RV10-List Archive Browser

RV10-Archive.digest.vol-ii
July 20, 2011 - August 19, 2011

> > href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com > > href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c > > > > > > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List"> > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List > > href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com > > href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c > > > > > > > > > >========= > > > > > > > > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 20, 2011
Subject: Re: -10 Plans
From: Shannon Hicks <civeng123(at)gmail.com>
Invite sent. jlstrib(at)comcast.net On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 4:04 PM, James Stribling wrote: > I forgot to provide my email address: jlstrib(at)comcast.net > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 1:08 PM, wrote: > >> Thanks Guys. I was afraid that there might be some copyright issues >> involved. Right now I have them in my Google Docs with access restricted to >> only those that have permission. Right now, that is just me and a friend >> that is helping me out. It is handy to have them available when away from >> the hanger if a question or concern comes up. >> >> Shannon >> >> >> On , Pascal wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Actually Tim took it down a year ago. It is not legal to copy the plans >> and >> > distribute. >> > >> > The best suggestion is ask Vans if you can do it and if so, do it and >> state >> > so. >> > >> > Pascal >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > From: DLM >> > >> > Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 7:30 AM >> > >> > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com >> > >> > Subject: Re: RV10-List: -10 Plans >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Check Tim's site . already done. >> > >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > >> > From: >> > Shannon >> > Hicks >> > >> > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com >> > >> > Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 6:59 >> > AM >> > >> > Subject: RV10-List: -10 Plans >> > >> > >> > I have started scanning all of my -10 plans for my own >> > personal use and was wondering if there would be any issues with making >> them >> > available for everyone to see. >> > >> > Thanks for your >> > input. >> > >> > Shannon >> > >> > >> > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List"> >> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >> > href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com >> > href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c >> > >> > >> > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List"> >> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >> > href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com >> > href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >========= >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> * >> >> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >> ttp://forums.matronics.com >> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> * >> >> > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 20, 2011
From: "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com>
Subject: Re: Oshkosh wireless sites
Bingo. I looked at the EAA site, but didn't see that they were listed on the map. Thanks. Dr Fred. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 20, 2011
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: NavWorx ADS600-B Transceiver Arrives...
I was just drilling there this a.m. There is a small gap between the top and bottom layer, which was perfect for me inserting a cleco, but I wasn't aware that signal attenuation was of particular concern with regard to glass thickness, since it allegedly is pretty transparent to RF. On 7/20/2011 8:21 AM, Linn Walters wrote: > > I think the FG is still pretty thick back there. The VS fairing would > be thinner ...... and there's a whole lot of aircraft out there flying > with the GPS antenna on the glareshield. > I like the glareshield mountiung .... shorter coax, less weight (those > ounces add up!) and easier installation. > Linn > > On 7/20/2011 8:48 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote: >> >> One does have to wonder just how many satellites you would miss that >> were shadowed by the vertical stab. Seems like you would still have >> more than 300 degree view of the sky there. >> Has anyone had success with GPS antenna under the cabin cover(without >> making holes in the fiberglass)? Seems like there shouldn't be a >> problem behind the door posts where there is no honeycomb. >> >> >> On 7/20/2011 5:26 AM, Bob Leffler wrote: >>> >>> >>> I'm surprised that your not having reception issues with the antenna >>> under the empennage fairing. The garmin install manual states to >>> stay clear of the VS. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jul 20, 2011, at 8:00 AM, "orchidman" wrote: >>> >>>> The UAT antenna is mounted about 12" from the unit in the floor >>>> of the tail section and the GPS is mounted under the fiber glass >>>> cover between the tail section and the vertical stab. >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 20, 2011
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: GPS antenna
Changed the subject. On 7/20/2011 5:46 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote: > > I was just drilling there this a.m. There is a small gap between the > top and bottom layer, which was perfect for me inserting a cleco, but > I wasn't aware that signal attenuation was of particular concern with > regard to glass thickness, since it allegedly is pretty transparent to > RF. I haven't been able to find any data on the signal degradation of FG ....... but the satellite signal is awful puny by the time it gets here. The more thickness, the more degradation. I was just comparing the thickness of the VS fairing Vs. the cabin top. I know there are antennas out there that work fine under a FG cowl. I wonder how many antennas are out there working just fine under the cabin top. Linn > > > On 7/20/2011 8:21 AM, Linn Walters wrote: >> >> >> I think the FG is still pretty thick back there. The VS fairing >> would be thinner ...... and there's a whole lot of aircraft out there >> flying with the GPS antenna on the glareshield. >> I like the glareshield mountiung .... shorter coax, less weight >> (those ounces add up!) and easier installation. >> Linn >> >> On 7/20/2011 8:48 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote: >>> >>> One does have to wonder just how many satellites you would miss that >>> were shadowed by the vertical stab. Seems like you would still have >>> more than 300 degree view of the sky there. >>> Has anyone had success with GPS antenna under the cabin >>> cover(without making holes in the fiberglass)? Seems like there >>> shouldn't be a problem behind the door posts where there is no >>> honeycomb. >>> >>> >>> On 7/20/2011 5:26 AM, Bob Leffler wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm surprised that your not having reception issues with the >>>> antenna under the empennage fairing. The garmin install manual >>>> states to stay clear of the VS. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jul 20, 2011, at 8:00 AM, "orchidman" wrote: >>>> >>>>> The UAT antenna is mounted about 12" from the unit in the floor >>>>> of the tail section and the GPS is mounted under the fiber glass >>>>> cover between the tail section and the vertical stab. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 20, 2011
Subject: Re: GPS antenna
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Yes, that would be very interesting. I know about the install that was carved out to be encapsulated "in" the cabin cover and what Vans opinion was about it, so seeking other options that don't require something more on top of fuselage. Not saying Vans is right or wrong, just that would prefer another solution. On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Linn Walters wrote: > > Changed the subject. > > I haven't been able to find any data on the signal degradation of FG ....... > but the satellite signal is awful puny by the time it gets here. The more > thickness, the more degradation. I was just comparing the thickness of the > VS fairing Vs. the cabin top. I know there are antennas out there that work > fine under a FG cowl. I wonder how many antennas are out there working just > fine under the cabin top. > Linn ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Paul Bowmar <paul(at)bwbco.com>
Subject: Re: Abe's Tiedowns for OSH
Date: Jul 20, 2011
I bet my tie downs would surpass any and didn't cost three bills. I cut 1/2 inch rebar in 25 inch lengths. Grind a point on one end and heat the other end with a torch to form a loop. I drive them into the ground near each other at a 45 degree angle so that when fully in the gowned the loops are together. Easy to tie the rope through. They are next to impossible to pull out either straight up or at an angle. And as recommended by the FAA, they go into the ground about 18 inches. and I drive them into the ground outward and foreword of the wing ties and behind the tail. Ah, weight you say. Yes, nine pounds for all six rebar and a ball peen to drive them in. 2.8 less than Abe's. I have used these for years at Osh and elsewhere without any problems. I hope the photos I have attached come through. If anybody is interested in more info, please contact me offline. My worries at Osh is not that my rebar tie downs will hold, but what the guy next to is using. I made these many years ago after surmising that all the products I saw commercially sold were inadequate. Paul RV-4 67KB On Jul 20, 2011, at 1:26 PM, Tim Olson wrote: > > After the disaster at Sun-N-Fun where the planes flipped all over > the place, I paid attention to the stuff going on when the > discussion turned to tiedowns. At the time, Aviation Consumer > decided to test them after the big blow and get feedback too, > from sun-n-fun attenders. So they did a tie-down comparison > and basically the thrust of it was that The Claw was probably > just slightly on top as the best. But, then came info > about the Storm Force tie down, which purported to be better > yet. > > So I watched with interest because I really care about my > plane and care not to have it thrashed at OSH, and every year... > and I mean EVERY year, we get at least one storm going through > that scares the heck out of me. (Remember that bozo with the > stuck horn in camp scholler that sounded like a tornado horn > that one year?) So I wanted to make sure that whatever I > had, it was very very good, if not the best I could practically > do. > > Well, after Aviation Consumer did that review, a couple others > that they hadn't heard about were made known to them. > One of them was Abe's Tiedowns...one that I had never heard > of. As it turns out, Abe's tiedowns were vastly stronger > than the other offerings when they tested them. > > You can go to Abe's Aviation site here, and see the > Aviation Consumer review and test. http://www.abesaviation.com/ > (actually, it looks like the link on their site has > gotten mixed up but either google it or go to youtube here) > > Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIuYK_eEQ9c > Google: "Aviation Consumer's Tiedown Shootout" > > The way the test turned out, they used an engine hoist > to test them, and the Abe's were so strong that the > engine hoist wouldn't do it without tipping over so they > hooked up a truck, and pulled to 1000lbs and the tires > on the truck spun without pulling the tiedown anchors out. > I was pretty impressed, and I'd never even heard of them > before. > > The Abe's set aren't cheap...I bought the deluxe-5 set > that costs $305, but there are cheaper options if you > wish. I got them last week and opened them up and > saw that they were really nice, made of stainless. They're > going to be a little heavier in the 5-set that I got, than > my claw set, but the anchoring hold is much much stronger. > My thought is that if I were going somewhere for a simple > overnight, perhaps I'd take the claw for weight savings > if it were an issue (it's only about 3 lbs less). But > sometimes you're traveling to a place like OSH. At OSH, > you can't really just LEAVE if a storm is imminent. The > rules don't allow it, and you can't just get up at > 9pm and decide to bug out before a huge line of storms > is coming. So for a show like OSH, I don't want my plane > flying around into someone else's, or flipping over, and > I'd gladly haul the best tiedown anchors I could get > for such a show. I know, it's paranoid, but it did just > happen at OSH. > > So anyway, I thought I'd pass on the note, since I wasn't > aware of them. I was impressed enough that I asked Abe's > guy to send me some flyers that I can set down by the plane > next to the tiedowns, to have something for people to > grab if they are interested in such a thing. I know it > might not be something you could get in time for OSH, > unless you scramble, but for builders who don't have them, > you may want to stop over and take a peek. > > Just thought I'd pass that along. > Tim > > -- > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: GPS antenna
From: Michael Kraus <n223rv(at)wolflakeairport.net>
Date: Jul 20, 2011
All mine are mounted between the firewall and the engine mount, under the cowling. Worked great for 8 years in my RV-4 and 44 hours in my RV-10. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 20, 2011, at 6:43 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote: > > Yes, that would be very interesting. I know about the install that was > carved out to be encapsulated "in" the cabin cover and what Vans > opinion was about it, so seeking other options that don't require > something more on top of fuselage. Not saying Vans is right or wrong, > just that would prefer another solution. > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Linn Walters wrote: >> >> Changed the subject. > >> >> I haven't been able to find any data on the signal degradation of FG ....... >> but the satellite signal is awful puny by the time it gets here. The more >> thickness, the more degradation. I was just comparing the thickness of the >> VS fairing Vs. the cabin top. I know there are antennas out there that work >> fine under a FG cowl. I wonder how many antennas are out there working just >> fine under the cabin top. >> Linn > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 20, 2011
Subject: Re: Oshkosh wireless sites
From: Bob Condrey <condreyb(at)gmail.com>
In response to the other part of the question, it appears to be working very well so far this year. Bob On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Fred Williams, M.D. < drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com> wrote: > drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com> > > Bingo. > > I looked at the EAA site, but didn't see that they were listed on the map. > Thanks. > > Dr Fred. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 20, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Re: NavWorx ADS600-B Transceiver Arrives...
Listers, I got a voicemail and a nice email from Bill at NavWorx this morning. He confirmed that the unit doesn't normally come with the antennas anymore, but he graciously offered to send me a UAT antenna free of charge. That was really nice. Bill also included the latest version of the installation/operation manual in PDF format along with his email. He said that they are working on adding the manuals to the web site, probably in August sometime. So, I'm good to go. I'll report later on my installation experience. Looking at the wring diagrams, it seems like it should be pretty straightforward connecting up between the GRT HX's and the 327. Matt - Matt Dralle RV-8 #82880 N998RV "Ruby Vixen" http://www.mattsrv8.com - Matt's Complete RV-8 Construction Log http://www.mattsrv8.com/Mishap - Landing Mishap Rebuild Log http://www.youtube.com/MattsRV8 - Matt's RV-8 HDTV YouTube Channel Status: 170+ Hours TTSN - Rebuilding Fuselage After Landing Mishap... At 07:22 PM 7/19/2011 Tuesday, Matt Dralle wrote: >Dear Listers, > >The NavWorx ADS600-B Transceiver kit arrived today. Included in the box were the following: > > 1ea ADS600-B Transceiver Unit > 1ea DB37 Connector w/ Shell > 2ea RG-142 BNC Antenna Coax Cables (terminated on one end) > 1ea Wireless receiver option (802.11) > 1ea End User License sheet > 1ea Attention Warning sheet > >Missing from the package, it seemed to me were: > > 1ea Installation Manual > 1ea Instruction Manual > 1ea Wiring Diagram > 2ea BNC connectors for Terminating Antenna Cable > 1ea UAT Antenna > 1ea GPS Antenna > >Attached are a couple of pictures of what I received. > >Looking over the NavWorx web site, I'm not finding anywhere to download instruction manuals or installation manuals. Am I suppose to buy the UAT and GPS antennas separately? I didn't see these available separately on the NavWorx web site when I ordered the package. > >I called and left NavWorx a voicemail. > >At this point, I'm kind at a loss...? :-/ > >Matt ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: GPS antenna
From: "AirMike" <Mikeabel(at)Pacbell.net>
Date: Jul 21, 2011
My Garmin 496 antenna is mounted on the top of the instrument panel and gets a good signal all the time. I saw a lot of nice installations inside the rear part of the cowl, but was concerned about the heat accumulating there after engine shutdown affecting the wire and antenna! -------- See you OSH '11 Q/B - flying 1 yr+ Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347264#347264 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: -10 Plans
Date: Jul 21, 2011
From: "Pierre van der Merwe" <Pierre(at)xoncoastal.co.za>
Hi Shannon Thanks for your trouble. I'd appreciate access as I am currently busy with the emp - #41049. Kind Regards Pierre van der Merwe Regional Director c +27 83 555 5080 t + 27 21 591 6901 f +27 21 591 6905 e pierre(at)xoncoastal.co.za 131 Vasco Boulevard, N1 City, Goodwood, South Africa PO Box 12958, N1 CITY, 7463, South Africa www.xon.co.za <http://www.xon.co.za/> "The information contained in this communication is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the user of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in reliance of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. The Employer is neither liable for the proper, complete transmission of the information contained in this communication nor any delay in its receipt". From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Shannon Hicks Sent: 20 July 2011 07:59 PM Subject: Re: Re: RV10-List: -10 Plans I just spoke with Van's and they do not have a problem with me sharing the plans with other -10 builders. They just don't want them accessible to everyone in the world with an internet connection. If anyone would like to have access to them, please email me directly along with your builder number and I will get you access to the plans. Shannon On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Matthew Collier wrote: Subject: Re: RV10-List: -10 Plans Shannon, How about making them available to anyone with a valid RV-10 customer number with Vans? I think it would be a very helpful option Van's could even offer if you sent them the file. Matthew RV-10 phase 1 flight testing On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 10:08 AM, wrote: Thanks Guys. I was afraid that there might be some copyright issues involved. Right now I have them in my Google Docs with access restricted to only those that have permission. Right now, that is just me and a friend that is helping me out. It is handy to have them available when away from the hanger if a question or concern comes up. Shannon On , Pascal wrote: > > > > > > > > > Actually Tim took it down a year ago. It is not legal to copy the plans and > distribute. > > The best suggestion is ask Vans if you can do it and if so, do it and state > so. > > Pascal > > > > > > > From: DLM > > Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 7:30 AM > > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > > Subject: Re: RV10-List: -10 Plans > > > > > > > > Check Tim's site . already done. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > Shannon > Hicks > > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > > Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 6:59 > AM > > Subject: RV10-List: -10 Plans > > > I have started scanning all of my -10 plans for my own > personal use and was wondering if there would be any issues with making them > available for everyone to see. > > Thanks for your > input. > > Shannon > > > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List"> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List > href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com > href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution"> http://www.matronics.com/c > > > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List"> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List > href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com > href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution"> http://www.matronics.com/c > > > > >========= > > > get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List tp://forums.matronics.com _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List tp://forums.matronics.com _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
Subject: Tie downs and local OSH events
Date: Jul 21, 2011
If anyone gets to OSH and discovers they need tiedowns, EAA Chapter 444 sells tiedowns that are similar to what Paul describes below at the tiedown shack near homebuilt parking. They are based on the design in the article below and they have sold thousands of these and have never had a complaint that I'm aware of. Many were in use down at Lakeland this year and no one lost their aircraft because of them. I know this sounds like a shameless plug but this is the primary revenue driver for the chapter for the year and I can't see spending the money on the Claw or others when these work just as good. They are $20 for purchase or you can "rent" them by returning them for $10 back at the end of the show. http://www.airventure.org/planning/tying_down.html Another shameless plug, W34 (30 miles due north from OSH) is having their annual fly-in on Sat/Sun this week. It's one of the best kept grass strips in the state. They have live music on Sat and breakfast on Sunday. More info below. http://www.shioctonairport.com/Fly-In.html Lastly, 68C has decided to have their famous Friday lunch this year during Airventure. They usually don't but due to popular demand they have decided to go ahead and have it this year. This is one of the best lunches in the area and if you want to get out of OSH for an afternoon, head up there. http://netnet.net/~wjknjan/ Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Bowmar Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 5:51 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Abe's Tiedowns for OSH I bet my tie downs would surpass any and didn't cost three bills. I cut 1/2 inch rebar in 25 inch lengths. Grind a point on one end and heat the other end with a torch to form a loop. I drive them into the ground near each other at a 45 degree angle so that when fully in the gowned the loops are together. Easy to tie the rope through. They are next to impossible to pull out either straight up or at an angle. And as recommended by the FAA, they go into the ground about 18 inches. and I drive them into the ground outward and foreword of the wing ties and behind the tail. Ah, weight you say. Yes, nine pounds for all six rebar and a ball peen to drive them in. 2.8 less than Abe's. I have used these for years at Osh and elsewhere without any problems. I hope the photos I have attached come through. If anybody is interested in more info, please contact me offline. My worries at Osh is not that my rebar tie downs will hold, but what the guy next to is using. I made these many years ago after surmising that all the products I saw commercially sold were inadequate. Paul RV-4 67KB On Jul 20, 2011, at 1:26 PM, Tim Olson wrote: > > After the disaster at Sun-N-Fun where the planes flipped all over the > place, I paid attention to the stuff going on when the discussion > turned to tiedowns. At the time, Aviation Consumer decided to test > them after the big blow and get feedback too, from sun-n-fun > attenders. So they did a tie-down comparison and basically the thrust > of it was that The Claw was probably just slightly on top as the best. > But, then came info about the Storm Force tie down, which purported to > be better yet. > > So I watched with interest because I really care about my plane and > care not to have it thrashed at OSH, and every year... > and I mean EVERY year, we get at least one storm going through that > scares the heck out of me. (Remember that bozo with the stuck horn in > camp scholler that sounded like a tornado horn > that one year?) So I wanted to make sure that whatever I > had, it was very very good, if not the best I could practically do. > > Well, after Aviation Consumer did that review, a couple others that > they hadn't heard about were made known to them. > One of them was Abe's Tiedowns...one that I had never heard of. As it > turns out, Abe's tiedowns were vastly stronger than the other > offerings when they tested them. > > You can go to Abe's Aviation site here, and see the Aviation Consumer > review and test. http://www.abesaviation.com/ (actually, it looks > like the link on their site has gotten mixed up but either google it > or go to youtube here) > > Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIuYK_eEQ9c > Google: "Aviation Consumer's Tiedown Shootout" > > The way the test turned out, they used an engine hoist to test them, > and the Abe's were so strong that the engine hoist wouldn't do it > without tipping over so they hooked up a truck, and pulled to 1000lbs > and the tires on the truck spun without pulling the tiedown anchors > out. > I was pretty impressed, and I'd never even heard of them before. > > The Abe's set aren't cheap...I bought the deluxe-5 set that costs > $305, but there are cheaper options if you wish. I got them last week > and opened them up and saw that they were really nice, made of > stainless. They're going to be a little heavier in the 5-set that I > got, than my claw set, but the anchoring hold is much much stronger. > My thought is that if I were going somewhere for a simple overnight, > perhaps I'd take the claw for weight savings if it were an issue (it's > only about 3 lbs less). But sometimes you're traveling to a place > like OSH. At OSH, you can't really just LEAVE if a storm is imminent. > The rules don't allow it, and you can't just get up at 9pm and decide > to bug out before a huge line of storms is coming. So for a show like > OSH, I don't want my plane flying around into someone else's, or > flipping over, and I'd gladly haul the best tiedown anchors I could > get for such a show. I know, it's paranoid, but it did just happen at > OSH. > > So anyway, I thought I'd pass on the note, since I wasn't aware of > them. I was impressed enough that I asked Abe's guy to send me some > flyers that I can set down by the plane next to the tiedowns, to have > something for people to grab if they are interested in such a thing. > I know it might not be something you could get in time for OSH, unless > you scramble, but for builders who don't have them, you may want to > stop over and take a peek. > > Just thought I'd pass that along. > Tim > > -- > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: GPS antenna
From: pilotdds <pilotdds(at)aol.com>
Date: Jul 21, 2011
My 430w ant is mounted on the glareshield near the trutrak ant-no problems in roughly 5 years full confidence for instrument approaches. -----Original Message----- From: AirMike <Mikeabel(at)Pacbell.net> Sent: Thu, Jul 21, 2011 12:12 am Subject: RV10-List: Re: GPS antenna My Garmin 496 antenna is mounted on the top of the instrument panel and get s a ood signal all the time. I saw a lot of nice installations inside the rear part f the cowl, but was concerned about the heat accumulating there after engin e hutdown affecting the wire and antenna! -------- ee you OSH '11 /B - flying 1 yr+ ead this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347264#347264 -= - The RV10-List Email Forum - -= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse -= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription, -= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, -= Photoshare, and much much more: - -= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List - -======================== -= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - -= Same great content also available via the Web Forums! - -= --> http://forums.matronics.com - -======================== -= - List Contribution Web Site - -= Thank you for your generous support! -= -Matt Dralle, List Admin. -= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution -======================== ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: NavWorx ADS600-B Transceiver Arrives...
From: "kevino" <kevino(at)worldwarehouse.com>
Date: Jul 21, 2011
Possible to attach the manual here? Am wanting to buy this but did want to review the manual. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347306#347306 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 21, 2011
Subject: Re: My "fix" for dragging brakes
From: Phillip Perry <philperry9(at)gmail.com>
A day or two late, but here are some details on the mod. I shot a video on my brake lines and someone noticed the return springs. At the bottom of this thread is a narrative description. http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=63149 The single best thing one could do is bend the flanges of the pedals inward so the bolt holes are perfectly aligned. This eliminates all binding caused by misaligned boles on both sides of the pedal. Once they're aligned there is absolutely no binding and the pedal is free to do anything it wants. I don't think I even need the return springs now, but since they are there and I already spent the money on them - I left them. Phil On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Phil Perry wrote: > It was me. I'll see if I can find some old write ups and photos of the > mod. It was easy, cheap, and effective. If I were building another one, > I'd do the same thing again. > > Phil > > > On Jul 19, 2011, at 4:05 PM, "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" < > rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> wrote: > > rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> > > > > I forgot who did that but I've seen it before and it is what I plan to > do. > > > > Michael > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto: > owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Linn Walters > > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 3:23 PM > > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > > Subject: Re: RV10-List: My "fix" for dragging brakes > > > > --> > > > > Your spring idea is good. However placing a compression spring over the > cylinder shaft would be lighter and maybe more effective solution. > > Linn > > > > On 7/19/2011 3:53 PM, billz wrote: > >> --> RV10-List message posted by: "billz" > >> > >> I've been reading about the various dragging brake issues on the forum, > talked with several folks and experienced the problem with a friend's RV-10. > >> > >> 1. I found out, from the folks at Matco, that it is critical for the > master cylinder to fully extend when pressure is removed from the brake > pedals. The last 1/16th in. of piston extension is needed for fluid to > bypass internally allowing the brake pads to retract. It doesn't take much > to keep pressure on the brake pads. My friend fixed his with a spring > arrangement on the pedals. > >> > >> 2. I also learned that minimizing friction in the brake pedals is > important. They should move freely with no binding. All bolt holes should > be properly drilled to assure free movement. The bolts should not be overly > tightened, to minimize drag. > >> > >> 3. The Van's design uses two short AN3 bolts on each side of the bottom > of the pedals. This can result in some minor twisting that can add > resistance to the pedal movement. Matco suggested replacing these with one > long bolt. (I purchased AN3-60 bolts, $10 each) I also used some aluminum > tubing over the bolt to provide a spacer inside the pedal flanges. I found > springs at McMaster (part # 9271K542 and 9271K542, 270 deg, left and right > hand). These were put over the through bolt and aluminum tube. The springs > I settled on (to get enough return force) were larger inside diameter than > the aluminum tube so I found some old garden hose to put over the tubing as > a spacer. > >> > >> As you can see from the pictures, the springs provide return force and > work nicely to provide positive pressure on the pedal and master cylinders. > So far, it seems like a "no drag" configuration. Since I'm not flying, a > final report will have to wait for the future. Does all this make sense > from what others have learned from experience?? > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Read this topic online here: > >> > >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347079#347079 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Attachments: > >> > >> http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_1388_336.jpg > >> http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_1387_104.jpg > >> http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_1386_109.jpg > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 21, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Re: NavWorx ADS600-B Transceiver Arrives...
At 08:17 AM 7/21/2011 Thursday, you wrote: > >Possible to attach the manual here? Am wanting to buy this but did want to review the manual. I put it here for my own personal reference: http://www.matronics.com/MattsRV8/ADS600-B-InstallationManual240-0008-00-14.pdf Matt - Matt Dralle RV-8 #82880 N998RV "Ruby Vixen" http://www.mattsrv8.com - Matt's Complete RV-8 Construction Log http://www.mattsrv8.com/Mishap - Landing Mishap Rebuild Log http://www.youtube.com/MattsRV8 - Matt's RV-8 HDTV YouTube Channel Status: 170+ Hours TTSN - Rebuilding Fuselage After Landing Mishap... ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Phil Barnette <barnettephillip(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: NavWorx ADS600-B Transceiver Arrives...
