RV10-Archive.digest.vol-jd

December 15, 2012 - January 11, 2013



      the cowl.
      
      Carl
      
      -----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sean Stephens Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 11:32 AM
Subject: Cowl Hinge Pins
Anyone know a source for the stainless hinge pins besides Vans? I don't understand why they don't provide enough for the side hinges between the top and bottom cowl. Page 47-8 says they are available from the accessories catalog. I'd think they are more than just accessories. I understand that they weld on a retainer for these "accessories", but one would think that it would be supplied in the kit. -Sean #40303 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 15, 2012
From: Sean Stephens <sean(at)stephensville.com>
Subject: Re: Cowl Hinge Pins
Thanks Carl. I assumed it was "required" to replace them with the part mentioned in the plans, but I am now seeing that is not the case. I shamelessly stole the pin retainer from Mike (http://www.azcloudflyer.com/finish/IMG_0298.jpg). And it seems the pins that come with the hinges will be fine. -Sean #40303 On 12/15/12 3:39 PM, Carl Froehlich wrote: > > Sean, > > I purchased hinge pin material from ACS - this may be the right number but > you need to check: MS20253-P2-7200 HINGE PIN SS 03-49000. I see no > advantage to stainless steel over the standard steel pins. > > I got (2) 6' lengths as I install the cowl side pins from inside the > cockpit. The pins run through a piece of 1/4" aluminum tubing on the cabin > side of the firewall that acts as a conduit. I took a 3/16" round head > rivet and drilled a 1/16" hole through the center, then countersunk the > shank end, cut off the head, and JB welded the rivet into one end of the > 1/4" tubing (countersunk part to the inside so the pin is directed into the > 1/16" hole). A 3/16" hole is drilled into the firewall such that the rivet > shank pokes through 1/4" or so, in a spot such that the pin is directed into > the first eyelet on the cowl. > > This is really a lot simpler than it sounds. The end result is with a few > AN fittings you have lockable side pins that don't poke through the front of > the cowl. > > Carl > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sean Stephens > Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 11:32 AM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV10-List: Cowl Hinge Pins > > > Anyone know a source for the stainless hinge pins besides Vans? I don't > understand why they don't provide enough for the side hinges between the top > and bottom cowl. Page 47-8 says they are available from the accessories > catalog. I'd think they are more than just accessories. I understand that > they weld on a retainer for these "accessories", but one would think that it > would be supplied in the kit. > > -Sean #40303 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill and Tami Britton" <william(at)gbta.net>
Subject: Bottom wing skin J-stiffeners
Date: Dec 15, 2012
Quick, simple question. The instructions state that the outboard bottom wing skin overlaps the inboard bottom skin but doesn't mention how the stiffeners overlap. Do I assume it's the same as the skins (which is what I've done up to this point) or does it really matter??? Thanks in advance, Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Cowl Hinge Pins
From: "Greg McFarlane" <grbcmcfarlane(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 16, 2012
Re conduit for cabin side entry of side cowl hinges, rather than use 1/4 inch ally pipe, if you go to your local auto brake place you'll be able to purchase steel brake pipe that the side pins are a neat fit in. Then it's only a matter of drilling a hole in the firewall and fwd fuse bulkhead F-1002-R that is a neat fit for the steel pipe and lines up with the side cowl hinges, bond with bondo or epoxy. I've kept mine straight just below the vents but you can bend the pipe to any location and the pin will happily follow. Epoxy a rivit into the last forward piano hinge, top or bottom to stop the pin from making friends with your fan. Cheers from Western Australia. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=390512#390512 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com>
Subject: RV-10 in AZ
Date: Dec 17, 2012
Is anybody on the list familiar with this plane or with the guy who is selling it? Please contact me off list or call me if you are familiar with either. > http://www.barnstormers.com/listing.php?id=728487 > Thanks. Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse(at)saintaviation.com C: 352-427-0285 F: 815-377-3694 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Cowl Hinge Pins
From: Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com>
Date: Dec 17, 2012
You will be very happy that you bought the pins from Van's if you do. The welded on tab makes it much easier to remove the pins and keeps them very securely. Just using an eyelet to hold the tip of the pin is not nearly as nice, IMHO. YMMV Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse(at)saintaviation.com C: 352-427-0285 F: 815-377-3694 On Dec 15, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Sean Stephens wrote: > > Anyone know a source for the stainless hinge pins besides Vans? I don't understand why they don't provide enough for the side hinges between the top and bottom cowl. Page 47-8 says they are available from the accessories catalog. I'd think they are more than just accessories. I understand that they weld on a retainer for these "accessories", but one would think that it would be supplied in the kit. > > -Sean #40303 > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 17, 2012
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: Cowl Hinge Pins
