Mach line and with a lesser slope than the Mach line. The crossover altitude where the Vne and Mmo lines meet (upper right corner of the graph) is the altitude where the barber pole starts to move towards a lower value. In the case of a turboprop with a lower Mmo, that will be a relatively lower altitude, perhaps the low teens. In the case of the average transport jet, that alt may be in the low to mid 20's. The upper left corner of the graph is where Mmo and Vs converge. In the case of a high flying jet we are bumping up against Mmo, which implies that we are transonic. Somewhere on the plane, like just above the cockpit, there is most likely supersonic flow. If we go any faster, or pull any g, we start to get shock waves on top the wing with flow separation aft of that, resulting in a rumble in the airframe. Yet the air is so thin that we are flying quite close to the critical angle of attack. Any increase in angle of attack will also induce flow separation and resultant bad things. It is entirely possible for a plane to have enough power to climb to an altitude where the air is so thin that the plane could stall and immediately overspeed in the recovery. This is, of course, how that operating realm came to be known as "coffin corner". >BTW, I estimated a limiting Mach number of about 0.26 for 230 mph TAS at >10,000'. Anyone have a better number? >Regards, >Jim Ayers glen matejcek aerobubba(at)earthlink.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Joe Radford" <rvjoe(at)cox.net>
Subject: Tom Green
Date: Mar 30, 2007
Thank you Tom Green! I wanted to post this note of gratitude for the way Tom Green at Vans handled a situation that I encountered recently. It has to do with a mismatch of parts that I ended up with from Vans for mounting the Alternator on my engine. This posting is long in the details that follow, so skip the details if you wish, but just know that Vans has regained the respect of one RV6 builder for the way Tom Green handled a very frustrating situation. I purchased a Firewall Forward kit from Vans a couple of years ago which included an Alternator kit with a Boss mount; but I ended up with an engine that requires a Case mount. At first it seemed like no big deal because Vans also sells a case mount bracket. I ordered that bracket from Vans, mounted it to my engine and hung the alternator. After mounting the bracket and alternator I discovered that the alternator was too far forward by 5/16 of an inch. I called Vans builder support to explain the problem I was having. I thought that maybe I was missing something. I just couldnt believe that if I bought the alternator and the bracket(s) from Vans that I would have a mismatch like this. I didnt see any way to get the alternator into alignment without milling down the backside of the front ear on the alternator by 5/16 on an inch. I didnt want to do this (even though there would have been enough meat to work with) because I didnt want to end up with a morphodite. When I spoke with an employee of Vans builder support (I wont mention his name) to see if he had any suggestions. He basically insulted me by saying that Vans doesnt know what engine, alternator, brackets, etc that the builder will end up with, and you have to remember that you are the manufacturer. I told him that I am aware of this, but I thought that since I bought the alternator and the brackets from Vans, I didnt think I would end up with a hodgepodge / mismatch. The conversation was going down hill and instead of getting any constructive suggestions, I got much more frustrated and I ended the conversation. I dont want this to sound like a slam on Vans Aircraft but after I hung up the phone and reflected on the conversation, my whole opinion of Vans Aircraft changed. I continued thinking (stewing) about the conversation for a few days. I decided to call back and talk to Tom Green just to let him know that Vans is selling parts (specifically the case mount bracket and alternator) that don t work together. After discussing any and all of the possible reasons that I may be encountering this problem, Tom suggested that I call Plane Power at (877)934-5700 and tell them what my application and engine are and get a part number from them for their kit. Tom said that Vans is now selling the Plane Power alternator kit as a Deluxe Alternator Kit and it even has over voltage protection built in, but they dont carry the one with the case mount. He said that he wants me to send back the Vans alternator kit and the bracket along with the part number for the Plane Power kit. He will then order that kit, have it drop shipped to me and just charge me the difference between the two kits. I was amazed at the way he dealt with this situation and the solution he came up with. I only called because I wanted to hear what his response would be to what had happened. I was hopping for a positive response because I didnt want and I didnt think it would be fair to let my opinion of Vans change because of one bad experience with the employee in the builder support. After speaking to Tom I called Plane Power and spoke to a nice lady named Linda. She said that they have exactly what I need and gave me the part number for their kit for my application. I sent my original parts back to Vans including a letter to Tom with the part number (that I got from Linda) and thanked him for his generous offer and solution to my problem. A week later I received the kit from Plane Power and I hadnt even arranged to pay the difference yet. I now have the Plane Power Alternator with their bracket mounted to my engine and it lines up perfectly. Kudos Tom! Thanks again. Joe Radford Peoria, Arizona ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 30, 2007
From: "Patty Hamilton" <PGILLIES(at)gwm.sc.edu>
Subject: Palmetto Wing RV Fly In next Saturday April 7
The Palmetto Wing of Vans Air Force Invites any and all RV pilots/flyers/builders, EAA members To the fourth annual PALMETTO RV FLYIN COOKOUT Saturday, April 7th No Rain date since Sunday is Easter (If it rains we will be eating a lot of hamburger) Columbia Downtown Owens Field Airport Columbia, SC Palmetto Burgers and Carolina Dogs Grills will be fired up at 11:00 AM No Program No Vendors No Speeches No Organization No Charge (Donations Accepted for EAA Chapter 242) Just good food, RVs, and friendly conversation. www.airnav.com/airport/KCUB Note right traffic for runway 13 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 30, 2007
From: ptrotter(at)optonline.net
Subject: Re: Tom Green
I have noticed the same thing when deailng with Van=27s support=2E Most of the guys act like you are imposing on them when you call for help=2C but if you get Tom he will go out of his way to help you and sort out a ny issues you might have=2E Paul ----- Original Message ----- From=3A Joe Radford Date=3A Friday=2C March 30=2C 2007 10=3A16 am Subject=3A RV-List=3A Tom Green To=3A rv-list=40matronics=2Ecom =3E --=3E RV-List message posted by=3A =22Joe Radford=22 =3E =3E Thank you Tom Green! =3E =3E I wanted to post this note of gratitude for the way Tom Green at Van s =3E handled a situation that I encountered recently=2E It has to do =3E with a =3E mismatch of parts that I ended up with from Vans for mounting =3E the Alternator =3E on my engine=2E This posting is long in the details that follow=2C =3E so skip the =3E details if you wish=2C but just know that Vans has regained the =3E respect of one =3E RV6 builder for the way Tom Green handled a very frustrating =3E situation=2E =3E I purchased a Firewall Forward kit from Vans a couple of years =3E ago which =3E included an Alternator kit with a Boss mount=3B but I ended up =3E with an engine =3E that requires a Case mount=2E At first it seemed like no big deal =3E becauseVans also sells a case mount bracket=2E I ordered that =3E bracket from Vans=2C =3E mounted it to my engine and hung the alternator=2E After mounting =3E the bracket =3E and alternator I discovered that the alternator was too far =3E forward by 5/16 =3E of an inch=2E I called Vans builder support to explain the =3E problem I was =3E having=2E I thought that maybe I was missing something=2E I just =3E couldn=92tbelieve that if I bought the alternator and the =3E bracket(s) from Vans that I =3E would have a mismatch like this=2E I didn=92t see any way to get =3E the alternator =3E into alignment without milling down the backside of the front =3E ear on the =3E alternator by 5/16 on an inch=2E I didn=92t want to do this (even =3E though there =3E would have been enough =93meat=94 to work with) because I didn=92t =3E want to end up =3E with a morphodite=2E When I spoke with an employee of Vans =3E builder support (I =3E won=92t mention his name) to see if he had any suggestions=2E He =3E basicallyinsulted me by saying that Vans doesn=92t know what =3E engine=2C alternator=2C =3E brackets=2C etc=85 that the builder will end up with=2C and =93you h ave =3E to remember =3E that you are the manufacturer=94=2E I told him that I am aware of =3E this=2C but I =3E thought that since I bought the alternator and the brackets from =3E Vans=2C I =3E didn=92t think I would end up with a hodgepodge / mismatch=2E The =3E conversationwas going down hill and instead of getting any =3E constructive suggestions=2C I =3E got much more frustrated and I ended the conversation=2E I don=92t =3E want this to =3E sound like a slam on Vans Aircraft but after I hung up the phone and =3E reflected on the conversation=2C my whole opinion of Vans Aircraft =3E changed=2E =3E I continued thinking (stewing) about the conversation for a few =3E days=2E I =3E decided to call back and talk to Tom Green just to let him know =3E that Vans is =3E selling parts (specifically the case mount bracket and =3E alternator) that don=92 =3E t work together=2E After discussing any and all of the possible =3E reasons that =3E I may be encountering this problem=2C Tom suggested that I call =3E Plane Power at =3E (877)934-5700 and tell them what my application and engine are =3E and get a =3E part number from them for their kit=2E Tom said that Vans is now =3E selling the =3E Plane Power alternator kit as a =93Deluxe Alternator Kit=94 and it =3E even has over =3E voltage protection built in=2C but they don=92t carry the one with =3E the case =3E mount=2E He said that he wants me to send back the Vans =3E alternator kit and =3E the bracket along with the part number for the Plane Power kit=2E =3E He will =3E then order that kit=2C have it drop shipped to me and just charge =3E me the =3E difference between the two kits=2E I was amazed at the way he =3E dealt with this =3E situation and the solution he came up with=2E I only called =3E because I wanted =3E to hear what his response would be to what had happened=2E I was =3E hopping for =3E a positive response because I didn=92t want and I didn=92t think it =3E would be =3E fair to let my opinion of Vans change because of one bad =3E experience with the =3E employee in the builder support=2E After speaking to Tom I called =3E Plane Power =3E and spoke to a nice lady named Linda=2E She said that they have =3E exactly what =3E I need and gave me the part number for their kit for my =3E application=2E I sent =3E my original parts back to Vans including a letter to Tom with =3E the part =3E number (that I got from Linda) and thanked him for his generous =3E offer and =3E solution to my problem=2E A week later I received the kit from =3E Plane Power =3E and I hadn=92t even arranged to pay the difference yet=2E I now =3E have the Plane =3E Power Alternator with their bracket mounted to my engine and it =3E lines up =3E perfectly=2E =3E =3E Kudos Tom! Thanks again=2E =3E =3E =3E Joe Radford =3E Peoria=2C Arizona =3E =3E =3E =5F-====================== ======================== ============= =3E =5F-= - The RV-List Email Forum - =3E =5F-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse =3E =5F-= the many List utilities such as the Subscriptions page=2C =3E =5F-= Archive Search =26 Download=2C 7-Day Browse=2C Chat=2C FAQ=2C =3E =5F-= Photoshare=2C and much much more=3A =3E =5F-= --=3E http=3A//www=2Ematronics=2Ecom/Navigator=3FRV-List =3E =5F-====================== ======================== ============= =3E =5F-= - NEW MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - =3E =5F-= Same great content now also available via the Web Forums! =3E =5F-= --=3E http=3A//forums=2Ematronics=2Ecom =3E =5F-====================== ======================== ============= =3E =3E =3E =3E ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: Purge valve return line
Date: Mar 30, 2007
> I could just pop an extra fitting in the cover plate of the tank, but > should > it be at the bottom, or near the top? If I end up not using it, I suppose > I > could just cap it off. Not having done this myself, take my advice with a grain of salt...but I don't personally think it matters much where you put the return fitting. And FWIW, after 1239 hours on my RV-7, I haven't had any purge related issues whatsoever. The way I teed it into the supply upstream of the selector has worked just fine. I do think that if you are BUILDING fuel tanks it makes sense to at least provision for returned fuel...but if you're dealing with already completed tanks or retrofitting a purge valve onto a flying airplane, personally I wouldn't bother with anything other than the teed-in solution. Just my 2 cents! )_( Dan RV-7 N714D www.rvproject.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Frank Stringham" <fstringham(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Tom Green
Date: Mar 30, 2007
I have also had great help from Gus, Scott, and Bruce. Frank @ SGU RV7A "NDY" >From: ptrotter(at)optonline.net >Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV-List: Tom Green >Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 19:35:43 +0000 (GMT) > >I have noticed the same thing when deailng with Van's support. Most of the >guys act like you are imposing on them when you call for help, but if you >get Tom he will go out of his way to help you and sort out any issues you >might have. > >Paul > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Joe Radford >Date: Friday, March 30, 2007 10:16 am >Subject: RV-List: Tom Green >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > > > > > Thank you Tom Green! > > > > I wanted to post this note of gratitude for the way Tom Green at Vans > > handled a situation that I encountered recently. It has to do > > with a > > mismatch of parts that I ended up with from Vans for mounting > > the Alternator > > on my engine. This posting is long in the details that follow, > > so skip the > > details if you wish, but just know that Vans has regained the > > respect of one > > RV6 builder for the way Tom Green handled a very frustrating > > situation. > > I purchased a Firewall Forward kit from Vans a couple of years > > ago which > > included an Alternator kit with a Boss mount; but I ended up > > with an engine > > that requires a Case mount. At first it seemed like no big deal > > becauseVans also sells a case mount bracket. I ordered that > > bracket from Vans, > > mounted it to my engine and hung the alternator. After mounting > > the bracket > > and alternator I discovered that the alternator was too far > > forward by 5/16 > > of an inch. I called Vans builder support to explain the > > problem I was > > having. I thought that maybe I was missing something. I just > > couldntbelieve that if I bought the alternator and the > > bracket(s) from Vans that I > > would have a mismatch like this. I didnt see any way to get > > the alternator > > into alignment without milling down the backside of the front > > ear on the > > alternator by 5/16 on an inch. I didnt want to do this (even > > though there > > would have been enough meat to work with) because I didnt > > want to end up > > with a morphodite. When I spoke with an employee of Vans > > builder support (I > > wont mention his name) to see if he had any suggestions. He > > basicallyinsulted me by saying that Vans doesnt know what > > engine, alternator, > > brackets, etc that the builder will end up with, and you have > > to remember > > that you are the manufacturer. I told him that I am aware of > > this, but I > > thought that since I bought the alternator and the brackets from > > Vans, I > > didnt think I would end up with a hodgepodge / mismatch. The > > conversationwas going down hill and instead of getting any > > constructive suggestions, I > > got much more frustrated and I ended the conversation. I dont > > want this to > > sound like a slam on Vans Aircraft but after I hung up the phone and > > reflected on the conversation, my whole opinion of Vans Aircraft > > changed. > > I continued thinking (stewing) about the conversation for a few > > days. I > > decided to call back and talk to Tom Green just to let him know > > that Vans is > > selling parts (specifically the case mount bracket and > > alternator) that don > > t work together. After discussing any and all of the possible > > reasons that > > I may be encountering this problem, Tom suggested that I call > > Plane Power at > > (877)934-5700 and tell them what my application and engine are > > and get a > > part number from them for their kit. Tom said that Vans is now > > selling the > > Plane Power alternator kit as a Deluxe Alternator Kit and it > > even has over > > voltage protection built in, but they dont carry the one with > > the case > > mount. He said that he wants me to send back the Vans > > alternator kit and > > the bracket along with the part number for the Plane Power kit. > > He will > > then order that kit, have it drop shipped to me and just charge > > me the > > difference between the two kits. I was amazed at the way he > > dealt with this > > situation and the solution he came up with. I only called > > because I wanted > > to hear what his response would be to what had happened. I was > > hopping for > > a positive response because I didnt want and I didnt think it > > would be > > fair to let my opinion of Vans change because of one bad > > experience with the > > employee in the builder support. After speaking to Tom I called > > Plane Power > > and spoke to a nice lady named Linda. She said that they have > > exactly what > > I need and gave me the part number for their kit for my > > application. I sent > > my original parts back to Vans including a letter to Tom with > > the part > > number (that I got from Linda) and thanked him for his generous > > offer and > > solution to my problem. A week later I received the kit from > > Plane Power > > and I hadnt even arranged to pay the difference yet. I now > > have the Plane > > Power Alternator with their bracket mounted to my engine and it > > lines up > > perfectly. > > > > Kudos Tom! Thanks again. > > > > > > Joe Radford > > Peoria, Arizona > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Watch free concerts with Pink, Rod Stewart, Oasis and more. Visit MSN Presents today. http://music.msn.com/presents?icid=ncmsnpresentstagline&ocid=T002MSN03A07001 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dwight Frye <dwight(at)openweave.org>
Subject: Re: Tom Green
Date: Mar 31, 2007
On Fri Mar 30 20:37:45 2007, Frank Stringham wrote : >I have also had great help from Gus, Scott, and Bruce. That is my list of favorites too. In particular Bruce has -always- gone out of his way to listen, to give me a straight story, to treat me and my problem with respect, and to even offer up alternatives I had not thought about. But all three have never been anything less that totally helpful and respectful. I am sure that there are other members of the Van's staff who also fall into the category of 'helpful and respectful' but it may be that the luck of the draw has not given me the opportunity to work with them. That being said ... there are others who, while I am sure are quite likely well-intentioned, don't fall into that category. I would stress that if you -do- have an unsatisfactory encounter don't just let it go ... call and ask for one of the three guys mentioned above, or talk to Tom Green. -- Dwight ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tracy Crook" <lors01(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List:Not waiting on Bluemountain
Date: Mar 31, 2007
Since I inadvertently started this thread with my "Still waiting on Bluemountain" comment I thought it only fair that I say that the G4 EFIS did arrive and it is a impressive piece of work. Haven't flown it yet but everything appears to work on the bench and so far I can't confuse the HSI no matter how much I rock & roll the panel. It took awhile but I think Bluemountain is finally ready for prime time. The engine pod for the engine monitor is a marvel of installation simplicity but I miss the user calibration capability that the earlier models had. You are pretty much stuck using only BMA supplied sensors with the G4. Maybe they will relent and add this capability in a future software release. Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with BMA in any way other than as a customer. Tracy Crook RV-4 (steam gauge technology) RV-8 (BMA glass panel) http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List ator?RV-List> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tracy Crook" <lors01(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re:Not waiting on Bluemountain
Date: Mar 31, 2007
Should have said "can't confuse the artificial horizon" in that last message. The HSI is mainly driven by the magnetometer when on the bench. The earths' magnetic field is pretty stable no matter what you do. Tracy ----- Original Message ----- From: Tracy Crook<mailto:lors01(at)msn.com> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2007 7:25 PM Subject: Re: RV-List:Not waiting on Bluemountain Since I inadvertently started this thread with my "Still waiting on Bluemountain" comment I thought it only fair that I say that the G4 EFIS did arrive and it is a impressive piece of work. Haven't flown it yet but everything appears to work on the bench and so far I can't confuse the HSI no matter how much I rock & roll the panel. It took awhile but I think Bluemountain is finally ready for prime time. The engine pod for the engine monitor is a marvel of installation simplicity but I miss the user calibration capability that the earlier models had. You are pretty much stuck using only BMA supplied sensors with the G4. Maybe they will relent and add this capability in a future software release. Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with BMA in any way other than as a customer. Tracy Crook RV-4 (steam gauge technology) RV-8 (BMA glass panel) http://www.matronics.nbsp; available via title=http://forums.matronics.com/ href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List ator?RV-List> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 31, 2007
From: Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Rudder Skin Crack
J. R. Dial wrote: > > > I have a crack starting on the trailing edge of the rudder > of my RV6. It is about 11 down from the top starting at the rivet and > going back. It is about long. I have heard of this before but does > somebody have a simple repair for this. I looked in the archives but > for some reason did not find anything. You can answer off list. > > Dick Dial > > jrdial@hal-pc.org Stop drill the crack (make sure you get past the end of the crack when you drill) with a bit larger bit than you might normally use, spray some fast-evaporating degreasing cleaner into the void, then force 'electrical grade', 'non-corrosive' silicone caulk into the hole to make a small internal blob contacting both the rudder skins. That's to reduce the flexing that causes the crack. (The 'electrical grade' caulk is to keep someone from telling you that your rudder is going to dissolve in the acid of regular RTV.) ;-) Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Rice" <rice737(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re:Not waiting on Bluemountain
Date: Apr 01, 2007
I have also received my G4's. They have been installed and seem to function properly. Can't wait to see them in the air, should be in the air in a few weeks. Paul Rice RV8 ----- Original Message ----- From: Tracy Crook<mailto:lors01(at)msn.com> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2007 7:27 PM Subject: RV-List: Re:Not waiting on Bluemountain Should have said "can't confuse the artificial horizon" in that last message. The HSI is mainly driven by the magnetometer when on the bench. The earths' magnetic field is pretty stable no matter what you do. Tracy ----- Original Message ----- From: Tracy Crook<mailto:lors01(at)msn.com> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2007 7:25 PM Subject: Re: RV-List:Not waiting on Bluemountain Since I inadvertently started this thread with my "Still waiting on Bluemountain" comment I thought it only fair that I say that the G4 EFIS did arrive and it is a impressive piece of work. Haven't flown it yet but everything appears to work on the bench and so far I can't confuse the HSI no matter how much I rock & roll the panel. It took awhile but I think Bluemountain is finally ready for prime time. The engine pod for the engine monitor is a marvel of installation simplicity but I miss the user calibration capability that the earlier models had. You are pretty much stuck using only BMA supplied sensors with the G4. Maybe they will relent and add this capability in a future software release. Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with BMA in any way other than as a customer. Tracy Crook RV-4 (steam gauge technology) RV-8 (BMA glass panel) http://www.matronics.nbsp; available via title=http://forums.matronics.com/ href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List">http://www.matronics. com/Navigator?RV-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List ator?RV-List> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 01, 2007
From: FRANCIS MALCZYNSKI <airfran(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Noise on runup
I have a friend who has comleted his RV6 and is ready to fly. However, when he does a static runup to check maximum RPM, he gets a rythmic noise that sounded to be like a resonant vibration of the engine hitting the inside of the cowl. The noise starts at about 2000 RPM. It is very loud and cannot be mistaken. Other people have heard it and described it as a whaa, whaa, whaa (can you aurilize this?) but again very loud. Any idea whats going on. The engine is a rebuilt 0320, 160hp, fuel injected running a 69 x 72 Performance Propeller. Could it be valve float? Any and all facts or thories would be appreciated. Thanks Fran Malczynski RV6 - N594EF Olcott, NY ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Bryan" <n616tb(at)btsapps.com>
Subject: Noise on runup
Date: Apr 01, 2007
I would be looking for marks on the cowl or back of spinner. If need be one could shoot some light primer around suspect areas and then recheck for scuffing. You didn't mention if this was a 6 or 6A, or maybe you do by omitting the (A). The comment here is be cautious with doing maximum RPM static run-ups as I have heard it can nose over. Just ideas Tim _____ From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of FRANCIS MALCZYNSKI Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 5:08 PM Subject: RV-List: Noise on runup I have a friend who has comleted his RV6 and is ready to fly. However, when he does a static runup to check maximum RPM, he gets a rythmic noise that sounded to be like a resonant vibration of the engine hitting the inside of the cowl. The noise starts at about 2000 RPM. It is very loud and cannot be mistaken. Other people have heard it and described it as a whaa, whaa, whaa (can you aurilize this?) but again very loud. Any idea whats going on. The engine is a rebuilt 0320, 160hp, fuel injected running a 69 x 72 Performance Propeller. Could it be valve float? Any and all facts or thories would be appreciated. Thanks Fran Malczynski RV6 - N594EF Olcott, NY ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 01, 2007
Subject: Re: Noise on runup
In a message dated 4/1/2007 3:10:52 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, airfran(at)verizon.net writes: I have a friend who has completed his RV6 and is ready to fly. However, when he does a static runup to check maximum RPM, he gets a rhythmic noise that sounded to be like a resonant vibration of the engine hitting the inside of the cowl. ========================================== Alternator, exhaust pipe or airbox hitting against cowling? GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A, C/S, Flying 840hrs, Silicon Valley, CA) ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 01, 2007
From: G McNutt <gmcnutt(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Noise on runup
Hi Fran Try a short run up with cowlings off to eliminate engine hitting cowling (don't fry the cylinder)s. How is the alignment of the alternator belt pulleys?? George in Langley BC FRANCIS MALCZYNSKI wrote: > I have a friend who has comleted his RV6 and is ready to fly. However, > when he does a static runup to check maximum RPM, he gets a rythmic > noise that sounded to be like a resonant vibration of the engine > hitting the inside of the cowl. The noise starts at about 2000 RPM. It > is very loud and cannot be mistaken. Other people have heard it and > described it as a whaa, whaa, whaa (can you aurilize this?) but again > very loud. Any idea whats going on. The engine is a rebuilt 0320, > 160hp, fuel injected running a 69 x 72 Performance Propeller. Could it > be valve float? > > Any and all facts or thories would be appreciated. > > Thanks > > Fran Malczynski > RV6 - N594EF > Olcott, NY > > > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 01, 2007
From: Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Noise on runup
FRANCIS MALCZYNSKI wrote: > I have a friend who has comleted his RV6 and is ready to fly. However, > when he does a static runup to check maximum RPM, he gets a rythmic > noise that sounded to be like a resonant vibration of the engine hitting > the inside of the cowl. The noise starts at about 2000 RPM. It is very > loud and cannot be mistaken. Other people have heard it and described it > as a whaa, whaa, whaa (can you aurilize this?) but again very loud. Any > idea whats going on. The engine is a rebuilt 0320, 160hp, fuel injected > running a 69 x 72 Performance Propeller. Could it be valve float? > > Any and all facts or thories would be appreciated. > > Thanks > > Fran Malczynski > RV6 - N594EF > Olcott, NY From an old time troubleshooter: Easiest first. Manually flex the prop to be sure it doesn't have loose laminations. Check to be sure the blades are tracked properly. (Did he check static balance?) Next, remove the cowl & look for rub-points. Then do another runup to see if the noise is gone without the cowl in place. Not trying to offend, but he does have oil pressure, right? (It's happened to others...) Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Hopperdhh(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 01, 2007
Subject: Re: Noise on runup
My advice in addition to that already posted is to be absolutely sure that the engine is not starving for fuel before flying. I don't think that is the case, but just be sure. Full throttle runups are worse for vibrations than flying. If something is hitting you should be able to find it. The front of the engine moves around more than the rear. Do you have at least 3/8 inch clearance everywhere? Dan Hopper RV-7A ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 01, 2007
From: scott bilinski <rv8a2001(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Noise on runup
There is a RV-6 at KSEE in San Diego that does the same thing. I think it also has the 320 and a fixed pitch but dont know which one. It is parked way on the otherside of the airport so I dont know what hanger its in. Every time that plane takes off people just shake there head saying there must be something wrong with it. Its been flying for 3 years this way that I know of. Scott Bilinski RV-8a FRANCIS MALCZYNSKI wrote: > I have a friend who has comleted his RV6 and is ready to fly. However, > when he does a static runup to check maximum RPM, he gets a rythmic > noise that sounded to be like a resonant vibration of the engine hitting > the inside of the cowl. The noise starts at about 2000 RPM. It is very > loud and cannot be mistaken. Other people have heard it and described it > as a whaa, whaa, whaa (can you aurilize this?) but again very loud. Any > idea whats going on. The engine is a rebuilt 0320, 160hp, fuel injected > running a 69 x 72 Performance Propeller. Could it be valve float? > Get your own web address. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 01, 2007
From: jorear(at)new.rr.com
Subject: Re: Noise on runup
----- Original Message ----- From: Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> Date: Sunday, April 1, 2007 7:57 pm Subject: Re: RV-List: Noise on runup > > FRANCIS MALCZYNSKI wrote: > > I have a friend who has comleted his RV6 and is ready to fly. > However, > > when he does a static runup to check maximum RPM, he gets a > rythmic > > noise that sounded to be like a resonant vibration of the engine > hitting > > the inside of the cowl. The noise starts at about 2000 RPM. It > is very > > loud and cannot be mistaken. Other people have heard it and > described it > > as a whaa, whaa, whaa (can you aurilize this?) but again very > loud. Any > > idea whats going on. The engine is a rebuilt 0320, 160hp, fuel > injected > > running a 69 x 72 Performance Propeller. Could it be valve float? > > > > Any and all facts or thories would be appreciated. > > > > Thanks > > > > Fran Malczynski > > RV6 - N594EF > > Olcott, NY > With all the responses regarding the engine hitting the cowl, wouldn't that be more of a factor on startup and shut down?? Seems to me that on a runup the engine should not be shakeing like a wet dog enough to be slapping the cowl. Just posing the question and trying to learnh something here.... ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Noise on runup
Date: Apr 02, 2007
From: <John.Morrissey(at)csiro.au>
Hi All, This often has something to do with the length of the exhaust stack and how far it is away from the floor. As each beat from the exhaust leave the end of the pipe it expands rapidly and sometimes causes a resonant vibration in the floor. Things to try: 1. Add extensions to the tail pipe 2. Glue some carpet on the floor 3. Add a couple of flat AL strips across the floor All of these could change the resonant frequency of the vibration in the area in question. Good lick John Morrissey _____ From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of scott bilinski Sent: Monday, 2 April 2007 12:19 PM Subject: Re: RV-List: Noise on runup There is a RV-6 at KSEE in San Diego that does the same thing. I think it also has the 320 and a fixed pitch but dont know which one. It is parked way on the otherside of the airport so I dont know what hanger its in. Every time that plane takes off people just shake there head saying there must be something wrong with it. Its been flying for 3 years this way that I know of. Scott Bilinski RV-8a FRANCIS MALCZYNSKI wrote: > I have a friend who has comleted his RV6 and is ready to fly. However, > when he does a static runup to check maximum RPM, he gets a rythmic > noise that sounded to be like a resonant vibration of the engine hitting > the inside of the cowl. The noise starts at about 2000 RPM. It is very > loud and cannot be mistaken. Other people have heard it and described it > as a whaa, whaa, whaa (can you aurilize this?) but again very loud. Any > idea whats going on. The engine is a rebuilt 0320, 160hp, fuel injected > running a 69 x 72 Performance Propeller. Could it be valve float? > _____ Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" <http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/;_ylc=X3oDMTE4MGw4Z2hlBF9TAzk3MTA3 M Dc2BHNlYwNtYWlsdGFncwRzbGsDZ3JlZW5jZW50ZXI-> at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 02, 2007
From: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" <dean.psiropoulos(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Poly pitot/static lines.
Question on those plastic fittings that screw into the back of airspeed, altimeter, etc to connect pitot and static lines. I'm using the paraflex that came with Van's static port kit but I'm wondering about how much torque to put on the fittings to get them to seal properly. I've installed the fittings into the back of the Dynon EFIS and tightend them as tight as I could by hand then put a wrench on them for about another quarter turn. I figure that there is already A LOT of threads into the brass female fitting and I didn't want to strip the threads in the plastic fitting. Is an extra quarter turn enough? Is there a spec for tightening these types of fittings? Please advise. Also the paraflex (plastic/nylon) tubing that goes into these fittings, after you hand tighten the nut enough so that the ferrule grips the tubing, how much more should you tighten to ensure a good seal? Does this tubing require the little inserts that go into the ends (of the tubing) in order make a good seal or can it be achieved without them (these inserts did NOT come with fittings I ordered from Gulf Coast avionics)? Thanks. Dean Psiropoulos RV-6A N197DM Last details before windshield and prop. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: Poly pitot/static lines.
Date: Apr 02, 2007
Hello Dean, Google SMC fittings To view alternative fittings. They cost a bit more But I think their system is a good alternative choice. Jim in Kelowna - 1.3 hr ----- Original Message ----- From: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" <dean.psiropoulos(at)verizon.net> Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 10:23 PM Subject: RV-List: Poly pitot/static lines. > > > Question on those plastic fittings that screw into the back of airspeed, > altimeter, etc to connect pitot and static lines. I'm using the paraflex > that came with Van's static port kit but I'm wondering about how much > torque > to put on the fittings to get them to seal properly. I've installed the > fittings into the back of the Dynon EFIS and tightend them as tight as I > could by hand then put a wrench on them for about another quarter turn. I > figure that there is already A LOT of threads into the brass female > fitting > and I didn't want to strip the threads in the plastic fitting. Is an > extra > quarter turn enough? Is there a spec for tightening these types of > fittings? Please advise. > > Also the paraflex (plastic/nylon) tubing that goes into these fittings, > after you hand tighten the nut enough so that the ferrule grips the > tubing, > how much more should you tighten to ensure a good seal? Does this tubing > require the little inserts that go into the ends (of the tubing) in order > make a good seal or can it be achieved without them (these inserts did NOT > come with fittings I ordered from Gulf Coast avionics)? Thanks. > > Dean Psiropoulos > RV-6A N197DM > Last details before windshield and prop. > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 02, 2007