Date: Jul 21, 2011
U Sent from my iPhone On Jul 20, 2011, at 4:32 PM, "jayb" wrote: > > Corrections to after additional input from Navworx... > > ADS600B connection list for GRT HX: > > ADS600: Maint Port RX-Pin 4 --- To DB9 for PC > ADS600: Maint Port TX-Pin 22 --- To DB9 for PC > ADS600: Maint Port GND-Pin28 --- To DB9 for PC > > ADS600: ALT Enc Serial RX-Pin 7 --- To GRT DU1A-Pin1 (Serial Out 6) > ADS600: ALT TIS TX-Pin 25 --- Not Connected (provided by Display) > ADS600: ALT Enc GND-Pin6 --- To GRT DU1A-Pin17 GND > ADS600: Display Serial TX-Pin 5 --- To GRT DU1B,2A,3A-Pin23 (Serial IN 7) > ADS600: Display Serial RX-Pin 24 --- To GRT DU2B-Pin22 (Serial OUT 7) > Wire for future GRT support. Disable Serial OUT 7. > > ~~~ Other connections are > > ADS600: ARINC IN1B-Pin28 --- To GTX330 ARINC OUT2B-Pin28 > ADS600: ARINC IN1A-Pin09 --- To GTX330 ARINC OUT2A-Pin30 > ADS600: UAT Fail OUT-Pin 14 --- Wire to ext connector for future use > ADS600: Transponder Suppression OUT-Pin35 --- Not connected > (provided by GTX330 ARINC) > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347209#347209 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: -10 Plans
From: "charliewaffles" <mcooper(at)live.com>
Date: Jul 21, 2011
Tim stll has these online for confirmed builders. Www.myrv10.com. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347342#347342 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Greg is in Sport Aviation again
Date: Jul 22, 2011
Looks like Vans gives his feedback on Greg=99s plane in the next issue of Sport Aviation (pg 96) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Date: Jul 22, 2011
Subject: Re: Greg is in Sport Aviation again
SSB3aXNoIEdyZWcgaGFkIHRoZSBvcHBvcnR1bml0eSB0byBwb3N0IGhpcyByZXBseSBhbG9uZyBz aWRlIHRoZSBhcnRpY2xlLgpJIGhhdmUgbm90IHlldCByZWFkIHRoZSBTQSBwb3N0aW5nIGJ1dCBJ IGFsc28gaG9wZSB0aGUgaW5hY2N1cmFjeSBpbiBWYW5zCmNvbW1lbnRzIGFib3V0IGluY3JlYXNl ZCBncm9zcyB3ZWlnaHQgd2VyZSByZW1vdmVkIGFzIGl0IHBhaW50cyBhbgppbmFjY3VyYXRlIHBp Y3R1cmUgb2YgR3JlZydzIGNob2ljZXMuCgpSb2JpbgpEbyBOb3QgQXJjaGl2ZQoKU2VudCBmcm9t IG15IGlQYWQyLgoKT24gSnVsIDIyLCAyMDExLCBhdCAzOjQ0IFBNLCBQYXNjYWwgPHJ2MTBmbHll ckB2ZXJpem9uLm5ldD4gd3JvdGU6CgogTG9va3MgbGlrZSBWYW5zIGdpdmVzIGhpcyBmZWVkYmFj ayBvbiBHcmVnknMgcGxhbmUgaW4gdGhlIG5leHQgaXNzdWUgb2YKU3BvcnQgQXZpYXRpb24gKHBn IDk2KQoKCgoqCgpfLT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQpfLT0gICAgICAgICAgLSBUaGUgUlYxMC1MaXN0IEVtYWlsIEZvcnVt IC0KXy09IFVzZSB0aGUgTWF0cm9uaWNzIExpc3QgRmVhdHVyZXMgTmF2aWdhdG9yIHRvIGJyb3dz ZQpfLT0gdGhlIG1hbnkgTGlzdCB1dGlsaXRpZXMgc3VjaCBhcyBMaXN0IFVuL1N1YnNjcmlwdGlv biwKXy09IEFyY2hpdmUgU2VhcmNoICYgRG93bmxvYWQsIDctRGF5IEJyb3dzZSwgQ2hhdCwgRkFR LApfLT0gUGhvdG9zaGFyZSwgYW5kIG11Y2ggbXVjaCBtb3JlOgpfLT0KXy09ICAgLS0+IGh0dHA6 Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9OYXZpZ2F0b3I/UlYxMC1MaXN0Cl8tPQpfLT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQpfLT0gICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAtIE1BVFJPTklDUyBXRUIgRk9SVU1TIC0KXy09IFNhbWUgZ3JlYXQgY29udGVu dCBhbHNvIGF2YWlsYWJsZSB2aWEgdGhlIFdlYiBGb3J1bXMhCl8tPQpfLT0gICAtLT4gaHR0cDov L2ZvcnVtcy5tYXRyb25pY3MuY29tCl8tPQpfLT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQpfLT0gICAgICAgICAgICAgLSBMaXN0IENv bnRyaWJ1dGlvbiBXZWIgU2l0ZSAtCl8tPSAgVGhhbmsgeW91IGZvciB5b3VyIGdlbmVyb3VzIHN1 cHBvcnQhCl8tPSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIC1NYXR0IERyYWxsZSwgTGlz dCBBZG1pbi4KXy09ICAgLS0+IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9jb250cmlidXRpb24K Xy09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT0KKgo ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Greg is in Sport Aviation again
From: "greghale" <ghale5224(at)aol.com>
Date: Jul 22, 2011
Sport Aviation gave me a heads up on Vans request to place his Facebook article in the August issue. I asked if they could include my comments, but they said his article would take up all the allowable space available for this section of the magazine. They did say they would include a link to my web site. I sent Vans a personal email asking why he decided to single me out when there have been many before me with RV modifications corvette engine, 3 seat RV6, floats and a complete redesign of the RV10 cabin top for a few. I didnt expect an answer nor did I get one. Except for the seat adjustment lever I sold, I was not making parts or plans on what I did. All I did was share my ideas and methods on what I did. Sport Aviation sent an email to me shortly after my first flight inquiring about my airplane. They had been following my changes and wanted to do an article on it. At the time I thought this was great, but now knowing the repercussions, I would have turned them down. When my aircraft was judged at Sun n Fun, I wasnt even at the aircraft. I had only bought the Do Not Touch sign to place on my propeller with my information on it. Not wanting to stay for the airshow, I left about 2 hours after I arrived. Guys, I have to be honest. This whole thing has really taken the wind out of my sails and given me nothing but grief. My only intention was to complement the RV10 aircraft which I still think is a great aircraft. Greg... -------- Greg Hale rv10 -- N210KH www.nwacaptain.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347458#347458 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
Subject: Re: Greg is in Sport Aviation again
Date: Jul 23, 2011
Greg, I wouldn't give it another thought. You did a great job and frankly much less modification than many others. Van is in his standard CYA mode so no one should be surprised at his response, it's standard fare. I can guarantee he wouldn't even hesitate to sell you another kit, it's all about risk mitigation and the business and I can't fault him one bit for that. The thing I find a bit disturbing is that our association, that has built itself up on the premise of experimental aviation and homebuilding, allowed the response it did without making it more factual. To me this is at least partially from having a manufacturing centric editor that doesn't really seem to understand the associations constituents. I'm all for shaking things up but not at the cost of abandoning it's roots. I may be over reacting but I'm really disappointed in SA publishing a one sided response that is clearly not bearing all the facts. Having grown up and still residing in the shadow of OSH and knowing everything that EAA has done for the local economy and the role it's played in my aviation interests I can only hope this isn't the start of an even more big GA centric view. Michael Sent from my iPad2 On Jul 22, 2011, at 11:25 PM, "greghale" wrote: > > Sport Aviation gave me a heads up on Vans request to place his Facebook article in the August issue. I asked if they could include my comments, but they said his article would take up all the allowable space available for this section of the magazine. They did say they would include a link to my web site. > > I sent Vans a personal email asking why he decided to single me out when there have been many before me with RV modifications ?" corvette engine, 3 seat RV6, floats and a complete redesign of the RV10 cabin top for a few. I didn?Tt expect an answer nor did I get one. Except for the seat adjustment lever I sold, I was not making parts or plans on what I did. All I did was share my ideas and methods on what I did. > > Sport Aviation sent an email to me shortly after my first flight inquiring about my airplane. They had been following my changes and wanted to do an article on it. At the time I thought this was great, but now knowing the repercussions, I would have turned them down. When my aircraft was judged at Sun n Fun, I wasn?Tt even at the aircraft. I had only bought the ?oDo Not Touch? sign to place on my propeller with my information on it. Not wanting to stay for the airshow, I left about 2 hours after I arrived. > > Guys, I have to be honest. This whole thing has really taken the wind out of my sails and given me nothing but grief. My only intention was to complement the RV10 aircraft which I still think is a great aircraft. > > Greg... > > -------- > Greg Hale rv10 -- N210KH > www.nwacaptain.com > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347458#347458 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Greg is in Sport Aviation again
From: Wayne Edgerton <w.edgerton(at)verizon.net>
Date: Jul 23, 2011
Greg, I think you did an outstanding job on your plane and don't believe that you should feel anything but pride. You've got one beautiful bird! I built mine the way I wanted it, as you did, and if someone else doesn't agree with me that's ok because that's their opinion, but it's still my plane the way I wanted it built. It's experimental, so that's the whole idea, build it the way you want it, hopefully always keeping safety in mind of coarse. So I think you need to put some wind back in your sail because you've built one beautiful flying machine and you should be very proud of it. Wayne Edgerton N602WT 40336 Sent from my Iphone Wayne ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 23, 2011
Subject: Re: Greg is in Sport Aviation again
From: Jim Combs <jiminlexky(at)gmail.com>
Guys lets take a look at all this without any emotion. Greg won an award not for engineering but for craftsmanship and quality of construction. Nothing in that award is for engineering changes to a design. Craftsmanship and attention to details during construction have nothing to do with engineering changes and testing to validate changes. Great craftsmanship does not equal good engineering. There is a perception that any time someone makes a change that they have done testing to validat e those changes. That takes money and time. Very few people will do that. Greg deserves his award based on quality and craftsmanship. That is obvious. Vans position on the other hand is all about engineering and safety. Vans Aircraft have done the engineering and testing (Take a look at the wing loading tests they did to validate the 2700lb using 3.8G and a 1.5 safety factor). The article says NOTHING about Gregs quality of construction. It is all about changes to the aircraft design with NO DATA to back up those engineering changes. The article is not bashing Gregs attention to detail and finish. It is about the engineering behind the changes. What I see is a change to loading and gross weight of a kit that Vans designed and stands behind. Any testing to validate the new design point i s missing. The same points can be made for the front seat belt attach points. One should build several fuselages with the different seat belt attach points and crash test them with proper instrumentation before just making claims that design "A" is better then design "B". Adding fuel out away from the center of gravity and not doing any engineering testing is a third point brought up in the article. Yes, Greg is being singled out for making changes. He won a very significant award for his workmanship. It was rightfully won and he deserves it. That award put him in the big spotlight. That is the unfortunate part of all this. Vans is rightfully pointing out that THEIR design has been changed and if anything happens down the road THEY will be ones dragged into court for faulty engineering even though changes were made without proper testing. Vans is not always great with their engineering. The doors of the -10 are an area that deserves more thought and possibly changes. Just looking at both sides of this. Jim Combs N312F - Flying 250 hours. On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 7:56 AM, RV Builder (Michael Sausen) < rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> wrote: > rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> > > Greg, > > I wouldn't give it another thought. You did a great job and frankly muc h > less modification than many others. Van is in his standard CYA mode so n o > one should be surprised at his response, it's standard fare. I can > guarantee he wouldn't even hesitate to sell you another kit, it's all abo ut > risk mitigation and the business and I can't fault him one bit for that. > > The thing I find a bit disturbing is that our association, that has buil t > itself up on the premise of experimental aviation and homebuilding, allow ed > the response it did without making it more factual. To me this is at lea st > partially from having a manufacturing centric editor that doesn't really > seem to understand the associations constituents. I'm all for shaking > things up but not at the cost of abandoning it's roots. > > I may be over reacting but I'm really disappointed in SA publishing a on e > sided response that is clearly not bearing all the facts. Having grown u p > and still residing in the shadow of OSH and knowing everything that EAA h as > done for the local economy and the role it's played in my aviation intere sts > I can only hope this isn't the start of an even more big GA centric view. > > Michael > > Sent from my iPad2 > > On Jul 22, 2011, at 11:25 PM, "greghale" wrote: > > > > > Sport Aviation gave me a heads up on Vans request to place his Facebook > article in the August issue. I asked if they could include my comments, but > they said his article would take up all the allowable space available for > this section of the magazine. They did say they would include a link to my > web site. > > > > I sent Vans a personal email asking why he decided to single me out whe n > there have been many before me with RV modifications =82?" corvette engin e, 3 > seat RV6, floats and a complete redesign of the RV10 cabin top for a few. I > didn=82?Tt expect an answer nor did I get one. Except for the seat adjus tment > lever I sold, I was not making parts or plans on what I did. All I did w as > share my ideas and methods on what I did. > > > > Sport Aviation sent an email to me shortly after my first flight > inquiring about my airplane. They had been following my changes and want ed > to do an article on it. At the time I thought this was great, but now > knowing the repercussions, I would have turned them down. When my aircra ft > was judged at Sun n Fun, I wasn=82?Tt even at the aircraft. I had only b ought > the =82?oDo Not Touch=82?=F9 sign to place on my propeller with my inform ation on > it. Not wanting to stay for the airshow, I left about 2 hours after I > arrived. > > > > Guys, I have to be honest. This whole thing has really taken the wind > out of my sails and given me nothing but grief. My only intention was to > complement the RV10 aircraft which I still think is a great aircraft. > > > > Greg... > > > > -------- > > Greg Hale rv10 -- N210KH > > www.nwacaptain.com > > > > > > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347458#347458 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > =========== =========== =========== =========== > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Greg is in Sport Aviation again
Date: Jul 23, 2011
From: "John Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Greg, I am hopeful the wind is back in your sails soon. I concur with Michael. Having felt the scorn of Dick and his Vans Aircraft team in the past, I too see both sides. He is calling in his markers with EAA to protect his flank from exactly what devastated the Lancair community a few years back. Insurance became "UNobtainable" and the sale of kits vaporized. Joe Bartel had to sell out and much seems to be going offshore. Even Cirrus is Chinese these days. I had pointed out early on with the prototype fuselage that a 12" wide tunnel would not serve more robust builder torsos like mine or Deems. The door would not close and we needed more shoulder room and less tunnel width. That triggered a torturous delay in the delivery of early fuselage kits to builders who had finished the Empennage. "Let me say here - I AM SORRY". Then I had the audacity to state that I thought the rudder hinge points provided a "Point of potential Failure". Two weeks later the RV-10 got its first SB. No I am not an Aeronautical Engineer. I just like to talk about Gonad Vents and points of improvement for conversation cause to me it is clear. I too want a safe flying aircraft and a parts supplier who listens and will stay in business - long term. As a mentor on Teen Flight, read "Band of Builders (Brothers) pages 110-114 in this same SA, our quiet group of Instructors/Mentors are not named which is okay. The last four weeks I have been hastily rebuilding a crashed RV-12 so it can fly to the "Big Show". I don't dare mention the specific parts I again find in need of redesign with the RV-12 model. Cause I hanger at KUAO and am a member in the same fraternal aviation club that VAN now belongs too, I am learning about speaking out it... doesn't pay and it carries a consequence. Another pet peeve is the EAA using Dick's picture to promote "Lifetime Membership". I was awed into becoming one only to find out that neither EAA nor Dick felt compelled for him to be one. Greg, you have embodied what is best about Experimental/ Amateur build. It was what caused Lance Niebauer to bring scores of spectators for two decades to OSH each year and see what is new and exciting from the Left Coast. It is what leads to "Grand Champion" and the improvements many of us love. I have not forgotten how Van (or was that Ken Krueger) did not want to embrace EFIS and put that damn center rib in the RV-10 glareshield to force steam gages installations. Tim O. had the shocking audacity to modify that rib (Early ON). Your workmanship, your desire to improve our craft and hopefully to return is a tribute to all who follow. Geoff should also get an award as well for his composite mods. When VANS acknowledges "Areas of Improvement" I will know that they listen to builders. The overworked "Just Build it" from Ken Scott, when scores of ribs have cracks from improper metal treatment leaves me with my phrase "Choose wisely" - you are the first line of liability, the QC and the decision maker long before VANS Aircraft is brought into litigation. Vans builds great parts - not perfect parts. They have been most effective into shoring up there flank with the most recent published cautions to deviating from those plans. EAA has done us all a dis-service by printing Vans facebook retort (without a balanced rebuttal from you) IMHO. Seems like Rupert & company across the pond. Good journalism is a dying industry. My hat is off to you and your balanced clarification from where you were coming from and what drove you to do what you did so well. I will be carrying around a Cold Beer or two these next few days to help blow hot air into those deflated sails. To other builders, we are blessed to have such a fine kit to improve on. If your boat is floated by not one single modification but "Just Build It", then that's great too. Van will be just fine. So will his company - they are great, hardworking dedicated members. He has just hunkered down for the next group of builders who don't walk away from their own operations of landing safely where they intended.... regardless of mods. Fly Safe. Enjoy OSH '11 John Cox #40600 ________________________________ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Sat 7/23/2011 4:56 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Greg is in Sport Aviation again Greg, I wouldn't give it another thought. You did a great job and frankly much less modification than many others. Van is in his standard CYA mode so no one should be surprised at his response, it's standard fare. I can guarantee he wouldn't even hesitate to sell you another kit, it's all about risk mitigation and the business and I can't fault him one bit for that. The thing I find a bit disturbing is that our association, that has built itself up on the premise of experimental aviation and homebuilding, allowed the response it did without making it more factual. To me this is at least partially from having a manufacturing centric editor that doesn't really seem to understand the associations constituents. I'm all for shaking things up but not at the cost of abandoning it's roots. I may be over reacting but I'm really disappointed in SA publishing a one sided response that is clearly not bearing all the facts. Having grown up and still residing in the shadow of OSH and knowing everything that EAA has done for the local economy and the role it's played in my aviation interests I can only hope this isn't the start of an even more big GA centric view. Michael Sent from my iPad2 On Jul 22, 2011, at 11:25 PM, "greghale" wrote: > > Sport Aviation gave me a heads up on Vans request to place his Facebook article in the August issue. I asked if they could include my comments, but they said his article would take up all the allowable space available for this section of the magazine. They did say they would include a link to my web site. > > > Guys, I have to be honest. This whole thing has really taken the wind out of my sails and given me nothing but grief. My only intention was to complement the RV10 aircraft which I still think is a great aircraft. > > Greg... > > -------- > Greg Hale rv10 -- N210KH > www.nwacaptain.com > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347458#347458 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 23, 2011
From: <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com>
Subject: Re: Greg is in Sport Aviation again
Greg: I hope you shrug this off. Your plane shows what can be done and is very nice. If Vans response had been delayed a few months and was directed to all builders who were deviating from his plans and was by way of caution and advice it might have been better received. I know it makes me think about changes I have made and might make in the future. Several RV-10's have AC, there is a underslung motorcycle carrier available, and more than one has tip tanks or enlarged main tanks. Albert Gardner, Oshkosh bound. In Grand Forks, ND, waiting for good weather. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: OSH Campsite available up front
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Date: Jul 23, 2011
Scott and I and Group are all here and I staked off one more site than we needed up here at 57/58th and Lindbergh. Sean paid $374 for it and it's a good sized site. First RV10 guy that wants it can have it for Sean's same cost. Its only maybe 200-300 yards from the entry gate. Email me at Timcell at myrv10 dot com to take it. Tim ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Greg is in Sport Aviation again
Date: Jul 23, 2011
Greg; For what this is worth, I have used your W&B spreadsheet, I have looked at your numerous upgrades and always marveled at the perfection of your workmanship. I suggest you write a column to the editor with your response. Your intention has not gone unnoticed by us builders, nor the community. I can see the wind out of the sails but dont lose faith at this point, your plane truly is awesome and Sport Aviation knew that when they wrote the article. Vans has been sued by others way too many times to not throw his thoughts out. Sport Aviation should have given the other side of the story, if that meant removing some of the Vans article to do so, than the editor should have done so, I am rather disappointed personally that they did not. I know how you feel, really I do but do write that article to Sport Aviation, if nothing else to vent your thoughts and get it out. Pascal -----Original Message----- From: greghale Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 9:12 PM Subject: RV10-List: Re: Greg is in Sport Aviation again Sport Aviation gave me a heads up on Vans request to place his Facebook article in the August issue. I asked if they could include my comments, but they said his article would take up all the allowable space available for this section of the magazine. They did say they would include a link to my web site. I sent Vans a personal email asking why he decided to single me out when there have been many before me with RV modifications corvette engine, 3 seat RV6, floats and a complete redesign of the RV10 cabin top for a few. I didnt expect an answer nor did I get one. Except for the seat adjustment lever I sold, I was not making parts or plans on what I did. All I did was share my ideas and methods on what I did. Sport Aviation sent an email to me shortly after my first flight inquiring about my airplane. They had been following my changes and wanted to do an article on it. At the time I thought this was great, but now knowing the repercussions, I would have turned them down. When my aircraft was judged at Sun n Fun, I wasnt even at the aircraft. I had only bought the Do Not Touch sign to place on my propeller with my information on it. Not wanting to stay for the airshow, I left about 2 hours after I arrived. Guys, I have to be honest. This whole thing has really taken the wind out of my sails and given me nothing but grief. My only intention was to complement the RV10 aircraft which I still think is a great aircraft. Greg... -------- Greg Hale rv10 -- N210KH www.nwacaptain.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347458#347458 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Don Mc Donald <building_partner(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: OSH Campsite available up front
Date: Jul 24, 2011
We are in a spot in Scholler for Coaches, with 50amp electrical and water.... we are probably departing on Friday, and the site is paid for through Sunday.... anyone coming in for Friday, Sat, and Sunday, and in need of a space, let me know. Don McDonald. 916-801-8402 or by email direct. Sent from my iPad On Jul 23, 2011, at 3:36 PM, Tim Olson wrote: > > Scott and I and Group are all here and I staked off one more site than we needed up here at 57/58th and Lindbergh. Sean paid $374 for it and it's a good sized site. > > First RV10 guy that wants it can have it for Sean's same cost. Its only maybe 200-300 yards from the entry gate. > > Email me at Timcell at myrv10 dot com to take it. > Tim > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: -10 Plans
From: "bill.peyton" <peyton.b(at)sbcglobal.net>
Date: Jul 24, 2011
I would like a copy also 40795. peyton.b (at) sbcglobal.net Thanks Bill -------- Bill Peyton Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347548#347548 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Alan Mekler" <amekler(at)metrocast.net>
Subject: Re: -10 Plans
Date: Jul 24, 2011
I would also like a copy. Alan amekler(at)metrocast.net N668G -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of bill.peyton Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2011 10:29 AM Subject: RV10-List: Re: -10 Plans I would like a copy also 40795. peyton.b (at) sbcglobal.net Thanks Bill -------- Bill Peyton Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347548#347548 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Melchert" <pilotmelch(at)omnav.com>
Subject: Re: -10 Plans
Date: Jul 24, 2011
Ditto, please. John Melchert john(at)melchert.org RV-10 Builder #40740 N316PT -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan Mekler Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2011 9:52 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: -10 Plans I would also like a copy. Alan amekler(at)metrocast.net N668G -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of bill.peyton Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2011 10:29 AM Subject: RV10-List: Re: -10 Plans I would like a copy also 40795. peyton.b (at) sbcglobal.net Thanks Bill -------- Bill Peyton Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347548#347548 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: RV-10's in HBP at OSH
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com>
Date: Jul 24, 2011
We're up to 13 now on Sunday a.m. Should be a great week!

________________________________________________________________________________
From: Don Mc Donald <building_partner(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: RV-10's in HBP at OSH
Date: Jul 24, 2011
Latest ceqount is 15 on the other side of the taxiway, and about 5 more in Homebuilt Camping. Don Sent from my iPad On Jul 24, 2011, at 9:28 AM, Tim Olson wrote: > We're up to 13 now on Sunday a.m. > Should be a great week! > > > > > > > >
> > >
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 24, 2011
Subject: You know it's Oshkosh when......
From: Phillip Perry <philperry9(at)gmail.com>
Spotted Cows are nearby..... Photo attached. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: OSH Campsite available up front
Date: Jul 24, 2011
No takers....Sean says 50% off. No takers yet. Tim On Jul 23, 2011, at 3:36 PM, Tim Olson wrote: > > Scott and I and Group are all here and I staked off one more site than we needed up here at 57/58th and Lindbergh. Sean paid $374 for it and it's a good sized site. > > First RV10 guy that wants it can have it for Sean's same cost. Its only maybe 200-300 yards from the entry gate. > > Email me at Timcell at myrv10 dot com to take it. > Tim > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: -10 Plans
From: "fdombroski" <f.dombroski(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Jul 25, 2011
Please add me to the access list. Thanks Frank D N10FD #40090 -------- Frank Dombroski RV-10 N10FD Flying RV-8 N84FD Finished and sold :-{ N40 Sky Manor Airport NJ Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347663#347663 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Roger Standley" <taildragon(at)msn.com>
Subject: Drill recomendation
Date: Jul 25, 2011
I broke off an AN507-6R6 screw in a K1100-06 nut plate. Because of the location, I would rather drill out the screw than replace the nut plate. The problem is that my drills aren't doing the job. Does anyone have a recommendation on drills that will cut out the AN507-6R6 screw? Roger 40291 flying ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 25, 2011
Subject: Re: Drill recomendation
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Consider drilling out the nut plate and replacing it with a ClickBond nutplate. Getting a bunged screw out of a nut plate is a challenge, especially with a small screw like that. If possible have someone pick up a demo kit from Click Bond at OSH. Or a packet of adhesive plus a nutplate or two can be had from the Flight Shop for under $10. BTW, for most Click Bond nut plates you can use the same one for dimpled or flat install, there is enough offset in the nut portion for the countersink. It would take a very sharp drill bit to get a good clean hole in the screw with a very good easy out to get that screw to budge. If the easy out broke, you would be down to changing the nut plate anyway. On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Roger Standley wrote: > I broke off an AN507-6R6 screw in a K1100-06 nut plate. Because of the > location, I would rather drill out the screw than replace the nut plate. The > problem is that my drills aren't doing the job. Does anyone have a > recommendation on drills that will cut out the AN507-6R6 screw? > > Roger > 40291 flying > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: OSH Campsite available up front
Date: Jul 25, 2011
The site is now taken. Tim On Jul 24, 2011, at 5:13 PM, Tim Olson wrote: > > No takers....Sean says 50% off. > No takers yet. > Tim > > > > On Jul 23, 2011, at 3:36 PM, Tim Olson wrote: > >> >> Scott and I and Group are all here and I staked off one more site than we needed up here at 57/58th and Lindbergh. Sean paid $374 for it and it's a good sized site. >> >> First RV10 guy that wants it can have it for Sean's same cost. Its only maybe 200-300 yards from the entry gate. >> >> Email me at Timcell at myrv10 dot com to take it. >> Tim >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 25, 2011
Subject: RV10-List - Three Daily Passes for Airventure
From: Jim Combs <jiminlexky(at)gmail.com>
I have three days worth of prepaid daily passes from a friend who cannot attend. Not at all sure if they are even transferrable since they have a name printed on them. I will be arriving tomorrow (Tuesday) via VFR RV-10. I will be leaving on Friday. Contact me off-line (E-Mail) - Price is negotiable (or even free!) We can work hour arrangements to get them to you at Air Venture Jim Combs N312F - Flying 250 hours JimInLexKy(at)GMail.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 25, 2011
Subject: Re: Drill recomendation
From: John Trollinger <john(at)trollingers.com>
I just have a craftsman screw removal kit, I have used it many a times on the 6r6 screws.. On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Roger Standley wrote: > I broke off an AN507-6R6 screw in a K1100-06 nut plate. Because of the > location, I would rather drill out the screw than replace the nut plate. The > problem is that my drills aren't doing the job. Does anyone have a > recommendation on drills that will cut out the AN507-6R6 screw? > > Roger > 40291 flying > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Wing Kit
From: "mds4878" <mike(at)profishenterprises.com>
Date: Jul 26, 2011
Getting ready to buy my wing kit. Does anybody have a wing kit for sale? Started or not started that would save me money buying. -------- RV-10 #40447 Fuselage almost done. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347777#347777 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Roger Standley <taildragon(at)msn.com>
Subject: Drill recomendation
Date: Jul 26, 2011
Thanks for the info=2C guys. I will give it a try. > Date: Mon=2C 25 Jul 2011 20:57:30 -0400 > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Drill recomendation > From: john(at)trollingers.com > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > > > I just have a craftsman screw removal kit=2C I have used it many a times > on the 6r6 screws.. > > On Mon=2C Jul 25=2C 2011 at 4:33 PM=2C Roger Standley wrote: > > I broke off an AN507-6R6 screw in a K1100-06 nut plate. Because of the > > location=2C I would rather drill out the screw than replace the nut pla te. The > > problem is that my drills aren't doing the job. Does anyone have a > > recommendation on drills that will cut out the AN507-6R6 screw? > > > > Roger > > 40291 flying > > > > > > > =========== =========== =========== =========== > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Thane States" <thane2(at)comporium.net>
Subject: Re: RV-10's in HBP at OSH
Date: Jul 26, 2011
Just got back after 2 nights at OSH. It was great to see so many fine looking RV-10's. I think I was the only one to not be painted, but with a little luck, I am of to the paint shop in the next week. Just a few performance #'s for those building. We managed to go non stop from KOSH to KUZA; 641 n.m. in 3 hrs. 41 mins. We started out with 30kts off the tail at 11,500. Running WOT. 20" mp. and 2330 rpm. 10 gph. 165 TAS. That is a personal best for longest flight in the 10. My bladder is most often the limiting factor. Once agian I cant say enough good about the performance and utility of this airplane. Safe flight to all going and returning from KOSH. Thane 192 Hrs. From: "Tim Olson" <Tim(at)myrv10.com> Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2011 12:28 PM Subject: RV10-List: RV-10's in HBP at OSH > We're up to 13 now on Sunday a.m. > Should be a great week! > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >
> > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List > href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com > href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution > >
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Very cool turboprop for RV10
From: "AirMike" <Mikeabel(at)Pacbell.net>
Date: Jul 27, 2011
The Diemech Company is developing a Czech made turboprop unit for the RV10. It is very Cool looking and weighs only 114#. They have a display on an RV10 fuselage near the Vans booth at EAA. It will require a new cowl and modified engine mount. One possible answer to to end of 100LL. Bad part is the cost $100k and burns 18 GPH -------- See you OSH '11 Q/B - flying 1 yr+ Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347828#347828 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Drill recomendation
From: "Space Cadet" <Dwight(at)Drefs.net>
Date: Jul 27, 2011
I've tried the hardware-store screw removal bits with marginal success, I've found that just using a standard drill bit run in the opposite direction with some solid pressure frequently gets the screw out enough. Dwight Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347844#347844 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 27, 2011
Subject: Re: Drill recomendation
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
It all depends on how new the nut plate is, how tightly wedged the screw is. Extraction bits only generate so much force before they will break. The #6 nutplates from Vans take WAY too much torque to install the screws, and just cause a few problems because of that excessive drag. I find they work a lot better if I run a tap into them part way, which then reduces the drag, while still giving plenty of locking force. On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 8:10 AM, Space Cadet wrote: > > I've tried the hardware-store screw removal bits with marginal success, I've found that just using a standard drill bit run in the opposite direction with some solid pressure frequently gets the screw out enough. > > Dwight > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347844#347844 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: FAA and AD notices
Date: Jul 28, 2011
From: "John Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Some time today, Dorinda Baker from the Head FAA legal office will make a formal announcement clarifying the subject of AD notices and whether they affect Experimental Builders. The answer has always been under contention. The Legal Eagles will retain the right to assert ADs for public safety but the answer is going to be official. NO & Yes, No AD notes will not be required to be complied with by Experimental Builders. The FAA is staying out of the fray. Yes, if that builder installs an Certified Engine and wants to keep his/her options open to sell it in the future as a "Certified", then owners of certified need to keep & maintain compliance. For those who wanted to hear NO - "its coming". For others who deal with maintaining a Certified Engine/Prop or Appliance.... they will need to read between the lines and continue to comply with issued ADs to the Certificated Airframe Manufacturers requirements. Don't ya just love the new and leaner FAA. John Cox #40600 from the ground & behind the scenes at OSH '11 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 28, 2011
Subject: Re: FAA and AD notices
