RV10-Archive.digest.vol-bk
August 01, 2006 - August 15, 2006
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Jessen" <jjessen(at)rcn.com> |
| Subject: | Aircraft Wiring for Smart People |
Go here (http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/richter/richter.html) to see
Nuckolls take on the issues. I'm not a promoter of either, nor am I able to
tell "right" from "wrong." Just trying to determine which philosophy to
favor more. I've taken Nuckolls seminar and almost walked out during the
first day because it seemed more about Bob than about substance. But I also
sat and had dinner with Bob and his wonderful wife, and talked to him in
depth about a new curriculum and how to approach it. He was very well aware
that the seminars needed to be updated. I do like his book and do like that
his training efforts have made a difference in many respects for
homebuilders. I learned from him and am still learning. I don't know
anything about Richter, other than he was kind enough to discuss
developmental issues with my son while Greg was in the throes of bringing
out the BM in its early days. Not many would be open to discussion during
development. Ask Rob. He and his crew have been overwhelmed with work.
Hard to answer probing questions when you are in the development/test phase.
So, because of that, I have respect for Richter. Different flavors. Smart,
hard working people. Glad they're both around.
John J
Thinking about static air.
_____
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder
(Michael Sausen)
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 7:35 AM
HOW DARE YOU! Oh wait, I agree with you. I think Bob's book is worth
every dime for guys like me that are strictly laymen. I personally don't
see it as a bible like many others and I have criticized people over on that
list for putting him on a pedestal. His list has a lot of good discussions
as long as you can separate the wheat from the chaff but there is a whole
lot of cheerleading. It does seem to be going to his head a bit as his
discussions are turning more philosophical than actually useful. But I
digress. The Aeroelectric Connection is really just a collection of very
old and well proven design philosophies but nothing ground shattering.
As for Greg's book, I too attended his seminar at the 2005 Airventure and
read his whitepaper. Good stuff also. It's funny how a little feud started
between Greg and Bob a while back witch spawned Greg's paper. Is either
approach wrong, not really. They just represent different design
philosophies.
Michael
_____
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim
Dawson-Townsend
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 4:16 PM
Not to be blasphemous, but has anyone else found "The AeroElectric
Connection" somewhat anti-climatic, compared to the way it is often talked
about as a document right up there with the Bible, the Constitution, and the
Declaration of Independence? It seems to have some areas in need of an
update, and a lot of focus on plastic airplanes. Certainly there's some
good information in there, but you'd think the thing could walk on water . .
.
TDT
40025
_____
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Reining
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 5:04 PM
I attended a workshop given by Greg Richter of Blue Mountain Avionics on
Saturday at Oshkosh entitled "Aircraft Wiring for Smart People". It was
excellent. Each member of the audience was given a 39 page handout at the
start of the forum, which served as the basis for the lecture. While you
may not agree on all the recommendations it contains (such as using a 28V
system), it sure does provide good information for planning and implementing
your system. For those of you who missed this forum, here's the link to the
same handout, available as a PDF file on the Blue Mountain Avionics website.
http://www.bluemountainavionics.com/pdf/aircraft_wiring_04december2004.pdf
By the way, be sure to also visit the AeroElectic website:
http://www.aeroelectric.com , and purchase
their excellent book on the same subject: "The AeroElectric Connection".
Bill Reining
RV-10 40514
Tail Cone
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Hartzell Propeller - Crate Size and Shipping Weight |
Just picked up my Hartzell prop. For the archives the package is 88" x
10" x 16" and the shipping weight is 84 pounds. The freight charge for
terminal pick up at Old Dominion's in Philadelphia was $112.45.
I ordered the prop from Vans the end of May, it was scheduled for
delivery on 8-1-06 which is exactly when it arrived.
Larry Rosen
#356
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tim Dawson-Townsend" <Tdawson(at)avidyne.com> |
| Subject: | Survey of the day: windshield visors |
I forgot to even make an analysis at Oshkosh.
What are folks doing for windshield visors?
a) nothing?
b) Rosen?
c) other aircraft visor?
d) used visors from a 81 Chevy Chevette?
TDT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Masys <dmasys(at)cox.net> |
---- Tim Dawson-Townsend wrote:
>
> Choices for test pilot:
> 1) me, 260 hour pilot, instrument rating. Only real experience in C-172 and
Warrior. Ten hours transition training in RV-10.
> 2) one of a few professional test pilots I know. Hours in the thousands. Types
in the dozens. Conceptually, zero hours in the RV-10.
For an RV, this is a pretty easy decision, which is to say it is a well proven
design and a very honest airplane. Even the bugbear of the short-wing RV's, which
is the stall-spin out of an uncoordinated slow flight condition, is less
of a risk in a -10. An acquaintence who works for Boeing as a test pilot and
does experimental first flights as a side business says the RV's are so predictable
they are almost like 'conformal testing to a type certificate'. (Of course,
he doesn't even agree to do such flights until he has done his own mechanical
inspection and believes it is a safe configuration.)
Having thrashed through this on the first flight of my -7A, I'd say that with reasonable
piloting experience and a good plan (plan the flight; fly the plan)
a first flight in your new RV is a great experience, not to be missed. If your
airplane has passed all of its tech inspections and doesn't have any of the
high risk anomalies (like fuel system modifications) then the biggest stress is
likely to be all those friends and family members who show up for the first
flight. The scariest part of my first flight was that I had a very accomplished
formation pilot flying chase in his RV and I got spooked just seeing another
airplane so close to mine during the laps around the airport that we did.
-Dan Masys
40448 cabin cover
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Schmidt" <sschmidt(at)ussynthetic.com> |
Those last 100 hours have turned into another 1000 hours I think.
But it will be worth it. I've already put 2500 hours into this project
and I'm not going to skimp on the final 100 hours.
I wanted to make Oshkosh but due to late shipments of certain pieces of
avionics I wasn't able to get the wiring finished plus I had some fun
trips I wanted to make this spring and summer on my motorcycle.
I had a great time at Oshkosh this year and was one of my favorite
years. I was there from Sunday to Sunday and this was the first time I
had been there the first three days of the show. The past 11 years I
have arrived on Wednesday night and I really noticed a big difference in
the crowds. The hangers were packed early in the week and pretty open
on Friday and Saturday. I had always though that Thursday and Friday
would be the days with the most airplanes but Monday and Tuesday are
definitely the busiest days.
The great thing about Oshkosh is that by the time I leave on Sunday, the
next Oshkosh is less than a year away.
Scott Schmidt
sschmidt(at)ussynthetic.com
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2006 8:04 PM
Congratulations Jesse. Scott Schmidt can tell you the work involved in
those last 100 hours. It will be a highlight of OSH '06 to see all of
your hard work in person.
John Cox
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tim Dawson-Townsend" <Tdawson(at)avidyne.com> |
I read something the other day that hadn't really occurred to me before,
that being the use of a PC flight simulator as a "mission rehersal" for
your first flight. I'm pretty sure there's an RV-10 model out there for
"X Plane", and you can customize the panel to match yours. Load airport
data for your local field, and you can run through the first flight
"virtually" before you do the real thing.
I think I might try that . . .
TDT
40025
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Masys
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 11:43 AM
---- Tim Dawson-Townsend wrote:
>
> Choices for test pilot:
> 1) me, 260 hour pilot, instrument rating. Only real experience in
C-172 and Warrior. Ten hours transition training in RV-10.
> 2) one of a few professional test pilots I know. Hours in the
thousands. Types in the dozens. Conceptually, zero hours in the RV-10.
For an RV, this is a pretty easy decision, which is to say it is a well
proven design and a very honest airplane. Even the bugbear of the
short-wing RV's, which is the stall-spin out of an uncoordinated slow
flight condition, is less of a risk in a -10. An acquaintence who works
for Boeing as a test pilot and does experimental first flights as a side
business says the RV's are so predictable they are almost like
'conformal testing to a type certificate'. (Of course, he doesn't even
agree to do such flights until he has done his own mechanical inspection
and believes it is a safe configuration.)
Having thrashed through this on the first flight of my -7A, I'd say that
with reasonable piloting experience and a good plan (plan the flight;
fly the plan) a first flight in your new RV is a great experience, not
to be missed. If your airplane has passed all of its tech inspections
and doesn't have any of the high risk anomalies (like fuel system
modifications) then the biggest stress is likely to be all those friends
and family members who show up for the first flight. The scariest part
of my first flight was that I had a very accomplished formation pilot
flying chase in his RV and I got spooked just seeing another airplane so
close to mine during the laps around the airport that we did.
-Dan Masys
40448 cabin cover
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
| Subject: | Rookie questions |
U3VzaWUgYW5kIENocmlzLCBiYWNrIHRvIHlvdXIgdmFsdWVkIHBvc3QgYW5kIHBvc2l0aXZlIHF1
ZXN0aW9ucy4gIFdoZW4gY29uc2lkZXJpbmcgZG91YmxlcnMsIHNjaG9vbCB0YXVnaHQgdXMgdG8g
YXNrLiAgIldoYXQgaXMgaGFyZGVyLCB1c2luZyBhIGRvdWJsZXIgZHVyaW5nIHRoZSBpbml0aWFs
IGNvbnN0cnVjdGlvbiBvciByZXBsYWNpbmcgdGhlIHNraW4gd2hlbiBpdCBpcyBjcmFja2luZyAt
IGFmdGVyIHRoZSBhbHVtaW51bSBzaG93cyBpdHMgbWVtb3J5Ij8gIFdoYXQgaXMgdGhlIGNvc3Qg
ZGlmZmVyZW5jZT8gVGhlIHF1ZXN0aW9uIGFwcGxpZWQgdG8ga2l0YnVpbHRzIGNhdXNlIGl0IGlz
IG5vdCBhbiBvcHRpb24gb24gdGhlIGNlcnRpZmllZCBzaWRlLg0KDQpJdCBpcyBhbiBpbnRlcmVz
dGluZyB3YXkgdG8gbG9vayBhdCBidWlsZCBxdWVzdGlvbnMgd2hlbiBldmFsdWF0aW5nIGlkZWFz
LCBtb2RzIG9yIHRoZSBvcmlnaW5hbCBzdGVwcy4NCg0KSm9obiBDb3gg4oCTIEtVQU8NCg0KLS0+
IFJWMTAtTGlzdCBtZXNzYWdlIHBvc3RlZCBieTogIkNocmlzICwgU3VzaWXCoCBEYXJjeSIgPFZI
TVVNQGJpZ3BvbmQuY29tPg0KDQpJIHNlZSBhIGxvdCBvZiBidWlsZGVycyBhcmUgcHV0dGluZyBk
b3VibGVycyBvbiBob3dldmVyIEkgZGlkbid0IG9uIG15IDYgYW5kDQpuZXZlciBoYWQgYSBwcm9i
bGVtLiBNaWdodCBwdXQgb25lIG9uIHRoZSAxMCBub3Qgc3VyZSB5ZXQuDQoNCkNocmlzDQotLS0t
LSBPcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlIC0tLS0tDQpTZW50OiBTYXR1cmRheSwgSnVseSAyOSwgMjAwNiAx
MTowOCBBTQ0KDQoNCg=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Masys <dmasys(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: insurance requirements |
---- Russell Daves wrote:
> I insured my RV-10 with AIG through NationAir, who has carried my insurance
> on various airplanes for over 10 years. My insurance binder DID NOT require
> any RV-10 transition training and I added my buddy as a named pilot for no
> extra charge. I have in excess of 1400 hours (254 in an RV-6A), Instrument
> Rating, High Performance, and Complex Aircraft signoffs. I also have NO
> INSURANCE claims in my history.
Just to keep it interesting, it happens that yesterday I contacted JT Helms at
NationAir about the need for transition training. My story is a lot like Russ':
1700 PIC, instrument current, high perf, complex endorsement, no claims,and
> 200 hrs in my 200hp/CS -7A, which is insured by NationAir. Here is JT's
reply from 7/31/06:
"I'm positive that they would require some time. I just checked with another agent
here that handles a lot of RVs and she and I were both thinking 5 hours max.
The company that has been a little more competitive, and which has a better
policy (Global's EAA Program) will almost surely ask for a checkout to include
5 hours.
AIG would also likely ask for 3 -5 hours. But, their policy for in flight RVs
is not nearly as good as Global's, especially during the fly off restrictions.
Please let me know if you have any additional questions.
John JT Helms
Branch Manager
NationAir Insurance Agencies, Inc. "
So maybe the playing field is changing, or maybe it just depends what day of the
week you ask.
-Dan Masys
40448
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com> |
| Subject: | Re: insurance requirements |
FWIW, when I bought my RV-4 last year and insured it with Global
(through Falcon/EAA), they only required 2 hours of dual. I expect they
would want more in the RV-10 because it doesn't have the track record of
the RV-4 and is worth a bunch more. However, it is not a taildragger
and is considerably easier to fly than the RV-4 (at least the one flight
I had in a -10 seemed to be a lot easier - much more stable and solid.
An RV-4 is a lot "twitchier").
Jack Phillips
#40610
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Masys
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 12:56 PM
---- Russell Daves wrote:
> I insured my RV-10 with AIG through NationAir, who has carried my
insurance
> on various airplanes for over 10 years. My insurance binder DID NOT
require
> any RV-10 transition training and I added my buddy as a named pilot
for no
> extra charge. I have in excess of 1400 hours (254 in an RV-6A),
Instrument
> Rating, High Performance, and Complex Aircraft signoffs. I also have
NO
> INSURANCE claims in my history.
Just to keep it interesting, it happens that yesterday I contacted JT
Helms at NationAir about the need for transition training. My story is
a lot like Russ': 1700 PIC, instrument current, high perf, complex
endorsement, no claims,and > 200 hrs in my 200hp/CS -7A, which is
insured by NationAir. Here is JT's reply from 7/31/06:
"I'm positive that they would require some time. I just checked with
another agent here that handles a lot of RVs and she and I were both
thinking 5 hours max. The company that has been a little more
competitive, and which has a better policy (Global's EAA Program) will
almost surely ask for a checkout to include 5 hours.
AIG would also likely ask for 3 -5 hours. But, their policy for in
flight RVs is not nearly as good as Global's, especially during the fly
off restrictions.
Please let me know if you have any additional questions.
John JT Helms
Branch Manager
NationAir Insurance Agencies, Inc. "
So maybe the playing field is changing, or maybe it just depends what
day of the week you ask.
-Dan Masys
40448
_________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Lycoming Suffix Information |
I understand there is a FAA web page that identifies what all of the suffix
letters mean for their engines. I did some searching but can't find it, does
anyone have a link to it?
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com> |
| Subject: | Lycoming Suffix Information |
Here are two sources for the info. The Lycoming document is actually
easier to sort through since it's more concise.
http://www.lycoming.textron.com/productSales/engineSpecifications/SSP204
.pdf
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.ns
f
Bob #40105
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert
Gardner
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 1:17 PM
I understand there is a FAA web page that identifies what all of the
suffix
letters mean for their engines. I did some searching but can't find it,
does
anyone have a link to it?
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com> |
| Subject: | Lycoming Suffix Information |
Try this:
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:I9NCUkeXRGcJ:rvimg.com/tcds/lycoming
-io-540.pdf+lycoming+io-540&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=3
Jack Phillips
#40610
Tail
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert
Gardner
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 2:17 PM
I understand there is a FAA web page that identifies what all of the
suffix
letters mean for their engines. I did some searching but can't find it,
does
anyone have a link to it?
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
_________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" <ddddsp1(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Altering the Exhaust? |
As I read some of these post on the exhaust and how builders are going t
o ALTER the pipes, bend them, cut them, etc. You may want to give Larry
Vetterman a call before you do that and insure you are NOT changing the
performance/porting when you make those changes. With a tuned exhaust
system you may be creating additional problems trying to correct one. I
am NOT saying your changes WILL effect the engine performance, but I wo
uld talk to the exhaust PRO before I modified his proven system.
FWIW,
Dean
40449
________________________________________________________________________
As I read some of these post on the exhaust and how builders ar
e going to ALTER the pipes, bend them, cut them, etc. You may want
to give Larry Vetterman a call before you do that and insure you a
re NOT changing the performance/porting when you make those changes.&nbs
p; With a tuned exhaust system you may be creating additional problems t
rying to correct one. I am NOT saying your changes WILL effect the
engine performance, but I would talk to the exhaust PRO before I modifi
ed his proven system.
FWIW,
Dean
40449
______________________
__________________________________________________
Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Altering the Exhaust? |
With my exhaust system I am not modifying anything. It is being built
by John Forsling who goes way back with Vetterman. John has done a lot
of work with exhaust systems over the years, including running different
exhaust styles on dynos, and is one of the experts. One of the things
that were discovered in dyno tests is that tuning doesn't make a
difference on most of these engines including ours which echo's what Tim
said.
Michael
________________________________
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
ddddsp1(at)juno.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 2:46 PM
As I read some of these post on the exhaust and how builders are going
to ALTER the pipes, bend them, cut them, etc. You may want to give
Larry Vetterman a call before you do that and insure you are NOT
changing the performance/porting when you make those changes. With a
tuned exhaust system you may be creating additional problems trying to
correct one. I am NOT saying your changes WILL effect the engine
performance, but I would talk to the exhaust PRO before I modified his
proven system.
FWIW,
Dean
40449
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" <ddddsp1(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Altering the Exhaust? |
Tim,
That will be a good test on your plane since you already have several ho
urs of data to compare it too. Did you ask Larry about putting any bend
s or curves in the pipe? Just adding length probably would not increase
exhaust back pressure much but I would think if people got carried away
with putting major bends in the pipes it would change the dynamics. HO
WEVER, as the builder we can do whatever we want.........build on.
Dean 40449
P.S. Engine inspector called today.......he was impressed how clean and
well preserved the O-540 was and said it should be ready to mount on the
plane by the 12th of Aug! I will sleep easier hearing that.
________________________________________________________________________
Tim,
That will be a good test on your plane since you already have several
hours of data to compare it too. Did you ask Larry about putting
any bends or curves in the pipe? Just adding length probably would
not increase exhaust back pressure much but I would think if peopl
e got carried away with putting major bends in the pipes it would change
the dynamics. HOWEVER, as the builder we can do whatever we
want.........build on.
Dean 40449
P.S. Engine inspector called today.......he was impressed how clean a
nd well preserved the O-540 was and said it should be ready to mount on
the plane by the 12th of Aug! I will sleep easier hearing that.
______________________
__________________________________________________
Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Sargeant" <k5wiv(at)amsat.org> |
| Subject: | Aircraft Wiring for Smart People |
I just downloaded Greg's paper last night and have read only part of it. In
what I have read so far he has some good ideas, but I take strong exception
to some of his recommendations concerning shielding. Specifically his
statements about grounding shields on one end only! While there are cases
where grounding shields at both ends can cause problems with ground loops or
where the "ground" is at different voltages at each end, the general rule is
that at RF frequencies a shield is not a shield unless it is properly
terminated at both ends, and in most cases work better at all frequencies
when so terminated. The practice of terminating shields at one end only
originated many years ago with the telephone companies where the highest
frequencies encountered were in the audio range and where the connected
equipment was likely to be separated by significant distances.
I do agree with Greg's recommendation to use return leads rather than
depending on aircraft structure for the return. The concept of twisting
wires together is very good, although I believe that it should be done
primarily, if not only, with pairs (Supply voltage and return, signal and
return, etc.) because it helps to significantly reduce the vulnerability of
this wiring to noise interference and to the radiation of noise.
Jack Sargeant
1127 Patricia St.
Wichita, KS 67208-2642
316/683-5268
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of RV Builder
(Michael Sausen)
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 9:35 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aircraft Wiring for Smart People
HOW DARE YOU! Oh wait, I agree with you. I think Bob's book is worth
every dime for guys like me that are strictly laymen. I personally don't
see it as a bible like many others and I have criticized people over on that
list for putting him on a pedestal. His list has a lot of good discussions
as long as you can separate the wheat from the chaff but there is a whole
lot of cheerleading. It does seem to be going to his head a bit as his
discussions are turning more philosophical than actually useful. But I
digress. The Aeroelectric Connection is really just a collection of very
old and well proven design philosophies but nothing ground shattering.
As for Greg's book, I too attended his seminar at the 2005 Airventure
and read his whitepaper. Good stuff also. It's funny how a little feud
started between Greg and Bob a while back witch spawned Greg's paper. Is
either approach wrong, not really. They just represent different design
philosophies.
Michael
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim
Dawson-Townsend
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 4:16 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aircraft Wiring for Smart People
Not to be blasphemous, but has anyone else found "The AeroElectric
Connection" somewhat anti-climatic, compared to the way it is often talked
about as a document right up there with the Bible, the Constitution, and the
Declaration of Independence? It seems to have some areas in need of an
update, and a lot of focus on plastic airplanes. Certainly there's some
good information in there, but you'd think the thing could walk on water . .
.
TDT
40025
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Reining
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 5:04 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Wiring for Smart People
I attended a workshop given by Greg Richter of Blue Mountain Avionics on
Saturday at Oshkosh entitled "Aircraft Wiring for Smart People". It was
excellent. Each member of the audience was given a 39 page handout at the
start of the forum, which served as the basis for the lecture. While you
may not agree on all the recommendations it contains (such as using a 28V
system), it sure does provide good information for planning and implementing
your system. For those of you who missed this forum, here's the link to the
same handout, available as a PDF file on the Blue Mountain Avionics website.
http://www.bluemountainavionics.com/pdf/aircraft_wiring_04december2004.pdf
By the way, be sure to also visit the AeroElectic website:
http://www.aeroelectric.com, and purchase their excellent book on the same
subject: "The AeroElectric Connection".
Bill Reining
RV-10 40514
Tail Cone
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Sargeant" <k5wiv(at)amsat.org> |
| Subject: | -10's for sale in quantity, available today |
Re: RV10-List: -10's for sale in quantity, available todayCorrect! Unless,
or course, I can't read or understand the FARs.
Jack & Cecilia Sargeant
1127 Patricia St.
Wichita, KS 67208-2642
316/683-5268
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Lockamy, Jack L
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 10:01 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: -10's for sale in quantity, available today
The "buyer" can still do any/all of the maintenance on the airplane. An
A&P is NOT required for maintenance on the aircraft, however the buyer could
elect to hire an A&P is he so desires or is not comfortable doing a
particular maintenance task. An A&P is only required to sign off the Annual
Condition Inspection as the "buyer" does not hold the Repairman Certificate
for that particular aircraft.
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert G. Wright" <armywrights(at)adelphia.net> |
Rob H., are you out there?
Wondering if there is a side view drawing of the 3500. Basically wondering
what the behind-the-panel footprint is so I can plan out that whole
sub-panel rib mod if necessary.
Rob Wright
#392
Wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick <ricksked(at)earthlink.net> |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LessDragProd(at)AOL.COM |
One of the USA MT distributors tried to "lock out" other USA MT distributors
from manning the MT Propeller booth. I know this, because I had been
invited to work in the MT Propeller booth in a rotation program that MT Propeller
had just started.
This other USA MT distributor made it very difficult for the MT Propeller
owner, Gerd Muhlbauer, and the other MT Propeller employees. So much so, that
only MT Propeller employees are now allowed to work in the booth.
I felt that the time I spent working in the MT Propeller booth at the
airshow gave me a much better insight into the product, the company and the people.
I feel that the plan to rotate all of the USA distributors through the MT
Propeller booth was a very good idea.
Unfortunately, one egocentric USA distributor destroyed this for all of the
other USA MT distributors. And also for potential MT Propeller customers.
MT Propeller USA in DeLand, Florida, is owned by MT Propeller. The people
from MT Propeller USA will be manning the MT Propeller booth at Sun-N-Fun next
year.
I believe they are all native USA, or have been here to long to still be
considered German. :-)
Regards,
Jim Ayers
In a message dated 07/31/2006 8:15:39 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
rvbuilder(at)sausen.net writes:
--> RV10-List message posted by: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)"
One thing I would like to say about MT @ OSH, it would be nice if they
had US distributors man their booth. I went in there asking questions
and was basically given the model number and shoved out of the booth by
a little annoying German guy. If they didn't have a good history I
would have changed my mind on the spot. Something to take back to them
Jim.
Michael
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick <ricksked(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Aircraft Wiring for Smart People |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Edgerton" <wayne.e(at)grandecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Survey of the day: windshield visors |
I've been in communications with the sales manager from Rosen and he
says they are working on visors for the RV10. He told me they are
struggling with how to attach them to the canopy. I've sent him off a
couple of ideas but he says they have several other projects they are
working on so the RV10 isn't getting top priority right now.
I've had Rosen in my last two planes and I really liked them. Other than
that I may have to fall back on the old stick on the window thingies.
Wayne Edgerton # 40336
Engine work
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bobby J. Hughes" <bhughes(at)qnsi.net> |
| Subject: | Survey of the day: windshield visors |
Maybe the gentleman who is machining the hardware parts for the 10's
could build a visor system. I can't remember his name at the moment. The
hard part would be the mount and rotating joint. Sliding aluminum track
with a locking device should be easy. Visor material should be easy to
come by. I had Rosen in my 172 and they sure make flying safer. I bet
most people would buy them if they where available at a fair price.
Bobby
40116
________________________________
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Wayne
Edgerton
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 6:31 AM
I've been in communications with the sales manager from Rosen and he
says they are working on visors for the RV10. He told me they are
struggling with how to attach them to the canopy. I've sent him off a
couple of ideas but he says they have several other projects they are
working on so the RV10 isn't getting top priority right now.
I've had Rosen in my last two planes and I really liked them. Other than
that I may have to fall back on the old stick on the window thingies.
Wayne Edgerton # 40336
Engine work
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | F-1073 hole too large |
If it was me, I would take the static port to a machinist, and have him make
a new one, to fit the new hole. It may cost you, but a good machinist like
my neighbor can make it to fit any hole and still have the exact pressure,
static source. Actually, it would not take that good a machinist, just
someone with a lathe.
Bob K
Back from OSH and finally cooling down here in Nevada.
At least here it's a dry heat. LOL
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 1:56 PM
John,
For me it would be...How much too big? Your scab patch on the inside my look
sorta OK, but as I understand it the Cleavland ports need to be installed so
the flat portion that extends out through the skin by a certain degree of
thousands of an inch, I don't recall the exact measurment to insure the
ports don't siphon air like a venturi, the small amount of protrusion makes
the air "burble" around the port so you get a true static pressure. You
would not get this by patching from behind then installing through the
patch.
So I would imagine you would have to mount that port in another hole then
patch your skins, which if you scab on a patch behind the existing hole you
could build up with epoxy filler and make a flush repair. Your call.....but
deep down it's more of a cosmetic thing....and if you want to buy new skins.
Rick S.
40185
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Survey of the day: windshield visors |
How about a fixture that would clamp to the top of the centerbrace
support that ties the top of the canopy to the fwd fuse? Should be a
simple clamp-on device with tabs on either side for mounting the visors to.
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse
http://deemsrv10.com/
Wayne Edgerton wrote:
> I've been in communications with the sales manager from Rosen and he
> says they are working on visors for the RV10. He told me they are
> struggling with how to attach them to the canopy. I've sent him off a
> couple of ideas but he says they have several other projects they are
> working on so the RV10 isn't getting top priority right now.
>
> I've had Rosen in my last two planes and I really liked them. Other
> than that I may have to fall back on the old stick on the window thingies.
>
> Wayne Edgerton # 40336
>
> Engine work
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vern W. Smith" <Vern(at)teclabsinc.com> |
| Subject: | To close wings now or wait. |
Michael & Rene'
Thanks for the advice on closing the wings. I'm going to jump in and
close them up now. Should be a breezy compared to dealing with proseal
and riveting on the fuel tanks!
Thanks again,
Vern (#40324 closing wings
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder
(Michael Sausen)
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 12:20 PM
Tough one. Might be better to leave the skins open but you will hate
going back to it later. Pretty mindless riveting in the wings.
Michael
I waited on the bottom wing skins and don't think it helped much. I
have conduit in the wings for wire. I found riveting the bottom skin a
real pain........if I did it again, I would not put it off. Get the
wings done and out of the way...
Rene' Felker
----Original message-----
On a lighter note my fuel tanks and control surfaces are done:) I'm
trying to decide wither to finish the bottom wing skins or jump into the
fuselage and leave the wings open until later for easy of wiring and
autopilot installation. Any thoughts guys?
Vern (#40324)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Gonzalez" <indigoonlatigo(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Survey of the day: windshield visors |
How about a Ram mount with the gooseneck arm and then going to a plastics
shop and getting a piece of colored plastric. This should mount on that
canterbrace.
JG. 409
>From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
>Reply-To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV10-List: Survey of the day: windshield visors
>Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 08:21:26 -0700
>
>
>How about a fixture that would clamp to the top of the centerbrace support
>that ties the top of the canopy to the fwd fuse? Should be a simple
>clamp-on device with tabs on either side for mounting the visors to.
>
>Deems Davis # 406
>Fuse
>http://deemsrv10.com/
>
>Wayne Edgerton wrote:
>
>>I've been in communications with the sales manager from Rosen and he says
>>they are working on visors for the RV10. He told me they are struggling
>>with how to attach them to the canopy. I've sent him off a couple of ideas
>>but he says they have several other projects they are working on so the
>>RV10 isn't getting top priority right now.
>> I've had Rosen in my last two planes and I really liked them. Other than
>>that I may have to fall back on the old stick on the window thingies.
>> Wayne Edgerton # 40336
>> Engine work
>
>
>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Gesele <sgesele(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Insurance and what I had to do |
> From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com>
> Subject: RV10-List: Insurance and what I had to do
> to get coverage.
>
> Once the
> 25 hrs were flown off, I started getting dual in my
> own RV-10 since from
> an insurance perspective, the test pilots were on
> the policy and are the
> Pilot in Command while I'm receiving dual. After 2
> hours of dual with
> my examiner friend, he signed off my high
> performance. Now I was able
> to log PIC for each hour of dual I was receiving in
> my own plane. >
> Thank You
> Ray Doerr
> 40250
>
> N519RV (Flying)
Ray,
Are you aware that you did not need the high
performance endorsement to start logging PIC in the
10? During the first two hours that you referenced,
you could have also logged that as PIC.