Amen to that Jesse! I had just the hing section for a long long time, and while it did work, eventually the eyelet widens and the pin can start to move and then the wear happens faster yet. I did the JB weld thing for a while to hold it on, and that worked ok for a while but soon one of them broke free and then I had to re-glue it. Finally I got ticked off enough that I did it better. I bought new pins, and a section of stainless hinge, and silver soldered them together. Yes, Van's does sell a pre-made pin, but by this point I was irritated and knew I could do a better job if I took the time. Wish I would have had Van's pins right from the start. Actually, if I could do it all over again, I'd make mine look like Sean's where the pins get hidden by an oval shaped RV-10 logo. That to me trims it out perfectly. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD On 12/17/2012 2:26 PM, Jesse Saint wrote: > > > You will be very happy that you bought the pins from Van's if you do. > The welded on tab makes it much easier to remove the pins and keeps > them very securely. Just using an eyelet to hold the tip of the pin > is not nearly as nice, IMHO. > > YMMV > > Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse(at)saintaviation.com C: > 352-427-0285 F: 815-377-3694 > > On Dec 15, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Sean Stephens > wrote: > >> >> >> Anyone know a source for the stainless hinge pins besides Vans? I >> don't understand why they don't provide enough for the side hinges >> between the top and bottom cowl. Page 47-8 says they are available >> from the accessories catalog. I'd think they are more than just >> accessories. I understand that they weld on a retainer for these >> "accessories", but one would think that it would be supplied in the >> kit. >> >> -Sean #40303 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Geoff Combs" <g.combs(at)aerosportmodeling.com>
Subject: Cowl Hinge Pins
Date: Dec 18, 2012
Here are the covers Tim was referring to. These are produced by Aerosport Products. Geoff Combs Aerosport 8090 howe industrial pkwy canal winchester, ohio 43110 614.834.5227p 614.834.5230f www.aerosportmodeling.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson Sent: Monday, December 17, 2012 10:15 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Cowl Hinge Pins Amen to that Jesse! I had just the hing section for a long long time, and while it did work, eventually the eyelet widens and the pin can start to move and then the wear happens faster yet. I did the JB weld thing for a while to hold it on, and that worked ok for a while but soon one of them broke free and then I had to re-glue it. Finally I got ticked off enough that I did it better. I bought new pins, and a section of stainless hinge, and silver soldered them together. Yes, Van's does sell a pre-made pin, but by this point I was irritated and knew I could do a better job if I took the time. Wish I would have had Van's pins right from the start. Actually, if I could do it all over again, I'd make mine look like Sean's where the pins get hidden by an oval shaped RV-10 logo. That to me trims it out perfectly. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD On 12/17/2012 2:26 PM, Jesse Saint wrote: > > > You will be very happy that you bought the pins from Van's if you do. > The welded on tab makes it much easier to remove the pins and keeps > them very securely. Just using an eyelet to hold the tip of the pin is > not nearly as nice, IMHO. > > YMMV > > Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse(at)saintaviation.com C: > 352-427-0285 F: 815-377-3694 > > On Dec 15, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Sean Stephens > wrote: > >> >> >> Anyone know a source for the stainless hinge pins besides Vans? I >> don't understand why they don't provide enough for the side hinges >> between the top and bottom cowl. Page 47-8 says they are available >> from the accessories catalog. I'd think they are more than just >> accessories. I understand that they weld on a retainer for these >> "accessories", but one would think that it would be supplied in the >> kit. >> >> -Sean #40303 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Danny Riggs <jdriggs49(at)msn.com>
Subject: Cowl Hinge Pins
Date: Dec 19, 2012
Can those be recessed? My buddy left his proud but seems like I've seen pic s of them flush??? > From: g.combs(at)aerosportmodeling.com > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Hinge Pins > Date: Tue=2C 18 Dec 2012 16:34:01 -0500 > > Here are the covers Tim was referring to. These are produced by Aerosport > Products. > > > Geoff Combs > Aerosport > 8090 howe industrial pkwy > canal winchester=2C ohio 43110 > 614.834.5227p > 614.834.5230f > www.aerosportmodeling.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson > Sent: Monday=2C December 17=2C 2012 10:15 PM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Cowl Hinge Pins > > > Amen to that Jesse! I had just the hing section for a long long time=2C and > while it did work=2C eventually the eyelet widens and the pin can start t o > move and then the wear happens faster yet. > I did the JB weld thing for a while to hold it on=2C and that worked ok f or a > while but soon one of them broke free and then I had to re-glue it. Final ly > I got ticked off enough that I did it better. > I bought new pins=2C and a section of stainless hinge=2C and silver solde red > them together. Yes=2C Van's does sell a pre-made pin=2C but by this point I was > irritated and knew I could do a better job if I took the time. Wish I wo uld > have had Van's pins right from the start. Actually=2C if I could do it a ll > over again=2C I'd make mine look like Sean's where the pins get hidden by an > oval shaped RV-10 logo. That to me trims it out perfectly. > > > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD > > > > On 12/17/2012 2:26 PM=2C Jesse Saint wrote: > > > > > > You will be very happy that you bought the pins from Van's if you do. > > The welded on tab makes it much easier to remove the pins and keeps > > them very securely. Just using an eyelet to hold the tip of the pin is > > not nearly as nice=2C IMHO. > > > > YMMV > > > > Jesse Saint Saint Aviation=2C Inc. jesse(at)saintaviation.com C: > > 352-427-0285 F: 815-377-3694 > > > > On Dec 15=2C 2012=2C at 11:32 AM=2C Sean Stephens > > wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> Anyone know a source for the stainless hinge pins besides Vans? I > >> don't understand why they don't provide enough for the side hinges > >> between the top and bottom cowl. Page 47-8 says they are available > >> from the accessories catalog. I'd think they are more than just > >> accessories. I understand that they weld on a retainer for these > >> "accessories"=2C but one would think that it would be supplied in the > >> kit. > >> > >> -Sean #40303 > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Cowl Hinge Pins
From: Bob Leffler <rv(at)thelefflers.com>
Date: Dec 19, 2012