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Even trickier will be avionics, some of which have ADs, when said avionics are used to comply with requirements for IFR, for ADS-B, transponder and ELTs...items that must perform to a TSO and probably can't if the AD isn't complied with. Would you really want to operate an engine that has an AD against the crank even if you were experimental? As good as they are, electronic ignition systems may contribute to crank and prop stresses by their precise firing, or maybe they help by eliminating some randomness in the firing. So one always has to pay attention to ADs and make a very careful analysis of whether it may affect the safety of your engine, even if you might not technically have to comply. As always, some will focus on the technical legality, rather than their own safety. By the same token, I have never understood the mentality of some in the FAA that seem to think that an engine has to be kept continuously in certified condition for it to go on a certified aircraft. As soon as all the parts on it conform to the engine type certificate, it is tested to perform to rated specs, it is certified, no matter what parts were attached to it previously. After all, it never was more than a collection of parts that had a data plate attached to one of the parts. On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:59 AM, John Cox wrote: > Some time today, Dorinda Baker from the Head FAA legal office will make a > formal announcement clarifying the subject of AD notices and whether they > affect Experimental Builders. The answer has always been under contention. > The Legal Eagles will retain the right to assert ADs for public safety but > the answer is going to be official. NO & Yes, No AD notes will not be > required to be complied with by Experimental Builders. The FAA is staying > out of the fray. Yes, if that builder installs an Certified Engine and > wants to keep his/her options open to sell it in the future as a > "Certified", then owners of certified need to keep & maintain compliance. > > For those who wanted to hear NO - "its coming". For others who deal with > maintaining a Certified Engine/Prop or Appliance.... they will need to read > between the lines and continue to comply with issued ADs to the Certificated > Airframe Manufacturers requirements. > > Don't ya just love the new and leaner FAA. > > John Cox #40600 from the ground & behind the scenes at OSH '11 > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: John Gonzalez <indigoonlatigo(at)msn.com>
Subject: FAA and AD notices
Date: Jul 28, 2011
Yes=2C same old ambiguity=2C but what about having=2C NO FAA. Fly at your own risk. Build at your own risk. Certified or experimental. No certified engines or certified anything for that matter. Buy at your own risk. Simply rely on the economic laws of manufacture's reputation. Let's see which engine company or aircraft manufacturer has killed fewer pe ople? Some how the internet says the cause of all accidents was due to pilot erro r. Who wrote those posts=2C not sure=2C but it could be the manufacturer...no =2C nothing like that ever happens! Does it? Internet is gospel...the truth=2C if it is written=2C it is true=2C right! Somalia is a nice place to live because they have no government. Awesome pl ace! Why was America the best place to live? Why is it still the best place to live? >From 1' AGL to 18=2C000' MSL it is still the best place for me to live. At least for today=2C next week=2C who knows? It is a mystery. Subject: RV10-List: FAA and AD notices Date: Thu=2C 28 Jul 2011 05:59:55 -0700 From: johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com Some time today=2C Dorinda Baker from the Head FAA legal office will make a formal announcement clarifying the subject of AD notices and whether they affect Experimental Builders. The answer has always been under contention. The Legal Eagles will retain the right to assert ADs for public safety bu t the answer is going to be official. NO & Yes=2C No AD notes will not be required to be complied with by Experimental Builders. The FAA is staying out of the fray. Yes=2C if that builder installs an Certified Engine and w ants to keep his/her options open to sell it in the future as a "Certified" =2C then owners of certified need to keep & maintain compliance. For those who wanted to hear NO - "its coming". For others who deal with m aintaining a Certified Engine/Prop or Appliance.... they will need to read between the lines and continue to comply with issued ADs to the Certificate d Airframe Manufacturers requirements. Don't ya just love the new and leaner FAA. John Cox #40600 from the ground & behind the scenes at OSH '11 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 5inch before and after redcube fuel-transducer
From: "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net>
Date: Jul 28, 2011
Hello For those who installed the redcube fuel transducer which comes with AFS did you manage to allow a straight line 5in before and after the redcube. If not do you still have accurate readings of fuel flow? Cheers Michael -------- RV-10 builder (interior,avionics, wiring) #511 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347945#347945 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jul 28, 2011
Subject: Re: 5inch before and after redcube fuel-transducer
Make the inlets and outlets as straight as you can but I've seen 90s screwed into each end and it still worked fine. IIRC the outlet is the most critical. Dave Saylor AirCrafters 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 95076 831-722-9141 Shop 831-750-0284 Cell On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Michael Wellenzohn wrote: > > Hello > For those who installed the redcube fuel transducer which comes with AFS did you manage to allow a straight line 5in before and after the redcube. If not do you still have accurate readings of fuel flow? > > Cheers > Michael > > -------- > RV-10 builder (interior,avionics, wiring) > #511 > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347945#347945 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 5inch before and after redcube fuel-transducer
From: "orchidman" <gary(at)wingscc.com>
Date: Jul 28, 2011
And put it between the servo and the spider. I have 45's on each side of my cube. Great accuracy. -------- Gary Blankenbiller RV10 - # 40674 (N2GB Flying) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347955#347955 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 5inch before and after redcube fuel-transducer
From: "maca2790" <vk2gcn(at)cirruscomms.com.au>
Date: Jul 28, 2011
I have put mine in the Position provided by Vans in the QB Fuselage I received. It's about 7 inchs from the Andair Pump I have Installed and I will most likley run the outlet to a lower postion on the firewall where I will place a Gascolator. cheers John MacCallum VH-DUU Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347957#347957 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 28, 2011
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: 5inch before and after redcube fuel-transducer
John, why a gascolator? How are you going to get to it to sump it??? Linn On 7/28/2011 7:52 PM, maca2790 wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: "maca2790" > > I have put mine in the Position provided by Vans in the QB Fuselage I received. It's about 7 inchs from the Andair Pump I have Installed and I will most likley run the outlet to a lower postion on the firewall where I will place a Gascolator. > > cheers > > John MacCallum > VH-DUU > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347957#347957 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 28, 2011
Subject: Re: 5inch before and after redcube fuel-transducer
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Some countries seem to believe that a gascolator is necessary for both carbureted and injected engines and thus require one. On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 6:09 PM, Linn Walters wrote: > > John, why a gascolator? How are you going to get to it to sump it??? > Linn > > On 7/28/2011 7:52 PM, maca2790 wrote: >> >> >> I have put mine in the Position provided by Vans in the QB Fuselage I >> received. It's about 7 inchs from the Andair Pump I have Installed and I >> will most likley run the outlet to a lower postion on the firewall where I >> will place a Gascolator. >> >> cheers >> >> John MacCallum >> VH-DUU >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347957#347957 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Ronnie Austin <ra1918(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Jul 29, 2011
Ronnie Austin Ra1918(at)yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 29, 2011
Subject: Fwd: Avidyne has a one time deal on their new Gps
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Just received this, for anyone wanting a non-Garmin solution Subject: Avidyne has a one time deal on their new Gps Avidyne has-a one time deal on their new competition for the garmin GNS and GTN series that they will sell you one for HALF price if you order- and pay for it in advance. I just found out about it so you have to act on this today if you want one. They will normally be over 16,000 bucks so this is a steal. These units are a direct replacement plug in for the GNS 530 and if you change the rack the GNS 430. This might be an option if you want WAAS or thinking about a touchscreen unit. You get to keep your old unit this is an outright deal not a trade in. Almost to good to be true. Does not include install but if it is a replacement for the garmin it will not take but 2-4 hours to do. -- This is the new units http://www.avidyne.com/news/press.asp?release=263 THIS MUST BE DONE TODAY. IT IS THE LAST DAY They are not open on the weekend so today is it. -You can fill out the attached form and put on both pages DEALER NUMBER T X 1040 Or you can fill it out and fax it to me at 903 597 4019 or scan and email to hartavion(at)tyler.net and I will handle it for you. I will need Thanks David Hartsell Hartsell Avionics If you do not wish to receive emails from Hartsell Avionics reply with remove and I will take you off of my mailing list _______________________________________________ Mapalist mailing list Mapalist(at)lists.mooneypilots.com http://lists.mooneypilots.com/listinfo.cgi/mapalist-mooneypilots.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Roger Standley" <taildragon(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: Drill recomendation
Date: Jul 29, 2011
Well, I tried the Craftsman screw removal kit. It wouldn't touch the AN hardware. Soooo, I still need a drill bit or maybe a grinder that will attack the AN507-6R6 screw. Any recommendations? Thank you, Roger 40291 flying ----- Original Message ----- From: Roger Standley<mailto:taildragon(at)msn.com> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 11:46 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Drill recomendation Thanks for the info, guys. I will give it a try. > Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 20:57:30 -0400 > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Drill recomendation > From: john(at)trollingers.com<mailto:john(at)trollingers.com> > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > > > > I just have a craftsman screw removal kit, I have used it many a times > on the 6r6 screws.. > > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Roger Standley wrote: > > I broke off an AN507-6R6 screw in a K1100-06 nut plate. Because of the > > location, I would rather drill out the screw than replace the nut plate. The > > problem is that my drills aren't doing the job. Does anyone have a > > recommendation on drills that will cut out the AN507-6R6 screw? > > > > Roger > > 40291 flying > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 29, 2011
From: George Nolin <gnolin(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: Drill recomendation
When you finally get the screw drilled out you will not have threads left i n the nut plate.- I recommend replacing it. G. Hank Nolin, P.E. 832-640-6284 www.salestaxexemptions.com - "Science, freedom, beauty, adventure--aviation offers it all." Charles A. Lindbergh --- On Fri, 7/29/11, Roger Standley wrote: From: Roger Standley <taildragon(at)msn.com> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Drill recomendation Date: Friday, July 29, 2011, 12:15 PM #yiv1468277423 .yiv1468277423hmmessage P { PADDING-BOTTOM:0px;MARGIN:0px;PADDING-LEFT:0px;PADDING-RIGHT:0px;PADDING-TO P:0px;} #yiv1468277423 .yiv1468277423hmmessage { FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma;FONT-SIZE:10pt;} Well, I tried the Craftsman screw removal kit. It wouldn't touch the AN har dware. Soooo, I still need a drill bit or maybe a grinder that will attack the AN507-6R6 screw. Any recommendations? Thank you, - Roger 40291 flying ----- Original Message ----- From: Roger Standley Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 11:46 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Drill recomendation Thanks for the info, guys. I will give it a try. > Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 20:57:30 -0400 > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Drill recomendation > From: john(at)trollingers.com > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > > > I just have a craftsman screw removal kit, I have used it many a times > on the 6r6 screws.. > > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Roger Standley wrot e: > > I broke off an AN507-6R6 screw in a K1100-06 nut plate. Because of the > > location, I would rather drill out the screw than replace the nut plate . The > > problem is that my drills aren't doing the job. Does anyone have a > > recommendation on drills that will cut out the AN507-6R6 screw? > > > > Roger > > 40291 flying > > > > > > > > Features Browse, --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List > via the http://forums.matronics.com > http://www.matronics.com/contribution > ========== > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 29, 2011
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: FAA and AD notices
Not that mysterious from here. Bill "what John said" Watson On 7/28/2011 3:55 PM, John Gonzalez wrote: > Yes, same old ambiguity, but what about having, *NO FAA*. > > Fly at your own risk. Build at your own risk. Certified or experimental. > > No certified engines or certified anything for that matter.* Buy* at > your own risk. Simply rely on the economic laws of manufacture's > reputation. > > Let's see which engine company or aircraft manufacturer has killed > fewer people? > > Some how the internet says the cause of all accidents was due to pilot > error. > > Who wrote those posts, not sure, but it could be the > manufacturer...no, nothing like that ever happens! Does it? > > Internet is gospel...the truth, if it is written, it is true, right! > > Somalia is a nice place to live because they have no government. > Awesome place! > > Why was America the best place to live? > > Why is it still the best place to live? > > >From 1' AGL to 18,000' MSL it is still the best place for me to live. > At least for today, next week, who knows? > > It is a mystery. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Subject: RV10-List: FAA and AD notices > Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 05:59:55 -0700 > From: johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > > Some time today, Dorinda Baker from the Head FAA legal office will > make a formal announcement clarifying the subject of AD notices and > whether they affect Experimental Builders. The answer has always been > under contention. The Legal Eagles will retain the right to assert > ADs for public safety but the answer is going to be official. NO & > Yes, No AD notes will not be required to be complied with by > Experimental Builders. The FAA is staying out of the fray. Yes, if > that builder installs an Certified Engine and wants to keep his/her > options open to sell it in the future as a "Certified", then owners of > certified need to keep & maintain compliance. > For those who wanted to hear NO - "its coming". For others who deal > with maintaining a Certified Engine/Prop or Appliance.... they will > need to read between the lines and continue to comply with issued ADs > to the Certificated Airframe Manufacturers requirements. > Don't ya just love the new and leaner FAA. > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 5inch before and after redcube fuel-transducer
From: "maca2790" <vk2gcn(at)cirruscomms.com.au>
Date: Jul 29, 2011
I believe it is an advantage to have a water Trap in the System as well. I'm not sure if it is required in Australia but I will check with my Tech Counselor next week when he visits. I bought an extension tube for the Bowl and hope to drain it through a hole in the cowl such as on the 172 SP I have been flying lately. >John, why a gascolator? How are you going to get to it to sump it??? >Linn Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348029#348029 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: 5inch before and after redcube fuel-transducer
Date: Jul 29, 2011
My understanding is there is no path for water to gravity flow to a gascolator in most low wing aircraft. The water in the fuel tank collects at the low point. For RVs that is at the fuel tanks sump as water cannot go up hill via the fuel line, even if the gascolator is lower than the bottom of the tank. Water entrained in the fuel as fuel is flowing may have a small fraction separate in the gascolator, but the majority will remain entrained. I do know however that the Andair gascolator filter screen meets the requirement for the AFP fuel injection system. Carl -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of maca2790 Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 6:06 PM Subject: RV10-List: Re: 5inch before and after redcube fuel-transducer I believe it is an advantage to have a water Trap in the System as well. I'm not sure if it is required in Australia but I will check with my Tech Counselor next week when he visits. I bought an extension tube for the Bowl and hope to drain it through a hole in the cowl such as on the 172 SP I have been flying lately. >John, why a gascolator? How are you going to get to it to sump it??? >Linn Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348029#348029 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: avionics settings
From: "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com>
Date: Jul 30, 2011
Anyone out there happen to know the settings for the Grand Rapids HX EFIS to get the altitude encoder talking to the Garmin GTX 330? Everyone except me seems to be at OshKosh. Eric Kallio Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348068#348068 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: avionics settings
From: Bob Leffler <rv(at)thelefflers.com>
Date: Jul 30, 2011
Sorry Eric, but I'm at OSH too, but I do have that at home. There is a schematic on my kitlog site, but that jpg is probably not readable. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 30, 2011, at 10:10 AM, "Eric_Kallio" wrote: > > Anyone out there happen to know the settings for the Grand Rapids HX EFIS to get the altitude encoder talking to the Garmin GTX 330? Everyone except me seems to be at OshKosh. > > Eric Kallio > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348068#348068 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: avionics settings
From: "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com>
Date: Jul 30, 2011
I finally have my xpndr and pitot static check on Monday so to fulfill the requirements for IFR cert, I need mode C. Right now the components aren't talking and I can work it out in flight by cycling through the options if I have to. Thanks. Eric Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348086#348086 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Wanted: Expired Pro Seal
From: "charliewaffles" <mcooper(at)live.com>
Date: Jul 30, 2011
Van's sells their small kit of expired proseal for about 50-75% off if they have some on hand. Just let them know you want the expired stuff. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348092#348092 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 5inch before and after redcube fuel-transducer
From: "maca2790" <vk2gcn(at)cirruscomms.com.au>
Date: Jul 30, 2011
Re water suspended in the fuel I don't know either if the Andair Gascolator will remove it. I will follow up with Andair and see what they say. cheers John MacCallum Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348096#348096 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 5inch before and after redcube fuel-transducer
From: "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net>
Date: Jul 31, 2011
Thanks for your replies. >From what I understand now based on your feedback it shouldn't be a risk to install the redcube in the tunnel but should try to leave some straight line at the output of it. Well I'll do my measurements then and order Bonaco Teflon lines. Thanks Michael -------- RV-10 builder (interior,avionics, wiring) #511 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348168#348168 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 31, 2011
Subject: Re: 5inch before and after redcube fuel-transducer
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Michael, I have been following the thread but am not completely up to date on the last conversations since I have been flying X-County back from OSH. That being said I strongly recommend you do not install the cube in the tunnel. I think the general consensus is that it is more important to install it between the fuel server and the spider than having 5" in/out of the cube. I had mine in the tunnel and could not get a steady reading on my FP. This made it impossible to refine my LOP flying and it also consistently set off my Low FP alarm because the reading bounced so much during straight & level flight. When I finally relocated the cube to the above detailed location the readings became rock solid and I have not had a single Low PF warning since. Good luck, Robin On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Michael Wellenzohn wrote: > rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net> > > Thanks for your replies. > > >From what I understand now based on your feedback it shouldn't be a risk > to install the redcube in the tunnel but should try to leave some straight > line at the output of it. > Well I'll do my measurements then and order Bonaco Teflon lines. > > Thanks > Michael > > -------- > RV-10 builder (interior,avionics, wiring) > #511 > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348168#348168 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 5inch before and after redcube fuel-transducer
From: "Mike Whisky" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net>
Date: Jul 31, 2011
Robin, Thanks for your feedback, how and where exactly did you mount the red cube? Pictures would be appreciated. Looks like I was the only one not being in Osh this year Thanks Mike [Wink] -------- RV-10 builder (interior & finishing) #511 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348182#348182 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 31, 2011
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: Rapco brake linings and discs now available
I'm just getting back from OSH and will try to get a couple of bits of info that I gathered out as I am thinking or writing them down. Regarding the Rapco linings, I'm not sure if you got the proper linings if they are shorter. I actually measured mine before leaving for OSH and measured brand new Rapco linings against brand new Cleveland linings. The Rapco's were very very slightly larger in both dimensions...maybe 1/64 on the length, and probably even less that on the height. At any rate, they were bigger, not smaller. I quizzed them at the booth at OSH on that. They seem to think that you most likely got the wrong lining. I can tell you though that from first-hand measurement, I found them larger, not smaller, but only by a small amount. I suppose you could have had a pre-production one or something too, but rest assured that new ones should be fine. I also clarified this, and added it to my write-up: There are 2 benefits to the Rapco brake discs linings over the Cleveland ones too: 1) The linings are made with a couple of dimpled notches in them, one on each end of the pad. This is a built-in wear indicator. Don't quote me on the number, but, I think it goes like this...if you wear the pad down so that the notch disappears, you have .020 left until you will start scraping the rivets on the discs. 2) The Rapco discs are made of steel, and then plated with Nickel, and then the nickel is removed from the braking wear surface. This leaves the remaining part of the disc protected against corrosion by a nickel plating. So that should allow for easier quick brake-checks to know that you're still in tolerance. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD On 7/15/2011 9:41 AM, Deems Davis wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: "Deems Davis" > > When I ordered new(recapped) Tires and Leakgard tubes from Dresser, based on > advice from this list I ordered a replacement set of RAPCO pads from Dresser > (aka VansRVTires) as well. I intended to replace the brake pads at my last > annual when I was doing the tires. However, I noticed that the pad were 1/4" > SHORTER in length than the old pads. The rivet holes align perfectly and > they are stamped/marked with the correct part number. I put them aside as > there was plenty of pad left on the existing pads, and intended to call > Dresser and ask ... why?? IMO the -10 is not blessed with brakes that are > TOO big and I wsn't interested in loosing any braking ability. Seeing this > thread reminded me that I haven't called. Anybody else notice this or have > more info chime in. > > Deems > > -----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, July 13, 2011 3:15 PM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Rapco brake linings and discs now available > > --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson > > That's one of the things within the link. :) > > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD > > > On 7/13/2011 4:34 PM, Pascal wrote: >> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Pascal" >> >> Desser sells the Rapco's as a reminder. >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Tim Olson Sent: Wednesday, July 13, >> 2011 1:19 PM To: RV10 Subject: RV10-List: Rapco brake linings and >> discs now available >> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson >> >> As you know if you've read my write-ups, I've been bugging Rapco for 4 >> or 5 years to start making the >> 66-112 brake linings for us so we have an alternate price and supply. >> The Cleveland ones go in and out of stock too often and the price is >> top dollar. >> I got a set of the new Rapco linings and replaced my discs at the same >> time since I scored one of them on the first brake pad run....running >> the rivets into the discs. >> >> So here's a write-up with pictures of the new discs. >> >> http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/maintenance/20110711/index.html >> >> If you haven't seen the brake lining replacement write-up, also follow >> the link to that one from within this page. >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 31, 2011
Subject: Re:OSH
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
I'm not hearing of ANY must have items introduced this year. Seems like a bit of a down year for new products. On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Tim Olson wrote: > > I'm just getting back from OSH and will try to get a couple of > bits of info that I gathered out as I am thinking or writing them > down. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Date: Jul 31, 2011
Subject: Re: 5inch before and after redcube fuel-transducer
Mike, Sorry no photos but the location is specific to your firewall forward. In my case I have forward facing cold induction. Basically we found a place where we were able to fabricate a small bracket to support the cube and ran our line out of the servo with a straight shot into the cube then as much of a straight out till the tube turns up towards the spider. I suggest you sit underneath your engine and hold the cube till you find the best place understanding where you are coming from and where you need the line to go. Some people leave the cube unsupported but I preferred it to be supported and tied to something substantial. Good luck, Robin Sent from my iPad2. On Jul 31, 2011, at 2:00 PM, "Mike Whisky" wrote: > > Robin, > Thanks for your feedback, how and where exactly did you mount the red cube? Pictures would be appreciated. > > Looks like I was the only one not being in Osh this year > Thanks > Mike [Wink] > > -------- > RV-10 builder (interior & finishing) > #511 > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348182#348182 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 31, 2011
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re:OSH
Should have stopped by the MGL booth .... they were introducing 3 or 4 new products. ;-) Linn On 7/31/2011 5:46 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: Kelly McMullen > > I'm not hearing of ANY must have items introduced this year. Seems > like a bit of a down year for new products. > > On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Tim Olson wrote: >> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson >> >> I'm just getting back from OSH and will try to get a couple of >> bits of info that I gathered out as I am thinking or writing them >> down. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 31, 2011
Subject: Re:OSH
From: Phillip Perry <philperry9(at)gmail.com>
This OSH was primarily about the tablet. Ipad was a clear winner over the Android obviously. On Jul 31, 2011 6:36 PM, "Linn Walters" wrote: > > Should have stopped by the MGL booth .... they were introducing 3 or 4 > new products. ;-) > Linn > > On 7/31/2011 5:46 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote: >> >> I'm not hearing of ANY must have items introduced this year. Seems >> like a bit of a down year for new products. >> >> On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Tim Olson wrote: >>> >>> I'm just getting back from OSH and will try to get a couple of >>> bits of info that I gathered out as I am thinking or writing them >>> down. >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re:OSH
Date: Jul 31, 2011
That's what I got out of it too. It's "everything ipad" basically. The software apps are all over the place and capabilities abound. WingX and their new air data and ahrs integration turns an ipad into a full low-end e fis that could compete with some of the systems we've been used to. Foreflight integrating to avionics and flight-plan-sharing. It's just amazi ng to see. For a vfr only airplane you could have some pretty cheap avionic s with an ipad and you can now get ads-b wx, XM wx, ads-b traffic and all th at stuff on your ipad. For those who got the Seattle avionics voyager software years ago like I did , it's sounding like it shouldnt be terribly long until I can use my lifetim e data subscription on an ipad app by them, so that's good. Some may remember in my cabo write-up that my ONLY real complaint left in-fl ight with wing-x was that you couldn't zoom-to-TAC view. I was flying over P hoenix and had to switch to foreflight to see the TAC view for the vfr corri dors. Well, Wingx silently fixed that months ago....I went there to complai n and when I tried it, it worked. So these companies are listening and thin gs are improving. But yeah, there wasn't much new and exciting outside of the ipad world. Tim On Jul 31, 2011, at 6:44 PM, Phillip Perry wrote: > This OSH was primarily about the tablet. Ipad was a clear winner over the Android obviously. > > On Jul 31, 2011 6:36 PM, "Linn Walters" wrote: > > > > > Should have stopped by the MGL booth .... they were introducing 3 or 4 > > new products. ;-) > > Linn > > > > On 7/31/2011 5:46 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote: > >> > >> I'm not hearing of ANY must have items introduced this year. Seems > >> like a bit of a down year for new products. > >> > >> On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Tim Olson wrote: > >>> > >>> I'm just getting back from OSH and will try to get a couple of > >>> bits of info that I gathered out as I am thinking or writing them > >>> down. > >> > >> > >> > >> > > Navigator to browse > ="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com /Navigator?RV10-List > ://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com > min. > > > > > > > > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 31, 2011
From: Scott Schmidt <scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Congrats and What?
I just read that we had three RV-10's recognized with awards this year. - Great job guys. -One is even from my airport, great job Rick and Mike, co ngratulations. -=0Ahttp://www.airventure.org/news/2011/110731_awards.html =0A=0A=0AI was very surprised Geoff's plane was not in there at all. -IMH O Geoff's plane should have been in there somewhere. -After looking at al l the planes myself and looking at the areas on the RV-10 that separate a g ood build job from a great build job Geoff's plane is clearly one of the be st there. -Sheet metal work, paint and interior are all a 10. -I just w ish we had four RV-10's with awards. -=0A=0AIt was great to see everyone there and meet a bunch of new faces.-=0AAlready looking forward to next y ear.-=0A-=0AScott Schmidt=0Ascottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com=0A ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 31, 2011
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: What is the difference between Lycoming YIO-540 and XI)-540?
The 'IO-540 I got thru Vans appears to be officially listed in the doc as a YIO-540. The 'experimental' and lower priced engine option. In other write-ups I see references to XIO-540s. What's up with that? Bill "hoping for first start-up tomorrow" Watson ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "preid" <rv10flyer(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Rapco brake linings and discs now available
Date: Jul 31, 2011
The smaller ones being sold are the older version of the linings. They have a material in them that will make them out last the cleveland. I'll see if I can get a better response on why Desser has the smaller version being sold. Pascal -------------------------------------------------- From: "Tim Olson" <Tim(at)myrv10.com> Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2011 2:11 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Rapco brake linings and discs now available > > I'm just getting back from OSH and will try to get a couple of > bits of info that I gathered out as I am thinking or writing them > down. > > Regarding the Rapco linings, I'm not sure if you got the proper > linings if they are shorter. I actually measured mine before > leaving for OSH and measured brand new Rapco linings against > brand new Cleveland linings. The Rapco's were very very slightly > larger in both dimensions...maybe 1/64 on the length, and probably > even less that on the height. At any rate, they were bigger, not > smaller. I quizzed them at the booth at OSH on that. They seem to > think that you most likely got the wrong lining. I can tell you > though that from first-hand measurement, I found them larger, not > smaller, but only by a small amount. I suppose you could have > had a pre-production one or something too, but rest assured that > new ones should be fine. > > I also clarified this, and added it to my write-up: > > There are 2 benefits to the Rapco brake discs linings over the Cleveland > ones too: 1) The linings are made with a couple of dimpled notches in > them, one on each end of the pad. This is a built-in wear indicator. > Don't quote me on the number, but, I think it goes like this...if you wear > the pad down so that the notch disappears, you have .020 left until you > will start scraping the rivets on the discs. 2) The Rapco discs are made > of steel, and then plated with Nickel, and then the nickel is removed from > the braking wear surface. This leaves the remaining part of the disc > protected against corrosion by a nickel plating. > > So that should allow for easier quick brake-checks to know that you're > still in tolerance. > > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD > > > On 7/15/2011 9:41 AM, Deems Davis wrote: >> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Deems Davis" >> >> When I ordered new(recapped) Tires and Leakgard tubes from Dresser, based >> on >> advice from this list I ordered a replacement set of RAPCO pads from >> Dresser >> (aka VansRVTires) as well. I intended to replace the brake pads at my >> last >> annual when I was doing the tires. However, I noticed that the pad were >> 1/4" >> SHORTER in length than the old pads. The rivet holes align perfectly and >> they are stamped/marked with the correct part number. I put them aside as >> there was plenty of pad left on the existing pads, and intended to call >> Dresser and ask ... why?? IMO the -10 is not blessed with brakes that are >> TOO big and I wsn't interested in loosing any braking ability. Seeing >> this >> thread reminded me that I haven't called. Anybody else notice this or >> have >> more info chime in. >> >> Deems >> >> -----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, July 13, 2011 3:15 PM >> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com >> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Rapco brake linings and discs now available >> >> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson >> >> That's one of the things within the link. :) >> >> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD > >> >> >> On 7/13/2011 4:34 PM, Pascal wrote: >>> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Pascal" >>> >>> Desser sells the Rapco's as a reminder. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- From: Tim Olson Sent: Wednesday, July 13, >>> 2011 1:19 PM To: RV10 Subject: RV10-List: Rapco brake linings and >>> discs now available >>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson >>> >>> As you know if you've read my write-ups, I've been bugging Rapco for 4 >>> or 5 years to start making the >>> 66-112 brake linings for us so we have an alternate price and supply. >>> The Cleveland ones go in and out of stock too often and the price is >>> top dollar. >>> I got a set of the new Rapco linings and replaced my discs at the same >>> time since I scored one of them on the first brake pad run....running >>> the rivets into the discs. >>> >>> So here's a write-up with pictures of the new discs. >>> >>> http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/maintenance/20110711/index.html >>> >>> If you haven't seen the brake lining replacement write-up, also follow >>> the link to that one from within this page. >>> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 31, 2011
Subject: Oil Cooler Question
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Did someone recently send me a request re: alternate inlet for oil cooling? With all my technology, I recall reading the email but can't find it anymore. Sorry, Robin ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: What is the difference between Lycoming YIO-540 and XI)-540?
