RV10-Archive.digest.vol-co

September 12, 2007 - September 24, 2007



      (913) 226-0106 (Pcs)
      (913) 859-1234 (Fax)
      Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com
      
      
      -----Original Message-----
From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 12:18 AM
Subject: Re: : Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Dear Ray : Thank you for your Email today, We shall manufacture the ELT 406 MHz in the next few months. We are now at the last step of FAA TSO Certification stage for ELT 406 MHz P/N AK-451. However, we have been contact with the FAA almost everyday and confirmed that there will not have any requirement from FAA about ELT 406 MHz in 2008. May be there are strong opposition from AOPA. The requirement of ELT 406.0 MHz will be for the Marine only in 2009. The Military Satellites of 121.0/243.0 MHz will be available after 2009 for sure. If we distribute the new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 with the same footprints, same sizes as our ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement. We also have a program of exchange to ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 and credit to your old ELT AK-450. Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon. BEST REGARDS, VICTOR VAN SALES MANAGER AMERI-KING CORP. 17881 Sampson Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA Tel (714) 842-8555 Fax (714) 842-4235 Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com Web Site: www.ameri-king.com -----Original Message-----
From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com>
Sent: 2007-09-10 12:02:36 Subject: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. I was hoping AmeriKing would create a 406 Mhz ELT using the same package as the AK-450 ELT. Do you have any info you can share on this topic? Thank You Ray Doerr CDNI Principal Engineer Sprint PCS 16020 West 113th Street Lenexa, KS 66219 Mailstop KSLNXK0101 (913) 859-1414 (Office) (913) 226-0106 (Pcs) (913) 859-1234 (Fax) Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 12, 2007
From: Dan Masys <dmasys(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Second Airplane?
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Second Airplane? > From: "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com> > > Ron, > > That is my concern, that I go to all the trouble and > expense of another build and find I don't NEED it or don't fly enough > hours to satisfy both planes. I currently fly about 150 hours/ year > (average since certified in early 2002). Is a 100 RV-10 hours & 50 7A > hours/year reasonable? Maybe, but maybe all RV-10 time would be OK too? > Hummmmm tough call. I'm currently paying for two hangars and trying to fly both my -10 and -7A often enough to keep them both healthy. The -10 isn't painted yet and the plan is to keep the -7A at least until the -10 comes back from the paint shop. My current experience is similar to that already posted -- whenever I really want to go somewhere for travel purposes, the -10 is the hands down winner. A real sweetheart of a cross country traveler in terms of comfort, speed, and information systems. But the -7A is such a hoot, with its 2500 fpm climb rate, aerobatic capability, and responsive controls. I just love taking the -7A out on a yank and bank excursion with a few aileron rolls after sitting in the plush cockpit of the -10 for a long x-country. When I take up Boy Scouts or Young Eagles and give them the controls, its always in the -7A since the experience is not unlike an aerial motorcycle, where the -10 is more like an aerial Lexus. Since both of them are paid for, the controlling factor will almost certainly be the long term maintenance. Both need attention, and time spent doing maintenance is time not flying; hangar queens definitely don't age gracefully. Having two airplanes definitely teaches you the meaning of the term "possessions" -- they are things that possess you! -Dan Masys ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 12, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Second Airplane?
Even though I'm not yet flying. I've considered this myself. I just can't conceive of selling my -10. just toooo much love has gone into it, not to mention the sweat and tears. But the desire for a 'toy' never goes away. I've considered a partnership in a -7 / -8, particularly if the other partner/s held the repairman's certificate. anybody in the PHX area want to share a -7 / -8? Deems Davis # 406 Will this heat never end.....??????? http://deemsrv10.com/ Dan Masys wrote: > > >> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Second Airplane? >> From: "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com> >> >> Ron, >> >> That is my concern, that I go to all the trouble and >> expense of another build and find I don't NEED it or don't fly enough >> hours to satisfy both planes. I currently fly about 150 hours/ year >> (average since certified in early 2002). Is a 100 RV-10 hours & 50 7A >> hours/year reasonable? Maybe, but maybe all RV-10 time would be OK too? >> Hummmmm tough call. >> > > I'm currently paying for two hangars and trying to fly both my -10 and -7A often enough to keep them both healthy. The -10 isn't painted yet and the plan is to keep the -7A at least until the -10 comes back from the paint shop. My current experience is similar to that already posted -- whenever I really want to go somewhere for travel purposes, the -10 is the hands down winner. A real sweetheart of a cross country traveler in terms of comfort, speed, and information systems. > > But the -7A is such a hoot, with its 2500 fpm climb rate, aerobatic capability, and responsive controls. I just love taking the -7A out on a yank and bank excursion with a few aileron rolls after sitting in the plush cockpit of the -10 for a long x-country. When I take up Boy Scouts or Young Eagles and give them the controls, its always in the -7A since the experience is not unlike an aerial motorcycle, where the -10 is more like an aerial Lexus. > > Since both of them are paid for, the controlling factor will almost certainly be the long term maintenance. Both need attention, and time spent doing maintenance is time not flying; hangar queens definitely don't age gracefully. > > Having two airplanes definitely teaches you the meaning of the term "possessions" -- they are things that possess you! > > -Dan Masys > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
Date: Sep 12, 2007
Subject: Re: Second Airplane?
I'm actually considering building a LongEZ once the -10 is done. Not too expensive to build and cheaper to fly with speed equivalent to the 10. Of course I have to do that pesky house remodel first in order to appease the wife. :-) Bring on the fiberglass! Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 4:54 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Second Airplane? Even though I'm not yet flying. I've considered this myself. I just can't conceive of selling my -10. just toooo much love has gone into it, not to mention the sweat and tears. But the desire for a 'toy' never goes away. I've considered a partnership in a -7 / -8, particularly if the other partner/s held the repairman's certificate. anybody in the PHX area want to share a -7 / -8? Deems Davis # 406 Will this heat never end.....??????? http://deemsrv10.com/ Dan Masys wrote: > > >> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Second Airplane? >> From: "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com> >> >> Ron, >> >> That is my concern, that I go to all the trouble and >> expense of another build and find I don't NEED it or don't fly enough >> hours to satisfy both planes. I currently fly about 150 hours/ year >> (average since certified in early 2002). Is a 100 RV-10 hours & 50 7A >> hours/year reasonable? Maybe, but maybe all RV-10 time would be OK too? >> Hummmmm tough call. >> > > I'm currently paying for two hangars and trying to fly both my -10 and -7A often enough to keep them both healthy. The -10 isn't painted yet and the plan is to keep the -7A at least until the -10 comes back from the paint shop. My current experience is similar to that already posted -- whenever I really want to go somewhere for travel purposes, the -10 is the hands down winner. A real sweetheart of a cross country traveler in terms of comfort, speed, and information systems. > > But the -7A is such a hoot, with its 2500 fpm climb rate, aerobatic capability, and responsive controls. I just love taking the -7A out on a yank and bank excursion with a few aileron rolls after sitting in the plush cockpit of the -10 for a long x-country. When I take up Boy Scouts or Young Eagles and give them the controls, its always in the -7A since the experience is not unlike an aerial motorcycle, where the -10 is more like an aerial Lexus. > > Since both of them are paid for, the controlling factor will almost certainly be the long term maintenance. Both need attention, and time spent doing maintenance is time not flying; hangar queens definitely don't age gracefully. > > Having two airplanes definitely teaches you the meaning of the term "possessions" -- they are things that possess you! > > -Dan Masys > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jeff Carpenter <jeff(at)westcottpress.com>
Subject: Firewall Sealant
Date: Sep 12, 2007
I'm about to order my CS 1900 Firewall Sealant as I've reached the point of riveting the forward rib subassemblies to the firewall and the final instruction on page 27-6 is to "proseal any gaps around the F-1001K Recess" etc. While I'm doing that, would it make sense to put a thin coat across the flush rivet lines on the engine side of the firewall? Jeff Carpenter 40304 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Firewall Sealant
Date: Sep 12, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
The final texture of the CS 1900 is much different from the other products. Reserve your decision until after you watch the dried product on the rib subassemblies. Then you should have no regrets. Fire Annunciation, Fire Suppression, walking away for another day is what it is all about. John Cox 40600 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Carpenter Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 4:50 PM Subject: RV10-List: Firewall Sealant I'm about to order my CS 1900 Firewall Sealant as I've reached the point of riveting the forward rib subassemblies to the firewall and the final instruction on page 27-6 is to "proseal any gaps around the F-1001K Recess" etc. While I'm doing that, would it make sense to put a thin coat across the flush rivet lines on the engine side of the firewall? Jeff Carpenter 40304 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 12, 2007
From: "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com>
Subject: Fitting cabin top
I'm now to the point of fitting the fiberglass top to the fuse. Like most of us with minimal fiberglass experience, I approached the fitting with some trepidation. I wanted to pass along a way to help get started. I did the rough cutting to within 1/16 th to 1/8 th of the line around the doorsill. I then got some help and tried to muscle it into place. After about two tries it became quickly obvious that about 1/4 inch needed to come off from the width of the door. The fiberglass had to be trimmed just about to the curve on each side. It also becomes obvious that the first place it must fit is between the door jambs. Rather than take the top on and off with each bit of sanding, I thought the best way might be to make a door sill template. Overall, I think it speeded up the process as it "only " took 4 tries to get the top to start fitting inside the sills. To make the template, first of all don't try to measure anything. Reverse engineer it. Take a 3/4 inch piece of plywood or MDF ( slightly larger than the opening which is about 37 x 12 inches) and get (3) 12 inch x 2 inch boards. Take one board and use a single screw along the base. This will support the backer board along the sill. Now take another one of the 12 inch boards and screw it vertically so it can be clamped to the back upright. Make sure it is above the small flange in the corner. Now put the third board up against the front upright and mark it's position (outline ). Remove the boards and screw the front upright in place. Now you have the width and size of the opening. Take 3 more 2 inch wide boards. One about 40 inches long and two more 12 inches. Use the long one as the base and use the uprights from the template to hold the vertical 12 inch boards. Screw them into the base of the 40 inch board and then add some scrap triangles in the corner to hold them square. You now have a template that you can fit over the fiberglass while you are sanding/trimming. Once the template will slide over the fiberglass top it will fit between the door jambs and you can then see how the joggle fits and needs to be trimmed and see how you need to radius the corners. I'll put some pics on my site at mykitlog.com in the next few days. I just realized my access to the site was down. If anybody is about to fit their top and needs pics I'll send them to you. Too many and too large for the list. Fred Williams 40515 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Firewall Sealant
From: "orchidman" <gary(at)wingscc.com>
Date: Sep 13, 2007
AV8ORJWC wrote: > > Reserve your decision until after you watch the dried product on the rib > subassemblies. Then you should have no regrets. > John, Could you please expand on this. I will be starting Section 27 next week and want to make sure I understand what you are saying. -------- Gary Blankenbiller RV10 - # 40674 Fuselage SB (N410GB reserved) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134170#134170 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Date: Sep 13, 2007
From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com>
No, Ameri-King did not indicate the price or timeframe for this new ELT, I was just glad to hear we are going to have competition in this space. As for the GPS option on the ELT, I for one was hoping to not have another GPS in my airplane, when I already have 3. I have dual Garmin 430W which are WAAS certified and a Garmin 496 handheld. I am wanting to connect the RS-232 aviation output from one of my 430W to the ELT and then have the ELT keep a copy of the latest GPS Sentence which has the Long/Lat and then transmit that, if the ELT was activated. But so far, I think all ELT's with the GPS option are embedding it into the ELT itself, so now you will likely need another GPS Antenna mounted on top and I don't want that. With everything having GPS in it in the future, I can see a time where we have 4+ GPS Antenna's on the plane. One for you Panel Mount, Handheld, ADSB UAT and ELT. I am just trying to minimize this. There is no reason the ADSB UAT and the ELT can't use the output from my 430W! Thank You Ray Doerr 40250 N519RV (Going to LOE 07) -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:13 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. >From what I have read, GPS data get's you a couple things. First and foremost it gives rescuers immediate coordinates to begin their search within a 100 meter radius. With just the 406 beacon, it will take several passes of low orbit SAR satellites to narrow down your location using Doppler Shift. The feds also say accuracy using DS is 1-3 miles, time & samples variable. Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick ONeill Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 8:20 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. With regard to the GPS location data option, has anyone seen any statistics on the benefit of this? How accurate is the satellite positioning on the 406 mhz units? Is the accuracy such that the GPS link makes a big difference in locating the beacon? Best Regards, Patrick #40715 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doerr, Ray R [NTK] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 5:29 AM Subject: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Here is the email chain I had with Ameri-King about there plans for a 406 Mhz ELT. Thank You Ray Doerr 40250 N519RV (Hobbs = 310) Looking forward to LOE 07 -----Original Message----- From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:48 AM Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Dear Ray : Thank you for your Email today, The new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 shall be the same footprint and size as our ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement. Another version of ELT 406.00 MHz is also available with an option of included the GPS feature within the ELT. Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon. BEST REGARDS, VICTOR VAN SALES MANAGER AMERI-KING CORP. 17881 Sampson Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA Tel (714) 842-8555 Fax (714) 842-4235 Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com Web Site: www.ameri-king.com -----Original Message----- From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> Sent: 2007-09-11 08:47:58 Subject: RE: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Thanks for your reply. Based on your reply, I was not clear if your AK-451 was the same footprint and size as the AK-450. Will the AK-451 support an RS-232 Serial In Line from a Panel Mounted GPS so that the AK-451 would transmit the last known Long and Lat from the GPS Data? I would like to see the AK-451 read this GPS Data and then save the most recent copy that it would then use if the ELT was activated. Thank You Ray Doerr CDNI Principal Engineer Sprint PCS 16020 West 113th Street Lenexa, KS 66219 Mailstop KSLNXK0101 (913) 859-1414 (Office) (913) 226-0106 (Pcs) (913) 859-1234 (Fax) Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com -----Original Message----- From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 12:18 AM Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Dear Ray : Thank you for your Email today, We shall manufacture the ELT 406 MHz in the next few months. We are now at the last step of FAA TSO Certification stage for ELT 406 MHz P/N AK-451. However, we have been contact with the FAA almost everyday and confirmed that there will not have any requirement from FAA about ELT 406 MHz in 2008. May be there are strong opposition from AOPA. The requirement of ELT 406.0 MHz will be for the Marine only in 2009. The Military Satellites of 121.0/243.0 MHz will be available after 2009 for sure. If we distribute the new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 with the same footprints, same sizes as our ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement. We also have a program of exchange to ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 and credit to your old ELT AK-450. Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon. BEST REGARDS, VICTOR VAN SALES MANAGER AMERI-KING CORP. 17881 Sampson Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA Tel (714) 842-8555 Fax (714) 842-4235 Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com Web Site: www.ameri-king.com -----Original Message----- From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> Sent: 2007-09-10 12:02:36 Subject: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. I was hoping AmeriKing would create a 406 Mhz ELT using the same package as the AK-450 ELT. Do you have any info you can share on this topic? Thank You Ray Doerr CDNI Principal Engineer Sprint PCS 16020 West 113th Street Lenexa, KS 66219 Mailstop KSLNXK0101 (913) 859-1414 (Office) (913) 226-0106 (Pcs) (913) 859-1234 (Fax) Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
Date: Sep 13, 2007
Subject: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
When thinking about integrating devices, it's not always best to have all of your eggs in one basket. In my mind I would want a completely independent system when it comes to SAR. For instance, the ELT runs off its own internal power, isolating it from ship faults. Another potential problem is what if you were to lose ship power completely in IFR. It's totally feasible to carry on for quite a while using vacuum instruments but your ELT would now have coordinates that would have the SAR teams in a completely different area. Integration is a good thing under normal conditions. But when your ELT needs to be used, you are usually outside the normal envelope and all bets are off. Really stop and think about what integration vs. stand alone get's you for saving that extra couple bucks and a few ounces. To each his own but I want something that is isolated from ship functions when it may make the difference between finding me or being one of the 8 other aircraft out there that is found years later while looking for someone famous. God speed to all those lost souls. Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doerr, Ray R [NTK] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 8:11 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. No, Ameri-King did not indicate the price or timeframe for this new ELT, I was just glad to hear we are going to have competition in this space. As for the GPS option on the ELT, I for one was hoping to not have another GPS in my airplane, when I already have 3. I have dual Garmin 430W which are WAAS certified and a Garmin 496 handheld. I am wanting to connect the RS-232 aviation output from one of my 430W to the ELT and then have the ELT keep a copy of the latest GPS Sentence which has the Long/Lat and then transmit that, if the ELT was activated. But so far, I think all ELT's with the GPS option are embedding it into the ELT itself, so now you will likely need another GPS Antenna mounted on top and I don't want that. With everything having GPS in it in the future, I can see a time where we have 4+ GPS Antenna's on the plane. One for you Panel Mount, Handheld, ADSB UAT and ELT. I am just trying to minimize this. There is no reason the ADSB UAT and the ELT can't use the output from my 430W! Thank You Ray Doerr 40250 N519RV (Going to LOE 07) -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:13 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. >From what I have read, GPS data get's you a couple things. First and foremost it gives rescuers immediate coordinates to begin their search within a 100 meter radius. With just the 406 beacon, it will take several passes of low orbit SAR satellites to narrow down your location using Doppler Shift. The feds also say accuracy using DS is 1-3 miles, time & samples variable. Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick ONeill Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 8:20 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. With regard to the GPS location data option, has anyone seen any statistics on the benefit of this? How accurate is the satellite positioning on the 406 mhz units? Is the accuracy such that the GPS link makes a big difference in locating the beacon? Best Regards, Patrick #40715 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doerr, Ray R [NTK] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 5:29 AM Subject: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Here is the email chain I had with Ameri-King about there plans for a 406 Mhz ELT. Thank You Ray Doerr 40250 N519RV (Hobbs = 310) Looking forward to LOE 07 -----Original Message----- From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:48 AM Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Dear Ray : Thank you for your Email today, The new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 shall be the same footprint and size as our ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement. Another version of ELT 406.00 MHz is also available with an option of included the GPS feature within the ELT. Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon. BEST REGARDS, VICTOR VAN SALES MANAGER AMERI-KING CORP. 17881 Sampson Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA Tel (714) 842-8555 Fax (714) 842-4235 Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com Web Site: www.ameri-king.com -----Original Message----- From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> Sent: 2007-09-11 08:47:58 Subject: RE: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Thanks for your reply. Based on your reply, I was not clear if your AK-451 was the same footprint and size as the AK-450. Will the AK-451 support an RS-232 Serial In Line from a Panel Mounted GPS so that the AK-451 would transmit the last known Long and Lat from the GPS Data? I would like to see the AK-451 read this GPS Data and then save the most recent copy that it would then use if the ELT was activated. Thank You Ray Doerr CDNI Principal Engineer Sprint PCS 16020 West 113th Street Lenexa, KS 66219 Mailstop KSLNXK0101 (913) 859-1414 (Office) (913) 226-0106 (Pcs) (913) 859-1234 (Fax) Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com -----Original Message----- From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 12:18 AM Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Dear Ray : Thank you for your Email today, We shall manufacture the ELT 406 MHz in the next few months. We are now at the last step of FAA TSO Certification stage for ELT 406 MHz P/N AK-451. However, we have been contact with the FAA almost everyday and confirmed that there will not have any requirement from FAA about ELT 406 MHz in 2008. May be there are strong opposition from AOPA. The requirement of ELT 406.0 MHz will be for the Marine only in 2009. The Military Satellites of 121.0/243.0 MHz will be available after 2009 for sure. If we distribute the new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 with the same footprints, same sizes as our ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement. We also have a program of exchange to ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 and credit to your old ELT AK-450. Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon. BEST REGARDS, VICTOR VAN SALES MANAGER AMERI-KING CORP. 17881 Sampson Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA Tel (714) 842-8555 Fax (714) 842-4235 Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com Web Site: www.ameri-king.com -----Original Message----- From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> Sent: 2007-09-10 12:02:36 Subject: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. I was hoping AmeriKing would create a 406 Mhz ELT using the same package as the AK-450 ELT. Do you have any info you can share on this topic? Thank You Ray Doerr CDNI Principal Engineer Sprint PCS 16020 West 113th Street Lenexa, KS 66219 Mailstop KSLNXK0101 (913) 859-1414 (Office) (913) 226-0106 (Pcs) (913) 859-1234 (Fax) Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
Date: Sep 13, 2007
Subject: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
One other thing to add. When you survive a forced landing in the mountains, it would be nice to pull the ELT and take it with you. If you are integrated with the ships GPS it might get a bit messy ripping out a surviving GPS and rigging up a cable to get the ELT to update your coordinates when you go and seek shelter, water, or food. Then there is the problem of carrying around a heavy battery, etc. You get my point. :-) Michael -----Original Message----- From: Michael Sausen On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 8:36 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. When thinking about integrating devices, it's not always best to have all of your eggs in one basket. In my mind I would want a completely independent system when it comes to SAR. For instance, the ELT runs off its own internal power, isolating it from ship faults. Another potential problem is what if you were to lose ship power completely in IFR. It's totally feasible to carry on for quite a while using vacuum instruments but your ELT would now have coordinates that would have the SAR teams in a completely different area. Integration is a good thing under normal conditions. But when your ELT needs to be used, you are usually outside the normal envelope and all bets are off. Really stop and think about what integration vs. stand alone get's you for saving that extra couple bucks and a few ounces. To each his own but I want something that is isolated from ship functions when it may make the difference between finding me or being one of the 8 other aircraft out there that is found years later while looking for someone famous. God speed to all those lost souls. Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doerr, Ray R [NTK] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 8:11 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. No, Ameri-King did not indicate the price or timeframe for this new ELT, I was just glad to hear we are going to have competition in this space. As for the GPS option on the ELT, I for one was hoping to not have another GPS in my airplane, when I already have 3. I have dual Garmin 430W which are WAAS certified and a Garmin 496 handheld. I am wanting to connect the RS-232 aviation output from one of my 430W to the ELT and then have the ELT keep a copy of the latest GPS Sentence which has the Long/Lat and then transmit that, if the ELT was activated. But so far, I think all ELT's with the GPS option are embedding it into the ELT itself, so now you will likely need another GPS Antenna mounted on top and I don't want that. With everything having GPS in it in the future, I can see a time where we have 4+ GPS Antenna's on the plane. One for you Panel Mount, Handheld, ADSB UAT and ELT. I am just trying to minimize this. There is no reason the ADSB UAT and the ELT can't use the output from my 430W! Thank You Ray Doerr 40250 N519RV (Going to LOE 07) -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:13 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. >From what I have read, GPS data get's you a couple things. First and foremost it gives rescuers immediate coordinates to begin their search within a 100 meter radius. With just the 406 beacon, it will take several passes of low orbit SAR satellites to narrow down your location using Doppler Shift. The feds also say accuracy using DS is 1-3 miles, time & samples variable. Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick ONeill Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 8:20 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. With regard to the GPS location data option, has anyone seen any statistics on the benefit of this? How accurate is the satellite positioning on the 406 mhz units? Is the accuracy such that the GPS link makes a big difference in locating the beacon? Best Regards, Patrick #40715 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doerr, Ray R [NTK] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 5:29 AM Subject: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Here is the email chain I had with Ameri-King about there plans for a 406 Mhz ELT. Thank You Ray Doerr 40250 N519RV (Hobbs = 310) Looking forward to LOE 07 -----Original Message----- From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:48 AM Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Dear Ray : Thank you for your Email today, The new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 shall be the same footprint and size as our ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement. Another version of ELT 406.00 MHz is also available with an option of included the GPS feature within the ELT. Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon. BEST REGARDS, VICTOR VAN SALES MANAGER AMERI-KING CORP. 17881 Sampson Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA Tel (714) 842-8555 Fax (714) 842-4235 Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com Web Site: www.ameri-king.com -----Original Message----- From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> Sent: 2007-09-11 08:47:58 Subject: RE: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Thanks for your reply. Based on your reply, I was not clear if your AK-451 was the same footprint and size as the AK-450. Will the AK-451 support an RS-232 Serial In Line from a Panel Mounted GPS so that the AK-451 would transmit the last known Long and Lat from the GPS Data? I would like to see the AK-451 read this GPS Data and then save the most recent copy that it would then use if the ELT was activated. Thank You Ray Doerr CDNI Principal Engineer Sprint PCS 16020 West 113th Street Lenexa, KS 66219 Mailstop KSLNXK0101 (913) 859-1414 (Office) (913) 226-0106 (Pcs) (913) 859-1234 (Fax) Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com -----Original Message----- From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 12:18 AM Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Dear Ray : Thank you for your Email today, We shall manufacture the ELT 406 MHz in the next few months. We are now at the last step of FAA TSO Certification stage for ELT 406 MHz P/N AK-451. However, we have been contact with the FAA almost everyday and confirmed that there will not have any requirement from FAA about ELT 406 MHz in 2008. May be there are strong opposition from AOPA. The requirement of ELT 406.0 MHz will be for the Marine only in 2009. The Military Satellites of 121.0/243.0 MHz will be available after 2009 for sure. If we distribute the new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 with the same footprints, same sizes as our ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement. We also have a program of exchange to ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 and credit to your old ELT AK-450. Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon. BEST REGARDS, VICTOR VAN SALES MANAGER AMERI-KING CORP. 17881 Sampson Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA Tel (714) 842-8555 Fax (714) 842-4235 Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com Web Site: www.ameri-king.com -----Original Message----- From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> Sent: 2007-09-10 12:02:36 Subject: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. I was hoping AmeriKing would create a 406 Mhz ELT using the same package as the AK-450 ELT. Do you have any info you can share on this topic? Thank You Ray Doerr CDNI Principal Engineer Sprint PCS 16020 West 113th Street Lenexa, KS 66219 Mailstop KSLNXK0101 (913) 859-1414 (Office) (913) 226-0106 (Pcs) (913) 859-1234 (Fax) Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Firewall Sealant
Date: Sep 13, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
For those builders who have used PolySulfate (stinky) Thioxotrophic (sticky shit) sealer known as "Proseal" by one brand name, and maligned by other makers. The product used for fuel tank sealing is entirely different than the product to sustain higher temperatures inside an engine cowl. It is wise to observe the appearance of the final "High Temperature" sealant after cure before making a commitment to use it beyond its intended purpose. The manufacturer (You) has lots of products to chose from. A material, B material and C material all have differing viscosities. 1/4 sets in 15 minutes, 1/2 sets in 30 and 2 sets in two hours. Each product number change also changes the properties, color, flexibility and heat resistance. Is that what you wanted Gary? John -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of orchidman Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 5:27 AM Subject: RV10-List: Re: Firewall Sealant AV8ORJWC wrote: > > Reserve your decision until after you watch the dried product on the rib > subassemblies. Then you should have no regrets. > John, Could you please expand on this. I will be starting Section 27 next week and want to make sure I understand what you are saying. -------- Gary Blankenbiller RV10 - # 40674 Fuselage SB (N410GB reserved) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134170#134170 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Date: Sep 13, 2007
From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com>
Good point, maybe we can at least get them to design a integrated Antenna for both GPS and 406 Mhz transmission. Thank You Ray Doerr -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 8:41 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. One other thing to add. When you survive a forced landing in the mountains, it would be nice to pull the ELT and take it with you. If you are integrated with the ships GPS it might get a bit messy ripping out a surviving GPS and rigging up a cable to get the ELT to update your coordinates when you go and seek shelter, water, or food. Then there is the problem of carrying around a heavy battery, etc. You get my point. :-) Michael -----Original Message----- From: Michael Sausen On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 8:36 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. When thinking about integrating devices, it's not always best to have all of your eggs in one basket. In my mind I would want a completely independent system when it comes to SAR. For instance, the ELT runs off its own internal power, isolating it from ship faults. Another potential problem is what if you were to lose ship power completely in IFR. It's totally feasible to carry on for quite a while using vacuum instruments but your ELT would now have coordinates that would have the SAR teams in a completely different area. Integration is a good thing under normal conditions. But when your ELT needs to be used, you are usually outside the normal envelope and all bets are off. Really stop and think about what integration vs. stand alone get's you for saving that extra couple bucks and a few ounces. To each his own but I want something that is isolated from ship functions when it may make the difference between finding me or being one of the 8 other aircraft out there that is found years later while looking for someone famous. God speed to all those lost souls. Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doerr, Ray R [NTK] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 8:11 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. No, Ameri-King did not indicate the price or timeframe for this new ELT, I was just glad to hear we are going to have competition in this space. As for the GPS option on the ELT, I for one was hoping to not have another GPS in my airplane, when I already have 3. I have dual Garmin 430W which are WAAS certified and a Garmin 496 handheld. I am wanting to connect the RS-232 aviation output from one of my 430W to the ELT and then have the ELT keep a copy of the latest GPS Sentence which has the Long/Lat and then transmit that, if the ELT was activated. But so far, I think all ELT's with the GPS option are embedding it into the ELT itself, so now you will likely need another GPS Antenna mounted on top and I don't want that. With everything having GPS in it in the future, I can see a time where we have 4+ GPS Antenna's on the plane. One for you Panel Mount, Handheld, ADSB UAT and ELT. I am just trying to minimize this. There is no reason the ADSB UAT and the ELT can't use the output from my 430W! Thank You Ray Doerr 40250 N519RV (Going to LOE 07) -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:13 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. >From what I have read, GPS data get's you a couple things. First and foremost it gives rescuers immediate coordinates to begin their search within a 100 meter radius. With just the 406 beacon, it will take several passes of low orbit SAR satellites to narrow down your location using Doppler Shift. The feds also say accuracy using DS is 1-3 miles, time & samples variable. Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick ONeill Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 8:20 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. With regard to the GPS location data option, has anyone seen any statistics on the benefit of this? How accurate is the satellite positioning on the 406 mhz units? Is the accuracy such that the GPS link makes a big difference in locating the beacon? Best Regards, Patrick #40715 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doerr, Ray R [NTK] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 5:29 AM Subject: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Here is the email chain I had with Ameri-King about there plans for a 406 Mhz ELT. Thank You Ray Doerr 40250 N519RV (Hobbs = 310) Looking forward to LOE 07 -----Original Message----- From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:48 AM Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Dear Ray : Thank you for your Email today, The new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 shall be the same footprint and size as our ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement. Another version of ELT 406.00 MHz is also available with an option of included the GPS feature within the ELT. Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon. BEST REGARDS, VICTOR VAN SALES MANAGER AMERI-KING CORP. 17881 Sampson Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA Tel (714) 842-8555 Fax (714) 842-4235 Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com Web Site: www.ameri-king.com -----Original Message----- From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> Sent: 2007-09-11 08:47:58 Subject: RE: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Thanks for your reply. Based on your reply, I was not clear if your AK-451 was the same footprint and size as the AK-450. Will the AK-451 support an RS-232 Serial In Line from a Panel Mounted GPS so that the AK-451 would transmit the last known Long and Lat from the GPS Data? I would like to see the AK-451 read this GPS Data and then save the most recent copy that it would then use if the ELT was activated. Thank You Ray Doerr CDNI Principal Engineer Sprint PCS 16020 West 113th Street Lenexa, KS 66219 Mailstop KSLNXK0101 (913) 859-1414 (Office) (913) 226-0106 (Pcs) (913) 859-1234 (Fax) Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com -----Original Message----- From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 12:18 AM Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Dear Ray : Thank you for your Email today, We shall manufacture the ELT 406 MHz in the next few months. We are now at the last step of FAA TSO Certification stage for ELT 406 MHz P/N AK-451. However, we have been contact with the FAA almost everyday and confirmed that there will not have any requirement from FAA about ELT 406 MHz in 2008. May be there are strong opposition from AOPA. The requirement of ELT 406.0 MHz will be for the Marine only in 2009. The Military Satellites of 121.0/243.0 MHz will be available after 2009 for sure. If we distribute the new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 with the same footprints, same sizes as our ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement. We also have a program of exchange to ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 and credit to your old ELT AK-450. Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon. BEST REGARDS, VICTOR VAN SALES MANAGER AMERI-KING CORP. 17881 Sampson Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA Tel (714) 842-8555 Fax (714) 842-4235 Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com Web Site: www.ameri-king.com -----Original Message----- From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> Sent: 2007-09-10 12:02:36 Subject: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. I was hoping AmeriKing would create a 406 Mhz ELT using the same package as the AK-450 ELT. Do you have any info you can share on this topic? Thank You Ray Doerr CDNI Principal Engineer Sprint PCS 16020 West 113th Street Lenexa, KS 66219 Mailstop KSLNXK0101 (913) 859-1414 (Office) (913) 226-0106 (Pcs) (913) 859-1234 (Fax) Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Firewall Sealant