From: Roger Embree <rembree(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Noise on runup
I had a resonant vibration that would occur at low power settings in flight. The baffle seal on one side was a bit too short and would flip inside out. I extended the baffle seal and the problem went away. Roger Embree ------------------------------------------------------------------------ FRANCIS MALCZYNSKI wrote: > I have a friend who has comleted his RV6 and is ready to fly. However, > when he does a static runup to check maximum RPM, he gets a rythmic > noise that sounded to be like a resonant vibration of the engine > hitting the inside of the cowl. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 02, 2007
From: Christopher Stone <rv8iator(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Poly pitot/static lines.
Dean... Used these in first RV-8. Still waiting for first flight next month. I use this tubing and these connectors at work to test our products. Typically hand tighten and then 1/4 turn for final snug. I am pressurizing these connections to 100 - 200 psi. No leaks. All my tubing is Parker Parflex polypropelene. (The same stuff Van's sells) Fittings are Parker nylon w/O-ring, stainless steel grasp ring and nut. Chris RV-8 x 2 > > >Question on those plastic fittings that screw into the back of airspeed, >altimeter, etc to connect pitot and static lines. I'm using the paraflex >that came with Van's static port kit but I'm wondering about how much torque >to put on the fittings to get them to seal properly. I've installed the >fittings into the back of the Dynon EFIS and tightend them as tight as I >could by hand then put a wrench on them for about another quarter turn. I >figure that there is already A LOT of threads into the brass female fitting >and I didn't want to strip the threads in the plastic fitting. Is an extra >quarter turn enough? Is there a spec for tightening these types of >fittings? Please advise. > >Also the paraflex (plastic/nylon) tubing that goes into these fittings, >after you hand tighten the nut enough so that the ferrule grips the tubing, >how much more should you tighten to ensure a good seal? Does this tubing >require the little inserts that go into the ends (of the tubing) in order >make a good seal or can it be achieved without them (these inserts did NOT >come with fittings I ordered from Gulf Coast avionics)? Thanks. > >Dean Psiropoulos >RV-6A N197DM >Last details before windshield and prop. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Mike Robertson <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Poly pitot/static lines.
Date: Apr 02, 2007
Dean, With the plastic fittings what you have described for the tightening should be good. hand tigh with about another 1/4 turn with the wrench. You will find out if they leak when you do the pitot static test . Good to hear from you. How close are you to being done? Mike Robertson > Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2007 01:23:11 -0400> From: dean.psiropoulos(at)verizon.net> Subject: RV-List: Poly pitot/static lines.> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com> > - net>> > Question on those plastic fittings that screw into the back of airs peed,> altimeter, etc to connect pitot and static lines. I'm using the para flex> that came with Van's static port kit but I'm wondering about how much torque> to put on the fittings to get them to seal properly. I've installe d the> fittings into the back of the Dynon EFIS and tightend them as tight as I> could by hand then put a wrench on them for about another quarter tur n. I> figure that there is already A LOT of threads into the brass female f itting> and I didn't want to strip the threads in the plastic fitting. Is a n extra> quarter turn enough? Is there a spec for tightening these types of > fittings? Please advise.> > Also the paraflex (plastic/nylon) tubing that goes into these fittings,> after you hand tighten the nut enough so that t he ferrule grips the tubing,> how much more should you tighten to ensure a good seal? Does this tubing> require the little inserts that go into the en ds (of the tubing) in order> make a good seal or can it be achieved without them (these inserts did NOT> come with fittings I ordered from Gulf Coast avionics)? Thanks.> > Dean Psiropoulos> RV-6A N197DM> Last details before w ====================> > > _________________________________________________________________ i'm making a difference.-Make every IM count for the cause of your choice . Join Now. im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=wlmailtagline ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "sportypilot" <sportypilot(at)stx.rr.com>
Subject: RV6 crashed
Date: Apr 02, 2007
Friend of mine at the Sinton Texas airport just called and said a RV6 Crashed, caught fire burned up at the Sinton Texas airport in the fog morning around 8:45 am anyone know who it was ? Danny.. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 02, 2007
From: Dave B <dbris200(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: RV6 crashed
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/4682657.html sportypilot wrote: > > > Friend of mine at the Sinton Texas airport just called and said a RV6 > Crashed, caught fire burned up at the Sinton Texas airport in the fog > > morning around 8:45 am anyone know who it was ? > > Danny.. > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 02, 2007
From: Tamara Cotner <cotnerfarms(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: RV6 crashed
Here's a link to this accident. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/4682657.html sportypilot wrote: Friend of mine at the Sinton Texas airport just called and said a RV6 Crashed, caught fire burned up at the Sinton Texas airport in the fog morning around 8:45 am anyone know who it was ? Danny.. --------------------------------- Be a PS3 game guru. Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! Games. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 04, 2007
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Test, Anyone Out There...?
Things have gotten kind of quiet on the List. Is everybody working on their plane? Matt Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 04, 2007
From: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Test, Anyone Out There...?
Matt, I wish.....I'm at work so I can pay for it (glad I get to snoop my mail during lunch)! Took Friday off so I can have a long weekend..... Ralph Capen -----Original Message----- >From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> >Sent: Apr 4, 2007 11:35 AM >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: RV-List: Test, Anyone Out There...? > > >Things have gotten kind of quiet on the List. Is everybody working on their plane? > >Matt > > >Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551 >925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email >http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Rice" <rice737(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: Test, Anyone Out There...?
Date: Apr 04, 2007
Hey Matt, I haven't received any post for a couple days. I have them all sent to my junk mail so I can look at them easily and I haven't gotten any mail there. I changed some settings on my email thinking it was my problem, but maybe not. Hope you can have it fixed soon, if it is on your end. Thanks, Paul Rice ----- Original Message ----- From: Matt Dralle<mailto:dralle(at)matronics.com> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 11:35 AM Subject: RV-List: Test, Anyone Out There...? > Things have gotten kind of quiet on the List. Is everybody working on their plane? Matt Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email http://www.matronics.com/> WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List ator?RV-List> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bruce Bell" <brucebell74(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: Test, Anyone Out There...?
Date: Apr 04, 2007
How are you doing on your RV-4? Bruce Bell Lubbock, Texas RV-4 N23BB 22 hours with 18 to go! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Dralle" <dralle(at)matronics.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 10:35 AM Subject: RV-List: Test, Anyone Out There...? > > > Things have gotten kind of quiet on the List. Is everybody working on > their plane? > > Matt > > > Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551 > 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email > http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 04, 2007
From: Darrell Reiley <lifeofreiley2003(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Test, Anyone Out There...?
Yes... Riveting on. Darrell --- Matt Dralle wrote: > > > > Things have gotten kind of quiet on the List. Is > everybody working on their plane? > > Matt > > > > Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | > CA | 94551 > 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | > dralle(at)matronics.com Email > http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products > For Aircraft > > > > > > browse > Subscriptions page, > FAQ, > > Web Forums! > > > > > Never miss an email again! Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: dralle(at)matronics.com (Matt Dralle)
Date: Apr 04, 2007
Subject: Re: Test, Anyone Out There...?
>-------------- > >Hey Matt, > >I haven't received any post for a couple days. I have them all sent to >my junk mail so I can look at them easily and I haven't gotten any mail >there. I changed some settings on my email thinking it was my problem, >but maybe not. Hope you can have it fixed soon, if it is on your end. > >Thanks, >Paul Rice >-------------- Everything seems to be working alright on the Matronics end. The other Lists have lots of traffic. Just mostly the RV-List for some reason. Hum, maybe I'll say something controversial and get the ball rolling. You know, I was thinking that only real men flew taildraggers, but then on the other hand, what kind of primer to real men use? :-) Matt -- Matt G. Dralle | Matronics | P.O. Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551 925-606-1001 Voice | 925-606-6281 FAX | dralle(at)matronics.com Email http://www.matronics.com/ W.W.W. | Featuring Products For Aircraft ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Test, Anyone Out There...?
From: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net>
Date: Apr 04, 2007
I may have something to kick around if folks aren't getting enough e-mail (g). Last week, I wrote a piece in the RV Builder's Hotline about flights builders give to people who are building. I've been surprised -- somewhat -- at the reaction I've gotten from some builders, many have reached that point (again) where they need a little push; a little motivation. I know some EAA chapters and builders groups -- such as the Minnesota Wing -- occasionally have builder motivation flights, but I got to thinking: wouldn't it be cool to set up some sort of program to match pilots with builders? Sort of a dating service without the romance -- or rather the romance is with flying. Anyway.... What would those of you who are flying, consider a fair compensation in exchange for providing, say, 20-30 minutes of ride-a-long time for a builder? And how many flights would you consider over the course of a month. This is my Old Eagles idea. -------- Bob Collins St. Paul, Minn. RV Builder's Hotline (free!) http://rvhotline.expercraft.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=104911#104911 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Test, Anyone Out There...?
Date: Apr 04, 2007
From: "Lloyd, Daniel R." <LloydDR(at)wernerco.com>
Personally, once I am flying in the next month or so, I will offer as many rides to whoever wants them within a 200 miles radius of 4G1, NWPA. I figure this 200 nm is about an hour from home, and a good excuse to go fly with friends. While I was building I got many rides from friends, and I will of course pay it forward for others. I think this is a great idea, and I think we just need a central webspot to coordinate rides for everyone, and one of my good friends put the cost of the ride at a nickel. He felt it was his and others responsibility to get everyone motivated to complete their projects and this was the best way he knew to motivate others. So as such, once the RV10E is done, I would be happy to give anyone a ride for a nickel, but it must be one of the new nickels because they look cool. I think we should make it a yearly contest to see who can get the most nickels and give an award out at Osh Kosh to the winner. Dan N289DT RV10E, so close I can feel it, at least in the imagination I am close! -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Collins Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 1:00 PM Subject: RV-List: Re: Test, Anyone Out There...? I may have something to kick around if folks aren't getting enough e-mail (g). Last week, I wrote a piece in the RV Builder's Hotline about flights builders give to people who are building. I've been surprised -- somewhat -- at the reaction I've gotten from some builders, many have reached that point (again) where they need a little push; a little motivation. I know some EAA chapters and builders groups -- such as the Minnesota Wing -- occasionally have builder motivation flights, but I got to thinking: wouldn't it be cool to set up some sort of program to match pilots with builders? Sort of a dating service without the romance -- or rather the romance is with flying. Anyway.... What would those of you who are flying, consider a fair compensation in exchange for providing, say, 20-30 minutes of ride-a-long time for a builder? And how many flights would you consider over the course of a month. This is my Old Eagles idea. -------- Bob Collins St. Paul, Minn. RV Builder's Hotline (free!) http://rvhotline.expercraft.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=104911#104911 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 04, 2007
From: Steve Eberhart <steve(at)newtech.com>
Subject: Re: Test, Anyone Out There...?
Matt Dralle wrote: > Hum, maybe I'll say something controversial and get the ball rolling. > > You know, I was thinking that only real men flew taildraggers, but then > on the other hand, what kind of primer to real men use? :-) > > Matt > OK I will bite. Spent the day working on my RV-7A. My building partner and hangar mate "Indiana Larry" (RV-7 N3XG) and I got the fuel tank vent lines installed in the nose and started running the fuel lines. I am building a NO PRIMER, RV-7A, Lycoming O-360-A1A with new Titan cylinders, Engine mount spaced out 9/16" from the firewall on 1 1/2" diameter spacers. Hopefully this will put my W/B right on with the 18 pound Catto 3 blade prop. As soon as the fuel lines are run and the wing lights are wired the wings will come off for painting. The painting process will be acid etch, alodyne, PPG epoxy primer, House of Kolor gold base coat followed by House of Kolor Kandy Apple Red and clear top coat. Interior is Classic Aero Designs Sportsman leather seats and carpeting. Everything else visible through the canopy is painted with PPG interior flat paint. Again, prep was acid etch, alodyne and then the paint. There should be enough meat here for several discussions. Steve Eberhart RV-7A, Slider, working on finish kit. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 04, 2007
From: Bob <panamared5(at)brier.net>
Subject: Re: Test, Anyone Out There...?
>>>Hum, maybe I'll say something controversial and get the ball >>>rolling. You know, I was thinking that only real men flew >>>taildraggers, but then on the other hand, what kind of primer to >>>real men use? I've always been wondering, what do real women fly? It was a woman who taught me how to fly a taildragger! Bob RV6 "The Wicked Witch of the West" ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <flynlow(at)usaviator.net>
Subject: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS!
Date: Apr 04, 2007
Hello all; I don't comment much on this group, but I find myself compelled to speak here. How many of you have ever flown a "REAL" tail dragger? Many years ago I was fortunate enough to own a 1944 DeHavilland Tiger Moth. It was rustic at best. The airspeed was a spring and plate affair on the wing strut. The compass was mounted between the pilots legs and you had to look down on it. Of course, it had no electrical system at all. No starter, no generator, no lights, no radios and most certainly no glass panel. It also had no brakes! and NO TAIL WHEEL! It came from the DeHavilland factory equipped with a steerable skid on the tail. To stop one simply held back on the stick to place more weight on the tail. Yep, the tail really did DRAG! I have not flown my RV8 yet as it is not finished, but you can be sure it will not have a glass panel. It will have some vintage vacuum gauges. The Tiger Moth was an incredibly fun airplane to fly. Low n slo, guts and struts...... It was very very very slow! A 300 mile trip was a long one. When I bought it I flew it from New Jersey to Kansas. Took three days. I expect the RV8 will be a bit faster than that. OK, I have reminisced enough, but I would still like to know if there are others out there who have flown anything with a skid and no brakes. Bud Silvers RV8 under construction. -----Original Message----- From: Bob [mailto:panamared5(at)brier.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 3:40 PM Subject: Re: RV-List: Test, Anyone Out There...? >>>Hum, maybe I'll say something controversial and get the ball >>>rolling. You know, I was thinking that only real men flew >>>taildraggers, but then on the other hand, what kind of primer to >>>real men use? I've always been wondering, what do real women fly? It was a woman who taught me how to fly a taildragger! Bob RV6 "The Wicked Witch of the West" ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bud Williams" <bud27(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS!
Date: Apr 04, 2007
Sorry, but I have to do this (and I fully expect to receive a ration of s(tuff) over this): just as modern conventional gear aircraft with tailwheels are not technically "taildraggers" as you imply, neither is the Tiger Moth a "tail dragger." Technically speaking, the term taildragger is derived from the earliest aircraft that literally "dragged their tails" across the ground (i.e., NO tail skid). That practice quickly faded away in favor of the tail skid, since tails didn't last too long when they hit ruts, holes, and other obstacles lying in the grass. Trust me when I say that the ride in this condition is a VERY rough ride...you WILL feel every little anomaly in the landing surface! :) It was also a lot easier to replace a shorn tail skid than it was to replace the back portion of the fuselage, rudder post, etc. As the Tiger Moth is a tail skid aircraft, it does not deserve the taildragger moniker any more than a "modern" aircraft with a tailwheel deserves the name. That all being said, the term taildragger lives on for ALL conventional aircraft, be they true taildraggers, tail skid, or tailwheel, in recognition of those great aircraft of yesteryear and the special skills required by pilots to fly them. So, acknowledge your fellow taildragging brethren as true "taildraggers"...or else be ready to be accused of not being one yourself if the best you can do is come up a Tiger Moth! :) LOL Bud -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of flynlow(at)usaviator.net Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 8:10 PM Subject: RV-List: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS! Hello all; I don't comment much on this group, but I find myself compelled to speak here. How many of you have ever flown a "REAL" tail dragger? Many years ago I was fortunate enough to own a 1944 DeHavilland Tiger Moth. It was rustic at best. The airspeed was a spring and plate affair on the wing strut. The compass was mounted between the pilots legs and you had to look down on it. Of course, it had no electrical system at all. No starter, no generator, no lights, no radios and most certainly no glass panel. It also had no brakes! and NO TAIL WHEEL! It came from the DeHavilland factory equipped with a steerable skid on the tail. To stop one simply held back on the stick to place more weight on the tail. Yep, the tail really did DRAG! I have not flown my RV8 yet as it is not finished, but you can be sure it will not have a glass panel. It will have some vintage vacuum gauges. The Tiger Moth was an incredibly fun airplane to fly. Low n slo, guts and struts...... It was very very very slow! A 300 mile trip was a long one. When I bought it I flew it from New Jersey to Kansas. Took three days. I expect the RV8 will be a bit faster than that. OK, I have reminisced enough, but I would still like to know if there are others out there who have flown anything with a skid and no brakes. Bud Silvers RV8 under construction. -----Original Message----- From: Bob [mailto:panamared5(at)brier.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 3:40 PM Subject: Re: RV-List: Test, Anyone Out There...? >>>Hum, maybe I'll say something controversial and get the ball >>>rolling. You know, I was thinking that only real men flew >>>taildraggers, but then on the other hand, what kind of primer to >>>real men use? I've always been wondering, what do real women fly? It was a woman who taught me how to fly a taildragger! Bob RV6 "The Wicked Witch of the West" ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 04, 2007
From: Darrell Reiley <lifeofreiley2003(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS!
All I know is that I'm not dragging my *&^ around anywhere... ;-) Darrell Reiley RV7A QB Slider "Reiley Rocket" N622DR Reserved N469RV Reserved CenTex_RV_Aircraft-owner(at)yahoogroups.com http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "WILLIAM AGSTER" <BAGSTERJR(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: RE: RV10-List: Kitlog Pro
Date: Apr 04, 2007
Matt, How can current users update our versions of KIT LOG PRO with your updates? Bill Agster ----- Original Message ----- From: Matt Dralle<mailto:dralle(at)matronics.com> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com ; rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2007 12:29 PM Subject: RV-List: RE: RV10-List: Kitlog Pro > At 05:29 AM 3/22/2007 Thursday, RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote: >Matt bought KitLog?!? Wow, that's cool! Maybe he will fix the problem where clicking next on a project web page takes you backward in dates instead of forward. That' has always drove me nuts along with the run on paragraphs. Spell check would be great too. I also mentioned to Paul way back when I was beta testing his 2.0 release that adding the ability to attach files to entries like scanned receipts to expenses would be useful. > >Michael Sausen Michael/Kitlog Users, I think you will be pleased. I've updated the "Next/Previous" functionality on the individual log entry pages so that the function is now more intuitive. Give it a try and let me know what you think... http://www.mykitlog.com/users/display_log.php?user=msausen&project=22 &category=0&log=16675&row=5<http://www.mykitlog.com/users/display_l og.php?user=msausen&project=22&category=0&log=16675&row=5> How's that for customer service? Tell a friend! Best regards, Matt Dralle Matronics / Kitlog Pro Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email http://www.matronics.com/> WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List ator?RV-List> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "WILLIAM AGSTER" <BAGSTERJR(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: RE: RV10-List: Kitlog Pro
Date: Apr 04, 2007
What If we do not want to post them to the server, just want the updates to our own software for "our computer" use? Bill Agster ----- Original Message ----- From: Matt Dralle<mailto:dralle(at)matronics.com> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2007 4:48 PM Subject: Re: RV-List: RE: RV10-List: Kitlog Pro > Darrell, No, all of these changes were made on the MyKitlog.com webserver side; no update to your Windows Application is required to take advantage of them. Matt Dralle At 04:15 PM 3/24/2007 Saturday, you wrote: > > >Matt, > >Would this be something requiring an update? I've >clicked on the check for updates and the reply is no >updates available. > >Thanks, > >Darrell > >--- Matt Dralle > wrote: > >> > >> >> At 05:29 AM 3/22/2007 Thursday, RV Builder (Michael >> Sausen) wrote: >> >Matt bought KitLog?!? Wow, that's cool! Maybe he >> will fix the problem where clicking next on a >> project web page takes you backward in dates instead >> of forward. That' has always drove me nuts along >> with the run on paragraphs. Spell check would be >> great too. I also mentioned to Paul way back when I >> was beta testing his 2.0 release that adding the >> ability to attach files to entries like scanned >> receipts to expenses would be useful. >> > >> >Michael Sausen >> >> Michael/Kitlog Users, >> >> I think you will be pleased. I've updated the >> "Next/Previous" functionality on the individual log >> entry pages so that the function is now more >> intuitive. Give it a try and let me know what you >> think... >> >> >http://www.mykitlog.com/users/display_log.php?user=msausen&project=2 2&category=0&log=16675&row=5 >> >> How's that for customer service? Tell a friend! >> >> Best regards, >> Matt Dralle >> Matronics / Kitlog Pro >> >> >> >> Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | >> CA | 94551 >> 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | >> dralle(at)matronics.com Email >> http://www.matronics.com/> WWW | Featuring Products >> For Aircraft >> >> >> >> browse >> Subscriptions page, >> FAQ, >> >> Web Forums! >> >> >> >> >> > > > > >Don't get soaked. Take a quick peek at the forecast >with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut. >http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather > Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email http://www.matronics.com/> WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List ator?RV-List> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: FASTPILOTRV8(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 04, 2007
Subject: Re: RV Instruments
Look at Op Technologies, they are Boeing Vendors they now stuff. Viper Jet uses OP. I am presently installing mine in an 4 year old RV8 Dane Sheahen N838RV RV8a _Fastpilotrv8(at)aol.com_ (mailto:Fastpilotrv8(at)aol.com) P. S. I have some slightly used approx. 300+ hours used round instruments for sales. Plus a S-Tec 30 AutoPilot for sale Sooo...I've been scoping out what to put in my panel (when I get there)... I don't suppose anyone knows a place I can buy a Garmin G900X for the price of a Dynon? Mike do not archive ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 04, 2007
From: Reuven Silberman <pilots2(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS!
But what kind of primer did the ole folks use to prime their dragged tails?? Curious minds want to know. Sorry, but I have to do this (and I fully expect to receive a ration of s(tuff) over this): just as modern conventional gear aircraft with tailwheels are not technically "taildraggers" as you imply, neither is the Tiger Moth a "tail dragger." Technically speaking, the term taildragger is derived from the earliest aircraft that literally "dragged their tails" across the ground (i.e., NO tail skid). That practice quickly faded away in favor of the tail skid, since tails didn't last too long when they hit ruts, holes, and other obstacles lying in the grass. Trust me when I say that the ride in this condition is a VERY rough ride...you WILL feel every little anomaly in the landing surface! :) It was also a lot easier to replace a shorn tail skid than it was to replace the back portion of the fuselage, rudder post, etc. As the Tiger Moth is a tail skid aircraft, it does not deserve the taildragger moniker any more than a "modern" aircraft with a tailwheel deserves the name. That all being said, the term taildragger lives on for ALL conventional aircraft, be they true taildraggers, tail skid, or tailwheel, in recognition of those great aircraft of yesteryear and the special skills required by pilots to fly them. So, acknowledge your fellow taildragging brethren as true "taildraggers"...or else be ready to be accused of not being one yourself if the best you can do is come up a Tiger Moth! :) LOL Bud -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of flynlow(at)usaviator.net Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 8:10 PM Subject: RV-List: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS! Hello all; I don't comment much on this group, but I find myself compelled to speak here. How many of you have ever flown a "REAL" tail dragger? Many years ago I was fortunate enough to own a 1944 DeHavilland Tiger Moth. It was rustic at best. The airspeed was a spring and plate affair on the wing strut. The compass was mounted between the pilots legs and you had to look down on it. Of course, it had no electrical system at all. No starter, no generator, no lights, no radios and most certainly no glass panel. It also had no brakes! and NO TAIL WHEEL! It came from the DeHavilland factory equipped with a steerable skid on the tail. To stop one simply held back on the stick to place more weight on the tail. Yep, the tail really did DRAG! I have not flown my RV8 yet as it is not finished, but you can be sure it will not have a glass panel. It will have some vintage vacuum gauges. The Tiger Moth was an incredibly fun airplane to fly. Low n slo, guts and struts...... It was very very very slow! A 300 mile trip was a long one. When I bought it I flew it from New Jersey to Kansas. Took three days. I expect the RV8 will be a bit faster than that. OK, I have reminisced enough, but I would still like to know if there are others out there who have flown anything with a skid and no brakes. Bud Silvers RV8 under construction. -----Original Message----- From: Bob [mailto:panamared5(at)brier.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 3:40 PM Subject: Re: RV-List: Test, Anyone Out There...? >>>Hum, maybe I'll say something controversial and get the ball >>>rolling. You know, I was thinking that only real men flew >>>taildraggers, but then on the other hand, what kind of primer to >>>real men use? I've always been wondering, what do real women fly? It was a woman who taught me how to fly a taildragger! Bob RV6 "The Wicked Witch of the West" "No pressure, no diamonds". ~Thomas Carlyle ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bud Williams" <bud27(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS!
Date: Apr 05, 2007
The old birds were made of wood.no primer (and not much life expectancy for the aircraft) -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Reuven Silberman Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 11:08 PM Subject: RE: RV-List: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS! But what kind of primer did the ole folks use to prime their dragged tails?? Curious minds want to know. Bud Williams wrote: Sorry, but I have to do this (and I fully expect to receive a ration of s(tuff) over this): just as modern conventional gear aircraft with tailwheels are not technically "taildraggers" as you imply, neither is the Tiger Moth a "tail dragger." Technically speaking, the term taildragger is derived from the earliest aircraft that literally "dragged their tails" across the ground (i.e., NO tail skid). That practice quickly faded away in favor of the tail skid, since tails didn't last too long when they hit ruts, holes, and other obstacles lying in the grass. Trust me when I say that the ride in this condition is a VERY rough ride...you WILL feel every little anomaly in the landing surface! :) It was also a lot easier to replace a shorn tail skid than it was to replace the back portion of the fuselage, rudder post, etc. As the Tiger Moth is a tail skid aircraft, it does not deserve the taildragger moniker any more than a "modern" aircraft with a tailwheel deserves the name. That all being said, the term taildragger lives on for ALL conventional aircraft, be they true taildraggers, tail skid, or tailwheel, in recognition of those great aircraft of yesteryear and the special skills required by pilots to fly them. So, acknowledge your fellow taildragging brethren as true "taildraggers"...or else be ready to be accused of not being one yourself if the best you can do is come up a Tiger Moth! :) LOL Bud -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of flynlow(at)usaviator.net Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 8:10 PM Subject: RV-List: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS! Hello all; I don't comment much on this group, but I find myself compelled to speak here. How many of you have ever flown a "REAL" tail dragger? Many years ago I was fortunate enough to own a 1944 DeHavilland Tiger Moth. It was rustic at best. The airspeed was a spring and plate affair on the wing strut. The compass was mounted between the pilots legs and you had to look down on it. Of course, it had no electrical system at all. No starter, no generator, no lights, no radios and most certainly no glass panel. It also had no brakes! and NO TAIL WHEEL! It came from the DeHavilland factory equipped with a steerable skid on the tail. To stop one simply held back on the stick to place more weight on the tail. Yep, the tail really did DRAG! I have not flown my RV8 yet as it is not finished, but you can be sure it will not have a glass panel. It will have some vintage vacuum gauges. The Tiger Moth was an incredibly fun airplane to fly. Low n slo, guts and struts...... It was very very very slow! A 300 mile trip was a long one. When I bought it I flew it from New Jersey to Kansas. Took three days. I expect the RV8 will be a bit faster than that. OK, I have reminisced enough, but I would still like to know if there are others out there who have flown anything with a skid and no brakes. Bud Silvers RV8 under construction. -----Original Message----- From: Bob [mailto:panamared5(at)brier.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 3:40 PM Subject: Re: RV-List: Test, Anyone Out ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Hopperdhh(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 05, 2007
Subject: Re: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS!
In a message dated 4/4/2007 11:02:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, lifeofreiley2003(at)yahoo.com writes: All I know is that I'm not dragging my *&^ around anywhere... ;-) Darrell Reiley RV7A QB Slider "Reiley Rocket" N622DR Reserved N469RV Reserved CenTex_RV_Aircraft-owner(at)yahoogroups.com Good post Darrell. Why would anyone want to drag their airplanes tail? I can see better when I taxi on the ground. And does it really matter in the air? I know they say 2 or 3 mph, but I have to wonder about that number. I'll bet my faired in nose gear is as clean as that dirty tail wheel and all its springs and horns and stuff sticking out there in the wind. Also, I don't have to stay at home when the wind blows across the runway. Dan Hopper RV-7A ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "smitty(at)smittysrv.com" <smitty(at)smittysrv.com>
Date: Apr 05, 2007
Subject: Riveting the Leading Edge to the Main Wing Spar
I started yesterday riveting the right wing main spar to the ribs in the leading edge. I can get the bucking bar to every rib but the center one. Someone suggested that I just pop-rivet it in place. Is that an OK thing to do? Smitty - RV-9A http://SmittysRV.com http://FunPlacesToFly.com -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web.com Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Bryan" <n616tb(at)btsapps.com>
Subject: Riveting the Leading Edge to the Main Wing Spar
Date: Apr 05, 2007
It is not only OK, but the plans call for it to just be pop riveted on the -6. Pop it on and keep going. Tim > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list- > server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of smitty(at)smittysrv.com > Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 9:00 AM > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: Riveting the Leading Edge to the Main Wing Spar > > > > I started yesterday riveting the right wing main spar to the ribs in the > leading edge. I can get the bucking bar to every rib but the center one. > Someone suggested that I just pop-rivet it in place. Is that an OK thing > to > do? > > Smitty - RV-9A > http://SmittysRV.com > http://FunPlacesToFly.com > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web.com - Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on > MicrosoftR > Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: wgill10(at)comcast.net
Subject: Re: Riveting the Leading Edge to the Main Wing Spar
Date: Apr 05, 2007
Smitty, I used solid rivets on all the leading edge ribs and don't recall having any difficulties. I do have good assortment of bucking bars and occasionally use one of the squeezer yokes as a bucking bar. I hope this helps in avoiding the use of pop rivets in this area, but I know others have used pop rivets here. Bill RV-7 FWF -------------- Original message -------------- From: "smitty(at)smittysrv.com" <smitty(at)smittysrv.com> > > I started yesterday riveting the right wing main spar to the ribs in the > leading edge. I can get the bucking bar to every rib but the center one. > Someone suggested that I just pop-rivet it in place. Is that an OK thing to > do? > > Smitty - RV-9A > http://SmittysRV.com > http://FunPlacesToFly.com > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web.com Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft > Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail > > > > > > >
Smitty,