By design they are supposed to be recessed and flushed. Here is a link to th e instructions. http://aerosportproducts.com/Docs/cowlpin.pdf Sent from my iPad On Dec 19, 2012, at 1:09 AM, Danny Riggs wrote: > Can those be recessed? My buddy left his proud but seems like I've seen pi cs of them flush??? > > > From: g.combs(at)aerosportmodeling.com > > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > > Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Hinge Pins > > Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 16:34:01 -0500 > > > > Here are the covers Tim was referring to. These are produced by Aerospor t > > Products. > > > > > > Geoff Combs > > Aerosport > > 8090 howe industrial pkwy > > canal winchester, ohio 43110 > > 614.834.5227p > > 614.834.5230f > > www.aerosportmodeling.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson > > Sent: Monday, December 17, 2012 10:15 PM > > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Cowl Hinge Pins > > > > > > Amen to that Jesse! I had just the hing section for a long long time, an d > > while it did work, eventually the eyelet widens and the pin can start to > > move and then the wear happens faster yet. > > I did the JB weld thing for a while to hold it on, and that worked ok fo r a > > while but soon one of them broke free and then I had to re-glue it. Fina lly > > I got ticked off enough that I did it better. > > I bought new pins, and a section of stainless hinge, and silver soldered > > them together. Yes, Van's does sell a pre-made pin, but by this point I w as > > irritated and knew I could do a better job if I took the time. Wish I wo uld > > have had Van's pins right from the start. Actually, if I could do it all > > over again, I'd make mine look like Sean's where the pins get hidden by a n > > oval shaped RV-10 logo. That to me trims it out perfectly. > > > > > > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD > > > > > > > > On 12/17/2012 2:26 PM, Jesse Saint wrote: > > > > > > > > > You will be very happy that you bought the pins from Van's if you do. > > > The welded on tab makes it much easier to remove the pins and keeps > > > them very securely. Just using an eyelet to hold the tip of the pin is > > > not nearly as nice, IMHO. > > > > > > YMMV > > > > > > Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse(at)saintaviation.com C: > > > 352-427-0285 F: 815-377-3694 > > > > > > On Dec 15, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Sean Stephens > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> > > >> Anyone know a source for the stainless hinge pins besides Vans? I > > >> don't understand why they don't provide enough for the side hinges > > >> between the top and bottom cowl. Page 47-8 says they are available > > >> from the accessories catalog. I'd think they are more than just > > >> accessories. I understand that they weld on a retainer for these > > >> "accessories", but one would think that it would be supplied in the > > >> kit. > > >> > > >> -Sean #40303 > > > > > > > > > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Danny Riggs <jdriggs49(at)msn.com>
Subject: Cowl Hinge Pins
Date: Dec 19, 2012
Thanks! Subject: Re: RV10-List: Cowl Hinge Pins From: rv(at)thelefflers.com Date: Wed=2C 19 Dec 2012 05:54:34 -0500 By design they are supposed to be recessed and flushed. Here is a link to t he instructions. http://aerosportproducts.com/Docs/cowlpin.pdf Sent from my iPad On Dec 19=2C 2012=2C at 1:09 AM=2C Danny Riggs wrote: Can those be recessed? My buddy left his proud but seems like I've seen pic s of them flush??? > From: g.combs(at)aerosportmodeling.com > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Hinge Pins > Date: Tue=2C 18 Dec 2012 16:34:01 -0500 > > Here are the covers Tim was referring to. These are produced by Aerosport > Products. > > > Geoff Combs > Aerosport > 8090 howe industrial pkwy > canal winchester=2C ohio 43110 > 614.834.5227p > 614.834.5230f > www.aerosportmodeling.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson > Sent: Monday=2C December 17=2C 2012 10:15 PM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Cowl Hinge Pins > > > Amen to that Jesse! I had just the hing section for a long long time=2C and > while it did work=2C eventually the eyelet widens and the pin can start t o > move and then the wear happens faster yet. > I did the JB weld thing for a while to hold it on=2C and that worked ok f or a > while but soon one of them broke free and then I had to re-glue it. Final ly > I got ticked off enough that I did it better. > I bought new pins=2C and a section of stainless hinge=2C and silver solde red > them together. Yes=2C Van's does sell a pre-made pin=2C but by this point I was > irritated and knew I could do a better job if I took the time. Wish I wo uld > have had Van's pins right from the start. Actually=2C if I could do it a ll > over again=2C I'd make mine look like Sean's where the pins get hidden by an > oval shaped RV-10 logo. That to me trims it out perfectly. > > > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD > > > > On 12/17/2012 2:26 PM=2C Jesse Saint wrote: > > > > > > You will be very happy that you bought the pins from Van's if you do. > > The welded on tab makes it much easier to remove the pins and keeps > > them very securely. Just using an eyelet to hold the tip of the pin is > > not nearly as nice=2C IMHO. > > > > YMMV > > > > Jesse Saint Saint Aviation=2C Inc. jesse(at)saintaviation.com C: > > 352-427-0285 F: 815-377-3694 > > > > On Dec 15=2C 2012=2C at 11:32 AM=2C Sean Stephens > > wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> Anyone know a source for the stainless hinge pins besides Vans? I > >> don't understand why they don't provide enough for the side hinges > >> between the top and bottom cowl. Page 47-8 says they are available > >> from the accessories catalog. I'd think they are more than just > >> accessories. I understand that they weld on a retainer for these > >> "accessories"=2C but one would think that it would be supplied in the > >> kit. > >> > >> -Sean #40303 > > > > ========= ctric.com >www.buildersbooks.com uilthelp.com matronics.com/contribution ========= ://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List ========= cs.com ========= ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 20, 2012
From: Sean Stephens <sean(at)stephensville.com>
Subject: NonStopAviation?