From: "orchidman" <gary(at)wingscc.com>
Date: Sep 13, 2007
AV8ORJWC wrote: > > Is that what you wanted Gary? > > John > > -- No, I am aware of the basic differences but the way I read your comment, there was something in the way the Firewall product was used or ??? that I might need to be aware of in where or how I would want to use it on the Firewall. Sorry, it is late and today has been a hard day at work so I know I am not making sense. Gary -------- Gary Blankenbiller RV10 - # 40674 Fuselage SB (N410GB reserved) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134313#134313 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 13, 2007
From: "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Firewall Sealant
I think John was referring to the firewall version having a different consistency, that perhaps doesn't flow as smooth or dry as smooth as the tank sealing version..so you may want to be more cautious where you apply it, to keep a nice looking firewall. I'm sure that if I am misinterpreting, John will speak up in the morning after work. On 9/13/07, orchidman wrote: > > > AV8ORJWC wrote: > > > > Is that what you wanted Gary? > > > > John > > > > -- > > No, I am aware of the basic differences but the way I read your comment, > there was something in the way the Firewall product was used or ??? that I > might need to be aware of in where or how I would want to use it on the > Firewall. > Sorry, it is late and today has been a hard day at work so I know I am not > making sense. > > Gary > > -------- > Gary Blankenbiller > RV10 - # 40674 > Fuselage SB > (N410GB reserved) > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134313#134313 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
From: "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net>
Date: Sep 13, 2007
There was a new ELT presented at Oshkosh. http://en.martec.fr/page/p-191/art_id-/ They claim to be better than the competition. Michael www.wellenzohn.net (just painted the interior) -------- RV-10 builder (wings) #511 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134341#134341 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: more ELTs
Date: Sep 14, 2007
From: <tdawson-townsend(at)aurora.aero>
In related news, Pointer supposedly is working on a 406 MHz ELT also, but they've been saying that for over a year with nothing seen yet. TDT Tim Dawson-Townsend Aurora Flight Sciences tdt(at)aurora.aero 617-500-4812 (office) 617-905-4800 (mobile) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 14, 2007
From: Werner Schneider <glastar(at)gmx.net>
Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Michael, did you see their price? Christen sells one for close to 2300$ wonder what the difference to the ME406 is as it seems currently the cheapest on the market. br Werner Michael Wellenzohn wrote: > > There was a new ELT presented at Oshkosh. > > http://en.martec.fr/page/p-191/art_id-/ > > They claim to be better than the competition. > > Michael > > www.wellenzohn.net (just painted the interior) > > -------- > RV-10 builder (wings) > #511 > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134341#134341 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Wayne Edgerton" <wayne.e(at)grandecom.net>
Subject: Bad battery/bad experience
Date: Sep 14, 2007
I thought I would pass along to you an experience I've had with Tex-Air Parts in Fort Worth on a Concorde battery I purchased from them. At the beginning of the year I purchase a Concorde RG25CX for my plane from Tex-Air but didn't use it until May when I went to start the plane. The battery was DOA and I returned it for exchange. They wouldn't exchange it outright but rather I had to buy a new one and they said they would process the credit and send it to me. As of today I still haven't received the credit. Below is an e-mail I sent them on Aug 25th and I'm still waiting for the refund. I guess what's irritating me is what appears to be their unwillingness to refund my money for a bad battery they sold me. I'm just posting this to give others heads up on where you purchase your items and be sure they will stand behind what they sell. Here is the e-mail I sent them on Aug 25th. Also I've noticed that when starting the plane with this battery I get an initial hesitation, like it's having difficulty turning the engine over but when I try the second time it turns over fine. In hindsight I might look at the Odyssey PC925 rather than the Concorde. Wayne Edgerton N602WT a little pissed off at Tex-Air _________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ I WILL FWD YOUR EMAIL TO GENE. HE IS THE ONE THAT KNOWS ABOUT YOUR BATTERY. SORRY YOU ARE HAVING SO MUCH TROUBLE. THANKS, DONNA ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- From: Wayne Edgerton [mailto:wayne.e(at)grandecom.net] Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2007 6:20 AM Subject: Return refund To return credit manager, On 5/18/07 I returned a Concorde battery RG25CX, see attachment. I purchased the battery from your company for the RV10 that I was building. When I was ready to start my engine on the RV10 it would not start it. The battery was obviously defective somehow right out of the box. So I returned the battery to your store in Fort Worth and purchased another one, which has worked fine. I was told at the time that I would have to pay for the new battery and then would receive credit for the returned battery when it was tested. After sometime I called into your FW store and asked about the progress of the credit. I was told that there would be a charge of something like $90 to test the battery and I think I had to pay the shipping charge back to the supplier to have it tested. This obviously irritated me and I told the person why don't I just write this experience off to a company with a really bad return policy, but that I would be making a posting to the RV blog about my experience with the battery and your company. I was told to wait and lets see what can be done. I did wait and nothing happened so I called back in and was told someone in the back had to test it and they had been really busy. I have called in on multiple occasion inquiring on the progress, probably 5 or 6 times, and have been told we're getting close. Let me explain that the money for me is not the issue. The issue is I bought a battery from your company that apparently was defective out of the box and now I'm getting a complete run around on receiving back credit for it. Boy if you think this type of customer service creates customer loyalty, you must have attended the wrong business school. I believe I've been really patient on this but the patience issue has just about run it's coarse. I thought it only fair to inform you that if something isn't forthcoming on this issue very soon my intentions are to write a letter to the Better Business Bureau regarding your business practices on this type of issue. I intend to also post this same complaint and experience on the RV builders blog. Again trust me this is not about the monies, hell if I'm building a $250,000 airplane this is small potatoes, but rather that you appear to be jerking me around on a return that should have been an exchange at the time of the return. I was told that it's the battery company that is the problem. Then I would suggest that you drop that line of product from your inventory if you are unable to support it. If you went to a department store and bought an item and then because it was defective took it back, would you accept the explanation that I really can't give you credit until the supplier oks it? I think not. If you take on a product and sell it you have to take responsibility with the customer for that product and you deal with the supplier or at least that's how I always ran my business. I never had a vendor that had that much control over me, it was actually the opposite. If they didn't want to support their product they were gone. Understand this is not a threat but rather I'm just letting you know in advance what my intentions are so you are not surprised when it occurs. Wayne Edgerton ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
Date: Sep 14, 2007
Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
On another note, AOPA plans to fight any mandatory upgrades to 406 because of the large price difference..... http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2007/070913elt.html Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Werner Schneider Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 3:52 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Michael, did you see their price? Christen sells one for close to 2300$ wonder what the difference to the ME406 is as it seems currently the cheapest on the market. br Werner Michael Wellenzohn wrote: > > There was a new ELT presented at Oshkosh. > > http://en.martec.fr/page/p-191/art_id-/ > > They claim to be better than the competition. > > Michael > > www.wellenzohn.net (just painted the interior) > > -------- > RV-10 builder (wings) > #511 > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134341#134341 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Mark Ritter <mritter509(at)msn.com>
Subject: Bad battery/bad experience
Date: Sep 14, 2007
Wayne, I'm using two Odyssey 680PC's and they are working great. They are going o n two years of use. Are you going to LOE? Mark RV-10/N410MR
From: wayne.e(at)grandecom.netTo: rv10-list(at)matronics.comSubject: RV10-List: B ad battery/bad experienceDate: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:18:45 -0500 I thought I would pass along to you an experience I've had with Tex-Air Par ts in Fort Worth on a Concorde battery I purchased from them. At the beginn ing of the year I purchase a Concorde RG25CX for my plane from Tex-Air but didn't use it unti l May when I went to start the plane. The battery was DOA and I returned it for exchange. They wouldn't exchange it outright but rather I had to buy a new one and they said they would process the credit and send it to me. As of today I still haven't received the credit. Below is an e-mail I sent the m on Aug 25th and I'm still waiting for the refund. I guess what's irritating me is what appears to be their unwillingness to r efund my money for a bad battery they sold me. I'm just posting this to giv e others heads up on where you purchase your items and be sure they will st and behind what they sell. Here is the e-mail I sent them on Aug 25th. Also I've noticed that when starting the plane with this battery I get an i nitial hesitation, like it's having difficulty turning the engine over but when I try the second time it turns over fine. In hindsight I might look at the Odyssey PC925 rather than the Concorde. Wayne Edgerton N602WT a little pissed off at Tex-Air ___________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ I WILL FWD YOUR EMAIL TO GENE. HE IS THE ONE THAT KNOWS ABOUT YOUR BATTE RY. SORRY YOU ARE HAVING SO MUCH TROUBLE. THANKS, DONNA From: Wayne Edgerton [mailto:wayne.e(at)grandecom.net] Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2007 6:20 AMTo: texair(at)texair.comSubject: Return refund To return credit manager, On 5/18/07 I returned a Concorde battery RG25CX, see attachment. I purchase d the battery from your company for the RV10 that I was building. When I wa s ready to start my engine on the RV10 it would not start it. The battery w as obviously defective somehow right out of the box. So I returned the batt ery to your store in Fort Worth and purchased another one, which has worked fine. I was told at the time that I would have to pay for the new battery and then would receive credit for the returned battery when it was tested. After sometime I called into your FW store and asked about the progress of the credit. I was told that there would be a charge of something like $90 t o test the battery and I think I had to pay the shipping charge back to the supplier to have it tested. This obviously irritated me and I told the per son why don't I just write this experience off to a company with a really b ad return policy, but that I would be making a posting to the RV blog about my experience with the battery and your company. I was told to wait and le ts see what can be done. I did wait and nothing happened so I called back in and was told someone in the back had to test it and they had been really busy. I have called in on multiple occasion inquiring on the progress, probably 5 or 6 times, and ha ve been told we're getting close. Let me explain that the money for me is n ot the issue. The issue is I bought a battery from your company that appare ntly was defective out of the box and now I'm getting a complete run around on receiving back credit for it. Boy if you think this type of customer se rvice creates customer loyalty, you must have attended the wrong business s chool. I believe I've been really patient on this but the patience issue has just about run it's coarse. I thought it only fair to inform you that if somethi ng isn't forthcoming on this issue very soon my intentions are to write a l etter to the Better Business Bureau regarding your business practices on th is type of issue. I intend to also post this same complaint and experience on the RV builders blog. Again trust me this is not about the monies, hell if I'm building a $250,00 0 airplane this is small potatoes, but rather that you appear to be jerking me around on a return that should have been an exchange at the time of the return. I was told that it's the battery company that is the problem. Then I would suggest that you drop that line of product from your inventory if you are unable to support it. If you went to a department store and bought an item and then because it was defective took it back, would you accept th e explanation that I really can't give you credit until the supplier oks it ? I think not. If you take on a product and sell it you have to take respon sibility with the customer for that product and you deal with the supplier or at least that's how I always ran my business. I never had a vendor that had that much control over me, it was actually the opposite. If they didn't want to support their product they were gone. Understand this is not a threat but rather I'm just letting you know in adv ance what my intentions are so you are not surprised when it occurs. Wayne Edgerton _________________________________________________________________ Capture your memories in an online journal! http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us ________________________________________________________________________________
From: GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Date: Sep 14, 2007
Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Michael...I know AOPA is fighting this with good cause for us...but also be aware that the USAF informed the CAP folks that they will no be accepting the old 121.5 code for SAR's in the future. The will only be responding to the 406 series for SAR's...I don't know how they are going to handle a physical report for an over due aircraft, though. When you read on these ELT's you'd believe they are all fail safe which they are not. CAP still finds down aircraft via search in air and on ground besides electronic methods...but it's not so immediate, though. Patrick ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 14, 2007
From: Shawn Moon <moons1999(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
It seems to me that they are fighting the wrong battle. What they should be doing is working on ways to get more companies to manufacture them so th ere is more competition and (hopefully) lower prices. I will admit, though , that it seems that in aerospace the first company to market sets the pric e and then everyone else just seems to follow that pricing. It seems to me that the 406 is a much better solution yet things like this only prove to impede the acceptance of the newer standards.=0A =0A--Shawn=0A40366 - Wings =0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: RV Builder (Michael Sausen) <rvbu ilder(at)sausen.net>=0ATo: "rv10-list(at)matronics.com" =0ASent: Friday, September 14, 2007 8:56:53 AM=0ASubject: RE: RV10-List: Re : Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.=0A=0A--> RV10-List message po sted by: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" =0A=0AOn anoth er note, AOPA plans to fight any mandatory upgrades to 406 because of the l arge price difference.....=0A=0Ahttp://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2007 /070913elt.html=0A=0AMichael=0A=0A-----Original Message-----=0AFrom: owner- rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com ] On Behalf Of Werner Schneider=0ASent: Friday, September 14, 2007 3:52 AM =0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com=0ASubject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Is AmeriKing g Schneider =0A=0AMichael,=0Adid you see their price? Chris ten sells one for close to 2300$ wonder=0Awhat the difference to the ME406 is as it seems currently the cheapest=0Aon the market.=0A=0Abr Werner=0A=0A lenzohn" =0A>=0A> There was a new ELT presented at Os hkosh.=0A>=0A> http://en.martec.fr/page/p-191/art_id-/=0A>=0A> They claim t o be better than the competition.=0A>=0A> Michael=0A>=0A> www.wellenzohn.ne t (just painted the interior)=0A>=0A> --------=0A> RV-10 builder (wings) =0A> #511=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A> Read this topic online here:=0A>=0A> http://f orums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134341#134341=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A> =============0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A =0A_______________________________________________________________________ _____________=0ABoardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now oo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 14, 2007
From: "pascal" <rv10builder(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Bad battery/bad experience
Looks like you were more patient than I. BBB needs to be advised. This will speak louder for others who look at the Tex-Air company and see that people have complained than anything else. On a different perspective and this is related to tools. I had a a countersink that broke shortly after using it for the empennage and I wrote Brown tools asking if it was normal. Michael Brown himself took the e-mail, expressed concern, asked for a picture with the writing so he could track the source, than immediately shipped out 2 replacement countersinks (different source). There are great support teams out there and I'm sure using this forum and Tim's site we can steer those behind us in the right direction. Tim has mentioned SteinAir as a resource others other companies. Pascal ----- Original Message ----- From: Wayne Edgerton To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 6:18 AM Subject: RV10-List: Bad battery/bad experience I thought I would pass along to you an experience I've had with Tex-Air Parts in Fort Worth on a Concorde battery I purchased from them. At the beginning of the year I purchase a Concorde RG25CX for my plane from Tex-Air but didn't use it until May when I went to start the plane. The battery was DOA and I returned it for exchange. They wouldn't exchange it outright but rather I had to buy a new one and they said they would process the credit and send it to me. As of today I still haven't received the credit. Below is an e-mail I sent them on Aug 25th and I'm still waiting for the refund. I guess what's irritating me is what appears to be their unwillingness to refund my money for a bad battery they sold me. I'm just posting this to give others heads up on where you purchase your items and be sure they will stand behind what they sell. Here is the e-mail I sent them on Aug 25th. Also I've noticed that when starting the plane with this battery I get an initial hesitation, like it's having difficulty turning the engine over but when I try the second time it turns over fine. In hindsight I might look at the Odyssey PC925 rather than the Concorde. Wayne Edgerton N602WT a little pissed off at Tex-Air _________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ I WILL FWD YOUR EMAIL TO GENE. HE IS THE ONE THAT KNOWS ABOUT YOUR BATTERY. SORRY YOU ARE HAVING SO MUCH TROUBLE. THANKS, DONNA ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- From: Wayne Edgerton [mailto:wayne.e(at)grandecom.net] Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2007 6:20 AM To: texair(at)texair.com Subject: Return refund To return credit manager, On 5/18/07 I returned a Concorde battery RG25CX, see attachment. I purchased the battery from your company for the RV10 that I was building. When I was ready to start my engine on the RV10 it would not start it. The battery was obviously defective somehow right out of the box. So I returned the battery to your store in Fort Worth and purchased another one, which has worked fine. I was told at the time that I would have to pay for the new battery and then would receive credit for the returned battery when it was tested. After sometime I called into your FW store and asked about the progress of the credit. I was told that there would be a charge of something like $90 to test the battery and I think I had to pay the shipping charge back to the supplier to have it tested. This obviously irritated me and I told the person why don't I just write this experience off to a company with a really bad return policy, but that I would be making a posting to the RV blog about my experience with the battery and your company. I was told to wait and lets see what can be done. I did wait and nothing happened so I called back in and was told someone in the back had to test it and they had been really busy. I have called in on multiple occasion inquiring on the progress, probably 5 or 6 times, and have been told we're getting close. Let me explain that the money for me is not the issue. The issue is I bought a battery from your company that apparently was defective out of the box and now I'm getting a complete run around on receiving back credit for it. Boy if you think this type of customer service creates customer loyalty, you must have attended the wrong business school. I believe I've been really patient on this but the patience issue has just about run it's coarse. I thought it only fair to inform you that if something isn't forthcoming on this issue very soon my intentions are to write a letter to the Better Business Bureau regarding your business practices on this type of issue. I intend to also post this same complaint and experience on the RV builders blog. Again trust me this is not about the monies, hell if I'm building a $250,000 airplane this is small potatoes, but rather that you appear to be jerking me around on a return that should have been an exchange at the time of the return. I was told that it's the battery company that is the problem. Then I would suggest that you drop that line of product from your inventory if you are unable to support it. If you went to a department store and bought an item and then because it was defective took it back, would you accept the explanation that I really can't give you credit until the supplier oks it? I think not. If you take on a product and sell it you have to take responsibility with the customer for that product and you deal with the supplier or at least that's how I always ran my business. I never had a vendor that had that much control over me, it was actually the opposite. If they didn't want to support their product they were gone. Understand this is not a threat but rather I'm just letting you know in advance what my intentions are so you are not surprised when it occurs. Wayne Edgerton ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
Date: Sep 14, 2007
Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
This is very true, but it gives people options like keeping your existing ELT until prices drop a bit and using a portable 406 PLB like the MicroFix . I expect that most airliners and many other aircraft will continue to fl y with their second radio tuned to 121.5 as good members of the community. For me this seems like a good compromise and allows for portability that y ou just can't get in the on board units. When the on board units drop in p rice to a reasonable figure I will then replace and have two levels of redu ndancy for that rare case I need SAR to find me. Yes for this to work it requires the PLB to be activated prior to an inci dent in case of unconsciousness. I plan to mount it somewhere in arms reac h so that I can add it to the emergency checklist. The nice thing with the Microfix is it's just a matter of hitting one button and freeing the ante nna. If it's secured someplace like under my legs, it has a very good chan ce of surviving if I do. And with the canopy being made of fiberglass it i s essentially transparent to the beacon. My $0.02 Michael From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m atronics.com] On Behalf Of GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 9:21 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. Michael...I know AOPA is fighting this with good cause for us...but also be aware that the USAF informed the CAP folks that they will no be accepting the old 121.5 code for SAR's in the future. The will only be responding to the 406 series for SAR's...I don't know how they are going to handle a phy sical report for an over due aircraft, though. When you read on these ELT's you'd believe they are all fail safe which the y are not. CAP still finds down aircraft via search in air and on ground b esides electronic methods...but it's not so immediate, though. Patrick ________________________________ See what's new at Make AOL Your Homepage. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 14, 2007
From: Scott Schmidt <scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Bad battery/bad experience
The best in this business are Stein Air and Flightline Interiors. If every company could replicate their customer service the world would be in harmo ny. =0AYou can tell when a supplier loves their job, their product, and the community they sell to. Even though Stein gives me crap about not wearing his t-shirts during prime photo opportunities at Oshkosh, he still is a gr eat supplier. =0AVan's does a good job too but you really get a personal ex perience like working with Stein and Abby. =0Awww.steinair.com=0Ahttp://ww w.flightlineinteriors.com/=0A =0AScott Schmidt=0Ascottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com=0A =0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: pascal <rv10builder(at)verizon.ne t>=0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Friday, September 14, 2007 7:35:35 AM=0ASubject: Re: RV10-List: Bad battery/bad experience=0A=0A=0ALooks like you were more patient than I. BBB needs to be advised. This will speak lou der for others who look at the Tex-Air company and see that people have com plained than anything else.=0A =0AOn a different perspective and this is re lated to tools. I had a a countersink that broke shortly after using it for the empennage and I wrote Brown tools asking if it was normal. Michael Bro wn himself took the e-mail, expressed concern, asked for a picture with the writing so he could track the source, than immediately shipped out 2 repla cement countersinks (different source). There are great support teams out t here and I'm sure using this forum and Tim's site we can steer those behind us in the right direction. Tim has mentioned SteinAir as a resource others other companies.=0APascal=0A =0A----- Original Message ----- =0AFrom: Wayn e Edgerton =0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com =0ASent: Friday, September 14, 20 07 6:18 AM=0ASubject: RV10-List: Bad battery/bad experience=0A=0A=0AI thoug ht I would pass along to you an experience I've had with Tex-Air Parts in F ort Worth on a Concorde battery I purchased from them. At the beginning of the year I =0Apurchase a Concorde RG25CX for my plane from Tex-Air but didn 't use it until May when I went to start the plane. The battery was DOA and I returned it for exchange. They wouldn't exchange it outright but rather I had to buy a new one and they said they would process the credit and send it to me. As of today I still haven't received the credit. Below is an e-m ail I sent them on Aug 25th and I'm still waiting for the refund.=0A =0AI g uess what's irritating me is what appears to be their unwillingness to refu nd my money for a bad battery they sold me. I'm just posting this to give o thers heads up on where you purchase your items and be sure they will stand behind what they sell.=0A =0AHere is the e-mail I sent them on Aug 25th. =0A =0AAlso I've noticed that when starting the plane with this battery I g et an initial hesitation, like it's having difficulty turning the engine ov er but when I try the second time it turns over fine. In hindsight I might look at the Odyssey PC925 rather than the Concorde.=0A =0AWayne Edgerton N 602WT =0Aa little pissed off at Tex-Air =0A =0A____________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________=0AI WILL FWD YOUR EMAIL TO GENE. H E IS THE ONE THAT KNOWS ABOUT YOUR BATTERY. SORRY YOU ARE HAVING SO MUCH TROUBLE.=0A =0ATHANKS,=0ADONNA=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AFrom: Wayne Edgerton [mailto: wayne.e(at)grandecom.net] =0ASent: Saturday, August 25, 2007 6:20 AM=0ATo: tex air(at)texair.com=0ASubject: Return refund=0A=0A=0ATo return credit manager, =0A =0AOn 5/18/07 I returned a Concorde battery RG25CX, see attachment. I p urchased the battery from your company for the RV10 that I was building. Wh en I was ready to start my engine on the RV10 it would not start it. The ba ttery was obviously defective somehow right out of the box. So I returned t he battery to your store in Fort Worth and purchased another one, which has worked fine. I was told at the time that I would have to pay for the new b attery and then would receive credit for the returned battery when it was t ested.=0A =0AAfter sometime I called into your FW store and asked about the progress of the credit. I was told that there would be a charge of somethi ng like $90 to test the battery and I think I had to pay the shipping charg e back to the supplier to have it tested. This obviously irritated me and I told the person why don't I just write this experience off to a company wi th a really bad return policy, but that I would be making a posting to the RV blog about my experience with the battery and your company. I was told t o wait and lets see what can be done.=0A =0AI did wait and nothing happened so I called back in and was told someone in the back had to test it and th ey had been really busy. I have called in on multiple occasion inquiring on the progress, probably 5 or 6 times, and have been told we're getting clos e. Let me explain that the money for me is not the issue. The issue is I bo ught a battery from your company that apparently was defective out of the b ox and now I'm getting a complete run around on receiving back credit for i t. Boy if you think this type of customer service creates customer loyalty, you must have attended the wrong business school.=0A =0AI believe I've bee n really patient on this but the patience issue has just about run it's coa rse. I thought it only fair to inform you that if something isn't forthcomi ng on this issue very soon my intentions are to write a letter to the Bette r Business Bureau regarding your business practices on this type of issue. I intend to also post this same complaint and experience on the RV builders blog. =0A =0AAgain trust me this is not about the monies, hell if I'm buil ding a $250,000 airplane this is small potatoes, but rather that you appear to be jerking me around on a return that should have been an exchange at t he time of the return. I was told that it's the battery company that is the problem. Then I would suggest that you drop that line of product from your inventory if you are unable to support it. If you went to a department sto re and bought an item and then because it was defective took it back, would you accept the explanation that I really can't give you credit until the s upplier oks it? I think not. If you take on a product and sell it you have to take responsibility with the customer for that product and you deal with the supplier or at least that's how I always ran my business. I never had a vendor that had that much control over me, it was actually the opposite. If they didn't want to support their product they were gone.=0A =0AUndersta nd this is not a threat but rather I'm just letting you know in advance wha t my intentions are so you are not surprised when it occurs. =0A =0AWayne E dgerton=0A=0A=0Ahref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http: //www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List=0Ahref="http://forums.matronics.c ============ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <rvmail(at)thelefflers.com>
Subject: Used Wing Kit
Date: Sep 14, 2007
I'm about ready to purchase the wing kit and a used has popped up on VAF? I'm curious as to what concerns and/or issues may arise by purchasing a used kit? This particular kit has been sitting in the midwest, unopened for 3 years. It looks like I could save about 10%, but is saving 10% worth the risk? Some of thing things I've already thought about are: - Corrision - Missing parts (I believe Van's only warranties for 30 days) - Blue plastic permanently adhered to the aluminum Have there been any significant changes to the wing in the last 3 years? Any other concerns that I haven't thought of? thanks, bob ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Free RV-10 W&B being offered
From: "Tom Meeker" <tom(at)aoaircrafters.com>
Date: Sep 14, 2007
Hey, Alpha Omega Aircrafters is offering a free weight and balance to RV-10 owners on September 29 if you call in in time. They are having a little fly in there (KCID) with reps from Lycoming, MT Props, Tru-trak, B&C, Airflow Systems, maybe others. Looks like they are also offering free food. Could be a fun event for RV-10 owners or builders. The number to call for more information is 319-362-9055. The guy's name is Tom. The AOA web site is www.aoaircrafters.com. I attached the flyer to the event also. Check it out. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134435#134435 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/rv10_flyer_200.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: glare shield paint
From: "jayb" <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Sep 14, 2007
What are folks using to paint / cover their glare shields? Someone mentioned "Plasticoat" (spelling?) works well, but I couldn't find mention of it at Spruce. Thanks, Jay Is glass work better than metal work? Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134452#134452 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rene Felker" <rene(at)felker.com>
Subject: glare shield paint
Date: Sep 14, 2007
I got the stuff Cleveland sells. Looks great. Rene' Felker N423CF 40322 801-721-6080 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jayb Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 2:07 PM Subject: RV10-List: glare shield paint What are folks using to paint / cover their glare shields? Someone mentioned "Plasticoat" (spelling?) works well, but I couldn't find mention of it at Spruce. Thanks, Jay Is glass work better than metal work? Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134452#134452 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: glare shield paint
From: "bcondrey" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com>
Date: Sep 14, 2007
Plasti-kote is rattle can paint that's available through auto part stores. http://www.plastikote.com/plastikote/index.jsp Bob #40105 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134486#134486 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 14, 2007
From: "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
A friend reported he had a 406 unit self activate while the aircraft was in hangar with no one around. I don't know how FAA will handle overdue and reports of aircraft hearing ELT, but I would expect they would be relaying to USAF expecting normal SAR treatment. On 9/14/07, GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com wrote: > > Michael...I know AOPA is fighting this with good cause for us...but also > be aware that the USAF informed the CAP folks that they will no be accepting > the old 121.5 code for SAR's in the future. The will only be responding > to the 406 series for SAR's...I don't know how they are going to handle a > physical report for an over due aircraft, though. > > When you read on these ELT's you'd believe they are all fail safe which > they are not. CAP still finds down aircraft via search in air and on ground > besides electronic methods...but it's not so immediate, though. > > Patrick > > > ------------------------------ > See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage. > > * > > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Free RV-10 W&B being offered
