RV10-Archive.digest.vol-ct
November 12, 2007 - November 24, 2007
RV7A flying ~500hrs
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145440#145440
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Removal of fuel tank access panel |
| From: | "n277dl" <dljinia(at)yahoo.com> |
John,
Thanks for reminding me why not to post to these boards. I do certainly appreciate
your wisdom in correcting the errors of my ways as I don't desire to steer
anyone wrong.
Doug
RV-7A flyer and -10 builder
--------
Doug
RV7A flying ~500hrs
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145578#145578
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Gonzalez" <indigoonlatigo(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | fuel tank access panel, updated! |
I took the suggestion of those that responded to my post and have found
unfortunetly all the things I have been contemplating, worrying about over
the last few weeks are true...The panel will not budge!!!!!!!!!
Just for the record, in the original placement, I did not use the cork
gasket in addition to the proseal.
I roughened up the aluminum with a scotch brite pad or 220 sand paper. I
tightened down the plate with the screws, there is no room for a metal
instrument let alone a fiber feinforced instrument.
Tonight I attempted removal with an exacto blade to start, then a chisel(at
the edge only) and obviously a plastic instrument which is no way stong
enough to do anything. I didn't even get an edge lifted.
I do understand why holes need to be deburred and why scratches lead to a
failure in a piece of aluminum which is under force. With that said, let's
move forward>>>>>
The bond is so strong that it is like to pieces of glass put together with a
thin film of water. We don't have the luxury of sliding the surfaces apart.
If I really work at this I am sure I am going to destroy my tank. The entire
rear wall of the tank flexs.
Here is why I am trying to open the tank:
Three weeks ago I closed the tanks. One weekend prior I riveted the
nutplates to the tank and stiffner. I hadn't realized that one of my
nutplates never got riveted,(couldn't find my dental mouth mirror and my
head is not small enough to stick down in the hole). I even cleaned the
proseal from the holes and didn't realize its absense. The week later in a
rush before a doctor's appointment, I closed the tanks with the access plate
and proseal. After placing the plate with the proseal and getting half the
screws in one of the screws did not bite into anything(The missing
nutplate). I didn't have time disassemble and to clean everything before
leaving for my doctors appointment which would take me away form the project
for atleast three hours. I just continued to close everything up and really
coated the problem screw.
So for three weeks I have been studying this situation, the tanks have been
leak tested and passed. The screw with out the nutplate was sealed in with
sealant through the hole and around and over the top of the screw head. The
access plate top surface around the area of the screw was sanded and the
bond to the proseal was exceptional. The screw in question was not the top
screw but the next to the top when the tank is in the normal flying
position. If for some reason it failed or leaked, fell out, it would not
drain the tank. Remember, the tanks are not under pressure, but the sloshing
of fuel might create a flex in the rear wall, but doughtful with the baffle
ribs and the tank access panel being 1/8th inch thick.
This was never in my opinion a strength issue, the stiffner plate was strong
enough, there are 11 of the twelve screws in place at one inch intervals and
the stiffner plate was independently riveted and also prosealed. Then the
access plate is 1/8 inch aluminum bonded with proseal, as we learned
tonight, appears to be bullet proof when surfaces are roughened up.
Where am I now? No seal has been broken except the screws. No knicks or
dings, so I will not take myself out of the gene pool by what I have done.
Do I put it back as it was or do I attempt a heat gun(Does anyone know if
this works?) and still posibly deform the rear of the tank.
Do I offer to fly John Cox down to see just how easy this is(or isn't)
Okay John Cox, time to shine on you Crazy Diamond.
Thanks,
Well thought out suggestion please!!!
John G 409
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com> |
| Subject: | Fuselage Crate in Pickup Truck |
How about Fuse and Wing crate in Pickup Truck!
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
N991RV flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Perry Casson - Home <pcasson(at)sasktel.net> |
| Subject: | Check oil door - top cowel - Hartwell flush clips |
Do I need one or two of these Hartwell H-5000-2 clips? Is one enough to keep the
oil door in place
with the back-pressure of the air. I was thinking of adding an aluminum stiffener
plate.
Also (to anyone on their final installation or in the air) is there at least 1"
of clearance in this
area to let the clips rotate
[Perry Casson]
I used 2 clips but I suspect one with a stiffener would be OK, No problem with
clearance.
http://casson.2y.net/yappa-ng/index.php?album=%2FRV-10%2F&image=IMG_1062.JPG
Perry Casson C-FMHP 15 hours
Regina, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank access panel, updated! |
John,
Do you have a high temp heat gun? I use one for heat shrink. The proseal should
soften some by heating up the plate and you should be able to start to slip you
blade in to start working the panel off.
Rick S.
40185
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Gonzalez" <indigoonlatigo(at)msn.com>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 8:27:53 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RV10-List: fuel tank access panel, updated!
I took the suggestion of those that responded to my post and have found
unfortunetly all the things I have been contemplating, worrying about over
the last few weeks are true...The panel will not budge!!!!!!!!!
Just for the record, in the original placement, I did not use the cork
gasket in addition to the proseal.
I roughened up the aluminum with a scotch brite pad or 220 sand paper. I
tightened down the plate with the screws, there is no room for a metal
instrument let alone a fiber feinforced instrument.
Tonight I attempted removal with an exacto blade to start, then a chisel(at
the edge only) and obviously a plastic instrument which is no way stong
enough to do anything. I didn't even get an edge lifted.
I do understand why holes need to be deburred and why scratches lead to a
failure in a piece of aluminum which is under force. With that said, let's
move forward>>>>>
The bond is so strong that it is like to pieces of glass put together with a
thin film of water. We don't have the luxury of sliding the surfaces apart.
If I really work at this I am sure I am going to destroy my tank. The entire
rear wall of the tank flexs.
Here is why I am trying to open the tank:
Three weeks ago I closed the tanks. One weekend prior I riveted the
nutplates to the tank and stiffner. I hadn't realized that one of my
nutplates never got riveted,(couldn't find my dental mouth mirror and my
head is not small enough to stick down in the hole). I even cleaned the
proseal from the holes and didn't realize its absense. The week later in a
rush before a doctor's appointment, I closed the tanks with the access plate
and proseal. After placing the plate with the proseal and getting half the
screws in one of the screws did not bite into anything(The missing
nutplate). I didn't have time disassemble and to clean everything before
leaving for my doctors appointment which would take me away form the project
for atleast three hours. I just continued to close everything up and really
coated the problem screw.
So for three weeks I have been studying this situation, the tanks have been
leak tested and passed. The screw with out the nutplate was sealed in with
sealant through the hole and around and over the top of the screw head. The
access plate top surface around the area of the screw was sanded and the
bond to the proseal was exceptional. The screw in question was not the top
screw but the next to the top when the tank is in the normal flying
position. If for some reason it failed or leaked, fell out, it would not
drain the tank. Remember, the tanks are not under pressure, but the sloshing
of fuel might create a flex in the rear wall, but doughtful with the baffle
ribs and the tank access panel being 1/8th inch thick.
This was never in my opinion a strength issue, the stiffner plate was strong
enough, there are 11 of the twelve screws in place at one inch intervals and
the stiffner plate was independently riveted and also prosealed. Then the
access plate is 1/8 inch aluminum bonded with proseal, as we learned
tonight, appears to be bullet proof when surfaces are roughened up.
Where am I now? No seal has been broken except the screws. No knicks or
dings, so I will not take myself out of the gene pool by what I have done.
Do I put it back as it was or do I attempt a heat gun(Does anyone know if
this works?) and still posibly deform the rear of the tank.
Do I offer to fly John Cox down to see just how easy this is(or isn't)
Okay John Cox, time to shine on you Crazy Diamond.
Thanks,
Well thought out suggestion please!!!
John G 409
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | List of Contributors |
Each year at the end of the List Fund Raiser, I post a message acknowledging everyone
that so generously made a Contribution to support the Lists. Its sort of
my way of publicly thanking everyone that took a minute to show their appreciation
for the Lists.
Won't you take a moment and assure that your name is on that List of Contributors
(LOC)? As a number of members have pointed out over the years, the List seems
at least - if not a whole lot more - valuable as a building/flying/recreating/entertainment
tool as your typical magazine subscription!
Please take minute and assure that your name is on this year's LOC! Show others
that you appreciate the Lists. Making a Contribution to support the Lists is
fast and easy using your Credit card or Paypal on the Secure Web Site:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
or by popping a personal check in the mail to:
Matt Dralle / Matronics
PO Box 347
Livermore CA 94551-0347
I would like to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution thus
far in this year's List Fund Raiser! Remember that its YOUR support that keeps
these Lists going and improving! Don't forget to include a little comment about
how the Lists have helped you!
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Daves" <dav1111(at)suddenlink.net> |
| Subject: | Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit |
I originally built a shelf across the longerons behind the baggage
bulkhead for a shelf to mount duel GRT AHRS and duel magnometers (AHRS
centered and magnometers left and right sides). Due to interference
from the battery (confirmed by GRT at OSH2007) I had to move the pilot's
side magnometer to the wing tip. I just clecod on a 90 degree bracket
to the wingtip rib (one cleco), leveled it, drilled holes for pop
rivets, and mounted the magnometer. Now everything works great.
Russ Daves
N710RV #40044 - 185+ hours
I have been reading this thread with interest as I am starting to look
ahead
to my avionics suite. I plan, at this point to install a Blue
Mountain EFIS
2 with an EFIS lite as a backup. Looking at the documentation,
they suggest
that the magnometer be at least 24 inches away from any ferrous
material
(bolts cables etc). They suggest placing it in either the tail
cone or the
wing.
Looking at the trail cone, would it not make sense to mount the
magnometer
on a bracket attached to one of the bulkheads?
A related question; where have you and others been mounting you
GPS
antennas? I was wondering if locating the antenna somewhere on the
top of
the canopy (on the inside) was practical.
Inquiring minds need to know
Les Kearney
40643 Frustrated in the fuse..
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Blue Mountain AVionics |
Hi
As I start looking at that curved blank piece of metal that will morph into
an instrument panel, I am trying to sort out what I should install.
I am interested in any opinions / experiences with the BMA EFIS 2. Not
having an unlimited budget, I my pan is to build a solid IFR panel around
whatever EFIS I choose. For the moment, the BMA EFIS seems to have most, if
not all, of what I need at a very reasonable price.
Inquiring minds need to know ..
Les Kearney
#40643 - Frustrated in the fuse
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Gonzalez" <indigoonlatigo(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | fuel tank access panel, updated! |
A few things I would like to add to this post for others to process.
While trying to take the cover off last night I was analysing the whole
process.
After removing the excess proseal from around and over the top edges of the
problem screw, I gripped the head of the screw with channel locks to see how
difficult it would be to remove by pulling straight up. I never got it to
move and the channel locks slipped off everytime. I physically needed to
unscrew the screw to break the grip of the proseal.
Here is what I think I have learned from this.
If one is not to use the supplied cork gasket with or without proseal then
perhaps do not tighten the screws so tight, this will allow the ability to
get something between the two metal plates.
If one scuffs up the aluminum prior to proseal application, the proseal acts
like a structural adhesive.
If proseal is placed on polished aluminum, like the parts come from Van's,
the proseal acts like a gasket. This is better for future panel removal.
Next time you use proseal place some on the two types of surfaces and see
what I mean.
Unless the heat gun really works on a test piece, the best remedy I can
think of is to keep the screw the same length, turn the tank upside down
(leading edge up) while placing the proseal back into this hole, the proseal
will pool up on the inside surface of the hole. Coat the threads and head
the screw with proseal and insert it back into the hole while rotating the
screw. The glob of proseal on the inside surface of the tank will chemically
join with the proseal on the end of the screw and it's threads. This will
work out even better then the screw placement before.
Conditional inspection a good idea, but would require an an access port
construction in the tank skin flange(don't think I can do this in this area)
or remove the tank every so many hours to check for leak which would mean no
paint on the wings.
Keep the ideas coming, it is actually a very good mental exercise
JOhn G.
>From: "John Gonzalez" <indigoonlatigo(at)msn.com>
>Reply-To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV10-List: fuel tank access panel, updated!
>Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 20:27:53 -0800
>
>
>I took the suggestion of those that responded to my post and have found
>unfortunetly all the things I have been contemplating, worrying about over
>the last few weeks are true...The panel will not budge!!!!!!!!!
>
>Just for the record, in the original placement, I did not use the cork
>gasket in addition to the proseal.
>I roughened up the aluminum with a scotch brite pad or 220 sand paper. I
>tightened down the plate with the screws, there is no room for a metal
>instrument let alone a fiber feinforced instrument.
>
>Tonight I attempted removal with an exacto blade to start, then a chisel(at
>the edge only) and obviously a plastic instrument which is no way stong
>enough to do anything. I didn't even get an edge lifted.
>
>I do understand why holes need to be deburred and why scratches lead to a
>failure in a piece of aluminum which is under force. With that said, let's
>move forward>>>>>
>
>The bond is so strong that it is like to pieces of glass put together with
>a thin film of water. We don't have the luxury of sliding the surfaces
>apart.
>
>If I really work at this I am sure I am going to destroy my tank. The
>entire rear wall of the tank flexs.
>
>Here is why I am trying to open the tank:
>
>Three weeks ago I closed the tanks. One weekend prior I riveted the
>nutplates to the tank and stiffner. I hadn't realized that one of my
>nutplates never got riveted,(couldn't find my dental mouth mirror and my
>head is not small enough to stick down in the hole). I even cleaned the
>proseal from the holes and didn't realize its absense. The week later in a
>rush before a doctor's appointment, I closed the tanks with the access
>plate and proseal. After placing the plate with the proseal and getting
>half the screws in one of the screws did not bite into anything(The missing
>nutplate). I didn't have time disassemble and to clean everything before
>leaving for my doctors appointment which would take me away form the
>project for atleast three hours. I just continued to close everything up
>and really coated the problem screw.
>
>So for three weeks I have been studying this situation, the tanks have been
>leak tested and passed. The screw with out the nutplate was sealed in with
>sealant through the hole and around and over the top of the screw head. The
>access plate top surface around the area of the screw was sanded and the
>bond to the proseal was exceptional. The screw in question was not the top
>screw but the next to the top when the tank is in the normal flying
>position. If for some reason it failed or leaked, fell out, it would not
>drain the tank. Remember, the tanks are not under pressure, but the
>sloshing of fuel might create a flex in the rear wall, but doughtful with
>the baffle ribs and the tank access panel being 1/8th inch thick.
>
>This was never in my opinion a strength issue, the stiffner plate was
>strong enough, there are 11 of the twelve screws in place at one inch
>intervals and the stiffner plate was independently riveted and also
>prosealed. Then the access plate is 1/8 inch aluminum bonded with proseal,
>as we learned tonight, appears to be bullet proof when surfaces are
>roughened up.
>
>Where am I now? No seal has been broken except the screws. No knicks or
>dings, so I will not take myself out of the gene pool by what I have done.
>
>Do I put it back as it was or do I attempt a heat gun(Does anyone know if
>this works?) and still posibly deform the rear of the tank.
>
>Do I offer to fly John Cox down to see just how easy this is(or isn't)
>
>Okay John Cox, time to shine on you Crazy Diamond.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Well thought out suggestion please!!!
>
>John G 409
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rene Felker" <rene(at)felker.com> |
| Subject: | Blue Mountain AVionics |
I am not flying yet...but I have a BMA lite and GRT Horizon 1 in my panel.
When I pull the airplane out and power it up, I can already see a
difference...The BMA has better resolution and contrast, but is not steady
when the airplane is sitting still, the GRT seams rock solid. Just an
observation. I would recommend you talk to Stein at Stein Air, I think he
really understands all the options.
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 Les Kearney
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 7:41 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Blue Mountain AVionics
Hi
As I start looking at that curved blank piece of metal that will morph into
an instrument panel, I am trying to sort out what I should install.
I am interested in any opinions / experiences with the BMA EFIS 2. Not
having an unlimited budget, I my pan is to build a solid IFR panel around
whatever EFIS I choose. For the moment, the BMA EFIS seems to have most, if
not all, of what I need at a very reasonable price.
Inquiring minds need to know ..
Les Kearney
#40643 - Frustrated in the fuse
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | The RV-10 Family Place |
Back in 2003/2004, we originally met some of the very early
RV-10 builders online on the yahoogroups RV-10 list. Many
of these builders, some of whom are flying and some of whom are
still in the later stages of construction, became "family" to me.
For various reasons that are irrelevant now, a while after things
really got going, we made the jump to the Matronics RV10-List,
and Matt Dralle, a guy who I've never met personally, put a lot
of time and effort into making the Matronics system something that
builders would really like. He added .jpg images that you can
actually receive in your emails, he added web forums for those who
don't like the email delivery method, he's prevented almost 100%
any SPAM from making it to our inbox, and he's provided an
unmoderated (or at least only minimally moderated) place for
discussion on literally dozens of various aircraft topics.
Not only that, but he does this without succumbing to the
ever popular "ad based" website support, so when we get our daily
fix of RV-10 information it works well on as little bandwidth
as possible on our end.
As I think back to the building process, guys like Rick, Bob,
John, Randy, Scott, Michael and COUNTLESS others have always been the
reason that I was able to feel welcome sharing, and be motivated
towards completion. I have both SAVED hundreds of dollars and
tons of time by reading tips from other builders, and I've also
helped to try to post back info that should save YOU many
hours and dollars. Regardless of the occasional poorly taken
comment by a builder here and there, we've been largely successful
being self-moderated, and I've found that it's rare that I
am willing to just "hit delete" on a thread. I thoroughly enjoy
getting my RV-10 information by direct email, rather than
daily digest or web forum, because it allows me to pick and
choose the true "gems" and file them away for safe keeping, which
is why I consider this site "home".
On my first year on the Matronics list, I don't think I donated
a cent. I wanted to just BE here first. After that, I gave a
donation, and every year after that I've increased my donation,
despite the fact that I've now been flying almost 2 years and
perhaps would seemingly benefit less from this list than a new
builder would. This year I figured it was time for me to
get the "2X years of the RVator", even if I'd never read it,
so I upped my donation again. I consider the benefits of
this list to be far more than the information, however, because
I continue to meet more and more people that really, truly,
are becoming extended family to my family. There are those
that my kids will be close to until well after I am gone.
That is one of the biggest benefits I get out of this list.
I tell you this because I emailed Matt before I left for Vegas and
asked how the fund raiser is going. Although I have no financial
stake in this, it means a lot to me that this email list is
here, and living without it is not something I'm interested
in experiencing. As it turns out, his donations have been running
a little slow this year. Considering that this site is not
ad-funded though, this site is truly "ours", so it is up to
us to determine the longevity of the Matronics RV-10 and other
lists. I know there are people who think that this could all be
run on an old PC on DSL, but the fact is, the subscriber list is
HUGE, so each post requires lots of server traffic, and keep
in mind there are dozens of separate lists, and beyond that,
the email you receive in your inbox is only 5-15% of the email
a server sees due to SPAM. Supporting this system takes a bit
of time, and money.
So I encourage you to take part in the matronics RV10-List,
participate, share, and meet the builders both around you and
at the same building stage as you. I've never been much of a
"search the archives" kind of guy, as it's nice to see the
new builders pop in to introduce themselves. If you're an
RV-10 builder on this list, I consider you one of my RV-10
brothers (or sisters), so I'm always happy to answer questions
here. That's why I call this place "Home". If you have
appreciation for what you get out of the list, don't wait
for November to blow by and miss a donation.
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vernon Smith <planesmith(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | grounding question |
This echo what other have suggested. The plan is to locally grounding the n
oise producers with a nutplate arrangement removing the primer from under t
he electrical terminal. Insulating the head jacks with fiber washers and ru
nning all of the audio/radio grounds to a single point ground on the fire w
all. My understanding this should eliminate the possibility of a ground loo
p noise. An exception to this is the strobe wire shielding which is grounde
d only back at the power unit not out at the wing tips, again I've read thi
s helps with the ground loop issue.
Idea Industries makes an anticorrosion gel for aluminum to aluminum and co
pper to aluminum electrical connections. It is not an aircraft product, how
ever I'm sure there is an equivalent aircraft approved material.
Vern Smith (#324 doors & top)
From: rv10(at)sinkrate.comTo: rv10-list(at)matronics.comSubject: RV10-List: groun
ding questionDate: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 14:20:32 -0800
What are people doing for ground wires for the nav, landing, and pitot heat
? Are you running separate wires for ground or grounding locally to the ai
rframe? This might be somewhat of a =93primer war=94 question as I=92ve he
ard some say always run ground wires and others say ground locally. Aeroel
ectric says local ground for =93non-noisy=94 items is fine. Just wondering
what others have done.
If airframe what kind of hardware do you use to get a solid ground connecti
on? Do you use regular AN nuts bolts and washers or do you use something l
ike a lock washer that has more bite maybe? Do you cover the nut/bolt with
anything to slow any corrosion being that you need to clean the primer off
the metal at the point of contact?
Yes John I=92ll wipe the dust off the 43.13 J
-Ben Westfall
#40579
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf=E9. Stop
by today.
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Oc
tWLtagline
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob-tcw" <rnewman(at)tcwtech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Blue Mountain AVionics |
Here's my view on the EFIS thing, we've effectively gone thru this
twice now. We looked real hard at BMA about 2 years ago when
planning our complete redo of our Glastar panel and decided against it
for some of the reasons Robin has already highlighted. Instead we
chose the Dynon D-100 series. This is intergrated in our Glastar and
has performed very well. I fly it IFR and VFR. We have also
installed 2 of the original small Dynon units in 2 other Glastars we
built, these were intended as back-up to steam gauges. Again Dynon has
done well and stood behind their product. Now for what I think needs
improvement. This is IFR specific, the resolution on the Dynon D-100
screen is just not fine enough on the HSI to accurately track the
localizer and glide slope (in my opinion of course) during the last mile
of an approach. The appearance of the horizontal and vertical bars is
just too fat to adequately communication slight deviations in course
during this very sensitive time of flight. I find that during this
time my scan goes to my traditional GI-106 indicator. Otherwise,
the Dynon has been an absolute outstanding value and rock solid.
(also note, I do not have the bright sceen option). Now for the
future. I've selected dual AFS 3500's to go in my RV-10. (I'm mainly
after bigger screens and the overlaid HSI view on top of the attitude
information) I'm still on the fence about adding a separate GI-106
indicator. I'd like to hear input from others on this.
Thanks,
Bob Newman.
Note: Our instrument panel can be seen at www.tcwtech.com, at the
bottom of the home page click on "see our new instrument panel N99RN"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Saylor" <Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com> |
| Subject: | Test Flight Results |
We just finished test flying, including the most recent flight at full aft
CG and gross weight. I put the plane on scales to load it so I know it was
right at the limit. It took 200 lbs in the baggage area, 200 in the rear
seats, and 400 lbs of pilots to get to aft C.G. at gross. Considering that
the normal baggage limit is 150#, I think you'd have to try pretty hard to
overload the plane or load it out of C.G. Still worth checking though.
At aft C.G. and gross weight we did approach stalls, zero G manuvers to
calibrate the AOA, slow flight, and cruise. Climb on a cool day from sea
level was near 1800FPM. Handling was normal athough the stalls seemed to
break more abrubtly than when it was light (at 2200 lbs it didn't really
break at all, just "mushed"). Heavy, it was still a very easy recovery just
by adding power.
This was the first cruise measurement we've made since installing the gear
fairings. We saw the standard 15 kt increase. At 5000', gross weight, 24"
and 2500 RPM we saw 177KTAS. We're RV grinning from ear to ear!
With the fairings installed we're at 1588 lbs. empty. Still no paint or
interior. I told the interior shop his budget was 8 pounds. He just
laughed...
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Saylor" <Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com> |
| Subject: | RE: The RV-10 Family Place |
I second Tim's support of the list!
Just yesterday I saved at least a couple hours of work when two of us
stepped up at the same time while aft loaded. I had read here that without
a tail tiedown ring installed, that little maneuver would send the tail down
and smash the rudder cap. We smacked the tiedown I installed for that very
reason pretty hard, but no damage, thanks very directly to Matt Dralle's
efforts. That one little item was worth my donation this year. There have
been so many others...
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Test Flight Results |
| From: | "bcondrey" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com> |
Dave,
Are you using a 2700 lb gross weight?
Bob
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145770#145770
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Test Flight Results |
| From: | "Perry, Phil" <Phil.Perry(at)netapp.com> |
Good report, Dave.
I might print that one off and hang it inside the shop. That'll keep me
focused on building. :)
________________________________
From: Dave Saylor [mailto:Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 12:50 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Test Flight Results
We just finished test flying, including the most recent flight at full
aft CG and gross weight. I put the plane on scales to load it so I know
it was right at the limit. It took 200 lbs in the baggage area, 200 in
the rear seats, and 400 lbs of pilots to get to aft C.G. at gross.
Considering that the normal baggage limit is 150#, I think you'd have to
try pretty hard to overload the plane or load it out of C.G. Still
worth checking though.
At aft C.G. and gross weight we did approach stalls, zero G manuvers to
calibrate the AOA, slow flight, and cruise. Climb on a cool day from
sea level was near 1800FPM. Handling was normal athough the stalls
seemed to break more abrubtly than when it was light (at 2200 lbs it
didn't really break at all, just "mushed"). Heavy, it was still a very
easy recovery just by adding power.
This was the first cruise measurement we've made since installing the
gear fairings. We saw the standard 15 kt increase. At 5000', gross
weight, 24" and 2500 RPM we saw 177KTAS. We're RV grinning from ear to
ear!
With the fairings installed we're at 1588 lbs. empty. Still no paint or
interior. I told the interior shop his budget was 8 pounds. He just
laughed...
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vernon Smith <planesmith(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | grounding question |
Thanks for catching that. Just another good reason to post and contribute.
Vern (#324)
> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 10:49:31 -0600> From: Tim(at)MyRV10.com> To: rv10-lis
t(at)matronics.com> Subject: Re: RV10-List: grounding question> > --> RV10-Lis
t message posted by: Tim Olson > > One correction....> > Th
e items that you should feel comfortable locally grounding are> the NON-noi
se-producers. The noisy items you'll definitely> want to pull back to a cen
tral ground point. Things like> a pitot heater though are generally not noi
sy, so many builders> will do local grounds for nav lights, pitots, and thi
ngs like that.> I'd recommend going CENTRAL ground for HID's and devices th
at> have any "frequency" to the power.> > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> > > > Vernon Smith wrote:> > This echo what other have suggested. The pla
n is to locally grounding > > the noise producers with a nutplate arrangeme
nt removing the primer from > > under the electrical terminal. Insulating t
he head jacks with fiber > > washers and running all of the audio/radio gro
unds to a single point > > ground on the fire wall. My understanding this s
hould eliminate the > > possibility of a ground loop noise. An exception to
this is the strobe > > wire shielding which is grounded only back at the p
ower unit not out at > > the wing tips, again I've read this helps with the
ground loop issue. > > > > Idea Industries makes an anticorrosion gel for
aluminum to aluminum and > > copper to aluminum electrical connections. It
is not an aircraft > > product, however I'm sure there is an equivalent air
craft approved > > material. > > > > Vern Smith (#324 doors & top)> > > > -
-----------------------------------------------------------------------> >
From: rv10(at)sinkrate.com> > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com> > Subject: RV10-Lis
t: grounding question> > Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 14:20:32 -0800> > > > What
are people doing for ground wires for the nav, landing, and> > pitot heat?
Are you running separate wires for ground or grounding> > locally to the ai
rframe? This might be somewhat of a =93primer war=94> > question as I=92ve
heard some say always run ground wires and others> > say ground locally. Ae
roelectric says local ground for =93non-noisy=94> > items is fine. Just won
dering what others have done.> > > > > > > > If airframe what kind of hardw
are do you use to get a solid ground> > connection? Do you use regular AN n
uts bolts and washers or do you> > use something like a lock washer that ha
s more bite maybe? Do you> > cover the nut/bolt with anything to slow any c
orrosion being that> > you need to clean the primer off the metal at the po
int of contact?> > > > > > > > Yes John I=92ll wipe the dust off the 43.13
J> > > > > > > > -Ben Westfall> > > > #40579> > > > > > > > > > > > *> > >
> blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution> > get=_blank>http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List> > p://forums.matronics.com> > > > *> > > >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
--> > Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf=E9.
Stop > > by today! > > <http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2
=======================> > >
_________________________________________________________________
!
ilnews
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Dunne" <acs(at)acspropeller.com.au> |
I'm looking for the screws that you attach the garmin radio racks to your
framework with.
I think they're MS24693BB 's 6-32's maybe?
Any body got some clues on this and whether the countersunk flat head is
82deg or 100deg?
Thanks,
John 40315 (instrument panel)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bcrnfnp(at)sbcglobal.net |
Hi All,
I have always wanted a Chelton since way back in 2004-2005, however they are now
out of my price range. Then I thought I would go with a GRT double display/double
AHRS/double RAIM GPS,etc.
Now I'm considering a split system with GRT and VistaNav (Solid state disc drive
of course).
>From what I've researched so far, the VistaNav appears to be better than the GRT
system and a lot less critical where the reference unit is placed (i.e. under
the copilots seat)
I like the idea that they are considered a Class II EFB, can have a PFD and MFD
displayed at same time, are being used on the big planes, and even come with
a TSO'd version, and similar systems from them are used on military UAVs.
Anyone have any comments on this? I really like the GRT system, but VistaNav looks
good also.
TIA
Barry Chapman
RV-9A emp N621TC (reserved)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Blue Mountain AVionics |
A neighbor with a Blue Mountain EFIS/1 in his RV-8 for 4 years now has yet
to get it to work. On the few times the AI display came up, he told me it
tumbled within a few minutes. He has decided he will never fly IFR with it
(he is a retired airline pilot). Another local pilot with a Lancair 4 has
had his EFIS/1 out of the panel more than it has been in. Both tell me the
Blue Mountain customer service after the sale is poor.
I recommend you talk to a Blue Mountain owner. Perhaps my two data points
are not the norm.
On the other side, I have had excellent after the sale service from both
Grand Rapids and Dynon.
Carl Froehlich
RV-8A (375 hrs)
RV-10 (wings)
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 9:41 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Blue Mountain AVionics
Hi
As I start looking at that curved blank piece of metal that will morph into
an instrument panel, I am trying to sort out what I should install.
I am interested in any opinions / experiences with the BMA EFIS 2. Not
having an unlimited budget, I my pan is to build a solid IFR panel around
whatever EFIS I choose. For the moment, the BMA EFIS seems to have most, if
not all, of what I need at a very reasonable price.
Inquiring minds need to know ..
Les Kearney
#40643 - Frustrated in the fuse
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob-tcw" <rnewman(at)tcwtech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: : RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods |
I'd like to share some insights into the engineering design considerations
regarding speed control circuits for DC motors. (the
Ray-Allen style trim servo uses a brushed DC motor)
I would discourage the use of a resistor type speed control for adjusting
the travel speed on the trim servos used in our RV aircraft for the
following reasons:
Adding a series resistor to the trim motor limits the available current to
the motor and although it will slow the motor down it also limits the
available motor torque (i.e.. its ability to move the attached control
surface). This could be undesirable as the loading on the control surface
will vary with aircraft configuration and performance. Although you may
"tune" the resistor combination to work in one flight regime it may not be
what you need in another. Now perhaps there is a suitable compromise
value you may find "works" for your plane, but have you tested it thru
temperature, airspeed and aircraft loading extremes? The fundamental
problem is that series resistor forms a voltage divider with the attached
motor, as you load the motor down, its impedance drops, this means that
more of the voltage available from the aircraft bus will be dropped across
the resistor and less will be available for the motor as you load it down.