I used solid rivets on all the leading edge ribs and don't recall having any difficulties. I do have good assortment of bucking bars and occasionally use one of the squeezer yokes as a bucking bar. I hope this helps in avoiding the use of pop rivets in this area, but I know others have used pop rivets here.

Bill

RV-7 FWF

=====

________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Riveting the Leading Edge to the Main Wing Spar
Date: Apr 05, 2007
That'll work. If you have someone who can help you, though, Those rivets are easily reached with one person reaching in through the holes from the outboard end and one shooting from below with the gun. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of > smitty(at)smittysrv.com > Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 9:00 AM > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: Riveting the Leading Edge to the Main Wing Spar > > > --> > > I started yesterday riveting the right wing main spar to the > ribs in the leading edge. I can get the bucking bar to every > rib but the center one. Someone suggested that I just > pop-rivet it in place. Is that an OK thing to do? > > Smitty - RV-9A > http://SmittysRV.com > http://FunPlacesToFly.com > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web.com - Enhanced email for the mobile individual based > on MicrosoftR Exchange - > http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com>
Subject: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS!
Date: Apr 05, 2007
The question that has been bugging me is where to tail-dragger pilots get those big brass balls you hear clanging when they climb out of their airplane and swagger bow-legged across the ramp? I was thinking about hanging a pair of them by the tail tie-down on my 8A. Terry _____ From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Reuven Silberman Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 9:08 PM Subject: RE: RV-List: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS! But what kind of primer did the ole folks use to prime their dragged tails?? Curious minds want to know. Bud Williams wrote: Sorry, but I have to do this (and I fully expect to receive a ration of s(tuff) over this): just as modern conventional gear aircraft with tailwheels are not technically "taildraggers" as you imply, neither is the Tiger Moth a "tail dragger." Technically speaking, the term taildragger is derived from the earliest aircraft that literally "dragged their tails" across the ground (i.e., NO tail skid). That practice quickly faded away in favor of the tail skid, since tails didn't last too long when they hit ruts, holes, and other obstacles lying in the grass. Trust me when I say that the ride in this condition is a VERY rough ride...you WILL feel every little anomaly in the landing surface! :) It was also a lot easier to replace a shorn tail skid than it was to replace the back portion of the fuselage, rudder post, etc. As the Tiger Moth is a tail skid aircraft, it does not deserve the taildragger moniker any more than a "modern" aircraft with a tailwheel deserves the name. That all being said, the term taildragger lives on for ALL conventional aircraft, be they true taildraggers, tail skid, or tailwheel, in recognition of those great aircraft of yesteryear and the special skills required by pilots to fly them. So, acknowledge your fellow taildragging brethren as true "taildraggers"...or else be ready to be accused of not being one yourself if the best you can do is come up a Tiger Moth! :) LOL Bud -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of flynlow(at)usaviator.net Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 8:10 PM Subject: RV-List: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS! Hello all; I don't comment much on this group, but I find myself compelled to speak here. How many of you have ever flown a "REAL" tail dragger? Many years ago I was fortunate enough to own a 1944 DeHavilland Tiger Moth. It was rustic at best. The airspeed was a spring and plate affair on the wing strut. The compass was mounted between the pilots legs and you had to look down on it. Of course, it had no electrical system at all. No starter, no generator, no lights, no radios and most certainly no glass panel. It also had no brakes! and NO TAIL WHEEL! It came from the DeHavilland factory equipped with a steerable skid on the tail. To stop one simply held back on the stick to place more weight on the tail. Yep, the tail really did DRAG! I have not flown my RV8 yet as it is not finished, but you can be sure it will not have a glass panel. It will have some vintage vacuum gauges. The Tiger Moth was an incredibly fun airplane to fly. Low n slo, guts and struts...... It was very very very slow! A 300 mile trip was a long one. When I bought it I flew it from New Jersey to Kansas. Took three days. I expect the RV8 will be a bit faster than that. OK, I have reminisced enough, but I would still like to know if there are others out there who have flown anything with a skid and no brakes. Bud Silvers RV8 under construction. -----Original Message----- From: Bob [mailto:panamared5(at)brier.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 3:40 PM Subject: Re: RV-List: Test, Anyone Out ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Fogarty at Lakes & Leisure Realty" <jfogarty(at)tds.net>
Subject: Re: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS!
Date: Apr 05, 2007
Aircraft Spruce and you get the squeeze from Avery. They are not aluminum, they are steel in a 30 knot crosswind. Sorry! Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: Terry Watson To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 10:31 AM Subject: RE: RV-List: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS! The question that has been bugging me is where to tail-dragger pilots get those big brass balls you hear clanging when they climb out of their airplane and swagger bow-legged across the ramp? I was thinking about hanging a pair of them by the tail tie-down on my 8A. Terry ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Reuven Silberman Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 9:08 PM To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RE: RV-List: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS! But what kind of primer did the ole folks use to prime their dragged tails?? Curious minds want to know. Bud Williams wrote: Sorry, but I have to do this (and I fully expect to receive a ration of s(tuff) over this): just as modern conventional gear aircraft with tailwheels are not technically "taildraggers" as you imply, neither is the Tiger Moth a "tail dragger." Technically speaking, the term taildragger is derived from the earliest aircraft that literally "dragged their tails" across the ground (i.e., NO tail skid). That practice quickly faded away in favor of the tail skid, since tails didn't last too long when they hit ruts, holes, and other obstacles lying in the grass. Trust me when I say that the ride in this condition is a VERY rough ride...you WILL feel every little anomaly in the landing surface! :) It was also a lot easier to replace a shorn tail skid than it was to replace the back portion of the fuselage, rudder post, etc. As the Tiger Moth is a tail skid aircraft, it does not deserve the taildragger moniker any more than a "modern" aircraft with a tailwheel deserves the name. That all being said, the term taildragger lives on for ALL conventional aircraft, be they true taildraggers, tail skid, or tailwheel, in recognition of those great aircraft of yesteryear and the special skills required by pilots to fly them. So, acknowledge your fellow taildragging brethren as true "taildraggers"...or else be ready to be accused of not being one yourself if the best you can do is come up a Tiger Moth! :) LOL Bud -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of flynlow(at)usaviator.net Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 8:10 PM To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RV-List: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS! Hello all; I don't comment much on this group, but I find myself compelled to speak here. How many of you have ever flown a "REAL" tail dragger? Many years ago I was fortunate enough to own a 1944 DeHavilland Tiger Moth. It was rustic at best. The airspeed was a spring and plate affair on the wing strut. The compass was mounted between the pilots legs and you had to look down on it. Of course, it had no electrical system at all. No starter, no generator, no lights, no radios and most certainly no glass panel. It also had no brakes! and NO TAIL WHEEL! It came from the DeHavilland factory equipped with a steerable skid on the tail. To stop one simply held back on the stick to place more weight on the tail. Yep, the tail really did DRAG! I have not flown my RV8 yet as it is not finished, but you can be sure it will not have a glass panel. It will have some vintage vacuum gauges. The Tiger Moth was an incredibly fun airplane to fly. Low n slo, guts and struts...... It was very very very slow! A 300 mile trip was a long one. When I bought it I flew it from New Jersey to Kansas. Took three days. I expect the RV8 will be a bit faster than that. OK, I have reminisced enough, but I would still like to know if there are others out there who have flown anything with a skid and no brakes. Bud Silvers RV8 under construction. -----Original Message----- From: Bob [mailto:panamared5(at)brier.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 3:40 PM To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Test, Anyone Out ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- 4/4/2007 1:09 PM ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 05, 2007
From: Walter Tondu <walter(at)tondu.com>
Subject: Re: Cushion clamps in living color
On 04/05 12:06, Fiveonepw(at)aol.com wrote: > Can anyone point to a supplier for adel type clamps with different colored > (not black-looking for yellow) cushions? I've seen these occasionally on > RVs and I've googled til I've gagged! I've got bags of used ones that I bought for a couple of buck from Max Industries here in Los Angeles. -- Walter Tondu http://www.rv7-a.com - Flying! http://www.evorocket.com - Building ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 05, 2007
From: Walter Tondu <walter(at)tondu.com>
Subject: Re: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS!
On 04/05 8:57, Rob Prior wrote: > What comes in the nosewheel kit? A skirt? :) A big(er) pecker :) -- Walter Tondu http://www.rv7-a.com - Flying! http://www.evorocket.com - Building ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: cushion clamps in living color
From: Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com
Date: Apr 05, 2007
The color of the clamps is not just for aesthetics - it has meaning. See Bub Nuckolls article here: http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/adel.html regards, Erich Weaver ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Today's montra is...
From: "smittysrv" <smitty(at)smittysrv.com>
Date: Apr 05, 2007
I'm saving money, I'm saving money, I'm saving money.. Keep poundin' them there rivets! -------- Smittys RV-9A Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=105204#105204 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Smitty" <smitty(at)smittysrv.com>
Subject: Re: Today's montra is...
Date: Apr 05, 2007
Oops. Sorry. Here's the picture to go with this posting: http://www.smittysrv.com/photos/duck.jpg > I'm saving money, I'm saving money, I'm saving money.. > Keep poundin' them there rivets! > > -------- > Smittys RV-9A > > > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=105204#105204 > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bud Williams" <bud27(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS!
Date: Apr 05, 2007
The advantages/disadvantages, piloting skills, manliness factors, and other related (or unrelated) of tailwheels versus training wheels...I mean nose wheels...have all been discussed on the RV lists many times in the past, and I do not wish to re-open those old threads. From a PERSONAL point of view, I have but one word in response: WIMP! :) LOL Seriously, to each their own...the -7A is a very fine airplane -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Darrell Reiley Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 10:00 PM Subject: RE: RV-List: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS! All I know is that I'm not dragging my *&^ around anywhere... ;-) Darrell Reiley RV7A QB Slider "Reiley Rocket" N622DR Reserved N469RV Reserved CenTex_RV_Aircraft-owner(at)yahoogroups.com http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 06, 2007
From: halbenjamin(at)optonline.net
Subject: Re: cushion clamps in living color
Hi Mark, As Eric mentioned below, the colors are coded as to the materials that they are made of. I get them from Genuine Aircraft Hardware Company. They also carry all kinds of fasteners & have a really handy catalog they call the "Toolbox Reference Book." Their website is a bit quirky, but I've always received good service from them. www.gen-aircraft-hardware.com Good Luck, Hal Benjamin RV-4 Long Island, New York Finish Kit ----- Original Message ----- From: Erich_Weaver(at)URSCorp.com Date: Thursday, April 5, 2007 1:47 pm Subject: RV-List: cushion clamps in living color > > The color of the clamps is not just for aesthetics - it has > meaning. See > Bub Nuckolls article here: > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/adel.html > > regards, > > Erich Weaver > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Bryan" <n616tb(at)btsapps.com>
Subject: Information Aero Estates Airpark Lake Palestine,Tx.
Date: Apr 06, 2007
Hi Bob and others, We moved to Texas from Oregon to find warmer weather. We looked in Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. We found many airparks and looked at many of them in person. Some of those we looked at were not areas where there were trees and green grass. Others were in either high terrain or flat out hot desert. We were looking for our cake and eat it too. Also some were pretty formal living. Those were beautiful, but very formal. Unfortunately the price reflected this as well. We are not rich folk and could not afford 200K for a lot in an air park. Aero Estates is in East Texas. We are about 120 miles east of Dallas and about 25 miles south of Tyler. Tyler has just about everything a person could want at over 100,000 people population. East Texas is green and has rolling terrain with lots of greenery. As a bonus, the airpark is on the south end of Lake Palestine a 21 square mile lake containing excellent fishing, water skiing, and other water sports. The airpark is very informal with a 3000 foot grass runway and pilot controlled lights will be installed later this month. The roads are not asphalt but are mostly a gravel type base. All of the taxiways are grass and get cut every other week. Lots when we purchased 1 1/2 year ago were from 14K to 21K for 1/2 acre. We have a private boat dock and launching with an associated picnic area. Currently the dues are only $15 per month or $150 per year. I see this going up some but not very much. East Texas and specifically the Frankston area is a much more moderate climate in the summer months than further south. This was a big plus to us as well as the lake. The CC&R's are in place but are not too restrictive; possibly not restrictive enough. There are still lots available but are beginning to sell pretty fast. I own lots 67 & 68 down by the lake. You can see all of this on the website at: www.aeroestatesairpark.com Convenience? Oh yeah, I have done more casual flying since moving here than ever before. We fly out almost every weekend with others from here and around to barbeques and such. Inconvenience? I work from home so don't go to town much. If you drive in for work, Tyler is 25 miles away. We do not live in town. I like that, but others may not. Bottom line is it is affordable, enjoyable, and in a climate friendly area. If anyone has specific questions feel free to contact me off list or by phone. If you just want to fly in and fish the lake you can tie down at my hangar as my guest. I just joined Chapter 1219 in Lufkin, Texas and look forward to that as well. Tim RV-6 > Tim > > For general information purposes, could you tell the rest of us a > little about the Airpark and why you decided to buy there. I have > always wondered about living on an Airpark. Is it worth it, money, > time, convenience, inconvenience etc? > > Now that the RVs just about build themselves we need something to > read about on the list...just kidding...well sort of. > > Bob > RV6 "Wicked Witch of the West" > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 06, 2007
From: <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Real Men! Real Women! and REAL TAIL DRAGGERS!
Facts: Its call traditional gear, (the term tail dragger is kind of new term since we got the planes with training wheels on the front. ;-) Nose draggers where known as Tricycle gear, like that first three wheeler you peddled when you where still making dodo in your drawers. RV model-A's: cost more, little slower, harder to build and structure takes cockpit space. Add some concern about the nose gear acting like a pole to a pole vaulter, a spatula flipping a pancake. No evidence that the trike has more cross wind capability, but if you can land that A model in a 30 kt cross wind, U R DA MAN. However I doubt you really landed in more the 30 total kts of wind much less 30 kts cross wind component. (any RV would have issues with 30 kts x-wind.) We know that the tail wheel may take a tad more skill, therefore the bigger balls. Both are planes thus great. George RV-4/RV-7/B757 --------------------------------- Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jerry2DT(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 06, 2007
Subject: Phase One Radius
Since I heard this list needs something to noodle about, here's one... Can anyone tell me why it is important to limit the radius one can fly off phase one to 50 miles, or any number of miles at all? I'm in the midst of this exercise and wonder what safety issue dictates this... I would rather see the rules reflect that the pilot has an understanding of simply staying away from populated areas, have a place to set down, etc., whether it's 50 miles out or 200... Sure would make it more interesting... Maybe this is a holdover of the 1920's or sumpin'? Just noodling, Jerry Cochran RV-6a 6 hrs. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 06, 2007
From: Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Phase One Radius
Jerry2DT(at)aol.com wrote: > Since I heard this list needs something to noodle about, here's one... > Can anyone tell me why it is important to limit the radius one can fly > off phase one to 50 miles, or any number of miles at all? I'm in the > midst of this exercise and wonder what safety issue dictates this... I > would rather see the rules reflect that the pilot has an understanding > of simply staying away from populated areas, have a place to set down, > etc., whether it's 50 miles out or 200... Sure would make it more > interesting... > > Maybe this is a holdover of the 1920's or sumpin'? > > Just noodling, > Jerry Cochran > RV-6a 6 hrs. Politics, just like the rule that you can't fly over densely populated areas, except for t/o & landing (except when a Class B airspace controller routes you directly over the city when you contact him/her on a cross country flight). 'Rules' like that keep the 99.9% of the population who don't fly experimentals from complaining too much that we get to play with neat toys. Many FSDO's will give much larger areas if you ask & draw limit lines that keep you away from major cities & busy airspace. Having said that, the FSDO can limit you to even less area if it sees fit. There's a local legend around here of a guy who got a test area that kept him within sight of the runway. The inspector told him that while he couldn't keep the guy from flying his creation, he *could* keep the wreckage easy to find. Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: Tires..
Date: Apr 06, 2007
> I have heard more than once, from pilots, that they have found, that > buying > re-treads, have given them better service than new ones... FWIW, I used only McCreary AirHawks for 1000 hours. They wore quickly but were very LIGHT and CHEAP. Rotating them at ~150 hours I was getting 250-300 hours on a set. At my last tire replacement, I switched to a set of Wilkerson retreads. I got Goodyear Flight Custom II retreads for basically the same price as new AirHawks. First the BAD news...they were notably heavier than the AirHawks, and they were slightly larger in diameter. Now the GOOD news. I'm going to get easily another 50% more landings on these retreads than I did on the AirHawks. 200 hours and I still haven't had to rotate 'em yet. May not even bother. A worthwhile experiment imho, and for somebody who wants maximum bang for the buck, the retreads seem to be a great value. But I'll be honest...I don't mind rotating the tires and replacing them more often. I *enjoy* working on my plane, and it doesn't take long to swap/rotate tires. When it comes time to replace tires again I'm going back to the McCreary AirHawks. I'd rather have the lightweight setup, even if that means I have to devote two more afternoons to maintenance every year (no biggie!). )_( Dan RV-7 N714D (1246 hours) www.rvproject.com / www.weathermeister.com / www.weighmyplane.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ronlee(at)pcisys.net
Subject: Re: Phase One Radius
Date: Apr 06, 2007
Some areas in Colorado are basically the entire state east of the Rockies. 50 nm would be boring and only allow three airports to visit. Ron Lee --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ronlee(at)pcisys.net
Subject: Safety (Was Real Men!...)
Date: Apr 06, 2007
If all you macho taildragger dudes can stop kissing yourself in the mirror for a bit I have a bigger issue. I am getting damn tired of hearing of RVs crashing and killing people. Does anyone feel that a safety course targeted to RV pilots may eventually improve our safety record? I don't know if you can get anything across to putzes who fly into class 5 (?) thunderstorms, tempt Darwin and lose, but if most accidents are pilot error we should do more to reduce that factor. Chose whatever motivation you want: Not leaving loved ones behind, having more planes for the resale market, more planes for Young Eagle or builder motivation flights or my favorite...lowering insurance costs. It could be web-based initially with other options for group learning at fly-ins. Comments? Ron Lee Yea I fly a -6A --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Kyle Boatright" <kboatright1(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Safety (Was Real Men!...)
Date: Apr 06, 2007
Excellent idea. What common threads do we see in fatal RV accidents? Marginal VFR/VFR into IMC? Low Altitude Aerobatics? These two are the ones that come to mind for me, and the thing is, EVERYONE knows that these are pilot killers and people still make these mistake all too frequently. Personally, I don't do low altitude acrobatics or buzz my friend's houses. I will fly in marginal VFR, but have never been dumb enough (or unlucky enough) to enter IMC. KB ----- Original Message ----- From: <ronlee(at)pcisys.net> Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 5:40 PM Subject: RV-List: Safety (Was Real Men!...) > > If all you macho taildragger dudes can stop kissing yourself in the > mirror for a bit I have a bigger issue. > > I am getting damn tired of hearing of RVs crashing and killing people. > > Does anyone feel that a safety course targeted to RV pilots may > eventually improve our safety record? I don't know if you can get > anything across to putzes who fly into class 5 (?) thunderstorms, tempt > Darwin and lose, but if most accidents are pilot error we should do more > to reduce that factor. > > Chose whatever motivation you want: Not leaving loved ones behind, > having more planes for the resale market, more planes for Young Eagle or > builder motivation flights or my favorite...lowering insurance costs. > > It could be web-based initially with other options for group learning at > fly-ins. > > Comments? > > Ron Lee > Yea I fly a -6A > > > --------------------------------------------- > This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. > http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dave Cudney <yenduc(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: Safety (Was Real Men!...)
Date: Apr 06, 2007
The lead article in the latest RV Builders hotline certainly shows that there is plenty of room for a safety program. dave On Apr 6, 2007, at 9:40 PM, ronlee(at)pcisys.net wrote: > > If all you macho taildragger dudes can stop kissing yourself in the > mirror for a bit I have a bigger issue. > > I am getting damn tired of hearing of RVs crashing and killing people. > > Does anyone feel that a safety course targeted to RV pilots may > eventually improve our safety record? I don't know if you can get > anything across to putzes who fly into class 5 (?) thunderstorms, > tempt > Darwin and lose, but if most accidents are pilot error we should do > more > to reduce that factor. > > Chose whatever motivation you want: Not leaving loved ones behind, > having more planes for the resale market, more planes for Young > Eagle or > builder motivation flights or my favorite...lowering insurance costs. > > It could be web-based initially with other options for group > learning at > fly-ins. > > Comments? > > Ron Lee > Yea I fly a -6A > > > --------------------------------------------- > This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. > http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 07, 2007
From: Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Tires..
Dan, Did you by chance measure the weight difference? I'm about to put on my 3rd set of Airhawks, mostly due to inertia, but the longer life has my intrigued. Jeff Point RV-6 Milwaukee > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RAS" <deruiteraircraftservices(at)btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Safety (Was Real Men!...)
Date: Apr 07, 2007
Hi All, Has anyone ever looked into the RV accident statistics and determined the ratio of accidents against the number of non-builder owners? ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Mader" <davemader(at)bresnan.net>
Subject: which angle
Date: Apr 07, 2007
Guys, I am building an RV-4 (circa 1989) and am constructing the firewall. The =BE x =BE x .125=94 angle that goes around the perimeter and reinforces the firewall needs To be cut and I would like to know if anybody remembers which pieces I use to cut these. I have 7 pieces. 2 that are 170=94 2 that are 130=94 1 that is 72=94 2 that are 31=94 Obviously, the 2 170=94 are the main longerons=85.anybody know or remember which pieces to use for the firewall? Dave Mader Sheridan, Wyo RV6, flying ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 07, 2007
From: Glen Matejcek <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Safety (Was Real Men!...)
Ron- > If all you macho taildragger dudes can stop kissing yourself in the > mirror for a bit I have a bigger issue. I, for one, never kiss the mirror. You never know who was there first. > Does anyone feel that a safety course targeted to RV pilots may > eventually improve our safety record? Only if you can get the get the right people to attend. >I don't know if you can get > anything across to putzes who fly into class 5 (?) thunderstorms, > tempt > Darwin and lose, but if most accidents are pilot error we should do > more > to reduce that factor. Therein lies the problem. If you just stage a safety course, you will quickly find that you are preaching to the choir. Most folks who get in over their heads are ignorant. Now, somewhere, someone who has lost a friend or loved one is already annoyed with me for my diction, but think about it. If they knew they were en route to their demise, they would alter their course. But they don't. Think of the piolts you know. You probably know one who will seek out a cfi that they know will give them at least somewhat of a work out on a BFR, and one who will try to find a buddy to do a little creative writing in the log. Objectively, which one is more likely to have problems down the road? Plus, some people just don't seem to be able to be responsible and have fun at the same time. Consider the audience on this list. We are all participating here because we acknowledge that we don't know what we don't know, but we want to learn it. There are thousands of folks reading this forum to learn. If you were to stage a safety seminar, it would be populated with a whole lot of the same folks. The putzes you referenced above would rather be out thinning the gene pool. So. What to do. Suppose someone proclaims themselves an RV guru. Perhaps they have a resume with a goodly amount of RV time and no insurance claims, and they can write reasonably well to boot. They approach an insurance company to try and set it up so that if an RV pilot gets training and a stamp of approval from the 'guru' they will get a break on insurance rates. Sound like a plan? This was tried recently in the conventional gear world. The alphabet groups wouldn't have anything to do with it. There was no real public explanation as to why they wouldn't buy off on it, but I believe it is because it would put a whole lot of economic power, aside from the direct revenues, into the hands of an individual. How could RVer's work around this? I can see two possible avenues. First would be an FAA approved / sanctioned / recognized body representing experimental aviation running a safety program that issued some sort of completion certificate, much like the formation fliers get. The other would be a type club performing the same function. Now, where do you find the people with the right skill sets and qualifications and, perhaps most importantly, the right motivations to make this happen? Glen Matejcek ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: Tires..
Date: Apr 07, 2007
> Did you by chance measure the weight difference? I'm about to put on my > 3rd set of Airhawks, mostly due to inertia, but the longer life has my > intrigued. Unfortunately, no. But with my highly accurate calibrated neuro-sensitive Hand 2000 scales I could definitely feel a difference of (what felt to me like) a couple of pounds per set. I think I have some old AirHawk cores lying around. When the Wilkerson retreat Flight Custom IIs come off, I'll try to remember to compare those. )_( Dan ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 07, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: PAPSP - Pilot & Aircraft Proficiency & Safety Program (Was Safety)
Glen, I began a thread on the RV-10 list some while back on the same topic only aimed particularly @ RV-10's. I got a response from about 25 listers who indicated interest in the idea/concept. I had planned to model it after the Bonanza Pilot proficiency programs. I'll attach a couple of messages to this e-mail that contain the gist of the program. I've held off on pushing/developing this as I'm trying to finish my RV-10 this year, and developing the program is a BIG time consumer. I had several offers from the RV community of very qualified people that were/are interested in participating in particular phases of developing the program.My intent was/is to pick this back up towards the end of the year when the -1o is flying, If there is enough interest in developing a program for the larger RV community perhaps the effort could be transitioned. Your comment about preaching to the choir has some merit to it. However, I don't believe that's a reason not to proceed. Additionally , My friend Rick Sked and his partner are attempting to form Aircraft Mutual http://www.aircraftmutual.com/ with the aim of taking the risk management/ property insurance issue away from the insurance carriers and into the hands of the RV pilots/owners. Rick would be whole heartedly in support of such a program. Deems Davis # 406 Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) http://deemsrv10.com/ Some prior e-mails on subject follow I'd like to float an idea to the group with the community zeroing in on 700 builders, and that is: Why don't we organize an RV-10 Pilot & Aircraft Proficiency Safety Program - PAPSP- ? I believe that several of the certificated type's have similar programs ( I know that Bonanza's/Barons do) so there are models out there that can be adopted/examined. With the strength of the building community evidenced on this list, and some prior posts aimed at organizing -10 type flyins. Why couldn't we combine those objectives? Loosely speaking the idea would be to periodically (annually initially?) meet at a fly-in (what about Doug Reeves Land Of Enchantment?). In between the hangar talk and comeraderie. there could be a pilot skills clinic established to talk specifically to -10 issues, as well as an aircraft safety/performance clinic (might even couple it with a formation flying clinic) . The clinics could be classroom based, cockpit/airframe based, or both. A ciriculum/s would have to be developed, guidelines established, volunteerism would have to be significant, but the benefits in Insurance, Safety, and potential performance improvements could be enormous, a 'self-regulating' group would likely draw the favor of insurance companies and underwriters. It also could just be a "Lot of Fun" (and could redirect some of the energy that goes into the building process into the 'flying' process and potentially delay the starting of another project to satisfy the 'need') Anyway just an idea, Anybody listening? Deems Davis # 406 / / f I'm taking up too much bandwidth with this let me know, But I felt the need to get something short concise and written that would serve to guide efforts as we go down this path. Some call these Mission statements, I took a crack at drafting an Objective statement the intent is the same. If this program is built to meet/suit the needs of the RV10 community, the communities feedback and input in crafting this is essential. Please review and critique it, rip it apart, modify it, and improve it in any way you think will add value or clarify what we are attempting to do, I'm pretty thick skinned and won't take offense at any input. I'll digest everything I receive and publish an update when the input dries up. If we have conflicting input we'll put it back to the group for a tie breaker. I want to make it clear that I'm not trying to take ownership of this or to stake out any turf, I'm probably the least qualified person to tackle something like this, based upon information that I've seen/received from several, there are many who have impressive credentials in the area of aviation and safety arena and are more qualified. So the floor is open for nominations. I included a VERY high level outline of how we might go about some of the next steps. Please note there are no time frames on anything at this point (contradicts my background, but suits my present reality, which is to make it Fun and not Work) My expectation is that building this could take months/years. If we can get a community consensus on Objective, Program Components/Elements and Priorities, we can break the development and implementation into incremental steps. Thanks for the interest expressed thus far and any suggestions going forward Deems Davis # 406 Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) http://deemsrv10.com/ / /To all who've responded to this thread so far: Thank you for your responses. As Patrick, John and others have pointed out, accomplishing something like this is NOT a minor undertaking. I don't doubt for a moment, the amount of work that would be required to put something like this together, with 40% (+/- 90%) more to go on my own project, I'm also not misleading myself into thinking this is something I could/would do alone or in my own spare time. However, I am willing to put some of the evening time that I spend (along with others time) browsing the boards/lists/websites into developing something that could be of significant value to our community. There is enough anecdotal evidence so far to suggest that the REAL value is there. As Patrick pointed out the biggest value, is a fleet of safety conscious pilots and aircraft. And while this is _First and Foremost_ a Safety and Proficiency idea, It doesn't rule out having some fun and enjoyment. It also doesn't have to be built and implemented in a way that requires us to build and eat the whole elephant at once, perhaps a phased approach is possible? In order for this idea/concept to work, it will have to have a LOT of support from the RV-10 community, as it would be entirely voluntary, there are no compulsory 'enforcement' actions that can be taken other than to withhold some type of certification. It would also require availability and commitment of some particular skills (CFI/CFII), that I for one don't have. (may encourage me to get another rating! :-) ) So with all of that said, the 1st item is to determine what , how much of an interest there is in a program like this, its easy to respond to an e-mail, and although I've received 10 + positive responses to the idea, that's not yet enough (1.5%) in my opinion to make a GO commitment. However it is encouraging enough to continue with the step of determining what kind of an interest there might be in such an event. Apart from this mail list, does anyone else have any additional ideas on how to survey the RV-10 group? I see that Rick S. and Bob K. have received. (If I can figure out how to do it I might put up a survey page on my web site, for those bashful folks who aren't as vocal on the mail list) IF, (big IF) there is enough interest, I'm thinking the next step would be to form an advisory group that would help to specify the mission, establish the scope, set priorities, outline a curriculum, establish governance, etc. Some of you have indicated an willingness.desire to contribute, I'll assemble a list of potential contributors and the skill set/expertise that may be available. If you don't want to respond on-line send me a not offline to register your interest. One of the suggestions was to broaden the concept to the whole RV community. My prior life experience taught me that as the size/complexity of the effort increases, the risk of failure increases exponentially. So I'm inclined to focus on this group (RV-10) for starters. If we can make a go of it, then it could be exported to a wider community. Please keep the suggestions/alternatives/input coming I have learned that the electronic/distributed community is indeed a synergistic organism and there is much more knowledge and expertise out here than I could ever hope to acquire in my lifetime. / > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 07, 2007
From: "Rob Prior" <rv7(at)b4.ca>
Subject: Re: Safety (Was Real Men!...)
On 16:00 1969-12-31 Glen Matejcek wrote: > How could RVer's work > around this? I can see two possible avenues. First would be an FAA > approved / sanctioned / recognized body representing experimental > aviation running a safety program that issued some sort of completion > certificate, much like the formation fliers get. Maybe we've already got the answer, sort of, right here. We all keep logs, and those of us who go off and do "extra" things to improve proficiency usually have it logged in one way or another. Personally I log all of my formation, tailwheel, and glider towing in separate columns in my logbook, and I had to add those columns because they weren't there when I started. I've also been counting landings since I got my PPL, and they outnumber my flights by about 5:1 now. I know pilots for who that ratio is almost 1:1, they never fly circuits just for the practise. Would having your logbook reviewed annually be a good idea? Or maybe have the option of submitting the totals for your "extra" activities, to show that you're more than just flying straight-and-level from A to B all the time? -Rob ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Charles Brame <chasb(at)satx.rr.com>
Subject: Phase one Radius
Date: Apr 07, 2007
One of our local builders recently got his inspection and Airworthiness Certificate. He presented the DAR with his desired Phase One area laid out on a sectional. It was a huge area covering most of south central Texas. His map had well delineated borders and excluded populated areas and Class B airspace, though it did completely surround some of the excluded areas. He specifically included some distant airports that had avionics shops, painting facilities, etc., and other RV builder's facilities. He highlighted emergency fields and airports for practice touch and goes and instrument approaches. The DAR said his requested area was something new and different and that he had obviously put some thought into it. The area was approved it without any restrictions. Charlie Brame RV-6A N11CB San Amntonio ---------------------------------------------------------------- > From: Jerry2DT(at)aol.com > Subject: RV-List: Phase One Radius > > Since I heard this list needs something to noodle about, here's > one... Can > anyone tell me why it is important to limit the radius one can fly > off phase > one to 50 miles, or any number of miles at all? I'm in the midst > of this > exercise and wonder what safety issue dictates this... I would > rather see the > rules > reflect that the pilot has an understanding of simply staying away > from > populated areas, have a place to set down, etc., whether it's 50 > miles out or > > 200... Sure would make it more interesting... > > Maybe this is a holdover of the 1920's or sumpin'? > > Just noodling, > Jerry Cochran > RV-6a 6 hrs. > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Porter" <december29(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Safety (Was Real Men!...)
Date: Apr 07, 2007