From: "bill.peyton" <peyton.b(at)sbcglobal.net>
Date: Jul 31, 2011
You purchased the experimental non-certified version of the engine. The certified costs around $3K more! In reality it is the identical engine, just a different part number....... Call Lycoming, I did. -------- Bill Peyton Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348223#348223 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 01, 2011
From: <ronrvbuilder(at)bigpond.com>
Subject: Re: What is the difference between Lycoming YIO-540 and
XI)-540? As a minimum, the YIO-540 contains roller tappets. Not sure that the XIO necessarily does. cheers Ron VH-XRM in Oz ---- "bill.peyton" wrote: > > You purchased the experimental non-certified version of the engine. The certified costs around $3K more! In reality it is the identical engine, just a different part number....... Call Lycoming, I did. > > -------- > Bill Peyton ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dawson-Townsend,Timothy" <tdawson-townsend(at)aurora.aero>
Subject: Airwolf Oil Chiller
Date: Aug 01, 2011
This is a simple, but "cool" new product at Oshkosh: the Airwolf Oil Chill er http://www.airwolf.com/ (click on Oil Chiller) http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/airwolfoilchiller.php Basically a heat sink that wraps around your oil filter. They have good an ecdotal results on some glider tow planes. An easy mod if oil temps are a concern. Tim 40025 Back in MA ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Oil Cooler Question
From: "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com>
Date: Aug 01, 2011
Yup, that was me. I am looking at doing something similar and if you are willing to share I would rather not reinvent the wheel, and may mimick what you have done. Eric Kallio N518RV Scout019(at)msn.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348247#348247 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 01, 2011
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Oil Cooler Question
OK, help me out here .... trying to follow this thread when there's no 'history' in the email is frustrating. I remember a post by .... someone who read an email from someone and couldn't remember ....... and I don't remember .... now I have a migraine!!! I have a friend with a recently minted RV-7 who is having high oil temp issues. I have my own ideas why, but he's looking at spending the bucks on a larger cooler, larger scat hose, larger time spent, larger dent in the wallet ...... and when I get my -10 finished I don't want to see high oil temps ....... so what really works????? Linn On 8/1/2011 10:00 AM, Eric_Kallio wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: "Eric_Kallio" > > Yup, that was me. I am looking at doing something similar and if you are willing to share I would rather not reinvent the wheel, and may mimick what you have done. > > Eric Kallio > N518RV > Scout019(at)msn.com > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348247#348247 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 01, 2011
Subject: Re: Airwolf Oil Chiller
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Color me skeptical. If your engine baffling is properly sealed, the oil filter isn't going to have very much air flow around it to carry away heat. On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 6:35 AM, Dawson-Townsend,Timothy wrote: > This is a simple, but "cool" new product at Oshkosh: the Airwolf Oil > Chiller > http://www.airwolf.com/ (click on Oil Chiller) > http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/airwolfoilchiller.php > Basically a heat sink that wraps around your oil filter. They have good > anecdotal results on some glider tow planes. An easy mod if oil temps are a > concern. > Tim > 40025 > Back in MA > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Deems Davis" <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Subject: Airwolf Oil Chiller
Date: Aug 01, 2011
A couple of well aimed blast tubes would help. Deems -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 7:19 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Airwolf Oil Chiller Color me skeptical. If your engine baffling is properly sealed, the oil filter isn't going to have very much air flow around it to carry away heat. On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 6:35 AM, Dawson-Townsend,Timothy wrote: > This is a simple, but "cool" new product at Oshkosh: the Airwolf Oil > Chiller http://www.airwolf.com/ (click on Oil Chiller) > http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/airwolfoilchiller.php > Basically a heat sink that wraps around your oil filter. They have > good anecdotal results on some glider tow planes. An easy mod if oil > temps are a concern. > Tim > 40025 > Back in MA > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Airwolf Oil Chiller
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com>
Date: Aug 01, 2011
Someone in my group talked to them and they said that the oil filter was mounted down low, in high airflow of cool air, and basically made the install a 100% best case.....so I wouldn't bank on it making any major difference for us without a bit of work to idealize the situation. Tim On Aug 1, 2011, at 9:19 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote: > > Color me skeptical. If your engine baffling is properly sealed, the > oil filter isn't going to have very much air flow around it to carry > away heat. > > On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 6:35 AM, Dawson-Townsend,Timothy > wrote: >> This is a simple, but "cool" new product at Oshkosh: the Airwolf Oil >> Chiller >> http://www.airwolf.com/ (click on Oil Chiller) >> http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/airwolfoilchiller.php >> Basically a heat sink that wraps around your oil filter. They have good >> anecdotal results on some glider tow planes. An easy mod if oil temps are a >> concern. >> Tim >> 40025 >> Back in MA >> >> >> >> >> > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Date: Aug 01, 2011
Subject: Re: Oil Cooler Question
Linn, If you have the standard vans cowl and a 260 Hp motor you should be most of the way there. I think builders that want the most efficient cooling trade in their standard vans oil cooler for the 2006 oil cooler or the dual pass Stewart Warner oil cooler that is a direct replacement size wise for Vans unit. I personally don't think the vans wedge is a good design (tested) and believe mounting to the back of the baffle system is a better more direct location for efficent cooling. The challenge is fitting the cooler around the motor mount. Eric, Because it sounds like we have a similar set up with an alternate cowl and plenum there is too much to discuss online. Please give me a call to talk about your specific situation. I have all but eliminated our high oil temps. Robin 805.801.8550 Sent from my iPad2. On Aug 1, 2011, at 7:24 AM, Linn Walters wrote: > > OK, help me out here .... trying to follow this thread when there's no 'history' in the email is frustrating. I remember a post by .... someone who read an email from someone and couldn't remember ....... and I don't remember .... now I have a migraine!!! > I have a friend with a recently minted RV-7 who is having high oil temp issues. I have my own ideas why, but he's looking at spending the bucks on a larger cooler, larger scat hose, larger time spent, larger dent in the wallet ...... and when I get my -10 finished I don't want to see high oil temps ....... so what really works????? > Linn > > > On 8/1/2011 10:00 AM, Eric_Kallio wrote: >> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Eric_Kallio" >> >> Yup, that was me. I am looking at doing something similar and if you are willing to share I would rather not reinvent the wheel, and may mimick what you have done. >> >> Eric Kallio >> N518RV >> Scout019(at)msn.com >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348247#348247 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gary" <speckter(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Airwolf Oil Chiller
Date: Aug 01, 2011
I talked with them and besides the fins they had a remote mounted cooler in the exit air of the cowl to achieve the temp drop that they promote, something like 60 degree difference. I thought that as simple as the design is I could make up a set of fins and put them on my B&C angle mount and just see if there is any difference. If not I could add a blast tube as Deems suggested. Gary Specketer -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 9:19 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Airwolf Oil Chiller Color me skeptical. If your engine baffling is properly sealed, the oil filter isn't going to have very much air flow around it to carry away heat. On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 6:35 AM, Dawson-Townsend,Timothy wrote: > This is a simple, but "cool" new product at Oshkosh: the Airwolf Oil > Chiller > http://www.airwolf.com/ (click on Oil Chiller) > http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/airwolfoilchiller.php > Basically a heat sink that wraps around your oil filter. They have good > anecdotal results on some glider tow planes. An easy mod if oil temps are a > concern. > Tim > 40025 > Back in MA > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 01, 2011
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Airwolf Oil Chiller
IMHO, it's a bandaid, and a poor one at that. I agree with Tim's comments. The blast tube idea would be effective if there was a can around the fins. My Traumahawk and Grumman with the O-235 has similar 'cans' around the oil filter or the oil screen housing. What we need to do is find the root cause because it's not just the RV-10s that have the problem. Is it poor baffling sealing? I'm planning on a plenum for mine as I hate cowl seals. For my buddys -7, the cooler dumps down into the lower right corner of the cowl. As I see it, the pressure differential across the cooler is the same as the pressure differential across the cylinders, but the oil cooler dumps into a large dead spot which makes airflow even worse. Ducting the oil cooler exhaust over to the cowl exit ramp might improve the airflow through the cooler ..... but I don't /_know_ /if it'll work. Linn On 8/1/2011 10:31 AM, Deems Davis wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: "Deems Davis" > > A couple of well aimed blast tubes would help. > > Deems > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen > Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 7:19 AM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Airwolf Oil Chiller > > --> RV10-List message posted by: Kelly McMullen > > Color me skeptical. If your engine baffling is properly sealed, the oil > filter isn't going to have very much air flow around it to carry away heat. > > On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 6:35 AM, Dawson-Townsend,Timothy > wrote: >> This is a simple, but "cool" new product at Oshkosh: the Airwolf Oil >> Chiller http://www.airwolf.com/ (click on Oil Chiller) >> http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/airwolfoilchiller.php >> Basically a heat sink that wraps around your oil filter. They have >> good anecdotal results on some glider tow planes. An easy mod if oil >> temps are a concern. >> Tim >> 40025 >> Back in MA >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 01, 2011
Subject: Re: Airwolf Oil Chiller
From: Phillip Perry <philperry9(at)gmail.com>
Air Wolf has recommended these for a long long time. Before they came out with their own product they suggested going to an Aero Salvage place and picking on up from a Piper Tomahawk. Apparently they were standard on thos e airframes. Pause here ---> I just checked the Airwolf site and their link is still up. Here is is: *Q:* I am running high oil temperatures. How much will your oil filter help reduce my oil temperatures? *A:* Regardless of what engine you operate, th e ideal temperature for the oil is 185=B0F. We want you to be as close to thi s number as possible. The first thing we need for you to do, is calibrate you r oil temperature gauge to the numeric value of 185=B0F , so we have a starti ng point to work from. You can do this by purchasing a good thermometer, heating up some oil along with your oil temperature bulb, and seeing where 185=B0F is on YOUR gauge. A remote mounted oil filter will usually drop the oil temperatures about 20=B0F. Keep in mind that an oil filter is radiating heat, and only has so much surface area available. It is dependent on some airflow blowing on or around the oil filter, to carry away the heat. To gai n maximum advantage of its cooling benefits, we recommend running a blast tub e off the baffles and blow this cool air on the filter. If you want every ounce of cooling you can get, go to a salvage yard and buy the finned aluminum oil filter shroud that was used on the Piper Tomahawk aircraft. This will usually only get you an additional 5=B0F but anything you get wil l be free cooling. I have seen them installed on an RV-10 before (Tomahawk Version). The filter was mounted on the lower passenger side of the firewall where it would be easy to change and drips/runs could go straight down into a drip pan without hitting anything in the FWF area. It had a blast tube as well. I'm planning on replicating that installation once my engine arrives this fall. It was a really nice setup. Phil On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Tim Olson wrote: > > Someone in my group talked to them and they said that the oil filter was > mounted down low, in high airflow of cool air, and basically made the > install a 100% best case.....so I wouldn't bank on it making any major > difference for us without a bit of work to idealize the situation. > Tim > > > On Aug 1, 2011, at 9:19 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote: > > > > > Color me skeptical. If your engine baffling is properly sealed, the > > oil filter isn't going to have very much air flow around it to carry > > away heat. > > > > On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 6:35 AM, Dawson-Townsend,Timothy > > wrote: > >> This is a simple, but "cool" new product at Oshkosh: the Airwolf Oil > >> Chiller > >> http://www.airwolf.com/ (click on Oil Chiller) > >> http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/airwolfoilchiller.php > >> Basically a heat sink that wraps around your oil filter. They have go od > >> anecdotal results on some glider tow planes. An easy mod if oil temps > are a > >> concern. > >> Tim > >> 40025 > >> Back in MA > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > =========== =========== =========== =========== > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: RV10 rudder stop
From: Thomas Lewis <tommylewis(at)aol.com>
Date: Aug 01, 2011
If your RV 10 was one of the two parked at OSH on Sat without a rudder lock installed when the wind blew, suggest you repair the broken left rudder stop soon. Tom Lewis Sent from my iPad ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: avionics settings
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Aug 01, 2011
You don't have to do it in flight since the 330 will display the correct pressure altitude (labeled FL ___) when it's talking to the HX. I have the 327 and it is hooked up thru a serial line. I think you have the option of a serial line, or the ARINC line? I can get you my serial setting next time I'm at the hangar if that helps. Bob -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348275#348275 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: avionics settings
From: "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com>
Date: Aug 01, 2011
Got some resolution from another builder in the area. The 330 has to be set to receive" Icarus ALT" on the settings screen and the garmin trimble encoder settings off of the EFIS encoder. I had the 330 set differently. Made that change and it looks to be working. Eric Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348277#348277 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Recent article by Gene Benson
Date: Aug 01, 2011
The NTSB has decided to take a look at the experimental and amateur-built aircraft. This isn't surprising since. According to the most recent Nall Report, amateur built fixed-wing aircraft logged less than 7% of total flight time as compared to other non-commercial fixed-wing operations, but accounted for 21% of all corresponding accidents and 30% of fatal accidents. Numbers like that are sure to draw attention. EAA is participating in the study by conducting a survey and sharing the results with NTSB. This is a difficult issue. We certainly want to maintain the freedom to design, build, and/or fly aircraft and anyone who engages in any or all of those activities understands that there is increased risk. These aircraft have panel-mounted placards warning passengers that the aircraft does not meet certification standards of the FAA so passengers are, at least in theory, notified of increased risk. Of course there is ample precedent for some level of government to protect us from ourselves as evidenced by all the safety equipment that is mandated for our cars, motorcycle helmet laws, restrictions on use of fireworks in some states, etc. This study will probably follow a familiar path. The NTSB will make recommendations to the FAA for new or expanded regulations. AOPA and EAA will mount a massive and successful campaign to block any new rules. But if the trend continues, blocking restrictions on amateur-built aircraft will become more difficult. The best course of action for anyone who has a stake in amateur-built aircraft is to do whatever is possible to prevent accidents and increase safety overall. A change in direction of the statistics curve will do more than anything else to avoid increased regulation. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 01, 2011
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Recent article by Gene Benson
I think there's a huge glaring error in the statistics. It's in that 7% of total flight time. Just take a look at your own airport ..... how often do the experimentals fly and the air time compared to all the hangar queens and lawn ornaments. Where did that flight time figure come from??? Other than my hobbs meter, nobody is keeping track of the flight time of my aircraft. I'll admit that I don't fly as much as I did years ago ..... but then neither do my 'certificated' friends. I also believe we're the fastest growing segment of aviation in the U.S. The other points about regulation are well taken. How do we prevent accidents caused by those that ignore the present 'guidelines' that are intended to keep us safe? Linn On 8/1/2011 1:25 PM, Pascal wrote: > The NTSB has decided to take a look at the experimental and > amateur-built aircraft. This isn't surprising since. According to the > most recent Nall Report, amateur built fixed-wing aircraft logged less > than 7% of total flight time as compared to other non-commercial > fixed-wing operations, but accounted for 21% of all corresponding > accidents and 30% of fatal accidents. Numbers like that are sure to > draw attention. EAA is participating in the study by conducting a > survey and sharing the results with NTSB. This is a difficult issue. > We certainly want to maintain the freedom to design, build, and/or fly > aircraft and anyone who engages in any or all of those activities > understands that there is increased risk. These aircraft have > panel-mounted placards warning passengers that the aircraft does not > meet certification standards of the FAA so passengers are, at least in > theory, notified of increased risk. Of course there is ample precedent > for some level of government to protect us from ourselves as evidenced > by all the safety equipment that is mandated for our cars, motorcycle > helmet laws, restrictions on use of fireworks in some states, etc. > This study will probably follow a familiar path. The NTSB will make > recommendations to the FAA for new or expanded regulations. AOPA and > EAA will mount a massive and successful campaign to block any new > rules. But if the trend continues, blocking restrictions on > amateur-built aircraft will become more difficult. The best course of > action for anyone who has a stake in amateur-built aircraft is to do > whatever is possible to prevent accidents and increase safety overall. > A change in direction of the statistics curve will do more than > anything else to avoid increased regulation. > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: What is the difference between Lycoming YIO-540 and XI)-540?
From: "rv10flyer" <wayne.gillispie(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Aug 01, 2011
I have YIO-540 too. Fuel servo, flow divider, fuel nozzles and data plate are different but still must meet same test cell specs. -------- Wayne Gillispie, A&P 5/93, PPC 10/08 Bldr# 40983SB IO-540 Install. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348283#348283 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 01, 2011
Subject: Re: What is the difference between Lycoming YIO-540 and
XI)-540?
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Having discussed the issue with the folks at Precision, the only difference between their experimental units and certified is the color of the servo body and the data plate. They are otherwise identical. On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 12:19 PM, rv10flyer wrote: > > I have YIO-540 too. Fuel servo, flow divider, fuel nozzles and data plate are different but still must meet same test cell specs. > > -------- > Wayne Gillispie, A&P 5/93, PPC 10/08 > Bldr# 40983SB IO-540 Install. > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348283#348283 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 01, 2011
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: What is the difference between Lycoming YIO-540 and XIO-540?
Thanks all.... I think I understand the difference between certified and experimental. But I see references to two different experimental versions - the YIO and the XIO. I'm wondering if anyone knows the difference between these. Bill On 7/31/2011 8:49 PM, Bill Watson wrote: > > The 'IO-540 I got thru Vans appears to be officially listed in the doc > as a YIO-540. The 'experimental' and lower priced engine option. In > other write-ups I see references to XIO-540s. > > What's up with that? > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 5inch before and after redcube fuel-transducer
From: "bill.peyton" <peyton.b(at)sbcglobal.net>
Date: Aug 01, 2011
While I have read that some have decent results from mounting the FP sensor in the tunnel between the electric and mechanical fuel pumps, I would not recommend it. As Robin stated, the readings will fluctuate wildly due to the interaction between the pumps. I have personally seen this on several installations, both carburetor and injected. As long as you mount it after the mechanical pump and leave a couple of inches of straight they seem to work fine. Putting it between the servo and the spider is a good example of this. Making a bracket and supporting the hose leading to and away from the cube is also important. -------- Bill Peyton Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348322#348322 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: avionics settings
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Aug 01, 2011
Sounds like you've got it working. As I promised, here are the HX settings I use for sending altitude to a Garmin 327 (not 330), over a serial line: HX serial port 6 speed: 9600 HX serial port 6 out: Fuel/Air Data (Z Format) (of course, any serial port can be used). -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348321#348321 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: What is the difference between Lycoming YIO-540 and XIO-540?
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Aug 01, 2011
A year + ago, I had to call Williamsport (I wanted the larger starter motor, which they exchanged with mine for no charge). While I was on the phone I asked them the difference between "X" and "Y", since this appeared to be new at that time. He said there is no difference. Just that Lycoming decided they wanted to keep track of where engines are going, so experimental engines sold by Vans are "Y"'s; those sold by others are "X"'s. At least, that's what he told me. Presumably if there was another large retailer, those would be "Z"'s. -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348324#348324 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 01, 2011
From: Chris <toaster73(at)embarqmail.com>
Subject: Re: What is the difference between Lycoming YIO-540 and XIO-540?
Perhaps the YIO is the factory built Lycoming without certification papers, and the XIO is built by the approved second source shops. -Chris Lucas #40072 YIO-540 ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> Subject: RV10-List: What is the difference between Lycoming YIO-540 and XIO-540? Thanks all.... I think I understand the difference between certified and experimental. But I see references to two different experimental versions - the YIO and the XIO. I'm wondering if anyone knows the difference between these. Bill On 7/31/2011 8:49 PM, Bill Watson wrote: > > The 'IO-540 I got thru Vans appears to be officially listed in the doc > as a YIO-540. The 'experimental' and lower priced engine option. In > other write-ups I see references to XIO-540s. > > What's up with that? > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Static Prop Balancing
From: jason.kreidler(at)regalbeloit.com
Date: Aug 02, 2011
Before having our prop dynamically balanced I would like to balance it statically. After all it doesn't much make sense to make a dynamic correction for a static condition that will change over time as the prop is dressed for various reasons. I found an article on EAA's site about balancing, but the apparatus they used requires a hole through the prop hub, which we do not have. Does anyone have any experience doing a static balance on a two blade Hartzell prop? I would just take it into a prop shop to have it done, but if it is simple I would like to check at each annual. http://www.eaa.org/experimenter/articles/2009-11_howto_props.asp Thoughts and tips appreciated. Thanks, Jason Kreidler 4 Partner Build - Sheboygan Falls, WI Wayne Elsner, Kyle Hokel, Tony Kolar, Jason Kreidler N44YH - #40617 - Flying ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 02, 2011
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Static Prop Balancing
Your prop is statically balanced when it is made and when it is overhauled by a prop shop. It should not need any further static balancing. I don't believe there is any simple way for you to check that balance on a constant speed prop. Your dynamic prop balance technician will be able to tell immediately if the static balance isn't close enough for him to be able to do the dynamic balance. He will tell you to take the prop to a prop shop and have them do a static balance. Not a normal problem unless someone has been overly aggressive filing out a ding in one prop blade. On 8/2/2011 5:32 AM, jason.kreidler(at)regalbeloit.com wrote: > Before having our prop dynamically balanced I would like to balance it > statically. After all it doesn't much make sense to make a dynamic > correction for a static condition that will change over time as the > prop is dressed for various reasons. > > I found an article on EAA's site about balancing, but the apparatus > they used requires a hole through the prop hub, which we do not have. > Does anyone have any experience doing a static balance on a two blade > Hartzell prop? I would just take it into a prop shop to have it done, > but if it is simple I would like to check at each annual. > > http://www.eaa.org/experimenter/articles/2009-11_howto_props.asp > > Thoughts and tips appreciated. > > Thanks, Jason Kreidler > > 4 Partner Build - Sheboygan Falls, WI > Wayne Elsner, Kyle Hokel, Tony Kolar, Jason Kreidler > N44YH - #40617 - Flying > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com>
Date: Aug 02, 2011
Subject: Re: Static Prop Balancing
Jason, I've dynamically balanced lots of props and lots of helicopters but never tried to do a static balance on a prop. You should see some balance weights on the hub when you get the prop--those are from the static balance after manufacture/overhaul. Don't change anything until you're doing a dynamic balance. Dave Saylor AirCrafters 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 95076 831-722-9141 Shop 831-750-0284 Cell On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 5:32 AM, wrote: > Before having our prop dynamically balanced I would like to balance it > statically. After all it doesn't much make sense to make a dynamic > correction for a static condition that will change over time as the prop is > dressed for various reasons. > > I found an article on EAA's site about balancing, but the apparatus they > used requires a hole through the prop hub, which we do not have. Does > anyone have any experience doing a static balance on a two blade Hartzell > prop? I would just take it into a prop shop to have it done, but if it is > simple I would like to check at each annual. > > http://www.eaa.org/experimenter/articles/2009-11_howto_props.asp > > Thoughts and tips appreciated. > > Thanks, Jason Kreidler > > 4 Partner Build - Sheboygan Falls, WI > Wayne Elsner, Kyle Hokel, Tony Kolar, Jason Kreidler > N44YH - #40617 - Flying > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 02, 2011
From: Rick Beebe <richard.beebe(at)yale.edu>
Subject: Re:OSH
On 07/31/2011 08:20 PM, Tim Olson wrote: > But yeah, there wasn't much new and exciting outside of the ipad world. > Tim I thought the new boxes introduced by Avidyne were pretty cool--especially for people looking for upgrades. Their IFD540 is a touch-screen gps/nav/comm that's a plug-and-play direct replacement for a Garmin GNS530. Someone with a 530 who's thinking about upgrading to the new Garmin GTN750 will have to re-do their stack. The Avidyne unit will slide right into the 530 tray. The AMX240 is an audio-panel that will directly replace a GMA340 or PSA8000. It adds bluetooth, music & cell phone inputs, flexible split modes and a replay function. The AXP340 transponder replaces a KT76A or KT78A and adds ADS-B extended squitter. And their DFC90 autopilot replaces an stec55x and adds envelope protection and a save-my-ass button. I played around with the IFD540 for a while and to me it was considerably more intuitive to use than the 530 (I haven't looked at a GTN750 yet). They had a killer deal at OSH, 50% off, but I didn't bite. --Rick ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Static Prop Balancing
From: "jkreidler" <jason.kreidler(at)regalbeloit.com>
Date: Aug 02, 2011
Youre both correct; we do have weights in place from the factory static balance. We have on 325 hours and are going to get the prop dynamically balanced. Over the course of those 325 hours we have had to dress the prop from normal operation. So before I have the prop dynamically balanced I want to confirm that it is still statically balanced. >From reading the Experimenter article we are told that even coats of paint can affect the static balance of the prop, so it seems worthwhile to me to verify the static balance. If I know the prop is statically balanced before having it dynamically balanced I will have a starting point for the future when it is necessary to dress the prop again. If it is not statically balance before having it dynamically balanced then we would need to have it dynamically rebalanced after dressing (not that it wouldn't be a good idea). Anyway, my point is to start with a known good static balance. So, has anyone done this on a constant speed prop? The racing guys must.... -------- Jason Kreidler 4 Partner Build - Sheboygan Falls, WI Tony Kolar, Kyle Hokel, Wayne Elser, Jason Kreidler N44YH - Flying - #40617 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348398#348398 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Very cool turboprop for RV10
From: "David Shelton" <SBaircraft(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Aug 02, 2011
Outside the US, avgas is terribly expensive and often hard to find. One of my foreign customers pays around $16 USD/Gallon. Over the life of the airplane, he'll burn around 50,000 gallons of fuel. I'm sure he'd love to switch to Jet A. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348406#348406 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Date: Aug 02, 2011
Subject: Re: Very cool turboprop for RV10
Except the turboprop displayed at OSH is $100K US (projected) and burns 18 GPH regardless of flight level or taxi. I prefer to taxi at 1.2 GPH and fly LOP in the 10 GPH range. Interesting the turbine on display was in the low 100 pound weight. Impressive. Something like 240 Hp. To your point though, I last filled up near San Diego where Jet A was $1.00 less/gallon. Robin -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of David Shelton Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 11:00 AM Subject: RV10-List: Re: Very cool turboprop for RV10 Outside the US, avgas is terribly expensive and often hard to find. One of my foreign customers pays around $16 USD/Gallon. Over the life of the airplane, he'll burn around 50,000 gallons of fuel. I'm sure he'd love to switch to Jet A. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348406#348406 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 02, 2011
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Static Prop Balancing
On 8/2/2011 1:22 PM, jkreidler wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: "jkreidler" > > Youre both correct; we do have weights in place from the factory static balance. We have on 325 hours and are going to get the prop dynamically balanced. Over the course of those 325 hours we have had to dress the prop from normal operation. So before I have the prop dynamically balanced I want to confirm that it is still statically balanced. Static balance is akin to using a grenade to get rid of a fly. If you want to do that, it's your prop, but you've had good advice already that it's gonna be a waste of time. If your prop is not close to balance, you already feel the vibration a lot. Keep in min that engine/prop vibration is very subjective. I lay a bowl of water on the glareshield to visibly show how much vibration is present. If there isn't much, then I can save my customer some bucks. Then I do the dynamic balance and repeat the water thingy again. You can definitely see the difference. Some can feel the difference, I can't. > > From reading the Experimenter article we are told that even coats of paint can affect the static balance of the prop, so it seems worthwhile to me to verify the static balance. Affect it? Absolutely! However, the exercise is akin to aerodynamic cleanup to gain knots. Takes a lot for a little gain. > If I know the prop is statically balanced before having it dynamically balanced I will have a starting point for the future when it is necessary to dress the prop again. If it is not statically balance before having it dynamically balanced then we would need to have it dynamically rebalanced after dressing (not that it wouldn't be a good idea). Anyway, my point is to start with a known good static balance. Doesn't make any difference. The dynamic balance will take care of any static unbalance and you won't even notice. Any change after the dynamic balance (like a little dressing) will upset the apple cart once again. > > So, has anyone done this on a constant speed prop? The racing guys must.... Probably not .... they just do the dynamic balance with a whole lot of extra RPMs. Linn .... balanced a few props > > -------- > Jason Kreidler > 4 Partner Build - Sheboygan Falls, WI > Tony Kolar, Kyle Hokel, Wayne Elser, Jason Kreidler > N44YH - Flying - #40617 > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348398#348398 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net>
Subject: Airwolf Oil Chiller
Date: Aug 02, 2011
That's exactly where I mounted mine. Michael From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m atronics.com] On Behalf Of Phillip Perry Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 9:51 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Airwolf Oil Chiller Air Wolf has recommended these for a long long time. Before they came out with their own product they suggested going to an Aero Salvage place and pi cking on up from a Piper Tomahawk. Apparently they were standard on those airframes. Pause here ---> I just checked the Airwolf site and their link is still up. Here is is: Q: I am running high oil temperatures. How much will your oil filter help redu ce my oil temperatures? A: Regardless of what engine you operate, the ideal temperature for the oil is 185=B0F. We want you to be as close to this number as possible. The first thing we need for you to do, is calibrate your oil temperature gauge to the numeric value of 185=B0F , so we have a starting point to work from. You c an do this by purchasing a good thermometer, heating up some oil along with your oil temperature bulb, and seeing where 185=B0F is on YOUR gauge. A re mote mounted oil filter will usually drop the oil temperatures about 20=B0F . Keep in mind that an oil filter is radiating heat, and only has so much s urface area available. It is dependent on some airflow blowing on or around the oil filter, to carry away the heat. To gain maximum advantage of its c ooling benefits, we recommend running a blast tube off the baffles and blow this cool air on the filter. If you want every ounce of cooling you can ge t, go to a salvage yard and buy the finned aluminum oil filter shroud that was used on the Piper Tomahawk aircraft. This will usually only get you an additional 5=B0F but anything you get will be free cooling. I have seen them installed on an RV-10 before (Tomahawk Version). The filt er was mounted on the lower passenger side of the firewall where it would b e easy to change and drips/runs could go straight down into a drip pan with out hitting anything in the FWF area. It had a blast tube as well. I'm pl anning on replicating that installation once my engine arrives this fall. It was a really nice setup. Phil On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Tim Olson > wrote: 0.com>> Someone in my group talked to them and they said that the oil filter was mo unted down low, in high airflow of cool air, and basically made the install a 100% best case.....so I wouldn't bank on it making any major difference for us without a bit of work to idealize the situation. Tim On Aug 1, 2011, at 9:19 AM, Kelly McMullen > wrote: :apilot2(at)gmail.com>> > > Color me skeptical. If your engine baffling is properly sealed, the > oil filter isn't going to have very much air flow around it to carry > away heat. > > On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 6:35 AM, Dawson-Townsend,Timothy > > wrote : >> This is a simple, but "cool" new product at Oshkosh: the Airwolf Oil >> Chiller >> http://www.airwolf.com/ (click on Oil Chiller) >> http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/airwolfoilchiller.php >> Basically a heat sink that wraps around your oil filter. They have good >> anecdotal results on some glider tow planes. An easy mod if oil temps a re a >> concern. >> Tim >> 40025 >> Back in MA >> >> >> >> >> > > arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List http://forums.matronics.com le, List Admin. ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 02, 2011
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Somewhat depressing...
Sitting here on the 'eve' of my first flight, I have to admit that it doesn't even register. I'm feeling like a million bucks... or about to fly a million bucks. Buying and flying this fine $175K ship would make me feel like, well, $17.5k at best. Nice piece of iron but it's not mine. Let's not bust the bubble, Bill "just dreaming" Watson On 8/2/2011 1:21 PM, Robin Marks wrote: > > Just saw this on Barnstormers weekly email promotion. > > http://www.barnstormers.com/ad_detail.php?ID=572544 > > *RV-10* <http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_572544_RV-10.html> > $175,000 *GREAT BUY*2008 RV-10 '09 OSH Bronze Lindy Winner - 152Hrs > - Garmin G1000 (G900X) Panel w/ Sythetic Vision - XM Satellite Weather > - TruTrak Sorcerer Autopilot with Altitude Pre-Select and VS - Angle > of Attack Indicator - Standby Dynon D10A EFIS - Prewired by Stein - > Factory New Lycoming IO-540 Electronic Ignition - Dual Battery - > etc ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 02, 2011
Subject: Re: Somewhat depressing...