Date: Sep 15, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Randy Hartman bills himself as only one of six Build Assist facilities in the US. Wonder if he counts Jesse? We have six just in Oregon and will wait for the FAA to redefine the 51% rule before doing a new head count on this growing trend. Liability is going to be the bane of this unique and controversial concept. If only the FAA did not give Repairmen certificates for writing checks to such firms. Its back to bucking my own rivets.. Thank you. John C in Orygun -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom Meeker Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 11:22 AM Subject: RV10-List: Free RV-10 W&B being offered Hey, Alpha Omega Aircrafters is offering a free weight and balance to RV-10 owners on September 29 if you call in in time. They are having a little fly in there (KCID) with reps from Lycoming, MT Props, Tru-trak, B&C, Airflow Systems, maybe others. Looks like they are also offering free food. Could be a fun event for RV-10 owners or builders. The number to call for more information is 319-362-9055. The guy's name is Tom. The AOA web site is www.aoaircrafters.com. I attached the flyer to the event also. Check it out. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134435#134435 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/rv10_flyer_200.pdf ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground wire
termination
Date: Sep 15, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Much of the consternation in finalizing RV-10 kit completion is the delay in choice of avionics, the choice of antenna, selecting antenna placement, and then final ground strapping/ground plane/ ground wire lug. No one is saying that the purchase of avionics needs to be done any too early. That is a lot of money $$$, but the choice should drive the choice of antenna. The choice of antenna should drive the location and then the method of attachment. The distance from the mount to the avionics is also important and the best performing wire (both coax and AWG22 power and ground) chosen. Few are even talking about horizontal and vertical polarity. Or =BD wave, 5/8 wave and associated wind load. I know Sausen said it didn't amount to much but then we just replaced all the antennae that got snapped off recently. Seems some of the flying veterans should weigh in on how early during the kit completion the antenna mount technique could be (should be) resolved. I am seeing a lot of builds which delays this important choice late into the canopy installation. I remember just one builder presented a spreadsheet/ checkmark matrix as to what, where and why -fairly early on, in his build. Composite canopies can play havoc with those choices. It is humorous that so many VANs builders thing of these as aluminum airplanes. Seems when it comes to antennae, they are more composite in their mount location than most certificated metal aircraft. Make it carbon fiber and its even worse. Has anyone tried duplicating Archers with copper rather than aluminum (inside the composite wingtip)? Any takers? Tim's WSI post got me reflecting... which you all know may not be a good thing. Plus with 1,000 subscribers there are sure a lot of lurkers and I don't want to lose Michael Sausen's posts again. Thanks Tim! Maybe some of you can rate your antenna performance and make stronger recommendations to the next 700 builders. John Cox #600 W7COX - (Amateur Radio) for those not informed ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "mark verrill" <mverrill(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Top Wing Skin and Wing Walk Doublers
Date: Sep 15, 2007
Hi folks, just looking for verification from someone who has been past this part before. Pg. 16-2 calls for several# 19 holes to be drilled, then countersunk. This is a first for me to countersink a hole this large in other than solid aluminum, like .060 plus. In this case, the top layer is the .025 top layer of skin, the walk doublers at .020 and the rib at ~ .025. This seems to leave some terrbly thin edges around this countersink. Based upon the other steps, it appears this wiill have another layer of dimpled material then a screw...which may make this less daunting, but without the manual section on fairning for the wing roots, I really don't know exactly what will attach here and how. I set up an example with some scraps of the same thickness and it appears that with another dimpled layer inside this countersink that this will be solid dispite the thin bevel. Someone reassure me please that I am reading this correctly (specifically step 3 on pg. 16-2) Thanks, Mark Verrill ~ SB wings mark verrill mverrill(at)earthlink.net EarthLink Revolves Around You. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)cox.net>
Subject: Top Wing Skin and Wing Walk Doublers
Date: Sep 15, 2007
You are reading it correctly. On the top skin only all but one of the inboard holes for #8 screws are countersunk, not dimpled. The aft most #8 screw hole is dimpled as it is beyond the area where here is a wing walk doubler. The countersunk hole is bigger (wider) than it would be in a thicker material but you will have the wing fairing in this hole under the screw head. Note that only the hole for the #8 screw is countersunk. The nut plate rivet holes on the skin are dimpled and all 3/32 holes are countersunk on the doubler. For this area the ribs are not dimpled. I just finished doing this on my left wing. Looking back however I might just dimple the doubler and all #8 screw holes on the right wing. This was the process when I built my 8A. Carl Froehlich Dogwood Airpark (VA-42) _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of mark verrill Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 3:40 PM Subject: RV10-List: Top Wing Skin and Wing Walk Doublers Hi folks, just looking for verification from someone who has been past this part before. Pg. 16-2 calls for several# 19 holes to be drilled, then countersunk. This is a first for me to countersink a hole this large in other than solid aluminum, like .060 plus. In this case, the top layer is the .025 top layer of skin, the walk doublers at .020 and the rib at ~ .025. This seems to leave some terrbly thin edges around this countersink. Based upon the other steps, it appears this wiill have another layer of dimpled material then a screw...which may make this less daunting, but without the manual section on fairning for the wing roots, I really don't know exactly what will attach here and how. I set up an example with some scraps of the same thickness and it appears that with another dimpled layer inside this countersink that this will be solid dispite the thin bevel. Someone reassure me please that I am reading this correctly (specifically step 3 on pg. 16-2) Thanks, Mark Verrill ~ SB wings mark verrill mverrill(at)earthlink.net EarthLink Revolves Around You. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 15, 2007
From: "pascal" <rv10builder(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Top Wing Skin and Wing Walk Doublers
no idea about the answer but I'll throw a Wing Gotcha from Tim's site out there for you since your on this page. This clip comes from: http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/wing/20040906/index.html On page 16-2, the aft wing-walk doubler has a nutplate holes to drill. Read ahead for the nutplate riveting and you will see that the forward most hole in the aft wing-walk doubler is correct per plans. I accidently drilled mine for a standard center-threaded nutplate, whereas this gets the nutplate with the threads on the end, with 2 rivets side by side. Pascal ----- Original Message ----- From: mark verrill To: RV10-List(at)matronics.com Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 12:40 PM Subject: RV10-List: Top Wing Skin and Wing Walk Doublers Hi folks, just looking for verification from someone who has been past this part before. Pg. 16-2 calls for several# 19 holes to be drilled, then countersunk. This is a first for me to countersink a hole this large in other than solid aluminum, like .060 plus. In this case, the top layer is the .025 top layer of skin, the walk doublers at .020 and the rib at ~ .025. This seems to leave some terrbly thin edges around this countersink. Based upon the other steps, it appears this wiill have another layer of dimpled material then a screw...which may make this less daunting, but without the manual section on fairning for the wing roots, I really don't know exactly what will attach here and how. I set up an example with some scraps of the same thickness and it appears that with another dimpled layer inside this countersink that this will be solid dispite the thin bevel. Someone reassure me please that I am reading this correctly (specifically step 3 on pg. 16-2) Thanks, Mark Verrill ~ SB wings mark verrill mverrill(at)earthlink.net EarthLink Revolves Around You. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 15, 2007
From: Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com>
Subject: Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground
wire termination I just stuck em where they look cool....lol, I pretty much followed the pla cement by several builders, the location of my remote transponder led to th at antenna located aft of the baggage compartment on the bottom right near the elevator bellcrank. Com 1 is on the right bottom, near the rear seats. GPS and GDL-69A antennas aft of the cabin top on the upper rear skin. Com 2 is an Archer in the right tip along with the MKR BCN made from stripped RG -400 wire, Nav is an Archer in the left tip. I powered the panel the other night the both=C2-COM's recieved very well but I'm inside the KVGT's clas s D space at my house, didn't try to transmit. I was too busy looking for s moke and playing with all the whistles and bells. I used a heat gun to warm the cylinders, EGT and CHT started to show a rise from the 92 degress in t he garage to about 110 before I stopped warming the cylinders, MAP was hold ing=C2-a steady reading so far it looks OK.=C2-Thankfully all seemed to be working as advertised. I could not tell you about the NAV antenna cause the wings are in the hangar and I could not plug them in to see how it was working.....I have only done continuity, short to ground and=C2-checked the trim and lights=C2-on the wings, no real ops testing there yet....giv e me about three months :)=C2-=C2- Rick S. 40185 ----- Original Message ----- From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 11:13:58 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angel es Subject: RV10-List: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground w ire termination Much of the consternation in finalizing RV-10 kit completion is the delay i n choice of avionics, the choice of antenna, selecting antenna placement, a nd then final ground strapping/ ground plane/ ground wire lug.=C2- No one is saying that the purchase of avionics needs to be done any too early.=C2 - That is a lot of money $$$ , but the choice should drive the choice of antenna.=C2- The choice of antenna should drive the location and then the method of attachment. =C2- The distance from the mount to the avionics i s also important and the best performing wire (both coax and AWG22 power an d ground) chosen . =C2- Few are even talking about horizontal and vertica l polarity. =C2- Or =C2=BD wave, 5/8 wave and associated wind load.=C2- I know Sausen said it didn =99 t amount to much but then we just rep laced all the antenna e that got snapped off recently. Seems some of the flying veterans should weigh in on how early during the k it completion the antenna mount technique could be (should be) resolved. I am seeing a lot of builds which delays this important choice late into the canopy installation . I remember just one builder presented a spreadsheet/ checkmark matrix as to what, where and why - fairly early on , in his build .=C2- Composite canopies can play havoc with those choices. =C2- It is humorous that so many VANs builders thing of these as aluminum airplanes. =C2- Seems when it comes to antenna e , they are more composite in their mount location than most certificated metal aircraft . Make it carbon fiber and its even worse. Has anyone tried duplicating Archers with copper rather than aluminum (insi de the composite wingtip) ? Any takers? =C2- Tim =99 s WSI post got me reflecting whi ch you all know may not be a good thing. =C2- Plus with 1,000 subscribers there are sure a lot of lurkers and I don =99 t want to lose Michael Sausen =99 s posts again.=C2- Thanks Tim! =C2- Maybe some of you can rate your antenna performance and make stronger recommendations to the next 700 builders. John Cox #600 W7COX =93 ( Amateur Radio ) for those not informed ==== ======================= ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground
wire termination
Date: Sep 15, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
I will be patient. I think this kind of discussion is of value. Thanks John C. 40600 ________________________________ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick Sked Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 2:28 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground wire termination I just stuck em where they look cool....lol, I pretty much followed the placement by several builders, the location of my remote transponder led to that antenna located aft of the baggage compartment on the bottom right near the elevator bellcrank. Com 1 is on the right bottom, near the rear seats. GPS and GDL-69A antennas aft of the cabin top on the upper rear skin. Com 2 is an Archer in the right tip along with the MKR BCN made from stripped RG-400 wire, Nav is an Archer in the left tip. I powered the panel the other night the both COM's recieved very well but I'm inside the KVGT's class D space at my house, didn't try to transmit. I was too busy looking for smoke and playing with all the whistles and bells. I used a heat gun to warm the cylinders, EGT and CHT started to show a rise from the 92 degress in the garage to about 110 before I stopped warming the cylinders, MAP was holding a steady reading so far it looks OK. Thankfully all seemed to be working as advertised. I could not tell you about the NAV antenna cause the wings are in the hangar and I could not plug them in to see how it was working.....I have only done continuity, short to ground and checked the trim and lights on the wings, no real ops testing there yet....give me about three months :) Rick S. 40185 ----- Original Message ----- From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 11:13:58 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles Subject: RV10-List: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground wire termination Much of the consternation in finalizing RV-10 kit completion is the delay in choice of avionics, the choice of antenna, selecting antenna placement, and then final ground strapping/ground plane/ ground wire lug. No one is saying that the purchase of avionics needs to be done any too early. That is a lot of money $$$, but the choice should drive the choice of antenna. The choice of antenna should drive the location and then the method of attachment. The distance from the mount to the avionics is also important and the best performing wire (both coax and AWG22 power and ground) chosen. Few are even talking about horizontal and vertical polarity. Or =BD wave, 5/8 wave and associated wind load. I know Sausen said it didn't amount to much but then we just replaced all the antennae that got snapped off recently. Seems some of the flying veterans should weigh in on how early during the kit completion the antenna mount technique could be (should be) resolved. I am seeing a lot of builds which delays this important choice late into the canopy installation. I remember just one builder presented a spreadsheet/ checkmark matrix as to what, where and why -fairly early on, in his build. Composite canopies can play havoc with those choices. It is humorous that so many VANs builders thing of these as aluminum airplanes. Seems when it comes to antennae, they are more composite in their mount location than most certificated metal aircraft. Make it carbon fiber and its even worse. Has anyone tried duplicating Archers with copper rather than aluminum (inside the composite wingtip)? Any takers? Tim's WSI post got me reflecting... which you all know may not be a good thing. Plus with 1,000 subscribers there are sure a lot of lurkers and I don't want to lose Michael Sausen's posts again. Thanks Tim! Maybe some of you can rate your antenna performance and make stronger recommendations to the next 700 builders. John Cox #600 W7COX - (Amateur Radio) for those not informed get=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List p://forums.matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ben Westfall" <rv10(at)sinkrate.com>
Subject: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground wire
termination
Date: Sep 15, 2007
John you=92re probably looking more for antenna performance than ease of placement but I thought it relevant to contribute this=85 I opted to put both com antenna=92s on the belly just aft of the rear spar attach bulkhead (copied from Tim Olson http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/fuselage/20050522/index.html ). I was crawling all over Van=92s personal 10 at the homecoming this year and noticed that he actually mounted his com antenna forward of the rear spar attach bulkhead. The coax connector is then accessible by removing the cover over the flap actuator bar. The significance being the antenna wire is accessible w/o cutting holes after final assembly. I think Tim opted to put his aux batteries in this location. I failed to read ahead in the plans far enough to see this as a viable mounting location. I cannot attest to performance of either location. -Ben #40579 Tailcone Attach PDX _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 11:14 AM Subject: RV10-List: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground wire termination Much of the consternation in finalizing RV-10 kit completion is the delay in choice of avionics, the choice of antenna, selecting antenna placement, and then final ground strapping/ground plane/ ground wire lug. No one is saying that the purchase of avionics needs to be done any too early. That is a lot of money $$$, but the choice should drive the choice of antenna. The choice of antenna should drive the location and then the method of attachment. The distance from the mount to the avionics is also important and the best performing wire (both coax and AWG22 power and ground) chosen. Few are even talking about horizontal and vertical polarity. Or =BD wave, 5/8 wave and associated wind load. I know Sausen said it didn=92t amount to much but then we just replaced all the antennae that got snapped off recently. Seems some of the flying veterans should weigh in on how early during the kit completion the antenna mount technique could be (should be) resolved. I am seeing a lot of builds which delays this important choice late into the canopy installation. I remember just one builder presented a spreadsheet/ checkmark matrix as to what, where and why -fairly early on, in his build. Composite canopies can play havoc with those choices. It is humorous that so many VANs builders thing of these as aluminum airplanes. Seems when it comes to antennae, they are more composite in their mount location than most certificated metal aircraft. Make it carbon fiber and its even worse. Has anyone tried duplicating Archers with copper rather than aluminum (inside the composite wingtip)? Any takers? Tim=92s WSI post got me reflecting=85 which you all know may not be a good thing. Plus with 1,000 subscribers there are sure a lot of lurkers and I don=92t want to lose Michael Sausen=92s posts again. Thanks Tim! Maybe some of you can rate your antenna performance and make stronger recommendations to the next 700 builders. John Cox #600 W7COX ' (Amateur Radio) for those not informed ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 15, 2007
From: "ivo welch" <ivowel(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Vinyl?
Dear RV-10 list: I am about to start advertising my RV10 for sale again. (http://welch.econ.brown.edu/n325hp). Moved to the standard CS 2-blade prop. For sale at $199k---it would probably be very tough to build with the ingredients that are in this plane, much less in the pro quality it was built. alas, its not looking as nice as it should. so, I would also like to spruce up the looks with some vinyl stripe design to go on top of the existing paint. Does anyone have good experiences with someone who produces nice vinyl stripes for easy application? help appreciated. regards, /ivo ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Vinyl?
Date: Sep 15, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Ivo - hoping for the best in your effort to sell N325HP. Two questions - #1 - Why would you give up a three blade and buy to install a two blade prop? I have never heard of getting 325 HP six cylinder Lycoming with those features. #2 - Can you enlighten us? /john -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ivo welch Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 5:50 PM Subject: RV10-List: Vinyl? Dear RV-10 list: I am about to start advertising my RV10 for sale again. (http://welch.econ.brown.edu/n325hp). Moved to the standard CS 2-blade prop. For sale at $199k---it would probably be very tough to build with the ingredients that are in this plane, much less in the pro quality it was built. alas, its not looking as nice as it should. so, I would also like to spruce up the looks with some vinyl stripe design to go on top of the existing paint. Does anyone have good experiences with someone who produces nice vinyl stripes for easy application? help appreciated. regards, /ivo ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 15, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground
wire termination With all this talk about antennas, I've got a question for the group. I need to mount a XM weather antenna and an additional GPS antenna. I already have the primary GPS mounted on the top of the tail cone aft of the cabin top intersection. I am not keen on placing them on the cabin top, primarily for aesthetics, so I'm planning on mounting them side by side on a shelf on the firewall. This will make installation and the cabling easier. The antennas don't require a ground plane as best as I can tell. Mounting them in this location will make for a shorter cable run and an easier installation. Anybody gone this route? Feedback? I think I recall that Checkoway mounted one or more antennas in this manner. Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ > * > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground wire
From: "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net>
Date: Sep 15, 2007
Deems, Rick Gray did the "antenna tray" on his RV10. Check out the "wet" pic. Joe -------- RV8 #80125 RV10 # 40512 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134601#134601 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08221_823.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 15, 2007
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground
wire termination Just wanted to provide feedback on the WSI antenna both location and performance re: grounding. Today I did 400nm with the new WSI AV-300. I've never EVER had my weather work as perfectly as this before. It's fantastic. Before, it was very nice to have, but clearly having only one satellite and having a piss-poor antenna didn't make it all it could be. The new Sirius system was great, with the standard antenna. To get the best positioning, I mounted it on the cabin top, about a foot behind the now GPS-only antenna for my GNS-480. It's too bad that things take antennas in the first place, but now both of these guys have a near level mount, with a full view in all directions. No ground plane required for either of them, which is nice too. The new WSI didn't hiccup once for the entire trip, and it kept me fed with good quality weather. The coolest part is now when I sign on from the test signal to the real deal, the price is even lower than I previously paid. So the location and ground-plane-less install worked great. Now, if you want to mount a COM or NAV antenna, don't think you'll get away without that ground plane. Same thing for the Avidyne TAS from what it sounds like too...so if you're going that route, think ahead as John states. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying John W. Cox wrote: > Much of the consternation in finalizing RV-10 kit completion is the > delay in choice of avionics, the choice of antenna, selecting antenna > placement, and then final ground strapping/ground plane/ ground wire > lug. No one is saying that the purchase of avionics needs to be done > any too early. That is a lot of money $$$, but the choice should drive > the choice of antenna. The choice of antenna should drive the location > and then the method of attachment. The distance from the mount to the > avionics is also important and the best performing wire (both coax and > AWG22 power and ground) chosen. Few are even talking about horizontal > and vertical polarity. Or wave, 5/8 wave and associated wind load. I > know Sausen said it didnt amount to much but then we just replaced all > the antennae that got snapped off recently. > > Seems some of the flying veterans should weigh in on how early during > the kit completion the antenna mount technique could be (should be) > resolved. I am seeing a lot of builds which delays this important choice > late into the canopy installation. I remember just one builder presented > a spreadsheet/ checkmark matrix as to what, where and why -fairly early > on, in his build. Composite canopies can play havoc with those > choices. It is humorous that so many VANs builders thing of these as > aluminum airplanes. Seems when it comes to antennae, they are more > composite in their mount location than most certificated metal aircraft. > Make it carbon fiber and its even worse. > > Has anyone tried duplicating Archers with copper rather than aluminum > (inside the composite wingtip)? > > Any takers? Tims WSI post got me reflecting which you all know may > not be a good thing. Plus with 1,000 subscribers there are sure a lot > of lurkers and I dont want to lose Michael Sausens posts again. > Thanks Tim! Maybe some of you can rate your antenna performance and > make stronger recommendations to the next 700 builders. > > John Cox > > #600 > > W7COX (Amateur Radio) for those not informed > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 15, 2007
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: Top Wing Skin and Wing Walk Doublers
Yep, that's a big "gotcha" section, so proceed carefully when doing those nutplates and countersinks so you do it just the way it's intended. The countersunk holes are just for fastening the wing root fairings later. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying pascal wrote: > no idea about the answer but I'll throw a Wing Gotcha from Tim's site > out there for you since your on this page. > > *This clip comes from: > **http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/wing/20040906/index.html* > On page 16-2 > <http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/wing/20040906/careful16-2.jpg>, the aft > wing-walk doubler has a nutplate holes to drill. Read ahead for the > nutplate riveting and you will see that the forward most hole in the aft > wing-walk doubler is correct per plans. I accidently drilled mine for a > standard center-threaded nutplate, whereas this gets the nutplate with > the threads on the end, with 2 rivets side by side. > > > > Pascal > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* mark verrill > *To:* RV10-List(at)matronics.com > *Sent:* Saturday, September 15, 2007 12:40 PM > *Subject:* RV10-List: Top Wing Skin and Wing Walk Doublers > > Hi folks, just looking for verification from someone who has been > past this part before. Pg. 16-2 calls for several# 19 holes to be > drilled, then countersunk. This is a first for me to countersink a > hole this large in other than solid aluminum, like .060 plus. In > this case, the top layer is the .025 top layer of skin, the walk > doublers at .020 and the rib at ~ .025. This seems to leave some > terrbly thin edges around this countersink. Based upon the other > steps, it appears this wiill have another layer of dimpled material > then a screw...which may make this less daunting, but without the > manual section on fairning for the wing roots, I really don't know > exactly what will attach here and how. I set up an example with > some scraps of the same thickness and it appears that with another > dimpled layer inside this countersink that this will be solid > dispite the thin bevel. Someone reassure me please that I am > reading this correctly (specifically step 3 on pg. 16-2) > > Thanks, > Mark Verrill ~ SB wings > > > mark verrill > mverrill(at)earthlink.net > EarthLink Revolves Around You. > > > * > > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List > href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com > > * > > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 15, 2007
From: "Rick Leach" <papadaddyo(at)tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: Questions
I sent this yesterday but may have had the wrong to address. If it is a duplicate, I apologize. I am just about ready to close up the top skin on the tail. Is there anything that anyone could recommend that I add to the tail or structure prior to putting on the top. As an example, Tim you have some good photos on your site where you added angle to support the AHRS. What about ELT installation, etc. I would love to see some pictures of any installations that might be beneficial to copy. Also, where is the best place for the ELT to go? Thanks, Rick Leach ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 15, 2007
From: Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground
wire termination Have you considered mounting them under the cabin top, inside the Accuracy Avionics overhead console? I know there are two layers of fiberglass and a core, but that shouldn't interfere with the signals. (in my non expert opinion). Any thoughts? Larry Rosen Deems Davis wrote: > > With all this talk about antennas, I've got a question for the group. > I need to mount a XM weather antenna and an additional GPS antenna. I > already have the primary GPS mounted on the top of the tail cone aft > of the cabin top intersection. I am not keen on placing them on the > cabin top, primarily for aesthetics, so I'm planning on mounting them > side by side on a shelf on the firewall. This will make installation > and the cabling easier. The antennas don't require a ground plane as > best as I can tell. Mounting them in this location will make for a > shorter cable run and an easier installation. Anybody gone this route? > Feedback? I think I recall that Checkoway mounted one or more antennas > in this manner. > > Deems Davis # 406 > 'Its all done....Its just not put together' > http://deemsrv10.com/ >> * >> >> * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 15, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground
wire termination Zack thanks for the pic of Ricks install. Larry, I think it's going to be easier to do the firewall shelf. I just spent 60 minutes in the garage and bent up some .032" and riveted it into a decent 'shelf'. I've already got 4 bolts that hold the voltage regulators to the inside of the firewall that I'll use to attach this to. One thing I didn't account for is the slight forward cant of the upper part of the firewall so there is a bit of a tilt to the shelf that I'll have to take out with some shims/standoffs. The cable/antenna runs for the cabin top install are problematic for me. Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ Larry Rosen wrote: > > Have you considered mounting them under the cabin top, inside the > Accuracy Avionics overhead console? I know there are two layers of > fiberglass and a core, but that shouldn't interfere with the signals. > (in my non expert opinion). Any thoughts? > > Larry Rosen > > Deems Davis wrote: >> >> With all this talk about antennas, I've got a question for the group. >> I need to mount a XM weather antenna and an additional GPS antenna. I >> already have the primary GPS mounted on the top of the tail cone aft >> of the cabin top intersection. I am not keen on placing them on the >> cabin top, primarily for aesthetics, so I'm planning on mounting them >> side by side on a shelf on the firewall. This will make installation >> and the cabling easier. The antennas don't require a ground plane as >> best as I can tell. Mounting them in this location will make for a >> shorter cable run and an easier installation. Anybody gone this >> route? Feedback? I think I recall that Checkoway mounted one or more >> antennas in this manner. >> >> Deems Davis # 406 >> 'Its all done....Its just not put together' >> http://deemsrv10.com/ >>> * >>> >>> * >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 15, 2007
From: Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Questions
Seems to be 2 preferred locations for the elt. One under the far aft under the vertical stab and the other is in the tail cone near the baggage compartment bulkhead on the right side. Vans has a mounting kit, but it is easy to make your self. The rear location puts the weight far aft, and has a short wire run to the antenna. Some items to complete prior to closing up the final skin on the tail would be, Any battery box modifications based on the battery you will be using. Pitch servo installation Wire pulls for battery, rear light and strobe, etc. Strobe power supply mounting AHARS (if you are mounting it in the rear and not a wing) Static port tubing runs Just a short list, but a start. Larry Rosen #356 Rick Leach wrote: > > I sent this yesterday but may have had the wrong to address. If it is > a duplicate, I apologize. I am just about ready to close up the top > skin on the tail. Is there anything that anyone could recommend that > I add to the tail or structure prior to putting on the top. As an > example, Tim you have some good photos on your site where you added > angle to support the AHRS. What about ELT installation, etc. I would > love to see some pictures of any installations that might be > beneficial to copy. Also, where is the best place for the ELT to go? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Rick Leach > > > > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DejaVu" <wvu(at)ameritel.net>
Subject: All Painted
Date: Sep 16, 2007
Guys, Some pictures attached for your viewing after 9 months and 90hrs since firs t flight. Anh ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: All Painted
From: "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net>
Date: Sep 16, 2007
DeJa, Nicely done! A beautiful paint scheme. You should be very proud. Zack -------- RV8 #80125 RV10 # 40512 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134653#134653 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com>
Subject: Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground
wire termination Deems, You have a pic of that in your RV-10, OSH pics...dry version. Wish we didn't have a plane to catch that day. I could have spent hours combing over Rick's RV. Rick S. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Deems Davis" <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 8:13:59 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles Subject: Re: RV10-List: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground wire termination Zack thanks for the pic of Ricks install. Larry, I think it's going to be easier to do the firewall shelf. I just spent 60 minutes in the garage and bent up some .032" and riveted it into a decent 'shelf'. I've already got 4 bolts that hold the voltage regulators to the inside of the firewall that I'll use to attach this to. One thing I didn't account for is the slight forward cant of the upper part of the firewall so there is a bit of a tilt to the shelf that I'll have to take out with some shims/standoffs. The cable/antenna runs for the cabin top install are problematic for me. Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ Larry Rosen wrote: > > Have you considered mounting them under the cabin top, inside the > Accuracy Avionics overhead console? I know there are two layers of > fiberglass and a core, but that shouldn't interfere with the signals. > (in my non expert opinion). Any thoughts? > > Larry Rosen > > Deems Davis wrote: >> >> With all this talk about antennas, I've got a question for the group. >> I need to mount a XM weather antenna and an additional GPS antenna. I >> already have the primary GPS mounted on the top of the tail cone aft >> of the cabin top intersection. I am not keen on placing them on the >> cabin top, primarily for aesthetics, so I'm planning on mounting them >> side by side on a shelf on the firewall. This will make installation >> and the cabling easier. The antennas don't require a ground plane as >> best as I can tell. Mounting them in this location will make for a >> shorter cable run and an easier installation. Anybody gone this >> route? Feedback? I think I recall that Checkoway mounted one or more >> antennas in this manner. >> >> Deems Davis # 406 >> 'Its all done....Its just not put together' >> http://deemsrv10.com/ >>> * >>> >>> * >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: RV-10 Incident
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com>
Interesting... I know nothing about the incident but I actually know something about this plane. While at my home airport (SBP) in California I saw an RV-10 parked in our transient restaurant parking. I was very excited to see one in person and it looked kinda nice from a distance. As I got closer my opinion changed considerably. First the good news... The wheel pants, gear legs and the panel were very nice. Now the rest of the story... The fit & finish was about the worst I had ever seen on an RV. The fit around the cowl was horrendous, with several different type screws used with different type washers and the cowl screws were not in a row, some were offset high and low. The baggage door was not aligned well and there was filler between some metal pieces that was only partially filled and partially left "mounded" then painted over. It looked awful!. The wing tips were not cut back to match the trailing edge of the ailerons. (I have not started that part of the build yet but I understand they should line up). By far the worst part and something I thought was a real danger were the back sides of the fiberglass tips to the horizontal stabilizer. They were left hollow, rough cut and very flexible. I was actually horrified that this portion of the build was not completed. I could not imagine that that was airworthy. As you can guess the fit of the doors was not acceptable to me but they were not that far off. And of course there was complete cracking around each window. I did end up taking some detailed photos of the plane and keep them filed in my "RV Pictures" folder under the file name "Ugly RV-10." I don't intend to be cruel but the attention to detail was completely lacking and all that hard work of construction was wasted by not spending 200-400 more hours on doing things right. One of my first thoughts was if the appearance items look this bad I wonder what it's like in places you don't easily see. As I was finishing my photo shoot the owner came out from the restaurant and we had the opportunity to chat. She was an older lady (~65) that had purchased the plane from Alabama/Mississippi or the like. She was based at Santa Paula Airport (SZP) about 70 miles south of me. That day she was giving a hangar neighbor acquaintance of mine a ride to SZP to pick up his beautiful Cessna 170 from service. I remember thinking to myself... well at least the plane has two pilots onboard in case there is an "issue." Please note I do not wish to be malicious but the plane had obvious flaws in craftsmanship. Like most incidents it's usually pilot problems before plane problems. Attached are some photos from the visit. Robin ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: "Rick Leach" <papadaddyo(at)tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: All Painted
Very nice _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of DejaVu Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 12:03 AM Subject: RV10-List: All Painted Guys, Some pictures attached for your viewing after 9 months and 90hrs since first flight. Anh ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Fiberglass and antenna placement
John W. Cox wrote: . Fiberglass is not transparent to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also requires your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally? Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite based systems. Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Max" <MaxHegler(at)msn.com>