Hi, This is how I break down RV accidents. I've looked at all the NTSB stuff and, for me, it goes like this. First, marginal VFR. I put in a Dynon so I have an attitude indicator with pitot heat but the aircraft is day/night VFR. In having an aircraft that's VFR it should keep me from trying to be stupid (I've been there, it is, end of topic) Secondly, RV's run out of gas. This one is why I built my wings as the QB kits come with the float gauges. I am tired of GA aircraft with bad fuel gauges. So...........we put capacitance gauges in my -8. I also use fuel flow, but the point is, be conservative and don't push the fuel. Know how much you have. Third is mechanical failure. This, I've seen, as hoses. So to answer this, I didn't build my own hoses and pressure test them with my compressor. I have TSO'ed hoses from Tulsa that are 3000 psi tested with a fire sleeve on each one. Didn't like the bill, but they won't fail. And fourth, the dumbs--t, "Watch this pullup". As an ex-USAF pilot, it just doesn't happen. We know about rolling G's, aerodynamics, etc. In the words of George senior, "Wouldn't be prudent...............". I would like to see a better safety record with RV's. They are a high performance SEL aircraft. They are not your grandma's Champ. I've seen guys scud running over Dundee, Oregon at 300 ft in formation. That is an accident waiting to happen. Ron, these are the area's I've thought about. I'm sure others have ideas. I have never shared these idea's because no one's asked. But I think they have value. And Van addressed some of these concerns a few years back talking about his flying attentions. It was (an is) a very good read from the RVator. His general tone is to "polish the stone". Don't accept landing long. Don't be 10 kts off speed. Don't fly the bomber pattern. Pay attention. Just my two cents, John 80002 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HCRV6(at)comcast.net
Subject: Re: which angle
Date: Apr 07, 2007
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 07, 2007
From: "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net>
Subject: Re: PAPSP - Pilot & Aircraft Proficiency & Safety Program (Was
Safety) This is a great idea. However, they would be able to get to more people if their website didn't require Flash... Not everyone that needs aircraft insurance has a broadband internet connection... Dick Tasker Deems Davis wrote: > Your comment about preaching to the choir has some merit to it. > However, I don't believe that's a reason not to proceed. Additionally > , My friend Rick Sked and his partner are attempting to form Aircraft > Mutual http://www.aircraftmutual.com/ with the aim of taking the > risk management/ property insurance issue away from the insurance > carriers and into the hands of the RV pilots/owners. Rick would be > whole heartedly in support of such a program. -- Please Note: No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however, that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced. -- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 07, 2007
From: Richard Seiders <seiders(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Safety (Was Real Men!...)
I don't consider myself a dumb-a-- pilot, but I'm not perfect either. I don't scud run, if it's IFR I file and fly IFR , but only if there are no thunderstorms in my path. I never go below 1/3 tanks, and try to avoid doing stupid things in an airplane weatherwise or otherwise. So I'm all for those who want to contribute to this effort reminding us all that even if we are the choir we all need to hear good thing/bad things a lot to avoid slipping into the kind of habits that may bite us. Dick RV6A At 11:53 AM 4/7/2007, you wrote: > >On 16:00 1969-12-31 Glen Matejcek wrote: > > How could RVer's work > > around this? I can see two possible avenues. First would be an FAA > > approved / sanctioned / recognized body representing experimental > > aviation running a safety program that issued some sort of completion > > certificate, much like the formation fliers get. > >Maybe we've already got the answer, sort of, right here. We all keep logs, >and those of us who go off and do "extra" things to improve proficiency >usually have it logged in one way or another. Personally I log all of my >formation, tailwheel, and glider towing in separate columns in my logbook, >and I had to add those columns because they weren't there when I started. >I've also been counting landings since I got my PPL, and they outnumber my >flights by about 5:1 now. I know pilots for who that ratio is almost 1:1, >they never fly circuits just for the practise. > >Would having your logbook reviewed annually be a good idea? Or maybe have >the option of submitting the totals for your "extra" activities, to show >that you're more than just flying straight-and-level from A to B all the >time? > >-Rob > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ron Brown" <romott(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Tires..
Date: Apr 08, 2007
Aviation Consumer ran extensive tests on tire brands as well as retreads. See http://www.desser.com/epdf/ACJuneFinal04-dtr.pdf We used the Wilkerson Retreads on our 172 - twice - got good results! As better wear than the expensive Michelins we were running before. Ron Brown ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 08, 2007
From: bertrv6(at)highstream.net
Subject: Re: PAPSP - Pilot & Aircraft Proficiency & Safety Program (Was
Safety) Quoting Deems Davis : > Glen, I began a thread on the RV-10 list some while back on the same > topic only aimed particularly @ RV-10's. I got a response from about 25 > listers who indicated interest in the idea/concept. I had planned to > model it after the Bonanza Pilot proficiency programs. I'll attach a > couple of messages to this e-mail that contain the gist of the program. > I've held off on pushing/developing this as I'm trying to finish my > RV-10 this year, and developing the program is a BIG time consumer. I > had several offers from the RV community of very qualified people that > were/are interested in participating in particular phases of developing > the program.My intent was/is to pick this back up towards the end of the > year when the -1o is flying, If there is enough interest in developing a > program for the larger RV community perhaps the effort could be > transitioned. > > Your comment about preaching to the choir has some merit to it. However, > I don't believe that's a reason not to proceed. Additionally , My friend > Rick Sked and his partner are attempting to form Aircraft Mutual > http://www.aircraftmutual.com/ with the aim of taking the risk > management/ property insurance issue away from the insurance carriers > and into the hands of the RV pilots/owners. Rick would be whole > heartedly in support of such a program. > > Deems Davis # 406 > Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) > http://deemsrv10.com/ > > > Some prior e-mails on subject follow > > > I'd like to float an idea to the group with the community zeroing in on > 700 builders, and that is: Why don't we organize an RV-10 Pilot & > Aircraft Proficiency Safety Program - PAPSP- ? I believe that several of > the certificated type's have similar programs ( I know that > Bonanza's/Barons do) so there are models out there that can be > adopted/examined. With the strength of the building community evidenced > on this list, and some prior posts aimed at organizing -10 type flyins. > Why couldn't we combine those objectives? Loosely speaking the idea > would be to periodically (annually initially?) meet at a fly-in (what > about Doug Reeves Land Of Enchantment?). In between the hangar talk and > comeraderie. there could be a pilot skills clinic established to talk > specifically to -10 issues, as well as an aircraft safety/performance > clinic (might even couple it with a formation flying clinic) . The > clinics could be classroom based, cockpit/airframe based, or both. A > ciriculum/s would have to be developed, guidelines established, > volunteerism would have to be significant, but the benefits in > Insurance, Safety, and potential performance improvements could be > enormous, a 'self-regulating' group would likely draw the favor of > insurance companies and underwriters. It also could just be a "Lot of > Fun" (and could redirect some of the energy that goes into the building > process into the 'flying' process and potentially delay the starting of > another project to satisfy the 'need') > > Anyway just an idea, > > Anybody listening? > > Deems Davis # 406 / > > / > > > f I'm taking up too much bandwidth with this let me know, But I felt > the need to get something short concise and written that would serve to > guide efforts as we go down this path. Some call these Mission > statements, I took a crack at drafting an Objective statement the > intent is the same. If this program is built to meet/suit the needs of > the RV10 community, the communities feedback and input in crafting this > is essential. Please review and critique it, rip it apart, modify it, > and improve it in any way you think will add value or clarify what we > are attempting to do, I'm pretty thick skinned and won't take offense at > any input. I'll digest everything I receive and publish an update when > the input dries up. If we have conflicting input we'll put it back to > the group for a tie breaker. I want to make it clear that I'm not trying > to take ownership of this or to stake out any turf, I'm probably the > least qualified person to tackle something like this, based upon > information that I've seen/received from several, there are many who > have impressive credentials in the area of aviation and safety arena and > are more qualified. So the floor is open for nominations. > > I included a VERY high level outline of how we might go about some of > the next steps. Please note there are no time frames on anything at > this point (contradicts my background, but suits my present reality, > which is to make it Fun and not Work) My expectation is that building > this could take months/years. If we can get a community consensus on > Objective, Program Components/Elements and Priorities, we can break > the development and implementation into incremental steps. > > Thanks for the interest expressed thus far and any suggestions going forward > > > Deems Davis # 406 > Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) > http://deemsrv10.com/ > / > > /To all who've responded to this thread so far: > > Thank you for your responses. As Patrick, John and others have pointed > out, accomplishing something like this is NOT a minor undertaking. I > don't doubt for a moment, the amount of work that would be required to > put something like this together, with 40% (+/- 90%) more to go on my > own project, I'm also not misleading myself into thinking this is > something I could/would do alone or in my own spare time. However, I am > willing to put some of the evening time that I spend (along with others > time) browsing the boards/lists/websites into developing something that > could be of significant value to our community. There is enough > anecdotal evidence so far to suggest that the REAL value is there. As > Patrick pointed out the biggest value, is a fleet of safety conscious > pilots and aircraft. And while this is _First and Foremost_ a Safety and > Proficiency idea, It doesn't rule out having some fun and enjoyment. It > also doesn't have to be built and implemented in a way that requires us > to build and eat the whole elephant at once, perhaps a phased approach > is possible? > > In order for this idea/concept to work, it will have to have a LOT of > support from the RV-10 community, as it would be entirely voluntary, > there are no compulsory 'enforcement' actions that can be taken other > than to withhold some type of certification. It would also require > availability and commitment of some particular skills (CFI/CFII), that I > for one don't have. (may encourage me to get another rating! :-) ) So > with all of that said, the 1st item is to determine what , how much of > an interest there is in a program like this, its easy to respond to an > e-mail, and although I've received 10 + positive responses to the idea, > that's not yet enough (1.5%) in my opinion to make a GO commitment. > However it is encouraging enough to continue with the step of > determining what kind of an interest there might be in such an event. > > Apart from this mail list, does anyone else have any additional ideas on > how to survey the RV-10 group? I see that Rick S. and Bob K. have > received. (If I can figure out how to do it I might put up a survey page > on my web site, for those bashful folks who aren't as vocal on the mail > list) > > IF, (big IF) there is enough interest, I'm thinking the next step would > be to form an advisory group that would help to specify the mission, > establish the scope, set priorities, outline a curriculum, establish > governance, etc. Some of you have indicated an willingness.desire to > contribute, I'll assemble a list of potential contributors and the skill > set/expertise that may be available. If you don't want to respond > on-line send me a not offline to register your interest. > > One of the suggestions was to broaden the concept to the whole RV > community. My prior life experience taught me that as the > size/complexity of the effort increases, the risk of failure increases > exponentially. So I'm inclined to focus on this group (RV-10) for > starters. If we can make a go of it, then it could be exported to a > wider community. > Please keep the suggestions/alternatives/input coming I have learned > that the electronic/distributed community is indeed a synergistic > organism and there is much more knowledge and expertise out here than I > could ever hope to acquire in my lifetime. > > / > >Hi: Yes is a good Idea, not new, it is called self Insured, or something similar no? I think, that one way would be, that an Organization like, the EAA, COULD MANAGE THE PROGRAM FOR THOSE INTERESTED IN SUCH. I WOULD SAY AOPA, BUT, THEY HAVE SOME MANY THINGS TO DO, BESIDES THEIR PAYINBG ADVERTISING, COMES FROM INSURANCE COMPANIES ETC.. BUT MAYBE NOT... CERTAINLY, AOPA, IS PERHAPS THE ONLY ORGANIZATION THAT GET RESULTS, FOR OUR BENEFIT, EAA, DOES NOT HAVE THE CLOUT... I WILL BET THAT IF THIS IDEA MATERIALIZED....SOME DAY... MOST INSURERS, WILL COME WITH SOMETHING SIMILAR AT A VERY LOW COST.. NOW THEY SAY, IMPOSSIBLE, WE ARE GIVEN THIS AWAY... IS ALWYAS THE SAME BERT RV6A > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Sletten" <marknlisa(at)hometel.com>
Subject: Safety, Risk Management & Pilots
Date: Apr 08, 2007
Listers, BEWARE! LONG-WINDED POST! The problem with developing a "training" program to teach safety to pilots is exactly that which has been voiced by a number of readers -- you're preaching to the choir. Additionally, because safety means different things to different pilots, a message that has import to everyone becomes difficult -- if not impossible -- to craft. Even the best trainers struggle with the issue. John and Martha King have even gone so far as to avoid the use of the word safety. The idea is it's been used so much pilots are becoming immune to its ability to get our attention. Instead, the King's now tout "risk management" as a way to focus our attention on the more important factors that should guide our decision making -- an idea that has much merit IMHO. Adding further to the problem is the difficulty faced in teaching and learning safety. Understanding safety isn't a matter of regurgitating a list of relevant facts or demonstrating unique skills -- it's an attitude, a belief. Like religion, safety deals with a personal value system, and as such resides in a particular learning domain that is difficult (but not impossible) to teach. Adult education experts classify learning into three domains: Cognitive, Psychomotor & Affective. The cognitive domain deals mainly with knowledge and can be equated to ground school for the purposes of our discussion. The psychomotor domain is where you learn skills; eye-hand coordination, manipulating the stick and rudder, accomplishing tasks in the proper order, etc. Flight training is learning in the psychomotor domain. Most of us are familiar with cognitive and psychomotor learning. The affective domain encompasses feelings, attitude, values, etc. A good flight school and/or instructor will imbue his/her syllabus with lessons addressing attitudes and values throughout the training program. For a much more in-depth review of affective learning click on this link: http://www.coe.uga.edu/epltt/affective.htm If you don't want to read the entire webpage let me cover some highlights. The best way to teach an attitude is to foster a need for one within your student during ground school (cognitive) and flight training (psychomotor), then teach by example. Students will best learn from their primary instructor -- either thru discussion or direct observation/imitation -- the importance of safety. Research shows that aside from personal experience, role modeling and social acceptance are the most powerful attitudinal developers. Think about the implications of that for a moment. Unless you survive a life-threatening experience from which to learn, your instructor and the rest of the flying community will likely form the basis of your attitude toward flight safety when faced with a "life or death" decision. Experts have further categorized levels of learning within the affective domain (see below). It's generally accepted that one must progress up this scale. For example, before one can value an attitude one must have learned of it, etc. 1. RECEIVING PHENOMENA -- an awareness; willingness to listen 2. RESPONDING TO PHENOMENA -- taking an active part in learning; participating 3. VALUING -- the value a person attaches to something 4. ORGANIZATION -- organizing values into order of priority 5. INTERNALIZING VALUES -- behavior which is controlled by a value system I think if asked, everyone of us would SAY we believe that flight safety is paramount; when faced with dire straights, getting the plane on the ground without injury to people or damage to the aircraft is the primary goal -- we are beyond the first three levels as regards our awareness and acceptance of safety in the affective domain. The problem seems to come when we're asked to PRIORITIZE. Even though we believe flight safety is paramount, our behavior often reflects conflicting values. We make silly decisions that lead to injury/death -- low-level aerobatics or trying to stretch a few more miles out that last top off -- and seem to make no sense. They seem to make no sense until we discern the controlling value. In the two above examples having fun or saving time is perceived as the priority. In my opinion, our problem isn't teaching new attitudes (values). Everyone understands flying airplanes is dangerous and can result in our death, or the deaths of others. Our problem is how to ORGANIZE and INTERNALIZE our values so that we may properly prioritize. Our behavior should (and most likely will) reflect our beliefs. Obviously there needs to be some balance; we build our planes to enjoy them and get us places in less time. But no one would argue that walking away from the aircraft following our return to earth should be the most important priority. I spent twenty years as a member of the USAF (Boom Operator on KC-135 aircraft). Any USAF flight crewmember will tell you that the Air Force has a lock on safety. That's not to say it doesn't deal with its share of accidents; after all, its pilots engage in some of the most hazardous flying activities imaginable. But no organization is better at instilling safety into its culture. Some of the things it does: SAFETY AS A CORPORATE VALUE -- Safety is mentioned at least once a day by "someone in charge." No aspect of your life is considered sacrosanct from safety review. Commanders are required to individually brief members who engage in high-risk activities off duty (skydiving, scuba diving, even flying light aircraft). Every season brings new hazards and results in a mass safety briefing to discuss them; 101 Critical Days of Summer, Winter Driving Tips, etc. Everyone from the top down is continually observed and critiqued on their attitude towards safety. You can see how this falls right into the "social acceptance" aspect of attitude change. MONTHLY FLYING SAFETY MEETINGS -- Every month crewmembers are required to attend a safety meeting. An officer is assigned specifically to organize and present pertinent safety topics. Accidents are mercilessly reviewed as regards the actions of the crew. All aspects of the accident are pored over (ever read an NTSB report on a major airline accident?) with the intention of showing how the crew's action (or inaction) contributed. All the data is presented coldly, emotionlessly, accurately and concisely; no punches are pulled out of respect for the living or dead crewmembers involved. More "social acceptance." POST-FLIGHT CRITIQUES -- After every mission, the crew (or crews in the event of a multi-aircraft flight) review the entire mission as regards flight safety and mission effectiveness. For training missions, flight safety rules; operational missions might require more emphasis on mission effectiveness. Crews discuss safety issues without prejudice or passion (hopefully) -- leave your ego at the door. All comments by everyone involved are taken at their face not as a personal attack, but as one person trying to help another avoid death or injury. No opinion is suppressed. Sometimes the discussion involves how safety relates to mission effectiveness, and these are the most beneficial because they help clarify one's system of value organization. It's not uncommon for these discussions to occur openly in view of other crewmembers that weren't on the flight. Comments from the peanut gallery are encouraged -- all actions are open for scrutiny. Can you say "social acceptance?" QUALIFICATION TRAINING -- This may seem silly to even mention, but the importance of ensuring one is qualified to engage in a particular activity before attempting to do so cannot be overstated. In the USAF, NO ONE is allowed to engage in a flight-related activity until they've been trained and their skills and knowledge evaluated and compared to a standard. Flight examiners also evaluate an individual's decision-making since how we react to a particular situation holds clues to our attitudes and values. CURRENCY TRAINING -- Effective, recurrent emergency procedures training conducted in as realistic a method as possible (simulators). No one can argue that a behavior repeated time and again becomes second nature. Research has proven that repetitive training such as this can even change attitudes. Hmmm... As you can see, the USAF incorporates and internalizes training in the affective domain throughout its entire culture. They utilize three key devices experts tell us are most effective in changing attitudes: -- Demonstration of the desired behavior by a respected role model (primary training) -- Practice of the desired behavior, often through role playing (simulator training) -- Reinforcement of the desired behavior (safety meetings, post-flight critiques, etc.) As has been mentioned, the alphabet groups have resisted getting the insurance companies involved... because they fear the "power" one might then wield within the community it has been suggested. While I don't know about that, I do know the Cirrus Owner's and Pilots Organization has resisted just such an initiative within its own group; the reason might surprise you. COPA has a remarkable record. You may have read of a number of high-profile accidents involving Cirrus aircraft; more than would seem the norm considering the number of aircraft in the fleet. What you probably didn't know is that nearly 90% of those accidents involved Cirrus pilots who are not members of COPA. Hmmmm.... COPA (www.cirruspilots.org) has incorporated safety awareness in every aspect of its activities. They organize and sponsor (or find someone to sponsor) type-specific training seminars. Almost all of the many fly-ins its members attend include some type of (voluntary, but almost universally attended) training seminar. If you want to know how COPA values safety, go to its website and click the link for the organization's "Code of Conduct." I submit you will likely never find a more cogent, concise and pertinent document from which to base your actions as a pilot. COPA also runs an extremely active message forum on which members regularly dissect recent flights (much like the USAF post-flight critique). There is also a move afoot among members to establish a "mentor" program. Each member will have contact information for an experienced Cirrus pilot whom they may consult to help with preflight decision-making. Ever looked over a preflight situation and agonized over what to do? What if you had someone you trust implicitly (other than the Flight Service Station) to help you focus on the important factors and make a good decision? I believe this single program has more potential to prevent accidents than almost anything else COPA does... So why did COPA resist seeking an insurance discount for COPA membership? Simply because its members fear pilots will then join just for the discount rather than to be involved and active in the safety programs. It attributes the remarkable safety statistic mentioned above to the fact that all its members are focused on safely flying the aircraft above all else -- and they want to keep it that way. One might ask the question: Is COPA's safety record due to its programs, because it attracts the kind of pilot who is naturally cautious or some other reason? That's a good question -- the kind where contemplating an answer may hold value for us all... I would suggest those of us who feel we should "DO" something about improving our safety record as a community might consider doing some of the things COPA does. The braver among us might consider posting about a recent flight where something unusual happened and open a discussion. Even posting about a flight were the pilot decided not to go can be instructive; on what factors did he or she base the no-go decision? Post-flight discussions are invaluable for reviewing tragedies and triumphs, but some posters are better than others at leaving out personal attacks and avoiding contempt when discussing another's actions. Because email isn't the most effective method of conveying meaning, we should endeavor as both a "sender" and "receiver" of data to avoid the distractions of rancor and contempt thereby limiting our emotional reactions -- that only leads to flame wars. And to ensure a rich supply of material for discussion, we should remember that those not familiar with a system like this will be much more amenable to posting their experiences for dissection if they don't feel like they're opening themselves up for cheap shots and personal attacks. Conversely, be open-minded if someone questions your activities. There isn't one among us who couldn't improve when it comes to safety, but unless you are aware of a shortcoming you can't eliminate it. Try to view criticism as an effort on the part of another to help you. Try to accept any and all comments on their face as an attempt to help foster a "safety culture" here on the list. For my own part, I try to beware my individualism. I try to remind myself the same attitude that led me away from certified aircraft and to build and fly a high-performance kit can lead to my unwillingness to listen to other's opinions. Those more experienced among us might also consider mentoring. I don't mean publicly flaming someone you believe made a stupid decision, but taking the time to thoughtfully review a situation after getting ALL THE FACTS and having a civilized discussion -- one on one -- with a wayward pilot. Discuss the importance of getting the proper training before engaging in a particular type of flight activity (formation, aerobatic, etc). Talk about the importance of staying current. Offer to be available to help with preflight decision making. Okay, I'll get off my soapbox now. BTW, please feel free to comment in any fashion you like about this post -- after 20 years of post-flight critiques I'm pretty thick skinned! Regards, Mark Sletten Legacy FG N828LM http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 08, 2007
From: bertrv6(at)highstream.net
Subject: Hello
Quoting Tim Bryan : > > Hi Bert, > > I had this same problem and no intercom. Have you checked your intercom? > For me the problem came down to the wiring for the mic jacks. There were > two wires that could be swapped and still allow the ptt to work. If they > were backwards there was no sidetone and no intercom. > > Just my experience. > Tim > Thanks Tim: I will check on that again.. I am sure is my wiring, I am not the best on electrical... If I had to do it again, I will buy the bullett and pay to have the pannel done by a professional... it was the hardest for me... Bert rv6a > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list- > > server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of bertrv6(at)highstream.net > > Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 10:27 AM > > To: Rv-list(at)matronics.com > > Subject: RV-List: Hello > > > > > > > > > > Hi: > > > > For those experts on avionics... I am having problem with my Radio. > > > > I do not have a side tone, on the head sets...Every one can hear me > > well, and I can hear, but no side tone.. > > I have checked for loose wires,, that is all... > > > > > > Suggestions, next step.. > > > > Thanks > > > > Bert > > > > rv6a > > > > Completing my 40 hrs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jerry2DT(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 08, 2007
Subject: Exhaust Stacks
Anyone here have opinion/facts on effect of exhaust stack length on power and/or aerodynamics of stacks hanging out in the airstream? I have standard Vetterman stacks and as they come extend from the bottom of cowling about 9". Anyone shorten them up with positive results? Just noodling as usual.. Jerry Cochran RV-6a Phase One ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jerry2DT(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 08, 2007
Subject: Exhaust Stacks
Anyone here have opinion/facts on effect of exhaust stack length on power and/or aerodynamics of stacks hanging out in the airstream? I have standard Vetterman stacks and as they come extend from the bottom of cowling about 9". Anyone shorten them up with positive results? Just noodling as usual.. Jerry Cochran RV-6a Phase One ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV6 Flyer" <rv6_flyer(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Exhaust Stacks
Date: Apr 08, 2007
Jerry: I shorten mine 10 years ago. It makes more noise in the cockpit and more vibration on the floor. After about a year of that, I installed 22 degree turn downs (purchased from Vetterman) to get the exhaust away from the airplane. Less floor vibration and appears to be less noise. I did not see any speed difference. I will let others that have done more flight testing with and without make claims to speed increases. Gary A. Sobek "My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell, 1,988 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA ----Original Message Follows---- From: Jerry2DT(at)aol.com Subject: RV-List: Exhaust Stacks Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2007 14:25:26 EDT Anyone here have opinion/facts on effect of exhaust stack length on power and/or aerodynamics of stacks hanging out in the airstream? I have standard Vetterman stacks and as they come extend from the bottom of cowling about 9". Anyone shorten them up with positive results? Just noodling as usual.. Jerry Cochran RV-6a Phase One ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. _________________________________________________________________ Exercise your brain! Try Flexicon. http://games.msn.com/en/flexicon/default.htm?icid=flexicon_hmemailtaglineapril07 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Richard Martin" <martin(at)gbonline.com>
Subject: Re: Exhaust Stacks
Date: Apr 08, 2007
Jerry, I have tested both the longer stacks from Larry and the earlier versions that were approx 4 -6 inches longer. The longer stacks will give you a 1 to 2knot speed gain, however, they will also slightly increase the noise level within the fuselage. The stacks with a down facing elbow are quieter and also slower than both of the above. These tests were done in my RV8. I do not know if the above will apply to the RV6 & RV7, however, I would think that the same results would apply also. Dick Martin RV8 N233M the fast one ----- Original Message ----- From: Jerry2DT(at)aol.com To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2007 1:25 PM Subject: RV-List: Exhaust Stacks Anyone here have opinion/facts on effect of exhaust stack length on power and/or aerodynamics of stacks hanging out in the airstream? I have standard Vetterman stacks and as they come extend from the bottom of cowling about 9". Anyone shorten them up with positive results? Just noodling as usual.. Jerry Cochran RV-6a Phase One ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- See what's free at AOL.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Carb Fittings? Primer fittings?
From: "Miles Bowen" <cessna170bdriver(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Apr 09, 2007
Russ has given some good advice on how to adjust the fitting, but this is definitely NOT the place for a "pinhole" fitting. This is the fuel inlet to the carb, and a "pinhole" fitting would not all allow sufficient fuel flow. The fitting to which the arrow points is not a setscrew, but a pipe plug, just there to seal the hole, which was probably only there to allow access for machining the part during fabrication. Miles -------- Miles 1955 C170B HRII Plans#211 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=105894#105894 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jerry2DT(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 09, 2007
Subject: Re: Exhaust Stacks
Thanks guys, Exactly the kind of info I was looking for. Guess I'll leave mine alone... Jerry Cochran From: "Richard Martin" <martin(at)gbonline.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: Exhaust Stacks Jerry, I have tested both the longer stacks from Larry and the earlier versions that were approx 4 -6 inches longer. The longer stacks will give you a 1 to 2knot speed gain, however, they will also slightly increase the noise level within the fuselage. The stacks with a down facing elbow are quieter and also slower than both of the above. These tests were done in my RV8. I do not know if the above will apply to the RV6 & RV7, however, I would think that the same results would apply also. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: Tires..
Date: Apr 09, 2007
I had read that article in the past but I went back and re-read it. First of all, there are at least TWO glaring errors that I spotted. But more importantly imho, the article approaches the notion of "value" to include the cost of labor for tire replacement. They under-value cheaper tires (at least from our perspective) because they imply that the aircraft owner will incur more "labor charges" as a result of having to change tires more frequently. So how does this apply to OBAM (owner built & maintained) aircraft owners, who theoretically "pay" nothing but an afternoon of our time when replacing tires? And how does it apply to us, RV builders who try to shave pounds wherever we can (to compensate for our often large guts)? Our value system is different imho. I think if somebody rewrote this article in the context of homebuilts, the conclusion & recommendations might be different. I still contend that on a combined basis of weight, diameter, cost per landing, and landings per rotation/replacment, the McCreary AirHawk takes the cake for the average RV owner. Your mileage and priorities may vary! )_( Dan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Brown" <romott(at)adelphia.net> Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2007 5:56 AM Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Tires.. > > Aviation Consumer ran extensive tests on tire brands as well as retreads. > > See http://www.desser.com/epdf/ACJuneFinal04-dtr.pdf > > We used the Wilkerson Retreads on our 172 - twice - got good results! As > better wear than the expensive Michelins we were running before. > > Ron Brown > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Russ & Marilyn" <rmkeith(at)gwi.net>
Subject: Re: Carb Fittings? Primer fittings?
Date: Apr 09, 2007
Absolutely right! The carb is not the place for the primer pinhole fittings, the primer fittings belong in the heads. Russ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Miles Bowen" <cessna170bdriver(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 12:26 PM Subject: RV-List: Re: Carb Fittings? Primer fittings? > > Russ has given some good advice on how to adjust the fitting, but this is > definitely NOT the place for a "pinhole" fitting. This is the fuel inlet > to the carb, and a "pinhole" fitting would not all allow sufficient fuel > flow. > > The fitting to which the arrow points is not a setscrew, but a pipe plug, > just there to seal the hole, which was probably only there to allow access > for machining the part during fabrication. > > Miles > > -------- > Miles > 1955 C170B > HRII Plans#211 > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=105894#105894 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Daniel Snow" <dsnow(at)coosahs.net>
Subject: Tools For Sale
Date: Apr 09, 2007
A full set worth $1400 for less than $1000. I also have a DRDT-2 worth $340 for $250. Please contact me directly for a full list at 256-473-4574 (Home), 256-240-2386 ext. 2049 (Work), or email daniel.snow(at)wancdf.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 09, 2007
From: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" <dean.psiropoulos(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Defrost
I'm finally down to the last 1% of the 90% that is left after you are 90% done. Consequently I'm getting ready to rivet the forward top skin on my RV-6A slider. But, before I do that, I'd like to know the group's concensus on cutting a couple slots in the skin and installing a fan and ducts underneath for a defrost system. Even though I live in Florida now, I know that I'll be traveling all over the country and weather is not always as pleasant in the north. So......how many have installed some sort of defrosting system in your RV (of any model)? Also who has the simplest method of implementing such a system (after 10 years of building I don't want to spend another six months just for this), and can you email a rough sketch or drawing? Thanks. Dean Psiropoulos RV-6A N197DM Close!! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Burns" <burnsm(at)suddenlink.net>
Subject: Defrost
Date: Apr 09, 2007
Dean, Check out this thread on VAF. http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=13724&page=1&pp=10&hi ghlight=defrost scroll down to my post :-) Mark Burns RV-7A finishing Louisiana -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of DEAN PSIROPOULOS Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 10:01 PM Subject: RV-List: Defrost I'm finally down to the last 1% of the 90% that is left after you are 90% done. Consequently I'm getting ready to rivet the forward top skin on my RV-6A slider. But, before I do that, I'd like to know the group's concensus on cutting a couple slots in the skin and installing a fan and ducts underneath for a defrost system. Even though I live in Florida now, I know that I'll be traveling all over the country and weather is not always as pleasant in the north. So......how many have installed some sort of defrosting system in your RV (of any model)? Also who has the simplest method of implementing such a system (after 10 years of building I don't want to spend another six months just for this), and can you email a rough sketch or drawing? Thanks. Dean Psiropoulos RV-6A N197DM Close!! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Vince-Himsl" <vhimsl(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Defrost
Date: Apr 09, 2007
Next time you are in Home Depot or equivalent, check out the 1" diameter round soffit vents; aluminum, screened, and with a lip to cover the crudely cut mounting hole...unless you have a chassis punch. I installed seven of small ones, 1 center and 3 equally spaced on each side on my RV8. Used Black silicone to secure them with louvers pointed towards windscreen to force naturally rising hot air closer to the windscreen. Following the KISS philosophy, I won't add fans, ducts, or anything else until I fly with it for awhile. Plan to be flying this year...finally! Vince H. RV8-VSB Moscow, ID. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of DEAN PSIROPOULOS Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 8:01 PM Subject: RV-List: Defrost I'm finally down to the last 1% of the 90% that is left after you are 90% done. Consequently I'm getting ready to rivet the forward top skin on my RV-6A slider. But, before I do that, I'd like to know the group's concensus on cutting a couple slots in the skin and installing a fan and ducts underneath for a defrost system. Even though I live in Florida now, I know that I'll be traveling all over the country and weather is not always as pleasant in the north. So......how many have installed some sort of defrosting system in your RV (of any model)? Also who has the simplest method of implementing such a system (after 10 years of building I don't want to spend another six months just for this), and can you email a rough sketch or drawing? Thanks. Dean Psiropoulos RV-6A N197DM Close!! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky)
Subject: Defrost
Date: Apr 10, 2007
What conditions makes this an issue? I've flown year round in PA and haven't had a problem yet. -------------- Original message -------------- From: "Mark Burns" <burnsm(at)suddenlink.net> > > Dean, > Check out this thread on VAF. > > http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=13724&page=1&pp=10&hi > ghlight=defrost > > scroll down to my post :-) > > Mark Burns > RV-7A finishing > Louisiana > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of DEAN PSIROPOULOS > Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 10:01 PM > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: Defrost > > > > I'm finally down to the last 1% of the 90% that is left after you are 90% > done. Consequently I'm getting ready to rivet the forward top skin on my > RV-6A slider. But, before I do that, I'd like to know the group's concensus > on cutting a couple slots in the skin and installing a fan and ducts > underneath for a defrost system. Even though I live in Florida now, I know > that I'll be traveling all over the country and weather is not always as > pleasant in the north. So......how many have installed some sort of > defrosting system in your RV (of any model)? Also who has the simplest > method of implementing such a system (after 10 years of building I don't > want to spend another six months just for this), and can you email a rough > sketch or drawing? Thanks. > > Dean Psiropoulos > RV-6A N197DM > Close!! > > > > > > > > > >
What conditions makes this an issue? I've flown year round in PA and haven't had a problem yet.