This effectively makes this method susceptible to problems over full
operating range of loads and supply voltages. Again, you may be able find
a "suitable" value that seems to work, but be careful to test over a wide
range of conditions.
A second, more long term problem associated with this method of speed
control has to do with motor life. A brushed DC motor can develop a
condition which will dramatically shorten its operating life if it is speed
controlled by reducing the available current available to the motor. The
phenomena is most prevalent in motors that are used for short durations or
intermittent duty. The condition that is likely to develop is that the
dust from the motor brushes will pack the slots of the motor's commutator.
This dust is a combination of conductive particles (carbon from the brushes)
and any oil from the motor bearings. This substance is like a conductive
paste and it gets wedged into the spaces between the commutator bars. The
paste effectively shorts out the motor over time. Normally, when the motor
is run at its designed voltage or when it controlled by reducing the
available motor voltage, there is plenty of current available to burn off
this conductive paste, and the motor lasts its full rated life. However,
if the motor is speed controlled by limiting the available current (eg.
using a series resistor dropper circuit) the ability to burn off this brush
paste is greatly compromised. The brush pasted remains packed in the
commutator and the motor effectively gets shorted out and stops moving.
This usually is noticed when the motor is turned on, and the brush paste
just cannot be cleared. The motor is then done. I've seen this effect
ruin dc motors within a dozen accumulated run hours.
In the DC motor industry the accepted method of speed control for
brushed DC motors is to reduce the motor voltage without limiting the
available motor current. This is done by a number of methods which include
linear regulators, high frequency switching regulators or direct PWM (pulse
width modulation) to name a few. All of these techniques can reduce the
average voltage to the motor without limiting the available motor current.
Sorry for the long post, but sometimes the engineering that goes to what
seems to be relatively simple can have significant consequences.
Bob Newman
TCW Technologies
www.tcwtech.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David McNeill" <dlm46007(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Blue Mountain AVionics |
Before I went with the Chelton as primary and GRT Sport as backup and XM
display, I checked with the L9(?) drivers in the PHX area. They had a full
time employee just updating the software and keeping the DBs updated. Also I
personally know a BM test pilot and he flies IFR with backup instruments and
three BM units in the aircraft. He indicates that the units reboot often.
Perhaps your best bet may be to find a satisfied BM customer and pick their
brain about reliability, and ease of support of the software and hardware.
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carl Froehlich
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 7:33 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Blue Mountain AVionics
A neighbor with a Blue Mountain EFIS/1 in his RV-8 for 4 years now has yet
to get it to work. On the few times the AI display came up, he told me it
tumbled within a few minutes. He has decided he will never fly IFR with it
(he is a retired airline pilot). Another local pilot with a Lancair 4 has
had his EFIS/1 out of the panel more than it has been in. Both tell me the
Blue Mountain customer service after the sale is poor.
I recommend you talk to a Blue Mountain owner. Perhaps my two data points
are not the norm.
On the other side, I have had excellent after the sale service from both
Grand Rapids and Dynon.
Carl Froehlich
RV-8A (375 hrs)
RV-10 (wings)
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 9:41 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Blue Mountain AVionics
Hi
As I start looking at that curved blank piece of metal that will morph into
an instrument panel, I am trying to sort out what I should install.
I am interested in any opinions / experiences with the BMA EFIS 2. Not
having an unlimited budget, I my pan is to build a solid IFR panel around
whatever EFIS I choose. For the moment, the BMA EFIS seems to have most, if
not all, of what I need at a very reasonable price.
Inquiring minds need to know ..
Les Kearney
#40643 - Frustrated in the fuse
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Blue Mountain Avionics |
HI
Many thanks to all who answered my query. I have several more data points
upon which to base my decision. All very useful and all remarkably
consistent.
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643 - Frustrated in the fuse
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of David McNeill
Sent: November-13-07 8:40 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Blue Mountain AVionics
Before I went with the Chelton as primary and GRT Sport as backup and XM
display, I checked with the L9(?) drivers in the PHX area. They had a full
time employee just updating the software and keeping the DBs updated. Also I
personally know a BM test pilot and he flies IFR with backup instruments and
three BM units in the aircraft. He indicates that the units reboot often.
Perhaps your best bet may be to find a satisfied BM customer and pick their
brain about reliability, and ease of support of the software and hardware.
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carl Froehlich
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 7:33 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Blue Mountain AVionics
A neighbor with a Blue Mountain EFIS/1 in his RV-8 for 4 years now has yet
to get it to work. On the few times the AI display came up, he told me it
tumbled within a few minutes. He has decided he will never fly IFR with it
(he is a retired airline pilot). Another local pilot with a Lancair 4 has
had his EFIS/1 out of the panel more than it has been in. Both tell me the
Blue Mountain customer service after the sale is poor.
I recommend you talk to a Blue Mountain owner. Perhaps my two data points
are not the norm.
On the other side, I have had excellent after the sale service from both
Grand Rapids and Dynon.
Carl Froehlich
RV-8A (375 hrs)
RV-10 (wings)
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 9:41 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Blue Mountain AVionics
Hi
As I start looking at that curved blank piece of metal that will morph into
an instrument panel, I am trying to sort out what I should install.
I am interested in any opinions / experiences with the BMA EFIS 2. Not
having an unlimited budget, I my pan is to build a solid IFR panel around
whatever EFIS I choose. For the moment, the BMA EFIS seems to have most, if
not all, of what I need at a very reasonable price.
Inquiring minds need to know ..
Les Kearney
#40643 - Frustrated in the fuse
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navi
gator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Patrick ONeill" <poneill(at)irealms.com> |
| Subject: | Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit |
Thanks much for the pictures Ray! That helps a lot.
Unfortunately, I don't think I can use that as the AHRS station. The xbow
NAV 420 has an integrated 3-axis magnetometer. I can imagine the grief
trying to situate it 6 inches from a main battery wire. So it's back to the
shelf plan for me.
But that might be another useful station for something else. I'll have to
keep that bracket in mind for the future.
By the way, how are you prepping the inside of the tail cone surfaces? Is
that all just alodine? Looks great!
Anyone else currently flying with OP EFIS? Any location success stories or
problems with the NAV 420 AHRS?
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: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:01 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
I was working with Garmin here in Olathe on this bracket and testing
it using my RV-10. Here are all the pictures I provided to Garmin during
this process. Van's actually created the bracket with the feedback that was
provided my Scott (Garmin) and myself.
By the way, I don't have either AHRS, but this bracket still makes
an excellent support for a 1" x 8" board when you need to crawl back into
the tail. We are still working on the bracket for the Magnometer, problem
is finding a good location that is free of magnetic interference to the
standards which Garmin has set for the Certified installations.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick ONeill
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:08 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
I just noticed that Van's is offering an AHRS mounting kit for the 10:
AHRS Mount Kit for the RV-10
Part Number = IF AHRS MOUNT-10
Description
Mount for Attitude Heading Reference System unit.
Provides parts to mount the AHRS unit for either the Garmin G900XT or the
Grand Rapids EFIS. Locates unit behind baggage bulkhead on RV-7, RV-9, and
RV-10.
Has anyone received one of these or better yet, any photos? I'm not getting
a clear picture of what it entails from the illustration on Van's web store.
It would be nice to skip fabricating an AHRS shelf.
I'm not sure which AHRS units are used by Garmin or GRT. I am trying to
figure out if it will accommodate the Xbow NAV 420 AHRS unit that ships from
OP. I also want to make sure it does not conflict with the ELT/Strobe PS
tray.
Best Regards,
Patrick #40715
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Cleary" <john_rv10(at)yahoo.com> |
John,
The GNS 400 and 500 series use AN577 6-32 screws with 100 degree
countersink.
Cheers,
John Cleary
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Dunne
Sent: Wednesday, 14 November 2007 9:51 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Screws
I=92m looking for the screws that you attach the garmin radio racks to
your
framework with.
I think they=92re MS24693BB =91s 6-32=92s maybe?
Any body got some clues on this and whether the countersunk flat head is
82deg or 100deg?
Thanks,
John 40315 (instrument panel)
"http://www.matronics.com/contribution"http://www.matronics.com/contribut
ion
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List"http://www.matronics.com/Na
vig
ator?RV10-List
"http://forums.matronics.com"http://forums.matronics.com
13/11/2007
11:09 AM
13/11/2007
11:09 AM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ben Westfall" <rv10(at)sinkrate.com> |
| Subject: | Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit |
Rob Hickman of advanced flight systems has posted a picture in his support
forums of his magnetometer install location on the 10 they are building.
There is a thread that specifically talks about magnetometer locations as
well.
Picture:
http://img99.imageshack.us/my.php?image=magnetometermountingrv1ij8.jpg
(popup adds on this one)
Forum thread:
http://www.advanced-flight-systems.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10
-Ben
#40579
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick ONeill
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 11:10 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
Thanks much for the pictures Ray! That helps a lot.
Unfortunately, I don't think I can use that as the AHRS station. The xbow
NAV 420 has an integrated 3-axis magnetometer. I can imagine the grief
trying to situate it 6 inches from a main battery wire. So it's back to the
shelf plan for me.
But that might be another useful station for something else. I'll have to
keep that bracket in mind for the future.
By the way, how are you prepping the inside of the tail cone surfaces? Is
that all just alodine? Looks great!
Anyone else currently flying with OP EFIS? Any location success stories or
problems with the NAV 420 AHRS?
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: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:01 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
I was working with Garmin here in Olathe on this bracket and testing
it using my RV-10. Here are all the pictures I provided to Garmin during
this process. Van's actually created the bracket with the feedback that was
provided my Scott (Garmin) and myself.
By the way, I don't have either AHRS, but this bracket still makes
an excellent support for a 1" x 8" board when you need to crawl back into
the tail. We are still working on the bracket for the Magnometer, problem
is finding a good location that is free of magnetic interference to the
standards which Garmin has set for the Certified installations.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick ONeill
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:08 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
I just noticed that Van's is offering an AHRS mounting kit for the 10:
AHRS Mount Kit for the RV-10
Part Number = IF AHRS MOUNT-10
Description
Mount for Attitude Heading Reference System unit.
Provides parts to mount the AHRS unit for either the Garmin G900XT or the
Grand Rapids EFIS. Locates unit behind baggage bulkhead on RV-7, RV-9, and
RV-10.
Has anyone received one of these or better yet, any photos? I'm not getting
a clear picture of what it entails from the illustration on Van's web store.
It would be nice to skip fabricating an AHRS shelf.
I'm not sure which AHRS units are used by Garmin or GRT. I am trying to
figure out if it will accommodate the Xbow NAV 420 AHRS unit that ships from
OP. I also want to make sure it does not conflict with the ELT/Strobe PS
tray.
Best Regards,
Patrick #40715
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit |
| From: | "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> |
That nice gold finish is PPG Armor Grip. I think it is 900 and
901.
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 Patrick
ONeill
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 1:10 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
Thanks much for the pictures Ray! That helps a lot.
Unfortunately, I don't think I can use that as the AHRS station. The
xbow
NAV 420 has an integrated 3-axis magnetometer. I can imagine the grief
trying to situate it 6 inches from a main battery wire. So it's back to
the
shelf plan for me.
But that might be another useful station for something else. I'll have
to
keep that bracket in mind for the future.
By the way, how are you prepping the inside of the tail cone surfaces?
Is
that all just alodine? Looks great!
Anyone else currently flying with OP EFIS? Any location success stories
or
problems with the NAV 420 AHRS?
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: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:01 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
I was working with Garmin here in Olathe on this bracket and
testing
it using my RV-10. Here are all the pictures I provided to Garmin
during
this process. Van's actually created the bracket with the feedback that
was
provided my Scott (Garmin) and myself.
By the way, I don't have either AHRS, but this bracket still
makes
an excellent support for a 1" x 8" board when you need to crawl back
into
the tail. We are still working on the bracket for the Magnometer,
problem
is finding a good location that is free of magnetic interference to the
standards which Garmin has set for the Certified installations.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick
ONeill
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:08 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
I just noticed that Van's is offering an AHRS mounting kit for the 10:
AHRS Mount Kit for the RV-10
Part Number = IF AHRS MOUNT-10
Description
Mount for Attitude Heading Reference System unit.
Provides parts to mount the AHRS unit for either the Garmin G900XT or
the
Grand Rapids EFIS. Locates unit behind baggage bulkhead on RV-7, RV-9,
and
RV-10.
Has anyone received one of these or better yet, any photos? I'm not
getting
a clear picture of what it entails from the illustration on Van's web
store.
It would be nice to skip fabricating an AHRS shelf.
I'm not sure which AHRS units are used by Garmin or GRT. I am trying to
figure out if it will accommodate the Xbow NAV 420 AHRS unit that ships
from
OP. I also want to make sure it does not conflict with the ELT/Strobe
PS
tray.
Best Regards,
Patrick #40715
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit |
| From: | "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> |
This is the exact same position that we found was the best
location for the Garmin unit when installed in the Tail area.
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 Ben Westfall
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 8:13 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
Rob Hickman of advanced flight systems has posted a picture in his
support
forums of his magnetometer install location on the 10 they are building.
There is a thread that specifically talks about magnetometer locations
as
well.
Picture:
http://img99.imageshack.us/my.php?image=magnetometermountingrv1ij8.jpg
(popup adds on this one)
Forum thread:
http://www.advanced-flight-systems.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10
-Ben
#40579
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick
ONeill
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 11:10 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
Thanks much for the pictures Ray! That helps a lot.
Unfortunately, I don't think I can use that as the AHRS station. The
xbow
NAV 420 has an integrated 3-axis magnetometer. I can imagine the grief
trying to situate it 6 inches from a main battery wire. So it's back to
the
shelf plan for me.
But that might be another useful station for something else. I'll have
to
keep that bracket in mind for the future.
By the way, how are you prepping the inside of the tail cone surfaces?
Is
that all just alodine? Looks great!
Anyone else currently flying with OP EFIS? Any location success stories
or
problems with the NAV 420 AHRS?
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: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:01 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
I was working with Garmin here in Olathe on this bracket and
testing
it using my RV-10. Here are all the pictures I provided to Garmin
during
this process. Van's actually created the bracket with the feedback that
was
provided my Scott (Garmin) and myself.
By the way, I don't have either AHRS, but this bracket still
makes
an excellent support for a 1" x 8" board when you need to crawl back
into
the tail. We are still working on the bracket for the Magnometer,
problem
is finding a good location that is free of magnetic interference to the
standards which Garmin has set for the Certified installations.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick
ONeill
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:08 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
I just noticed that Van's is offering an AHRS mounting kit for the 10:
AHRS Mount Kit for the RV-10
Part Number = IF AHRS MOUNT-10
Description
Mount for Attitude Heading Reference System unit.
Provides parts to mount the AHRS unit for either the Garmin G900XT or
the
Grand Rapids EFIS. Locates unit behind baggage bulkhead on RV-7, RV-9,
and
RV-10.
Has anyone received one of these or better yet, any photos? I'm not
getting
a clear picture of what it entails from the illustration on Van's web
store.
It would be nice to skip fabricating an AHRS shelf.
I'm not sure which AHRS units are used by Garmin or GRT. I am trying to
figure out if it will accommodate the Xbow NAV 420 AHRS unit that ships
from
OP. I also want to make sure it does not conflict with the ELT/Strobe
PS
tray.
Best Regards,
Patrick #40715
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Judge" <bjudge(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Blue Mountain AVionics |
I'm an RV-8 builder, owner flyer. I'm hanging out on this list to
learn more about the RV-10
For those interested in Blue Mountain Avionics I'll share my first
hand experiences.
Here are the Facts:
I got on the list for an EFIS lite G3 about 2 years before my first
flight. The lead time was something like 10 weeks and I received my
unit after about 16 weeks. After installation I noticed the issues
with the unit sitting still with no GPS input: The ADI would tumble
after a few minutes of sitting still in my garage. When I asked BMA
about this I was told that GPS was necessary for stable attitude
solutions. After I made it to that airport with GPS input the unit
displayed the same behavior. I was then told it needed to be in
flight to display proper attitude. This didn't pan out either. I
sent it back for service, they turned it around in 8 weeks after a
"recalibration" and it still didn't display stable attitude.
After getting no response for some time I sent a letter certified mail
return receipt asking for them to refund my money or I would hire a
lawyer in Copperhill to take them to small claims court. After that I
got some more attention from the service department and they told me
that unless the unit sees 10-12 satellites it can't function. To
solve the attitude equations they have to use Pitot or GPS info: BMA
is on the GPS side of the equations. I was told that a refund was out
of the question for a product sold 2 years ago.
Here is some analysis:
That is where I left things with BMA. Despite taking a $3000 loss on
the equipment I can't have something that needs GPS in my plane just
to maintain control. Anybody that has flown for a while has probably
seen GPS become unavailable. It is not unusual to see notams for GPS
outages around military airspace and so I couldn't stomach being that
dependent on GPS. I can cope with loss of GPS nav capabilites but
loss of attitude at the same time is outside of my risk envelope.
Greg Richter says the GPS is a better choice for giving stable
attitude.
here is some opinion:
I now have a Dynon D10A with an HSI-34. This combo has the base
features that I wanted: standard 6 pack and CDI at near the same
price as the BMA. Dynon is a much more mature product than the BMA
and Dynon is much more intuitive. The HS-34 is a new addition and
wasn't available when I was shopping.
Homebuilding is an unusual market place because of the potential large
lag between the time products hit the market and when the end users
actually get to use the products. BMA doesn't seem to care about this
kind if issue. Additionally 8 weeks is far too long for a product
turnaround.
I am just talking about the fundamental issues that I have had with
BMA. I could expound for several more pages on this and other issues
I have with them.
Just to keep me honest I have copied Greg Richter from BMA. I'm sure
his opinion will differ from mine.
Bill Judge
RV-8, flying since 11/18/06 now with 180 hrs now
N84WJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Lassetter" <rblassett(at)alltel.net> |
| Subject: | Construction/Restoration |
Hello all,
I would like to offer my aircraft construction/restoration services to the
group. I have a 40' X 60' hangar in NE Georgia and have a lifetime of
experience with various aircraft. I can construct large projects for $15.00
per hour with first-class workmanship. Please email me directly or give me
a call.
Russ Lassetter
202 Aviation Blvd.
Cleveland, GA 30528
706-348-7514
rblassett(at)alltel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill DeRouchey <billderou(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: : RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods |
Bob-
I developed an automatic elevator trim system for my aircraft 15 months ago and
it has been performing flawlessly. Its so benign that its virtually invisible
and has never failed.
The black box creates a stream of 12-14.5 volt square pulses at 20hz. Pitot pressure
is sensed and a fine microprocessor backs off the duty cycle expotentially
as the speed increases. There are no switches normally needed, although I
have an off and constant 12 volt override switch for emergencies. The feel on
the trim switch is constant - no matter what speed the aircraft is moving.
Do you see any long term motor or electrical issues with this arrangement?
Bill DeRouchey
N939SB, flying
billderou(at)yahoo.com
Bob-tcw wrote:
I'd like to share some insights into the engineering design considerations
regarding speed control circuits for DC motors. (the
Ray-Allen style trim servo uses a brushed DC motor)
I would discourage the use of a resistor type speed control for adjusting
the travel speed on the trim servos used in our RV aircraft for the
following reasons:
Adding a series resistor to the trim motor limits the available current to
the motor and although it will slow the motor down it also limits the
available motor torque (i.e.. its ability to move the attached control
surface). This could be undesirable as the loading on the control surface
will vary with aircraft configuration and performance. Although you may
"tune" the resistor combination to work in one flight regime it may not be
what you need in another. Now perhaps there is a suitable compromise
value you may find "works" for your plane, but have you tested it thru
temperature, airspeed and aircraft loading extremes? The fundamental
problem is that series resistor forms a voltage divider with the attached
motor, as you load the motor down, its impedance drops, this means that
more of the voltage available from the aircraft bus will be dropped across
the resistor and less will be available for the motor as you load it down.
This effectively makes this method susceptible to problems over full
operating range of loads and supply voltages. Again, you may be able find
a "suitable" value that seems to work, but be careful to test over a wide
range of conditions.
A second, more long term problem associated with this method of speed
control has to do with motor life. A brushed DC motor can develop a
condition which will dramatically shorten its operating life if it is speed
controlled by reducing the available current available to the motor. The
phenomena is most prevalent in motors that are used for short durations or
intermittent duty. The condition that is likely to develop is that the
dust from the motor brushes will pack the slots of the motor's commutator.
This dust is a combination of conductive particles (carbon from the brushes)
and any oil from the motor bearings. This substance is like a conductive
paste and it gets wedged into the spaces between the commutator bars. The
paste effectively shorts out the motor over time. Normally, when the motor
is run at its designed voltage or when it controlled by reducing the
available motor voltage, there is plenty of current available to burn off
this conductive paste, and the motor lasts its full rated life. However,
if the motor is speed controlled by limiting the available current (eg.
using a series resistor dropper circuit) the ability to burn off this brush
paste is greatly compromised. The brush pasted remains packed in the
commutator and the motor effectively gets shorted out and stops moving.
This usually is noticed when the motor is turned on, and the brush paste
just cannot be cleared. The motor is then done. I've seen this effect
ruin dc motors within a dozen accumulated run hours.
In the DC motor industry the accepted method of speed control for
brushed DC motors is to reduce the motor voltage without limiting the
available motor current. This is done by a number of methods which include
linear regulators, high frequency switching regulators or direct PWM (pulse
width modulation) to name a few. All of these techniques can reduce the
average voltage to the motor without limiting the available motor current.
Sorry for the long post, but sometimes the engineering that goes to what
seems to be relatively simple can have significant consequences.
Bob Newman
TCW Technologies
www.tcwtech.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | German Alvarez <german.alvarez(at)playalinda.net> |
| Subject: | RE: fuel tank access panel, updated! |
I do not know the exact size of the fuel tack access panel, and this may
be totally wrong, I hope the self regulating power of the list validates
this, but have you consider a suction-cup like the one used in raised
floors or to carry glass/appliances?
http://www.anver.com/document/company/vacuum%20handcups.htm
some of them can pull 500 lb.
--ga
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Patrick Thyssen <jump2(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit |
Here is my mount for the 420 ahrs.
I can build a shelf on the four posts if I need to get it 6 inchs higher away
from battery and servo. I'm a good 20 " away now. Will try to demag the cable
if not see about stainless.
Pat Thyssen
"Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" wrote:
That nice gold finish is PPG Armor Grip. I think it is 900 and
901.
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 Patrick
ONeill
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 1:10 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
Thanks much for the pictures Ray! That helps a lot.
Unfortunately, I don't think I can use that as the AHRS station. The
xbow
NAV 420 has an integrated 3-axis magnetometer. I can imagine the grief
trying to situate it 6 inches from a main battery wire. So it's back to
the
shelf plan for me.
But that might be another useful station for something else. I'll have
to
keep that bracket in mind for the future.
By the way, how are you prepping the inside of the tail cone surfaces?
Is
that all just alodine? Looks great!
Anyone else currently flying with OP EFIS? Any location success stories
or
problems with the NAV 420 AHRS?
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: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:01 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
I was working with Garmin here in Olathe on this bracket and
testing
it using my RV-10. Here are all the pictures I provided to Garmin
during
this process. Van's actually created the bracket with the feedback that
was
provided my Scott (Garmin) and myself.
By the way, I don't have either AHRS, but this bracket still
makes
an excellent support for a 1" x 8" board when you need to crawl back
into
the tail. We are still working on the bracket for the Magnometer,
problem
is finding a good location that is free of magnetic interference to the
standards which Garmin has set for the Certified installations.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick
ONeill
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:08 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
I just noticed that Van's is offering an AHRS mounting kit for the 10:
AHRS Mount Kit for the RV-10
Part Number = IF AHRS MOUNT-10
Description
Mount for Attitude Heading Reference System unit.
Provides parts to mount the AHRS unit for either the Garmin G900XT or
the
Grand Rapids EFIS. Locates unit behind baggage bulkhead on RV-7, RV-9,
and
RV-10.
Has anyone received one of these or better yet, any photos? I'm not
getting
a clear picture of what it entails from the illustration on Van's web
store.
It would be nice to skip fabricating an AHRS shelf.
I'm not sure which AHRS units are used by Garmin or GRT. I am trying to
figure out if it will accommodate the Xbow NAV 420 AHRS unit that ships
from
OP. I also want to make sure it does not conflict with the ELT/Strobe
PS
tray.
Best Regards,
Patrick #40715
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Patrick Pulis" <patrick.pulis(at)seagas.com.au> |
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: : RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods |
| From: | "William Curtis" <wcurtis(at)nerv10.com> |
When this was last discussed, a few folks ask me for resistor values. I did a
rough calculation and determined that about a 10 ohm resistor would be required
to get it down to ~7 volts (assuming .6 amp draw) but that resistor would have
to be quite large to dissipate nearly 3 watts.
I redesigned the speed controller by using the ubiquitous 780x power regulator
instead. In this case a 7806 regulates the input voltage down to 6 volts for
up to 1 amp. The speed controller is activated by a switch on the flap torque
tube where ,when the flaps are up, power to the trim motor is via the 7806 power
regulator, any other flap position and trim motor runs at full speed. Much
more efficient and elegant compared to a resistor.
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/90Electrical/RV10PitchTrim.pdf
I encourage your development of products for the RV-10 and I think your trim controller
is an excellent product. However, we all have the tendency to implement
the "gold plated" solution when the more effective stainless steel would do.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
>
> I'd like to share some insights into the engineering design considerations
> regarding speed control circuits for DC motors. (the
> Ray-Allen style trim servo uses a brushed DC motor)
> I would discourage the use of a resistor type speed control for adjusting
> the travel speed on the trim servos used in our RV aircraft for the
> following reasons:
>
> Adding a series resistor to the trim motor limits the available current to
> the motor and although it will slow the motor down it also limits the
> available motor torque (i.e.. its ability to move the attached control
> surface). This could be undesirable as the loading on the control surface
> will vary with aircraft configuration and performance. Although you may
> "tune" the resistor combination to work in one flight regime it may not be
> what you need in another. Now perhaps there is a suitable compromise
> value you may find "works" for your plane, but have you tested it thru
> temperature, airspeed and aircraft loading extremes? The fundamental
> problem is that series resistor forms a voltage divider with the attached
> motor, as you load the motor down, its impedance drops, this means that
> more of the voltage available from the aircraft bus will be dropped across
> the resistor and less will be available for the motor as you load it down.
> This effectively makes this method susceptible to problems over full
> operating range of loads and supply voltages. Again, you may be able find
> a "suitable" value that seems to work, but be careful to test over a wide
> range of conditions.
> A second, more long term problem associated with this method of speed
> control has to do with motor life. A brushed DC motor can develop a
> condition which will dramatically shorten its operating life if it is speed
> controlled by reducing the available current available to the motor. The
> phenomena is most prevalent in motors that are used for short durations or
> intermittent duty. The condition that is likely to develop is that the
> dust from the motor brushes will pack the slots of the motor's commutator.
> This dust is a combination of conductive particles (carbon from the brushes)
> and any oil from the motor bearings. This substance is like a conductive
> paste and it gets wedged into the spaces between the commutator bars. The
> paste effectively shorts out the motor over time. Normally, when the motor
> is run at its designed voltage or when it controlled by reducing the
> available motor voltage, there is plenty of current available to burn off
> this conductive paste, and the motor lasts its full rated life. However,
> if the motor is speed controlled by limiting the available current (eg.
> using a series resistor dropper circuit) the ability to burn off this brush
> paste is greatly compromised. The brush pasted remains packed in the
> commutator and the motor effectively gets shorted out and stops moving.
> This usually is noticed when the motor is turned on, and the brush paste
> just cannot be cleared. The motor is then done. I've seen this effect
> ruin dc motors within a dozen accumulated run hours.
>
> In the DC motor industry the accepted method of speed control for
> brushed DC motors is to reduce the motor voltage without limiting the
> available motor current. This is done by a number of methods which include
> linear regulators, high frequency switching regulators or direct PWM (pulse
> width modulation) to name a few. All of these techniques can reduce the
> average voltage to the motor without limiting the available motor current.
>
>
>
> Sorry for the long post, but sometimes the engineering that goes to what
> seems to be relatively simple can have significant consequences.
>
>
> Bob Newman
> TCW Technologies
> www.tcwtech.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill DeRouchey <billderou(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit |
Two successful Xbow 420 installations:
Since the Xbow 420 incorporates orientation sensors and a three axis magnetometer
we located the unit close to the origin of all three axis as practical but
moved outside the hard iron magnetic fields.
We constructed a flat plate approx .125 thick and installed it where the rear
seat shoulder harness cable is bolted to the upper longeron. It spans the fuselage
width wise and we relocated the seat belt cable to the front lip of this
plate. Used the same three holes on each side that was originally for the shoulder
harness anchor. Also over engineered it with an .063 Tee running laterally
to stiffen any up and down vibrations. The NAV420 is on the top and centered
laterally.
I measured the magnetic fields around the elevator trim motor and the elevator
trim motor/battery and they will interfere with a compass 24" away. Do not underestimate
the field around the small elevator trim motor - it is significant.
This location was outside both fore and aft magnetic fields and has a significant
advantage. If the plate is flat on the longeron and at right angles to the
yaw centerline it will automatically have two axis perfectly aligned. Simply
run a string from front center to the tail center to form the yaw axis and center
the NAV420 on this string to align the third axis. No installation correction
was needed for either RV-10 with this approach.
Do not even think of locating a magnetometer anywhere near the baggage compartment.
The magnetic interference can easily be significant and uncontrollable.
Sorry I do not have a picture.
Bill DeRouchey
N939SB, flying
Patrick Thyssen wrote:
Here is my mount for the 420 ahrs.
I can build a shelf on the four posts if I need to get it 6 inchs higher away
from battery and servo. I'm a good 20 " away now. Will try to demag the cable
if not see about stainless.
Pat Thyssen
"Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" wrote:
That nice gold finish is PPG Armor Grip. I think it is 900 and
901.
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 Patrick
ONeill
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 1:10 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
Thanks much for the pictures Ray! That helps a lot.
Unfortunately, I don't think I can use that as the AHRS station. The
xbow
NAV 420 has an integrated 3-axis magnetometer. I can imagine the grief
trying to situate it 6 inches from a main battery wire. So it's back to
the
shelf plan for me.
But that might be another useful station for something else. I'll have
to
keep that bracket in mind for the future.
By the way, how are you prepping the inside of the tail cone surfaces?
Is
that all just alodine? Looks great!
Anyone else currently flying with OP EFIS? Any location success stories
or
problems with the NAV 420 AHRS?
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: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:01 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
I was working with Garmin here in Olathe on this bracket and
testing
it using my RV-10. Here are all the pictures I provided to Garmin
during
this process. Van's actually created the bracket with the feedback that
was
provided my Scott (Garmin) and myself.
By the way, I don't have either AHRS, but this bracket still
makes
an excellent support for a 1" x 8" board when you need to crawl back
into
the tail. We are still working on the bracket for the Magnometer,
problem
is finding a good location that is free of magnetic interference to the
standards which Garmin has set for the Certified installations.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick
ONeill
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:08 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
I just noticed that Van's is offering an AHRS mounting kit for the 10:
AHRS Mount Kit for the RV-10
Part Number = IF AHRS MOUNT-10
Description
Mount for Attitude Heading Reference System unit.
Provides parts to mount the AHRS unit for either the Garmin G900XT or
the
Grand Rapids EFIS. Locates unit behind baggage bulkhead on RV-7, RV-9,
and
RV-10.