Has anyone successfully purchased a product from nonstopaviation recently? I made a purchase over a week ago and have heard nothing. Tried calling and emailing with no reply. -Sean #40303 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)live.com>
Subject: Re: NonStopAviation?
Date: Dec 20, 2012
check the archives, this sounds familiar for a vendor out there, in the end they came through with the products, so no worries there, they were just slow to follow-up. -----Original Message----- From: Sean Stephens Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 7:00 AM Subject: RV10-List: NonStopAviation? Has anyone successfully purchased a product from nonstopaviation recently? I made a purchase over a week ago and have heard nothing. Tried calling and emailing with no reply. -Sean #40303 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)live.com>
Subject: Re: ECI Pushrod Shroud Retainer- Update
Date: Dec 21, 2012
Well, quite remotely at this point, I needed to replace the springs in the pushrod as part of this SI! As I mentioned previously I thought I was not part of the ECI Service Instruction, but it wasn't a few days after I sent out the response below that I noticed an oil stream on the belly (I have a no fluid on the belly policy) I traced it back to a cylinder and started thinking about the Service Instruction, so I took the plenum off and sure enough there was a leak coming out of the pushrod. I called ECI and they Fedex'd out the parts needed. I give them credit for the great customer support with this. I filled out a warranty form and 3 days later the parts and new gaskets were shipped to me. Mine were not broken (yet) but the springs were showing wear (118 hours) and there appeared to be stress cracks developing, hence the loose of tension to hold the pushrod in place (attached). -----Original Message----- From: Pascal Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 1:11 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: ECI Pushrod Shroud Retainer I called Eci, good folks! the stock was changed in July 2010. Basically if there was a problem one would know rather quickly in the form of a oil leak. I explained I had over 100 hours and he suggested that it was quite remote at this point to have an issue, which means I probably had the engine built with different retainer clips. If you have had the engine less than 2 years this should not apply to you. -----Original Message----- From: Tim Olson Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 12:36 PM Subject: RV10-List: ECI Pushrod Shroud Retainer Not sure if others got this or not, but just one part to check out if you have used an ECI parts kit at all, or happen to have an ECI retainer clip from some maintenance. http://eci.aero/pdf/12-1.pdf Just one of those little things... Tim ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: NonStopAviation?
From: "dhmoose" <dhmoose(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Dec 21, 2012
I purchased an oil door from them approx 10 days ago. I received email confirmation on the order and a week later, a second email confirmation that the item shipped. So far, it hasn't arrived but it seems likely that it will. Fingers crossed. :) David -------- David Halmos RV-10 Finishing Kit...far from finished! Portland, OR Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=390805#390805 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: NonStopAviation?
From: "dhmoose" <dhmoose(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Dec 22, 2012
Shipment arrived today! Nonstop aviation is still in business. -------- David Halmos RV-10 Cowl and baffles Portland, OR Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=390827#390827 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 22, 2012
Subject: Fwd: Confirmation of RV-10 class.
(from Dave Saylor) Will the builder in NM who called about using his cabin top please give me a call? Best number is 831-750-0284. Thx! ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Tim Farrell <tim(at)aircraftersllc.com> Date: Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 1:59 PM Subject: Confirmation of RV-10 class. dave(at)aircraftersllc.com> Hello all, Merry Christmas. I'd like to confirm that we will be going ahead with the class. Please RSVP me one more time to confirm your assistance. We will also need to get the deposit before Feb. 1. I will be contacting you after Christmas to see how we can arrange that. The class will be Feb 23 & 24 starting at 8am. See http://www.aircraftersllc.com/news_events.html?id=news for more info. Our refund policy will be the following: full refund before feb 1. After that, you are committed to the 50%. We're all pilots and we all understand the effects of weather. I would ask that you have a backup plan in case you are weathered in, but in the case that you are flying in and can't make it do to local weather, we'll refund 50% and the remainder can be applied to another class or shop time. Currently I am emailing you all blind carbon copy. I would like to share your email with other participants, so in my next email I will copy everyone CC. If you DO NOT want your email shared, please tell me. I wish you all the best holidays, Talk soon, Tim Farrell -- *Aircrafters* 140 Aviation Way Watsonville CA, 95076 KWVI 831-722-9141 www.AircraftersLLC.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: RV-10 in AZ
From: "woxofswa" <woxof(at)aol.com>
Date: Dec 23, 2012
I've asked around some about this guy and so far nobody knows him. If KellyM doesn't know him then he is truly off the builder's guild grid. I am curious what he wants for his project. -------- Myron Nelson Mesa, AZ Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. Finishing kit and FWF kit in progress. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=390849#390849 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: NonStopAviation?
From: "ivankris" <ivankris(at)rogers.com>
Date: Dec 23, 2012
I have purchased several items from them in the past and they have always shipped. I believe Steve runs this as a part time business but he produces top quality products. -------- Ivan K. www.ivankristensen.com Builder # 40838 Flying (265 hrs.) C-GMDV Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=390850#390850 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: NonStopAviation?
From: Alan Mekler <amekler(at)metrocast.net>
Date: Dec 23, 2012
Ivan, Steve Raddatz was killed May 23,2009 in a formation flying accident. His partner Eric runs NonstopAviation. Regards, Alan N668G RV-10( built by Steve Raddatz) Sent from my iPad On Dec 23, 2012, at 12:16 PM, "ivankris" wrote: > > I have purchased several items from them in the past and they have always shipped. I believe Steve runs this as a part time business but he produces top quality products. > > -------- > Ivan K. > > www.ivankristensen.com > Builder # 40838 > Flying (265 hrs.) > C-GMDV > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=390850#390850 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: NonStopAviation?