<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">-------------- Original message -------------- From: "Mark Burns" <burnsm@suddenlink.net> > --> RV-List message posted by: "Mark Burns" <BURNSM@SUDDENLINK.NET> > > Dean, > Check out this thread on VAF. > > http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=13724&page=1&pp=10&hi > ghlight=defrost > > scroll down to my post :-) > > Mark Burns > RV-7A finishing > Louisiana > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DEAN PSIROPOULOS > Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 10:01 PM > To: rv-list@matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: Defrost > > --> RV-List message posted by: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" > <DEAN.PSIROPOULOS@VERI ZON.NE T>
>
> I'm finally down to the last 1% of the 90% that is left after you are 90%
> done. Consequently I'm getting ready to rivet the forward top skin on my
> RV-6A slider. But, before I do that, I'd like to know the group's concensus
> on cutting a couple slots in the skin and installing a fan and ducts
> underneath for a defrost system. Even though I live in Florida now, I know
> that I'll be traveling all over the country and weather is not always as
> pleasant in the north. So......how many have installed some sort of
> defrosting system in your RV (of any model)? Also who has the simplest
> method of implementing such a system (after 10 years of building I don't
> want to spend another six months just for this), and can you email a rough
> sketch or drawing? Thanks.
>
> Dean Psiropoulos
> RV-6A N197DM
> Close!!
>
>
>
>
>
> ;