Has anyone received one of these or better yet, any photos? I'm not
getting
a clear picture of what it entails from
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris and Susie McGough" <VHMUM(at)bigpond.com> |
Guys I was not happy with Vans setup of rear part of exhaust etc. I also
did not need the heat that comes out of those huge muffs into the cabin.
I contacted Larry and he made these up for me . I was originally only
going to change the passenger side but Larry said there would be a
pressure change so I changed them both and now have the standard setup
like we had in our 6. Because there is no baffle as such there is a
slight power increase. I only had to change the rear part of exhaust and
it was about an hours work. They are longer than the previous exhaust.
As you can see there is now less clutter in the engine compartment.
Not intended to put anyone's exhaust down at all, just wanted to show
what I have done.
regards Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DejaVu" <wvu(at)ameritel.net> |
| Subject: | Fw: RV-A Nose gear AD |
FYI.
Anh
N591VU-105hrs
------------------
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 8:52 PM
Subject: [Mid-AtlRVwing] RV-A Nose gear AD
There is a Mandatory Service Bulletin 07-11-09 for all Tricycle Gear
RV,s. Check Van's site.
Turtle
__._,_.___
Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic
Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Members | Calendar
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format
to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Visit Your Grou
p
Y! Sports for TV
Access it for free
Get Fantasy Sports
stats on your TV.
Yahoo! Finance
It's Now Personal
Guides, news,
advice & more.
Need traffic?
Drive customers
With search ads
on Yahoo!
.
__,_._,___
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris and Susie McGough" <VHMUM(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: RV-A Nose gear AD |
For 2 seaters only
----- Original Message -----
From: DejaVu
To: RV10
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 3:57 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Fw: RV-A Nose gear AD
FYI.
Anh
N591VU-105hrs
------------------
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 8:52 PM
Subject: [Mid-AtlRVwing] RV-A Nose gear AD
There is a Mandatory Service Bulletin 07-11-09 for all Tricycle Gear
RV,s. Check Van's site.
Turtle
__._,_.___
Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic
Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Members | Calendar
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch
format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Visit Your
Group
Y! Sports for TV
Access it for free
Get Fantasy Sports
stats on your TV.
Yahoo! Finance
It's Now Personal
Guides, news,
advice & more.
Need traffic?
Drive customers
With search ads
on Yahoo!
.
__,_._,___
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Check oil door - top cowel - Hartwell flush clips |
| From: | "AirMike" <Mikeabel(at)Pacbell.net> |
I mounted my (one) Hartwell clip on the oil door. Looking at it two could be better.
I got a little upward bowing from riveting on the clip. It fits great except
that the ends flare up a bit (not desirable for holding the air in the cowl).
I must admit that I do like the totally flush look on the cowling rather
than those two icky fasteners. Also the Hartwell clips are stone simple and tough
as nails. They weigh about 40 grams each
I figured that I can put a z-strip over the clip and straighten out the bow in
the door. This would add nominal weight. and then do the epoxy glass bit
--------
OSH '08 or Bust
Q/B Kit - Doors/windows/fiberglass stuff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146096#146096
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Tech Councelor - when is the right time |
| From: | "AirMike" <Mikeabel(at)Pacbell.net> |
I am a first time builder. I have done quite a bit of work on my Q/B fuse kit.
I got my empenage approved by a T/C. When is another visit appropriate?
--------
OSH '08 or Bust
Q/B Kit - Doors/windows/fiberglass stuff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146097#146097
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Value of the List... |
If you look forward to checking your List email everyday (and a lot of you have
written to say that you do!), then you're probably getting at least 0 or 0 worth
of Entertainment from the Lists each year. You'd pay twice that for a subscription
to some lame magazine or even a dinner out. Isn't the List worth at least
that much to you? Wouldn't it be great if you could pay that amount and get
a well-managed media source free of advertising, SPAM, and viruses? Come to
think of it, you do... :-)
Won't you please take a minute to make your Contribution today and support the
Lists?
Contribution Page:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Again, I want to say THANK YOU to everyone that has made a Contribution thus far
during this year's List Fund Raiser!! These Lists are made possible exclusively
through YOUR generosity!!
Thank you for your support!
Matt Dralle
Email List Admin.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Patrick ONeill" <poneill(at)irealms.com> |
| Subject: | Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit |
Thanks Bill. That's great info for the alignment. It is also great to
hear
some results from the compass observations.
With the AHRS mounted so far aft of the lateral axis, are there any
artifacts in the attitude indication? It sounds like no, but that was
something I always wondered about.
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 Bill
DeRouchey
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 5:48 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
Two successful Xbow 420 installations:
Since the Xbow 420 incorporates orientation sensors and a three axis
magnetometer we located the unit close to the origin of all three axis
as
practical but moved outside the hard iron magnetic fields.
We constructed a flat plate approx .125 thick and installed it where the
rear seat shoulder harness cable is bolted to the upper longeron. It
spans
the fuselage width wise and we relocated the seat belt cable to the
front
lip of this plate. Used the same three holes on each side that was
originally for the shoulder harness anchor. Also over engineered it with
an
.063 Tee running laterally to stiffen any up and down vibrations. The
NAV420
is on the top and centered laterally.
I measured the magnetic fields around the elevator trim motor and the
elevator trim motor/battery and they will interfere with a compass 24"
away.
Do not underestimate the field around the small elevator trim motor - it
is
significant.
This location was outside both fore and aft magnetic fields and has a
significant advantage. If the plate is flat on the longeron and at right
angles to the yaw centerline it will automatically have two axis
perfectly
aligned. Simply run a string from front center to the tail center to
form
the yaw axis and center the NAV420 on this string to align the third
axis.
No installation correction was needed for either RV-10 with this
approach.
Do not even think of locating a magnetometer anywhere near the baggage
compartment. The magnetic interference can easily be significant and
uncontrollable.
Sorry I do not have a picture.
Bill DeRouchey
N939SB, flying
Patrick Thyssen wrote:
Here is my mount for the 420 ahrs.
I can build a shelf on the four posts if I need to get it 6 inchs higher
away from battery and servo. I'm a good 20 " away now. Will try to demag
the
cable if not see about stainless.
Pat Thyssen
"Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" wrote:
That nice gold finish is PPG Armor Grip. I think it is 900 and
901.
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 Patrick
ONeill
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 1:10 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
Thanks much for the pictures Ray! That helps a lot.
Unfortunately, I don't think I can use that as the AHRS station. The
xbow
NAV 420 has an integrated 3-axis magnetometer. I can imagine the grief
trying to situate it 6 inches from a main battery wire. So it's back to
the
shelf plan for me.
But that might be another useful station for something else. I'll have
to
keep that bracket in mind for the future.
By the way, how are you prepping the inside of the tail cone surfaces?
Is
that all just alodine? Looks great!
Anyone else currently flying with OP EFIS? Any location success stories
or
problems with the NAV 420 AHRS?
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: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:01 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
I was working with Garmin here in Olathe on this bracket and
testing
it using my RV-10. Here are all the pictures I provided to Garmin
during
this process. Van's actually created the bracket with the feedback that
was
provided my Scott (Garmin) and myself.
By the way, I don't have either AHRS, but this bracket still
makes
an excellent support for a 1" x 8" board when you need to crawl back
into
the tail. We are still working on the bracket for the Magnometer,
problem
is finding a good location that is free of magnetic interference to the
standards which Garmin has set for the Certified installations.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick
ONeill
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:08 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
I just noticed that Van's is offering an AHRS mounting kit for the 10:
AHRS Mount Kit for the RV-10
Part Number = IF AHRS MOUNT-10
Description
Mount for Attitude Heading Reference System unit.
Provides parts to mount the AHRS unit for either the Garmin G900XT or
the
Grand Rapids EFIS. Locates unit behind baggage bulkhead on RV-7, RV-9,
and
RV-10.
Has anyone received one of these or better yet, any photos? I'm not
getting
a clear picture of what it entails from
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Tech Councelor - when is the right time |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com> |
Hi Mike,
There is not a hard and fast rule about when the inspections need to be
done, but in general, before a section is closed up, an inspection is
probably appropriate. It was good for you to have the empennage
inspected since most of the skills required to build the airplane are
developed in that section.
Since you are building a Q/B, most of the structural work has been done
at the factory. I would have the T/C look at it when you've got most of
the systems work done (fuel system, electrical system, etc.) to make
sure you haven't created a dangerous situation with potential for
chafing fuel lines or electrical wires, etc. I've just finished the
empennage kit myself and have not yet gotten into the wing or fuselage
so I don't know exactly when in the sequence you get into the systems
work - it may be that comes in the finishing kit.
It doesn't hurt to have more than three inspections during the course of
the project,so I would recommend having the T/C look at your fuselage
when you have the fiberglass work completed, particularly if your T/C
knows something about fiberglass. I'm a T/C for our chapter, but my
expertise is more in woodwork, welding and fabric work, with some
experience in sheet metal (more being gained daily). This is my first
all metal airplane and I know next to nothing about fiberglass. Bear in
mind that very few T/C's are thoroughly knowledgeable about all aspects
of aircraft construction, so be sure to ask if yours has the knowledge
to really give you help on specific areas.
Jack Phillips
#40610
Empennage Tip Fairings
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of AirMike
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 2:38 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Tech Councelor - when is the right time
I am a first time builder. I have done quite a bit of work on my Q/B
fuse kit. I got my empenage approved by a T/C. When is another visit
appropriate?
--------
OSH '08 or Bust
Q/B Kit - Doors/windows/fiberglass stuff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146097#146097
_________________________________________________
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify
the sender
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - Norsk
- Portuguese
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gary" <speckter(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Tech Councelor - when is the right time |
I tell folks, when you think about whether to have an inspection or not it
is time. Heck it is always a good time to talk airplanes with another nut,
co call your tech councilor and have a good time.
Gary
40274
The fuselage went to the paint shop yesterday
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Phillips, Jack
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 7:52 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Tech Councelor - when is the right time
Hi Mike,
There is not a hard and fast rule about when the inspections need to be
done, but in general, before a section is closed up, an inspection is
probably appropriate. It was good for you to have the empennage
inspected since most of the skills required to build the airplane are
developed in that section.
Since you are building a Q/B, most of the structural work has been done
at the factory. I would have the T/C look at it when you've got most of
the systems work done (fuel system, electrical system, etc.) to make
sure you haven't created a dangerous situation with potential for
chafing fuel lines or electrical wires, etc. I've just finished the
empennage kit myself and have not yet gotten into the wing or fuselage
so I don't know exactly when in the sequence you get into the systems
work - it may be that comes in the finishing kit.
It doesn't hurt to have more than three inspections during the course of
the project,so I would recommend having the T/C look at your fuselage
when you have the fiberglass work completed, particularly if your T/C
knows something about fiberglass. I'm a T/C for our chapter, but my
expertise is more in woodwork, welding and fabric work, with some
experience in sheet metal (more being gained daily). This is my first
all metal airplane and I know next to nothing about fiberglass. Bear in
mind that very few T/C's are thoroughly knowledgeable about all aspects
of aircraft construction, so be sure to ask if yours has the knowledge
to really give you help on specific areas.
Jack Phillips
#40610
Empennage Tip Fairings
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of AirMike
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 2:38 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Tech Councelor - when is the right time
I am a first time builder. I have done quite a bit of work on my Q/B
fuse kit. I got my empenage approved by a T/C. When is another visit
appropriate?
--------
OSH '08 or Bust
Q/B Kit - Doors/windows/fiberglass stuff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146097#146097
_________________________________________________
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands -
Norsk - Portuguese
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MauleDriver <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tech Councelor - when is the right time |
I've been installing systems (wiring, brakes, fuel, control system,
strobe power) in the QB fuse for a few months. I plan for a formal TC
inspection before closing and riveting the baggage floor in place.
In watching my TC, he'll come by any time to advise but a formal
inspection involves paperwork and a thorough inspection.
Bill "finishing Andair valve, moving to control system" Watson
40605
Durham NC
AirMike wrote:
>
> I am a first time builder. I have done quite a bit of work on my Q/B fuse kit.
I got my empenage approved by a T/C. When is another visit appropriate?
>
> --------
> OSH '08 or Bust
> Q/B Kit - Doors/windows/fiberglass stuff
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146097#146097
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <jim(at)CombsFive.Com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: RV-A Nose gear AD |
The AD only applies to 2 seat versions of RV's
===========================================================
From: "DejaVu" <wvu(at)ameritel.net>
Date: 2007/11/14 Wed PM 11:57:27 EST
Subject: RV10-List: Fw: RV-A Nose gear AD
FYI.
Anh
N591VU-105hrs
------------------
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 8:52 PM
Subject: [Mid-AtlRVwing] RV-A Nose gear AD
There is a Mandatory Service Bulletin 07-11-09 for all Tricycle Gear
RV,s. Check Van's site.
Turtle
__._,_.___
Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic
Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Members | Calendar
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Visit Your Group
Y! Sports for TV
Access it for free
Get Fantasy Sports
stats on your TV.
Yahoo! Finance
It's Now Personal
Guides, news,
advice & more.
Need traffic?
Drive customers
With search ads
on Yahoo!
.
__,_._,___
===========================================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gary" <speckter(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | : RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods |
Could you also design a time out feature in this circuit to eliminate the
runaway problem?
Gary
40274
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Curtis
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods
When this was last discussed, a few folks ask me for resistor values. I did
a rough calculation and determined that about a 10 ohm resistor would be
required to get it down to ~7 volts (assuming .6 amp draw) but that resistor
would have to be quite large to dissipate nearly 3 watts.
I redesigned the speed controller by using the ubiquitous 780x power
regulator instead. In this case a 7806 regulates the input voltage down to
6 volts for up to 1 amp. The speed controller is activated by a switch on
the flap torque tube where ,when the flaps are up, power to the trim motor
is via the 7806 power regulator, any other flap position and trim motor runs
at full speed. Much more efficient and elegant compared to a resistor.
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/90Electrical/RV10PitchTrim.pdf
I encourage your development of products for the RV-10 and I think your trim
controller is an excellent product. However, we all have the tendency to
implement the "gold plated" solution when the more effective stainless steel
would do.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
>
> I'd like to share some insights into the engineering design considerations
> regarding speed control circuits for DC motors. (the
> Ray-Allen style trim servo uses a brushed DC motor)
> I would discourage the use of a resistor type speed control for adjusting
> the travel speed on the trim servos used in our RV aircraft for the
> following reasons:
>
> Adding a series resistor to the trim motor limits the available current
to
> the motor and although it will slow the motor down it also limits the
> available motor torque (i.e.. its ability to move the attached control
> surface). This could be undesirable as the loading on the control
surface
> will vary with aircraft configuration and performance. Although you may
> "tune" the resistor combination to work in one flight regime it may not be
> what you need in another. Now perhaps there is a suitable compromise
> value you may find "works" for your plane, but have you tested it thru
> temperature, airspeed and aircraft loading extremes? The fundamental
> problem is that series resistor forms a voltage divider with the attached
> motor, as you load the motor down, its impedance drops, this means that
> more of the voltage available from the aircraft bus will be dropped across
> the resistor and less will be available for the motor as you load it down.
> This effectively makes this method susceptible to problems over full
> operating range of loads and supply voltages. Again, you may be able
find
> a "suitable" value that seems to work, but be careful to test over a wide
> range of conditions.
> A second, more long term problem associated with this method of speed
> control has to do with motor life. A brushed DC motor can develop a
> condition which will dramatically shorten its operating life if it is
speed
> controlled by reducing the available current available to the motor.
The
> phenomena is most prevalent in motors that are used for short durations or
> intermittent duty. The condition that is likely to develop is that the
> dust from the motor brushes will pack the slots of the motor's commutator.
> This dust is a combination of conductive particles (carbon from the
brushes)
> and any oil from the motor bearings. This substance is like a conductive
> paste and it gets wedged into the spaces between the commutator bars.
The
> paste effectively shorts out the motor over time. Normally, when the
motor
> is run at its designed voltage or when it controlled by reducing the
> available motor voltage, there is plenty of current available to burn off
> this conductive paste, and the motor lasts its full rated life.
However,
> if the motor is speed controlled by limiting the available current (eg.
> using a series resistor dropper circuit) the ability to burn off this
brush
> paste is greatly compromised. The brush pasted remains packed in the
> commutator and the motor effectively gets shorted out and stops moving.
> This usually is noticed when the motor is turned on, and the brush paste
> just cannot be cleared. The motor is then done. I've seen this
effect
> ruin dc motors within a dozen accumulated run hours.
>
> In the DC motor industry the accepted method of speed control for
> brushed DC motors is to reduce the motor voltage without limiting the
> available motor current. This is done by a number of methods which
include
> linear regulators, high frequency switching regulators or direct PWM
(pulse
> width modulation) to name a few. All of these techniques can reduce the
> average voltage to the motor without limiting the available motor current.
>
>
>
> Sorry for the long post, but sometimes the engineering that goes to
what
> seems to be relatively simple can have significant consequences.
>
>
> Bob Newman
> TCW Technologies
> www.tcwtech.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill DeRouchey <billderou(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit |
Absolutely not. In fact, I have not observed any negatives with my installation.
It could be because the XBOW NAV420 is an excellent gyro. It has published specifications
and each gyro is individually calibrated for the small difference
in sensors.
To finish off the installation - secure the gyro with brass bolts, washers, and
nuts. Tuck the GPS antenna underneath the vertical stablizer to fuselage fairing
as far forward as possible and centered on the vertical stab to minimize
the shadowing effect of the stab. My glass panel has a status that shows the
loss of this GPS signal and I have never lost coverage while flying.
Bill
Patrick ONeill wrote:
Thanks Bill. That's great info for the alignment. It is also great to hear
some results from the compass observations.
With the AHRS mounted so far aft of the lateral axis, are there any artifacts
in the attitude indication? It sounds like no, but that was something I always
wondered about.
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 Bill DeRouchey
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 5:48 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
Two successful Xbow 420 installations:
Since the Xbow 420 incorporates orientation sensors and a three axis magnetometer
we located the unit close to the origin of all three axis as practical but
moved outside the hard iron magnetic fields.
We constructed a flat plate approx .125 thick and installed it where the rear
seat shoulder harness cable is bolted to the upper longeron. It spans the fuselage
width wise and we relocated the seat belt cable to the front lip of this
plate. Used the same three holes on each side that was originally for the shoulder
harness anchor. Also over engineered it with an .063 Tee running laterally
to stiffen any up and down vibrations. The NAV420 is on the top and centered
laterally.
I measured the magnetic fields around the elevator trim motor and the elevator
trim motor/battery and they will interfere with a compass 24" away. Do not underestimate
the field around the small elevator trim motor - it is significant.
This location was outside both fore and aft magnetic fields and has a significant
advantage. If the plate is flat on the longeron and at right angles to the
yaw centerline it will automatically have two axis perfectly aligned. Simply
run a string from front center to the tail center to form the yaw axis and center
the NAV420 on this string to align the third axis. No installation correction
was needed for either RV-10 with this approach.
Do not even think of locating a magnetometer anywhere near the baggage compartment.
The magnetic interference can easily be significant and uncontrollable.
Sorry I do not have a picture.
Bill DeRouchey
N939SB, flying
Patrick Thyssen wrote:
Here is my mount for the 420 ahrs.
I can build a shelf on the four posts if I need to get it 6 inchs higher away
from battery and servo. I'm a good 20 " away now. Will try to demag the cable
if not see about stainless.
Pat Thyssen
"Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" wrote:
That nice gold finish is PPG Armor Grip. I think it is 900 and
901.
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 Patrick
ONeill
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 1:10 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
Thanks much for the pictures Ray! That helps a lot.
Unfortunately, I don't think I can use that as the AHRS station. The
xbow
NAV 420 has an integrated 3-axis magnetometer. I can imagine the grief
trying to situate it 6 inches from a main battery wire. So it's back to
the
shelf plan for me.
But that might be another useful station for something else. I'll have
to
keep that bracket in mind for the future.
By the way, how are you prepping the inside of the tail cone surfaces?
Is
that all just alodine? Looks great!
Anyone else currently flying with OP EFIS? Any location success stories
or
problems with the NAV 420 AHRS?
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: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:01 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
<> <> <>
I was working with Garmin here in Olathe on this bracket and
testing
it using my RV-10. Here are all the pictures I provided to Garmin
during
this process. Van's actually created the bracket with the feedback that
was
provided my Scott (Garmin) and myself.
By the way, I don't have either AHRS, but this bracket still
makes
an excellent support for a 1" x 8" board when you need to crawl back
into
the tail. We are still working on the bracket for the Magnometer,
problem
is finding a good location that is free of magnetic interference to the
standards which Garmin has set for the Certified installations.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick
ONeill
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:08 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Vans RV-10 AHRS Mounting Kit
I just noticed that Van's is offering an AHRS mounting kit for the 10:
AHRS Mount Kit for the RV-10
Part Number = IF AHRS MOUNT-10
Description
Mount for Attitude Heading Reference System unit.
Provides parts to mount the AHRS unit for either the Garmin G900XT or
the
Grand Rapids EFIS. Locates unit behind baggage bulkhead on RV-7, RV-9,
and
RV-10.
Has anyone received one of these or better yet, any photos? I'm not
getting
a clear picture of what it entails from
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: : RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods |
| From: | "sergiolov" <dd(at)vtesrl.it> |
I am going to use your circuit for my trim. However, seems that there is a mistake
in the wiring of the relays,that in this configuration shorts the +12 to ground,
unless there is something of which I am not aware.
Sergio
RV8 82041, flying
RV10, finish kit
wcurtis(at)nerv10.com wrote:
> When this was last discussed, a few folks ask me for resistor values. I did
a rough calculation and determined that about a 10 ohm resistor would be required
to get it down to ~7 volts (assuming .6 amp draw) but that resistor would
have to be quite large to dissipate nearly 3 watts.
>
> I redesigned the speed controller by using the ubiquitous 780x power regulator
instead. In this case a 7806 regulates the input voltage down to 6 volts for
up to 1 amp. The speed controller is activated by a switch on the flap torque
tube where ,when the flaps are up, power to the trim motor is via the 7806
power regulator, any other flap position and trim motor runs at full speed. Much
more efficient and elegant compared to a resistor.
>
> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/90Electrical/RV10PitchTrim.pdf
>
> I encourage your development of products for the RV-10 and I think your trim
controller is an excellent product. However, we all have the tendency to implement
the "gold plated" solution when the more effective stainless steel would
do.
>
> William
> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
>
> ------
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146263#146263
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob-tcw" <rnewman(at)tcwtech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: : RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods |
Don't forget to account for the heat-sinking of the linear regulator. If
your design assumtion is for 0.5 amps of current at 6 volts on the servo,
that leaves 8 volts across the regulator for a supply voltage of 14 volts.
The power dissipation in the regulator will be 8 x 0.5 = 4 watts. Also,
don't forget to handle raw electronic components such as voltage regulators
with proper static safe procautions. Avoid making walking wounded that are
likely to fail at the least timely moment. Good luck rolling your own.
-Bob Newman
www.tcwtech.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "sergiolov" <dd(at)vtesrl.it>
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 2:44 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods
>
> I am going to use your circuit for my trim. However, seems that there is a
> mistake in the wiring of the relays,that in this configuration shorts the
> +12 to ground, unless there is something of which I am not aware.
> Sergio
> RV8 82041, flying
> RV10, finish kit
>
>
> wcurtis(at)nerv10.com wrote:
>> When this was last discussed, a few folks ask me for resistor values. I
>> did a rough calculation and determined that about a 10 ohm resistor would
>> be required to get it down to ~7 volts (assuming .6 amp draw) but that
>> resistor would have to be quite large to dissipate nearly 3 watts.
>>
>> I redesigned the speed controller by using the ubiquitous 780x power
>> regulator instead. In this case a 7806 regulates the input voltage down
>> to 6 volts for up to 1 amp. The speed controller is activated by a
>> switch on the flap torque tube where ,when the flaps are up, power to the
>> trim motor is via the 7806 power regulator, any other flap position and
>> trim motor runs at full speed. Much more efficient and elegant compared
>> to a resistor.
>>
>> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/90Electrical/RV10PitchTrim.pdf
>>
>> I encourage your development of products for the RV-10 and I think your
>> trim controller is an excellent product. However, we all have the
>> tendency to implement the "gold plated" solution when the more effective
>> stainless steel would do.
>>
>> William
>> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
>>
>> ------
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146263#146263
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Marlow <sam(at)fr8dog.net> |
| Subject: | Wheel Fairing Air Access covers |
I've looked and looked on the web for these things. The little spring
assisted access door to put air in your tires, with wheel pants
installed. Does anybody remember the part #?
Thanks,
Sam Marlow
#40157 Flying now
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rv10builder <rv10builder(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Tech Councelor - when is the right time |
At first I can honestly say I was a little intimidated at the idea of a
tech counselor going over my project and offering constructive
criticism. In fact, just the opposite happened. I found that they
offer invaluable advise that has saved me time and money on my project!
I made countless decisions based upon their past experience. This was
especially important to me being a first time builder.
Find one (or two) and get them involved ASAP...you'll be glad you did.
(And a special thanks to my T.C.'s Mr. Cartwright and Mr. Masys for
their time!)
Brian Sutherland
Nashville, TN
Finishing!
http://www.mykitlog.com/rv10builder
AirMike wrote:
>
> I am a first time builder. I have done quite a bit of work on my Q/B fuse kit.
I got my empenage approved by a T/C. When is another visit appropriate?
>
> --------
> OSH '08 or Bust
> Q/B Kit - Doors/windows/fiberglass stuff
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146097#146097
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Extra Rivethead Door Handles |
| From: | "bcondrey" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com> |
I ordered a set of the door handles and latching pins but decided to go with flush
door handles. I will keep the pins but will let the door handles go for same
price I paid - $78 for the pair plus $5 to cover shipping. Just received
today and still in the wrapping as delivered from Rivethead. These are direct
replacements for the exterior handles that you fabricate on manual page 45-9.
http://www.rivethead-aero.com/rv10_005.htm
As others have said, his products are terrific it's just his lack of responsiveness/communications
coupled with a multi-month delay that's the problem. I wanted
the pins and decided to go ahead and take delivery of the handles too since
I was sure that somebody would want them.
Bob #40105
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146322#146322
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bruce Patton <bpattonsoa(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel Fairing Air Access covers |
I believe that Aircraft Spruce has them. They are fragile and will break. I recommend
steel hole plugs, at your hardware store. Paint up a few extra, they
can get lost.
Bruce
Sam Marlow wrote:
I've looked and looked on the web for these things. The little spring assisted
access door to put air in your tires, with wheel pants installed. Does anybody
remember the part #?
Thanks,
Sam Marlow
#40157 Flying now
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Extra Rivethead Door Handles |
| From: | "bcondrey" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com> |
That didn't take long! Handles are spoken for, but if you're interested let me
know just in case something falls through.
Bob
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146352#146352
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy Lervold" <randy(at)romeolima.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel Fairing Air Access covers |
I suspect you're describing these...
http://www.romeolima.com/RV3works/IdeasProducts/ideasproducts.htm#AccessD
oors
Randy Lervold
RV-3B, flying
----- Original Message -----
From: Sam Marlow
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 2:31 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Wheel Fairing Air Access covers
I've looked and looked on the web for these things. The little spring
assisted access door to put air in your tires, with wheel pants
installed. Does anybody remember the part #?
Thanks,
Sam Marlow
#40157 Flying now
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kilopapa(at)antelecom.net |
| Subject: | Re: : RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods |
Thanks for the informative and technical post. I like that.
Kevin
40494
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: "Bob-tcw" <rnewman(at)tcwtech.com>
Subject: Re: RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:28:24 -0500
rnewman(at)tcwtech.com>
>
>I'd like to share some insights into the engineering design
>considerations regarding speed control circuits for DC
>motors...........
>
>Bob Newman
>TCW Technologies
>www.tcwtech.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RV Pilot at Whiteman (WHP) |
| From: | "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com> |
I recall not too long ago there was a -10 builder based at Whiteman
(WHP).
I was hoping to speak with you regarding field specifics.
Robin
805-801-8550
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Marlow <sam(at)fr8dog.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel Fairing Air Access covers |
Thanks Randy, that's exactly what I was looking for! Nice website.
Randy Lervold wrote:
> I suspect you're describing these...
> http://www.romeolima.com/RV3works/IdeasProducts/ideasproducts.htm#AccessDoors
>
> Randy Lervold
> RV-3B, flying
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Sam Marlow
> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> *Sent:* Thursday, November 15, 2007 2:31 PM
> *Subject:* RV10-List: Wheel Fairing Air Access covers
>
> I've looked and looked on the web for these things. The little
> spring assisted access door to put air in your tires, with wheel
> pants installed. Does anybody remember the part #?
> Thanks,
> Sam Marlow
> #40157 Flying now
>
> *
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy Lervold" <randy(at)romeolima.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel Fairing Air Access covers |
Well, it's not an RV-10, in fact it's at the opposite end of the mission
profile spectrum, but I sure like it!
Those little doors are installed on the outside of the wheel pants, note
how you can't even see them?
Randy
www.rv-3.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Sam Marlow
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 4:56 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Wheel Fairing Air Access covers
Thanks Randy, that's exactly what I was looking for! Nice website.
Randy Lervold wrote:
I suspect you're describing these...
http://www.romeolima.com/RV3works/IdeasProducts/ideasproducts.htm#AccessD
oors
Randy Lervold
RV-3B, flying
----- Original Message -----
From: Sam Marlow
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 2:31 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Wheel Fairing Air Access covers
I've looked and looked on the web for these things. The little
spring assisted access door to put air in your tires, with wheel pants
installed. Does anybody remember the part #?
Thanks,
Sam Marlow
#40157 Flying now
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
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
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ontribution
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: : RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods |
| From: | "Keith Snyder" <kmitch51(at)earthlink.net> |
Hey William,
Looking at Mr. Newman's website it looks like he is just up the road from you.
Not far from me either.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146475#146475
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MauleDriver <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Flexible fuel lines from Andair to tanks |
To those that have done this, any advice? Any concerrns about minimum
bend radius needed to get from the tunnel out? From what I've read in
the archives, several people have done this but haven't found a lot of
detail on the fuel versus the brake lines. (There may be more to see
once Kitlog starts working again).
I was planning to run the aluminum lines but am having a real hard time
getting it in the fuselage after applying (2) 90deg bends. Curving it
doesn't seem to quite work. I can simply force it in by bending and
unbending but it gets scraped up.
So before ordering more tubing, I started to think that flexible lines
might be a good if more expensive solution. Aeroquip hoses seems to be
a popular choice.
Bill Watson
40605
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob-tcw" <rnewman(at)tcwtech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: : RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods |
Guys, your welcome to visit, I'd love to have fellow builders stop by.
Your welcome to check out the progress on my RV-10 (deep in the fuse) or
see a Safety-Trim in operation in my Glastar out at 1N9 , Queen City
Airport in Allentown PA.
just send me an email rnewman(at)tcwtech.com
Bob Newman
www.tcwtech.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Snyder" <kmitch51(at)earthlink.net>
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods
>
> Hey William,
> Looking at Mr. Newman's website it looks like he is just up the road from
> you. Not far from me either.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146475#146475
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Dunne" <acs(at)acspropeller.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Flexible fuel lines from Andair to tanks |
Hi Bill, have you got a decent tube bender? The one I bought from Spruce
looks after multiple tubing diameters and can bend 180 deg no problem and no
flat spots. I was so impressed, I started re-doing my lines just for the fun
of it.(not really)
John 40315
----- Original Message -----
From: "MauleDriver" <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2007 6:26 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Flexible fuel lines from Andair to tanks
>
> To those that have done this, any advice? Any concerrns about minimum
> bend radius needed to get from the tunnel out? From what I've read in the
> archives, several people have done this but haven't found a lot of detail
> on the fuel versus the brake lines. (There may be more to see once Kitlog
> starts working again).