From: Phillip Perry <philperry9(at)gmail.com>
Good luck Bill. Stay safe and I look forward to a report, the photos, and a big smile. I've enjoyed watching your progress. Phil "Wishing the best for Bill tomorrow" Perry On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Bill Watson wrote: > Sitting here on the 'eve' of my first flight, I have to admit that it > doesn't even register. > > I'm feeling like a million bucks... or about to fly a million bucks. > Buying and flying this fine $175K ship would make me feel like, well, $17 .5k > at best. Nice piece of iron but it's not mine. > > Let's not bust the bubble, > Bill "just dreaming" Watson > > > On 8/2/2011 1:21 PM, Robin Marks wrote: > > Just saw this on Barnstormers weekly email promotion. > > > http://www.barnstormers.com/ad_detail.php?ID=572544 > > > *RV-10* <http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_572544_RV-10.html> - > $175,000 - *GREAT BUY* - 2008 RV-10 '09 OSH Bronze Lindy Winner - 152 Hrs - > Garmin G1000 (G900X) Panel w/ Sythetic Vision - XM Satellite Weather - > TruTrak Sorcerer Autopilot with Altitude Pre-Select and VS - Angle of Att ack > Indicator - Standby Dynon D10A EFIS - Prewired by Stein - Factory New > Lycoming IO-540 Electronic Ignition - Dual Battery - > > etc > > * > =========== =========== =========== =========== > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Miller" <gengrumpy(at)aol.com>
Date: Aug 03, 2011
Subject: Re: Somewhat depressing...
V2hlcmUgaXMgaXQ/CgpTZW50IHZpYSBEUk9JRCBvbiBWZXJpem9uIFdpcmVsZXNzCgotLS0tLU9y aWdpbmFsIG1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQpGcm9tOiBEYXZlIFNheWxvciA8ZGF2ZS5zYXlsb3IuYWlyY3Jh ZnRlcnNAZ21haWwuY29tPgpUbzogcnYxMC1saXN0QG1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20KU2VudDogV2VkLCBB dWcgMywgMjAxMSAxNzo1MjoyNSBHTVQrMDA6MDAKU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFJWMTAtTGlzdDogU29t ZXdoYXQgZGVwcmVzc2luZy4uLgoKLS0+IFJWMTAtTGlzdCBtZXNzYWdlIHBvc3RlZCBieTogRGF2 ZSBTYXlsb3IgPGRhdmUuc2F5bG9yLmFpcmNyYWZ0ZXJzQGdtYWlsLmNvbT4KCklzIGFueW9uZSBj bG9zZSBlbm91Z2ggdG8gdGhpcyB0byBzcGVuZCBhIGRheSBkb2luZyBhIHByZS1wdXJjaGFzZSBm b3IKbWU/ICBDb250YWN0IG1lIG9mZmxpbmUuCgpEbyBub3QgYXJjaGl2ZQoKRGF2ZSBTYXlsb3IK QWlyQ3JhZnRlcnMKMTQwIEF2aWF0aW9uIFdheQpXYXRzb252aWxsZSwgQ0EgOTUwNzYKODMxLTcy Mi05MTQxIFNob3AKODMxLTc1MC0wMjg0IENlbGwKCgoKT24gV2VkLCBBdWcgMywgMjAxMSBhdCA5 OjU3IEFNLCBNaWNoYWVsIEtyYXVzCjxuMjIzcnZAd29sZmxha2VhaXJwb3J0Lm5ldD4gd3JvdGU6 Cj4gLS0+IFJWMTAtTGlzdCBtZXNzYWdlIHBvc3RlZCBieTogTWljaGFlbCBLcmF1cyA8bjIyM3J2 QHdvbGZsYWtlYWlycG9ydC5uZXQ+Cj4KPiBCaWxsIGdldHRpbmcgZmlyc3QgZmxpZ2h0IGppdHRl cnMgV2F0c29uLAo+Cj4gTWF5YmUgdGhpcyB3aWxsIGhlbHAgZWFzZSB5b3VyIGZlZWxpbmdzLgo+ Cj4gaHR0cDovL3d3dy55b3V0dWJlLmNvbS93YXRjaD92PXFxajRwaUViWDc0JmZlYXR1cmU9eW91 dHViZV9nZGF0YV9wbGF5ZXIKPgo+IC1NaWtlIG5vIGNhdGNoeSBwaHJhc2UgS3JhdXMuIDotKQo+ Cj4gU2VudCBmcm9tIG15IGlQaG9uZQo+Cj4gT24gQXVnIDMsIDIwMTEsIGF0IDEyOjI5IFBNLCBC aWxsIFdhdHNvbiA8TWF1bGVkcml2ZXJAbmMucnIuY29tPiB3cm90ZToKPgo+PiAtLT4gUlYxMC1M aXN0IG1lc3NhZ2UgcG9zdGVkIGJ5OiBCaWxsIFdhdHNvbiA8TWF1bGVkcml2ZXJAbmMucnIuY29t Pgo+Pgo+PiBUaGFua3MgUGhpbC4KPj4KPj4gSSBzaG91bGQgY2xhcmlmeSB0aGF0IEkgdXNlIHRo ZSB0ZXJtICdldmUnIGxvb3NlbHkuIMKgRXZlcnl0aGluZyB0YWtlcyBsb25nZXIgaW4gaG9tZWJ1 aWxkZXIgbGFuZCwgc28gaXQgaXMgZmlyc3QgZmxpZ2h0ICdldmUnIGZvciBhYm91dCBhIG1vbnRo LiDCoEJ1dCBJJ20gc3dlYXRpbmcgYW5kIHNtaWxpbmchCj4+Cj4+IEJpbGwKPj4gZG8gbm90IGFy Y2hpdmUKPj4KPj4gT24gOC8zLzIwMTEgMTI6MDkgQU0sIFBoaWxsaXAgUGVycnkgd3JvdGU6Cj4+ PiBHb29kIGx1Y2sgQmlsbC4gwqBTdGF5IHNhZmUgYW5kIEkgbG9vayBmb3J3YXJkIHRvIGEgcmVw b3J0LCB0aGUgcGhvdG9zLCBhbmQgYSBiaWcgc21pbGUuCj4+Pgo+Pj4gSSd2ZSBlbmpveWVkIHdh dGNoaW5nIHlvdXIgcHJvZ3Jlc3MuCj4+Pgo+Pj4gUGhpbCAiV2lzaGluZyB0aGUgYmVzdCBmb3Ig QmlsbCB0b21vcnJvdyIgUGVycnkKPj4+Cj4+Pgo+Pj4KPj4KPj4KPj4KPj4KPj4KPj4KPgo+Cj4K Pgo+Cj4KPgoKCl8tPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09Cl8tPSAgICAgICAgICAtIFRoZSBSVjEwLUxpc3QgRW1haWwgRm9ydW0g LQpfLT0gVXNlIHRoZSBNYXRyb25pY3MgTGlzdCBGZWF0dXJlcyBOYXZpZ2F0b3IgdG8gYnJvd3Nl Cl8tPSB0aGUgbWFueSBMaXN0IHV0aWxpdGllcyBzdWNoIGFzIExpc3QgVW4vU3Vic2NyaXB0aW9u LApfLT0gQXJjaGl2ZSBTZWFyY2ggJiBEb3dubG9hZCwgNy1EYXkgQnJvd3NlLCBDaGF0LCBGQVEs Cl8tPSBQaG90b3NoYXJlLCBhbmQgbXVjaCBtdWNoIG1vcmU6Cl8tPQpfLT0gICAtLT4gaHR0cDov L3d3dy5tYXRyb25pY3MuY29tL05hdmlnYXRvcj9SVjEwLUxpc3QKXy09Cl8tPT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09Cl8tPSAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgIC0gTUFUUk9OSUNTIFdFQiBGT1JVTVMgLQpfLT0gU2FtZSBncmVhdCBjb250ZW50 IGFsc28gYXZhaWxhYmxlIHZpYSB0aGUgV2ViIEZvcnVtcyEKXy09Cl8tPSAgIC0tPiBodHRwOi8v Zm9ydW1zLm1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20KXy09Cl8tPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09Cl8tPSAgICAgICAgICAgICAtIExpc3QgQ29u dHJpYnV0aW9uIFdlYiBTaXRlIC0KXy09ICBUaGFuayB5b3UgZm9yIHlvdXIgZ2VuZXJvdXMgc3Vw cG9ydCEKXy09ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgLU1hdHQgRHJhbGxlLCBMaXN0 IEFkbWluLgpfLT0gICAtLT4gaHR0cDovL3d3dy5tYXRyb25pY3MuY29tL2NvbnRyaWJ1dGlvbgpf LT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PQoKCg= ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: A Dad's Life......
From: Michael Kraus <n223rv(at)wolflakeairport.net>
Date: Aug 03, 2011
Even my RV-10 has car seats...... Gotta love it!! Sent from my iPhone

________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: A Dad's Life......
From: Rick <ricksked(at)cox.net>
Date: Aug 03, 2011
How cool!! Rick Sent from my iPhone On Aug 3, 2011, at 6:17 PM, Michael Kraus wrote: > Even my RV-10 has car seats...... > > > > > Gotta love it!! > > Sent from my iPhone > >
> > >
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: A Dad's Life......
From: Michael Kraus <n223rv(at)wolflakeairport.net>
Date: Aug 04, 2011
Keep in mind, the ISO button shuts up the wife too :-). Not to say there is ever a need for that..... I'm just saying..... Sent from my iPhone On Aug 4, 2011, at 1:06 AM, Dave Saylor wrote: > We grew to love the pax mute button. Wish I had one that worked in the house sometimes. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Cumins" <jcumins(at)jcis.net>
Subject: A Dad's Life......
Date: Aug 04, 2011
HEHE awesome. I used a car seat many time in my old cardinal. Put the son to sleep many times. But now in less than 2 weeks the ultimate intercom isolate button will happen. I take him to San Francisco State for his first year of collage. YES The house will be quiet The pantry will have food left in it. The house will remain clean. There will not be cloths tossed all over the place. Life will be good, and I can get back to working on the RV10 wings again. And the best part of it all the wife and I get some peace and quiet!!!!!!!!!!!! -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael Kraus Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 6:17 PM Subject: RV10-List: A Dad's Life...... Even my RV-10 has car seats...... ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: A Dad's Life......
From: "Strasnuts" <sean(at)braunandco.com>
Date: Aug 04, 2011
See how relaxing it is WITHOUT kids! -------- 40936 RV-10 SB N801VR Flying Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348621#348621 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/cockpit_277.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 05, 2011
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Tach sensing and GRT EIS setting
I have 2 Slick mags. I chose to install this sensor for tach input into my GRT EIS http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/inpages/mgltachslick.php Does anyone know the correct setting for the GRT EIS? The default for a 6 cylinder, 4cycle engine is a setting of '0' which corresponds to '1.5' signals per rpm as I read it. I assume that is for there P-lead sensing setup. I don't have access to a external tach yet to verify but would appreciate any help. I'm calling GRT too. Thanks Bill "so close and yet..." Watson ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 05, 2011
Subject: Re: Tach sensing and GRT EIS setting
From: Rob Kochman <rv10rob(at)gmail.com>
I think that's right. I switched from the p-lead sensor to the hall effect mag sensor on my Dynon, and the correct setting for both is 1.5. -Rob On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 7:16 AM, Bill Watson wrote: > > I have 2 Slick mags. I chose to install this sensor for tach input into my > GRT EIS > http://www.aircraftspruce.com/**catalog/inpages/mgltachslick.**php> > > Does anyone know the correct setting for the GRT EIS? > > The default for a 6 cylinder, 4cycle engine is a setting of '0' which > corresponds to '1.5' signals per rpm as I read it. I assume that is for > there P-lead sensing setup. > > I don't have access to a external tach yet to verify but would appreciate > any help. > > I'm calling GRT too. > > Thanks > Bill "so close and yet..." Watson > > -- Rob Kochman RV-10 Flying, Phase 1 Woodinville, WA http://kochman.net/N819K ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 05, 2011
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: A Dad's Life......
I'm chuckling with you. I have a friend who had a Navajo and a couple of small kids (4 & 6). On Angel flights, they'd come along but he didn't have to climb to O2 levels to knock 'em out. The first time out with him I asked him "do they ever settle down?" Watch this.... going thru 8k they sat down and conked out. Which of course meant they were full of energy as we arrived... and they were fun then! Bill 40605 ==> N215TG On 8/4/2011 4:30 PM, Rick Lark wrote: > Funny you should mention that. Years ago I was flying a CEO of a large > tire manufacturing co from Southern Ont to Ohio regularly. His > underlings used to party it up in the back of the Navajo on the way > home. After about 30 minutes of partying, the CEO used to stick his > head into the cockpit and ask us to climb to a higher altitude. We'd > pull the curtain shut, use the O2 and everyone would get quiet quite > quickly. The CEO then had a nice little nap and peace and quiet. > I still chuckle about it. > Rick > #40956 > Southampton, Ont > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Chris Hukill <cjhukill(at)cox.net>
Subject: transducers
Date: Aug 06, 2011
The picture in the plans show that the oil and fuel pressure transducers that attach to the manifold mounted on the firewall have the transducers pointed down. The transducers that came with my Dynon are to large in diameter to mount that way. The ones shown look to be smaller diameter. Does anyone know what transducers are pictured in the plans and if they are compatible with the Dynon Skyview? Chris Hukill ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: transducers
From: Michael Kraus <n223rv(at)wolflakeairport.net>
Date: Aug 06, 2011
I have the SkyView in my -10. I used their transducers and have them pointed forward. Plenty of room. You are correct, they will not fit vertical. Let me know if you want a picture and I can dig one up. -Mike Kraus Sent from my iPhone On Aug 6, 2011, at 9:58 AM, Chris Hukill wrote: > > The picture in the plans show that the oil and fuel pressure transducers that attach to the manifold mounted on the firewall have the transducers pointed down. The transducers that came with my Dynon are to large in diameter to mount that way. The ones shown look to be smaller diameter. Does anyone know what transducers are pictured in the plans and if they are compatible with the Dynon Skyview? > Chris Hukill > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: transducers
From: "rv10flyer" <wayne.gillispie(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Aug 07, 2011
I just inst grt fuel/oil pres senders. The plans show either a plug or ftg for hose on top and bottom and senders toward the front. I am not inst oil sw for light/hobbs. If you were it would go on the bottom. -------- Wayne Gillispie, A&P 5/93, PPC 10/08 Bldr# 40983SB IO-540 Install. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348809#348809 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: -10 Plans
From: pilotdds <pilotdds(at)aol.com>
Date: Aug 07, 2011
shannon I would greatly appreciate a set of the plans my builder number is 40182 and my e-mail is pilotdds(at)aol.com -----Original Message----- From: DLM <dlm34077(at)q.com> Sent: Wed, Jul 20, 2011 7:33 am Subject: Re: RV10-List: -10 Plans Check Tim's site . already done. ----- Original Message ----- From: Shannon Hicks Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 6:59 AM Subject: RV10-List: -10 Plans I have started scanning all of my -10 plans for my own personal use and was wondering if there would be any issues with making them available for ever yone to see. Thanks for your input. Shannon href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics. com/Navigator?RV10-List ref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com ref="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c -= - The RV10-List Email Forum - -= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse -= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription, -= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, -= Photoshare, and much much more: - -= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List - -======================== -= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - -= Same great content also available via the Web Forums! - -= --> http://forums.matronics.com - -======================== -= - List Contribution Web Site - -= Thank you for your generous support! -= -Matt Dralle, List Admin. -= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution -======================== ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 07, 2011
From: George Nolin <gnolin(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: transducers
Use a 3/16 aluminum strip between the manifold and the firewall and they wi ll fit. This will restore the manifold to three ports for each activity. G. Hank Nolin, P.E. 832-640-6284 www.salestaxexemptions.com - "Science, freedom, beauty, adventure--aviation offers it all." Charles A. Lindbergh --- On Sat, 8/6/11, Chris Hukill wrote: From: Chris Hukill <cjhukill(at)cox.net> Subject: RV10-List: transducers Date: Saturday, August 6, 2011, 8:58 AM The picture in the plans show that the oil and fuel pressure transducers th at attach to the manifold mounted on the firewall have the transducers poin ted down. The transducers that came with my Dynon are to large in diameter to mount that way. The ones shown look to be smaller diameter. Does anyone know what transducers are pictured in the plans and if they are compatible with the Dynon Skyview? Chris Hukill le, List Admin. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Les Kearney" <kearney(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Primary Comm Radio
Date: Aug 07, 2011
Hi I am in the final stages (yeah right!) of wiring my panel. I have a GNS430W and an SL30 amongst other toys. I am wondering which will be most used from a comm perspective. I plan to have a flip / flop on the stick and would like to make the right choice as to which radio is connected to the switch. Any comments / opinions? Cheers Les #40643 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 07, 2011
Subject: Re: Primary Comm Radio
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
430W. Robin Sent from Android phone Probably while driving On Aug 7, 2011 11:42 AM, "Les Kearney" wrote: ** Hi I am in the final stages (yeah right!) of wiring my panel. I have a GNS430W and an SL30 amongst other toys. I am wondering which will be most used from a comm perspective. I plan to have a flip / flop on the stick and would like to make the right choice as to which radio is connected to the switch. Any comments / opinions? Cheers Les #40643 * * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "fehdxlbb(at)gmail.com" <fehdxlbb(at)gmail.com>
Date: Aug 07, 2011
Subject: Re: Primary Comm Radio
As a datapoint, I use the SL30 for ATC since I don't know the frequencies ahead of time and have to twist them in anyway. This free's up the G530 for AWOS and UNICOM since I look up those frequencies from the database rather than twisting them in. Don't have any flip\flop buttons on the yoke, so can't comment on that point. Hope that helps. Jim -----Original message----- From: Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca> Sent: Sun, Aug 7, 2011 18:39:33 GMT+00:00 Subject: RV10-List: Primary Comm Radio Hi I am in the final stages (yeah right!) of wiring my panel. I have a GNS430W and an SL30 amongst other toys. I am wondering which will be most used from a comm perspective. I plan to have a flip / flop on the stick and would like to make the right choice as to which radio is connected to the switch. Any comments / opinions? Cheers Les #40643 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Seano" <sean(at)braunandco.com>
Subject: Re: Primary Comm Radio
Date: Aug 07, 2011
Primary Comm RadioLes, I am with Robin, I have the 430W and the SL30. I have my Com1 Nav1 on the 430W. Sean ----- Original Message ----- From: Les Kearney To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 12:30 PM Subject: RV10-List: Primary Comm Radio Hi I am in the final stages (yeah right!) of wiring my panel. I have a GNS430W and an SL30 amongst other toys. I am wondering which will be most used from a comm perspective. I plan to have a flip / flop on the stick and would like to make the right choice as to which radio is connected to the switch. Any comments / opinions? Cheers Les #40643 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Date: Aug 07, 2011
Subject: Primary Comm Radio
I do just the reverse. Comm 2 is always my WX comm. Here is why: 430W Transmit power: 10 watts minimum; 16 watts minimum (GNS 430A) SL30 Transmit power 8 watts (carrier power) My G900X has dual 16 Watt comms. Nice to have J My 8A with a 430/SL30 has 1 - 16 Watt Comm & 1 - 8 Watt Comm. Use the 16 fo r all your primary communication IMHO. Robin *From:* owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *fehdxlbb(at)gmail.com *Sent:* Sunday, August 07, 2011 11:50 AM *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Primary Comm Radio As a datapoint, I use the SL30 for ATC since I don't know the frequencies ahead of time and have to twist them in anyway. This free's up the G530 fo r AWOS and UNICOM since I look up those frequencies from the database rather than twisting them in. Don't have any flip\flop buttons on the yoke, so can't comment on that point. Hope that helps. Jim -----Original message----- *From: *Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca>* Sent: *Sun, Aug 7, 2011 18:39:33 GMT+00:00* Subject: *RV10-List: Primary Comm Radio Hi I am in the final stages (yeah right!) of wiring my panel. I have a GNS430W and an SL30 amongst other toys. I am wondering which will be most used from a comm perspective. I plan to have a flip / flop on the stick and would lik e to make the right choice as to which radio is connected to the switch. Any comments / opinions? Cheers Les #40643 * * * * ===========* ===========* ===========* ===========* * * ~?=DE=83g(=D3=8D=D3=87qzn ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rene Felker" <rene(at)felker.com>
Subject: Primary Comm Radio
Date: Aug 07, 2011
I guess just to be different..I have it the other way around. I use the SL30 for all my primary comm and the 430 for my primary navigation. I have the sl30 hooked to my Grand Rapids and I can push freqs from the GRT system to the sl30. I have a freq flip/flop on my sick hooked to my SL30... I think it may depend more on how you plan on integrating and using your EFIS, etc. I really thought I was going to use my EFIS more to control the radios than I really have. I think my old age is catching up with me and I just go to looking up freqs and putting them in the radio instead of using the efis to look them up and push them over. Rene' Felker N423CF 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: Sunday, August 07, 2011 12:31 PM Subject: RV10-List: Primary Comm Radio Hi I am in the final stages (yeah right!) of wiring my panel. I have a GNS430W and an SL30 amongst other toys. I am wondering which will be most used from a comm perspective. I plan to have a flip / flop on the stick and would like to make the right choice as to which radio is connected to the switch. Any comments / opinions? Cheers Les #40643 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: David <dmaib(at)mac.com>
Subject: Re: Primary Comm Radio
Date: Aug 07, 2011
I have the SL-30 functioning as COMM 1 and the 430W as COMM 2. I do push VOR freqs from my Chelton into the SL-30 sometimes, but that is not a major factor for me. I can't tell you any particular reason I made that decision back during the build, but I am glad I did. (It is entirely possible that Stein recommended that setup, I just don't remember) The SL-30 is a really great radio IMHO. The ability to monitor two comm freqs as well as two VORs off of one radio is awesome. My VOR needles on the Chelton point to the primary VOR as well as the secondary or standby VOR in the SL-30. I have the flip- flop switch on my stick set up for COMM 1. My stack is set up with the SL-30 above the 430W, so maybe that is why I made the decision. Bottom line, it is probably not too important unless your EFIS setup makes one radio or the other preferable. David Maib 40559 Flying On Aug 7, 2011, at 2:30 PM, Les Kearney wrote: > Hi > > I am in the final stages (yeah right!) of wiring my panel. I have a > GNS430W and an SL30 amongst other toys. I am wondering which will > be most used from a comm perspective. I plan to have a flip / flop > on the stick and would like to make the right choice as to which > radio is connected to the switch. > > Any comments / opinions? > > Cheers > > Les > #40643 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 07, 2011
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Primary Comm Radio
Not sure why you bought the optional extra power on the 430, but for the majority of folks with a standard 430 the power output with it and the SL30 will be identical at 8 watts. On 8/7/2011 12:05 PM, Robin Marks wrote: > > I do just the reverse. Comm 2 is always my WX comm. Here is why: > > 430W > > Transmit power: > > > > 10 watts minimum; 16 watts minimum (GNS 430A) > > SL30 > > Transmit power 8 watts (carrier power) > > My G900X has dual 16 Watt comms. Nice to have J > > My 8A with a 430/SL30 has 1 - 16 Watt Comm & 1 - 8 Watt Comm. Use the > 16 for all your primary communication IMHO. > > Robin > > **** ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Primary Comm Radio
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Aug 07, 2011
I have sl-30 #1, G-420 #2. Not sure there is any real reason to prefer one over the other, although a minor point: G-420 has an inhibit input so the receiver is off when transmitting on the SL-30, to prevent any feed thru if it happens to be selected on the audio panel. I don't think the SL-30 has such an input (?). -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348846#348846 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Oil Cooler mount
From: "billz" <billz(at)roadrunner.com>
Date: Aug 07, 2011
I know this topic has been discussed at length, but am looking for guidance from some of those who've done it. I'm working the fuselage and finish kit (and a little of the firewall forward) at the same time. I'm not pleased with the airflow with the standard Vans oil cooler mount, but am leaning towards using it with modifications. Based on forum discussions, I purchased the 2006X oil cooler and have their fiberglass plenum. I intended to make my own mount with the fiberglass plenum, to improve airflow, but am not doing well. I'd like to mount the oil cooler horizontally so the airflow is directly into and out of the oil cooler. I made a flange that attaches to the cooler, but can't come up with any mount designs that seem to work. I can use the standard mounting holes and configure a bracket that will be attached with it, but I don't like the idea of having the bracket support the cooler with tension loads on all the components. The cooler will fit horizontally in that area, but will be at the bottom of all the standard mounting holes. I can see some durability issues down the road. I could move the whole thing to the other side of the engine, but don't really want to take up space over there. It could be mounted on the baffle, but that will add stress on the baffle and perhaps cause fatigue cracking. After all this, I'm back to using the improved cooler with the Vans mount. I seem to remember seeing some mounts that had an added deflector installed inside the "V" box to provide better air distribution onto the cooler. This makes a lot of sense that a small louver could direct part of the air flow onto the top part of the cooler and make better use of the cooling surface in the upper part of the oil cooler. I could make one, but if someone else has already done it, I'd rather just buy it. If anyone knows if someone has an oil cooler air deflector for sale, please let me know. It seems that I talk with many who have no problems with the standard design and I'm thinking that some effort put into sealing the baffles and oil cooler box and ducting may be all that's needed. I'd appreciate any comments you folks may have on my dilemma. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348848#348848 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 07, 2011
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Oil Cooler mount
As I posted earlier, I have a friend with an RV-7 with high oil temps. As I look at the cooler installation on his airplane, the air out of the cooler dumps down into the corner of the cowl, where there is no real airflow out the ramp. the other observation I have made is that the differential pressure across the oil cooler is the same as the differential across the cylinders as the oil cooler is in parallel. Also, the square inches of the cooler is larger than the scat tubing supplying the air. I plan on making a plenum since I hate cowl seals. So, two areas that may help: A larger scat tube to the cooler, and a scat tube from the output of the cooler over to the ramp. That experiment on the RV-7 is in process. Linn On 8/7/2011 5:40 PM, billz wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: "billz" > > I know this topic has been discussed at length, but am looking for guidance from some of those who've done it. I'm working the fuselage and finish kit (and a little of the firewall forward) at the same time. I'm not pleased with the airflow with the standard Vans oil cooler mount, but am leaning towards using it with modifications. > > Based on forum discussions, I purchased the 2006X oil cooler and have their fiberglass plenum. I intended to make my own mount with the fiberglass plenum, to improve airflow, but am not doing well. I'd like to mount the oil cooler horizontally so the airflow is directly into and out of the oil cooler. I made a flange that attaches to the cooler, but can't come up with any mount designs that seem to work. I can use the standard mounting holes and configure a bracket that will be attached with it, but I don't like the idea of having the bracket support the cooler with tension loads on all the components. The cooler will fit horizontally in that area, but will be at the bottom of all the standard mounting holes. I can see some durability issues down the road. I could move the whole thing to the other side of the engine, but don't really want to take up space over there. It could be mounted on the baffle, but that will add stress on the baffle and perhaps cause fatigue c! > racking. After all this, I'm back to using the improved cooler with the Vans mount. > > I seem to remember seeing some mounts that had an added deflector installed inside the "V" box to provide better air distribution onto the cooler. This makes a lot of sense that a small louver could direct part of the air flow onto the top part of the cooler and make better use of the cooling surface in the upper part of the oil cooler. I could make one, but if someone else has already done it, I'd rather just buy it. If anyone knows if someone has an oil cooler air deflector for sale, please let me know. > > It seems that I talk with many who have no problems with the standard design and I'm thinking that some effort put into sealing the baffles and oil cooler box and ducting may be all that's needed. > > I'd appreciate any comments you folks may have on my dilemma. > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348848#348848 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Date: Aug 07, 2011
Subject: Oil Cooler mount
Linn, Are you flying with your wheel pants on your 7? The reason I ask is we goofed around with all different oil cooler locations and feed lines but had 220 oil temps no matter what we did (RV-8A). Then we got to the point during Phase 1 where we added the gear leg fairings & wheel pants. We gained 14 knots TAS and now my oil never climbs above 205 and settles in under 200 during 90+ OAT's. We feel really stupid wasting all that time plus R&D when all we needed to do was to keep adding the required bits & pieces. I need to get away from this computer on a beautiful Sunday afternoon. Good luck, Robin -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Linn Walters Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 2:58 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Oil Cooler mount As I posted earlier, I have a friend with an RV-7 with high oil temps. As I look at the cooler installation on his airplane, the air out of the cooler dumps down into the corner of the cowl, where there is no real airflow out the ramp. the other observation I have made is that the differential pressure across the oil cooler is the same as the differential across the cylinders as the oil cooler is in parallel. Also, the square inches of the cooler is larger than the scat tubing supplying the air. I plan on making a plenum since I hate cowl seals. So, two areas that may help: A larger scat tube to the cooler, and a scat tube from the output of the cooler over to the ramp. That experiment on the RV-7 is in process. Linn On 8/7/2011 5:40 PM, billz wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: "billz" > > I know this topic has been discussed at length, but am looking for guidance from some of those who've done it. I'm working the fuselage and finish kit (and a little of the firewall forward) at the same time. I'm not pleased with the airflow with the standard Vans oil cooler mount, but am leaning towards using it with modifications. > > Based on forum discussions, I purchased the 2006X oil cooler and have their fiberglass plenum. I intended to make my own mount with the fiberglass plenum, to improve airflow, but am not doing well. I'd like to mount the oil cooler horizontally so the airflow is directly into and out of the oil cooler. I made a flange that attaches to the cooler, but can't come up with any mount designs that seem to work. I can use the standard mounting holes and configure a bracket that will be attached with it, but I don't like the idea of having the bracket support the cooler with tension loads on all the components. The cooler will fit horizontally in that area, but will be at the bottom of all the standard mounting holes. I can see some durability issues down the road. I could move the whole thing to the other side of the engine, but don't really want to take up space over there. It could be mounted on the baffle, but that will add stress on the baffle and perhaps cause fatigue! c! > racking. After all this, I'm back to using the improved cooler with the Vans mount. > > I seem to remember seeing some mounts that had an added deflector installed inside the "V" box to provide better air distribution onto the cooler. This makes a lot of sense that a small louver could direct part of the air flow onto the top part of the cooler and make better use of the cooling surface in the upper part of the oil cooler. I could make one, but if someone else has already done it, I'd rather just buy it. If anyone knows if someone has an oil cooler air deflector for sale, please let me know. > > It seems that I talk with many who have no problems with the standard design and I'm thinking that some effort put into sealing the baffles and oil cooler box and ducting may be all that's needed. > > I'd appreciate any comments you folks may have on my dilemma. > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348848#348848 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 07, 2011
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Oil Cooler mount
Actually, I'm not flying .... still building ...... which is a good thing since all the 'gotchas' should be solved by then!!! :-) :-) I'll pass your comment on to my buddy though!!! Linn On 8/7/2011 6:14 PM, Robin Marks wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: Robin Marks > > Linn, > Are you flying with your wheel pants on your 7? The reason I ask is we > goofed around with all different oil cooler locations and feed lines but > had 220 oil temps no matter what we did (RV-8A). Then we got to the point > during Phase 1 where we added the gear leg fairings& wheel pants. We > gained 14 knots TAS and now my oil never climbs above 205 and settles in > under 200 during 90+ OAT's. We feel really stupid wasting all that time > plus R&D when all we needed to do was to keep adding the required bits& > pieces. > I need to get away from this computer on a beautiful Sunday afternoon. > Good luck, > Robin > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Linn Walters > Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 2:58 PM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Oil Cooler mount > > --> RV10-List message posted by: Linn Walters > > As I posted earlier, I have a friend with an RV-7 with high oil temps. > As I look at the cooler installation on his airplane, the air out of the > cooler dumps down into the corner of the cowl, where there is no real > airflow out the ramp. the other observation I have made is that the > differential pressure across the oil cooler is the same as the > differential across the cylinders as the oil cooler is in parallel. > Also, the square inches of the cooler is larger than the scat tubing > supplying the air. > I plan on making a plenum since I hate cowl seals. > So, two areas that may help: A larger scat tube to the cooler, and a > scat tube from the output of the cooler over to the ramp. > That experiment on the RV-7 is in process. > Linn > > On 8/7/2011 5:40 PM, billz wrote: >> --> RV10-List message posted by: "billz" >> >> I know this topic has been discussed at length, but am looking for > guidance from some of those who've done it. I'm working the fuselage and > finish kit (and a little of the firewall forward) at the same time. I'm > not pleased with the airflow with the standard Vans oil cooler mount, but > am leaning towards using it with modifications. >> Based on forum discussions, I purchased the 2006X oil cooler and have > their fiberglass plenum. I intended to make my own mount with the > fiberglass plenum, to improve airflow, but am not doing well. I'd like to > mount the oil cooler horizontally so the airflow is directly into and out > of the oil cooler. I made a flange that attaches to the cooler, but can't > come up with any mount designs that seem to work. I can use the standard > mounting holes and configure a bracket that will be attached with it, but > I don't like the idea of having the bracket support the cooler with > tension loads on all the components. The cooler will fit horizontally in > that area, but will be at the bottom of all the standard mounting holes. > I can see some durability issues down the road. I could move the whole > thing to the other side of the engine, but don't really want to take up > space over there. It could be mounted on the baffle, but that will add > stress on the baffle and perhaps cause fatigue! > c! >> racking. After all this, I'm back to using the improved cooler with > the Vans mount. >> I seem to remember seeing some mounts that had an added deflector > installed inside the "V" box to provide better air distribution onto the > cooler. This makes a lot of sense that a small louver could direct part > of the air flow onto the top part of the cooler and make better use of the > cooling surface in the upper part of the oil cooler. I could make one, > but if someone else has already done it, I'd rather just buy it. If > anyone knows if someone has an oil cooler air deflector for sale, please > let me know. >> It seems that I talk with many who have no problems with the standard > design and I'm thinking that some effort put into sealing the baffles and > oil cooler box and ducting may be all that's needed. >> I'd appreciate any comments you folks may have on my dilemma. >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348848#348848 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Richard Bibb" <rbibb(at)tomet.net>