Date: Dec 23, 2012
I purchased the 4" oil cooler air butterfly valve and oil door hidden hinge. Parts arrived promptly and I'm happy with the quality. Carl -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ivankris Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2012 12:17 PM Subject: RV10-List: Re: NonStopAviation? I have purchased several items from them in the past and they have always shipped. I believe Steve runs this as a part time business but he produces top quality products. -------- Ivan K. www.ivankristensen.com Builder # 40838 Flying (265 hrs.) C-GMDV Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=390850#390850 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 23, 2012
Subject: Re: RV-10 in AZ
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
I've heard of several RV-10s being built in the PHX area at home, that don't seem to participate in either Van's Airforce or here. One other local -10 builder thinks he is at Stellar AirPark but I have no actual knowledge. On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 9:37 AM, woxofswa wrote: > > I've asked around some about this guy and so far nobody knows him. If KellyM doesn't know him then he is truly off the builder's guild grid. > > I am curious what he wants for his project. > > -------- > Myron Nelson > Mesa, AZ > Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. Finishing kit and FWF kit in progress. > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=390849#390849 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: RV-10 in AZ
From: "bill.peyton" <peyton.b(at)sbcglobal.net>
Date: Dec 24, 2012
Chris Sands is "float208" on VAF -------- Bill WA0SYV Aviation Partners, LLC Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=390870#390870 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: RV-10 in AZ
From: John <johnag5b(at)cableone.net>
Date: Dec 24, 2012
Hey Myron - About whose 10 are you enquiring? My 10 is for sale. Ask Deems or Kelly or Gary Hendickson or Gary Towner or anybody at KPRC about it or just call me. 938-308-0471. John Ackerman Prescott AZ On Dec 23, 2012, at 9:37 AM, "woxofswa" wrote: > > I've asked around some about this guy and so far nobody knows him. If KellyM doesn't know him then he is truly off the builder's guild grid. > > I am curious what he wants for his project. > > -------- > Myron Nelson > Mesa, AZ > Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. Finishing kit and FWF kit in progress. > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=390849#390849 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: RV-10 in AZ
From: Jeff Carpenter <jeff(at)westcottpress.com>
Date: Dec 24, 2012
He has it on Barnstormers for $100,000 Jeff Carpenter 40304 On Dec 23, 2012, at 8:37 AM, woxofswa wrote: > > I've asked around some about this guy and so far nobody knows him. If KellyM doesn't know him then he is truly off the builder's guild grid. > > I am curious what he wants for his project. > > -------- > Myron Nelson > Mesa, AZ > Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. Finishing kit and FWF kit in progress. > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=390849#390849 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: RV-10 in AZ
From: "woxofswa" <woxof(at)aol.com>
Date: Dec 24, 2012
I'm not interested as a buyer. I have my own project about his same stage and was just curious about market value. It seems to me that a project that far along would bring more return if it were finished, but maybe not. Glad I don't need/want to sell, as I sure wouldn't want to let it go for 100k. My casual observation is that a quality build at about 100 hours logged brings the best return, but I could be wrong. -------- Myron Nelson Mesa, AZ Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. Finishing kit and FWF kit in progress. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=390913#390913 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Les Kearney" <kearney(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Kudos
Date: Dec 27, 2012
Hi I have been silent (because of travel and building) of late but do want to acknowledge Andrew Leopold (Angus Aviation Pty Ltd) who markets the Gretz heated pitot and the good folks at Aircraft Spruce. A month or so ago, I installed my wings and completed the wiring for the heated pitot. In the heated hanger everything worked as advertised. When I energized the pitot outside in about -12c it immediately failed. Although the root cause is not apparent, the it looks like the heating element on the head had a short. The challenge for me was this was bought several years ago (from ACS) when I purchased my QB wings. Given that it was in a box since the initial install of the mounting bracket, Andrew immediately offered to replace it through ACS. I think it is great that we, as builders, have access to suppliers like Andrew, who will stand by their product (even when made by the original owner of Gretz Aero). Equally helpful was ACS who was also prepared to stand behind the product and shipped the replacement to me so I could avoid waiting for a replacement from Oz. This is what customer service is about. Cheers Les C-GCWZ "Officially" finished and awaiting CofA ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)live.com>
Subject: Re: Kudos
Date: Dec 27, 2012
I have had the same experience with Dynon, Vertical Power and Aircraft Spruce. Aircraft Spruce really does care about customer service. Last month Mr Irwin himself sent me an e-mail thanking me for helping out with an issue on a local RV list. As the owner and president of a large company, that speaks volumes that Spruce cares enough that they monitor lists and take care of issues like yours Les, in my case, by the President of the company himself. I just ordered a few random items, new ear seals and replacement parts, that exceeded $100, forgot to mention I had a promo code from AOPA when ordering and called back asking for AOPA deal ($10 card)Once they got the code straightened out I was assured I would get the card sent out. It's all about customer service and these small things lead me to buy big things from Spruce. Thank you for the feedback! Pascal -----Original Message----- From: Les Kearney Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 9:18 AM Subject: RV10-List: Kudos Hi I have been silent (because of travel and building) of late but do want to acknowledge Andrew Leopold (Angus Aviation Pty Ltd) who markets the Gretz heated pitot and the good folks at Aircraft Spruce. A month or so ago, I installed my wings and completed the wiring for the heated pitot. In the heated hanger everything worked as advertised. When I energized the pitot outside in about -12c it immediately failed. Although the root cause is not apparent, the it looks like the heating element on the head had a short. The challenge for me was this was bought several years ago (from ACS) when I purchased my QB wings. Given that it was in a box since the initial install of the mounting bracket, Andrew immediately offered to replace it through ACS. I think it is great that we, as builders, have access to suppliers like Andrew, who will stand by their product (even when made by the original owner of Gretz Aero). Equally helpful was ACS who was also prepared to stand behind the product and shipped the replacement to me so I could avoid waiting for a replacement from Oz. This is what customer service is about. Cheers Les C-GCWZ "Officially" finished and awaiting CofA ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Kudos
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Dec 27, 2012
I agree. Not too long ago the ACS president personally emailed me to correct a small complaint He is trying hard to give good service, and I shop there because of that, even if I do have to pay the CA sales tax! -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391051#391051 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Kudos