Subject: RV-10 Incident
Date: Sep 16, 2007
"Alabama/Mississippi or the like"??? If you don't know where she purchased it, I would leave statements like this out of your comments. You insult the many careful, diligent builders in those areas. I know of many great builders from "Alabama/Mississippi or the like." That said, it would have been good if you had been diligent enough to get the exact location so no one else would be duped by a lousy builder. Max -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 11:26 AM Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Incident "that had purchased the plane from Alabama/Mississippi or the like." Robin ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: RV-10 Incident
This plane was built by John Nys who is in Texas. He has built several RV-10's and is one of the 'build for hire' gang. He had a couple of his plane @ OSH in '06 and they displayed the same workmanship issues noted in Robins e-mail. He boasted to some that he could build a plane in 3 months. To be fair I understand that he also built/assisted in the construction of Alex D.'s -10 which is cosmetically better. Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ Max wrote: > > "Alabama/Mississippi or the like"??? > > If you don't know where she purchased it, I would leave statements like this > out of your comments. You insult the many careful, diligent builders in > those areas. I know of many great builders from "Alabama/Mississippi or the > like." > That said, it would have been good if you had been diligent enough to get > the exact location so no one else would be duped by a lousy builder. > > Max > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks > Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 11:26 AM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Incident > > "that had purchased the plane from Alabama/Mississippi or the like." > > Robin > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: James Hein <n8vim(at)arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement
I am an extra-class ham radio operator, so here's my opinion: Most fiberglass is relatively transparent to RF. Glass cloth and epoxy don't attenuate RF much more than dust. If you put in carbon fiber, or other additives then the situation changes. The biggest issues typically are actually getting 1) a good ground plane, and 2) good seperation from nearby antennas and other parallel pieces of metal which can cause an impedance mismatch. I have several antennas on top of my tower which are actually *encased* in fiberglass. Want a cheap tool for analyzing your antenna installation? Here's what I use (a bit overkill for the aviation band): http://www.mfjenterprises.com/products.php?prodid=MFJ-269 -Jim 40384 Deems Davis wrote: > > > John W. Cox wrote: > > . Fiberglass is not transparent > to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is > only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also requires > your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier > potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you > need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence > > John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have > always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is > a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a > 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally? > Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite > based systems. > > Deems Davis # 406 > 'Its all done....Its just not put together' > http://deemsrv10.com/ > >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground
wire termination John W. Cox wrote: > > I understand you guys (Deems, Zack and Rick) are having an "offline > party discussion" but can you share the photos of Rick's OSH aircraft > for everyone? The suspense can be fatal. No offline discussion going on John, Zack sent a pic. which was posted to the list and Rick pointed out to me that I already had a similar copy of it on my web site: http://deemsrv10.com/album/OSHKOSH%202007/RV-10's/slides/DSC_0419.html. page forward and back to see the rest of Rick's plane. Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement
James, Thanks for the feedback, Here's another naive question: In your opinion would the heat which exists in the engine compartment adversely affect the performance of these satellited antennas? Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ James Hein wrote: > > I am an extra-class ham radio operator, so here's my opinion: > > Most fiberglass is relatively transparent to RF. Glass cloth and epoxy > don't attenuate RF much more than dust. If you put in carbon fiber, or > other additives then the situation changes. > > The biggest issues typically are actually getting 1) a good ground > plane, and 2) good seperation from nearby antennas and other parallel > pieces of metal which can cause an impedance mismatch. > > I have several antennas on top of my tower which are actually > *encased* in fiberglass. > > Want a cheap tool for analyzing your antenna installation? Here's what > I use (a bit overkill for the aviation band): > http://www.mfjenterprises.com/products.php?prodid=MFJ-269 > > -Jim 40384 > > Deems Davis wrote: > >> >> >> John W. Cox wrote: >> >> . Fiberglass is not transparent >> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is >> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also requires >> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier >> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you >> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence >> >> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have >> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is >> a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a >> 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally? >> Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite >> based systems. >> >> Deems Davis # 406 >> 'Its all done....Its just not put together' >> http://deemsrv10.com/ >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement
I've always taken antenna reception quality as THE #1 reason to choose an antenna or mounting location....especially important if you're shooting for the same quality as a "certified" installation. I never understood why as experimental builders, who build planes that we pride as being built "better than factory", anyone would build absolutely sub-standard to all of the advice by manufacturers regarding their installation requirements....on purpose, no less. The fact that someone would bother to hem and haw about a WAAS GPS antenna no less, really makes me wonder, as the amount of drag off a small wart of an antenna is way less than if you were talking about a Nav or Com antenna, and the signal you're trying to receive is EXTREMELY faint in comparison. Here's something I dug up recently: http://www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/Dual%20Benefit/warner_gps_spoofing.html "The GPS signal strength measured at the surface of the Earth is about 160dBw (1 x 1016 watts), which is roughly equivalent to viewing a 25-watt light bulb from a distance of 10,000 miles. This weak signal can easily be blocked by destroying or shielding the GPS receivers antenna. The GPS signal can also be effectively jammed by a signal of a similar frequency but greater strength. " So then think about the many electrical noise causing things in an airplane....probably one of the loudest of which would be the spark plugs and ignition system. And then to choose to actually mount the antennas CLOSER to those items? I mean, I've seen TV's get scrambled signals when a snowmobile drove by the house years ago....not that the plane is going to be as poor, but we're *really* talking some tiny electrical signals with GPS...and sorry, but if someone even thinks they're going to pass by on flying ILS and VOR approaches and instead favor trusting a WAAS approach, why sacrifice? If they're going to sacrifice that, then why bother to look at the actual LPV-spec GPS units in the first place....just fly them with an autopilot or EFIS driven by a 396. (and no, I'm not REALLY endorsing that thinking) http://www.nap.edu/html/embedded_everywhere/ch2_b8.html "What makes GPS reception difficult is that radio frequency (RF) signals from the satellites are very weak. Special coding is used to allow receivers to detect these weak signals, but even with coding, GPS receivers generally work only if they have a direct line of sight to the satellites. Performance inside buildings or in an area covered by foliage is generally quite poor" http://www.wowinfo.com/gps/gps/chapter2n3.htm "This is an extremely low-powered systemso low-powered, in fact, that the signal is really buried in the natural background radio noise. The receiver recovers this weak signal from the satellites by using spread-spectrum communication technology, a very tricky concept in communication theory that works by means of pseudo-random codes." http://www.dot.nd.gov/manuals/surveymanual/gps-operations.pdf "Youd think that with all of these radio waves raining down on us from dozens of satellites in space wed all glow in the dark. Actually, the strength of the GPS signal is very small, equivalent to the tail light of a car seen from 2,500 kilometers away-halfway across the U.S.! Weaker, in fact, than the ordinary background radio noise thats all around us all of the time." So then thinking about laying it underneath fiberglass, my thought is: "Well, if fiberglass is transparent to GPS, then how many layers are transparent to the GPS. Can you put it under 1/16", 1/8", 1", 5"? At what point do you decide you've hidden the GPS from it enough?" And, if it's under a cowl, or at some other point not mounted horizontally with a full view of the sky in all directions, then which of the available satellites that are now unavailable are you happy to just toss aside from shadowing due to poor mounting? So some of them aren't worth seeing. I understand the love of building a cosmetically pleasing airplane, but to sacrifice life-saving avionics signals really makes me wonder. And nothing against Dan Checkoway, but it's amazing how one person's good experience with a poor mounting choice can spread to such a universal acceptance of the idea. It might be better to bounce mounting and location questions off the antenna makers and companies like Garmin and see how far they're willing to stick their neck out with an answer. If it were harmless, they'd have no reason to avoid giving the advice. I've had many phone calls to Comant and questions to other antenna makers throughout the build, which in the end mostly just led me to try to be as "conventional" as possible to attempt the same reliability as the certified planes could have. Now, if someone was building a VFR only airplane, I'd say "heck yeah, may as well give it a try". Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying Deems Davis wrote: > > > John W. Cox wrote: > > . Fiberglass is not transparent > to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is > only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also requires > your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier > potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you > need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence > > John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have always > heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is a loss > due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a 'false > positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally? Both of > the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite based systems. > > Deems Davis # 406 > 'Its all done....Its just not put together' > http://deemsrv10.com/ >> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: James Hein <n8vim(at)arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement
The heat in the engine compartment would affect the antennas somewhat. Why? 1. Matching components (if used - capacitors and/or inductors) values will change with regard to temperature 2. Coax dielectric will soften, allowing the center conductor to migrate closer to the shield over time, changing the impedance of the coax, reducing performance. In reality, #1 probably doesn't amount to much difference at all due to the small values involved, but #2 needs to be protected against (heat shield, etc.) -Jim 40384 Deems Davis wrote: > > James, Thanks for the feedback, Here's another naive question: In your > opinion would the heat which exists in the engine compartment > adversely affect the performance of these satellited antennas? > > Deems Davis # 406 > 'Its all done....Its just not put together' > http://deemsrv10.com/ > > James Hein wrote: > >> >> I am an extra-class ham radio operator, so here's my opinion: >> >> Most fiberglass is relatively transparent to RF. Glass cloth and >> epoxy don't attenuate RF much more than dust. If you put in carbon >> fiber, or other additives then the situation changes. >> >> The biggest issues typically are actually getting 1) a good ground >> plane, and 2) good seperation from nearby antennas and other parallel >> pieces of metal which can cause an impedance mismatch. >> >> I have several antennas on top of my tower which are actually >> *encased* in fiberglass. >> >> Want a cheap tool for analyzing your antenna installation? Here's >> what I use (a bit overkill for the aviation band): >> http://www.mfjenterprises.com/products.php?prodid=MFJ-269 >> >> -Jim 40384 >> >> Deems Davis wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> John W. Cox wrote: >>> >>> . Fiberglass is not transparent >>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is >>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also >>> requires >>> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier >>> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you >>> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence >>> >>> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have >>> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there >>> is a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is >>> a 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums >>> equally? Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are >>> satellite based systems. >>> >>> Deems Davis # 406 >>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together' >>> http://deemsrv10.com/ >>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: "pascal" <rv10builder(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: RV-10 Incident
and to think I worry if a rivet incorrectly squeezed will be a problem! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com> Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 9:25 AM Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Incident Interesting... I know nothing about the incident but I actually know something about this plane. While at my home airport (SBP) in California I saw an RV-10 parked in our transient restaurant parking. I was very excited to see one in person and it looked kinda nice from a distance. As I got closer my opinion changed considerably. First the good news... The wheel pants, gear legs and the panel were very nice. Now the rest of the story... The fit & finish was about the worst I had ever seen on an RV. The fit around the cowl was horrendous, with several different type screws used with different type washers and the cowl screws were not in a row, some were offset high and low. The baggage door was not aligned well and there was filler between some metal pieces that was only partially filled and partially left "mounded" then painted over. It looked awful!. The wing tips were not cut back to match the trailing edge of the ailerons. (I have not started that part of the build yet but I understand they should line up). By far the worst part and something I thought was a real danger were the back sides of the fiberglass tips to the horizontal stabilizer. They were left hollow, rough cut and very flexible. I was actually horrified that this portion of the build was not completed. I could not imagine that that was airworthy. As you can guess the fit of the doors was not acceptable to me but they were not that far off. And of course there was complete cracking around each window. I did end up taking some detailed photos of the plane and keep them filed in my "RV Pictures" folder under the file name "Ugly RV-10." I don't intend to be cruel but the attention to detail was completely lacking and all that hard work of construction was wasted by not spending 200-400 more hours on doing things right. One of my first thoughts was if the appearance items look this bad I wonder what it's like in places you don't easily see. As I was finishing my photo shoot the owner came out from the restaurant and we had the opportunity to chat. She was an older lady (~65) that had purchased the plane from Alabama/Mississippi or the like. She was based at Santa Paula Airport (SZP) about 70 miles south of me. That day she was giving a hangar neighbor acquaintance of mine a ride to SZP to pick up his beautiful Cessna 170 from service. I remember thinking to myself... well at least the plane has two pilots onboard in case there is an "issue." Please note I do not wish to be malicious but the plane had obvious flaws in craftsmanship. Like most incidents it's usually pilot problems before plane problems. Attached are some photos from the visit. Robin ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Spiders!!!
From: "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com>
Date: Sep 16, 2007
Uncle Sam saw fit to send for some training for a few weeks and upon my return I found my hanger infested with spiders. I HATE spiders!!!! But I spent all day stomping and spraying and taking back my hanger and cleaning the exterior of my parts. I am back to preventative spraying of the perimeter to keep them from returning. My question is, does anyone know of a a non-corrosive fogger that is safe to use around airplane parts? My interior is primed but with plenty of untreated aluminum I am still very cautious about what I spray around my parts. I am concerned that there may be more spiders in my wings and my tail control surfaces. Eric Kallio 40518 Upper forward fuse Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134720#134720 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: Dan Masys <dmasys(at)cox.net>
Subject: Performance data
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Bad battery/bad experience > From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> > > Okay Dan, It's been weeks and weeks since OSH '07 and almost months. > Your flyoff hours were done in record time as I remember. Now we are > all interested In the service ceiling, cruise at 8,500 MSL, climb rate > and fuel consumption numbers. Just how is it going or was there a > problem? This is not like you. > > John Cox I know this was directed at the other Dan who got his fly-off done in a week in order to get to OSH, but I did the same with my "PORV10" - Plain Ole RV10" with box stock new Lycoming IO-540 and Hartzell CS prop. So here are my numbers: Service ceiling: only tested to 17.5 K and airplane was climbing at 400 fpm between 17K and 17.5K. Handles really well up there, indicating 120 Kts and doing 165 KTAS. Cruise at 8500: 172 KTAS at 13.5 gph. Interesting thing is it will reliably deliver 168-170 KTAS at 13,000-14,000 ft at best power settings, which makes it a great platform for climbing up to the middle altitudes to get better winds. Climb rate: exactly Vans numbers or slightly better at middle and gross weights. With the stock Lycoming using magnetos, both CHTs and oil temps stay in acceptable limits on protracted best rate climbs (after I removed the air dams from both sides of the front cylinders). This is one really fine airplane! -Dan Masys N104LD - 42 SNEW ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement
OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how much attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed anywhere in your clips, and still remains. The specified/recommended Commant Antenna for the HeadsUP XM Weather receiver (used in Avidyne installations in certified Cirrus 's) comes configured with a gain of 30-34 db. The receiver itself is preset to expect a gain of 22db (+/-2db). The installation manual actually _recommends/requires_ some additional attenuation and provides a formula for figuring the amount available through several different types and lengths (feet & yards) of coax. Turns out that you need quite a bit of coax to get it down to the 22db range (17-58 ' depending on type of coax) Alternatively you may use a DC bias passing attenuator in line with the cable itself. (my choice). The only caution from the mfg about placement was to keep it away from transmitting antennas, (min 36's"). If, as James suggests, the fiberglass (1/16 - 3/32") of the cowl is not an issue in signal loss, and there are no other blocking restrictions, then why criticize someone who wants to make the installation cosmetically attractive as well? the vast majority of the 396/496 Garmins w/ weather are flying with glareshield mounted antennas with the same issues. Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ Tim Olson wrote: > > I've always taken antenna reception quality as THE #1 reason to choose > an antenna or mounting location....especially important if you're > shooting for the same quality as a "certified" installation. I never > understood why as experimental builders, who build planes that we pride > as being built "better than factory", anyone would build absolutely > sub-standard to all of the advice by manufacturers regarding their > installation requirements....on purpose, no less. The fact that someone > would bother to hem and haw about a WAAS GPS antenna no less, really > makes me wonder, as the amount of drag off a small wart of an antenna > is way less than if you were talking about a Nav or Com antenna, and the > signal you're trying to receive is EXTREMELY faint in comparison. > > Here's something I dug up recently: > http://www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/Dual%20Benefit/warner_gps_spoofing.html > > > "The GPS signal strength measured at the surface of the Earth is about > 160dBw (1 x 1016 watts), which is roughly equivalent to viewing a > 25-watt light bulb from a distance of 10,000 miles. This weak signal > can easily be blocked by destroying or shielding the GPS receivers > antenna. The GPS signal can also be effectively jammed by a signal of > a similar frequency but greater strength. " > > So then think about the many electrical noise causing things in an > airplane....probably one of the loudest of which would be the spark > plugs and ignition system. And then to choose to actually mount > the antennas CLOSER to those items? I mean, I've seen TV's get > scrambled signals when a snowmobile drove by the house years > ago....not that the plane is going to be as poor, but we're > *really* talking some tiny electrical signals with GPS...and sorry, but > if someone even thinks they're going to pass by on flying ILS and VOR > approaches and instead favor trusting a WAAS approach, why sacrifice? > If they're going to sacrifice that, then why bother to look at the > actual LPV-spec GPS units in the first place....just fly them with > an autopilot or EFIS driven by a 396. (and no, I'm not REALLY > endorsing that thinking) > > > http://www.nap.edu/html/embedded_everywhere/ch2_b8.html > "What makes GPS reception difficult is that radio frequency (RF) > signals from the satellites are very weak. Special coding is used to > allow receivers to detect these weak signals, but even with coding, > GPS receivers generally work only if they have a direct line of sight > to the satellites. Performance inside buildings or in an area covered > by foliage is generally quite poor" > > http://www.wowinfo.com/gps/gps/chapter2n3.htm > "This is an extremely low-powered systemso low-powered, in fact, that > the signal is really buried in the natural background radio noise. The > receiver recovers this weak signal from the satellites by using > spread-spectrum communication technology, a very tricky concept in > communication theory that works by means of pseudo-random codes." > > http://www.dot.nd.gov/manuals/surveymanual/gps-operations.pdf > "Youd think that with all of these radio waves raining down on us > from dozens of satellites in space > wed all glow in the dark. Actually, the strength of the GPS signal is > very small, equivalent to the tail > light of a car seen from 2,500 kilometers away-halfway across the > U.S.! Weaker, in fact, than the > ordinary background radio noise thats all around us all of the time." > > > So then thinking about laying it underneath fiberglass, my thought is: > "Well, if fiberglass is transparent to GPS, then how many layers are > transparent to the GPS. Can you put it under 1/16", 1/8", 1", 5"? > At what point do you decide you've hidden the GPS from it enough?" > > And, if it's under a cowl, or at some other point not mounted > horizontally with a full view of the sky in all directions, then > which of the available satellites that are now unavailable are you > happy to just toss aside from shadowing due to poor mounting? So > some of them aren't worth seeing. > > I understand the love of building a cosmetically pleasing airplane, but > to sacrifice life-saving avionics signals really makes me wonder. And > nothing against Dan Checkoway, but it's amazing how one person's good > experience with a poor mounting choice can spread to such a universal > acceptance of the idea. It might be better to bounce mounting > and location questions off the antenna makers and companies like Garmin > and see how far they're willing to stick their neck out with an answer. > If it were harmless, they'd have no reason to avoid giving the advice. > I've had many phone calls to Comant and questions to other antenna > makers throughout the build, which in the end mostly just led me to > try to be as "conventional" as possible to attempt the same > reliability as the certified planes could have. > > Now, if someone was building a VFR only airplane, I'd say "heck yeah, > may as well give it a try". > > > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying > > > Deems Davis wrote: >> >> >> John W. Cox wrote: >> >> . Fiberglass is not transparent >> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is >> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also requires >> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier >> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you >> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence >> >> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have >> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is >> a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a >> 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally? >> Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite >> based systems. >> >> Deems Davis # 406 >> 'Its all done....Its just not put together' >> http://deemsrv10.com/ >>> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: wiring runs and aC43.13-1B Chapter 11-Section 11-clamping
From: "tomhanaway" <tomhanaway(at)adelphia.net>
Date: Sep 16, 2007
I see most builders run their wing wiring through the grommets in the wings and in the side panels. Especially where surrounded by conduit. Makes sense to me. I'm trying to figure out Section 11 of "acceptable methods" Aircraft Inspection, Repair and Alterations which seems to call for a cushion clamp even when running through a grommet where the wires are less than 3/8" from the hole edge. Could someone give me some guidance. Thanks, Tom Hanaway Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134733#134733 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Fiberglass and antenna placement
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Now you guys are getting with the program. Coax length, inline connectors, combiners, splitters and fiberglas thickness equate to db signal losses. John #600 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 3:48 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how much attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed anywhere in your clips, and still remains. The specified/recommended Commant Antenna for the HeadsUP XM Weather receiver (used in Avidyne installations in certified Cirrus 's) comes configured with a gain of 30-34 db. The receiver itself is preset to expect a gain of 22db (+/-2db). The installation manual actually _recommends/requires_ some additional attenuation and provides a formula for figuring the amount available through several different types and lengths (feet & yards) of coax. Turns out that you need quite a bit of coax to get it down to the 22db range (17-58 ' depending on type of coax) Alternatively you may use a DC bias passing attenuator in line with the cable itself. (my choice). The only caution from the mfg about placement was to keep it away from transmitting antennas, (min 36's"). If, as James suggests, the fiberglass (1/16 - 3/32") of the cowl is not an issue in signal loss, and there are no other blocking restrictions, then why criticize someone who wants to make the installation cosmetically attractive as well? the vast majority of the 396/496 Garmins w/ weather are flying with glareshield mounted antennas with the same issues. Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ Tim Olson wrote: > > I've always taken antenna reception quality as THE #1 reason to choose > an antenna or mounting location....especially important if you're > shooting for the same quality as a "certified" installation. I never > understood why as experimental builders, who build planes that we pride > as being built "better than factory", anyone would build absolutely > sub-standard to all of the advice by manufacturers regarding their > installation requirements....on purpose, no less. The fact that someone > would bother to hem and haw about a WAAS GPS antenna no less, really > makes me wonder, as the amount of drag off a small wart of an antenna > is way less than if you were talking about a Nav or Com antenna, and the > signal you're trying to receive is EXTREMELY faint in comparison. > > Here's something I dug up recently: > http://www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/Dual%20Benefit/warner_gps_spoof ing.html > > > "The GPS signal strength measured at the surface of the Earth is about > -160dBw (1 x 10-16 watts), which is roughly equivalent to viewing a > 25-watt light bulb from a distance of 10,000 miles. This weak signal > can easily be blocked by destroying or shielding the GPS receiver's > antenna. The GPS signal can also be effectively jammed by a signal of > a similar frequency but greater strength. " > > So then think about the many electrical noise causing things in an > airplane....probably one of the loudest of which would be the spark > plugs and ignition system. And then to choose to actually mount > the antennas CLOSER to those items? I mean, I've seen TV's get > scrambled signals when a snowmobile drove by the house years > ago....not that the plane is going to be as poor, but we're > *really* talking some tiny electrical signals with GPS...and sorry, but > if someone even thinks they're going to pass by on flying ILS and VOR > approaches and instead favor trusting a WAAS approach, why sacrifice? > If they're going to sacrifice that, then why bother to look at the > actual LPV-spec GPS units in the first place....just fly them with > an autopilot or EFIS driven by a 396. (and no, I'm not REALLY > endorsing that thinking) > > > http://www.nap.edu/html/embedded_everywhere/ch2_b8.html > "What makes GPS reception difficult is that radio frequency (RF) > signals from the satellites are very weak. Special coding is used to > allow receivers to detect these weak signals, but even with coding, > GPS receivers generally work only if they have a direct line of sight > to the satellites. Performance inside buildings or in an area covered > by foliage is generally quite poor" > > http://www.wowinfo.com/gps/gps/chapter2n3.htm > "This is an extremely low-powered system-so low-powered, in fact, that > the signal is really buried in the natural background radio noise. The > receiver recovers this weak signal from the satellites by using > spread-spectrum communication technology, a very tricky concept in > communication theory that works by means of pseudo-random codes." > > http://www.dot.nd.gov/manuals/surveymanual/gps-operations.pdf > "You'd think that with all of these radio waves raining down on us > from dozens of satellites in space > we'd all glow in the dark. Actually, the strength of the GPS signal is > very small, equivalent to the tail > light of a car seen from 2,500 kilometers away-halfway across the > U.S.! Weaker, in fact, than the > ordinary background radio noise that's all around us all of the time." > > > So then thinking about laying it underneath fiberglass, my thought is: > "Well, if fiberglass is transparent to GPS, then how many layers are > transparent to the GPS. Can you put it under 1/16", 1/8", 1", 5"? > At what point do you decide you've hidden the GPS from it enough?" > > And, if it's under a cowl, or at some other point not mounted > horizontally with a full view of the sky in all directions, then > which of the available satellites that are now unavailable are you > happy to just toss aside from shadowing due to poor mounting? So > some of them aren't worth seeing. > > I understand the love of building a cosmetically pleasing airplane, but > to sacrifice life-saving avionics signals really makes me wonder. And > nothing against Dan Checkoway, but it's amazing how one person's good > experience with a poor mounting choice can spread to such a universal > acceptance of the idea. It might be better to bounce mounting > and location questions off the antenna makers and companies like Garmin > and see how far they're willing to stick their neck out with an answer. > If it were harmless, they'd have no reason to avoid giving the advice. > I've had many phone calls to Comant and questions to other antenna > makers throughout the build, which in the end mostly just led me to > try to be as "conventional" as possible to attempt the same > reliability as the certified planes could have. > > Now, if someone was building a VFR only airplane, I'd say "heck yeah, > may as well give it a try". > > > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying > > > Deems Davis wrote: >> >> >> John W. Cox wrote: >> >> . Fiberglass is not transparent >> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is >> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also requires >> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier >> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you >> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence >> >> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have >> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is >> a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a >> 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally? >> Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite >> based systems. >> >> Deems Davis # 406 >> 'Its all done....Its just not put together' >> http://deemsrv10.com/ >>> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: "Chris Johnston" <CJohnston(at)popsound.com>
yay! while we're arguing about stuff... could you guys argue about this for me so i can decide? i'm trying to decide on some less leaky inner tubes, and i think it's between Desser's "leak guard", and Michelin's "airstop". what say you all? and is it reasonably self-explanatory to order the right size inner tube? is it possible for me to screw it up? cj #40410 fuse/finishing www.perfectlygoodairplane.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement
OK, I just redesigned my antenna installation : atop a 5 foot tall pylon, made of spaceage transpardium mounted in the exact center/top point of the cabin cover, equipped with a gyro stabilized gimble that ensures stability of the antenna in all unusual attitudes. I'm out of here John W. Cox wrote: > > Now you guys are getting with the program. Coax length, inline > connectors, combiners, splitters and fiberglas thickness equate to db > signal losses. > > John #600 > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis > Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 3:48 PM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement > > > OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how much > attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed anywhere > in your clips, and still remains. The specified/recommended Commant > Antenna for the HeadsUP XM Weather receiver (used in Avidyne > installations in certified Cirrus 's) comes configured with a gain of > 30-34 db. The receiver itself is preset to expect a gain of 22db > (+/-2db). The installation manual actually _recommends/requires_ some > additional attenuation and provides a formula for figuring the amount > available through several different types and lengths (feet & yards) of > > coax. Turns out that you need quite a bit of coax to get it down to the > > 22db range (17-58 ' depending on type of coax) Alternatively you may > use a DC bias passing attenuator in line with the cable itself. (my > choice). The only caution from the mfg about placement was to keep it > away from transmitting antennas, (min 36's"). > > If, as James suggests, the fiberglass (1/16 - 3/32") of the cowl is not > an issue in signal loss, and there are no other blocking restrictions, > then why criticize someone who wants to make the installation > cosmetically attractive as well? the vast majority of the 396/496 > Garmins w/ weather are flying with glareshield mounted antennas with the > > same issues. > > Deems Davis # 406 > 'Its all done....Its just not put together' > http://deemsrv10.com/ > > Tim Olson wrote: > >> >> I've always taken antenna reception quality as THE #1 reason to choose >> an antenna or mounting location....especially important if you're >> shooting for the same quality as a "certified" installation. I never >> understood why as experimental builders, who build planes that we >> > pride > >> as being built "better than factory", anyone would build absolutely >> sub-standard to all of the advice by manufacturers regarding their >> installation requirements....on purpose, no less. The fact that >> > someone > >> would bother to hem and haw about a WAAS GPS antenna no less, really >> makes me wonder, as the amount of drag off a small wart of an antenna >> is way less than if you were talking about a Nav or Com antenna, and >> > the > >> signal you're trying to receive is EXTREMELY faint in comparison. >> >> Here's something I dug up recently: >> >> > http://www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/Dual%20Benefit/warner_gps_spoof > ing.html > >> "The GPS signal strength measured at the surface of the Earth is about >> > > >> -160dBw (1 x 10-16 watts), which is roughly equivalent to viewing a >> 25-watt light bulb from a distance of 10,000 miles. This weak signal >> can easily be blocked by destroying or shielding the GPS receiver's >> antenna. The GPS signal can also be effectively jammed by a signal of >> a similar frequency but greater strength. " >> >> So then think about the many electrical noise causing things in an >> airplane....probably one of the loudest of which would be the spark >> plugs and ignition system. And then to choose to actually mount >> the antennas CLOSER to those items? I mean, I've seen TV's get >> scrambled signals when a snowmobile drove by the house years >> ago....not that the plane is going to be as poor, but we're >> *really* talking some tiny electrical signals with GPS...and sorry, >> > but > >> if someone even thinks they're going to pass by on flying ILS and VOR >> approaches and instead favor trusting a WAAS approach, why sacrifice? >> If they're going to sacrifice that, then why bother to look at the >> actual LPV-spec GPS units in the first place....just fly them with >> an autopilot or EFIS driven by a 396. (and no, I'm not REALLY >> endorsing that thinking) >> >> >> http://www.nap.edu/html/embedded_everywhere/ch2_b8.html >> "What makes GPS reception difficult is that radio frequency (RF) >> signals from the satellites are very weak. Special coding is used to >> allow receivers to detect these weak signals, but even with coding, >> GPS receivers generally work only if they have a direct line of sight >> to the satellites. Performance inside buildings or in an area covered >> by foliage is generally quite poor" >> >> http://www.wowinfo.com/gps/gps/chapter2n3.htm >> "This is an extremely low-powered system-so low-powered, in fact, that >> > > >> the signal is really buried in the natural background radio noise. The >> > > >> receiver recovers this weak signal from the satellites by using >> spread-spectrum communication technology, a very tricky concept in >> communication theory that works by means of pseudo-random codes." >> >> http://www.dot.nd.gov/manuals/surveymanual/gps-operations.pdf >> "You'd think that with all of these radio waves raining down on us >> from dozens of satellites in space >> we'd all glow in the dark. Actually, the strength of the GPS signal is >> > > >> very small, equivalent to the tail >> light of a car seen from 2,500 kilometers away-halfway across the >> U.S.! Weaker, in fact, than the >> ordinary background radio noise that's all around us all of the time." >> >> >> So then thinking about laying it underneath fiberglass, my thought is: >> "Well, if fiberglass is transparent to GPS, then how many layers are >> transparent to the GPS. Can you put it under 1/16", 1/8", 1", 5"? >> At what point do you decide you've hidden the GPS from it enough?" >> >> And, if it's under a cowl, or at some other point not mounted >> horizontally with a full view of the sky in all directions, then >> which of the available satellites that are now unavailable are you >> happy to just toss aside from shadowing due to poor mounting? So >> some of them aren't worth seeing. >> >> I understand the love of building a cosmetically pleasing airplane, >> > but > >> to sacrifice life-saving avionics signals really makes me wonder. And >> nothing against Dan Checkoway, but it's amazing how one person's good >> experience with a poor mounting choice can spread to such a universal >> acceptance of the idea. It might be better to bounce mounting >> and location questions off the antenna makers and companies like >> > Garmin > >> and see how far they're willing to stick their neck out with an >> > answer. > >> If it were harmless, they'd have no reason to avoid giving the advice. >> I've had many phone calls to Comant and questions to other antenna >> makers throughout the build, which in the end mostly just led me to >> try to be as "conventional" as possible to attempt the same >> reliability as the certified planes could have. >> >> Now, if someone was building a VFR only airplane, I'd say "heck yeah, >> may as well give it a try". >> >> >> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying >> >> >> >> Deems Davis wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> John W. Cox wrote: >>> >>> . Fiberglass is not transparent >>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is >>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also >>> > requires > >>> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier >>> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you >>> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence >>> >>> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have >>> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is >>> > > >>> a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a >>> 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally? >>> Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite >>> based systems. >>> >>> Deems Davis # 406 >>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together' >>> http://deemsrv10.com/ >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground wi