Subject: Re: Primary Comm Radio
Date: Aug 07, 2011
I believe any comm. radio would have an inhibit input line on it lest the overwhelming power from a transmit antenna just a few feet away would overwhelm the input of the second radio if not damaging it. Richard Bibb RV-10 very slo but gaining momentum build -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Turner Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 5:31 PM Subject: RV10-List: Re: Primary Comm Radio I have sl-30 #1, G-420 #2. Not sure there is any real reason to prefer one over the other, although a minor point: G-420 has an inhibit input so the receiver is off when transmitting on the SL-30, to prevent any feed thru if it happens to be selected on the audio panel. I don't think the SL-30 has such an input (?). -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348846#348846 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Oil Cooler mount
Date: Aug 07, 2011
Just did the final mount of my oil cooler today. Photo attached. Photo was taken before I added an Adel clamp and piece of angle to attach the forward bottom flange of the cooler to the adjacent engine mount pipe. This forward hard point is needed to prevent flexing of the cooler flanges if you just had it attached only to the firewall. The two pieces of .063 angle are attached on their inboard ends to the left tunnel vertical bulkhead angle. I used Adel clamps for the outboard support attach points as there is no good firewall support angle in that area. Carl -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of billz Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 5:40 PM Subject: RV10-List: Oil Cooler mount I know this topic has been discussed at length, but am looking for guidance from some of those who've done it. I'm working the fuselage and finish kit (and a little of the firewall forward) at the same time. I'm not pleased with the airflow with the standard Vans oil cooler mount, but am leaning towards using it with modifications. Based on forum discussions, I purchased the 2006X oil cooler and have their fiberglass plenum. I intended to make my own mount with the fiberglass plenum, to improve airflow, but am not doing well. I'd like to mount the oil cooler horizontally so the airflow is directly into and out of the oil cooler. I made a flange that attaches to the cooler, but can't come up with any mount designs that seem to work. I can use the standard mounting holes and configure a bracket that will be attached with it, but I don't like the idea of having the bracket support the cooler with tension loads on all the components. The cooler will fit horizontally in that area, but will be at the bottom of all the standard mounting holes. I can see some durability issues down the road. I could move the whole thing to the other side of the engine, but don't really want to take up space over there. It could be mounted on the baffle, but that will add stress on the baffle and perhaps cause fatigue c! racking. After all this, I'm back to using the improved cooler with the Vans mount. I seem to remember seeing some mounts that had an added deflector installed inside the "V" box to provide better air distribution onto the cooler. This makes a lot of sense that a small louver could direct part of the air flow onto the top part of the cooler and make better use of the cooling surface in the upper part of the oil cooler. I could make one, but if someone else has already done it, I'd rather just buy it. If anyone knows if someone has an oil cooler air deflector for sale, please let me know. It seems that I talk with many who have no problems with the standard design and I'm thinking that some effort put into sealing the baffles and oil cooler box and ducting may be all that's needed. I'd appreciate any comments you folks may have on my dilemma. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348848#348848 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Alan Mekler" <amekler(at)metrocast.net>
Subject: Re: Primary Comm Radio
Date: Aug 07, 2011
I'd go with what radio sounds better as my primary. My 2 cents. alan -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Bibb Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 6:35 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Primary Comm Radio I believe any comm. radio would have an inhibit input line on it lest the overwhelming power from a transmit antenna just a few feet away would overwhelm the input of the second radio if not damaging it. Richard Bibb RV-10 very slo but gaining momentum build -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Turner Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 5:31 PM Subject: RV10-List: Re: Primary Comm Radio I have sl-30 #1, G-420 #2. Not sure there is any real reason to prefer one over the other, although a minor point: G-420 has an inhibit input so the receiver is off when transmitting on the SL-30, to prevent any feed thru if it happens to be selected on the audio panel. I don't think the SL-30 has such an input (?). -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348846#348846 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Oil Cooler mount
From: pilotdds <pilotdds(at)aol.com>
Date: Aug 07, 2011
very clever -----Original Message----- From: Carl Froehlich <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net> Sent: Sun, Aug 7, 2011 4:17 pm Subject: RE: RV10-List: Oil Cooler mount Just did the final mount of my oil cooler today. Photo attached. Photo wa s aken before I added an Adel clamp and piece of angle to attach the forward ottom flange of the cooler to the adjacent engine mount pipe. This forward ard point is needed to prevent flexing of the cooler flanges if you just ad it attached only to the firewall. The two pieces of .063 angle are ttached on their inboard ends to the left tunnel vertical bulkhead angle. used Adel clamps for the outboard support attach points as there is no ood firewall support angle in that area. Carl -----Original Message----- rom: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of billz ent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 5:40 PM o: rv10-list(at)matronics.com ubject: RV10-List: Oil Cooler mount I know this topic has been discussed at length, but am looking for guidance rom some of those who've done it. I'm working the fuselage and finish kit and a little of the firewall forward) at the same time. I'm not pleased ith the airflow with the standard Vans oil cooler mount, but am leaning owards using it with modifications. Based on forum discussions, I purchased the 2006X oil cooler and have their iberglass plenum. I intended to make my own mount with the fiberglass lenum, to improve airflow, but am not doing well. I'd like to mount the il cooler horizontally so the airflow is directly into and out of the oil ooler. I made a flange that attaches to the cooler, but can't come up with ny mount designs that seem to work. I can use the standard mounting holes nd configure a bracket that will be attached with it, but I don't like the dea of having the bracket support the cooler with tension loads on all the omponents. The cooler will fit horizontally in that area, but will be at he bottom of all the standard mounting holes. I can see some durability ssues down the road. I could move the whole thing to the other side of the ngine, but don't really want to take up space over there. It could be ounted on the baffle, but that will add stress on the baffle and perhaps ause fatigue c! racking. After all this, I'm back to using the improved cooler with the ans mount. I seem to remember seeing some mounts that had an added deflector installed nside the "V" box to provide better air distribution onto the cooler. This akes a lot of sense that a small louver could direct part of the air flow nto the top part of the cooler and make better use of the cooling surface n the upper part of the oil cooler. I could make one, but if someone else as already done it, I'd rather just buy it. If anyone knows if someone has n oil cooler air deflector for sale, please let me know. It seems that I talk with many who have no problems with the standard desig n nd I'm thinking that some effort put into sealing the baffles and oil ooler box and ducting may be all that's needed. I'd appreciate any comments you folks may have on my dilemma. ead this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348848#348848 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 07, 2011
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: Primary Comm Radio
Mine is just like David's....the SL-30 is Nav1/Com1, and the GNS480 is Nav2/Com2. I think it does make sense to plan it partly around your EFIS. The SL-30 is about the easiest to integrate for many people, and in David's and my case, you can use the standby NAV to effectively have it draw TWO NAV radio needles on the EFIS....so if your other Nav/Com/GPS has one, it's like having 3 in the plane. The SL-30 is the perfect fit for us Chelton users, because it allows our EFIS to populate the frequencies for both ILS/Nav and COM, right from the Chelton Database. It's a great radio and even manually entering freqs it's what we use for our primary radio. The ability to monitor a 2nd comm freq is awesome. I can do the same on the GNS480, but I do it all the time on the SL-30. Even flying to OSH, I was talking to the guys in my flight on ACTV, and listening to Fisk on STBY. Since my GNS480 has the same ability, being an apollo product, it's like having 4 COM's and 4 NAV's in the plane. Then, as others have said, I tend to do all my radio work on the SL-30, and on the GNS480 that leaves me free to tune in ATIS, call flightwatch work with FSS, or whatever, and I'm not punching buttons on it all the time. I can also use the 480 to pull up NRST VOR, NRST Airport, and all the other good stuff since it has an internal database. Regarding transmit power, I don't even know off hand what the transmit powers are anymore of my 2 radios, but in 750+ hours of flying, both of the radios have been flawless with belly mounted COM antennas. Ground, Tower, ATC, and everyone else, has always had no trouble talking to me, and I've had the airplane in so many places that it's pretty much proven itself. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD On 8/7/2011 3:16 PM, David wrote: > I have the SL-30 functioning as COMM 1 and the 430W as COMM 2. I do push > VOR freqs from my Chelton into the SL-30 sometimes, but that is not a > major factor for me. I can't tell you any particular reason I made that > decision back during the build, but I am glad I did. (It is entirely > possible that Stein recommended that setup, I just don't remember) The > SL-30 is a really great radio IMHO. The ability to monitor two comm > freqs as well as two VORs off of one radio is awesome. My VOR needles on > the Chelton point to the primary VOR as well as the secondary or standby > VOR in the SL-30. I have the flip-flop switch on my stick set up for > COMM 1. My stack is set up with the SL-30 above the 430W, so maybe that > is why I made the decision. Bottom line, it is probably not too > important unless your EFIS setup makes one radio or the other preferable. > > David Maib > 40559 > Flying > > On Aug 7, 2011, at 2:30 PM, Les Kearney wrote: > >> Hi >> >> I am in the final stages (yeah right!) of wiring my panel. I have a >> GNS430W and an SL30 amongst other toys. I am wondering which will be >> most used from a comm perspective. I plan to have a flip / flop on the >> stick and would like to make the right choice as to which radio is >> connected to the switch. >> >> Any comments / opinions? >> >> Cheers >> >> Les >> #40643 >> >> * >> >> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com >> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> >> * > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Les Kearney" <kearney(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Primary Comm Radio
Date: Aug 07, 2011
Hi Thank you to all that expressed an opinion on this thorny question. It sounds like a split deciusion from those who are flying. Perhaps I need to break out the magic eight ball... Cheers Les ________________________________________________________________________________
From: David Leikam <arplnplt(at)gmail.com>
Subject: High EGT readings
Date: Aug 08, 2011
I just finished my 40 hour phase I this weekend and noticed for the last few hours that my #1 and #2 EGT temp readings are a bit higher than the rest during low power settings. Would this be a sign of failing probes or something else? Dave Leikam ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 08, 2011
Subject: Re: High EGT readings
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Not likely anything is wrong. you may want to download and graph what data you have, but you aren't going to have uniform balance at all power settings. If you have a tight spread at your normal cruise, that is about as good as you can hope for. Only if something has changed over last flight or two would I be looking for anything. On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 7:10 AM, David Leikam wrote: > > I just finished my 40 hour phase I this weekend and noticed for the last > few hours that my #1 and #2 EGT temp readings are a bit higher than the rest > during low power settings. Would this be a sign of failing probes or > something else? > > Dave Leikam > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chris" <toaster73(at)embarqmail.com>
Subject: High EGT readings
Date: Aug 08, 2011
I just had an experience with this in an RV-6. The #1 cylinder was reading 100 deg hotter than the rest in cruise. Turns out to be a deposit on the spark plug. It did not show up on mag check until later. SO I think the monitor did pick up the issue before the next mag check. Cleaned plug and all is well and temps back into alignment. -Chris Lucas #40072 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of David Leikam Sent: Monday, August 08, 2011 10:11 AM Subject: RV10-List: High EGT readings I just finished my 40 hour phase I this weekend and noticed for the last few hours that my #1 and #2 EGT temp readings are a bit higher than the rest during low power settings. Would this be a sign of failing probes or something else? Dave Leikam ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 08, 2011
Subject: Re: High EGT readings
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
You can detect that either by in-flight mag check or mag check on the ground. When you go to single mag the EGT should go up about 100 degrees on all cylinders. If it doesn't on one or drops off, that plug is suspect. On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Chris wrote: > > I just had an experience with this in an RV-6. The #1 cylinder was reading > 100 deg hotter than the rest in cruise. Turns out to be a deposit on the > spark plug. It did not show up on mag check until later. SO I think the > monitor did pick up the issue before the next mag check. Cleaned plug and > all is well and temps back into alignment. > -Chris Lucas > #40072 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of David Leikam > Sent: Monday, August 08, 2011 10:11 AM > To: RV-10 matronics > Subject: RV10-List: High EGT readings > > > I just finished my 40 hour phase I this weekend and noticed for the last > few > hours that my #1 and #2 EGT temp readings are a bit higher than the rest > during low power settings. Would this be a sign of failing probes or > something else? > > Dave Leikam > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 08, 2011
Subject: Re: Under cowl antenna mount
From: Jim Combs <jiminlexky(at)gmail.com>
There was some discussion a while back about mounting GPS and Weather antenna's. Here is my solution. I have a Garmin 430W GPS antenna, a stand alone GPS serial receiver and the XM weather antenna's all mounted under the cowling. No issues in 270+ hours. The stand alone GPS unit drives the AFS Autopilot and the copilot AFS-3500 EFIS. The Garmin GPS is driving the pilot side AFS-4500 EFIS. They are forward enough to have a good view of the sky. The $30 GPS receiver is this one: http://www.amazon.com/Serial-GPS-Reciever-Cable-Kit/dp/B000VUFGF8 Jim Combs N312F - 270+ hours ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 08, 2011
Subject: Re: Red Fuel Transducer Mount - Firewall
From: Jim Combs <jiminlexky(at)gmail.com>
There was a discussion about alternate mounting if the red fuel transducer. I put mine on the lower right side of the firewall. Used 45 Degree fittings at the transducer. No fuel pump fluctuations and not engine mounted. Both fuel lines are adele clamped to the engine mount to reduce vibration loads on the cube. Jim Combs N312F - 270+ hours ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Primary Comm Radio
From: "johngoodman" <johngoodman(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Aug 09, 2011
Just a quick comment - I have a 430W and an SL-40. Aerotronics put together the panel and they set up the comm flip flop on the stick to change the PS9000EX, not the radios. I hadn't thought about it until now, but if you're listening to two different frequencies, those are most likely the ones you want to transmit on. John -------- #40572 First flight was on 25 June, 2011 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349052#349052 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: High EGT readings
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Aug 09, 2011
I've seen an engine monitor pick up a weak mag or plug that passed the usual runup check. Full power operation is more demanding. -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349064#349064 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: David <dmaib(at)mac.com>
Subject: Re: Primary Comm Radio
Date: Aug 09, 2011
Correct. That is a choice you have during the wiring/setup process. The flip-flop can either switch between radios, or between primary and standby freqs on one of the radios. David Maib 40559 Flying On Aug 9, 2011, at 5:18 PM, johngoodman wrote: > > > Just a quick comment - I have a 430W and an SL-40. Aerotronics put > together the panel and they set up the comm flip flop on the stick > to change the PS9000EX, not the radios. I hadn't thought about it > until now, but if you're listening to two different frequencies, > those are most likely the ones you want to transmit on. > > John > > -------- > #40572 First flight was on 25 June, 2011 > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349052#349052 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 09, 2011
Subject: Re: FAA and AD notices
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
John, I searched EAA website for anything on this and came up blank. Has anyone got a link to what was actually said or copy of the announcement?? Kelly On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:59 AM, John Cox wrote: > Some time today, Dorinda Baker from the Head FAA legal office will make a > formal announcement clarifying the subject of AD notices and whether they > affect Experimental Builders. The answer has always been under contention. > The Legal Eagles will retain the right to assert ADs for public safety but > the answer is going to be official. NO & Yes, No AD notes will not be > required to be complied with by Experimental Builders. The FAA is staying > out of the fray. Yes, if that builder installs an Certified Engine and > wants to keep his/her options open to sell it in the future as a > "Certified", then owners of certified need to keep & maintain compliance. > > For those who wanted to hear NO - "its coming". For others who deal with > maintaining a Certified Engine/Prop or Appliance.... they will need to read > between the lines and continue to comply with issued ADs to the Certificated > Airframe Manufacturers requirements. > > Don't ya just love the new and leaner FAA. > > John Cox #40600 from the ground & behind the scenes at OSH '11 > > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: -10 Plans
From: "Lew Gallagher" <lewgall(at)charter.net>
Date: Aug 11, 2011
Hey Shannon, I had emailed you awhile back and don't remember getting a link, access, etc. I'll try again: lewgall(at)charter.net , builder #40549. Thanks. Later, - Lew -------- non-pilot crazy about building NOW OFICIALLY BUILDER #40549 Fly off completed ! Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349175#349175 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 11, 2011
From: Sean Stephens <sean(at)stephensville.com>
Subject: Re: External Brake Lines - crack
For those using the 5052 tubing, did you use the .305 or .277 inside diameter? http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/mepages/alumtube_5052.php Thanks, -Sean #40303 On 7/11/11 11:43 AM, John Cumins wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: "John Cumins" > > I believe that Vans is using poor quality tubing. In production aircraft > they use 5052 based alum tubing. Vans supplies 301 based soft tubing. So I > have decided to not use any tubing material from Vans and order all 5052 > tubing that one can get a good flare on with out the worries of cracking > like the 301 based tubing. > > I will use Teflon hosed with fire sleeve on all fluid hoses in the engine > compartment. > > Just my 3 cents worth > > > John Cumins > President > 707-425-7100 > 707-425-7576 Fax ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 11, 2011
Subject: Re: External Brake Lines - crack
From: Rob Kochman <rv10rob(at)gmail.com>
I used the thinner walled stuff (i.e. the .305 ID or .035 wall thickness), which I think matches the thickness of the 3003 Van's ships. Note these are the measurements for the 3/8" tubing, so I assume you're talking about fuel lines. -Rob On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Sean Stephens wrote: > > For those using the 5052 tubing, did you use the .305 or .277 inside > diameter? > > http://www.aircraftspruce.com/**catalog/mepages/alumtube_5052.**php> > > Thanks, > > -Sean #40303 > > On 7/11/11 11:43 AM, John Cumins wrote: > >> --> RV10-List message posted by: "John Cumins" >> >> I believe that Vans is using poor quality tubing. In production aircraft >> they use 5052 based alum tubing. Vans supplies 301 based soft tubing. So >> I >> have decided to not use any tubing material from Vans and order all 5052 >> tubing that one can get a good flare on with out the worries of cracking >> like the 301 based tubing. >> >> I will use Teflon hosed with fire sleeve on all fluid hoses in the engine >> compartment. >> >> Just my 3 cents worth >> >> >> John Cumins >> President >> 707-425-7100 >> 707-425-7576 Fax >> > > -- Rob Kochman RV-10 Flying since March 2011 Woodinville, WA http://kochman.net/N819K ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: External Brake Lines - crack
From: "rv10flyer" <wayne.gillispie(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Aug 11, 2011
I used .035" wall thickness on fuel and brake lines. Est what you'll need then order 2 ea extra 6' lengths of each size. Shipping is higher on the long boxes. I purcased ss/teflon flex brake line set from Bonaco. -------- Wayne Gillispie, A&P 5/93, PPC 10/08 Bldr# 40983SB IO-540 Install. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349224#349224 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 11, 2011
From: Sean Stephens <sean(at)stephensville.com>
Subject: Re: External Brake Lines - crack
Yes, sorry. 3/8 fuel line. Thanks for the input. On 8/11/11 7:02 PM, Rob Kochman wrote: > I used the thinner walled stuff (i.e. the .305 ID or .035 wall > thickness), which I think matches the thickness of the 3003 Van's > ships. Note these are the measurements for the 3/8" tubing, so I > assume you're talking about fuel lines. > -Rob > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Sean Stephens > wrote: > > > > > For those using the 5052 tubing, did you use the .305 or .277 > inside diameter? > > http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/mepages/alumtube_5052.php > > Thanks, > > -Sean #40303 > > On 7/11/11 11:43 AM, John Cumins wrote: > > --> RV10-List message posted by: "John > Cumins"> > > I believe that Vans is using poor quality tubing. In > production aircraft > they use 5052 based alum tubing. Vans supplies 301 based soft > tubing. So I > have decided to not use any tubing material from Vans and > order all 5052 > tubing that one can get a good flare on with out the worries > of cracking > like the 301 based tubing. > > I will use Teflon hosed with fire sleeve on all fluid hoses in > the engine > compartment. > > Just my 3 cents worth > > > John Cumins > President > 707-425-7100 > 707-425-7576 Fax > > ======================scription, > www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List" > target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List > ======================ttp://forums.matronics.com/" > target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com > ====================== -Matt Dralle, List Admin. > =============================== > > > -- > Rob Kochman > RV-10 Flying since March 2011 > Woodinville, WA > http://kochman.net/N819K > > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Cumins" <jcumins(at)jcis.net>
Subject: Re: External Brake Lines - crack
Date: Aug 11, 2011
I will be doing the same. Due to the massive flexing of the gear lag I think the Flix lines will last much better than any hard line will. And the Flex of the gear legs will never become an issue at all. But I will do all hard lines as per plans just with 5052 lines not 3003 lines. Probably Branco flex lines on the brake systems where needed to. Those plastic lines shoe not be allowed on the plane at all. John Cumins 40864 Wing skin deburring -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of rv10flyer Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 5:29 PM Subject: RV10-List: Re: External Brake Lines - crack I used .035" wall thickness on fuel and brake lines. Est what you'll need then order 2 ea extra 6' lengths of each size. Shipping is higher on the long boxes. I purcased ss/teflon flex brake line set from Bonaco. -------- Wayne Gillispie, A&P 5/93, PPC 10/08 Bldr# 40983SB IO-540 Install. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349224#349224 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Interior lights
From: "Strasnuts" <sean(at)braunandco.com>
Date: Aug 11, 2011
Lights are now available at planearound.com -------- 40936 RV-10 SB N801VR Flying Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349236#349236 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: External Brake Lines - crack
Date: Aug 12, 2011
From: "John Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Work hardened aluminum tubing increases the chance for cracks and loss of H-5606 in proximity to hot brake calipers and rotors. The Flex line at that connection helps to improve safety. On a recent rebuilt "after incident" on an RV-12 we made just that mod. No regrets. Aircraft is back better than ever. The skill of easily learning proper elbow bending of 5052 is no different than 3003. The 3003 is cheaper and easier to ship. If that is your priority, then you can understand the selection choice. Countless stories of the nylaflow lines make them a less than appropriate alternative....IMHO. John Cox 40600 ________________________________ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of John Cumins Sent: Thu 8/11/2011 5:57 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: External Brake Lines - crack I will be doing the same. Due to the massive flexing of the gear lag I think the Flix lines will last much better than any hard line will. And the Flex of the gear legs will never become an issue at all. But I will do all hard lines as per plans just with 5052 lines not 3003 lines. Probably Branco flex lines on the brake systems where needed to. Those plastic lines shoe not be allowed on the plane at all. John Cumins 40864 Wing skin deburring -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of rv10flyer Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 5:29 PM Subject: RV10-List: Re: External Brake Lines - crack I used .035" wall thickness on fuel and brake lines. Est what you'll need then order 2 ea extra 6' lengths of each size. Shipping is higher on the long boxes. I purcased ss/teflon flex brake line set from Bonaco. -------- Wayne Gillispie, A&P 5/93, PPC 10/08 Bldr# 40983SB IO-540 Install. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349224#349224 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2011
From: Sean Stephens <sean(at)stephensville.com>
Subject: TT AutoTrim Mount Location
Anyone have pics of their TT AutoTrim mounting? Trying to deduce the best location. Thanks, -Sean #40303 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Re: TT AutoTrim Mount Location
At 08:49 AM 8/14/2011 Sunday, you wrote: > >Anyone have pics of their TT AutoTrim mounting? Trying to deduce the best location. > >Thanks, > >-Sean #40303 Hi Sean, In my RV-8, I mounted it right near the servo. Do you have the strain-gauge sensor that the earlier units required? The cable from the strain-gauge to the AutoTrim box is only about 12" long, so you are kind of limited on how far away you could realisticly mounted it. Here are some pictures of what I did: Part 1: http://www.mattsrv8.com/users/display_log.php?user=MattsRV8&project=638&category=2971&log=71180&row=134 Part 2: http://www.mattsrv8.com/users/display_log.php?user=MattsRV8&project=638&category=2971&log=71181&row=133 Part 3: http://www.mattsrv8.com/users/display_log.php?user=MattsRV8&project=638&category=2971&log=71182&row=132 Matt - Matt "Red Dawg" Dralle RV-8 #82880 N998RV "Ruby Vixen" http://www.mattsrv8.com - Matt's Complete RV-8 Construction Log http://www.mattsrv8.com/Mishap - Landing Mishap Rebuild Log http://www.youtube.com/MattsRV8 - Matt's RV-8 HDTV YouTube Channel Status: 170+ Hours TTSN - Rebuilding Fuselage After Landing Mishap... ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DLM" <dlm34077(at)q.com>
Subject: TT AutoTrim Mount Location
Date: Aug 14, 2011
Adjacent to the elevator servo and near the trim wires to the rear. Put a dsub on the trim servo wires such that a dsub plug can be wired to remove the trim module/elevator servo and fly with manual trim. (My elevator servo required a recalibration and was sent to TT). If you need a picture of the plug I can get next time I go to hangar. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sean Stephens Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2011 8:50 AM Subject: RV10-List: TT AutoTrim Mount Location Anyone have pics of their TT AutoTrim mounting? Trying to deduce the best location. Thanks, -Sean #40303 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2011
From: Sean Stephens <sean(at)stephensville.com>
Subject: Re: TT AutoTrim Mount Location
Thanks Matt. I have the newer model that does not use the sensor. -Sean #40303 On 8/14/11 12:12 PM, Matt Dralle wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: Matt Dralle > > At 08:49 AM 8/14/2011 Sunday, you wrote: >> --> RV10-List message posted by: Sean Stephens >> >> Anyone have pics of their TT AutoTrim mounting? Trying to deduce the best location. >> >> Thanks, >> >> -Sean #40303 > Hi Sean, > > In my RV-8, I mounted it right near the servo. Do you have the strain-gauge sensor that the earlier units required? The cable from the strain-gauge to the AutoTrim box is only about 12" long, so you are kind of limited on how far away you could realisticly mounted it. > > Here are some pictures of what I did: > > Part 1: > > http://www.mattsrv8.com/users/display_log.php?user=MattsRV8&project=638&category=2971&log=71180&row=134 > > Part 2: > > http://www.mattsrv8.com/users/display_log.php?user=MattsRV8&project=638&category=2971&log=71181&row=133 > > Part 3: > > http://www.mattsrv8.com/users/display_log.php?user=MattsRV8&project=638&category=2971&log=71182&row=132 > > Matt > > > - > Matt "Red Dawg" Dralle > RV-8 #82880 N998RV "Ruby Vixen" > http://www.mattsrv8.com - Matt's Complete RV-8 Construction Log > http://www.mattsrv8.com/Mishap - Landing Mishap Rebuild Log > http://www.youtube.com/MattsRV8 - Matt's RV-8 HDTV YouTube Channel > Status: 170+ Hours TTSN - Rebuilding Fuselage After Landing Mishap... > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2011
From: Sean Stephens <sean(at)stephensville.com>
Subject: Re: TT AutoTrim Mount Location
Yep, I know I want it as close to the pitch servo as I can get it, just trying to get an idea of the best mount to fab for it. Would be nice if they left enough room on the same mount as the servo. Thanks, -Sean #40303 On 8/14/11 12:18 PM, DLM wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: "DLM" > > Adjacent to the elevator servo and near the trim wires to the rear. Put a > dsub on the trim servo wires such that a dsub plug can be wired to remove > the trim module/elevator servo and fly with manual trim. (My elevator servo > required a recalibration and was sent to TT). If you need a picture of the > plug I can get next time I go to hangar. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sean Stephens > Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2011 8:50 AM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV10-List: TT AutoTrim Mount Location > > --> RV10-List message posted by: Sean Stephens > > Anyone have pics of their TT AutoTrim mounting? Trying to deduce the > best location. > > Thanks, > > -Sean #40303 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2011
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Bucking Bar Recommendation...