>
> I was planning to run the aluminum lines but am having a real hard time
> getting it in the fuselage after applying (2) 90deg bends. Curving it
> doesn't seem to quite work. I can simply force it in by bending and
> unbending but it gets scraped up.
> So before ordering more tubing, I started to think that flexible lines
> might be a good if more expensive solution. Aeroquip hoses seems to be a
> popular choice.
>
> Bill Watson
> 40605
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: : RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods |
| From: | "William Curtis" <wcurtis(at)nerv10.com> |
Yeah, I was trying to make the drawing simpler so I flipped one of the relays and
then got it all mixed up. I've corrected it and updated the drawing at the
same link. For whoever asked about the timeout circuit, This would more complexity
than I would be comfortable putting together. For that you should probably
go with Bob's controller--or just make sure you have a pull able circuit
breaker on the panel for the Trim motor.
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/90Electrical/RV10PitchTrim.pdf
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
>
> I am going to use your circuit for my trim. However, seems that there is a mistake
in the wiring of the relays,that in this configuration shorts the +12 to
ground, unless there is something of which I am not aware.
> Sergio
> RV8 82041, flying
> RV10, finish kit
>
>
>
> wcurtis(at)nerv10.com wrote:
> > When this was last discussed, a few folks ask me for resistor values. I did
a rough calculation and determined that about a 10 ohm resistor would be required
to get it down to ~7 volts (assuming .6 amp draw) but that resistor would
have to be quite large to dissipate nearly 3 watts.
> >
> > I redesigned the speed controller by using the ubiquitous 780x power regulator
instead. In this case a 7806 regulates the input voltage down to 6 volts
for up to 1 amp. The speed controller is activated by a switch on the flap torque
tube where ,when the flaps are up, power to the trim motor is via the 7806
power regulator, any other flap position and trim motor runs at full speed.
Much more efficient and elegant compared to a resistor.
> >
> > http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/90Electrical/RV10PitchTrim.pdf
> >
> > I encourage your development of products for the RV-10 and I think your trim
controller is an excellent product. However, we all have the tendency to implement
the "gold plated" solution when the more effective stainless steel would
do.
> >
> > William
> > http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
> >
> > ------
>
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146263#146263
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Wheel Fairing Air Access covers |
| From: | "William Curtis" <wcurtis(at)nerv10.com> |
You mean these?
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/accessdoors.php
Spruce has them for ~$21.30 or you can call up B&B Aircraft supply. I got two
from them at OSH '07 for $7.50 each.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
> X-Rcpt-To:
>
> I've looked and looked on the web for these things. The little spring
> assisted access door to put air in your tires, with wheel pants
> installed. Does anybody remember the part #?
> Thanks,
> Sam Marlow
> #40157 Flying now
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flexible fuel lines from Andair to tanks |
Bill,
I used the flex lines, made them myself, they seek their own radius if you don't
force them out of the tunnel through the same route as the aluminum lines. I
can't see any reason not to use them, although there my be a bogey at my 6 coming
out of the sun to tell me otherwise (NATO name johncox) I terminated them
perfectly at the wing root, allows for flex at every area that may flex. I do
plan on applying a time change to them, just not sure what that is yet but I
suspect a minumum of every other or every third annual. Input for this is appreciated.
They are fairly inexpensive and easy to make once you know the correct
length. One real advanage is when using the andair, I could pull them togehter
and route the rear cabin heat scat right on by the side. Insulated of course.
Rick S.
40185
----- Original Message -----
From: "MauleDriver" <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 12:26:57 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RV10-List: Flexible fuel lines from Andair to tanks
To those that have done this, any advice? Any concerrns about minimum
bend radius needed to get from the tunnel out? From what I've read in
the archives, several people have done this but haven't found a lot of
detail on the fuel versus the brake lines. (There may be more to see
once Kitlog starts working again).
I was planning to run the aluminum lines but am having a real hard time
getting it in the fuselage after applying (2) 90deg bends. Curving it
doesn't seem to quite work. I can simply force it in by bending and
unbending but it gets scraped up.
So before ordering more tubing, I started to think that flexible lines
might be a good if more expensive solution. Aeroquip hoses seems to be
a popular choice.
Bill Watson
40605
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David McNeill" <dlm46007(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | wheel pants and leg fairings during flight test |
Have builders left the aluminium pieces on the nose and main wheels during
initial flight tests? How well do brake lines do when clamped in place
without fairings during testing?.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: : RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods |
| From: | "William Curtis" <wcurtis(at)nerv10.com> |
Bob,
Did you know my Cardinal was based at Queen City (1N9) up until the last week of
October. I just got a hangar at Quakertown. Very nice and reasonable. I was
on the waiting list at Queen City for the past year and a half. Queen City
is a nice utilititarian airport where folks just come, fly, then go home. I
never did get around to getting the permit to drive on the airport. Silly, you
can taxi your aircraft all around the airport but you have to take a test and
get a permit to drive your automobile on the airport grounds. Queen City is
nice but Quakertown is much more personable.
Did you get the note that Queen City was selected one of four airports in PA to
get an ADS-B ground station? Oh well, with the ADS-B, even if I'm not based
there, it's close enough to use as an alternate in lieu of Allentown (ABE) when
required. My old-old airport in NJ (47N) just got a new WAAS RNAV 25 approach
with an MDA down to 480-1. That's only 200 more feet than an ILS would get
you down. That plus the glidescope on RNAV(GPS) approaches and WAAS is WAA(s)
cool.
In the meantime, I'm busy building shelves in the hangar and changing the oil in
the Cardinal. Will have to come and visit you soon though.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
> Return-Path: Fri Nov 16 17:18:51 2007
>
>
> Guys, your welcome to visit, I'd love to have fellow builders stop by.
> Your welcome to check out the progress on my RV-10 (deep in the fuse) or
> see a Safety-Trim in operation in my Glastar out at 1N9 , Queen City
> Airport in Allentown PA.
>
> just send me an email rnewman(at)tcwtech.com
>
> Bob Newman
> www.tcwtech.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Keith Snyder" <kmitch51(at)earthlink.net>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 4:20 PM
> Subject: Re: RV10-List:Trim troubles and mods
>
>
> >
> > Hey William,
> > Looking at Mr. Newman's website it looks like he is just up the road from
> > you. Not far from me either.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=146475#146475
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MauleDriver <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flexible fuel lines from Andair to tanks |
Yes I do. I picked up one from Sears (Imperial 370FH) that works great
- 3 sizes, 180deg and anything else - no problem. I also have a cheapy
from Harbour Freight for 1/4" that works well too.
The problem I'm having is that I've managed to make 2 perfect 90deg
bends with perfect dimensions to get from the Andair fuel valve down to
the hole in the tunnel. But I can't fish the remaining straight part
thru the tunnel hole without curving and bending the section that is
supposed to be straight in the end.
John Dunne wrote:
>
> Hi Bill, have you got a decent tube bender? The one I bought from
> Spruce looks after multiple tubing diameters and can bend 180 deg no
> problem and no flat spots. I was so impressed, I started re-doing my
> lines just for the fun of it.(not really)
> John 40315
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "MauleDriver" <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com>
> To: "RV10-List Digest Server"
> Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2007 6:26 AM
> Subject: RV10-List: Flexible fuel lines from Andair to tanks
>
>
>>
>> To those that have done this, any advice? Any concerrns about
>> minimum bend radius needed to get from the tunnel out? From what
>> I've read in the archives, several people have done this but haven't
>> found a lot of detail on the fuel versus the brake lines. (There may
>> be more to see once Kitlog starts working again).
>>
>> I was planning to run the aluminum lines but am having a real hard
>> time getting it in the fuselage after applying (2) 90deg bends.
>> Curving it doesn't seem to quite work. I can simply force it in by
>> bending and unbending but it gets scraped up.
>> So before ordering more tubing, I started to think that flexible
>> lines might be a good if more expensive solution. Aeroquip hoses
>> seems to be a popular choice.
>>
>> Bill Watson
>> 40605
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flexible fuel lines from Andair to tanks |
A couple of points...
1) Regarding line changes, if I could have taken the time to get
the exact measurement, there were some great conductive (use conductive
if you use teflon) hoses that I could have used. The only problem
is the ends aren't D.I.Y. so you have to have them made for you.
That would at least give a nice long service life. The Aeroquip
should last a long time but I'll probably replace them before
5-10 years. Probably closer to the latter. They actually hold up
great to all forms of fuel.
2) Regarding insulation, on the trip down and back to Vegas we used
cabin heat a bunch, being in the 25F range a lot. Some may remember
that this year I wrapped the SCAT for rear heat with the same
silver firewall insulation, all the way back to the fuel valve.
Now that I got a good chance to use cabin heat I think I can say
that I'd recommend insulating that SCAT all the way back. I notice
a very big difference in the top of the tunnel temp between the
insulated part and the non-insulated around the spar and aft. The
seat frames even soak in lots of heat when you have the rear heat
turned on far. By just wrapping the SCAT, you should be able to keep
the heat in the SCAT and not put it into the tunnel. Now, this has
nothing to do with the old popular complaint of hot tunnels
with no heat turned on....something that I personally no longer
believe is an issue if the builder takes a few steps to prevent
problems.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
Rick Sked wrote:
>
> Bill,
>
> I used the flex lines, made them myself, they seek their own radius
> if you don't force them out of the tunnel through the same route as
> the aluminum lines. I can't see any reason not to use them, although
> there my be a bogey at my 6 coming out of the sun to tell me
> otherwise (NATO name johncox) I terminated them perfectly at the wing
> root, allows for flex at every area that may flex. I do plan on
> applying a time change to them, just not sure what that is yet but I
> suspect a minumum of every other or every third annual. Input for
> this is appreciated. They are fairly inexpensive and easy to make
> once you know the correct length. One real advanage is when using the
> andair, I could pull them togehter and route the rear cabin heat scat
> right on by the side. Insulated of course.
>
> Rick S. 40185 ----- Original Message ----- From: "MauleDriver"
> To: "RV10-List Digest Server"
> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 12:26:57 PM
> (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles Subject: RV10-List: Flexible fuel
> lines from Andair to tanks
>
>
> To those that have done this, any advice? Any concerrns about
> minimum bend radius needed to get from the tunnel out? From what
> I've read in the archives, several people have done this but haven't
> found a lot of detail on the fuel versus the brake lines. (There may
> be more to see once Kitlog starts working again).
>
> I was planning to run the aluminum lines but am having a real hard
> time getting it in the fuselage after applying (2) 90deg bends.
> Curving it doesn't seem to quite work. I can simply force it in by
> bending and unbending but it gets scraped up.
>
> So before ordering more tubing, I started to think that flexible
> lines might be a good if more expensive solution. Aeroquip hoses
> seems to be a popular choice.
>
> Bill Watson 40605
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DejaVu" <wvu(at)ameritel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wheel pants and leg fairings during flight test |
I left my aluminum pieces on without wheel pants. No ill effect. No ill ef
fect with the brake lines either. I used the tape per plans in three place
s to hold the brake lines against the gear legs.
Anh
N591VU-105hrs
----- Original Message -----
From: David McNeill
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 9:24 PM
Subject: RV10-List: wheel pants and leg fairings during flight test
Have builders left the aluminium pieces on the nose and main wheels durin
g initial flight tests? How well do brake lines do when clamped in place wi
thout fairings during testing?.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris Hukill" <cjhukill(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Fuel line bend radius |
I wasn't happy with the tight bends needed to get the fuel lines out of
the tunnel, nor did I want to use flex lines due to there service
lifespan. Instead I used 90 degree bulkhead fittings, going thru the
holes provided, but with .125 plates riveted over the holes, with the
proper size holes for the fitting. Makes a very nice looking transition.
Chris Hukill
winging it
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David McNeill" <dlm46007(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Fuel line bend radius |
like this?
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Hukill
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2007 5:31 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Fuel line bend radius
I wasn't happy with the tight bends needed to get the fuel lines out of the
tunnel, nor did I want to use flex lines due to there service lifespan.
Instead I used 90 degree bulkhead fittings, going thru the holes provided,
but with .125 plates riveted over the holes, with the proper size holes for
the fitting. Makes a very nice looking transition.
Chris Hukill
winging it
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Flexible fuel lines from Andair to tanks |
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
Rick, I am back in Cambridge doing some research at the MIT Aerospace
Library on another matter but I will try to use the rising East Sun to
sneak up on you.
Chris made a great point that flex lines have a hard date - time
expiration like fruit or produce they have to be replaced at set
intervals.
I liked the comment made at MIT that "A correct initial solution to a
problem is better than masking its existance with redundant systems".
Whether flex, braided, teflon coated or solid, they all have a minimum
bend radii called out in the AC43.13. I will try to post the clip on my
return to the Left Coast in 36 hours.
I am having an early Thansgiving with my son before having to work
Thursday so our paying passengers can have theirs.
John C
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of Rick Sked
Sent: Fri 11/16/2007 6:09 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Flexible fuel lines from Andair to tanks
Bill,
I used the flex lines, made them myself, they seek their own radius if
you don't force them out of the tunnel through the same route as the
aluminum lines. I can't see any reason not to use them, although there
my be a bogey at my 6 coming out of the sun to tell me otherwise (NATO
name johncox) I terminated them perfectly at the wing root, allows for
flex at every area that may flex. I do plan on applying a time change to
them, just not sure what that is yet but I suspect a minumum of every
other or every third annual. Input for this is appreciated. They are
fairly inexpensive and easy to make once you know the correct length.
One real advanage is when using the andair, I could pull them togehter
and route the rear cabin heat scat right on by the side. Insulated of
course.
Rick S.
40185
----- Original Message -----
From: "MauleDriver" <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 12:26:57 PM (GMT-0800)
America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RV10-List: Flexible fuel lines from Andair to tanks
To those that have done this, any advice? Any concerrns about minimum
bend radius needed to get from the tunnel out? From what I've read in
the archives, several people have done this but haven't found a lot of
detail on the fuel versus the brake lines. (There may be more to see
once Kitlog starts working again).
I was planning to run the aluminum lines but am having a real hard time
getting it in the fuselage after applying (2) 90deg bends. Curving it
doesn't seem to quite work. I can simply force it in by bending and
unbending but it gets scraped up.
So before ordering more tubing, I started to think that flexible lines
might be a good if more expensive solution. Aeroquip hoses seems to be
a popular choice.
Bill Watson
40605
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Saylor" <Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com> |
| Subject: | wheel pants and leg fairings during flight test |
I used some silicone fusion tape to pad the gear legs and brake lines, then
just zip tied the lines to the legs top, mid, and bottom. They were fine
for 40 hours.
I did all the flight testing with the brackets on the mains but not on the
nose. The nose bracket is kind of more natural in the fairing
anyway--that's were it will be when you install it on the fork.
Tim's extensions hung in the breeze too.
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 David McNeill
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 6:24 PM
Subject: RV10-List: wheel pants and leg fairings during flight test
Have builders left the aluminium pieces on the nose and main wheels during
initial flight tests? How well do brake lines do when clamped in place
without fairings during testing?.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fuel line bend radius |
| From: | "William Curtis" <wcurtis(at)nerv10.com> |
Ditto. I did the same thing. I wished Vans would have made these holes 9/16 so
if you wanted to go this approach they would be unchanged and drill out to 3/4
for the standard installation. I made 1/16" oversized washers for both sides
to use the bulkhead fitting. I used a 45 degree bulkhead fitting however.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
>
> I wasn't happy with the tight bends needed to get the fuel lines out of the tunnel,
nor did I want to use flex lines due to there service lifespan. Instead
I used 90 degree bulkhead fittings, going thru the holes provided, but with .125
plates riveted over the holes, with the proper size holes for the fitting.
Makes a very nice looking transition.
> Chris Hukill
> winging it
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Please Make a Contribution to Support Your Lists... |
Just a reminder that November is the Annual List Fund Raiser. Please make a Contribution
today to support the continued operation and upgrade of these great
List services!! And pick up a really nice free gift with your qualifying Contribution
too!
The Contribution Site is fast and easy:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gary" <speckter(at)comcast.net> |
I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but do we
know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation, just curious
if any thing suspicious was found.
Gary
40274
Painting
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James Hein <n8vim(at)arrl.net> |
The only information I know of was posted by Jan Eggenfellner on the
Eggenfellner newsgroup on 11/9/2007:
Here is his words:
------------------
Until we know more about Dan and his accident we all agree that he was a
wonderful person and good pilot. Anything else is speculation and I
will not have it. I will offer the little that I do know however. So
far the only news are from the video where the engine was described as
running and the airplane in a slight banked turn. I also know that an
aileron trim was worked on to make the airplane fly straight along with
moving the batteries from the aft part of the airplane, to the front
tunnell area, the night before. This flight was suposed to be the test
flight to confirm the workings of the changes made the night before,
prior to flying with more people onboard. I have not yet been contacted
by the FAA or NTSB regarding any possible engine issue.
I have had requests from some that feel we should delete Dan from our
web pages. Not at all in agreement with this and would actually like to
selebrate his life, smiles and happy personality for all to
see. However, this is just my opinion and I will remove some pictures.
Jan
---------------------
gary wrote:
>
>I know the NTSB takes a year to publish a cause for accidents, but do we
>know any info about Dan's. I am not looking for speculation, just curious
>if any thing suspicious was found.
>
>Gary
>40274
>Painting
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Upper gear leg fairing attach? |
| From: | "Chris Johnston" <CJohnston(at)popsound.com> |
hey all -
perhaps a dumb question. big surprise. can someone enlighten me as to
the method of attach of the upper gear leg fairing? The plans say screw
#6 1/2 SS SMS 3 places, and AN509-8R8 K1000-08 AN426AD3-3.5 (1place). I
found stainless screws in the kit, but i'm thinking they're not the
right ones. and what about nutplates for those 3 places? I don't get
it. I thought that this must've confounded others, but a search of the
archives didn't turn up anything. when i look inside the aircraft where
these screws are supposed to go, it's not immediately apparent to me how
it goes together. Are these "SMS" screws special? does "SMS" stand for
"Super Magic Screw"?
one additional question... does anyone think it would be a problem to do
the upper gear leg intersections later, and with weight on the wheels?
the fairings sent to me by Vans for this area more closely resemble
lasagna noodles than fairings, and i thought i might buy new ones from
Fairings Etc. The problem is, that would take more time, and I'm trying
to get these #@$!%!! fairings done so i can hang the engine! I kind of
feel like I'm eating all my broccoli so I can get dessert. thoughts?
cj
(currently doing fairings - so call me Sandy)
#40410
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: N289DT Accident |
| From: | Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net> |
RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote:
>I suggest this because there are several other people out there looking at installing
an alternative engine and we can't deny the fact that the install of an
alternative engine in this case probably had a contributing factor.
Hi Michael,
Not to quibble too much, but until we have actual evidence it is
completely unreasonable to assume the installation of an alternative
engine had any contributing factor. For all we know it could be as
simple as a screwdriver got caught in the aileron controls.
I mean no offense, but in my opinion your statement above crosses
completely into the speculation and WAG zone.
Perhaps Tim is right, and we should wait for the NTSB preliminary
report. We all want to find out what happened, but it is all too easy
to start "suggesting" the direction the finger should point when we
don't have any data and aren't directly involved in the investigation.
-Dj
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Saylor" <Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com> |
| Subject: | baggage area tie downs |
Jay,
Can you send me a shipping address?
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Rowe
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: baggage area tie downs
Dave: Please send me a set of four tiedowns. Tell me the total $ including
shipping and I'll get a check in the mail. Jay Rowe #40301.
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave <mailto:Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com> Saylor
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 3:26 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: baggage area tie downs
Here are some picture of tiedowns I made out of hinge material. We're
getting ready to make these available for sale--they should be on the
website in a few days. Price will be $49 for a set of 4. I've had 72#
strapped down for all my phase one so far and they're working great. The
return on the movable side is to keep it up above carpet level.
Let me know if you need a set. We'll have a couple other RV-10 specific
products online soon.
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 David McNeill
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 11:08 AM
Subject: RV10-List: baggage area tie downs
Anyone placed anchor points in the baggage area to secure the tool box,
suitcases, etc? photos?
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com
/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
_____
Free Release Date: 10/28/2007 1:58 PM
<http://promos.hotbar.com/promos/promodll.dll?RunPromo&El=&SG=&RAND=21098&pa
rtner=seekmo> Upgrade Your Email - Click here!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Leg fairing hinges? |
| From: | "Chris Johnston" <CJohnston(at)popsound.com> |
hey all -
question #3 for the day... The finishing plans are a bit light on the
detail, and when it specifies the hinges for the leg fairings, for the
main gear, it doesn't give a part number at all, and for the nose leg
fairing, it says "hinge .063". I was getting ready to use a regular ole
aluminum hinge (like everywhere else) but i noticed the steel hinges
have that part number on the sticker. i thought those were only for the
cowl. so, anyone care to enlighten me as to which hinges are supposed
to be used for the leg fairings? also, is the nosewheel fairing the
same as the main leg fairings? sheesh. i need some help here...
thanks
cj
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of Chris Johnston
Sent: Sun 11/18/2007 9:03 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Upper gear leg fairing attach?
hey all -
perhaps a dumb question. big surprise. can someone enlighten me as to
the method of attach of the upper gear leg fairing? The plans say screw
#6 1/2 SS SMS 3 places, and AN509-8R8 K1000-08 AN426AD3-3.5 (1place). I
found stainless screws in the kit, but i'm thinking they're not the
right ones. and what about nutplates for those 3 places? I don't get
it. I thought that this must've confounded others, but a search of the
archives didn't turn up anything. when i look inside the aircraft where
these screws are supposed to go, it's not immediately apparent to me how
it goes together. Are these "SMS" screws special? does "SMS" stand for
"Super Magic Screw"?
one additional question... does anyone think it would be a problem to do
the upper gear leg intersections later, and with weight on the wheels?
the fairings sent to me by Vans for this area more closely resemble
lasagna noodles than fairings, and i thought i might buy new ones from
Fairings Etc. The problem is, that would take more time, and I'm trying
to get these #@$!%!! fairings done so i can hang the engine! I kind of
feel like I'm eating all my broccoli so I can get dessert. thoughts?
cj
(currently doing fairings - so call me Sandy)
#40410
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Leffler" <rv(at)thelefflers.com> |
| Subject: | Tail Longeron bending |
Any secrets to bending the longeron easily?
I seem to be banging on it without any results. I'm assuming that I must
either start hitting with more force or get a heavier mallet.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Leffler" <rv(at)thelefflers.com> |
| Subject: | Tail Longeron bending |
The answer was obviously, just use a heavier mallet. I ran out a bought a
much larger rubber mallet and bending became a non-issue.
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Leffler
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 4:27 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Tail Longeron bending
Any secrets to bending the longeron easily?
I seem to be banging on it without any results. I'm assuming that I must
either start hitting with more force or get a heavier mallet.
__________ NOD32 2665 (20071117) Information __________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Patrick ONeill" <poneill(at)irealms.com> |
| Subject: | Tail Longeron bending |
Be sure to preload it. I was timid about bending it at first and the mallet
blows would slightly deflect the longeron but it would snap right back. If
you preload it well first(bend it in the desired direction of bend with your
free hand until it begins to strongly resist you), it bends very easily with
each tap. So much so that I could see the bend occur with each blow. Once
I figured out the preload amount, it was pretty easy to get the bend and
correct any over bend and 90 degree deflection in the angle.
Just make sure that you have the bend mark aligned precisely where it is
secured in the vise and it should go smoothly. If you go a little over, you
can bend it back without issue (but try to minimize the mount of bends so
you don't overstress the material.) Just follow the same procedure.
At first I was not looking forward to this step, but after doing it, it was
one of the easier and less problem prone tasks.
Best Regards,
Patrick #40715
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Leffler
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 1:27 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Tail Longeron bending
Any secrets to bending the longeron easily?
I seem to be banging on it without any results. I'm assuming that I must
either start hitting with more force or get a heavier mallet.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KiloPapa" <kilopapa(at)antelecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: N289DT Accident |
Let the investigators investigate. Trying to discuss possible causes in
this forum without accurate and reliable information or knowledge is
irresponsible. As suggested earlier, speculation and WAG's have no place
here (even though some will not likely stay away from it.)
Kevin
40494
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David McNeill" <dlm46007(at)cox.net> |
Certainly the list can wait for the NTSB report to take it apart but there
are several points worth mentioning that can be deduced by a check of the
public FAA records. The aircraft was DAR inspected 7/10/2007 and first flown
7/12/2007. Less than two weeks later the 40 hours of test period which are
usually restricted to the local area were flown "off" and the aircraft
arrived at OSH. This may seem a little John Cox but the reason for a test
period is "fly, analyze, fix and fly again". This does not seem to be
compatible with an aircraft display at OSH less than two weeks later.
The second point is that alternative engine installations require the same
amount of engineering analysis and design as certified ones. The builder
needs to have the engineering expertise (in which case he pays with his
time) or purchase the expertise (cash) or wing it (risk). I will not
speculate on the motives or actions of this builder but if a builder cannot
afford a Lycosaurus then he can't afford to do an alternate engine properly.
I recall when I was purchasing the tail kit that Mistral was offering me a
$5000 discount on the engine to bring an flying 10 to OSH the next year. We
just laughed, knowing the real costs. During my building partner's visit to
Switzerland he visited the factory; the engineers there indicated that they
could not fly for more than 30 minutes due to heat problems; yet the
peddlers were trying to sell an engine for me to 'engineer" into the 10.
Incidentally they are still trying to certify this engine in a long term
project with Embry Riddle. With alternative engines as it is with all of
aviation, "If you cannot afford the time and money to do it right , you
cannot afford to do it".
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: N289DT Accident |
Tim, My thanks to you for the time putting this post together. I'm one
of those that is getting 'close' to flying, and Dan's crash and death
hit me personally hard. I also have experienced and share Ron's comments
about the frustration, in the never ending 'final finishing stretch'.
But if there is a silver lining to this story, it is that it has helped
at least one builder (me) to adjust their attitude about completion, I
no longer have a 'date' target, (what's the use? I never meet any of
them anyway!) Instead, I have 73 items on a Word document, and I add 1
item for every 2 that I cross off. Someday there will be no more items
on the list, and then I'll begin another called 'items found during
testing of systems prior to 1st flight'.
The NTSB has historically paid less attention to the Experimental
segment of aviation, so we may never hear/know the 'cause'. But this
post reinforces that perhaps the best tool we have as builders/pilots is
Judgement. May we all use it wisely.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: N289DT Accident |
In a message dated 11/18/2007 6:34:15 PM Central Standard Time,
deemsdavis(at)cox.net writes:
The NTSB has historically paid less attention to the Experimental
segment of aviation, so we may never hear/know the 'cause'. But this
post reinforces that perhaps the best tool we have as builders/pilots is
Judgement. May we all use it wisely.
Deems while you feel this way about the NTSB and maybe the FAA who may
assist in the various investigation, from my research and working as a CAP Wing
Safety Officer, I can tell you that if you go to the NTSB files you'll find that
they investigate all accidents about equally...there are many Van's
accidents and incidents to read about. But not ultralight aircraft since they
are
not registered...that the key, if registered they must investigate.
When Aviation Consumer wrote an article concerning the accident rates of
experimentals, I did a secondary research of all Van's accidents and all Cirrus
accidents to compare experimentals best kit to GA best selling production
plane. Actually, Van's numbers were OK about equal to the accident rate/hrs as
Piper...far behind Cessna's and well a head of Cirrus...but at that time
Cirrus was somewhat newish and they'd had a lot of fatal accidents per hours
flown. Since that time Cirrus has gotten a new safety program and their hours
have steadily increased with better and safer flying hours.
Anyway I presented the data and my conclusions to AC, the sent a note back
saying basically Ok, Van's are good but we're talking about all experimental's
vs production aircraft. And they did not want to review the top one in each
category. I don't have my data currently, but as I remember the #1 reason
for a Van's accident was pilots running out of gas with often fatal results.
Cirrus's #1 reason...IFR flight into IMC and failure of pilot control but
hard to tell from reading NTSB reports whether a final report or from other
categories.
If you're in flying long enough, you'll lose some friends, I've lost several
this past year. But let's all do the best we can do building, flying and
supporting each other whether in a spam can or experimental.
P
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Lewis <Tim_Lewis(at)msm.umr.edu> |
| Subject: | Pullable 60 Amp Breaker |
Over the years I've looked without success for a pullable 60 Amp
breaker. The other day I noticed one in a friend's Glastar (an early
two-weeks-to-taxi pathfinder). I crawled under the panel, jotted down
the part number, and found several sources on the net. The part number
is 413-K14-LN2, made by ETA. I bought one from Pacific Coast Avionics
(part number "ETA-60". They have a 75 Amp version, too.
Use with caution, of course. Pulling the breaker when the alternator is
putting out significant current can ruin the alternator (V = L*di/dt, I
suppose).
--
Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA)
RV-6A N47TD -- 900 hrs
RV-10 #40059 under construction
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <jcarlton3(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: N289DT Accident |
Hi Tim,
If I could get access to your site I would appreciate it. You may have me on your
roster from the past couple of years but we have had a slowdown in construction
on our "10" project.
This accident with Dan has actually inspired me to get back to it and work even
harder at building a quality, safe aircraft. Anything I can glean from the proceedings
would be beneficial. I recall talking to Dan at various times and I
unfortunately regret not meeting up with him on a trip to Dana's in Kentucky as
we planned awhile back. Now I wish I had made more effort to get together for
that event. Maybe that would have changed events in life for us both.
Thanks for your excellent documentation and logs of construction and subsequent
flying of your "10". Invaluable...
Jim Carlton
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David McNeill" <dlm46007(at)cox.net> |
Just finished fitting the cowl; fits like a glove. Here are a couple of
tips.
the 1001N-L and -R should match the knuckles on the firewall and cowl
exactly per plan picture. Otherwise it is necessary to remove a portion of
the knuckles after the 1001Ns are riveted on. Then the center secured pin
arrangment will work.
the hinge pins on the bottom cowl hinges should be left longer and secure
with a clip at the center of the lower cowl attach bracket. Otherwise it
wil be dificult to remove the cowl pins until the exhaust cools.
the side hinge pins should be left long and bent around the forward end of
the cowl inlet and secured there (as in the Glastar). Otherwise the pin will
lack enough length to grab it and remove it..
drilling the side hinges can be accomplihed by Clecoing the forward center
together and clampling the sides together off the aircraft. This method was
used to drill the side hinges for the top cowl.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet holes |
Hi
A few weeks ago I posted a query regarding the edge clearance on the WD-1002
brackets that tie into the F1004 fuse channel and the firewall. After some
discussion with Van's I decided to install new parts and try again.
The source of my problem seemed to be the F1001B flange that contains a line
of pre drilled holes that pretty much determined where the rivets would go
in the WD-1002 flange. Attached is a picture of the flanges that I replaced.
To my mind, and in the opinion of others I respect, these edge clearances
were insufficient. Attached is a picture of the WD1002 brackets I removed &
replaced showing the rivet edge distances I initially achieved.
Fortunately my brother who runs a heavy maintenance crew of a regonial
airline visited this weekend and help resolve my issue. We ended up
fabricating a new F1001B flange but this time without a line of rivet holes.
We then aligned all the parts (the F1001B / WD1002 and F1040 channel)
clamped everything down and drew a new rivet line on the F1001B that would
give better overall edge clearances on the WD1002 flange. The end result was
edge clearances of 1.5 - 2D on all rivets (most were 2D). This was far
better than what was originally obtained. As a side benefit I learned a
great deal about bending AL and how to avoid stress cracks in bends etc.