________________________________________________________________________________
From: PeterHunt1(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 10, 2007
Subject: Defrost
Dean, I installed an avionics cooling fan with three output tubes. I ran one tube to the radio/GPS (Garmin 530)another to my transponder and the third tube to a small manifold which, through slits, blows a small amount of air on the inside of the front of my canopy. The cooling fan is on my avionics bus and runs all the time. I don't know if it helps defrost the canopy, but I can say I have never had trouble with moisture inside the canopy. It was an easy option. Come see it at Leeward Air Ranch this Saturday or catch me at Sun 'n Fun. Pete in Clearwater RV-6, 2006 Sun 'n Fun Reserve Grand Champion ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 10, 2007
From: Sherman Butler <lsbrv7a(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: PAPSP - Pilot & Aircraft Proficiency & Safety Program (Was
Safety) I suspect that EAA though quieter has clout. I think, that one way would be, that an Organization like, the EAA, COULD MANAGE THE PROGRAM FOR THOSE INTERESTED IN SUCH. I WOULD SAY AOPA, BUT, THEY HAVE SOME MANY THINGS TO DO, BESIDES THEIR PAYINBG ADVERTISING, COMES FROM INSURANCE COMPANIES ETC.. BUT MAYBE NOT... CERTAINLY, AOPA, IS PERHAPS THE ONLY ORGANIZATION THAT GET RESULTS, FOR OUR BENEFIT, EAA, DOES NOT HAVE THE CLOUT... Sherman Butler RV-7a Wings Idaho Falls --------------------------------- Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 10, 2007
From: Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: HIO in an RV?
Anyone out there who's put an HIO helicopter engine in an RV? If so, I'd love to hear the details. Feel free to email me off-list, if desired. Thanks, Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ronlee(at)pcisys.net
Subject: Garmin GNS 430 WAAS Upgrade Questions
Date: Apr 11, 2007
From Garmin I learned the following (hopefully all is correct) 1) Turnaround time is one week 2) Terrain/obstacle functionality is included in the $1500 price. Price may increase some time next year (TBD). 3) Primary nav software may be out 3rd quarter of 2007 4) New antenna and coax are included 5) Retains the current mounting tray 6) May require autopilot wiring change/addition >From Jeppesen the database renewals use the same JSUM software and Skybound adapter. Annual cost increases from $375 to $410 My question from anyone who has made the upgrade is it really a remove and replace situation? Will it still drive my Trio wing leveler autopilot with no wiring changes? Is the possible autpipilot wiring change if you have altitude autopilot? Any other issues that may affect a decision to upgrade? Ron Lee --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 11, 2007
From: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" <dean.psiropoulos(at)verizon.net>
Subject: RE:Defrost
Thanks to everyone who emailed on and off the list about installing a defrost system in my RV. I'll pour over the wealth of data I've received and decide on a course of action. Just when you think you're done with fabrication tasks...........:-) Dean ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Shirley Harding" <ShirleyH(at)oceanbroadband.net>
Subject: Balancing control surfaces
Date: Apr 11, 2007
Listers, some advice please from those with more experience than me. Having flown my RV6 for a year now, I've finally got round to having her painted. (Bright red - looks fabulous!). I know that I need to rebalance the elevators, and I think I know how to do that - the Vans manual does cover that. However, my plastic plane colleagues are adamant that I must do the same with the ailerons. The Vans manual is, as far as I can find, silent on that topic. It only refers to the galvanised water pipe being the counterweight. Other RV builders I've spoken to have not balanced the ailerons and no-one has had any flutter problems that I know of. Any comments or advice much appreciated. Shirley Perth ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Balancing control surfaces
Date: Apr 11, 2007
> > > Listers, some advice please from those with more experience than > me. Having > flown my RV6 for a year now, I've finally got round to having her > painted. > (Bright red - looks fabulous!). I know that I need to rebalance the > elevators, and I think I know how to do that - the Vans manual does > cover > that. However, my plastic plane colleagues are adamant that I must > do the > same with the ailerons. The Vans manual is, as far as I can find, > silent on > that topic. It only refers to the galvanised water pipe being the > counterweight. Other RV builders I've spoken to have not balanced the > ailerons and no-one has had any flutter problems that I know of. Any > comments or advice much appreciated. The elevators are 100% balanced - i.e. the balance weight is adjusted so it balances 100% of the moment around the hinge line. Some aircraft have aileron balances that are required to be 100% balanced, or some specific lower percentage. But, the short wing RVs have very stiff wings, thus Van did not need to be so particular about aileron balance weights. The specified water pipe is heavy enough. No need to add weight to the aileron balance, and no need to worry about aileron flutter. Kevin Horton RV-8 (Finishing Kit) Ottawa, Canada http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Balancing control surfaces
Date: Apr 11, 2007
On 11 Apr 2007, at 02:44, Shirley Harding wrote: > > > Listers, some advice please from those with more experience than > me. Having > flown my RV6 for a year now, I've finally got round to having her > painted. > (Bright red - looks fabulous!). I know that I need to rebalance the > elevators, and I think I know how to do that - the Vans manual does > cover > that. However, my plastic plane colleagues are adamant that I must > do the > same with the ailerons. The Vans manual is, as far as I can find, > silent on > that topic. It only refers to the galvanised water pipe being the > counterweight. Other RV builders I've spoken to have not balanced the > ailerons and no-one has had any flutter problems that I know of. Any > comments or advice much appreciated. > > Shirley > Perth > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Hard Starting Without Primer
Date: Apr 11, 2007
From: "Snow, Daniel A." <Daniel.Snow(at)wancdf.com>
Based on the experience of others, I didn't install a primer on my new Superior XP O-320 engine. I use the mixture control to kill the engine, so I understand fuel has to get back to the jets before it will run. However, I'm having to crank for roughly 20 seconds, let the starter cool, then crank again for nearly 20 seconds before it will start. My start sequence is; Master on Fuel pump on for at least 10 seconds Throttle 1/4 open Crank for 5 seconds Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open Continue cranking for 5 more seconds Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open Continue cranking for 5 more seconds Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open Continue cranking for 5 more seconds Stop cranking and let starter cool for 2 minutes Crank for 5 seconds Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open Start playing with throttle to find the "sweet spot" Starts rough until I find the "sweet spot" Idles smoothly and runs up fine after warm For those of you who don't use a primer, do you have any suggestions? I don't know if I'm giving it too much fuel or not enough. I don't smell gas at the air inlet, so I don't think I'm flooding it, but I'm afraid to pump too much at the beginning. Do I need to just let the boost pump run for a while with the throttle at 1/4 open to get fuel to the jets, or is that only going to work when the engine is cranking over? I just remembered, it restarts within a couple of revolutions when I shut it down using the mixture control, so fuel should be reaching the jets fairly quickly on a cold start. Thanks, Daniel Snow RV-9A, 1 week to SnF, 2 weeks to inspection ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Walter" <dale1rv6(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Hard Starting Without Primer
Date: Apr 11, 2007
Try: Master on Mixture rich Fuel pump on Pump throttle one full stroke Without delay; close throttle, then open 1/8 inch, crank 5 seconds, if no start repeat throttle pump, open throttle only 1/8 inch again and crank 10 seconds. If it does not start after 20 seconds something is wrong After start lean mixture as much as possible while keeping engine running smooth After 20 years and 3,000 hrs on carb Lycoming engines I have never had to pump while cranking. Best of luck, Dale -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Snow, Daniel A. Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 8:13 AM Subject: RV-List: Hard Starting Without Primer Based on the experience of others, I didn't install a primer on my new Superior XP O-320 engine. I use the mixture control to kill the engine, so I understand fuel has to get back to the jets before it will run. However, I'm having to crank for roughly 20 seconds, let the starter cool, then crank again for nearly 20 seconds before it will start. My start sequence is; Master on Fuel pump on for at least 10 seconds Throttle 1/4 open Crank for 5 seconds Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open Continue cranking for 5 more seconds Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open Continue cranking for 5 more seconds Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open Continue cranking for 5 more seconds Stop cranking and let starter cool for 2 minutes Crank for 5 seconds Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open Start playing with throttle to find the "sweet spot" Starts rough until I find the "sweet spot" Idles smoothly and runs up fine after warm For those of you who don't use a primer, do you have any suggestions? I don't know if I'm giving it too much fuel or not enough. I don't smell gas at the air inlet, so I don't think I'm flooding it, but I'm afraid to pump too much at the beginning. Do I need to just let the boost pump run for a while with the throttle at 1/4 open to get fuel to the jets, or is that only going to work when the engine is cranking over? I just remembered, it restarts within a couple of revolutions when I shut it down using the mixture control, so fuel should be reaching the jets fairly quickly on a cold start. Thanks, Daniel Snow RV-9A, 1 week to SnF, 2 weeks to inspection ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "sheldon barrett" <sheldonb(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: Hard Starting Without Primer
Date: Apr 10, 2007
Daniel, I had the same kind of start problem (no primer system) early on when first learning my plane... 0-360 COLD STARTS: ( cold start = 1st start for the day).. Mixture rich, pump throttle 3 times and leave at 1/4 open, engage starter... fires right up... HOT STARTS: Do not push or touch throttle, leave closed (pulled back).. leave mixture in cut off.. start cranking... slowly push mixture in.. when engine likes it, it will start... give some throttle to keep it running... Works every time.. Sheldon RV6A 450 hours 0-360 FP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Snow, Daniel A." <Daniel.Snow(at)wancdf.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 5:13 AM Subject: RV-List: Hard Starting Without Primer > > Based on the experience of others, I didn't install a primer on my new > Superior XP O-320 engine. I use the mixture control to kill the engine, > so I understand fuel has to get back to the jets before it will run. > However, I'm having to crank for roughly 20 seconds, let the starter > cool, then crank again for nearly 20 seconds before it will start. My > start sequence is; > > Master on > Fuel pump on for at least 10 seconds > Throttle 1/4 open > Crank for 5 seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Continue cranking for 5 more seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Continue cranking for 5 more seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Continue cranking for 5 more seconds > Stop cranking and let starter cool for 2 minutes > Crank for 5 seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Start playing with throttle to find the "sweet spot" > Starts rough until I find the "sweet spot" > Idles smoothly and runs up fine after warm > > For those of you who don't use a primer, do you have any suggestions? I > don't know if I'm giving it too much fuel or not enough. I don't smell > gas at the air inlet, so I don't think I'm flooding it, but I'm afraid > to pump too much at the beginning. Do I need to just let the boost pump > run for a while with the throttle at 1/4 open to get fuel to the jets, > or is that only going to work when the engine is cranking over? > > I just remembered, it restarts within a couple of revolutions when I > shut it down using the mixture control, so fuel should be reaching the > jets fairly quickly on a cold start. > > Thanks, > > Daniel Snow > RV-9A, 1 week to SnF, 2 weeks to inspection > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Bryan" <n616tb(at)btsapps.com>
Subject: Hard Starting Without Primer
Date: Apr 11, 2007
Daniel, I have an 0-360A1A and I couldn't start mine easily without the primer. I know I have heard others doing it, but I can't get mine started reasonably without using it. Thankfully I installed it. Also I think you don't want to pump the throttle unless you are cranking simultaneously. If it is an updraft carb, then fuel can just run out into the airbox, down the drain hole into the cowl and well, you get the point. Why not just install a primer? Tim > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list- > server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Snow, Daniel A. > Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 7:13 AM > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: Hard Starting Without Primer > > > Based on the experience of others, I didn't install a primer on my new > Superior XP O-320 engine. I use the mixture control to kill the engine, > so I understand fuel has to get back to the jets before it will run. > However, I'm having to crank for roughly 20 seconds, let the starter > cool, then crank again for nearly 20 seconds before it will start. My > start sequence is; > > Master on > Fuel pump on for at least 10 seconds > Throttle 1/4 open > Crank for 5 seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Continue cranking for 5 more seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Continue cranking for 5 more seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Continue cranking for 5 more seconds > Stop cranking and let starter cool for 2 minutes > Crank for 5 seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Start playing with throttle to find the "sweet spot" > Starts rough until I find the "sweet spot" > Idles smoothly and runs up fine after warm > > For those of you who don't use a primer, do you have any suggestions? I > don't know if I'm giving it too much fuel or not enough. I don't smell > gas at the air inlet, so I don't think I'm flooding it, but I'm afraid > to pump too much at the beginning. Do I need to just let the boost pump > run for a while with the throttle at 1/4 open to get fuel to the jets, > or is that only going to work when the engine is cranking over? > > I just remembered, it restarts within a couple of revolutions when I > shut it down using the mixture control, so fuel should be reaching the > jets fairly quickly on a cold start. > > Thanks, > > Daniel Snow > RV-9A, 1 week to SnF, 2 weeks to inspection > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "L Klingmuller" <l_klingmuller6(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Very wet lower plug
Date: Apr 11, 2007
When I was building, I was not aware that lots of flying also requires maintenance, lots of it at times! Returning recently from a long, very pleasant x-country trip, I discovered a slight drop in the mag check of about 125 rpm. 50 to 75 is normal for my Lycoming 0-360 A1A. So, I pulled the lower plugs which always collect more lead than the upper. Darn, the lower #2 plug was full of green oil!! Never seen oil before. What next? Fly the plane for a couple of hours and then check the plug again hoping that the ring gaps have shifted? Pull the cylinder? Those of you who have lots of engine experience, please help me out here with your knowledge. Lothar, 6A, 700 hrs on a new Lyc. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: sturdy(at)att.net
Subject: Garmin GNS 430 WAAS Upgrade Questions
Date: Apr 11, 2007
I recently had the wiring of my Garmin 420 to the Indicator done in preparation for the WAAS Upgrade. I had to have 4 wires (2 Glide Slope and 2 Vertical Flag) wires installed. After install, during the self test after start up, my Garmin 420 nows shows the normal half left needle BUT ALSO a half up needle and both flags disappear. With that wiring done, my unit can now be sent in for the upgrade and new cable and antenna, and will slide into the same tray. In talking with someone who has already had it done, he says that he now gets vertical guidance during a GPS approach. Stu McCurdy RV-8 Flying ----------------------------------- From: ronlee(at)pcisys.net Subject: RV-List: Garmin GNS 430 WAAS Upgrade Questions From Garmin I learned the following (hopefully all is correct) 1) Turnaround time is one week 2) Terrain/obstacle functionality is included in the $1500 price. Price may increase some time next year (TBD). 3) Primary nav software may be out 3rd quarter of 2007 4) New antenna and coax are included 5) Retains the current mounting tray 6) May require autopilot wiring change/addition >From Jeppesen the database renewals use the same JSUM software and Skybound adapter. Annual cost increases from $375 to $410 My question from anyone who has made the upgrade is it really a remove and replace situation? Will it still drive my Trio wing leveler autopilot with no wiring changes? Is the possible autpipilot wiring change if you have altitude autopilot? Any other issues that may affect a decision to upgrade? Ron Lee

I recently had the wiring of my Garmin 420 to the Indicator done in preparation for the WAAS Upgrade. I had to have 4 wires (2 Glide Slope and 2 Vertical Flag) wires installed. After install, during the self test after start up, my Garmin 420 nows shows the normal half left needle BUT ALSO a half up needle and both flags disappear. With that wiring done, my unit can now be sent in for the upgrade and new cable and antenna, and will slide into the same tray. In talking with someone who has already had it done, he says that he now gets vertical guidance during a GPS approach.