Dear Listers, After nearly 23 years of building metal airplanes on and off, I finally came across a really nice bucking bar. The part number details are below and I've attached a picture of it with the optional 6.5" Dolly Shank attached (recommended). The handle has a vibration absorbing mechanism inside and it makes riveting almost a pleasure. It really works good. I was truly amazed at how much more comfortable it is riveting using the tool. If you've got even a modest amount of riveting left to do on your project, surf over to the US Tool web site and order up one. You won't be sorry! I don't get any kick back (pun intended) from US Tool; I'm just a very stratified customer. US Tool - TP111R - Recoilless Bucking Bar - All Steel: https://www.ustool.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p 41 US Tool - 31021-3 - 6.5" Dolly Shank: https://www.ustool.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p 80 Matt - Matt "Red Dawg" Dralle RV-8 #82880 N998RV "Ruby Vixen" http://www.mattsrv8.com - Matt's Complete RV-8 Construction Log http://www.mattsrv8.com/Mishap - Landing Mishap Rebuild Log http://www.youtube.com/MattsRV8 - Matt's RV-8 HDTV YouTube Channel Status: 170+ Hours TTSN - Rebuilding Fuselage After Landing Mishap... ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Bucking Bar Recommendation...
From: "rv10flyer" <wayne.gillispie(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Aug 14, 2011
Thanks for the pirep. I also like my 1" x 1" x 2" tungsten for 90% of the ones i did not use my squeezer on. I would buy an alligator squeezer if building another. That one seems a little on the large size for me. -------- Wayne Gillispie, A&P 5/93, PPC 10/08 Bldr# 40983SB IO-540 Install. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349462#349462 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gary Specketer" <speckter(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Tools for sale
Date: Aug 15, 2011
RE: RV10-List: Re: External Brake Lines - crackMy friend died this spring and I am charged with selling his tools. They can be seen here https://picasaweb.google.com/gspecketer/RonSStuff?authkey=Gv1sRgCM6ChfP d---NtAE# If any are of interest, contact me Gary Specketer gspecketer(at)hotmail.com 770-403-3450 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Modified Van's air box
Date: Aug 15, 2011
I found that the Van's air box can be easily modified to handle the larger K&N E-1000 filter. Photo attached. This air box is made for the James Cowl. Also note the .032 aluminum plate and air filter brackets in the bottom of the air box. On my RV-8A I found the air filter wears away the bottom fiberglass, and the bottom of the air filter tends to lose its shape with time (the bottom diameter gets smaller). The plate also makes the alternate air door fabrication easier. Carl ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Paint air water separator
Date: Aug 15, 2011
For those of you doing your own painting, attached photo is a water separator that I find to work well. When painting I add a few blocks of ice to the water. In the photo the red hose is air in, the orange hose is air out. The drain valve is connected at the bottom of the vertical PVC pipe. The vertical pipe acts as a water collector. Carl ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Roxanne and Mike Lefever <roxianmike(at)msn.com>
Subject: Tools for sale
Date: Aug 15, 2011
Gary looks like there are 9 plastic trays plus one bag that contain various pop rivets=2C screws=2C nuts washers etc...................I would take al l 10 of these if they are still availble. From: speckter(at)comcast.net Subject: RV10-List: Tools for sale Date: Mon=2C 15 Aug 2011 16:19:57 -0500 RE: RV10-List: Re: External Brake Lines - crack My friend died this spring and I am charged with selling his tools. They can be seen here https://picasaweb.google.com/gspecketer/RonSStuff?authkey=Gv1sRgCM6ChfPd- --NtAE# If any are of interest=2C contact me Gary Specketer gspecketer(at)hotmail.com 770-403-3450 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Tools for sale
From: Rob Kermanj <flysrv10(at)gmail.com>
Date: Aug 15, 2011
I will take. The river squeezed, nut plates nut sand s drills. Tell me how t o pay. Thanks. Rob Kermanj Sent from my iPad On Aug 15, 2011, at 5:19 PM, "Gary Specketer" wrote: > My friend died this spring and I am charged with selling his tools. They c an be seen here > > https://picasaweb.google.com/gspecketer/RonSStuff?authkey=Gv1sRgCM6ChfPd ---NtAE# > > If any are of interest, contact me > > Gary Specketer > gspecketer(at)hotmail.com > 770-403-3450 > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dick Gurleys <rngurley(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Tools for sale
Date: Aug 15, 2011
I will take the rivet nut squeezed Sent from my iPad On Aug 15, 2011, at 7:47 PM, Rob Kermanj wrote: > I will take. The river squeezed, nut plates nut sand s drills. Tell me ho w to pay. Thanks. > > Rob Kermanj > Sent from my iPad > > On Aug 15, 2011, at 5:19 PM, "Gary Specketer" wrote : > >> My friend died this spring and I am charged with selling his tools. They can be seen here >> >> https://picasaweb.google.com/gspecketer/RonSStuff?authkey=Gv1sRgCM6ChfP d---NtAE# >> >> If any are of interest, contact me >> >> Gary Specketer >> gspecketer(at)hotmail.com >> 770-403-3450 >> >> >> > > 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Tools for sale
From: Dick Gurleys <rngurley(at)att.net>
Date: Aug 15, 2011
Sent from my iPad On Aug 15, 2011, at 7:58 PM, Dick Gurleys wrote: > I will take the rivet nut squeezer and mandrels. Let me know how to pay Dick Gurley > > Sent from my iPad > > On Aug 15, 2011, at 7:47 PM, Rob Kermanj wrote: > >> I will take. The river squeezed, nut plates nut sand s drills. Tell me h ow to pay. Thanks. >> >> Rob Kermanj >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On Aug 15, 2011, at 5:19 PM, "Gary Specketer" wrot e: >> >>> My friend died this spring and I am charged with selling his tools. The y can be seen here >>> >>> https://picasaweb.google.com/gspecketer/RonSStuff?authkey=Gv1sRgCM6Chf Pd---NtAE# >>> >>> If any are of interest, contact me >>> >>> Gary Specketer >>> gspecketer(at)hotmail.com >>> 770-403-3450 >>> >>> >>> >> >> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 15, 2011
Subject: Final NTSB report on Todd Swezey's accident
From: Rob Kochman <rv10rob(at)gmail.com>
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/AccidentReports/mm04tyq440db21b4iuke52qe1/X08152011120000.pdf Not very enlightening. -Rob -- Rob Kochman RV-10 Flying since March 2011 Woodinville, WA http://kochman.net/N819K ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: tips on panel hole layout and cutting
From: "jayb" <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Aug 15, 2011
Does anyone know of a good tutorial for panel layout / cutting? I understand that Kitplanes May 2006 issue had a good article, but sadly I don't have it. I'm especially interested in how to cut the combo hole for Altimeter w/ knob. I found a panel layout template and mounting hole jig in ACS. Anyone know if those are worth the $$? I'm comfortable using a fly cutter for the four 2.25" steam gauges. However, it seems that accuracy is required for screw holes on gauges and EFISes. Any tips, tricks, time savers or pointers to further information is appreciated! Cheers, Jay Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349594#349594 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2011
From: "Sean S. Blair" <dogsbark(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: tips on panel hole layout and cutting
Jay, I hear there are several companies that will waterjet or CNC your panel to perfection.=C2- You should be able to use panel planning software and sen d the file for the cut.=C2- Stein may offer this service. Sean Blair RV-7=C2- ----- Original Message ----- From: "jayb" <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 10:34:22 PM Subject: RV10-List: tips on panel hole layout and cutting Does anyone know of a good tutorial for panel layout / cutting? I understan d that Kitplanes May 2006 issue had a good article, but sadly I don't have it. I'm especially interested in how to cut the combo hole for Altimeter w/ kno b. I found a panel layout template and mounting hole jig in ACS. Anyone kno w if those are worth the $$? I'm comfortable using a fly cutter for the four 2.25" steam gauges. However , it seems that accuracy is required for screw holes on gauges and EFISes. Any tips, tricks, time savers or pointers to further information is appreci ated! Cheers, Jay Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349594#349594 =========== =========== MS - =========== e - =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2--Matt Dralle, List Admin. =========== ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2011
From: "Sean S. Blair" <dogsbark(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: tips on panel hole layout and cutting
A few options: http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pspages/panelplanner.php http://www.frontpanelexpress.com/products/showcase/instrument-panels/index. html Sean Blair RV-7 ----- Original Message ----- From: "jayb" <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 10:34:22 PM Subject: RV10-List: tips on panel hole layout and cutting Does anyone know of a good tutorial for panel layout / cutting? I understan d that Kitplanes May 2006 issue had a good article, but sadly I don't have it. I'm especially interested in how to cut the combo hole for Altimeter w/ kno b. I found a panel layout template and mounting hole jig in ACS. Anyone kno w if those are worth the $$? I'm comfortable using a fly cutter for the four 2.25" steam gauges. However , it seems that accuracy is required for screw holes on gauges and EFISes. Any tips, tricks, time savers or pointers to further information is appreci ated! Cheers, Jay Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349594#349594 =========== =========== MS - =========== e - =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2--Matt Dralle, List Admin. =========== ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2011
From: "Sean S. Blair" <dogsbark(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: tips on panel hole layout and cutting
....and another idea at VAF: http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=75053&highlight= panel+design+software Sean Blair RV-7 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sean S. Blair" <dogsbark(at)comcast.net> Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 11:13:42 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: tips on panel hole layout and cutting A few options: =C2- http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pspages/panelplanner.php =C2- http://www.frontpanelexpress.com/products/showcase/instrument-panels/index. html Sean Blair RV-7 =C2- ----- Original Message ----- From: "jayb" <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 10:34:22 PM Subject: RV10-List: tips on panel hole layout and cutting Does anyone know of a good tutorial for panel layout / cutting? I understan d that Kitplanes May 2006 issue had a good article, but sadly I don't have it. I'm especially interested in how to cut the combo hole for Altimeter w/ kno b. I found a panel layout template and mounting hole jig in ACS. Anyone kno w if those are worth the $$? I'm comfortable using a fly cutter for the four 2.25" steam gauges. However , it seems that accuracy is required for screw holes on gauges and EFISes. Any tips, tricks, time savers or pointers to further information is appreci ated! Cheers, Jay Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349594#349594 nbsp; =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2--Matt D ============== == ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: tips on panel hole layout and cutting
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Aug 15, 2011
A standard drill-mounted 2 1/4" hole cutter, with a 1/4" pilot drill, from any hardware store will cut a few holes in the panel before it gets too dull. For the adjustment knob cut outs I like an abrasive tool of the right diameter in a Dremmel or similar tool. Finish with a file. The 3 or 4 screw mounting holes are tricky, but I've found a paper template (matched to the instrument) will get you very close. You may have to oversize or slot one or more holes a bit unless you're very careful. -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349603#349603 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2011
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: tips on panel hole layout and cutting
I'm fortunate in that I have a friend with a punch!! I think the hole template is well worth the cost. You'll end up with a much better looking panel IMHO. Barring that, for the mounting screw holes you can buy layout blue in a spray can and use a scale and scribe to measure the centers. I also use sharpened screws in the holes to mark the spots. As for the holes with a cutout ..... sometimes you can use the offending part to scribe around it ..... or use a set of files to 'file, fit, file, fit'. Linn On 8/16/2011 12:34 AM, jayb wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: "jayb" > > Does anyone know of a good tutorial for panel layout / cutting? I understand that Kitplanes May 2006 issue had a good article, but sadly I don't have it. > > I'm especially interested in how to cut the combo hole for Altimeter w/ knob. I found a panel layout template and mounting hole jig in ACS. Anyone know if those are worth the $$? > > I'm comfortable using a fly cutter for the four 2.25" steam gauges. However, it seems that accuracy is required for screw holes on gauges and EFISes. > > Any tips, tricks, time savers or pointers to further information is appreciated! > > Cheers, > Jay > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349594#349594 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: tips on panel hole layout and cutting
From: "rv10flyer" <wayne.gillispie(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Aug 16, 2011
I layed out all dim on panel, applied masking tape to bottom of jig saw, cut, filed, sanded, painted in one day. Mark and drilled mounting holes when you receive avionics. -------- Wayne Gillispie, A&P 5/93, PPC 10/08 Bldr# 40983SB IO-540 Install. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349617#349617 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gary Specketer" <speckter(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Tools for sale
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Thanks to all who responded to the tools for sale. The family and I are sorting through the many responses and will get back with you as we get things sorted out. Gary Specketer ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Slick mag problem
From: "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com>
Date: Aug 16, 2011
36.4 hours on the airframe and on the mag check I had a 400 RPM drop. For some more background in the first runs with the engine after install the mag drop was about 125 RPM. As I progressed through phase 1 the mag drop got worse and I thought I was having fouled plug issues by not being able to lean (James Cowl) because following a fouled plug clearing procedure the mag drop would be back into 'acceptable' ranges. After extensive troubleshooting by myself and a couple of other mechanics we found the output of the coil to be very weak with some 'abnormal resistance' as they called it through the condenser. I called the engine manufacturer about the problem, and of course they are trying to work something, but they are merely the middle man. Anyone ever had any luck getting warranty work from the manufacturer of the Slick mags? I am supposed to be heading out on a trip next week and can't afford to be screwing around with the crap mag for awhile. Eric Kallio N518RV... Flying Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349619#349619 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Subject: Re: Slick mag problem
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
I'd replace the defective parts, keep the bad ones and receipts for all you did. Yes, it may cost you a few hundred up front, you may or may not get reimbursed, but your plane will be flying and your trip won't be ruined. If you are lucky, you will get reimbursed. IIRC I think Champion now owns Slick. I know Unison sold their aircraft product business lines to several other companies. Tempest got the spark plug business. On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Eric_Kallio wrote: > > 36.4 hours on the airframe and on the mag check I had a 400 RPM drop. For > some more background in the first runs with the engine after install the mag > drop was about 125 RPM. As I progressed through phase 1 the mag drop got > worse and I thought I was having fouled plug issues by not being able to > lean (James Cowl) because following a fouled plug clearing procedure the mag > drop would be back into 'acceptable' ranges. After extensive troubleshooting > by myself and a couple of other mechanics we found the output of the coil to > be very weak with some 'abnormal resistance' as they called it through the > condenser. I called the engine manufacturer about the problem, and of course > they are trying to work something, but they are merely the middle man. > Anyone ever had any luck getting warranty work from the manufacturer of the > Slick mags? I am supposed to be heading out on a trip next week and can't > afford to be screwing around with the crap mag for awhile. > > Eric Kallio > N518RV... Flying > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349619#349619 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Slick mag problem
From: "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com>
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Kelly, that's what I was looking at doing. Just wasn't sure if there was a hot swap program with the manufacturer before laying out the couple hundred bucks. I have also been digging for repair manuals to see if the coil and condenser on the 6000 and 4000 series are the same. I have access to a brand new 4000 series mag for float parts but won't touch it until I know if the parts are compatible, but service manuals for the Slick mags are tough to come by in my neck of the woods. I am awaiting a call back from the engine manufacturer and Slick a.k.a. Champion about the issue. Eric Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349630#349630 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: tips on panel hole layout and cutting
From: "jayb" <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Thanks for the link! I'm not opposed to cutting my own panel. It's just time and effort, right? Been building for nearly 8 years, so what's another couple of months. :-) Having said that, I would like to leverage the knowledge and/or work that's already been done if possible to improve the result. Especially if someone else already has a similar layout and/or use of "known to deliver" vendors. I hadn't seen ACS software. Interesting... However, I wouldn't consider purchasing layout software or CAD without knowing 1) does it support -10 panels? 2) does it provide all the widgets I have to install and 3) Has anyone else used it to verify that it's accurate and ready for CNC. It would make me crazy to churn through endless iterations before getting it right. It may be less headache to go low tech and simply layout directly on the panel blank. That way I can fine tune placement while sitting in the cockpit making airplane noises. Cheers, Jay [quote="dogsbark(at)comcast.net"]A few options: http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pspages/panelplanner.php (http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pspages/panelplanner.php) http://www.frontpanelexpress.com/products/showcase/instrument-panels/index.html (http://www.frontpanelexpress.com/products/showcase/instrument-panels/index.html) Sean Blair RV-7 > [b] Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349631#349631 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Subject: Re: Slick mag problem
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
I show K3975 coil for 42xx and 63xx mags, k3984 capacitor for both series. On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 7:18 AM, Eric_Kallio wrote: > > Kelly, that's what I was looking at doing. Just wasn't sure if there was a > hot swap program with the manufacturer before laying out the couple hundred > bucks. I have also been digging for repair manuals to see if the coil and > condenser on the 6000 and 4000 series are the same. I have access to a brand > new 4000 series mag for float parts but won't touch it until I know if the > parts are compatible, but service manuals for the Slick mags are tough to > come by in my neck of the woods. I am awaiting a call back from the engine > manufacturer and Slick a.k.a. Champion about the issue. > > Eric > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349630#349630 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Slick mag problem
From: "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com>
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Thanks Kelly. I now have a temporary solution for sure. Eric Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349642#349642 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2011
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: tips on panel hole layout and cutting
I low tech'd it. Used someone's layout program for some early gross layouts. Then just drew directly on one of Stein's 3 piece panels. Just didn't feel like committing it all to a CNC effort. Would do it the same way if I had to do it again. Sounds like you have a few round holes - I used a fly cutter and hole cutter... they worked fine as long as care is used. I had a lot of square holes including 9 or 10 rockers and half a dozen indicators. A square file made very quick and easy work of them - I was totally surprised! Low tech let's you think as you lay the thing out. Good luck. Bill "just had a love-in with a DAR" Watson It may be less headache to go low tech and simply layout directly on the panel blank. That way I can fine tune placement while sitting in the cockpit making airplane noises. Cheers, Jay ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: tips on panel hole layout and cutting
From: "Jim Berry" <jimberry(at)qwest.net>
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Jay, You might want to consider Omnijet for water jet cutting, just up the road from you in Denver. They can convert your hand drawings to CAD and do very nice work. Talk to Nigel at 303-427-6255. He is a pilot and RV builder wanna be. Jim Berry N15JB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349661#349661 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Subject: Re: tips on panel hole layout and cutting
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Not sure if this was mentioned earlier but I used XPanel ( http://www.xpanelsoftware.com/ ) for laying out my 8A panel. It was really easy to use with the library of avionics and allows you to output to a printer/plotter to tape a paper version on your panel for review and then I believe you can export the completed panel for CNC/Water Jet etc... Under $100.00. Good luck Robin On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Jim Berry wrote: > > Jay, > > You might want to consider Omnijet for water jet cutting, just up the road > from you in Denver. They can convert your hand drawings to CAD and do very > nice work. Talk to Nigel at 303-427-6255. He is a pilot and RV builder > wanna be. > > Jim Berry > N15JB > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349661#349661 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: air box alternate air
From: "lbgjb10" <lbgjb(at)gnt.net>
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Taking things apart at annual. Noticed that alternate air doesn't seem to work right. Picture 2 shows it closed and under tab to keep it closed. Picture 1 shows it fully ?? open. BUT when you close it, it won't slide under tab for closing unless you have the tab loose, but then it closes, but stays open a little bit. Any suggestions?? thanks. -------- Larry and Gayle N104LG Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349685#349685 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/open_106.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/closed_116.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: air box alternate air
From: "Jim Berry" <jimberry(at)qwest.net>
Date: Aug 16, 2011
My recollection is that Van indicates in the FAB instructions that once the alternate air door is opened, it cannot be closed while in flight i.e. you must pull the cowl to get it fully closed. Jim Berry N15JB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349688#349688 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2011
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: air box alternate air
OK, let's think this through. The door is there to bypass a plugged filter ... ice or snow ...... bird ...... or maybe to get around the pressure drop across the filter, I dunno. Anyway, why not hinge the door on the inside ..... make the door larger than the opening and hold it closed with a magnet of sufficient tenacity so normal operation won't open the door. If the filter becomes clogged the suction automatically opens the door. No controls needed, and it automatically resets. Now I agree that there there's some testing involved regarding the tenacity of the magnet. Moving the magnet further from it's metal catch .... layers of paper or plastic will move the magnet away a smidgen at a time. An alternate method would be a weak spring .... Any discussion??? Linn On 8/16/2011 5:58 PM, Jim Berry wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: "Jim Berry" > > My recollection is that Van indicates in the FAB instructions that once the alternate air door is opened, it cannot be closed while in flight i.e. you must pull the cowl to get it fully closed. > > Jim Berry > N15JB > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349688#349688 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rene Felker" <rene(at)felker.com>
Subject: Re: air box alternate air
Date: Aug 16, 2011
This goes way back in my memory.....but I think this was discussed when I first started my project and I think may have even been an option then. The problem with the magnet, etc. it is that it is not being controlled by the pilot and it can be activated without you knowing and thus you could be by-passing the filter all the time without even knowing........just my opinion. Since it is one safety device that I don't ever what to have to use, if I ever needed it and I have to remove the cowl to reset, I don't see it as much of a problem. Just an opinion....maybe not even a good one. Rene' Felker N423CF 801-721-6080 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Linn Walters Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 4:14 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: air box alternate air OK, let's think this through. The door is there to bypass a plugged filter ... ice or snow ...... bird ...... or maybe to get around the pressure drop across the filter, I dunno. Anyway, why not hinge the door on the inside ..... make the door larger than the opening and hold it closed with a magnet of sufficient tenacity so normal operation won't open the door. If the filter becomes clogged the suction automatically opens the door. No controls needed, and it automatically resets. Now I agree that there there's some testing involved regarding the tenacity of the magnet. Moving the magnet further from it's metal catch .... layers of paper or plastic will move the magnet away a smidgen at a time. An alternate method would be a weak spring .... Any discussion??? Linn On 8/16/2011 5:58 PM, Jim Berry wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: "Jim Berry" > > My recollection is that Van indicates in the FAB instructions that once the alternate air door is opened, it cannot be closed while in flight i.e. you must pull the cowl to get it fully closed. > > Jim Berry > N15JB > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349688#349688 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Subject: Re: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
On 8/16/2011 6:20 PM, Tim Olson wrote: > > After years of me replying back to Avemco's mailings > that their rates are too high, and they have no clue > when it comes to pricing experimental aircraft, They don't even know how to price certified aircraft. They quoted me around $1800 to cover a 1975 Grumman AA1B for a $19,000 coverage value. I bought a policy elsewhere with identical coverage for $588. I took the time to write back to the Avemco agent telling him why I bought the policy elsewhere (namely, price), and the response I got was a weak attempt to justify the higher cost, describing quality of service, etc. I explained that $1200 buys a lot of avgas which translates to quality flight time... Does anyone actually do business with Avemco? -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2011
From: Bruce Johnson <bruce1hwjohnson(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style
Same experience here, I used them early on as no one wanted to insure a low -time pilot.-I thought they were doing me a favor until I got a little time and some other quotes. They were almost 35% higher than my current pro vider. Maybe all of the ten owners ought to get together with one provider to see if we can get a better rate. I am with Falcon [broker]-on mine and I think I am paying around $2500--=0A=0A=0AFrom: Dj Merrill <deej@deej .net>=0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 3:49 P M=0ASubject: Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style=0A=0A--> RV10-Lis t message posted by: Dj Merrill =0A=0AOn 8/16/2011 6:20 PM, Tim Olson wrote:=0A> =0A> After years of me replying back to Avemco's maili ngs=0A> that their rates are too high, and they have no clue=0A> when it co mes to pricing experimental aircraft,=0A=0A- - They don't even know how to price certified aircraft.- They quoted me around $1800 to cover a 197 5 Grumman AA1B for a $19,000 coverage value.- I bought a policy elsewhere with identical coverage for $588.- I took the time to write back to the Avemco agent telling him why I bought the policy elsewhere (namely, price), and the response I got was a weak attempt to justify the higher cost, desc ribing quality of service, etc.- I explained that $1200 buys a lot of avg as which translates to quality flight time...=0A=0A- - Does anyone actu ally do business with Avemco?=0A=0A-Dj=0A=0A-- Dj Merrill - N1JOV=0ASportsm an 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/=0AGlastar Flyer N8 =========================0A ======================= ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style
From: pilotdds <pilotdds(at)aol.com>
Date: Aug 16, 2011
what are you guys using as a hull value? -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Johnson <bruce1hwjohnson(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Tue, Aug 16, 2011 4:30 pm Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style Same experience here, I used them early on as no one wanted to insure a low time pilot. I thought they were doing me a favor until I got a little time and some other quotes. They were almost 35% higher than my current provide r. Maybe all of the ten owners ought to get together with one provider to s ee if we can get a better rate. I am with Falcon [broker] on mine and I thi nk I am paying around $2500 From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net> Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 3:49 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style On 8/16/2011 6:20 PM, Tim Olson wrote: > > After years of me replying back to Avemco's mailings > that their rates are too high, and they have no clue > when it comes to pricing experimental aircraft, They don't even know how to price certified aircraft. They quoted me a round $1800 to cover a 1975 Grumman AA1B for a $19,000 coverage value. I b ought a policy elsewhere with identical coverage for $588. I took the time to write back to the Avemco agent telling him why I bought the policy else where (namely, price), and the response I got was a weak attempt to justify the higher cost, describing quality of service, etc. I explained that $12 00 buys a lot of avgas which translates to quality flight time... Does anyone actually do business with Avemco? -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://www.matronics.com/Na - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -bsp; w.matronics.com/contribution" target =_blank>http://www.matronics.com/cont============ === -= - The RV10-List Email Forum - -= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse -= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription, -= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, -= Photoshare, and much much more: - -= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List - -======================== -= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - -= Same great content also available via the Web Forums! - -= --> http://forums.matronics.com - -======================== -= - List Contribution Web Site - -= Thank you for your generous support! -= -Matt Dralle, List Admin. -= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution -======================== -= - The RV10-List Email Forum - -= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse -= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription, -= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, -= Photoshare, and much much more: - -= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List - -======================== -= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - -= Same great content also available via the Web Forums! - -= --> http://forums.matronics.com - -======================== -= - List Contribution Web Site - -= Thank you for your generous support! -= -Matt Dralle, List Admin. -= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution -======================== ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2011
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style
They gave me a good rate in Alaska, and when I moved to Aridzona, and the first 6 months changing to cover the Mooney I bought with maybe 30 hours of retract time. Their price on renewal jumped several hundred dollars, I found a better rate, and they have never ever come close to my current rate, even with their lesser coverage, as they in the past would not write a million smooth policy. On 8/16/2011 4:24 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote: > Same experience here, I used them early on as no one wanted to insure > a low time pilot. I thought they were doing me a favor until I got a > little time and some other quotes. They were almost 35% higher than my > current provider. Maybe all of the ten owners ought to get together > with one provider to see if we can get a better rate. I am with Falcon > [broker] on mine and I think I am paying around $2500 > > *From:* Dj Merrill > *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 16, 2011 3:49 PM > *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style > > > > > On 8/16/2011 6:20 PM, Tim Olson wrote: > > > > After years of me replying back to Avemco's mailings > > that their rates are too high, and they have no clue > > when it comes to pricing experimental aircraft, > > They don't even know how to price certified aircraft. They quoted > me around $1800 to cover a 1975 Grumman AA1B for a $19,000 coverage > value. I bought a policy elsewhere with identical coverage for $588. > I took the time to write back to the Avemco agent telling him why I > bought the policy elsewhere (namely, price), and the response I got > was a weak attempt to justify the higher cost, describing quality of > service, etc. I explained that $1200 buys a lot of avgas which > translates to quality flight time... > > Does anyone actually do business with Avemco? > > -Dj > > -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV > Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ > Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://www.matronics.com/Na - > MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -bsp; > w.matronics.com/contribution" > target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/cont=============== > > > <http://deej.net/glastar/> > <http://deej.net/glastar/> > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2011
From: Bruce Johnson <bruce1hwjohnson(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style
$ 150,000.00 for mine, And I know its under valued, I just don't plan on us ing it. I have around that just in parts and pieces.=0A=0A=0AFrom: pilotdds =0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Tuesday, August 1 6, 2011 4:42 PM=0ASubject: Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style=0A =0A=0Awhat are you guys using as a hull value?=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A-----Original Message-----=0AFrom: Bruce Johnson <bruce1hwjohnson(at)yahoo.com>=0ATo: rv10-l ist =0ASent: Tue, Aug 16, 2011 4:30 pm=0ASubject: Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style=0A=0A=0ASame experience here, I used them early on as no one wanted to insure a low-time pilot.-I tho ught they were doing me a favor until I got a little time and some other qu otes. They were almost 35% higher than my current provider. Maybe all of th e ten owners ought to get together with one provider to see if we can get a better rate. I am with Falcon [broker]-on mine and I think I am paying a round $2500--=0A=0A=0AFrom: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>=0ATo: rv10-list@ matronics.com=0ASent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 3:49 PM=0ASubject: Re: RV10- j Merrill =0A=0AOn 8/16/2011 6:20 PM, Tim Olson wrote:=0A> =0A> After years of me replying back to Avemco's mailings=0A> that their ra tes are too high, and they have no clue=0A> when it comes to pricing experi mental aircraft,=0A=0A- - They don't even know how to price certified a ircraft.- They quoted me around $1800 to cover a 1975 Grumman AA1B for a $19,000 coverage value.- I bought a policy elsewhere with identical cover age for $588.- I took the time to write back to the Avemco agent telling him why I bought the policy elsewhere (namely, price), and the response I g ot was a weak attempt to justify the higher cost, describing quality of ser vice, etc.- I explained that $1200 buys a lot of avgas which translates t o quality flight time...=0A=0A- - Does anyone actually do business with Avemco?=0A=0A-Dj=0A=0A-- Dj Merrill - N1JOV=0ASportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/=0AGlastar Flyer N866RH - http://www.mat ronics.com/Na- - - - - - - - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -bsp; - - - - - - - - - - w.matronics.com/contribution" target= _blank>http://www.matronics.com/cont============= ====0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A p://forums.matronics.comblank>http://www.mat ronics.com/contribution =0Aget=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator? =============== ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: air box alternate air