I guess if I had to do this all over again, I would order the F1001B without
the pre-drilled rivet holes. That way I could achieve far better results
(now that I know what to do) right out of the gate.
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643 - Still singing the section 29 blues
_____
From: Les Kearney [mailto:kearney(at)shaw.ca]
Sent: October-27-07 10:16 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet holes
Hi Again
I have a follow-up question for builders who have / are going through the
forward fuse construction. After a couple of emails / calls to Vans, it
appears that a reduced edge clearance for the to upper flange rivets is
okay. Unfortunately the edge clearances that I have achieved are still
woefully inadequate (at least to me).
I have spent quite a bit of time trying sort out what the problem is with
the WD1002. It appears that the edge of the top flange runs very close to
the line of rivet holes in the F1001B flange. As a result it requires
considerable clamping to get any sort of edge clearance when match drilling.
This clamping in turn seems to cause a distortion the firewall as it causes
a twist in the WD1002 base. I have this problem in both my WD1002 weldments.
Fortunately, the WD1003 weldments seem okay and require only a *little*
clamping to get good edge distances.
I would be interested in finding out if other builders have had the same
problem and if so how did they handle it.
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643 - Frustrated in the fuse ..
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" <ddddsp1(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Trip report from Nellis Show |
Tim,
Curious about your flight plan to SLC from Valentine.........waypoints e
tc. Looking to go to Las Vegas in a few weeks...........what is the pr
eferred NORTH route like you took via SLC.
Dean
_____________________________________________________________
Click here to solve your love problems with the best love advice.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iiegICWW8QGZP1oBwrkdTQu
NOPldNp9mUqe5YCLSZ4JzzLGjC/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet holes |
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
Well done Les. And a tribute to my Heavy Check brethren coming to the
rescue for proper edge distance achievement. My others benefit by your
efforts.
John Cox (Formerly Heavy Check)
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 9:07 PM
Subject: FW: RV10-List: WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet
holes
Hi
A few weeks ago I posted a query regarding the edge clearance on the
WD-1002 brackets that tie into the F1004 fuse channel and the firewall.
After some discussion with Van's I decided to install new parts and try
again.
The source of my problem seemed to be the F1001B flange that contains a
line of pre drilled holes that pretty much determined where the rivets
would go in the WD-1002 flange. Attached is a picture of the flanges
that I replaced. To my mind, and in the opinion of others I respect,
these edge clearances were insufficient. Attached is a picture of the
WD1002 brackets I removed & replaced showing the rivet edge distances I
initially achieved.
Fortunately my brother who runs a heavy maintenance crew of a regonial
airline visited this weekend and help resolve my issue. We ended up
fabricating a new F1001B flange but this time without a line of rivet
holes. We then aligned all the parts (the F1001B / WD1002 and F1040
channel) clamped everything down and drew a new rivet line on the F1001B
that would give better overall edge clearances on the WD1002 flange. The
end result was edge clearances of 1.5 - 2D on all rivets (most were 2D).
This was far better than what was originally obtained. As a side benefit
I learned a great deal about bending AL and how to avoid stress cracks
in bends etc.
I guess if I had to do this all over again, I would order the F1001B
without the pre-drilled rivet holes. That way I could achieve far better
results (now that I know what to do) right out of the gate.
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643 - Still singing the section 29 blues
________________________________
From: Les Kearney [mailto:kearney(at)shaw.ca]
Sent: October-27-07 10:16 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet
holes
Hi Again
I have a follow-up question for builders who have / are going through
the forward fuse construction. After a couple of emails / calls to Vans,
it appears that a reduced edge clearance for the to upper flange rivets
is okay. Unfortunately the edge clearances that I have achieved are
still woefully inadequate (at least to me).
I have spent quite a bit of time trying sort out what the problem is
with the WD1002. It appears that the edge of the top flange runs very
close to the line of rivet holes in the F1001B flange. As a result it
requires considerable clamping to get any sort of edge clearance when
match drilling. This clamping in turn seems to cause a distortion the
firewall as it causes a twist in the WD1002 base. I have this problem in
both my WD1002 weldments. Fortunately, the WD1003 weldments seem okay
and require only a *little* clamping to get good edge distances.
I would be interested in finding out if other builders have had the same
problem and if so how did they handle it.
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643 - Frustrated in the fuse ..
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Trip report from Nellis Show |
That was actually pretty easy. Going to Valentine and over direct to
SLC (BTF) was pretty easy. The hard part was just going over
the mountain right at BTF. Just call approach as you get there
because there's no good way other than over the mountain in just the
right spot to do it without busting airspace. From SLC, it was a
very easy flight down to Bryce Canyon VOR, and then basically
direct Vegas. You'll fly down parallel to mountain ranges, so
you're right next to long lines of mountains, but you're scooting
along at comfortable altitudes (we used 10,500) and there isn't
anything big to get in your way. Really easy actually, although
had I just done it alone without knowing the land I probably
would have been paranoid a bit....not out of knowing I was in
mountains, but out of not knowing how simple that flight could
be.
I went KLUM to KVTN to Guernsey for a kiddie poop break, and then
direct BTF.
That North route is an hour shorter than the south for me, or more.
I couldn't do it on the way home because of a storm.
Tim
ddddsp1(at)juno.com wrote:
> Tim,
>
> Curious about your flight plan to SLC from Valentine.........waypoints
> etc. Looking to go to Las Vegas in a few weeks...........what is the
> preferred NORTH route like you took via SLC.
>
> Dean
>
>
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> Click here to solve your love problems with the best love advice.
> <http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2112/fc/Ioyw6iiegICWW8QGZP1oBwrkdTQuNOPldNp9mUqe5YCLSZ4JzzLGjC/>
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rene Felker" <rene(at)felker.com> |
| Subject: | Trip report from Nellis Show |
My preferred route from SLC (KOGD) to Vegas, you pick the airport, is FFU
(west of Provo)(go by it and not over it, it is on a mountain), Delta,
Milford, Mormon Mesa VOR and into Vegas.
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 Tim Olson
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 11:21 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Trip report from Nellis Show
That was actually pretty easy. Going to Valentine and over direct to
SLC (BTF) was pretty easy. The hard part was just going over
the mountain right at BTF. Just call approach as you get there
because there's no good way other than over the mountain in just the
right spot to do it without busting airspace. From SLC, it was a
very easy flight down to Bryce Canyon VOR, and then basically
direct Vegas. You'll fly down parallel to mountain ranges, so
you're right next to long lines of mountains, but you're scooting
along at comfortable altitudes (we used 10,500) and there isn't
anything big to get in your way. Really easy actually, although
had I just done it alone without knowing the land I probably
would have been paranoid a bit....not out of knowing I was in
mountains, but out of not knowing how simple that flight could
be.
I went KLUM to KVTN to Guernsey for a kiddie poop break, and then
direct BTF.
That North route is an hour shorter than the south for me, or more.
I couldn't do it on the way home because of a storm.
Tim
ddddsp1(at)juno.com wrote:
> Tim,
>
> Curious about your flight plan to SLC from Valentine.........waypoints
> etc. Looking to go to Las Vegas in a few weeks...........what is the
> preferred NORTH route like you took via SLC.
>
> Dean
>
>
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> Click here to solve your love problems with the best love advice.
>
<http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2112/fc/Ioyw6iiegICWW8QGZP1oBwrkdTQuNOP
ldNp9mUqe5YCLSZ4JzzLGjC/>
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Upper gear leg fairing attach? |
| From: | "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net> |
CJ,
I put 4 platenuts in instead of the sheet metal screws. It wasn't too hard.
The platenuts are pop-riveted in and work great. I put them exactly where the
plans dictate. The sheet metal screws are definitely easier and probably work
just as good since Van has them on his RV10's.
Zack
CJohnston(at)popsound.com wrote:
> hey all -
>
> perhaps a dumb question. big surprise. can someone enlighten me as to the method
of attach of the upper gear leg fairing? The plans say screw #6 1/2 SS
SMS 3 places, and AN509-8R8 K1000-08 AN426AD3-3.5 (1place). I found stainless
screws in the kit, but i'm thinking they're not the right ones. and what about
nutplates for those 3 places? I don't get it. I thought that this must've
confounded others, but a search of the archives didn't turn up anything. when
i look inside the aircraft where these screws are supposed to go, it's not immediately
apparent to me how it goes together. Are these "SMS" screws special?
does "SMS" stand for "Super Magic Screw"?
>
> one additional question... does anyone think it would be a problem to do the
upper gear leg intersections later, and with weight on the wheels? the fairings
sent to me by Vans for this area more closely resemble lasagna noodles than
fairings, and i thought i might buy new ones from Fairings Etc. The problem
is, that would take more time, and I'm trying to get these #@$!%!! fairings done
so i can hang the engine! I kind of feel like I'm eating all my broccoli so
I can get dessert. thoughts?
>
> cj
> (currently doing fairings - so call me Sandy)
> #40410
> www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
--------
RV8 #80125
RV10 # 40512
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=147080#147080
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rene Felker" <rene(at)felker.com> |
| Subject: | First Flight Plans |
I shared this with Tim last night, but think it is a good input for the
list. Over the past couple of months I have been putting a focused effort in
to complete and fly the project....to be airplane. I had training scheduled
with Alex in Oct but had to cancel because of work. But, it was a good
thing because I have yet to finish the project. Although I am close, there
is still work to be done....seems endless. Considering recent events, I
have decided to change my plan of attack and just focus on getting the
project through the DAR inspection, then once that is completed, schedule my
transition training....hey Scott are you giving transition training....then
do my first flight. That should take all the pressure off and allow me the
time I will need to continue on the interior and to calibrate and set up all
the electronic wonders I have on this plane.
Rene' Felker
N423CF
40322
801-721-6080
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: N289DT Accident |
| From: | "tintopranch" <mark_sutherland(at)yahoo.com> |
Tim, Thanks for taking the time to give us some background on the accident. I
have about 100 hours on my RV10 and this crash hit me hard. I am always looking
for ways to minimize the risk of flying and I have had my share of close calls
over the years of flying (1600 hrs). This kind of tragedy makes you take a
good hard look at yourself.
This reinforces what I believe is the way to long and successful pilot's life:
1) Take baby steps with your flying experience (example: do not go from a simple
certified plane to a complex experimental without proper training and experience)
2) Fix the little things, because in flight they can become an enormous distraction.
3) Take your time to do it right (ie. safe), because flying does not always give
you a second chance.
4) Do your homework, like this forum, manuals, etc.
5) Minimize you risk when you fly, never combine a new plane, new pilot, new
engine, IFR, night flying, etc. Pick one and work with it awhile until you feel
you can handle it in an emergence situation, then take on the next one.
Sometimes, I do not follow my own advice....this accident has made me much more
critical of myself.
--------
MARK SUTHERLAND
RV-10 40292
Flying since June 07
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=147109#147109
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KiloPapa" <kilopapa(at)antelecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: plexiglass bond to fiberglass |
Thanks for the follow-up report.
Kevin
40494
----- Original Message -----
From: "eagerlee" <eagerlee(at)comcast.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 7:54 PM
Subject: RV10-List: plexiglass bond to fiberglass
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet holes |
| From: | "William Curtis" <wcurtis(at)nerv10.com> |
I think Deems was the one that brought this to attention first. I remembered it
when I got to that point and rather than letting WD-1002 jsut sit under the
F1001B, I applied some outboard presure to the WD-1002 to make sure the required
edge clearance was achieved. I drilled the aft most hole first at a marked
edge clearance, inserted the cleco and then drilled the remaining holes.
Unfortunately I did not document this on my site.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
>
> Hi
>
>
>
> A few weeks ago I posted a query regarding the edge clearance on the WD-1002
> brackets that tie into the F1004 fuse channel and the firewall. After some
> discussion with Van's I decided to install new parts and try again.
>
>
>
> The source of my problem seemed to be the F1001B flange that contains a line
> of pre drilled holes that pretty much determined where the rivets would go
> in the WD-1002 flange. Attached is a picture of the flanges that I replaced.
> To my mind, and in the opinion of others I respect, these edge clearances
> were insufficient. Attached is a picture of the WD1002 brackets I removed &
> replaced showing the rivet edge distances I initially achieved.
>
>
>
> Fortunately my brother who runs a heavy maintenance crew of a regonial
> airline visited this weekend and help resolve my issue. We ended up
> fabricating a new F1001B flange but this time without a line of rivet holes.
> We then aligned all the parts (the F1001B / WD1002 and F1040 channel)
> clamped everything down and drew a new rivet line on the F1001B that would
> give better overall edge clearances on the WD1002 flange. The end result was
> edge clearances of 1.5 - 2D on all rivets (most were 2D). This was far
> better than what was originally obtained. As a side benefit I learned a
> great deal about bending AL and how to avoid stress cracks in bends etc.
>
>
>
> I guess if I had to do this all over again, I would order the F1001B without
> the pre-drilled rivet holes. That way I could achieve far better results
> (now that I know what to do) right out of the gate.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
> Les Kearney
>
> #40643 - Still singing the section 29 blues
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: Les Kearney [mailto:kearney(at)shaw.ca]
> Sent: October-27-07 10:16 PM
> To: 'rv10-list(at)matronics.com'
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet holes
>
>
>
> Hi Again
>
>
>
> I have a follow-up question for builders who have / are going through the
> forward fuse construction. After a couple of emails / calls to Vans, it
> appears that a reduced edge clearance for the to upper flange rivets is
> okay. Unfortunately the edge clearances that I have achieved are still
> woefully inadequate (at least to me).
>
>
>
> I have spent quite a bit of time trying sort out what the problem is with
> the WD1002. It appears that the edge of the top flange runs very close to
> the line of rivet holes in the F1001B flange. As a result it requires
> considerable clamping to get any sort of edge clearance when match drilling.
> This clamping in turn seems to cause a distortion the firewall as it causes
> a twist in the WD1002 base. I have this problem in both my WD1002 weldments.
> Fortunately, the WD1003 weldments seem okay and require only a *little*
> clamping to get good edge distances.
>
>
>
> I would be interested in finding out if other builders have had the same
> problem and if so how did they handle it.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
> Les Kearney
>
> #40643 - Frustrated in the fuse ..
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet holes |
William
I tried the approach you used and the end result was the edge distance on
the photos - not very good in my mind. As well, the heavy clamping caused a
noticeable deformation in the firewall which I was unhappy about. I was
afraid that there was too much stress on the base of the flange which could
crack sometime in the future.
I wanted the parts to sit more or less aligned with no more than finger
pressure being required to hold them in the desired position.
I may have been a bit anal about this, but the consensus of the people I
spoke to was that I needed a better solution.
Cheers
Les
#40643 - Still singing the section 29 blues
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Curtis
Sent: November-19-07 10:34 AM
Subject: re: FW: RV10-List: WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet
holes
I think Deems was the one that brought this to attention first. I
remembered it when I got to that point and rather than letting WD-1002 jsut
sit under the F1001B, I applied some outboard presure to the WD-1002 to make
sure the required edge clearance was achieved. I drilled the aft most hole
first at a marked edge clearance, inserted the cleco and then drilled the
remaining holes.
Unfortunately I did not document this on my site.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
>
> Hi
>
>
>
> A few weeks ago I posted a query regarding the edge clearance on the
WD-1002
> brackets that tie into the F1004 fuse channel and the firewall. After some
> discussion with Van's I decided to install new parts and try again.
>
>
>
> The source of my problem seemed to be the F1001B flange that contains a
line
> of pre drilled holes that pretty much determined where the rivets would go
> in the WD-1002 flange. Attached is a picture of the flanges that I
replaced.
> To my mind, and in the opinion of others I respect, these edge clearances
> were insufficient. Attached is a picture of the WD1002 brackets I removed
&
> replaced showing the rivet edge distances I initially achieved.
>
>
>
> Fortunately my brother who runs a heavy maintenance crew of a regonial
> airline visited this weekend and help resolve my issue. We ended up
> fabricating a new F1001B flange but this time without a line of rivet
holes.
> We then aligned all the parts (the F1001B / WD1002 and F1040 channel)
> clamped everything down and drew a new rivet line on the F1001B that would
> give better overall edge clearances on the WD1002 flange. The end result
was
> edge clearances of 1.5 - 2D on all rivets (most were 2D). This was far
> better than what was originally obtained. As a side benefit I learned a
> great deal about bending AL and how to avoid stress cracks in bends etc.
>
>
>
> I guess if I had to do this all over again, I would order the F1001B
without
> the pre-drilled rivet holes. That way I could achieve far better results
> (now that I know what to do) right out of the gate.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
> Les Kearney
>
> #40643 - Still singing the section 29 blues
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: Les Kearney [mailto:kearney(at)shaw.ca]
> Sent: October-27-07 10:16 PM
> To: 'rv10-list(at)matronics.com'
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: WD-1002 / F1001B / F1040 Fuse channel rivet holes
>
>
>
> Hi Again
>
>
>
> I have a follow-up question for builders who have / are going through the
> forward fuse construction. After a couple of emails / calls to Vans, it
> appears that a reduced edge clearance for the to upper flange rivets is
> okay. Unfortunately the edge clearances that I have achieved are still
> woefully inadequate (at least to me).
>
>
>
> I have spent quite a bit of time trying sort out what the problem is with
> the WD1002. It appears that the edge of the top flange runs very close to
> the line of rivet holes in the F1001B flange. As a result it requires
> considerable clamping to get any sort of edge clearance when match
drilling.
> This clamping in turn seems to cause a distortion the firewall as it
causes
> a twist in the WD1002 base. I have this problem in both my WD1002
weldments.
> Fortunately, the WD1003 weldments seem okay and require only a *little*
> clamping to get good edge distances.
>
>
>
> I would be interested in finding out if other builders have had the same
> problem and if so how did they handle it.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
> Les Kearney
>
> #40643 - Frustrated in the fuse ..
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jay Brinkmeyer <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Brake line fitting shown on page 36-2... |
My brake lines were completed a while back. Last week I reviewed the whole works
due to the hard line vs braided thread.
While viewing CJ's photos I noticed the AN837-4D fitting at the fuse exit point
as 45 degree angle. However, I used a "straight" through fitting as shown on
the figure on page 36-2. That page indeed calls out the same part number, but
the diagram shows the part as the straight through variety.
Checking the description on Vans website, AN837-4D is described as "45 deg elbow
bulkhead tube/tube". Checking page 47-07 in the plans shows the part as 45 degrees,
not straight through. I'm assuming the correct fitting is the 45 degree
part, right? Maybe it doesn't matter.
So page 36-2 has correct part number, but not correct diagram. Maybe Vans fixed
the plans after mine was printed?
Regards,
Jay
Get easy, one-click access to your favorites.
Make Yahoo! your homepage.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MauleDriver <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Brake line fitting shown on page 36-2... |
It is a slightly confusing drawing. I noticed the struggle in the
drawing with correctly portraying a 45 degree fitting in a roughly 45
degree isometric drawing. You can't tell whether it is 90 or 45 degrees.
I put the 45 degree part in based on the part list/web site documentation.
Jay Brinkmeyer wrote:
>
> My brake lines were completed a while back. Last week I reviewed the whole works
due to the hard line vs braided thread.
> While viewing CJ's photos I noticed the AN837-4D fitting at the fuse exit point
as 45 degree angle. However, I used a "straight" through fitting as shown on
the figure on page 36-2. That page indeed calls out the same part number, but
the diagram shows the part as the straight through variety.
>
> Checking the description on Vans website, AN837-4D is described as "45 deg elbow
bulkhead tube/tube". Checking page 47-07 in the plans shows the part as 45
degrees, not straight through. I'm assuming the correct fitting is the 45 degree
part, right? Maybe it doesn't matter.
>
> So page 36-2 has correct part number, but not correct diagram. Maybe Vans fixed
the plans after mine was printed?
>
> Regards,
> Jay
>
>
> Get easy, one-click access to your favorites.
> Make Yahoo! your homepage.
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David McNeill" <dlm46007(at)cox.net> |
That "required crew" may fly with the FAA but try it on the insurance
company. The flight will likely be without insurance. In investigating this
with my Glastar, our problem may not be with the FAA but with the insurance
carrier. More than one on board implied no insurance.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[
mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Curtis
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:02 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: First Flight Prep
John,
Without commenting on what Dan did or did not do, nothing in the regulation
prevents two people from being the "required crew" during Phase One.
As an RV builder YOU are the manufacturer so if YOU determine that you need
two sets of hand, eyeballs and feet to fully test your new creation, I see
nothing in the regulation that would prevent this. With some exaggeration,
what if Boeing wanted to have a few additional test engineers aboard a new
design to monitor instrumentation -- who are you or the FAA to say that they
can't. That is why the FAA leaves it up to the manufacturer to determine the
"required crew" during Phase One. That is not a limitation.
I wondered how long it would be before the finger pointing and name calling
began from this tragic event. Now we know where it starts.
William
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Curtis" <wcurtis(at)nerv10.com> |
David,
No insurance for whom? The extra pilot or ....?
As with so many things in aviation (and life in general), what is legal may not
necessarily be prudent. That being said, if someone can't cite a regulation
(after having time to research) then it is just their opinion and opinions without
facts is just noise.
Personally, I cannot think of any reason for two "required crew" members in an
RV-10. But just as IFR with two pilots is most ofter safer, if someone determined
that the aircraft of their own manufacturer requires an extra person to monitor
things during Phase On, I see nothing in the regulations to prevent this.
A few weeks ago I was perusing the NTSB reports and I came across this report:
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id 060522X00601&key=1
This aircraft was just out of Phase I. Maybe in this case it was that extra cremember
that didn't catch the oversight.
After I read that report, this picture immediately came to mind: http://www.matronics.com/forums/download.php?id=7337
I was just about to respond to the last question on the thread and then the N289DT
accident occurred.
I try not to judge, I just hope to learn from the mistakes of others.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
>
> That "required crew" may fly with the FAA but try it on the insurance
> company. The flight will likely be without insurance. In investigating this
> with my Glastar, our problem may not be with the FAA but with the insurance
> carrier. More than one on board implied no insurance.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
>
> [
> mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Curtis
>
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:02 PM
>
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: First Flight Prep
>
>
> John,
>
> Without commenting on what Dan did or did not do, nothing in the regulation
> prevents two people from being the "required crew" during Phase One.
>
> As an RV builder YOU are the manufacturer so if YOU determine that you need
> two sets of hand, eyeballs and feet to fully test your new creation, I see
>
> nothing in the regulation that would prevent this. With some exaggeration,
>
> what if Boeing wanted to have a few additional test engineers aboard a new
> design to monitor instrumentation -- who are you or the FAA to say that they
> can't. That is why the FAA leaves it up to the manufacturer to determine the
> "required crew" during Phase One. That is not a limitation.
>
> I wondered how long it would be before the finger pointing and name calling
> began from this tragic event. Now we know where it starts.
>
> William
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: N289DT Accident |
| From: | "John Kirkland" <jskirkland(at)webpipe.net> |
Well, I guess the Epistle of Tim explains why we haven't seen a preliminary NTSB
report yet, despite the fact that there are several accidents, some experimental,
that are already on the NTSB site that have occurred since Nov 2. The investigator
will have his hands full for some time. I haven't mentioned to my wife
yet that another builder has had a fatal accident, I don't even know how to
broach that subject. When we were deciding on building experimental vs buying
used type certificated, I took her around to see RV-7 and RV-9A projects under
construction. "See honey, it's just like a real plane....."
Thanks Tim, I think the Finance Committee will keep my project alive.
--------
RV-10 #40333
N540XP (reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=147279#147279
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David McNeill" <dlm46007(at)cox.net> |
no hull and no liability for the owner.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Curtis
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 6:46 PM
Subject: re: RV10-List: required crew
David,
No insurance for whom? The extra pilot or ....?
As with so many things in aviation (and life in general), what is legal may
not necessarily be prudent. That being said, if someone can't cite a
regulation (after having time to research) then it is just their opinion and
opinions without facts is just noise.
Personally, I cannot think of any reason for two "required crew" members in
an RV-10. But just as IFR with two pilots is most ofter safer, if someone
determined that the aircraft of their own manufacturer requires an extra
person to monitor things during Phase On, I see nothing in the regulations
to prevent this.
A few weeks ago I was perusing the NTSB reports and I came across this
report:
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id 060522X00601&key=1
This aircraft was just out of Phase I. Maybe in this case it was that extra
cremember that didn't catch the oversight.
After I read that report, this picture immediately came to mind:
http://www.matronics.com/forums/download.php?id=7337
I was just about to respond to the last question on the thread and then the
N289DT accident occurred.
I try not to judge, I just hope to learn from the mistakes of others.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
>
> That "required crew" may fly with the FAA but try it on the insurance
> company. The flight will likely be without insurance. In investigating
> this with my Glastar, our problem may not be with the FAA but with the
> insurance carrier. More than one on board implied no insurance.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
>
> [
> mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William
> Curtis
>
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:02 PM
>
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: First Flight Prep
>
>
> John,
>
> Without commenting on what Dan did or did not do, nothing in the
> regulation prevents two people from being the "required crew" during Phase
One.
>
> As an RV builder YOU are the manufacturer so if YOU determine that you
> need two sets of hand, eyeballs and feet to fully test your new
> creation, I see
>
> nothing in the regulation that would prevent this. With some
> exaggeration,
>
> what if Boeing wanted to have a few additional test engineers aboard a
> new design to monitor instrumentation -- who are you or the FAA to say
> that they can't. That is why the FAA leaves it up to the manufacturer
> to determine the "required crew" during Phase One. That is not a
limitation.
>
> I wondered how long it would be before the finger pointing and name
> calling began from this tragic event. Now we know where it starts.
>
> William
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tail Longeron bending |
| From: | "John Kirkland" <jskirkland(at)webpipe.net> |
An interesting thing I noticed when I did this was that when I laid the longeron
on the fuse skin to check the bend, I noticed the long straight part had a slight
bow in it, so I carefully took that out too. Laying it on a flat table or
bench with the fuse skin also lets you check it for twisting that might have
occurred when beating the bend in it. I also got to take out a little bit of
twist on one of mine.
--------
RV-10 #40333
N540XP (reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=147292#147292
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: required crew |
I know my insurance company specified this to me directly
when i obtained my insurance....only me in the plane or
the insurance was invalidated.
Tim
David McNeill wrote:
>
> no hull and no liability for the owner.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Curtis
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 6:46 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: re: RV10-List: required crew
>
>
> David,
>
> No insurance for whom? The extra pilot or ....?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com> |
I need a little help with the hinges on the doors.
On Page 45-06 figure two shows the left side door hinges. A close look
at the WD 1019 L and R show that they are not welded on square to their
hinge bracket. This effectively makes them "ramp up" towards the
center between the hinges. I installed the opposite right side with the
L hinge up front and the R hinge aft. It "looks like" it levels out the
WD 1019 hinges. Is this an optical illusion or is the correct
orientation ramped up and sloped up towards the middle?
Thanks in advance for the replies.
Fred Williams
40515
Top came off hopefully for the last time tonight.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Tail Longeron bending |
That's exactly how I remember it going, just when you get it to fit in
one axis, you check and the other is out, it took a series of back and
forth 'sessions' to get them to fit in both axis.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
John Kirkland wrote:
>
> An interesting thing I noticed when I did this was that when I laid the longeron
on the fuse skin to check the bend, I noticed the long straight part had a
slight bow in it, so I carefully took that out too. Laying it on a flat table
or bench with the fuse skin also lets you check it for twisting that might have
occurred when beating the bend in it. I also got to take out a little bit
of twist on one of mine.
>
> --------
> RV-10 #40333
> N540XP (reserved)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pascal" <rv10builder(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: required crew |
If there is a situation where the builder has a specific need for
additional crew in the aircraft during the fight test period, FAA
Advisory Circular AC 20-27E, CERTIFICATION AND OPERATION OF
AMATEUR-BUILT AIRCRAFT, offers the following advice:
"If an additional crew member is required for a particular test
function, that requirement should be specified in the application
program letter for the airworthiness certificate and listed in the
operating limitations by the FAA."
The FAA will review each application on a case-by-case basis, and may
allow additional crew if they feel there is sufficient justification.
EAA Position: We concur with the FAA that during all flight testing only
the test pilot is allowed in the aircraft. We have yet to see a
homebuilt aircraft that requires a co-pilot. If flight data needs to be
recorded, make use of a tape recorder or other recording device to
record flight data, e.g., airspeeds, engine instrument readings, etc.
----- Original Message -----
From: David McNeill
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:03 PM
Subject: RV10-List: required crew
That "required crew" may fly with the FAA but try it on the insurance
company. The flight will likely be without insurance. In investigating
this with my Glastar, our problem may not be with the FAA but with the
insurance carrier. More than one on board implied no insurance.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William
Curtis
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:02 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: First Flight Prep
John,
Without commenting on what Dan did or did not do, nothing in the
regulation prevents two people from being the "required crew" during
Phase One.
As an RV builder YOU are the manufacturer so if YOU determine that you
need two sets of hand, eyeballs and feet to fully test your new
creation, I see
nothing in the regulation that would prevent this. With some
exaggeration,
what if Boeing wanted to have a few additional test engineers aboard a
new design to monitor instrumentation -- who are you or the FAA to say
that they can't. That is why the FAA leaves it up to the manufacturer to
determine the "required crew" during Phase One. That is not a
limitation.
I wondered how long it would be before the finger pointing and name
calling began from this tragic event. Now we know where it starts.
William
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "B. Rig" <brucelas(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: N289DT Accident |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pascal" <rv10builder(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | EAA benefits and resources |
I meant to include that when in doubt utilize the EAA "homebuilders"
site (membership required) there is so much on every phase covered. from
planning to building to registering, to testing and flying.. not to
mention the Govt AC's, FAR and other great information.
When in doubt about something check here first.. you'll be glad your a
EAA member!
Pascal
----- Original Message -----
From: Pascal
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: required crew
If there is a situation where the builder has a specific need for
additional crew in the aircraft during the fight test period, FAA
Advisory Circular AC 20-27E, CERTIFICATION AND OPERATION OF
AMATEUR-BUILT AIRCRAFT, offers the following advice:
"If an additional crew member is required for a particular test
function, that requirement should be specified in the application
program letter for the airworthiness certificate and listed in the
operating limitations by the FAA."
The FAA will review each application on a case-by-case basis, and may
allow additional crew if they feel there is sufficient justification.
EAA Position: We concur with the FAA that during all flight testing
only the test pilot is allowed in the aircraft. We have yet to see a
homebuilt aircraft that requires a co-pilot. If flight data needs to be
recorded, make use of a tape recorder or other recording device to
record flight data, e.g., airspeeds, engine instrument readings, etc.
----- Original Message -----
From: David McNeill
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:03 PM
Subject: RV10-List: required crew
That "required crew" may fly with the FAA but try it on the
insurance company. The flight will likely be without insurance. In
investigating this with my Glastar, our problem may not be with the FAA
but with the insurance carrier. More than one on board implied no
insurance.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William
Curtis
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:02 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: First Flight Prep
John,
Without commenting on what Dan did or did not do, nothing in the
regulation prevents two people from being the "required crew" during
Phase One.
As an RV builder YOU are the manufacturer so if YOU determine that
you need two sets of hand, eyeballs and feet to fully test your new
creation, I see
nothing in the regulation that would prevent this. With some
exaggeration,
what if Boeing wanted to have a few additional test engineers aboard
a new design to monitor instrumentation -- who are you or the FAA to say
that they can't. That is why the FAA leaves it up to the manufacturer to
determine the "required crew" during Phase One. That is not a
limitation.
I wondered how long it would be before the finger pointing and name
calling began from this tragic event. Now we know where it starts.