A high performance endorsement is required to act as
PIC. Your examiner friend, with the endorsement, was
the acting PIC.
The endorsement is just that, an endorsement and not a
rating. Even without it, you are still rated in the
aircraft (ASEL).
"(e) Logging pilot-in-command flight time.
(1) A sport, recreational, private, or commercial
pilot may log pilot-in-command time only for that
flight time during which that person
(i) Is the sole manipulator of the controls of an
aircraft for which the pilot is rated or has
privileges;"
The regs state "rated OR has privileges". You do not
have 'privileges' without the endorsement, but you are
'rated' (ASEL). The word 'or' indicates that only one
of these conditions must be true for you to log the
time.
Scott Gesele
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert G. Wright" <armywrights(at)adelphia.net> |
Roger, but is the 5.5" the size of the face? I've seen some side views of
EFISs and the subpanel tube is mounted toward the bottom of the screen,
which gives a bunch of room to the ribs.
Rob
#392
_____
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 12:21 AM
5.5" + connectors
http://www.advanced-control-systems.com/Support/AF-3500%20Dimensions.pdf
Rick S.
40185
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | IO-540-C4B5 engine choice |
I'm thinking about an engine for my plane and would appreciate info on the
following:
Has anyone installed an IO-540-C4B5 engine in an RV-10?
Does anyone know of problems using this engine in an RV10?
Kevin
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
I'm
thinking about an engine for my plane and would appreciate info on the
following:
Has anyone
installed an IO-540-C4B5 engine in an RV-10?
Does anyone
know of problems using this engine in an
RV10?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rhonda Bewley" <Rhonda(at)bpaengines.com> |
| Subject: | IO-540-C4B5 engine choice |
Kevin:
The C4B5 is a parallel head IO-540 and is the exact same engine as the
D4A5 except in certified category except that is derated for a different
power setting. It is an excellent choice for your-10.
Regards,
Rhonda Barrett-Bewley
Barrett Precision Engines, Inc.
2870-B N. Sheridan Rd.
Tulsa, OK 74115
(918) 835-1089 phone
(918) 835-1754 fax
www.barrettprecisionengines.com
<http://www.barrettprecisionengines.com/>
________________________________
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Belue, Kevin
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 10:04 AM
I'm thinking about an engine for my plane and would appreciate info on
the following:
Has anyone installed an IO-540-C4B5 engine in an RV-10?
Does anyone know of problems using this engine in an RV10?
Kevin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Schroeder, Bob (Parts Clerk)" <BSchroeder(at)uta.cog.ut.us> |
| Subject: | -10's for sale in quantity, available today |
John, don't get me wrong. I can't afford to do that either. As a matter
of fact I sold my RV10 and got an RV6A solely because I can't afford to
build the 10. Still, I guess that I don't really see the problem. It
seems that if there is going to be a market for our homebuilt aircraft,
(I hope, because I won't be able to fly forever) then it's one of the
things that we have to put up with. Would someone please quote the 51%
rule verbatim, here, as I still am under the belief that ii don't have
to build 51% of an airplane to own and fly it. It only matters for the
repairman's certificate. At least that's my understanding. Bill Cosby in
one of his comedy albums accused his brother of being the "big Jello
sheriff of the house" for pointing out to their father that he had
already had 2 helpings of Jello earlier. From my point of view, people
building planes for hire don't bother me and might possibly make the
market better. I have seen many homebuilt aircraft that I wouldn't to be
anywhere around, and if someone wants to buy an experimental aircraft
then he/she needs to spend some time verifying that the plane that they
are buying is a good one, be it me, that built it for my personal
"education and enjoyment" or from someone that wants to make money on
it. I hope that when it comes time to sell mine I can make some money
(in fifteen years). I'm just saying that putting the spot light on the
situation for "big brother" to stick his nose under the edge of the tent
as it were, is just asking for rules designed for the lowest common
denominator in people have an adverse affect on the rest of us that play
by the rules.
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Lenhardt
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 3:11 PM
The point of the "51% Rule" is to permit you, the amateur, to design and
build your own airplane that you can fly in the National Airspace system
without having to go the "certified" route because it is for your own
education and enjoyment. The intent is not to manufacture airplanes.
That's what we're talking about here.
If you want to build and sell airplanes, become an aircraft manufacturer
like Piper or Cessna and get the your aircraft certified to Part 23
standards.
John
#40262
----- Original Message -----
From: Schroeder, Bob (Parts Clerk)
If on the other hand I just have lots of money and don't care if
the local FBO rakes me over the coals to work on my "experimental
aircraft" then why would anyone care except for the people involved? It
seems to me that some people are upset because someone else can do
something that they cannot do (jealous or some other feeling) so lets
put a spot light on the situation.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Clark" <jclarkmail(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: -10's for sale in quantity, available today |
Bob,
"Big Brother" already is aware of the "bending of the rules".
The discussions here are about insuring that our "hobby" is not crippled by
those who might blatantly violate the rules. If the rules are violated then
either they will get changed or enforcement could end up "over the top".
I don't think anyone is concerned about a builder who builds a plane, flys
it for a few years, decides to sell it and build something different for yet
another REAL educational experience.
Actually I think there is value in "Big Brother" seeing that there are some
(many. many) builders who ARE in the mode of SELF-POLICING.
James
On 8/3/06, Schroeder, Bob (Parts Clerk) wrote:
>
> John, don't get me wrong. I can't afford to do that either. As a matter
> of fact I sold my RV10 and got an RV6A solely because I can't afford to
> build the 10. Still, I guess
>
<<>>
n years). I'm just saying that putting the spot light on the situation for
> "big brother" to stick his nose under the edge of the tent as it were, is
> just asking for rules designed for the lowest common denominator in people
> have an adverse affect on the rest of us that play by the rules.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *John Lenhardt
> *Sent:* Monday, July 31, 2006 3:11 PM
> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: -10's for sale in quantity, available today
>
>
> The point of the "51% Rule" is to permit you, the amateur, to design and
> build your own airplane that you can fly in the National Airspace system
> without having to go the "certified" route because it is for your own
> education and enjoyment. The intent is not to manufacture airplanes.
> That's what we're talking about here.
>
>
> If you want to build and sell airplanes, become an aircraft manufacturer
> like Piper or Cessna and get the your aircraft certified to Part 23
> standards.
>
>
> John
>
> #40262
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> *From:* Schroeder, Bob (Parts Clerk)
>
>
> If on the other hand I just have lots of money and don't care if the local
> FBO rakes me over the coals to work on my "experimental aircraft" then why
> would anyone care except for the people involved? It seems to me that some
> people are upset because someone else can do something that they cannot do
> (jealous or some other feeling) so lets put a spot light on the situation.
>
--
This is an alternate email. Please continue to email me at
james(at)nextupventures.com .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jae Chang" <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com> |
| Subject: | W-1007E extends beyond rear spar flange. pg 15-3 |
I just want to close this thread. I got a response back from Van's. They
said it is not an issue. I could file the bit that over-extends the
flange, if I want to.
I will just continue on and hope for the best, as always.
Jae
Jae,The real problem is not just that the doubler extends beyong the
spar cap, but when they make these parts ALL of the holes are
punched/drilled prior to bending, and when the bends get made wrong,
(which is what is causing the problem) it will shift all of the holes,
some might be tempted to match drill lthe holes into the doubler and
continue, but all of these holes will be misalligned with the skins,
when it come time to put them on, check to make sure this isn't the case
with the parts you get, (I'm a bit surprised to see this problem showing
up in later wing kits).
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse/Finishing/Panel
http://deemsrv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: W-1007E extends beyond rear spar flange. pg 15-3 |
Jae, FWIW check that the distance of the holes in the spar cap from the
edge is the same all of the way along the spar. In the spar I received
they were not, which meant that the holes were not going to align with
the wing skins. Also I had a small gap at the bend between the spar and
the doubler, when I received the new spar there was no gap and the
pieces fit snuggly.
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse/Finishing/Panel
http://deemsrv10.com/
Jae Chang wrote:
>
>I just want to close this thread. I got a response back from Van's. They
>said it is not an issue. I could file the bit that over-extends the
>flange, if I want to.
>
>I will just continue on and hope for the best, as always.
>
>Jae
>
>
>Jae,The real problem is not just that the doubler extends beyong the
>spar cap, but when they make these parts ALL of the holes are
>punched/drilled prior to bending, and when the bends get made wrong,
>(which is what is causing the problem) it will shift all of the holes,
>some might be tempted to match drill lthe holes into the doubler and
>continue, but all of these holes will be misalligned with the skins,
>when it come time to put them on, check to make sure this isn't the case
>
>with the parts you get, (I'm a bit surprised to see this problem showing
>
>up in later wing kits).
>
>Deems Davis # 406
>Fuse/Finishing/Panel
>http://deemsrv10.com/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick <ricksked(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | -10's for sale in quantity, available today |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert G. Wright" <armywrights(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | IO-540-C4B5 engine choice |
Additionally, Certificated airplanes either call for the C4B5 or the D4A5.
The Piper Aztec uses the "C4B5" which is rated for 250 HP at 2575 RPM. The
EXACT SAME engine turning at 2700 RPM gives you 260 HP, and this is the
designation of "D4A5." I just went through this last night with my
overhauler who wrote in my engine logbook .C4B5. As an experimental builder
I just run the engine at 2700 RPM and I'll be operating a D4A5. This is not
overrunning the engine like stroking or high compression pistons does, and
reaching recommended TBO should be a non-issue as long as you take care of
your engine.
you arrive at each derivative starting from an O-540-ALA.
Model
HP
T/O
Fuel
C.R.
DESCRIPTION
Suffix
RPM
IO-540-D4A5
260
2700
100/100LL
8.50:1
Same as O-540-E4A5 but with Bendix fuel injection
-48
O-540-E4A5
260
2700
100/i00LL
8.50:1
Same as -A4D5 except for higher speed and rating
-40
O-540-A4D5
250/235
2575/2400
100/100LL
8.50:1
Same as -A1D5 but with more effective counterweights for use with Hartzell
"compact" propeller
-40
O-540-A1D5
250/235
2575/2400
100/100LL
8.50:1
Same as -A1B5 except for Retard Breaker Magnetos
-40
O-540-A1B5
250/235
2575/2400
100/100LL
8.50:1
Same as -A1A5 except for short propeller governor studs and two impulse
magnetos
-40
O-540-A1A5
250/235
2575/2400
100/100LL
8.50:1
Same as O-540-A1A but one fifth and one sixth order counterweights
-40
O-540-ALA
250/235
2575/2400
100/100LL
8.50:1
Two sixth order counterweights
-40
IO-540-C4B5
250
2575
100/100LL
8.50:1
Same as -C1B5 but with more effective counterweights for use with Hartzell
"compact,, propeller
-48
IO-540-C1B5
250
2575
100/100LL
8.50:1
Same as O-540-A1D5 but with Bendix fuel injector
-48
O-540-A1D5
250/235
2575/2400
100/100LL
8.50:1
Same as -A1B5 except for Retard Breaker Magnetos
-40
O-540-A1B5
250/235
2575/2400
100/100LL
8.50:1
Same as -A1A5 except for short propeller governor studs and two impulse
magnetos
-40
O-540-A1A5
250/235
2575/2400
100/100LL
8.50:1
Same as O-540-A1A but one fifth and one sixth order counterweights
-40
O-540-ALA
250/235
2575/2400
100/100LL
8.50:1
Two sixth order counterweights
-40
Rob Wright
#392
Wings
Picking up engine tomorrow!
_____
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rhonda Bewley
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 10:21 AM
Kevin:
The C4B5 is a parallel head IO-540 and is the exact same engine as the D4A5
except in certified category except that is derated for a different power
setting. It is an excellent choice for your-10.
Regards,
Rhonda Barrett-Bewley
Barrett Precision Engines, Inc.
2870-B N. Sheridan Rd.
Tulsa, OK 74115
(918) 835-1089 phone
(918) 835-1754 fax
www.barrettprecisionengines.com <http://www.barrettprecisionengines.com/>
_____
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Belue, Kevin
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 10:04 AM
I'm thinking about an engine for my plane and would appreciate info on the
following:
Has anyone installed an IO-540-C4B5 engine in an RV-10?
Does anyone know of problems using this engine in an RV10?
Kevin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Daves" <dav1111(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: IO-540-C4B5 engine choice |
N710RV (flying RV-10) has an IO-540-C4B5. It is the same engine that
Van's sales as the D model, with a different data plate. Piper
specified the design specs for their Apace aircraft and Lycoming took
the 260 HP engine and downrated it from 2700 rpm to 2550 and put a C4B5
data plate on it.
How do I know? Both engines have the same part numbers for all the
internal parts.
I bought a core and had my IA overhaul the engine. I run it at 2700 rpm
for the full 260 HP. Works great.
Russ Daves
----- Original Message -----
From: Belue, Kevin
To: 'rv10-list(at)matronics.com'
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 10:03 AM
Subject: RV10-List: IO-540-C4B5 engine choice
I'm thinking about an engine for my plane and would appreciate info on
the following:
Has anyone installed an IO-540-C4B5 engine in an RV-10?
Does anyone know of problems using this engine in an RV10?
Kevin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca> |
Hi
I want to introduce my self to the -10 List.
During an evening discussion last week at KOSH, I was chatting with an
acquaintance about homebuilt and how I want to build *something*
*someday*.
In past years I had looked at some of the plastic designs but I am a bit
wary of putting a lot of time & money into these designs. My
acquaintance
suggested that I look at the RV-10.
To make a long story short, I was quite impressed with the aluminum
design,
match drilled quick build kit and performance specs of the -10. For the
moment, my investment is limited to the info kits sold at the Van booth
at
KOSH. What I am doing is sorting out the logistics of building an a/c.
This
includes finding out what builder support is available locally and
seeing
what sheet metal courses are available at the local trade school. I am
also
researching Canadian building / inspection / certification requirements
etc.
I do have a few questions for the list, questions that may help me
decide if
I want to take Van's $30k demo ride.
* How difficult is it to follow the building instructions?
* How much space is required? My wife has graciously donated 2 of the
3 bays in our garage (provided her car doesn't winter outside). I expect
to
have a 20' x 20' space available. Is this sufficient for all but the
final
assembly?
* The Van info includes a flyer from AIR-CRAFTERS who operate a build
center. They suggest that I can build the -10 tail kit in 10 days at
their
facility after teaching me to do things right. Does anyone have
experience
with this firm? Is this a worthwhile investment?
* What things should a first time builder be wary of?
Cheers
Les Kearney
Alberta, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Window overspray |
I think I was the one, Marcus, who put out that post you're thinking
of. I've now had the occasion on 2 planes, at 2 times, to use
a product called "scratch off".
http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1154658472-328-402&browse=airframe&product=scratch-off
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/cspages/menus/ncs18.php
I even took the time to swing by and thank them again at OSH because
it truly is a fantastic kit. I had overspray and scratching on
an old plane since I bought it, and it cleaned up the windows
great. Then, I got paint overspray under the tape on my -10 and
it took all of that off and polished them up good. You won't
be disappointed if you use as directed. Very nice, and doesn't
really take a lot of work or time. I only used I think the
2 finest grits on the -10, or worst case I used 3 of the 4.
You just use an electric drill and it takes almost no time.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> -----Original Message-----
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Marcus Cooper
> Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 6:39 PM
>
>
> Some time ago there were some great responses on how to remove overspray
> from the windows. At the time I was scoffing the idea and didn't save what
> would now be some extremely valuable information. Any reposting, or at
> least the proper search words (no luck on my part), would be deeply
> appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Marcus
> 40286 - engine running, dangerously close to inspection time! If I can just
> get all the Gucci panels programmed I'll be in business.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <millstees(at)ameritech.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New To The List |
Hi Les:
I am currently building an RV-10. I have completed the tail and wings,
and am just starting on the fuselage. I will attempt to answer your
questions below:
a.. How difficult is it to follow the building instructions? The first
section is very detailed, with indepth explainations of everything.
Later it get much less detailed, and assumes you know the obvious
information. All in all, it is very well written and illustrated.
b.. How much space is required? My wife has graciously donated 2 of
the 3 bays in our garage (provided her car doesn't winter outside). I
expect to have a 20' x 20' space available. Is this sufficient for all
but the final assembly? I have a 3 car garage, and have built the tail
and wings in 1 bay of the garage...I have the same agreement with my
wife, her car is in the garage, and I store the finished wings in the
other bay. I am about to expand into part of the second bay, as the
fuselage grows.
c.. The Van info includes a flyer from AIR-CRAFTERS who operate a
build center. They suggest that I can build the -10 tail kit in 10 days
at their facility after teaching me to do things right. Does anyone have
experience with this firm? Is this a worthwhile investment? I don't
know, however, I have heard good results from other builders. Van's has
a tool box that you can purchase that is very good to practice on, you
do all the different types of riveting. many people, my self included,
just jump right in, and end up screwing-up the vertical stab skins, and
re-doing them.
d.. What things should a first time builder be wary of? Waiting to
order your kit until after the first of the year, when prices go up.
Don't buy anything until you are ready to install, especially
electronics. Its very tempting, but you end up with outdated,
overpriced stuff. Buy the RV tool kit from one of the tool companies,
and a small band saw, and drill press.
Hope this helps..take a good look at Tim Olson's web page, which you can
access through the Van's web site.
Steve Mills
40486 RV-10
Naperville, Illinois 630-308-7476 cell
working on fuselage
----- Original Message -----
From: Les Kearney
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 9:04 PM
Subject: RV10-List: New To The List
Hi
I want to introduce my self to the -10 List.
During an evening discussion last week at KOSH, I was chatting with an
acquaintance about homebuilt and how I want to build *something*
*someday*. In past years I had looked at some of the plastic designs but
I am a bit wary of putting a lot of time & money into these designs. My
acquaintance suggested that I look at the RV-10.
To make a long story short, I was quite impressed with the aluminum
design, match drilled quick build kit and performance specs of the -10.
For the moment, my investment is limited to the info kits sold at the
Van booth at KOSH. What I am doing is sorting out the logistics of
building an a/c. This includes finding out what builder support is
available locally and seeing what sheet metal courses are available at
the local trade school. I am also researching Canadian building /
inspection / certification requirements etc.
I do have a few questions for the list, questions that may help me
decide if I want to take Van's $30k demo ride.
a.. How difficult is it to follow the building instructions?
b.. How much space is required? My wife has graciously donated 2 of
the 3 bays in our garage (provided her car doesn't winter outside). I
expect to have a 20' x 20' space available. Is this sufficient for all
but the final assembly?
c.. The Van info includes a flyer from AIR-CRAFTERS who operate a
build center. They suggest that I can build the -10 tail kit in 10 days
at their facility after teaching me to do things right. Does anyone have
experience with this firm? Is this a worthwhile investment?
d.. What things should a first time builder be wary of?
Cheers
Les Kearney
Alberta, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim McDonald" <jamcd(at)platinum.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: New To The List |
----- Original Message -----
From: Les Kearney
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:04 PM
Subject: RV10-List: New To The List
Hi
I want to introduce my self to the -10 List.
During an evening discussion last week at KOSH, I was chatting with an
acquaintance about homebuilt and how I want to build *something*
*someday*. In past years I had looked at some of the plastic designs but
I am a bit wary of putting a lot of time & money into these designs. My
acquaintance suggested that I look at the RV-10.
To make a long story short, I was quite impressed with the aluminum
design, match drilled quick build kit and performance specs of the -10.
For the moment, my investment is limited to the info kits sold at the
Van booth at KOSH. What I am doing is sorting out the logistics of
building an a/c. This includes finding out what builder support is
available locally and seeing what sheet metal courses are available at
the local trade school. I am also researching Canadian building /
inspection / certification requirements etc.
I do have a few questions for the list, questions that may help me
decide if I want to take Van's $30k demo ride.
a.. How difficult is it to follow the building instructions?
b.. How much space is required? My wife has graciously donated 2 of
the 3 bays in our garage (provided her car doesn't winter outside). I
expect to have a 20' x 20' space available. Is this sufficient for all
but the final assembly?
c.. The Van info includes a flyer from AIR-CRAFTERS who operate a
build center. They suggest that I can build the -10 tail kit in 10 days
at their facility after teaching me to do things right. Does anyone have
experience with this firm? Is this a worthwhile investment?
d.. What things should a first time builder be wary of?
Cheers
Les Kearney
Alberta, Canada
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
08/02/2006
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert G. Wright" <armywrights(at)adelphia.net> |
Part of what Tim Olson meant to me when he said to plan out your costs is
that, for an RV-10, the demo ride is between $90-120k (US). :]]
I've been building in less than a 20x20 workshop. When I got my QB Wings
and Fuse in, I had to store some of the tail sections in my rented hangar at
the airport. When my finishing kit came in I bought some shelves for many
parts, put the carton with the front seats on top of the dresser in the
bedroom, and put the door skins and cowlings in the hangar. It's amazing
how much time you can spend just walking around your large parts in the shop
in order to get a tool. Oh, my windshield and side windows are in the front
hall in the house as well. This HAS to be a family undertaking!
With the level of detail that's written into the plans I recommend as
Rick(?) did that you buy Van's toolbox practice kit, the RV tool kit from
somewhere (Avery, Isham's, Wicks, etc), get lots of insight from the list,
and jump in with both feet. The hardest hole to drill and rivet to set are
the first ones! Boil this statement down to say that if time is on your
side, skip the build center. The tail kit section is where you really lay
your personal skills down and the time invested here will pay dividends in
later subkits. I know others will chime in saying the build centers really
helped bolster their confidence so this obviously is merely from my
perspective. I attended a SportAir workshop on general sheetmetal work
before I started building. Besides some of the info papers they put out I
really think I could have begun construction without the workshop, but only
due to the level of detail in the plans.
Also as a first time builder, the biggest thing I try to be wary of is me.
It's easy to get bogged down on a task or think that there has to be a
"perfect" way to do things. Also, everyone out there in this industry will
try to sell you something that may or may not save money, increase
performance, or lessen your build time. It's up to you to wade through it
and decide what you'll want for your plane, and you just need to be
comfortable with those choices. Once again this very active list will be
more than happy to chime in and give its collective thoughts on anything
you'd like.
Take a trip back to the matronics webpage and learn how to search the RV-10
archive as well as using the "D0 N0T ARCHlVE" string in your emails. There
is SO much material in the archive. Most other questions past that point
will be answered on Tim Olson's webpage www.myrv10.com
<http://www.myrv10.com/> .
Rob Wright
#392
Wings
Pick up engine tomorrow!
_____
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 9:04 PM
Hi
I want to introduce my self to the -10 List.
During an evening discussion last week at KOSH, I was chatting with an
acquaintance about homebuilt and how I want to build *something* *someday*.
In past years I had looked at some of the plastic designs but I am a bit
wary of putting a lot of time & money into these designs. My acquaintance
suggested that I look at the RV-10.
To make a long story short, I was quite impressed with the aluminum design,
match drilled quick build kit and performance specs of the -10. For the
moment, my investment is limited to the info kits sold at the Van booth at
KOSH. What I am doing is sorting out the logistics of building an a/c. This
includes finding out what builder support is available locally and seeing
what sheet metal courses are available at the local trade school. I am also
researching Canadian building / inspection / certification requirements etc.
I do have a few questions for the list, questions that may help me decide if
I want to take Van's $30k demo ride.
* How difficult is it to follow the building instructions?
* How much space is required? My wife has graciously donated 2 of the
3 bays in our garage (provided her car doesn't winter outside). I expect to
have a 20' x 20' space available. Is this sufficient for all but the final
assembly?
* The Van info includes a flyer from AIR-CRAFTERS who operate a build
center. They suggest that I can build the -10 tail kit in 10 days at their
facility after teaching me to do things right. Does anyone have experience
with this firm? Is this a worthwhile investment?
* What things should a first time builder be wary of?
Cheers
Les Kearney
Alberta, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pascal" <pascalreid(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New To The List |
Les;
Not too long ago I was in the same predicament. I haven't started
building yet, but I can tell you what I have discovered.
I've looked at the plans and if you take them and review them a few
times before starting each step than start that step first in your mind
how you'll do it than with the actual pieces you'll find that it is
rather simple, if there is confusion initially you go to someone like
Tim Olson's website http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/index.html and see how
he explains that step.
2 Car garage should be plenty for the majority of the kits
I would suggest you take a Sportair course that will accomplish a couple
of objectives
1) Is Sheet metal something you can see spending 1000 plus hours working
with?
2) Is kit building everything you hoped it is- ie do you understand the
process, "gotchas" that may be encountered, etc
I have also heard there is a company in Oregon where the instructor is
first rate - I don't know enough about this but I believe it maybe
http://www.synergyair.com/
If you are looking to move this project along quickly Aircrafters is a
good solution to get the tail built quickly and learn the foundation as
you mentioned, you'll want to get the QB's as well then.
I gained much from my instructor, Dan Checkoway, in the Sportair course
and highly recommend it.
What things should a first time builder be wary of?
1) 1300-1500 hours spent and maybe even consumed in this project
2) There are costs for tools, kits, insurance, hangar, fuel, and
maintenance in general, all adds up to more than expected initially.
Van's makes it that it's inexpensive for the first kit and the price
doubles than quadriples as you move into the final kits for the
fusellage and finishing kit. This is when the engine and avionics are
being bought so expect that as you move along.
The RV-10 is a sweet flying aircraft. I was fortunate, a builder in
California spent time talking to me and took me for a flight I will
never forget, for his willingness to assist and help me go broke
building this plane. This is a solid group of people. I would suggest
looking for a fellow Canadian builder that will take you for a flight,
if possible, just be prepared to know that you will go into overdrive to
start wanting to build this plane after that experience.
My final advice is search the web for "RV-10", you'll find builders like
Deems and Tim have excellent step by step pictures and descriptions,
this will give you a really good sense of what is involved in building
this plane.
Best of success in your research, and hopeful building. Do let us know
how things work out.
Pascal
----- Original Message -----
From: Les Kearney
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 7:04 PM
Subject: RV10-List: New To The List
Hi
I want to introduce my self to the -10 List.
During an evening discussion last week at KOSH, I was chatting with an
acquaintance about homebuilt and how I want to build *something*
*someday*. In past years I had looked at some of the plastic designs but
I am a bit wary of putting a lot of time & money into these designs. My
acquaintance suggested that I look at the RV-10.
To make a long story short, I was quite impressed with the aluminum
design, match drilled quick build kit and performance specs of the -10.
For the moment, my investment is limited to the info kits sold at the
Van booth at KOSH. What I am doing is sorting out the logistics of
building an a/c. This includes finding out what builder support is
available locally and seeing what sheet metal courses are available at
the local trade school. I am also researching Canadian building /
inspection / certification requirements etc.
I do have a few questions for the list, questions that may help me
decide if I want to take Van's $30k demo ride.
a.. How difficult is it to follow the building instructions?
b.. How much space is required? My wife has graciously donated 2 of
the 3 bays in our garage (provided her car doesn't winter outside). I
expect to have a 20' x 20' space available. Is this sufficient for all
but the final assembly?
c.. The Van info includes a flyer from AIR-CRAFTERS who operate a
build center. They suggest that I can build the -10 tail kit in 10 days
at their facility after teaching me to do things right. Does anyone have
experience with this firm? Is this a worthwhile investment?
d.. What things should a first time builder be wary of?
Cheers
Les Kearney
Alberta, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)adelphia.net> |
I'm not sure if anyone else mentioned this but if you are a new builder,
look for the nearest EAA chapter and introduce yourself. If you're
lucky,
someone else will be building the same plane you are, if not, there is
an
incredible amount of talent and experience available. The guys will bend
over backward to lend a hand, advice, whatever. If you need special
tools, a
bolt or rivet or just a helping hand on occasion it will be there.
Additionally, I have made many new friends as well as built a RV-9A and
halfway finished an RV-10. Oh, and be sure to ask them which primer is
the
best.
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | IO-540-C4B5 engine choice |
Thanks everyone for the engine info.
Kevin
_____
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 5:21 PM
Additionally, Certificated airplanes either call for the C4B5 or the D4A5.
The Piper Aztec uses the "C4B5" which is rated for 250 HP at 2575 RPM. The
EXACT SAME engine turning at 2700 RPM gives you 260 HP, and this is the
designation of "D4A5." I just went through this last night with my
overhauler who wrote in my engine logbook ...C4B5... As an experimental
builder I just run the engine at 2700 RPM and I'll be operating a D4A5.
This is not overrunning the engine like stroking or high compression pistons
does, and reaching recommended TBO should be a non-issue as long as you take
care of your engine.
you arrive at each derivative starting from an O-540-ALA.
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
Thanks
everyone for the engine info.
From:
Robert G. Wright
[mailto:armywrights(at)adelphia.net]
Sent: Thursday, August
03, 2006
5:21 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List:
IO-540-C4B5 engine choice
Additionally, Certificated
airplanes
either call for the C4B5 or the D4A5. The Piper Aztec uses the
"C4B5" which is rated for 250 HP at 2575 RPM. The EXACT SAME
engine turning at 2700 RPM gives you 260 HP, and this is the
designation of
"D4A5." I just went through this last night with my
overhauler who wrote in my engine logbook ...C4B5... As an experimental
builder I just run the engine at 2700 RPM and I'll be operating a
D4A5.
This is not overrunning the engine like stroking or high compression
pistons
does, and reaching recommended TBO should be a non-issue as long as you
take
care of your engine.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Schroeder, Bob (Parts Clerk)" <BSchroeder(at)uta.cog.ut.us> |
| Subject: | -10's for sale in quantity, available today |
Thanks for the insight James. I just hope that this situation doesn't
make things harder for us!
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of James Clark
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 2:32 PM
Bob,
"Big Brother" already is aware of the "bending of the rules".
The discussions here are about insuring that our "hobby" is not crippled
by those who might blatantly violate the rules. If the rules are
violated then either they will get changed or enforcement could end up
"over the top".
I don't think anyone is concerned about a builder who builds a plane,
flys it for a few years, decides to sell it and build something
different for yet another REAL educational experience.
Actually I think there is value in "Big Brother" seeing that there are
some (many. many) builders who ARE in the mode of SELF-POLICING.
James
On 8/3/06, Schroeder, Bob (Parts Clerk)
wrote:
John, don't get me wrong. I can't afford to do that either. As a matter
of fact I sold my RV10 and got an RV6A solely because I can't afford to
build the 10. Still, I guess
<<>>
n years). I'm just saying that putting the spot light on the
situation for "big brother" to stick his nose under the edge of the tent
as it were, is just asking for rules designed for the lowest common
denominator in people have an adverse affect on the rest of us that play
by the rules.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Lenhardt
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 3:11 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: -10's for sale in quantity, available
today
The point of the "51% Rule" is to permit you, the amateur, to
design and build your own airplane that you can fly in the National
Airspace system without having to go the "certified" route because it is
for your own education and enjoyment. The intent is not to manufacture
airplanes. That's what we're talking about here.
If you want to build and sell airplanes, become an aircraft
manufacturer like Piper or Cessna and get the your aircraft certified to
Part 23 standards.
John
#40262
----- Original Message -----
From: Schroeder, Bob (Parts Clerk)
If on the other hand I just have lots of money and don't care if
the local FBO rakes me over the coals to work on my "experimental
aircraft" then why would anyone care except for the people involved? It
seems to me that some people are upset because someone else can do
something that they cannot do (jealous or some other feeling) so lets
put a spot light on the situation.
--
This is an alternate email. Please continue to email me at
james(at)nextupventures.com .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "W. Curtis" <wcurtis(at)core.com> |
| Subject: | Overhead Console |
When I spoke to Debbie Dewey at OSH regarding her spectacular RV-10, I asked her about the overhead console. She mentioned she purchased it from eBay for about $50 and it was the overhead console for the Chevy S-10 Blazer. A search of eBay motors for "overhead console blazer" will show many for sale averaging $50. This adds such a finished look to the RV-10 I had to have one. The following link is from Deems site of Debbie's RV10. http://www.deemsrv10.com/album/OSHKOSH%202006/slides/DSC03080.JPG
Also, if anyone wants to bid on this one, please do so as I have already won one on another auction and are currently the high bidder on this one. Wanted to make sure I got one. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=009&item=1!
90014870966&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEBI%3AIT&rd=1
William Curtis
SB Fuselage - 40237
http://nerv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Overhead Console |
DON'T ANYBODY BID ON THIS (I already did, ;-) )
THANKS BILL!
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse/Finishing/Panel
http://deemsrv10.com/
W. Curtis wrote:
> When I spoke to Debbie Dewey at OSH regarding her spectacular RV-10, I
> asked her about the overhead console. She mentioned she purchased it
> from eBay for about $50 and it was the overhead console for the Chevy
> S-10 Blazer. A search of eBay motors for "overhead console blazer"
> will show many for sale averaging $50. This adds such a finished look
> to the RV-10 I had to have one. The following link is from Deems site
> of Debbie's RV10.
> http://www.deemsrv10.com/album/OSHKOSH%202006/slides/DSC03080.JPG
>
> Also, if anyone wants to bid on this one, please do so as I have
> already won one on another auction and are currently the high bidder
> on this one. Wanted to make sure I got one.
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=009&item=190014870966&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEBI%3AIT&rd=1
> <http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=009&item=190014870966&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEBI%3AIT&rd=1>
>
>
> William Curtis
> SB Fuselage - 40237
> http://nerv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Douglas" <bsponcil(at)belinblank.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Overhead Console |
A friend of mine used the same blazer overhead console in his Glasair
III. He got it from the local junk yard for $30 so that may be another
option besides eBay.
-Brian
#40497
N211BD
Iowa City, IA
----- Original Message -----
From: W. Curtis
To: RV10-List(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 8:53 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Overhead Console
When I spoke to Debbie Dewey at OSH regarding her spectacular RV-10, I
asked her about the overhead console. She mentioned she purchased it
from eBay for about $50 and it was the overhead console for the Chevy
S-10 Blazer. A search of eBay motors for "overhead console blazer" will
show many for sale averaging $50. This adds such a finished look to the
RV-10 I had to have one. The following link is from Deems site of
Debbie's RV10.
http://www.deemsrv10.com/album/OSHKOSH%202006/slides/DSC03080.JPG
Also, if anyone wants to bid on this one, please do so as I have
already won one on another auction and are currently the high bidder on
this one. Wanted to make sure I got one.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=009&item=
190014870966&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEBI%3AIT&rd=1
William Curtis
SB Fuselage - 40237
http://nerv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
| Subject: | Overhead Console |
Hopefully, Tony is monitoring this, cause there are sure a lot available
overhead consoles at a reasonable price. Debbie, your quality was
beyond comment. Beautiful aircraft and I was hurt not to see you taking
home an award. It's a winner in my book.
Watch S-10 Blazers jump on the stolen auto list as the 10 builders
follow Deems purchase and bypass Ebay.
John Cox
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 7:11 AM
DON'T ANYBODY BID ON THIS (I already did, ;-) )
THANKS BILL!
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse/Finishing/Panel
http://deemsrv10.com/
W. Curtis wrote:
> When I spoke to Debbie Dewey at OSH regarding her spectacular RV-10, I
> asked her about the overhead console. She mentioned she purchased it
> from eBay for about $50 and it was the overhead console for the Chevy
> S-10 Blazer. A search of eBay motors for "overhead console blazer"
> will show many for sale averaging $50. This adds such a finished look
> to the RV-10 I had to have one. The following link is from Deems site
> of Debbie's RV10.
> http://www.deemsrv10.com/album/OSHKOSH%202006/slides/DSC03080.JPG
>
> Also, if anyone wants to bid on this one, please do so as I have
> already won one on another auction and are currently the high bidder
> on this one. Wanted to make sure I got one.
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=009&item=190
014870966&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEBI%3AIT&rd=1
>
<http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=009&item=19
0014870966&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEBI%3AIT&rd=1>
>
>
> William Curtis
> SB Fuselage - 40237
> http://nerv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick <ricksked(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New To The List |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick <ricksked(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: I'm a new RV10 builder |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick <ricksked(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Overhead Console |
I have Tony's contact info, I'm having him work up my fiberglass panel/console
and overhead. He has some pretty trick window trim rings too. I'll post to Tim's
site if he wants too. The photos are too big for the list.
Rick S.
40185
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
| Subject: | Overhead Console |
If you send a CDROM to Tim with the pictures, I will reimburse you for
the shipping expense.
John Cox
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 9:37 AM
I have Tony's contact info, I'm having him work up my fiberglass
panel/console and overhead. He has some pretty trick window trim rings
too. I'll post to Tim's site if he wants too. The photos are too big for
the list.
Rick S.
40185
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy DeBauw" <Randy(at)abros.com> |
| Subject: | Overhead Console |
________________________________
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of W. Curtis
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 6:54 AM
When I spoke to Debbie Dewey at OSH regarding her spectacular RV-10, I
asked her about the overhead console. She mentioned she purchased it
from eBay for about $50 and it was the overhead console for the Chevy
S-10 Blazer. A search of eBay motors for "overhead console blazer" will
show many for sale averaging $50. This adds such a finished look to the
RV-10 I had to have one. The following link is from Deems site of
Debbie's RV10.
http://www.deemsrv10.com/album/OSHKOSH%202006/slides/DSC03080.JPG
Also, if anyone wants to bid on this one, please do so as I have already
won one on another auction and are currently the high bidder on this
one. Wanted to make sure I got one.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=009&item=
190
014870966&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEBI%3AIT&rd=1
William Curtis
SB Fuselage - 40237
http://nerv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jdalton77" <jdalton77(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New To The List |
Welcome! JUST DO IT! That's what I did - and I'm into the fuselage now
and having a ball.
a.. How difficult is it to follow the building instructions?
b.. EASY! I'm not too mechanical and am having no problem.
There are also tons of websites that can help you if you get stuck.
c.. How much space is required? My wife has graciously donated 2 of
the 3 bays in our garage (provided her car doesn't winter outside). I
expect to have a 20' x 20' space available. Is this sufficient for all
but the final assembly?
d.. I'm doing mine in a 24x32' garage. I won't be able to put
the wings on here. That'll have to happen in the hangar. I'm still
debating if I'm going to paint it here or not. I am priming it in the
garage though.
e.. The Van info includes a flyer from AIR-CRAFTERS who operate a
build center. They suggest that I can build the -10 tail kit in 10 days
at their facility after teaching me to do things right. Does anyone have
experience with this firm? Is this a worthwhile investment?
f.. I chose to build at home and completed the tail very quickly
on my own. I know some people love the build center, but I think I
would have missed out on a lot of interesting building if I had gone
there.
g.. What things should a first time builder be wary of?
h.. You'll need lots of time, lot's of tools, and a very
understanding family to get this done. You can get a lot of tools cheap
at Harbor Freight, but some of them you'll need the real thing and they
aint cheap.
BY THE WAY, IT'S A $40,000 test ride and that's before the engine and
avionics (includes $5k in stuff you'll need just to put the tail
together . . .
a..
b.. ----- Original Message -----
From: Les Kearney
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 10:04 PM
Subject: RV10-List: New To The List
Hi
I want to introduce my self to the -10 List.
During an evening discussion last week at KOSH, I was chatting with an
acquaintance about homebuilt and how I want to build *something*
*someday*. In past years I had looked at some of the plastic designs but
I am a bit wary of putting a lot of time & money into these designs. My
acquaintance suggested that I look at the RV-10.
To make a long story short, I was quite impressed with the aluminum
design, match drilled quick build kit and performance specs of the -10.
For the moment, my investment is limited to the info kits sold at the
Van booth at KOSH. What I am doing is sorting out the logistics of
building an a/c. This includes finding out what builder support is
available locally and seeing what sheet metal courses are available at
the local trade school. I am also researching Canadian building /
inspection / certification requirements etc.
I do have a few questions for the list, questions that may help me
decide if I want to take Van's $30k demo ride.
a.. How difficult is it to follow the building instructions?
b.. How much space is required? My wife has graciously donated 2 of
the 3 bays in our garage (provided her car doesn't winter outside). I
expect to have a 20' x 20' space available. Is this sufficient for all
but the final assembly?
c.. The Van info includes a flyer from AIR-CRAFTERS who operate a
build center. They suggest that I can build the -10 tail kit in 10 days
at their facility after teaching me to do things right. Does anyone have
experience with this firm? Is this a worthwhile investment?
d.. What things should a first time builder be wary of?
Cheers
Les Kearney
Alberta, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jae Chang" <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com> |
| Subject: | Overhead Console |
Does anyone else find it ironic, that we are all oogling over a $50 6
year old USED car part, to put into our brand new $100,000+ airplanes?!
Jae
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I'm a new RV10 builder |
Bill, Alexander is a great experience and there is no better way to jump into the
project than with a little guidance. Jacob is very knowledgeable and great
to work with, If you remember tell him Eric and Jenna say hello. I went through
there the end of February. Best money that I have spent in a long time, with
the exception of buying the kit itself of course. They keep you pointed in the
right direction and help you develop proper work practices. The won't do the
build for you...which is a good thing...what they do is build your experience
and confidence, and do some of the monotonous work, i.e. deburring, some match
drilling, and priming. When you leave the project won't seem as daunting. Be
prepared for some LONG days, but you will hardly notice the time fly by. Let
us know how it goes for you down there. You will find this list to be a great
resource for questions and plenty of opinions and good ideas. we are fortunate
to have several builders that are flying that are still active on the board and
are more than willing to assist others. To me that says alot about the people
in our ever growing community. Welcome and enjoy the build.
Eric Kallio
518 awaiting SB wings
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=52338#52338
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
| Subject: | Overhead Console |
Jae, to place it into perspective you need to grasp the price of Tony's
if you don't oogle one quickly.
John
________________________________
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jae Chang
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 10:46 AM
Does anyone else find it ironic, that we are all oogling over a $50 6
year old USED car part, to put into our brand new $100,000+ airplanes?!
Jae
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John N. Strain II" <aircarepros(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Overhead Console |
Not to through a wrench in the hype, but if you are wanting air conditioning or
even ventilation that far forward in the cabin, the chevy's overhead doesn't
lend itself very well to adaptation. No automotive does however, so its back
to custom laid fiberglass and although Tony's price maybe high, it does allow
for excellent ventilation in the cabin space and looks very prestigious as it
does it. Other alternatives are in development also and will be out by mid to
late Sept.
Hopefully, Tony is monitoring this, cause there are sure a lot available
overhead consoles at a reasonable price. Debbie, your quality was
beyond comment. Beautiful aircraft and I was hurt not to see you taking
home an award. It's a winner in my book.
Watch S-10 Blazers jump on the stolen auto list as the 10 builders
follow Deems purchase and bypass Ebay.
John Cox
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 7:11 AM
DON'T ANYBODY BID ON THIS (I already did, ;-) )
THANKS BILL!
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse/Finishing/Panel
http://deemsrv10.com/
W. Curtis wrote:
> When I spoke to Debbie Dewey at OSH regarding her spectacular RV-10, I
> asked her about the overhead console. She mentioned she purchased it
> from eBay for about $50 and it was the overhead console for the Chevy
> S-10 Blazer. A search of eBay motors for "overhead console blazer"
> will show many for sale averaging $50. This adds such a finished look
> to the RV-10 I had to have one. The following link is from Deems site
> of Debbie's RV10.
> http://www.deemsrv10.com/album/OSHKOSH%202006/slides/DSC03080.JPG
>
> Also, if anyone wants to bid on this one, please do so as I have
> already won one on another auction and are currently the high bidder
> on this one. Wanted to make sure I got one.
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=009&item=190
014870966&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEBI%3AIT&rd=1
>
0014870966&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEBI%3AIT&rd=1>
>
>
> William Curtis
> SB Fuselage - 40237
> http://nerv10.com/
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | Kitplanes article on the Lyc 390X and BPE |
Everyone knows that I'm a proponent of Barrett Precision Engines and I
think they do great work but there is an article in this months
Kitplanes that gives some good information on BPE and why they would
make a good choice for anyone that is looking for an engine.
I am in no way affiliated with them and have received no kickbacks
(other than a beer Allen bought me at Airventure) nor did I receive any
breaks for having my engine on display at OSH. I am simply very
impressed with their customer service and ability to be straight
shooters when it comes to questions on their engines. Ask Allen what he
thinks about me putting dual LSE III ignitions on sometime. :-)
If someone would like a copy of the article, email me offline and I'll
shoot you a copy.
Michael Sausen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New To The List |
I went to the quick build tail class at Alexender Tech center. It was a
great learning experience and with their assistance I completed the Tail
and Empennage in 2 weeks. You can see photos of my build here
<http://lrosen.nerv10.com/Construct/Log/Emp/Alexander/index.html>
Larry Rosen
#356
>
> * The Van info includes a flyer from AIR-CRAFTERS who operate a
> build center. They suggest that I can build the -10 tail kit in
> 10 days at their facility after teaching me to do things right.
> Does anyone have experience with this firm? Is this a
> worthwhile investment?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Ritter" <mritter509(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Kitplanes article on the Lyc 390X and BPE |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Daves" <dav1111(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: MT 3 blade prop cowl mod, was MT at OSH |
I also did a modification of my lower cowl for my 3 blade MT Prop. Hope
the picture comes through, if not I am also posting on Doug Reeves Web
Site under the RV-10 section.
I took a piece of fiberglass I had trimmed off the door window and made
a replacement piece for the lower cowl cut out. The trimmed piece had a
slight curve to it so I designed the cover to slide up under the front
of the cowl. After I installed the piano hinges on both sides I then
installed fiberglass over the part that slide under the cowl to bring
the finished piece out level with the front end. I can remove one piano
hinge safety screw, slide out the piano hinge pin on one side and flip
the cover back up inside and then remove the lower cowl. Works like a
dream and you can make the cut out as far forward as you desire. Also
no drag created because the mod lays flush with the bottom of the cowl.
Russ Daves
N710RV Flying
N65RV (RV-6A Sold)
----- Original Message -----
From: RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 11:33 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: MT at OSH
Jim Erslick has a neat little mod for this problem. For those of you
that don't know, it was Jim and Debbie that built her -10 together. Jim
cut a removable panel out of the scoop to allow the cowl to drop lower
and aid in getting it past the 3blade prop. He has started building
another -10 for himself and is looking at just making the entire scoop
removable. I'm not sure what my options will be yet on the James cowl.
Michael
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <gorejr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Kitplanes article on the Lyc 390X and BPE |
I just ordered a IO540 for my RV-10 at Barrets at Oskosh. I would like to read
the article if possible. Thanks Jim, Michael your engine looked great!
>
> From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
> Date: 2006/08/05 Sat AM 11:02:46 EDT
> To:
> Subject: RV10-List: Kitplanes article on the Lyc 390X and BPE
>
> Everyone knows that I'm a proponent of Barrett Precision Engines and I
> think they do great work but there is an article in this months
> Kitplanes that gives some good information on BPE and why they would
> make a good choice for anyone that is looking for an engine.
>
> I am in no way affiliated with them and have received no kickbacks
> (other than a beer Allen bought me at Airventure) nor did I receive any
> breaks for having my engine on display at OSH. I am simply very
> impressed with their customer service and ability to be straight
> shooters when it comes to questions on their engines. Ask Allen what he
> thinks about me putting dual LSE III ignitions on sometime. :-)
>
> If someone would like a copy of the article, email me offline and I'll
> shoot you a copy.
>
> Michael Sausen
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Marc Cook <marc(at)kitplanes.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Kitplanes article on the Lyc 390X and BPE |
Bart does great work.
What do you mean by "kick backs"?
On Aug 5, 2006, at 2:43 PM, Mark Ritter wrote:
> DITTO for Bart at Aero Sport. Great reputation and good folks to
> do business with. No kick backs either.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
| Subject: | Overhead Console |
John, if I understand the problem which is left undeclared. It is the
volume of air and the flow rate capable under the stock GMC component as
mounted to a VANS canopy. Tony's allows more volume and flow rate with
better static pressure results. Given the poor finish work of the M & T
composite cowl, this dilemma can be effected by a primary adapter
(builder created) between the VANS composite and the GMC quality looking
finish piece. Now for those who chose not to go with conditioned air,
they may already be home free without the intermediary adapter. Did I
miss why people should through their money at Tony.
Just posting what might be a cost effective solution for the budget
minded.
John C
________________________________
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John N.
Strain II
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 5:16 PM
Not to through a wrench in the hype, but if you are wanting air
conditioning or even ventilation that far forward in the cabin, the
chevy's overhead doesn't lend itself very well to adaptation. No
automotive does however, so its back to custom laid fiberglass and
although Tony's price maybe high, it does allow for excellent
ventilation in the cabin space and looks very prestigious as it does it.
Other alternatives are in development also and will be out by mid to
late Sept.
"John W. Cox" wrote:
Hopefully, Tony is monitoring this, cause there are sure a lot available
overhead consoles at a reasonable price. Debbie, your quality was
beyond comment. Beautiful aircraft and I was hurt not to see you taking
home an award. It's a winner in my book.
Watch S-10 Blazers jump on the stolen auto list as the 10 builders
follow Deems purchase and bypass Ebay.
John Cox
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 7:11 AM
DON'T ANYBODY BID ON THIS (I already did, ;-) )
THANKS BILL!
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse/Finishing/Panel
http://deemsrv10.com/
W. Curtis wrote:
> When I spoke to Debbie Dewey at OSH regarding her spectacular RV-10, I
> asked her about the overhead console. She mentioned she purchased it
> from eBay for about $50 and it was the overhead console for the Chevy
> S-10 Blazer. A search of eBay motors for "overhead console blazer"
> will show many for sale averaging $50. This adds such a finished look
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
| Subject: | Kitplanes article on the Lyc 390X and BPE |
I have no horse in this race either but friends I respect have all
seconded the choice of Barrett. For those inclined towards LOP
operations, you will find GAMI is supportive as well. That was a great
article in Kitplanes.
John Cox
________________________________
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder
(Michael Sausen)
Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 8:03 AM
Everyone knows that I'm a proponent of Barrett Precision Engines and I
think they do great work but there is an article in this months
Kitplanes that gives some good information on BPE and why they would
make a good choice for anyone that is looking for an engine.
I am in no way affiliated with them and have received no kickbacks
(other than a beer Allen bought me at Airventure) nor did I receive any
breaks for having my engine on display at OSH. I am simply very
impressed with their customer service and ability to be straight
shooters when it comes to questions on their engines. Ask Allen what he
thinks about me putting dual LSE III ignitions on sometime. :-)
If someone would like a copy of the article, email me offline and I'll
shoot you a copy.
Michael Sausen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | Kitplanes article on the Lyc 390X and BPE |
Good point! I meant as in no under the table transfer of funds for my
endorsement. :)
Michael
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Marc Cook
Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2006 11:49 AM
Bart does great work.
What do you mean by "kick backs"?
On Aug 5, 2006, at 2:43 PM, Mark Ritter wrote:
DITTO for Bart at Aero Sport. Great reputation and good folks to do
business with. No kick backs either.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Marc Cook <marc(at)kitplanes.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Kitplanes article on the Lyc 390X and BPE |
Got it. The crew at Barrett was great to work with, and fed me as
much thick, black coffee as I could stand. That's the extent of my
kickback!
On Aug 6, 2006, at 10:15 AM, RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote:
> Good point! I meant as in no under the table transfer of funds for
> my endorsement. :)
>
>
> Michael
>
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-
> server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Marc Cook
> Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2006 11:49 AM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Kitplanes article on the Lyc 390X and BPE
>
>
> Bart does great work.
>
>
> What do you mean by "kick backs"?
>
>
> On Aug 5, 2006, at 2:43 PM, Mark Ritter wrote:
>
>
> DITTO for Bart at Aero Sport. Great reputation and good folks to
> do business with. No kick backs either.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
| Subject: | Kitplanes article on the Lyc 390X and BPE |
One of the point (or points) that may be of value considering is the
tolerance in Gram/Inches of each component and an actual hard copy Dyno
run upon complete assembly. The playing field can get pretty level when
you add roller tappets, hybrid electronic ignition, an improved fuel
servo, light weight starter/alternator, tuned custom welded exhaust
headers, choice of epoxy enamel color, 1 gram/inch balance and a true
Dyno Printout of your "pride and joy" once the dollars begin to flow.
Track record helps too.
John Cox
________________________________
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Marc Cook
Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2006 11:26 AM
Got it. The crew at Barrett was great to work with, and fed me as much
thick, black coffee as I could stand. That's the extent of my kickback!
On Aug 6, 2006, at 10:15 AM, RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote:
owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Marc Cook
Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2006 11:49 AM
Bart does great work.
What do you mean by "kick backs"?
On Aug 5, 2006, at 2:43 PM, Mark Ritter wrote:
DITTO for Bart at Aero Sport. Great reputation and good folks to do
business with. No kick backs either.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris Johnston" <CJohnston(at)popsound.com> |
| Subject: | F-1070 side fuse skin bending from factory? |
hey all -
after my super awesome fuse skin bending session, i'm ready to order a
new skin. i followed all the instructions, had a woodworking buddy
create perfect blocks per the plans out of nice hardwood, and after
getting a nice looking bend, i noticed that the skin was cracked by the
sharp bend. after searching the archives, i saw that vans was talking
about creating those bends at the factory. anyone know if that is
happening? if it is, is it also happening for the forward fuse skins
F-1069? i'm just wondering if i should keep at my bending efforts, or
move on and order (hopefully) pre-bent skins. someone give me good
news...
cj
#40410
fuse
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | New Incoming Message Size Limit Implemented... |
Dear Listers,
Due to a number of requests to limit the size of incoming posts to the Lists because
of the recently added enclosure feature, I have add a new filter that will
limit the total size of any given message posted to the List. I have initially
set the limit to 2MB
and we'll see how everyone likes that.
If a member attempts to post a message that is greater than the set limit, they
will receive an email back indicating that their message wasn't posted to the
List and why. Also included in the message will be the current size limit and
how large their message
was.
Some might say that 2MB is still too large, but its a place to start...
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John N. Strain II" <aircarepros(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Overhead Console |
John,
I missed some of the earlier chat about why the GMC overhead (except for the
fact that Jim and Debbie put it in Debbie's plane), so I may have missed something
vital. Those not concerned with conditioned air have absolutely no issue
as far as I can tell with the GMC overhead. All I'm saying is for any affording
AC, they will want to maximize its' capability. The GMC overhead requires
significant alteration to be able to be used as a very limited airflow device,
as well as will also require so much transitional fiberglass work that it may
become less than cost effective. I am by no means pushing Tony's product as
the only option, just a very nice, high priced one. There will be other overheads
with even more effectiveness and much better priced than Tony's coming out
very soon (not yet having permission to release the specific details). The
option of someone laying up there own complete panel is still not that expensive
(just time consuming) and could provide a more
finished look in the cabin than a bolt on component.
Then there's my own concerns which are only meant to amuze. I have a 96 suburban
and I don't want to see my insurance rates climbing through the roof because
a bunch of RV guys create a new base for the chop shop marketplace.
Thanks John for clarifying. I will become better at making myself clear and
will never intend to offend without clearly stating so. Keep on building.
John S.
"John W. Cox" wrote:
John, if I understand the problem which is left undeclared. It
is the volume of air and the flow rate capable under the stock GMC component
as mounted to a VANS canopy. Tonys allows more volume and flow rate with better
static pressure results. Given the poor finish work of the M & T composite
cowl, this dilemma can be effected by a primary adapter (builder created) between
the VANS composite and the GMC quality looking finish piece. Now for those
who chose not to go with conditioned air, they may already be home free without
the intermediary adapter. Did I miss why people should through their money
at Tony.
Just posting what might be a cost effective solution for the budget minded.
John C
---------------------------------
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John N. Strain II
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 5:16 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Overhead Console
Not to through a wrench in the hype, but if you are wanting air conditioning
or even ventilation that far forward in the cabin, the chevy's overhead doesn't
lend itself very well to adaptation. No automotive does however, so its back
to custom laid fiberglass and although Tony's price maybe high, it does allow
for excellent ventilation in the cabin space and looks very prestigious as it
does it. Other alternatives are in development also and will be out by mid
to late Sept.
"John W. Cox" wrote:
Hopefully, Tony is monitoring this, cause there are sure a lot available
overhead consoles at a reasonable price. Debbie, your quality was
beyond comment. Beautiful aircraft and I was hurt not to see you taking
home an award. It's a winner in my book.
Watch S-10 Blazers jump on the stolen auto list as the 10 builders
follow Deems purchase and bypass Ebay.
John Cox
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 7:11 AM
DON'T ANYBODY BID ON THIS (I already did, ;-) )
THANKS BILL!
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse/Finishing/Panel
http://deemsrv10.com/
W. Curtis wrote:
> When I spoke to Debbie Dewey at OSH regarding her spectacular RV-10, I
> asked her about the overhead console. She mentioned she purchased it
> from eBay for about $50 and it was the overhead console for the Chevy
> S-10 Blazer. A search of eBay motors for "overhead console blazer"
> will show many for sale averaging $50. This adds such a finished look
>
---------------------------------
Groups are talking. We´re listening. Check out the handy changes to Yahoo!
Groups.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Overhead Console |
| From: | "Tim Dawson-Townsend" <Tdawson(at)avidyne.com> |
I don't think any of the Chevy console users or future users intended to
use it for ventilation purposes. Just a nice place for some map lights,
switches, sunglasses, and a way to hide/protect the cable connections to
your top-mounted TAS antenna.
TDT
40025
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John N.
Strain II
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 12:55 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Overhead Console
John,
I missed some of the earlier chat about why the GMC overhead (except for
the fact that Jim and Debbie put it in Debbie's plane), so I may have
missed something vital. Those not concerned with conditioned air have
absolutely no issue as far as I can tell with the GMC overhead. All I'm
saying is for any affording AC, they will want to maximize its'
capability. The GMC overhead requires significant alteration to be able
to be used as a very limited airflow device, as well as will also
require so much transitional fiberglass work that it may become less
than cost effective. I am by no means pushing Tony's product as the
only option, just a very nice, high priced one. There will be other
overheads with even more effectiveness and much better priced than
Tony's coming out very soon (not yet having permission to release the
specific details). The option of someone laying up there own complete
panel is still not that expensive (just time consuming) and could
provide a more finished look in the cabin than a bolt on component.
Then there's my own concerns which are only meant to amuze. I have a 96
suburban and I don't want to see my insurance rates climbing through the
roof because a bunch of RV guys create a new base for the chop shop
marketplace.
Thanks John for clarifying. I will become better at making myself clear
and will never intend to offend without clearly stating so. Keep on
building.
John S.
"John W. Cox" wrote:
John, if I understand the problem which is left undeclared. It is the
volume of air and the flow rate capable under the stock GMC component as
mounted to a VANS canopy. Tony's allows more volume and flow rate with
better static pressure results. Given the poor finish work of the M & T
composite cowl, this dilemma can be effected by a primary adapter
(builder created) between the VANS composite and the GMC quality looking
finish piece. Now for those who chose not to go with conditioned air,
they may already be home free without the intermediary adapter. Did I
miss why people should through their money at Tony.
Just posting what might be a cost effective solution for the budget
minded.
John C
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John N.
Strain II
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 5:16 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Overhead Console
Not to through a wrench in the hype, but if you are wanting air
conditioning or even ventilation that far forward in the cabin, the
chevy's overhead doesn't lend itself very well to adaptation. No
automotive does however, so its back to custom laid fiberglass and
although Tony's price maybe high, it does allow for excellent
ventilation in the cabin space and looks very prestigious as it does it.
Other alternatives are in development also and will be out by mid to
late Sept.
"John W. Cox" wrote:
Hopefully, Tony is monitoring this, cause there are sure a lot
available
overhead consoles at a reasonable price. Debbie, your quality was
beyond comment. Beautiful aircraft and I was hurt not to see you taking
home an award. It's a winner in my book.
Watch S-10 Blazers jump on the stolen auto list as the 10 builders
follow Deems purchase and bypass Ebay.
John Cox
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 7:11 AM
DON'T ANYBODY BID ON THIS (I already did, ;-) )
THANKS BILL!
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse/Finishing/Panel
http://deemsrv10.com/
W. Curtis wrote:
> When I spoke to Debbie Dewey at OSH regarding her spectacular RV-10,
I
> asked her about the overhead console. She mentioned she purchased it
> from eBay for about $50 and it was the overhead console for the Chevy
> S-10 Blazer. A search of eBay motors for "overhead console blazer"
> will show many for sale averaging $50. This adds such a finished look
>
________________________________
Groups are talking. We=B4re listening. Check out the handy changes to
Yahoo! Groups.
<http://pa.yahoo.com/*http:/us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=41144/*http:/groups.yah
oo.com/local/newemail.html>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | F-1070 side fuse skin bending from factory? |
| From: | "Chris Johnston" <CJohnston(at)popsound.com> |
I guess I'll put this another way - no response yet... can anyone who
has received their fuse kit recently (past couple months) check and see
if the F1070 L/R skins are pre-bent? I just talked with vans, and the
lady at the order counter didn't know.
Thanks!
cj
#40410
fuse
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris
Johnston
Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2006 1:26 PM
Subject: RV10-List: F-1070 side fuse skin bending from factory?
hey all -
after my super awesome fuse skin bending session, i'm ready to order a
new skin. i followed all the instructions, had a woodworking buddy
create perfect blocks per the plans out of nice hardwood, and after
getting a nice looking bend, i noticed that the skin was cracked by the
sharp bend. after searching the archives, i saw that vans was talking
about creating those bends at the factory. anyone know if that is
happening? if it is, is it also happening for the forward fuse skins
F-1069? i'm just wondering if i should keep at my bending efforts, or
move on and order (hopefully) pre-bent skins. someone give me good
news...
cj
#40410
fuse
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rleffler(at)rrohio.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Overhead Console |
As a newbie on the list, not knowing "Tony", can somebody point me to where I can
learn more about his console and products.
thanks,
bob
>
> From: "John N. Strain II" <aircarepros(at)yahoo.com>
> Date: 2006/08/07 Mon PM 12:55:15 EDT
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Overhead Console
>
> John,
>
> I missed some of the earlier chat about why the GMC overhead (except for the
fact that Jim and Debbie put it in Debbie's plane), so I may have missed something
vital. Those not concerned with conditioned air have absolutely no issue
as far as I can tell with the GMC overhead. All I'm saying is for any affording
AC, they will want to maximize its' capability. The GMC overhead requires
significant alteration to be able to be used as a very limited airflow device,
as well as will also require so much transitional fiberglass work that it
may become less than cost effective. I am by no means pushing Tony's product
as the only option, just a very nice, high priced one. There will be other overheads
with even more effectiveness and much better priced than Tony's coming
out very soon (not yet having permission to release the specific details). The
option of someone laying up there own complete panel is still not that expensive
(just time consuming) and could provide a more
> finished look in the cabin than a bolt on component.
> Then there's my own concerns which are only meant to amuze. I have a 96 suburban
and I don't want to see my insurance rates climbing through the roof because
a bunch of RV guys create a new base for the chop shop marketplace.
>
> Thanks John for clarifying. I will become better at making myself clear and
will never intend to offend without clearly stating so. Keep on building.
>
> John S.
>
> "John W. Cox" wrote:
> John, if I understand the problem which is left undeclared.
It is the volume of air and the flow rate capable under the stock GMC component
as mounted to a VANS canopy. Tonys allows more volume and flow rate with better
static pressure results. Given the poor finish work of the M & T composite
cowl, this dilemma can be effected by a primary adapter (builder created) between
the VANS composite and the GMC quality looking finish piece. Now for those
who chose not to go with conditioned air, they may already be home free without
the intermediary adapter. Did I miss why people should through their money
at Tony.
>
> Just posting what might be a cost effective solution for the budget minded.
>
> John C
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John N. Strain II
> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 5:16 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Overhead Console
>
>
> Not to through a wrench in the hype, but if you are wanting air conditioning
or even ventilation that far forward in the cabin, the chevy's overhead doesn't
lend itself very well to adaptation. No automotive does however, so its back
to custom laid fiberglass and although Tony's price maybe high, it does allow
for excellent ventilation in the cabin space and looks very prestigious as
it does it. Other alternatives are in development also and will be out by mid
to late Sept.
>
> "John W. Cox" wrote:
>
> Hopefully, Tony is monitoring this, cause there are sure a lot available
> overhead consoles at a reasonable price. Debbie, your quality was
> beyond comment. Beautiful aircraft and I was hurt not to see you taking
> home an award. It's a winner in my book.
>
> Watch S-10 Blazers jump on the stolen auto list as the 10 builders
> follow Deems purchase and bypass Ebay.
>
> John Cox
>
> -----Original Message-----
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 7:11 AM
>
>
> DON'T ANYBODY BID ON THIS (I already did, ;-) )
>
> THANKS BILL!
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> Fuse/Finishing/Panel
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>
> W. Curtis wrote:
>
> > When I spoke to Debbie Dewey at OSH regarding her spectacular RV-10, I
>
> > asked her about the overhead console. She mentioned she purchased it
> > from eBay for about $50 and it was the overhead console for the Chevy
> > S-10 Blazer. A search of eBay motors for "overhead console blazer"
> > will show many for sale averaging $50. This adds such a finished look
> >
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Groups are talking. We´re listening. Check out the handy changes to Yahoo!
Groups.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Alabama Area Builders? |
| From: | "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com> |
It looks like I'm going to be spending the majority of next week in
Huntsville. If there any area builders up for a visit or wanting to
compare notes during the evening let me know off-line.
Thanks!
Bob #40105
Baffling & "stuff"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ken Silverman" <k_l_silverman(at)hotmail.com> |
Has anyone build yet using the TIO-540AF1B single turbo of Mooneys
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick <ricksked(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Kitplanes article on the Lyc 390X and BPE |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
Have you priced one yet?
Figure at least 25K or more above IO-540Aseries.
Quoting Ken Silverman :
> Has anyone build yet using the TIO-540AF1B single turbo of Mooneys
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hasbrouck" <jhasbrouck(at)woh.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: F-1070 side fuse skin bending from factory? |
Received mine in May and no, the fuse skins were not prebent then.. I heard
the rumor also and was hopeful. Mine are bent now, was a pain but turned
out okay.
John Hasbrouck
#40264
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
It is reported to fall out of the sky. You will be the first and many
are hoping to see one.
John Cox
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ken Silverman
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 2:32 PM
Subject: RV10-List: TIO-540AF1B
Has anyone build yet using the TIO-540AF1B single turbo of Mooneys
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick <ricksked(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: F-1070 side fuse skin bending from factory? |
One thing about those areas of the skins, don't be afraid to radius the inside
corner a bit and polish the edges real well prior to bending, don't just do a
mild deburring. Doing these two step will ease some of the surface tension that
leads to cracking. Go easy with the hammer part, that's where you'll get the
cracks started. Alignment of the wood blocks and securely clamping of the blocks
is essential. Pre-bent would be nice but heck, you can brag about how you
bent your skins by hand on the "old" RV-10 kits.
Rick S.
40185
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
Might also look at the IO-540-R1A5, which was installed on late
PA24-260s with dual RayJay turbos, I believe manually
controlled.......but power is limited to Van's magic 260hp.
Quoting "John W. Cox" :
> It is reported to fall out of the sky. You will be the first and many
> are hoping to see one.
>
>
> John Cox
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ken Silverman
> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 2:32 PM
> To: RV10-List(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: TIO-540AF1B
>
>
> Has anyone build yet using the TIO-540AF1B single turbo of Mooneys
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
A TNIO540 (performance limited to the magic 260.0 bhp) would be the
perfect platform for those days flying around Cumulo-Granite Clouds and
tight canyons here in the Western US and Canada.
Vic and Noel are still in that elite group and soon to join is Ed
Hayden. Hot Rodders of the 21st Century and rebels to the core.
John Cox
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly
McMullen
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 3:49 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: TIO-540AF1B
Might also look at the IO-540-R1A5, which was installed on late
PA24-260s with dual RayJay turbos, I believe manually
controlled.......but power is limited to Van's magic 260hp.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Alabama Area Builders? |
Bob Condrey,
I'll be in Huntsville from Sunday night to Friday night. All week with
nothing to do but go to a DAU class. My cell number is 702-767-3587, give
me a call Sunday and lets get together. Going to be there for ACQ 201B.
Bob K
Finishing kit, rotary engine, etc, etc, etc.
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Condrey, Bob (US
SSA)
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 12:13 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Alabama Area Builders?
It looks like I'm going to be spending the majority of next week in
Huntsville. If there any area builders up for a visit or wanting to compare
notes during the evening let me know off-line.
Thanks!
Bob #40105
Baffling & "stuff"
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: F-1070 side fuse skin bending from factory? |
| From: | "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net> |
CJ,
I just finished bending the skins today. I would have to agree with Rick, go
easy with the hammer part. You don't need much bending on these skins. They
pull up real nice with clecoes.
Zack
--------
RV8 #80125
RV10 # 40512
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=53249#53249
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris" <toaster73(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alabama Area Builders? |
Bob,
I feel your pain...SYS 301 is in my immediate future. Oh joy.
-CHris Lucas
#40072
----- Original Message -----
From: bob.kaufmann
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 8:34 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Alabama Area Builders?
Bob Condrey,
I'll be in Huntsville from Sunday night to Friday night. All week
with nothing to do but go to a DAU class. My cell number is
702-767-3587, give me a call Sunday and lets get together. Going to be
there for ACQ 201B.
Bob K
Finishing kit, rotary engine, etc, etc, etc.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Condrey, Bob
(US SSA)
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 12:13 PM
To: RV10-List(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV10-List: Alabama Area Builders?
It looks like I'm going to be spending the majority of next week in
Huntsville. If there any area builders up for a visit or wanting to
compare notes during the evening let me know off-line.
Thanks!
Bob #40105
Baffling & "stuff"
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Alternative Turbine, Anyone? |
| From: | "Jae Chang" <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com> |
http://www.innodyn.com/aviation/news_archives/news_08_04_06_01.htm
In case anyone missed this posting from the VAF site, here is the link
above announcing a first flight for an RV-8T.
http://www.innodyn.com/aviation/products.html
They even list a 255HP turbine for $34,500. That is less than any prices
i've seen for even the 540's. They claim to be working on or already have
available FWF kits for the -10 model as well.
Wow, i would love to see an RV-10T some day! Maybe I should think about
installing the aux tanks! I wish. ;)
Jae
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "W. Curtis" <wcurtis(at)core.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Overhead Console |
http://aircraftdoorseals.com
>--> RV10-List message posted by: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>
>Here's a couple of pics.
>
>http://deemsrv10.com/album/OSHKOSH%202006/slides/DSC03085.html
>
>I recall listening to Jim Erskin talking to Mike Sausen, Jim said he
>paid $85 for the door seal, but I didn't catch where he got it. Mike do
>you recall?
>
>Deems Davis # 406
>Fuse/Finishing/Panel
>http://deemsrv10.com/
>
>Jesse Saint wrote:
>>--> RV10-List message posted by: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>
>>
>>Does anybody have any good detailed pictures of what Debbie did with her
>>door seals?
>
William Curtis
http://nerv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Overhead Console |
| From: | "Tim Dawson-Townsend" <Tdawson(at)avidyne.com> |
How much? Website says "call for quote" . . .
TDT
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of W. Curtis
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 10:52 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: Overhead Console
http://aircraftdoorseals.com
>Here's a couple of pics.
>
>http://deemsrv10.com/album/OSHKOSH%202006/slides/DSC03085.html
>
>I recall listening to Jim Erskin talking to Mike Sausen, Jim said he
>paid $85 for the door seal, but I didn't catch where he got it. Mike do
>you recall?
>
>Deems Davis # 406
>Fuse/Finishing/Panel
>http://deemsrv10.com/
>
>Jesse Saint wrote:
>>
>>Does anybody have any good detailed pictures of what Debbie did with
her
>>door seals?
>
William Curtis
http://nerv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | GPS & Autopilot Setup |
I am using a ControlVision GPS (HP ipaq 4700) connected to my Trio EZ Pilot
Autopilot and it is not working properly. Is anyone else using this same
setup? I'm trying to resolve the problem and I'm wondering if it's working
for someone else.
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Ritter" <mritter509(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | First IFR Flight in the RV-10 (and more) |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Help With RV Mailing List |
Hi Everyone
I seem to still be having problems with the list and am uncertain as to what
the problem may be.
I created a new email address RV10(at)SHAW.CA to subscribe to three of the RV
lists. A day or so after subscribing, I received a number of posts (all
dated Sunday August 6th). The very last post received was from
Majordomo(at)matronics.com indicating that I have been subscribed. Since then I
have not received any of the new posts even though I can see new posts on
the web browser version of the lists.
I have made sure that I don't have any spam filtering in effect.
The list subscription inquiry indicates that I am subscribed.
Does anyone have any idea as to why I am not receiving any of the new posts?
Regards
Les Kearney
Alberta, Canada
PS: I have tried sending emails directly to the list coordinator but have
not received a reply as of yet.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: First IFR Flight in the RV-10 (and more) |
| From: | "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com> |
Cedar Point!!!! I am in! I grew up 20 miles away from there. Beautiful area. I
haven't been back in years, but the amusement park and water park offer plenty
of entertainment for family of all ages. While I never went to the airport, there
are many restaurants and hotels that span the ranges of qualities and prices.
Plenty of areas for camping and other activities. There are also great day
trips just down the road about 20 minutes out of Port Clinton that go to the
Islands in Lake Erie. Plenty to do and a great area. I am a little biased though.
Eric Kallio
40518 waiting for SB wings
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=53464#53464
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Ritter" <mritter509(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First IFR Flight in the RV-10 (and more) |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: First IFR Flight in the RV-10 (and more) |
| From: | "Bobby J. Hughes" <bhughes(at)qnsi.net> |
Mark,
I vote for Lockhart TX.
Bobby
40116
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Ritter
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 4:08 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: First IFR Flight in the RV-10 (and more)
Cedar Point is central to what? Looks like its a long ways from Texas.
But it does sound like a fun place.
Mark (N410MR flying)
________________________________
From: "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com>
Reply-To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV10-List: Re: First IFR Flight in the RV-10 (and
more)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 13:39:33 -0700
>
>Cedar Point!!!! I am in! I grew up 20 miles away from there.
Beautiful area. I haven't been back in years, but the amusement park and
water park offer plenty of entertainment for family of all ages. While I
never went to the airport, there are many restaurants and hotels that
span the ranges of qualities and prices. Plenty of areas for camping and
other activities. There are also great day trips just down the road
about 20 minutes out of Port Clinton that go to the Islands in
=========================
to
and
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
=========================
=========================
the
=========================
=========================
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Ritter" <mritter509(at)msn.com> |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jdalton77" <jdalton77(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: First IFR Flight in the RV-10 (and more) |
I worked there when I was 18. Great place. Easy flight for me - only 30
minutes from Detroit by air.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 4:39 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: First IFR Flight in the RV-10 (and more)
>
> Cedar Point!!!! I am in! I grew up 20 miles away from there. Beautiful
> area. I haven't been back in years, but the amusement park and water park
> offer plenty of entertainment for family of all ages. While I never went
> to the airport, there are many restaurants and hotels that span the ranges
> of qualities and prices. Plenty of areas for camping and other activities.
> There are also great day trips just down the road about 20 minutes out of
> Port Clinton that go to the Islands in Lake Erie. Plenty to do and a great
> area. I am a little biased though.
>
> Eric Kallio
> 40518 waiting for SB wings
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=53464#53464
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Kermanj <flysrv10(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First IFR Flight in the RV-10 (and more) |
I vote for Kansas, smack in the middle of the country. Mostly for
those of us living at the edges of the map. I will however try and
come to whatever location is selected.
On Aug 8, 2006, at 9:23 PM, jdalton77 wrote:
>
> I worked there when I was 18. Great place. Easy flight for me -
> only 30 minutes from Detroit by air.
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 4:39 PM
> Subject: RV10-List: Re: First IFR Flight in the RV-10 (and more)
>
>
>>
>> Cedar Point!!!! I am in! I grew up 20 miles away from there.
>> Beautiful area. I haven't been back in years, but the amusement
>> park and water park offer plenty of entertainment for family of
>> all ages. While I never went to the airport, there are many
>> restaurants and hotels that span the ranges of qualities and
>> prices. Plenty of areas for camping and other activities. There
>> are also great day trips just down the road about 20 minutes out
>> of Port Clinton that go to the Islands in Lake Erie. Plenty to do
>> and a great area. I am a little biased though.
>>
>> Eric Kallio
>> 40518 waiting for SB wings
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=53464#53464
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> Size Limit Now At: 1MB - 08/08/06 (was 2MB)
> ===========================================================
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: First IFR Flight in the RV-10 (and more) |
| From: | "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> |
My home airport in K34 in Gardner Kansas, and we have
excellent BBQ at K81 just 10 minutes away. We are just 40 minutes drive
south west on I35 of Kansas City. The only problem with this locataion
is it is about 1 hour drive to Worlds of fun, but these two airports are
very GA friendly and you can pop a tent at K34 for sure.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV (Flying)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Kermanj
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:38 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: First IFR Flight in the RV-10 (and more)
I vote for Kansas, smack in the middle of the country. Mostly for those
of us living at the edges of the map. I will however try and come to
whatever location is selected.
On Aug 8, 2006, at 9:23 PM, jdalton77 wrote:
I worked there when I was 18. Great place. Easy flight for me - only
30 minutes from Detroit by air.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 4:39 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: First IFR Flight in the RV-10 (and more)
Cedar Point!!!! I am in! I grew up 20 miles away from there.
Beautiful area. I haven't been back in years, but the amusement park and
water park offer plenty of entertainment for family of all ages. While I
never went to the airport, there are many restaurants and hotels that
span the ranges of qualities and prices. Plenty of areas for camping and
other activities. There are also great day trips just down the road
about 20 minutes out of Port Clinton that go to the Islands in Lake
Erie. Plenty to do and a great area. I am a little biased though.
Eric Kallio
40518 waiting for SB wings
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=53464#53464
- The RV10-List Email Forum -
=========================
============
Thank you for your generous support!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Ritter" <mritter509(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | RE: RV-10 gathering |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Kermanj <flysrv10(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | has anyone had this problem? |
My left rudder pedal rubs against the tunnel skin and is starting to
split the aluminum. The attachment bolt that connects the rudder
cable on the passenger side is tight against the tunnel skin.
I would appreciate you email if you have the same problem and any
solution that you have come up with. I am at the head scratching
stage right now.
Rob Kermanj
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick <ricksked(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Arc protection diodes |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Arc protection diodes |
I built up my own trim/flap relay board for my 8A, no diodes. The current
draw is too small.
Carl Froehlich
RV-8A (260 hrs)
RV-10 (tail cone)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Rick
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 8:07 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV10-List: Arc protection diodes
Anyone else who built their own trim/relay board know the value for the
diode rectifiers used to protect the relay and trim switches from arcing the
contacts? Or any on who used the Aircraft Extras or Ray Allen relay decks
know what value they put in their decks?
I suspect a 1 amp by 50 volt should do. Circut draws less than an amp.
Rick S.
40185
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Daves" <dav1111(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: has anyone had this problem? |
Try the West Marine Cable Guides. The model number is 107656 and are
5/16th size. I ordered three of them and cut the third one in half and
ran the extra halves back past the baggage compartment bulkhead past the
battery as well. It was a little extra work and I used Plastic clamps in
the back obtained from the local Lowes store and pop riveted them to the
side of the tunnel.
Good Luck,
Russ Daves
N710RV Flying
----- Original Message -----
From: Rob Kermanj
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 12:58 PM
Subject: RV10-List: has anyone had this problem?
My left rudder pedal rubs against the tunnel skin and is starting to
split the aluminum. The attachment bolt that connects the rudder cable
on the passenger side is tight against the tunnel skin.
I would appreciate you email if you have the same problem and any
solution that you have come up with. I am at the head scratching stage
right now.
Rob Kermanj
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick <ricksked(at)earthlink.net> |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sean Blair" <seanblair(at)adelphia.net> |
I'm getting ready to attach the front fuselage skins and was wondering if I
should use Proseal at the firewall like I did on the bottom skin.
Thanks,
Sean Blair
#40225
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
So that "small nosewheel shimmy" I've mentioned for the past couple
of weeks....
Tonight I found that the old posts someone previously made on this
subject REALLY need to be not only investigated fully, but I
completely believe that basically EVERY RV-10 will have this
problem if you do not plan ahead and do something about it before it
happens to you.
Check out this Front Axle and Fork wear write-up:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/maintenance/20060809/index.html
If you read my write-up, you'll see that I previously even called
Van's after someone else had the problem, trying to proactively
"fix" the issue, even though I wasn't fully aware of exactly how
the problem manifested itself. What REALLY would be nice is if people
find things like this, post some pictures and an explanation.
A picture is worth 1000 words, and it makes it much easier to
understand. Had I known about this before, I would not be in this
position today. My front Fork is now worn with a groove, and my
temper is lit. Tomorrow I'll be calling again to find out if
there is already a "fix" that is finally publicly known...and then
I'll add it to the above page.
Additionally, this has prompted me to stay up a little extra tonight
and lay the groundwork for the "Maintenance Issue" section of the
RV-10 Tips page at:
http://www.myrv10.com/tips/index.html
Hopefully I can get some good input from others about things that
everyone really needs to watch for once they start flying. Lets
keep these planes in the air, and keep them safe.
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sean Blair" <seanblair(at)adelphia.net> |
Okay...another one. I plan to install LED position lighting. Any
recommendations? I'll be using a 12 volt system.
Is there a 12 volt LED strobe available? I see Whelen has one, but it's a
24 volt.
Thanks again,
Sean Blair
#40225
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: has anyone had this problem? |
When Randy had his inspection, one of the "Dings" I heard was the bolts
needed to have the nut on the outside of the pedals so the cotter pins
didn't snag your shoes. This puts the nut right next to the tunnel, of
course.
So, I tried to prepare by mounting the bolt that way. I found that mine
rubbed the tunnel. So, I prayed that nobody would say anything and
mounted my bolts with the rounded head towards the tunnel. After that,
I haven't had any rubbing.
If you get rubbing, even with that bolt flipped, then I'm wondering if
there isn't anything you can do with those nylon blocks on the longerons
up on top to shift the pedals slightly so that they are further from the
tunnel. I know what you mean, the pedals are close, but on mine they
don't touch anymore. I was unable to allow myself to keep the
carpeting on the tunnel in that area though....the gap wasn't big enough
and I didn't want the cable links hanging up on the carpet some day.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
Rob Kermanj wrote:
> My left rudder pedal rubs against the tunnel skin and is starting to
> split the aluminum. The attachment bolt that connects the rudder cable
> on the passenger side is tight against the tunnel skin.
>
> I would appreciate you email if you have the same problem and any
> solution that you have come up with. I am at the head scratching stage
> right now.
>
> Rob Kermanj
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | EFDsteve(at)AOL.COM |
Check out Jeff Bordelon's site: _http://www.jeffsrv-7a.com/LEDPROJECT.htm_
(http://www.jeffsrv-7a.com/LEDPROJECT.htm)
I think that these are very nice. I'm using these wingtip position lights,
tho I'm not sure what I'm using for the tail yet.
Steve Weinstock
40230
Okay..another one. I plan to install LED position lighting. Any
recommendations? I=99ll be using a 12 volt system.
Is there a 12 volt LED strobe available? I see Whelen has one, but it
=99s a
24 volt.
Thanks again,
Sean Blair
#40225
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Henkjan van der Zouw" <henkjan(at)zme.nl> |
| Subject: | Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
Hi Tim,
I did not like the construction of the front wheel bearing and made a
change even before putting my 10 on it's wheels because I had fear about
exactly what happened to your front wheel.
Van's provides two bushing made from thin wall stainless steel tubing
for mounting at the outside of the bearings only, this will not prevent
the bearing inner rings from rotating at the shaft, due to the heavy
seals my inner rings were rotating at the shaft, I didn't like that,
feared that the bushings would damage the fork, your experience proves
that.
Here's what I did, first I determined the distance between the bearing
inner rings, then I made an aliminium bushing on the lathe just a little
wider than the measured distance ( 0.1 to 0.2 mm) to give the bearings
just that little play that they need.
Then I made two aluminium bushings for the outside, dimensions just so
that the total of the two outside bushings, the two bearing inner rings
and the inside bushing are a little bit longer then the shaft, it all
clamps together during assembly.
I did not use the bushings supplied by Van's.
Now it's assembled it's a very rigid construction that allows the
bearings just to rotate at the point that they should as well as both
seals.
Need to say that the length of the bushing between the inner rings needs
to be measured for every wheel separately due to tolerances of the
wheels.
I can disassemble it again and post pictures if you want.
Henkjan van der Zouw
#40355, sorry, still building.........
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] Namens Tim Olson
Verzonden: donderdag 10 augustus 2006 6:36
Aan: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Onderwerp: RV10-List: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10
So that "small nosewheel shimmy" I've mentioned for the past couple
of weeks....
Tonight I found that the old posts someone previously made on this
subject REALLY need to be not only investigated fully, but I
completely believe that basically EVERY RV-10 will have this
problem if you do not plan ahead and do something about it before it
happens to you.
Check out this Front Axle and Fork wear write-up:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/maintenance/20060809/index.html
If you read my write-up, you'll see that I previously even called
Van's after someone else had the problem, trying to proactively
"fix" the issue, even though I wasn't fully aware of exactly how
the problem manifested itself. What REALLY would be nice is if people
find things like this, post some pictures and an explanation.
A picture is worth 1000 words, and it makes it much easier to
understand. Had I known about this before, I would not be in this
position today. My front Fork is now worn with a groove, and my
temper is lit. Tomorrow I'll be calling again to find out if
there is already a "fix" that is finally publicly known...and then
I'll add it to the above page.
Additionally, this has prompted me to stay up a little extra tonight
and lay the groundwork for the "Maintenance Issue" section of the
RV-10 Tips page at:
http://www.myrv10.com/tips/index.html
Hopefully I can get some good input from others about things that
everyone really needs to watch for once they start flying. Lets
keep these planes in the air, and keep them safe.
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Kermanj <flysrv10(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: has anyone had this problem? |
Thanks for the replay. Mine actually scrapes the tunnel right at the
passenger's left foot cable to pedal connector. It is the connection
bolt scraping the wall.
Rob Kermanj
On Aug 9, 2006, at 8:59 PM, Russell Daves wrote:
> Try the West Marine Cable Guides. The model number is 107656 and
> are 5/16th size. I ordered three of them and cut the third one in
> half and ran the extra halves back past the baggage compartment
> bulkhead past the battery as well. It was a little extra work and I
> used Plastic clamps in the back obtained from the local Lowes store
> and pop riveted them to the side of the tunnel.
>
> <009601c6bc18$441631a0$b0436a44>
>
> <009701c6bc18$441fce90$b0436a44>
>
> Good Luck,
>
> Russ Daves
> N710RV Flying
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rob Kermanj
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 12:58 PM
> Subject: RV10-List: has anyone had this problem?
>
> My left rudder pedal rubs against the tunnel skin and is starting
> to split the aluminum. The attachment bolt that connects the
> rudder cable on the passenger side is tight against the tunnel skin.
>
> I would appreciate you email if you have the same problem and any
> solution that you have come up with. I am at the head scratching
> stage right now.
>
> Rob Kermanj
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Ritter" <mritter509(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | RE: RV-10 gathering |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Kermanj <flysrv10(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: has anyone had this problem? |
My bolts are flipped and it still digs, especially when the left
pedal is pressed considering that the tunnel tapers out. I have
tried moving the left rudder assembly to the right but there is not
slack in the bearing blocks. I think my only solution at this point
is to cut the supporting tube's right end about a 1/4', insert it
into the right bearing block and shim the left end. What do you think?
I will post a photo today, perhaps others will run into the same
problem.
Rob Kermanj
On Aug 10, 2006, at 12:44 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
>
> When Randy had his inspection, one of the "Dings" I heard was the
> bolts
> needed to have the nut on the outside of the pedals so the cotter
> pins didn't snag your shoes. This puts the nut right next to the
> tunnel, of
> course.
>
> So, I tried to prepare by mounting the bolt that way. I found that
> mine
> rubbed the tunnel. So, I prayed that nobody would say anything and
> mounted my bolts with the rounded head towards the tunnel. After
> that,
> I haven't had any rubbing.
>
> If you get rubbing, even with that bolt flipped, then I'm wondering if
> there isn't anything you can do with those nylon blocks on the
> longerons
> up on top to shift the pedals slightly so that they are further
> from the
> tunnel. I know what you mean, the pedals are close, but on mine they
> don't touch anymore. I was unable to allow myself to keep the
> carpeting on the tunnel in that area though....the gap wasn't big
> enough
> and I didn't want the cable links hanging up on the carpet some day.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
>
> Rob Kermanj wrote:
>> My left rudder pedal rubs against the tunnel skin and is starting
>> to split the aluminum. The attachment bolt that connects the
>> rudder cable on the passenger side is tight against the tunnel skin.
>> I would appreciate you email if you have the same problem and any
>> solution that you have come up with. I am at the head scratching
>> stage right now.
>> Rob Kermanj
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Arc protection diodes |
| From: | "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> |
I built my own Trim/Flap controller board for my RV-9 and
RV-10. It uses all solid state MosFet so there is no moving parts to
wear out. I used 50 Amp Mosfet for the Flap motor so they don't even
get the least bit hot.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
CDNI Principal Engineer
Sprint PCS
16020 West 113th Street
Lenexa, KS 66219
Mailstop KSLNXK0101
(913) 859-1414 (Office)
(913) 226-0106 (Pcs)
(913) 859-1234 (Fax)
Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 7:07 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Arc protection diodes
Anyone else who built their own trim/relay board know the value for the
diode rectifiers used to protect the relay and trim switches from arcing
the contacts? Or any on who used the Aircraft Extras or Ray Allen relay
decks know what value they put in their decks?
I suspect a 1 amp by 50 volt should do. Circut draws less than an amp.
Rick S.
40185
=========================
to
and
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
=========================
=========================
the
=========================
=========================
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
| From: | "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> |
I didn't have much luck with Van's on this issue as well. My A
& P caught this issue before I had the plane inspected and what we came
up with is to shave .040 off the aluminum axle itself so the wheel won't
slide side to side. Once I did this the wheel was solidly in the middle
in the axle with enough force on the bearings so as to create a slight
drag on the tire when trying to turn it by hand.
I will check on mine tonight and report back. I currently have
106 hours on my plane.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV (Flying)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 11:36 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10
So that "small nosewheel shimmy" I've mentioned for the past couple
of weeks....
Tonight I found that the old posts someone previously made on this
subject REALLY need to be not only investigated fully, but I
completely believe that basically EVERY RV-10 will have this
problem if you do not plan ahead and do something about it before it
happens to you.
Check out this Front Axle and Fork wear write-up:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/maintenance/20060809/index.html
If you read my write-up, you'll see that I previously even called
Van's after someone else had the problem, trying to proactively
"fix" the issue, even though I wasn't fully aware of exactly how
the problem manifested itself. What REALLY would be nice is if people
find things like this, post some pictures and an explanation.
A picture is worth 1000 words, and it makes it much easier to
understand. Had I known about this before, I would not be in this
position today. My front Fork is now worn with a groove, and my
temper is lit. Tomorrow I'll be calling again to find out if
there is already a "fix" that is finally publicly known...and then
I'll add it to the above page.
Additionally, this has prompted me to stay up a little extra tonight
and lay the groundwork for the "Maintenance Issue" section of the
RV-10 Tips page at:
http://www.myrv10.com/tips/index.html
Hopefully I can get some good input from others about things that
everyone really needs to watch for once they start flying. Lets
keep these planes in the air, and keep them safe.
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
I have some new info on the Axle issue. I'll post the text here,
but I updated the web page for better readability.
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/maintenance/20060809/index.html
---
Refer to page 46-06 on your plans for visual information
I both figured out an idea, and just got off the phone with Gus at
Van's. Yes, they are aware of the issue. Apparently they did change
the U-1023 spacers that are delivered with the kits and now instead of
thin stainless steel, they're thick aluminum spacers, that should spin
less easily, especially stuck against the similar aluminum, as it might
tend to gall and stick. He didn't know why they didn't make it an S.B.
and send out new parts. So, this is DEFINITELY something to address for
anyone who hasn't yet, and these parts should be available free. This
isn't to say that the new fix is ideal, but certainly better than what I
had to fly with for 100+ hours.
The NOSE FORK ASSY part is somewhere around $160, for those who are
interested. I may end up doing that, depending on how paranoid I
am....which remains to be seen.
I am getting the new spacers via UPS ground, instead of overnight,
because I also have one other thing that I'd like to try and accomplish.
Personally, I think I know what needs to be done to protect those
forks. Today at fastenal I found 3/8" ID x 1.5" OD stainless fender
washers and they're .050" thick. A very similar Aviation hardware
washer would be the AN970-6, which are only 12 cents at Van's and are
1-5/8" diameter and .063 thick. The idea is that if that U-1009 axle
is cut down in length by the same thickness as 2 of those washer, you
could then install a large-area flat washer against the fork, and that
would prevent EVER having that fork wear. You never want to
unnecessarily wear an expensive part. So, on my order is a few
AN970-6's, -7's, and a new U-1009 axle. The axle was about $15, and I
ordered it so that I could allow these parts to ship UPS ground, and
still feel good about chopping up my old U-1009 and shortening it at a
local machine shop so I can put these washers in for the weekend. If
the new spacers work fine with my shortened axle and washers, then I
will just leave it that way permanently. Small price to pay to fix the
issue fast....less than an hours' flight time. The bigger problem is
until I either get over it, or buy a new fork assy, I'm going to have
that nagging thought of the fork damage. There's still about .290-.300
thickness to that fork, which should be good, especially if you hold
that nosewheel off well on landing.
More photos to come as things come together...
-----
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
> Check out this Front Axle and Fork wear write-up:
> http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/maintenance/20060809/index.html
>
>
> If you read my write-up, you'll see that I previously even called Van's
> after someone else had the problem, trying to proactively "fix" the
> issue, even though I wasn't fully aware of exactly how the problem
> manifested itself. What REALLY would be nice is if people find things
> like this, post some pictures and an explanation.
> A picture is worth 1000 words, and it makes it much easier to
> understand. Had I known about this before, I would not be in this
> position today. My front Fork is now worn with a groove, and my temper
> is lit. Tomorrow I'll be calling again to find out if there is already
> a "fix" that is finally publicly known...and then I'll add it to the
> above page.
>
> Additionally, this has prompted me to stay up a little extra tonight and
> lay the groundwork for the "Maintenance Issue" section of the RV-10 Tips
> page at:
>
> http://www.myrv10.com/tips/index.html
>
> Hopefully I can get some good input from others about things that
> everyone really needs to watch for once they start flying. Lets keep
> these planes in the air, and keep them safe.
>
> --
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
| From: | "Lockamy, Jack L" <jack.lockamy(at)navy.mil> |
Why not just drill a single hole in each side of the fork and into the
spacers just forward or aft of the axle bolt? Counter sink the hole(s)
on the outside of the fork (both sides), tap the hole in the spacer for
a #8 screw, insert a #8 countersunk/flush screw in each hole and you're
done! No way that spacer is gonna rotate...
I did this on my RV-7A before this was ever even mentioned as I could
see that the spacer could easily rotate and cause the fork to be
'grooved'. So far the 'preventive measure' taken above has proved to
work, took less than 10 minutes and I didn't even need a lathe...
Jack Lockamy
N174JL RV-7A 210 hrs
Camarillo, CA
www.jacklockamy.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Lauritsen - Work" <mike(at)cleavelandtool.com> |
| Subject: | Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
Back in the 80's and early 90's before the full swivel tail wheel all the
tail dragger RVs had a similar problem with the tail wheel. We made a kit
to fix it using the same idea as Henkjan. I don't know if it would be
possible to make a kit for this if the wheels vary in thickness, but if
someone finds a solution I would be happy to make a kit of the parts.
Mike Lauritsen
Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
2225 First St.
Boone, Iowa 50036
515-432-6794
mike(at)cleavelandtool.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Henkjan van der
Zouw
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 1:59 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10
Hi Tim,
I did not like the construction of the front wheel bearing and made a
change even before putting my 10 on it's wheels because I had fear about
exactly what happened to your front wheel.
Van's provides two bushing made from thin wall stainless steel tubing
for mounting at the outside of the bearings only, this will not prevent
the bearing inner rings from rotating at the shaft, due to the heavy
seals my inner rings were rotating at the shaft, I didn't like that,
feared that the bushings would damage the fork, your experience proves
that.
Here's what I did, first I determined the distance between the bearing
inner rings, then I made an aliminium bushing on the lathe just a little
wider than the measured distance ( 0.1 to 0.2 mm) to give the bearings
just that little play that they need.
Then I made two aluminium bushings for the outside, dimensions just so
that the total of the two outside bushings, the two bearing inner rings
and the inside bushing are a little bit longer then the shaft, it all
clamps together during assembly.
I did not use the bushings supplied by Van's.
Now it's assembled it's a very rigid construction that allows the
bearings just to rotate at the point that they should as well as both
seals.
Need to say that the length of the bushing between the inner rings needs
to be measured for every wheel separately due to tolerances of the
wheels.
I can disassemble it again and post pictures if you want.
Henkjan van der Zouw
#40355, sorry, still building.........
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] Namens Tim Olson
Verzonden: donderdag 10 augustus 2006 6:36
Aan: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Onderwerp: RV10-List: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10
So that "small nosewheel shimmy" I've mentioned for the past couple
of weeks....
Tonight I found that the old posts someone previously made on this
subject REALLY need to be not only investigated fully, but I
completely believe that basically EVERY RV-10 will have this
problem if you do not plan ahead and do something about it before it
happens to you.
Check out this Front Axle and Fork wear write-up:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/maintenance/20060809/index.html
If you read my write-up, you'll see that I previously even called
Van's after someone else had the problem, trying to proactively
"fix" the issue, even though I wasn't fully aware of exactly how
the problem manifested itself. What REALLY would be nice is if people
find things like this, post some pictures and an explanation.
A picture is worth 1000 words, and it makes it much easier to
understand. Had I known about this before, I would not be in this
position today. My front Fork is now worn with a groove, and my
temper is lit. Tomorrow I'll be calling again to find out if
there is already a "fix" that is finally publicly known...and then
I'll add it to the above page.
Additionally, this has prompted me to stay up a little extra tonight
and lay the groundwork for the "Maintenance Issue" section of the
RV-10 Tips page at:
http://www.myrv10.com/tips/index.html
Hopefully I can get some good input from others about things that
everyone really needs to watch for once they start flying. Lets
keep these planes in the air, and keep them safe.
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
| From: | "Bobby J. Hughes" <bhughes(at)qnsi.net> |
Mike,
This is one problem Van's should fix and very soon. This is be a Service
Bulletin.
Bobby
(40116)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mike
Lauritsen - Work
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 11:01 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the
RV-10
-->
Back in the 80's and early 90's before the full swivel tail wheel all
the tail dragger RVs had a similar problem with the tail wheel. We made
a kit to fix it using the same idea as Henkjan. I don't know if it
would be possible to make a kit for this if the wheels vary in
thickness, but if someone finds a solution I would be happy to make a
kit of the parts.
Mike Lauritsen
Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
2225 First St.
Boone, Iowa 50036
515-432-6794
mike(at)cleavelandtool.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Henkjan van
der Zouw
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 1:59 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the
RV-10
Hi Tim,
I did not like the construction of the front wheel bearing and made a
change even before putting my 10 on it's wheels because I had fear about
exactly what happened to your front wheel.
Van's provides two bushing made from thin wall stainless steel tubing
for mounting at the outside of the bearings only, this will not prevent
the bearing inner rings from rotating at the shaft, due to the heavy
seals my inner rings were rotating at the shaft, I didn't like that,
feared that the bushings would damage the fork, your experience proves
that.
Here's what I did, first I determined the distance between the bearing
inner rings, then I made an aliminium bushing on the lathe just a little
wider than the measured distance ( 0.1 to 0.2 mm) to give the bearings
just that little play that they need.
Then I made two aluminium bushings for the outside, dimensions just so
that the total of the two outside bushings, the two bearing inner rings
and the inside bushing are a little bit longer then the shaft, it all
clamps together during assembly.
I did not use the bushings supplied by Van's.
Now it's assembled it's a very rigid construction that allows the
bearings just to rotate at the point that they should as well as both
seals.
Need to say that the length of the bushing between the inner rings needs
to be measured for every wheel separately due to tolerances of the
wheels.
I can disassemble it again and post pictures if you want.
Henkjan van der Zouw
#40355, sorry, still building.........
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] Namens Tim Olson
Verzonden: donderdag 10 augustus 2006 6:36
Aan: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Onderwerp: RV10-List: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10
So that "small nosewheel shimmy" I've mentioned for the past couple of
weeks....
Tonight I found that the old posts someone previously made on this
subject REALLY need to be not only investigated fully, but I completely
believe that basically EVERY RV-10 will have this problem if you do not
plan ahead and do something about it before it happens to you.
Check out this Front Axle and Fork wear write-up:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/maintenance/20060809/index.html
If you read my write-up, you'll see that I previously even called Van's
after someone else had the problem, trying to proactively "fix" the
issue, even though I wasn't fully aware of exactly how the problem
manifested itself. What REALLY would be nice is if people find things
like this, post some pictures and an explanation.
A picture is worth 1000 words, and it makes it much easier to
understand. Had I known about this before, I would not be in this
position today. My front Fork is now worn with a groove, and my temper
is lit. Tomorrow I'll be calling again to find out if there is already
a "fix" that is finally publicly known...and then I'll add it to the
above page.
Additionally, this has prompted me to stay up a little extra tonight and
lay the groundwork for the "Maintenance Issue" section of the RV-10 Tips
page at:
http://www.myrv10.com/tips/index.html
Hopefully I can get some good input from others about things that
everyone really needs to watch for once they start flying. Lets keep
these planes in the air, and keep them safe.
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hasbrouck" <jhasbrouck(at)woh.rr.com> |
Sean,
Better check the plans!!!! The cowl attach hinges go in that rivet
line I think. You can pro-seal when you place the hinges but you better
wait till then. Look at the rivet call-outs on page 28-19, there are
none called for on the firewall/skin yet..
John Hasbrouck
#40264
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <seanblair(at)adelphia.net> |
Understood, John, but shouldn't I use Proseal at the access point between the firewall
and the skins? I don't plan to rivet until the hinges are installed and
don't see how I would get Proseal between the skins later.
Thanks,
Sean B.
#40225
---- John Hasbrouck wrote:
> Sean,
>
> Better check the plans!!!! The cowl attach hinges go in that rivet line
I think. You can pro-seal when you place the hinges but you better wait till
then. Look at the rivet call-outs on page 28-19, there are none called for on
the firewall/skin yet..
>
> John Hasbrouck
> #40264
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert G. Wright" <armywrights(at)adelphia.net> |
There are many LED nav light kits. Currently no tail light LED/Strobe
combos, so I went with the standard Whelen that Van's recommends. Hopefully
someone will make an LED retrofit for the same Whelen housing when the
technology permits.
Rob Wright
#392
Wings (L HID)
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of EFDsteve(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 12:13 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: lighting
Check out Jeff Bordelon's site: http://www.jeffsrv-7a.com/LEDPROJECT.htm
I think that these are very nice. I'm using these wingtip position lights,
tho I'm not sure what I'm using for the tail yet.
Steve Weinstock
40230
Okay...another one. I plan to install LED position lighting. Any
recommendations? I'll be using a 12 volt system.
Is there a 12 volt LED strobe available? I see Whelen has one, but it's a
24 volt.
Thanks again,
Sean Blair
#40225
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Schipper <mike(at)learningplanet.com> |
I installed the CreativAir Wingtip LED position, strobe, and landing
light setup in my -9A and have been very happy with it so far. The
construction process was fun and relatively painless. I used the
Whelen tail position/strobe in the back of the rudder.
http://www.my9a.com/lights.asp
One thing that I noticed however about this system is that since the
lights are designed for the smaller wingtips on the 7/8/9,
asthetically it seems a bit too small in the wingtip of the -10.
Maybe they'll come up with a slightly larger layout for the -10
before I need to make a decision because otherwise I really like the
product.
Regards,
Mike Schipper
RV-10 - #40576 - Emp. - www.rvten.com
RV-9A - N63MS - Flying - www.my9a.com
On Aug 10, 2006, at 3:56 PM, Robert G. Wright wrote:
> Okay=85..another one. I plan to install LED position lighting. Any
> recommendations? I=92ll be using a 12 volt system.
>
> Is there a 12 volt LED strobe available? I see Whelen has one, but
> it=92s a 24 volt.
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Sean Blair
>
> #40225
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert G. Wright" <armywrights(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Tru-Trak roll servo neutral position answer |
No wonder there's no definite answer in the plans. Finally got my answer on
the roll servo pushrod neutral position.
Rob Wright
#392 Wings
-----Original Message-----
From: Zach Williamson [mailto:zach(at)trutrakap.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: FW: TTFS Website Feedback
Robert,
The roll servo push rod is adjusted so that when the primary controls
are moved from stop to stop the servo arm will nearly contact the servo
stops. The center to center distance of the push rod will vary slightly
from airplane to airplane.
The Sorcerer is capable of driving a yaw damper but the yaw damper (and
as a result a third servo) is not required.
Thanks,
Zach
>
>I have my two servos drop shipped from you through my purchase at SteinAir.
>After reviewing drawings/pictures, I need to know the neutral position for
>the roll servo push rod.
>
>Also, thinking about using the sorcerer. Will I need the third servo? I'm
>not planning on yaw damping.
>Thanks.
>
>Robert Wright
>
>
>--
Zach Williamson
Trutrak Flight Systems
1-866-TRUTRAK
(479) 751-0250 ext. 229
www.trutrakap.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hasbrouck" <jhasbrouck(at)woh.rr.com> |
Tim is right. My point about the pro-seal was to be aware where the hinges
go so as not to creat a big mess that will need clean-up later. I think a
nice bead of the stuff in the joint between the inside of the skin and the
firewall would do nicely to seal. Should have been more specific but was
heading back to the office when I read the first post.....john
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Dunne" <acs(at)acspropeller.com.au> |
| Subject: | Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
Tim, fantastic idea. I'm glad someone like yourself is taking the time to
help the rest of us out with these information issues.
Following is an extract from an email sent to me a few days ago,
"returned the nosewheel to Matco to have it replaced with WHLNW511.25 which
is correct for the valve stem on the tube and avoids the clearance problem
with the supplies WHLNW501.25."
As I'm no where near my plans at the moment I don't know if it is relevant
to your findings, is an issue or can even help.
I'd also suggest adding to your maint issues, the clearance issue with the
elevator trim motor and as someone has mentioned in the last few days the
co-pilot left rudder pedal clearance on the tunnel wall. Both could pose
safety issues down the track.
John 40315
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Thursday, 10 August 2006 2:36 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10
"Additionally, this has prompted me to stay up a little extra tonight
and lay the groundwork for the "Maintenance Issue" section of the
RV-10 Tips page at:
http://www.myrv10.com/tips/index.html
Hopefully I can get some good input from others about things that
everyone really needs to watch for once they start flying. Lets
keep these planes in the air, and keep them safe.
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Edgerton" <wayne.e(at)grandecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
I'm currently building in Justin, TX in George Orndorff's hangar, he's
the one that makes the RV building videos and is also a Van's tech
center, and I was talking to him about this problem, wondering if I
needed to take some type of action on mine. His response to me on this
issue was that this was a quite common occurrence on the RV's. He said
the reason he believes it happens is that when the builder tightens down
the bolt holding on the bushing and tire that they tighten it down too
much. He said I should just tighten it down just until it's snug. Then
after flying it for 5 or 10 hours check it and retighten it. Do this
over the first 20 or 30 hours.
I have a friend who is an A&P and also a DAR and I called him and ask
him the same question. He agreed with George. He said to tighten the
bolt down until a little grease comes out of the bearing and then back
it off a little and then keep an eye on it for awhile.
This may not be the case on Tim's plane though?
For what ever it's worth.
Wayne Edgerton #40336
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "W. Curtis" <wcurtis(at)core.com> |
| Subject: | IO-540 Hose kit -possible group buy |
RV-10 builders nearing Firewall Forward or engine planning stage. Having not ordered
the Firewall Forward kit yet and just planning ahead, I've looked at the
plans and determined the following hoses are required for the IO-540 installation:
VA-119 IE VMP HOSE (AN4, 21.5, AIR) $ 34.60
VA-102 FUEL PRES. HOSE (AN4, 15.5, FUEL) $ 58.20
VA-133 OIL PRESS HOSE (AN4, 27.25, OIL) $ 69.00
VA-138 FUEL SUPPLY HOSE (AN6, 14.0, FUEL) $ 69.65
VA-189 FUEL LINE IO-540 (AN6, 25.5, FUEL) $153.45
VA-135 OIL COOLER HOSE (AN8, 16.5, OIL) $ 66.85
VA-190 OIL COOLER HOSE (AN8, 27.0, OIL) $ 95.65
I'm not sure but I think the only Van's hose that is Teflon with the integral firesleeve are the VA-138 and VA-189 hoses. I requested a quote from Aircraft Hose (http://www.aircrafthose.com) for the above hoses ALL Teflon with integral firesleeve except the (VA-119) MAP Hose. They came back with and initial price of $491 for the set. The Van's price for the set of hoses (not all Teflon with integral firesleeve) is about $545. I've asked them if they could offer a greater discount if we could arrange a group buy. I haven't heard back from them yet but wanted to get you thinking.
Here are the specifics.
Stratoflex Integral Firesleeve Hoses for RV-10
111-4 hose with a 300-4D fitting 21.50" Long (111001-4CR0214) (IO-540 Man Press.)
124-4J hose with a 524-4CR fitting 15.50" Long (124J001-4CR0154) (IO-540 Fuel Press.)
124-4J hose with a 524-4CR fitting 27.25" Long (124J001-4CR0272) (IO-540 Oil Press.)
124-6J hose with a 524-6CR fitting 14.00" Long (124J001-6CR0140) (IO-540 Fuel Supply)
124-6J hose with a 524-6CR fitting 25.50" Long (124J001-6CR0254) (IO-540 Fuel Line)
124-8J hose with a 524-8CR fitting 16.50" Long (124J001-8CR0164) (Oil cooler)
124-8J hose with a 524-8CR fitting 27.00" Long (124J001-8CR0270) (Oil cooler)
Hose with Integral firesleeve
http://www.aircrafthose.com/images/pic1248j.jpg
Hose with external firesleeve
http://www.aircrafthose.com/images/pic2650c.jpg
William Curtis
http://nerv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
They are basically correct. However I disagree with their solution.
When you have two metals of this dissimilar of a hardness rubbing
together with such a small surface area something is going to give
eventually. You need to spread that across a more substantial area.
Even my cheap wheelbarrow has this provision.
Michael
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Wayne
Edgerton
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 7:36 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the
RV-10
I'm currently building in Justin, TX in George Orndorff's hangar, he's
the one that makes the RV building videos and is also a Van's tech
center, and I was talking to him about this problem, wondering if I
needed to take some type of action on mine. His response to me on this
issue was that this was a quite common occurrence on the RV's. He said
the reason he believes it happens is that when the builder tightens down
the bolt holding on the bushing and tire that they tighten it down too
much. He said I should just tighten it down just until it's snug. Then
after flying it for 5 or 10 hours check it and retighten it. Do this
over the first 20 or 30 hours.
I have a friend who is an A&P and also a DAR and I called him and ask
him the same question. He agreed with George. He said to tighten the
bolt down until a little grease comes out of the bearing and then back
it off a little and then keep an eye on it for awhile.
This may not be the case on Tim's plane though?
For what ever it's worth.
Wayne Edgerton #40336
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IO-540 Hose kit -possible group buy |
I got a complete kit of integral fire sleeve hoses from these guys for
my Mooney. Terrific, lightweight, smaller than external firesleeve, etc.
Price was a bit more, but was for 7 hoses, all requiring TSO tags, etc.
Good company.
W. Curtis wrote:
> RV-10 builders nearing Firewall Forward or engine planning stage. Having
> not ordered the Firewall Forward kit yet and just planning ahead, I've
> looked at the plans and determined the following hoses are required for
> the IO-540 installation:
>
> VA-119 IE VMP HOSE (AN4, 21.5, AIR) $ 34.60
> VA-102 FUEL PRES. HOSE (AN4, 15.5, FUEL) $ 58.20
> VA-133 OIL PRESS HOSE (AN4, 27.25, OIL) $ 69.00
> VA-138 FUEL SUPPLY HOSE (AN6, 14.0, FUEL) $ 69.65
> VA-189 FUEL LINE IO-540 (AN6, 25.5, FUEL) $153.45
> VA-135 OIL COOLER HOSE (AN8, 16.5, OIL) $ 66.85
> VA-190 OIL COOLER HOSE (AN8, 27.0, OIL) $ 95.65
>
> I'm not sure but I think the only Van's hose that is Teflon with the
> integral firesleeve are the VA-138 and VA-189 hoses. I requested a quote
> from Aircraft Hose (http://www.aircrafthose.com) for the above hoses ALL
> Teflon with integral firesleeve except the (VA-119) MAP Hose. They came
> back with and initial price of $491 for the set. The Van's price for the
> set of hoses (not all Teflon with integral firesleeve) is about $545.
> I've asked them if they could offer a greater discount if we could
> arrange a group buy. I haven't heard back from them yet but wanted to
> get you thinking.
>
> Here are the specifics.
> Stratoflex Integral Firesleeve Hoses for RV-10
> 111-4 hose with a 300-4D fitting 21.50" Long (111001-4CR0214) (IO-540
> Man Press.)
> 124-4J hose with a 524-4CR fitting 15.50" Long (124J001-4CR0154) (IO-540
> Fuel Press.)
> 124-4J hose with a 524-4CR fitting 27.25" Long (124J001-4CR0272) (IO-540
> Oil Press.)
> 124-6J hose with a 524-6CR fitting 14.00" Long (124J001-6CR0140) (IO-540
> Fuel Supply)
> 124-6J hose with a 524-6CR fitting 25.50" Long (124J001-6CR0254) (IO-540
> Fuel Line)
> 124-8J hose with a 524-8CR fitting 16.50" Long (124J001-8CR0164) (Oil
> cooler)
> 124-8J hose with a 524-8CR fitting 27.00" Long (124J001-8CR0270) (Oil
> cooler)
>
> Hose with Integral firesleeve
> http://www.aircrafthose.com/images/pic1248j.jpg
>
> Hose with external firesleeve
> http://www.aircrafthose.com/images/pic2650c.jpg
>
> William Curtis
> http://nerv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: IO-540 Hose kit -possible group buy |
Bill, I'm close to receiving my engine, count me as interested
Deems
W. Curtis wrote:
> RV-10 builders nearing Firewall Forward or engine planning stage.
> Having not ordered the Firewall Forward kit yet and just planning
> ahead, I've looked at the plans and determined the following hoses are
> required for the IO-540 installation:
>
> VA-119 IE VMP HOSE (AN4, 21.5, AIR) $ 34.60
> VA-102 FUEL PRES. HOSE (AN4, 15.5, FUEL) $ 58.20
> VA-133 OIL PRESS HOSE (AN4, 27.25, OIL) $ 69.00
> VA-138 FUEL SUPPLY HOSE (AN6, 14.0, FUEL) $ 69.65
> VA-189 FUEL LINE IO-540 (AN6, 25.5, FUEL) $153.45
> VA-135 OIL COOLER HOSE (AN8, 16.5, OIL) $ 66.85
> VA-190 OIL COOLER HOSE (AN8, 27.0, OIL) $ 95.65
>
> I'm not sure but I think the only Van's hose that is Teflon with the
> integral firesleeve are the VA-138 and VA-189 hoses. I requested a
> quote from Aircraft Hose (http://www.aircrafthose.com) for the above
> hoses ALL Teflon with integral firesleeve except the (VA-119) MAP
> Hose. They came back with and initial price of $491 for the set. The
> Van's price for the set of hoses (not all Teflon with integral
> firesleeve) is about $545. I've asked them if they could offer a
> greater discount if we could arrange a group buy. I haven't heard back
> from them yet but wanted to get you thinking.
>
> Here are the specifics.
> Stratoflex Integral Firesleeve Hoses for RV-10
> 111-4 hose with a 300-4D fitting 21.50" Long (111001-4CR0214) (IO-540
> Man Press.)
> 124-4J hose with a 524-4CR fitting 15.50" Long (124J001-4CR0154)
> (IO-540 Fuel Press.)
> 124-4J hose with a 524-4CR fitting 27.25" Long (124J001-4CR0272)
> (IO-540 Oil Press.)
> 124-6J hose with a 524-6CR fitting 14.00" Long (124J001-6CR0140)
> (IO-540 Fuel Supply)
> 124-6J hose with a 524-6CR fitting 25.50" Long (124J001-6CR0254)
> (IO-540 Fuel Line)
> 124-8J hose with a 524-8CR fitting 16.50" Long (124J001-8CR0164) (Oil
> cooler)
> 124-8J hose with a 524-8CR fitting 27.00" Long (124J001-8CR0270) (Oil
> cooler)
>
> Hose with Integral firesleeve
> http://www.aircrafthose.com/images/pic1248j.jpg
>
> Hose with external firesleeve
> http://www.aircrafthose.com/images/pic2650c.jpg
>
> William Curtis
> http://nerv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
Wayne, for what it's worth, I really don't think this will work
that way on the RV-10. I may be wrong, but I think you really need
to tighten that thing well on this plane or you'll REALLY have problems.
I'm betting that the assembly those guys are familiar with isn't the
same thing as what we have. If you have any looseness, you're going
to really screw up your axle. I just updated that page....scroll
to the bottom to read tonights update. I got a little long winded again
(surprise surprise), but I explained the axle and rotation and other
things in a bit of depth. For you -10 builders, that page is really
worth understanding, just so you can ponder it and know what's going
on there....even if you come to some other conclusion. (if you do,
let me know...I'd love to hear it, or hear exactly what the mechanics
are that George thinks would be better if it were looser)
I'll post the text of tonights update here again, but you would be
much better served to just read it on the page, and see the latest
photos. This is just for the archive's sake.
Here's the link again.
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/maintenance/20060809/index.html
---
Today I stopped by a machine shop and had them take off about .115" off
my axle, to accomodate 2 AN970-6 washers on the outer edge. Yes, they
are .063 each, so .126" would have been the standard, but I wanted the
axle to be even just a little more snug than before, because any flexing
inward will bring that valve cap closer to the fork. As a side note,
this from John D. today...a note someone sent him:
"returned the nosewheel to Matco to have it replaced with WHLNW511.25
which is correct for the valve stem on the tube and avoids the clearance
problem with the supplies WHLNW501.25."
In other words, Van's is sending out the wrong wheel for the application
on this plane...because they use this wheel for the RV-7's and such, and
didn't want to have to stock 2 parts. So we get to receive the one that
isn't made for the application, and therefore unless you swap wheels,
you're going to have minimal valve stem clearance.....pretty nice, huh?
Anyway, I had the axle cut shorter at a machine shop, and then I just
had to guesstimate how much to take off the 2 spacers. Knowing they had
worn into a taper on the inside, to fit against the bearing, I had them
only cut down by .085" total. I did .035" on one side, and .050" on the
other. That way I could have a slightly longer sleeve on the left side,
so my valve stem had just that little extra clearance from the fork.
This brought forth a small problem... Tonight when I assembled it as in
the first photo below, it looked great. VERY much better than original.
Then, when I put the whole wheel together, I found that the spacers
had worn probably at least .120" because there was tons of slop in the
spacers yet, even though they now had a nice flat surface to sit
between, and had been cut less than the axle, and the washers were in
there to fill in some space. The spacers just spun. So, I decided
since I already ordered another axle, I'd take my bandsaw and VERY
carefully trim off some more axle, and just use one more washer on the
left side. That should keep that valve stem even FURTHER away. If I
was right, I could get it so there would be plenty of pressure on the
bearings and spacers to hold them in place so they don't spin. Sure
enough, it worked just great. I could now torque that bolt down tight
and keep the spacers from spinning, and the bearing too. Just to be
totally sure they never spun again, I drilled a couple of holes in the
stainless spacers, and remounted it all. Then I made a pilot hole in
the aluminum axle shaft, and took it all apart and tapped it for an 8-32
screw on each spacer. Then I cleaned it up, regreased, and put it all
together. Now it is very solid, and should never wear the fork
again....I just am left with a crappy fork...so I'll probably just get a
new one. Once my new spacers and axle come in, I may tear it all apart
and use those pieces, but I'll still probably cut the axle and spacers
down and use the washers on the outer ends. It will prevent your forks
from being the sacrificial component. The bearing, for future
reference, is a Timken LM-6700-LA (I think that's right, but I'll
re-check tomorrow)
A note about tightening the axle nut... Tonight on the RV-10 list,
someone said that George Orndorff (A Van's tech center place), says that
the bolt should only be snugged, and then rechecked often in the first
few hours. I don't personally believe this is true on the RV-10, but
perhaps it is on the other models. Here's why. I studied this long
and hard, and now I fully understand why this is such a huge freaking
issue. It didn't make sense at first, having worked on dozens and
dozens of automotive bearings in the past. You see, on automotive apps,
the bearings are pressed in on the backside, and a nut and washer holds
the bearing tight. But it pushes against a different area of the
bearing. And the grease seal is usually a seal that is pressed into the
hub, with a seal around the shaft on the ID of the seal. This is NOT
how these bearings are on this application. On THIS application, you
are expecting that the sleeves, the axle, the bolt, AND the inner race
area of the bearing do not ever rotate. The problem is, if these
bearings were a tight knurled, or press fit onto that axle shaft, it
might be easy to keep them from rotating by just not letting the shaft
spin. But, what happens here is that the grease seal is a large seal
that the wheel spins around....so the seal is on the OD of the bearing
in this case. That's why my stinking seals were so torn when the wheel
wobbled. The kicker to the problem is, if you don't have the spacers
very tight against the bearing, there's not enough force to keep the
bearing from turning on the shaft. If the bearing spins on the axle
shaft, then it's becoming USELESS as a bearing. At that point, you're
using the aluminum axle as the bushing, and the wheel is rolling by
spinning the hard steel bearing race against your soft aluminum axle
shaft.....instead of turning the roller bearings inside of the wheel's
outer race. The seal itself has a lot of drag against the wheel as it
spins, and this drag will make it so that the wheel tries REALLY hard to
make the bearing spin. As it turns out, if you don't have tight
spacers, it's really easy to get that bearing spinning. And once the
bearing is spinning, the spacers stuffed right up against it will spin
too. And once they start spinning, they'll spin against the fork. If
you have the stainless ones like me, they'll ABSOLUTELY then start
carving into your forks. If you have the new and improved thick
aluminum ones (that I can't comment firmly on because I haven't seen
them), then they would have more surface area against both the bearing
and the fork....so on one hand the bearing will try to turn it harder,
but the fork will prevent it harder as well. To me, this is STILL
going to be a less than ideal situation until you PREVENT the spacers
from turning, and you PROTECT the forks from being worn if they do turn.
The lock screws I put in should keep the spacers still. The washers
will protect the forks. The one further improvement that would be
simple would be to drill a tiny hole in the fork on one side, that
drills into the aluminum axle, and then tap for a small hex head
internal setscrew lock, so that you could pin the axle from rotating at
all too. Beyond that, the only real improvement I could think of is if
you could find a way to either press-fit, or hold that inner bearing
from turning on the axle. Perhaps knurling it, epoxy, a small keyway
and shear key, or something like that would be the ticket. If you've
done all of the other steps, and have tight spacers, you probably
wouldn't have any huge issues from that point.
The worst thing about it is that no matter what you do, you really don't
have independent control over how tight the bearings are
seated...separate from how tight the axle bolts are and how long the
spacers are. Just to let you know how this all ends up the way I have
it tonight, the wheel will not continue rolling if you spin it by hand.
I don't think it's too tight from a bearing perspective, but the
grease seals against the wheel hub provide a lot of drag, so they don't
let the wheel spin real freely.
A couple other tips, while I'm at it. By the time you get to 25 hours
on your plane, re-check that large nut that holds the fork on. Mine
needed to be tightened almost one full flat to the next castle stop, to
retorque it after it took it's set. I think the spec is about 24lbs.
pull of breakout force to rotate the nose at an angle.
The second tip that I can't yet verify is fairing balance. To prevent
shimmy, I've heard that a good idea is to balance your fairing. Since I
had a little lead shot around, and I wanted this all to be perfect now,
tonight I weighed out a little lead and taped it to the nose of the
nosewheel fairing. I got it so that I could hold it where it mounts, in
the centers of those 4 screw areas, and get it to be about neutrally
balanced. Then I just took a little shot away, poured the rest into
the nose of the fairing, and mixed a couple of squirts of epoxy. I
poured the epoxy into the nose over the shot, put down one layer of
cloth, and then a little more epoxy. By tomorrow that stuff won't be
going anywhere, and I already re-checked the balance and it's now much
less tail heavy, so maybe that will improve things too.
---
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - 107 hours Flying
Wayne Edgerton wrote:
> I'm currently building in Justin, TX in George Orndorff's hangar, he's
> the one that makes the RV building videos and is also a Van's tech
> center, and I was talking to him about this problem, wondering if I
> needed to take some type of action on mine. His response to me on this
> issue was that this was a quite common occurrence on the RV's. He said
> the reason he believes it happens is that when the builder tightens down
> the bolt holding on the bushing and tire that they tighten it down too
> much. He said I should just tighten it down just until it's snug. Then
> after flying it for 5 or 10 hours check it and retighten it. Do this
> over the first 20 or 30 hours.
>
> I have a friend who is an A&P and also a DAR and I called him and ask
> him the same question. He agreed with George. He said to tighten the
> bolt down until a little grease comes out of the bearing and then back
> it off a little and then keep an eye on it for awhile.
>
> This may not be the case on Tim's plane though?
>
> For what ever it's worth.
>
> Wayne Edgerton #40336
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" <ddddsp1(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
Tim,
Are you planning to drill thru the fork into the axle and TAP it with a
contersunk screw to keep the axle from turning like you did to the space
r? I am thinking it would be easy to do and would eliminate the axle fr
om turning even if the wheel got loose.
Dean
Getting engine today.
________________________________________________________________________
Tim,
Are you planning to drill thru the fork into the axle and TAP it with
a contersunk screw to keep the axle from turning like you did to the sp
acer? I am thinking it would be easy to do and would eliminate the
axle from turning even if the wheel got loose.
Dean
Getting engine today.
______________________
__________________________________________________
Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <gorejr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: IO-540 Hose kit -possible group buy |
Bill,
I would be interested. Jim Gore
>
> From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
> Date: 2006/08/11 Fri AM 12:36:57 EDT
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: IO-540 Hose kit -possible group buy
>
>
> Bill, I'm close to receiving my engine, count me as interested
>
> Deems
>
> W. Curtis wrote:
>
> > RV-10 builders nearing Firewall Forward or engine planning stage.
> > Having not ordered the Firewall Forward kit yet and just planning
> > ahead, I've looked at the plans and determined the following hoses are
> > required for the IO-540 installation:
> >
> > VA-119 IE VMP HOSE (AN4, 21.5, AIR) $ 34.60
> > VA-102 FUEL PRES. HOSE (AN4, 15.5, FUEL) $ 58.20
> > VA-133 OIL PRESS HOSE (AN4, 27.25, OIL) $ 69.00
> > VA-138 FUEL SUPPLY HOSE (AN6, 14.0, FUEL) $ 69.65
> > VA-189 FUEL LINE IO-540 (AN6, 25.5, FUEL) $153.45
> > VA-135 OIL COOLER HOSE (AN8, 16.5, OIL) $ 66.85
> > VA-190 OIL COOLER HOSE (AN8, 27.0, OIL) $ 95.65
> >
> > I'm not sure but I think the only Van's hose that is Teflon with the
> > integral firesleeve are the VA-138 and VA-189 hoses. I requested a
> > quote from Aircraft Hose (http://www.aircrafthose.com) for the above
> > hoses ALL Teflon with integral firesleeve except the (VA-119) MAP
> > Hose. They came back with and initial price of $491 for the set. The
> > Van's price for the set of hoses (not all Teflon with integral
> > firesleeve) is about $545. I've asked them if they could offer a
> > greater discount if we could arrange a group buy. I haven't heard back
> > from them yet but wanted to get you thinking.
> >
> > Here are the specifics.
> > Stratoflex Integral Firesleeve Hoses for RV-10
> > 111-4 hose with a 300-4D fitting 21.50" Long (111001-4CR0214) (IO-540
> > Man Press.)
> > 124-4J hose with a 524-4CR fitting 15.50" Long (124J001-4CR0154)
> > (IO-540 Fuel Press.)
> > 124-4J hose with a 524-4CR fitting 27.25" Long (124J001-4CR0272)
> > (IO-540 Oil Press.)
> > 124-6J hose with a 524-6CR fitting 14.00" Long (124J001-6CR0140)
> > (IO-540 Fuel Supply)
> > 124-6J hose with a 524-6CR fitting 25.50" Long (124J001-6CR0254)
> > (IO-540 Fuel Line)
> > 124-8J hose with a 524-8CR fitting 16.50" Long (124J001-8CR0164) (Oil
> > cooler)
> > 124-8J hose with a 524-8CR fitting 27.00" Long (124J001-8CR0270) (Oil
> > cooler)
> >
> > Hose with Integral firesleeve
> > http://www.aircrafthose.com/images/pic1248j.jpg
> >
> > Hose with external firesleeve
> > http://www.aircrafthose.com/images/pic2650c.jpg
> >
> > William Curtis
> > http://nerv10.com/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
Yeah, but not until I get all the new parts and see them.
That's one hole I'll "drill once".
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
ddddsp1(at)juno.com wrote:
> Tim,
>
> Are you planning to drill thru the fork into the axle and TAP it with a
> contersunk screw to keep the axle from turning like you did to the
> spacer? I am thinking it would be easy to do and would eliminate the
> axle from turning even if the wheel got loose.
>
> Dean
>
> Getting engine today.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Kermanj <flysrv10(at)gmail.com> |
I insulated the tunnel, including the fuel lines (fear of vapor lock)
and found that it made absolutely NO DIFFERENCE in the radiating heat
from the tunnel. I will next try the Y hose split as suggested by
Van and really hope that I can get results.
RV10 Tunnel - 2
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Important documents worth filing |
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
Here are a set of FAA documents that those still building might find
valuable. Those flying please disregard. They will change with the
September recommendations of the Task Force.
The 8130.2F has just been revised.
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgOrders.nsf/0
/9A00207837D6A395862571A8005B0BBD?OpenDocument
Here is the AC20-27F.
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCirc
ular.nsf/0/0CA2845E2AAFFFBB86256DBF00640CB2?OpenDocument
John Cox
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
I don't think they are saying leave them loose. What they are saying is
you don't want to crank down taper bearings as you will destroy them at
a much greater rate than normal and cause even more of the slop you are
seeing. What I think they are missing is that this is a design problem
because the small surface area of the SS bushing is in direct contact
with the aluminum fork. No matter what you do to make sure the axle
stays SNUG, this WILL eventually ware into the fork without something
else to increase the surface area against the fork. This could be a cap
or simply a steel washer.
In my opinion you have the right idea Tim, machine down the axle
whatever the thickness of the washers are and put them in with it.
Michael Sausen
RV-10 #352 Buildus Interuptus due to moving
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 11:41 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the
RV-10
Wayne, for what it's worth, I really don't think this will work that way
on the RV-10. I may be wrong, but I think you really need to tighten
that thing well on this plane or you'll REALLY have problems.
I'm betting that the assembly those guys are familiar with isn't the
same thing as what we have. If you have any looseness, you're going
to really screw up your axle. I just updated that page....scroll
to the bottom to read tonights update. I got a little long winded again
(surprise surprise), but I explained the axle and rotation and other
things in a bit of depth. For you -10 builders, that page is really
worth understanding, just so you can ponder it and know what's going on
there....even if you come to some other conclusion. (if you do, let me
know...I'd love to hear it, or hear exactly what the mechanics are that
George thinks would be better if it were looser)
I'll post the text of tonights update here again, but you would be much
better served to just read it on the page, and see the latest photos.
This is just for the archive's sake.
Here's the link again.
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/maintenance/20060809/index.html
---
Today I stopped by a machine shop and had them take off about .115" off
my axle, to accomodate 2 AN970-6 washers on the outer edge. Yes, they
are .063 each, so .126" would have been the standard, but I wanted the
axle to be even just a little more snug than before, because any flexing
inward will bring that valve cap closer to the fork. As a side note,
this from John D. today...a note someone sent him:
"returned the nosewheel to Matco to have it replaced with WHLNW511.25
which is correct for the valve stem on the tube and avoids the clearance
problem with the supplies WHLNW501.25."
In other words, Van's is sending out the wrong wheel for the application
on this plane...because they use this wheel for the RV-7's and such, and
didn't want to have to stock 2 parts. So we get to receive the one that
isn't made for the application, and therefore unless you swap wheels,
you're going to have minimal valve stem clearance.....pretty nice, huh?
Anyway, I had the axle cut shorter at a machine shop, and then I just
had to guesstimate how much to take off the 2 spacers. Knowing they had
worn into a taper on the inside, to fit against the bearing, I had them
only cut down by .085" total. I did .035" on one side, and .050" on the
other. That way I could have a slightly longer sleeve on the left side,
so my valve stem had just that little extra clearance from the fork.
This brought forth a small problem... Tonight when I assembled it as in
the first photo below, it looked great. VERY much better than original.
Then, when I put the whole wheel together, I found that the spacers
had worn probably at least .120" because there was tons of slop in the
spacers yet, even though they now had a nice flat surface to sit
between, and had been cut less than the axle, and the washers were in
there to fill in some space. The spacers just spun. So, I decided
since I already ordered another axle, I'd take my bandsaw and VERY
carefully trim off some more axle, and just use one more washer on the
left side. That should keep that valve stem even FURTHER away. If I
was right, I could get it so there would be plenty of pressure on the
bearings and spacers to hold them in place so they don't spin. Sure
enough, it worked just great. I could now torque that bolt down tight
and keep the spacers from spinning, and the bearing too. Just to be
totally sure they never spun again, I drilled a couple of holes in the
stainless spacers, and remounted it all. Then I made a pilot hole in
the aluminum axle shaft, and took it all apart and tapped it for an 8-32
screw on each spacer. Then I cleaned it up, regreased, and put it all
together. Now it is very solid, and should never wear the fork
again....I just am left with a crappy fork...so I'll probably just get a
new one. Once my new spacers and axle come in, I may tear it all apart
and use those pieces, but I'll still probably cut the axle and spacers
down and use the washers on the outer ends. It will prevent your forks
from being the sacrificial component. The bearing, for future
reference, is a Timken LM-6700-LA (I think that's right, but I'll
re-check tomorrow)
A note about tightening the axle nut... Tonight on the RV-10 list,
someone said that George Orndorff (A Van's tech center place), says that
the bolt should only be snugged, and then rechecked often in the first
few hours. I don't personally believe this is true on the RV-10, but
perhaps it is on the other models. Here's why. I studied this long
and hard, and now I fully understand why this is such a huge freaking
issue. It didn't make sense at first, having worked on dozens and
dozens of automotive bearings in the past. You see, on automotive apps,
the bearings are pressed in on the backside, and a nut and washer holds
the bearing tight. But it pushes against a different area of the
bearing. And the grease seal is usually a seal that is pressed into the
hub, with a seal around the shaft on the ID of the seal. This is NOT
how these bearings are on this application. On THIS application, you
are expecting that the sleeves, the axle, the bolt, AND the inner race
area of the bearing do not ever rotate. The problem is, if these
bearings were a tight knurled, or press fit onto that axle shaft, it
might be easy to keep them from rotating by just not letting the shaft
spin. But, what happens here is that the grease seal is a large seal
that the wheel spins around....so the seal is on the OD of the bearing
in this case. That's why my stinking seals were so torn when the wheel
wobbled. The kicker to the problem is, if you don't have the spacers
very tight against the bearing, there's not enough force to keep the
bearing from turning on the shaft. If the bearing spins on the axle
shaft, then it's becoming USELESS as a bearing. At that point, you're
using the aluminum axle as the bushing, and the wheel is rolling by
spinning the hard steel bearing race against your soft aluminum axle
shaft.....instead of turning the roller bearings inside of the wheel's
outer race. The seal itself has a lot of drag against the wheel as it
spins, and this drag will make it so that the wheel tries REALLY hard to
make the bearing spin. As it turns out, if you don't have tight
spacers, it's really easy to get that bearing spinning. And once the
bearing is spinning, the spacers stuffed right up against it will spin
too. And once they start spinning, they'll spin against the fork. If
you have the stainless ones like me, they'll ABSOLUTELY then start
carving into your forks. If you have the new and improved thick
aluminum ones (that I can't comment firmly on because I haven't seen
them), then they would have more surface area against both the bearing
and the fork....so on one hand the bearing will try to turn it harder,
but the fork will prevent it harder as well. To me, this is STILL
going to be a less than ideal situation until you PREVENT the spacers
from turning, and you PROTECT the forks from being worn if they do turn.
The lock screws I put in should keep the spacers still. The washers
will protect the forks. The one further improvement that would be
simple would be to drill a tiny hole in the fork on one side, that
drills into the aluminum axle, and then tap for a small hex head
internal setscrew lock, so that you could pin the axle from rotating at
all too. Beyond that, the only real improvement I could think of is if
you could find a way to either press-fit, or hold that inner bearing
from turning on the axle. Perhaps knurling it, epoxy, a small keyway
and shear key, or something like that would be the ticket. If you've
done all of the other steps, and have tight spacers, you probably
wouldn't have any huge issues from that point.
The worst thing about it is that no matter what you do, you really don't
have independent control over how tight the bearings are
seated...separate from how tight the axle bolts are and how long the
spacers are. Just to let you know how this all ends up the way I have
it tonight, the wheel will not continue rolling if you spin it by hand.
I don't think it's too tight from a bearing perspective, but the
grease seals against the wheel hub provide a lot of drag, so they don't
let the wheel spin real freely.
A couple other tips, while I'm at it. By the time you get to 25 hours
on your plane, re-check that large nut that holds the fork on. Mine
needed to be tightened almost one full flat to the next castle stop, to
retorque it after it took it's set. I think the spec is about 24lbs.
pull of breakout force to rotate the nose at an angle.
The second tip that I can't yet verify is fairing balance. To prevent
shimmy, I've heard that a good idea is to balance your fairing. Since I
had a little lead shot around, and I wanted this all to be perfect now,
tonight I weighed out a little lead and taped it to the nose of the
nosewheel fairing. I got it so that I could hold it where it mounts, in
the centers of those 4 screw areas, and get it to be about neutrally
balanced. Then I just took a little shot away, poured the rest into
the nose of the fairing, and mixed a couple of squirts of epoxy. I
poured the epoxy into the nose over the shot, put down one layer of
cloth, and then a little more epoxy. By tomorrow that stuff won't be
going anywhere, and I already re-checked the balance and it's now much
less tail heavy, so maybe that will improve things too.
---
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - 107 hours Flying
Wayne Edgerton wrote:
> I'm currently building in Justin, TX in George Orndorff's hangar, he's
> the one that makes the RV building videos and is also a Van's tech
> center, and I was talking to him about this problem, wondering if I
> needed to take some type of action on mine. His response to me on this
> issue was that this was a quite common occurrence on the RV's. He said
> the reason he believes it happens is that when the builder tightens
> down the bolt holding on the bushing and tire that they tighten it
> down too much. He said I should just tighten it down just until it's
> snug. Then after flying it for 5 or 10 hours check it and retighten
> it. Do this over the first 20 or 30 hours.
>
> I have a friend who is an A&P and also a DAR and I called him and ask
> him the same question. He agreed with George. He said to tighten the
> bolt down until a little grease comes out of the bearing and then back
> it off a little and then keep an eye on it for awhile.
>
> This may not be the case on Tim's plane though?
>
> For what ever it's worth.
>
> Wayne Edgerton #40336
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
I just had this exchange off-list that might be nice for
the list. Michael wasn't thinking of how the bearings
are torqued down, and now he realizes that it's by the
spacer length. So I'll post my off-list talk here just
for the list's benefit. (I'm really sorry this is getting
so long, but I think we're all eventually going to learn
and benefit from this discussion).
--------
Ok, I'll leave you with this thought then....
The forks by design will lay right on the axle, a fixed distance. The
spacers also lay directly against the fork.
With this design, as you tighten it, the outer faces of both the axle
and the spacers will be flush, and flat against the fork. Therefore
there isn't really any bearing force adjustment possible, because it is
controlled ONLY by the length of the spacers...and it will be perfect
only if the spacers are the perfect length....and it will stay perfect
only if there is no wear. If one were to only snug the
axle bolt slightly, the center axle itself in theory could be less tight
and not flush with the forks,while the spacers ARE. That would make a
whole additional problem in that the axle itself could be the part that
easily turns.
There's one thing that sure would make this a much slicker design....to
have the axle made so the center axle can't turn, and then to have a way
to keep the bearings from rotating on the axle...so they only rotate in
the hub. If that could be done (i.e.
a press-fit, or splined attachment, or something like that) then the
spacers would never spin, and all of this would be a complete non-issue.
This is where Van's really should step in and clarify the torque,
because IMHO, if you're going to just snug that bolt down, you're just
LOOKING for problems.
The design itself is not great....but certain assembly things could
really make it bad.
Think about it a minute, and if you see what I'm saying, maybe I should
move this post to the list. If you think I'm nuts though, then we
should investigate this further.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote:
>
> I don't think they are saying leave them loose. What they are saying is
> you don't want to crank down taper bearings as you will destroy them at
> a much greater rate than normal and cause even more of the slop you are
> seeing. What I think they are missing is that this is a design problem
> because the small surface area of the SS bushing is in direct contact
> with the aluminum fork. No matter what you do to make sure the axle
> stays SNUG, this WILL eventually ware into the fork without something
> else to increase the surface area against the fork. This could be a cap
> or simply a steel washer.
>
> In my opinion you have the right idea Tim, machine down the axle
> whatever the thickness of the washers are and put them in with it.
>
> Michael Sausen
> RV-10 #352 Buildus Interuptus due to moving
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | speckter(at)comcast.net |
| Subject: | Re: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
Glastar has this same issue. The difference is that they use a Cleveland wheel
that has seals like the main axels. They use an aluminum spacer between the
fork and the bearing (slipped over the axel) and then a small roll pin in the
fork that seats into a small slot on the spacer to stop rotation.
With the radius on the bearing that we have the only solution is to have a spacer
that has the same radius and a large surface area.
Another thing to try is to have a spacer inside the wheel on the axel so that when
you clamp up the whole assembly the inner race of both bearings are clamped
between the spacers and thus you can clamp the bearing race tight without preloading
the bearing excessively.
All in all not a great design from Van.
Gary
40274
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
>
> Wayne, for what it's worth, I really don't think this will work
> that way on the RV-10. I may be wrong, but I think you really need
> to tighten that thing well on this plane or you'll REALLY have problems.
> I'm betting that the assembly those guys are familiar with isn't the
> same thing as what we have. If you have any looseness, you're going
> to really screw up your axle. I just updated that page....scroll
> to the bottom to read tonights update. I got a little long winded again
> (surprise surprise), but I explained the axle and rotation and other
> things in a bit of depth. For you -10 builders, that page is really
> worth understanding, just so you can ponder it and know what's going
> on there....even if you come to some other conclusion. (if you do,
> let me know...I'd love to hear it, or hear exactly what the mechanics
> are that George thinks would be better if it were looser)
>
> I'll post the text of tonights update here again, but you would be
> much better served to just read it on the page, and see the latest
> photos. This is just for the archive's sake.
>
> Here's the link again.
> http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/maintenance/20060809/index.html
>
> ---
> Today I stopped by a machine shop and had them take off about .115" off
> my axle, to accomodate 2 AN970-6 washers on the outer edge. Yes, they
> are .063 each, so .126" would have been the standard, but I wanted the
> axle to be even just a little more snug than before, because any flexing
> inward will bring that valve cap closer to the fork. As a side note,
> this from John D. today...a note someone sent him:
>
> "returned the nosewheel to Matco to have it replaced with WHLNW511.25
> which is correct for the valve stem on the tube and avoids the clearance
> problem with the supplies WHLNW501.25."
>
> In other words, Van's is sending out the wrong wheel for the application
> on this plane...because they use this wheel for the RV-7's and such, and
> didn't want to have to stock 2 parts. So we get to receive the one that
> isn't made for the application, and therefore unless you swap wheels,
> you're going to have minimal valve stem clearance.....pretty nice, huh?
>
>
> Anyway, I had the axle cut shorter at a machine shop, and then I just
> had to guesstimate how much to take off the 2 spacers. Knowing they had
> worn into a taper on the inside, to fit against the bearing, I had them
> only cut down by .085" total. I did .035" on one side, and .050" on the
> other. That way I could have a slightly longer sleeve on the left side,
> so my valve stem had just that little extra clearance from the fork.
> This brought forth a small problem... Tonight when I assembled it as in
> the first photo below, it looked great. VERY much better than original.
> Then, when I put the whole wheel together, I found that the spacers
> had worn probably at least .120" because there was tons of slop in the
> spacers yet, even though they now had a nice flat surface to sit
> between, and had been cut less than the axle, and the washers were in
> there to fill in some space. The spacers just spun. So, I decided
> since I already ordered another axle, I'd take my bandsaw and VERY
> carefully trim off some more axle, and just use one more washer on the
> left side. That should keep that valve stem even FURTHER away. If I
> was right, I could get it so there would be plenty of pressure on the
> bearings and spacers to hold them in place so they don't spin. Sure
> enough, it worked just great. I could now torque that bolt down tight
> and keep the spacers from spinning, and the bearing too. Just to be
> totally sure they never spun again, I drilled a couple of holes in the
> stainless spacers, and remounted it all. Then I made a pilot hole in
> the aluminum axle shaft, and took it all apart and tapped it for an 8-32
> screw on each spacer. Then I cleaned it up, regreased, and put it all
> together. Now it is very solid, and should never wear the fork
> again....I just am left with a crappy fork...so I'll probably just get a
> new one. Once my new spacers and axle come in, I may tear it all apart
> and use those pieces, but I'll still probably cut the axle and spacers
> down and use the washers on the outer ends. It will prevent your forks
> from being the sacrificial component. The bearing, for future
> reference, is a Timken LM-6700-LA (I think that's right, but I'll
> re-check tomorrow)
>
> A note about tightening the axle nut... Tonight on the RV-10 list,
> someone said that George Orndorff (A Van's tech center place), says that
> the bolt should only be snugged, and then rechecked often in the first
> few hours. I don't personally believe this is true on the RV-10, but
> perhaps it is on the other models. Here's why. I studied this long
> and hard, and now I fully understand why this is such a huge freaking
> issue. It didn't make sense at first, having worked on dozens and
> dozens of automotive bearings in the past. You see, on automotive apps,
> the bearings are pressed in on the backside, and a nut and washer holds
> the bearing tight. But it pushes against a different area of the
> bearing. And the grease seal is usually a seal that is pressed into the
> hub, with a seal around the shaft on the ID of the seal. This is NOT
> how these bearings are on this application. On THIS application, you
> are expecting that the sleeves, the axle, the bolt, AND the inner race
> area of the bearing do not ever rotate. The problem is, if these
> bearings were a tight knurled, or press fit onto that axle shaft, it
> might be easy to keep them from rotating by just not letting the shaft
> spin. But, what happens here is that the grease seal is a large seal
> that the wheel spins around....so the seal is on the OD of the bearing
> in this case. That's why my stinking seals were so torn when the wheel
> wobbled. The kicker to the problem is, if you don't have the spacers
> very tight against the bearing, there's not enough force to keep the
> bearing from turning on the shaft. If the bearing spins on the axle
> shaft, then it's becoming USELESS as a bearing. At that point, you're
> using the aluminum axle as the bushing, and the wheel is rolling by
> spinning the hard steel bearing race against your soft aluminum axle
> shaft.....instead of turning the roller bearings inside of the wheel's
> outer race. The seal itself has a lot of drag against the wheel as it
> spins, and this drag will make it so that the wheel tries REALLY hard to
> make the bearing spin. As it turns out, if you don't have tight
> spacers, it's really easy to get that bearing spinning. And once the
> bearing is spinning, the spacers stuffed right up against it will spin
> too. And once they start spinning, they'll spin against the fork. If
> you have the stainless ones like me, they'll ABSOLUTELY then start
> carving into your forks. If you have the new and improved thick
> aluminum ones (that I can't comment firmly on because I haven't seen
> them), then they would have more surface area against both the bearing
> and the fork....so on one hand the bearing will try to turn it harder,
> but the fork will prevent it harder as well. To me, this is STILL
> going to be a less than ideal situation until you PREVENT the spacers
> from turning, and you PROTECT the forks from being worn if they do turn.
> The lock screws I put in should keep the spacers still. The washers
> will protect the forks. The one further improvement that would be
> simple would be to drill a tiny hole in the fork on one side, that
> drills into the aluminum axle, and then tap for a small hex head
> internal setscrew lock, so that you could pin the axle from rotating at
> all too. Beyond that, the only real improvement I could think of is if
> you could find a way to either press-fit, or hold that inner bearing
> from turning on the axle. Perhaps knurling it, epoxy, a small keyway
> and shear key, or something like that would be the ticket. If you've
> done all of the other steps, and have tight spacers, you probably
> wouldn't have any huge issues from that point.
>
> The worst thing about it is that no matter what you do, you really don't
> have independent control over how tight the bearings are
> seated...separate from how tight the axle bolts are and how long the
> spacers are. Just to let you know how this all ends up the way I have
> it tonight, the wheel will not continue rolling if you spin it by hand.
> I don't think it's too tight from a bearing perspective, but the
> grease seals against the wheel hub provide a lot of drag, so they don't
> let the wheel spin real freely.
>
> A couple other tips, while I'm at it. By the time you get to 25 hours
> on your plane, re-check that large nut that holds the fork on. Mine
> needed to be tightened almost one full flat to the next castle stop, to
> retorque it after it took it's set. I think the spec is about 24lbs.
> pull of breakout force to rotate the nose at an angle.
>
> The second tip that I can't yet verify is fairing balance. To prevent
> shimmy, I've heard that a good idea is to balance your fairing. Since I
> had a little lead shot around, and I wanted this all to be perfect now,
> tonight I weighed out a little lead and taped it to the nose of the
> nosewheel fairing. I got it so that I could hold it where it mounts, in
> the centers of those 4 screw areas, and get it to be about neutrally
> balanced. Then I just took a little shot away, poured the rest into
> the nose of the fairing, and mixed a couple of squirts of epoxy. I
> poured the epoxy into the nose over the shot, put down one layer of
> cloth, and then a little more epoxy. By tomorrow that stuff won't be
> going anywhere, and I already re-checked the balance and it's now much
> less tail heavy, so maybe that will improve things too.
>
> ---
>
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - 107 hours Flying
>
>
>
> Wayne Edgerton wrote:
> > I'm currently building in Justin, TX in George Orndorff's hangar, he's
> > the one that makes the RV building videos and is also a Van's tech
> > center, and I was talking to him about this problem, wondering if I
> > needed to take some type of action on mine. His response to me on this
> > issue was that this was a quite common occurrence on the RV's. He said
> > the reason he believes it happens is that when the builder tightens down
> > the bolt holding on the bushing and tire that they tighten it down too
> > much. He said I should just tighten it down just until it's snug. Then
> > after flying it for 5 or 10 hours check it and retighten it. Do this
> > over the first 20 or 30 hours.
> >
> > I have a friend who is an A&P and also a DAR and I called him and ask
> > him the same question. He agreed with George. He said to tighten the
> > bolt down until a little grease comes out of the bearing and then back
> > it off a little and then keep an eye on it for awhile.
> >
> > This may not be the case on Tim's plane though?
> >
> > For what ever it's worth.
> >
> > Wayne Edgerton #40336
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Glastar has this same issue. The difference is that they use a Cleveland
wheel that has seals like the main axels. They use an aluminum spacer
between the fork and the bearing (slipped over the axel) and then a small roll
pin in the fork that seats into a small slot on the spacer to stop rotation.
With the radius on the bearing that we have the only solution is to have a
spacer that has the same radius and a large surface area.
Another thing to try is to have a spacer inside the wheel on the axel so that
when you clamp up the whole assembly the inner race of both bearings are clamped
between the spacers and thus you can clamp the bearing race tight without
preloading the bearing excessively.
All in all not a great design from Van.
Gary
40274
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson
>
> Wayne, for what it's worth, I really don't
think this will work
> that way on the RV-10. I may be wrong, but I think
you really need
> to tighten that thing well on this plane or you'll
REALLY have problems.
> I'm betting that the assembly those guys are
familiar with isn't the
> same thing as what we have. If you have any looseness,
you're going
> to really screw up your axle. I just updated that
page....scroll
> to the bottom to read tonights update. I got a little
long winded again
> (surprise surprise), but I explained the axle and
rotation and other
> things in a bit of depth. For you -10 builders,
that page is really
> worth understanding, ju
st so
you can ponder it and know what's going
> on there....even if you come to some other conclusion. (if you do,
> let me know...I'd love to hear it, or hear exactly what the mechanics
> are that George thinks would be better if it were looser)
>
> I'll post the text of tonights update here again, but you would be
> much better served to just read it on the page, and see the latest
> photos. This is just for the archive's sake.
>
> Here's the link again.
> http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/maintenance/20060809/index.html
>
> ---
> Today I stopped by a machine shop and had them take off about .115" off
> my axle, to accomodate 2 AN970-6 washers on the outer edge. Yes, they
> are .063 each, so .126" would have been the standard, but I wanted the
> axle to be even just a little more snug than before, because any flexing
> inward will bring that valve cap closer to the fo
rk. As
a side note,
> this from John D. today...a note someone sent him:
>
> "returned the nosewheel to Matco to have it replaced with WHLNW511.25
> which is correct for the valve stem on the tube and avoids the clearance
> problem with the supplies WHLNW501.25."
>
> In
other words, Van's is sending out the wrong wheel for the application
>
on this plane...because they use this wheel for the RV-7's and such, and
>
didn't want to have to stock 2 parts. So we get to receive the one that
> isn't made for the application, and therefore unless you swap wheels,
> you're going to have minimal valve stem clearance.....pretty nice, huh?
>
>
> Anyway, I had the axle cut shorter at a machine
shop, and then I just
> had to guesstimate how much to take off the
2 spacers. Knowing they had
> worn into a taper on the inside, to fit
against the bearing, I had them
> only cut d
own by
.085" total. I did .035" on one side, and .050" on the
> other. That way
I could have a slightly longer sleeve on the left side,
> so my valve
stem had just that little extra clearance from the fork.
> This brought
forth a small problem... Tonight when I assembled it as in
> the first
photo below, it looked great. VERY much better than original.
> Then,
when I put the whole wheel together, I found that the spacers
> had worn
probably at least .120" because there was tons of slop in the
> spacers
yet, even though they now had a nice flat surface to sit
> between,
and had been cut less than the axle, and the washers were in
> there to
fill in some space. The spacers just spun. So, I decided
> since I already
ordered another axle, I'd take my bandsaw and VERY
> carefully trim
off some more axle, and just use one more washer on the
> left side.
That should keep that valve stem even FURTHER away.
If I <
BR>> was right, I could get it so there would be plenty of pressure on the
>
bearings and spacers to hold them in place so they don't spin. Sure
>
enough, it worked just great. I could now torque that bolt down tight
>
and keep the spacers from spinning, and the bearing too. Just to be
>
totally sure they never spun again, I drilled a couple of holes in the
> stainless spacers, and remounted it all. Then I made a pilot hole in
> the aluminum axle shaft, and took it all apart and tapped it for an 8-32
> screw on each spacer. Then I cleaned it up, regreased, and put it
all
> together. Now it is very solid, and should never wear the fork
>
again....I just am left with a crappy fork...so I'll probably just get
a
> new one. Once my new spacers and axle come in, I may tear it all apart
> and use those pieces, but I'll still probably cut the axle and spacers
> down and use the washers on the outer
ends.
It will prevent your forks
> from being the sacrificial component. The
bearing, for future
> reference, is a Timken LM-6700-LA (I think that's
right, but I'll
> re-check tomorrow)
>
> A note about tightening
the axle nut... Tonight on the RV-10 list,
> someone said that
George Orndorff (A Van's tech center place), says that
> the bolt should
only be snugged, and then rechecked often in the first
> few hours.
I don't personally believe this is true on the RV-10, but
> perhaps it
is on the other models. Here's why. I studied this long
> and hard, and
now I fully understand why this is such a huge freaking
> issue. It didn't
make sense at first, having worked on dozens and
> dozens of automotive
bearings in the past. You see, on automotive apps,
> the bearings
are pressed in on the backside, and a nut and washer holds
> the bearing
tight. But it pushes against a different area of t
he
> bearing. And the grease seal is usually a seal that is pressed into the
>
hub, with a seal around the shaft on the ID of the seal. This is NOT
>
how these bearings are on this application. On THIS application, you
>
are expecting that the sleeves, the axle, the bolt, AND the inner race
> area of the bearing do not ever rotate. The problem is, if these
>
bearings were a tight knurled, or press fit onto that axle shaft, it
>
might be easy to keep them from rotating by just not letting the shaft
>
spin. But, what happens here is that the grease seal is a large seal
>
that the wheel spins around....so the seal is on the OD of the bearing
> in this case. That's why my stinking seals were so torn when the wheel
> wobbled. The kicker to the problem is, if you don't have the spacers
> very tight against the bearing, there's not enough force to keep the
> bearing from turning on the shaft. If the
beari
ng spins on the axle
> shaft, then it's becoming USELESS as a bearing. At
that point, you're
> using the aluminum axle as the bushing, and the
wheel is rolling by
> spinning the hard steel bearing race against your
soft aluminum axle
> shaft.....instead of turning the roller bearings
inside of the wheel's
> outer race. The seal itself has a lot of drag against
the wheel as it
> spins, and this drag will make it so that the
wheel tries REALLY hard to
> make the bearing spin. As it turns out, if
you don't have tight
> spacers, it's really easy to get that bearing spinning.
And once the
> bearing is spinning, the spacers stuffed right
up against it will spin
> too. And once they start spinning, they'll spin
against the fork. If
> you have the stainless ones like me, they'll
ABSOLUTELY then start
> carving into your forks. If you have the new and
improved thick
> aluminum ones (that I can't
comme
nt firmly on because I haven't seen
> them), then they would have more surface
area against both the bearing
> and the fork....so on one hand the
bearing will try to turn it harder,
> but the fork will prevent it harder
as well. To me, this is STILL
> going to be a less than ideal situation
until you PREVENT the spacers
> from turning, and you PROTECT the
forks from being worn if they do turn.
> The lock screws I put in should
keep the spacers still. The washers
> will protect the forks. The one
further improvement that would be
> simple would be to drill a tiny
hole in the fork on one side, that
> drills into the aluminum axle, and
then tap for a small hex head
> internal setscrew lock, so that you could
pin the axle from rotating at
> all too. Beyond that, the only real
improvement I could think of is if
> you could find a way to either press-fit,
or hold that inner bearing
> from tur
ning o
n the axle. Perhaps knurling it, epoxy, a small keyway
> and shear key,
or something like that would be the ticket. If you've
> done all of the
other steps, and have tight spacers, you probably
> wouldn't have any
huge issues from that point.
>
> The worst thing about it is that
no matter what you do, you really don't
> have independent control over
how tight the bearings are
> seated...separate from how tight the axle
bolts are and how long the
> spacers are. Just to let you know how this
all ends up the way I have
> it tonight, the wheel will not continue
rolling if you spin it by hand.
> I don't think it's too tight from a
bearing perspective, but the
> grease seals against the wheel hub provide
a lot of drag, so they don't
> let the wheel spin real freely.
>
> A couple other tips, while I'm at it. By the time you get to 25
hours
> on your plane, re-check that large nut
that
holds the fork on. Mine
> needed to be tightened almost one full flat to
the next castle stop, to
> retorque it after it took it's set. I think
the spec is about 24lbs.
> pull of breakout force to rotate the nose at
an angle.
>
> The second tip that I can't yet verify is fairing
balance. To prevent
> shimmy, I've heard that a good idea is to balance
your fairing. Since I
> had a little lead shot around, and I wanted
this all to be perfect now,
> tonight I weighed out a little lead and taped
it to the nose of the
> nosewheel fairing. I got it so that I could
hold it where it mounts, in
> the centers of those 4 screw areas, and
get it to be about neutrally
> balanced. Then I just took a little shot
away, poured the rest into
> the nose of the fairing, and mixed a couple
of squirts of epoxy. I
> poured the epoxy into the nose over the shot,
put down one layer of
> cloth, and then a
little
more epoxy. By tomorrow that stuff won't be
> going anywhere, and I already
re-checked the balance and it's now much
> less tail heavy, so maybe
that will improve things too.
>
> ---
>
>
>
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - 107 hours Flying
>
>
>
>
Wayne Edgerton wrote:
> > I'm currently building in Justin, TX
in George Orndorff's hangar, he's
> > the one that makes the RV building
videos and is also a Van's tech
> > center, and I was talking
to him about this problem, wondering if I
> > needed to take some type
of action on mine. His response to me on this
> > issue was that
this was a quite common occurrence on the RV's. He said
> > the reason
he believes it happens is that when the builder tightens down
> >
the bolt holding on the bushing and tire that they tighten it down too
>
> much. He said I should just tighten it down j
ust un
Downl
BR>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Front Axle Reference Info |
| From: | "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com> |
Since some of us are visual people and might not have this part of the
kit yet, attached is the manual illustration of the front wheel attach
for reference.
Tim: along the lines of your set screw suggestion, somebody also
suggested drilling a hole through the nose fork, match drilling into the
axle, and installing a flat head screw to keep the axle from spinning.
This, along with your screws through the spacers/axles would seem to
guarantee the stability of the assembly and eliminate the need for the
washers (and associated trimming). Thoughts?
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> |
Perihelion design has a white led retrofit for the Whelen A555 tail lamp
it is for the position lamp only and not the strobe. See it here
<http://www.periheliondesign.com/ledlights.htm>. It is pricey at $139
and you still need the Whelen A555.
Larry Rosen
#356
Sean Blair wrote:
>
> Okay..another one. I plan to install LED position lighting. Any
> recommendations? Ill be using a 12 volt system.
>
> Is there a 12 volt LED strobe available? I see Whelen has one, but
> its a 24 volt.
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Sean Blair
>
> #40225
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Front Axle Reference Info |
Exactly. I think if you did a proper placement of a set screw from
the fork outside, you could drill into both the spacer and the
axle simultaneously, which would keep them both from turning and
then you wouldn't need the 2 screws I did. I just did this because
I have a whole set of new parts coming and didn't yet want to drill
my already compromised fork...since I have that groove worn into
them. I'm not as confident adding one more hole. If I had brand
new forks, I would have absolutely done it...but not until I've
seen the new spacer.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
Condrey, Bob (US SSA) wrote:
> Since some of us are visual people and might not have this part of the
> kit yet, attached is the manual illustration of the front wheel attach
> for reference.
>
> Tim: along the lines of your set screw suggestion, somebody also
> suggested drilling a hole through the nose fork, match drilling into the
> axle, and installing a flat head screw to keep the axle from spinning.
> This, along with your screws through the spacers/axles would seem to
> guarantee the stability of the assembly and eliminate the need for the
> washers (and associated trimming). Thoughts?
>
> Bob
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Front Axle Reference Info |
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
Thanks Bob, I should have looked for the reference diagram in the first
place. This is just messed up on a couple of levels. Tim is definitely
right, without something to lock everything in place, and let the
bearings do their job, something is going to wear eventually. Throw in
dissimilar metal hardness's and it's going to happen a lot faster.
Michael Sausen
RV-10 #352 Buildus Interuptus due to moving
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Condrey, Bob
(US SSA)
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 9:38 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Front Axle Reference Info
Since some of us are visual people and might not have this part of the
kit yet, attached is the manual illustration of the front wheel attach
for reference.
Tim: along the lines of your set screw suggestion, somebody also
suggested drilling a hole through the nose fork, match drilling into the
axle, and installing a flat head screw to keep the axle from spinning.
This, along with your screws through the spacers/axles would seem to
guarantee the stability of the assembly and eliminate the need for the
washers (and associated trimming). Thoughts?
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Front Axle Reference Info |
| From: | "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com> |
Just talked with Vans - apparently the new aluminum spacer part number
is U-1023, not sure what the original stainless steel spacer part number
was. They said aluminum version has been shipping in finish kits for a
little while now. They are sending me a pair of the aluminum spacers at
no charge. Nobody seems to know why a letter or service bulletin
wasn't issued.
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 10:16 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Front Axle Reference Info
Exactly. I think if you did a proper placement of a set screw from
the fork outside, you could drill into both the spacer and the
axle simultaneously, which would keep them both from turning and
then you wouldn't need the 2 screws I did. I just did this because
I have a whole set of new parts coming and didn't yet want to drill
my already compromised fork...since I have that groove worn into
them. I'm not as confident adding one more hole. If I had brand
new forks, I would have absolutely done it...but not until I've
seen the new spacer.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
Condrey, Bob (US SSA) wrote:
> Since some of us are visual people and might not have this part of the
> kit yet, attached is the manual illustration of the front wheel attach
> for reference.
>
> Tim: along the lines of your set screw suggestion, somebody also
> suggested drilling a hole through the nose fork, match drilling into
the
> axle, and installing a flat head screw to keep the axle from spinning.
> This, along with your screws through the spacers/axles would seem to
> guarantee the stability of the assembly and eliminate the need for the
> washers (and associated trimming). Thoughts?
>
> Bob
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jay Wik <jwik(at)crary.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Front Axle Reference Info |
In our business we have a lot of assemblies with dual bearing
applications. High speed rotor fans and chipper rotors, but also some
low rpm wheel hubs.
Our experience is that the best solution to all related problems with
shafts and bearings, is if the bearing races are trapped on both
sides and the stack up of spacers inside and outside of the bearings
are loaded so the races and spacers have no inclination to rotate.
Rather than an internal spacer we would typically machine a internal
step on the shaft (Axle).
The spacer or step on the inside might be a problem in standardizing if
there is much variability in wheels. It would be a better approach than
a spacer however if the wheel hub doesn't provide enough dimension for a
separate spacer becaus it doesen't take much of a step to effectively
stop the race.
The difficulty with a set screw or bolt, could be one of structural
integrity, but maybe even more so getting the perfect positioning of
those holes. you can still end up with too much play or too much
pre-load on the bearings.
Tim Olson wrote:
>
> Exactly. I think if you did a proper placement of a set screw from
> the fork outside, you could drill into both the spacer and the
> axle simultaneously, which would keep them both from turning and
> then you wouldn't need the 2 screws I did. I just did this because
> I have a whole set of new parts coming and didn't yet want to drill
> my already compromised fork...since I have that groove worn into
> them. I'm not as confident adding one more hole. If I had brand
> new forks, I would have absolutely done it...but not until I've
> seen the new spacer.
>
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
>
> Condrey, Bob (US SSA) wrote:
>> Since some of us are visual people and might not have this part of the
>> kit yet, attached is the manual illustration of the front wheel attach
>> for reference.
>>
>> Tim: along the lines of your set screw suggestion, somebody also
>> suggested drilling a hole through the nose fork, match drilling into the
>> axle, and installing a flat head screw to keep the axle from spinning.
>> This, along with your screws through the spacers/axles would seem to
>> guarantee the stability of the assembly and eliminate the need for the
>> washers (and associated trimming). Thoughts?
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
| From: | "Randy DeBauw" <Randy(at)abros.com> |
If the axle spins you have serious problems. You have to have the yoke
tight enough to hold the axle tight. The extra length of the spacers is
only enough so the bearings have a slight preload. The axle must be
locked by the yoke. As Tim has confirmed the axle was not spinning just
the outer spacer. Randy
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 4:41 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the
RV-10
Yeah, but not until I get all the new parts and see them.
That's one hole I'll "drill once".
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
ddddsp1(at)juno.com wrote:
> Tim,
>
> Are you planning to drill thru the fork into the axle and TAP it with
a
> contersunk screw to keep the axle from turning like you did to the
> spacer? I am thinking it would be easy to do and would eliminate the
> axle from turning even if the wheel got loose.
>
> Dean
>
> Getting engine today.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Henkjan van der Zouw" <henkjan(at)zme.nl> |
| Subject: | Front Axle Reference Info |
I have 40355 and still the SS spacers, they are no good!
Henkjan van der Zouw!
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] Namens
speckter(at)comcast.net
Verzonden: vrijdag 11 augustus 2006 19:57
Aan: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Onderwerp: Re: RV10-List: Front Axle Reference Info
I tried to order the spacers from Van's just now. they insisted that
they only shipped out very few stainless spacers before they switched.
thus they wanted to charge me for the new ones. It took some talking to
convince her that even though the part # were the same I had the SS
ones.
Left Hand meet Right hand
Gary
40274
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "David McNeill" <dlm46007(at)cox.net>
>
> I just spoke to Van's and they switched to aluminum early in the
finish kit
> shipments so check your spacers before calling.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)"
> To:
> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 9:52 AM
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Front Axle Reference Info
>
>
> >
> >
> > Tim,
> >
> > Actually it's a little more complicated than that. Kit numbers only
> > reflect where you were in line when you orde red th e tail kit. Any
other
> > kit would be dependent on the date it was shipped from Van's. I
didn't
> > ask exactly when they started shipping the new version of U-1023.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> > Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 11:19 AM
> > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Front Axle Reference Info
> >
> >
> > The old part number was the same, U-1023....they just changed the
> > piece that they were sending from thin stainless to thick
> > aluminum. I haven't seen the new parts first-hand yet, but
> > I understand that they are shipping new kits with the new ones.
> & gt; Me ====== BLOCKQ UOTE>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick <ricksked(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: IO-540 Hose kit -possible group buy |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Nose Wheel Valve Clearance Solution |
| From: | "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com> |
I just found out that Matco will exchange the stock nose wheel that
Van's supplies with a different version that provides about 5/8"
clearance from the fork. If you haven't yet mounted a tire on it they
will do this for only the cost of shipping!
If you have already mounted the tire they say you will likely mar the
wheel removing the tire and therefore it can't be sold as new. They can
however sell you a new "valve half", re-machine the back half and reuse
the same bearings for about $55. Since you ship them the stock rim they
can evaluate and if you were careful enough they'll just do the
exchange. Cost to purchase a complete wheel outright is about $125.
I have never been very happy about the valve stem clearance so I'm going
to exchange mine while waiting for the new U-1023 spacers to come from
Van's and take care of everything at once.
Thanks to Dean Sombke for this tip! Hopefully others will take
advantage of this offer from Matco before mounting the tire on their
nosewheel.
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David McNeill" <dlm46007(at)cox.net> |
following info taken from the archive 3/16/2006
The name , IIRC, was same as someone posted. He is the Van's rep at
Matco.
550 West 3615 South
Salt Lake City, UT 84115 USA
(801) 486-7574
(801) 486-7581 Fax
tech(at)MATCOmfg.com
you will need to call for RMA.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bcondrey" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com> |
My finish kit is from was crated 11/05/05 and had the stainless steel U-1023.
BOb
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54265#54265
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jay <jss165(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Overhead Console |
Another good place to find auto salvage parts is
www.car-part.com This is a searchable database of
salvage parts for just about any automobile you can
think of.
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rodger Todd <rj_todd(at)yahoo.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Matco contact |
I have recently exchanged my wheel - I passed the tip
onto John Dunne and originally got it from Dave
McNeill - thanks very much Dave.
What you need to do is contact Matco, easiest way is
to e-mail tech(at)matcomfg.com and explain what you want.
The replacement wheel is the WHLNW511.25, the
difference is that hub is machined for the longer stem
of the inner tube we use. I dealt with George Happ
who was most professional.
They will advise you of your costs and options
available. The wheel has to be in absolutely brand
new condition for the simple exchange. They apply a
handling charge to make the swap as well as charging
return postage. My costs were in Ozzie Dollars and
therefore not applicable to most.
They will supply you with a RMA which must be
exhibited on the return parcel. Again, I can't comment
on timescales as I'm on the other side of the world!
Rodger
Somewhere gazing at the QB
--- David McNeill wrote:
> following info taken from the archive 3/16/2006
>
>
> The name , IIRC, was same as someone posted. He is
> the Van's rep at Matco.
>
>
> 550 West 3615 South
> Salt Lake City, UT 84115 USA
>
> (801) 486-7574
> (801) 486-7581 Fax
>
> tech(at)MATCOmfg.com
>
>
> you will need to call for RMA.
>
>
>
___________________________________________________________
All New Yahoo! Mail Tired of Vi@gr@! come-ons? Let our SpamGuard protect you. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Edgerton" <wayne.e(at)grandecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Serious Front Axle Maintenance Issue on the RV-10 |
Hi Tim,
I talked to Gus at Van's yesterday about this issue and since I also
have the steel sleeves he will be sending me out the aluminum ones. But
I did ask him about the tightness issue and he told me I should tighten
the bolt to about 160 to 190 " lbs and the wheel and if I try and turn
it by hand it will be a little hard to turn and shouldn't spin freely.
Again for what ever that worth
Wayne Edgerton
#40336
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David McNeill" <dlm46007(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Van's Manifold pressure kit |
Anybody bought that kit? besides the hose what else is in it? I am using
the GRT EIS as the engine monitor and the tube to their MAP transducer
is about .125" ID. I have not been able to find a connector between the
AN807 bulkhead adaptor which is set up for .25" ID.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" <ddddsp1(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | New Pistons and Lord Mounts |
I have some extra parts I do not need for my RV. Thought I would offer t
hem to the RV crowd and if no interest put them on Ebay. Parts include 6
NEW pistons for an (I)O-540. Part # SL 75413 . Also have 4 NEW Lord mot
or mounts Part # J3804-20 . If anyone is interested send me an email.
ddddsp(at)juno.com
Dean
________________________________________________________________________
I have some extra parts I do not need for my RV. Thought I wo
uld offer them to the RV crowd and if no interest put them on Ebay. Part
s include 6 NEW pistons for an (I)O-540. Part # SL 75413 . Also have 4 N
EW Lord motor mounts Part # J3804-20 . If anyone is interested send me a
n email.
ddd
dsp(at)juno.comDean
______________________
__________________________________________________
Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | First post-51% rule-private build w/ QB kit |
| From: | "tomhanaway" <tomhanaway(at)adelphia.net> |
Hi all,
I'm one of those lurkers that's been thinking about this for three years and am
ready to pull the trigger. I apologize if this has been answered before but
my search didn't turn up an answer.
Recent discussion of the 51% rule has raised some concerns. I don't pretend to
understand the politics behind it but I read the primary direction as towards
commercial/multi-unit builders.
My question is (and perhaps I should mail a letter to Van's also) is:
If I build a RV-10 as follows, will I have stayed within the 51% homebuilt rule?
1 Empennage- build at Alexander Tech Center to learn skills (my work under supervision
and guidance).
2. Wings and fuselage-quick build kit by myself
3. engine and avionics-installed myself
4. cabin/seat upholstery-outsourced (if necessary, I could do this but it doesn't
excite me).
5. painting-outsourced (I definitely don't have the skills or resources for this).
My intent is to build this for myself. Pleasure of building probably greater than
pleasure of flying. Will not be selling plane in any sort of foreseeable future.
Is the consensus that I'm in the clear on this or am I treading dangerously close
to not meeting the 51% rule? Any suggestions for pursuing a definitive answer
prior to ordering stages of kit?
Thanks in advance,
Tom Hanaway
Boynton Beach, FL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54522#54522
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First post-51% rule-private build w/ QB kit |
I don't see this as a problem for you at all. Any true, legitimate
builder assist like Alexander Tech Center shouldn't be in violation, and
the fact that you're personally there doing the work is what matters.
I think Van's has official approval of the QB wings and fuse under the
51% rule. You can check, but I think this will pass. There's a lot
left undone.
Interior, Panel, and Paint don't even count towards the requirements
at least by the rules that I've heard of...unless something major
just changed. So those won't be any problem. I can't remember if
the engine does or doesn't, but you definitely aren't required to
assemble the engine yourself, and considering you're going to install
it yourself, you're fine there too.
So what you're considering seems to be fine. Unless something
drastic changes, I can't see how you'd have any problem.
Tim
do not achive
tomhanaway wrote:
>
>
> Hi all, I'm one of those lurkers that's been thinking about this for
> three years and am ready to pull the trigger. I apologize if this
> has been answered before but my search didn't turn up an answer.
> Recent discussion of the 51% rule has raised some concerns. I don't
> pretend to understand the politics behind it but I read the primary
> direction as towards commercial/multi-unit builders.
>
> My question is (and perhaps I should mail a letter to Van's also) is:
>
>
> If I build a RV-10 as follows, will I have stayed within the 51%
> homebuilt rule? 1 Empennage- build at Alexander Tech Center to learn
> skills (my work under supervision and guidance). 2. Wings and
> fuselage-quick build kit by myself 3. engine and avionics-installed
> myself 4. cabin/seat upholstery-outsourced (if necessary, I could do
> this but it doesn't excite me). 5. painting-outsourced (I definitely
> don't have the skills or resources for this).
>
> My intent is to build this for myself. Pleasure of building probably
> greater than pleasure of flying. Will not be selling plane in any
> sort of foreseeable future.
>
> Is the consensus that I'm in the clear on this or am I treading
> dangerously close to not meeting the 51% rule? Any suggestions for
> pursuing a definitive answer prior to ordering stages of kit?
>
> Thanks in advance, Tom Hanaway Boynton Beach, FL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Jessen" <jjessen(at)rcn.com> |
| Subject: | First post-51% rule-private build w/ QB kit |
Tom,
As I understand it, but I'm not an authority on the topic, Van's is within
the 51% rule, even if you were to buy all quick build components. The
paint, upholstery, fire wall forward (engine, etc) and building the panel
are not counted in the 51% rule. So, as you described what you're up to,
the only question would be Alexander's. I would check with both Van's and
Alexander's. I would think that the latter would have taken this into
account when setting up their program. If it's supervision only, then go
have fun! My guess is you'll be fine.
John Jessen
#40328
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of tomhanaway
Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 5:48 AM
Subject: RV10-List: First post-51% rule-private build w/ QB kit
Hi all,
Recent discussion of the 51% rule has raised some concerns. I don't pretend
to understand the politics behind it but I read the primary direction as
towards commercial/multi-unit builders.
My question is (and perhaps I should mail a letter to Van's also) is:
If I build a RV-10 as follows, will I have stayed within the 51% homebuilt
rule?
1 Empennage- build at Alexander Tech Center to learn skills (my work under
supervision and guidance).
2. Wings and fuselage-quick build kit by myself 3. engine and
avionics-installed myself 4. cabin/seat upholstery-outsourced (if necessary,
I could do this but it doesn't excite me).
5. painting-outsourced (I definitely don't have the skills or resources for
this).
My intent is to build this for myself. Pleasure of building probably greater
than pleasure of flying. Will not be selling plane in any sort of
foreseeable future.
Is the consensus that I'm in the clear on this or am I treading dangerously
close to not meeting the 51% rule? Any suggestions for pursuing a
definitive answer prior to ordering stages of kit?
Thanks in advance,
Tom Hanaway
Boynton Beach, FL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54522#54522
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: First post-51% rule-private build w/ QB kit |
| From: | "tomhanaway" <tomhanaway(at)adelphia.net> |
Thanks for the feedback. Alexander's confirms by telephone and on the website that
they meet/observe the 51% standard. Nice to hear that painting and interior
upholstery aren't part of the standard.
Tom H.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54566#54566
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gary" <speckter(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | First post-51% rule-private build w/ QB kit |
You are definitely in compliance. Not even close. Have fun and go for i.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of tomhanaway
Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 7:48 AM
Subject: RV10-List: First post-51% rule-private build w/ QB kit
Hi all,
I'm one of those lurkers that's been thinking about this for three years and
am ready to pull the trigger. I apologize if this has been answered before
but my search didn't turn up an answer.
Recent discussion of the 51% rule has raised some concerns. I don't pretend
to understand the politics behind it but I read the primary direction as
towards commercial/multi-unit builders.
My question is (and perhaps I should mail a letter to Van's also) is:
If I build a RV-10 as follows, will I have stayed within the 51% homebuilt
rule?
1 Empennage- build at Alexander Tech Center to learn skills (my work under
supervision and guidance).
2. Wings and fuselage-quick build kit by myself
3. engine and avionics-installed myself
4. cabin/seat upholstery-outsourced (if necessary, I could do this but it
doesn't excite me).
5. painting-outsourced (I definitely don't have the skills or resources for
this).
My intent is to build this for myself. Pleasure of building probably greater
than pleasure of flying. Will not be selling plane in any sort of
foreseeable future.
Is the consensus that I'm in the clear on this or am I treading dangerously
close to not meeting the 51% rule? Any suggestions for pursuing a
definitive answer prior to ordering stages of kit?
Thanks in advance,
Tom Hanaway
Boynton Beach, FL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54522#54522
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Evan and Megan Johnson" <evmeg(at)snowcrest.net> |
| Subject: | loading the roof |
OK guys...I've run into a problem. I finally committed to doing the
fiberglass roof and the D*@&! thing does not seem to fit. The door
openings in the aluminum fuselage are just a bit narrow (about 3/16"
tight). I have sanded the glass down to about 3/16" thick at the door
jams and it is still an extremely tight fit. I think if I really force
it I can get it in there but I will likely fracture the door frame. That
frame is going to get mighty flimsy if I keep cutting....I have already
exposed the glass laminations and intend to put new epoxy in. Any
suggestions?
Evan Johnson
www.evansaviationproducts.com
(530)247-0375
(530)351-1776 cell
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pascal" <pascalreid(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: First post-51% rule-private build w/ QB kit |
> the only question would be Alexander's.
Builder assistance is certainly within the rule- Alexander's qualify as
Builder asssitance since the builder isn't assisting them but actually is
the builder getting the assistance.
Lancair does this for months for their builders (and significantly more
expensive at that too!)
Tom;
Best of success with this building- you are more than fine.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Jessen" <jjessen(at)rcn.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 6:47 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: First post-51% rule-private build w/ QB kit
>
> Tom,
>
> As I understand it, but I'm not an authority on the topic, Van's is within
> the 51% rule, even if you were to buy all quick build components. The
> paint, upholstery, fire wall forward (engine, etc) and building the panel
> are not counted in the 51% rule. So, as you described what you're up to,
> the only question would be Alexander's. I would check with both Van's and
> Alexander's. I would think that the latter would have taken this into
> account when setting up their program. If it's supervision only, then go
> have fun! My guess is you'll be fine.
>
> John Jessen
> #40328
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of tomhanaway
> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 5:48 AM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: First post-51% rule-private build w/ QB kit
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Recent discussion of the 51% rule has raised some concerns. I don't
> pretend
> to understand the politics behind it but I read the primary direction as
> towards commercial/multi-unit builders.
>
> My question is (and perhaps I should mail a letter to Van's also) is:
>
> If I build a RV-10 as follows, will I have stayed within the 51% homebuilt
> rule?
> 1 Empennage- build at Alexander Tech Center to learn skills (my work under
> supervision and guidance).
> 2. Wings and fuselage-quick build kit by myself 3. engine and
> avionics-installed myself 4. cabin/seat upholstery-outsourced (if
> necessary,
> I could do this but it doesn't excite me).
> 5. painting-outsourced (I definitely don't have the skills or resources
> for
> this).
>
> My intent is to build this for myself. Pleasure of building probably
> greater
> than pleasure of flying. Will not be selling plane in any sort of
> foreseeable future.
>
> Is the consensus that I'm in the clear on this or am I treading
> dangerously
> close to not meeting the 51% rule? Any suggestions for pursuing a
> definitive answer prior to ordering stages of kit?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Tom Hanaway
> Boynton Beach, FL
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54522#54522
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hasbrouck" <jhasbrouck(at)woh.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Riveting forward side skins? |
I've searched the archives with no luck for the answer. How do you buck
the three rivets associated with the 1042B clip in the aft end of the
lower fuse channel? Looks like I'll need something narrower than what I
have to get in there. Suggestions would be appreciated. Did you use
the modified elevator bucking bar in the channels for the rest of those
rivets? Thanks
John Hasbrouck
#40264
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: loading the roof |
Evan,
I just checked my canopy/cover/roof, and I'm down to close to 1/8"
fiberglass thickness at the door jams, where the canopy fits between,
the aluminum uprights. I believe that other builders have also reported
that they also had to take off may more than they expected and more than
indicated in the plans. I don't think that what you're describing is a
significant problem.
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse/Finish/Panel
http://deemsrv10.com/
Evan and Megan Johnson wrote:
> OK guys...I've run into a problem. I finally committed to doing the
> fiberglass roof and the D*@&! thing does not seem to fit. The door
> openings in the aluminum fuselage are just a bit narrow (about 3/16"
> tight). I have sanded the glass down to about 3/16" thick at the door
> jams and it is still an extremely tight fit. I think if I really force
> it I can get it in there but I will likely fracture the door frame.
> That frame is going to get mighty flimsy if I keep cutting....I have
> already exposed the glass laminations and intend to put new epoxy in.
> Any suggestions?
> Evan Johnson
> www.evansaviationproducts.com <http://www.evansaviationproducts.com>
> (530)247-0375
> (530)351-1776 cell
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pascal" <pascalreid(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: loading the roof |
whenever in doubt check out Tim's website. Not sure this is what you're
looking for but there is door trimming
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/fuselage/20050706/index.html
and the next page has fitting doors
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/fuselage/20050710/index.html
----- Original Message -----
From: Evan and Megan Johnson
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 2:53 PM
Subject: RV10-List: loading the roof
OK guys...I've run into a problem. I finally committed to doing the
fiberglass roof and the D*@&! thing does not seem to fit. The door
openings in the aluminum fuselage are just a bit narrow (about 3/16"
tight). I have sanded the glass down to about 3/16" thick at the door
jams and it is still an extremely tight fit. I think if I really force
it I can get it in there but I will likely fracture the door frame. That
frame is going to get mighty flimsy if I keep cutting....I have already
exposed the glass laminations and intend to put new epoxy in. Any
suggestions?
Evan Johnson
www.evansaviationproducts.com
(530)247-0375
(530)351-1776 cell
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Riveting forward side skins? |
John, I had the same question when I got to this point. I ended up
modifying the elevator bucking bar (link to pic attached)
http://deemsrv10.com/album/Sec%2029%20Fuse%20Side%20Skins/slides/DSC02624.html
I puzzled over how to cut the bar, but used a high speed electric
grinder with a metal cut-off wheel, went pretty quickly, Filed it
smooth,and dressed it with the scotchbrite.
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse/Finish/Panel
http://deemsrv10.com/
John Hasbrouck wrote:
> I've searched the archives with no luck for the answer. How do you
> buck the three rivets associated with the 1042B clip in the aft end of
> the lower fuse channel? Looks like I'll need something narrower than
> what I have to get in there. Suggestions would be appreciated. Did
> you use the modified elevator bucking bar in the channels for the rest
> of those rivets? Thanks
> John Hasbrouck
> #40264
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Clocking AN Blue Fittings |
| From: | "McGANN, Ron" <ron.mcgann(at)baesystems.com> |
G'day all
A number of sections require AN fluid fittings (eg elbows) to be
installed (clocked) at a particular angle (eg the fuel line connections
at the fuel valve). When the AN fitting is installed, it naturally
'bottoms out' into the part (eg fuel valve) and has a natural clocked
position when it is tight.
To achieve a particular clocking, the fitting can't always be 'bottomed
out' and hence tight. How do you achieve both correct clocking and a
fit tight enough to prevent leaks? Does fuel lube etc provide a useful
seal??
cheers,
Ron
#187 finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Werner Schneider <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Pump Cooling Shroud |
Hi Tim,
NewGlasair offers one too:
<http://www.glasairaviation.com/options/glasairoptfire.html#fuelpump>
br Werner
Tim Olson wrote:
>
> I'm thinking that I may add a fuel pump cooling shroud
> some time, just because it seems like a prudent thing to do
> given the heat of the engine compartment.
> I found one at:
> http://showplanes.com/index_800.htm
>
> Does anyone know of any alternate suppliers?
>
> I just added about 4" extensions to my exhaust last night.
> Haven't flown with them yet. As many of you found at OSH,
> the older exhaust systems are shorter than the new. I figured
> I'd see if it made any noise difference, or if I can notice
> any heat difference. I don't have enough heat that
> it will be easy to tell, but if suddenly things are cooler
> then it'll be a plus. If it's quieter, that would be nice
> too, although it isn't super loud. Just more little
> things to tweak the bird closer to perfection.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Hasbrouck" <jhasbrouck(at)woh.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Riveting forward side skins? |
Thanks Deems, a picture's worth a thousand words!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kent Jones <kjones(at)Bost.org> |
| Subject: | Re: IO-540 Hose kit -possible group buy |
Curtis,
Sorry the late response; I also would be interested in your proposed
hose group buy.
Thanks,
Kent C. Jones
Fort Smith, Arkansas
RV-10 # 296
(479) 478-5550
W. Curtis wrote:
> RV-10 builders nearing Firewall Forward or engine planning stage.
> Having not ordered the Firewall Forward kit yet and just planning
> ahead, I've looked at the plans and determined the following hoses are
> required for the IO-540 installation:
>
> VA-119 IE VMP HOSE (AN4, 21.5, AIR) $ 34.60
> VA-102 FUEL PRES. HOSE (AN4, 15.5, FUEL) $ 58.20
> VA-133 OIL PRESS HOSE (AN4, 27.25, OIL) $ 69.00
> VA-138 FUEL SUPPLY HOSE (AN6, 14.0, FUEL) $ 69.65
> VA-189 FUEL LINE IO-540 (AN6, 25.5, FUEL) $153.45
> VA-135 OIL COOLER HOSE (AN8, 16.5, OIL) $ 66.85
> VA-190 OIL COOLER HOSE (AN8, 27.0, OIL) $ 95.65
>
> I'm not sure but I think the only Van's hose that is Teflon with the
> integral firesleeve are the VA-138 and VA-189 hoses. I requested a
> quote from Aircraft Hose (http://www.aircrafthose.com) for the above
> hoses ALL Teflon with integral firesleeve except the (VA-119) MAP
> Hose. They came back with and initial price of $491 for the set. The
> Van's price for the set of hoses (not all Teflon with integral
> firesleeve) is about $545. I've asked them if they could offer a
> greater discount if we could arrange a group buy. I haven't heard back
> from them yet but wanted to get you thinking.
>
> Here are the specifics.
> Stratoflex Integral Firesleeve Hoses for RV-10
> 111-4 hose with a 300-4D fitting 21.50" Long (111001-4CR0214) (IO-540
> Man Press.)
> 124-4J hose with a 524-4CR fitting 15.50" Long (124J001-4CR0154)
> (IO-540 Fuel Press.)
> 124-4J hose with a 524-4CR fitting 27.25" Long (124J001-4CR0272)
> (IO-540 Oil Press.)
> 124-6J hose with a 524-6CR fitting 14.00" Long (124J001-6CR0140)
> (IO-540 Fuel Supply)
> 124-6J hose with a 524-6CR fitting 25.50" Long (124J001-6CR0254)
> (IO-540 Fuel Line)
> 124-8J hose with a 524-8CR fitting 16.50" Long (124J001-8CR0164) (Oil
> cooler)
> 124-8J hose with a 524-8CR fitting 27.00" Long (124J001-8CR0270) (Oil
> cooler)
>
> Hose with Integral firesleeve
> http://www.aircrafthose.com/images/pic1248j.jpg
>
> Hose with external firesleeve
> http://www.aircrafthose.com/images/pic2650c.jpg
>
> William Curtis
> http://nerv10.com/
--
Kent C. Jones
Bost, Inc./Westark Diversified
Fort Smith, Arkansas
kjones(at)bost.org
www.bost.org
(479) 478-5550
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Edgerton" <wayne.e(at)grandecom.net> |
Someone recently made a posting that said there was a new door seal out
and Alex D was going to carry them. I've tried to find this post but to
no avail. Could who ever made that post tell me about it again please?
Wayne Edgerton #40336
Engine hung - jumping around a lot
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | PJ Seipel <seipel(at)seznam.cz> |
| Subject: | Re: IO-540 Hose kit -possible group buy |
Add me to the list.
PJ Seipel
RV-10 #40032
> *
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sean Stephens <sean(at)stephensville.com> |
| Subject: | Re: IO-540 Hose kit -possible group buy |
Add me to the list of people wishing they were at the point of needing
them. :)
-Sean #40303 (kit in Illinois, me in Arizona, bummer)
no not archive
PJ Seipel wrote:
>
> Add me to the list.
>
> PJ Seipel
> RV-10 #40032
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | AN Clocking (again) |
| From: | "McGANN, Ron" <ron.mcgann(at)baesystems.com> |
All,
Rick Sked indicated that the body of my post may not have been received
by everyone, so here's another try. (BTW has anyone else had problems
posting to the list recently??)
A number of sections require AN fluid fittings (eg elbows) to be
installed (clocked) at a particular angle (eg the fuel line connections
at the fuel valve). When the AN fitting is installed, it naturally
'bottoms out' into the part (eg fuel valve) and has a natural clocked
position when it is tight.
To achieve a particular clocking, the fitting can't always be 'bottomed
out' and hence tight. How do you achieve both correct clocking and a
fit tight enough to prevent leaks? Does fuel lube etc provide a useful
seal??
TIA
Ron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" <ddddsp1(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AN Clocking (again) |
Fuel Lube works great..........only Duck tape is used more often...:)
Just a dap of fuel lube on those fittings and you will sleep easy.
Dean
40449
Motor waiting to be mounted
________________________________________________________________________
Fuel Lube works great..........only Duck tape is used more ofte
n...:) Just a dap of fuel lube
on those fittings and you will sleep easy.
Dean
40449
Motor waiting to be mounted
______________________
__________________________________________________
Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Carpenter <jeff(at)westcottpress.com> |
| Subject: | Fuel Sender and Pro Seal |
Is Pro Seal used between the tank sender gasket and outside flange of
the tank... or only on the inside side of the tank flange and sender
pass through?
Jeff Carpenter
40304
Finishing up the tanks and unpacking the fuse...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert G. Wright" <armywrights(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Pitch trim servo |
Looking back through the archives:
I also have one of the newer Pitch servos. I'm wondering if anyone's seen
how far to screw in the rod end before tightening the jamnut (i.e. length
from center of bearing to end of 'arm'). Tru-track's online servo install
doc's don't have any of this info for the newer servo. It probably doesn't
matter but usually there are dimensions for these silly control surface
actuation things!
Rob Wright
#392 Wings & misc.
Vacation this week working on the plane!
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Sipp
Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 8:54 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Pitch trim servo
John,
I just installed mine the other night. The TruTrak web site has the
dimensions to locate the bellcrank arm attach hole. They said to look at
the 7 or 9 installation document as they are the same on all the airplanes.
Oh and when replacing the servo arm with the torque enhancer don't remove
the little screw on the servo that is off set from the center one that is a
shear screw and will break if removed. I have already tested this feature.
Dick Sipp
40065
----- Original Message -----
From: John <mailto:jwt(at)roadmapscoaching.com> Testement
Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2006 10:48 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Pitch trim servo
Anyone have instructions or photos of the new TruTrak pitch trim servo
installation (with the roller arm thingy)? I only got a couple of photos and
no info on where to drill the bellcrank arm, etc.
Take care,
John
_________________________________
John Testement
Human Potential Project
Phone: 804-303-1927
Email: john.testement(at)humanpotentialproject.com
3204 Long Meadow Cir.
Glen Allen, VA 23059
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Evan and Megan Johnson" <evmeg(at)snowcrest.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Sender and Pro Seal |
throw the gasket in the garbage and just use the sealant....I know this one
:)
Evan Johnson
www.evansaviationproducts.com
(530)247-0375
(530)351-1776 cell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Carpenter" <jeff(at)westcottpress.com>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 6:03 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Fuel Sender and Pro Seal
>
> Is Pro Seal used between the tank sender gasket and outside flange of
> the tank... or only on the inside side of the tank flange and sender
> pass through?
>
> Jeff Carpenter
> 40304
> Finishing up the tanks and unpacking the fuse...
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert G. Wright" <armywrights(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Fuel Sender and Pro Seal |
I coated the mating surfaces of the gasket/aluminum. I saw that as where
gaps would happen. Don't tighten your screws too tight after you smear the
sealant and install it, you might snap a screw off in the nutplate....
Rob Wright
#392
Wings
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Evan and Megan
Johnson
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 8:42 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fuel Sender and Pro Seal
throw the gasket in the garbage and just use the sealant....I know this one
:)
Evan Johnson
www.evansaviationproducts.com
(530)247-0375
(530)351-1776 cell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Carpenter" <jeff(at)westcottpress.com>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 6:03 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Fuel Sender and Pro Seal
>
> Is Pro Seal used between the tank sender gasket and outside flange of
> the tank... or only on the inside side of the tank flange and sender
> pass through?
>
> Jeff Carpenter
> 40304
> Finishing up the tanks and unpacking the fuse...
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" <ddddsp1(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Sender and Pro Seal |
If you proseal the sender in ....HOW will you remove it to replace it or
repair it someday? Might consider making a gasket out of cork material
and put Fuel Lube on it. That would be a better fix.
IMHO
Dean 40449
________________________________________________________________________
If you proseal the sender in ....HOW will you remove it to repl
ace it or repair it someday? Might consider making a gasket out of
cork material and put Fuel Lube on it. That would be a better fix
.
IMHO
Dean 40449
______________________
__________________________________________________
Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
http://forums.matronics.com>
http://wiki.matronics.com>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave" <redflyer(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | loading the roof |
Evan,
I know a RV-10 builder that cut the cabin top in the middle of the bars at
the bottom of the door opening. I think he just took out about an 1/8", a
saw blade thickness. That allowed the uprights to flex into the door
opening. The seems to be a good solution as long as it doesn't affect the
fit of the door. You could splice the cut with fiberglass but since it is
screwed down anyway, I doubt it would make much difference. The cut is also
in an area that is least needed for structure. That area of the cabin top
primarily serves the purpose of a molding for the door. I haven't gotten
that far. When I do that may be my approach.
Best regards,
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Evan and Megan
Johnson
Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 2:53 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV10-List: loading the roof
OK guys...I've run into a problem. I finally committed to doing the
fiberglass roof and the D*@&! thing does not seem to fit. The door openings
in the aluminum fuselage are just a bit narrow (about 3/16" tight). I have
sanded the glass down to about 3/16" thick at the door jams and it is still
an extremely tight fit. I think if I really force it I can get it in there
but I will likely fracture the door frame. That frame is going to get mighty
flimsy if I keep cutting....I have already exposed the glass laminations
and intend to put new epoxy in. Any suggestions?
Evan Johnson
www.evansaviationproducts.com
(530)247-0375
(530)351-1776 cell
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: 'Y' for SCAT ducting |
| From: | "Tim Dawson-Townsend" <Tdawson(at)avidyne.com> |
Where was a source for a ducting 'Y' splitter for use to split airflow
from the engine baffles to direct towards the heater boxes (reference
tunnel temps)
Can't seem to find it at Spruce, but you never know what they are going
to call some stuff . . .
TDT
40025
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: 'Y' for SCAT ducting |
I think the 2" Y tube is: 08-04100
I think I myself will try to find a way to get a 2" tube with a
1" or 1.25" branch off it instead. I hate to think that I'd be
bypassing a huge percentage of the air, because I don't want
the heat muff to get too hot. If anyone knows a place that welds
aluminum things like the Y tube, pass the info on...I'd like
to get a custom pair of Y's done. One to feed a fuel pump
cooling shroud, and one to do additional blast cooling.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
Tim Dawson-Townsend wrote:
> Where was a source for a ducting 'Y' splitter for use to split airflow from the
engine baffles to direct towards the heater boxes (reference tunnel temps)
>
> Can't seem to find it at Spruce, but you never know what they are going to call
some stuff . . .
>
> TDT
> 40025
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Air Vent Recommendation |
For people who are flying or almost flying, and still have a budget
left, I have a suggestion...
Vic tipped me off at OSH that the large aluminum eyeball vents
provide much more air and leak less than the cheap plastic ones.
I originally used the $17ea Van's black plastic vents. They worked
OK. They didn't stay open when you wanted them open, and they didn't
close as tightly. Adjusting the flow was tough at best. The flow
seemed OK.
This weekend I put on the aluminum vents, VENT SV-6 BLACK from
Vans. $145ea. These work very nicely, provide more air, far better
air control, and a better seal. Surprising, but they were worth it,
especially in the summer. The deal was sold for me to buy them when
on a high-speed descent last week, you could hear the sound of
air rushing in, and all of a sudden my vent popped shut. The
sudden noise change startled me for a millisecond. It was then that
I decided to invest in better vents.
I found these sites on the net..and from what I've been told, Van's
is selling the "airkit" vents, which are supposed to be much nicer
than the affordablepanels vents...but this is just what I was told.
http://www.airkitllc.com/products.php
http://www.affordablepanels.com/Airvents.html
http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1154458795-156-660&browse=heatvent&product=sv-6
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | NYTerminat(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AN Clocking (again) |
Where can you get "fuel lube?
In a message dated 8/14/2006 9:35:28 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
ddddsp1(at)juno.com writes:
Fuel Lube works great..........only Duck tape is used more often...:)
Just a dap of fuel lube on those fittings and you will sleep easy.
Dean
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Daves" <dav1111(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: 'Y' for SCAT ducting |
I obtained mine from Van's. Item number VENT DL-Y at $19.00. I attached it
directly to the riveted on scat tube flange at the back of the baffle
directing the Y down towards the heater boxes and the primary run down to
the right side heat muff.
Russ Daves
N710RV Flying
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Dawson-Townsend" <Tdawson(at)avidyne.com>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 11:28 PM
Subject: RV10-List: RE: 'Y' for SCAT ducting
Where was a source for a ducting 'Y' splitter for use to split airflow from
the engine baffles to direct towards the heater boxes (reference tunnel
temps)
Can't seem to find it at Spruce, but you never know what they are going to
call some stuff . . .
TDT
40025
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Daves" <dav1111(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Air Vent Recommendation |
I second Tim's recommendation. I got mine from Affordable Panels for
$117.50 each plus $8.45 shipping. I got the black ones and painted the
screws black and they look and work great.
Russ Daves
N710RV Flying
From: "Tim Olson" <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 12:17 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Air Vent Recommendation
>
> For people who are flying or almost flying, and still have a budget
> left, I have a suggestion...
> Vic tipped me off at OSH that the large aluminum eyeball vents
> provide much more air and leak less than the cheap plastic ones.
> I originally used the $17ea Van's black plastic vents. They worked
> OK. They didn't stay open when you wanted them open, and they didn't
> close as tightly. Adjusting the flow was tough at best. The flow
> seemed OK.
>
> This weekend I put on the aluminum vents, VENT SV-6 BLACK from
> Vans. $145ea. These work very nicely, provide more air, far better
> air control, and a better seal. Surprising, but they were worth it,
> especially in the summer. The deal was sold for me to buy them when
> on a high-speed descent last week, you could hear the sound of
> air rushing in, and all of a sudden my vent popped shut. The
> sudden noise change startled me for a millisecond. It was then that
> I decided to invest in better vents.
>
> I found these sites on the net..and from what I've been told, Van's
> is selling the "airkit" vents, which are supposed to be much nicer
> than the affordablepanels vents...but this is just what I was told.
>
> http://www.airkitllc.com/products.php
> http://www.affordablepanels.com/Airvents.html
> http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1154458795-156-660&browse=heatvent&product=sv-6
>
> --
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RAS" <deruiteraircraftservices(at)btinternet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: loading the roof |
Hi Evan,
I found that position of the threstles(saw horses) can make quite a
difference to the gap between the aluminum posts. I have no horses
further forward than the mainspar, have another under the rearspar and
one under the tailpost. The roof fit has to be done before the fuse goes
on the gear.
m
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Kermanj <flysrv10(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Sender and Pro Seal |
That's right! Throw the gasket in the garbage and just use the
sealant. Use proseal everywhere! On the screw threads, over the
screw heads and any other place you might suspect a leak. No kidding.
On Aug 14, 2006, at 9:42 PM, Evan and Megan Johnson wrote:
>
>
> throw the gasket in the garbage and just use the sealant....I know
> this one
> :)
> Evan Johnson
> www.evansaviationproducts.com
> (530)247-0375
> (530)351-1776 cell
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Carpenter" <jeff(at)westcottpress.com>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 6:03 PM
> Subject: RV10-List: Fuel Sender and Pro Seal
>
>
>>
>>
>> Is Pro Seal used between the tank sender gasket and outside flange of
>> the tank... or only on the inside side of the tank flange and sender
>> pass through?
>>
>> Jeff Carpenter
>> 40304
>> Finishing up the tanks and unpacking the fuse...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: door seal (was Overhead Console) |
Wayne,
Is this what you are looking for. If you get additional information
pass it along to the group
Larry Rosen
W. Curtis wrote:
>
> http://aircraftdoorseals.com
>
>
> >
> >Here's a couple of pics.
> >
> >http://deemsrv10.com/album/OSHKOSH%202006/slides/DSC03085.html
> >
> >I recall listening to Jim Erskin talking to Mike Sausen, Jim said he
> >paid $85 for the door seal, but I didn't catch where he got it. Mike do
> >you recall?
> >
> >Deems Davis # 406
> >Fuse/Finishing/Panel
> >http://deemsrv10.com/
> >
> >Jesse Saint wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>Does anybody have any good detailed pictures of what Debbie did with her
> >>door seals?
> >
>
>
> William Curtis
> http://nerv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jesse Saint" <jesse(at)itecusa.org> |
| Subject: | AN Clocking (again) |
I will try to answer in a way that has been recommended and has worked.
When we first started, we would take the fittings to the torque value,
then
clock them from there. Yes, this takes a TON of pressure sometimes,
which
is not good. In fact, we had some leak when this happened. It was
recommended by a very experience A&P that we use some kind of thread
sealer,
Fuel/Seal Lube works great, then just run them on as tight as we can get
them by hand, then clock them from there. We did this on two oil cooler
leaks where we had followed the original method and had gotten leaks,
and no
more leaks. If there is no clocking, he said to get it as tight as you
can
by hand, then take it one or two flats (1/6 or 2/6 turn) and leave it.
It
should not =93naturally bottom out=94 in normal conditions, because the
pipe
threads are tapered so the further you go in, the tighter it should get,
unlike a bolt. You should start the lube back at least one thread from
the
end to make sure you don=92t get any in the opening, and thus into your
system. Also, don=92t use any lube on the flare fittings, just the pipe
threads.
Hope this helps.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
HYPERLINK "mailto:jesse(at)itecusa.org"jesse(at)itecusa.org
HYPERLINK "http://www.itecusa.org"www.itecusa.org
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 6:43 PM
Subject: RV10-List: AN Clocking (again)
All,
Rick Sked indicated that the body of my post may not have been received
by
everyone, so here's another try. (BTW has anyone else had problems
posting
to the list recently??)
A number of sections require AN fluid fittings (eg elbows) to be
installed
(clocked) at a particular angle (eg the fuel line connections at the
fuel
valve). When the AN fitting is installed, it naturally 'bottoms out'
into
the part (eg fuel valve) and has a natural clocked position when it is
tight.
To achieve a particular clocking, the fitting can't always be 'bottomed
out'
and hence tight. How do you achieve both correct clocking and a fit
tight
enough to prevent leaks? Does fuel lube etc provide a useful seal??
TIA
Ron
=========================
==========
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List"http://www.matronics.com/Na
vig
ator?RV10-List
=========================
==========
"http://forums.matronics.com"http://forums.matronics.com
=========================
==========
"http://wiki.matronics.com"http://wiki.matronics.com
=========================
==========
"http://www.matronics.com/contribution"http://www.matronics.com/contribut
ion
=========================
==========
8/14/2006
--
8/14/2006
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | NYTerminat(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AN Clocking (again) |
Jessie
Where did you get the Fuel/Seal lube?
Bob
In a message dated 8/15/2006 9:30:45 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
jesse(at)itecusa.org writes:
will try to answer in a way that has been recommended and has worked. When
we first started, we would take the fittings to the torque value, then clock
them from there. Yes, this takes a TON of pressure sometimes, which is not
good. In fact, we had some leak when this happened. It was recommended by a
very experience A&P that we use some kind of thread sealer, Fuel/Seal Lube
works great, then just run them on as tight as we can get them by hand, then
clock them from there. We did this on two oil cooler
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" <ddddsp1(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Air Vent Recommendation |
Another idea.............We bought the smaller aluminum vents from ACS t
hat come in grey or black ($56). Made a Y out of fiberglass and attache
d it to the NACA Duct so we have 2 vents per side and more air control i
n more directions. If you do not want LEAKY vents..........plan to pay
more than what the plastic ones sell for. I know one person left the ch
eap vents off.........uses a big CORK to plug the hole and takes the cor
k out when he wants air........it is an "all or nothing vent" system.
Go YUGO EFIS!!!
Dean 40449
________________________________________________________________________
Another idea.............We bought the smaller aluminum vents f
rom ACS that come in grey or black ($56). Made a Y out of fibergla
ss and attached it to the NACA Duct so we have 2 vents per side and more
air control in more directions. If you do not want LEAKY vents...
.......plan to pay more than what the plastic ones sell for. I kno
w one person left the cheap vents off.........uses a big CORK to plug th
e hole and takes the cork out when he wants air........it is an "all or
nothing vent" system.
Go YUGO EFIS!!!
Dean 40449
______________________
__________________________________________________
Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!