Stu McCurdy

RV-8 Flying

-----------------------------------
<DIV>From: <A onclick="return doCompose(this);" href="http://webmail.att.net/wmc/v/wm/461CE65F000CE3EE00001BE62160281060970B9D9A9B9C?cmd=ComposeTo&adr=ronlee%40pcisys%2Enet&sid=c0" lid="ronlee@pcisys.net">ronlee@pcisys.net</A> Subject: RV-List: Garmin GNS 430 WAAS Upgrade Questions From Garmin I learned the following (hopefully all is correct) 1) Turnaround time is one week 2) Terrain/obstacle functionality is included in the $1500 price. Price may increase some time next year (TBD). 3) Primary nav software may be out 3rd quarter of 2007 4) New antenna and coax are included 5) Retains the current mounting tray 6) May require autopilot wiring change/addition >From Jeppesen the database renewals use the same JSUM software and Skybound adapter. Annual cost increases from $375 to $410 My question from anyone who has made the upgrade is it really a remove an d repl ace situation? Will it still drive my Trio wing leveler
autopilot with no wiring changes? Is the possible autpipilot wiring
change if you have altitude autopilot? Any other issues that may affect
a decision to upgrade?

Ron Lee

________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 11, 2007
From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: Hard Starting Without Primer
Daniel, I've been flying my primerless O-320 for over seven years. I think if you will pull the throttle nearly closed instead of 1/4 open you will enjoy good starts. With my engine, it is turn on fuel pump until pressure is established then pump off, one or two full strokes of the throttle depending on how cold the ambient air, pull the throttle lightly closed, hit the starter button, and the engine will start within 2-5 blades (lightweight starter, two Slick mags). Hot starts are the same except no fuel pump or stroking of the throttle. The nearly closed throttle creates more vacuum in the carb and pulls the rich mixture into the engine better than having the throttle 1/4 open. If your carb idle mixture screw is set correctly, the engine should start fine on nearly closed throttle. Sam Buchanan ================================= Snow, Daniel A. wrote: > > Based on the experience of others, I didn't install a primer on my new > Superior XP O-320 engine. I use the mixture control to kill the engine, > so I understand fuel has to get back to the jets before it will run. > However, I'm having to crank for roughly 20 seconds, let the starter > cool, then crank again for nearly 20 seconds before it will start. My > start sequence is; > > Master on > Fuel pump on for at least 10 seconds > Throttle 1/4 open > Crank for 5 seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Continue cranking for 5 more seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Continue cranking for 5 more seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Continue cranking for 5 more seconds > Stop cranking and let starter cool for 2 minutes > Crank for 5 seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Start playing with throttle to find the "sweet spot" > Starts rough until I find the "sweet spot" > Idles smoothly and runs up fine after warm > > For those of you who don't use a primer, do you have any suggestions? I > don't know if I'm giving it too much fuel or not enough. I don't smell > gas at the air inlet, so I don't think I'm flooding it, but I'm afraid > to pump too much at the beginning. Do I need to just let the boost pump > run for a while with the throttle at 1/4 open to get fuel to the jets, > or is that only going to work when the engine is cranking over? > > I just remembered, it restarts within a couple of revolutions when I > shut it down using the mixture control, so fuel should be reaching the > jets fairly quickly on a cold start. > > Thanks, > > Daniel Snow > RV-9A, 1 week to SnF, 2 weeks to inspection ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Mike Robertson <mrobert569(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Very wet lower plug
Date: Apr 11, 2007
If you are getting oil in the upper cylinder chamber it is probably one of two problems. The most likely reason is either the intake valve guide has worn too much or the oil scraper ring on the piston has gone bad. Of the t wo the most likely is a valve guide. I would check the cylinder compressio n right off, then I would recommend changing the oil filter and carefully c hecking the filter element for metal. If that is ok then I would clean the plug and fly a couple of hours doing a mag check before and after each fli ght. You might also want to remove the cylinder cover and do a simple visu al check of the rockers and valves. If nothing appears out of sorts, and t he compression is still good then you may want to see how much oil it is bu rning. The Lycoming Service Instruction 1427B tells you the max oil consum ption is found by using the following formula: .006 X BHP X 4 / 7.4 = Qt/ Hr. So for your 180hp engine it works out to .584 quarts per hour. If your oil consumption is greater than that then you will have to remove the cylinder and figure out why. Good Luck, Mike Robertson From: l_klingmuller6(at)earthlink.netTo: rv-list(at)matronics.comSubject: RV-List : Very wet lower plugDate: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 08:13:17 -0600 When I was building, I was not aware that lots of flying also requires main tenance, lots of it at times! Returning recently from a long, very pleasant x-country trip, I discovered a slight drop in the mag check of about 125 rpm. 50 to 75 is normal for my Lycoming 0-360 A1A. So, I pulled the lower plugs which always collect more lead than the upper. Darn, the lower #2 plug was full of green oil!! Never seen oil before. What next? Fly the plane for a couple of hours and then check the plug aga in hoping that the ring gaps have shifted? Pull the cylinder? Those of you who have lots of engine experience, please help me out here wi th your knowledge. Lothar, 6A, 700 hrs on a new Lyc. _________________________________________________________________ Your friends are close to you.-Keep them that way. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 11, 2007
From: John Fasching <n1cxo320(at)salidaco.com>
Subject: Re: Very wet lower plug
Lothor - I had this once in my O-320. It was also #2 cylinder. The hangar neighbor, an A & P offered a guess that ring gaps might get aligned and allow some oil to seep down. . he suggested to keep flying and just monitor it. I did that. It never happened again. I am uncertain if his explanation (guess) was correct, but he was right about not getting too excited and to just monitor it. John at Salida L Klingmuller wrote: > > *When I was building, I was not aware that lots of flying also > requires maintenance, lots of it at times!* > ** > *Returning recently from a long, very pleasant x-country trip, I > discovered a slight drop in the mag check of about 125 rpm. 50 to 75 > is normal for my Lycoming 0-360 A1A. So, I pulled the lower plugs > which always collect more lead than the upper.* > ** > *Darn, the lower #2 plug was full of green oil!! Never seen oil before.* > *What next? Fly the plane for a couple of hours and then check the > plug again hoping that the ring gaps have shifted? Pull the cylinder? * > ** > *Those of you who have lots of engine experience, please help me out > here with your knowledge.* > ** > *Lothar, 6A, 700 hrs on a new Lyc.* > > > > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ronlee(at)pcisys.net
Subject: Re: Garmin GNS 430 WAAS Upgrade Questions
Date: Apr 11, 2007
Stu, I already have an indicator for the ILS functionality. Are you saying that the vertical guidance from WAAS needs a separate wire? I know that I get horizontal/lateral guidance from GPS positioning on my indicator so at least that seems to be the same wire(s). My guess (without pinout info) is that I already have the vertical part connected. Will you have to go through a dealer or do the upgrade yourself? Ron Lee --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Walter" <dale1rv6(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Hard Starting Without Primer
Date: Apr 11, 2007
Two things to consider: If the result of one pump of throttle is liquid and not spray, your cranking engine will not pull the liquid against gravity. 2nd; my method is to pump once and crank immediately before it condenses. This allows me to set the throttle to correct position (nearly closed eg 1/8 inch from closed) for cold start. I agree that multiple pumps will cause excess liquid fuel and is a fire hazard, even while cranking. Multiple pumps is similar to working with hammers and pliers when you need wrenches. Dale -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Bryan Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 9:57 AM Subject: RE: RV-List: Hard Starting Without Primer Daniel, I have an 0-360A1A and I couldn't start mine easily without the primer. I know I have heard others doing it, but I can't get mine started reasonably without using it. Thankfully I installed it. Also I think you don't want to pump the throttle unless you are cranking simultaneously. If it is an updraft carb, then fuel can just run out into the airbox, down the drain hole into the cowl and well, you get the point. Why not just install a primer? Tim > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list- > server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Snow, Daniel A. > Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 7:13 AM > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: Hard Starting Without Primer > > > Based on the experience of others, I didn't install a primer on my new > Superior XP O-320 engine. I use the mixture control to kill the engine, > so I understand fuel has to get back to the jets before it will run. > However, I'm having to crank for roughly 20 seconds, let the starter > cool, then crank again for nearly 20 seconds before it will start. My > start sequence is; > > Master on > Fuel pump on for at least 10 seconds > Throttle 1/4 open > Crank for 5 seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Continue cranking for 5 more seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Continue cranking for 5 more seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Continue cranking for 5 more seconds > Stop cranking and let starter cool for 2 minutes > Crank for 5 seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Start playing with throttle to find the "sweet spot" > Starts rough until I find the "sweet spot" > Idles smoothly and runs up fine after warm > > For those of you who don't use a primer, do you have any suggestions? I > don't know if I'm giving it too much fuel or not enough. I don't smell > gas at the air inlet, so I don't think I'm flooding it, but I'm afraid > to pump too much at the beginning. Do I need to just let the boost pump > run for a while with the throttle at 1/4 open to get fuel to the jets, > or is that only going to work when the engine is cranking over? > > I just remembered, it restarts within a couple of revolutions when I > shut it down using the mixture control, so fuel should be reaching the > jets fairly quickly on a cold start. > > Thanks, > > Daniel Snow > RV-9A, 1 week to SnF, 2 weeks to inspection > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Randy Lervold" <randy(at)romeolima.com>
Subject: Re: Hard Starting Without Primer
Date: Apr 11, 2007
If you pump the throttle without the engine turning over to suck the fuel from the accelerator pump in you are risking an intake fire. I've actually seen it happen right before my eyes. Therefore I would strongly recommend you pump the throttle AFTER you engage the starter. Also, IIRC, while the MA4-5 carburetor used on virtually all carbureted O-360s has an accelerator I seem to remember that many of the models for the O-320 do not. Get the exact model number of your carburetor and do some reasearch on it to determine whether it has an accelerator pump or not. If it doesn't then pumping won't do any good. Once you get the model number you can always call Precision Airmotive for confirmation... http://www.precisionairmotive.com/ Randy Lervold ----- Original Message ----- From: "sheldon barrett" <sheldonb(at)frontiernet.net> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 3:04 AM Subject: Re: RV-List: Hard Starting Without Primer > > > Daniel, > I had the same kind of start problem (no primer system) early on when > first learning my plane... 0-360 > COLD STARTS: ( cold start = 1st start for the day).. Mixture rich, pump > throttle 3 times and leave at 1/4 open, engage starter... fires right > up... > HOT STARTS: Do not push or touch throttle, leave closed (pulled back).. > leave mixture in cut off.. start cranking... slowly push mixture in.. when > engine likes it, it will start... give some throttle to keep it running... > Works every time.. > Sheldon RV6A 450 hours 0-360 FP > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Snow, Daniel A." <Daniel.Snow(at)wancdf.com> > To: > Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 5:13 AM > Subject: RV-List: Hard Starting Without Primer > > >> >> Based on the experience of others, I didn't install a primer on my new >> Superior XP O-320 engine. I use the mixture control to kill the engine, >> so I understand fuel has to get back to the jets before it will run. >> However, I'm having to crank for roughly 20 seconds, let the starter >> cool, then crank again for nearly 20 seconds before it will start. My >> start sequence is; >> >> Master on >> Fuel pump on for at least 10 seconds >> Throttle 1/4 open >> Crank for 5 seconds >> Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open >> Continue cranking for 5 more seconds >> Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open >> Continue cranking for 5 more seconds >> Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open >> Continue cranking for 5 more seconds >> Stop cranking and let starter cool for 2 minutes >> Crank for 5 seconds >> Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open >> Start playing with throttle to find the "sweet spot" >> Starts rough until I find the "sweet spot" >> Idles smoothly and runs up fine after warm >> >> For those of you who don't use a primer, do you have any suggestions? I >> don't know if I'm giving it too much fuel or not enough. I don't smell >> gas at the air inlet, so I don't think I'm flooding it, but I'm afraid >> to pump too much at the beginning. Do I need to just let the boost pump >> run for a while with the throttle at 1/4 open to get fuel to the jets, >> or is that only going to work when the engine is cranking over? >> >> I just remembered, it restarts within a couple of revolutions when I >> shut it down using the mixture control, so fuel should be reaching the >> jets fairly quickly on a cold start. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Daniel Snow >> RV-9A, 1 week to SnF, 2 weeks to inspection >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Kyle Boatright" <kboatright1(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Hard Starting Without Primer
Date: Apr 11, 2007
My experience is similar to what Sam Buchanan posted. My technique is to turn the fuel pump on, mixture rich, one pump of the throttle, then wait for 10-20 seconds (in my case, that's about how long it takes to fasten all of the belts). Then, throttle barely cracked and hit the starter. The engine starts right up. KB ----- Original Message ----- >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list- >> server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Snow, Daniel A. >> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 7:13 AM >> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >> Subject: RV-List: Hard Starting Without Primer >> >> >> Based on the experience of others, I didn't install a primer on my new >> Superior XP O-320 engine. I use the mixture control to kill the engine, >> so I understand fuel has to get back to the jets before it will run. >> However, I'm having to crank for roughly 20 seconds, let the starter >> cool, then crank again for nearly 20 seconds before it will start. My >> start sequence is; >> >> Master on >> Fuel pump on for at least 10 seconds >> Throttle 1/4 open >> Crank for 5 seconds >> Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open >> Continue cranking for 5 more seconds >> Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open >> Continue cranking for 5 more seconds >> Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open >> Continue cranking for 5 more seconds >> Stop cranking and let starter cool for 2 minutes >> Crank for 5 seconds >> Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open >> Start playing with throttle to find the "sweet spot" >> Starts rough until I find the "sweet spot" >> Idles smoothly and runs up fine after warm >> >> For those of you who don't use a primer, do you have any suggestions? I >> don't know if I'm giving it too much fuel or not enough. I don't smell >> gas at the air inlet, so I don't think I'm flooding it, but I'm afraid >> to pump too much at the beginning. Do I need to just let the boost pump >> run for a while with the throttle at 1/4 open to get fuel to the jets, >> or is that only going to work when the engine is cranking over? >> >> I just remembered, it restarts within a couple of revolutions when I >> shut it down using the mixture control, so fuel should be reaching the >> jets fairly quickly on a cold start. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Daniel Snow >> RV-9A, 1 week to SnF, 2 weeks to inspection >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: PittsS1(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 11, 2007
Subject: Re: Hard Starting Without Primer
starting ... you guys sure make it difficult ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "T.C. Chang" <tc1234c(at)roadrunner.com>
Subject: Hard Starting Without Primer (fuel dripping down carbureator)
Date: Apr 11, 2007
The MA 4SPA carburetor on my O-320 does have an accelerator. I don't have any starting problem. However, today when I had the cowl off to adjust the idle a friend observed a small amount of fuel dripping down the airbox after I have pulled the mixture off (not during the engine run). In the past few flights I noticed some black streaks on my nose wheel pant. It must be dirt washed down by the fuel. Any suggestions on what I should look into? Ted ------------------------------------------ T.C. Chang http://tc1234c.googlepages.com/ RV-9A, Lycoming (ECI) O320-D2A, 160 hp, Carb, Dual Mag, Sensenich FP GRT dual DU H1, TT DigiFlight II VSGV, 133.4 Hobbs 4/9/2007 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Randy Lervold Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 7:57 PM Subject: Re: RV-List: Hard Starting Without Primer If you pump the throttle without the engine turning over to suck the fuel from the accelerator pump in you are risking an intake fire. I've actually seen it happen right before my eyes. Therefore I would strongly recommend you pump the throttle AFTER you engage the starter. Also, IIRC, while the MA4-5 carburetor used on virtually all carbureted O-360s has an accelerator I seem to remember that many of the models for the O-320 do not. Get the exact model number of your carburetor and do some reasearch on it to determine whether it has an accelerator pump or not. If it doesn't then pumping won't do any good. Once you get the model number you can always call Precision Airmotive for confirmation... http://www.precisionairmotive.com/ Randy Lervold >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 11, 2007
From: Dave B <dbris200(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: Hard Starting Without Primer
If you crank the engine with the throttle partially open, you'll draw very little fuel into the cylinders. If the throttle is completely closed it will pull fuel through the idle circuit and make starting a lot easier. I learned this early on when I started flying a hand propped Continental. You had to pull the prop through with the throttle closed until it sounded "squishy" then crack the throttle and it started on the first blade. If you have to pump the throttle, you're doing something wrong. Dave Also, a minor point, the primer and injectors both add the fuel before the valve, not directly into the cylinder. > During starting raw fuel is best introduced into the intake ports > immediately ahead of the intake valve (carbureted systems) or in the > cylinders (fuel injected systems). > * > * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: Hard Starting Without Primer
Date: Apr 11, 2007
Hi Dave, You are right , I stand corrected. Jim in Kelowna ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave B" <dbris200(at)sbcglobal.net> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 5:56 PM Subject: Re: RV-List: Hard Starting Without Primer > > If you crank the engine with the throttle partially open, you'll draw very > little fuel into the cylinders. If the throttle is completely closed it > will pull fuel through the idle circuit and make starting a lot easier. I > learned this early on when I started flying a hand propped Continental. > You had to pull the prop through with the throttle closed until it sounded > "squishy" then crack the throttle and it started on the first blade. If > you have to pump the throttle, you're doing something wrong. > > Dave > > Also, a minor point, the primer and injectors both add the fuel before the > valve, not directly into the cylinder. > >> During starting raw fuel is best introduced into the intake ports >> immediately ahead of the intake valve (carbureted systems) or in the >> cylinders (fuel injected systems). >> * >> * > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "james frierson" <tn3639(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Hard Starting Without Primer
Date: Apr 12, 2007
I have basically the same setup and all I do is pump the throttle once or twice depending on the temperature and it fires off within one or two blades. You may need to check your ignition system. The local spam can rental was having the same problem and it was traced to a bad mag. Generally if it is getting fuel, air and spark something is going to happen pretty quick. Not to mention that you are damaging your starter with all that cranking... Hope this helps and let us know what happens. Scott Based on the experience of others, I didn't install a primer on my new Superior XP O-320 engine. I use the mixture control to kill the engine, so I understand fuel has to get back to the jets before it will run. However, I'm having to crank for roughly 20 seconds, let the starter cool, then crank again for nearly 20 seconds before it will start. My start sequence is; Master on Fuel pump on for at least 10 seconds Throttle 1/4 open Crank for 5 seconds Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open Continue cranking for 5 more seconds Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open Continue cranking for 5 more seconds Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open Continue cranking for 5 more seconds Stop cranking and let starter cool for 2 minutes Crank for 5 seconds Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open Start playing with throttle to find the "sweet spot" Starts rough until I find the "sweet spot" Idles smoothly and runs up fine after warm For those of you who don't use a primer, do you have any suggestions? I don't know if I'm giving it too much fuel or not enough. I don't smell gas at the air inlet, so I don't think I'm flooding it, but I'm afraid to pump too much at the beginning. Do I need to just let the boost pump run for a while with the throttle at 1/4 open to get fuel to the jets, or is that only going to work when the engine is cranking over? I just remembered, it restarts within a couple of revolutions when I shut it down using the mixture control, so fuel should be reaching the jets fairly quickly on a cold start. Thanks, Daniel Snow RV-9A, 1 week to SnF, 2 weeks to inspectio======================== - The RV-List&the many List utilities such as the S======================= - NEW MATRONIC now also available via the Web Forum=================================== href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com _________________________________________________________________ Mortgage rates near historic lows. Refinance $200,000 loan for as low as $771/month* https://www2.nextag.com/goto.jsp?product=100000035&url=%2fst.jsp&tm=y&search=mortgage_text_links_88_h27f8&disc=y&vers=689&s=4056&p=5117 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Hard Starting Without Primer
Date: Apr 12, 2007
From: "Snow, Daniel A." <Daniel.Snow(at)wancdf.com>
As I've posted before, my Superior XP O-320 has the same MA4-5 used on the O-360's. Someone pointed out that they could feel when the accelerator pump was pumping fuel, however the MA4-5 has a spring connection to the pump lever that causes the pump to move at a semi-constant speed regardless of how quickly you pump the throttle. Thanks for all the suggestions guys. Last night I pumped one time and closed the throttle, followed immediately by cranking. It started in 2-3 blades. The next test is to not pump before cranking and see if the idle circuit is enough to start the engine in a couple of blades. Daniel Snow >Also, IIRC, while the MA4-5 carburetor used on virtually all carbureted >O-360s has an accelerator I seem to remember that many of the models for the >O-320 do not. Get the exact model number of your carburetor and do some >reasearch on it to determine whether it has an accelerator pump or not. If >it doesn't then pumping won't do any good. Once you get the model number you >can always call Precision Airmotive for confirmation... ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 12, 2007
From: Dave B <dbris200(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: Hard Starting Without Primer
This is a good point. My AFP injected O360A1D started perfectly for several years even though I had installed the wrong Shower of Sparks unit and it wasn't working at all, meaning that it was starting with NO spark retard because the SkyTec starter cranked it so fast that it didn't matter. Then when the battery started to get weak it got very hard to start. Modifying the SOS solved the problem. So, check the ignition system, be sure it's starting on the correct mag and that the impulse is working. Dave > You may need to check your ignition system. The local spam can rental > was having the same problem and it was traced to a bad mag. > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Danielson" <johnd(at)wlcwyo.com>
Subject: Hard Starting Without Primer
Date: Apr 12, 2007
I agree with not being to aggressive about pumping the throttle when starting. The exception to this is when you are trying to start a very cold engine ( 0 deg or colder). I had problems starting my engine while in Rochester MN about 4 years ago. The outside temp was -10 Deg., the plane had been in a hanger at about 15 deg. The engine just would not start with normal priming and a pump or two of the throttle. One old boy told me to pump the throttle vigoursly as I cranked the engine. I probably pumped the throttle 10 times, but the engine did catch and began to run normally. Just a thought. John L. Danielson -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dale Walter Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 12:05 PM Subject: RE: RV-List: Hard Starting Without Primer Two things to consider: If the result of one pump of throttle is liquid and not spray, your cranking engine will not pull the liquid against gravity. 2nd; my method is to pump once and crank immediately before it condenses. This allows me to set the throttle to correct position (nearly closed eg 1/8 inch from closed) for cold start. I agree that multiple pumps will cause excess liquid fuel and is a fire hazard, even while cranking. Multiple pumps is similar to working with hammers and pliers when you need wrenches. Dale -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Bryan Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 9:57 AM Subject: RE: RV-List: Hard Starting Without Primer Daniel, I have an 0-360A1A and I couldn't start mine easily without the primer. I know I have heard others doing it, but I can't get mine started reasonably without using it. Thankfully I installed it. Also I think you don't want to pump the throttle unless you are cranking simultaneously. If it is an updraft carb, then fuel can just run out into the airbox, down the drain hole into the cowl and well, you get the point. Why not just install a primer? Tim > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list- > server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Snow, Daniel A. > Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 7:13 AM > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: Hard Starting Without Primer > > > Based on the experience of others, I didn't install a primer on my new > Superior XP O-320 engine. I use the mixture control to kill the engine, > so I understand fuel has to get back to the jets before it will run. > However, I'm having to crank for roughly 20 seconds, let the starter > cool, then crank again for nearly 20 seconds before it will start. My > start sequence is; > > Master on > Fuel pump on for at least 10 seconds > Throttle 1/4 open > Crank for 5 seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Continue cranking for 5 more seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Continue cranking for 5 more seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Continue cranking for 5 more seconds > Stop cranking and let starter cool for 2 minutes > Crank for 5 seconds > Pump throttle one time and hold at 1/4 open > Start playing with throttle to find the "sweet spot" > Starts rough until I find the "sweet spot" > Idles smoothly and runs up fine after warm > > For those of you who don't use a primer, do you have any suggestions? I > don't know if I'm giving it too much fuel or not enough. I don't smell > gas at the air inlet, so I don't think I'm flooding it, but I'm afraid > to pump too much at the beginning. Do I need to just let the boost pump > run for a while with the throttle at 1/4 open to get fuel to the jets, > or is that only going to work when the engine is cranking over? > > I just remembered, it restarts within a couple of revolutions when I > shut it down using the mixture control, so fuel should be reaching the > jets fairly quickly on a cold start. > > Thanks, > > Daniel Snow > RV-9A, 1 week to SnF, 2 weeks to inspection > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Richard Suffoletto" <rsuffoletto(at)starstream.net>