William
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
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: | "Pascal" <rv10builder(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: EAA benefits and resources |
oy vay http://members.eaa.org/home/homebuilders
Pascal
----- Original Message -----
From: Pascal
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 8:09 PM
Subject: EAA benefits and resources
I meant to include that when in doubt utilize the EAA "homebuilders"
site (membership required) there is so much on every phase covered. from
planning to building to registering, to testing and flying.. not to
mention the Govt AC's, FAR and other great information.
When in doubt about something check here first.. you'll be glad your a
EAA member!
Pascal
----- Original Message -----
From: Pascal
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: required crew
If there is a situation where the builder has a specific need for
additional crew in the aircraft during the fight test period, FAA
Advisory Circular AC 20-27E, CERTIFICATION AND OPERATION OF
AMATEUR-BUILT AIRCRAFT, offers the following advice:
"If an additional crew member is required for a particular test
function, that requirement should be specified in the application
program letter for the airworthiness certificate and listed in the
operating limitations by the FAA."
The FAA will review each application on a case-by-case basis, and
may allow additional crew if they feel there is sufficient
justification.
EAA Position: We concur with the FAA that during all flight testing
only the test pilot is allowed in the aircraft. We have yet to see a
homebuilt aircraft that requires a co-pilot. If flight data needs to be
recorded, make use of a tape recorder or other recording device to
record flight data, e.g., airspeeds, engine instrument readings, etc.
----- Original Message -----
From: David McNeill
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:03 PM
Subject: RV10-List: required crew
That "required crew" may fly with the FAA but try it on the
insurance company. The flight will likely be without insurance. In
investigating this with my Glastar, our problem may not be with the FAA
but with the insurance carrier. More than one on board implied no
insurance.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William
Curtis
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 4:02 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: First Flight Prep
John,
Without commenting on what Dan did or did not do, nothing in the
regulation prevents two people from being the "required crew" during
Phase One.
As an RV builder YOU are the manufacturer so if YOU determine that
you need two sets of hand, eyeballs and feet to fully test your new
creation, I see
nothing in the regulation that would prevent this. With some
exaggeration,
what if Boeing wanted to have a few additional test engineers
aboard a new design to monitor instrumentation -- who are you or the FAA
to say that they can't. That is why the FAA leaves it up to the
manufacturer to determine the "required crew" during Phase One. That is
not a limitation.
I wondered how long it would be before the finger pointing and
name calling began from this tragic event. Now we know where it starts.
William
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
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: wheel pants and leg fairings during flight test |
| From: | "John Kirkland" <jskirkland(at)webpipe.net> |
I don't mean to hijack the thread from dlm46007, but reading this and reflecting
on recent events in the RV-10 builders community, wouldn't one want to do the
later portion of the flight testing with gear leg fairings and wheel pants on?
Doesn't AC 90-89A advise us that one purpose of flight test is to gather performance
data with which to build tables and/or charts of things like take-off
and landing distance, cruise performance, climb performance, ie the stuff you
find in a Cessna POH in section 5? Seems like the plane should be in a 'completed'
configuration once one has confidence that all of the minor squawks are
fixed and new ones aren't cropping up, nothing is dripping or sparking. Seems
to me like one would want to know hard performance numbers and have completed
POH, with calibrated instrumentation to boot, before taking off on long cross
countries to FL or OSH. Did anyone do their flight testing like that?
--------
RV-10 #40333
N540XP (reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=147334#147334
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | [Please Read] Why I Have A Fund Raiser... |
Dear Listers,
Each year I like to explain why I have a Fund Raiser and also take the opportunity
to express why I think the List Services here provide a superior experience
over the commercial equivalents.
I use the List Fund Raiser each year to offset the costs involved with running
a high performance email list site such as this one. With the annual support from
the List members through the PBS-like Fund Raiser, I have found I can run
the entire site without having to inflect any of the members with those annoying
banner ads flashing up all the time trying to sell little-blue-pills or other
garbage nobody wants or needs. From the comments I've received over the years
regarding the Lists, the great majority of the members really appreciate the
non-commercialism of my List systems and don't mind my 'go-team-go' banter once
a year during November to encourage members to support the Lists.
I believe that the Lists services that I provide here offer many benefits over
the commercial equivalents in a number of ways. The first feature I believe to
be significant is that you cannot receive a computer v*rus from any of these
Lists directly. Each incoming message is filtered and dangerous attachments stripped
off prior to posting. I also provide a Photo and File Share feature that
allows members to share files and bitmaps with other members and everyone can
be assured that these files will be prescanned for any sort of v*rus before
they are posted. More recently, I have enabled limited posting of a number of
file formats including pictures and PDFs.
Another very important feature of this system in my opinion is the extensive List
Archives that are available for download, browsing, and searching. The Archives
go all the way back to the very beginning of each List and with the very
fast Search Engine, the huge size of some of the Archives is a non-issue in quickly
finding the data you're looking for.
And added just a couple of years ago is the new Email List Forum that allows members who prefer the Web BBS-style of List interaction. The beauty of the new List Forums is that they contain the exact same content that is distributed via email. Messages posted via email are cross-posted to the respective Forum and vice versa. The Forums also allow for another convenient method of sharing pictures and other files (http://forums.matronics.com ). Additionally, added recently is the List Wiki that allows members to build their own "Online List Encyclopedia" of sorts, documenting various aspects of their project for all to share ( http://wiki.matronics.com ).
I've been running email Lists and services under the matronics.com domain since
about 1989 starting with RV-List and 30 guys I knew and who where also building
RVs. It has grown into nearly 70 different aviation-related Email Lists and
an associated web site that receives over 34,000,000 hits each year!! Additionally,
the List Email system forwarded well over 77,000 postings last year, accounting
for an unbelievable 33,000,000 (yes, that's 33 MILLION) email messages
delivered to Matronics List subscribers! I think there's a lot of value in supporting
a service that has gone the long haul and is still providing and improving
a high quality service all _without any advertising budget_!
I have to admit running these Lists is a labor of love and I hope it shows in the
quality of the experience that you receive when you get a List Email Message,
Search the Archives, use the List Browser, or surf the Forums and Wiki sites.
The Lists will be here for a long time to come. If you just want to lurk a
while for free, that's great and I encourage you to do so. If you use, appreciate,
and receive value from these Lists, then please support them during the Annual
List Fund Raiser!
List Contribution Web Site:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Leffler" <rv(at)thelefflers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tail Longeron bending |
Thanks for the info.....
I'll have to check the other axis. I did check the bend on a flat table,
but wasn't specifically looking at the other axis. I would hope that if it
was off, I would have noticed it. But I will check again just to be sure.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 10:09 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Tail Longeron bending
That's exactly how I remember it going, just when you get it to fit in
one axis, you check and the other is out, it took a series of back and
forth 'sessions' to get them to fit in both axis.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
John Kirkland wrote:
>
> An interesting thing I noticed when I did this was that when I laid the
longeron on the fuse skin to check the bend, I noticed the long straight
part had a slight bow in it, so I carefully took that out too. Laying it on
a flat table or bench with the fuse skin also lets you check it for twisting
that might have occurred when beating the bend in it. I also got to take
out a little bit of twist on one of mine.
>
> --------
> RV-10 #40333
> N540XP (reserved)
>
>
__________ NOD32 2671 (20071120) Information __________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com> |
Vern:
Thanks; the pics help a lot. I have the left side correct as per the
drawings, I'll flip the right side and get that correct.
Russ;
I unfortunately followed the plans and drilled the holes into the top.
I thought I had to have them in place before I bonded the accuracy
avionics overhead in place. I have not drilled the door side yet. I see
your point about the seals and any upholstery affecting the fit. I
don't yet see how to get around fitting the door without drilling the
hinges. Will have to get farther down the road. I could go back and
fill the holes with structural flox and epoxy.
BTW . Great game this weekend at Texas Tech. Got to be there to watch
em storm the field. Sorry OU fans.
Get your guns up!
Dr Fred
40515.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dogsbark(at)comcast.net |
Does anyone have the torque settings for the replacement Matco nose wheel, for
the the three bolts that hold the wheel halves together? My mains have it printed
on the sticker, but not on the nose wheel. Looks like most of their wheels
are 50 in/lbs.
Thanks,
Sean
#40225
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MauleDriver <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Painting and corrosion proofing the steps |
As I prepare to seal up the baggage area floor, I keep looking at the
steps and trying to figure out the best way to handle prepping them
before permanently installing them. As far as installation, my current
plan is to drill small guide holes in the fuselage skin and the baggage
floor so that if I ever have to remove the step, I can drill holes to
access the bolts. I decided against installing access hatches in the
baggage floor.
I've seen the 'perfectly good airplane' treatment with nickel plating
and powder coating as I recall. Very nice but I wonder if how much was
powder coated and how it still fit in the hole if it was entirely
coated. Vans just has you mount it and presumably paint it with the
fuselage. I worry about the steel on steel contact in light of exposure
to moisture and a light, scratched coat of primer. I worry about the
interior where it should stay dry but any moisture would be trapped.
Any thoughts on corrosion proofing and paint appreciated.
Bill Watson
40605
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DOUGPFLYRV(at)aol.com |
TIM, I WOULD APPRECIATE AUTHORIZATION TO READ YOUR POST.
THANKS,
DOUG PRESTON
N372RV
40372
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Off Topic - New Pilot |
| From: | "Jon Reining" <jonathan.w.reining(at)wellsfargo.com> |
With a lot of help and support, I'm now a Private Pilot.
My wife and I bought a 7KCAB Citabria almost exactly a year ago to take primary
lessons in while my dad and I are building the RV10. Saturday was the big day
and it didn't look like it was going to happen. We live in the SF Bay Area
and we've had thick fog and a system parked on top of us for the past week, not
raining, but low, ugly gloomy clouds. Talked to the examiner Saturday morning
a couple times and we decided that no, not possible to do the flying portion
so might as well get the oral and paperwork out of the way. On my way over
though, I looked at the weather and it was changing for the better. Gnoss Field,
KDVO, went VFR and big thanks to my dad for flying the plane over so I could
do the practical exam as well. Flew the plane home to Oakland just as the
sun was setting and watched the fog pulling in under the Golden Gate Bridge and
up towards Berkeley- beautiful flight home.
The Citabria is more fun than a barrel of monkeys, but also looking forward to
the day when the RV10 is done so we can do for decent cross country trips. For
now, just looking forward to a little flying.
Jon Reining PP-ASEL :)
40514 - delayed due to framing the garage walls
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=147482#147482
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps |
| From: | "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com> |
Bill, I had the same concern with mine, especially in the humidity of southern
Louisiana. I prepped my steps with sand paper starting very course and finishing
with somewhere around a 100 grit. Then I primed the steps and let them set
for a day or 2 to get a good cure time. When I went to install them I touched
up the primer before securing them. For the inside I sanded as far as I could
reach and then poured primer in to the end and slowly spun it until the interior
was primed. Perhaps this was a bit overboard but I really worry about corrosion
down here and have primed everything. As I am not too far ahead of you I
have no feedback to provide you for effectiveness of my method, but I am confident.
Hope this helps.
Eric Kallio
40518 Fuel system
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=147483#147483
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Off Topic - New Pilot |
| From: | "Perry, Phil" <Phil.Perry(at)netapp.com> |
Congrats Jon!!!
Welcome to the brotherhood! (Or sisterhood for some.) :)
Phil
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Reining [mailto:jonathan.w.reining(at)wellsfargo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 9:55 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Off Topic - New Pilot
-->
With a lot of help and support, I'm now a Private Pilot.
My wife and I bought a 7KCAB Citabria almost exactly a year ago to take
primary lessons in while my dad and I are building the RV10. Saturday
was the big day and it didn't look like it was going to happen. We live
in the SF Bay Area and we've had thick fog and a system parked on top of
us for the past week, not raining, but low, ugly gloomy clouds. Talked
to the examiner Saturday morning a couple times and we decided that no,
not possible to do the flying portion so might as well get the oral and
paperwork out of the way. On my way over though, I looked at the
weather and it was changing for the better. Gnoss Field, KDVO, went VFR
and big thanks to my dad for flying the plane over so I could do the
practical exam as well. Flew the plane home to Oakland just as the sun
was setting and watched the fog pulling in under the Golden Gate Bridge
and up towards Berkeley- beautiful flight home.
The Citabria is more fun than a barrel of monkeys, but also looking
forward to the day when the RV10 is done so we can do for decent cross
country trips. For now, just looking forward to a little flying.
Jon Reining PP-ASEL :)
40514 - delayed due to framing the garage walls
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=147482#147482
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Painting and corrosion proofing the steps |
| From: | "Chris Johnston" <CJohnston(at)popsound.com> |
Hey there -
I actually had the steps zinc coated, then powdercoated. The
powdercoating guys said that the zinc coating does well to prevent
corrosion, and also helps the powdercoating to stick. The zinc coating
is over the whole part, and the powdercoating is only done to the part
that hangs in the breeze. I had them mask off the tube that slides into
the fuse. The zinc coating didn't add any (perceivable) thickness, and
didn't hamper the install of the step. Worked pretty well. time will
tell!
cj
#40410
airplaning
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of MauleDriver
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 7:37 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps
As I prepare to seal up the baggage area floor, I keep looking at the
steps and trying to figure out the best way to handle prepping them
before permanently installing them. As far as installation, my current
plan is to drill small guide holes in the fuselage skin and the baggage
floor so that if I ever have to remove the step, I can drill holes to
access the bolts. I decided against installing access hatches in the
baggage floor.
I've seen the 'perfectly good airplane' treatment with nickel plating
and powder coating as I recall. Very nice but I wonder if how much was
powder coated and how it still fit in the hole if it was entirely
coated. Vans just has you mount it and presumably paint it with the
fuselage. I worry about the steel on steel contact in light of exposure
to moisture and a light, scratched coat of primer. I worry about the
interior where it should stay dry but any moisture would be trapped.
Any thoughts on corrosion proofing and paint appreciated.
Bill Watson
40605
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Newman" <rnewman(at)lutron.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps |
Bill, I just recently installed my steps and was on verge of posting
some information regarding these. I will have photos to share
tomorrow.
I decided I was not satisfied with the use of a 3/16" bolt thru the
hollow tube as the means of securing the step, it seemes that over time
the bolt hole will ellongate and there will be movement of the step.
The fundamental issue seemed to me that the hollow tube and support
structure do not actually provide any real clamping force to prevent
tube rotation. ( as you torque the bolt the tube/ weldment will just
deform)
Therefore, what I decided to do was make a solid bushing to press
into the tube leg that supports the tube wall where the bolt passes
thru. I turned a set of bushings out of 1" x 1.5" aluminum stock.
I turned the diameter to match the interior diameter of the step tube
and drilled a 1/4" clearance hole for the bolt to pass thru. Now the
bolt torque has a solid structure to actually provide clamping force on
the weldment/tube combination.
I'll post pictures tomorrow.
Now as for corrision proofing, I've elected to have my steps chrome
plated. I had this done up to the point where the tube passes thru the
weldment. From there on I painted the steel tubes with the same epoxy
primer I've used on the rest of the airplane. ( Deft 44g-11).
Bob Newman
TCW Technologies
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | First Flight Prep |
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
You won personal credit for bringing the definition of Solo to light or
more specifically not carrying any passengers during Phase One. Section
13, paragraph e (1).
Until the Operating Limitations for Dan are published here on the RV-10
list, we are speculating that he was able to convince the FAA
Airworthiness Inspector he needed a named individual aboard during Phase
One. One thing that is now fact is that there was no DAR involved. The
Phase One was an FAA issuance.
Here is an attachment which is the exact language. The italicized word
"strongly" are the FAAs - not mine.
I am patiently waiting to read specific Limitations which allow
additional crewmembers. I am wagering Dan's was not one of them and his
primary flight area during Phase One did not include Florida.
What kind of certificate do you believe is carried aboard manufacturer
aircraft during their research and development phase before final
issuance of the Production TC and published guidelines of the TCDS?
Lets see a raising of hands as to which RV-10s of the 100+ flying
aircraft obtained written permission to carry passengers during Phase
One. I'll bite - who? Next I am going to hear about instruction
received too.
Joe Gauthier is the contact at EAA if you want their help in developing
a safe and effective Phase One testing program.
The addition of the weight and power increase of the turbo may have
triggered a second 40 hour Phase One after the initial period.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William
Curtis
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 8:44 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: First Flight Prep
OK, I bit. A few folks have reported getting approval for second crew
member on phase on, not-withstanding the requirements of the insurance
company. Further, this is dependant on the local FSDOs interpretation
of the Advisory Circular (which are not binding regulations by the
way)--so what did I win for this bonus round?
What's a "experimental production certificate?" Now you are just making
things up. Not all aircraft developed by manufacturers go into nor are
intended to go into production. Regardless, how many test pilot do you
think the Citation Mustang had during Phase One? This aircraft is
certified for single pilot operation.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
>
> William, thank you for taking the bait, both hook,line and sinker.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Schmidt <scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps |
What I did for the step was to simply cut access holes in my baggage compartment
so I could take the steps on and off. I just manufactured a simple cover with
nutplates. Then you don't have to worry about the step right now. You can
do this at anytime as well. The carpet kit covers this area and you never even
know.
Plus, when I take the plane to Reno I can remove the steps and hope for 200 knots
more speed to compete with the NXT's.
I had my steps ceramic coated when I did my exhaust. They aren't real shiny but
it has really held up nicely. They informed me that the ceramic coating had
a tensile strength of 30ksi which should prevent any cracking as they bend when
people get on and off them.
http://www.scottandranae.smugmug.com/gallery/400885/1/15988904/Medium
Scott Schmidt
----- Original Message ----
From: Chris Johnston <CJohnston(at)popsound.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 9:42:22 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps
Hey there -
I actually had the steps zinc coated, then powdercoated. The
powdercoating guys said that the zinc coating does well to prevent
corrosion, and also helps the powdercoating to stick. The zinc coating
is over the whole part, and the powdercoating is only done to the part
that hangs in the breeze. I had them mask off the tube that slides
into
the fuse. The zinc coating didn't add any (perceivable) thickness, and
didn't hamper the install of the step. Worked pretty well. time will
tell!
cj
#40410
airplaning
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of MauleDriver
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 7:37 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps
As I prepare to seal up the baggage area floor, I keep looking at the
steps and trying to figure out the best way to handle prepping them
before permanently installing them. As far as installation, my current
plan is to drill small guide holes in the fuselage skin and the baggage
floor so that if I ever have to remove the step, I can drill holes to
access the bolts. I decided against installing access hatches in the
baggage floor.
I've seen the 'perfectly good airplane' treatment with nickel plating
and powder coating as I recall. Very nice but I wonder if how much was
powder coated and how it still fit in the hole if it was entirely
coated. Vans just has you mount it and presumably paint it with the
fuselage. I worry about the steel on steel contact in light of
exposure
to moisture and a light, scratched coat of primer. I worry about the
interior where it should stay dry but any moisture would be trapped.
Any thoughts on corrosion proofing and paint appreciated.
Bill Watson
40605
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Gonzalez <indigoonlatigo(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Painting and corrosion proofing the steps |
Scott,
Have you tried to put the bold in the receiver when the side wall panels ar
e on. I can't remember, but I think the bolt was too long to fit without ei
ther making an additional hole in the floor(Behind those side panels) or al
so having the side panels removable with screws and nutplates.
John G. 409
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:49:07 -0800From: scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.comSubject:
Re: RV10-List: Painting and corrosion proofing the stepsTo: rv10-list@matro
nics.com
What I did for the step was to simply cut access holes in my baggage compar
tment so I could take the steps on and off. I just manufactured a simple c
over with nutplates. Then you don't have to worry about the step right now
. You can do this at anytime as well. The carpet kit covers this area and
you never even know. Plus, when I take the plane to Reno I can remove the
steps and hope for 200 knots more speed to compete with the NXT's. I had
my steps ceramic coated when I did my exhaust. They aren't real shiny but
it has really held up nicely. They informed me that the ceramic coating had
a tensile strength of 30ksi which should prevent any cracking as they bend
when people get on and off them. http://www.scottandranae.smugmug.com/gall
ery/400885/1/15988904/MediumScott Schmidt
----- Original Message ----From: Chris Johnston <CJohnston(at)popsound.com>To:
rv10-list(at)matronics.comSent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 9:42:22 AMSubject:
RE: RV10-List: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps--> RV10-List mess
age posted by: "Chris Johnston" Hey there - I actua
lly had the steps zinc coated, then powdercoated. Thepowdercoating guys sa
id that the zinc coating does well to preventcorrosion, and also helps the
powdercoating to stick. The zinc coatingis over the whole part, and the po
wdercoating is only done to the partthat hangs in the breeze. I had them m
ask off the tube that slides intothe fuse. The zinc coating didn't add any
(perceivable) thickness, anddidn't hamper the install of the step. Worked
pretty well. time willtell!cj#40410airplaningwww.perfectlygoodairplane.ne
t-----Original Message-----From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com[mailt
o:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of MauleDriverSent: Tuesd
ay, November 20, 2007 7:37 AMTo: RV10-List Digest ServerSubject: RV10-List:
MauleDriver As I prepare to seal up the baggage area
floor, I keep looking at the steps and trying to figure out the best way t
o handle prepping them before permanently installing them. As far as insta
llation, my current plan is to drill small guide holes in the fuselage skin
and the baggage floor so that if I ever have to remove the step, I can dri
ll holes to access the bolts. I decided against installing access hatches
in the baggage floor.I've seen the 'perfectly good airplane' treatment with
nickel plating and powder coating as I recall. Very nice but I wonder if
how much was powder coated and how it still fit in the hole if it was entir
ely coated. Vans just has you mount it and presumably paint it with the fu
selage. I worry about the steel on steel contact in light of
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Gonzalez <indigoonlatigo(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | RV Pilot at Whiteman (WHP) |
No hangers at Camarillo are there?
If the guy at Whiteman is not online give me a ring and I'll get his contac
t information from his hanger neighbor who I know.
John G.
818 970 7768
Subject: RV10-List: RV Pilot at Whiteman (WHP)Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 23:13:
I recall not too long ago there was a -10 builder based at Whiteman (WHP).
I was hoping to speak with you regarding field specifics.
Robin
805-801-8550
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Off Topic - New Pilot |
| From: | "Jon Reining" <jonathan.w.reining(at)wellsfargo.com> |
Thanks for the congrats.
Phil mentioned sisterhood for some and I thought I'd comment on it.
My wife joined the 99's, an organization of women pilots, and absolutely loves
it. She finds a lot of encouragement from hanging out with other women pilots
and it has really helped get her into flying. Her flying also has a ton of benefits:
Safety - looking forward to switching off and being her co-pilot
Financial - she's more willing to have part of the budget support the hobby
Fun! - I'll go down to Oakland and watch her do touch and goes and bounce down
the runway (she used to laugh at me too).
In case you're wondering, husbands are referred to as 49 1/2's.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=147524#147524
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Schmidt <scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps |
I have no issues taking the bolt on and off through the one access hole shown in
the picture. I don't have any additional holes. It is hard to remember but
the bolt I believe goes from the top down. It is not something I want to do
alot, but I could have both steps off in 20 minutes I would guess.
Scott Schmidt
N104XP
----- Original Message ----
From: John Gonzalez <indigoonlatigo(at)msn.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 11:33:55 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;padding:0px;}
body.hmmessage
{
FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma;}
Scott,
Have you tried to put the bold in the receiver when the side wall panels are on.
I can't remember, but I think the bolt was too long to fit without either making
an additional hole in the floor(Behind those side panels) or also having
the side panels removable with screws and nutplates.
John G. 409
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:49:07 -0800
From: scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps
.ExternalClass DIV
{}
What I did for the step was to simply cut access holes in my baggage compartment
so I could take the steps on and off. I just manufactured a simple cover with
nutplates. Then you don't have to worry about the step right now. You can
do this at anytime as well. The carpet kit covers this area and you never even
know.
Plus, when I take the plane to Reno I can remove the steps and hope for 200 knots
more speed to compete with the NXT's.
I had my steps ceramic coated when I did my exhaust. They aren't real shiny but
it has really held up nicely. They informed me that the ceramic coating had
a tensile strength of 30ksi which should prevent any cracking as they bend when
people get on and off them.
http://www.scottandranae.smugmug.com/gallery/400885/1/15988904/Medium
Scott Schmidt
----- Original Message ----
From: Chris Johnston <CJohnston(at)popsound.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 9:42:22 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps
Hey there -
I actually had the steps zinc coated, then powdercoated. The
powdercoating guys said that the zinc coating does well to prevent
corrosion, and also helps the powdercoating to stick. The zinc coating
is over the whole part, and the powdercoating is only done to the part
that hangs in the breeze. I had them mask off the tube that slides into
the fuse. The zinc coating didn't add any (perceivable) thickness, and
didn't hamper the install of the step. Worked pretty well. time will
tell!
cj
#40410
airplaning
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of MauleDriver
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 7:37 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps
As I prepare to seal up the baggage area floor, I keep looking at the
steps and trying to figure out the best way to handle prepping them
before permanently installing them. As far as installation, my current
plan is to drill small guide holes in the fuselage skin and the baggage
floor so that if I ever have to remove the step, I can drill holes to
access the bolts. I decided against installing access hatches in the
baggage floor.
I've seen the 'perfectly good airplane' treatment with nickel plating
and powder coating as I recall. Very nice but I wonder if how much was
powder coated and how it still fit in the hole if it was entirely
coated. Vans just has you mount it and presumably paint it with the
fuselage. I worry about the steel on steel contact in light of
blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
get=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
p://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps |
I had mine chromed. Looks good. I was worried about the fit into the
sleeve after the chrome was put on, but it slid right in. I did fill
the inside of the step with primer. After I rinsed out all the rust and
debris from the chrome plating job. Cost about $150.
Dr Fred
40515.
MauleDriver wrote:
>
> As I prepare to seal up the baggage area floor, I keep looking at the
> steps and trying to figure out the best way to handle prepping them
> before permanently installing them. As far as installation, my
> current plan is to drill small guide holes in the fuselage skin and
> the baggage floor so that if I ever have to remove the step, I can
> drill holes to access the bolts. I decided against installing access
> hatches in the baggage floor.
>
> I've seen the 'perfectly good airplane' treatment with nickel plating
> and powder coating as I recall. Very nice but I wonder if how much
> was powder coated and how it still fit in the hole if it was entirely
> coated. Vans just has you mount it and presumably paint it with the
> fuselage. I worry about the steel on steel contact in light of
> exposure to moisture and a light, scratched coat of primer. I worry
> about the interior where it should stay dry but any moisture would be
> trapped.
>
> Any thoughts on corrosion proofing and paint appreciated.
>
> Bill Watson
> 40605
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | First Flight Prep |
| From: | "William Curtis" <wcurtis(at)nerv10.com> |
oy vay! Can someone translate the below message for me?
When did we make the jump from "required crew" to "passengers?" I think EVERYONE
knows passengers are NOT allowed. This was never in question.
I specifically said in my first post that I was not going to comment on what Dan
did or did not do, but you keep bringing it up. I'll choose only to address
your finger pointing and you making up regulations on the fly.
I started building my RV-10 because I got tired of A&Ps that made up regulations on the fly as a way to stick their hands in my pocket. Obviously that is not your intention, but it seems a hard habit to break. I got very good and separating actual regulations from the crap that they sometimes up with. So I'm especially sensitive when someone on the forum spouts Truthiness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness) in the guise of regulations, weather I agree with it or not.
Do you know what the "A" in AC stands for? Do you know what the "R" in FAR stands
for? You seem to be confusing the two.
> What kind of certificate do you believe is carried aboard manufacturer aircraft
during their research and development phase before final issuance of the Production
TC and published guidelines of the TCDS?
Maybe you need to brush up on you FARs. Aircraft don't get production certificates,
companies do. Aircraft get type certificate or remain on an experimental
certificate. Just making up as you go, huh?
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
>
> You won personal credit for bringing the definition of Solo to light or
> more specifically not carrying any passengers during Phase One. Section
> 13, paragraph e (1).
>
> Until the Operating Limitations for Dan are published here on the RV-10
> list, we are speculating that he was able to convince the FAA
> Airworthiness Inspector he needed a named individual aboard during Phase
> One. One thing that is now fact is that there was no DAR involved. The
> Phase One was an FAA issuance.
>
> Here is an attachment which is the exact language. The italicized word
> "strongly" are the FAAs - not mine.
>
> I am patiently waiting to read specific Limitations which allow
> additional crewmembers. I am wagering Dan's was not one of them and his
> primary flight area during Phase One did not include Florida.
>
> What kind of certificate do you believe is carried aboard manufacturer
> aircraft during their research and development phase before final
> issuance of the Production TC and published guidelines of the TCDS?
>
> Lets see a raising of hands as to which RV-10s of the 100+ flying
> aircraft obtained written permission to carry passengers during Phase
> One. I'll bite - who? Next I am going to hear about instruction
> received too.
>
> Joe Gauthier is the contact at EAA if you want their help in developing
> a safe and effective Phase One testing program.
>
> The addition of the weight and power increase of the turbo may have
> triggered a second 40 hour Phase One after the initial period.
>
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William
> Curtis
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 8:44 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: First Flight Prep
>
>
> OK, I bit. A few folks have reported getting approval for second crew
> member on phase on, not-withstanding the requirements of the insurance
> company. Further, this is dependant on the local FSDOs interpretation
> of the Advisory Circular (which are not binding regulations by the
> way)--so what did I win for this bonus round?
>
> What's a "experimental production certificate?" Now you are just making
> things up. Not all aircraft developed by manufacturers go into nor are
> intended to go into production. Regardless, how many test pilot do you
> think the Citation Mustang had during Phase One? This aircraft is
> certified for single pilot operation.
>
> William
> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
>
> -------- Original Message --------
>
> >
> > William, thank you for taking the bait, both hook,line and sinker.
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RVATOR to be free in 2008 |
| From: | "William Curtis" <wcurtis(at)nerv10.com> |
You have to provide your own paper but it looks like Vans will be providing the
RVATOR electronically in '08--and in color. This is great!
You can still get the printed copy for the $15 per year. That will probably remain
monochrome.
http://www.vansaircraft.com/pdf/free_rvator.pdf
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Firewall penetrations |
| From: | "McGANN, Ron" <ron.mcgann(at)baesystems.com> |
G'day all,
I am about to work the firewall for wire and cable pass throughs. What
penetration techniques have people found the best - eyeballs, s/s
grommet covers, tube/firesleeve etc?
Are there any specific locations to avoid when making the penetrations?
Is there a 'best spot'?
What is the best way to cut 'largish' holes (ie >1/2") into the
stainless??
Thanks in advance for your suggestions.
Ron
187 finishing
"Warning:
The information contained in this email and any attached files is
confidential to BAE Systems Australia. If you are not the intended
recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this email or any
attachments is expressly prohibited. If you have received this email
in error, please notify us immediately. VIRUS: Every care has been
taken to ensure this email and its attachments are virus free,
however, any loss or damage incurred in using this email is not the
sender's responsibility. It is your responsibility to ensure virus
checks are completed before installing any data sent in this email to
your computer."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MauleDriver <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps |
Bob, you didn't happen to turn a few extra bushings did you?
Bob Newman wrote:
>
> Bill, I just recently installed my steps and was on verge of posting
> some information regarding these. I will have photos to share
> tomorrow.
>
> I decided I was not satisfied with the use of a 3/16" bolt thru the
> hollow tube as the means of securing the step, it seemes that over time
> the bolt hole will ellongate and there will be movement of the step.