From: "rwwende" <n7006w(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 28, 2012
Since I did not want to wait three weeks for shipping to and from the land down under, I isolated my problem to being a bad thermistor on the old pitot. The control board worked fine. After receiving a new one from Stein and bench testing it first, I installed it in the airplane along with an opti-isolator my MIT Engineering neighbor built for me, which eliminates the led lights and displays the status on the EFIS. Love it. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391087#391087 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Kudos
From: Seano <sean(at)braunandco.com>
Date: Dec 28, 2012
That's cool! Sent from my iPhone On Dec 28, 2012, at 12:47, "rwwende" wrote: > > Since I did not want to wait three weeks for shipping to and from the land down under, I isolated my problem to being a bad thermistor on the old pitot. The control board worked fine. > > After receiving a new one from Stein and bench testing it first, I installed it in the airplane along with an opti-isolator my MIT Engineering neighbor built for me, which eliminates the led lights and displays the status on the EFIS. Love it. > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391087#391087 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 28, 2012
From: Sean Stephens <sean(at)stephensville.com>
Subject: Re: Pitot Opto-Isolator Was: Kudos
For those looking to get the pitot annunciators on their EFIS, check out the following post from Matt on the VP forums. Post #8 on the thread. I had to use a different part number which is indicated on the last post of the thread. http://www.verticalpower.com/forums/showthread.php?255-Gretz-Aero-G-1000-Pitot&p=1667&posted=1#post1667 -Sean #40303 On 12/28/12 1:47 PM, rwwende wrote: > > Since I did not want to wait three weeks for shipping to and from the land down under, I isolated my problem to being a bad thermistor on the old pitot. The control board worked fine. > > After receiving a new one from Stein and bench testing it first, I installed it in the airplane along with an opti-isolator my MIT Engineering neighbor built for me, which eliminates the led lights and displays the status on the EFIS. Love it. > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391087#391087 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 29, 2012
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Kudos
I had a similar experience. Having acquired it directly from Gretz, I had to work with Andrew directly. I resisted sending the unit to Oz but found that it was not expensive, surprisingly quick, and I got total satisfaction from Andrew. Since removing the pitot takes the plane off line, I found that I was able to fashion a Vans Version 1.0 pitot to replace the Gretz in about an hour. None too soon with icing season approaching. I took on my first RV10 ice flying into Sandy's giant low. It happened so slowly and unexpectedly that it caught me my surprise as I slowly lost airspeed in autopilot cruise. I could never quite see the ice from the cockpit but getting into warmer clear air resulted in a few bangs as it came off the prop. I like the "always on" concept and the reduced need to burn my fingers checking operation on the ground. Bill "happy customer of Angus Aviation" Watson On 12/27/2012 12:18 PM, Les Kearney wrote: > > Hi > > I have been silent (because of travel and building) of late but do want to > acknowledge Andrew Leopold (Angus Aviation Pty Ltd) who markets the Gretz > heated pitot and the good folks at Aircraft Spruce. > > A month or so ago, I installed my wings and completed the wiring for the > heated pitot. In the heated hanger everything worked as advertised. When I > energized the pitot outside in about -12c it immediately failed. Although > the root cause is not apparent, the it looks like the heating element on the > head had a short. The challenge for me was this was bought several years ago > (from ACS) when I purchased my QB wings. Given that it was in a box since > the initial install of the mounting bracket, Andrew immediately offered to > replace it through ACS. > > I think it is great that we, as builders, have access to suppliers like > Andrew, who will stand by their product (even when made by the original > owner of Gretz Aero). Equally helpful was ACS who was also prepared to stand > behind the product and shipped the replacement to me so I could avoid > waiting for a replacement from Oz. > > This is what customer service is about. > > Cheers > > Les > C-GCWZ "Officially" finished and awaiting CofA > > > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna Installation
From: Patrick Pulis <rv10free2fly(at)yahoo.com.au>
Date: Dec 30, 2012
For those that have installed an overhead console, at what point should the console finally be installed (i.e. should the door hinges, gas strut brackets and any antenna mounts have already been installed prior to the final installation of the console). Additionally I need to install my TCAS antenna on the upper rear section of the cabin top in as near to the level flying attitude as possible. How close is the aircraft to its level flying attitude when it's sitting on the ground on its landing gear. Any angle measurements (i.e. the variation between level flight and when on the ground) would be greatly appreciated please. For those that have installed the Garmin GTS-800 TCAS antenna on the cabin top, did you use conductive paint for your ground plane or an alternative method please? Warm regards & Happy New Year to all, Patrick Pulis Adelaide, South Australia # 40299 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna Installat
From: "woxofswa" <woxof(at)aol.com>
Date: Dec 29, 2012
I installed my console (Aerosport) with the top upside down on my work table. I had no issues installing the top or fitting the doors afterwards. Good luck. -------- Myron Nelson Mesa, AZ Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. Finishing kit and FWF kit in progress. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391188#391188 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 29, 2012
Subject: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna Installation
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
It depends whether you can access your intended antenna locations with the overhead in place or not. If they are okay where the two removable panels are, no problem. Otherwise you need to mount the items first. On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Patrick Pulis wrote: > > For those that have installed an overhead console, at what point should > the console finally be installed (i.e. should the door hinges, gas strut > brackets and any antenna mounts have already been installed prior to the > final installation of the console). > > Additionally I need to install my TCAS antenna on the upper rear section > of the cabin top in as near to the level flying attitude as possible. How > close is the aircraft to its level flying attitude when it's sitting on the > ground on its landing gear. Any angle measurements (i.e. the variation > between level flight and when on the ground) would be greatly appreciated > please. > > For those that have installed the Garmin GTS-800 TCAS antenna on the cabin > top, did you use conductive paint for your ground plane or an alternative > method please? > > Warm regards & Happy New Year to all, > > Patrick Pulis > Adelaide, South Australia > # 40299 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 29, 2012
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Matt's RV-8 Rebuild...