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Vans' instructions definitely say that once pulled, you have to drop the cowl and manually reset it to fully closed. There are some production aircraft with "automatic" alternate air, as you describe. But i suspect alternate air is needed so seldom that the re-setting is just a once in a blue moon thing. -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349708#349708 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bob Leffler" <rv(at)thelefflers.com>
Subject: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style
Date: Aug 16, 2011
I'm having this debate with my insurance agent at the moment too. If I insure to cover market value, which is about $50k more than my direct expense. If I insure for my direct expense, it's about $1k/yr less. What's is at risk then is my labor. From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of pilotdds Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 7:42 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style what are you guys using as a hull value? -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Johnson <bruce1hwjohnson(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Tue, Aug 16, 2011 4:30 pm Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style Same experience here, I used them early on as no one wanted to insure a low time pilot. I thought they were doing me a favor until I got a little time and some other quotes. They were almost 35% higher than my current provider. Maybe all of the ten owners ought to get together with one provider to see if we can get a better rate. I am with Falcon [broker] on mine and I think I am paying around $2500 From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net> Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 3:49 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style On 8/16/2011 6:20 PM, Tim Olson wrote: > > After years of me replying back to Avemco's mailings > that their rates are too high, and they have no clue > when it comes to pricing experimental aircraft, They don't even know how to price certified aircraft. They quoted me around $1800 to cover a 1975 Grumman AA1B for a $19,000 coverage value. I bought a policy elsewhere with identical coverage for $588. I took the time to write back to the Avemco agent telling him why I bought the policy elsewhere (namely, price), and the response I got was a weak attempt to justify the higher cost, describing quality of service, etc. I explained that $1200 buys a lot of avgas which translates to quality flight time... Does anyone actually do business with Avemco? -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://www.matronics.com/Na <http://deej.net/glastar/> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -bsp; w.matronics.com/contribution" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/cont=============== <http://deej.net/glastar/> <http://deej.net/glastar/> <http://deej.net/glastar/> get=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List p://forums.matronics.com blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Subject: Re: Insurance was: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style
50:1 sounds about right. $3,000 for $150-175,000. What is at risk is your labor ONLY in the case of a total claim. If you hav e damage that is less than the total you are still covered and have saved a few dollars along the way. That being said you are actually risking TWICE your labor as you will have had to build two -10's in a total loss situation while only being reimburse d for the bits and pieces. Robin Sent from my iPad2. On Aug 16, 2011, at 6:02 PM, "Bob Leffler" wrote: I=92m having this debate with my insurance agent at the moment too. If I insure to cover market value, which is about $50k more than my direct expense. If I insure for my direct expense, it=92s about $1k/yr less. What=92s is at risk then is my labor. *From:* owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *pilotdds *Sent:* Tuesday, August 16, 2011 7:42 PM *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style what are you guys using as a hull value? -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Johnson <bruce1hwjohnson(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Tue, Aug 16, 2011 4:30 pm Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style Same experience here, I used them early on as no one wanted to insure a low time pilot. I thought they were doing me a favor until I got a little time and some other quotes. They were almost 35% higher than my current provider. Maybe all of the ten owners ought to get together with one provider to see if we can get a better rate. I am with Falcon [broker] on mine and I think I am paying around $2500 *From:* Dj Merrill *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com *Sent:* Tuesday, August 16, 2011 3:49 PM *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style On 8/16/2011 6:20 PM, Tim Olson wrote: > > After years of me replying back to Avemco's mailings > that their rates are too high, and they have no clue > when it comes to pricing experimental aircraft, They don't even know how to price certified aircraft. They quoted me around $1800 to cover a 1975 Grumman AA1B for a $19,000 coverage value. I bought a policy elsewhere with identical coverage for $588. I took the tim e to write back to the Avemco agent telling him why I bought the policy elsewhere (namely, price), and the response I got was a weak attempt to justify the higher cost, describing quality of service, etc. I explained that $1200 buys a lot of avgas which translates to quality flight time... Does anyone actually do business with Avemco? -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://www.matronics.com/Na - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -bsp; w.matronics.com/contribution" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/cont========== ===== <http://deej.net/glastar/> * <http://deej.net/glastar/>* * <http://deej.net/glastar/>* *get=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List <http://deej.net/glastar/>* *p://forums.matronics.com* *blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution* * * * * * * ** ** ** ** ** *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List* ** ** *http://forums.matronics.com* ** ** ** ** *http://www.matronics.com/contribution* ** * * * * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Insurance was: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Problem is, if you under-insure it and then damage it in an accident, the agency can call it totalled for that under-insured value and you then lose your airplane to them. Jack Phillips _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 9:32 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Insurance was: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style 50:1 sounds about right. $3,000 for $150-175,000. What is at risk is your labor ONLY in the case of a total claim. If you have damage that is less than the total you are still covered and have saved a few dollars along the way. That being said you are actually risking TWICE your labor as you will have had to build two -10's in a total loss situation while only being reimbursed for the bits and pieces. Robin Sent from my iPad2. On Aug 16, 2011, at 6:02 PM, "Bob Leffler" wrote: I'm having this debate with my insurance agent at the moment too. If I insure to cover market value, which is about $50k more than my direct expense. If I insure for my direct expense, it's about $1k/yr less. What's is at risk then is my labor. From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of pilotdds Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 7:42 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style what are you guys using as a hull value? -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Johnson < <mailto:bruce1hwjohnson(at)yahoo.com> bruce1hwjohnson(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Tue, Aug 16, 2011 4:30 pm Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style Same experience here, I used them early on as no one wanted to insure a low time pilot. I thought they were doing me a favor until I got a little time and some other quotes. They were almost 35% higher than my current provider. Maybe all of the ten owners ought to get together with one provider to see if we can get a better rate. I am with Falcon [broker] on mine and I think I am paying around $2500 From: Dj Merrill < <mailto:deej(at)deej.net> deej(at)deej.net> Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 3:49 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style deej(at)deej.net> On 8/16/2011 6:20 PM, Tim Olson wrote: > > After years of me replying back to Avemco's mailings > that their rates are too high, and they have no clue > when it comes to pricing experimental aircraft, They don't even know how to price certified aircraft. They quoted me around $1800 to cover a 1975 Grumman AA1B for a $19,000 coverage value. I bought a policy elsewhere with identical coverage for $588. I took the time to write back to the Avemco agent telling him why I bought the policy elsewhere (namely, price), and the response I got was a weak attempt to justify the higher cost, describing quality of service, etc. I explained that $1200 buys a lot of avgas which translates to quality flight time... Does anyone actually do business with Avemco? -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - <http://deej.net/sportsman/> http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - <http://deej.net/glastar/> http://www.matronics.com/Na - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -bsp; w.matronics.com/contribution" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/cont=============== <http://deej.net/glastar/> <http://deej.net/glastar/> <http://deej.net/glastar/> get=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List p://forums.matronics.com blank> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> http://www.matronics.com/contribution http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List <http://forums.matronics.com> http://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com /Navigator?RV10-List rums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com "http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contributio n ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Subject: Re: air box alternate air
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
My Mooney has automatic alternate air. A circular plate on the inside of air filter box, held closed by a spring that is secured with nut and cotter pin. Nut is tightened to provide 3-4 lbs pressure holding plate closed. It has enough area that if something like 1 psi suction develops in the air box, it opens, otherwise closes. On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Bob Turner wrote: > > Vans' instructions definitely say that once pulled, you have to drop the > cowl and manually reset it to fully closed. > > There are some production aircraft with "automatic" alternate air, as you > describe. But i suspect alternate air is needed so seldom that the > re-setting is just a once in a blue moon thing. > > -------- > Bob Turner > RV-10 QB > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349708#349708 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2011
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Insurance was: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style
Only if you agree to such a settlement. It is a calculation of insured loss vs claim vs salvage value. When claim plus salvage equals insured value, they will offer to total. You can counter. It becomes a financial decision, just as the stated insured value is a financial decision. Insure too high and they will refuse to total something that really should be totalled. On 8/16/2011 6:44 PM, Jack Phillips wrote: > > Problem is, if you under-insure it and then damage it in an accident, > the agency can call it totalled for that under-insured value and you > then lose your airplane to them. > > Jack Phillips > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:*owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Robin Marks > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 16, 2011 9:32 PM > *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com > *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Insurance was: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style > > 50:1 sounds about right. $3,000 for $150-175,000. > > What is at risk is your labor ONLY in the case of a total claim. If > you have damage that is less than the total you are still covered and > have saved a few dollars along the way. > > That being said you are actually risking TWICE your labor as you will > have had to build two -10's in a total loss situation while only being > reimbursed for the bits and pieces. > > Robin > > Sent from my iPad2. > > > On Aug 16, 2011, at 6:02 PM, "Bob Leffler" > wrote: > >> Im having this debate with my insurance agent at the moment too. If >> I insure to cover market value, which is about $50k more than my >> direct expense. If I insure for my direct expense, its about $1k/yr >> less. Whats is at risk then is my labor. >> >> *From:*owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com >> >> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com >> ] *On Behalf Of *pilotdds >> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 16, 2011 7:42 PM >> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com >> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style >> >> what are you guys using as a hull value? >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Bruce Johnson <bruce1hwjohnson(at)yahoo.com >> > >> To: rv10-list > >> Sent: Tue, Aug 16, 2011 4:30 pm >> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style >> >> Same experience here, I used them early on as no one wanted to insure >> a low time pilot. I thought they were doing me a favor until I got a >> little time and some other quotes. They were almost 35% higher than >> my current provider. Maybe all of the ten owners ought to get >> together with one provider to see if we can get a better rate. I am >> with Falcon [broker] on mine and I think I am paying around $2500 >> >> *From:*Dj Merrill > >> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com >> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 16, 2011 3:49 PM >> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Aviation Humor - Garmin Style >> >> > >> >> On 8/16/2011 6:20 PM, Tim Olson wrote: >> > >> > After years of me replying back to Avemco's mailings >> > that their rates are too high, and they have no clue >> > when it comes to pricing experimental aircraft, >> >> They don't even know how to price certified aircraft. They quoted me >> around $1800 to cover a 1975 Grumman AA1B for a $19,000 coverage >> value. I bought a policy elsewhere with identical coverage for $588. >> I took the time to write back to the Avemco agent telling him why I >> bought the policy elsewhere (namely, price), and the response I got >> was a weak attempt to justify the higher cost, describing quality of >> service, etc. I explained that $1200 buys a lot of avgas which >> translates to quality flight time... >> >> Does anyone actually do business with Avemco? >> >> -Dj >> >> -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV >> Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ >> Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://www.matronics.com/Na - MATRONICS WEB >> FORUMS -bsp; w.matronics.com/contribution >> <http://w.matronics.com/contribution>" >> target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/cont=============== >> >> >> >> >> >> *_ <http://deej.net/glastar/>_* >> *_ <http://deej.net/glastar/>_* >> *_get=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List _* >> *p://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>* >> *blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution* >> * * >> * * >> * * >> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List* >> *http://forums.matronics.com* >> *http://www.matronics.com/contribution* >> * * >> * * >> * * >> *href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List* >> *rums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com* >> *"http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution* >> * * > * * > * * > ** > ** > ** > *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List* > ** > ** > *http://forums.matronics.com* > ** > ** > *http://www.matronics.com/contribution* > * * > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chris Hukill" <cjhukill(at)cox.net>
Subject: panel cutout
Date: Aug 17, 2011
I just use my vertical mill! Chris Hukill (DNA) ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: panel cutout
From: Michael Kraus <n223rv(at)wolflakeairport.net>
Date: Aug 17, 2011
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: tips on panel hole layout and cutting
From: "bcondrey" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com>
Date: Aug 17, 2011
Jay, Give me a ring sometime and I'll walk you through what I did and how. I've done a couple of panels now, both old school, and it's not a big deal to manually cut them. Bob Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349747#349747 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: panel cutout
From: Michael Kraus <n223rv(at)wolflakeairport.net>
Date: Aug 17, 2011
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Project available
From: "Phil White" <philwhite9(at)aol.com>
Date: Aug 17, 2011
Due to job loss, my RV-10 project is available. The airframe is 95% complete, lacking only pants and leg fairings. No firewall forward components (I tried an auto engine; bad idea). :( FliteLine interior, Tru-Trak roll servo, LED nav+strobes, plus many more accessory items. Avionics optional (GRT Sport w/GPS, iCom A-210, 396, KT76A). Looking to recoup some investment. You save 1,600+ hours! Located near Chicago at LL22. Call Phil 630-985-1234 or philwhite9 at aol dot com. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349786#349786 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/plane_assbd_sml_195.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 17, 2011
From: Bruce Johnson <bruce1hwjohnson(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Project available
Sorry Phil, sould have helped you a couple of years ago. Good luck on the j ob hunt. And I would like to say something political, but this isn't the fo rum.-=0A=0A=0AFrom: Phil White <philwhite9(at)aol.com>=0ATo: rv10-list@matro nics.com=0ASent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 1:07 PM=0ASubject: RV10-List: P ite9(at)aol.com>=0A=0ADue to job loss, my RV-10 project is available.- The a irframe is 95% complete, lacking only pants and leg fairings.- No firewal l forward components (I tried an auto engine; bad idea).- :(=0A- FliteL ine interior, Tru-Trak roll servo, LED nav+strobes, plus many more accessor y items.- Avionics optional (GRT Sport w/GPS, iCom A-210, 396, KT76A).- Looking to recoup some investment.- You save 1,600+ hours!=0A- Located near Chicago at LL22.- Call Phil 630-985-1234 or philwhite9 at aol dot c om.=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ARead this topic online here:=0A=0Ahttp://forums.matronics .com/viewtopic.php?p=349786#349786=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AAttachments: =0A=0Ahttp: -======================== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)verizon.net>
Subject: the story of Gary's RV-10 continues
Date: Aug 18, 2011
http://macsblog.com/2011/08/when-a-kit-aircraft-is-not-a-kit-aircraft/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com>
Date: Aug 18, 2011
Subject: Re: the story of Gary's RV-10 continues
Greg doesn't deserve this. Changes, yes, but I've seen alot worse. Greg's changes are well considered, and he seems to understand and accept the compromises he made. From Greg's earlier posts he seems to have learned a lot from the attention he received. I have a huge respect for Van. He's one of my heros and I understand his point. It's just that--his point. I've flown heavy RVs and modified RVs. Lighter is better. Sometimes mods don't work out. I don't think I'd hesitate to fly in Greg's plane, in the manner he intends to use it. It's not one of the bad ones. I don't think any of us want to be bound by rules put forth by the manufacturer of the kit, unless we get something for it--fewer restrictions, or some other guarantee, but that seems to be where this is headed. Abide or else. I think EAA has done Greg a disservice by honoring him with a complimentary write-up and yanking the rug out from under him. I wouldn't want that attention. I think EAA owes him an apology, and I'm going to tell them so. Rod Hightower needs to show some leadership and explain how it is that EAA could change course so abruptly in regards to the treatment Greg has received. I hope Greg sees this as an opportunity for others to learn something and can somehow see a positive side. His last post here seemed kind of regretful, and that's too bad. His craftsmanship should never have been rewarded with what he got. Hang in there, Greg. Enjoy your plane. Dave Saylor AirCrafters 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 95076 831-722-9141 Shop 831-750-0284 Cell On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 4:25 PM, Pascal wrote: > http://macsblog.com/2011/08/when-a-kit-aircraft-is-not-a-kit-aircraft/ > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: the story of Gary's RV-10 continues
Date: Aug 18, 2011
I agree with Dave. I looked at Greg's airplane at OSH and was impressed with the workmanship. I was a bit surprised to see that he had doubled the fuel capacity, but I feel that 60 gallons is a pretty minimal fuel load for such an airplane so I can understand why he chose to increase it. Is this an unproven change? Of course it is. These are EXPERIMENTAL aircraft. It is incumbent on us, the builders, to do sufficent testing (that's what the 25 or 40 hour pahse I periodi is for) to prove that our aircraft are safe. If that means flutter testing then so be it. I resent EAA hiring Mac MacLellan to write for Sport Aviation. I didn't like his writing for FLYING magazine, and always felt that he only wanted to talk to people with turbine powered aircraft. He knows absolutely nothing about homebuilt aircraft, kitplanes or plans-built. Until he (or Rod Hightower for that matter) has built an aircraft with his own hands, I don't feel that he has anything useful to offer. Jack Phillips #40610 Wings (still) Raleigh, NC -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Saylor Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 8:07 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: the story of Gary's RV-10 continues Greg doesn't deserve this. Changes, yes, but I've seen alot worse. Greg's changes are well considered, and he seems to understand and accept the compromises he made. From Greg's earlier posts he seems to have learned a lot from the attention he received. I have a huge respect for Van. He's one of my heros and I understand his point. It's just that--his point. I've flown heavy RVs and modified RVs. Lighter is better. Sometimes mods don't work out. I don't think I'd hesitate to fly in Greg's plane, in the manner he intends to use it. It's not one of the bad ones. I don't think any of us want to be bound by rules put forth by the manufacturer of the kit, unless we get something for it--fewer restrictions, or some other guarantee, but that seems to be where this is headed. Abide or else. I think EAA has done Greg a disservice by honoring him with a complimentary write-up and yanking the rug out from under him. I wouldn't want that attention. I think EAA owes him an apology, and I'm going to tell them so. Rod Hightower needs to show some leadership and explain how it is that EAA could change course so abruptly in regards to the treatment Greg has received. I hope Greg sees this as an opportunity for others to learn something and can somehow see a positive side. His last post here seemed kind of regretful, and that's too bad. His craftsmanship should never have been rewarded with what he got. Hang in there, Greg. Enjoy your plane. Dave Saylor AirCrafters 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 95076 831-722-9141 Shop 831-750-0284 Cell On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 4:25 PM, Pascal wrote: > http://macsblog.com/2011/08/when-a-kit-aircraft-is-not-a-kit-aircraft/ > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com>
Date: Aug 18, 2011
Subject: ADS-B
I had a successful test flight today using NavWorx's ADS600-B. I'm using it with the ARINC 429 option feeding a GNS530W. The 530 is set for Traffic Advisory mode, vs. Garmin GTX330 mode. TA uses a somewhat simplified display with a little less information, but according to Bill at NavWorx, it's more accurate than 330 mode, for now. NavWorx has been very responsive to a ton of questions from me, and more than fair when I transposed the antenna connectors (sszzzztt--don't do that). It's pretty cool to see traffic on the screen, several miles away, and then maneuver around to get close enough to get a visual, and know right where to look. Like magic. Any questions, feel free to call or email, on or off list. Dave Saylor AirCrafters 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 95076 831-722-9141 Shop 831-750-0284 Cell ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: ADS-B
From: Rob Kermanj <flysrv10(at)gmail.com>
Date: Aug 19, 2011
Can you tell us aboutthe services you receive? Rob Kermanj Sent from my iPad On Aug 18, 2011, at 11:38 PM, Dave Saylor wrote: > > I had a successful test flight today using NavWorx's ADS600-B. > > I'm using it with the ARINC 429 option feeding a GNS530W. The 530 is > set for Traffic Advisory mode, vs. Garmin GTX330 mode. TA uses a > somewhat simplified display with a little less information, but > according to Bill at NavWorx, it's more accurate than 330 mode, for > now. > > NavWorx has been very responsive to a ton of questions from me, and > more than fair when I transposed the antenna connectors > (sszzzztt--don't do that). > > It's pretty cool to see traffic on the screen, several miles away, and > then maneuver around to get close enough to get a visual, and know > right where to look. Like magic. > > Any questions, feel free to call or email, on or off list. > > Dave Saylor > AirCrafters > 140 Aviation Way > Watsonville, CA 95076 > 831-722-9141 Shop > 831-750-0284 Cell > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 19, 2011
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: the story of Gary's RV-10 continues
The question this raises in my mind is; what kind of liability concerns have kit makers had to deal with? Are they being routinely sued like aircraft manufacturers when their aircraft are in accidents? If they are being sued, are they settling or winning? If they aren't, how are they protecting themselves? We're all playing in this kit plane/experimental aircraft space where as builders, each of us has a great deal of freedom to do whatever we want with the only real liability being the souls we have on board. I just don't understand how that freedom plays out on the kit makers' side. Can anyone knowledgeably comment? Bill "thinking the door should be better designed as I consider pencil whipping my gross to 3200lbs" Watson ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com>
Date: Aug 19, 2011
Subject: Re: ADS-B
I'm getting traffic only, because seeing anything else on a Garmin isn't possible at this time. If I installed another type of display I think I could receive weather and other services. I know of another installation using an AFS display that gets some weather. In the future, I hope to be able to bluetooth the ADS-B data to an iPad. NavWorx has a schematic for outputting to a BT device but I haven't tried it. Dave Saylor AirCrafters 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 95076 831-722-9141 Shop 831-750-0284 Cell On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Rob Kermanj wrote: > > Can you tell us aboutthe services you receive? > > Rob Kermanj > Sent from my iPad > > On Aug 18, 2011, at 11:38 PM, Dave Saylor wrote: > >> >> I had a successful test flight today using NavWorx's ADS600-B. >> >> I'm using it with the ARINC 429 option feeding a GNS530W. The 530 is >> set for Traffic Advisory mode, vs. Garmin GTX330 mode. TA uses a >> somewhat simplified display with a little less information, but >> according to Bill at NavWorx, it's more accurate than 330 mode, for >> now. >> >> NavWorx has been very responsive to a ton of questions from me, and >> more than fair when I transposed the antenna connectors >> (sszzzztt--don't do that). >> >> It's pretty cool to see traffic on the screen, several miles away, and >> then maneuver around to get close enough to get a visual, and know >> right where to look. Like magic. >> >> Any questions, feel free to call or email, on or off list. >> >> Dave Saylor >> AirCrafters >> 140 Aviation Way >> Watsonville, CA 95076 >> 831-722-9141 Shop >> 831-750-0284 Cell >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com>
Date: Aug 19, 2011
Subject: Re: the story of Gary's RV-10 continues
Well...I have a little experience in the liability department. A few years ago I got a subpoena to give information to the court about a Lancair accident. I had nothing to do with the plane, or the customer, or anyone on board. The court needed information about how the planes are built, so it called me. For free, but that's a different gripe. Lancair was being sued because someone thought they might be responsible for "producing" a faulty kit, which then somehow led to the accident. So, manufacturers, at least Lancair, have had some exposure and they will try to limit their exposure by insisting that builders not change the kit. I'm don't think that currently they can enforce it but they'll try. I don't know if Lancair won or lost. The CEO at the time was a lawyer and I got an earful about his legal expenses--he didn't represent himself--so it was surely painful even if he won. The trend is for better and better kits. We all know how good the 10 is. It seems to me that the better some kits get, the more they pull the market up with them. They have to get better to compete. I think that eventually we'll see a "not-as-light sport" category that further reduces our ability to make changes, and I think that would be fine as long as AB remains. I hope logic prevails and relieves the kit provider from liability when changes are made. I don't think any builder would expect their changes to be guaranteed by the kit producer. But I guess judges and juries do the unexpected. Dave Saylor AirCrafters 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 95076 831-722-9141 Shop 831-750-0284 Cell On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Bill Watson wrote: > > The question this raises in my mind is; what kind of liability concerns have > kit makers had to deal with? Are they being routinely sued like aircraft > manufacturers when their aircraft are in accidents? If they are being sued, > are they settling or winning? If they aren't, how are they protecting > themselves? > > We're all playing in this kit plane/experimental aircraft space where as > builders, each of us has a great deal of freedom to do whatever we want > with the only real liability being the souls we have on board. I just don't > understand how that freedom plays out on the kit makers' side. Can anyone > knowledgeably comment? > > Bill "thinking the door should be better designed as I consider pencil > whipping my gross to 3200lbs" Watson > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: ADS-B
From: Bob Leffler <rv(at)thelefflers.com>
Date: Aug 19, 2011
Dave Sent from my iPhone On Aug 19, 2011, at 9:51 AM, Dave Saylor wrote: > > I'm getting traffic only, because seeing anything else on a Garmin > isn't possible at this time. If I installed another type of display I > think I could receive weather and other services. I know of another > installation using an AFS display that gets some weather. > > In the future, I hope to be able to bluetooth the ADS-B data to an > iPad. NavWorx has a schematic for outputting to a BT device but I > haven't tried it. > > Dave Saylor > AirCrafters > 140 Aviation Way > Watsonville, CA 95076 > 831-722-9141 Shop > 831-750-0284 Cell > > > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Rob Kermanj wrote: >> >> Can you tell us aboutthe services you receive? >> >> Rob Kermanj >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On Aug 18, 2011, at 11:38 PM, Dave Saylor wrote: >> >>> >>> I had a successful test flight today using NavWorx's ADS600-B. >>> >>> I'm using it with the ARINC 429 option feeding a GNS530W. The 530 is >>> set for Traffic Advisory mode, vs. Garmin GTX330 mode. TA uses a >>> somewhat simplified display with a little less information, but >>> according to Bill at NavWorx, it's more accurate than 330 mode, for >>> now. >>> >>> NavWorx has been very responsive to a ton of questions from me, and >>> more than fair when I transposed the antenna connectors >>> (sszzzztt--don't do that). >>> >>> It's pretty cool to see traffic on the screen, several miles away, and >>> then maneuver around to get close enough to get a visual, and know >>> right where to look. Like magic. >>> >>> Any questions, feel free to call or email, on or off list. >>> >>> Dave Saylor >>> AirCrafters >>> 140 Aviation Way >>> Watsonville, CA 95076 >>> 831-722-9141 Shop >>> 831-750-0284 Cell >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: ADS-B
From: Bob Leffler <rv(at)thelefflers.com>
Date: Aug 19, 2011
Dave, You may want to consider wifi. While the adapter costs more, I believe current draw is more on the iPad for Bluetooth. Bob Sent from my iPhone On Aug 19, 2011, at 9:51 AM, Dave Saylor wrote: > > I'm getting traffic only, because seeing anything else on a Garmin > isn't possible at this time. If I installed another type of display I > think I could receive weather and other services. I know of another > installation using an AFS display that gets some weather. > > In the future, I hope to be able to bluetooth the ADS-B data to an > iPad. NavWorx has a schematic for outputting to a BT device but I > haven't tried it. > > Dave Saylor > AirCrafters > 140 Aviation Way > Watsonville, CA 95076 > 831-722-9141 Shop > 831-750-0284 Cell > > > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Rob Kermanj wrote: >> >> Can you tell us aboutthe services you receive? >> >> Rob Kermanj >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On Aug 18, 2011, at 11:38 PM, Dave Saylor wrote: >> >>> >>> I had a successful test flight today using NavWorx's ADS600-B. >>> >>> I'm using it with the ARINC 429 option feeding a GNS530W. The 530 is >>> set for Traffic Advisory mode, vs. Garmin GTX330 mode. TA uses a >>> somewhat simplified display with a little less information, but >>> according to Bill at NavWorx, it's more accurate than 330 mode, for >>> now. >>> >>> NavWorx has been very responsive to a ton of questions from me, and >>> more than fair when I transposed the antenna connectors >>> (sszzzztt--don't do that). >>> >>> It's pretty cool to see traffic on the screen, several miles away, and >>> then maneuver around to get close enough to get a visual, and know >>> right where to look. Like magic. >>> >>> Any questions, feel free to call or email, on or off list. >>> >>> Dave Saylor >>> AirCrafters >>> 140 Aviation Way >>> Watsonville, CA 95076 >>> 831-722-9141 Shop >>> 831-750-0284 Cell >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 19, 2011
Subject: Re: the story of Gary's RV-10 continues
From: Chris Colohan <rv10(at)colohan.com>
As an engineer, I have to be pedantic. So I apologise if my response is overly-pedantic... On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 5:43 PM, Jack Phillips wrote: > > I agree with Dave. I looked at Greg's airplane at OSH and was impressed > with the workmanship. I was a bit surprised to see that he had doubled the > fuel capacity, but I feel that 60 gallons is a pretty minimal fuel load for > such an airplane so I can understand why he chose to increase it. Is this > an unproven change? Of course it is. These are EXPERIMENTAL aircraft. It > is incumbent on us, the builders, to do sufficent testing (that's what the > 25 or 40 hour pahse I periodi is for) to prove that our aircraft are safe. > If that means flutter testing then so be it. > Testing does not prove a design is safe. It simply proves, that at the test points tested, under limited repetitions, the design did not fail. It adds some confidence that a design was correctly manufactured, and also that the original design calculations were correct. Before testing can do any of this, you need a proper design. This may include structural analysis, computer simulation, failure testing, etc. For an unmodified kit, you are trusting that Van's has done this for you. If you modify the kit, it is up to the builder to decide how much additional design work is required. For simple, non-safety-critical things you can eyeball it. For significant changes, you would probably be better off redoing the analysis and simulation work, as it may help catch corner cases which testing is likely to miss (or save you from a catastrophic test failure). When I read Van's article, I simply read it as: "hey, if you modify our design this much you need to redo some of the design work to be safe. Please either do the design work, or don't modify this much!" Testing is rarely a good substitute for design. Chris (FWIW, I think the EAA has come down _way_ too hard on Greg. But the resulting discussion this has spawned has been very interesting, and educational for me.) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com>
Date: Aug 19, 2011
Subject: Re: ADS-B
Wifi would be better. Any iPad interfaces will be down the road a bit. Dave Saylor AirCrafters 140 Aviation Way Watsonville, CA 95076 831-722-9141 Shop 831-750-0284 Cell On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 7:48 AM, Bob Leffler wrote: > > Dave, > > You may want to consider wifi. While the adapter costs more, I believe current draw is more on the iPad for Bluetooth. > > Bob > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Aug 19, 2011, at 9:51 AM, Dave Saylor wrote: > >> >> I'm getting traffic only, because seeing anything else on a Garmin >> isn't possible at this time. If I installed another type of display I >> think I could receive weather and other services. I know of another >> installation using an AFS display that gets some weather. >> >> In the future, I hope to be able to bluetooth the ADS-B data to an >> iPad. NavWorx has a schematic for outputting to a BT device but I >> haven't tried it. >> >> Dave Saylor >> AirCrafters >> 140 Aviation Way >> Watsonville, CA 95076 >> 831-722-9141 Shop >> 831-750-0284 Cell >> >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Rob Kermanj wrote: >>> >>> Can you tell us aboutthe services you receive? >>> >>> Rob Kermanj >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>> On Aug 18, 2011, at 11:38 PM, Dave Saylor wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> I had a successful test flight today using NavWorx's ADS600-B. >>>> >>>> I'm using it with the ARINC 429 option feeding a GNS530W. The 530 is >>>> set for Traffic Advisory mode, vs. Garmin GTX330 mode. TA uses a >>>> somewhat simplified display with a little less information, but >>>> according to Bill at NavWorx, it's more accurate than 330 mode, for >>>> now. >>>> >>>> NavWorx has been very responsive to a ton of questions from me, and

July 20, 2011 - August 19, 2011

RV10-Archive.digest.vol-ii