> The fundamental issue seemed to me that the hollow tube and support
> structure do not actually provide any real clamping force to prevent
> tube rotation. ( as you torque the bolt the tube/ weldment will just
> deform)
> Therefore, what I decided to do was make a solid bushing to press
> into the tube leg that supports the tube wall where the bolt passes
> thru. I turned a set of bushings out of 1" x 1.5" aluminum stock.
> I turned the diameter to match the interior diameter of the step tube
> and drilled a 1/4" clearance hole for the bolt to pass thru. Now the
> bolt torque has a solid structure to actually provide clamping force on
> the weldment/tube combination.
> I'll post pictures tomorrow.
>
> Now as for corrision proofing, I've elected to have my steps chrome
> plated. I had this done up to the point where the tube passes thru the
> weldment. From there on I painted the steel tubes with the same epoxy
> primer I've used on the rest of the airplane. ( Deft 44g-11).
>
> Bob Newman
> TCW Technologies
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps |
I was also concerned about the single AN3 bolt that attaches the steps.
I had noticed and received reports that some early flyers had
experienced the step loosening up on them. you can't put much torque on
an AN3 bolt. So if thing loosen up after some use there's not a lot of
extra torque to be applied. Also a drill bit makes a slightly triangular
hole anyway. I didn't have the idea, skills or equipment to machine a
bushing , which is an ideal solution, so I drilled the holes out and
replaced them with an AN4 bolt. Seems to provide a more solid attachment
IMO.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob-tcw" <rnewman(at)tcwtech.com> |
Earlier today I posted regarding side step preparations and had
indicated I had pictures of the bushings I made that prevent the tube
from deforming when you tighten the bolt that holds the step. Well
here are the pictures.
Best regards,
Bob Newman
TCW Technologies
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetrations |
Ron,
I used=C2- aluminum eyeballs for everything, it made getting the alignmen
t a snap. I filled the aft pocket of the eyeball inside the cockpit with=C2
-high temp=C2-silicone. I use a greenlee punch to make the holes,=C2-
you drill a 3/4 hole with a unibit then use the punch, works great. I'll fw
d some photos and shoot them out to you. I used the three triangle=C2-sta
cked in the recess for power, rpm and mixture. I use the upper left=C2-fi
rewall for the purge control and low in the tunnel for the FAB aux air door
. I also used the eyeballs for my battery and alternator lead penetrations.
Granted these are a bit pricey, but they look good, allow for the cable to
exit the firewall at it's best angle. The only thing that was a pain, not
hard but time consuming was drilling out the balls for the cables or wire w
ith the drill press.
Rick Sked
40185
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron McGANN" <ron.mcgann(at)baesystems.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 1:37:04 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RV10-List: Firewall penetrations
G'day all,
I am about to work the firewall for wire and cable pass throughs.=C2- Wha
t penetration techniques have people found the best - eyeballs, s/s grommet
covers, tube/firesleeve etc?
Are there any specific locations to avoid when making the penetrations?=C2
- Is there a 'best spot'?
What is the best way to cut 'largish' holes (ie >1/2") into the stainless??
Thanks in advance for your suggestions.
Ron
187 finishing "Warning:
The information contained in this email and any attached files is
confidential to BAE Systems Australia. If you are not the intended
recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this email or any
attachments is expressly prohibited. If you have received this email
in error, please notify us immediately. VIRUS: Every care has been
taken to ensure this email and its attachments are virus free,
however, any loss or damage incurred in using this email is not the
sender's responsibility. It is your responsibility to ensure virus
checks are completed before installing any data sent in this email to
===============
====
=======================
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Door Hinges. |
| From: | "AirMike" <Mikeabel(at)Pacbell.net> |
It is tricky. You have to watch the diagrams verrrrrry carefully. Essentially the
hinge pins line up in a straight axis with each other. This is a classic case
of not measure twice cut once, but measure 6x - cut 1x.
I am slogged down in this phase right now. I decided to hold off on fastening my
cabin top. I installed the rear windows and I am putting the cabin top liner
on (Fliteline) before I put the cabin top on.
--------
OSH '08 or Bust
Q/B Kit - Doors/windows/fiberglass stuff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=147644#147644
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MauleDriver <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Elevator pushrod idler arm assembly |
It seems that the plans specify a 7/16" thick rod end bearing and a 1/2"
thick rod end bearing to both be fastened to the Idler arm clevis. But
the clevis is 7/16" wide.
I find it odd they the design would call for two rod end bearings of
different thicknesses to share a single clevis.
Did anyone else run into this or can you otherwise tell me where I'm
going wrong?
I've gone back and double checked the plans and the manual to find that:
The forward pushrod has rod end bearing MD3614M on its aft end, which
according to the builders manual is 7/16" thick
The rear pushrod has rod end bearing MD3616M on both ends which
according to the builders manual is 1/2" thick
I think I can force the idler arm clevis to accept both but that just
doesn't seem like good design or practice.
Bill Watson
40605
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MauleDriver <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator pushrod idler arm assembly |
Duh.... Nevermind. The walk back from the hangar in the crisp morning
air provided some insight. I went back and once again looked at the
plans focusing on the washer configuration. Looking carefully, I see
that to 10L washers are used inside the clevis to build up the thinner
rod end. With a push and a squeeze, that should work.
Bill "more coffee" Watson
40605
MauleDriver wrote:
>
> It seems that the plans specify a 7/16" thick rod end bearing and a
> 1/2" thick rod end bearing to both be fastened to the Idler arm
> clevis. But the clevis is 7/16" wide.
>
> I find it odd they the design would call for two rod end bearings of
> different thicknesses to share a single clevis.
>
> Did anyone else run into this or can you otherwise tell me where I'm
> going wrong?
>
> I've gone back and double checked the plans and the manual to find that:
> The forward pushrod has rod end bearing MD3614M on its aft end, which
> according to the builders manual is 7/16" thick
> The rear pushrod has rod end bearing MD3616M on both ends which
> according to the builders manual is 1/2" thick
>
> I think I can force the idler arm clevis to accept both but that just
> doesn't seem like good design or practice.
>
> Bill Watson
> 40605
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator pushrod idler arm assembly |
Bill, what page and control arm number are you talking about?
I see page 39-3 with a F-1089 that uses a GMM-4M-675 on the
forward end, and a MD3614M on the aft. Then on page 39-4
there's a F-1090 that uses 2 of the MD3616M's. And, then
on page 39-6 it shows th attachment of the aft end of F-1089
with it's MD3614M connecting to the idler arm with the
F-1090's MD3616M, but you can see washers inserted on that
forward part of the idler arm for the smaller one. That bracket
should be big enough for both of those, not small so you have
to stuff the larger one in.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
MauleDriver wrote:
>
> It seems that the plans specify a 7/16" thick rod end bearing and a 1/2"
> thick rod end bearing to both be fastened to the Idler arm clevis. But
> the clevis is 7/16" wide.
>
> I find it odd they the design would call for two rod end bearings of
> different thicknesses to share a single clevis.
>
> Did anyone else run into this or can you otherwise tell me where I'm
> going wrong?
>
> I've gone back and double checked the plans and the manual to find that:
> The forward pushrod has rod end bearing MD3614M on its aft end, which
> according to the builders manual is 7/16" thick
> The rear pushrod has rod end bearing MD3616M on both ends which
> according to the builders manual is 1/2" thick
>
> I think I can force the idler arm clevis to accept both but that just
> doesn't seem like good design or practice.
>
> Bill Watson
> 40605
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MauleDriver <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator pushrod idler arm assembly |
I missed the washers. I just didn't focus in on where they were to be
inserted. Too early in the morning and not enough caffeine.
However, the idler arm 'clevis' measures 7/16" rather than the 1/2"
needed but after a little coaxing it shouldn't be a problem.
Thanks.
Tim Olson wrote:
>
> Bill, what page and control arm number are you talking about?
>
> I see page 39-3 with a F-1089 that uses a GMM-4M-675 on the
> forward end, and a MD3614M on the aft. Then on page 39-4
> there's a F-1090 that uses 2 of the MD3616M's. And, then
> on page 39-6 it shows th attachment of the aft end of F-1089
> with it's MD3614M connecting to the idler arm with the
> F-1090's MD3616M, but you can see washers inserted on that
> forward part of the idler arm for the smaller one. That bracket
> should be big enough for both of those, not small so you have
> to stuff the larger one in.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
>
> MauleDriver wrote:
>>
>> It seems that the plans specify a 7/16" thick rod end bearing and a
>> 1/2" thick rod end bearing to both be fastened to the Idler arm
>> clevis. But the clevis is 7/16" wide.
>>
>> I find it odd they the design would call for two rod end bearings of
>> different thicknesses to share a single clevis.
>>
>> Did anyone else run into this or can you otherwise tell me where I'm
>> going wrong?
>>
>> I've gone back and double checked the plans and the manual to find that:
>> The forward pushrod has rod end bearing MD3614M on its aft end, which
>> according to the builders manual is 7/16" thick
>> The rear pushrod has rod end bearing MD3616M on both ends which
>> according to the builders manual is 1/2" thick
>>
>> I think I can force the idler arm clevis to accept both but that just
>> doesn't seem like good design or practice.
>>
>> Bill Watson
>> 40605
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
I'd like to kind of get a quick informal survey for a couple
days and see if we can find out what kind of hours we're
gathering as a fleet. If you have a flying RV-10, take this
post, add your N-number and total hours to the bottom of the list,
(**Round it to the nearest 5) and TRIM OUT ALL THE JUNK
THAT GETS ADDED BELOW IT (We'll try to keep it a clean
and lean email), and lets see what kind of running total
we can come up with in the next couple days. From there,
we can expand on it and make some wild assumptions about the fleet
based on about 110-115 flying. No major purpose for this, but it
seemed like a cool thing to do. If you know of other RV-10's that
may not post to the list, and want to post their numbers, go ahead.
I'll add what I know was Vic's before he sold it.
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
************************************
**** RV-10 total flying hours ****
**** (as of approx. 11/22-23/07 ****
************************************
310 N104CD
580 N64VC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | scbt(at)comcast.net |
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
K203JJ - 155 hrs
>
>
>
K203JJ - 155 hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetrations |
| From: | "AirMike" <Mikeabel(at)Pacbell.net> |
Every RV builder should check out EPM-AVCORP.com before they start working on their
FIREwall. Regardless of which way you go, you should have the information.
This guy has done the research.
--------
OSH '08 or Bust
Q/B Kit - Doors/windows/fiberglass stuff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=147698#147698
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
Tim Olson wrote:
>
> I'd like to kind of get a quick informal survey for a couple
> days and see if we can find out what kind of hours we're
> gathering as a fleet. If you have a flying RV-10, take this
> post, add your N-number and total hours to the bottom of the list,
> (**Round it to the nearest 5) and TRIM OUT ALL THE JUNK
> THAT GETS ADDED BELOW IT (We'll try to keep it a clean
> and lean email), and lets see what kind of running total
> we can come up with in the next couple days. From there,
> we can expand on it and make some wild assumptions about the fleet
> based on about 110-115 flying. No major purpose for this, but it
> seemed like a cool thing to do. If you know of other RV-10's that
> may not post to the list, and want to post their numbers, go ahead.
> I'll add what I know was Vic's before he sold it.
>
************************************
**** RV-10 total flying hours ****
**** (as of approx. 11/22-23/07 ****
************************************
Hours N-Number
----- --------
310 N104CD
580 N64VC
155 K203JJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
| From: | pilotdds(at)aol.com |
728DD--175
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Sent: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 7:25 am
Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours
?
I'd like to kind of get a quick informal survey for a couple?
days and see if we can find out what kind of hours we're?
gathering as a fleet. If you have a flying RV-10, take this?
post, add your N-number and total hours to the bottom of the list,?
(**Round it to the nearest 5) and TRIM OUT ALL THE JUNK?
THAT GETS ADDED BELOW IT (We'll try to keep it a clean?
and lean email), and lets see what kind of running total?
we can come up with in the next couple days. From there,?
we can expand on it and make some wild assumptions about the fleet?
based on about 110-115 flying. No major purpose for this, but it?
seemed like a cool thing to do. If you know of other RV-10's that?
may not post to the list, and want to post their numbers, go ahead.?
I'll add what I know was Vic's before he sold it.?
?
-- Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying?
?
************************************?
**** RV-10 total flying hours ****?
**** (as of approx. 11/22-23/07 ****?
************************************?
?
310 N104CD?
580 N64VC?
?
?
?
________________________________________________________________________
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Kraus <n223rv(at)wolflakeairport.net> |
| Subject: | Painting and corrosion proofing the steps |
I installed the bolts upside down for this very reason, and drilled a 1/2'' hole
in the bottom of the fuse and filled it with a hole plug. In the baggage floor
I installed two of the same access panels used on the wings for the stall
mechanism.
I ended up chrome plating my steps, the sure do look purdy and hopefully will be
durable. If not, at least it won't be too hard to swap them out.
-Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: "John Gonzalez" <indigoonlatigo(at)msn.com>
Sent: 11/20/07 1:33 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Painting and corrosion proofing the steps
Scott,
Have you tried to put the bold in the receiver when the side wall panels are on.
I can't remember, but I think the bolt was too long to fit without either making
an additional hole in the floor(Behind those side panels) or also having
the side panels removable with screws and nutplates.
John G. 409
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:49:07 -0800From: scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.comSubject: Re:
RV10-List: Painting and corrosion proofing the stepsTo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
What I did for the step was to simply cut access holes in my baggage compartment
so I could take the steps on and off. I just manufactured a simple cover with
nutplates. Then you don't have to worry about the step right now
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Schmidt <scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall penetrations |
http://www.epm-avcorp.com/tubeseal.html
I really liked these for all my wires. Just order the biggest one if you go this
route. The smaller ones are much more difficult to work with. I used the
eyeball style for my throttle, prop and mixture and for my three cables that power
the electronic ignition.
http://www.scottandranae.smugmug.com/gallery/518426/1/53556340/Medium
Scott Schmidt
----- Original Message ----
From: "McGANN, Ron" <ron.mcgann(at)baesystems.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:37:04 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Firewall penetrations
Firewall penetrations
G'day all,
I am about to work the firewall for wire and cable pass throughs. What penetration
techniques have people found the best - eyeballs, s/s grommet covers, tube/firesleeve
etc?
Are there any specific locations to avoid when making the penetrations? Is there
a 'best spot'?
What is the best way to cut 'largish' holes (ie >1/2") into the stainless??
Thanks in advance for your suggestions.
Ron
187 finishing
"Warning:
The information contained in this email and any attached files is
confidential to BAE Systems Australia. If you are not the intended
recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this email or any
attachments is expressly prohibited. If you have received this email
in error, please notify us immediately. VIRUS: Every care has been
taken to ensure this email and its attachments are virus free,
however, any loss or damage incurred in using this email is not the
sender's responsibility. It is your responsibility to ensure virus
checks are completed before installing any data sent in this email to
your computer."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jae Chang <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com> |
| Subject: | [Fwd: NTSB prelim report on N289DT] |
Looks like the NTSB prelim report is released...
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: NTSB prelim report on N289DT
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 08:55:30 -0800
From: Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com>
Has anyone posted this link to the RV-10 matronics list ?
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id 071120X01821&key=1
g
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | neil <ncol(at)xtra.co.nz> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
20 ZK-RVT
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
| From: | dougpflyrv(at)aol.com |
YA'LL HAVE A HAPPY THANKSGIVING
DP
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Sent: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 9:25 am
Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours
?
I'd like to kind of get a quick informal survey for a couple?
days and see if we can find out what kind of hours we're?
gathering as a fleet. If you have a flying RV-10, take this?
post, add your N-number and total hours to the bottom of the list,?
(**Round it to the nearest 5) and TRIM OUT ALL THE JUNK?
THAT GETS ADDED BELOW IT (We'll try to keep it a clean?
and lean email), and lets see what kind of running total?
we can come up with in the next couple days. From there,?
we can expand on it and make some wild assumptions about the fleet?
based on about 110-115 flying. No major purpose for this, but it?
seemed like a cool thing to do. If you know of other RV-10's that?
may not post to the list, and want to post their numbers, go ahead.?
I'll add what I know was Vic's before he sold it.?
?
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying?
?
************************************?
**** RV-10 total flying hours ****?
**** (as of approx. 11/22-23/07 ****?
************************************?
?
310 N104CD?
580 N64VC
85?? N372RV
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Jones <d.j.goneflyin(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
-----Original Message-----
>From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
>Sent: Nov 21, 2007 11:09 AM
>To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV10-List: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours
>
>
>Tim Olson wrote:
>>
>> I'd like to kind of get a quick informal survey for a couple
>> days and see if we can find out what kind of hours we're
>> gathering as a fleet. If you have a flying RV-10, take this
>> post, add your N-number and total hours to the bottom of the list,
>> (**Round it to the nearest 5) and TRIM OUT ALL THE JUNK
>> THAT GETS ADDED BELOW IT (We'll try to keep it a clean
>> and lean email), and lets see what kind of running total
>> we can come up with in the next couple days. From there,
>> we can expand on it and make some wild assumptions about the fleet
>> based on about 110-115 flying. No major purpose for this, but it
>> seemed like a cool thing to do. If you know of other RV-10's that
>> may not post to the list, and want to post their numbers, go ahead.
>> I'll add what I know was Vic's before he sold it.
>>
>
>************************************
>**** RV-10 total flying hours ****
>**** (as of approx. 11/22-23/07 ****
>************************************
>Hours N-Number
>----- --------
>310 N104CD
>580 N64VC
>155 K203JJ
086 N331DJ
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Schmidt <scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
Tim Olson wrote:
>
> I'd like to kind of get a quick informal survey for a couple
> days and see if we can find out what kind of hours we're
> gathering as a fleet. If you have a flying RV-10, take this
> post, add your N-number and total hours to the bottom of the list,
> (**Round it to the nearest 5) and TRIM OUT ALL THE JUNK
> THAT GETS ADDED BELOW IT (We'll try to keep it a clean
> and lean email), and lets see what kind of running total
> we can come up with in the next couple days. From there,
> we can expand on it and make some wild assumptions about the fleet
> based on about 110-115 flying. No major purpose for this, but it
> seemed like a cool thing to do. If you know of other RV-10's that
> may not post to the list, and want to post their numbers, go ahead.
> I'll add what I know was Vic's before he sold it.
>
************************************
**** RV-10 total flying hours ****
**** (as of approx. 11/22-23/07 ****
************************************
Hours N-Number
----- --------
310 N104CD
580 N64VC
155 K203JJ
290 N104XP
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Perry Casson - Home <pcasson(at)sasktel.net> |
| Subject: | RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
************************************
**** RV-10 total flying hours ****
**** (as of approx. 11/22-23/07 ****
************************************
310 N104CD
580 N64VC
155 K203JJ
20 C-FMHP
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | NTSB report is out on 289DT |
The following just came out of the NTSB.
NTSB Identification: NYC08LA023
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Friday, November 02, 2007 in Greenville, PA
Aircraft: Vans Aircraft RV-10, registration: N289DT
Injuries: 1 Fatal.
This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain
errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final
report has been completed.
On November 2, 2007, at 0830 eastern daylight time, an amateur built
Vans RV-10, N289DT, was substantially damaged when it impacted terrain
near Greenville, Pennsylvania. The certificated private pilot was
fatally injured. Day visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the
local flight that departed Greenville Municipal Airport (4G1),
Greenville, Pennsylvania. No flight plan was filed for the personal
flight conducted under 14 CFR Part 91.
According to a family member, the pilot had driven to the airport to
practice "touch and go's" and to make sure everything was functioning
properly, prior to a planned afternoon trip in the airplane with his
family to Boston, Massachusetts.
Witness interviews were conducted by the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) and the Safety Board, and while no one saw the airplane depart
4G1, the airplane was observed by a witness at approximately 0800
traveling in a northwesterly direction at low altitude, moving "fast,"
and sounding like it was "running strong like a Ford Mustang
(turbocharged) Cobra that the witness once owned." At approximately
0825, the airplane was again observed but, this time by multiple
witnesses. Descriptions varied between witness statements as to the
altitude, direction of flight, and velocity of the airplane; however,
the preponderance of witness statements were that the airplane was
flying north on the east side of Pennsylvania State Route 58, and seemed
to make a circle to the left at approximately 500 feet above ground
level (agl). It was next observed to travel in a westerly direction, fly
across Route 58 and make another turn to the left with the engine
"revving up and down," and losing altitude. When it reached
approximately 50-feet agl and was heading east, the airplane rolled
wings level and impacted a cornfield in a 35 to 60 degree nose down
attitude. A fireball erupted, and the airplane slid approximately
100-feet. It then impacted the shoulder of Route 58, nosed over, and
came to rest inverted on the roadway.
The amateur built airplane, was a four place, low wing monoplane. It was
equipped with a non-certificated Eggenfellner E6T/220, which was a water
cooled, fuel injected, turbo-charged, six cylinder engine. The
airplane's special airworthiness certificate was issued on July 10, 2007.
The pilot held a private pilot certificate, with a rating for airplane
single engine land. His most recent FAA third class medical certificate
was issued on March 14, 2006. According to his pilot logbook, he had
accrued 221.4 total hours of flight experience.
A weather observation taken about 23 minutes after the accident at Port
Meadville Airport (GKJ), Meadville, Pennsylvania, located about 14
nautical miles northeast of the accident site, recorded the winds as 090
degrees at 4 knots, visibility 10 miles, sky clear, temperature 1 degree
Celsius, dew point -2 degrees Celsius, and an altimeter setting of 30.36
inches of mercury.
The wreckage was retained by the Safety Board for further examination.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
Just re-cleaning the thread....
Tim Olson wrote:
>
> I'd like to kind of get a quick informal survey for a couple
> days and see if we can find out what kind of hours we're
> gathering as a fleet. If you have a flying RV-10, take this
> post, add your N-number and total hours to the bottom of the list,
> (**Round it to the nearest 5) and TRIM OUT ALL THE JUNK
> THAT GETS ADDED BELOW IT (We'll try to keep it a clean
> and lean email), and lets see what kind of running total
> we can come up with in the next couple days. From there,
> we can expand on it and make some wild assumptions about the fleet
> based on about 110-115 flying. No major purpose for this, but it
> seemed like a cool thing to do. If you know of other RV-10's that
> may not post to the list, and want to post their numbers, go ahead.
> I'll add what I know was Vic's before he sold it.
>
************************************
**** RV-10 total flying hours ****
**** (as of approx. 11/22-23/07 ****
************************************
Hours N-Number
----- --------
310 N104CD
580 N64VC
155 K203JJ
85 N372RV
175 N728DD
20 ZK-RVT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gommone7(at)bellsouth.net |
Happy thanksgiving to everybody ,and safe fly.
Hugo 40456
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pascal" <rv10builder(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | RV-10 report on line |
NTSB Preliminary Report is online.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id 071120X01821&key=1
..."the preponderance of witness statements were that the airplane was
flying north on the east side of Pennsylvania State Route 58, and
seemed to make a circle to the left at approximately 500 feet above
ground level (agl). It was next observed to travel in a westerly
direction, fly across Route 58 and make another turn to the left with
the engine "revving up and down," and losing altitude. When it reached
approximately 50-feet agl and was heading east, the airplane rolled
wings level and impacted a cornfield in a 35 to 60 degree nose down
attitude. A fireball erupted, and the airplane slid approximately 100-
feet. It then impacted the shoulder of Route 58, nosed over, and came
to rest inverted on the roadway."...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jae Chang <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com> |
| Subject: | [Fwd: NTSB prelim report on N289DT] |
oops. i meant to only forward the link. i didn't mean to post anyone's
email addresses out to the world, including my own. sorry Gerry!
Jae
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
| From: | "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> |
************************************
**** RV-10 total flying hours ****
**** (as of approx. 11/22-23/07 ****
************************************
340 N519RV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | RV-10 Door Incidents |
Sorry to not post just all good cheer before a holiday, but
a safety message well received should be cheery, right?
A former RV-10 owner saw the write up I did from early this
week and that prompted him to call me today. He's a
professional pilot, with many many thousand hours of experience,
and is a CFI (and more). He said he hadn't posted anything
previously because it is indeed embarrassing to tell a story
of poor preparation...things like missing something on a
checklist and then having an incident. But reading the
write up he felt compelled to share his story. He's not
involved in our online community any more, but asked me
if I'd mind telling it for him. (And no, to make sure this
isn't mis-attributed, it was not the famous red/white
plane of Vic's)
The basic story is simple. A passenger was along, and as
they taxied along, they were less "sterile cockpit" than
what you may prefer. This caused them to overlook the
checklist item of verifying the doors closed and latched.
They got their VFR takeoff clearance, and as they rotated,
the door came up. His headset was twisted sideways, as
your body's edge is a little in the air stream when this
happen, so he quickly moved to put his headset back on,
and as he looked up at the door, it departed the aircraft.
With 8000' of runway, there was room to do a gentle
landing, and taxi back to grab the door. The issue is,
he said it was an extremely rattling event...much like
an "explosion" to use his words, when that door opened.
He believed that it was startling enough that some day,
a door opening event would cause a bad accident....not
because the plane flew poorly (he said it flew just
great without the door), but because the pilot will
be too startled and may react inappropriately.
Now, although not much has been written on forums about
RV-10's and doors, it's pretty well known to some that
there have indeed been a handful of RV-10 door incidents
where the door was either torn off or nearly torn off,
due to improper latching. I'm not sure how many...probably
under 10, but over 5. This is just a guess, but I'd
have to say that I believe this is about the only mechanical
type issue we've seen that has caused damage to a plane.
So, it's something to absolutely take seriously with your
checklist. Does the RV-10 need a door redesign? Well,
it would be a lie to say you couldn't design a better door
system, but, it is what it is. In reality, although
the doors have this potential, if the pilot is diligent
you'll very likely never see an incident, and this pilot
knows that. He knew he screwed up. Van's also knew their
design wasn't perhaps as ideal as a Cirrus, for instance,
but it is a simple design that a homebuilder can handle
easily. Van's has known this for a long time, and they
came out with their door latch warning system just to
combat this problem with inattentive pilots. It monitors
the door pins and there are lights and a buzzer to let
you know if the pins aren't secured properly. Given
that addition, there's no reason you should have to
have as much worry. This pilot did not have that system
installed because he felt he may become too reliant on
the sensing hardware, rather than a good checklist
procedure....and hardware fails too. Well, as is easy
to guess...pilots probably fail more often than hardware
does, and that's what happened here. It's something
that could happen to any of us.
I write this all here as a reminder from him to pay
attention to this item very closely in your piloting.
It is the one known issue that you really have to
watch for. But once those doors are latched and the
roll pin is seated tightly in the latch mechanism,
it is also true that there is no reason you should
have a door come off, so you should not be overly
alarmed at the mere potential.
Please, as you flying RV-10 owners take to the skies both
this Holiday season and beyond, check the doors, and
instill it in your families to all participate in the
door pin check. Install the latch warning system and
use it. Admittedly, since the system came out after I
was flying I have not yet installed my kit, but this is
quickly helping me to move it higher on the to-do list,
and I need to be extra cautious. Also, thanks to our
former RV-10 pal who was willing to share his story
and a learning experience with you all.
Happy Thanksgiving!
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Ritter <mritter509(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 09:25:06 -0600> From: Tim(at)MyRV10.com> To: rv10-lis
t(at)matronics.com> Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours
to kind of get a quick informal survey for a couple> days and see if we ca
n find out what kind of hours we're> gathering as a fleet. If you have a fl
ying RV-10, take this> post, add your N-number and total hours to the botto
m of the list,> (**Round it to the nearest 5) and TRIM OUT ALL THE JUNK> TH
AT GETS ADDED BELOW IT (We'll try to keep it a clean> and lean email), and
lets see what kind of running total> we can come up with in the next couple
days. From there,> we can expand on it and make some wild assumptions abou
t the fleet> based on about 110-115 flying. No major purpose for this, but
it> seemed like a cool thing to do. If you know of other RV-10's that> may
not post to the list, and want to post their numbers, go ahead.> I'll add w
hat I know was Vic's before he sold it.> > -- > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD -
Flying> > > ************************************> **** RV-10 total flying h
ours ****> **** (as of approx. 11/22-23/07 ****> **************************
===============> > >
_________________________________________________________________
You keep typing, we keep giving. Download Messenger and join the i=92m Init
iative now.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
| From: | "dherring10" <dherring10(at)suddenlink.net> |
I think all of you guys are just bragging, trying to make us non-flyers feel bad!
[Laughing]
Dwayne Herring
40506
fighting with canopy & doors
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=147778#147778
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
| From: | "Randy DeBauw" <Randy(at)abros.com> |
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 7:25 AM
Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours
I'd like to kind of get a quick informal survey for a couple
days and see if we can find out what kind of hours we're
gathering as a fleet. If you have a flying RV-10, take this
post, add your N-number and total hours to the bottom of the list,
(**Round it to the nearest 5) and TRIM OUT ALL THE JUNK
THAT GETS ADDED BELOW IT (We'll try to keep it a clean
and lean email), and lets see what kind of running total
we can come up with in the next couple days. From there,
we can expand on it and make some wild assumptions about the fleet
based on about 110-115 flying. No major purpose for this, but it
seemed like a cool thing to do. If you know of other RV-10's that
may not post to the list, and want to post their numbers, go ahead.
I'll add what I know was Vic's before he sold it.
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
************************************
**** RV-10 total flying hours ****
**** (as of approx. 11/22-23/07 ****
************************************
310 N104CD
580 N64VC
225 N610RV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | GenGrumpy(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | V-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
In a message dated 11/21/2007 10:28:24 A.M. Central Standard Time,
Tim(at)MyRV10.com writes:
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson
Tim Olson wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson
>
> I'd like to kind of get a quick informal survey for a couple
> days and see if we can find out what kind of hours we're
> gathering as a fleet. If you have a flying RV-10, take this
> post, add your N-number and total hours to the bottom of the list,
> (**Round it to the nearest 5) and TRIM OUT ALL THE JUNK
> THAT GETS ADDED BELOW IT (We'll try to keep it a clean
> and lean email), and lets see what kind of running total
> we can come up with in the next couple days. From there,
> we can expand on it and make some wild assumptions about the fleet
> based on about 110-115 flying. No major purpose for this, but it
> seemed like a cool thing to do. If you know of other RV-10's that
> may not post to the list, and want to post their numbers, go ahead.
> I'll add what I know was Vic's before he sold it.
>
************************************
**** RV-10 total flying hours ****
**** (as of approx. 11/22-23/07 ****
************************************
Hours N-Number
----- --------
310 N104CD
580 N64VC
155 K203JJ
65 N184JM
**************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest
products.
(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David McNeill" <dlm46007(at)cox.net> |
I have have the Digiflite II V2.20. The aircraft is not flying; roll servo
harness is in dsub for wing connection. pitch servo harness is connected to
the elevator control horn. When testing the controller, I find that the
units turns on and properly indicates when receiving the GPS signal. The
Problem is that the ALT Hold function can not be disengaged without going
into setup mode and and turning off the pitch servo altogether. Is something
wrong with the harness? the unit? or are these strange results in response
to a system only partially connected? TT has updated the software once
already and the aircraft has not left the garage.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | What Are You Thankful For...? |
Dear Listers,
Here in the United States, Thursday is our National day of Thanksgiving. Many
of us will be traveling to be with our families and friends to share in generous
feasts of plenty and giving thanks for many blessings that have been bestowed
upon us.
Many Listers have expressed over the last couple of weeks how thankful they are
for the Email Lists and Forums here on the Matronics servers and for all of the
assistance and comradery they have experienced being a part of the Lists.
One of my favorite kind of comments is when write to me and says something like,
"Its the first thing I do in the morning while I'm having my morning coffee!".