Dear fellow RV Builders and Flyers, I've been working hard on the RV-8 rebuild over the holidays and thought I'd share. Here the current status as of December 28 2012 on the new RV-8 2.0. This quick video highlights the new instrument panel including the recently finished cockpit audio output for the video camera. Line level output from the airplane's intercom is routed out through the RCA outputs in the rear of the cabin through some matching circuitry in the gold RCA connectors up to the camera's Mic input. The matching seems to be working pretty well. The audio in the video is coming right from the intercom and includes a mix of the intercom voice, the music or DVD output from the Kenwood stereo, and the audio output from the Garmin SL-30 Com unit (aircraft communications radio). Yet to be wired in is the audio outputs from the EFIS's, the VP-200, and the ADS600B. Note also that the video output from the camera is also routed in though the new A/V panel and then out through the headrest LCD display for the passenger. The video is also available on the pilot's Kenwood display. Everything is working pretty nicely. I'm particularly pleased with the new A/V panel I/O. Matt's HD YouTube Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xrTKAuDEyI&feature=share&list=PLB2F39639392A90DE - 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: 172+ Hours TTSN - Rebuilding Fuselage After Landing Mishap... RV-6 #20916 N360EM "The Flyer" http://www.mattsrv6.com - Matt's RV-6 Revitalization Log Status: 120+ Hours Since Purchase - Upgrades Complete; Now In Full Flyer Mode ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 29, 2012
From: Viorel Nichols <viorel.nichols(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Auto-response
Away on holiday from the 22 December 2012 till 29 January 2013 Wishing you a happy festive season . Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year from Viorel ... ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna Installat
From: "bill.peyton" <peyton.b(at)sbcglobal.net>
Date: Dec 30, 2012
The bottom of the door frame is close to level flight. For the cabin cover the closest area to level flight is directly between the doors. Unfortunately, Vans does not want you mounting anything there from a roll-over strutural integrity. This is where I put both my GPS antennas. There are wood stringer stifferners buried in the glass that run fore and aft. If you mount the overhead you won't be able to get to the coax unless it is mounted above one of the removable panels. Ground planes are not required for GPS antennas to function, I am not sure about TCAS. I believe Sean (strasnuts) has the same system you are inquiring about. Bill -------- Bill WA0SYV Aviation Partners, LLC Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391224#391224 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 30, 2012
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna
Installat Garmin actually does call for a ground plane for their WAAS GPS antennas. On 12/30/2012 7:01 AM, bill.peyton wrote: > > Ground planes are not required for GPS antennas to function, I am not sure about TCAS. I believe Sean (strasnuts) has the same system you are inquiring about. > Bill > > -------- > Bill > WA0SYV > Aviation Partners, LLC > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391224#391224 > > ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna Installat
From: "billz" <billz(at)roadrunner.com>
Date: Dec 30, 2012
I've just completed antenna installations on my cabin top. After lengthy discussions with Folks who have installed the GTS800 as well as others, concerning the various GPS antennas, this is what I decided to do. 1. The GPS antennas do not need an additional ground plane. The base of the antenna provides an adequate ground plane. However, I did run some #10 wire between the antenna mounting fasteners and to my common ground point (on the firewall), to provide lightning protection. 2. I have the Garmin GPS (WAAS) antenna in front with the combined (experimental)GPS/WAAS antenna behind it. I'm planning to run these three wires forward, through the windshield support post. 3. I decided to mount the GTS 800 antenna behind the doors. After seeing the installation on the Cessna Corvalis at Oshkosh, it seemed like a good place. The 10 deg. angle exceeds the recommended angle (5 deg.), but shouldn't be a major performance issue. It seems to work for Cessna. This also provides a short cable run from the antenna to the GTS 800 processor, mounted behind the baggage compartment. I installed and 18 in diameter ground plane under the GTS 800 antenna. I used aluminum window screen. The antenna is bolted to a mounting plate (with nutplates). The mounting plate is bolted (and epoxied) to the cabin top and I used conductive paste between the screen and the mounting plate. Attached are some pictures that should provide more insight into the process. BTW, the ground plane screen is covered with epoxy to fair it into the cabin top. The picture shows the first of many coats of epoxy. I hope this is a help with your airplane. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391240#391240 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_1493_161.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_1502_576.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_1491_199.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: N433RV First Flight
From: "hotwheels" <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Dec 30, 2012