From: "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net>
Date: Sep 16, 2007
[quote="AV8ORJWC"]I understand you guys (Deems, Zack and Rick) are having an "offline party discussion" but can you share the photos of Rick's OSH aircraft for everyone? The suspense can be fatal. OK John, Here some shots I took of Rick's plane at OSH. You can also view more at the link below. Zack http://rickygray.myphotoalbum.com/view_album.php?set_albumName=album04 -------- RV8 #80125 RV10 # 40512 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134752#134752 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08295_126.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08294_194.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08232_101.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08228_147.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08222_182.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08221_962.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08220_797.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann(at)cox.net>
Subject: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Date: Sep 16, 2007
Just fill it with nitrogen and forget about it. Bob K -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Johnston Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 4:53 PM Subject: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! yay! while we're arguing about stuff... could you guys argue about this for me so i can decide? i'm trying to decide on some less leaky inner tubes, and i think it's between Desser's "leak guard", and Michelin's "airstop". what say you all? and is it reasonably self-explanatory to order the right size inner tube? is it possible for me to screw it up? cj #40410 fuse/finishing www.perfectlygoodairplane.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com>
Subject: Re: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Michelin all the way...they hold air best of any tube I have ever seen and worht the extra dollars. Being cheap I'm going to swap mine out at the first tire change. Rick S. 40185 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Johnston" <CJohnston(at)popsound.com> Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 5:52:45 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles Subject: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! yay! while we're arguing about stuff... could you guys argue about this for me so i can decide? i'm trying to decide on some less leaky inner tubes, and i think it's between Desser's "leak guard", and Michelin's "airstop". what say you all? and is it reasonably self-explanatory to order the right size inner tube? is it possible for me to screw it up? cj #40410 fuse/finishing www.perfectlygoodairplane.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
Date: Sep 16, 2007
Subject: RV-10 Incident
Also TruTrak's -10. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 12:37 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: RV-10 Incident This plane was built by John Nys who is in Texas. He has built several RV-10's and is one of the 'build for hire' gang. He had a couple of his plane @ OSH in '06 and they displayed the same workmanship issues noted in Robins e-mail. He boasted to some that he could build a plane in 3 months. To be fair I understand that he also built/assisted in the construction of Alex D.'s -10 which is cosmetically better. Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ Max wrote: > > "Alabama/Mississippi or the like"??? > > If you don't know where she purchased it, I would leave statements like this > out of your comments. You insult the many careful, diligent builders in > those areas. I know of many great builders from "Alabama/Mississippi or the > like." > That said, it would have been good if you had been diligent enough to get > the exact location so no one else would be duped by a lousy builder. > > Max > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks > Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 11:26 AM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Incident > > "that had purchased the plane from Alabama/Mississippi or the like." > > Robin > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
Date: Sep 16, 2007
Subject: RV-10 Incident
John is in the Tulsa area. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Max Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 12:24 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: RV-10 Incident "Alabama/Mississippi or the like"??? If you don't know where she purchased it, I would leave statements like this out of your comments. You insult the many careful, diligent builders in those areas. I know of many great builders from "Alabama/Mississippi or the like." That said, it would have been good if you had been diligent enough to get the exact location so no one else would be duped by a lousy builder. Max -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 11:26 AM Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Incident "that had purchased the plane from Alabama/Mississippi or the like." Robin ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com>
Subject: Re: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Sorry buddy but although nitrogen molecules are larger than good ol' 79/19 % air mixture you still will get leak down from a cheap tube, now nitrogen for stability and moisture free is a different story. Use nitrogen in your Michelins and your gonna be hard pressed to beat the combo but changing air temps will still cause fluctuation of tire pressures so you can't just "forget about it" Rick S. 40185 ----- Original Message ----- From: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann(at)cox.net> Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 6:32:18 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles Subject: RE: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! Just fill it with nitrogen and forget about it. Bob K -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Johnston Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 4:53 PM Subject: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! yay! while we're arguing about stuff... could you guys argue about this for me so i can decide? i'm trying to decide on some less leaky inner tubes, and i think it's between Desser's "leak guard", and Michelin's "airstop". what say you all? and is it reasonably self-explanatory to order the right size inner tube? is it possible for me to screw it up? cj #40410 fuse/finishing www.perfectlygoodairplane.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Just my experience: 3 Desser leakguards. Mains are great, add air maybe every 6 months. Nose tube...no such ruck. Leaks worse than the standard tube previously there..have to add air every month. On 9/16/07, Chris Johnston wrote: > > yay! while we're arguing about stuff... could you guys argue about this > for me so i can decide? i'm trying to decide on some less leaky inner > tubes, and i think it's between Desser's "leak guard", and Michelin's > "airstop". what say you all? and is it reasonably self-explanatory to > order the right size inner tube? is it possible for me to screw it up? > > cj > #40410 > fuse/finishing > www.perfectlygoodairplane.net > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Indran Chelvanayagam <dc71(at)netspace.net.au>
Subject: Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement
Date: Sep 17, 2007
After a real world test of holding a handheld GPS under the On 17/09/2007, at 6:47 AM, Deems Davis wrote: > > OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how > much attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed > anywhere in your clips, and still remains. >>> John W. Cox wrote: >>> >>> . Fiberglass is not transparent >>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is >>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Indran Chelvanayagam <dc71(at)netspace.net.au>
Subject: Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement
Date: Sep 17, 2007
After a real world test of holding a handheld GPS under the cabin top then the cowl while watching the Satellite signal strength page, I'm convinced that there is some attenuation from fibreglass - whether it's significant or not is up to the individual builder. Personally I have installed my antennae outside the cabin top. Indran On 17/09/2007, at 6:47 AM, Deems Davis wrote: > > OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how > much attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed > anywhere in your clips, and still remains. > >>> John W. Cox wrote: >>> >>> . Fiberglass is not transparent >>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is >>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. >>> ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Retractable Seat Belt Question
Date: Sep 16, 2007
From: "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com>
I have a Retractable Seat Belt question especially for Grumpy and Chris Johnston. I was able to assemble a very nice combination to create a retractable seat belt set with a rotary buckle release. My concern is the units weight in at 5 lbs each . I assume the stock vans belts weigh a couple of pounds each (including all hardware). Chris, Grumpy, how much did your retractable units weigh? Anyone else out there using retracts? I can't imagine any retractable systems weighing less than 3.5 lbs due to all the metal in the retract housing so my units may not be out of line but I sure don't want to hang another 20 lbs on my plane (net 12 additional lbs). The good news is that these belts are ~$130.00 per set. Thanks, Robin ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Patrick ONeill" <poneill(at)irealms.com>
Subject: Fiberglass and antenna placement
Date: Sep 16, 2007
This comes as a huge relief. I thought I was the only one planning to equip their RV-10 with AWACS. Patrick #40715 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 5:56 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement OK, I just redesigned my antenna installation : atop a 5 foot tall pylon, made of spaceage transpardium mounted in the exact center/top point of the cabin cover, equipped with a gyro stabilized gimble that ensures stability of the antenna in all unusual attitudes. I'm out of here John W. Cox wrote: > --> > > Now you guys are getting with the program. Coax length, inline > connectors, combiners, splitters and fiberglas thickness equate to db > signal losses. > > John #600 > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis > Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 3:48 PM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement > > > OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how > much > attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed anywhere > in your clips, and still remains. The specified/recommended Commant > Antenna for the HeadsUP XM Weather receiver (used in Avidyne > installations in certified Cirrus 's) comes configured with a gain of > 30-34 db. The receiver itself is preset to expect a gain of 22db > (+/-2db). The installation manual actually _recommends/requires_ some > additional attenuation and provides a formula for figuring the amount > available through several different types and lengths (feet & yards) of > > coax. Turns out that you need quite a bit of coax to get it down to > the > > 22db range (17-58 ' depending on type of coax) Alternatively you may > use a DC bias passing attenuator in line with the cable itself. (my > choice). The only caution from the mfg about placement was to keep it > away from transmitting antennas, (min 36's"). > > If, as James suggests, the fiberglass (1/16 - 3/32") of the cowl is > not > an issue in signal loss, and there are no other blocking restrictions, > then why criticize someone who wants to make the installation > cosmetically attractive as well? the vast majority of the 396/496 > Garmins w/ weather are flying with glareshield mounted antennas with the > > same issues. > > Deems Davis # 406 > 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ > > Tim Olson wrote: > >> >> I've always taken antenna reception quality as THE #1 reason to >> choose an antenna or mounting location....especially important if >> you're shooting for the same quality as a "certified" installation. >> I never understood why as experimental builders, who build planes >> that we >> > pride > >> as being built "better than factory", anyone would build absolutely >> sub-standard to all of the advice by manufacturers regarding their >> installation requirements....on purpose, no less. The fact that >> > someone > >> would bother to hem and haw about a WAAS GPS antenna no less, really >> makes me wonder, as the amount of drag off a small wart of an antenna >> is way less than if you were talking about a Nav or Com antenna, and >> > the > >> signal you're trying to receive is EXTREMELY faint in comparison. >> >> Here's something I dug up recently: >> >> > http://www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/Dual%20Benefit/warner_gps_spo > of > ing.html > >> "The GPS signal strength measured at the surface of the Earth is >> about >> > > >> -160dBw (1 x 10-16 watts), which is roughly equivalent to viewing a >> 25-watt light bulb from a distance of 10,000 miles. This weak signal >> can easily be blocked by destroying or shielding the GPS receiver's >> antenna. The GPS signal can also be effectively jammed by a signal of >> a similar frequency but greater strength. " >> >> So then think about the many electrical noise causing things in an >> airplane....probably one of the loudest of which would be the spark >> plugs and ignition system. And then to choose to actually mount the >> antennas CLOSER to those items? I mean, I've seen TV's get scrambled >> signals when a snowmobile drove by the house years ago....not that >> the plane is going to be as poor, but we're >> *really* talking some tiny electrical signals with GPS...and sorry, >> > but > >> if someone even thinks they're going to pass by on flying ILS and VOR >> approaches and instead favor trusting a WAAS approach, why sacrifice? >> If they're going to sacrifice that, then why bother to look at the >> actual LPV-spec GPS units in the first place....just fly them with an >> autopilot or EFIS driven by a 396. (and no, I'm not REALLY endorsing >> that thinking) >> >> >> http://www.nap.edu/html/embedded_everywhere/ch2_b8.html >> "What makes GPS reception difficult is that radio frequency (RF) >> signals from the satellites are very weak. Special coding is used to >> allow receivers to detect these weak signals, but even with coding, >> GPS receivers generally work only if they have a direct line of sight >> to the satellites. Performance inside buildings or in an area covered >> by foliage is generally quite poor" >> >> http://www.wowinfo.com/gps/gps/chapter2n3.htm >> "This is an extremely low-powered system-so low-powered, in fact, >> that >> > > >> the signal is really buried in the natural background radio noise. >> The >> > > >> receiver recovers this weak signal from the satellites by using >> spread-spectrum communication technology, a very tricky concept in >> communication theory that works by means of pseudo-random codes." >> >> http://www.dot.nd.gov/manuals/surveymanual/gps-operations.pdf >> "You'd think that with all of these radio waves raining down on us >> from dozens of satellites in space >> we'd all glow in the dark. Actually, the strength of the GPS signal is >> > > >> very small, equivalent to the tail >> light of a car seen from 2,500 kilometers away-halfway across the >> U.S.! Weaker, in fact, than the >> ordinary background radio noise that's all around us all of the time." >> >> >> So then thinking about laying it underneath fiberglass, my thought >> is: "Well, if fiberglass is transparent to GPS, then how many layers >> are transparent to the GPS. Can you put it under 1/16", 1/8", 1", >> 5"? At what point do you decide you've hidden the GPS from it >> enough?" >> >> And, if it's under a cowl, or at some other point not mounted >> horizontally with a full view of the sky in all directions, then >> which of the available satellites that are now unavailable are you >> happy to just toss aside from shadowing due to poor mounting? So >> some of them aren't worth seeing. >> >> I understand the love of building a cosmetically pleasing airplane, >> > but > >> to sacrifice life-saving avionics signals really makes me wonder. >> And nothing against Dan Checkoway, but it's amazing how one person's >> good experience with a poor mounting choice can spread to such a >> universal acceptance of the idea. It might be better to bounce >> mounting and location questions off the antenna makers and companies >> like >> > Garmin > >> and see how far they're willing to stick their neck out with an >> > answer. > >> If it were harmless, they'd have no reason to avoid giving the >> advice. I've had many phone calls to Comant and questions to other >> antenna makers throughout the build, which in the end mostly just led >> me to try to be as "conventional" as possible to attempt the same >> reliability as the certified planes could have. >> >> Now, if someone was building a VFR only airplane, I'd say "heck yeah, >> may as well give it a try". >> >> >> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying >> >> >> >> Deems Davis wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> John W. Cox wrote: >>> >>> . Fiberglass is not transparent >>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is >>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also >>> > requires > >>> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier >>> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when >>> you need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence >>> >>> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have >>> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is >>> > > >>> a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a >>> 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally? >>> Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite >>> based systems. >>> >>> Deems Davis # 406 >>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Oil Canning
Date: Sep 17, 2007
From: "McGANN, Ron" <ron.mcgann(at)baesystems.com>
Hey all, Getting to the final assembly stage. I pulled out the VS that was completed over 3 years ago. Did not know any better at the time and thought my first airplane part was just fine. But there is significant oil canning on both of the large aft-lower panels. The only other oil canning I have is very minor on one or two of the lower wing skin panels, so the VS is really giving me the irrits. Any clues on how to tighten the skins? cheers, Ron 187 finishing ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Vinyl?
Date: Sep 17, 2007
From: "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com>
Talk with Denny Demeter at Av Grafix (http://www.avgrafix.com/). He did all the vinyl garaphics and stencils for my Pietenpol, which won awards at OSH. Easy to apply and no thicker than paint. Jack Phillips #40610 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ivo welch Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 8:50 PM Subject: RV10-List: Vinyl? Dear RV-10 list: I am about to start advertising my RV10 for sale again. (http://welch.econ.brown.edu/n325hp). Moved to the standard CS 2-blade prop. For sale at $199k---it would probably be very tough to build with the ingredients that are in this plane, much less in the pro quality it was built. alas, its not looking as nice as it should. so, I would also like to spruce up the looks with some vinyl stripe design to go on top of the existing paint. Does anyone have good experiences with someone who produces nice vinyl stripes for easy application? help appreciated. regards, /ivo _________________________________________________ or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - Norsk - Portuguese ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground wi
From: "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net>
Date: Sep 17, 2007
Rick, Rick Gray owns that site and put up those pics. You'll have to ask him. Zack -------- RV8 #80125 RV10 # 40512 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134805#134805 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "rtitsworth" <rtitsworth(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Date: Sep 17, 2007
Do inter tubes hold really Nitrogen better than air??? Air is composed of ~80% Nitrogen. So it would seem that if it is the "other" components of air (mostly O2) that leak out, then the tube would still be ~80% full of Nitrogen - and more so on successive re-fills. After the first subsequent refill the air would be ~95% Nitrogen. After the second refill it would be ~99% Nitrogen. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list- Subject: RE: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! Just fill it with nitrogen and forget about it. Bob K ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
Date: Sep 17, 2007
Subject: Fiberglass and antenna placement
Deems, make sure you rip all the fiberglass and plastic covering off those certified antennas too. I think the most useful tip I have got out of this string so far is don't by anything from Commant except for maybe VHF and Transponder. Not a surprise as when I have asked them questions in OSH they basically gave me a hand out, promptly ignored me, and walked away when they had no one else at their booth. Part of the reason that people are seeing better reception from the Bluetooth "bugs" is because they are using much newer technologies than the "certified" antennas. Does that surprise anyone that the certified vendors are probably not really doing anything to improve the antennas because of the hassle to get them recertified. Anyone else remember the horrors stories of the older certified units giving the RAIM messages, usually at the worse possible times? At this point I will probably have no less than 3-4 satellite antennas performing various functions. Some will be under the canopy and some may not. Depends on how well they function and how important they are. Will I stick an antenna for a Garmin x96 on the outside? Not a chance. But for primary navigation WAAS GPS, potentially. But only after I test it out. So while everyone is super concerned about if the 1/4" of fiberglass is attenuating the GPS signal in the UHF L Band microwave range (in which most outdoor antennas are protected by fiberglass or ABS plastic), has anyone actually looked at exactly how far they are running those antenna leads? Depending on the cable type you can probably figure a loss of 0.5db for every meter of cable. Or how about if your Bluetooth, cell phone, oscillation of that laptop clock, or RF noise from your various "uncertified" personal electronics are causing any interference in your nav systems that could induce an error? So who wants to volunteer to do a SNR study for GPS locations on the RV-10 along with the factory coverings of said antennas? Just for the record I have a pair of Commant CI-121 Comm antennas, a pair of archer wingtip antennas for nav, and a Commant CI-105 transponder antenna. Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 7:56 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement OK, I just redesigned my antenna installation : atop a 5 foot tall pylon, made of spaceage transpardium mounted in the exact center/top point of the cabin cover, equipped with a gyro stabilized gimble that ensures stability of the antenna in all unusual attitudes. I'm out of here John W. Cox wrote: > > Now you guys are getting with the program. Coax length, inline > connectors, combiners, splitters and fiberglas thickness equate to db > signal losses. > > John #600 > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis > Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 3:48 PM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement > > > OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how much > attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed anywhere > in your clips, and still remains. The specified/recommended Commant > Antenna for the HeadsUP XM Weather receiver (used in Avidyne > installations in certified Cirrus 's) comes configured with a gain of > 30-34 db. The receiver itself is preset to expect a gain of 22db > (+/-2db). The installation manual actually _recommends/requires_ some > additional attenuation and provides a formula for figuring the amount > available through several different types and lengths (feet & yards) of > > coax. Turns out that you need quite a bit of coax to get it down to the > > 22db range (17-58 ' depending on type of coax) Alternatively you may > use a DC bias passing attenuator in line with the cable itself. (my > choice). The only caution from the mfg about placement was to keep it > away from transmitting antennas, (min 36's"). > > If, as James suggests, the fiberglass (1/16 - 3/32") of the cowl is not > an issue in signal loss, and there are no other blocking restrictions, > then why criticize someone who wants to make the installation > cosmetically attractive as well? the vast majority of the 396/496 > Garmins w/ weather are flying with glareshield mounted antennas with the > > same issues. > > Deems Davis # 406 > 'Its all done....Its just not put together' > http://deemsrv10.com/ > > Tim Olson wrote: > >> >> I've always taken antenna reception quality as THE #1 reason to choose >> an antenna or mounting location....especially important if you're >> shooting for the same quality as a "certified" installation. I never >> understood why as experimental builders, who build planes that we >> > pride > >> as being built "better than factory", anyone would build absolutely >> sub-standard to all of the advice by manufacturers regarding their >> installation requirements....on purpose, no less. The fact that >> > someone > >> would bother to hem and haw about a WAAS GPS antenna no less, really >> makes me wonder, as the amount of drag off a small wart of an antenna >> is way less than if you were talking about a Nav or Com antenna, and >> > the > >> signal you're trying to receive is EXTREMELY faint in comparison. >> >> Here's something I dug up recently: >> >> > http://www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/Dual%20Benefit/warner_gps_spoof > ing.html > >> "The GPS signal strength measured at the surface of the Earth is about >> > > >> -160dBw (1 x 10-16 watts), which is roughly equivalent to viewing a >> 25-watt light bulb from a distance of 10,000 miles. This weak signal >> can easily be blocked by destroying or shielding the GPS receiver's >> antenna. The GPS signal can also be effectively jammed by a signal of >> a similar frequency but greater strength. " >> >> So then think about the many electrical noise causing things in an >> airplane....probably one of the loudest of which would be the spark >> plugs and ignition system. And then to choose to actually mount >> the antennas CLOSER to those items? I mean, I've seen TV's get >> scrambled signals when a snowmobile drove by the house years >> ago....not that the plane is going to be as poor, but we're >> *really* talking some tiny electrical signals with GPS...and sorry, >> > but > >> if someone even thinks they're going to pass by on flying ILS and VOR >> approaches and instead favor trusting a WAAS approach, why sacrifice? >> If they're going to sacrifice that, then why bother to look at the >> actual LPV-spec GPS units in the first place....just fly them with >> an autopilot or EFIS driven by a 396. (and no, I'm not REALLY >> endorsing that thinking) >> >> >> http://www.nap.edu/html/embedded_everywhere/ch2_b8.html >> "What makes GPS reception difficult is that radio frequency (RF) >> signals from the satellites are very weak. Special coding is used to >> allow receivers to detect these weak signals, but even with coding, >> GPS receivers generally work only if they have a direct line of sight >> to the satellites. Performance inside buildings or in an area covered >> by foliage is generally quite poor" >> >> http://www.wowinfo.com/gps/gps/chapter2n3.htm >> "This is an extremely low-powered system-so low-powered, in fact, that >> > > >> the signal is really buried in the natural background radio noise. The >> > > >> receiver recovers this weak signal from the satellites by using >> spread-spectrum communication technology, a very tricky concept in >> communication theory that works by means of pseudo-random codes." >> >> http://www.dot.nd.gov/manuals/surveymanual/gps-operations.pdf >> "You'd think that with all of these radio waves raining down on us >> from dozens of satellites in space >> we'd all glow in the dark. Actually, the strength of the GPS signal is >> > > >> very small, equivalent to the tail >> light of a car seen from 2,500 kilometers away-halfway across the >> U.S.! Weaker, in fact, than the >> ordinary background radio noise that's all around us all of the time." >> >> >> So then thinking about laying it underneath fiberglass, my thought is: >> "Well, if fiberglass is transparent to GPS, then how many layers are >> transparent to the GPS. Can you put it under 1/16", 1/8", 1", 5"? >> At what point do you decide you've hidden the GPS from it enough?" >> >> And, if it's under a cowl, or at some other point not mounted >> horizontally with a full view of the sky in all directions, then >> which of the available satellites that are now unavailable are you >> happy to just toss aside from shadowing due to poor mounting? So >> some of them aren't worth seeing. >> >> I understand the love of building a cosmetically pleasing airplane, >> > but > >> to sacrifice life-saving avionics signals really makes me wonder. And >> nothing against Dan Checkoway, but it's amazing how one person's good >> experience with a poor mounting choice can spread to such a universal >> acceptance of the idea. It might be better to bounce mounting >> and location questions off the antenna makers and companies like >> > Garmin > >> and see how far they're willing to stick their neck out with an >> > answer. > >> If it were harmless, they'd have no reason to avoid giving the advice. >> I've had many phone calls to Comant and questions to other antenna >> makers throughout the build, which in the end mostly just led me to >> try to be as "conventional" as possible to attempt the same >> reliability as the certified planes could have. >> >> Now, if someone was building a VFR only airplane, I'd say "heck yeah, >> may as well give it a try". >> >> >> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying >> >> >> >> Deems Davis wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> John W. Cox wrote: >>> >>> . Fiberglass is not transparent >>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is >>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also >>> > requires > >>> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier >>> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you >>> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence >>> >>> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have >>> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is >>> > > >>> a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a >>> 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally? >>> Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite >>> based systems. >>> >>> Deems Davis # 406 >>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together' >>> http://deemsrv10.com/ >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
Date: Sep 17, 2007
Subject: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Now here is an off the wall thought, anyone give any consideration to usi ng one of the leak sealant products in their tubes? Maybe something like S lime? Pro's/Con's? Might be just the thing to reduce air loss and the dif ference between being stuck on a backwoods strip or making it home. Though ts from the peanut gallery? J Michael From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m atronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 8:52 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! Just my experience: 3 Desser leakguards. Mains are great, add air maybe eve ry 6 months. Nose tube...no such ruck. Leaks worse than the standard tube p reviously there..have to add air every month. On 9/16/07, Chris Johnston > wrote: yay! while we're arguing about stuff... could you guys argue about this fo r me so i can decide? i'm trying to decide on some less leaky inner tubes, and i think it's between Desser's "leak guard", and Michelin's "airstop". what say you all? and is it reasonably self-explanatory to order the righ t size inner tube? is it possible for me to screw it up? cj #40410 fuse/finishing www.perfectlygoodairplane.net<http://www.perfectlygoodairplane.net> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
Date: Sep 17, 2007
Subject: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Some of the benefits to using Nitrogen is it's usually much dryer than compressed air and a bit more stable through the temperature ranges we see. Also, Oxygen is corrosive to rubber where Nitrogen is inert. If you believe the guys at your local auto shop, they may tell you that you will get another 1/2 mile to the gallon but I call horsepucky. If you really want to use it almost every tire shop now will fill tires with Nitrogen so you can just stop by one and have them fill them. You could also get a small tank and regulator from your local welding gas supply and keep it around the shop/hanger. Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of rtitsworth Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 7:51 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! Do inter tubes hold really Nitrogen better than air??? Air is composed of ~80% Nitrogen. So it would seem that if it is the "other" components of air (mostly O2) that leak out, then the tube would still be ~80% full of Nitrogen - and more so on successive re-fills. After the first subsequent refill the air would be ~95% Nitrogen. After the second refill it would be ~99% Nitrogen. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list- Subject: RE: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! Just fill it with nitrogen and forget about it. Bob K ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 17, 2007
From: "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com>
Subject: GPS antennae
Other than the "unsightly wart" appearance, how much drag is there in a GPS antennae on the top back of the canopy? Is there a measurable speed difference? Fred Williams 40515 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 17, 2007
From: Jay Brinkmeyer <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Vinyl?
>From an archive I found a while back... I painted my RV8 white,in stages, as I built the parts, then after final assembly, had vinyl stripes applied by Eric Mann, of Freedom Signs and Graphics (775 771-3937). I designed a paint scheme, e-mailed it Eric, who had actual RV8 dimensions in his program. He fine tuned the scheme, and sent me a rendering for approval. When I flew the RV8 to Reno, he applied the prepared stripes in about an hour. The cost was only a couple hundred bucks, and you can do it yourself. Go to my website and see it http://members.cox.net/cjhukill/ The stripes have been on about 5 years now, and look as good as the day they installed. Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel. http://travel.yahoo.com/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
Date: Sep 17, 2007
Subject: GPS antennae
That's the money question and the answer is probably well less than a knot depending on where it goes. It's more likely to cause problems from buildup in icing conditions or p-static signal degradation than have any real impact to performance. I think most people are more interested in the clean lines that an antenna free surface provides. Dan had the most important point that I completely forgot to mention. Paint type and water are the two biggest things that will attenuate a signal, especially at those frequencies. You guys with satellite TV, how good does that work when you get the big buildups outside. The fast glass guys bury everything they can inside the fiberglass shell. How many antennas do you see sticking out of a LongEZ, Cozy, or similar plans built glass? Granted I probably would be more leery using one of those in hard IFR. Ever see what happens to glass aircraft without protection when hit by lightning, not pretty but I digress. Do the research, look at your mission profile, read all the facts and comments, and make your own decisions. The data exist for and against such configurations. Michael -----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: Monday, September 17, 2007 10:53 AM Subject: RV10-List: GPS antennae Other than the "unsightly wart" appearance, how much drag is there in a GPS antennae on the top back of the canopy? Is there a measurable speed difference? Fred Williams 40515 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 17, 2007
From: Jay Brinkmeyer <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Vinyl?