That's a wonderful tribute to the purpose and function of these Lists. Its
always great to hear I'm not the only one that jumps out of bed each morning
to check my List email!!
Won't you take a minute today and show your appreciation for these Lists and for
their continued operation and upgrade?
The List Contribution Site is:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you in advance for your kind consideration,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "rtitsworth" <rtitsworth(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | RV-10 Door Incidents |
Tim, etal
I'm a Lancair builder, but lurk here because of all the good experimental
dialog, much of which still applies regardless of the airframe. For those
RV'ers taking your door message to heart, we Lancair builder/flyers share
the same door importance/fate. FYI, attached are a few personal photos of a
Lancair Columbia that had a door open in flight near Indianapolis.
The slipstream "tore" the left (pilot) door off, after it became unlatched
in-flight. The door then struck the top of the right wing - yes, up over
the top of the aircraft and down into the wing while in-flight. The damage
to the wing skin was significant, into the core, much more than cosmetic,
but not catastrophic. Note: that area is the fuel tank on a Lancair. The
door then, struck the right Hstab. I'd guess it would be hard to do that
much damage with a good full sledge hammer blow (significant). As a result
of that impact, the fuselage was cracked under the tail. The longitudinal
crack is at the fuselage 1/2 mold joining line (joggle). The
circumferential crack(s) are through the outer skin, core, and inner skin.
The entire tail was loose/wobbly to the touch. From seeing it myself, I
can't imaging the tail would have stayed on too much longer or in a stiff
crosswind landing. The pilot was able to declare an emergency and land, but
was "very" lucky. Also keep in mind this was a Columbia which is certified
in the utility class and VNE of 235 kts - quite strong - perhaps even more
so than either our RV or ES birds.
Now a door latch annunciator (and checklist) believer,
Rick Titsworth
Lancair ES, part of the fixed gear fraternity ;-)
1000+ hrs, Mutli, Com, IFR, land & sea
p.s. Tim, I'd love to read your N289DT post, but do not have an RV#.
-----Original Message-----
Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Door Incidents
Sorry to not post just all good cheer before a holiday, but
a safety message well received should be cheery, right?
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
| From: | "tintopranch" <mark_sutherland(at)yahoo.com> |
95 611TT
--------
MARK SUTHERLAND
RV-10 40292
Flying since June 07
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=147904#147904
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Perry Casson - Home <pcasson(at)sasktel.net> |
Pretty darn sure pressing "Alt" a 2nd time would turn off Alt Hold on my unit.
Not sure what version
I'm running but will check later today.
Perry
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf
Of David McNeill
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 11:29 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Trutrak AP
I have have the Digiflite II V2.20. The aircraft is not flying; roll servo harness
is in dsub for
wing connection. pitch servo harness is connected to the elevator control horn.
When testing the
controller, I find that the units turns on and properly indicates when receiving
the GPS signal. The
Problem is that the ALT Hold function can not be disengaged without going into
setup mode and and
turning off the pitch servo altogether. Is something wrong with the harness? the
unit? or are these
strange results in response to a system only partially connected? TT has updated
the software once
already and the aircraft has not left the garage.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JSMcGrew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours |
In a message dated 11/22/2007 8:28:10 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
Tim(at)MyRV10.com writes:
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson
Just re-cleaning the thread....
I'd like to kind of get a quick informal survey for a couple
days and see if we can find out what kind of hours we're
gathering as a fleet. If you have a flying RV-10, reply to this
post with your N-number and total hours and lets see what kind of
running total we can come up with in the next couple days. From there,
we can expand on it and make some wild assumptions about the fleet
based on about 110-115 flying. No major purpose for this, but it
seemed like a cool thing to do. If you know of other RV-10's that
may not post to the list, and want to post their numbers, go ahead.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
************************************
**** RV-10 total flying hours ****
**** (as of approx. 11/22-23/07 ****
************************************
TOTAL SO FAR: 2851 (16 of 110+)
** Wow, it looks like the fleet hours for the -10 are probably
well over 10,000 if we continue anywhere near this rate**
Hours N-Number
----- --------
310 N104CD
580 N64VC
155 K203JJ
85 N372RV
175 N728DD
20 ZK-RVT
86 N331DJ
290 N104XP
20 C-FMHP
340 N519RV
160 N410MR
85 N602WT
225 N610RV
70 C-FXCS
65 N184JM
185 N710RV
100 N312JE
**************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest
products.
(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David C. Watterson" <dcw(at)dddirectories.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yoursRV-10 Total Flight |
Time - Submit yours
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 7:25 AM
Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours
I'd like to kind of get a quick informal survey for a couple
days and see if we can find out what kind of hours we're
gathering as a fleet. If you have a flying RV-10, take this
post, add your N-number and total hours to the bottom of the list,
(**Round it to the nearest 5) and TRIM OUT ALL THE JUNK
THAT GETS ADDED BELOW IT (We'll try to keep it a clean
and lean email), and lets see what kind of running total
we can come up with in the next couple days. From there,
we can expand on it and make some wild assumptions about the fleet
based on about 110-115 flying. No major purpose for this, but it
seemed like a cool thing to do. If you know of other RV-10's that
may not post to the list, and want to post their numbers, go ahead.
I'll add what I know was Vic's before he sold it.
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
************************************
**** RV-10 total flying hours ****
**** (as of approx. 11/22-23/07 ****
************************************
310 N104CD
580 N64VC
225 N610RV
291 N2733K
4:28 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Fanning" <drdonfa(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yoursRV-10 Total Flight |
Time - Submit yours
I'm Don Fanning, owner of RV10, N415EC, and have flown 194 hrs since new.
Don
On Nov 22, 2007 9:30 AM, David C. Watterson wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 7:25 AM
> Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Total Flight Time - Submit yours
>
>
> I'd like to kind of get a quick informal survey for a couple
> days and see if we can find out what kind of hours we're
> gathering as a fleet. If you have a flying RV-10, take this
> post, add your N-number and total hours to the bottom of the list,
> (**Round it to the nearest 5) and TRIM OUT ALL THE JUNK
> THAT GETS ADDED BELOW IT (We'll try to keep it a clean
> and lean email), and lets see what kind of running total
> we can come up with in the next couple days. From there,
> we can expand on it and make some wild assumptions about the fleet
> based on about 110-115 flying. No major purpose for this, but it
> seemed like a cool thing to do. If you know of other RV-10's that
> may not post to the list, and want to post their numbers, go ahead.
> I'll add what I know was Vic's before he sold it.
>
> --
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
>
> ************************************
> **** RV-10 total flying hours ****
> **** (as of approx. 11/22-23/07 ****
> ************************************
>
> 310 N104CD
> 580 N64VC
> 225 N610RV
> 291 N2733K
>
>
> 4:28 PM
>
>
--
Don
Liberty University
Of: 434-592-4127
Cel: 434-944-5347
email: drdonfa(at)gmail.com
Skype: drdonfanning
MSN Messenger: drdonfa
Web: www.luglobal.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jae Chang <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com> |
| Subject: | pg 20-6 inboard bottom wing skin nutplate |
Happy thanksgiving! i know it's a holiday, because i always end up with
a problem on the start of a holiday.
http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/airframe/wings/photos/sec20/IMG_5509.html
http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/airframe/wings/photos/sec20/IMG_5510.html
The above photos show the bottom inboard wing rib. You can see where one
of the nutplate hole patterns in the skin, lines up right between a
notch in the rib flange.
On page 20-6, it calls for a K1100-08 here, which matches the hole
pattern pre-punched into the bottom skin, but this will make for an
awkward rivet in the notch without a shim or another type of nutplate.
Nothing in the archives about this. What am i missing or did i do wrong?
Jae
40533 - back to the wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | RV-10 Door Incidents |
Rick,
Thanks for sharing this, it is indeed valuable information and shows the potential
damage our gull wing doors can cause from a sudden departure in flight.
I have/am considering a strap that limits the doors opening to 6 inches or so
for a combination of safety, ability to leave the door "cracked" in hot climates
while on the ground, and as a strap to grab to shut the door. I'll probably
do some experimenting once I get the doors installed.
I think it's great that our list is considered not only civil enough, but also
informative enough to attract pilots and builders from other aircraft ranks.
Thanks for contributing to our greater knowledge!
Michael Sausen
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of rtitsworth
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 2:03 AM
Subject: FW: RV10-List: RV-10 Door Incidents
Tim, etal
I'm a Lancair builder, but lurk here because of all the good experimental dialog,
much of which still applies regardless of the airframe. For those RV'ers taking
your door message to heart, we Lancair builder/flyers share the same door
importance/fate. FYI, attached are a few personal photos of a Lancair Columbia
that had a door open in flight near Indianapolis.
The slipstream "tore" the left (pilot) door off, after it became unlatched in-flight.
The door then struck the top of the right wing - yes, up over the top
of the aircraft and down into the wing while in-flight. The damage to the wing
skin was significant, into the core, much more than cosmetic, but not catastrophic.
Note: that area is the fuel tank on a Lancair. The door then, struck
the right Hstab. I'd guess it would be hard to do that much damage with a good
full sledge hammer blow (significant). As a result of that impact, the fuselage
was cracked under the tail. The longitudinal crack is at the fuselage 1/2
mold joining line (joggle). The circumferential crack(s) are through the outer
skin, core, and inner skin.
The entire tail was loose/wobbly to the touch. From seeing it myself, I can't
imaging the tail would have stayed on too much longer or in a stiff crosswind
landing. The pilot was able to declare an emergency and land, but was "very"
lucky. Also keep in mind this was a Columbia which is certified in the utility
class and VNE of 235 kts - quite strong - perhaps even more so than either our
RV or ES birds.
Now a door latch annunciator (and checklist) believer,
Rick Titsworth
Lancair ES, part of the fixed gear fraternity ;-)
1000+ hrs, Mutli, Com, IFR, land & sea
p.s. Tim, I'd love to read your N289DT post, but do not have an RV#.
-----Original Message-----
Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Door Incidents
Sorry to not post just all good cheer before a holiday, but a safety message well
received should be cheery, right?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James Hein <n8vim(at)arrl.net> |
| Subject: | Re: pg 20-6 inboard bottom wing skin nutplate |
Here's a photo of mine; I was told to just rivet it (the rivet will
expand slightly):
-Jim 40384
Jae Chang wrote:
>
> Happy thanksgiving! i know it's a holiday, because i always end up
> with a problem on the start of a holiday.
>
> http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/airframe/wings/photos/sec20/IMG_5509.html
>
> http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/airframe/wings/photos/sec20/IMG_5510.html
>
>
> The above photos show the bottom inboard wing rib. You can see where
> one of the nutplate hole patterns in the skin, lines up right between
> a notch in the rib flange.
>
> On page 20-6, it calls for a K1100-08 here, which matches the hole
> pattern pre-punched into the bottom skin, but this will make for an
> awkward rivet in the notch without a shim or another type of nutplate.
>
> Nothing in the archives about this. What am i missing or did i do wrong?
>
> Jae
> 40533 - back to the wings
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RV-10 Door Incidents |
| From: | "William Curtis" <wcurtis(at)nerv10.com> |
I always suspected this is why Cirrus hinged their doors forward rather than at
the top as a classic gull wing. Hinged at the front an adjar door will tend
to be pushed closed by the slipstream, rather than get ripped off by it.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
>
> Rick,
>
> Thanks for sharing this, it is indeed valuable information and shows the potential
damage our gull wing doors can cause from a sudden departure in flight.
I have/am considering a strap that limits the doors opening to 6 inches or
so for a combination of safety, ability to leave the door "cracked" in hot climates
while on the ground, and as a strap to grab to shut the door. I'll probably
do some experimenting once I get the doors installed.
>
> I think it's great that our list is considered not only civil enough, but also
informative enough to attract pilots and builders from other aircraft ranks.
Thanks for contributing to our greater knowledge!
>
> Michael Sausen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of rtitsworth
> Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 2:03 AM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: FW: RV10-List: RV-10 Door Incidents
>
> Tim, etal
>
> I'm a Lancair builder, but lurk here because of all the good experimental dialog,
much of which still applies regardless of the airframe. For those RV'ers
taking your door message to heart, we Lancair builder/flyers share the same door
importance/fate. FYI, attached are a few personal photos of a Lancair Columbia
that had a door open in flight near Indianapolis.
>
> The slipstream "tore" the left (pilot) door off, after it became unlatched in-flight.
The door then struck the top of the right wing - yes, up over the top
of the aircraft and down into the wing while in-flight. The damage to the wing
skin was significant, into the core, much more than cosmetic, but not catastrophic.
Note: that area is the fuel tank on a Lancair. The door then, struck
the right Hstab. I'd guess it would be hard to do that much damage with a
good full sledge hammer blow (significant). As a result of that impact, the fuselage
was cracked under the tail. The longitudinal crack is at the fuselage
1/2 mold joining line (joggle). The circumferential crack(s) are through the
outer skin, core, and inner skin.
> The entire tail was loose/wobbly to the touch. From seeing it myself, I can't
imaging the tail would have stayed on too much longer or in a stiff crosswind
landing. The pilot was able to declare an emergency and land, but was "very"
lucky. Also keep in mind this was a Columbia which is certified in the utility
class and VNE of 235 kts - quite strong - perhaps even more so than either
our RV or ES birds.
>
> Now a door latch annunciator (and checklist) believer,
>
> Rick Titsworth
> Lancair ES, part of the fixed gear fraternity ;-)
> 1000+ hrs, Mutli, Com, IFR, land & sea
>
> p.s. Tim, I'd love to read your N289DT post, but do not have an RV#.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Door Incidents
>
> Sorry to not post just all good cheer before a holiday, but a safety message
well received should be cheery, right?
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RV-10 Door Incidents |
| From: | "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com> |
>>I always suspected this is why Cirrus hinged their doors forward
rather than at the top as a classic gull wing. Hinged at the front an
adjar door will tend to be pushed closed by the slipstream, rather than
get ripped off by it."
Yes and no. I have a D-35 Bonanza that had a difficult latching
mechanism (doors hinges forward as we all know). Heck it's a 1952 plane
designed in the 40's. Between the latch mechanism and the goofy door
handle the only door on the plane looked closed but on two (2) occasions
the door unlatched in flight. Both times the door unlatched on takeoff.
Because the door hinges in the front there was no concern of the door
ripping off but there was NO possibility of closing the door in flight
either. The slipstream pulled the door open. I know, I was in the PAX
seat. Great idea to include "Seatbelts Secure" in the checklist! It took
all my strength to hold the door in MOST OF THE WAY while we went around
and landed. If I released the tension the door would open a bit more but
not much more. So I was fighting to hold the door 2-3" closed vs. where
it would have naturally been had I applied very little pressure to the
door handle. Also note holding the door like that is very awkward with
little leverage. After the second time the door popped we completely
removed & serviced the door and replaced the door latching mechanism.
All good after that.
On my Turbo Lance II (AKA Land Lance) our rear baggage door once was not
fully closed. Again a misaligned mechanism. The misalignment was minimal
but about 8 minutes after takeoff we heard a buzzing sound. The sound
was the battery style home CO sensor I had placed in the plane. We could
hear it over the engine/Comm sounds. I was on a short flight (14
minutes) with a couple of friends to attend a BBQ so I nosed down,
throttled back and coasted into PRB. Again we completely removed &
serviced the door and replaced all the door latching mechanism. As most
know the Turbo Lance II is a long plane with the exhaust on the right
side and the baggage door on the rear left side. One might think that
the CO might dissipate in the slipstream but there was enough to set off
my detector. Truly a silent killer. My -10 will include a remote CO
detector that will alarm on the G900X.
Photos of both planes attached.
Robin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "rtitsworth" <rtitsworth(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | RV-10 Door Incidents |
Some ES guys have built such a strap. One thought/caution is to build it
strong. My understanding (second hand), is that the Columbia pilot had the
strap in hand at the time of his door incident, and the strap was tore out
of the door (unconfirmed). The simple math might be something like 0.05 psi
differential (conservative est) times the size of the door (~1,000 sqin)
50 lbs. The actual force could be much more (> couple hundred lbs??).
-----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, November 22, 2007 11:43 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: RV-10 Door Incidents
Rick,
... I have/am considering a strap that limits the doors opening to 6 inches
or so...
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Manifold Pressure |
| From: | "McGANN, Ron" <ron.mcgann(at)baesystems.com> |
G'day all,
Happy thanksgiving to the guys across the pond!
I know this has been discussed in the past, but listers have been using
'Do Not Arch. . . ' so diligently that the archive trail is pretty
fragmented (ie useless). Where does one find an adapter for the 1/8"
tube (into the GRT EFIS) to the 3/32" restrictor at the manifold
pressure bulkhead fitting??
Cheers,
Ron
-187 finishing
"Warning:
The information contained in this email and any attached files is
confidential to BAE Systems Australia. If you are not the intended
recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this email or any
attachments is expressly prohibited. If you have received this email
in error, please notify us immediately. VIRUS: Every care has been
taken to ensure this email and its attachments are virus free,
however, any loss or damage incurred in using this email is not the
sender's responsibility. It is your responsibility to ensure virus
checks are completed before installing any data sent in this email to
your computer."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rene Felker" <rene(at)felker.com> |
| Subject: | Manifold Pressure |
I just went down to the local auto parts store (aviation department of
course) and got a box of air line fittings. It had various sizes and one of
them worked. Sorry I don't have brand or real sizes...
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 McGANN, Ron
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 3:21 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Manifold Pressure
G'day all,
Happy thanksgiving to the guys across the pond!
I know this has been discussed in the past, but listers have been using 'Do
Not Arch. . . ' so diligently that the archive trail is pretty fragmented
(ie useless). Where does one find an adapter for the 1/8" tube (into the
GRT EFIS) to the 3/32" restrictor at the manifold pressure bulkhead
fitting??
Cheers,
Ron
-187 finishing
"Warning:
The information contained in this email and any attached files is
confidential to BAE Systems Australia. If you are not the intended
recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this email or any
attachments is expressly prohibited. If you have received this email
in error, please notify us immediately. VIRUS: Every care has been
taken to ensure this email and its attachments are virus free,
however, any loss or damage incurred in using this email is not the
sender's responsibility. It is your responsibility to ensure virus
checks are completed before installing any data sent in this email to
your computer."
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fine Wire Spark Plug Offer |
| From: | "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> |
Aircraft Spruce is also offering a FREE $75 Aircraft Spruce Gift Card
with the purchase of one case (12) Autolite XL Fine Wire spark plugs.
The Unison Autolite XL Fine Wire spark plugs are priced well below
competitor's plugs, plus you receive the $75 Gift Card which can be used
on your next order with Aircraft Spruce.
Aircraft Spruce & Specialty Co.
1-877-4SPRUCE
www.aircraftspruce.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Schlatterer" <billschlatterer(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Manifold Pressure Fitting |
Ron, there was a fitting in the Vans kit with a 1/8 hose end on it for a
manifold fitting but I also needed a manifold pressure source for my P-Mag
so I just modified a 90 degree bulkhead fitting to do both. I took two
short 3/16 bolts, cut the heads off, and used a 40(?) drill in a drill press
to go right through the bolt to make it hollow. Then I just drilled the
bulkhead fitting and threaded it for the 3/16 bolts and put a little JB Weld
on it to be sure. Used regular manifold line (#6 I think) to right rear
cylinder. Be sure to put the restrictor in. Total time was about 20
minutes as I remember it. Pictures should tell the story.
Hope this helps.
Bill S
7a finishing finishing finishing ,......
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 4:21 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Manifold Pressure
G'day all,
Happy thanksgiving to the guys across the pond!
I know this has been discussed in the past, but listers have been using 'Do
Not Arch. . . ' so diligently that the archive trail is pretty fragmented
(ie useless). Where does one find an adapter for the 1/8" tube (into the
GRT EFIS) to the 3/32" restrictor at the manifold pressure bulkhead
fitting??
Cheers,
Ron
-187 finishing
"Warning:
The information contained in this email and any attached files is
confidential to BAE Systems Australia. If you are not the intended
recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this email or any
attachments is expressly prohibited. If you have received this email
in error, please notify us immediately. VIRUS: Every care has been
taken to ensure this email and its attachments are virus free,
however, any loss or damage incurred in using this email is not the
sender's responsibility. It is your responsibility to ensure virus
checks are completed before installing any data sent in this email to
your computer."
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Door Incidents |
| From: | "bcondrey" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com> |
Just for the record the flush exterior handles from Steve DiNieri (http://iflyrv10.com/) don't change the stock latching/locking mechanism. I have also heard of one that completely disables the lock part but this isn't it.
No affiliation, just clarifying.
Bob #40105
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=148045#148045
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: pg 20-6 inboard bottom wing skin nutplate |
Jae;
I went out and looked at my wings. Did the same thing. Just put the
nut plate over the end of the gap. Just like Mr Hein's pics.
Fred
40515.
Having fun with fiberglass. .......
ae Chang wrote:
>
> Happy thanksgiving! i know it's a holiday, because i always end up
> with a problem on the start of a holiday.
>
> http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/airframe/wings/photos/sec20/IMG_5509.html
>
> http://www.jline.com/log/aviation/build/airframe/wings/photos/sec20/IMG_5510.html
>
>
> The above photos show the bottom inboard wing rib. You can see where
> one of the nutplate hole patterns in the skin, lines up right between
> a notch in the rib flange.
>
> On page 20-6, it calls for a K1100-08 here, which matches the hole
> pattern pre-punched into the bottom skin, but this will make for an
> awkward rivet in the notch without a shim or another type of nutplate.
>
> Nothing in the archives about this. What am i missing or did i do wrong?
>
> Jae
> 40533 - back to the wings
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Turner Checking In |
| From: | "Andy Turner" <aturner(at)clarion.edu> |
Builder #40784 checking in here. Andy Turner, Clarion, Pennsylvania. I'm far enough
into this process to see that I'll be asking more than few questions along
the way, so it seems appropriate to say hi before I start asking for too much
help. I'm a 2000 hr. private pilot, current owner of a C-172 and a C-140, both
of which I enjoy a great deal. My wife Sharon is an enthusiastic aviator as
well. We use the Skyhawk for cross-country travel, with several long trips each
year, and see the RV-10 as an upgrade over the Skyhawk. On the personal side,
I pay the bills by working as a college professor at Clarion University. My
research focus is on the ecology of lakes and streams. Thus, I spend a lot of
time both working and recreating outdoors. This time of year I spend my spare
time hunting in the woods of western PA, so the RV-10 project will receive more
attention once deer season is over in 2 weeks.
One question has come up already: I just finished riveting the rear spar of the
vertical stabilizer, and found that most of the rivet callouts seemed a bit long.
I had a few bent-over rivets, and ended up going with a size shorter for
most of the rear spar. I also found that my rivet gun handles the longer rivets
better than a hand squeezer does. Am I the only one to find that the rivets
called out in the plans often seem too long? Is a pneumatic squeezer less likely
to bend-over rivets than a hand squeezer?
--------
Andy Turner
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=148104#148104
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Turner Checking In |
Andy,
In most cases, Van's rivet call out are close (if not slightly short) for
1/8" rivets, but 1/2 to 1 size short many of the 3/32" rivets. I have a
couple of pounds of 3.5 rivets left over from my RV-8A and now the RV-10.
Not sure how you are coming up with long rivet call outs.
The rule is use the correct size rivet. If you do not have a rivet length
gauge, get one. Here is a link to Brown Brothers for a rivet length gauge:
http://www.browntool.com/productselect.asp?productid=697
Here is a link for rivet shop end gauges:
http://www.browntool.com/productselect.asp?productid=696
Preventing rivets from bending first starts at using the correct length.
Second aspect is your proficiency with a squeezer. With time you get better
at it. Keep it parallel and steady (hard to do with a hand squeezer). I
strongly recommend you save yourself a lot of pain and get a pneumatic
squeezer now. Get a 3" or 4" yoke, along with the dimple dies and set
assortment. If you really need to you can sell it after you're done for
about what you paid for it (or just keep it for the next RV like I did).
Here are some links to Cleaveland Tool:
http://www.cleavelandtoolstore.com/prodinfo.asp?number=SNB214
http://www.cleavelandtoolstore.com/prodinfo.asp?number=SNY40
http://www.cleavelandtoolstore.com/prodinfo.asp?number=SNKITW
http://www.cleavelandtoolstore.com/prodinfo.asp?number=DIEKITW
Good luck,
Carl Froehlich (RV-8A) 375 hrs
RV-10 (wings)
Dogwood Airpark, VA42
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Andy Turner
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 2:45 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Turner Checking In
Builder #40784 checking in here. Andy Turner, Clarion, Pennsylvania. I'm far
enough into this process to see that I'll be asking more than few questions
along the way, so it seems appropriate to say hi before I start asking for
too much help. I'm a 2000 hr. private pilot, current owner of a C-172 and a
C-140, both of which I enjoy a great deal. My wife Sharon is an enthusiastic
aviator as well. We use the Skyhawk for cross-country travel, with several
long trips each year, and see the RV-10 as an upgrade over the Skyhawk. On
the personal side, I pay the bills by working as a college professor at
Clarion University. My research focus is on the ecology of lakes and
streams. Thus, I spend a lot of time both working and recreating outdoors.
This time of year I spend my spare time hunting in the woods of western PA,
so the RV-10 project will receive more attention once deer season is over in
2 weeks.
One question has come up already: I just finished riveting the rear spar of
the vertical stabilizer, and found that most of the rivet callouts seemed a
bit long. I had a few bent-over rivets, and ended up going with a size
shorter for most of the rear spar. I also found that my rivet gun handles
the longer rivets better than a hand squeezer does. Am I the only one to
find that the rivets called out in the plans often seem too long? Is a
pneumatic squeezer less likely to bend-over rivets than a hand squeezer?
--------
Andy Turner
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=148104#148104
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David McNeill" <dlm46007(at)cox.net> |
what kind of quotes and recommendations have 10 builders for aircraft paint?
My plans are a base color of Jetglo matterhorn white and a trim color of
Acryglo deep marroon. Design will be basic. I am located AZ so places east
of the Mississippi don't compute. Any recommendations for western US.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MauleDriver <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Turner Checking In |
Welcome aboard Andy!
Re rivet lengths - you are right, some rivet call outs are off by a half
size and Vans generally doesn't include half sizes (except perhaps for
the AN4263 - 3.5?). Clearly, with a bit of patience you can get away
with using the longer size. Or you can get a rivet cutter to cut them
down (too much work when more than 3 or 4 rivets are required). Or
better yet, you can stock a few of the key half sizes. Spruce and
others sell them and they are cheap. I forgot the key sizes to get for
the tail.
I'm grew up in Pittsburgh and used to spend a lot of time in the western
PA woods and streams. Miss them a lot.
Bill Watson
#40605
Durham NC
>
> One question has come up already: I just finished riveting the rear spar of the
vertical stabilizer, and found that most of the rivet callouts seemed a bit
long. I had a few bent-over rivets, and ended up going with a size shorter for
most of the rear spar. I also found that my rivet gun handles the longer rivets
better than a hand squeezer does. Am I the only one to find that the rivets
called out in the plans often seem too long? Is a pneumatic squeezer less likely
to bend-over rivets than a hand squeezer?
>
> --------
> Andy Turner
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=148104#148104
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Turner Checking In |
Andy,
Make sure that the rivet is really too long or not, 1.5 the diameter of protrusion
is a good rule of thumb. I found Vans had short callouts more than long in
almost all cases. The 470 rivets tend to be more of a challenge, make sure you
are applying force dead straight onto the rivet, any side force will bend that
puppy in a minute. I used a pnemumatic squeezer from start to finish, I would
not trade it for the world. It's worth every penny. When you run into a situation
where it appears the rivet may be too long as per the callout, step back
and make sure you haven't missed a doubler or another part in the sequence
of assembly, I heard of others doing this and I also hear some people have to
drill out a bad rivet once in awhile. Not me though, it's been perfect from the
beginning... heh heh...
Rick Sked
40185
bleeding brakes...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Turner" <aturner(at)clarion.edu>
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 11:45:13 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RV10-List: Turner Checking In
Builder #40784 checking in here. Andy Turner, Clarion, Pennsylvania. I'm far enough
into this process to see that I'll be asking more than few questions along
the way, so it seems appropriate to say hi before I start asking for too much
help. I'm a 2000 hr. private pilot, current owner of a C-172 and a C-140, both
of which I enjoy a great deal. My wife Sharon is an enthusiastic aviator as
well. We use the Skyhawk for cross-country travel, with several long trips each
year, and see the RV-10 as an upgrade over the Skyhawk. On the personal side,
I pay the bills by working as a college professor at Clarion University. My
research focus is on the ecology of lakes and streams. Thus, I spend a lot of
time both working and recreating outdoors. This time of year I spend my spare
time hunting in the woods of western PA, so the RV-10 project will receive more
attention once deer season is over in 2 weeks.
One question has come up already: I just finished riveting the rear spar of the
vertical stabilizer, and found that most of the rivet callouts seemed a bit long.
I had a few bent-over rivets, and ended up going with a size shorter for
most of the rear spar. I also found that my rivet gun handles the longer rivets
better than a hand squeezer does. Am I the only one to find that the rivets
called out in the plans often seem too long? Is a pneumatic squeezer less likely
to bend-over rivets than a hand squeezer?
--------
Andy Turner
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=148104#148104
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob-tcw" <rnewman(at)tcwtech.com> |
| Subject: | Safety-Trim Update |
Fellow builders,
We have added some new application notes to our
web site this week. We now have a navigation tab, "Application
Notes" You'll see details on Pilot/Co-Pilot trim switch wiring as
well as details on our 2 speed models. visit www.tcwtech.com for the
details.
Hope all had a great Thanksgiving. We visited The Air & Space Museum
in Washington DC yesterday (yes it's open Thanksgiving Day !) and
recharged our aviation history batteries.
Regards,
Bob Newman
TCW Technologies
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
Dear Listers,
Below are a few more of the nice comments Listers have been making along with their
Contributions in support of the Lists this year. Please make your Contribution
today to support the continued operation and upgrade of these services.
Remember, there is _no advertising budget_ to keep these Lists funded. It is
solely through your generosity that they continue.
Please make a Contribution:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List and Forum Administrator
------------------------------What Listers Are Saying------------------------------
The list has been invaluable in the building of my Zenith CH701.
George R
Thanks for keeping the lists a non-commercial venue for us
to gather and share knowledge.
Neal G
What a fantastic resource!
Ralph C
It's a pretty cheep troubleshooting tool with and unlimited
resource of personal knowledge.
Bruce G
A full house of Info & Ideas...
Ellery B
I really enjoy the Piet list.
Steven D
The Lists are an indispensable resource for those of us
building OBAM aircraft.
Bret S
..a great service.
Frank D
..all in all it is a great resource if you ask specific
questions.
Richard S
Your list has really helped me in my first build.
Michael W
Always a pleasure to support this great resource...
Richard W
I enjoy the lists very much, they are very beneficial.
Bob L
Great place to chat with other builders and Flyers.
Ellery B
Your lists are a great service to builders and owners!
Richard D
A real good place for someone that is starting to get
interested into flying without investing any money at
first.
Ellery B
The list has been an great help to my building process.
David B
I'm close to finishing my Zenith 601 thanks to you and
the Zenith List.
Jeff D
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Edgerton" <wayne.e(at)grandecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: paint prices |
The last I heard Glo Custom Paint, Grady, on 52F in TX is charging
$10,000.
Wayne Edgerton N602WT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chuck Weyant" <chuck(at)chuckdirect.com> |
| Subject: | Lack of Install Instructions TruTrak |
November 12, 2007 - November 24, 2007
RV10-Archive.digest.vol-ct