N433RV RV-10 made her maiden flight on December 29th after nearly 9 years of building. My -10 is powered by a rebuilt Lyco IO-540, 2-blade Hartzell blended airfoil propeller, dual Light Speed electronic ignitions, dual B&C alternators and B&C starter. The panel includes Grand Rapids HXes and EIS, PS9000 Audio, Garmin 430W, SL30 and GTX330 xponder, TruTrak autopilot, Navworx UAT and a few steam gauges. It's a very nice ride. The plane has amazing performance. KFLY is at 6800' MSL and I was at pattern altitude before reaching the end of the runway. The controls were very responsive and the plane did exactly what I asked. I found that my -10 has a heavy left wing as has been reported by others. However, that should be easily remedied by adding some aileron trim. Speaking of trim, the Final Inspection document stated that "1/3 nose up travel" recommended for first flight. However, I found that to be way too much (50 lbs of sand in the baggage compartment for W&B). Neutral trim would have been a better choice - at least for me. My first flight was cut short due to a fuel issue after about 30 minutes. Fortunately, both pilot and plane made it safely back to the airport where I made a surprising good landing for an RV rookie. I can hardly wait to get back in the air after everything gets the once over. Thanks to my family who put up with riveting, cutting and dust in our garage... To the folks at Van's for providing a great design, to AlexD for quality transition training, to numerous EAA Tech Counselor visits and to my builder buddies (you know who you are!) and, of course, to tips provided by many of the folks on this list........ I couldn't have made the journey without lots of help from all of you! Cheers, Jay Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391255#391255 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_0382_lr_671.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: N433RV First Flight
From: Bob-TCW <rnewman(at)tcwtech.com>
Date: Dec 30, 2012
Jay. Congratulations! Enjoy. Bob Newman N541RV Sent from my iPhone On Dec 30, 2012, at 8:25 PM, "hotwheels" wrote: > > N433RV RV-10 made her maiden flight on December 29th after nearly 9 years of building. > > My -10 is powered by a rebuilt Lyco IO-540, 2-blade Hartzell blended airfoil propeller, dual Light Speed electronic ignitions, dual B&C alternators and B&C starter. The panel includes Grand Rapids HXes and EIS, PS9000 Audio, Garmin 430W, SL30 and GTX330 xponder, TruTrak autopilot, Navworx UAT and a few steam gauges. It's a very nice ride. > > The plane has amazing performance. KFLY is at 6800' MSL and I was at pattern altitude before reaching the end of the runway. The controls were very responsive and the plane did exactly what I asked. I found that my -10 has a heavy left wing as has been reported by others. However, that should be easily remedied by adding some aileron trim. Speaking of trim, the Final Inspection document stated that "1/3 nose up travel" recommended for first flight. However, I found that to be way too much (50 lbs of sand in the baggage compartment for W&B). Neutral trim would have been a better choice - at least for me. > > My first flight was cut short due to a fuel issue after about 30 minutes. Fortunately, both pilot and plane made it safely back to the airport where I made a surprising good landing for an RV rookie. I can hardly wait to get back in the air after everything gets the once over. > > Thanks to my family who put up with riveting, cutting and dust in our garage... To the folks at Van's for providing a great design, to AlexD for quality transition training, to numerous EAA Tech Counselor visits and to my builder buddies (you know who you are!) and, of course, to tips provided by many of the folks on this list........ I couldn't have made the journey without lots of help from all of you! > > Cheers, > Jay > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391255#391255 > > > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_0382_lr_671.jpg > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: N433RV First Flight
Date: Dec 30, 2012
Hi Jay Congrats on the first flight! Cheers Les Sent from my iPhone On 2012-12-30, at 6:25 PM, "hotwheels" wrote: > > N433RV RV-10 made her maiden flight on December 29th after nearly 9 years of building. > > My -10 is powered by a rebuilt Lyco IO-540, 2-blade Hartzell blended airfoil propeller, dual Light Speed electronic ignitions, dual B&C alternators and B&C starter. The panel includes Grand Rapids HXes and EIS, PS9000 Audio, Garmin 430W, SL30 and GTX330 xponder, TruTrak autopilot, Navworx UAT and a few steam gauges. It's a very nice ride. > > The plane has amazing performance. KFLY is at 6800' MSL and I was at pattern altitude before reaching the end of the runway. The controls were very responsive and the plane did exactly what I asked. I found that my -10 has a heavy left wing as has been reported by others. However, that should be easily remedied by adding some aileron trim. Speaking of trim, the Final Inspection document stated that "1/3 nose up travel" recommended for first flight. However, I found that to be way too much (50 lbs of sand in the baggage compartment for W&B). Neutral trim would have been a better choice - at least for me. > > My first flight was cut short due to a fuel issue after about 30 minutes. Fortunately, both pilot and plane made it safely back to the airport where I made a surprising good landing for an RV rookie. I can hardly wait to get back in the air after everything gets the once over. > > Thanks to my family who put up with riveting, cutting and dust in our garage... To the folks at Van's for providing a great design, to AlexD for quality transition training, to numerous EAA Tech Counselor visits and to my builder buddies (you know who you are!) and, of course, to tips provided by many of the folks on this list........ I couldn't have made the journey without lots of help from all of you! > > Cheers, > Jay > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391255#391255 > > > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_0382_lr_671.jpg > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: N433RV First Flight
From: Byron Gillespie <bgill1(at)mediastreamus.net>
Date: Dec 30, 2012
Way to go. I know the feeling. Any comments you care to share on the "fuel issue"? I always learn a lot from what other folks find. Byron N253RV Flying (just need some paint) