RV10-Archive.digest.vol-cc

February 21, 2007 - March 07, 2007



      
      On 2/21/07, Werner Schneider  wrote:
      >
      > Hello Dean and Jim
      >
      > I only partly agree on that, I did go the cheap route with a KX-125 and
      > a KN75 first, then had to add a KI-106 for glideslope. Then the KX
      > failed shortly after 2 years, they did charge me $1200.- to fix it. The
      > whole setup was much more expensive then if I had gone with am SL-30
      > straight ahead (you find them used to (but seldom)). The SL-30 has many
      > nice features like 2nd com listen mode, cross reference tracking of 2nd
      > NAV and you can have the display of the glideslop on any Dynon EFIS.
      >
      > I swapped meanwhile the King stuff with an SL-30 and I did not regret,
      > except that I would have saved a lot of money going that route from the
      > start.
      >
      > br Werner
      >
      > ddddsp1(at)juno.com wrote:
      > >
      > > Jim,
      > >
      > > Try to find someone already flying that did what you are trying to
      > > do.  They are out there.  Also, one has to be willing to buy other
      > > brands INSTEAD of GARMIN/KING if you wanna truly cuts costs.  For
      > > example,  A nice Garmin 496 is roughly $3500?   There are other GPS
      > > units that will fit your bill for $1000.  SAVINGS = $2500     Also, a
      > > Garmin SL30 is $3250?  A new Icom 200 and a yellow tagged Nav radio
      > > can be had for $2250. SAVINGS = $1000.  I would love the greatest and
      > > latest from Garmin too, but I choose not to pay their PREMIUM price
      > > versus other Avionics that do what I need.  I flew a Cherokee 140 all
      > > day yesterday..............the newest thing in the IFR panel was a
      > > pair of KING 155's.  The owner was a happy pilot,,,,,,,,buy to meet
      > > your needs and your budget............ NOT to impress your friends and
      > > fellow pilots!
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Dean 40449
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ________________________________________________________________________
      > > *FREE* Reminder Service - *NEW* from AmericanGreetings.com
      > > Click *HERE* and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again!
      > > <http://track.juno.com/s/lc?s=197335&u=http://www.americangreetings.com/products/online_calendar.pd?c=uol5752>
      > > *
      > >
      > >
      > > *
      >
      >
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Gonzalez" <indigoonlatigo(at)msn.com>
Subject: IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing)
Date: Feb 21, 2007
I am in a particular spot in my building process which has provided me with a certain perspective on all this and many of the builders I am sure have felt what I am going through at one time or another. All the planning on the panel costs and other anticipated costs are good and a wise thing to do. It is my thought however, that if you are really nit picking the costs to such a degree, than I might take a look at exactly why you are thinking of building the Rv in the first place. Is it all about cutting costs? It is a lot like building a home. It is always more expensive than first imagined. All I am suggesting is that there is a lot of time, a lot of effort and money from the time you start to the actual time when you get to start putting in the panel. If it has been a life long dream to build your own plane, then no matter how much it costs, go for it. If you are doing to cut costs, I might suggest that it is much like putting a nice steak into one end of the meat grinder. You know the meat will come out the other end, but it might not be what you expected coming out the other end. It is a beast of a project. It is not difficult work, and a lot of it fun for the most part, just time consuming and very difficult alongside life's other responsibilties, unless you have a lot of free time. My two cents. Emotional cents. JOhn G. >From: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann(at)cox.net> >Reply-To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com >To: >Subject: RE: RV10-List: IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing) >Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 21:17:39 -0800 > >Jim > > >You are adding unnecessary expenses by wanting more than a good IFR >platform.. Price out Dual grand rapids efis, SL30, 300 xl the Gtx 327, >drop >down in quality to Maybe a 1000II audio, and a lesser auto pilot and you >will save a lot of money, and you will have a certified IFR aircraft, that >is better than what's in every DC-8 or 707 in the world. > > >2 cents worth > > >Bob K > >Panel and fiberglass and wires and oxygen system and a few rivets now and >then just to keep in practice. > > > _____ > >From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com >[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of James S. Clark >IV >Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 7:13 PM >To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV10-List: IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing) > > >John, > > >I'm not sure I followed everything in your post, or how it was meant to >apply to me. > > >Just to clear things up: I am not interested in a minimalist VFR panel. I >will build an IFR plane or I will buy an IFR TC aircraft. I am trying to >budget these options with some detail. > > >My mission is quite clear to me: End up with a 4 seat IFR platform that I >can use for several years (it doesn't have to be the top of the line or my >final configuration for the first few years). This platform may have steam >gauges (archer or other) or electronic flight instruments or glass flight >instruments (RV10). > > >My question was intended to get people's ideas on a reasonable minimal cost >IFR panel for the RV10. It seems that roughly no matter how I cut it: >Quickbuild + Shipping + New Engine +FWF = 100k. Avionics + Finishing is >where I have choices and drastically different costs. > > >For example one possible IFR option: > >2 GRT EFIS 1 + EIS > >8000B audio panel > >GNS480 > >DigiFlight-IIVSGV > >SL30 NavCom > >GTX327 > >ADI, Alt, AS, Compass > > >The above adds roughly 33k. The remainder in the spreadsheet version 3 I >have sent out seem to come to 14k more (including some nice hidden costs >that Anh sent out) > > >Naturally, I will do everything within my power and budget not to "sell >myself short". > > >Best regards, > >Jim Clark > >-Still learning the ropes... > > >On Feb 20, 2007, at 9:39 PM, John W. Cox wrote: > > >The minimalist panel is not IFR it is VFR as VAN designed with steam > >gages. Stay away from induction and control surface icing and get the > >most out of a minimalist budget. Save panel real estate for the point in > >time you have the amended perspective. You will be quite pleased. The > >only big change since it was first introduced is the inflation rate > >applied , by VAN to the kit components and the drying up of used IO-540 > >cores as VAN had originally budgeted. Randy used a reconditioned prop > >and there has been little discussion on the value of that route. > > >Know your mission, do not sell yourself short. > > >John Cox > >#40600 > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > >[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of James S. > >Clark IV > >Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 5:53 PM > >To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > >Subject: RV10-List: IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing) > > > > > >Linn, I like the idea on the panel. I'd be interested in hearing more > >about your panel choices. > > >Tim, sorry for the confusion: no I don't plan to borrow all 150k, but > >for budgeting I think it is good to plan for the lost earnings that > >those dollars could be used for if not tied up in an aircraft (or toy). > > >I am interested in cost savings though: Specifically, if an IFR RV-10 > >is a must (even if using steam gauges), what is the lowest reasonable > >target figure? I find it very hard to come in at <130. But I have > >heard several say lower. What am I missing? > > >I have heard the following suggestions which I like very much: > >Don't paint right away. -Jesse, how does this change if stored outside? > >Store RV-10 outside (ouch, I don't know if I can live with this). How > >well will an RV-10 endure VA weather with covers? If I know up front > >it will be stored outside, any special priming areas I should consider? > >Save money on engine - don't get new (with conflicting ideas on how > >much this saves) - various posters > >Buy steam gauges for first panel (but still IFR), wait to go glass > >IFR for later if mission/desires dictate. Try to keep panel > >instruments from first panel revision, useful for 2nd panel down the > >road. - Linn > >Go slow build to save...-various > > >John, thanks for your thoughts. I appreciate the comparison with the > >Archer and like Jesse's idea about fewer wasted pit stops. > > >Bill, thanks for your comparison of the archer. I would be interested > >if you have any numbers on how much savings can be expected in the > >maintenance. What would be your yearly numbers for each? > > >What would others consider a minimalist RV-10 IFR panel? > > >Thanks for all your help, > >Best regards, > >Jim Clark > > >- The RV10-List Email Forum - > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Reconditioned prop (was IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing))
Date: Feb 21, 2007
From: "Vern W. Smith" <Vern(at)teclabsinc.com>
John, In your reply you mentioned Randy used a reconditioned prop. I thought the Hartzel for the RV10 was a new design and there were no "used" propellers available. Is there any more information about possible reconditioned options? Vern Smith (#324 fuselage) -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 6:40 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing) Randy used a reconditioned prop and there has been little discussion on the value of that route. Know your mission, do not sell yourself short. John Cox #40600 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 21, 2007
Subject: Re: IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing)
Nick couldn't agree more...for a few $$ the 430 is so much more capable but I thought the ideas was "budget" IFR...with the amount of time to plan...it seems that there will lots of newer and more interesting products coming on the market place...Is TruTrak coming along with their EFIS? As Kelly point ed out there are many radio's to select along with audio panels/transponders/little monitors for the rear seats! When it comes to "toy's" I'm a cash sort of guy. P ________________________ I agree with everything except. I=99d combine the 300xl and a VOR and find a used 430. If you look around they can usually be found for 4-4500. Yes a little more than a 300, but it combines space and IMO has better situationa l awareness. FWIW Nick Nafsinger


**************************************
Check out free AOL at http://free.aol.com/thenewaol/index.adp. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, millions of free high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and much more. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Leikam" <DAVELEIKAM(at)wi.rr.com>
Subject: A bit overwhelmed
Date: Feb 21, 2007
I have come to the end of the plans for the empennage kit on my 10. I still have to finish installing the trim servo assembly, and glass tail tips, rudder tips, tail strobe...etc. I am waiting on my fuse and wings. I need to start accumulating glass supplies, (good posts from Gary and John Testement recently) and also get together electrical supplies, wire, conduit and so forth. The project suddenly seems a bit overwhelming as I anticipate the delivery of the next kits. I don't want to lose momentum but I find myself staring into space trying to figure out what to accomplish next most efficiently. My wife just told me yesterday she can't wait until the plane is done because of all the crap which happened recently with commercial air travel. Give me a push guys! Dave Leikam 40496 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing)
This thread seems to be more about saving money than building an airplane. If finances are that big of an issue in Jim's decision process (as they seem to be). This issue will continue to raise it's ugly head throughout a long and sometimes stressful process. And not just on avionics issues, which is the current fixation, but on virtually every item that Van's does not supply in the kit (at least 70% of the total airplane finished cost for which you will have several options to select from). I would hope that after investing the considerable amount of time (not just in building, but in researching, learning, etc) Jim will want for yourself an airplane that he can be proud of, one that will echo the pride and workmanship of those that have already been completed as a part of the -10 fleet. Starting off cutting corners is not a good way to begin IMO. My advice would be to seriously consider whether he can reasonably allow for more financial headroom, as I can promise that it will be needed. If not, go for the Archer and save the building until a time in life where if better fits with work/life situation. I speak from experience having started (but not finished) 2 kits earlier in life when job, family and finances were different. I got into an IFR Arrow on a partnership, then worked my way into owning a Bonanza, and then traded up into several other TC aircraft. I'm now in a situation that the stars and moon are all aligned and I'm able to complete my postponed dream of build my own plane. You NEED a LOT of PASSION and desire to do this as it's a LONG journey. The statistics suggest that the majority of builders that begin a project do not finish it. Finances are the leading reason for abandoning a project. Deems Davis # 406 Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) http://deemsrv10.com/ John Gonzalez wrote: > > I am in a particular spot in my building process which has provided me > with a certain perspective on all this and many of the builders I am > sure have felt what I am going through at one time or another. > > All the planning on the panel costs and other anticipated costs are > good and a wise thing to do. It is my thought however, that if you are > really nit picking the costs to such a degree, than I might take a > look at exactly why you are thinking of building the Rv in the first > place. Is it all about cutting costs? ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing)
Date: Feb 21, 2007
From: "Chris Johnston" <CJohnston(at)popsound.com>
You could do what I did.... First, you figure out how much the aircraft will cost to build, then file that paper away. Go blindly forth buying and building, and file away the receipts. Don't calculate your costs EVER during the build. This will only make you unhappy. Don't try to figure out why you seem to be over budget (using only mental calculations), this will also make you unhappy. Try to save money on things, and be proud when you do. Don't think about the fact that you've bought an extra fuse side skin, 4 extra trim tabs, all the parts necessary for a new baggage door (because you couldn't live with a 1/8" gap), a new battery tray (because you countersunk the wrong side when you were building), the countless single switches from Mouser.com that you buy to evaluate the coolness factor (and that end up in the "switches" box in the "airplane room").... I'll cut myself off here because I could go on for awhile remembering parts that I've screwed up and/or bought and not used.... Anyway, also don't mind the total and complete deconstruction of the "what expensive is" portion of your brain. This drives up the cost of an airplane. For example: I'm at the supermarket, looking at cheese. The Kraft cheese is $3.00, the fancy cheese is $5.50. You look at it and think, "well, why not...after all, it's not like it's a $41,000 engine or anything, and we deserve it for that hard weekend of building that we put in!" After awhile, the extra $1.50 for cheese turns into leather seats with seat-heaters. It's only a couple thousand more, and it'll be soooo nice! This condition should not be confused with the "well, I'll only build one, so I better make it exactly as neato as I want" condition. This is the condition whereby you start building an airplane with a budget and a plan, and then as the aircraft starts to become real, suddenly (or not so suddenly) you decide that you only want the best for your baby. This starting to sound familiar to anyone out there? yep. It does to me. Also I'm a low time pilot who doesn't have a plane already, and I have to make time to fly. In my area, an IFR 172 that you'd actually want to fly in IFR conditions runs $130 (wet) an hour. Oh, and I hadn't budgeted on the cost to get my instrument rating. Expensive. Yep. And I'm happy as a clam. Eventually I'll run out of parts or money, and hopefully both at the same time! for me, I was never much of a bean counter, and I'm enjoying the process. One day, I'll figure out how much it cost me in dollars, and it'll seem like a bargain for how much I've gotten back in experience. Corny, but true. And I'm not even flying yet. cj #40410 fuse www.perfectlygoodairplane.net -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of James S. Clark IV Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 7:13 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing) John, I'm not sure I followed everything in your post, or how it was meant to apply to me. Just to clear things up: I am not interested in a minimalist VFR panel. I will build an IFR plane or I will buy an IFR TC aircraft. I am trying to budget these options with some detail. My mission is quite clear to me: End up with a 4 seat IFR platform that I can use for several years (it doesn't have to be the top of the line or my final configuration for the first few years). This platform may have steam gauges (archer or other) or electronic flight instruments or glass flight instruments (RV10). My question was intended to get people's ideas on a reasonable minimal cost IFR panel for the RV10. It seems that roughly no matter how I cut it: Quickbuild + Shipping + New Engine +FWF = 100k. Avionics + Finishing is where I have choices and drastically different costs. For example one possible IFR option: 2 GRT EFIS 1 + EIS 8000B audio panel GNS480 DigiFlight-IIVSGV SL30 NavCom GTX327 ADI, Alt, AS, Compass The above adds roughly 33k. The remainder in the spreadsheet version 3 I have sent out seem to come to 14k more (including some nice hidden costs that Anh sent out) Naturally, I will do everything within my power and budget not to "sell myself short". Best regards, Jim Clark -Still learning the ropes... On Feb 20, 2007, at 9:39 PM, John W. Cox wrote: The minimalist panel is not IFR it is VFR as VAN designed with steam gages. Stay away from induction and control surface icing and get the most out of a minimalist budget. Save panel real estate for the point in time you have the amended perspective. You will be quite pleased. The only big change since it was first introduced is the inflation rate applied , by VAN to the kit components and the drying up of used IO-540 cores as VAN had originally budgeted. Randy used a reconditioned prop and there has been little discussion on the value of that route. Know your mission, do not sell yourself short. John Cox #40600 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of James S. Clark IV Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 5:53 PM Subject: RV10-List: IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing) Linn, I like the idea on the panel. I'd be interested in hearing more about your panel choices. Tim, sorry for the confusion: no I don't plan to borrow all 150k, but for budgeting I think it is good to plan for the lost earnings that those dollars could be used for if not tied up in an aircraft (or toy). I am interested in cost savings though: Specifically, if an IFR RV-10 is a must (even if using steam gauges), what is the lowest reasonable target figure? I find it very hard to come in at <130. But I have heard several say lower. What am I missing? I have heard the following suggestions which I like very much: Don't paint right away. -Jesse, how does this change if stored outside? Store RV-10 outside (ouch, I don't know if I can live with this). How well will an RV-10 endure VA weather with covers? If I know up front it will be stored outside, any special priming areas I should consider? Save money on engine - don't get new (with conflicting ideas on how much this saves) - various posters Buy steam gauges for first panel (but still IFR), wait to go glass IFR for later if mission/desires dictate. Try to keep panel instruments from first panel revision, useful for 2nd panel down the road. - Linn Go slow build to save...-various John, thanks for your thoughts. I appreciate the comparison with the Archer and like Jesse's idea about fewer wasted pit stops. Bill, thanks for your comparison of the archer. I would be interested if you have any numbers on how much savings can be expected in the maintenance. What would be your yearly numbers for each? What would others consider a minimalist RV-10 IFR panel? Thanks for all your help, Best regards, Jim Clark - The RV10-List Email Forum - ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 2007
From: Cory Emberson <bootless(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: re: infant ear protectors
When my son was an infant, we cut the foam earplugs down, inserted those, and then put a knit cap with a chin strap/ties on over that so they wouldn't come out. I've seen the MuttMuffs, which are cool for dogs, but the woman who invented them told me they did not have a noise reduction rating (which is an expensive proposition). Also, their design takes into account the dog's natural hearing protection - their ears flopping over. So, they would probably be ok if the baby is also wearing cut-down earplugs as well. Hope this helps, Cory PILOTDDS(at)aol.com wrote: > When i was at oshkosh another 10 pilot & his wife discussed using dog > hearing protectors to protect their infant's ears. Does anyone have a > pirep on this technique or any other suggestions to protect a four > month old child's ears. > The 10 is a family plane, right? 728DD 113 hours and loving it! > > > ************************************** > Check out free AOL at http://free.aol.com/thenewaol/index.adp. Most > comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, millions of free > high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and much more. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Gonzalez" <indigoonlatigo(at)msn.com>
Subject: control horn remedy
Date: Feb 21, 2007
here are some pics to go with an earlier post many months ago. John G. Don't know why the mammoth ski trip title shows??we will see. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 2007
From: Niko <owl40188(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Engine Mount Hole Alignment to Firewall
Hi Rob,=0A=0AI don't think the settling is from the engine mount I believe its from the rubber vibration isolators that go between the engine and the mount.=0A=0AI had talked to Vans about forcing the engine mount into positi on on the Firewall and they suggested against it. Having said that, typica lly in aircraft construction the mechanic is allowed to use whatever force he can generate by his bare hands only, no tools to get extra leverage. Ap plying excessive force could reduce the life of the part.=0A=0ANiko=0A40188 =0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: Rob Wright <armywrights@adelphia .net>=0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 11:5 6:11 PM=0ASubject: RE: RV10-List: Engine Mount Hole Alignment to Firewall =0A=0A=0AI have =93encouraged=94 my engine mount into position while instal ling bolts. I wonder what real problems there could be in that little bit of static tension, as long as it=92s not using a winch to stretch the thing . I=92m thinking that it may reduce the amount of settling that many exper ience.=0A =0ARob=0A#392=0ACleaning up emails from a week of vacation ' ne ed a blackberry!=0A =0A=0A=0A=0AFrom: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Niko=0ASent: Mon day, February 12, 2007 10:23 AM=0ATo: Matronics=0ASubject: RV10-List: Engin e Mount Hole Alignment to Firewall=0A =0AI tried to drill the engine mount holes in the firewall this weekend. After drilling the left upper hole fir st (pilots side) I noticed that the firewall pilot hole on the upper right side is about 3/16 inch off (outboard.) The lower holes are not too bad. I sent an email to Vans asking if I should simply stretch the engine mount frame into place since it appears I can pull it into place with just my han ds (no clamps ). Here is the response.=0A =0A"Since the engine mount weldm ent moves somewhat when it it =0Aremoved from the jig, we don't expect all the holes to line up. If =0Aafter drilling the upper left hole, some of th e other holes seem to be =0Afairly close, drill them first. Drill the uppe r right hole last. Don't =0Aforce the mount into position."=0A =0AI am inc luding this since when I did a search on the archives I found references to forcing the mount into position.=0A =0AFollowing the recommended procedure it would be interesting if one has to replace an engine mount frame. I ho pe they all move the same amount after removal from the jig.=0A =0A =0ANiko ================ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Leikam" <DAVELEIKAM(at)wi.rr.com>
Subject: Re: IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing)
Date: Feb 21, 2007
I will echo Chris on this. I am doing pretty much what he is as far as not paying too much attention to the nickels and dimes and even dollars. I know what I can afford without thinking too hard. I have a file I put all the receipts in, but I haven't added anything up yet. Think of what you spend on the little stuff each day before you built your plane. One of the very reasons I chose to build is that it doesn't hurt so bad to pay as you go. I look for deals too. I looked at our credit card charges the other day with my wife and was amazed at the spending on the thing. We live off our card, barley ever write checks. But most things are those everyday life things for home and kids. (And an occasional part from Gretz.) But we always pay the thing off each month. (Excessive dept is another story.) In the beginning I thought about how my plane would rank compared to other builders as far as style and options and technique. Then I realized this is My Plane, for me and my family. I will build it how I want. As long as it is safe, and I fly it safe, and I am happy with it, nothing else matters. There is no wrong way to build a plane which is safe to fly when completed. If a person wants a basic VFR or IFR panel and likes it who cares? More power to them for making the journey at all. All I wanted was a two seat Ran's folding wing plane on floats. then my wife said we had to have four seats. Dave Leikam 40496 ----- Original Message ----- From: Chris Johnston To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 11:21 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing) You could do what I did.. First, you figure out how much the aircraft will cost to build, then file that paper away. Go blindly forth buying and building, and file away the receipts. Don't calculate your costs EVER during the build. This will only make you unhappy. Don't try to figure out why you seem to be over budget (using only mental calculations), this will also make you unhappy. Try to save money on things, and be proud when you do. Don't think about the fact that you've bought an extra fuse side skin, 4 extra trim tabs, all the parts necessary for a new baggage door (because you couldn't live with a 1/8" gap), a new battery tray (because you countersunk the wrong side when you were building), the countless single switches from Mouser.com that you buy to evaluate the coolness factor (and that end up in the "switches" box in the "airplane room").. I'll cut myself off here because I could go on for awhile remembering parts that I've screwed up and/or bought and not used.. Anyway, also don't mind the total and complete deconstruction of the "what expensive is" portion of your brain. This drives up the cost of an airplane. For example: I'm at the supermarket, looking at cheese. The Kraft cheese is $3.00, the fancy cheese is $5.50. You look at it and think, "well, why not.after all, it's not like it's a $41,000 engine or anything, and we deserve it for that hard weekend of building that we put in!" After awhile, the extra $1.50 for cheese turns into leather seats with seat-heaters. It's only a couple thousand more, and it'll be soooo nice! This condition should not be confused with the "well, I'll only build one, so I better make it exactly as neato as I want" condition. This is the condition whereby you start building an airplane with a budget and a plan, and then as the aircraft starts to become real, suddenly (or not so suddenly) you decide that you only want the best for your baby. This starting to sound familiar to anyone out there? yep. It does to me. Also I'm a low time pilot who doesn't have a plane already, and I have to make time to fly. In my area, an IFR 172 that you'd actually want to fly in IFR conditions runs $130 (wet) an hour. Oh, and I hadn't budgeted on the cost to get my instrument rating. Expensive. Yep. And I'm happy as a clam. Eventually I'll run out of parts or money, and hopefully both at the same time! for me, I was never much of a bean counter, and I'm enjoying the process. One day, I'll figure out how much it cost me in dollars, and it'll seem like a bargain for how much I've gotten back in experience. Corny, but true. And I'm not even flying yet. cj #40410 fuse www.perfectlygoodairplane.net -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of James S. Clark IV Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 7:13 PM To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Subject: Re: RV10-List: IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing) John, I'm not sure I followed everything in your post, or how it was meant to apply to me. Just to clear things up: I am not interested in a minimalist VFR panel. I will build an IFR plane or I will buy an IFR TC aircraft. I am trying to budget these options with some detail. My mission is quite clear to me: End up with a 4 seat IFR platform that I can use for several years (it doesn't have to be the top of the line or my final configuration for the first few years). This platform may have steam gauges (archer or other) or electronic flight instruments or glass flight instruments (RV10). My question was intended to get people's ideas on a reasonable minimal cost IFR panel for the RV10. It seems that roughly no matter how I cut it: Quickbuild + Shipping + New Engine +FWF = 100k. Avionics + Finishing is where I have choices and drastically different costs. For example one possible IFR option: 2 GRT EFIS 1 + EIS 8000B audio panel GNS480 DigiFlight-IIVSGV SL30 NavCom GTX327 ADI, Alt, AS, Compass The above adds roughly 33k. The remainder in the spreadsheet version 3 I have sent out seem to come to 14k more (including some nice hidden costs that Anh sent out) Naturally, I will do everything within my power and budget not to "sell myself short". Best regards, Jim Clark -Still learning the ropes... On Feb 20, 2007, at 9:39 PM, John W. Cox wrote: The minimalist panel is not IFR it is VFR as VAN designed with steam gages. Stay away from induction and control surface icing and get the most out of a minimalist budget. Save panel real estate for the point in time you have the amended perspective. You will be quite pleased. The only big change since it was first introduced is the inflation rate applied , by VAN to the kit components and the drying up of used IO-540 cores as VAN had originally budgeted. Randy used a reconditioned prop and there has been little discussion on the value of that route. Know your mission, do not sell yourself short. John Cox #40600 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of James S. Clark IV Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 5:53 PM To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RV10-List: IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing) Linn, I like the idea on the panel. I'd be interested in hearing more about your panel choices. Tim, sorry for the confusion: no I don't plan to borrow all 150k, but for budgeting I think it is good to plan for the lost earnings that those dollars could be used for if not tied up in an aircraft (or toy). I am interested in cost savings though: Specifically, if an IFR RV-10 is a must (even if using steam gauges), what is the lowest reasonable target figure? I find it very hard to come in at <130. But I have heard several say lower. What am I missing? I have heard the following suggestions which I like very much: Don't paint right away. -Jesse, how does this change if stored outside? Store RV-10 outside (ouch, I don't know if I can live with this). How well will an RV-10 endure VA weather with covers? If I know up front it will be stored outside, any special priming areas I should consider? Save money on engine - don't get new (with conflicting ideas on how much this saves) - various posters Buy steam gauges for first panel (but still IFR), wait to go glass IFR for later if mission/desires dictate. Try to keep panel instruments from first panel revision, useful for 2nd panel down the road. - Linn Go slow build to save...-various John, thanks for your thoughts. I appreciate the comparison with the Archer and like Jesse's idea about fewer wasted pit stops. Bill, thanks for your comparison of the archer. I would be interested if you have any numbers on how much savings can be expected in the maintenance. What would be your yearly numbers for each? What would others consider a minimalist RV-10 IFR panel? Thanks for all your help, Best regards, Jim Clark - The RV10-List Email Forum - - The RV10-List Email Forum - --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List - NEW MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - --> http://forums.matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Jessen" <jjessen(at)rcn.com>
Subject: IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing)
Date: Feb 21, 2007
This is one part of my life where I don't think too much about the money. It's not that I don't think about it, of course I do, but to me this is a legacy to my son. My wife and I put both kids through private high school (ugh) and spendy colleges (oh, my goodness, ugh). I'll not be able to retire like many of you, but at least I'll leave a few items to leave behind. One will be this plane, a couple houses, etc. And when I go, as the great line in Ocean's 12, I believe it was, I want the last check I write to bounce. So....I'm having a good time building. I will have a good, but not great IFR panel. I will get my IFR rating and learn how to fly much, much better than I know today. And, if we have a world that will still allow it, I'll fly the ever loving stuffing out of her before they yank my medical. John Jessen #328 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Reconditioned prop (was IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing))
Date: Feb 21, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Randy points to an excellent path. Until the blades disappear like the IO-540 blocks. Consider reconditioned. VAN holds a spot for you for a new set of scimitar blades and a new Lycoming when you are ready to step UP and options are gone. Be realistic - recycle. John Cox -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Randy DeBauw Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 10:38 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Reconditioned prop (was IFR RV-10 Budgeting (ongoing)) Hello, I am back from Vacation. I have a rebuilt early prop. The same one that was on the prototype RV10 when it first flew. I paid 3500.00 outright and had to wait 7 months for the rebuilder to get a nice set of blades in. He had a nice used hub in stock. Randy ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike Doble (Home Office)" <mikedoble(at)wi.rr.com>
Subject: A bit overwhelmed
Date: Feb 21, 2007
Dave - I'll be over with more beer... Mike (still haven't riveted anything) Doble _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Leikam Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 10:47 AM Subject: RV10-List: A bit overwhelmed I have come to the end of the plans for the empennage kit on my 10. I still have to finish installing the trim servo assembly, and glass tail tips, rudder tips, tail strobe...etc. I am waiting on my fuse and wings. I need to start accumulating glass supplies, (good posts from Gary and John Testement recently) and also get together electrical supplies, wire, conduit and so forth. The project suddenly seems a bit overwhelming as I anticipate the delivery of the next kits. I don't want to lose momentum but I find myself staring into space trying to figure out what to accomplish next most efficiently. My wife just told me yesterday she can't wait until the plane is done because of all the crap which happened recently with commercial air travel. Give me a push guys! Dave Leikam 40496 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: FAA Meeting
From: "LarryRosen" <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net>
Date: Feb 21, 2007
If you look at the online forum there are 30 pages with the oldest post in December 31, 2006. The formum has a limited retention time. The archives do not have a time limit. Jesse, Keep up updated please. Larry Rosen #356 -------- Larry Rosen #40356 N205EN (reserved) <http> Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p'608#96608 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Aileron and flap actuation
From: "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com>
Date: Feb 23, 2007
When attaching the ailerons and flaps I am finding that both peices, on both wings, rub the top skin. The flaps contact just prior to the neutral position and the ailerons at about 20 degrees trailing edge down. I don't have pics handy, but I can get some if needed. Is this common, or do I get to re-work my wings? Don't want to get to far into the aileron actuation section unitl I clarify this. Thanks. Eric Kallio 40518 starting the fuel tanks that were put off til last...the joys of proseal. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p'844#96844 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "KiloPapa" <kilopapa(at)antelecom.net>
Subject: Re: Whelen A-500A Strobe Installation
Date: Feb 23, 2007
What have you found to be a good source for strobe lights. The Whelen A500 for the rudder alone is $150 at ACS. Thanks, Kevin 40494 tail/empennage ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jae Chang" <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com>
Date: Feb 23, 2007
Subject: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning
Has anyone else dealt with this issue? I am on page 16-2 on the Top Wing Skins section. My left wing lined up perfectly. On the right wing, to my surprise, I have an alignment problem between the top wing skin and the rear spar. Here are some photos to illustrate... Every other hole lines up between the top wing skin and the wing skeleton, except for the inboard rear spar holes. The holes are out of alignment and gradually come closer into alignment until they are lined up perfectly again between the 4th and 5th rib, counting the root rib as rib #1. http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4481.html Broader picture of the general area... http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4482.html The inboard most hole is the furthest out of line by about 1/16". The rear spar hole needs to come further aft by 1/16". I then did a lot of measuring to compare my left wing (perfect) with right wing (problem). The problem appears to be with the rear spar. The upper flange seems to taper from 22/32" wide down to 20/32" wide at the inboard edge, which would account for the 1/16" alignment error in the top skin. Photo of rear spar top flange on left (correct side): http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4483.html Photo of rear spar top flange on right (error side): http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4484.html I spoke with Van's this morning. They made 2 recommendations: 1. Does the bottom skin line up? Answer: surprisingly enough, YES. It's not perfect, but will be manageable. 2. Drill and rivet the misaligned holes with 1/8" rivets. The problem with this solution is that the new hole will have an edge-distance problem. I should have 1/4" clearance to the edge, but I will only have 3/16" clearance to the aft edge on the rear spar. As I work outboard, the edge distance issue should get better and better, but still not within spec. 1/16" would not be a problem anywhere else on the wing, as far as I can tell. I could have "massaged" things possibly by that amount. However, this problem is at the wing root and wing walk area, which is heavily reinforced. There is no "massaging" possible here. Finally, I could get a new rear-spar, however, that means removing all of the doublers and tons of AN470AD4-8 and 4-6 rivets!!! Thus, the warning to other builders, BEFORE riveting the rear spar, measure the top flange on your rear spar, to make sure it stays even in width. Even better, try fitting the top skin on before riveting the rear spar. Can anyone provide any other recommendations? Another thought is, can I somehow put in a shim between the rear spar and the 2 inboard ribs? The shim would have to only be along the top holes, since the bottom holes are lined up. Thanks, Jae ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Leikam" <DAVELEIKAM(at)wi.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Whelen A-500A Strobe Installation
Date: Feb 23, 2007
I got mine from Van's. Combination strobe and white tail light. Bought the rest of my lights and strobes from http://www.creativair.com/. They recommend you buy the tail strobe/light from Van's. Dave Leikam 40496 Waiting for QB fuse and wings. ----- Original Message ----- From: "KiloPapa" <kilopapa(at)antelecom.net> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 11:28 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Whelen A-500A Strobe Installation > > What have you found to be a good source for strobe lights. The Whelen > A500 for the rudder alone is $150 at ACS. > > Thanks, > > Kevin > 40494 > tail/empennage > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Kevin Belue" <kdbelue(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning
Date: Feb 23, 2007
Jae, I had the same problem (about 2 years ago). My rear spar flange was off more than yours, though. Van's sent me another spar and I drilled out all the rivets and replaced it. It looks like you can use yours - I would drill the holes to match and use the "oops" rivets if necessary. It's a good idea for everyone to check the dimensions on the rear spar before rivetting because it is a big job to remove it. Kevin Belue RV-6A flying RV-10 finish ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jae Chang" <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 12:18 PM Subject: RV10-List: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning > > Has anyone else dealt with this issue? I am on page 16-2 on the Top Wing > Skins > section. My left wing lined up perfectly. On the right wing, to my > surprise, I > have an alignment problem between the top wing skin and the rear spar. > > Here are some photos to illustrate... > > Every other hole lines up between the top wing skin and the wing skeleton, > except for the inboard rear spar holes. The holes are out of alignment and > gradually come closer into alignment until they are lined up perfectly > again > between the 4th and 5th rib, counting the root rib as rib #1. > http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4481.html > > Broader picture of the general area... > http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4482.html > > The inboard most hole is the furthest out of line by about 1/16". The rear > spar > hole needs to come further aft by 1/16". > > I then did a lot of measuring to compare my left wing (perfect) with right > wing > (problem). The problem appears to be with the rear spar. The upper flange > seems > to taper from 22/32" wide down to 20/32" wide at the inboard edge, which > would > account for the 1/16" alignment error in the top skin. > > Photo of rear spar top flange on left (correct side): > http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4483.html > > Photo of rear spar top flange on right (error side): > http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4484.html > > I spoke with Van's this morning. They made 2 recommendations: > > 1. Does the bottom skin line up? Answer: surprisingly enough, YES. It's > not > perfect, but will be manageable. > > 2. Drill and rivet the misaligned holes with 1/8" rivets. > > The problem with this solution is that the new hole will have an > edge-distance > problem. I should have 1/4" clearance to the edge, but I will only have > 3/16" > clearance to the aft edge on the rear spar. As I work outboard, the edge > distance issue should get better and better, but still not within spec. > > 1/16" would not be a problem anywhere else on the wing, as far as I can > tell. I > could have "massaged" things possibly by that amount. However, this > problem is > at the wing root and wing walk area, which is heavily reinforced. There is > no > "massaging" possible here. > > Finally, I could get a new rear-spar, however, that means removing all of > the > doublers and tons of AN470AD4-8 and 4-6 rivets!!! > > Thus, the warning to other builders, BEFORE riveting the rear spar, > measure the > top flange on your rear spar, to make sure it stays even in width. Even > better, > try fitting the top skin on before riveting the rear spar. > > Can anyone provide any other recommendations? > > Another thought is, can I somehow put in a shim between the rear spar and > the 2 > inboard ribs? The shim would have to only be along the top holes, since > the > bottom holes are lined up. > > Thanks, > > Jae > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Leikam" <DAVELEIKAM(at)wi.rr.com>
Subject: Wiring
Date: Feb 23, 2007
Has anyone purchased or do you recommend purchasing the wiring kit from Stein? Dave Leikam 40496 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jae Chang" <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com>
Date: Feb 23, 2007
Subject: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning
Kevin... Well, I just hope we can help this from happening to anyone else. I have already ordered a replacement left rear spar. Even the replacement was not the SAME as my original. With these discrepancies, I think there are plenty of quality control issues on the rear spars At this point, I am leaning towards upsizing to 1/8" hole and rivets. However, what can I do to deal with the edge-distance clearance issue? Does anyone have any recommendations? My thoughts are: 1. Just leave it alone. It's just 1/16" under the edge distance clearance for a 1/8" rivet. 2. Add some extra 3/32" holes and rivets in rear spar upper flange. The current spacing between holes is 26/32". If I put another hole in between existing holes, is that safe to do? Thanks again for the suggestions, Jae -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Belue Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 10:55 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning Jae, I had the same problem (about 2 years ago). My rear spar flange was off more than yours, though. Van's sent me another spar and I drilled out all the rivets and replaced it. It looks like you can use yours - I would drill the holes to match and use the "oops" rivets if necessary. It's a good idea for everyone to check the dimensions on the rear spar before rivetting because it is a big job to remove it. Kevin Belue RV-6A flying RV-10 finish ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jae Chang" <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 12:18 PM Subject: RV10-List: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning > > Has anyone else dealt with this issue? I am on page 16-2 on the Top Wing > Skins > section. My left wing lined up perfectly. On the right wing, to my > surprise, I > have an alignment problem between the top wing skin and the rear spar. > > Here are some photos to illustrate... > > Every other hole lines up between the top wing skin and the wing skeleton, > except for the inboard rear spar holes. The holes are out of alignment and > gradually come closer into alignment until they are lined up perfectly > again > between the 4th and 5th rib, counting the root rib as rib #1. > http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4481.html > > Broader picture of the general area... > http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4482.html > > The inboard most hole is the furthest out of line by about 1/16". The rear > spar > hole needs to come further aft by 1/16". > > I then did a lot of measuring to compare my left wing (perfect) with right > wing > (problem). The problem appears to be with the rear spar. The upper flange > seems > to taper from 22/32" wide down to 20/32" wide at the inboard edge, which > would > account for the 1/16" alignment error in the top skin. > > Photo of rear spar top flange on left (correct side): > http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4483.html > > Photo of rear spar top flange on right (error side): > http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4484.html > > I spoke with Van's this morning. They made 2 recommendations: > > 1. Does the bottom skin line up? Answer: surprisingly enough, YES. It's > not > perfect, but will be manageable. > > 2. Drill and rivet the misaligned holes with 1/8" rivets. > > The problem with this solution is that the new hole will have an > edge-distance > problem. I should have 1/4" clearance to the edge, but I will only have > 3/16" > clearance to the aft edge on the rear spar. As I work outboard, the edge > distance issue should get better and better, but still not within spec. > > 1/16" would not be a problem anywhere else on the wing, as far as I can > tell. I > could have "massaged" things possibly by that amount. However, this > problem is > at the wing root and wing walk area, which is heavily reinforced. There is > no > "massaging" possible here. > > Finally, I could get a new rear-spar, however, that means removing all of > the > doublers and tons of AN470AD4-8 and 4-6 rivets!!! > > Thus, the warning to other builders, BEFORE riveting the rear spar, > measure the > top flange on your rear spar, to make sure it stays even in width. Even > better, > try fitting the top skin on before riveting the rear spar. > > Can anyone provide any other recommendations? > > Another thought is, can I somehow put in a shim between the rear spar and > the 2 > inboard ribs? The shim would have to only be along the top holes, since > the > bottom holes are lined up. > > Thanks, > > Jae > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2007
From: Niko <owl40188(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning
Hi Jay,=0A =0AI think you will be fine going with 1/8 inch rivets.=0A =0AYo u would have reduced your allowable bearing stress on the spar by about 30% due to the shorter edge distance but you will have gained about that much from the higher bearing area. By the way, 1.5D is not considered short edg e distance. Many pieces of structure are designed to that edge distance. I am assuming you are measuring from the center of the hole to the edge of the part. Additionally depending on the thickness of the parts the spar mi ght not be the weakest link.=0A =0A =0AThe net area on the spar will be sli ghtly reduced so the spar will be weaker by the difference in the area of t he upper flanges which is pretty small. Also the upper spar is usually in compression which minimizes the effect.=0A =0AI don't think its a problem b ut you might want to check with Vans anyway. Do make sure though that you get good holes and no "figure 8s"=0A =0ANiko=0A40188=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: Jae Chang <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com>=0ATo: rv10-li st(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Friday, February 23, 2007 3:34:14 PM=0ASubject: RE : RV10-List: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning=0A=0A=0A--> RV10-List mes sage posted by: "Jae Chang" =0A=0AKevin... Wel l, I just hope we can help this from happening to anyone else. I=0Ahave alr eady ordered a replacement left rear spar. Even the replacement was not=0At he SAME as my original. With these discrepancies, I think there are plenty of=0Aquality control issues on the rear spars=0A=0AAt this point, I am lean ing towards upsizing to 1/8" hole and rivets. However,=0Awhat can I do to d eal with the edge-distance clearance issue? Does anyone have=0Aany recommen dations?=0A=0AMy thoughts are:=0A=0A1. Just leave it alone. It's just 1/16" under the edge distance clearance for a=0A1/8" rivet.=0A=0A2. Add some ext ra 3/32" holes and rivets in rear spar upper flange. The current=0Aspacing between holes is 26/32". If I put another hole in between existing=0Aholes, is that safe to do?=0A=0AThanks again for the suggestions,=0AJae=0A=0A---- -Original Message-----=0AFrom: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com=0A[mail to:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Belue=0ASent: F riday, February 23, 2007 10:55 AM=0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com=0ASubject: Re: RV10-List: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning=0A=0A--> RV10-List mess age posted by: "Kevin Belue" =0A=0AJae,=0A=0AI had the same problem (about 2 years ago). My rear spar flange was off more=0Athan yours, though. Van's sent me another spar and I drilled out all the rivets =0Aand replaced it. It looks like you can use yours - I would drill the hol es to=0Amatch and use the "oops" rivets if necessary. It's a good idea for everyone to=0Acheck the dimensions on the rear spar before rivetting becaus e it is a big job=0Ato remove it.=0A=0AKevin Belue=0ARV-6A flying=0ARV-10 f inish=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message -----=0AFrom: "Jae Chang" <jc-matronic s_rv10(at)jline.com>=0ATo: =0ASent: Friday, February 23, 2007 12:18 PM=0ASubject: RV10-List: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warnin @jline.com>=0A>=0A> Has anyone else dealt with this issue? I am on page 16- 2 on the Top Wing =0A> Skins=0A> section. My left wing lined up perfectly. On the right wing, to my =0A> surprise, I=0A> have an alignment problem bet ween the top wing skin and the rear spar.=0A>=0A> Here are some photos to i llustrate...=0A>=0A> Every other hole lines up between the top wing skin an d the wing skeleton,=0A> except for the inboard rear spar holes. The holes are out of alignment and=0A> gradually come closer into alignment until the y are lined up perfectly =0A> again=0A> between the 4th and 5th rib, counti ng the root rib as rib #1.=0A> http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wing kit/photos/IMG_4481.html=0A>=0A> Broader picture of the general area...=0A> http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4482.html=0A> =0A> The inboard most hole is the furthest out of line by about 1/16". The rear =0A> spar=0A> hole needs to come further aft by 1/16".=0A>=0A> I then did a lot of measuring to compare my left wing (perfect) with right =0A> wi ng=0A> (problem). The problem appears to be with the rear spar. The upper f lange =0A> seems=0A> to taper from 22/32" wide down to 20/32" wide at the i nboard edge, which =0A> would=0A> account for the 1/16" alignment error in the top skin.=0A>=0A> Photo of rear spar top flange on left (correct side): =0A> http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4483.html =0A>=0A> Photo of rear spar top flange on right (error side):=0A> http://ww w.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4484.html=0A>=0A> I spoke with Van's this morning. They made 2 recommendations:=0A>=0A> 1. Does the bottom skin line up? Answer: surprisingly enough, YES. It's =0A> not=0A> p erfect, but will be manageable.=0A>=0A> 2. Drill and rivet the misaligned holes with 1/8" rivets.=0A>=0A> The problem with this solution is that the new hole will have an =0A> edge-distance=0A> problem. I should have 1/4" cl earance to the edge, but I will only have =0A> 3/16"=0A> clearance to the a ft edge on the rear spar. As I work outboard, the edge=0A> distance issue s hould get better and better, but still not within spec.=0A>=0A> 1/16" would not be a problem anywhere else on the wing, as far as I can =0A> tell. I =0A> could have "massaged" things possibly by that amount. However, this =0A> problem is=0A> at the wing root and wing walk area, which is heavily r einforced. There is =0A> no=0A> "massaging" possible here.=0A>=0A> Finally, I could get a new rear-spar, however, that means removing all of =0A> the =0A> doublers and tons of AN470AD4-8 and 4-6 rivets!!!=0A>=0A> Thus, the wa rning to other builders, BEFORE riveting the rear spar, =0A> measure the=0A > top flange on your rear spar, to make sure it stays even in width. Even =0A> better,=0A> try fitting the top skin on before riveting the rear spar. =0A>=0A> Can anyone provide any other recommendations?=0A>=0A> Another thou ght is, can I somehow put in a shim between the rear spar and =0A> the 2=0A > inboard ribs? The shim would have to only be along the top holes, since =0A> the=0A> bottom holes are lined up.=0A>=0A> Thanks,=0A>=0A> Jae=0A>=0A> ============ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse(at)saintaviation.com>
Subject: Aileron and flap actuation
Date: Feb 23, 2007
As the other post stated, using UHVM tape or something like that on the Flap will keep it from scratching the paint. It is good to have a tight fit there. On the aileron, if you have not connected the two ailerons together yet, then you probably won't have to worry, because they don't travel as much when they are hooked up. If they are already hooked up, then you may have a problem. Hope this helps. Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse(at)saintaviation.com www.saintaviation.com Cell: 352-427-0285 Fax: 815-377-3694 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric_Kallio Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 9:53 AM Subject: RV10-List: Aileron and flap actuation When attaching the ailerons and flaps I am finding that both peices, on both wings, rub the top skin. The flaps contact just prior to the neutral position and the ailerons at about 20 degrees trailing edge down. I don't have pics handy, but I can get some if needed. Is this common, or do I get to re-work my wings? Don't want to get to far into the aileron actuation section unitl I clarify this. Thanks. Eric Kallio 40518 starting the fuel tanks that were put off til last...the joys of proseal. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p'844#96844 -- 1:44 PM ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Wiring
Date: Feb 23, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
I will recommend Stein. I have been told he is a great guy, reputable businessman and can use all the positive cashflow we can forward him as a result of being victimized by the D2A fiasco. Tim gives a hearty endorsement and that is enough for me. John Cox #40600 ________________________________ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Leikam Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 10:59 AM Subject: RV10-List: Wiring Has anyone purchased or do you recommend purchasing the wiring kit from Stein? Dave Leikam 40496 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2007
Subject: Re: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning
From: "Jae Chang" <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com>
Niko... Vans is recommending using oops rivets, so i think that would definitely mean a weaker structure than using the original callout. Part of the reason, is because this is a tight access area, because of the built-up doublers in the way. Finally, Vans brought up another issue. The 1/16" missing from the upper flange had to have gone somewhere. Yep, it went into the web of the spar. There is now quite a gap created above the ribs. This is the gap in the right (problem side) root rib. That is almost 1/8" thick. 0.125". The top skin is .032". That means the shim I would have to use to fill that gap will be 3 to 4 times the thickness of the top skin. http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4485.html This is another inner rib, all the inner ribs have the same problem, up to the 5th rib, which is fine. http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4486.html As a comparison, this is what my left root rib looks like - what it should be. http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4487.html I am going to have to think about this over the weekend. Now, i am leaning towards replacement. Any opinions on what others would do? That hissing sound i hear is the sound of building momentum leaking away again! Jae > Hi Jay, > > I think you will be fine going with 1/8 inch rivets. > > You would have reduced your allowable bearing stress on the spar by about > 30% due to the shorter edge distance but you will have gained about that > much from the higher bearing area. By the way, 1.5D is not considered > short edge distance. Many pieces of structure are designed to that edge > distance. I am assuming you are measuring from the center of the hole to > the edge of the part. Additionally depending on the thickness of the > parts the spar might not be the weakest link. > > > The net area on the spar will be slightly reduced so the spar will be > weaker by the difference in the area of the upper flanges which is pretty > small. Also the upper spar is usually in compression which minimizes the > effect. > > I don't think its a problem but you might want to check with Vans anyway. > Do make sure though that you get good holes and no "figure 8s" > > Niko > 40188 > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Jae Chang <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com> > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 3:34:14 PM > Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning > > > Kevin... Well, I just hope we can help this from happening to anyone else. > I > have already ordered a replacement left rear spar. Even the replacement > was not > the SAME as my original. With these discrepancies, I think there are > plenty of > quality control issues on the rear spars > > At this point, I am leaning towards upsizing to 1/8" hole and rivets. > However, > what can I do to deal with the edge-distance clearance issue? Does anyone > have > any recommendations? > > My thoughts are: > > 1. Just leave it alone. It's just 1/16" under the edge distance clearance > for a > 1/8" rivet. > > 2. Add some extra 3/32" holes and rivets in rear spar upper flange. The > current > spacing between holes is 26/32". If I put another hole in between existing > holes, is that safe to do? > > Thanks again for the suggestions, > Jae > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Belue > Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 10:55 AM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning > > > Jae, > > I had the same problem (about 2 years ago). My rear spar flange was off > more > than yours, though. Van's sent me another spar and I drilled out all the > rivets > and replaced it. It looks like you can use yours - I would drill the holes > to > match and use the "oops" rivets if necessary. It's a good idea for > everyone to > check the dimensions on the rear spar before rivetting because it is a big > job > to remove it. > > Kevin Belue > RV-6A flying > RV-10 finish > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jae Chang" <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com> > To: > Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 12:18 PM > Subject: RV10-List: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning > > >> >> >> Has anyone else dealt with this issue? I am on page 16-2 on the Top Wing >> Skins >> section. My left wing lined up perfectly. On the right wing, to my >> surprise, I >> have an alignment problem between the top wing skin and the rear spar. >> >> Here are some photos to illustrate... >> >> Every other hole lines up between the top wing skin and the wing >> skeleton, >> except for the inboard rear spar holes. The holes are out of alignment >> and >> gradually come closer into alignment until they are lined up perfectly >> again >> between the 4th and 5th rib, counting the root rib as rib #1. >> http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4481.html >> >> Broader picture of the general area... >> http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4482.html >> >> The inboard most hole is the furthest out of line by about 1/16". The >> rear >> spar >> hole needs to come further aft by 1/16". >> >> I then did a lot of measuring to compare my left wing (perfect) with >> right >> wing >> (problem). The problem appears to be with the rear spar. The upper >> flange >> seems >> to taper from 22/32" wide down to 20/32" wide at the inboard edge, which >> would >> account for the 1/16" alignment error in the top skin. >> >> Photo of rear spar top flange on left (correct side): >> http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4483.html >> >> Photo of rear spar top flange on right (error side): >> http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4484.html >> >> I spoke with Van's this morning. They made 2 recommendations: >> >> 1. Does the bottom skin line up? Answer: surprisingly enough, YES. It's >> not >> perfect, but will be manageable. >> >> 2. Drill and rivet the misaligned holes with 1/8" rivets. >> >> The problem with this solution is that the new hole will have an >> edge-distance >> problem. I should have 1/4" clearance to the edge, but I will only have >> 3/16" >> clearance to the aft edge on the rear spar. As I work outboard, the edge >> distance issue should get better and better, but still not within spec. >> >> 1/16" would not be a problem anywhere else on the wing, as far as I can >> tell. I >> could have "massaged" things possibly by that amount. However, this >> problem is >> at the wing root and wing walk area, which is heavily reinforced. There >> is >> no >> "massaging" possible here. >> >> Finally, I could get a new rear-spar, however, that means removing all >> of >> the >> doublers and tons of AN470AD4-8 and 4-6 rivets!!! >> >> Thus, the warning to other builders, BEFORE riveting the rear spar, >> measure the >> top flange on your rear spar, to make sure it stays even in width. Even >> better, >> try fitting the top skin on before riveting the rear spar. >> >> Can anyone provide any other recommendations? >> >> Another thought is, can I somehow put in a shim between the rear spar >> and >> the 2 >> inboard ribs? The shim would have to only be along the top holes, since >> the >> bottom holes are lined up. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Jae >> >>============ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric Parlow" <ericparlow(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Weather? for- i39, Richmond Madison Flyin Feb. 24th. is ON
Date: Feb 23, 2007
What's the weather look like there? Who's going? Hasn't been much e-traffic this on The Kickoff ............... Last 3 years were great! ERic-- RV-10 N104EP ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Wiring
Date: Feb 23, 2007
From: "Lloyd, Daniel R." <LloydDR(at)wernerco.com>
I have been working with Stein for over a year now, and I can say without a doubt he is an honest and forthright vendor, which in this day and age is a rarity. I have been one of the ones bit by the Direct2 fiasco, and Stein has been a pleasure to deal with during a difficult time. He has been in the middle of a bad situation, and has done everything in his power to make it right. For a small shop that is saying allot, Lancair customers got the shaft and Steins customers got taken care of. I would recommend Stein and his group to anyone needing his services. Dan Lloyd N289DT -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Leikam Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 1:59 PM To: matronics Subject: RV10-List: Wiring Has anyone purchased or do you recommend purchasing the wiring kit from Stein? Dave Leikam 40496 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" <ddddsp1(at)juno.com>
Date: Feb 24, 2007
Subject: Wiring
STEIN all the way!!!!! He is an awesome guy to work with. BTW S tein, my dimmer had a short in it and the ICOM does not have DIMMER cap ability anyway. I hooked them all direct to power and they worked great ! DEAN 40449 YUGO Avionics working great! ________________________________________________________________________ FREE Reminder Service - NEW from AmericanGreetings.com Click HERE and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again! http://track.juno.com/s/lc?s=197335&u=http://www.americangreetings.c om/products/online_calendar.pd?c=uol5752

STEIN all the way!!!!!        ; He is an awesome guy to work with.   BTW Stein,  my dim mer had a short in it and the ICOM does not have DIMMER capability anywa y.  I hooked them all direct to power and they worked great!

 

DEAN 40449

YUGO Avionics working great!



______________________ __________________________________________________
FREE Remin der Service - NEW from AmericanGreetings.com
Click HERE and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again!
< br>

      
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2007
From: "JOHN STARN" <jhstarn(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Wiring
OH NO....Please, I feel a YUGO joke coming on.... KABONG Do Not Archive DEAN 40449 YUGO Avionics working great! ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 2007
From: Bill DeRouchey <billderou(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10
There have been several folks from the Matronics list that have been following the activities of building my own RV10, air data computer, primary flight display, Garmin interface computer, and a Crossbow gyro. All of these components have been integrated into my panel which is IFR legal with lots of innovation for cross country travel. I took full advantage of every skill I have ever learned in my life to make this happen but mostly engineer, programmer, and pilot. It has been wonderful to lay in bed thinking of ways to make the flight experience more enjoyable and safer then implement the idea the next day. Now its time for Sara and I to make a second run at creating a business. The first was packaged telecommunication software for DEC computers from 1978-1986. The prototype panel has been flying since August and I have been steadily making improvements and productizing the components since then. Just last week we finished the first production components for another Watsonville,CA RV-10 panel and its time to open the doors to our new business. Our web site went live this evening. We loaded it with features and (hopefully) good description of what the panel could do for you. Note that from initial concept the panel was approached as a system design instead of just another box. Without this approach the many good ideas that arose from who knows where could not have been implemented and its these ideas that make it a great panel. Check it out at: www.wtdaviationtechnology.com Call if you like. I am always interested in suggestions or discussing ideas. If you will consider doing business with us then I will do the best I can for you. Bill DeRouchey N939SB, flying bill(at)wtdaviationtechnology.com 831.345.3440 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <jim(at)CombsFive.Com>
Subject: Re: Weather? for- i39, Richmond Madison Flyin Feb. 24th. is
ON
Date: Feb 24, 2007
Forcast is for 52 Degree's and partly sunny. Winds 10-15 MPH. =========================================================== From: "Eric Parlow" <ericparlow(at)hotmail.com> Date: 2007/02/23 Fri PM 10:00:58 EST Subject: RV10-List: Weather? for- i39, Richmond Madison Flyin Feb. 24th. is ON What's the weather look like there? Who's going? Hasn't been much e-traffic this on The Kickoff ............... Last 3 years were great! ERic-- RV-10 N104EP =========================================================== ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Heat Selector Box Cushion Clamp Attachment
The heat selector boxes (VENT TG-10) on the firewall have cushion clamps attached to hold the push cables in place. Would someone direct me to where in the plans they have you drill the hole for the screw to hold the clamp in place? What hardware do they recommend. It looks like an 8R8 screw, but with a nut or nut plate? -- Larry Rosen RV-10 #356 http://lrosen.nerv10.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10
Congratulations Bill. I know it has been a long road pulling all this together. On 2/23/07, Bill DeRouchey wrote: > There have been several folks from the Matronics list that have been > following the activities of building my own RV10, air data computer, primary > flight display, Garmin interface computer, and a Crossbow gyro. All of these > components have been integrated into my panel which is IFR legal with lots > of innovation for cross country travel. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Byron Gillespie" <bgill1(at)charter.net>
Subject: Heat Selector Box Cushion Clamp Attachment
Date: Feb 24, 2007
Hi Larry: If it's the ones I believe you are talking about, I am showing the nut plates install on fuselage 27-5 and the bolts AN3-4 on FF1-3. Are those the ones? Byron N253RV Assigned More finishing today.. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry Rosen Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 9:08 AM Subject: RV10-List: Heat Selector Box Cushion Clamp Attachment The heat selector boxes (VENT TG-10) on the firewall have cushion clamps attached to hold the push cables in place. Would someone direct me to where in the plans they have you drill the hole for the screw to hold the clamp in place? What hardware do they recommend. It looks like an 8R8 screw, but with a nut or nut plate? -- Larry Rosen RV-10 #356 http://lrosen.nerv10.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Hilger" <ninepapa(at)bendbroadband.com>
Subject: Re: Heat Selector Box Cushion Clamp Attachment
Date: Feb 24, 2007
Larry I think what you are looking for is on page FF1-3. It looks like the nutplates are already installed in the firewall. John Hilger RV-10 #359 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Rosen" <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 6:08 AM Subject: RV10-List: Heat Selector Box Cushion Clamp Attachment > > The heat selector boxes (VENT TG-10) on the firewall have cushion clamps > attached to hold the push cables in place. Would someone direct me to > where in the plans they have you drill the hole for the screw to hold > the clamp in place? What hardware do they recommend. It looks like an > 8R8 screw, but with a nut or nut plate? > -- > Larry Rosen > RV-10 #356 > http://lrosen.nerv10.com > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: PJ Seipel <seipel(at)seznam.cz>
Subject: Door Handles
I know this was discussed before, but did anyone ever end up with some decent looking door handles that don't cost $350 each? Ideally I'm looking for something that will fit with the existing mechanism. PJ Seipel RV-10 #40032 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: rv10builder <rv10builder(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Door Handles
I got a very nice set of door handles from Dave Czachorowski. His WEB site is www.rivethead-aero.com. He can be reached at (302) 437-6087 or by email: dczach86(at)hotmail.com Regards, Brian Sutherland Nashville, TN #40308 http://www.mykitlog.com/rv10builder PJ Seipel wrote: > > I know this was discussed before, but did anyone ever end up with some > decent looking door handles that don't cost $350 each? Ideally I'm > looking for something that will fit with the existing mechanism. > > PJ Seipel > RV-10 #40032 > > > . > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: John Ackerman <johnag5b(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: Door Handles
Date: Feb 24, 2007
Brian, I don't see door handles listed. What an I missing? do not archive John Ackerman On Feb 24, 2007, at 8:26 AM, rv10builder wrote: > > > I got a very nice set of door handles from Dave Czachorowski. His > WEB site is www.rivethead-aero.com. He can be reached at (302) > 437-6087 or by email: > dczach86(at)hotmail.com > > Regards, > > Brian Sutherland > Nashville, TN > #40308 > http://www.mykitlog.com/rv10builder > > > PJ Seipel wrote: >> >> I know this was discussed before, but did anyone ever end up with >> some decent looking door handles that don't cost $350 each? >> Ideally I'm looking for something that will fit with the existing >> mechanism. >> >> PJ Seipel >> RV-10 #40032 >> >> >> >> >> . >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Heat Selector Box Cushion Clamp Attachment
Not the ones I am looking for. 27-5 shows the nut plates to the FW, FF1-3 shows the cushion clamps to the FW. I am looking for how to connect the cushion clamp to the Heater Box. Larry Byron Gillespie wrote: > > Hi Larry: > > If it's the ones I believe you are talking about, I am showing the nut > plates install on fuselage 27-5 and the bolts AN3-4 on FF1-3. Are those > the ones? > > Byron > N253RV Assigned > More finishing today.. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry Rosen > Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 9:08 AM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV10-List: Heat Selector Box Cushion Clamp Attachment > > > The heat selector boxes (VENT TG-10) on the firewall have cushion clamps > > attached to hold the push cables in place. Would someone direct me to > where in the plans they have you drill the hole for the screw to hold > the clamp in place? What hardware do they recommend. It looks like an > 8R8 screw, but with a nut or nut plate? > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
From: Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Door Handles
Here is an earlier post on the door handles by Dave. The RV-10 handles are not on his web site. Larry zackrv8 wrote: > > Guys, > > Dave just made a door handle for the RV10. It fits the existing RV10 handle assembly perfect. Like the other RV canopy handles he makes, it mounts with just 2 set screws. No need to put the large screw in the front. > > We put this on tonight to check the fit. I already had the existing holes drilled for Vans handle. We slid the new handle on, torqued both set screws, removed the handle, center punched were the set screws made marks, and put the handle back on. The center punch makes little divots were the set screws go and this handle does not rotate. I tried pretty hard...but it doesn't rotate. Good to go. > > Dave is making an aluminum insert that replaces Van's plastic cap. He says it will be a press fit. Just tap it in. I'll post a pic when I get it. > > If you are interested in these handles, you can call Dave at 302-437-6087 or email him at his new email address.. dczachorowski(at)comcast.net > > Check out the pics below... > > Zack > > -------- > RV8 #80125 > RV10 # 40512 > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=79987#79987 > > > Attachments: > > <http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc06652_804.jpg> > <http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc06648_135.jpg> > <http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc06657_111.jpg> > <http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc06656_430.jpg> > > > rv10builder wrote: > > I got a very nice set of door handles from Dave Czachorowski. His WEB > site is www.rivethead-aero.com. He can be reached at (302) 437-6087 > or by email: > dczach86(at)hotmail.com > > Regards, > > Brian Sutherland > Nashville, TN > #40308 > http://www.mykitlog.com/rv10builder > > > PJ Seipel wrote: >> >> I know this was discussed before, but did anyone ever end up with >> some decent looking door handles that don't cost $350 each? Ideally >> I'm looking for something that will fit with the existing mechanism. >> >> PJ Seipel >> RV-10 #40032 >> >> >> >> >> . >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Door Handles
From: "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net>
Date: Feb 24, 2007
PJ, Dave does in fact make the exterior handles that fit right on to the existing Van's door handle mechanism. He'll even engrave them if you want. He does not have a picture or link to it on his website but trust me, he does have them. Also, coming soon, will be a bolt on replacement for the crappy square tubing that is currently the inside door handle. Dave is currently working on a set for our RV10 and I'll post some pics as soon as I get them on the plane. Zack seipel(at)seznam.cz wrote: > I know this was discussed before, but did anyone ever end up with some > decent looking door handles that don't cost $350 each? Ideally I'm > looking for something that will fit with the existing mechanism. > > PJ Seipel > RV-10 #40032 -------- RV8 #80125 RV10 # 40512 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=97129#97129 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 2007
Subject: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10
From: "William Curtis" <wcurtis(at)nerv10.com>
Bill,=0A=0ACongratulations!- It is encouraging to see continued inn ovation in the aircraft/avionics arena.- =0A=0AIf you don't mind ho wever, permit me to be the devil's advocate for a moment.- Looking throug h your site I see that your single panel, single gyro EFIS system-is $19, 000 with an additional $3000 for an second display.- What additional does you system offer at-$10,000 more than an equivalent more established Gra nd Rapids system or only $10,000 less than a fully type certificated Garmin G600 system?- Please don't take this question the wrong way, only it see ms on the surface, a builder would be paying more for an equivalent experim ental system that does not yet have any track record.=0A=0AWilliam =0Ahttp://wcurtis.nerv10.com/ =0A=0A--------------------------------- -------=0A ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------- -----------------=0A0.93 FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD 'From' yahoo.com does not mat ch 'Received' headers=0A0.00 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message =0A=0A There have been several folks from the Matronics list that hav e been following the activities of building my own RV10, air data computer, primary flight display, Garmin interface computer, and a Crossbow gyro. Al l of these components have been integrated into my-panel which is IFR-l egal with lots of innovation for cross country travel. - I took full adva ntage of every skill I have ever learned in my life to make this happen but mostly engineer, programmer, and pilot. It has been wonderful to lay in be d thinking-of ways to make the flight experience more enjoyable and safer then implement the idea the next day. - Now its time for Sara and I to m ake a second run at creating a business. The first was packaged telecommuni cation software for DEC computers from 1978-1986. - The prototype panel h as been flying since August and I have been steadily making improvements an d productizing the components since then. Just last week we finished the fi rst production components for another-Watsonville,CA -RV-10 panel and i ts time to open the doors to our new business. - Our web site went live -this evening. We loaded it with features and (hopefully) good descriptio n of what the panel could do for you. Note that from initial concept-the panel was approached as a system design instead of just another box. Withou t this approach the many good ideas that arose from who knows where could n ot have been implemented and its these ideas that make it a great panel. Ch eck it out at: www.wtdaviationtechnology.com - Call if you like. I am alw ays interested in suggestions or discussing ideas.-If you will consider d oing business with us then I will do the best I can for you. - Bill DeRou chey N939SB, flying bill(at)wtdaviationtechnology.com 831.345.3440 - - - ========= =0A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steven DiNieri" <capsteve(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Door Handles
Date: Feb 25, 2007
PJ, I myself was disappointed with the stock handle so I set out to make a better "mousetrap". This pic is just a preview. I am planning releasing the handles officially the end of next month along with a few other cool products. I'm pretty proud of the results, and I've tried to keep the cost of a complete install and retrofit kits as low as possible. Sorry for the sales ad but I'm pretty excited about it and felt it may offer some alternative choices.... Steve DiNieri 40205 Iflyrv10.com Preautoacc.com > > I know this was discussed before, but did anyone ever end up with some > decent looking door handles that don't cost $350 each? Ideally I'm > looking for something that will fit with the existing mechanism. > > PJ Seipel > RV-10 #40032 > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steven DiNieri" <capsteve(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Door Handles
Date: Feb 25, 2007
Duh, pictures would help..... PJ, I myself was disappointed with the stock handle so I set out to make a better "mousetrap". This pic is just a preview. I am planning releasing the handles officially the end of next month along with a few other cool products. I'm pretty proud of the results, and I've tried to keep the cost of a complete install and retrofit kits as low as possible. Sorry for the sales ad but I'm pretty excited about it and felt it may offer some alternative choices.... Steve DiNieri 40205 Iflyrv10.com Preautoacc.com > > I know this was discussed before, but did anyone ever end up with some > decent looking door handles that don't cost $350 each? Ideally I'm > looking for something that will fit with the existing mechanism. > > PJ Seipel > RV-10 #40032 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steven DiNieri" <capsteve(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Door Handles
Date: Feb 25, 2007
Trying to attach pics.............> > > > Steve DiNieri > 40205 > > Iflyrv10.com > Preautoacc.com > > > > > > I know this was discussed before, but did anyone ever end up with some > > decent looking door handles that don't cost $350 each? Ideally I'm > > looking for something that will fit with the existing mechanism. > > > > PJ Seipel > > RV-10 #40032 > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Indran Chelvanayagam" <dc71(at)netspace.net.au>
Subject: Wiring
Date: Feb 25, 2007
Dan, how did Lancair customers get the shaft? The deal I was given after the D2A fiasco seemed reasonable : $1400 for a Xbow, and $2600 for a pinpoint, along with $1400 credit at Aerocraft parts. This equates to a "free" Crossbow, if you were going to buy the parts anyway. Indran 40228 _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd, Daniel R. Sent: Saturday, 24 February 2007 12:13 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Wiring ... Lancair customers got the shaft and ... Dan Lloyd N289DT ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike Doble (Home Office)" <mikedoble(at)wi.rr.com>
Subject: Door Handles
Date: Feb 25, 2007
Steve - Those handles look great. I can't wait to see the other products you've come up with. Mike Builder 40691 Working on my tail... www.mykitlog.com/mikedoble -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steven DiNieri Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 11:28 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Door Handles Trying to attach pics.............> > > > Steve DiNieri > 40205 > > Iflyrv10.com > Preautoacc.com > > > > > > I know this was discussed before, but did anyone ever end up with some > > decent looking door handles that don't cost $350 each? Ideally I'm > > looking for something that will fit with the existing mechanism. > > > > PJ Seipel > > RV-10 #40032 > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "jdalton77" <jdalton77(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5
Date: Feb 25, 2007
Anyone using this engine? Lycoming IO-540 C4B5? I don't know a lot about engines but this is 250HP and is from an Aztec. What do you guys think? Jeff Just received slo-build Wing Kit #40544 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <jim(at)CombsFive.Com>
Subject: Re: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5
Date: Feb 25, 2007
Jeff, I have one of two that came off an Aztec. It's essentially the same as the D4B5. So far I have not had any issues with the installation. Not flying yet though. I also get a Hartzel prop and they had an STC for the prop on this particular engine with no AD's or RPM limitations. Both engines off this particular Aztec went to RV-10 builders. I pulled the hydraulic pump and the vacuum pump off my engine. I plan on keeping the 70 amp alt too. Jim C N312F / 40192 Do No Archive =========================================================== From: "jdalton77" <jdalton77(at)comcast.net> Date: 2007/02/25 Sun PM 02:08:28 EST Subject: RV10-List: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5 Anyone using this engine? Lycoming IO-540 C4B5? I don't know a lot about engines but this is 250HP and is from an Aztec. What do you guys think? Jeff Just received slo-build Wing Kit #40544 =========================================================== ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Potential Gotca - gear supports / F1004K L/R
From: "egohr1" <EGOHR86(at)alumni.carnegiemellon.edu>
Date: Feb 25, 2007
I just finished fitting the main gear supports into the fuse floor structure. The plans call for double flush rivets in the spar, but not on the F1004K L/R. The shop heads on the aft six rivets would not allow the gear support to line up with the holes in the spar, so they are now double flush, like the spar. -------- eric gohr EGOHR86(at)alumni.carnegiemellon.edu Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=97268#97268 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: David Maib <dmaib(at)mac.com>
Subject: Re: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5
Date: Feb 25, 2007
Hi Jeff, I too have a C4B5 off an Aztec. I got it at Wentworth in Minneapolis. Where are you located? I believe, but don't know yet for sure, that this engine can be overhauled to D4A5. The gentleman that is overhauling mine is researching that for me. David Maib #40559 QB Wings On Feb 25, 2007, at 1:08 PM, jdalton77 wrote: Anyone using this engine? Lycoming IO-540 C4B5? I don't know a lot about engines but this is 250HP and is from an Aztec. What do you guys think? Jeff Just received slo-build Wing Kit #40544 www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List_- ============================================================ _- forums.matronics.com_- =========================================================== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Reining" <wreining(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Is It OK to Flatten a Dimple?
Date: Feb 25, 2007
Oops - I mistakenly dimpled a hole in one of the flanges on a tail cone frame (where the longeron attaches). It flattened right out when I squeezed it with a rivet set. Is this OK? I wouldn't think a whole row would be a good idea, but just one? Bill (and Jon) Reining 40514 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rene" <rene(at)felker.com>
Subject: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5
Date: Feb 25, 2007
Jim C, you wouldn't happen to have that vacuum pump pad sitting around unused? I am looking for one and would be willing to pay a reasonable price for it. Anyone else have one? I have a C4B5 and plan on using a standby alternator. Rene' N423CF 40322 Finish or something like that..... 801-721-6080 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jim(at)combsfive.com Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 12:38 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5 Jeff, I have one of two that came off an Aztec. It's essentially the same as the D4B5. So far I have not had any issues with the installation. Not flying yet though. I also get a Hartzel prop and they had an STC for the prop on this particular engine with no AD's or RPM limitations. Both engines off this particular Aztec went to RV-10 builders. I pulled the hydraulic pump and the vacuum pump off my engine. I plan on keeping the 70 amp alt too. Jim C N312F / 40192 Do No Archive =========================================================== From: "jdalton77" <jdalton77(at)comcast.net> Date: 2007/02/25 Sun PM 02:08:28 EST Subject: RV10-List: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5 Anyone using this engine? Lycoming IO-540 C4B5? I don't know a lot about engines but this is 250HP and is from an Aztec. What do you guys think? Jeff Just received slo-build Wing Kit #40544 =========================================================== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jay Rowe" <jfrjr(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: fiberglass course
Date: Feb 25, 2007
Just about to put the cabin on and without any skills or knowledge re. fiberglass. I see that EAA has a "Composite Course" weekend instruction class. Is that only for those building glass planes or would it be something useful to the RV group? Or is there other sources of instruction out there. Help!! Jay Rowe 40301. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Wiring
Date: Feb 25, 2007
From: "Lloyd, Daniel R." <LloydDR(at)wernerco.com>
$1400 in credit at full retail prices equates to more money in his pocket and less in his customers. An offer to make your customers whole does not include forcing them to purchase additional items from you at retail....My .02 of course. Dan -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Indran Chelvanayagam Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 6:28 AM To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RE: RV10-List: Wiring Dan, how did Lancair customers get the shaft? The deal I was given after the D2A fiasco seemed reasonable : $1400 for a Xbow, and $2600 for a pinpoint, along with $1400 credit at Aerocraft parts. This equates to a "free" Crossbow, if you were going to buy the parts anyway. Indran 40228 _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd, Daniel R. Sent: Saturday, 24 February 2007 12:13 PM To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RE: RV10-List: Wiring ... Lancair customers got the shaft and ... Dan Lloyd N289DT ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Wiring
Date: Feb 25, 2007
From: "Lloyd, Daniel R." <LloydDR(at)wernerco.com>
In addition to my other comments, you paid for a working system, does it seem right to you that your vendor, who took your money, offers to split the cost with you? Kind of strange in my book. The point being is that I was giving a reference for Stein, who made his customers whole by delivering the system that they ordered and paid for. He did not make us split it with him and get a credit to use at a later date at full retail pricing. Dan -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Indran Chelvanayagam Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 6:28 AM To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RE: RV10-List: Wiring Dan, how did Lancair customers get the shaft? The deal I was given after the D2A fiasco seemed reasonable : $1400 for a Xbow, and $2600 for a pinpoint, along with $1400 credit at Aerocraft parts. This equates to a "free" Crossbow, if you were going to buy the parts anyway. Indran 40228 _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd, Daniel R. Sent: Saturday, 24 February 2007 12:13 PM To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RE: RV10-List: Wiring ... Lancair customers got the shaft and ... Dan Lloyd N289DT ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 2007
From: Tim Lewis <Tim_Lewis(at)msm.umr.edu>
Subject: Re: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5
That's what I bought, and overhauled it with the help of an friend who is an IA. If you look through the Lycoming parts manual, you'll see that the C4B5 is part-for-part identical to the D4A5, except for some different choices regarding selection of oil filler neck (as I recall). The Lycoming tech reps at Oshkosh verified this, and said that the C4B5 can be run just like the D4A5 (2700 RPM, 260 HP) with no ill effects. Tim -- Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA) RV-6A N47TD -- 850 hrs RV-10 #40059 under construction jdalton77 wrote: > Anyone using this engine? Lycoming IO-540 C4B5? > > I don't know a lot about engines but this is 250HP and is from an > Aztec. What do you guys think? > > Jeff > Just received slo-build Wing Kit > #40544 > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DejaVu" <wvu(at)ameritel.net>
Subject: Re: Wiring
Date: Feb 25, 2007
MessageI think this is called the art of being lawyer. He can boink you in the rear end and you thank him when he's done with you! Anh ----- Original Message ----- From: Lloyd, Daniel R. To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 10:13 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Wiring In addition to my other comments, you paid for a working system, does it seem right to you that your vendor, who took your money, offers to split th e cost with you? Kind of strange in my book. The point being is that I was giving a reference for Stein, who made his customers whole by delivering th e system that they ordered and paid for. He did not make us split it with h im and get a credit to use at a later date at full retail pricing. Dan -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-serv er(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Indran Chelvanayagam Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 6:28 AM To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RE: RV10-List: Wiring Dan, how did Lancair customers get the shaft? The deal I was given afte r the D2A fiasco seemed reasonable : $1400 for a Xbow, and $2600 for a pinp oint, along with $1400 credit at Aerocraft parts. This equates to a "free" Crossbow, if you were going to buy the parts anyway. Indran 40228 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- - From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-serv er(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd, Daniel R. Sent: Saturday, 24 February 2007 12:13 PM To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RE: RV10-List: Wiring ... Lancair customers got the shaft and ... Dan Lloyd N289DT href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics. com/Navigator?RV10-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Lsssp(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 25, 2007
Subject: Re: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5
This engine has been sitting for 7 years. The Aztec just sold on ebay for 16,000 and this guy is now parting out on Barnstormers. Be Careful ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "The McGough Family" <VHMUM(at)bigpond.com>
Subject: Re: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5
Date: Feb 26, 2007
You can also use a N1A5 as the only diference is a heavy duty crank. ----- Original Message ----- From: Lsssp(at)aol.com To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 3:09 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5 This engine has been sitting for 7 years. The Aztec just sold on ebay for 16,000 and this guy is now parting out on Barnstormers. Be Careful ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Russell Daves" <dav1111(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5
Date: Feb 26, 2007
I agree with Tim. My C4B5 is flying high on N710RV (first flight 7/28/06). It is a great core to use for overhaul for the RV-10. Russ Daves ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 2007
From: Niko <owl40188(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning
Hi Jae,=0A=0ASorry to see you are having such a problem with your rear spar .=0A=0AAfter seeing your latest pictures I would replace the rear spar. No t that it couldn't be fixed but you are going to put a lot of time into fix ing it with shims, you won't be totally happy with it and then you might st ill run into unforseen problems when you mount your ailerons and flaps beca use of the taller aft spar. You would be in effect changing the airfoil sh ape. One you start drilling out the rivets you might find its going fairly fast and you haven't lost all that much time.=0A=0AGood luck with it.=0A =0ANiko=0A40188=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: Jae Chang <jc-m atronics_rv10(at)jline.com>=0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Friday, Febr uary 23, 2007 7:46:39 PM=0ASubject: Re: RV10-List: Rear spar alignment flaw nics_rv10(at)jline.com>=0A=0ANiko... Vans is recommending using oops rivets, s o i think that would=0Adefinitely mean a weaker structure than using the or iginal callout. Part=0Aof the reason, is because this is a tight access are a, because of the=0Abuilt-up doublers in the way.=0A=0AFinally, Vans brough t up another issue. The 1/16" missing from the upper=0Aflange had to have g one somewhere. Yep, it went into the web of the spar.=0AThere is now quite a gap created above the ribs.=0A=0AThis is the gap in the right (problem si de) root rib. That is almost 1/8"=0Athick. 0.125". The top skin is .032". T hat means the shim I would have to=0Ause to fill that gap will be 3 to 4 ti mes the thickness of the top skin.=0Ahttp://www.jline.com/log/aviation/buil d/wingkit/photos/IMG_4485.html=0A=0AThis is another inner rib, all the inne r ribs have the same problem, up to=0Athe 5th rib, which is fine.=0Ahttp:// www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4486.html=0A=0AAs a com parison, this is what my left root rib looks like - what it should=0Abe.=0A http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4487.html=0A=0AI am going to have to think about this over the weekend. Now, i am leaning =0Atowards replacement.=0A=0AAny opinions on what others would do?=0A=0ATha t hissing sound i hear is the sound of building momentum leaking away=0Aaga in!=0A=0AJae=0A=0A> Hi Jay,=0A>=0A> I think you will be fine going with 1/8 inch rivets.=0A>=0A> You would have reduced your allowable bearing stress on the spar by about=0A> 30% due to the shorter edge distance but you will have gained about that=0A> much from the higher bearing area. By the way, 1.5D is not considered=0A> short edge distance. Many pieces of structure a re designed to that edge=0A> distance. I am assuming you are measuring fro m the center of the hole to=0A> the edge of the part. Additionally dependi ng on the thickness of the=0A> parts the spar might not be the weakest link .=0A>=0A>=0A> The net area on the spar will be slightly reduced so the spar will be=0A> weaker by the difference in the area of the upper flanges whic h is pretty=0A> small. Also the upper spar is usually in compression which minimizes the=0A> effect.=0A>=0A> I don't think its a problem but you migh t want to check with Vans anyway.=0A> Do make sure though that you get good holes and no "figure 8s"=0A>=0A> Niko=0A> 40188=0A>=0A>=0A> ----- Original Message ----=0A> From: Jae Chang <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com>=0A> To: rv1 0-list(at)matronics.com=0A> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 3:34:14 PM=0A> Sub ject: RE: RV10-List: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning=0A>=0A>=0A> --> R V10-List message posted by: "Jae Chang" =0A> =0A> Kevin... Well, I just hope we can help this from happening to anyone e lse.=0A> I=0A> have already ordered a replacement left rear spar. Even the replacement=0A> was not=0A> the SAME as my original. With these discrepanci es, I think there are=0A> plenty of=0A> quality control issues on the rear spars=0A>=0A> At this point, I am leaning towards upsizing to 1/8" hole and rivets.=0A> However,=0A> what can I do to deal with the edge-distance clea rance issue? Does anyone=0A> have=0A> any recommendations?=0A>=0A> My thoug hts are:=0A>=0A> 1. Just leave it alone. It's just 1/16" under the edge dis tance clearance=0A> for a=0A> 1/8" rivet.=0A>=0A> 2. Add some extra 3/32" h oles and rivets in rear spar upper flange. The=0A> current=0A> spacing betw een holes is 26/32". If I put another hole in between existing=0A> holes, i s that safe to do?=0A>=0A> Thanks again for the suggestions,=0A> Jae=0A>=0A > -----Original Message-----=0A> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com =0A> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Belue =0A> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 10:55 AM=0A> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.c om=0A> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning=0A>=0A> =0A> Jae,=0A>=0A> I had the same problem (about 2 years ago). My rear spar flange was off=0A> more=0A> than yours, though. Van's sent me another spar and I drilled out all the=0A> rivets=0A> and replaced it. It looks like you can use yours - I would drill the holes=0A> to=0A> match and use the "oops " rivets if necessary. It's a good idea for=0A> everyone to=0A> check the d imensions on the rear spar before rivetting because it is a big=0A> job=0A> to remove it.=0A>=0A> Kevin Belue=0A> RV-6A flying=0A> RV-10 finish=0A>=0A >=0A> ----- Original Message -----=0A> From: "Jae Chang" <jc-matronics_rv10 (at)jline.com>=0A> To: =0A> Sent: Friday, February 23 , 2007 12:18 PM=0A> Subject: RV10-List: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warnin ics_rv10(at)jline.com>=0A>>=0A>> Has anyone else dealt with this issue? I am o n page 16-2 on the Top Wing=0A>> Skins=0A>> section. My left wing lined up perfectly. On the right wing, to my=0A>> surprise, I=0A>> have an alignment problem between the top wing skin and the rear spar.=0A>>=0A>> Here are so me photos to illustrate...=0A>>=0A>> Every other hole lines up between the top wing skin and the wing=0A>> skeleton,=0A>> except for the inboard rear spar holes. The holes are out of alignment=0A>> and=0A>> gradually come clo ser into alignment until they are lined up perfectly=0A>> again=0A>> betwee n the 4th and 5th rib, counting the root rib as rib #1.=0A>> http://www.jli ne.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4481.html=0A>>=0A>> Broader pi cture of the general area...=0A>> http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/w ingkit/photos/IMG_4482.html=0A>>=0A>> The inboard most hole is the furthest out of line by about 1/16". The=0A>> rear=0A>> spar=0A>> hole needs to com e further aft by 1/16".=0A>>=0A>> I then did a lot of measuring to compare my left wing (perfect) with=0A>> right=0A>> wing=0A>> (problem). The proble m appears to be with the rear spar. The upper=0A>> flange=0A>> seems=0A>> t o taper from 22/32" wide down to 20/32" wide at the inboard edge, which=0A> > would=0A>> account for the 1/16" alignment error in the top skin.=0A>>=0A >> Photo of rear spar top flange on left (correct side):=0A>> http://www.jl ine.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4483.html=0A>>=0A>> Photo of rear spar top flange on right (error side):=0A>> http://www.jline.com/log/a viation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4484.html=0A>>=0A>> I spoke with Van's thi s morning. They made 2 recommendations:=0A>>=0A>> 1. Does the bottom skin line up? Answer: surprisingly enough, YES. It's=0A>> not=0A>> perfect, but will be manageable.=0A>>=0A>> 2. Drill and rivet the misaligned holes with 1/8" rivets.=0A>>=0A>> The problem with this solution is that the new hole will have an=0A>> edge-distance=0A>> problem. I should have 1/4" clearance to the edge, but I will only have=0A>> 3/16"=0A>> clearance to the aft edg e on the rear spar. As I work outboard, the edge=0A>> distance issue should get better and better, but still not within spec.=0A>>=0A>> 1/16" would no t be a problem anywhere else on the wing, as far as I can=0A>> tell. I=0A>> could have "massaged" things possibly by that amount. However, this=0A>> p roblem is=0A>> at the wing root and wing walk area, which is heavily reinfo rced. There=0A>> is=0A>> no=0A>> "massaging" possible here.=0A>>=0A>> Final ly, I could get a new rear-spar, however, that means removing all=0A>> of =0A>> the=0A>> doublers and tons of AN470AD4-8 and 4-6 rivets!!!=0A>>=0A>> Thus, the warning to other builders, BEFORE riveting the rear spar,=0A>> me asure the=0A>> top flange on your rear spar, to make sure it stays even in width. Even=0A>> better,=0A>> try fitting the top skin on before riveting t he rear spar.=0A>>=0A>> Can anyone provide any other recommendations?=0A>> =0A>> Another thought is, can I somehow put in a shim between the rear spar =0A>> and=0A>> the 2=0A>> inboard ribs? The shim would have to only be alon g the top holes, since=0A>> the=0A>> bottom holes are lined up.=0A>>=0A>> T hanks,=0A>>=0A>> Jae=0A>>=0A>>==============0A=0A ======================== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Saylor" <Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com>
Subject: fiberglass course
Date: Feb 26, 2007
Jay and All, The SportAir workshops are worthwhile. The composite workshop will give you an overview of the two types of resin used on RVs and a chance to work with at least the most common one if not both. If there is sufficient interest, I would be happy to put together a more advanced 2 day course that is specific to RV10s, particularly fitting the top, bonding the door skins, fitting the windows, etc. Any takers for late April? I'd need at least 8. Cost would be $300, Saturday and Sunday, in Watsonville (KWVI). Dave Saylor AirCrafters LLC 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 831-722-9141 831-750-0284 CL www.AirCraftersLLC.com _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Rowe Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 5:54 PM Subject: RV10-List: fiberglass course Just about to put the cabin on and without any skills or knowledge re. fiberglass. I see that EAA has a "Composite Course" weekend instruction class. Is that only for those building glass planes or would it be something useful to the RV group? Or is there other sources of instruction out there. Help!! Jay Rowe 40301. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <rvmail(at)thelefflers.com>
Subject: Re: fiberglass course
Date: Feb 26, 2007
I would be interested, but the date would impact my availability. > > From: "Dave Saylor" <Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com> > Date: 2007/02/26 Mon PM 01:24:02 EST > To: > Subject: RE: RV10-List: fiberglass course > > Jay and All, > > The SportAir workshops are worthwhile. The composite workshop will give you > an overview of the two types of resin used on RVs and a chance to work with > at least the most common one if not both. > > If there is sufficient interest, I would be happy to put together a more > advanced 2 day course that is specific to RV10s, particularly fitting the > top, bonding the door skins, fitting the windows, etc. > > Any takers for late April? I'd need at least 8. Cost would be $300, > Saturday and Sunday, in Watsonville (KWVI). > > Dave Saylor > AirCrafters LLC > 140 Aviation Way > Watsonville, CA > 831-722-9141 > 831-750-0284 CL > www.AirCraftersLLC.com > > _____ > > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Rowe > Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 5:54 PM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV10-List: fiberglass course > > > Just about to put the cabin on and without any skills or knowledge re. > fiberglass. I see that EAA has a "Composite Course" weekend instruction > class. Is that only for those building glass planes or would it be > something useful to the RV group? Or is there other sources of instruction > out there. Help!! Jay Rowe 40301. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: fiberglass course
From: "jim berry" <jimberry(at)qwest.net>
Date: Feb 26, 2007
Dave I am interested. Most any date will work for me. Jim Berry Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=97447#97447 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse(at)saintaviation.com>
Subject: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5
Date: Feb 26, 2007
N256H has over 300 hours on a C4B5 off an Aztec. It was overhauled with new Titan cylinders. Two things to watch out for, one very minor. First, and the bigger issue, you will probably need new engine mount ears. The one we got has the big hole ears and the -10 needs the small hole. I know there is a technical Dynafocal 1, Dynafocal 2 and some other name for the different mount formats, but I don't know which is which. If it has the big holes, you will need to buy a set with small holes. I actually may have a set around here, but I would have to look for it. Second, the work of getting the baffles fit around the case is a fair bit more on the C4B5 (in my experience) than the D4A5. There are some slight differences in the case (at least on the one we got) that make it more work to get fit, while the D4A5 fits the baffles absolutely beautifully as they come from Van's. Again, the 2nd one is a minor issue, just requiring a little more time. It is also my understanding that the internal parts are identical, so running it as a 260HP 2700RPM engine instead of a 250HP 2575RPM engine is supposedly fine, and since you are putting it on an experimental airplane, you could probably put that in your operating manual somewhere and be fine, but that is a decision you have to make, of course. Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse(at)saintaviation.com www.saintaviation.com Cell: 352-427-0285 Fax: 815-377-3694 _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jdalton77 Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 2:08 PM Subject: RV10-List: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5 Anyone using this engine? Lycoming IO-540 C4B5? I don't know a lot about engines but this is 250HP and is from an Aztec. What do you guys think? Jeff Just received slo-build Wing Kit #40544 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 2007
From: Bill DeRouchey <billderou(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10
Hi William- Thanks for the good question. It required me to remember all the reasons for each decision of each step over the last 3.5 years. Its not a short answer. Why is it so expensive? I, more than any other, would like our primary flight display "PFD" to be less expensive. However, if you look at the complete panel prices you will see that you receive all the high end features without the high end pricing. In the end, our price was determined by our objective: provide a high quality, solid IFR platform. Kindly understand that "solid" means with and without turbulence. Lets disect this objective. We started with the best components available, integrated a display computer, and filled in the holes. Garmin 430/530 was chosen as one cornerstone. This unit has certifications that allow you to file /G, an easy map update process, Glideslope, Localizer, GPS, and COM receivers. Its a mature product that you can afford. Note that most Chelton owners have a G430 installed. TIP: for $500 you can get the G430 downloaded with terrain capability - not TAWS, just terrain warning. ANOTHER TIP: on our PFD we show the numbers that you typically see on the right side of the G430 display with map selected. Use the menu button and remove this area from the G430 increasing your map size by 50%! All the suggested panels are FAA legal. Mission is cross country IFR. This is the rule, not the exception. Many innovations were added to support this mission, such as, fuel management, wind, prop setting, etc. We don't approach IFR as a challenge. With proper instrumentation, we expect it to be comfortable with the grandkids (or if your ahead of the game - kids) in the back. We allowed for a robust backup plan with more than one layer. If you look closely at the suggested panels you will see 2 & 1/2 levels of backup. The independently sensored autopilot is the half level. Note that each subsequent level becomes simplier. My objective to the all-in-one glass PFD is the backup becomes more complex. Typically, one choses another similar unit as backup with the advertised swap displays in case of failure. It requires very complex logic to do this automatically, and there are hardware and software components added to support this functionality which makes it less reliable. The origin of this thinking is what the engineering department would call "scope". They would list all the things that could go wrong with their component and provide a recovery procedure. The fault with this scope is the pilot is subject to any problem that occurs - not just a predefined set of PFD problems. Nowhere can you purchase a glass panel that is as deeply integrated into the RV10 as our PFD. We pickup the fuel levels, flaps, door sensors, and stall warning to minimize weight, wiring, and additional components. The price of our product would be much more appealing if we removed the gyro. Unfortunately, Crossbow is the only manufacturer of solid state gyros that meets our objective of a "solid IFR platform". Since there is only one qualifying choice I did not want our customers to shop the gyro and attempt to save money thinking they were still purchasing a "solid IFR platform". Perhaps, in the future there will be other suitable choices and we could provide options. Now I must talk about gyros so you won't believe that this is an arbitrary judgement. Before I ordered the RV10 kit (and I am kit #29), I swore that I would never put a blankity, blank vacuum system in another plane ... ever. So, my approach was to create a solid state gyro that would be the crux of an IFR panel. I purchased the magnetic sensors, accelerometers, and rate gyros necessary to build my own gyro. After prototyping each of the components and thinking what would be required to produce a reliable 360 degree, accurate and inexpensive gyro the answer was it is simply not possible because of the cost of the engineering test equipment required. You need a very accurate rate table, a temperature chamber to characterize sensor behavior, calibrated orientation, tight production controls, and the ability to measure and calibrate each unit shipped. It was clearly a product for a very serious engineering company dedicated to this purpose. This was not my intended business, so I abandoned this effort and began shopping. My criteria for purchase was/is: 1. Proven know-how engineering and manufacturing cabability 2. Published acuracy specifications. 3. Experienced with aircraft applications 4. Birth certificate (calibration) for each unit 5. Price Needless to say, only Crossbow met these requirements. Looking to the PFD's future, we offer multiple, defined components rather than a single box. Software upgrades are simple, changing out the entire cpu is simple, updating the display is simple, etc. Since the purchased components have clearly defined interfaces and our manufactured components have standard, extensible protocol links with the display computer its relatively easy to keep improving the product. We don't ever want to be in the position of squeezing life out of a 6.4" display long after the market has moved on. Regarding your specific question about the competition $10,000 under our price: Look close, they are all VFR components. The major reason is their gyros are of dubious quality, and do not meet the first four purchase requirements (above). Most of these manufacturers clearly state that they are for VFR usage - its the purchasers that streach the usage into IFR situations. Trading money on the ground for a challenge in the air is a bad idea. Regarding your question about the Garmin 600 $10,000 over our price: This package was designed to directly compete with Chelton. Its not the best of everything, just better than Chelton. Choose a display you will be comfortable looking at for many hours. They tilted two 6.4" displays on end with low resolution and unknown brightness. Our display is 10.4" with 1024 x 768 resolution and 1200 nits of brightness. These are engineering numbers and cannot be compared with a "sunlight bright" phase the marketing weenie penned. The visibility from an RV10 is wonderful - but the downside is it lets in a lot of sun. What computer are you purchasing? Does it have extra capacity for future upgrades, or is it an economical implementation that needs a hardware upgrade for future improvements? I looked once again for the accuracy specifications of the Garmin gyro with no luck. Nothing is published. I have become very hard headed on this subject because I view the gyro as the crux of an IFR flight. Remember that our IFR mission includes turbulence. This is when I expect to feel comfortable and it doesn't matter if this is a lucky day or not. Bill DeRouchey N939SB, flying bill(at)wtdaviationtechnology.com William Curtis wrote: Bill, Congratulations! It is encouraging to see continued innovation in the aircraft/avionics arena. If you don't mind however, permit me to be the devil's advocate for a moment. Looking through your site I see that your single panel, single gyro EFIS system is $19,000 with an additional $3000 for an second display. What additional does you system offer at $10,000 more than an equivalent more established Grand Rapids system or only $10,000 less than a fully type certificated Garmin G600 system? Please don't take this question the wrong way, only it seems on the surface, a builder would be paying more for an equivalent experimental system that does not yet have any track record. William http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/ --------------------------------- ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.93 FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD 'From' yahoo.com does not match 'Received' headers 0.00 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message There have been several folks from the Matronics list that have been following the activities of building my own RV10, air data computer, primary flight display, Garmin interface computer, and a Crossbow gyro. All of these components have been integrated into my panel which is IFR legal with lots of innovation for cross country travel. I took full advantage of every skill I have ever learned in my life to make this happen but mostly engineer, programmer, and pilot. It has been wonderful to lay in bed thinking of ways to make the flight experience more enjoyable and safer then implement the idea the next day. Now its time for Sara and I to make a second run at creating a business. The first was packaged telecommunication software for DEC computers from 1978-1986. The prototype panel has been flying since August and I have been steadily making improvements and productizing the components since then. Just last week we finished the first production components for another Watsonville,CA RV-10 panel and its time to open the doors to our new business. Our web site went live this evening. We loaded it with features and (hopefully) good description of what the panel could do for you. Note that from initial concept the panel was approached as a system design instead of just another box. Without this approach the many good ideas that arose from who knows where could not have been implemented and its these ideas that make it a great panel. Check it out at: www.wtdaviationtechnology.com Call if you like. I am always interested in suggestions or discussing ideas. If you will consider doing business with us then I will do the best I can for you. Bill DeRouchey N939SB, flying bill(at)wtdaviationtechnology.com 831.345.3440 http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?R --> http://forums.matronics.com============= ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10
Date: Feb 26, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Turbulence and Unreported Icing coupled with strong headwinds and my use of Corrective Lens (due to advancing pilot age) in a low light situation.... Now that gets my attention. I think your thought process, research, design background and final decisions will prove to offer the RV-10 builders a great option to Butt up against Chelton, OP Technologies and Garmin. I ruled out the cheaper VFR offerings long ago. It is down to painfully thoughtful and analytic evaluation at this point. I also look forward to Deems' report flying behind his OP Tech screens. Bill, Thanks for the investment and the answer to our Devil's Advocate. John Cox #40600 ________________________________ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill DeRouchey Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 1:07 PM Subject: re: RV10-List: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10 Hi William- Thanks for the good question. It required me to remember all the reasons for each decision of each step over the last 3.5 years. Its not a short answer. Why is it so expensive? I, more than any other, would like our primary flight display "PFD" to be less expensive. However, if you look at the complete panel prices you will see that you receive all the high end features without the high end pricing. In the end, our price was determined by our objective: provide a high quality, solid IFR platform. Kindly understand that "solid" means with and without turbulence. Lets disect this objective. We started with the best components available, integrated a display computer, and filled in the holes. Garmin 430/530 was chosen as one cornerstone. This unit has certifications that allow you to file /G, an easy map update process, Glideslope, Localizer, GPS, and COM receivers. Its a mature product that you can afford. Note that most Chelton owners have a G430 installed. TIP: for $500 you can get the G430 downloaded with terrain capability - not TAWS, just terrain warning. ANOTHER TIP: on our PFD we show the numbers that you typically see on the right side of the G430 display with map selected. Use the menu button and remove this area from the G430 increasing your map size by 50%! All the suggested panels are FAA legal. Mission is cross country IFR. This is the rule, not the exception. Many innovations were added to support this mission, such as, fuel management, wind, prop setting, etc. We don't approach IFR as a challenge. With proper instrumentation, we expect it to be comfortable with the grandkids (or if your ahead of the game - kids) in the back. We allowed for a robust backup plan with more than one layer. If you look closely at the suggested panels you will see 2 & 1/2 levels of backup. The independently sensored autopilot is the half level. Note that each subsequent level becomes simplier. My objective to the all-in-one glass PFD is the backup becomes more complex. Typically, one choses another similar unit as backup with the advertised swap displays in case of failure. It requires very complex logic to do this automatically, and there are hardware and software components added to support this functionality which makes it less reliable. The origin of this thinking is what the engineering department would call "scope". They would list all the things that could go wrong with their component and provide a recovery procedure. The fault with this scope is the pilot is subject to any problem that occurs - not just a predefined set of PFD problems. Nowhere can you purchase a glass panel that is as deeply integrated into the RV10 as our PFD. We pickup the fuel levels, flaps, door sensors, and stall warning to minimize weight, wiring, and additional components. The price of our product would be much more appealing if we removed the gyro. Unfortunately, Crossbow is the only manufacturer of solid state gyros that meets our objective of a "solid IFR platform". Since there is only one qualifying choice I did not want our customers to shop the gyro and attempt to save money thinking they were still purchasing a "solid IFR platform". Perhaps, in the future there will be other suitable choices and we could provide options. Now I must talk about gyros so you won't believe that this is an arbitrary judgement. Before I ordered the RV10 kit (and I am kit #29), I swore that I would never put a blankity, blank vacuum system in another plane ... ever. So, my approach was to create a solid state gyro that would be the crux of an IFR panel. I purchased the magnetic sensors, accelerometers, and rate gyros necessary to build my own gyro. After prototyping each of the components and thinking what would be required to produce a reliable 360 degree, accurate and inexpensive gyro the answer was it is simply not possible because of the cost of the engineering test equipment required. You need a very accurate rate table, a temperature chamber to characterize sensor behavior, calibrated orientation, tight production controls, and the ability to measure and calibrate each unit shipped. It was clearly a product for a very serious engineering company dedicated to this purpose. This was not my intended business, so I abandoned this effort and began shopping. My criteria for purchase was/is: 1. Proven know-how engineering and manufacturing cabability 2. Published acuracy specifications. 3. Experienced with aircraft applications 4. Birth certificate (calibration) for each unit 5. Price Needless to say, only Crossbow met these requirements. Looking to the PFD's future, we offer multiple, defined components rather than a single box. Software upgrades are simple, changing out the entire cpu is simple, updating the display is simple, etc. Since the purchased components have clearly defined interfaces and our manufactured components have standard, extensible protocol links with the display computer its relatively easy to keep improving the product. We don't ever want to be in the position of squeezing life out of a 6.4" display long after the market has moved on. Regarding your specific question about the competition $10,000 under our price: Look close, they are all VFR components. The major reason is their gyros are of dubious quality, and do not meet the first four purchase requirements (above). Most of these manufacturers clearly state that they are for VFR usage - its the purchasers that streach the usage into IFR situations. Trading money on the ground for a challenge in the air is a bad idea. Regarding your question about the Garmin 600 $10,000 over our price: This package was designed to directly compete with Chelton. Its not the best of everything, just better than Chelton. Choose a display you will be comfortable looking at for many hours. They tilted two 6.4" displays on end with low resolution and unknown brightness. Our display is 10.4" with 1024 x 768 resolution and 1200 nits of brightness. These are engineering numbers and cannot be compared with a "sunlight bright" phase the marketing weenie penned. The visibility from an RV10 is wonderful - but the downside is it lets in a lot of sun. What computer are you purchasing? Does it have extra capacity for future upgrades, or is it an economical implementation that needs a hardware upgrade for future improvements? I looked once again for the accuracy specifications of the Garmin gyro with no luck. Nothing is published. I have become very hard headed on this subject because I view the gyro as the crux of an IFR flight. Remember that our IFR mission includes turbulence. This is when I expect to feel comfortable and it doesn't matter if this is a lucky day or not. Bill DeRouchey N939SB, flying bill(at)wtdaviationtechnology.com William Curtis wrote: Bill, If you don't mind however, permit me to be the devil's advocate for a moment. Looking through your site I see that your single panel, single gyro EFIS system is $19,000 with an additional $3000 for an second display. What additional does you system offer at $10,000 more than an equivalent more established Grand Rapids system or only $10,000 less than a fully type certificated Garmin G600 system? Please don't take this question the wrong way, only it seems on the surface, a builder would be paying more for an equivalent experimental system that does not yet have any track record. William http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 2007
From: "Mike Lauritsen - Work" <mike(at)cleavelandtool.com>
Subject: Re: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5
Does anyone have a measurement for "big ear" and "small ear"? Thanks, Mike On 2/26/07, Jesse Saint wrote: > > First, and the bigger issue, you will probably need new engine mount > ears. The one we got has the big hole ears and the -10 needs the small > hole. I know there is a technical Dynafocal 1, Dynafocal 2 and some other > name for the different mount formats, but I don't know which is which. If > it has the big holes, you will need to buy a set with small holes. I > actually may have a set around here, but I would have to look for it. > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Crossbow vs Pinpoint
From: "Mike@Crossbow" <msmith(at)xbow.com>
Date: Feb 26, 2007
I just wanted to poke my head in here and provide a couple of pieces of information for those that are considering mounting a NAV425EX in their aircraft. 1) You do NOT have to mount the unit at the CG of the aircraft as has already been stated in this forum. We recommend in our installation manual that our customers mount the unit as close as possible to the CG, however given the size and nature of RV's/Lancairs a better location is aft of the baggage area. The intent of mounting at the CG is to prevent any "lever affect", however this really doesn't occur in such small aircraft. 2) Please note that we are currently recommending an external mount GPS antenna (TSO'd) be used with all installations. I understand that this causes some heartache for builders, however please note that there isn't one certified GPS antenna made for internal installations. We believe and our testing has proven that there is a reason for this. In theory composite aircraft should be transparent, however our experiences have shown this to not hold completely true. We urge all of our customers to consider the Antcom 2G15A-XS-1 antenna or a suitable alternative called out in our service bulletin. Sincerely, -------- Michael Smith Application Engineer Inertial Systems Crossbow Technology msmith(at)xbow.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=97493#97493 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5
Date: Feb 26, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
The mounts were changed to reflect the design improvement of the IO-720 (the Big Eight) mount on DWG #63168 dated on 3/15/1966 as Change M. There is a 31 degree angle at the center of the bolt in relation to the base of the mount at the bolt pattern. The ID of the mount for receiving the rubber dampener is 1.390/1.380". Forward to Aft from the face of each washer the measurement is 2.110". The Ear should be 0.630/0620" thick. Bonded Sandwich Assembly is Lord Part # J-9604-20 which is NOT FURNISHED with engine. Maximum movement to snubbing is 0.27" There is also a Lord Part #J-9613-12 and J-9613-15 which is with an ID of 2.015/2.005" and Forward to Aft from face of each washer as 2.760". These have a 20 degree angle to the base. Subject to change based on bushing used. The ear should be 0.625" thick. Ask your engine rebuilder. Maximum movement to snubbing is 0.46" and this characteristic can create the sag at the prop hub which has been discussed before. Both mounts use 0.438" Close Tolerance Bolts. John ________________________________ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mike Lauritsen - Work Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 2:34 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5 Does anyone have a measurement for "big ear" and "small ear"? Thanks, Mike On 2/26/07, Jesse Saint < jesse(at)saintaviation.com > wrote: First, and the bigger issue, you will probably need new engine mount ears. The one we got has the big hole ears and the -10 needs the small hole. I know there is a technical Dynafocal 1, Dynafocal 2 and some other name for the different mount formats, but I don't know which is which. If it has the big holes, you will need to buy a set with small holes. I actually may have a set around here, but I would have to look for it. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <jim(at)CombsFive.Com>
Subject: Re: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5
Date: Feb 26, 2007
Here are the two pages referring to the ears from the Lycoming PC-615 parts catalog. The D4A5 uses parts 70456 (Small Holes / Vans RV-10 Mount) The C4B5 uses parts 72306 (Large Holes) Jim C ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 2007
Subject: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10
From: "William Curtis" <wcurtis(at)nerv10.com>
John,=0A=0AFirstly, thank you for categorizing me as "our Devil's ad vocate."- I'll make sure to update my signature with that title!- =0A=0ASecondly, what does "Turbulence and Unreported Icing coupled with strong headwinds and my use of Corrective Lens (due to advancing pilot age) in a low light situation.. " have to do with an EFIS?- I always feel I n eed a Rosetta stone and a decoder ring to decipher you messages--I guess I' m a little slow with them.=0A=0AAnyway, any cheap gyro can handle tur bulence, rolls and pitch, what they can't handle is a very slow constant ba nk turn or speedily erect after power up.- None (cheap, expensive, certif ied or not) will do anything about "unreported icing, strong headwinds" or lessen you reliance on the "use of corrective lenses"-those features WOULD indeed be worth considerable more that the $10,000 price differential.- C heaper does not automatically make an EFIS "VFR" nor does expensive make it "IFR."- From the FAA's perspective there is no such thing as a VFR or IF R EFIS. -All these units, Grand Rapids, Chelton (Sport), BMA, and now WTD ALL use uncertified gyros.- Some of these gyros are better than others b ut NONE are certified and only individual opinions make one "VFR" and anoth er "IFR."- All indications are that WTC will be using the Crossbow 425EX not the certified 500GA gyro. - - Bill, - Thanks again for the inform ation. -I'll look forward to seeing your EFIS at Sun-N-Fun or OSH. -Let us know when you have an installation manual and wiring diagrams on your w ebsite.- I assume you will be using the ARINC 429 bus connection to/from the 4/530 and the autopilot? - -William - "our Devil's Advocate" =0Ahttp://wcurtis.nerv10.com/ =0A=0A--------------------------------- -------=0A=0A Turbulence and Unreported Icing coupled with strong he adwinds and my use of Corrective Lens (due to advancing pilot age) in a low light situation.. Now that gets my attention.- I think your thought proc ess, research, design background and final decisions will prove to offer th e RV-10 builders a great option to Butt up against Chelton, OP Technologies and Garmin. -I ruled out the cheaper VFR offerings long ago.- It is do wn to painfully thoughtful and analytic evaluation at this point.- I also look forward to Deems' report flying behind his OP Tech screens. - Bil l, Thanks for the investment and the answer to our Devil's Advocate. - =0A=0AJohn Cox =0A#40600 =0A----------------------------- -----------=0A From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:own er-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill DeRouchey=0ASent: M onday, February 26, 2007 1:07 PM=0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com=0ASubj ect: re: RV10-List: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10 - Hi Willi am- Thanks for the good question. It required me to remember all the reas ons for each decision of each step over the last 3.5 years. Its not a short answer. - Why is it so expensive? - I, more than any other, wo uld like our primary flight display "PFD" to be less expensive. However, if you look at the complete panel prices you will see that you receive all th e high end features without the high end pricing. In the end, our price was determined by our objective: provide a high quality, solid IFR platform. K indly understand that "solid" means with and without turbulence. Lets disec t this objective. - We started with the best components available, in tegrated a display computer, and filled in the holes. Garmin 430/530 was ch osen as one cornerstone. This unit has certifications that allow you to fil e /G, an easy map update process, Glideslope, Localizer, GPS, and COM recei vers. Its a mature product that you can afford. Note that most Chelton owne rs have a G430 installed. TIP: for $500 you can get the G430 downloaded wit h terrain capability - not TAWS, just terrain warning. ANOTHER TIP: on our PFD we show the numbers that you typically see on the right side of the G43 0 display with map selected. Use the menu button and remove this area from the G430 increasing your map size by 50%! - All the suggested panels are FAA legal. - Mission is cross country IFR. This is the rule, not the exception. Many innovations were added to support this mission, such as , fuel management, wind, prop setting, etc. We don't approach IFR as a chal lenge. With proper instrumentation, we expect it to be comfortable with the grandkids (or if your ahead of the game - kids) in the back. - We al lowed for a robust backup plan with more than one layer. If you look closel y at the suggested panels you will see 2 & 1/2 levels of backup. The indepe ndently sensored autopilot is the half level. Note that each subsequent lev el becomes simplier. My objective to the all-in-one glass PFD is the backup becomes more complex.- Typically, one choses another similar unit as bac kup with the advertised swap displays in case of failure. It requires very complex logic to do this automatically, and there are hardware and software components added to support this functionality which makes it less reliabl e. The origin of this thinking is what the engineering department would cal l "scope". They would list all the things that could go wrong with their co mponent and provide a recovery procedure. The fault with this scope-is th e pilot is subject to any problem that occurs - not just a predefined set o f PFD problems. - Nowhere can you purchase a glass panel that is as deeply integrated into the RV10 as our PFD. We pickup the fuel levels, flap s, door sensors, and stall warning to minimize weight, wiring, and addition al components. - The price of our product would be much more appealin g if we removed the gyro. Unfortunately, Crossbow is the only manufacturer of solid state gyros that meets our objective of a "solid IFR platform". Si nce there is only one qualifying choice I did not want our customers to sho p the gyro and attempt to save money thinking they were still purchasing a "solid IFR platform". Perhaps, in the future there will be other suitable c hoices and we could provide options. Now I must talk about gyros so you won 't believe that this is an arbitrary judgement. - Before I ordered th e RV10 kit (and I am kit #29), I swore that I would never put a blankity, b lank vacuum system in another plane ... ever. So, my approach was to create a solid state gyro that would be the crux of an IFR panel. I purchased the magnetic sensors, accelerometers, and rate gyros necessary to build my own gyro. After prototyping each of the components and thinking what would be required to produce a reliable 360 degree, accurate and inexpensive gyro th e answer was it is simply not possible because of the cost of the engineeri ng test equipment required. You need a very accurate rate table, a temperat ure chamber to characterize sensor behavior, calibrated orientation, tight production controls, and the ability to measure and calibrate each unit shi pped. It was clearly a product for a very serious engineering company dedic ated to this purpose. This was not my intended business, so I abandoned thi s effort and began shopping. - My criteria for purchase was/is: - ---------- 1. Proven know-how engineering and manufactu ring cabability ----------- 2. Published acuracy sp ecifications. ----------- 3. Experienced with aircr aft applications ----------- 4. Birth certificate ( calibration) for each unit ----------- 5. Price - Needless to say, only Crossbow met these requirements. - Looking to the PFD's future, we offer multiple, defined components rather than a s ingle box. Software upgrades are simple, changing out the entire cpu is sim ple, updating the display is simple, etc. Since the purchased components ha ve clearly defined interfaces and our manufactured components have standard , extensible protocol links with the display computer its relatively easy t o keep improving the product. We don't ever want to be in the position of s queezing-life out of a 6.4" display long after the market has moved on. - Regarding your specific question about the competition $10,000 under our price: Look close, they are all VFR components. The major reason is th eir gyros are of dubious quality, and do not meet the first four purchase r equirements (above). Most of these manufacturers clearly state that they ar e for VFR usage - its the purchasers that streach the usage into IFR situat ions. Trading money on the ground for a challenge in the air is a bad idea. - Regarding your question about the Garmin 600 $10,000 over our pric e: This package was designed to directly compete with Chelton. Its not the best of everything, just better than Chelton. Choose a display you will be comfortable looking at for many hours. They tilted two 6.4" displays on end with low resolution and unknown brightness. Our display is 10.4" with 1024 x 768 resolution and 1200 nits of brightness. These are engineering number s and cannot be compared with a "sunlight bright" phase the marketing weeni e penned. The visibility from an RV10 is wonderful - but the downside is it lets in a lot of sun. - What computer are you purchasing? Does it ha ve extra capacity for future upgrades, or is it an economical implementatio n that needs a hardware upgrade for future improvements? - I looked o nce again for the accuracy specifications of the Garmin gyro with no luck. Nothing is published. I have become very hard headed on this subject becaus e I view the gyro as the crux of an IFR flight. Remember that our IFR missi on includes turbulence. This is when I expect to feel comfortable and it do esn't matter if this is a lucky day or not. - Bill DeRouchey N939SB , flying bill(at)wtdaviationtechnology.com - =0A=0AWilliam Curt is wrote: Bill,=0A=0AIf you don't mind however , permit me to be the devil's advocate for a moment.- Looking through you r site I see that your single panel, single gyro EFIS system-is $19,000 w ith an additional $3000 for an second display.- What additional does you system offer at-$10,000 more than an equivalent more established Grand Ra pids system or only $10,000 less than a fully type certificated Garmin G600 system?- Please don't take this question the wrong way, only it seems on the surface, a builder would be paying more for an equivalent experimental system that does not yet have any track record.=0A=0AWilliam=0Aht ================= =0A ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10
Date: Feb 26, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
The only other type of flight into icing I know of is Known/ Reported Icing. Without prop and leading edge boots would any RV pilot be found there? I hope not in my insurance pool. When the workload is heavy, a large easy to read screen is better than a small, cheap one on the workload at hand. KISS. It brings down planes out here all the time. My situational awareness is improved when the data is clear, concise and easy to process. John Cox ________________________________ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Curtis Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 5:20 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10 John, Firstly, thank you for categorizing me as "our Devil's advocate." I'll make sure to update my signature with that title! Secondly, what does "Turbulence and Unreported Icing coupled with strong headwinds and my use of Corrective Lens (due to advancing pilot age) in a low light situation.... " have to do with an EFIS? I always feel I need a Rosetta stone and a decoder ring to decipher you messages--I guess I'm a little slow with them. Anyway, any cheap gyro can handle turbulence, rolls and pitch, what they can't handle is a very slow constant bank turn or speedily erect after power up. None (cheap, expensive, certified or not) will do anything about "unreported icing, strong headwinds" or lessen you reliance on the "use of corrective lenses"-those features WOULD indeed be worth considerable more that the $10,000 price differential. Cheaper does not automatically make an EFIS "VFR" nor does expensive make it "IFR." From the FAA's perspective there is no such thing as a VFR or IFR EFIS. All these units, Grand Rapid s, Chelton (Sport), BMA, and now WTD ALL use uncertified gyros. Some of these gyros are better than others but NONE are certified and only individual opinions make one "VFR" and another "IFR." All indications are that WTC will be using the Crossbow 425EX not the certified 500GA gyro. Bill, Thanks again for the information. I'll look forward to seeing your EFIS at Sun-N-Fun or OSH. Let us know when you have an installation manual and wiring diagrams on your website. I assume you will be using the ARINC 429 bus connection to/from the 4/530 and the autopilot? William - "our Devil's Advocate" http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/ ________________________________ Turbulence and Unreported Icing coupled with strong headwinds and my use of Corrective Lens (due to advancing pilot age) in a low light situation.... Now that gets my attention. I think your thought process, research, design background and final decisions will prove to offer the RV-10 builders a great option to Butt up against Chelton, OP Technologies and Garmin. I ruled out the cheaper VFR offerings long ago. It is down to painfully thoughtful and analytic evaluation at this point. I also look forward to Deems' report flying behind his OP Tech screens. Bill, Thanks for the investment and the answer to our Devil's Advocate. John Cox #40600 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 2007
From: Bill DeRouchey <billderou(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10
John, You are very wrong about "any cheap gyro can handle turbulence, rolls & pitch". I tested a gyro that was not cheap and failed miserably performing these tasks. The problem seems to be they cannot separate the gravity vector from the centripetal vector with any accuracy and the error compounds itself over time. The root of this problem is you can pick out a gyro and we can joyfully debate its accuracy through a six-pack of beer, but in the end neither of us has data. We don't have data because they can not afford to test the unit on their own or have not tested the unit using a certified lab, or do not like the results after testing with a certified lab. I called an unnamed gyro-person and asked how he tested his gyro? His answer was we strapped it down, went flying, and it looked about right! The pilots need to learn that without a published specification that covers accuracy in both static and aircraft dynamic conditions they have no gyro. I did not intend to keep the Crossbow part number a secret. Its NAV420CA-100, their standard for experimental usage. If anyone would like I will add an option for the certified AHRS500 or 510. Just simply did not believe folks would pay the extra $8K (approx) for the certified unit when the experimental unit is a close sibling. Bill DeRouchey N939SB, flying bill(at)wtdaviationtechnology.com William Curtis wrote: John, Firstly, thank you for categorizing me as "our Devil's advocate." I'll make sure to update my signature with that title! Secondly, what does "Turbulence and Unreported Icing coupled with strong headwinds and my use of Corrective Lens (due to advancing pilot age) in a low light situation. " have to do with an EFIS? I always feel I need a Rosetta stone and a decoder ring to decipher you messages--I guess I'm a little slow with them. Anyway, any cheap gyro can handle turbulence, rolls and pitch, what they can't handle is a very slow constant bank turn or speedily erect after power up. None (cheap, expensive, certified or not) will do anything about unreported icing, strong headwinds or lessen you reliance on the use of corrective lensesthose features WOULD indeed be worth considerable more that the $10,000 price differential. Cheaper does not automatically make an EFIS "VFR" nor does expensive make it "IFR." From the FAAs perspective there is no such thing as a VFR or IFR EFIS. All these units, Grand Rapids, Chelton (Sport), BMA, and now WTD ALL use uncertified gyros. Some of these gyros are better than others but NONE are certified and only individual opinions make one "VFR" and another "IFR." All indications are that WTC will be using the Crossbow 425EX not the certified 500GA gyro. Bill, Thanks again for the information. Ill look forward to seeing your EFIS at Sun-N-Fun or OSH. Let us know when you have an installation manual and wiring diagrams on your website. I assume you will be using the ARINC 429 bus connection to/from the 4/530 and the autopilot? William - "our Devils Advocate" http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/ --------------------------------- Turbulence and Unreported Icing coupled with strong headwinds and my use of Corrective Lens (due to advancing pilot age) in a low light situation. Now that gets my attention. I think your thought process, research, design background and final decisions will prove to offer the RV-10 builders a great option to Butt up against Chelton, OP Technologies and Garmin. I ruled out the cheaper VFR offerings long ago. It is down to painfully thoughtful and analytic evaluation at this point. I also look forward to Deems report flying behind his OP Tech screens. Bill, Thanks for the investment and the answer to our Devils Advocate. John Cox #40600 --------------------------------- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill DeRouchey Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 1:07 PM Subject: re: RV10-List: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10 Hi William- Thanks for the good question. It required me to remember all the reasons for each decision of each step over the last 3.5 years. Its not a short answer. Why is it so expensive? I, more than any other, would like our primary flight display "PFD" to be less expensive. However, if you look at the complete panel prices you will see that you receive all the high end features without the high end pricing. In the end, our price was determined by our objective: provide a high quality, solid IFR platform. Kindly understand that "solid" means with and without turbulence. Lets disect this objective. We started with the best components available, integrated a display computer, and filled in the holes. Garmin 430/530 was chosen as one cornerstone. This unit has certifications that allow you to file /G, an easy map update process, Glideslope, Localizer, GPS, and COM receivers. Its a mature product that you can afford. Note that most Chelton owners have a G430 installed. TIP: for $500 you can get the G430 downloaded with terrain capability - not TAWS, just terrain warning. ANOTHER TIP: on our PFD we show the numbers that you typically see on the right side of the G430 display with map selected. Use the menu button and remove this area from the G430 increasing your map size by 50%! All the suggested panels are FAA legal. Mission is cross country IFR. This is the rule, not the exception. Many innovations were added to support this mission, such as, fuel management, wind, prop setting, etc. We don't approach IFR as a challenge. With proper instrumentation, we expect it to be comfortable with the grandkids (or if your ahead of the game - kids) in the back. We allowed for a robust backup plan with more than one layer. If you look closely at the suggested panels you will see 2 & 1/2 levels of backup. The independently sensored autopilot is the half level. Note that each subsequent level becomes simplier. My objective to the all-in-one glass PFD is the backup becomes more complex. Typically, one choses another similar unit as backup with the advertised swap displays in case of failure. It requires very complex logic to do this automatically, and there are hardware and software components added to support this functionality which makes it less reliable. The origin of this thinking is what the engineering department would call "scope". They would list all the things that could go wrong with their component and provide a recovery procedure. The fault with this scope is the pilot is subject to any problem that occurs - not just a predefined set of PFD problems. Nowhere can you purchase a glass panel that is as deeply integrated into the RV10 as our PFD. We pickup the fuel levels, flaps, door sensors, and stall warning to minimize weight, wiring, and additional components. The price of our product would be much more appealing if we removed the gyro. Unfortunately, Crossbow is the only manufacturer of solid state gyros that meets our objective of a "solid IFR platform". Since there is only one qualifying choice I did not want our customers to shop the gyro and attempt to save money thinking they were still purchasing a "solid IFR platform". Perhaps, in the future there will be other suitable choices and we could provide options. Now I must talk about gyros so you won't believe that this is an arbitrary judgement. Before I ordered the RV10 kit (and I am kit #29), I swore that I would never put a blankity, blank vacuum system in another plane ... ever. So, my approach was to create a solid state gyro that would be the crux of an IFR panel. I purchased the magnetic sensors, accelerometers, and rate gyros necessary to build my own gyro. After prototyping each of the components and thinking what would be required to produce a reliable 360 degree, accurate and inexpensive gyro the answer was it is simply not possible because of the cost of the engineering test equipment required. You need a very accurate rate table, a temperature chamber to characterize sensor behavior, calibrated orientation, tight production controls, and the ability to measure and calibrate each unit shipped. It was clearly a product for a very serious engineering company dedicated to this purpose. This was not my intended business, so I abandoned this effort and began shopping. My criteria for purchase was/is: 1. Proven know-how engineering and manufacturing cabability 2. Published acuracy specifications. 3. Experienced with aircraft applications 4. Birth certificate (calibration) for each unit 5. Price Needless to say, only Crossbow met these requirements. Looking to the PFD's future, we offer multiple, defined components rather than a single box. Software upgrades are simple, changing out the entire cpu is simple, updating the display is simple, etc. Since the purchased components have clearly defined interfaces and our manufactured components have standard, extensible protocol links with the display computer its relatively easy to keep improving the product. We don't ever want to be in the position of squeezing life out of a 6.4" display long after the market has moved on. Regarding your specific question about the competition $10,000 under our price: Look close, they are all VFR components. The major reason is their gyros are of dubious quality, and do not meet the first four purchase requirements (above). Most of these manufacturers clearly state that they are for VFR usage - its the purchasers that streach the usage into IFR situations. Trading money on the ground for a challenge in the air is a bad idea. Regarding your question about the Garmin 600 $10,000 over our price: This package was designed to directly compete with Chelton. Its not the best of everything, just better than Chelton. Choose a display you will be comfortable looking at for many hours. They tilted two 6.4" displays on end with low resolution and unknown brightness. Our display is 10.4" with 1024 x 768 resolution and 1200 nits of brightness. These are engineering numbers and cannot be compared with a "sunlight bright" phase the marketing weenie penned. The visibility from an RV10 is wonderful - but the downside is it lets in a lot of sun. What computer are you purchasing? Does it have extra capacity for future upgrades, or is it an economical implementation that needs a hardware upgrade for future improvements? I looked once again for the accuracy specifications of the Garmin gyro with no luck. Nothing is published. I have become very hard headed on this subject because I view the gyro as the crux of an IFR flight. Remember that our IFR mission includes turbulence. This is when I expect to feel comfortable and it doesn't matter if this is a lucky day or not. Bill DeRouchey N939SB, flying bill(at)wtdaviationtechnology.com William Curtis wrote: Bill, If you don't mind however, permit me to be the devil's advocate for a moment. Looking through your site I see that your single panel, single gyro EFIS system is $19,000 with an additional $3000 for an second display. What additional does you system offer at $10,000 more than an equivalent more established Grand Rapids system or only $10,000 less than a fully type certificated Garmin G600 system? Please don't take this question the wrong way, only it seems on the surface, a builder would be paying more for an equivalent experimental system that does not yet have any track record. William http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RobHickman(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 26, 2007
Subject: Re: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10
In a message dated 2/26/2007 1:09:40 PM Pacific Standard Time, billderou(at)yahoo.com writes: "Nowhere can you purchase a glass panel that is as deeply integrated into the RV10 as our PFD. We pickup the fuel levels, flaps, door sensors, and stall warning to minimize weight, wiring, and additional components." "Regarding your specific question about the competition $10,000 under our price: Look close, they are all VFR components. The major reason is their gyros are of dubious quality, and do not meet the first four purchase requirements" In the interest of accuracy... The AF-3500EE EFIS/Engine Monitor has the inputs for the fuel levels, door switches, aileron trim, elevator trim,flap position, and AOA stall warning all for the RV-10. Our original AF-2500 engine monitor in both factory RV-10's has always had the flap, trim, and door switch warnings. The AF-3500 & AF-3400 EFIS use an AHRS that is based on the Certified Crossbow 500 AHRS. An AF-3500EE EFIS/Engine Monitor/AOA is deeply integrated into Van's personal RV-10 panel, for around $8,000 including all the engine sensors. Sincerely, Rob Hickman _www.Advanced-Flight-Systems.com_ (http://www.Advanced-Flight-Systems.com)


**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 2007
From: Bill DeRouchey <billderou(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10
My last response was to William. Sorry John. Bill Bill DeRouchey wrote: John, You are very wrong about "any cheap gyro can handle turbulence, rolls & pitch". I tested a gyro that was not cheap and failed miserably performing these tasks. The problem seems to be they cannot separate the gravity vector from the centripetal vector with any accuracy and the error compounds itself over time. The root of this problem is you can pick out a gyro and we can joyfully debate its accuracy through a six-pack of beer, but in the end neither of us has data. We don't have data because they can not afford to test the unit on their own or have not tested the unit using a certified lab, or do not like the results after testing with a certified lab. I called an unnamed gyro-person and asked how he tested his gyro? His answer was we strapped it down, went flying, and it looked about right! The pilots need to learn that without a published specification that covers accuracy in both static and aircraft dynamic conditions they have no gyro. I did not intend to keep the Crossbow part number a secret. Its NAV420CA-100, their standard for experimental usage. If anyone would like I will add an option for the certified AHRS500 or 510. Just simply did not believe folks would pay the extra $8K (approx) for the certified unit when the experimental unit is a close sibling. Bill DeRouchey N939SB, flying bill(at)wtdaviationtechnology.com William Curtis wrote: John, Firstly, thank you for categorizing me as "our Devil's advocate." I'll make sure to update my signature with that title! Secondly, what does "Turbulence and Unreported Icing coupled with strong headwinds and my use of Corrective Lens (due to advancing pilot age) in a low light situation. " have to do with an EFIS? I always feel I need a Rosetta stone and a decoder ring to decipher you messages--I guess I'm a little slow with them. Anyway, any cheap gyro can handle turbulence, rolls and pitch, what they can't handle is a very slow constant bank turn or speedily erect after power up. None (cheap, expensive, certified or not) will do anything about unreported icing, strong headwinds or lessen you reliance on the use of corrective lensesthose features WOULD indeed be worth considerable more that the $10,000 price differential. Cheaper does not automatically make an EFIS "VFR" nor does expensive make it "IFR." From the FAAs perspective there is no such thing as a VFR or IFR EFIS. All these units, Grand Rapids, Chelton (Sport), BMA, and now WTD ALL use uncertified gyros. Some of these gyros are better than others but NONE are certified and only individual opinions make one "VFR" and another "IFR." All indications are that WTC will be using the Crossbow 425EX not the certified 500GA gyro. Bill, Thanks again for the information. Ill look forward to seeing your EFIS at Sun-N-Fun or OSH. Let us know when you have an installation manual and wiring diagrams on your website. I assume you will be using the ARINC 429 bus connection to/from the 4/530 and the autopilot? William - "our Devils Advocate" http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/ --------------------------------- Turbulence and Unreported Icing coupled with strong headwinds and my use of Corrective Lens (due to advancing pilot age) in a low light situation. Now that gets my attention. I think your thought process, research, design background and final decisions will prove to offer the RV-10 builders a great option to Butt up against Chelton, OP Technologies and Garmin. I ruled out the cheaper VFR offerings long ago. It is down to painfully thoughtful and analytic evaluation at this point. I also look forward to Deems report flying behind his OP Tech screens. Bill, Thanks for the investment and the answer to our Devils Advocate. John Cox #40600 --------------------------------- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill DeRouchey Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 1:07 PM Subject: re: RV10-List: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10 Hi William- Thanks for the good question. It required me to remember all the reasons for each decision of each step over the last 3.5 years. Its not a short answer. Why is it so expensive? I, more than any other, would like our primary flight display "PFD" to be less expensive. However, if you look at the complete panel prices you will see that you receive all the high end features without the high end pricing. In the end, our price was determined by our objective: provide a high quality, solid IFR platform. Kindly understand that "solid" means with and without turbulence. Lets disect this objective. We started with the best components available, integrated a display computer, and filled in the holes. Garmin 430/530 was chosen as one cornerstone. This unit has certifications that allow you to file /G, an easy map update process, Glideslope, Localizer, GPS, and COM receivers. Its a mature product that you can afford. Note that most Chelton owners have a G430 installed. TIP: for $500 you can get the G430 downloaded with terrain capability - not TAWS, just terrain warning. ANOTHER TIP: on our PFD we show the numbers that you typically see on the right side of the G430 display with map selected. Use the menu button and remove this area from the G430 increasing your map size by 50%! All the suggested panels are FAA legal. Mission is cross country IFR. This is the rule, not the exception. Many innovations were added to support this mission, such as, fuel management, wind, prop setting, etc. We don't approach IFR as a challenge. With proper instrumentation, we expect it to be comfortable with the grandkids (or if your ahead of the game - kids) in the back. We allowed for a robust backup plan with more than one layer. If you look closely at the suggested panels you will see 2 & 1/2 levels of backup. The independently sensored autopilot is the half level. Note that each subsequent level becomes simplier. My objective to the all-in-one glass PFD is the backup becomes more complex. Typically, one choses another similar unit as backup with the advertised swap displays in case of failure. It requires very complex logic to do this automatically, and there are hardware and software components added to support this functionality which makes it less reliable. The origin of this thinking is what the engineering department would call "scope". They would list all the things that could go wrong with their component and provide a recovery procedure. The fault with this scope is the pilot is subject to any problem that occurs - not just a predefined set of PFD problems. Nowhere can you purchase a glass panel that is as deeply integrated into the RV10 as our PFD. We pickup the fuel levels, flaps, door sensors, and stall warning to minimize weight, wiring, and additional components. The price of our product would be much more appealing if we removed the gyro. Unfortunately, Crossbow is the only manufacturer of solid state gyros that meets our objective of a "solid IFR platform". Since there is only one qualifying choice I did not want our customers to shop the gyro and attempt to save money thinking they were still purchasing a "solid IFR platform". Perhaps, in the future there will be other suitable choices and we could provide options. Now I must talk about gyros so you won't believe that this is an arbitrary judgement. Before I ordered the RV10 kit (and I am kit #29), I swore that I would never put a blankity, blank vacuum system in another plane ... ever. So, my approach was to create a solid state gyro that would be the crux of an IFR panel. I purchased the magnetic sensors, accelerometers, and rate gyros necessary to build my own gyro. After prototyping each of the components and thinking what would be required to produce a reliable 360 degree, accurate and inexpensive gyro the answer was it is simply not possible because of the cost of the engineering test equipment required. You need a very accurate rate table, a temperature chamber to characterize sensor behavior, calibrated orientation, tight production controls, and the ability to measure and calibrate each unit shipped. It was clearly a product for a very serious engineering company dedicated to this purpose. This was not my intended business, so I abandoned this effort and began shopping. My criteria for purchase was/is: 1. Proven know-how engineering and manufacturing cabability 2. Published acuracy specifications. 3. Experienced with aircraft applications 4. Birth certificate (calibration) for each unit 5. Price Needless to say, only Crossbow met these requirements. Looking to the PFD's future, we offer multiple, defined components rather than a single box. Software upgrades are simple, changing out the entire cpu is simple, updating the display is simple, etc. Since the purchased components have clearly defined interfaces and our manufactured components have standard, extensible protocol links with the display computer its relatively easy to keep improving the product. We don't ever want to be in the position of squeezing life out of a 6.4" display long after the market has moved on. Regarding your specific question about the competition $10,000 under our price: Look close, they are all VFR components. The major reason is their gyros are of dubious quality, and do not meet the first four purchase requirements (above). Most of these manufacturers clearly state that they are for VFR usage - its the purchasers that streach the usage into IFR situations. Trading money on the ground for a challenge in the air is a bad idea. Regarding your question about the Garmin 600 $10,000 over our price: This package was designed to directly compete with Chelton. Its not the best of everything, just better than Chelton. Choose a display you will be comfortable looking at for many hours. They tilted two 6.4" displays on end with low resolution and unknown brightness. Our display is 10.4" with 1024 x 768 resolution and 1200 nits of brightness. These are engineering numbers and cannot be compared with a "sunlight bright" phase the marketing weenie penned. The visibility from an RV10 is wonderful - but the downside is it lets in a lot of sun. What computer are you purchasing? Does it have extra capacity for future upgrades, or is it an economical implementation that needs a hardware upgrade for future improvements? I looked once again for the accuracy specifications of the Garmin gyro with no luck. Nothing is published. I have become very hard headed on this subject because I view the gyro as the crux of an IFR flight. Remember that our IFR mission includes turbulence. This is when I expect to feel comfortable and it doesn't matter if this is a lucky day or not. Bill DeRouchey N939SB, flying bill(at)wtdaviationtechnology.com William Curtis wrote: Bill, If you don't mind however, permit me to be the devil's advocate for a moment. Looking through your site I see that your single panel, single gyro EFIS system is $19,000 with an additional $3000 for an second display. What additional does you system offer at $10,000 more than an equivalent more established Grand Rapids system or only $10,000 less than a fully type certificated Garmin G600 system? Please don't take this question the wrong way, only it seems on the surface, a builder would be paying more for an equivalent experimental system that does not yet have any track record. William http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Nick Leonard" <Nick(at)NLeonard.com>
Subject: Hole plugs for the baggage door
Date: Feb 26, 2007
What is everyone doing for filling the 1.5" hole in the baggage door behind the lock. Did someone have to buy a bag of 50 snap caps and needs to get rid of them one at a time or did you just found a convenient source locally for snap caps? Please don't tell me that one came with your kit. Nick (#40015, starting on cabin top) nick(at)nleonard.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Russell Daves" <dav1111(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5
Date: Feb 27, 2007
The RV-10 uses Engine Mount Ears #70456. Russ Daves N710RV - First Flight 7/28/06 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Russell Daves" <dav1111(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: RE: Lycoming IO-540 C4B5
Date: Feb 27, 2007
You cannot go by the Lycoming Parts Catalog regarding which engine uses which ears. You have to use the small ears #70456 on either the C4B5, or D4A5 or any other variant of the IO-540 when it is mounted on the Van's engine mount. It is not the engine that controls the ears needed but the engine mount. Russ Daves N710RV - First Flight 7/28/06 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: dogsbark(at)comcast.net
Subject: Re: Hole plugs for the baggage door
Date: Feb 27, 2007
Would this work? http://www.heyco.com/pages/products/section_3/3-09.html Sean Blair #40225 -------------- Original message -------------- From: "Nick Leonard" <Nick(at)NLeonard.com> What is everyone doing for filling the 1.5" hole in the baggage door behind the lock. Did someone have to buy a bag of 50 snap caps and needs to get rid of them one at a time or did you just found a convenient source locally for snap caps? Please don't tell me that one came with your kit. Nick (#40015, starting on cabin top) nick(at)nleonard.com

Would this work?
 
 
Sean Blair
#40225
 
What is everyone doing for filling the 1.5" hole in the baggage door behind the lock.  Did someone have to buy a bag of 50 snap caps and needs to get rid of them one at a time or did you just found a convenient source locally for snap caps?  Please don't tell me that one came with your kit.

     Nick (#40015, starting on cabin top)

nick(at)nleonard.com


      
      
      

      
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Hole plugs for the baggage door
Date: Feb 27, 2007
From: "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com>
My local Westlake Hardware has nickel plated hole plugs with one that fit the hole exactly. Bob #40105 _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Nick Leonard Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 12:18 AM Subject: RV10-List: Hole plugs for the baggage door What is everyone doing for filling the 1.5" hole in the baggage door behind the lock. Did someone have to buy a bag of 50 snap caps and needs to get rid of them one at a time or did you just found a convenient source locally for snap caps? Please don't tell me that one came with your kit. Nick (#40015, starting on cabin top) nick(at)nleonard.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jay Rowe" <jfrjr(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: fiberglass course
Date: Feb 27, 2007
Sign me up but I would appreciate if you could let me know right off if you have enough bodies as otherwise I would take the composite course. Jay ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Saylor To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 1:24 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: fiberglass course Jay and All, The SportAir workshops are worthwhile. The composite workshop will give you an overview of the two types of resin used on RVs and a chance to work with at least the most common one if not both. If there is sufficient interest, I would be happy to put together a more advanced 2 day course that is specific to RV10s, particularly fitting the top, bonding the door skins, fitting the windows, etc. Any takers for late April? I'd need at least 8. Cost would be $300, Saturday and Sunday, in Watsonville (KWVI). Dave Saylor AirCrafters LLC 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 831-722-9141 831-750-0284 CL www.AirCraftersLLC.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Rowe Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 5:54 PM To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RV10-List: fiberglass course Just about to put the cabin on and without any skills or knowledge re. fiberglass. I see that EAA has a "Composite Course" weekend instruction class. Is that only for those building glass planes or would it be something useful to the RV group? Or is there other sources of instruction out there. Help!! Jay Rowe 40301. href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronic s.com/Navigator?RV10-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- 2/26/2007 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 2007
From: Niko <owl40188(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10
The word cheap is funny in conjuction with current EFIS systems. The curre nt supposedly "good" EFIS systems run in the high 20's for a 2 screen syste m. Thats about what I paid for my VW GPS, but it came with a with 200hp ca r with leather interior and lots of options, attached to it. Amazingly it also works inside the entire tunnel in Baltimore harbor where my Garmin 196 would stop working as soon as I entered the tunnel. Dynon can make a unit for about 2K, yes its the low end but 1/4 of the cost of some of the other ones.. OP, and Chelton want more than two complete Dynon systems just for a screen to be used as an MFD with no AHRS, or software or anything else. Thats actuall more than Garmin charges for their GMX200 and its certified . In fact a single Chelton screen without anything else costs about the sa me as a complete GRT system with 2 screens and an EIS. Now Garmin has a 90 0 which is going into panels that are going to approach 6 figures. For th at amount of money you will be able to get one of the new Cessna LSA, instruments, engi ne and airframe prebuilt for you and certified although I think I will go f or a SuperCub or a Maule or maybe even 2 RV12. I saw a Maule taking off at our airport last year and it was amazing. The angle of attack was so high that I was sure he was going to stall. But the airplane kept on hanging i n there and the pilot kept on doing touch and goes at the same high angle o f attack. =0A=0AThere are too many EFIS companies right now and the indust ry will consolidate. The Garmin 600 is coming in at $28K and I am guessing one can get it for about $25K and its certified. That will set a benchmar k at the high end. Dynon has set the benchmark at the low end and they are constantly adding more features with moving map being another item they wi ll add and they will be pushing the low end bar higher and higher. Someone should be able to comen in at $15K for a non-certified dual screen compara ble to the G600/Chelton/OP. If someone comes in at that price with a produ ct comperable to the Cheltons then they will dominate the market.. Maybe w e need the Japanese to come in and show us how to produce quality affordabl e products. This company needs to plan on high quality, high volume, and low cost and price their products accordingly. Now we have more than hal f a dozen companies competing in the experimental market. Especially at th e high end there appear to be too many players. =0A=0AAs far as being able to see under low light and t urbulence, a concern I also share, the solution has existed for many years . Its round gauges. Back to basic no frills flying. On a standard altime ter you can take all the number markings away and you can still tell your a ltitude to within about 50ft. If you want to maintain 3000ft or 4000ft or 5000ft once there you only have to make sure the big needle is pointing st raight up no number reading. Thats as simple as it gets.=0A=0ANiko=0A40188 =0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: William Curtis <wcurtis@nerv10 .com>=0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com; rv10-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Monday , February 26, 2007 8:20:24 PM=0ASubject: RE: RV10-List: Glass Primary Flig ht Displays for RV-10=0A=0A=0AJohn,=0A=0AFirstly, thank you for categorizin g me as "our Devil's advocate." I'll make sure to update my signature with that title! =0A=0ASecondly, what does "Turbulence and Unreported Icing co upled with strong headwinds and my use of Corrective Lens (due to advancing pilot age) in a low light situation=85. " have to do with an EFIS? I alwa ys feel I need a Rosetta stone and a decoder ring to decipher you messages- -I guess I'm a little slow with them.=0A=0AAnyway, any cheap gyro can handl e turbulence, rolls and pitch, what they can't handle is a very slow consta nt bank turn or speedily erect after power up. None (cheap, expensive, cer tified or not) will do anything about =93unreported icing, strong headwinds =94 or lessen you reliance on the =93use of corrective lenses=94=97those fe atures WOULD indeed be worth considerable more that the $10,000 price diffe rential. Cheaper does not automatically make an EFIS "VFR" nor does expens ive make it "IFR." From the FAA=92s perspective there is no such thing as a VFR or IFR EFIS. All these units, Grand Rapids , Chelton (Sport), BMA, a nd now WTD ALL use uncertified gyros. Some of these gyros are better than others but NONE are certified and only individual opinions make one "VFR" a nd another "IFR." All indications are that WTC will be using the Crossbow 425EX not the certified 500GA gyro.=0A =0A =0ABill,=0A =0AThanks again for the information. I=92ll look forward to seeing your EFIS at Sun-N-Fun or O SH . Let us know when you have an installation manual and wiring diagrams on your website. I assume you will be using the ARINC 429 bus connection t o/from the 4/530 and the autopilot?=0A =0A =0AWilliam - "our Devil=92s Advo cate"=0Ahttp://wcurtis.nerv10.com/=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ATurbulence and Unreport ed Icing coupled with strong headwinds and my use of Corrective Lens (due t o advancing pilot age) in a low light situation=85. Now that gets my attent ion. I think your thought process, research, design background and final d ecisions will prove to offer the RV-10 builders a great option to Butt up a gainst Chelton, OP Technologies and Garmin. I ruled out the cheaper VFR of ferings long ago. It is down to painfully thoughtful and analytic evaluati on at this point. I also look forward to Deems=92 report flying behind his OP Tech screens.=0A =0ABill, Thanks for the investment and the answer to o ur Devil=92s Advocate.=0A =0AJohn Cox =0A#40600 =0A=0A=0A=0AFrom: owner-rv1 0-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] O n Behalf Of Bill DeRouchey=0ASent: Monday, February 26, 2007 1:07 PM=0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com=0ASubject: re: RV10-List: Glass Primary Flight Disp lays for RV-10=0A =0AHi William-=0AThanks for the good question. It require d me to remember all the reasons for each decision of each step over the la st 3.5 years. Its not a short answer.=0A =0AWhy is it so expensive?=0A =0AI , more than any other, would like our primary flight display "PFD" to be le ss expensive. However, if you look at the complete panel prices you will se e that you receive all the high end features without the high end pricing. In the end, our price was determined by our objective: provide a high quali ty, solid IFR platform. Kindly understand that "solid" means with and witho ut turbulence. Lets disect this objective.=0A =0AWe started with the best c omponents available, integrated a display computer, and filled in the holes . Garmin 430/530 was chosen as one cornerstone. This unit has certification s that allow you to file /G, an easy map update process, Glideslope, Locali zer, GPS, and COM receivers. Its a mature product that you can afford. Note that most Chelton owners have a G430 installed. TIP: for $500 you can get the G430 downloaded with terrain capability - not TAWS, just terrain warnin g. ANOTHER TIP: on our PFD we show the numbers that you typically see on th e right side of the G430 display with map selected. Use the menu button and remove this area from the G430 increasing your map size by 50%!=0A =0AAll the suggested panels are FAA legal.=0A =0AMission is cross country IFR. Thi s is the rule, not the exception. Many innovations were added to support th is mission, such as, fuel management, wind, prop setting, etc. We don't app roach IFR as a challenge. With proper instrumentation, we expect it to be c omfortable with the grandkids (or if your ahead of the game - kids) in the back.=0A =0AWe allowed for a robust backup plan with more than one layer. I f you look closely at the suggested panels you will see 2 & 1/2 levels of b ackup. The independently sensored autopilot is the half level. Note that ea ch subsequent level becomes simplier. My objective to the all-in-one glass PFD is the backup becomes more complex. Typically, one choses another simi lar unit as backup with the advertised swap displays in case of failure. It requires very complex logic to do this automatically, and there are hardwa re and software components added to support this functionality which makes it less reliable. The origin of this thinking is what the engineering depar tment would call "scope". They would list all the things that could go wron g with their component and provide a recovery procedure. The fault with thi s scope is the pilot is subject to any problem that occurs - not just a pre defined set of PFD problems. =0A =0ANowhere can you purchase a glass panel that is as deeply integrated into the RV10 as our PFD. We pickup the fuel l evels, flaps, door sensors, and stall warning to minimize weight, wiring, a nd additional components.=0A =0AThe price of our product would be much more appealing if we removed the gyro. Unfortunately, Crossbow is the only manu facturer of solid state gyros that meets our objective of a "solid IFR plat form". Since there is only one qualifying choice I did not want our custome rs to shop the gyro and attempt to save money thinking they were still purc hasing a "solid IFR platform". Perhaps, in the future there will be other s uitable choices and we could provide options. Now I must talk about gyros s o you won't believe that this is an arbitrary judgement.=0A =0ABefore I ord ered the RV10 kit (and I am kit #29), I swore that I would never put a blan kity, blank vacuum system in another plane ... ever. So, my approach was to create a solid state gyro that would be the crux of an IFR panel. I purcha sed the magnetic sensors, accelerometers, and rate gyros necessary to build my own gyro. After prototyping each of the components and thinking what wo uld be required to produce a reliable 360 degree, accurate and inexpensive gyro the answer was it is simply not possible because of the cost of the en gineering test equipment required. You need a very accurate rate table, a t emperature chamber to characterize sensor behavior, calibrated orientation, tight production controls, and the ability to measure and calibrate each u nit shipped. It was clearly a product for a very serious engineering compan y dedicated to this purpose. This was not my intended business, so I abando ned this effort and began shopping.=0A =0AMy criteria for purchase was/is: =0A 1. Proven know-how engineering and manufacturing cabability =0A 2. Published acuracy specifications.=0A 3. Experi enced with aircraft applications=0A 4. Birth certificate (calibr ation) for each unit=0A 5. Price=0A =0ANeedless to say, only Cro ssbow met these requirements.=0A =0ALooking to the PFD's future, we offer m ultiple, defined components rather than a single box. Software upgrades are simple, changing out the entire cpu is simple, updating the display is sim ple, etc. Since the purchased components have clearly defined interfaces an d our manufactured components have standard, extensible protocol links with the display computer its relatively easy to keep improving the product. We don't ever want to be in the position of squeezing life out of a 6.4" disp lay long after the market has moved on.=0A =0ARegarding your specific quest ion about the competition $10,000 under our price: Look close, they are all VFR components. The major reason is their gyros are of dubious quality, an d do not meet the first four purchase requirements (above). Most of these m anufacturers clearly state that they are for VFR usage - its the purchasers that streach the usage into IFR situations. Trading money on the ground fo r a challenge in the air is a bad idea.=0A =0ARegarding your question about the Garmin 600 $10,000 over our price: This package was designed to direct ly compete with Chelton. Its not the best of everything, just better than C helton. Choose a display you will be comfortable looking at for many hours. They tilted two 6.4" displays on end with low resolution and unknown brigh tness. Our display is 10.4" with 1024 x 768 resolution and 1200 nits of bri ghtness. These are engineering numbers and cannot be compared with a "sunli ght bright" phase the marketing weenie penned. The visibility from an RV10 is wonderful - but the downside is it lets in a lot of sun.=0A =0AWhat comp uter are you purchasing? Does it have extra capacity for future upgrades, o r is it an economical implementation that needs a hardware upgrade for futu re improvements?=0A =0AI looked once again for the accuracy specifications of the Garmin gyro with no luck. Nothing is published. I have become very h ard headed on this subject because I view the gyro as the crux of an IFR fl ight. Remember that our IFR mission includes turbulence. This is when I exp ect to feel comfortable and it doesn't matter if this is a lucky day or not .=0A =0ABill DeRouchey=0AN939SB, flying=0Abill(at)wtdaviationtechnology.com=0A =0A=0A=0AWilliam Curtis wrote:=0ABill,=0A=0AIf you do n't mind however, permit me to be the devil's advocate for a moment. Looki ng through your site I see that your single panel, single gyro EFIS system is $19,000 with an additional $3000 for an second display. What additional does you system offer at $10,000 more than an equivalent more established Grand Rapids system or only $10,000 less than a fully type certificated Gar min G600 system? Please don't take this question the wrong way, only it se ems on the surface, a builder would be paying more for an equivalent experi mental system that does not yet have any track record.=0A=0AWilliam=0Ahttp: =========== ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Rolling and fitting of fuselage side skins
Date: Feb 27, 2007
From: "Vern W. Smith" <Vern(at)teclabsinc.com>
William, Thanks for posting the pictures and idea of using 1 =BD" angle iron for rolling the fuselage side skins on your web site. I used this method the past weekend in place of the hardwood form called out in the plans. It worked great! I did leave the blue plastic in place until after the rolling process was complete (on the forward skins the plans say peal it off before rolling them.) If anyone else is interested in this, it can be found at the following link.RV-10 Fuselage Construction - Fuselage Side Skins <http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/08fuselage/index29.html> Thanks again, Vern Smith (#324 fuselage skins fitted:) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com>
Subject: GPS Antenna
Date: Feb 27, 2007
I'm planning on using a 496 for a GPS unit. Has anyone else flying with this GPS? If so, did you use an external antenna, where did you mount it and what model antenna is it? Or, is the internal antenna OK? Thanks in advance, Albert Gardner Yuma, AZ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com>
Subject: FW: Extra Holes in Aft Tunnel
Date: Feb 27, 2007
There are 2 small holes in the aft part of the tunnel that are still empty. They are located near the flap motor, near the top of the tunnel and are arranged in a vertical pattern. They show up in the plans from place to place but I can't see what they are for. Early on I thought they would be for rudder cable guides but if they are I have overlooked installing them and they don't seem to be lined up correctly if that is the intended use. Any help would be appreciated. Albert Gardner Yuma, AZ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dennis Brown" <dennis2004(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: GPS Antenna
Date: Feb 27, 2007
Yes, the remote antenna that comes with it work fine just put it up on top of the glare shield. Dennis ----- Original Message ----- From: Albert Gardner To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 1:57 PM Subject: RV10-List: GPS Antenna I'm planning on using a 496 for a GPS unit. Has anyone else flying with this GPS? If so, did you use an external antenna, where did you mount it and what model antenna is it? Or, is the internal antenna OK? Thanks in advance, Albert Gardner Yuma, AZ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com>
Subject: Extra Holes in Aft Tunnel
Date: Feb 27, 2007
There are 2 small holes in the aft part of the tunnel on each side that are still empty as I well along in construction. They are located near the flap motor, near the top of the tunnel and are arranged in a vertical pattern. They show up in the plans from place to place but I can't see what they are for. Early on I thought they would be for rudder cable guides but if they are I have overlooked installing them and they don't seem to be lined up correctly if that is the intended use. Any help would be appreciated. Albert Gardner Yuma, AZ ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Extra Holes in Aft Tunnel
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: "McGANN, Ron" <ron.mcgann(at)baesystems.com>
Albert, The holes are for rudder cable guides - See page 38-9. Installation is not mentioned in the instructions, but they are in the drawings. I have seen several web sites with these guides missing. cheers, Ron ________________________________ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert Gardner Sent: Wednesday, 28 February 2007 7:42 AM To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RV10-List: Extra Holes in Aft Tunnel There are 2 small holes in the aft part of the tunnel on each side that are still empty as I well along in construction. They are located near the flap motor, near the top of the tunnel and are arranged in a vertical pattern. They show up in the plans from place to place but I can't see what they are for. Early on I thought they would be for rudder cable guides but if they are I have overlooked installing them and they don't seem to be lined up correctly if that is the intended use. Any help would be appreciated. Albert Gardner Yuma, AZ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 2007
From: "bruce breckenridge" <bbreckenridge(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: GPS Antenna
Albert; My wife and I have been using the 396 with both external antennas, one being XM Weather/Radio. We learned right away that when flying northerly, the GPS antenna was best mounted in the back window of our C172, because it lost signal quite often. Maybe it was due to the high wings. Once we learned the game, we've been very pleased with the performance of the unit. Ideally, a permanent GPS antenna on top of the aircraft would give the best coverage. Bruce 40018 Wings ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse(at)saintaviation.com>
Subject: Extra Holes in Aft Tunnel
Date: Feb 27, 2007
OK, now I see. Little holes, like #40 holes, on the side of the tunnel, not on the bulkhead. They are being riveted in the attached picture. The part is F-1016H and can be found in the plans on page 38-9. Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse(at)saintaviation.com www.saintaviation.com Cell: 352-427-0285 Fax: 815-377-3694 _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 4:35 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Extra Holes in Aft Tunnel Albert, The holes are for rudder cable guides - See page 38-9. Installation is not mentioned in the instructions, but they are in the drawings. I have seen several web sites with these guides missing. cheers, Ron _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert Gardner Sent: Wednesday, 28 February 2007 7:42 AM Subject: RV10-List: Extra Holes in Aft Tunnel There are 2 small holes in the aft part of the tunnel on each side that are still empty as I well along in construction. They are located near the flap motor, near the top of the tunnel and are arranged in a vertical pattern. They show up in the plans from place to place but I can't see what they are for. Early on I thought they would be for rudder cable guides but if they are I have overlooked installing them and they don't seem to be lined up correctly if that is the intended use. Any help would be appreciated. Albert Gardner Yuma, AZ href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com /Navigator?RV10-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 27, 2007
Subject: Re: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10
In a message dated 2/27/07 12:33:25 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dmaib(at)mac.com writes: On Feb 27, 2007, at 10:33 AM, Niko wrote: This company needs to plan on high quality, high volume, and low cost I imagine the "high volume" could be the problem. The amateur built market is very healthy, but I doubt if the numbers will constitute anything approaching what a manufacturer would consider high volume. I believe if you check the numbers, Vans is out selling Mooney, Piper, Commander, Cessna and all the others put together each year except Cirrus...


**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michael Schipper <mike(at)learningplanet.com>
Subject: Re: GPS Antenna
Date: Feb 27, 2007
I put the antenna under the cowl. It works great. http://www.my9a.com/img/finish/misc4/gpsantenna.jpg Regards, Mike Schipper RV-10 #40576 - www.rvten.com RV-9A - N63MS - www.my9a.com On Feb 27, 2007, at 1:57 PM, Albert Gardner wrote: > I=92m planning on using a 496 for a GPS unit. Has anyone else flying > with this GPS? If so, did you use an external antenna, where did > you mount it and what model antenna is it? Or, is the internal > antenna OK? > > Thanks in advance, > > Albert Gardner > > Yuma, AZ > > List > ======================== > ======================== > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Saylor" <Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com>
Subject: Fiberglass Course
Date: Feb 27, 2007
Regarding an RV-10-specific composite course: Thanks for your responses! It looks like a go. The date was unresolved until now but it looks like the last weekend in April will work best for the most people. I will finalize the date and other details by the end of the week but plan tenatively for Saturday and Sunday, April 28 and 29. Dave Saylor AirCrafters LLC 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 831-722-9141 831-750-0284 CL www.AirCraftersLLC.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DejaVu" <wvu(at)ameritel.net>
Subject: PIPREP at 34 Hours
Date: Feb 28, 2007
There are plenty of aerodynamic performance posted already, especially on T im Olson's site so I won't go there much. Below are my notes/squawks/comme nts/lessons learned at 34 hours. Slightly long post but hope there's someth ing here for everyone. There are also a question or two. Maybe you can h elp me out. Handling/Flying qualities: RV-10 is a joy to fly. No new news here. Casual observers tell me the IO- 540 sounds manly - very throaty. Controls are at least twice as heavy as my old RV-6. Still light. Well ba lanced feel. With one soul onboard and 40-80lbs ballast in the baggage area... takeoffs require a slight nose down trim irregardless of fuel level, perhaps a =BC i nch trim tabs up or about a full one second push on the coolie hat. In cru ise I can see a slight (1/8 in) elevator leading edge (where the counter ba lance arms are) protruding above the trailing edge of the horizontal stab. Pitch trim band is narrow. Slight power adjustment will require you to re- trim. Not really a problem here. Have not ever ran out of pitch trim author ity. If you fight with the controls while the Trutrak is engaged, it WILL give i n to you - only once. Replacing the shear screw fixed the problem. Still getting used to differential braking. Tail wheel seems much more nat ural, sorry. Aircraft is too easy to land. Takes two hands to pull the stick all the wa y aft on roll out. Don't take me literally. Take transition training befor e flying yours. Engine: Engine burns about 1qt of straight mineral oil every 5 hours. I keep it at 9qts. Tim Olson mentioned his stabilizes around 8qts. Maybe I let it bre athe out too much. Will let it go down to 8qts and see what happens. I do n't expect full break in for at least 50 hours. Cylinders #2 and #4 running hot compared to others prior to maiden flight. Fuel flow test indicated that they got 50% amount of fuel compared to cyli nders. Found out port on spider faintly labeled "METER" was used for #2 (m y bad). Fuel for this port is shared with port for #4. Thus, they each go t 50% of fuel. Moving fuel lines around on the spider and plugged the METER port fixed the problem. Use CHT 's1 and 2 are hottest. 410degF on climb out at 105kts. Definitely nee d to cut down the air dams if nothing else. They are around 380degF in cru ise while others are around 360. See what's all Tim Olson did on his site. I think he's cruising around 320deg now. Vetterman exhaust discolors bottom cowl in areas closest to the exhaust. N ot sure how close they are to the cowl. You'll want to protect the inside of the bottom cowl with aluminum sheets that Van's sell or something simila r. Smooth the cowl first with a layer of resin. Prop governor arm slightly interfered with top cowl in flight but not on th e ground at the area of the bolt attaching the clevis to the governor arm. The cowls move slightly in flight. Give a good =BC" clearance fixed the p roblem. Airframe: Noticed bottom left cowl hinge had one broken eyelet on the cowl half at 25 hours. At 34 hours 5 out of 6 eyelets were broken. Replaced hinge half o n cowl. Will throw away bottoms hinges and use nutplates/screws like what Tim Olson did at the next opportunity. He uses 0.063 tab and five nutplates (appear to be K1000-08) per side. Stress crack around the bottom most rivet on the oil cooler hose flange on the baffle. The weldment on the flange itself appears ok. Will add double r and re-rivet the flange in place. Will also reinforce the weldment as so meone else suggested. Will have to search the archive on how this person d id it. No excessive heat in tunnel. I insulated the bottom of the tunnel from fir ewall to spar, and around fuel lines immediately below the fuel selector va lve. I also routed one port from the avionics cooling fan to the tunnel to keep the air moving inside the tunnel. NACA air vents as designed are cold on the knees in the winter time with a slight leak. Route them to your panel or somewhere else if I were you. No problems with the nose wheel spacers. I added screws through the nose f ork to make sure the spacers don't move. Small short "cracks" around rear windows due to flexing. Not sure what to do here. Feels like you need to allow it to flex. Any suggestions? I'd l ike to fix it before painting. Need to install the upper intersection fairings so I can fly with wheel pan ts on and gain a few knots. Avionics: Satisfied with the GRT EFIS's. No problems switching from standard six-pac k to glass panel. I enjoy the readily available true airspeed, wind velocit y, flight path vector, g-meter, electronic checklists, etc. Love the Mode-S. Aerocrapper (pun intended) suggested a "Mute" switch for t he Mode-S in case b*tching Betty gets too annoying around the pattern. Don 't need this switch. B*tching Betty is not annoying at all. She comes on only once when the traffic first shows up. GRT EIS 6000 fuel levels are inop. Found out Aerocrapper did not provide t he 4.8V input or via 470ohm resistors to the sensor inputs. Hate to think of mucking behind the panel at this point. Garmin 430 is powerful. Learning curve is still steep at this point. Human factors: Infinity stick grips are awesome. I make shoot-em-up noises while flyingJ. Only complaint is coolie hat does not engage until it almost hits the sto ps. Seats with wonder-cushions are uncomfortable for me, at least for my weight (170lbs). Feels like I'm sitting on a rock. After the foam is warmed up i t really conforms to your curves, like slightly up your crack. Wear jeans so this doesn't happen. Don't have a good way to stow the fwd harnesses. Don't like to see "hooks" above my head or on the center bar above the glare shield right in front o f my eyes. Keep pounding those rivets.. Anh N591VU ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: Perry Casson <pcasson(at)sasktel.net>
Subject: GPS Antenna
I installed both the el-cheapo external Garmin GPS antenna included with the x96/x96's and Sat Radio Antenna on the glareshield, I considered putting them under the cowl but didn't like sat radio electronics in that environment. For the GPS antenna we flush mounted it using an instrument blank cover and simple bracket and for the Sat Radio we used the Air Gizmos mount but built a small bracket to lower it a bit. Seems to work great in the shop, but not yet flying. Photos of what we did start here <http://casson.2y.net/yappa-ng/index.php?album=%2FRV-10%2F&image=IMG_1019.JPG> and use "Next Image" to look at the next 5 for details if you wish. Perry Casson Regina, Canada ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jay Rowe" <jfrjr(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Fiberglass Course
Date: Feb 28, 2007
Dave you can sign me up for the April 28/29 for sure. Do you need a deposit? Jay Rowe ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Saylor To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 12:10 AM Subject: RV10-List: Fiberglass Course Regarding an RV-10-specific composite course: Thanks for your responses! It looks like a go. The date was unresolved until now but it looks like the last weekend in April will work best for the most people. I will finalize the date and other details by the end of the week but plan tenatively for Saturday and Sunday, April 28 and 29. Dave Saylor AirCrafters LLC 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 831-722-9141 831-750-0284 CL www.AirCraftersLLC.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- 2/26/2007 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bob Leffler" <rvmail(at)thelefflers.com>
Subject: Fiberglass Course
Date: Feb 28, 2007
What's the closest commercial airport to fly in to? SJC? _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Saylor Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 12:10 AM Subject: RV10-List: Fiberglass Course Regarding an RV-10-specific composite course: Thanks for your responses! It looks like a go. The date was unresolved until now but it looks like the last weekend in April will work best for the most people. I will finalize the date and other details by the end of the week but plan tenatively for Saturday and Sunday, April 28 and 29. Dave Saylor AirCrafters LLC 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 831-722-9141 831-750-0284 CL www.AirCraftersLLC.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 2007
Subject: EAA's Sportaire workshops
The EAA is sponsoring an RV workshop in my area...I originally wanted to attend the Western PA's workshop but they no longer have them...anyway has anyone attended the EAA version and is it worth the time and money...the other I'm considering is the work shop in GA... Patrick


**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: PIPREP at 34 Hours
From: "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net>
Date: Feb 28, 2007
Anh, Great to hear the report. Thanks for the input. This is all good stuff for us that follow you. Here's a suggestion on the shoulder straps. Instead of the overhead aluminum strap, why not sew some velcro onto the shoulder harness? Just velcro overhead when not in use. I wish I could have warned you of the bottom piano hinge on the cowl. I have screws and platenuts (4 K-1008's each side) there also. No problems after 1000 hours. I would suggest getting rid of the black P-O-C eyeball vents that Vans provide in the kit. Get the aluminum ones that are sold by many vendors (suggest Stein for starters). Adds a touch of class to your interior and seals off the cold air. Joe [quote="wvu(at)ameritel.net"]There are plenty of aerodynamic performance posted already, especially on Tim Olson?s site so I won?t go there much. Below are my notes/squawks/comments/lessons learned at 34 hours. Slightly long post but hope there?s something here for everyone. There are also a question or two. Maybe you can help me out. Handling/Flying qualities: RV-10 is a joy to fly. No new news here. Casual observers tell me the IO-540 sounds manly ? very throaty. Controls are at least twice as heavy as my old RV-6. Still light. Well balanced feel. With one soul onboard and 40-80lbs ballast in the baggage area... takeoffs require a slight nose down trim irregardless of fuel level, perhaps a ? inch trim tabs up or about a full one second push on the coolie hat. In cruise I can see a slight (1/8 in) elevator leading edge (where the counter balance arms are) protruding above the trailing edge of the horizontal stab Pitch trim band is narrow. Slight power adjustment will require you to re-trim. Not really a problem here. Have not ever ran out of pitch trim authority. If you fight with the controls while the Trutrak is engaged, it WILL give in to you ? only once. Replacing the shear screw fixed the problem. Still getting used to differential braking. Tail wheel seems much more natural, sorry. Aircraft is too easy to land. Takes two hands to pull the stick all the way aft on roll out. Don?t take me literally. Take transition training before flying yours. Engine: Engine burns about 1qt of straight mineral oil every 5 hours. I keep it at 9qts. Tim Olson mentioned his stabilizes around 8qts.? Maybe I let it breathe out too much. Will let it go down to 8qts and see what happens. I don?t expect full break in for at least 50 hours. Cylinders #2 and #4 running hot compared to others prior to maiden flight. Fuel flow test indicated that they got 50% amount of fuel compared to cylinders. Found out port on spider faintly labeled ?METER? was used for #2 (my bad). Fuel for this port is shared with port for #4. Thus, they each got 50% of fuel. Moving fuel lines around on the spider and plugged the METER port fixed the problem. Use CHT 's1 and 2 are hottest. 410degF on climb out at 105kts. Definitely need to cut down the air dams if nothing else. They are around 380degF in cruise while others are around 360. See what?s all Tim Olson did on his site. I think he?s cruising around 320deg now. Vetterman exhaust discolors bottom cowl in areas closest to the exhaust. Not sure how close they are to the cowl. You?ll want to protect the inside of the bottom cowl with aluminum sheets that Van?s sell or something similar. Smooth the cowl first with a layer of resin. Prop governor arm slightly interfered with top cowl in flight but not on the ground at the area of the bolt attaching the clevis to the governor arm. The cowls move slightly in flight. Give a good ?? clearance fixed the problem. Airframe: Noticed bottom left cowl hinge had one broken eyelet on the cowl half at 25 hours. At 34 hours 5 out of 6 eyelets were broken. Replaced hinge half on cowl. Will throw away bottoms hinges and use nutplates/screws like what Tim Olson did at the next opportunity. He uses 0.063 tab and five nutplates (appear to be K1000-08) per side. Stress crack around the bottom most rivet on the oil cooler hose flange on the baffle. The weldment on the flange itself appears ok. Will add doubler and re-rivet the flange in place. Will also reinforce the weldment as someone else suggested. Will have to search the archive on how this person did it. No excessive heat in tunnel. I insulated the bottom of the tunnel from firewall to spar, and around fuel lines immediately below the fuel selector valve. I also routed one port from the avionics cooling fan to the tunnel to keep the air moving inside the tunnel. NACA air vents as designed are cold on the knees in the winter time with a slight leak. Route them to your panel or somewhere else if I were you. No problems with the nose wheel spacers. I added screws through the nose fork to make sure the spacers don?t move. Small short ?cracks? around rear windows due to flexing. Not sure what to do here. Feels like you need to allow it to flex. Any suggestions? I?d like to fix it before painting. Need to install the upper intersection fairings so I can fly with wheel pants on and gain a few knots Avionics: Satisfied with the GRT EFIS?s. No problems switching from standard six-pack to glass panel. I enjoy the readily available true airspeed, wind velocity, flight path vector, g-meter, electronic checklists, etc. Love the Mode-S. Aerocrapper (pun intended) suggested a ?Mute? switch for the Mode-S in case b*tching Betty gets too annoying around the pattern. Don?t need this switch. B*tching Betty is not annoying at all. She comes on only once when the traffic first shows up. GRT EIS 6000 fuel levels are inop. Found out Aerocrapper did not provide the 4.8V input or via 470ohm resistors to the sensor inputs. Hate to think of mucking behind the panel at this point. Garmin 430 is powerful. Learning curve is still steep at this point. Human factors: Infinity stick grips are awesome. I make shoot-em-up noises while flyingJ. Only complaint is coolie hat does not engage until it almost hits the stops. Seats with wonder-cushions are uncomfortable for me, at least for my weight (170lbs). Feels like I?m sitting on a rock. After the foam is warmed up it really conforms to your curves, like slightly up your crack. Wear jeans so this doesn?t happen. Don?t have a good way to stow the fwd harnesses. Don?t like to see ?hooks? above my head or on the center bar above the glare shield right in front of my eyes. Keep pounding those rivets?. AnhN591VU > [b] -------- RV8 #80125 RV10 # 40512 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=97842#97842 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michael Schipper <mike(at)learningplanet.com>
Subject: Re: PIPREP at 34 Hours
Date: Feb 28, 2007
Great writeup, Anh. Thanks for taking the time to document your findings. > If you fight with the controls while the Trutrak is engaged, it > WILL give in to you ' only once. Replacing the shear screw fixed > the problem. Does this mean that the trim servo's screw broke off when you applied too much control pressure? Regards, Mike Schipper RV-10 #40576 - www.rvten.com On Feb 27, 2007, at 11:17 PM, DejaVu wrote: > There are plenty of aerodynamic performance posted already, > especially on Tim Olson=92s site so I won=92t go there much. Below are > my notes/squawks/comments/lessons learned at 34 hours. Slightly > long post but hope there=92s something here for everyone. There are > also a question or two. Maybe you can help me out. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jay Rowe" <jfrjr(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: EAA's Sportaire workshops
Date: Feb 28, 2007
Patrick: I attended a long (very long) week course at the Alexander Tech Center in Griffin GA. We worked about 12 hours day for 9 days. There were two RV-8 builders there as well and they were able to complete their tail feathers by only doing 8 to 10 hours/day and on the last Sunday they were out of there by noon. I was probably a bit slower than the averabe dub but the 10 has a lot more rivets and parts than the 8. The course and instructors were very good and I learned just about all I needed to know to continue on with the wings and fuselage (I am just starting the finish kit). I would highly recommended it if you have the time and cash. Jay Rowe ----- Original Message ----- From: GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 8:01 AM Subject: RV10-List: EAA's Sportaire workshops The EAA is sponsoring an RV workshop in my area...I originally wanted to attend the Western PA's workshop but they no longer have them...anyway has anyone attended the EAA version and is it worth the time and money...the other I'm considering is the work shop in GA... Patrick ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at 657x4311227241x4298082137/aol?redir=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaol%2Ecom" target="_blank">AOL.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- 2/27/2007 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 2007
Subject: Re: EAA's Sportaire workshops
In a message dated 2/28/07 10:02:23 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, jfrjr(at)adelphia.net writes: : I attended a long (very long) week course at the Alexander Tech Center in Griffin GA.....Thanks I would highly recommended it if you have the time and cash. Jay Rowe Thanks Jay...


**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 2007
Subject: Re: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10
Mooney delivered about 20 planes...Commander 0, Tiger 0, Piper ?, Cessna 85 0 and about 15%+ of these were delivered to CAP so it you take these and flee t sales out, Cessna probably delivered less than 500 to GA pilots, worldwide. Van's is quickly becoming a major producer of GA aircraft. I'd guess in the next 2 years, CAP will have filled it's pipe line on the Glass cockpits and will then really cut back on Cessna's G 1000 182 production unless Cessna finds new customers. and I do believe Vans delivered more than 1000 new kits starts, but this does not mean completed airplanes just new starts. But they did say that th e kits are taking to the air at more than 1 a day, so that is still a healthy number. Dan N289DT ____________________________________ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Mich ael Sausen) Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 9:03 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10 He wishes! Textron=99s Cessna unit last year delivered 1239 fully ou tfitted aircraft, 850 of which were piston. Do not archive From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of GRANSCOTT(at)aol.co m Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 7:37 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Glass Primary Flight Displays for RV-10 In a message dated 2/27/07 12:33:25 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dmaib(at)mac.com writes: On Feb 27, 2007, at 10:33 AM, Niko wrote: This company needs to plan on high quality, high volume, and low cost I imagine the "high volume" could be the problem. The amateur built market is very healthy, but I doubt if the numbers will constitute anything approaching what a manufacturer would consider high volume. I believe if you check the numbers, Vans is out selling Mooney, Piper, Commander, Cessna and all the others put together each year except Cirrus. .. ____________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List http://forums.matronics.com href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.c om/Navigator?RV10-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List)


**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: "Pascal" <rv10builder(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: EAA's Sportaire workshops
I did the course last June with Dan Checkoway leading. I did it to determine if I could and wanted to build an aluminum airframe. We built the airfoil project one sees for sale on the Van's webstore. I can only speak for that experience and not Sportair workshops in general I enjoyed the RV building overview, discussing tools, space and pretty much everything mentioned in the "homebuilders" site on the EAA website under "planning". Doing the Hands on was a great experience, it's one thing to talk about doing it, it's another having a knowledgeable person guiding and showing "better and easier ways to get the same thing completed". We had probably 4 of the 18 people in the class as "started the project xx months/years ago" they took the course to improve and learn what they have had problems with. As a potential builder looking for whats involved, I thought it was worth the time and money, not sure there is much benefit for anyone who has done the research from start to finish and has months building already- if one hasn't had the time the course will cover everything from planning to registering to first flight all in a few hours. In summary- I studied the EAA homebuilders site and learned the start to finish expectations. I took the time to see projects and ask local builders questions. I took the time to review the blueprints on peoples sites (ie Tim's) and went throught the process in my head, cleco, drill, deburr, etc.. All that was missing was doing it with an instructor- because I was prepared I listened and understood more, it was the Hands on however that I truly benefitted from. This RV forum will cover the ground school piece questions and usually in "real-time" as in "I met the DAR last weekend and they suggested I do .... for the first flight", but unless you have a friend or know someone willing to teach you, the Sportair classes are a good investment of your time and money. I couldn't see a builder who already started and was building every weekend really benefitting from it. A good refresher for someone who hasn't been in the project (some of the students took off for 2 years and wanted a refresher on everything) I would venture to guess any course would be a good experience if the instructor knows how to communicate clearly- in CA Dan Checkoway is a great example, he is so intense in his RV that one leaves the class excited and ready to be part of the same experience. In GA you may receive the same level of instructor, you may not. Time and money wise.. I think it will take less time and cost less in the long run doing a course. I haven't heard of anyone complain about any of the courses out there. Some may not benefit too much; others will, I found in my experience those in a rush to go home missed out, those that stuck around learned quite a lot from an instructor ready to talk and spread the wealth of knowledge. It's what one make of it that makes the difference. ----- Original Message ----- From: GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 5:01 AM Subject: RV10-List: EAA's Sportaire workshops The EAA is sponsoring an RV workshop in my area...I originally wanted to attend the Western PA's workshop but they no longer have them...anyway has anyone attended the EAA version and is it worth the time and money...the other I'm considering is the work shop in GA... Patrick ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at 657x4311227241x4298082137/aol?redir=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaol%2Ecom" target="_blank">AOL.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: How to dimple screw holes for wing tip (QB Wing)
From: "Michael Wellenzohn" <michael(at)wellenzohn.net>
Date: Feb 28, 2007
Hello, I cannot reach the holes in the top wing skin with my dimple die set to produce the required 10# screw dimples for the wing tip attachment. How did other QB wing builders do it? Regards Michael -------- RV-10 builder (wings) #511 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=97941#97941 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: How to dimple screw holes for wing tip (QB Wing)
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: "Lloyd, Daniel R." <LloydDR(at)wernerco.com>
Grind down the dimple die set Dan N289DT -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael Wellenzohn Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 2:22 PM Subject: RV10-List: How to dimple screw holes for wing tip (QB Wing) Hello, I cannot reach the holes in the top wing skin with my dimple die set to produce the required 10# screw dimples for the wing tip attachment. How did other QB wing builders do it? Regards Michael -------- RV-10 builder (wings) #511 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=97941#97941 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: PIPREP at 34 Hours
In this situation the shear screw did exactly what it was supposed to do. The autopilot wanted to do one thing Anh wanted to do another. Anh, the PIC, won. The shear pin sheared and Anh had total control of the aircraft. The TruTrak autopilot was mechanically disengaged. Larry #356 Michael Schipper wrote: > Great writeup, Anh. Thanks for taking the time to document your findings. > >> If you fight with the controls while the Trutrak is engaged, it WILL >> give in to you only once. Replacing the shear screw fixed the problem. > > Does this mean that the trim servo's screw broke off when you applied > too much control pressure? > > Regards, > Mike Schipper > RV-10 #40576 - www.rvten.com <http://www.rvten.com> > > > On Feb 27, 2007, at 11:17 PM, DejaVu wrote: > >> There are plenty of aerodynamic performance posted already, >> especially on Tim Olsons site so I wont go there much. Below are >> my notes/squawks/comments/lessons learned at 34 hours. Slightly long >> post but hope theres something here for everyone. There are also a >> question or two. Maybe you can help me out. > > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" <ddddsp1(at)juno.com>
Date: Mar 01, 2007
Subject: Re: PIPREP at 34 Hours
Trio is a better design than this.............IMHO Dean 40449 On MOD 277 Yugo panel working well ________________________________________________________________________ FREE Reminder Service - NEW from AmericanGreetings.com Click HERE and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again! http://track.juno.com/s/lc?s=197335&u=http://www.americangreetings.c om/products/online_calendar.pd?c=uol5752

Trio is a better design than this.............IMHO

Dean 40449

On MOD 277  Yugo panel working well



______________________ __________________________________________________
FREE Remin der Service - NEW from AmericanGreetings.com
Click HERE and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again!
< br>

      
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: PIPREP at 34 Hours
Tell us more. How do you manually override the Trio servo? Larry ddddsp1(at)juno.com wrote: > > Trio is a better design than this.............IMHO > > Dean 40449 > > On MOD 277 Yugo panel working well > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > *FREE* Reminder Service - *NEW* from AmericanGreetings.com > Click *HERE* and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again! > <http://track.juno.com/s/lc?s=197335&u=http://www.americangreetings.com/products/online_calendar.pd?c=uol5752> > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: CHRISTOPHER HARRIS <cbpip(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: PIPREP at 34 Hours
Anh, great news on the airplane. You should consider, though---having a highly motivated A&P ride shotgun to observe, and take notes for you, just so you can enjoy flying the plane and not have to worry about the statistical stuff so much. I could recommend a local guy to provide this service for you, he's available almost anytime, and drives a black Ford F-250. Chris DejaVu wrote: There are plenty of aerodynamic performance posted already, especially on Tim Olsons site so I wont go there much. Below are my notes/squawks/comments/lessons learned at 34 hours. Slightly long post but hope theres something here for everyone. There are also a question or two. Maybe you can help me out. Handling/Flying qualities: RV-10 is a joy to fly. No new news here. Casual observers tell me the IO-540 sounds manly very throaty. Controls are at least twice as heavy as my old RV-6. Still light. Well balanced feel. With one soul onboard and 40-80lbs ballast in the baggage area... takeoffs require a slight nose down trim irregardless of fuel level, perhaps a inch trim tabs up or about a full one second push on the coolie hat. In cruise I can see a slight (1/8 in) elevator leading edge (where the counter balance arms are) protruding above the trailing edge of the horizontal stab Pitch trim band is narrow. Slight power adjustment will require you to re-trim. Not really a problem here. Have not ever ran out of pitch trim authority. If you fight with the controls while the Trutrak is engaged, it WILL give in to you only once. Replacing the shear screw fixed the problem. Still getting used to differential braking. Tail wheel seems much more natural, sorry. Aircraft is too easy to land. Takes two hands to pull the stick all the way aft on roll out. Dont take me literally. Take transition training before flying yours. Engine: Engine burns about 1qt of straight mineral oil every 5 hours. I keep it at 9qts. Tim Olson mentioned his stabilizes around 8qts. Maybe I let it breathe out too much. Will let it go down to 8qts and see what happens. I dont expect full break in for at least 50 hours. Cylinders #2 and #4 running hot compared to others prior to maiden flight. Fuel flow test indicated that they got 50% amount of fuel compared to cylinders. Found out port on spider faintly labeled METER was used for #2 (my bad). Fuel for this port is shared with port for #4. Thus, they each got 50% of fuel. Moving fuel lines around on the spider and plugged the METER port fixed the problem. Use CHT 's1 and 2 are hottest. 410degF on climb out at 105kts. Definitely need to cut down the air dams if nothing else. They are around 380degF in cruise while others are around 360. See whats all Tim Olson did on his site. I think hes cruising around 320deg now. Vetterman exhaust discolors bottom cowl in areas closest to the exhaust. Not sure how close they are to the cowl. Youll want to protect the inside of the bottom cowl with aluminum sheets that Vans sell or something similar. Smooth the cowl first with a layer of resin. Prop governor arm slightly interfered with top cowl in flight but not on the ground at the area of the bolt attaching the clevis to the governor arm. The cowls move slightly in flight. Give a good clearance fixed the problem. Airframe: Noticed bottom left cowl hinge had one broken eyelet on the cowl half at 25 hours. At 34 hours 5 out of 6 eyelets were broken. Replaced hinge half on cowl. Will throw away bottoms hinges and use nutplates/screws like what Tim Olson did at the next opportunity. He uses 0.063 tab and five nutplates (appear to be K1000-08) per side. Stress crack around the bottom most rivet on the oil cooler hose flange on the baffle. The weldment on the flange itself appears ok. Will add doubler and re-rivet the flange in place. Will also reinforce the weldment as someone else suggested. Will have to search the archive on how this person did it. No excessive heat in tunnel. I insulated the bottom of the tunnel from firewall to spar, and around fuel lines immediately below the fuel selector valve. I also routed one port from the avionics cooling fan to the tunnel to keep the air moving inside the tunnel. NACA air vents as designed are cold on the knees in the winter time with a slight leak. Route them to your panel or somewhere else if I were you. No problems with the nose wheel spacers. I added screws through the nose fork to make sure the spacers dont move. Small short cracks around rear windows due to flexing. Not sure what to do here. Feels like you need to allow it to flex. Any suggestions? Id like to fix it before painting. Need to install the upper intersection fairings so I can fly with wheel pants on and gain a few knots Avionics: Satisfied with the GRT EFISs. No problems switching from standard six-pack to glass panel. I enjoy the readily available true airspeed, wind velocity, flight path vector, g-meter, electronic checklists, etc. Love the Mode-S. Aerocrapper (pun intended) suggested a Mute switch for the Mode-S in case b*tching Betty gets too annoying around the pattern. Dont need this switch. B*tching Betty is not annoying at all. She comes on only once when the traffic first shows up. GRT EIS 6000 fuel levels are inop. Found out Aerocrapper did not provide the 4.8V input or via 470ohm resistors to the sensor inputs. Hate to think of mucking behind the panel at this point. Garmin 430 is powerful. Learning curve is still steep at this point. Human factors: Infinity stick grips are awesome. I make shoot-em-up noises while flyingJ. Only complaint is coolie hat does not engage until it almost hits the stops. Seats with wonder-cushions are uncomfortable for me, at least for my weight (170lbs). Feels like Im sitting on a rock. After the foam is warmed up it really conforms to your curves, like slightly up your crack. Wear jeans so this doesnt happen. Dont have a good way to stow the fwd harnesses. Dont like to see hooks above my head or on the center bar above the glare shield right in front of my eyes. Keep pounding those rivets. Anh N591VU ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: Tim Lewis <Tim_Lewis(at)msm.umr.edu>
Subject: Re: PIPREP at 34 Hours
I suspect this (pilot override leads to sheared servo screws) is not how the system is supposed to operate. According to TruTrak's Digiflight II operator's manual: "... use the encoder knob to select the desired value of roll servo torque. This value should be between 7 and 12. ... The value chosen should be sufficient to fly the aircraft, but not so much that it is difficult to override the autopilot if necessary." According to TruTrak's FAQ: "What if a servo jams? The chances of a servo jamming are very slim, however if a servo did happen to jam, there are shear screws on every servo that allow a breakaway of the servo arm." It appears that the servo torque is intended to be adjusted so that the pilot can override the servo (without shearing the screws). If the TruTrak is really designed to shear screws (hence disabling the system) if the pilot tries to override the servo, I don't think I'd care to buy a TruTrak autopilot. Even my elderly Navaid responds more gracefully than that. Tim -- Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA) RV-6A N47TD -- 850 hrs RV-10 #40059 under construction Larry Rosen wrote: > > In this situation the shear screw did exactly what it was supposed to > do. The autopilot wanted to do one thing Anh wanted to do another. > Anh, the PIC, won. The shear pin sheared and Anh had total control of > the aircraft. The TruTrak autopilot was mechanically disengaged. > > Larry > #356 > > Michael Schipper wrote: >> Great writeup, Anh. Thanks for taking the time to document your >> findings. >> >>> If you fight with the controls while the Trutrak is engaged, it WILL >>> give in to you only once. Replacing the shear screw fixed the >>> problem. >> >> Does this mean that the trim servo's screw broke off when you applied >> too much control pressure? >> >> Regards, >> Mike Schipper >> RV-10 #40576 - www.rvten.com <http://www.rvten.com> >> >> >> >> On Feb 27, 2007, at 11:17 PM, DejaVu wrote: >> >>> There are plenty of aerodynamic performance posted already, >>> especially on Tim Olsons site so I wont go there much. Below are >>> my notes/squawks/comments/lessons learned at 34 hours. Slightly long >>> post but hope theres something here for everyone. There are also a >>> question or two. Maybe you can help me out. >> >> * >> >> >> * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: Tim Lewis <Tim_Lewis(at)msm.umr.edu>
Subject: The value of EFIS backup
I don't think I've ever cross posted anything to the RV-10 list from another list, but this one is too valuable to miss.... I'm going with an AF-3500 EFIS as primary attitude display, backup provided by vacuum driven gyro powered by Sigma Tek Aeon piston vacuum pump. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: RV-List: Glass for IFRGlass for IFR Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 06:44:00 -0500 From: Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) <mike.stewart(at)us.ibm.com> --> RV-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" As a survivor of a dual efis (GRT & BMA), single lockup, IMC, 2000'agl vectors to final approach, it was the a/p that broke the tie for me. One said left turn, one said right. My GRT locked up frozen on the efis screen in a turn. I was fortunate to have noticed the discrepancy. Disorientation set in in about 1 second as soon as it was noticed. You cant imagine the immediate brain confusion when the 2 EFIS's are not agreeing in a big way. Turn on the a/p and sort it out. A/p says BMA wins, and thats what I flew to the runway. It resulted in an emergency firmware update the following day by GRT. Turns out the EFIS did not like a GPS approach with no assigned runway in the database. Was a software bug. Would have been easier if the screen had just gone blank, but your don't get to choose your fail modes. Also as a side note, had I of had 2 GRT's, they both would have locked up and I'd of been on A/P alone. That would not have been fun, but doable. It can happen. I was happy that day I chose 2 different EFIS's. Probably saved my butt. Also, as was asked earlier on this thread, I have tested my Trio A/P in many unusual attitudes, and it will right me from the most ridicules attitudes every time. Mike ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: PIPREP at 34 Hours
Date: Feb 28, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Anh, awesome report.. And yes everyone should do some research off Tim's site to keep absorption of hydrocarbon fluids and heat discoloration of composites. With this weather, your posting was a ray of sunshine. John Cox ________________________________ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of DejaVu Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 9:17 PM Subject: RV10-List: PIPREP at 34 Hours There are plenty of aerodynamic performance posted already, especially on Tim Olson's site so I won't go there much. Below are my notes/squawks/comments/lessons learned at 34 hours. Slightly long post but hope there's something here for everyone. There are also a question or two. Maybe you can help me out. Handling/Flying qualities: RV-10 is a joy to fly. No new news here. Casual observers tell me the IO-540 sounds manly - very throaty. Controls are at least twice as heavy as my old RV-6. Still light. Well balanced feel. With one soul onboard and 40-80lbs ballast in the baggage area... takeoffs require a slight nose down trim irregardless of fuel level, perhaps a =BC inch trim tabs up or about a full one second push on the coolie hat. In cruise I can see a slight (1/8 in) elevator leading edge (where the counter balance arms are) protruding above the trailing edge of the horizontal stab Pitch trim band is narrow. Slight power adjustment will require you to re-trim. Not really a problem here. Have not ever ran out of pitch trim authority. If you fight with the controls while the Trutrak is engaged, it WILL give in to you - only once. Replacing the shear screw fixed the problem. Still getting used to differential braking. Tail wheel seems much more natural, sorry. Aircraft is too easy to land. Takes two hands to pull the stick all the way aft on roll out. Don't take me literally. Take transition training before flying yours. Engine: Engine burns about 1qt of straight mineral oil every 5 hours. I keep it at 9qts. Tim Olson mentioned his stabilizes around 8qts. Maybe I let it breathe out too much. Will let it go down to 8qts and see what happens. I don't expect full break in for at least 50 hours. Cylinders #2 and #4 running hot compared to others prior to maiden flight. Fuel flow test indicated that they got 50% amount of fuel compared to cylinders. Found out port on spider faintly labeled "METER" was used for #2 (my bad). Fuel for this port is shared with port for #4. Thus, they each got 50% of fuel. Moving fuel lines around on the spider and plugged the METER port fixed the problem. Use CHT 's1 and 2 are hottest. 410degF on climb out at 105kts. Definitely need to cut down the air dams if nothing else. They are around 380degF in cruise while others are around 360. See what's all Tim Olson did on his site. I think he's cruising around 320deg now. Vetterman exhaust discolors bottom cowl in areas closest to the exhaust. Not sure how close they are to the cowl. You'll want to protect the inside of the bottom cowl with aluminum sheets that Van's sell or something similar. Smooth the cowl first with a layer of resin. Prop governor arm slightly interfered with top cowl in flight but not on the ground at the area of the bolt attaching the clevis to the governor arm. The cowls move slightly in flight. Give a good =BC" clearance fixed the problem. Airframe: Noticed bottom left cowl hinge had one broken eyelet on the cowl half at 25 hours. At 34 hours 5 out of 6 eyelets were broken. Replaced hinge half on cowl. Will throw away bottoms hinges and use nutplates/screws like what Tim Olson did at the next opportunity. He uses 0.063 tab and five nutplates (appear to be K1000-08) per side. Stress crack around the bottom most rivet on the oil cooler hose flange on the baffle. The weldment on the flange itself appears ok. Will add doubler and re-rivet the flange in place. Will also reinforce the weldment as someone else suggested. Will have to search the archive on how this person did it. No excessive heat in tunnel. I insulated the bottom of the tunnel from firewall to spar, and around fuel lines immediately below the fuel selector valve. I also routed one port from the avionics cooling fan to the tunnel to keep the air moving inside the tunnel. NACA air vents as designed are cold on the knees in the winter time with a slight leak. Route them to your panel or somewhere else if I were you. No problems with the nose wheel spacers. I added screws through the nose fork to make sure the spacers don't move. Small short "cracks" around rear windows due to flexing. Not sure what to do here. Feels like you need to allow it to flex. Any suggestions? I'd like to fix it before painting. Need to install the upper intersection fairings so I can fly with wheel pants on and gain a few knots Avionics: Satisfied with the GRT EFIS's. No problems switching from standard six-pack to glass panel. I enjoy the readily available true airspeed, wind velocity, flight path vector, g-meter, electronic checklists, etc. Love the Mode-S. Aerocrapper (pun intended) suggested a "Mute" switch for the Mode-S in case b*tching Betty gets too annoying around the pattern. Don't need this switch. B*tching Betty is not annoying at all. She comes on only once when the traffic first shows up. GRT EIS 6000 fuel levels are inop. Found out Aerocrapper did not provide the 4.8V input or via 470ohm resistors to the sensor inputs. Hate to think of mucking behind the panel at this point. Garmin 430 is powerful. Learning curve is still steep at this point. Human factors: Infinity stick grips are awesome. I make shoot-em-up noises while flying:-). Only complaint is coolie hat does not engage until it almost hits the stops. Seats with wonder-cushions are uncomfortable for me, at least for my weight (170lbs). Feels like I'm sitting on a rock. After the foam is warmed up it really conforms to your curves, like slightly up your crack. Wear jeans so this doesn't happen. Don't have a good way to stow the fwd harnesses. Don't like to see "hooks" above my head or on the center bar above the glare shield right in front of my eyes. Keep pounding those rivets.... Anh N591VU ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DejaVu" <wvu(at)ameritel.net>
Subject: Re: PIPREP at 34 Hours
Date: Mar 01, 2007
Mike, There's a #8 screw which attaches the servo arm to the shaft. There's a "d onut" around the shaft immediately underneath the arm. The donut is secured to the shaft by an allen head screw. Then there's a #6 shear screw about1 /4" from the #8 screw going through the arm into the donut. When you move the arm with a broken shear screw the shaft and donut don't move. So when you apply too much control pressure it's the #6 shear screw that breaks off This is not normal procedure to manually override the servo. It's done by press and hold the engage button, or do the same using the remotely moun ted CWS switch on the Infinity grip in my case. This temporarily disengages the A/P allowing you to fly the plane manually. Release the button when y ou're ready for the A/P to take over again. Anh ----- Original Message ----- From: Michael Schipper To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 9:02 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: PIPREP at 34 Hours Great writeup, Anh. Thanks for taking the time to document your findings. If you fight with the controls while the Trutrak is engaged, it WILL gi ve in to you ' only once. Replacing the shear screw fixed the problem. Does this mean that the trim servo's screw broke off when you applied too much control pressure? Regards, Mike Schipper RV-10 #40576 - www.rvten.com On Feb 27, 2007, at 11:17 PM, DejaVu wrote: There are plenty of aerodynamic performance posted already, especially on Tim Olson=92s site so I won=92t go there much. Below are my notes/squaw ks/comments/lessons learned at 34 hours. Slightly long post but hope there =92s something here for everyone. There are also a question or two. Mayb e you can help me out. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 01, 2007
Subject: Re: The value of EFIS backup
Tim not trying to second guess...but it seems the writer said he turned the decision over to the auto pilot? What would have happened if the AP was crossing feeding information for the GRT rather than the feed he was expecting...I would have thought that the PIC would look for a secondary back up such as his Attitude indicator, airspeed, VSI, wet compass and cross check etc as immediate actions not trust the AP and maybe go missed approach until you've sorted out the equipment or get vectors to final approach course after reporting the equipment problem to the approach controller?...maybe I don't understand what his action was? Additionally, I would have throught the general GPS instructions to a final approach course would include selecting the type of approach...example "VOR 23L" etc., after selecting the airport identifier then selecting how one gets to 23L, vectors, ILS, VOR, GPS etc., what ever is in the system to select followed by altitude assignments on the AP if you're using this and setting in the approach/nav mode, etc. P


**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 2007
From: mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com
Subject: Re: EAA's Sportaire workshops
I did the Alexander Tech Center too and would 2nd all points. Bill "on vacation in BVI but can't wait to bang some more" Watson #605 -----Original Message----- From: Jay Rowe <jfrjr(at)adelphia.net> Subj: Re: RV10-List: EAA's Sportaire workshops Date: Wed Feb 28, 2007 11:17 am Size: 1K Patrick: I attended a long (very long) week course at the Alexander Tech Center in Griffin GA. We worked about 12 hours day for 9 days. There were two RV-8 builders there as well and they were able to complete their tail feathers by only doing 8 to 10 hours/day and on the last Sunday they were out of there by noon. I was probably a bit slower than the averabe dub but the 10 has a lot more rivets and parts than the 8. The course and instructors were very good and I learned just about all I needed to know to continue on with the wings and fuselage (I am just starting the finish kit). I would highly recommended it if you have the time and cash. --- message truncated --- ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Flap positioning system
From: "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com>
Date: Mar 02, 2007
Getting ready to order standard build fuse kit. Is the flap positioning system that Vans offers on the order form sufficient, or should I go with some of the other one-touch flap positioning systems? What are those of you flying using? Thanks. Eric Kallio 40518 Fuel tanks (which I waited until last to do) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98314#98314 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: Kent Forsythe <rv10builder(at)4sythe.com>
Subject: Fuel Tank Leaks
I have completed my tanks and during testing have noticed some leaks along the rear baffle and the tank skins. No doubt I did not get enough or good placement of the tank sealant. Does anyone have any tricks for getting into the tank to get more sealant along that those edges? I thought about taking the fuel senders out so that I could get in through that hole. On the outer edges, I can get in through the fuel cap area. I am having trouble getting to the middle of the tanks though. Is it acceptable to seal on the outside of the tank where the baffle meets the skins? Thanks, Kent Kent Forsythe 40338 - Wings Slow Build All The Way! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse(at)saintaviation.com>
Subject: Fuel Tank Leaks
Date: Mar 02, 2007
Kent, I think the biggest issue would be the size of the leak. Ideally, you want a good seal of Proseal on the inside of the tank so the pressure would be wanting to make it seal more, rather than push it out, which is what you would get if you put it on the outside. It might not make a huge difference, so with the tank already sealed up, you could probably try a little along the outside of that area. Van's, I believe, has mentioned using some kind of locktite that will wick into the hole to seal little holes, especially around a rivet or something like that. Van's also has a kit that you can get to put an access panel in the rear bulkhead, which would allow you to get your hand inside, but that puts that much bigger hole in your tank which could allow other leaks. Again, it comes down to how bad the leak is. If it is leaking along that whole joint, you might even consider drilling it out and redoing the bulkhead. Use plenty of proseal when you do that part. Hope this helps. Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse(at)saintaviation.com www.saintaviation.com Cell: 352-427-0285 Fax: 815-377-3694 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kent Forsythe Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 12:53 PM Subject: RV10-List: Fuel Tank Leaks I have completed my tanks and during testing have noticed some leaks along the rear baffle and the tank skins. No doubt I did not get enough or good placement of the tank sealant. Does anyone have any tricks for getting into the tank to get more sealant along that those edges? I thought about taking the fuel senders out so that I could get in through that hole. On the outer edges, I can get in through the fuel cap area. I am having trouble getting to the middle of the tanks though. Is it acceptable to seal on the outside of the tank where the baffle meets the skins? Thanks, Kent Kent Forsythe 40338 - Wings Slow Build All The Way! -- 2:43 PM ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: "James K Hovis" <james.k.hovis(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Fuel Tank Leaks
Kent & Jesse, In the production world, we've used thinned sealer (I'm not sure how similar the sealer we use is to Proseal) and apply a slight vacuum to the tank. This helps get the sealer wicked into the gap. Will Proseal thin with MEK or Acetone? Kevin H. On 3/2/07, Jesse Saint wrote: > > Kent, > > I think the biggest issue would be the size of the leak. Ideally, you want > a good seal of Proseal on the inside of the tank so the pressure would be > wanting to make it seal more, rather than push it out, which is what you > would get if you put it on the outside. It might not make a huge > difference, so with the tank already sealed up, you could probably try a > little along the outside of that area. Van's, I believe, has mentioned > using some kind of locktite that will wick into the hole to seal little > holes, especially around a rivet or something like that. Van's also has a > kit that you can get to put an access panel in the rear bulkhead, which > would allow you to get your hand inside, but that puts that much bigger hole > in your tank which could allow other leaks. Again, it comes down to how bad > the leak is. If it is leaking along that whole joint, you might even > consider drilling it out and redoing the bulkhead. Use plenty of proseal > when you do that part. > > Hope this helps. > > Jesse Saint > Saint Aviation, Inc. > jesse(at)saintaviation.com > www.saintaviation.com > Cell: 352-427-0285 > Fax: 815-377-3694 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kent Forsythe > Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 12:53 PM > To: RV10List > Subject: RV10-List: Fuel Tank Leaks > > > I have completed my tanks and during testing have noticed some leaks > along the rear baffle and the tank skins. No doubt I did not get > enough or good placement of the tank sealant. Does anyone have any > tricks for getting into the tank to get more sealant along that those > edges? I thought about taking the fuel senders out so that I could get > in through that hole. On the outer edges, I can get in through the fuel > cap area. I am having trouble getting to the middle of the tanks > though. Is it acceptable to seal on the outside of the tank where the > baffle meets the skins? > > Thanks, > > Kent > > Kent Forsythe > 40338 - Wings > Slow Build All The Way! > > > -- > 2:43 PM > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: Rick <ricksked(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Flap positioning system
Eric, ALthough not quite ready for flight I would reconsider the Van's offering which is made by showplanes, a well made product and does exactly what you want it to do but the FPS from Aircraft Extras: www.aircraftextras.com has a lot more features, if I had know about it before I would have used Aircraft Extras. Just the normal 2 cents worth. Rick S. 40185 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Saylor" <Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com>
Subject: Working with Composites: RV-10
Date: Mar 02, 2007
Working with Composites: RV-10 This course will provide an overview of the composite parts and techniques used on Van's Aircraft RV-10 kits. We will focus on correct materials and processes, fitting the composite top and doors, cowl, spinner, fairings, and other composite parts. You will recieve hands-on training to identify and use all necessary materials. Examples of completed and in-process assemblies will be available to view. Who: Harold Bunyi and Dave Saylor. Harold holds a BS in Aeronautical Engineering and built kitplane parts in the Phillipines for many years. He has worked at AirCrafters for 4 years and spends nearly all his time working with composites. I started working with composite kitplanes in 1998. I am an A&P/IA, and I have finished the composite sections of my personal RV-10 project, along with many other composite and aluminum projects. I recieved my BS in Aeronautics from San Jose State. When: April 28 & 29, 2007 (Saturday & Sunday) 8AM-4PM Saturday 8AM-3PM Sunday Where: AirCrafters LLC Watsonville Airport (KWVI) 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 95076 831-722-9141 www.AirCraftersLLC.com <http://www.aircraftersllc.com/> Class size is limited to 15 builders $300 payable by cash, check or credit card Please call or email to register, even if you have emailed expressing interst in the last few days. 50% deposit is required before April 2nd. Balance due before class starts. "Sunday Only" availble for those completing the SportAir Composite course March 24/25, 2007. Cost for Sunday Only is $150. Nearest major airport is San Jose International. 45 minute drive to KWVI. Best Lodging is Watsonville Comfort Inn: 831-728-2300. 10 rooms are reserved under "AirCrafters". Ask for one of those rooms and use your credit card to reserve it. Other lodging is available nearby but the Big Sur Marathon is the same weekend and most local lodging will fill up. Aircraft parking is available at the class site. Please call if we can help with logistics. Many thanks for your interest, Dave Saylor AirCrafters LLC 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 831-722-9141 831-750-0284 CL www.AirCraftersLLC.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com>
Subject: Fuel tank leaks
Pro seal will dissolve in MEK. Fred Williams 40515 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: IFR RV-10 / Bahamas Flight
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: "Scott Schmidt" <sschmidt(at)ussynthetic.com>
Well, I just finished flying some good hard IFR last week in the -10. My wife and I packed up our bags and left Salt Lake City for the Bahamas. Once we hit Texas I flew IFR all the way to the Bahamas. No big storms just low ceilings and clouds at all levels. The RV-10 did awesome and the Cheltons were amazing. I really learned how to quickly modify my flight plan on the Cheltons. I still do have some issues with the altitude wandering from the Chelton and there is a little bit of side to side motion from the Cheltons as well. I would typically let the Cheltons handle the lateral steering and just let the Digiflight handle the altitude. That Digiflight autopilot is great. Out of Jasper TX. I had ceilings at 500 feet and didn't break until 4500 feet. I just took off, hit the autopilot button with a 800 fpm climb with my assigned heading of 090 and it did a great job. I could not be happier. I would have loved to have inflight weather but can't decide which way to go. You can get away without many of the extras but the Digiflight linked with IFR GPS would be a great way to go and it wouldn't break the bank. Unfortunately, we arrived in the Bahamas on Saturday night and received a call within 20 minutes of checking into our hotel that her dad who had been fighting cancer over the last year took a turn for the worse. I put her on a flight first thing Sunday morning and I left Freeport at noon on Sunday and headed to Fort Peirce for customs. Then I left Fort Peirce IFR up the east side of Florida and was vectored right over the Cape Canaveral and Daytona Raceway and cruised in between some big storms. I then landed at Albany Georgia for fuel and then flew to Layfette Louisiania for the night. The next morning I flew to Burnet TX for fuel, then Sante Fe for fuel, then home to Salt Lake City. The RV-10 is a great cross country machine. From Salt Lake to the Bahamas in less than 36 hours including 10 hours of sleep, dinner, and breakfast at Layfette. Fortunately I landed in Salt Lake City at 6:30pm and was able to be there when my father-in-law passed away with all of us by his side Monday night. He was also a pilot and luckily was able to fly in the RV-10 before he passed away. So make sure you all have fun this weekend and take a flight for Randy! He will be greatly missed! http://www.legacy.com/saltlaketribune/Obituaries.asp?Page=LifeStory&Per sonID=86653425 -Scott Schmidt N104XP ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Fuel tank leaks
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
http://corporate.ppg.com/ppg/aerospace/default.htm http://www.ppg.com/prc-desoto/pdf/sglssary.pdf Simply the facts. Flame-Master is not "ProSeal". It is a knockoff copy of the product spec. Think of facial tissue and "Kleenex". Cellophane tape and 3M "Scotchtape". Every good Sheetmetal Instructor can give you a complete lesson in 10 minutes. Mediocre ones never do. Now installing Wet Rivets (those with rivets coated in this damn stuff) takes a little longer. Every good riveter can do wet rivets. Great riveters do it faster and cleaner. John Cox ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: ProSeal for the archives
Date: Mar 02, 2007
From: "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com>
You guys are killing me with your butchered description of my Beloved ProSeal. ProSeal is a high quality PolySulfite Thixotrophic (Sticky Shit) made exclusively by DeSoto, a division of PPG (and unfortunately for my cloths a staple of the Air Carrier Industry - part 121). Van and their Flame Master Product though a "Knock off" form of such a quality product is not and will never be my ProSeal. Like Charleston (Ben Hur and Moses) said "you will have to pry it from my dead hand". There are four distinct reasons for failure in application. 1. Expired product. 2. Improper mix procedure... John G. you can chime in here. 3. Improper atmospherics like humidity or extreme temperatures. 4. Operator error in the installation/application. This is the glue that holds airliners together. The product you are using, (which I would venture to say is not my beloved Proseal) comes in paintable "A" (like syrup) and extrudable "B" (like old toothpaste). Properly applied I can create a convex 1/4 fillet as small as 3/32" of an inch, and then apply a fillet spoon to convert it to a near flawless concave seam of beauty. In bead sizes larger than 3/8" in the hands of an epileptic (no offence intended) I can take a disgusting irregular "sloppy" bead, Mist it with Isopropyl Alcohol and while using a cheap latex glove convert it into a smooth final product. The alcohol evaporates without altering the catalyzed bead. Within minutes it can be cleaned with alcohol. Within hours it requires MEK (which you better know what you are doing). We NEVER ever use Toluene although we have it cause it alters and adulterates the final chemical, cured composition. My beloved Proseal is paintable, it is removable (but a real BITCH) and sticks to any and everything that is clean. Now as to pulling a vacuum, nothing could be further from proper technique. A vacuum (negative pressure) causes atmospherics to enter from outside of a tank. It leads to bead failure. I guess a slight positive pressure could help wick Polysulphite into a fayed seam from within the tank but using correct procedure is always recommended. The slightest excess in either Negative or Positive is going to reform your pristine tank into a new beast. Proseal can be laid over clean, previously applied and cured substrate. The secret is getting it to the specific area of the leak. This is Experimental Aircraft Manufacture so you boys and girls have fun playing with chemicals and toys of dubious result from your chemistry cabinet. John Cox the Turbanator #40600 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jay Rowe" <jfrjr(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Working with Composites: RV-10
Date: Mar 03, 2007
The deposit is in the mail. Jay Rowe ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Saylor To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 5:32 PM Subject: RV10-List: Working with Composites: RV-10 Working with Composites: RV-10 This course will provide an overview of the composite parts and techniques used on Van's Aircraft RV-10 kits. We will focus on correct materials and processes, fitting the composite top and doors, cowl, spinner, fairings, and other composite parts. You will recieve hands-on training to identify and use all necessary materials. Examples of completed and in-process assemblies will be available to view. Who: Harold Bunyi and Dave Saylor. Harold holds a BS in Aeronautical Engineering and built kitplane parts in the Phillipines for many years. He has worked at AirCrafters for 4 years and spends nearly all his time working with composites. I started working with composite kitplanes in 1998. I am an A&P/IA, and I have finished the composite sections of my personal RV-10 project, along with many other composite and aluminum projects. I recieved my BS in Aeronautics from San Jose State. When: April 28 & 29, 2007 (Saturday & Sunday) 8AM-4PM Saturday 8AM-3PM Sunday Where: AirCrafters LLC Watsonville Airport (KWVI) 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 95076 831-722-9141 www.AirCraftersLLC.com Class size is limited to 15 builders $300 payable by cash, check or credit card Please call or email to register, even if you have emailed expressing interst in the last few days. 50% deposit is required before April 2nd. Balance due before class starts. "Sunday Only" availble for those completing the SportAir Composite course March 24/25, 2007. Cost for Sunday Only is $150. Nearest major airport is San Jose International. 45 minute drive to KWVI. Best Lodging is Watsonville Comfort Inn: 831-728-2300. 10 rooms are reserved under "AirCrafters". Ask for one of those rooms and use your credit card to reserve it. Other lodging is available nearby but the Big Sur Marathon is the same weekend and most local lodging will fill up. Aircraft parking is available at the class site. Please call if we can help with logistics. Many thanks for your interest, Dave Saylor AirCrafters LLC 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 831-722-9141 831-750-0284 CL www.AirCraftersLLC.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- 3/1/2007 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Aileron Control Stick Travel
From: "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net>
Date: Mar 03, 2007
Could anyone please help me with the aileron travel distance? Basically, I need to know the control stick distance from the nuetral position to either side until it hits the aileron stops. Or, another way to put it, does your control stick come close or hit the inside of the door handles at full aileron travel (with back elevator of course)? I know many of you probably have the Infinity grip already on but I am trying to get a rough idea until I hook up my controls. Thanks Joe -------- RV8 #80125 RV10 # 40512 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98464#98464 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 2007
From: Sam Marlow <sam(at)fr8dog.net>
Subject: Re: Aileron Control Stick Travel
The best I recall, the ailerons limit the travel somewhat, so, if they hit the side walls now, I think that's normal. Sam Marlow zackrv8 wrote: > > Could anyone please help me with the aileron travel distance? Basically, I need to know the control stick distance from the nuetral position to either side until it hits the aileron stops. > > Or, another way to put it, does your control stick come close or hit the inside of the door handles at full aileron travel (with back elevator of course)? > > I know many of you probably have the Infinity grip already on but I am trying to get a rough idea until I hook up my controls. > > Thanks > > Joe > > -------- > RV8 #80125 > RV10 # 40512 > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98464#98464 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 2007
From: Tim Lewis <Tim_Lewis(at)msm.umr.edu>
Subject: Fuel flow gauge based on fuel injector spider pressure
Does anybody know the pressure range of the "gauge" port (nozzle pressure) on the Bendix spider (RSA-5AD1 fuel injection system)? This would seem to be a handy item to display in the cockpit (or on the ground) to help troubleshoot things like plugged injectors. My primary fuel flow measurement will come from my engine monitor's flowscan. Thanks, Tim Lewis ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Aileron Control Stick Travel
From: "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net>
Date: Mar 03, 2007
Thanks Sam! quote="sam(at)fr8dog.net"]The best I recall, the ailerons limit the travel somewhat, so, if they hit the side walls now, I think that's normal. Sam Marlow zackrv8 wrote: > > > Could anyone please help me with the aileron travel distance? Basically, I need to know the control stick distance from the nuetral position to either side until it hits the aileron stops. > > Or, another way to put it, does your control stick come close or hit the inside of the door handles at full aileron travel (with back elevator of course)? > > I know many of you probably have the Infinity grip already on but I am trying to get a rough idea until I hook up my controls. > > Thanks > > Joe > > -------- > RV8 #80125 > RV10 # 40512 > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98464#98464 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- RV8 #80125 RV10 # 40512 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98558#98558 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 2007
From: James Hein <n8vim(at)arrl.net>
Subject: How long to wait until priming/painting Proseal?
How long do you have to wait after applying Class B-2 Proseal before you can spray primer on it? I am not asking for the cure time (I already know it seems forever!) bit I want to know how soon I can spray primer over the Proseal. Is it hours or days? John? -Jim 40384 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DejaVu" <wvu(at)ameritel.net>
Subject: Re: Aileron Control Stick Travel
Date: Mar 03, 2007
Joe, Mine comes close (maybe an inch) to the side. Of course it hits your lap way before that. At full fwd stick mine slightly hits the panel. My panel extends 1" below the stock panel. Anh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sam Marlow" <sam(at)fr8dog.net> Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2007 10:45 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aileron Control Stick Travel > > > The best I recall, the ailerons limit the travel somewhat, so, if they hit > the side walls now, I think that's normal. > Sam Marlow > > zackrv8 wrote: >> >> Could anyone please help me with the aileron travel distance? Basically, >> I need to know the control stick distance from the nuetral position to >> either side until it hits the aileron stops. >> Or, another way to put it, does your control stick come close or hit the >> inside of the door handles at full aileron travel (with back elevator of >> course)? >> I know many of you probably have the Infinity grip already on but I am >> trying to get a rough idea until I hook up my controls. >> >> Thanks >> >> Joe >> >> -------- >> RV8 #80125 RV10 # 40512 >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98464#98464 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: dogsbark(at)comcast.net
Subject: Re: Flap positioning system
Date: Mar 04, 2007
Question......I'm in the process of installing the doulbers for the Com antennas and going the typical conduit and alodine approach others have used under the rear seats. I made the hole in the bottom skin and doubler just large enough for the antenna connection to fit through. Do I need to make this slightly larger so in the future I can get the BNC (sp) connector through the bottom if I need to make a new connection? It will be trapped in there otherwise. Will this cause any problems with grounding? This stuff is all new to me. Thanks for any help. Sean Blair #40225
Question......I'm in the process of installing the doulbers for the Com antennas and going the typical conduit and alodine approach others have used under the rear seats.  I made the hole in the bottom skin and doubler just large enough for the antenna connection to fit through.  Do I need to make this slightly larger so in the future I can get the BNC (sp) connector through the bottom if I need to make a new connection?  It will be trapped in there otherwise.  Will this cause any problems with grounding?
 
This stuff is all new to me.  Thanks for any help.
 
Sean Blair
#40225

      
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: dogsbark(at)comcast.net
Subject: Com antenna
Date: Mar 04, 2007
Oooops...forgot to change the subject Question......I'm in the process of installing the doulbers for the Com antennas and going the typical conduit and alodine approach others have used under the rear seats. I made the hole in the bottom skin and doubler just large enough for the antenna connection to fit through. Do I need to make this slightly larger so in the future I can get the BNC (sp) connector through the bottom if I need to make a new connection? It will be trapped in there otherwise. Will this cause any problems with grounding? This stuff is all new to me. Thanks for any help. Sean Blair #40225
 
 
Oooops...forgot to change the subject
 
Question......I'm in the process of installing the doulbers for the Com antennas and going the typical conduit and alodine approach others have used under the rear seats.  I made the hole in the bottom skin and doubler just large enough for the antenna connection to fit through.  Do I need to make this slightly larger so in the future I can get the BNC (sp) connector through the bottom if I need to make a new connection?  It will be trapped in there otherwise.  Will this cause any problems with grounding?
 
This stuff is all new to me.  Thanks for any help.
 
Sean Blair
#40225

      
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 2007
From: "John N. Strain II" <aircarepros(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Air Conditioning Kit Complete and Posted
Hi All, Flightline AC has posted the completion of our kits for the RV10. Take a look at the website http://flightlineac.com/vans_aircraft_kits. The overhead photos posted by Thane States is of one of Flightline's overheads that he is showing his installation of. Ed Hayden of Hillsboro has the prototype installed in his airplane and several kits are nearing completion across the country. John Strain Flightline AC, Inc. 541-330-5466 --------------------------------- It's here! Your new message! Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse(at)saintaviation.com>
Subject: Com antenna
Date: Mar 04, 2007
Absolutely! If you are going to have a connection in a closed area, you need to have the hole big enough to get the wire through, and leave plenty of slack to be able to replace the connector a couple of times if necessary. Without that hole, you won't be able to install the antenna at all because you won't be able to get the wire out of the hole to connect it to the antenna. You should be grounding fine through the screws, which I assume are going into nutplates. Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse(at)saintaviation.com www.saintaviation.com Cell: 352-427-0285 Fax: 815-377-3694 _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of dogsbark(at)comcast.net Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2007 11:20 PM Subject: RV10-List: Com antenna Oooops...forgot to change the subject Question......I'm in the process of installing the doulbers for the Com antennas and going the typical conduit and alodine approach others have used under the rear seats. I made the hole in the bottom skin and doubler just large enough for the antenna connection to fit through. Do I need to make this slightly larger so in the future I can get the BNC (sp) connector through the bottom if I need to make a new connection? It will be trapped in there otherwise. Will this cause any problems with grounding? This stuff is all new to me. Thanks for any help. Sean Blair #40225 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DejaVu" <wvu(at)ameritel.net>
Subject: Re: Com antenna
Date: Mar 04, 2007
This reminds me of one squawk I forgot to mention in my PIREP. I had a pro blem with the radio where others could hear me fine but I could not hear th em. I could not even hear the chase plane unless it was within 20 feet of me. Originally I installed the cork gasket that came with the antenna in be tween the antenna base and the fuselage. i.e. grounding through the screws only. Once I took the gasket off grounding improved and I could hear peop le just fine. Anh N591VU ----- Original Message ----- From: Jesse Saint To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2007 12:10 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Com antenna Absolutely! If you are going to have a connection in a closed area, you need to have the hole big enough to get the wire through, and leave plenty of slack to be able to replace the connector a couple of times if necessary Without that hole, you won't be able to install the antenna at all becau se you won't be able to get the wire out of the hole to connect it to the a ntenna. You should be grounding fine through the screws, which I assume ar e going into nutplates. Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse(at)saintaviation.com www.saintaviation.com Cell: 352-427-0285 Fax: 815-377-3694 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server (at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of dogsbark(at)comcast.net Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2007 11:20 PM To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RV10-List: Com antenna Oooops...forgot to change the subject Question......I'm in the process of installing the doulbers for the Com antennas and going the typical conduit and alodine approach others have us ed under the rear seats. I made the hole in the bottom skin and doubler ju st large enough for the antenna connection to fit through. Do I need to ma ke this slightly larger so in the future I can get the BNC (sp) connector t hrough the bottom if I need to make a new connection? It will be trapped i n there otherwise. Will this cause any problems with grounding? This stuff is all new to me. Thanks for any help. Sean Blair #40225 http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 2007
From: aj <ajhauter(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: IFR RV-10 / Bahamas Flight
Scott, Thanks for the update, always exciting to hear about rventures. Just a thought about the Cheltons-- I recall Tim saying the Pinpoint doesn't use gps inputs for its navigation solution. He seemed to view this as a positive in case your gps feeds get blocked, delayed, etc. Nevertheless, no sensor onboard provides as accurate a positional estimate as gps, so it really doesn't matter how superior the algorithm may be, the optimal solution would have gps. Just wondering if this might be the cause of some of the altitude wondering... ajay Well, I just finished flying some good hard IFR last week in the -10. My wife and I packed up our bags and left Salt Lake City for the Bahamas. Once we hit Texas I flew IFR all the way to the Bahamas. No big storms just low ceilings and clouds at all levels. The RV-10 did awesome and the Cheltons were amazing. I really learned how to quickly modify my flight plan on the Cheltons. I still do have some issues with the altitude wandering from the Chelton and there is a little bit of side to side motion from the Cheltons as well. I would typically let the Cheltons handle the lateral steering and just let the Digiflight handle the altitude. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Aileron Control Stick Travel
From: "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net>
Date: Mar 04, 2007
Thanks Anh. It was hard for me to stick my fat fingers between the door and Vans square handle. Dave made up a prototype inside door handle from aluminum billet and we noticed the stick comes very close. However, after sitting in the plane, you are right....the stick will hit your legs before it hits the door handle. Sounds like we might have to chop a little off the stick to clear the foward panel with an Infinity Stick Grip on it. Zack wvu(at)ameritel.net wrote: > Joe, > Mine comes close (maybe an inch) to the side. Of course it hits your lap way > before that. > > At full fwd stick mine slightly hits the panel. My panel extends 1" below > the stock panel. > Anh > > --- -------- RV8 #80125 RV10 # 40512 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98617#98617 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: John Ackerman <johnag5b(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Re: Com antenna
Date: Mar 04, 2007
Sean - FWIW, I made a couple inspection plates right over the antennae in the forward outer corners of the seat floors, and mounted them with angles riveted to the ribs and a homemade U-channel at the aft end of the doubler, riveted to the seat floor. This makes it easy to get at the antennae, and helps immensely with running the wiring. I put a hole in the middle of the inspection plate with a large rubber grommet that was a slide fit on Van's conduit, and ran the conduit vertically there to and through the uppermost lightening hole immediately forward of the inspection plate. This allows the inspection plate to be slid up and out of the way when you need to get in there. There is one conduit running under the baggage floors to the inspection plate/antenna area, and another that goes forward from there. This lets me push and pull on the big #2 cable, especially, thus expediting the threading of wires. Hope this is of some use John Ackerman On Mar 3, 2007, at 9:19 PM, dogsbark(at)comcast.net wrote: > > > Oooops...forgot to change the subject > > Question......I'm in the process of installing the doulbers for the > Com antennas and going the typical conduit and alodine approach > others have used under the rear seats. I made the hole in the > bottom skin and doubler just large enough for the antenna > connection to fit through. Do I need to make this slightly larger > so in the future I can get the BNC (sp) connector through the > bottom if I need to make a new connection? It will be trapped in > there otherwise. Will this cause any problems with grounding? > > This stuff is all new to me. Thanks for any help. > > Sean Blair > #40225 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DejaVu" <wvu(at)ameritel.net>
Subject: Re: IFR RV-10 / Bahamas Flight
Date: Mar 04, 2007
I don't fully understand the guts of the DigiFlight II. It can work as a stand alone unit and not relying on an external AHRS, right? Sometimes engaging the ALT hold commands a ~500fpm descent. Sometimes it would eventually level out. Other times I get impatient waiting to see if it would level out. Doing an inflight GYRO reset usually corrects the problem. Anh N591VU ----- Original Message ----- From: "aj" <ajhauter(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2007 1:50 AM Subject: RV10-List: Re: IFR RV-10 / Bahamas Flight > > > Scott, > > Thanks for the update, always exciting to hear about rventures. > > Just a thought about the Cheltons-- I recall Tim saying the Pinpoint > doesn't use gps inputs for its navigation solution. He seemed to view > this as a positive in case your gps feeds get blocked, delayed, etc. > Nevertheless, no sensor onboard provides as accurate a positional estimate > as gps, so it really doesn't matter how superior the algorithm may be, the > optimal solution would have gps. Just wondering if this might be the > cause of some of the altitude wondering... > > ajay > > Well, I just finished flying some good hard IFR last week in the -10. My > wife and I packed up our bags and left Salt Lake City for the Bahamas. > Once we hit Texas I flew IFR all the way to the Bahamas. No big storms > just low ceilings and clouds at all levels. The RV-10 did awesome and the > Cheltons were amazing. I really learned how to quickly modify my flight > plan on the Cheltons. I still do have some issues with the altitude > wandering from the Chelton and there is a little bit of side to side > motion from the Cheltons as well. I would typically let the Cheltons > handle the lateral steering and just let the Digiflight handle the > altitude. > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 04, 2007
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: IFR RV-10 / Bahamas Flight
AJ, No, the GPS aiding, or lack thereof, isn't at all what's in play with Scott's wanderings. It's solely a function of getting the proper settings in both the screens and the autopilot. Making an autopilot fly straight is easy. Making an autopilot capable of GPSS fly a perfectly straight track with no wing wag is slightly (but only slightly harder). Making it fly perfectly level and fly up and down and capture target altitudes is a bit harder yet. This is just because the more function you have, the more variety of settings there are that you have to tweak for your specific aircraft to get them to perform. I gave Scott some baseline settings a while back that improved his performance a bit. I've had pretty much perfect performance laterally, and after a bunch of testing, and adjusting some non-standard stuff on the TruTrak, I had very good vertical performance too. Not perfect, in that altitudes would wander 20-30' at times, but good enough to fly any approach. The thing to keep in mind is that before EFIS, with their great air data and resolution, you wouldn't generally even know if you were 10-20' off...the precision wasn't there. Now we know. Currently, we're on the final quest for perfection with getting the proper mix of settings for the 2 main models of TruTraks to work well with GPSV. There were some software issues with the TruTrak's that were fixed in software version 2.22, so if Scott's not running 2.22, then that's first and foremost something to change. They also did some work on improving it in Chelton SW 6.0A9, and more in the soon to come 6.0A10 that are supposed to keep wanderings with GPSV and TruTraks down to 7'. But we're still working on identifying the proper settings with the current software. The most important thing to remember is that anyone who's buying any system that will control their AP for lateral and especially vertical performance is that there is a bit of flight work to be done to get them tuned in. You can't do as I did for months and just take off and go places....you need to go out and actually do some tuning flights to make sure you get everything right for your airplane. The baselines that we have now are pretty good, but everyones may be a little different due to airframe differences. There are many settings that affect things...and I learned a couple more even last week. EFIS: Autopilot Analog Gain (affects roll and heading capture) Autopilot Pitch Gain (affects pitch performance) Vproc (setting procedure speed affects roll and wideness of turns and heading capture) Vclimb (setting climb speed affects pitch angle of autopilot... may also be using mach climb settings) Autopilot Roll Steering PID Loop (Needs to be disabled since TT does it in their system) Autopilot Valid Polarity (should be "open collector is valid") TruTrak: Lateral Activity (greatly affects roll characteristics) Lateral Torque Bank Angle (Low-med-high) Microactivity (both pitch and roll...can definitely affect performance) GPSS Gain (Obviously, this can affect a lot on turns and GPSS captures) Vertical Activity (this setting has a huge affect on our RV-10s) Min. Airspeed (affects pitch performance) Max. Airspeed (affects pitch performance) Static Lag (can affect how the AP assumes the speed at which your static system is responding to altitude differences) Half Step (can give finer resolution to pitch adjustments) GPSV Gain (has a huge affect on ability to hold and capture altitudes in some cases) There are others that have possible affects too in the TT. So you can see from the above list, it's definitely not going to be "plug-and-play" for anyone who's going to fly a system with all the vertical and lateral features. I've had a pretty easy time getting lateral to work perfectly. It took a bit of playing to get to where I was very satisfied vertically. But not being one to accept less than perfect, I'm currently working with a few people to come up with what will work as the best possible RV-10 baseline....which will also assume you're running the very latest TruTrak and EFIS softwares. As recently as last week, I found out that Vclimb, on the EFIS, wasn't just there so you could mark your EFIS speed tape with climb speed. I had it set to 106kts. Well, it turns out it also affects the pitch angle for altitude captures....so now I need to go out and set to perhaps a more appropriate setting for cruise climb. It's these little things that can make all the difference. For Scott's lateral wandering, I think that should be easy to lick. I'd start with perhaps trying a number between 100 and 128 for the "Autopilot Analog Gain" setting, and set Vproc to 145-150kts. And, I'd say try an Lateral activity of 3 on the AP, and maybe try switching between bank angle high and bank angle medium. For the vertical wandering, I'd say start by making sure he's at 6.0A9 and TruTrak 2.22...and if not, stop there and get that taken care of. Then shoot me every speed and AP setting in the EFIS, and every autopilot setting and I'll take a peek at what's set. It won't be long though and we'll have a better baseline documented that he and anyone else can refer to in getting started. With the dropout of D2A from the Chelton line, we're actually getting much better support. There is now open communication to a technical support person within Chelton, which is new because D2A used to only deal with people directly and not have you call Chelton. Deliveries are flowing, and I hear they're sending out about 20 systems per week of the old D2A "theft" backlog. People are getting systems with both Crossbow and Pinpoint AHRS installed and flying. Chelton has stepped up an begun calling the Pinpoint the "Chelton AHRS" (refer to their website), and is supporting it fully, and unofficially we've heard that the manufacturing was done by one of the other foreign Chelton group companies along with components from the same Chelton contractors who actually made many of the parts in the EFIS. So they're stepping out from behind the curtain a bit and are doing much better than D2A at pretty much everything. Heck, the fact that when people pay for equipment they get it is something new...with the D2A situation. I've heard some rumors as to the amount of their "theft" (I'll just call it that because it's obviously "theft by fraud") and the dollar figures are staggering. So in short, it isn't surprising to see someone having wandering problems, both laterally and vertically, when externally controlling their AP. There's a lot of work to do....and everyone who's installing a similar high-end EFIS and autopilot will go through these same steps. It doesn't have to do with the GPS aiding of the AHRS, but the large number of settings which must be set. Too many builders, and I'm not pointing fingers at Scott here, just plug it all together, (or buy a pre-made panel), and then just assume it's all going to work the way they want when they start flying. This is probably true, if you're running the old six-pack and just a GPS/Nav/Com, but certainly not when you're running any of the most sophisticated stuff (OP Tech / Garmin / Chelton / Grand Rapids) Scott, shoot me an offline email and lets get your situation analyzed a bit and lick this thing. You're going to start a new flying season going all over the country...you may as well have it all set up perfectly and working beautifully. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying aj wrote: > > Scott, > > Thanks for the update, always exciting to hear about rventures. > > Just a thought about the Cheltons-- I recall Tim saying the Pinpoint > doesn't use gps inputs for its navigation solution. He seemed to > view this as a positive in case your gps feeds get blocked, delayed, > etc. Nevertheless, no sensor onboard provides as accurate a > positional estimate as gps, so it really doesn't matter how superior > the algorithm may be, the optimal solution would have gps. Just > wondering if this might be the cause of some of the altitude > wondering... > > ajay > > Well, I just finished flying some good hard IFR last week in the -10. > My wife and I packed up our bags and left Salt Lake City for the > Bahamas. Once we hit Texas I flew IFR all the way to the Bahamas. No > big storms just low ceilings and clouds at all levels. The RV-10 did > awesome and the Cheltons were amazing. I really learned how to > quickly modify my flight plan on the Cheltons. I still do have some > issues with the altitude wandering from the Chelton and there is a > little bit of side to side motion from the Cheltons as well. I would > typically let the Cheltons handle the lateral steering and just let > the Digiflight handle the altitude. > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jerry Grimmonpre" <jerry(at)mc.net>
Subject: Re: IFR RV-10 / Bahamas Flight
Date: Mar 04, 2007
Tim ... This is good info ... are you archiving posts, such as this, to your site? A lurker ... Jerry Grimmonpre RV8 wires ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Olson" <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2007 9:23 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: IFR RV-10 / Bahamas Flight ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chris Hukill" <cjhukill(at)cox.net>
Subject: Com antennas
Date: Mar 04, 2007
Why don't you mount the antennas just forward of the rear seats, under the flap tube cover? The coax is accessible when the covers are off, and the flange of the aft spar bulkhead is a ready made doubler for the aft mount screws of the antennas. I'll send you pictures if you want. Chris Hukill cjhukill(at)cox.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Hertner" <effectus(at)rogers.com>
Subject: New Design Brake Pedals For RV Aircraft
Date: Mar 04, 2007
RV-10 Listers, A while ago I posted that I had finished the design work on a new type of stainless steel brake pedals for RVs. I would like to thank you for the replies and the encouragement to bring them to market. I am happy to announce that I have been able to do just that. I have been fortunate to team up with Mike Lauritsen and his excellent company Cleaveland Aircraft Tools to offer these brake pedals for sale. Mike has great record of providing high quality tools and accessories for the experimental builder. Mike has the brake pedals listed on his website and will be placed in the Accessories section of his next catalogue. They are being offered for $199.00 per set and are ready to ship. Here is a link to Mike's site where you can read more about this new product: http://www.cleavelandtoolstore.com/prodinfo.asp?number=RVSGPEDAL Thanks everyone and I hope that you enjoy this new product from my company Effectus AeroProducts Inc. Stay tuned as there are a number of other products that I have in development. I will be offering them to you through Cleaveland Aircraft Tools as well. Dave Hertner #40164 Attaching Canopy ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 04, 2007
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: Wing Heights (plus T-Hanger measure request)
Jim and all, Anh just called me from his hangar where he obtained some recently requested measurements. Here they are: Ground to wing root at spar above wheel: 27.5" Ground to wing tip at spar at end of aluminum wing: 35" Ground to wing at trailing edge wing root: 28.5" Ground to wing end of aluminum near tip at trailing edge: 36.5" Ground to tiedown bolt: 34.5" Ground to tiedown bolt tail: 37" Trailing edge of wing to spinner tip (the fit required for depth of T-hangar): 135" Hope those measurements help everyone who wanted them. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying > > ----- Original Message ----- From: <jim(at)CombsFive.Com> > To: > Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2007 9:01 AM > Subject: RV10-List: Wing Heights > >> >> I have a hanger that can be shared with an RV-7. Can someone with a >> finished aircraft give the a couple of distance measurements? >> >> (1) Just outside the main landing gear, Distance to the bottom of the >> wing to the ground. Spar and edge of raised flap. >> >> (2) At the wing tip / wing intersection, Distance to the bottom of the >> wing to the ground. Spar and rear edge of wingtip >> >> (3) Tail tie down to ground measurement. >> >> We are looking to see if the wings will overlap enough to allow really >> close quarters. It would be nice not to have to move one airplane to >> get the other out. >> >> Thanks, Jim Combs >> N312F - Finish Kit >> 40192 >> ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Tail cone F-1032
From: Michael D Chase <MChase(at)gdatp.com>
Date: Mar 05, 2007
Question to the group did anyone else have an issue with their Longerion breaking during the bending operation or did I get a bad piece of extruded AL? I was attempting to put a ~2 degree bend in my F1032R Longerion, had it in the vice supported at the 20" mark, my 8 year old daughter was preloading and when I struck it about the 5th time "firmly" right next to the vice with a rubber mallet it broke where 8 -12 inches further down the "being bent" end where I had drilled the hole. I can't figure this out, why would it break in this location? It wasn't hitting anything and from the attached photo you can see I as striking 8-12 inches up stream of the break. My concern is I may have gotten a piece of AL with a fault, cold shock or something? I don't know that much about civilian Aerospace requirements but would think there must be some test requirements for extruded material; X-ray, penetrant or MPI. It seems that some if not most of the Al angle in this kit is structural has anyone else had similar issues with this piece or any others? By the way I am now afraid to bend the other side any suggestions from the group on a good way to bend this piece. Michael Chase General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products 802-657-6029 Office 802-922-5930 Cell mchase(at)gdatp.com This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is private, confidential, or exempt from disclosure. Any unauthorized review, use, copying, printing, disclosure, retention, or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply to this e-mail, and delete all copies without disclosing this message to others. Thank you. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: PILOTDDS(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 05, 2007
Subject: Re: Empty weight..
728dd came in at 1613 with paint and 3 screen grt .Also garmin 430 sl30 and tx.That includes paint but no fairings.I used the hartzell. ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Tail cone F-1032
From: "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com>
Date: Mar 05, 2007
Michael, I also "firmly" bent mine in the same manner as you and didn't have this problem. I would suggest that you call Vans and send them the pictures. It does look like there could have been weak point in the metal with teh fairly clean break, but Vans will be the ones to ulitmately determine this and send you a new piece. I would say go ahead with the other piece and start softer and build up to more firm strikes. If the second one bends properly you have at least validated your method prior to contacting Vans. Just my 2 cents as there are a thousand ways to skin a cat. Eric Kallio 40518 Fuse on order Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98828#98828 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2007
From: "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com>
Subject: EAA Sport air workshops
Here's a plug for the EAA sportair workshops. I attended the one on electrical systems and Avionics in Dallas this weekend. It was taught by Dick Koehler. Very worthwhile for a newbie like me. The course went over the design and theory of the electrical systems for our aircraft. We wired up an intercom harness and a small panel wiring exercise which basically was the nav lights and panel light circut from the standard van's wiring diagram. I'd recommended it to anyone who does not have a good back round in electronics. Also got to meet Mark and Angela Lanier from Fort Worth. They are currently working on wing construction. Fred Williams 40515 Bottom wing skins riveted ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Jessen" <jjessen(at)rcn.com>
Subject: Re: Tail cone F-1032
Date: Mar 05, 2007
Yeah, I second that. They'd want to know this has happened, and I've never heard this happening before. You don't have to put that much pressure on the longeron, and I'm sure you didn't. I don't have my electronic plans with me, but you might think about the order of doing the drilling and cutting. Wonder if you might mark the location of the drill site first, bend, then drill. John Jessen (#328) -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric_Kallio Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 9:22 AM Subject: RV10-List: Re: Tail cone F-1032 Michael, I also "firmly" bent mine in the same manner as you and didn't have this problem. I would suggest that you call Vans and send them the pictures. It does look like there could have been weak point in the metal with teh fairly clean break, but Vans will be the ones to ulitmately determine this and send you a new piece. I would say go ahead with the other piece and start softer and build up to more firm strikes. If the second one bends properly you have at least validated your method prior to contacting Vans. Just my 2 cents as there are a thousand ways to skin a cat. Eric Kallio 40518 Fuse on order Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98828#98828 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2007
From: Shawn Moon <moons1999(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: EAA Sport air workshops
Fred,=0A Wish I would have known that. I was there doing Composite Cons truction and it would have been good to meet you and the Laniers, especiall y since I am now in the Fort Worth area. As for the composite class, I wou ld recommend it....... but not necessarily for RV-10 builders. Unfortunate ly we did not spend much time on filling and finishing, which is what I thi nk 10 builders need more of. It was a very good class, though, for anybody who would like to try their hand at creating parts or have other projects that involve more "ground up" composite construction. It was a lot of fun with a lot of interaction and a knowledgeable instructor.=0A=0A--Shawn=0A40 366=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred@ suddenlinkmail.com>=0ATo: RV 10 =0ASent: Monday, M arch 5, 2007 8:20:39 AM=0ASubject: RV10-List: EAA Sport air workshops=0A kmail.com>=0A=0AHere's a plug for the EAA sportair workshops. I attended t he one on =0Aelectrical systems and Avionics in Dallas this weekend. It wa s taught =0Aby Dick Koehler. Very worthwhile for a newbie like me. The co urse went =0Aover the design and theory of the electrical systems for our a ircraft. =0AWe wired up an intercom harness and a small panel wiring exerc ise which =0Abasically was the nav lights and panel light circut from the s tandard =0Avan's wiring diagram. =0A=0AI'd recommended it to anyone who doe s not have a good back round in =0Aelectronics. =0A=0AAlso got to meet Mark and Angela Lanier from Fort Worth. They are =0Acurrently working on wing construction.=0A=0AFred Williams =0A40515=0ABottom wing skins riveted=0A=0A ========================0A=0A =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A =0A____________________________________________ ________________________________________=0AThe fish are biting. =0AGet more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing.=0Ahttp://searchmarket ing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2007
From: Jay Brinkmeyer <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: What's the going rate on a "reaman" IO540 D4A5?
Hey All, I'm looking for a sanity check on price/features for a "reman" zero time IO540 D4A5. It's a never used engine (vintage 1979). Includes: Fuel injection, magnetos, plugs, harness, starter 6 mo warranty 8.5-1 compression ratio Full test cell (fuel flow and oil pressure checkes) and dyno balance All AD's complied with (crank AD not relevant as the crank is older than thoses affected) $36.5K (is this a fair price) Is there anything else I should ask the vendor about? Thanks, Jay Never Miss an Email Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started! http://mobile.yahoo.com/services?promote=mail ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Tail cone F-1032
From: "egohr1" <EGOHR86(at)alumni.carnegiemellon.edu>
Date: Mar 05, 2007
I would send it to Vans. I just finished benting the Fuse longerons from the 3/4 x 3/4 x .125 angle, and this bent is gentle and easy compared with them. -------- eric gohr EGOHR86(at)alumni.carnegiemellon.edu Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98880#98880 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2007
From: "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: What's the going rate on a "reaman" IO540 D4A5?
#1 Question would be how it has been stored. Has it been torn down, inspected and resealed, or still in original 1979 assembly mode, in which case the seals are probably junk even if the engine was perfectly pickled. If it hasn't been open since 1979, as it sounds, I'd factor in the cost of a teardown, inspect and reseal, figuring any corroded or otherwise unairworthy part would be covered under said warranty. Otherwise, you face the fairly high risk of something failing, perhaps 7 months after you buy it and then you have to teardown and fix with no warranty. On 3/5/07, Jay Brinkmeyer wrote: > > Hey All, > > I'm looking for a sanity check on price/features for a "reman" zero time IO540 D4A5. It's a never used engine (vintage 1979). > > Includes: > Fuel injection, magnetos, plugs, harness, starter > 6 mo warranty > 8.5-1 compression ratio > Full test cell (fuel flow and oil pressure checkes) and dyno balance > All AD's complied with (crank AD not relevant as the crank is older than thoses affected) > > $36.5K (is this a fair price) > > Is there anything else I should ask the vendor about? > > Thanks, > Jay > > > Never Miss an Email > Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started! > http://mobile.yahoo.com/services?promote=mail > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2007
From: Niko <owl40188(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Infinity leather
I am wondering if Infinity is selling the sticks with a leather option or i f this something the builders a putting on.=0A=0ANiko ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2007
From: Niko <owl40188(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Nosewheel grease fitting
There is a grease fitting on the nosewheel but no mention of applying greas e in the manual. It doesn't appear to me that grease at this location woul d do much good. Are builders putting grease at this location?=0A=0AThanks =0ANiko=0A40188 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "jdalton77" <jdalton77(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: EAA Sport air workshops
Date: Mar 05, 2007
I'm taking it in April. Thanks for the Pirep! Jeff Wings ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 9:20 AM Subject: RV10-List: EAA Sport air workshops > > > Here's a plug for the EAA sportair workshops. I attended the one on > electrical systems and Avionics in Dallas this weekend. It was taught by > Dick Koehler. Very worthwhile for a newbie like me. The course went over > the design and theory of the electrical systems for our aircraft. We > wired up an intercom harness and a small panel wiring exercise which > basically was the nav lights and panel light circut from the standard > van's wiring diagram. > I'd recommended it to anyone who does not have a good back round in > electronics. > Also got to meet Mark and Angela Lanier from Fort Worth. They are > currently working on wing construction. > > Fred Williams 40515 > Bottom wing skins riveted > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: What's the going rate on a "reaman" IO540 D4A5?
Date: Mar 05, 2007
From: "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com>
Jay, I'd either negotiate a better price or pass on it. You can get a NEW engine from Mattituck (and I suspect others) for only $2K more and it will have a new engine warranty, etc. Since this engine has been sitting since 1979 it should at least be gone over to determine if the internals are Ok. Another RV-10 builder had his engine gone through by the local engine shop, didn't need any parts (except gaskets, rings, etc), and the cost was about $2000. That expense alone gets you to the price of new even if no parts are needed which is doubtful. I would think that as a minimum the fuel system would need to have seals replaced. Bob -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Brinkmeyer Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 11:16 AM Subject: RV10-List: What's the going rate on a "reaman" IO540 D4A5? Hey All, I'm looking for a sanity check on price/features for a "reman" zero time IO540 D4A5. It's a never used engine (vintage 1979). Includes: Fuel injection, magnetos, plugs, harness, starter 6 mo warranty 8.5-1 compression ratio Full test cell (fuel flow and oil pressure checkes) and dyno balance All AD's complied with (crank AD not relevant as the crank is older than thoses affected) $36.5K (is this a fair price) Is there anything else I should ask the vendor about? Thanks, Jay Never Miss an Email Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started! http://mobile.yahoo.com/services?promote=mail ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2007
Subject: What's the going rate on a "reaman" IO540 D4A5?
From: "William Curtis" <wcurtis(at)nerv10.com>
Jay,=0A=0AStrickly speaking, you realize that only the Lycoming facto ry can "reman" an engine to "zero time" right?- If anyone else other than the factory does it then it is simply an overhaul.-- If this is just a n overhaul, then an-additional $3,500 could get you a brand new "clone." =0A=0AWhen was it "reman'd?"- If more than 12 years ago then it is effectively "run out" even though it is "never used."- Additional informa tion is required to fully answer your question.=0A=0AWilliam=0Ahtt p://wcurtis.nerv10.com/ =0A=0A--------------------------------------- y All,=0A=0AI'm looking for a sanity check on price/features for a "r eman" zero time IO540 D4A5. It's a never used engine (vintage 1979).=0A =0AIncludes:=0AFuel injection, magnetos, plugs, harness, starter =0A6 mo warranty=0A8.5-1 compression ratio=0AFull test cell (fuel flo w and oil pressure checkes) and dyno balance=0AAll AD's complied with (c rank AD not relevant as the crank is older than thoses affected)=0A =0A$36.5K (is this a fair price)=0A=0AIs there anything else I should ask the vendor about?=0A=0AThanks,=0AJay=0A=0ANever Miss an Email=0AStay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started! =======================0A =0A ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2007
From: Niko <owl40188(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Overhead Liner
One more question for the day.=0A=0AThis one is in reference to the overhea d liner and what to do at the seam where two sections mate and where the l iner ends like the door posts. Is some type of binder being used here? I am going to use the fiberglass around the perimeter, however, I am wonderin g about all the other places where the liner ends.=0A=0AThanks=0ANiko=0A401 88 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel flow gauge based on fuel injector spider pressure
From: "Don" <airflow2(at)bellsouth.net>
Date: Mar 05, 2007
0-10 PSI If you want the back pressure curve, you can email me at airflow2(at)bellsouth.net. Don Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98926#98926 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "jdalton77" <jdalton77(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: EAA Sport air workshops
Date: Mar 05, 2007
I'm taking it in April. Thanks for the Pirep! Jeff Wings ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 9:20 AM Subject: RV10-List: EAA Sport air workshops > > > Here's a plug for the EAA sportair workshops. I attended the one on > electrical systems and Avionics in Dallas this weekend. It was taught by > Dick Koehler. Very worthwhile for a newbie like me. The course went over > the design and theory of the electrical systems for our aircraft. We > wired up an intercom harness and a small panel wiring exercise which > basically was the nav lights and panel light circut from the standard > van's wiring diagram. > I'd recommended it to anyone who does not have a good back round in > electronics. > Also got to meet Mark and Angela Lanier from Fort Worth. They are > currently working on wing construction. > > Fred Williams 40515 > Bottom wing skins riveted > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2007
From: Bill DeRouchey <billderou(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: What's the going rate on a "reaman" IO540 D4A5?
Only Lycoming can produce a "remanufactured" Lycoming engine. If this is other than a genuine Lycoming zero time reman then, at that price, run. A way to know is the engine log will have no entries and the front inside page will be a sticker signed by Lycoming with 0.0 for engine total time. Also, a Lycoming reman will have the suffix "R" on the serial number. Good Luck, Bill DeRouchey N939SB, flying bill(at)wtdaviationtechnology.com "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)" wrote: Jay, I'd either negotiate a better price or pass on it. You can get a NEW engine from Mattituck (and I suspect others) for only $2K more and it will have a new engine warranty, etc. Since this engine has been sitting since 1979 it should at least be gone over to determine if the internals are Ok. Another RV-10 builder had his engine gone through by the local engine shop, didn't need any parts (except gaskets, rings, etc), and the cost was about $2000. That expense alone gets you to the price of new even if no parts are needed which is doubtful. I would think that as a minimum the fuel system would need to have seals replaced. Bob -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Brinkmeyer Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 11:16 AM Subject: RV10-List: What's the going rate on a "reaman" IO540 D4A5? Hey All, I'm looking for a sanity check on price/features for a "reman" zero time IO540 D4A5. It's a never used engine (vintage 1979). Includes: Fuel injection, magnetos, plugs, harness, starter 6 mo warranty 8.5-1 compression ratio Full test cell (fuel flow and oil pressure checkes) and dyno balance All AD's complied with (crank AD not relevant as the crank is older than thoses affected) $36.5K (is this a fair price) Is there anything else I should ask the vendor about? Thanks, Jay Never Miss an Email Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started! http://mobile.yahoo.com/services?promote=mail ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 05, 2007
From: "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: What's the going rate on a "reaman" IO540 D4A5?
Hi Bill, That may be true today, but it wasn't always true. In 1971 a factory reman was installed in my plane. I still have that logbook, with same serial number 3 overhauls later. The only letters in the serial number are L at the front and A at the rear. The factory signature looks like Jim Heim, Mar 19, 1971. Hmm, better get a birthday gift for my engine, for its 36th. On 3/5/07, Bill DeRouchey wrote: > Only Lycoming can produce a "remanufactured" Lycoming engine. If this is > other than a genuine Lycoming zero time reman then, at that price, run. A > way to know is the engine log will have no entries and the front inside page > will be a sticker signed by Lycoming with 0.0 for engine total time. Also, a > Lycoming reman will have the suffix "R" on the serial number. > > Good Luck, > Bill DeRouchey > N939SB, flying > bill(at)wtdaviationtechnology.com > > > "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)" wrote: > > Jay, > > I'd either negotiate a better price or pass on it. You can get a NEW > engine from Mattituck (and I suspect others) for only $2K more and it > will have a new engine warranty, etc. > > Since this engine has been sitting since 1979 it should at least be gone > over to determine if the internals are Ok. Another RV-10 builder had > his engine gone through by the local engine shop, didn't need any parts > (except gaskets, rings, etc), and the cost was about $2000. That > expense alone gets you to the price of new even if no parts are needed > which is doubtful. I would think that as a minimum the fuel system > would need to have seals replaced. > > Bob > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Jay > Brinkmeyer > Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 11:16 AM > To: RV10 > Subject: RV10-List: What's the going rate on a "reaman" IO540 D4A5? > > > Hey All, > > I'm looking for a sanity check > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Saylor" <Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com>
Subject: What's the going rate on a "reaman" IO540 D4A5?
Date: Mar 06, 2007
Jay, If the engine has been sitting since 1979, it's not a bolt-in. It basically needs a teardown inspection to replace seals, check for corrosion, etc. Most shops charge a flat rate for that so it should be an easy thing to price, assuming no squawks. The cost of the engine should reflect needing the inspection. Lycon in Visalia, CA is charges about $31K for a similar engine outright w/ fresh overhaul, dyno run, etc. www.lycon.com . Your price seems high. Dave Saylor AirCrafters LLC 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 831-722-9141 831-750-0284 CL www.AirCraftersLLC.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 06, 2007
From: "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com>
Subject: So let's just sue everybody
Ditto on "kill all the lawyers" Couple things. 1. You can't cure stupidity. 2. I have a friend who loaned me an accident evaluation of the Cirrus crash. He was killed by physics... not aileron failure. It came down to turn radius and speed. The corridor that he was attempting to turn in was very narrow. If I remember correctly, only about a mile wide. He was also turning downwind which lengthened his ground track turn radius. When they calculated the amount of airspace that it took to execute a 180 degree turn it exceeded the real estate that he had. So, he was killed by physics. There is a good explanation of speed vs turn radius in "Stick and Rudder." Only there they are talking about why one crashes into the ground while strafing the girlfriends house. Basically, at high speed it takes four times the radius to turn. One of the recommendations was that if you find yourself in this sort of situation: _slow down._ Pull the throttle and drop the flaps if you can. After I read the write up on the accident, I went out and tried it in my 152. A coordinated turn with full flaps can be surprisingly tight. Tuck that information away the next time you find yourself in a canyon with limited airspace. Dr. Fred 40515 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Tail cone F-1032
From: Michael D Chase <MChase(at)gdatp.com>
Date: Mar 06, 2007
Thanks to all for the advice. I bent the left last night, same method as previously attempted on the broken right and it looks great no issues, two easy hits and done. I spoke with Brain and Scott at Vans and new F1032 is on the way, they are great to work with! Michael Chase General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products 802-657-6029 Office 802-922-5930 Cell mchase(at)gdatp.com This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is private, confidential, or exempt from disclosure. Any unauthorized review, use, copying, printing, disclosure, retention, or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply to this e-mail, and delete all copies without disclosing this message to others. Thank you. "egohr1" Sent by: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com 03/05/2007 01:04 PM Please respond to rv10-list(at)matronics.com To rv10-list(at)matronics.com cc Subject RV10-List: Re: Tail cone F-1032 I would send it to Vans. I just finished benting the Fuse longerons from the 3/4 x 3/4 x .125 angle, and this bent is gentle and easy compared with them. -------- eric gohr EGOHR86(at)alumni.carnegiemellon.edu Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=98880#98880 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: So let's just sue everybody
Date: Mar 06, 2007
From: "Chris Johnston" <CJohnston(at)popsound.com>
Yup. I saw a little write-up that outlined the corridor width, speed of the aircraft, and required bank angle to make a 180 safely, and it was so steep that you might as well do a hammerhead instead - both maneuvers would probably be considered "aerobatics", and the cirrus would look much nicer after the hammerhead... cj #40410 fuse www.perfectlygoodairplane.net -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fred Williams, M.D. Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 7:08 AM Subject: RV10-List: So let's just sue everybody Ditto on "kill all the lawyers" Couple things. 1. You can't cure stupidity. 2. I have a friend who loaned me an accident evaluation of the Cirrus crash. He was killed by physics... not aileron failure. It came down to turn radius and speed. The corridor that he was attempting to turn in was very narrow. If I remember correctly, only about a mile wide. He was also turning downwind which lengthened his ground track turn radius. When they calculated the amount of airspace that it took to execute a 180 degree turn it exceeded the real estate that he had. So, he was killed by physics. There is a good explanation of speed vs turn radius in "Stick and Rudder." Only there they are talking about why one crashes into the ground while strafing the girlfriends house. Basically, at high speed it takes four times the radius to turn. One of the recommendations was that if you find yourself in this sort of situation: _slow down._ Pull the throttle and drop the flaps if you can. After I read the write up on the accident, I went out and tried it in my 152. A coordinated turn with full flaps can be surprisingly tight. Tuck that information away the next time you find yourself in a canyon with limited airspace. Dr. Fred 40515 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Gonzalez" <indigoonlatigo(at)msn.com>
Subject: So let's just sue everybody
Date: Mar 06, 2007
Throw wind shear into the equation and a venturi effect from the surrounding buildings, and it could be more bumpy than "Mr.Toads Wild Ride" John G. 409 >From: "Chris Johnston" <CJohnston(at)popsound.com> >Reply-To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com >To: >Subject: RE: RV10-List: So let's just sue everybody >Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 09:42:27 -0800 > > >Yup. I saw a little write-up that outlined the corridor width, speed of >the aircraft, and required bank angle to make a 180 safely, and it was >so steep that you might as well do a hammerhead instead - both maneuvers >would probably be considered "aerobatics", and the cirrus would look >much nicer after the hammerhead... > >cj >#40410 >fuse >www.perfectlygoodairplane.net > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com >[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fred >Williams, M.D. >Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 7:08 AM >To: RV 10 >Subject: RV10-List: So let's just sue everybody > > > >Ditto on "kill all the lawyers" > >Couple things. > >1. You can't cure stupidity. > >2. I have a friend who loaned me an accident evaluation of the Cirrus >crash. He was killed by physics... not aileron failure. It came down >to turn radius and speed. The corridor that he was attempting to turn >in was very narrow. If I remember correctly, only about a mile wide. >He was also turning downwind which lengthened his ground track turn >radius. When they calculated the amount of airspace that it took to >execute a 180 degree turn it exceeded the real estate that he had. So, >he was killed by physics. There is a good explanation of speed vs turn > >radius in "Stick and Rudder." Only there they are talking about why one > >crashes into the ground while strafing the girlfriends house. >Basically, at high speed it takes four times the radius to turn. > >One of the recommendations was that if you find yourself in this sort of > >situation: _slow down._ >Pull the throttle and drop the flaps if you can. After I read the write > >up on the accident, I went out and tried it in my 152. A coordinated >turn with full flaps can be surprisingly tight. Tuck that information >away the next time you find yourself in a canyon with limited airspace. > >Dr. Fred >40515 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 06, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: OT: So let's just sue everybody- called Deep Pockets
If I recall correctly from my insurance days. There's a legal precedent called either 'Consequential Damages' or 'Contingent Liability' (I may have the names wrong). which allows for a defendant which is found to be only 10% responsible to be required to pay 90% of the damages. It was euphemistically referred to as " Deep Pockets" within the insurance company. Lawyers would typically cast the widest net they could hoping that they would find at least one defendant with an insurance policy with limits high enough to satisfy their greed, errr clients damages. Deems Davis # 406 Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) http://deemsrv10.com/ Back in fiberglass hell ! > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" <ddddsp1(at)juno.com>
Date: Mar 06, 2007
Subject: Re: Air Conditioning Kit Complete and Posted
How much WEIGHT does this all add.............and what does it do tho th e C.G.? Dean ________________________________________________________________________ FREE Reminder Service - NEW from AmericanGreetings.com Click HERE and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again! http://track.juno.com/s/lc?s=197335&u=http://www.americangreetings.c om/products/online_calendar.pd?c=uol5752

How much WEIGHT does this all add.............and what does it do tho the C.G.?

 

Dean



______________________ __________________________________________________
FREE Remin der Service - NEW from AmericanGreetings.com
Click HERE and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again!
< br>

      
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 06, 2007
From: "John N. Strain II" <aircarepros(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Air Conditioning Kit Complete and Posted
The total kit adds 46.5 lbs. 14 lb is at the engine front and the 30 lb is 2" behind the rear bulkhead and the rest is in between with the hose. This should help with the weight forward condition of the 10, but as to how much cg movment, I do not wish to make a statement that I can't support with proper calculation. I will leave that up to one of you guys with the proper formula. John Strain Flightline AC, Inc. cell #541-815-8935 "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" wrote: How much WEIGHT does this all add.............and what does it do tho the C.G.? Dean ________________________________________________________________________ FREE Reminder Service - NEW from AmericanGreetings.com Click HERE and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again! --------------------------------- Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" <ddddsp1(at)juno.com>
Date: Mar 07, 2007
Subject: Re: Air Conditioning Kit Complete and Posted
John, NO RV10's are flying yet with this system to get CG change data from? A t a minimum it will reduce your baggage weight to 50lbs with 4 passenger s. Rough guess the CG should move only marginally. That 46.5 lbs inclu des the overhead vents and all ducting? Thanks, DEAN ________________________________________________________________________ FREE Reminder Service - NEW from AmericanGreetings.com Click HERE and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again! http://track.juno.com/s/lc?s=197335&u=http://www.americangreetings.c om/products/online_calendar.pd?c=uol5752

John,

NO RV10's are flying yet with this system to get CG change data from?   At a minimum it will reduce your baggage weight to 50lbs with 4 p assengers.  Rough guess the CG should move only marginally.  T hat 46.5 lbs includes the overhead vents and all ducting?

Thanks,

DEAN



______________________ __________________________________________________
FREE Remin der Service - NEW from AmericanGreetings.com
Click HERE and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again!
< br>

      
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DejaVu" <wvu(at)ameritel.net>
Subject: Re: So let's just sue everybody
Date: Mar 07, 2007
I guess the key is "if you find yourself in this sort of situation:". Without knowing how big the playing field is to begin with, plus they may not have known what the supposed turning radius was at that speed (I don't know what it is for our -10s), add another full second before you start to react, plus the pucker factor and it becomes more believable something like this could happen to anyone. I've lost friends who were extra-gifted in the business of flying. It makes you think bit and try to stay on the conservative side. Another maneuver I was taught, which I don't remember if it has a name (perhaps Joe Zac can help me out), that's used by the heavies to make a quick 180 when you're surprised by a mountain side ahead: bank 30deg to the appropriate side, pull and maintain 3 G's, when you have bled off most of your airspeed you should be pointing in the opposite direction, level the wings. I don't think throttle setting is a factor. The idea is similar to that described in the 152 below but you also slant the turning plane to reduce the effective bird-eye view of the turning radius. Anh N591VU ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 10:08 AM Subject: RV10-List: So let's just sue everybody > > > > > Ditto on "kill all the lawyers" > > Couple things. > 1. You can't cure stupidity. > > 2. I have a friend who loaned me an accident evaluation of the Cirrus > crash. He was killed by physics... not aileron failure. It came down to > turn radius and speed. The corridor that he was attempting to turn in was > very narrow. If I remember correctly, only about a mile wide. He was > also turning downwind which lengthened his ground track turn radius. When > they calculated the amount of airspace that it took to execute a 180 > degree turn it exceeded the real estate that he had. So, he was killed by > physics. There is a good explanation of speed vs turn radius in "Stick > and Rudder." Only there they are talking about why one crashes into the > ground while strafing the girlfriends house. Basically, at high speed it > takes four times the radius to turn. > One of the recommendations was that if you find yourself in this sort of > situation: _slow down._ > Pull the throttle and drop the flaps if you can. After I read the write > up on the accident, I went out and tried it in my 152. A coordinated turn > with full flaps can be surprisingly tight. Tuck that information away the > next time you find yourself in a canyon with limited airspace. > Dr. Fred > 40515 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DejaVu" <wvu(at)ameritel.net>
Subject: Re: Air Conditioning Kit Complete and Posted
Date: Mar 07, 2007
The URL doesn't work for me. At a glance how does this system compare to t hat of http://www.airflow-systems.com/ that I know at least Alex's -10 in T X is flying with? Anh N591VU ----- Original Message ----- From: John N. Strain II To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 5:04 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Air Conditioning Kit Complete and Posted DJ and 10 gang, Sorry it took so long to get back to you. I have posted the new pricing on the website. Keep in mind that if you have your own LW10184 ring gear and/or an overhe ad air deliver panel, that we credit those component prices back to you if we do not supply. I am including the page url so that you do not have to g o searching http://flightlineac.com/vans_aircraft_kits . If you have any questions feel free to call and we can get you more info or get your kit co ming. John Strain - president Flightline AC, Inc. 541-330-5466 cell 541-815-8935 > wrote: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 07, 2007
From: MauleDriver <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: So let's just sue everybody
I would say that knowing the physics is one thing, and being proficient in recognition and avoidance is a second. How many of us have flown ground reference maneuvers both low and close to something? Turning into a hillside or block of buildings is a bit off-putting until you do it a few times. But it doesn't take much for your brain to easily judge airspeed, wind, distance, etc, once it has some experience. Having lived there and flown the Hudson river portion of the VFR corridor a few times, the whole environment is a giant distraction. Again, experience will allow the distractions to fade into the background while the pilot can begin to deal with what's important. Interestingly, a right turn would have turned the Cirrus into the wind and into friendlier territory - except that it would have been an airspace violation. Seems like a good deal in retrospect. Anyway, Anh, I think it's called a chandelle, a maneuver you learn for your commercial ticket. It takes some practice to get it to work. Any of you western guys ever practice it in a box canyon? Turning into the wall? Thanks for the another flying '10 Anh! Bill "back from vacation and attaching the feathers to the tailcone" Watson DejaVu wrote: > > I guess the key is "if you find yourself in this sort of situation:". > Without knowing how big the playing field is to begin with, plus they > may not have known what the supposed turning radius was at that speed > (I don't know what it is for our -10s), add another full second before > you start to react, plus the pucker factor and it becomes more > believable something like this could happen to anyone. I've lost > friends who were extra-gifted in the business of flying. It makes you > think bit and try to stay on the conservative side. > > Another maneuver I was taught, which I don't remember if it has a name > (perhaps Joe Zac can help me out), that's used by the heavies to make > a quick 180 when you're surprised by a mountain side ahead: bank 30deg > to the appropriate side, pull and maintain 3 G's, when you have bled > off most of your airspeed you should be pointing in the opposite > direction, level the wings. I don't think throttle setting is a > factor. The idea is similar to that described in the 152 below but > you also slant the turning plane to reduce the effective bird-eye view > of the turning radius. > > Anh > N591VU > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred Williams, M.D." > > To: "RV 10" > Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 10:08 AM > Subject: RV10-List: So let's just sue everybody > > >> >> >> >> >> Ditto on "kill all the lawyers" >> >> Couple things. >> 1. You can't cure stupidity. >> >> 2. I have a friend who loaned me an accident evaluation of the Cirrus >> crash. He was killed by physics... not aileron failure. It came >> down to turn radius and speed. The corridor that he was attempting >> to turn in was very narrow. If I remember correctly, only about a >> mile wide. He was also turning downwind which lengthened his ground >> track turn radius. When they calculated the amount of airspace that >> it took to execute a 180 degree turn it exceeded the real estate that >> he had. So, he was killed by physics. There is a good explanation >> of speed vs turn radius in "Stick and Rudder." Only there they are >> talking about why one crashes into the ground while strafing the >> girlfriends house. Basically, at high speed it takes four times the >> radius to turn. >> One of the recommendations was that if you find yourself in this sort >> of situation: _slow down._ >> Pull the throttle and drop the flaps if you can. After I read the >> write up on the accident, I went out and tried it in my 152. A >> coordinated turn with full flaps can be surprisingly tight. Tuck >> that information away the next time you find yourself in a canyon >> with limited airspace. >> Dr. Fred >> 40515 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 07, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning
Jae, sorry I was out for a while and just going back through mail that I missed. I had a similar problem with one of the rear spars that was not bent/formed correctly and resulted in a slight taper (3/32 - 1-16") in the spar cap on one of the ends. It throws off a lot of other stuff, Van's sent me a new one. Deems Davis # 406 Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) http://deemsrv10.com/ Jae Chang wrote: > > Niko... Vans is recommending using oops rivets, so i think that would > definitely mean a weaker structure than using the original callout. Part > of the reason, is because this is a tight access area, because of the > built-up doublers in the way. > > Finally, Vans brought up another issue. The 1/16" missing from the upper > flange had to have gone somewhere. Yep, it went into the web of the spar. > There is now quite a gap created above the ribs. > > This is the gap in the right (problem side) root rib. That is almost 1/8" > thick. 0.125". The top skin is .032". That means the shim I would have to > use to fill that gap will be 3 to 4 times the thickness of the top skin. > http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4485.html > > This is another inner rib, all the inner ribs have the same problem, up to > the 5th rib, which is fine. > http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4486.html > > As a comparison, this is what my left root rib looks like - what it should > be. > http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/wingkit/photos/IMG_4487.html > > I am going to have to think about this over the weekend. Now, i am leaning > towards replacement. > > Any opinions on what others would do? > > That hissing sound i hear is the sound of building momentum leaking away > again! > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric Parlow" <ericparlow(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Rear spar alignment flaw and Warning
Date: Mar 07, 2007
Has anyone had the 430/530 WAAS conversion done and installed it? We need to know if there were any modification needed to the plane's wiring or antennas.


February 21, 2007 - March 07, 2007

RV10-Archive.digest.vol-cc