>From an archive I found a while back... I painted my RV8 white,in stages, as I built the parts, then after final assembly, had vinyl stripes applied by Eric Mann, of Freedom Signs and Graphics (775 771-3937). I designed a paint scheme, e-mailed it Eric, who had actual RV8 dimensions in his program. He fine tuned the scheme, and sent me a rendering for approval. When I flew the RV8 to Reno, he applied the prepared stripes in about an hour. The cost was only a couple hundred bucks, and you can do it yourself. Go to my website and see it http://members.cox.net/cjhukill/ The stripes have been on about 5 years now, and look as good as the day they installed. Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel. http://travel.yahoo.com/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: glare shield paint
From: "jayb" <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Sep 17, 2007
Bob... Which item on poly website are you referring to? Thanks, Jay Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134898#134898 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Fiberglass and antenna placement
Date: Sep 17, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Don't forget the five degree forward cant to compensate for your additional forward airspeed with the BPE Cold Air/Davis Induction System. Thanks for playing. John -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 5:56 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement OK, I just redesigned my antenna installation : atop a 5 foot tall pylon, made of spaceage transpardium mounted in the exact center/top point of the cabin cover, equipped with a gyro stabilized gimble that ensures stability of the antenna in all unusual attitudes. I'm out of here John W. Cox wrote: > > Now you guys are getting with the program. Coax length, inline > connectors, combiners, splitters and fiberglas thickness equate to db > signal losses. > > John #600 > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis > Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 3:48 PM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement > > > OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how much > attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed anywhere > in your clips, and still remains. The specified/recommended Commant > Antenna for the HeadsUP XM Weather receiver (used in Avidyne > installations in certified Cirrus 's) comes configured with a gain of > 30-34 db. The receiver itself is preset to expect a gain of 22db > (+/-2db). The installation manual actually _recommends/requires_ some > additional attenuation and provides a formula for figuring the amount > available through several different types and lengths (feet & yards) of > > coax. Turns out that you need quite a bit of coax to get it down to the > > 22db range (17-58 ' depending on type of coax) Alternatively you may > use a DC bias passing attenuator in line with the cable itself. (my > choice). The only caution from the mfg about placement was to keep it > away from transmitting antennas, (min 36's"). > > If, as James suggests, the fiberglass (1/16 - 3/32") of the cowl is not > an issue in signal loss, and there are no other blocking restrictions, > then why criticize someone who wants to make the installation > cosmetically attractive as well? the vast majority of the 396/496 > Garmins w/ weather are flying with glareshield mounted antennas with the > > same issues. > > Deems Davis # 406 > 'Its all done....Its just not put together' > http://deemsrv10.com/ > > Tim Olson wrote: > >> >> I've always taken antenna reception quality as THE #1 reason to choose >> an antenna or mounting location....especially important if you're >> shooting for the same quality as a "certified" installation. I never >> understood why as experimental builders, who build planes that we >> > pride > >> as being built "better than factory", anyone would build absolutely >> sub-standard to all of the advice by manufacturers regarding their >> installation requirements....on purpose, no less. The fact that >> > someone > >> would bother to hem and haw about a WAAS GPS antenna no less, really >> makes me wonder, as the amount of drag off a small wart of an antenna >> is way less than if you were talking about a Nav or Com antenna, and >> > the > >> signal you're trying to receive is EXTREMELY faint in comparison. >> >> Here's something I dug up recently: >> >> > http://www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/Dual%20Benefit/warner_gps_spoof > ing.html > >> "The GPS signal strength measured at the surface of the Earth is about >> > > >> -160dBw (1 x 10-16 watts), which is roughly equivalent to viewing a >> 25-watt light bulb from a distance of 10,000 miles. This weak signal >> can easily be blocked by destroying or shielding the GPS receiver's >> antenna. The GPS signal can also be effectively jammed by a signal of >> a similar frequency but greater strength. " >> >> So then think about the many electrical noise causing things in an >> airplane....probably one of the loudest of which would be the spark >> plugs and ignition system. And then to choose to actually mount >> the antennas CLOSER to those items? I mean, I've seen TV's get >> scrambled signals when a snowmobile drove by the house years >> ago....not that the plane is going to be as poor, but we're >> *really* talking some tiny electrical signals with GPS...and sorry, >> > but > >> if someone even thinks they're going to pass by on flying ILS and VOR >> approaches and instead favor trusting a WAAS approach, why sacrifice? >> If they're going to sacrifice that, then why bother to look at the >> actual LPV-spec GPS units in the first place....just fly them with >> an autopilot or EFIS driven by a 396. (and no, I'm not REALLY >> endorsing that thinking) >> >> >> http://www.nap.edu/html/embedded_everywhere/ch2_b8.html >> "What makes GPS reception difficult is that radio frequency (RF) >> signals from the satellites are very weak. Special coding is used to >> allow receivers to detect these weak signals, but even with coding, >> GPS receivers generally work only if they have a direct line of sight >> to the satellites. Performance inside buildings or in an area covered >> by foliage is generally quite poor" >> >> http://www.wowinfo.com/gps/gps/chapter2n3.htm >> "This is an extremely low-powered system-so low-powered, in fact, that >> > > >> the signal is really buried in the natural background radio noise. The >> > > >> receiver recovers this weak signal from the satellites by using >> spread-spectrum communication technology, a very tricky concept in >> communication theory that works by means of pseudo-random codes." >> >> http://www.dot.nd.gov/manuals/surveymanual/gps-operations.pdf >> "You'd think that with all of these radio waves raining down on us >> from dozens of satellites in space >> we'd all glow in the dark. Actually, the strength of the GPS signal is >> > > >> very small, equivalent to the tail >> light of a car seen from 2,500 kilometers away-halfway across the >> U.S.! Weaker, in fact, than the >> ordinary background radio noise that's all around us all of the time." >> >> >> So then thinking about laying it underneath fiberglass, my thought is: >> "Well, if fiberglass is transparent to GPS, then how many layers are >> transparent to the GPS. Can you put it under 1/16", 1/8", 1", 5"? >> At what point do you decide you've hidden the GPS from it enough?" >> >> And, if it's under a cowl, or at some other point not mounted >> horizontally with a full view of the sky in all directions, then >> which of the available satellites that are now unavailable are you >> happy to just toss aside from shadowing due to poor mounting? So >> some of them aren't worth seeing. >> >> I understand the love of building a cosmetically pleasing airplane, >> > but > >> to sacrifice life-saving avionics signals really makes me wonder. And >> nothing against Dan Checkoway, but it's amazing how one person's good >> experience with a poor mounting choice can spread to such a universal >> acceptance of the idea. It might be better to bounce mounting >> and location questions off the antenna makers and companies like >> > Garmin > >> and see how far they're willing to stick their neck out with an >> > answer. > >> If it were harmless, they'd have no reason to avoid giving the advice. >> I've had many phone calls to Comant and questions to other antenna >> makers throughout the build, which in the end mostly just led me to >> try to be as "conventional" as possible to attempt the same >> reliability as the certified planes could have. >> >> Now, if someone was building a VFR only airplane, I'd say "heck yeah, >> may as well give it a try". >> >> >> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying >> >> >> >> Deems Davis wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> John W. Cox wrote: >>> >>> . Fiberglass is not transparent >>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is >>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also >>> > requires > >>> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier >>> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you >>> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence >>> >>> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have >>> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is >>> > > >>> a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a >>> 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally? >>> Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite >>> based systems. >>> >>> Deems Davis # 406 >>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together' >>> http://deemsrv10.com/ >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: GPS antennae
Date: Sep 17, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Mathematically measurable using the formula found in the AC43.13. Insignificant in the grand scheme of ROP/LOP operations. John W. Cox 40600 -----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: Monday, September 17, 2007 8:53 AM Subject: RV10-List: GPS antennae Other than the "unsightly wart" appearance, how much drag is there in a GPS antennae on the top back of the canopy? Is there a measurable speed difference? Fred Williams 40515 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Kevin Belue" <kdbelue(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground
wire termination
Date: Sep 17, 2007
I mounted my Garmin 196 GPS antenna under the top cowling in my RV-6A. It worked fine, although there was some attenuation - which was ok since this was a VFR application. Then I painted my plane with metallic paint on top of the cowling and the GPS no longer received enough signal to work, so I moved the antenna. I don't like having antennas hanging out on the plane, but on my RV-10 the GPS antennas are outside on the top. The GPS antenna may work ok under the cowling as long as no metallic paint is over it, but I don't want anything to attenuate the signal since this will be used for IFR flying. Kevin Belue RV-6A N97KB RV-10 finishing ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann(at)cox.net>
Subject: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Date: Sep 17, 2007
I would not use it unless I had an emergency and needed to fix a flat. I think, with no rational reason, is that the chance of it puddleing and causing a grossly out of balance tire is to high. Bob K From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 6:52 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! Now here is an off the wall thought, anyone give any consideration to using one of the leak sealant products in their tubes? Maybe something like Slime? Pro's/Con's? Might be just the thing to reduce air loss and the difference between being stuck on a backwoods strip or making it home. Thoughts from the peanut gallery? J Michael From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 8:52 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! Just my experience: 3 Desser leakguards. Mains are great, add air maybe every 6 months. Nose tube...no such ruck. Leaks worse than the standard tube previously there..have to add air every month. On 9/16/07, Chris Johnston wrote: yay! while we're arguing about stuff... could you guys argue about this for me so i can decide? i'm trying to decide on some less leaky inner tubes, and i think it's between Desser's "leak guard", and Michelin's "airstop". what say you all? and is it reasonably self-explanatory to order the right size inner tube? is it possible for me to screw it up? cj #40410 fuse/finishing www.perfectlygoodairplane.net http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List http://forums.matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Lenhardt" <av8or(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Retractable Seat Belt Question
Date: Sep 17, 2007
What belts are you using for that price? John Lenhardt ----- Original Message ----- From: Robin Marks To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 11:43 PM Subject: RV10-List: Retractable Seat Belt Question I have a Retractable Seat Belt question especially for Grumpy and Chris Johnston. I was able to assemble a very nice combination to create a retractable seat belt set with a rotary buckle release. My concern is the units weight in at 5 lbs each . I assume the stock vans belts weigh a couple of pounds each (including all hardware). Chris, Grumpy, how much did your retractable units weigh? Anyone else out there using retracts? I can't imagine any retractable systems weighing less than 3.5 lbs due to all the metal in the retract housing so my units may not be out of line but I sure don't want to hang another 20 lbs on my plane (net 12 additional lbs). The good news is that these belts are ~$130.00 per set. Thanks, Robin ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 17, 2007
From: "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com>
Subject: Re: GPS antennae
You did that just to make me open AC 43.13, didn't you......... Dr Fred. John W. Cox wrote: > > Mathematically measurable using the formula found in the AC43.13. > Insignificant in the grand scheme of ROP/LOP operations. > > John W. Cox 40600 > > -----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: Monday, September 17, 2007 8:53 AM > To: RV 10 > Subject: RV10-List: GPS antennae > > > > Other than the "unsightly wart" appearance, how much drag is there in a > GPS antennae on the top back of the canopy? Is there a measurable > speed difference? > > Fred Williams > 40515 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com>
Subject: Fuel Tank Calibration Problem (Dynon FliteDek 180)
Date: Sep 17, 2007
OK guys. I could use a little help here. I tried to calibrate my fuel gages tonight but no joy. I have SW resistive floats and as I fill the tanks, the Dynon system says the readings from the tank doesn't change as gas is added. It's possible that the float is stuck, the wiring is incorrect, the Dynon is bad or not setup correctly, or maybe the SW gage is bad. However, both tanks act the same. I'm trying to remember how the gage is wired internally. There is only 1 screw on the outside of the tank, that's probably the center tap of the variable resistor attached to the float. How is the thing grounded internally? I can't remember what it looks like inside. Does anyone have a picture of their gage before it was installed in the tank they can share with me? Did we have to ground the gage internally and I forgot to do that? Thanks in advance, Albert Gardner Yuma, AZ N991RV ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Saylor" <Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com>
Subject: Fuel Tank Calibration Problem (Dynon FliteDek 180)
Date: Sep 17, 2007
Albert, You should be able to bend a coat hanger 90 degrees and thread it throught the sump hole, then push up gently on the float arm. With a meter you should see the resistance change between the center pin and any good ground. I think the resistance is 40 to 240 ohms. That should troubleshoot the float. Good Luck, Dave Saylor AirCrafters LLC 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 831-722-9141 831-750-0284 CL www.AirCraftersLLC.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert Gardner Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 9:56 PM Subject: RV10-List: Fuel Tank Calibration Problem (Dynon FliteDek 180) --> OK guys. I could use a little help here. I tried to calibrate my fuel gages tonight but no joy. I have SW resistive floats and as I fill the tanks, the Dynon system says the readings from the tank doesn't change as gas is added. It's possible that the float is stuck, the wiring is incorrect, the Dynon is bad or not setup correctly, or maybe the SW gage is bad. However, both tanks act the same. I'm trying to remember how the gage is wired internally. There is only 1 screw on the outside of the tank, that's probably the center tap of the variable resistor attached to the float. How is the thing grounded internally? I can't remember what it looks like inside. Does anyone have a picture of their gage before it was installed in the tank they can share with me? Did we have to ground the gage internally and I forgot to do that? Thanks in advance, Albert Gardner Yuma, AZ N991RV ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Retractable Seat Belt Question
Date: Sep 18, 2007
From: "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com>
John, I am not using these YET. I just cobbled these together this weekend as a test. I think I prefer the rotary belt release but didn't want the 3" wide racing belts so I opted for the 2" belt with rotary release. Below is a photo of a set I found on ebay (sold to drifters) for $50.00 delivered. They are a 4 point fixed location belt. No retract. (retract portion below). 5 point also available for about the same price. I found these retract belts online. MSRP ~$99, I think I paid $79 delivered! They are built by Corbeau and may be good enough to use as-is but I THINK I wanted the rotary release so I blended the two sets (both black). >From the Corbeau I used from the retract all they way down to the shoulder adjustment buckle. >From the Rotary Release I used from the bottom of the shoulder adjustment buckle down; including the lap belt and rotary buckle. Note: on the Corbeau there is a quick disconnect between the Y and the retract assembly. Could be nice to remove when the rear seats are not used (lap belt stays attached) Again the Corbeau are probably good enough to use as is but I didn't want the basic car belt buckle which may be more comfortable than the Rotary Release (see padding behind the belt buckle). http://www.corbeau.com/products/2_inch_belts/2_inch.shtml Final note: the retract attaches with a single bolt. I believe we may have to modify the attachment mechanism. Robin From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Lenhardt Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 6:31 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Retractable Seat Belt Question What belts are you using for that price? John Lenhardt ----- Original Message ----- sing these From: Robin Marks <mailto:robin1(at)mrmoisture.com> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 11:43 PM Subject: RV10-List: Retractable Seat Belt Question I have a Retractable Seat Belt question especially for Grumpy and Chris Johnston. I was able to assemble a very nice combination to create a retractable seat belt set with a rotary buckle release. My concern is the units weight in at 5 lbs each . I assume the stock vans belts weigh a couple of pounds each (including all hardware). Chris, Grumpy, how much did your retractable units weigh? Anyone else out there using retracts? I can't imagine any retractable systems weighing less than 3.5 lbs due to all the metal in the retract housing so my units may not be out of line but I sure don't want to hang another 20 lbs on my plane (net 12 additional lbs). The good news is that these belts are ~$130.00 per set. Thanks, Robin 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 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel Tank Calibration Problem (Dynon FliteDek 180)
From: "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net>
Date: Sep 17, 2007
Hello Albert, check out the linmk below. Hope that helps. http://www.wellenzohn.net/RV10Wings/fuellevelsender.html Michael -------- RV-10 builder (fuselage) #511 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134984#134984 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 18, 2007
Subject: Re: Fuel Tank Calibration Problem (Dynon FliteDek 180)
From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse(at)saintaviation.com>
The first thing to try would be to see what resistance you have to ground on the lead wire. It is possible that you don't have the right wire connected to the sender. If you read a resistance at one level, then add fuel, the resistance should change if the float is working (or the coat hangar trick is a good idea). It should start changing almost immediately if the float is installed correctly, as it ready accurately usually from 0 to 24 or 26 gallons, at which time the float is all the way at the top of the tank and can't read the last 4-6 gallons. If you do get resistance changes when you check at the float, then make sure you have the right wire going to the Dynon (I can't remember which pin it is right now, but will be in your installation manual) and make sure you have continuity from the sender end of the wire to the pin in the back of the connector. If this is shorted that would cause it not to work. Also, if you somehow have the wires switched so the left is going to the right and vice versa, then you would also be getting this problem most likely, since the Dynon is specifically reading one pin for left and the other for right. If this is the case, you can either re-route those two wires or just switch them in the connector, depending on how "buttoned up" your wiring is. Before draining the tank and trying anything else, I would just test the resistance as you add fuel (or even as you rock the wings as the float will move if there is fuel in the wings when you rock it). You could do it just by jacking up one wing to fake the float out in case you end up having to remove all of the fuel you have put in already and don't want to add more for this reason. Hope this helps. GOD BLESS! Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse(at)saintaviation.com www.saintaviation.com 352-427-0285 Albert Gardner wrote: > > > OK guys. I could use a little help here. I tried to calibrate my fuel > gages > tonight but no joy. I have SW resistive floats and as I fill the tanks, > the > Dynon system says the readings from the tank doesn't change as gas is > added. > It's possible that the float is stuck, the wiring is incorrect, the Dynon > is > bad or not setup correctly, or maybe the SW gage is bad. However, both > tanks > act the same. I'm trying to remember how the gage is wired internally. > There > is only 1 screw on the outside of the tank, that's probably the center tap > of the variable resistor attached to the float. How is the thing grounded > internally? I can't remember what it looks like inside. Does anyone have a > picture of their gage before it was installed in the tank they can share > with me? Did we have to ground the gage internally and I forgot to do > that? > Thanks in advance, > Albert Gardner > Yuma, AZ > N991RV > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 18, 2007
From: "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com>
Subject: Russel Davis
Everybody pray for Russ. (Texas Tech RV 10) He had an accident this weekend and his right hand contacted a prop. (helping a friend with his airplane) Lost at least 1/2 of his right index finger and had to have surgery. The email stated he would post details when he is feeling better. He stated he was out of the hospital and back home. Requested not to get a bunch of emails as he probably wouldn't feel up to answering all of them I wrote to Russ this weekend to find out how he did his Kevlar panel. Fred Williams 40515 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 18, 2007
From: Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com>
Subject: Re: Russel Davis
Russ? or Stein? Stein had an accident I don't believe it was Russ. Rick S. 40185 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 7:33:11 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles Subject: RV10-List: Russel Davis Everybody pray for Russ. (Texas Tech RV 10) He had an accident this weekend and his right hand contacted a prop. (helping a friend with his airplane) Lost at least 1/2 of his right index finger and had to have surgery. The email stated he would post details when he is feeling better. He stated he was out of the hospital and back home. Requested not to get a bunch of emails as he probably wouldn't feel up to answering all of them I wrote to Russ this weekend to find out how he did his Kevlar panel. Fred Williams 40515 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 18, 2007
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch
Fred, I *think* you're wrong, I just called Russ, to verify his 10 digits. ;) I've talked to Stein a bit the past couple days....he's been a bit laid up after chopping off half his index finger in a prop. Something about wanting to verify the tach by how hard the prop hits the finger or some scientific test like that. His spirits are as good as they can be, given the event. Below I'll link his post on VAF to try to at least announce the happening. http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?p=155476#post155476 Hi All, I figured that this soon will filter out in the rumor mill because enough people already know, so I'd make a quick post personally to let you know what is going on. This weekend I was helping a friend get his rotax powered quicksilver running and had a rather unfortuneate and messy accident (don't worry too much, it wasn't fatal). Long story short. My right hand ended up contacting the running prop (sharp nylon 3 bladed ultra prop).....as you can well imagine the prop ended up much better than my right hand - which didn't fare too well....but in the end not as bad as it could have been. The prop has a tiny red stained nick on it from one of my bones, and we had to hunt (in the grass of our runway) for the severed flesh if mine, but we did ok and had everything on ice before heading to the hospital, I'm home from the hospital now, had orthopedic surgery from a hand/upper extremity specailist and am going to be fine, albeit with 1/2 less of a missing digit on my right hand than I had last week at this time. They were unable to use the last half of my index finger - but the rest should be ok.......we hope! Please bear with me while I'm slow to type (noy very fast with only 1 usable hand) and the other not feeling too good right now. I'll be working reduced hours this week due to more appointments with the surgeon, so to those of you waiting for "stuff" from me personally, your patience is appreciated. I would kindly ask that you not deluge me with lots of personal calls or emails because I just simply cannot respond right now. I'm pretty doped up, really tired and in a wee bit of pain. After I'm feeling a bit better I'll post a long, detailed (and probably disturbing) account of the accident - becase that's all it is. After having a dog bite my running prop on the RV some years ago, and sitting in a cockpit when another old guy got hit by a prop many years before, I treat them like bombs.....but it still happenend to me, so PLEASE BE EXTRA carefull. I'm pretty carefull and it still happened in less than a blink of an eye. I can't overstate how emotionally and physically painfull of an experience this is. I'm going to be fine in the end and won't be much worse for it, but it's still a miserable thing to deal with. The silver lining is I'm alive, didn't lose a hand or arm, and have most of my fingers back. It's embarrassing, humiliating and painful to type this note, but it needs to be done. Thanks to all who have already sent their supprt, and I sincerely appreciate everyone's patience while I get through this. I'm still working as able, just reduced hours and reduced email responses. Again, thanks for everything from such a great community of people, many of you I'm proud to call friends, Best Regards, God Bless and BE SAFE! Stein Bruch RV6, Minneapolis Fred Williams, M.D. wrote: > > > Everybody pray for Russ. (Texas Tech RV 10) He had an accident this > weekend and his right hand contacted a prop. (helping a friend with his > airplane) Lost at least 1/2 of his right index finger and had to have > surgery. The email stated he would post details when he is feeling > better. He stated he was out of the hospital and back home. Requested > not to get a bunch of emails as he probably wouldn't feel up to > answering all of them I wrote to Russ this weekend to find out how he > did his Kevlar panel. > > Fred Williams > > 40515 > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 18, 2007
From: James Hein <n8vim(at)arrl.net>
Subject: Re: Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch
So..... He can't give any more helpful pointers? Look on the bright side; You'll save 10% off manicure prices! We had one guy at work who crushed a finger in a log splitter last year. What did his coworkers do? They placed these stickers all over his office upon his return: How's that for sympathy! Hope you had a good laugh from this email Stein! Get well soon! -Jim 40384 Tim Olson wrote: > > Fred, > > I *think* you're wrong, I just called Russ, to verify his > 10 digits. ;) > > I've talked to Stein a bit the past couple days....he's been > a bit laid up after chopping off half his index finger in a > prop. Something about wanting to verify the tach by how > hard the prop hits the finger or some scientific test like > that. His spirits are as good as they can be, given the > event. Below I'll link his post on VAF to try to at least announce > the happening. > > http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?p=155476#post155476 > > Hi All, > > I figured that this soon will filter out in the rumor mill because > enough people already know, so I'd make a quick post personally to let > you know what is going on. > > This weekend I was helping a friend get his rotax powered quicksilver > running and had a rather unfortuneate and messy accident (don't worry > too much, it wasn't fatal). > > Long story short. My right hand ended up contacting the running prop > (sharp nylon 3 bladed ultra prop).....as you can well imagine the prop > ended up much better than my right hand - which didn't fare too > well....but in the end not as bad as it could have been. The prop has > a tiny red stained nick on it from one of my bones, and we had to hunt > (in the grass of our runway) for the severed flesh if mine, but we did > ok and had everything on ice before heading to the hospital, > > I'm home from the hospital now, had orthopedic surgery from a > hand/upper extremity specailist and am going to be fine, albeit with > 1/2 less of a missing digit on my right hand than I had last week at > this time. They were unable to use the last half of my index finger - > but the rest should be ok.......we hope! > > Please bear with me while I'm slow to type (noy very fast with only 1 > usable hand) and the other not feeling too good right now. I'll be > working reduced hours this week due to more appointments with the > surgeon, so to those of you waiting for "stuff" from me personally, > your patience is appreciated. I would kindly ask that you not deluge > me with lots of personal calls or emails because I just simply cannot > respond right now. I'm pretty doped up, really tired and in a wee bit > of pain. > > After I'm feeling a bit better I'll post a long, detailed (and > probably disturbing) account of the accident - becase that's all it > is. After having a dog bite my running prop on the RV some years ago, > and sitting in a cockpit when another old guy got hit by a prop many > years before, I treat them like bombs.....but it still happenend to > me, so PLEASE BE EXTRA carefull. I'm pretty carefull and it still > happened in less than a blink of an eye. > > I can't overstate how emotionally and physically painfull of an > experience this is. I'm going to be fine in the end and won't be much > worse for it, but it's still a miserable thing to deal with. The > silver lining is I'm alive, didn't lose a hand or arm, and have most > of my fingers back. It's embarrassing, humiliating and painful to type > this note, but it needs to be done. > > Thanks to all who have already sent their supprt, and I sincerely > appreciate everyone's patience while I get through this. I'm still > working as able, just reduced hours and reduced email responses. > Again, thanks for everything from such a great community of people, > many of you I'm proud to call friends, > > Best Regards, God Bless and BE SAFE! > Stein Bruch > RV6, Minneapolis > > > Fred Williams, M.D. wrote: >> >> >> Everybody pray for Russ. (Texas Tech RV 10) He had an accident this >> weekend and his right hand contacted a prop. (helping a friend with >> his airplane) Lost at least 1/2 of his right index finger and had to >> have surgery. The email stated he would post details when he is >> feeling better. He stated he was out of the hospital and back home. >> Requested not to get a bunch of emails as he probably wouldn't feel >> up to answering all of them I wrote to Russ this weekend to find >> out how he did his Kevlar panel. >> >> Fred Williams >> >> 40515 >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 18, 2007
From: "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com>
Subject: Fred Williams/ Hand injury
I read that post totally wrong. Glad to hear it wasn't Russ, not glad to hear that his friend Stein got hurt. It's all bad. Still needs a prayer for recovery. Fred Williams. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch
Date: Sep 18, 2007
From: "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com>
If a handshake hurts too much we could welcome Stein back with a High 4 1/2 Robin ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gary" <speckter(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch
Date: Sep 18, 2007
Back when I test flew my Glasair III I returned to my wood working shop to find that the employees had made me a coffin, just in case! I don't know what they would have done if I hadn't made it. Gary 40274 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 3:51 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch If a handshake hurts too much we could welcome Stein back with a High 4 1/2 Robin ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
Date: Sep 18, 2007
Subject: Air Force Completes Transition of GPS Fleet to Upgraded Control
System This is good to see but it makes me a bit nervous to learn that the entire GPS nav data command and control system is in one location and LA none the less...... http://www.losangeles.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123068412 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Air Force Completes Transition of GPS Fleet to Upgraded
Control System
Date: Sep 18, 2007
From: John Jessen <n212pj(at)gmail.com>
Flying United from east to west coast yesterday, I tuned into channel 9 and listened to air traffic control to pass the time and practice writing down freq changes and the like. One commercial coming out of LA asked Salt Lake Center if they knew that the GPS was off line yet again, probably due to the military practicing jamming. He felt that the controller should pass on the information to other flights so there would be less confusion and other pilots could be prepared. The controller thanked the pilot and said it wasn't the first time. Okay then. John J _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 1:58 PM Subject: RV10-List: Air Force Completes Transition of GPS Fleet to Upgraded Control System This is good to see but it makes me a bit nervous to learn that the entire GPS nav data command and control system is in one location and LA none the less.. http://www.losangeles.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123068412 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch
From: "orchidman" <gary(at)wingscc.com>
Date: Sep 18, 2007
Do we need to get a new sofa on wheels for Osh next year :D Seat belts required for sure! -------- Gary Blankenbiller RV10 - # 40674 Fuselage SB (N410GB reserved) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135133#135133 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" <ddddsp1(at)juno.com>
Date: Sep 18, 2007
Subject: Re: Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch
Stein, Sorry to hear about your incident.........I do sell Pain meds........: ) Wanna trade some for an SL30? I have the kind that take the pai n away and relax you to the point of NO CARES! I am sure it was not your fault.........has to be one of those irrespo nsible props that are not finger friendly. Know any good attorneys..... ..I am sure they can sue the prop for lost wages and emotional distress. GET WELL! DEAN _____________________________________________________________ Click to find local singles for dating, romance and fun. http://3rdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iif6R6CarDMR3qK0KqIv51ljI Ieeq5467k4R0yUAN7Sftkub6/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Oil Canning
Date: Sep 19, 2007
From: "McGANN, Ron" <ron.mcgann(at)baesystems.com>
Zero responses. Searched the RV-10 archives and there is very little there. I guess I can only assume that no other RV-10 builder has any oil canning. The general RV archives are only a little more enlightening. What happened to the good old days - when a basic building query met with half a dozen or more immediate useful suggestions? I hope the list has not not exhausted itself as a resource for builder assistance. I know oil canning is common on all metal aircraft, but I am interested in solutions that the -10 crowd may have deployed to reduce or eliminate the problem - unless of course I am the ONLY crappy builder with oil canning. cheers, Ron 187 finishing ________________________________ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron Sent: Monday, 17 September 2007 8:38 PM To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RV10-List: Oil Canning Hey all, Getting to the final assembly stage. I pulled out the VS that was completed over 3 years ago. Did not know any better at the time and thought my first airplane part was just fine. But there is significant oil canning on both of the large aft-lower panels. The only other oil canning I have is very minor on one or two of the lower wing skin panels, so the VS is really giving me the irrits. Any clues on how to tighten the skins? cheers, Ron 187 finishing ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Oil Canning
Date: Sep 18, 2007
From: "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com>
No, you're not the only one. When I mounted my horizontal stabilizer on the tail cone I found a couple of areas that weren't as tight as the rest. I've been watching to see what response you get. Jack Phillips #40610 _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 7:00 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Oil Canning Zero responses. Searched the RV-10 archives and there is very little there. I guess I can only assume that no other RV-10 builder has any oil canning. The general RV archives are only a little more enlightening. What happened to the good old days - when a basic building query met with half a dozen or more immediate useful suggestions? I hope the list has not not exhausted itself as a resource for builder assistance. I know oil canning is common on all metal aircraft, but I am interested in solutions that the -10 crowd may have deployed to reduce or eliminate the problem - unless of course I am the ONLY crappy builder with oil canning. cheers, Ron 187 finishing _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron Sent: Monday, 17 September 2007 8:38 PM To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RV10-List: Oil Canning Hey all, Getting to the final assembly stage. I pulled out the VS that was completed over 3 years ago. Did not know any better at the time and thought my first airplane part was just fine. But there is significant oil canning on both of the large aft-lower panels. The only other oil canning I have is very minor on one or two of the lower wing skin panels, so the VS is really giving me the irrits. Any clues on how to tighten the skins? cheers, Ron 187 finishing href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics .com/Navigator?RV10-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com _________________________________________________ This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privilege d, proprietary or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is p rohibited. Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - N orsk - Portuguese ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch
Date: Sep 18, 2007
From: John Jessen <n212pj(at)gmail.com>
Man, oh man, Stein! What the heck! That must have given the old ticker a shock. Might have needed the ever popular Digitalis purpurea to settle things down or get them going again. My goodness! Well at least we know about this given that we can all communicate easily and instantaneously in this digital age we're in. Not that in other times we wouldn't have had a pulse on this type of news, but you might never have heard of such a thing, and who knows the spin they'd put on it. Did you have to prop yourself up, afterwards? All the best, my friend. John Jessen ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Leikam" <DAVELEIKAM(at)wi.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Oil Canning
Date: Sep 18, 2007
Oil CanningI have an area on one elevator with a lose skin. I went to see my tech counselors RV-6 and he had a few of the same in different sections. He said it happens and if it is not dramatic, not to worry. Sorry, I can't offer more info. Dave Leikam 40496 Wing guts ----- Original Message ----- From: McGANN, Ron To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 4:59 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Oil Canning Zero responses. Searched the RV-10 archives and there is very little there. I guess I can only assume that no other RV-10 builder has any oil canning. The general RV archives are only a little more enlightening. What happened to the good old days - when a basic building query met with half a dozen or more immediate useful suggestions? I hope the list has not not exhausted itself as a resource for builder assistance. I know oil canning is common on all metal aircraft, but I am interested in solutions that the -10 crowd may have deployed to reduce or eliminate the problem - unless of course I am the ONLY crappy builder with oil canning. cheers, Ron 187 finishing ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron Sent: Monday, 17 September 2007 8:38 PM To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RV10-List: Oil Canning Hey all, Getting to the final assembly stage. I pulled out the VS that was completed over 3 years ago. Did not know any better at the time and thought my first airplane part was just fine. But there is significant oil canning on both of the large aft-lower panels. The only other oil canning I have is very minor on one or two of the lower wing skin panels, so the VS is really giving me the irrits. Any clues on how to tighten the skins? cheers, Ron 187 finishing 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 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jeff Carpenter <jeff(at)westcottpress.com>
Subject: Re: Oil Canning
Date: Sep 18, 2007
Hi Ron, I've got quite a bit of oil canning in my elevators. My tech counselor shrugged and said don't worry about it... but I'm not happy with it and may re do those parts if I've got some time to kill while waiting on panel parts. I showed it to a cousin of mine who's done repair work on Airforce 1. He suggested drilling a hole in the middle of it, dimpling and flush riveting the hole. I've not tried it... can't tell you if it works... but if you do, and it does... please let me know. Jeff Carpenter 40304 N410CF On Sep 18, 2007, at 3:59 PM, McGANN, Ron wrote: > Zero responses. Searched the RV-10 archives and there is very > little there. I guess I can only assume that no other RV-10 > builder has any oil canning. The general RV archives are only a > little more enlightening. > > What happened to the good old days - when a basic building query > met with half a dozen or more immediate useful suggestions? I > hope the list has not not exhausted itself as a resource for > builder assistance. > > I know oil canning is common on all metal aircraft, but I am > interested in solutions that the -10 crowd may have deployed to > reduce or eliminate the problem - unless of course I am the ONLY > crappy builder with oil canning. > > cheers, > Ron > 187 finishing > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list- > server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron > Sent: Monday, 17 September 2007 8:38 PM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV10-List: Oil Canning > > > Hey all, > > Getting to the final assembly stage. I pulled out the VS that was > completed over 3 years ago. Did not know any better at the time > and thought my first airplane part was just fine. But there is > significant oil canning on both of the large aft-lower panels. The > only other oil canning I have is very minor on one or two of the > lower wing skin panels, so the VS is really giving me the irrits. > Any clues on how to tighten the skins? > > cheers, > Ron > 187 finishing > > > 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: EFDsteve(at)aol.com
Date: Sep 18, 2007
Subject: Re: Oil Canning
Dan Checkoway has something on his RV-7 site about this. He just used some RTV to attach some pieces of "J" channel to the inside of the tailcone, between the ribs to stiffen the skins. His entry on this is Sept. 2, 2005. Steve Weinstock 40230 In a message dated 9/18/2007 6:12:04 P.M. Central Daylight Time, Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com writes: No, you're not the only one. When I mounted my horizontal stabilizer on the tail cone I found a couple of areas that weren't as tight as the rest. I've been watching to see what response you get. Jack Phillips #40610 ____________________________________ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 7:00 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Oil Canning Zero responses. Searched the RV-10 archives and there is very little there. I guess I can only assume that no other RV-10 builder has any oil canning. The general RV archives are only a little more enlightening. What happened to the good old days - when a basic building query met with half a dozen or more immediate useful suggestions? I hope the list has not not exhausted itself as a resource for builder assistance. I know oil canning is common on all metal aircraft, but I am interested in solutions that the -10 crowd may have deployed to reduce or eliminate the problem - unless of course I am the ONLY crappy builder with oil canning. cheers, Ron 187 finishing ____________________________________ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron Sent: Monday, 17 September 2007 8:38 PM Subject: RV10-List: Oil Canning Hey all, Getting to the final assembly stage. I pulled out the VS that was completed over 3 years ago. Did not know any better at the time and thought my first airplane part was just fine. But there is significant oil canning on both of the large aft-lower panels. The only other oil canning I have is very minor on one or two of the lower wing skin panels, so the VS is really giving me the irrits. Any clues on how to tighten the skins? cheers, Ron 187 finishing ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 18, 2007
Subject: Re: Aircraft renters insurance
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
Dave Leikam wrote: > Can anyone recommend a good aircraft renters insurance company? I have > to start renting from the FBO as my friend sold the Archer I was > flying. A bit off subject but this is the largest pilot group I can > talk to at once. Thanks. Hi Dave, I use: Melissa Perkins NationAir 603-883-0033 603-883-1299 Fax They have treated me very well over the years. -Dj -- Dj Merrill Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 http://econ.duke.edu/~deej/sportsman/ "Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: DLIUDVINAITIS(at)aol.com
Date: Sep 18, 2007
Subject: Re: Oil Canning
Ron, I myself have not had any signs of oil canning. Have done my Hs, wings, Vs, tailcone 1.5 years ago still have not seen any. Maybe when you were assembling Hs, wings, Vs, etc. you started at the ends and worked riveting inward towards centers. I myself started in center of assembles and worked outward this I thought would help by letting metal shrink/strech outwards towards the ends of assembles. worked for me I have no oil canning visible as for solving problem. shrinking metal/streching I would go with tech recommendations an/or move on and keep building. Dave Liudvinaitis #40466 fuselage, side skins ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Oil Canning
Date: Sep 19, 2007
From: "McGANN, Ron" <ron.mcgann(at)baesystems.com>
Thanks all for the responses. As mentioned, I am at the stages of final assembly and the vast majority of panels are tighter than a drum. I religiously started riveting from the centre and worked towards the edges - as you have done Dave. On perhaps a handful of panels, the skin is not quite so tight and exhibits a slight 'wobble' when pressed in just the right spot, but the skin always recovers to the relaxed condition. The VS is just way too loose in my mind and needs to be tightened. I have heard other descriptions of oil canning as the skin popping out when pressed in a particular place - and staying there until pressed again. Am I confusing some flex in the panels with something more insidious? cheers, Ron ________________________________ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of DLIUDVINAITIS(at)aol.com Sent: Wednesday, 19 September 2007 11:37 AM To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Subject: Re: RV10-List: Oil Canning Ron, I myself have not had any signs of oil canning. Have done my Hs, wings, Vs, tailcone 1.5 years ago still have not seen any. Maybe when you were assembling Hs, wings, Vs, etc. you started at the ends and worked riveting inward towards centers. I myself started in center of assembles and worked outward this I thought would help by letting metal shrink/strech outwards towards the ends of assembles. worked for me I have no oil canning visible as for solving problem. shrinking metal/streching I would go with tech recommendations an/or move on and keep building. Dave Liudvinaitis #40466 fuselage, side skins ________________________________ Make AOL Your Homepage. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 18, 2007
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: Oil Canning
Well, when there's so much stress that it goes "pop pop" as you press and release, where it makes a concave and then when you push opposite, it "pops" loudly out, then I'd think it might be worth doing something about. The skin will have areas where it will flex some though, and although I'm not addressing any known engineering things on this plane or any other, I'm guessing that you don't want it always stretched super tight, as wings and surfaces need to flex. Maybe John can comment a bit. If you do have a section oil canning, and it can't be easily fixed by some riveting, it may be time for taking one of a few measures. I've heard of stiffners either being riveted in or prosealed in. The access area around my stall warning plate got oil-canning like that. I added stiffners in that particular area around the hole...2 of them, one in each direction. That took care of it. But, I'm cautious to offer that as general advice, because I'm sure there are some areas where adding stiffners might make things too...well...stiff. I'm not sure that the list can give a definite answer on it, and it's something that either might be best referred to a tech counselor locally, or played by "ear" (with the popping noise). That's probably why you didn't get quick answers....most people are just waiting to hear what someone has to say, because the exact magnitude isn't known without standing there by it. Sorry, I know that didn't help, but it was a shot. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying McGANN, Ron wrote: > Thanks all for the responses. > > As mentioned, I am at the stages of final assembly and the vast majority > of panels are tighter than a drum. I religiously started riveting from > the centre and worked towards the edges - as you have done Dave. On > perhaps a handful of panels, the skin is not quite so tight and exhibits > a slight 'wobble' when pressed in just the right spot, but the skin > always recovers to the relaxed condition. The VS is just way too loose > in my mind and needs to be tightened. I have heard other descriptions > of oil canning as the skin popping out when pressed in a particular > place - and staying there until pressed again. Am I confusing some flex > in the panels with something more insidious? > > cheers, > Ron > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of > *DLIUDVINAITIS(at)aol.com > *Sent:* Wednesday, 19 September 2007 11:37 AM > *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com > *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Oil Canning > > Ron, > I myself have not had any signs of oil canning. Have done my Hs, > wings, Vs, tailcone 1.5 years ago still have not seen any. Maybe > when you were assembling Hs, wings, Vs, etc. you started at the ends > and worked riveting inward towards centers. I myself started in > center of assembles and worked outward this I thought would help by > letting metal shrink/strech outwards towards the ends of > assembles. worked for me I have no oil canning visible as for > solving problem. shrinking metal/streching I would go with tech > recommendations an/or move on and keep building. > > Dave Liudvinaitis > #40466 > fuselage, side skins > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Make AOL Your Homepage. > > * > > 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: "Chris and Susie McGough" <VHMUM(at)bigpond.com>
Subject: Re: Rivethead-aero
Date: Sep 19, 2007
I just received this email from rivethead aero. Hopefully David comes good and it seems by temporarily closing his website he is doing something positive to fill backorders. regards Chris 388 RV Builder / Owner: I apologize for the lack of communication concerning the status of your order. Over the past weeks I have been working to complete open orders. If your parts have not shipped yet, they will be on the way very shortly. I appreciate your frustration. I assure you Full Throttle Concepts will continue to provide and support these products. I am very thankful to every member of the RV community for their support. My intent is to provide parts of good quality, and I want each person to be satisfied years after their purchase. I will be temporarily suspending new web orders as I concentrate on completing orders and building inventory. I will also use this time implement more efficient tooling and programming in the production processes. I will open web orders again on 10/12/2007. In an effort to provide better communication concerning order status, stock level and lead time information will be added to the website. Again, I am very thankful to all of the people in the RV community for their support over the years. Keeping pace with this group can be challenging, but for me it is very rewarding. I enjoy this work very much and I will continue to improve my service. Sincerely, David Czachorowski ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Wayne Edgerton" <wayne.e(at)grandecom.net>
Subject: Re: Rivethead-aero
Date: Sep 19, 2007
I received my order from Rivethead yesterday, which was the metal door guides and new polished outside door handles. They really look great. I have been communicating with Dave's nephew Joe and here is his last e-mail to me. Dave apparently has a regular job and does the RV stuff on the side. Wayne Edgerton N602WT _________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ Wayne, Glad you got your parts. Dave has been extremely busy with his job, and I mean extremely! Hopefully soon for the interior handles. I have seen his design on Solid Works. I actually got to see them work with this software. Pretty cool. It will be well worth the wait and the good news is that you can still use your Vans handles because these are bolt on replacements. Glad to hear your painting is coming along. I look forward to seeing some pics. Joe ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Wayne Hadath" <whadath(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Looking for friends
Date: Sep 19, 2007
Fellow RV 10 Builders I have purchased Serial number 40732. I have just mounted the tail cone and am currently working on the baggage door. What a terrific kit!! I am located in Kitchener, Ontario, Canada and I am building at my hangar at CYKF. I heard recently that there is a builder located in Salem, which is not far from here. If you monitor the list may be you could contact me. Are there any other builders in the Kitchener area? I still have not decided on prop yet but I am leaning towards the 3 blade MT. I don't like the fact it is a wooden prop but I am familiar with the smoothness of the 3 blades. Hopefully in the next while there will be a bit more clarity on the ELT situation so an informed decision can be made. Thanks Wayne Hadath RV 10 Quickbuild, hoping for first flight, 1st day of summer 08. F1 Rocket (Parts kit) 200 hours flying http://www.justplaneworks.com/ Just Plane Works Inc. 23 Jadestone Court Kitchener, Ontario Canada N2A 3X7 519-648-3375 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Mark Ritter <mritter509(at)msn.com>
Subject: Looking for friends
Date: Sep 19, 2007
Wayne, I have an MT three blade prop on my RV-10 and love the takeoff power and vi bration free operation (I understand the two blade is also very smooth and has all the push you need for takeoff). Probably a tad slower than the two blade but it does look sexy. Little nicks are easy to fix on the composite cover. I got a few in Mexico and fixed them with some five minute epoxy pe r the MT manuel. Mark RV-10/N410MR
From: whadath(at)rogers.comTo: rv10-list(at)matronics.comSubject: RV10-List: Look ing for friendsDate: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:19:11 -0400 Fellow RV 10 Builders I have purchased Serial number 40732. I have just mounted the tail cone and am currently working on the baggage door. What a terrific kit!! I am located in Kitchener, Ontario, Canada and I am building at my hangar a t CYKF. I heard recently that there is a builder located in Salem, which is not far from here. If you monitor the list may be you could contact me. Are there any other builders in the Kitchener area? I still have not decided on prop yet but I am leaning towards the 3 blade M T. I don=92t like the fact it is a wooden prop but I am familiar with the s moothness of the 3 blades. Hopefully in the next while there will be a bit more clarity on the ELT sit uation so an informed decision can be made. Thanks Wayne Hadath RV 10 Quickbuild, hoping for first flight, 1st day of summer 08. F1 Rocket (Parts kit) 200 hours flying http://www.justplaneworks.com/ Just Plane Works Inc. 23 Jadestone Court Kitchener, Ontario Canada N2A 3X7 519-648-3375 _________________________________________________________________ Gear up for Halo=AE 3 with free downloads and an exclusive offer. It=92s ou r way of saying thanks for using Windows Live=99. http://gethalo3gear.com?ocid=SeptemberWLHalo3_WLHMTxt_2 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com>
Subject: Empty weight
Date: Sep 19, 2007
I weighed N991RV yesterday as part of getting ready for the DAR. Left wheel: 659 lbs., right wheel: 665 lbs., nose wheel: 310 lbs. Total: 1634 lbs. Eguipment: Dynon 180 & 100, sl30, sl40, ps8000 audio, truetrak, full flightline interior (not leather) overhead console, painted, aerocomposits 3 blade prop, soundproofing under floor. Albert Gardner Yuma, AZ ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Empty weight
Date: Sep 19, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Albert, valuable post...knowing the left to right differential is important and great to read. Did you mount your batteries right of the longitudinal centerline? John Cox Oregon -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert Gardner Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 10:00 AM Subject: RV10-List: Empty weight I weighed N991RV yesterday as part of getting ready for the DAR. Left wheel: 659 lbs., right wheel: 665 lbs., nose wheel: 310 lbs. Total: 1634 lbs. Eguipment: Dynon 180 & 100, sl30, sl40, ps8000 audio, truetrak, full flightline interior (not leather) overhead console, painted, aerocomposits 3 blade prop, soundproofing under floor. Albert Gardner Yuma, AZ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 19, 2007
From: German Alvarez <german.alvarez(at)playalinda.net>
Subject: The end of Selective Availability (SA) on GPS
Not specific to the RV-10, but good news, future GPS satellites will not even have the SA feature. http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/09/us-ends-gps-cri.html http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=&ie=UTF-8&q=GPS+%22Selective+Availability%22&btnG=Search --ga ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Richard Sipp" <rsipp(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Empty weight
Date: Sep 19, 2007
Great data point Albert, thanks for sharing. How about the same for more of the finished airplanes? Also the empty CG location would be nice to know. Dick Sipp N110DV 40065 finishing frenzy at airport > I weighed N991RV yesterday as part of getting ready for the DAR. > Left wheel: 659 lbs., right wheel: 665 lbs., nose wheel: 310 lbs. > Total: 1634 lbs. > > Eguipment: Dynon 180 & 100, sl30, sl40, ps8000 audio, truetrak, full > flightline interior (not leather) overhead console, painted, aerocomposits > 3 blade prop, soundproofing under floor. > > Albert Gardner > Yuma, AZ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com>
Subject: Empty weight
Date: Sep 19, 2007
The battery is in Vans location on the centerline. I was a little surprised to see the extra 6 lbs. on the right wheel. The trutrak servo is in the right wing so that's certainly part of the difference but I didn't weigh it before I installed it. Albert Gardner Yuma, AZ -----Original Message----- Albert, valuable post...knowing the left to right differential is important and great to read. Did you mount your batteries right of the longitudinal centerline? John Cox Oregon ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com>
Subject: Empty weight
Date: Sep 19, 2007
OK Dick, here are the calculations of empty C.G. The main wheel arm lengths (and all other arm lengths as well) came from Vans. I didn't measure them myself. Albert Gardner Yuma, AZ Datum 99.44 Inches forward of wing leading edge. (L.E.) Design C.G. Range 15%-30% of wing chord, or 8.4 - 16.8 inches from L.E., or 107.84 - 116.24 inches aft of Datum. Wing L.E. 99.44 inches aft of Datum. Fuel 108.9" aft of datum Pilot & Front Seat Passenger 114.58" aft of datum. Rear Seat Passenger(s) 151.26" aft of datum. Baggage 173.5" aft of datum. Max 100 lbs. Aircraft is initially weighed empty in level flight attitude. Includes all engine fluids and non usable fuel. Airplane CG Weight Arm Moment Main wheel, right 665 124.44 82,752.60 Main wheel, left 659 124.31 81,920.29 Nose wheel 310 50.44 15,636.40 Totals 1,634 180,309.29 C.G. 110.35 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rivethead-aero
From: "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net>
Date: Sep 19, 2007
I wish I also had received a mail or order confirmation. Still hoping Michael www.wellenzohn.net (engine mounted yesterday and put her on the wheels the day before) -------- RV-10 builder (fuselage) #511 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135433#135433 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Brake cylinder assembly question
From: "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net>
Date: Sep 19, 2007
Hello, just a quick question on the brake cylinder as described on page 46-07 Step 2&3. Both cylinder are identical that means I have two "left sides" because the bleeder valve on the right side points up and not down. Was it the same with yours? Also it calls for AD822-4D elbow fittings but they wont fit in the threaded holes in the cylinder (hole is too small). 2.Question Front tire tube installation, did you remove all washers even the one which protects the tube see attached picture (washer on the right). -------- RV-10 builder (fuselage) #511 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135434#135434 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/wheels026_787.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Dunne" <acs(at)acspropeller.com.au>
Subject: Brake cylinder assembly question
Date: Sep 20, 2007
Michael, page 46-07 step 2 tells you to remove one of the fittings from the top to the bottom effectively creating a "right side". Have you correctly identified the elbow fitting, (AN822-4D) I don't recall a problem here. John 40315 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael Wellenzohn Sent: Thursday, 20 September 2007 4:27 PM Subject: RV10-List: Brake cylinder assembly question Hello, just a quick question on the brake cylinder as described on page 46-07 Step 2&3. Both cylinder are identical that means I have two "left sides" because the bleeder valve on the right side points up and not down. Was it the same with yours? Also it calls for AD822-4D elbow fittings but they wont fit in the threaded holes in the cylinder (hole is too small). 2.Question Front tire tube installation, did you remove all washers even the one which protects the tube see attached picture (washer on the right). -------- RV-10 builder (fuselage) #511 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135434#135434 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/wheels026_787.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 20, 2007
From: Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com>
Subject: Re: Brake cylinder assembly question
Michael, Yes, it's the same, you need to remove a bleeder and move it to the other side to create a "right" caliper. The plans have instructions on doing this. Yes, remove all the washers from the tube and beofre you install it for good, make a bend so the fill valve does not hit the fork unless you swapped out the wheel assembly and are not using the Van's supplied wheel. Rick S. 40185 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 11:27:29 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles Subject: RV10-List: Brake cylinder assembly question Hello, just a quick question on the brake cylinder as described on page 46-07 Step 2&3. Both cylinder are identical that means I have two "left sides" because the bleeder valve on the right side points up and not down. Was it the same with yours? Also it calls for AD822-4D elbow fittings but they wont fit in the threaded holes in the cylinder (hole is too small). 2.Question Front tire tube installation, did you remove all washers even the one which protects the tube see attached picture (washer on the right). -------- RV-10 builder (fuselage) #511 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135434#135434 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/wheels026_787.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 20, 2007
From: Sam Marlow <sam(at)fr8dog.net>
Subject: Removing the front seats
Just finished installing the interior, but now I need to crawl under the panel again. How do I remove the front seats without removing the rear carpet and flap drive cover? That's a lot of work! I think someone had a solution back a year or so ago, but I couldn't locate it in the archives. Thanks! Sam Marlow ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 20, 2007
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: Removing the front seats
It takes a little work, but it's possible. What you do is to trim a bevel into that nylon slide runner on the seat side of the rails. You trim it on the front side of the rails, so that when you pull the seat latch off and slide it all the way back, there's enough slop that you can tip the back of the seat upwards. It's much harder to explain than to see...but it's just loosening up the first 3/4" or so of that nylon glide. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying Sam Marlow wrote: > Just finished installing the interior, but now I need to crawl under the > panel again. How do I remove the front seats without removing the rear > carpet and flap drive cover? That's a lot of work! I think someone had a > solution back a year or so ago, but I couldn't locate it in the archives. > Thanks! > Sam Marlow > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: ELT again
Date: Sep 20, 2007
From: <tdawson-townsend(at)aurora.aero>
"Hopefully in the next while there will be a bit more clarity on the ELT situation so an informed decision can be made. Thanks Wayne Hadath" Wayne, maybe it doesn't apply to homebuilts, but I think 406 MHz ELTs are mandatory for certificated aircraft in Canada, or at least new ones . . .. TDT Tim Dawson-Townsend Aurora Flight Sciences tdt(at)aurora.aero 617-500-4812 (office) 617-905-4800 (mobile) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 20, 2007
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: OT: Positive Customer Service Experience - Randolph Engineering
I figure when someone really comes through beaming, it's nice to pass it on. A year ago after my Lasik I went looking for some good sunglasses for flying, and yeah, I bought the marketing and decided to go with a pair made by Randolph Engineering. They make them for the military and they have a few various types and lens shades. Well, I dropped them on the blacktop and chipped a lens a little. Decided I liked them after a year, so I bought 2 more pair...one for spare in the plane and one for the car or other. I sent the original pair in, with a note telling them the age of them, and that I personally dropped them and chipped them, but would like to buy new lenses and that they should just bill me accordingly. They sent back a brand new pair of glasses for ZERO dollars. Sure, to them I'm sure that's a simple and cheap thing. To me, it shows great customer service. I figured a public "thanks" would be nice, hence this post. -- Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Dunne" <acs(at)acspropeller.com.au>
Subject: Re: OT: Positive Customer Service Experience - Randolph Engineering
Date: Sep 21, 2007
Tim, 12 months on are you still happy with your Lasik surgery? John 40315 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Olson" <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 6:08 AM Subject: RV10-List: OT: Positive Customer Service Experience - Randolph Engineering > > I figure when someone really comes through beaming, it's > nice to pass it on. > > A year ago after my Lasik I went looking for some good > sunglasses for flying, and yeah, I bought the marketing > and decided to go with a pair made by Randolph Engineering. > They make them for the military and they have a few various > types and lens shades. > > Well, I dropped them on the blacktop and chipped a lens a > little. Decided I liked them after a year, so I bought 2 > more pair...one for spare in the plane and one for > the car or other. I sent the original pair in, with > a note telling them the age of them, and that I personally > dropped them and chipped them, but would like to buy new > lenses and that they should just bill me accordingly. > > They sent back a brand new pair of glasses for ZERO dollars. > > Sure, to them I'm sure that's a simple and cheap thing. > To me, it shows great customer service. I figured a > public "thanks" would be nice, hence this post. > > -- > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 20, 2007
From: Sam Marlow <sam(at)fr8dog.net>
Subject: Re: Removing the front seats
Thanks Tim, do you have a pic by chance on your website? Tim Olson wrote: > > It takes a little work, but it's possible. What you do is to trim a > bevel into that nylon slide runner on the seat side of the rails. > You trim it on the front side of the rails, so that when you pull > the seat latch off and slide it all the way back, there's enough > slop that you can tip the back of the seat upwards. It's much > harder to explain than to see...but it's just loosening up the first > 3/4" or so of that nylon glide. > > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying > > > Sam Marlow wrote: >> Just finished installing the interior, but now I need to crawl under >> the panel again. How do I remove the front seats without removing the >> rear carpet and flap drive cover? That's a lot of work! I think >> someone had a solution back a year or so ago, but I couldn't locate >> it in the archives. >> Thanks! >> Sam Marlow >> >> * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: How's things in Oz?
From: "marcausman" <marc(at)verticalpower.com>
Date: Sep 20, 2007
rleffler wrote: > > So here's my request: > > Develop a white paper of exactly was is the cost comparison would be using traditional technology versus your product. If the cost is as close as you indicate, then the white paper should help convince us with tight budgets to take the plunge. > > I did enjoy meeting and talking with your team at Michael's last week. I think you have a great product, I just can't afford it at the moment. > > bob > Bob, There's a white paper here at the top of the page: http://www.verticalpower.com/purchase.html The goal is to help you determine if it makes sense for your particular situation, taking into account price and other factors as well. Marc -------- Marc Ausman http://www.verticalpower.com RV-7 IO-390 Flying Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135596#135596 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DejaVu" <wvu(at)ameritel.net>
Subject: Re: Removing the front seats
Date: Sep 20, 2007
Nah, not that much work. A pointy exacto carves the nylon away nicely. Just pull the seat back as far as it will go. Look at the front side of the seat rails and carve away the nylon portion that's preventing the seat back from coming up. Anh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Olson" <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 1:12 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Removing the front seats > > > It takes a little work, but it's possible. What you do is to trim a bevel > into that nylon slide runner on the seat side of the rails. > You trim it on the front side of the rails, so that when you pull > the seat latch off and slide it all the way back, there's enough > slop that you can tip the back of the seat upwards. It's much > harder to explain than to see...but it's just loosening up the first > 3/4" or so of that nylon glide. > > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying > > > Sam Marlow wrote: >> Just finished installing the interior, but now I need to crawl under the >> panel again. How do I remove the front seats without removing the rear >> carpet and flap drive cover? That's a lot of work! I think someone had a >> solution back a year or so ago, but I couldn't locate it in the archives. >> Thanks! >> Sam Marlow >> >> * > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <rvmail(at)thelefflers.com>
Subject: Re: How's things in Oz?
Date: Sep 20, 2007
Thanks for the update! I'm on the road and will read later this weekend. bob > > From: "marcausman" <marc(at)verticalpower.com> > Date: 2007/09/20 Thu PM 09:50:20 EST > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV10-List: Re: How's things in Oz? > > > > rleffler wrote: > > > > So here's my request: > > > > Develop a white paper of exactly was is the cost comparison would be using traditional technology versus your product. If the cost is as close as you indicate, then the white paper should help convince us with tight budgets to take the plunge. > > > > I did enjoy meeting and talking with your team at Michael's last week. I think you have a great product, I just can't afford it at the moment. > > > > bob > > > > > Bob, > > There's a white paper here at the top of the page: http://www.verticalpower.com/purchase.html > > The goal is to help you determine if it makes sense for your particular situation, taking into account price and other factors as well. > > Marc > > -------- > Marc Ausman > http://www.verticalpower.com > RV-7 IO-390 Flying > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135596#135596 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Fuel Tanks - To Alodine or Not to Alodine - That is the Question?
Date: Sep 21, 2007
From: "Patrick Pulis" <patrick.pulis(at)seagas.com.au>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Brake cylinder assembly question
From: "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net>
Date: Sep 20, 2007
Great thanks for your answers. Michael -------- RV-10 builder (fuselage) #511 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135619#135619 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: FW: Fuel Tanks - To Alodine or Not to Alodine - That is the
Question?
Date: Sep 21, 2007
From: "Patrick Pulis" <patrick.pulis(at)seagas.com.au>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel Tank Calibration Problem (Dynon FliteDek 180)
From: "johngoodman" <johngoodman(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Sep 21, 2007
Albert, I just finished installing mine and pressure tested it. I think the ground is the mount's screws attached to the airplane. The center screw picks up the resistance. Frankly, I don't think it makes any difference which way you wire it since it's just ohms, but I ain't no electrician.... Maybe you don't have a good ground. Put an ohmmeter to the big screw and one of the mounting screws to see what you got. The swing on mine was 31 full, 245 empty. Good luck. -------- #40572 Empennage done, starting QB Wings N711JG reserved Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135698#135698 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Spiders!!!