Subject: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
Date: Apr 12, 2007
I am planning to fly to OSH from the Sacramento area for the first time this year. Just wondered if anyone had a favorite fuel/food/overnight stop along the route. I plan to take my time and see some of the country along the way. Thanks Richard -- 10:44 PM ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 13, 2007
Subject: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
In a message dated 4/12/2007 3:07:34 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, rsuffoletto(at)starstream.net writes: I am planning to fly to OSH from the Sacramento area for the first time this year. Just wondered if anyone had a favorite fuel/food/overnight stop along the route. I plan to take my time and see some of the country along the way. =================================================== Richard- If you are into staying indoors (hotel) I would recommend Worthington, MN (southwest corner of the state). The Holiday Inn is close by and will come pick you up. They have an excellent restaurant inside. Also North Platte, NE was good although the hotels are a little farther away from the airport. If you want to camp, I've stayed at Mitchell, SD before and enjoyed it very much. GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A, C/S, Flying 840hrs, Silicon Valley, CA) ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
From: "Miles Bowen" <cessna170bdriver(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Apr 13, 2007
Jennings, Louisiana has a Comfort Inn (http://www.airnav.com/reserve/hotel?tnid=399C&near=3R7)on the airport (http://www.airnav.com/airport/3R7), with tiedowns on the property. No transportation required! Miles -------- Miles 1955 C170B HRII Plans#211 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=106718#106718 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
From: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net>
Date: Apr 13, 2007
Those'd have to be some nifty tiedowns and a heck of a hotel to make it worth stopping on the way to Osh from Sacramento. (g) -------- Bob Collins St. Paul, Minn. RV Builder's Hotline (free!) http://rvhotline.expercraft.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=106764#106764 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Oldsfolks(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 13, 2007
Subject: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
If you are taking a Southern route , Mena , Arkansas ( KMEZ) has an excellent airport and MAC Jet Center has fuel ,lowest price around, a crew car to lodging and the friendliest service around. Owner is a long-time friend of mine and I recommend his business. Bob Olds RV-4 , N1191X Charleston,Arkansas ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ronlee(at)pcisys.net
Subject: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
Date: Apr 13, 2007
Possibilities include Devils Tower and Mt Rushmore. Ron Lee --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "David Burton" <d-burton(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
Date: Apr 13, 2007
Any suggestions on where to stay at Rushmore? We intend to spend a day there at least on the way from Seattle... -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ronlee(at)pcisys.net Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 3:07 PM Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh Possibilities include Devils Tower and Mt Rushmore. Ron Lee --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "WILLIAM AGSTER" <BAGSTERJR(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
Date: Apr 13, 2007
Suggested stops Sacramento - OshkoshStop in Leadville, CO and get your certificate (suitable for framing) for landing at the highest runway in the United States. Then south of Weston Pass and through Wilkerson Pass into Denver Centennial Airport. Great food at the Perfect Landing restaurant and good self-serve fuel prices on the north end of the field (north of the Alpha ramp). Bill Agster RV-7A N174BJ (reserved) ----- Original Message ----- From: Richard Suffoletto<mailto:rsuffoletto(at)starstream.net> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 3:04 PM Subject: RV-List: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh I am planning to fly to OSH from the Sacramento area for the first time this year. Just wondered if anyone had a favorite fuel/food/overnight stop along the route. I plan to take my time and see some of the country along the way. Thanks Richard -- 10:44 PM http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List ator?RV-List> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "WILLIAM AGSTER" <BAGSTERJR(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
Date: Apr 13, 2007
How do you get to Jennings in a straight line from Sacramento to Oshkosh? LSU grad building 7A in Denver. Bill Agster N174BJ (reserved) ----- Original Message ----- From: Miles Bowen<mailto:cessna170bdriver(at)yahoo.com> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 9:43 AM Subject: RV-List: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh > Jennings, Louisiana has a Comfort Inn (http://www.airnav.com/reserve/hotel?tnid=399C&near=3R7)on the airport (http://www.airnav.com/airport/3R7>), with tiedowns on the property. No transportation required! Miles -------- Miles 1955 C170B HRII Plans#211 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=106718#106718 matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=106718#106718> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List ator?RV-List> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "WILLIAM AGSTER" <BAGSTERJR(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
Date: Apr 13, 2007
Forget going south!!! Stop in Leadville, CO (LXV) and get your certificate (suitable for framing) for landing at the highest runway in the United States. Then south of Weston Pass and through Wilkerson Pass into Denver Centennial Airport (APA). Great food at the Perfect Landing restaurant and good self-serve fuel prices on the north end of the field (north of the Alpha ramp). Greely, CO (GXY) is also a great stop for food and fuel prices and friendly service. Both locations have many hotels that will come and get you to take you to a good nights rest. Check the AOPA directory. Bill Agster RV-7A N174BJ (reserved) ----- Original Message ----- From: Oldsfolks(at)aol.com<mailto:Oldsfolks(at)aol.com> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 2:37 PM Subject: RV-List: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh If you are taking a Southern route , Mena , Arkansas ( KMEZ) has an excellent airport and MAC Jet Center has fuel ,lowest price around, a crew car to lodging and the friendliest service around. Owner is a long-time friend of mine and I recommend his business. Bob Olds RV-4 , N1191X Charleston,Arkansas ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- See what's free at AOL.com<http://www.aol.com/?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503>. http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List ator?RV-List> ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
From: "Miles Bowen" <cessna170bdriver(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Apr 13, 2007
Bob Collins wrote: > Those'd have to be some nifty tiedowns and a heck of a hotel to make it worth stopping on the way to Osh from Sacramento. (g) OOPS! I read OSHKOSH and thought SUN-N-FUN, since that's what's happening now. (He did say he wanted to "see some of the country on the way". [Wink] -------- Miles 1955 C170B HRII Plans#211 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=106802#106802 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ronlee(at)pcisys.net
Subject: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
Date: Apr 14, 2007
> > Any suggestions on where to stay at Rushmore? We intend to spend a day > there at least on the way from Seattle... http://www.airnav.com/airport/KRAP Do a search in the Black Hills. There appeared to be nicer places there closer to Rushmore http://mountrushmore.areaparks.com/hotels.html http://www.mountrushmoremotels.com/ http://www.blackhillsmotels.com/mtrushmore.htm --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Christopher Dahl" <dahlhouse(at)volcano.net>
Subject: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
Date: Apr 13, 2007
Suggested stops Sacramento - OshkoshRichard,,,if you get Sport Aviation, take a look at the February 2007 issue....there is an article chronicling just such a trip written by Lauran and Kay Lyn Paine tho they started from Salem, Oregon... Chris RV4 kit#26 ----- Original Message ----- From: Richard Suffoletto To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 3:04 PM Subject: RV-List: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh I am planning to fly to OSH from the Sacramento area for the first time this year. Just wondered if anyone had a favorite fuel/food/overnight stop along the route. I plan to take my time and see some of the country along the way. Thanks Richard -- 10:44 PM ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 13, 2007
Subject: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
In a message dated 4/13/2007 5:38:19 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, ronlee(at)pcisys.net writes: http://www.airnav.com/airport/KRAP Do a search in the Black Hills. There appeared to be nicer places there closer to Rushmore ================================= Hard to believe that there might be better places even near a place called KRAP ;o) GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A, C/S, Flying 840hrs, Silicon Valley, CA) ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 13, 2007
From: Cory Emberson <bootless(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
Spearfish is very nice - nice people, beautiful area. Be careful, though, of Sturgiss Rally prices on the way to OSH! The Silver Rose restaurant is very good, if it's still there. > > > >Do a search in the Black Hills. There appeared to be nicer places there >closer to Rushmore > > >================================= > >Hard to believe that there might be better places even near a place called >KRAP ;o) > > > >GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A, C/S, Flying 840hrs, Silicon Valley, CA) > > >************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Suggested stops Sacramento - Oshkosh
Date: Apr 14, 2007
From: "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen(at)dts9000.com>
And if you decide to stop in Sturgiss, beware of "exhibition driving" which is the catch all for hotrodding and showing off...the revenue from the Sturgiss Rally funds their schools for the whole year. I don't know if they have a law against "exhibition flying" but if they do, they're gonna catch a whole bunch of you Rvers!!! Chuck Jensen Spearfish is very nice - nice people, beautiful area. Be careful, though, of Sturgiss Rally prices on the way to OSH! The Silver Rose restaurant is very good, if it's still there. > > > >Do a search in the Black Hills. There appeared to be nicer places >there >closer to Rushmore > > >================================= > >Hard to believe that there might be better places even near a place >called >KRAP ;o) > > > >GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A, C/S, Flying 840hrs, Silicon Valley, CA) > > >************************************** See what's free at >http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "glen matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: Need 4.25 inch alternator pulley
Date: Apr 14, 2007
Hi Dale, >>Hi, >>I am trying to find a larger pulley (4.25 inch)for a 60 amp alternator >>(part >>#14185). The pulley part number per my paperwork is 14087007TAY, a GM part >>number for a 70's Camaro pulley that goes on the air pump. >> >>Thanks, >>Dale >> A while back I learned coincidental that the local auto zone had a whole box of misc alt pulleys from over the years just collecting dust in the back room. If you can still carry your alt in, you might get what you need as a trade. glen matejcek aerobubba(at)earthlink.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bobpaulo(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 14, 2007
Subject: RV-10
Best place for rivet purchase would be appreciated. Thanks, Robert Paulovich ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 14, 2007
From: Paul Besing <pbesing(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: RV-10
Vans. Bobpaulo(at)aol.com wrote: Best place for rivet purchase would be appreciated. Thanks, Robert Paulovich --------------------------------- See what's free at AOL.com. --------------------------------- Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell? Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "WILLIAM AGSTER" <BAGSTERJR(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: RV-10
Date: Apr 14, 2007
Just bought some recently. How fast do you want them?? Fast, order from Wicks. Ordered some from Van's also and they did not ship them until Thursday when I ordered them over the internet on the previous Sunday. No excuse for shipping four days later. Good thing I did not need them by the following weekend. Wicks shipped Monday and I had them on Wednesday to Denver. Bill Agster 7A ----- Original Message ----- From: Bobpaulo(at)aol.com<mailto:Bobpaulo(at)aol.com> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2007 12:20 PM Subject: RV-List: RV-10 Best place for rivet purchase would be appreciated. Thanks, Robert Paulovich ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- See what's free at AOL.com<http://www.aol.com/?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503>. http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List ator?RV-List> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ronlee(at)pcisys.net
Subject: Interesting article on user fee issue
Date: Apr 16, 2007
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070415/ap_on_bi_ge/ticket_taxes_9 --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ronlee(at)pcisys.net
Subject: Monument Valley Utah Day trip
Date: Apr 16, 2007
One of the RV grasshoppers (GH #2) wanted to fly out to Monument Valley Utah (think John Wayne western) before starting his condition inspection. We finally decided on Saturday (14 April). Our plan was to head out from Meadow lake (00V) towards Salida then over to Telluride, make another T&G at another airport then overfly Monument Valley before coming back close to the four corners area and do a T&G at the southwestern CO airports where we have never been. My hangar buddy grasshopper (GH #3) and I depart and were to meet up with GH #2 near Pikes Peak. Before we meet up with #2, he notes that he lost his alternator and heads back home. GH #3 and I continue west and make stops at Gunnison and Montrose then head south to Telluride. Just before we switch to the Telluride unicom, we hear GH #2. He is on his way so we stop at Telluride and wait for him. I won't reveal his alternator issue but just as a side comment, if you ever get cold and need to reach back and get a blankie to cover yourself, make sure that you do not hit the alternator switch and move it to the off position. The approach to Telluride was awesome. I was more concerned with avoiding noise sensitive areas and not screwing up than in taking a picture but it was the best final approach I have ever seen. White, snow capped mountains everywhere but on the approach path to Rwy 9. Just spectacular. After GH #2 arrives we go into town for lunch. Departure was to the west and on to Nucla. At that point GH #2 leaves for home and GH #3 and I head over to Monument Valley. Once there, I continue overhead patrol while he descends and takes pictures. >From there we start the journey home. He decides to stop at Cortez (not just a T&G) so I tell him to meet me at Pagosa Springs. I make a T&G at Durango and stop at Pagosa for fuel. We meet up there then fly over Wolf Creek Pass and makes T&Gs at Del Norte, Leach and Monte Vista. Del Norte was neat in that there is a tall rocky formation on the approach end of Rwy 8. We both managed to miss it. Then over the Great Sand Dunes, beyond which GH #3 does a T&G at Silver West and we climb back up to cross the front range and back to Meadow Lake. Total flight time for me was 5.8 hours and a day of incredibly beautiful Colorado/Utah flying. --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 16, 2007
From: John Fasching <n1cxo320(at)salidaco.com>
Subject: Fees?
You got an $18 bill from Canada? Nothing ! I got a $852 bill from Australia a fews years ago for landing fees...several years before I even finished building the RV6A - even forgot I made the trip !! They even had my registration number which was on reserve correct. John at Salida, CO ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ronlee(at)pcisys.net
Subject: Re: Interesting article on user fee issue
Date: Apr 16, 2007
I did not state in my original post that the article was interesting mainly because it seemed to be slanted in a way to support the FAA/airline position. I paid my first landing fee Saturday at Telluride. $2.88 USD When I fly around my airport I am often at the same altitude or close to that of arriving aircraft. I talk with COS approach for traffic advise and to maneuver to facilitate commercial traffic flow into COS. Imagine what would happen if they decide to charge me for being a friendly airspace user? You guessed it. I would stop talking to COS approach. I know that this is a probable response since after being jerked around by Denver approach I no longer speak with them when flying OVER Denver Class B. Does that impact traffic into or out of DEN? I have no idea. Don't care. I tried to be cooperative and was treated poorly so I no longer try to play nice with them. --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Joseph Larson <jpl(at)showpage.org>
Subject: Re: Interesting article on user fee issue
Date: Apr 16, 2007
The head of the Minneapolis guys talked at a Wings a year or two ago. He was there to explain why they were enlarging the Class B and also to talk to GA pilots about some of our flying habits. One thing he noticed is that the pilots tend to skirt the edges of class B -- either barely below it, barely above, or barely outside. He felt we thought we were "getting away" with something. I've flown just under and just outside class B here, and I did it so that I could stay out of the way of the busy controllers, but he basically told us, "the controllers prefer to talk to you rather than guess what it is you're doing". If you add user fees for me to talk to the controllers, I'll go back to my old habits of never talking to them. I'll use free weather services, I'll never file a flight plan unless it's IFR, and I won't file IFR if I think I can safely scud run. When I practice my approaches, I'll only shoot approaches that don't involve talking to any controllers. I won't file PIREPs in fear that talking to anyone will cost me more money, and besides -- why should I file PIREPs if they're going to charge some other pilot to hear them? I will, however, fly at legal distances -- barely -- from both Class B airspace and local clouds, blithely not talking to anyone at all. That airliner will just have to go around me. Is that really what anyone wants? -Joe On Apr 16, 2007, at 3:34 PM, ronlee(at)pcisys.net wrote: > > I did not state in my original post that the article was interesting > mainly because it seemed to be slanted in a way to support the > FAA/airline position. > > I paid my first landing fee Saturday at Telluride. $2.88 USD > > When I fly around my airport I am often at the same altitude or > close to > that of arriving aircraft. I talk with COS approach for traffic > advise > and to maneuver to facilitate commercial traffic flow into COS. > Imagine > what would happen if they decide to charge me for being a friendly > airspace user? You guessed it. I would stop talking to COS approach. > > I know that this is a probable response since after being jerked > around > by Denver approach I no longer speak with them when flying OVER Denver > Class B. Does that impact traffic into or out of DEN? I have no > idea. > Don't care. I tried to be cooperative and was treated poorly so I no > longer try to play nice with them. > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HCRV6(at)comcast.net
Subject: Contact Info for John Parks
Date: Apr 16, 2007
Can someone send me a phone number and/or e-mail address for John Parks, the avionics guy. I bought my Garmin stuff from him several years ago but seem to have misplaced his number. -- Harry Crosby RV-6 N16CX, 330 hours ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Interesting article on user fee issue
From: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net>
Date: Apr 16, 2007
jpl(at)showpage.org wrote: > Is that really what anyone wants? > > -Joe > Sadly, if it means some Americans can have a few more cents (or think they'll have a few more cents) in their pockets and someone else makes the sacrifice, either with their lives or their money, then,yes, I think that's what America wants. I cringed when I read the AP article yesterday. OTOH, we do have to recognize that there's a fair amount of pork out there. I know in Jim Oberstar's district, there's some really beautiful airports out in the middle of nowhere. I don't have a solution for the dilemma, other than the system is really screwed up as to how stuff gets funded, or fixed -- or whether it does -- and it's hard to use a logical argument -- a rational argument -- in a process (politics) that is entirely irrational and illogical. Frustrating, ain't it? -------- Bob Collins St. Paul, Minn. RV Builder's Hotline (free!) http://rvhotline.expercraft.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=107322#107322 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com>
Subject: Contact Info for John Parks
Date: Apr 16, 2007
Harry, I think you will get a lot of answers, but I'll bet you are talking about John STARK at starkavionics.com. His phone number is (206) 321-1008 and email address is john(at)starkavionics.com Terry -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of HCRV6(at)comcast.net Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 9:51 AM Subject: RV-List: Contact Info for John Parks Can someone send me a phone number and/or e-mail address for John Parks, the avionics guy. I bought my Garmin stuff from him several years ago but seem to have misplaced his number. -- Harry Crosby RV-6 N16CX, 330 hours ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 16, 2007
From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley1(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Contact Info for John Parks
Harry, I wonder if you mean John Stark? If so, here is the information that I have: Stark Avionics Hangar 12 Columbus Metro Airport Columbus, GA 31909 706-321-1008 Regards, Richard Dudley RV-6A flying HCRV6(at)comcast.net wrote: > >Can someone send me a phone number and/or e-mail address for John Parks, the avionics guy. I bought my Garmin stuff from him several years ago but seem to have misplaced his number. > >-- >Harry Crosby >RV-6 N16CX, 330 hours > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Ensing" <densing(at)carolina.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Contact Info for John Parks
Date: Apr 16, 2007
Harry, is it possible you are referring to electronics guy John STARK in Columbus GA vs. John Parks? If it is John Stark his phone number is 706.312.1008. Dale Ensing ----- Original Message ----- From: <HCRV6(at)comcast.net> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 12:51 PM Subject: RV-List: Contact Info for John Parks > > Can someone send me a phone number and/or e-mail address for John Parks, > the avionics guy. I bought my Garmin stuff from him several years ago but > seem to have misplaced his number. > > -- > Harry Crosby > RV-6 N16CX, 330 hours > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 16, 2007
From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley1(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Contact Info for John Parks
Not sure if this got sent. Harry, I wonder if you mean John Stark? If so, here is the information that I have: Stark Avionics Hangar 12 Columbus Metro Airport Columbus, GA 31909 706-321-1008 Regards, Richard Dudley RV-6A flying HCRV6(at)comcast.net wrote: > >Can someone send me a phone number and/or e-mail address for John Parks, the avionics guy. I bought my Garmin stuff from him several years ago but seem to have misplaced his number. > >-- >Harry Crosby >RV-6 N16CX, 330 hours > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Interesting article on user fee issue
From: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net>
Date: Apr 16, 2007
I don't think a dollars-and-sense "defense" is going to work. AOPA has been trying that for years and even *I'm* not interested in it. I think the way to justify these is to note that without the support for airports for private pilots, -- and specifically, I'm thinking that this story cited several of the reliever airports in Minnesota -- the skies get more crowded and all of a sudden commercial passengers (that would be the voters) are at risk http://www.airdisaster.com/eyewitness/psa182.shtml (http://www.airdisaster.com/eyewitness/psa182.shtml) We're going to have to hit the non-flying public where it hurts the most -- how it affects THEM. Right now, everyone who flies commercially knows it s*cks. So stress that if the relievers -- like a Flying Cloud in the Twin Cities -- disappears, there'll be fewer takeoffs at MSP. That's longer waits and runway delays. There's the safety issue. There's the benefits issue. In our neck of the woods, the forests have a nasty habit of burning. These airports provide the ability to provide services to fight them (this is especially true int he aforementioned Rep. Oberstar's district, which includes the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness). Close the airport, let it burn, and then where are you non-flying hikers going to camp and hike? Hopefully, everyone kind of avoids the not-so-subtle "rich jet jockey" or rich pilot message of the article. Anybody who's ever watched the Land Yachts come rolling into Camp Scholler during AirVenture know there's some validity to that. (g) -------- Bob Collins St. Paul, Minn. RV Builder's Hotline (free!) http://rvhotline.expercraft.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=107368#107368 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Burns" <burnsm(at)suddenlink.net>
Subject: Re: Interesting article on user fee issue
Date: Apr 16, 2007
-----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Collins Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 2:25 PM Subject: RV-List: Re: Interesting article on user fee issue I don't think a dollars-and-sense "defense" is going to work. AOPA has been trying that for years and even *I'm* not interested in it. I think the way to justify these is to note that without the support for airports for private pilots, -- and specifically, I'm thinking that this story cited several of the reliever airports in Minnesota -- the skies get more crowded and all of a sudden commercial passengers (that would be the voters) are at risk http://www.airdisaster.com/eyewitness/psa182.shtml (http://www.airdisaster.com/eyewitness/psa182.shtml) We're going to have to hit the non-flying public where it hurts the most -- how it affects THEM. Right now, everyone who flies commercially knows it s*cks. So stress that if the relievers -- like a Flying Cloud in the Twin Cities -- disappears, there'll be fewer takeoffs at MSP. That's longer waits and runway delays. There's the safety issue. There's the benefits issue. In our neck of the woods, the forests have a nasty habit of burning. These airports provide the ability to provide services to fight them (this is especially true int he aforementioned Rep. Oberstar's district, which includes the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness). Close the airport, let it burn, and then where are you non-flying hikers going to camp and hike? Hopefully, everyone kind of avoids the not-so-subtle "rich jet jockey" or rich pilot message of the article. Anybody who's ever watched the Land Yachts come rolling into Camp Scholler during AirVenture know there's some validity to that. (g) -------- Bob Collins St. Paul, Minn. RV Builder's Hotline (free!) http://rvhotline.expercraft.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=107368#107368 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gordon or marge" <gcomfo(at)tc3net.com>
Subject: Re: Interesting article on user fee issue
Date: Apr 16, 2007
- Sadly, if it means some Americans can have a few more cents (or think they'll have a few more cents) in their pockets and someone else makes the sacrifice, either with their lives or their money, then,yes, I think that's what America wants. I cringed when I read the AP article yesterday. OTOH, we do have to recognize that there's a fair amount of pork out there. I know in Jim Oberstar's district, there's some really beautiful airports out in the middle of nowhere. I don't have a solution for the dilemma, other than the system is really screwed up as to how stuff gets funded, or fixed -- or whether it does -- and it's hard to use a logical argument -- a rational argument -- in a process (politics) that is entirely irrational and illogical. Frustrating, ain't it? -------- Bob Collins St. Paul, Minn. RV Builder's Hotline (free!) http://rvhotline.expercraft.com It's more alarming than frustrating. I suspect that the FAA's goal, in addition to things already mentioned, is to develop a funding system that is not under the thumb of congress. Once in place the rates could be manipulated by the bureaucracy to suit itself. Ever try to lobby a bureaucracy? They also want to free up the trust fund to use for operations. It is not clear to me if user fees would replace the fuel taxes or be piled on top to them but knowing how the government works it is doubtful the fuel tax would disappear. The U.S. House and Senate are not exactly loveable organizations but they do respond somewhat to the electorate. I have utterly no confidence that the FAA would be reasonable and if they were free of congressional oversight their incompetence with respect to obtaining value for money spent would know no bounds. God help us all if this all comes to pass.

March 26, 2007 - April 16, 2007

RV-Archive.digest.vol-sr