From: "johngoodman" <johngoodman(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Sep 21, 2007
Get a dehumidifier. Make it bone dry in there if you can and you'll have nothing but dessicated spiders that can be vacuumed out. John -------- #40572 Empennage done, starting QB Wings N711JG reserved Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135700#135700 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 21, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Pitot/Static fittings on TruTrak Digflight ll VSVG
Has anyone had any difficulty with attaching pitot/static lines to the Tru-Trak A/P? I've got the pitot/static kit from Safeair, and it has the 'instant' brass fittings that you screw into the various instruments and then push the poly tubing into. The brass fittings fit into the encoder, the ADC, the Dynon EFIS, but NOT the Tru Trak, When I attempt to screw them in they begin to cock to one side, forcing it will result in the threads being stripped. it appears that the holes that are tapped in what appears to be a black plastic fitting on the rear of the Tru Trak are slightly smaller (rough measurement w/ caliper confirms. Anybody know what size threads these are? I checked the install manual but nothing referenced there. Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Dynon heated AOA/Pitot
From: "johngoodman" <johngoodman(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Sep 21, 2007
What are others doing to route the second tube, wiring, and controller in the wing? I'm thinking of enlarging the Vans pitot snap bushings to a larger size and mounting the controller to the inside of the bottom skin with an access panel. I'm reluctant to route tubing through lightening holes. John -------- #40572 Empennage done, starting QB Wings N711JG reserved Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135704#135704 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rene Felker" <rene(at)felker.com>
Subject: Pitot/Static fittings on TruTrak Digflight ll VSVG
Date: Sep 21, 2007
I had a similar problem. Once I got them started they went in easy.....to easy for me and I ended up cracking the piece of plastic. I emailed Tru-Trak and they told me I had to send the unit back. The fittings are supposed to be finger tight and then a quarter turn, no more. I sent my unit back and they replaced the plastic piece and put the fitting in for me......I sent the fitting back with the unit and asked them to do it. Other than my shipping cost to them, they did it for free. Only took about 10 days. Great company, great support. Rene' Felker N423CF 40322 801-721-6080 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 7:37 PM Subject: RV10-List: Pitot/Static fittings on TruTrak Digflight ll VSVG Has anyone had any difficulty with attaching pitot/static lines to the Tru-Trak A/P? I've got the pitot/static kit from Safeair, and it has the 'instant' brass fittings that you screw into the various instruments and then push the poly tubing into. The brass fittings fit into the encoder, the ADC, the Dynon EFIS, but NOT the Tru Trak, When I attempt to screw them in they begin to cock to one side, forcing it will result in the threads being stripped. it appears that the holes that are tapped in what appears to be a black plastic fitting on the rear of the Tru Trak are slightly smaller (rough measurement w/ caliper confirms. Anybody know what size threads these are? I checked the install manual but nothing referenced there. Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Leikam" <DAVELEIKAM(at)wi.rr.com>
Subject: Gretz pitot and Tru-Trak
Date: Sep 21, 2007
Three questions for ya'll, For those with a Gretz pitot, where did you mount the control circuit board? I have Safe Air static kit, did you use the green nylon tube all the way to the pitot or Van's aluminum tube? (Tim I know you used AL tube from your site.) On my Tru-Trak roll servo there is a "stop limit bracket." Did you install this? Thanks!!! Dave Leikam 40496 Wing guts ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 21, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Pitot/Static fittings on TruTrak Digflight ll VSVG
Thanks to All, a little careful perseverance and they are in, it just didn't make sense that they would be a different size than the others. Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ Jesse Saint wrote: > > I have had this happen in the past. You just have to work at it a little > bit to get it straight then it goes in with out trouble. It is the same > threads as all the other instruments I have used, just a little tougher to > get started. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 21, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Gretz pitot and Tru-Trak
Check these pics re Gretz location :http://deemsrv10.com/album/Sec%2020%20Bottom%20Wing%20Skin/slides/DSC02110.html I used the green tube all the way to the pitot, im not sure this is the best way, I tried contacting Gretz, but couldn't get an answer. My reasoning was that the benefit of the Gretz is that it cycles the current on & off as required so that the pitot head isn't always hot, and therefore it shouldn't get as hot as the traditional installations ????? Re stop limit bracket : Yes I did : http://deemsrv10.com/album/Sec%2020%20Bottom%20Wing%20Skin/slides/DSC02106.html Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ Dave Leikam wrote: > Three questions for ya'll, > > For those with a Gretz pitot, where did you mount the control circuit > board? I have Safe Air static kit, did you use the green nylon tube > all the way to the pitot or Van's aluminum tube? > (Tim I know you used AL tube from your site.) > > On my Tru-Trak roll servo there is a "stop limit bracket." Did you > install this? > * > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Wayne Edgerton" <wayne.e(at)grandecom.net>
Subject: Re: Gretz pitot and Tru-Trak
Date: Sep 22, 2007
Hi Dave, I mounted the circuit board on the inside to the access panel right next to the pitot tube. I also have the Safe Air but ran the aluminum tubing. Wayne Edgerton N602WT in the paint shop hoping to make it to LOE this year ?? ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Oil Canning
Date: Sep 22, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Oil Canning A moderate deformation or buckling of sheet material, particularly common with flat sheet metal surfaces. Typically caused by uneven stresses at the fastening points. This terminology also refers to the popping sound made when pressure is applied to the deformed sheet forcing the deformation in the opposite direction. Oil canning can be defined as the actual waviness in the flat areas of roofing and siding panels. Generally the period and amplitude of the wave depend on the continuous width of the flat. Oil canning is an inherent part of light gauge cold formed metal products, particularly those with broad flat areas. Profiles having wide flat surfaces are often referred to as "architectural" roofing and siding panels. Such panels are distinguished from corrugated shapes as the latter are more fluted in design, have much narrower flats, and are less likely to exhibit oil canning. Background Oil canning has a number of causes: 1. Metal coil Residual stresses induced during coil production can contribute. Examples of other contributing features are: a. Full center - the coil is longer in the middle of the strip; this is the most common example. (The gradation manifests as ripples or buckles near mid-coil.) b. Wavy edge - the coil is longer on the edge of the strip. c. Camber - the deviation of a side edge from a straight line. (This is not always a problem.) These conditions exist to some extent in all metal and tend to become more exaggerated as the strength level of the rolled sheet product increases and also for thinner and wider sheet product. When excessive, each circumstance may cause oil canning after roll forming by the manufacturer. 2. Fabrication a. Slitting - The slitting of a master coil can release and redistribute residual forces. The coil's esponse can create or increase oil canning. The economics of rolling and coating wider coils makes slitting almost mandatory. b.Forming - New residual stresses can be created during some forming operations. Architectural panel profiles typically require more forming along sides than in the middle, and often require more forming along one side than the other. This dictates that forming commences along the sides. This sequential "working" of the sheet will have a tendency to "trap" uneven metal contained within the coil in the panel central areas (corrugated ribbed profiles are most often worked from the center out, thereby "pushing" the uneven metal to the edges). 3. Installation a. Misalignment of the support system - Structural supports that are produced, fabricated and installed within allowable tolerances can create a "non-planar" or contoured bearing surface. Stresses induced while panels conform to this surface can contribute to oil canning. b. Over engagement of panels - Most panels accommodate transverse thermal expansion by flexing of webs and by "take up" at side joints. When panels are over engaged, these relief features are hindered or eliminated. In the extreme the "over engagement" process itself can generate waviness. Either cause can contribute to oil canning. c. Over driving of fasteners - This operation creates stresses in the panel and provides a "reading line" at the fasteners. d. Longitudinal Expansion - The surface temperature of exposed panels cycles throughout the year and even fluctuates daily. The temperature and the cycle depend on many variables, e.g. project location and orientation, cloud cover, panel inclination, surface finish or color, system thermal insulation characteristics. The panels' physical response is to expand or contract. If panels are restrained by "thru-fasteners", clips, or perimeter details, they try to accommodate or relieve thermal forces through several mechanisms, i.e. "slotting" around fasteners, out-of plane "bowing", local distortion of flat areas - "waviness". The magnitude of thermal force depends on the restraint provided (hence the panel stiffness and support stiffness), on the base materials' physical properties, and on the temperature differential between the support structure and the external skin. Waviness can be amplified when there is uneven fastener restraint along the panel. Such restraint is common on "concealed fastener" systems having fasteners along one edge and an interlock along the other. Waviness caused by thermal forces differs from other forms of oil canning in that waves can appear and disappear as the sun rises and moves around the building. e. Movement of the primary structure - Excessive differential deflection, racking, drift, or settlement within the primary structure can cause noticeable waviness within panel flats. This distortion can be temporary or sustained. f. Handling - Carrying of panels in the flat or twisting of panels can induce a wavy appearance to a previously flat panel. Twisting can occur if one corner of a panel is used to lift a panel or to remove the panel from a bundle. Coil producers and panel manufacturers attempt to minimize these conditions and produce quality products. On going research seeks improved production methods. All of the above factors can and do occur and can cause oil canning in architectural roofing or siding products. While a number of factors dictate the panel design, the following are items that the designer, panel manufacturer, and erector may consider in reducing the occurrence of oil canning: 1. Coil: Tension or stretcher leveling, a process whereby the metal is "stretched" in coil form beyond its yield point, will provide a flatter surface less prone to oil canning. In general the heavier the gauge the less likely a product is to oil can. The possibility of oil canning can be reduced by ordering tension leveled and re-squared material. 2. Design: The addition of stiffening beads "breaks-up" the flat surface and makes oil canning less apparent. Embossing will also help hide surface waviness in the metal. The selection of lower gloss coatings and lighter colors tend to minimize the visual effect of oil canning. 3. Installation: More stringent specifications regarding the alignment of the supporting structure will focus attention on this critical aspect. Instructions to the erection forces regarding proper handling, spacing, and fastening should be a part of the manufacturers' delivery packet. Conclusion Oil canning is an aesthetic problem. Normally structural integrity is not affected. However, structural integrity must be reviewed if the distortion results from an extreme external influence. Since many uncontrollable factors are involved, no manufacturer can realistically assure the total elimination of oil canning. With careful attention to the production and selection of material, to the panel design, and to installation practice, oil canning can be effectively minimized. Unless specified tolerances have been accepted by the panel provider and panel manufacturer and are incorporated into the contract documents prior to fabrication, and if reasonable precautions have been taken, oil canning is not grounds for panel rejection. John Cox #600 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Richard Reynolds <rvreynolds(at)macs.net>
Subject: LogTen Pro
Date: Sep 22, 2007
I just downloaded a demo of this program on my MAC. Are there any instructions on how to get started, ie, set it up for my log book, airplane? Richard Reynolds ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Dunne" <acs(at)acspropeller.com.au>
Subject: Wingtip
Date: Sep 23, 2007
Off to the shed this morning to fix yesterdays mistake.....thought I had placed the wingtip in the correct position, that is, centrally located inside the nose of the wing skin, and started fixing. Turns out I was off by around 1/4" and multiplying the error as I tried to coax the rest of the tip into shape. By the end I had introduced a substantial reflex on the trailing edge creating a mini,"up elevator". I was initially tempted to make the adjustment by splitting the trailing edge, since you have to trim it to size in any case but was worried by the result Tim Olson ended up with (see his website for info) and decided just to do it again properly. In hindsight I should've packed out the substantially flattened tip with something to encourage the correct shape before commencing with the fitting. When I re-tried the fit, I found a sweeter position 1/4'' away, but it was by no means obvious. Today I'll be fibreglassing over the incorrect holes. Something for someone yet to do this step. John 40315 (Finishing all the things I put off 'till tomorrow) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 22, 2007
From: Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Puzzled, perplex & confused in the fuse ....
Hi As I continue to build I have found that when anything didn't seem right in the kit, it was because of the then builder not getting the right slot "a" lined up with the right slot "b". Until now that is.. I have spent the priming and deburring parts associated with Secton 28 - the mid fuse. I started to assemble the forward fuselage bulkhead sub-assembly (Page 28-4) and found that the inboard forward seat rail support just won't fit. The bolt / rivet holes that should match the corresponding holes on the F1043A L/R & F1043B L/R bulkheads are two close by about 1/8". The nut plate hole that should match the hole in the F1043B L/R flange is too far forward by 1/16" inch. The outboard seat rail supports fix perfectly. I have assembled the inboard seat rail supports correctly (see page 28-3) (there is really only one way to make the supports). Has anyone else run into this problem? Any suggestions? I would like to press on building this weekend and plan to call Van's on Monday. Cheers Les Kearney #40643 - frustrated in the fuse .. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Puzzled, perplex & confused in the fuse ....
From: "egohr1" <EGOHR86(at)alumni.carnegiemellon.edu>
Date: Sep 23, 2007
I had the same problem. If you look at the parts in question and compare them to the other seat rail supports and find one of the legs on the angle to be short call Vans, they sent me new parts. -------- eric gohr EGOHR86(at)alumni.carnegiemellon.edu Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135864#135864 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: DLIUDVINAITIS(at)aol.com
Date: Sep 23, 2007
Subject: Re: Puzzled, perplex & confused in the fuse ....
LES HAD SAME PROBLEM . THE F1043F-L&R ARE DRILLED WRONG. LOOK AT THE ANGLE AT ITS SIDE VIEW. HOLES TO JOIN BOTH F1043F PARTS TOGETHER ARE ON THE LARGER WIDTH SIDE WHEN IT NEEDS TO BE ON THE SMALLER. CALLED VANS THEY REPLACED BOTH SETS AOK! HOPE THIS HELPS. DAVE LIUDVINAITIS #40466 FUSELAGE ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Aluminum aircraft - basis for corrosion
Date: Sep 23, 2007
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Slow Sunday. One of my co-members at my aviation group (Columbia Aviation Association) is the North American, CEO for SAPA RC one of the world's largest specialty manufacturer's of aluminum products. His firm has contributed to an interactive website to help users of aluminum to better understand important issues - "Aluminum Matter". John Noordwijk, is both an avid sailor and pilot (owning a Cirrus) but also curious on the RV-10 build and issues which arise. Several of SAPA's engineers provide technical support to this website. http://aluminium.matter.org.uk/content/html/eng/default.asp?catid=180&p a geid=2144416690 If you take the time to core deeper, you will find a wealth of explanations, graphics and questions (for you to answer) that can make us all better manufacturers of aircraft. Three of their products are 2024, 3003 and 7075 which hold value with aviation construction. I am seeing several of the forms of corrosion in the aircraft I work on. Understanding what contributes to it allows us a path towards causal/corrective actions. John Cox #600 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 23, 2007
From: Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Puzzled, perplex & confused in the fuse ....
Eric / Dave Thanks for the timely response. I am glad I wasn't seeing things . Perhaps this should be added to Tim's "Gotcha" list so that builders can check for this problem before they need the parts. Cheers Les #40643 - now only partially confused in the fuse. _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney Sent: September-22-07 11:33 PM Subject: RV10-List: Puzzled, perplex & confused in the fuse .... Hi As I continue to build I have found that when anything didn't seem right in the kit, it was because of the then builder not getting the right slot "a" lined up with the right slot "b". Until now that is.. I have spent the priming and deburring parts associated with Secton 28 - the mid fuse. I started to assemble the forward fuselage bulkhead sub-assembly (Page 28-4) and found that the inboard forward seat rail support just won't fit. The bolt / rivet holes that should match the corresponding holes on the F1043A L/R & F1043B L/R bulkheads are two close by about 1/8". The nut plate hole that should match the hole in the F1043B L/R flange is too far forward by 1/16" inch. The outboard seat rail supports fix perfectly. I have assembled the inboard seat rail supports correctly (see page 28-3) (there is really only one way to make the supports). Has anyone else run into this problem? Any suggestions? I would like to press on building this weekend and plan to call Van's on Monday. Cheers Les Kearney #40643 - frustrated in the fuse .. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: throttle, etc cables
Date: Sep 23, 2007
From: <tdawson-townsend(at)aurora.aero>
I ran my throttle, prop, and mixture cables over the bottom bar of the engine mount, like shown on the FF plans. Seems like not a lot of room in there and potential for rubbing. Did other folks do the same, or let the cables go under the bottom bar of the engine mount? Thanks, TDT ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chris and Susie McGough" <VHMUM(at)bigpond.com>
Subject: Re: throttle, etc cables
Date: Sep 24, 2007
throttle, etc cablesMy cables were not long enough as supplied by FF kit and using the pre punched holes in firewall so I made new holes in the fire wall and run the cables under the bar and clamped them. regards Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: tdawson-townsend(at)aurora.aero To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 6:10 AM Subject: RV10-List: throttle, etc cables I ran my throttle, prop, and mixture cables over the bottom bar of the engine mount, like shown on the FF plans. Seems like not a lot of room in there and potential for rubbing. Did other folks do the same, or let the cables go under the bottom bar of the engine mount? Thanks, TDT ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chris and Susie McGough" <VHMUM(at)bigpond.com>
Subject: spinner
Date: Sep 24, 2007
throttle, etc cablesWith the spinner instalation are people turning the prop to make sure the spinner is true? Just wondering as the engine is preserved and did not want to turn? regards Chris ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Vertical Power
From: "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net>
Date: Sep 23, 2007
Jesse, I expect mine to be shipped next week. I'll also publish me progress and experience here in the forum. But it might take a little longer since I will go on vacation soon. Michael -------- RV-10 builder (fuselage) #511 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135961#135961 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jay Rowe" <jfrjr(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: engine baffling--paint?
Date: Sep 23, 2007
Just starting the engine baffling. Could/should I paint the baffling or just leave it as shiny alum? If painting is advised what do I use for paint, and what kind of prep works needs to be done on the alum? Thanks 10'ers. Jay Rowe ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)cox.net>
Subject: engine baffling--paint?
Date: Sep 23, 2007
I used a dark gray, single stage Imron paint over PPG DP40LF primer for the baffles on my 8A. I used the same paint with a lighter gray Imron contrast color for the interior. This is a hard, durable paint. After 5 years it still looks brand new. PPG Concept single stage paint is also a good choice. For the exterior I used PPG Concept clear/base coat. The product is very forgiving to the amateur painter. Carl Froehlich RV-8A (350 hrs) RV-10 (wings) _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Rowe Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 7:45 PM Subject: RV10-List: engine baffling--paint? Just starting the engine baffling. Could/should I paint the baffling or just leave it as shiny alum? If painting is advised what do I use for paint, and what kind of prep works needs to be done on the alum? Thanks 10'ers. Jay Rowe <http://promos.hotbar.com/promos/promodll.dll?RunPromo&El=&SG=&RAND=47770&pa rtner=seekmo> Upgrade Your Email - Click here! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Saylor" <Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com>
Subject: spinner
Date: Sep 23, 2007
Chris, You won't "de-preserve" it by turning the prop through by hand. Take the top plugs out so it's easier, and put a pointer at the tip of the spinner to check how true it turns. You will displace the spinner a bit when turning the prop, but if you kind of average it out the fit is just fine. 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 Chris and Susie McGough Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 1:34 PM Subject: RV10-List: spinner With the spinner instalation are people turning the prop to make sure the spinner is true? Just wondering as the engine is preserved and did not want to turn? regards Chris ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Byron Gillespie" <bgill1(at)charter.net>
Subject: throttle, etc cables
Date: Sep 23, 2007
I ran mine under the bar - but also did not have enough cable length. I am using a canted center panel that my knobs mount on - this takes up an extra inch or so leaving me buying a new set of cables. But like you, It looked like over time it might get a little close - so I didn't want to take a chance. Byron Wrapping up the panel install N253RV Assigned -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of tdawson-townsend(at)aurora.aero Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 4:11 PM Subject: RV10-List: throttle, etc cables I ran my throttle, prop, and mixture cables over the bottom bar of the engine mount, like shown on the FF plans. Seems like not a lot of room in there and potential for rubbing. Did other folks do the same, or let the cables go under the bottom bar of the engine mount? Thanks, TDT ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 23, 2007
From: Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Fast Stack Wiring Harness
Hi As I look through the brochures I picked up at KOSH, I keep coming back to one from Approach Avionics. They make a wiring harness / hub system that on the surface seems like it would simplify wiring of just about any panel configuration. Does anyone have any experience with this system? Any comments positive / negative welcome. I want to wire my own panel but at this point it seems like a dark art to me (then again so was riveting a year ago). Cheers Les Kearney #40643 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Fast Stack Wiring Harness
Date: Sep 23, 2007
From: "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com>
Les, I believe my business partner used them to rewire / interconnect avionics in our D-35 Bonanza (1953). From what I recall it was plug N play and all went well. He was very impressed and could not think of a better way to integrate a Garmin stack into a 50 year old airplane. Robin From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 7:32 PM Subject: RV10-List: Fast Stack Wiring Harness Hi As I look through the brochures I picked up at KOSH, I keep coming back to one from Approach Avionics. They make a wiring harness / hub system that on the surface seems like it would simplify wiring of just about any panel configuration. Does anyone have any experience with this system? Any comments positive / negative welcome. I want to wire my own panel but at this point it seems like a dark art to me (then again so was riveting a year ago). Cheers Les Kearney #40643 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 23, 2007
From: Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Fast Stack Wiring Harness
Hi Robin Thanks for the info. Their website says they are OEM for an a/c manufacturer. I plan to call them tomorrow to find out who uses them. All in all, it seems like a better way to go versus hand wiring if: * The harnesses are of a high quality * They are reliable and will be around to support their product * The hub will withstand the temperature extremes of a G/A aircraft in Canada * It will support whatever avionics I decide to install (that is still yet another question) Cheers Les Kearney #40643 _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: September-23-07 8:50 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Fast Stack Wiring Harness Les, I believe my business partner used them to rewire / interconnect avionics in our D-35 Bonanza (1953). From what I recall it was plug N play and all went well. He was very impressed and could not think of a better way to integrate a Garmin stack into a 50 year old airplane. Robin From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 7:32 PM Subject: RV10-List: Fast Stack Wiring Harness Hi As I look through the brochures I picked up at KOSH, I keep coming back to one from Approach Avionics. They make a wiring harness / hub system that on the surface seems like it would simplify wiring of just about any panel configuration. Does anyone have any experience with this system? Any comments positive / negative welcome. I want to wire my own panel but at this point it seems like a dark art to me (then again so was riveting a year ago). Cheers Les Kearney #40643 http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List http://forums.matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse(at)saintaviation.com>
Subject: Fast Stack Wiring Harness
Date: Sep 24, 2007
Les, I was actually going to ask the same thing to the list. I have been talking to them and am going to be installing a Fast Stack system soon. I will let you know how the installation goes. I have heard some say the installation doesn't save much time, but I don't know yet. It actually costs less than buying all of the different wiring harnesses you would need to wire up a Radio Stack with A/P and a Dynon screen, so I think it may be a hard system to beat if it works anything like it is advertised to. Stein would probably be able to offer a little insight here. I know they use all shielded wire and shielded connectors on the hub side. Keep in mind, though, that they just handle the signal wires, not power, ground, headsets, etc. Tim will give you a good run-down on what things he can integrate with, but I think the list is fairly extensive. Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse(at)saintaviation.com www.saintaviation.com Cell: 352-427-0285 Fax: 815-377-3694 _____ From: Les Kearney [mailto:kearney(at)shaw.ca] Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 10:32 PM Subject: RV10-List: Fast Stack Wiring Harness Hi As I look through the brochures I picked up at KOSH, I keep coming back to one from Approach Avionics. They make a wiring harness / hub system that on the surface seems like it would simplify wiring of just about any panel configuration. Does anyone have any experience with this system? Any comments positive / negative welcome. I want to wire my own panel but at this point it seems like a dark art to me (then again so was riveting a year ago). Cheers Les Kearney #40643 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 24, 2007
From: Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Rivethead-Aero Door Guide - help
I am one of the fortunate ones that have received my door guides from rivethead-aero. While trying to install them they are to wide (the distance between the door frame to the door) and prevent the door from closing properly. In my case it is for 3 of the 4 guides. Has anyone else had this problem and what is the solution? Larry Rosen #356 still working on the doors ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rene Felker" <rene(at)felker.com>
Subject: Rivethead-Aero Door Guide - help
Date: Sep 24, 2007
I had the same problem. I cut down the nylon guides on the door. I was able to cut enough off so that they did not contact. I have not put the doors back on since I got the fuselage back from the paint shop....hope they still fit. Rene' Felker N423CF 40322 801-721-6080 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry Rosen Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 7:16 AM Subject: RV10-List: Rivethead-Aero Door Guide - help I am one of the fortunate ones that have received my door guides from rivethead-aero. While trying to install them they are to wide (the distance between the door frame to the door) and prevent the door from closing properly. In my case it is for 3 of the 4 guides. Has anyone else had this problem and what is the solution? Larry Rosen #356 still working on the doors ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rivethead-Aero Door Guide - help
From: "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net>
Date: Sep 24, 2007
Larry, The door guides were made that way to accommodate every application. Every door to fuselage distance is not the same on every RV10. So, you have to trim the backside of the guides to make it fit. I guess you could trim some off the delrin on the door if you wanted to, but I didn't do that. Zack -------- RV8 #80125 RV10 # 40512 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136080#136080 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 24, 2007
From: Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Rivethead-Aero Door Guide - help
"trim the backside" Thats what I thought but, how? If I had a mill it would be easy, but then I could have made the part ;-) . I could use a grinder or sanding disk, but that seems a crude way to fit such a beautiful piece of machine work. Suggestions. Larry zackrv8 wrote: > > Larry, > > The door guides were made that way to accommodate every application. Every door to fuselage distance is not the same on every RV10. So, you have to trim the backside of the guides to make it fit. I guess you could trim some off the delrin on the door if you wanted to, but I didn't do that. > > > Zack > > -------- > RV8 #80125 > RV10 # 40512 > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136080#136080 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 24, 2007
From: Scott Schmidt <scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: spinner
I just pushed it on, drilled the holes and it came out perfect. As long as it is even on the inside of the spinner it should be fine.=0AI never turne d the engine to check it. =0A=0AScott Schmidt=0Ascottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com=0A =0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: Chris and Susie McGough <VHMUM (at)bigpond.com>=0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Sunday, September 23, 2 007 1:34:09 PM=0ASubject: RV10-List: spinner=0A=0A=0AWith the spinner insta lation are people turning the prop to make sure the spinner is true? Just w ondering as the engine is preserved and did not want to turn?=0A =0Aregards == ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 24, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Rivethead-Aero Door Guide - help
This is definately NOT an elegant way to do it, but since I didn't have a milling machine. I used a flat 1/2" router bit, chucked in a drill press. Put the part in a drill press vise and 'milled' off very small amounts at a time. cleaned it up with the vixen file. Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/ Larry Rosen wrote: > > "trim the backside" Thats what I thought but, how? If I had a mill > it would be easy, but then I could have made the part ;-) . I > could use a grinder or sanding disk, but that seems a crude way to fit > such a beautiful piece of machine work. Suggestions. > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Fast Stack Wiring Harness
Date: Sep 24, 2007
From: "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com>
Les, I was wrong... again. My partner used custom harnesses built by: http://www.approachfaststack.com/index.html Product cross reference: http://www.approachfaststack.com/products.html Again he was impressed with their plug-n-plan function as well as the quality of the assemblies. Robin From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 8:24 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Fast Stack Wiring Harness Hi Robin Thanks for the info. Their website says they are OEM for an a/c manufacturer. I plan to call them tomorrow to find out who uses them. All in all, it seems like a better way to go versus hand wiring if: =D8 The harnesses are of a high quality =D8 They are reliable and will be around to support their product =D8 The hub will withstand the temperature extremes of a G/A aircraft in Canada =D8 It will support whatever avionics I decide to install (that is still yet another question) Cheers Les Kearney #40643 ________________________________ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: September-23-07 8:50 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Fast Stack Wiring Harness Les, I believe my business partner used them to rewire / interconnect avionics in our D-35 Bonanza (1953). From what I recall it was plug N play and all went well. He was very impressed and could not think of a better way to integrate a Garmin stack into a 50 year old airplane. Robin From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 7:32 PM Subject: RV10-List: Fast Stack Wiring Harness Hi As I look through the brochures I picked up at KOSH, I keep coming back to one from Approach Avionics. They make a wiring harness / hub system that on the surface seems like it would simplify wiring of just about any panel configuration. Does anyone have any experience with this system? Any comments positive / negative welcome. I want to wire my own panel but at this point it seems like a dark art to me (then again so was riveting a year ago). Cheers Les Kearney #40643 http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List http://forums.matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Prop Governor Question
From: "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net>
Date: Sep 24, 2007
I installed the prop governor a couple days ago but I thing that the orientation of the lever is wrong. Before I cut the hole for the cable in the baffeling assembly I want to be sure that this is right? If you could attach a picture of your installation that would help most. I used the MT FWF Kit and the governor came as you see in the picture. Michael -------- RV-10 builder (fuselage) #511 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136112#136112 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc01635_302.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Wayne Edgerton" <wayne.e(at)grandecom.net>
Subject: LOE flyin
Date: Sep 24, 2007
I haven't seen much said about people planning on attending the Land of Enchantment flyin event the weekend of Oct 5th. Are many of you planning on attending? If I get my plane out of the paint shop and ready to go I plan on being there. I know Russ Daves was over this weekend and told me that he is going to be there. There will be a couple of us flying in from 16X. I'm trying to get my wife braved up to be able to come with. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Free RV-10 W&B being offered
From: "Tom Meeker" <tom(at)aoaircrafters.com>
Date: Sep 24, 2007
Looks like the RV-10 weight and balance flyin at Alpha Omega Aircrafters is being postponed. It was scheduled for next Saturday, the 29 but isn't going to happen then. So if you or anyone you know was thinking of going, spread the word around. It says on their web site that it is postponed but no re-do date is given. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136113#136113 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: RV-10 Weigh-in Fly-in at AOA is POSPONED.
From: "Tom Meeker" <tom(at)aoaircrafters.com>
Date: Sep 24, 2007
Looks like Alpha Omega Aircrafters is postponing their announced weigh-in fly-in for RV-10 owners that was suppose to take place next Saturday, the 29th. No date for for re-scheduling is given. Spread the word around to anyone who might have been thinking about going. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136114#136114 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Door Guides
Date: Sep 24, 2007
From: <tdawson-townsend(at)aurora.aero>
Don't the milled aluminum door guides REPLACE the delrin blocks on the door frame? TDT 40025 Tim Dawson-Townsend Aurora Flight Sciences tdt(at)aurora.aero 617-500-4812 (office) 617-905-4800 (mobile) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rene Felker" <rene(at)felker.com>
Subject: Door Guides
Date: Sep 24, 2007
Yes, I cut my blocks on the door. Rene' Felker N423CF 40322 801-721-6080 _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of tdawson-townsend(at)aurora.aero Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 9:55 AM Subject: RV10-List: Door Guides Don't the milled aluminum door guides REPLACE the delrin blocks on the door frame? TDT 40025 Tim Dawson-Townsend Aurora Flight Sciences tdt(at)aurora.aero 617-500-4812 (office) 617-905-4800 (mobile) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 24, 2007
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Door Guides
Yes, however, I think the post was was referring to the delrin blocks that are on the door itself vs on the door frame. Deems Davis # 406 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/


September 12, 2007 - September 24, 2007

RV10-Archive.digest.vol-co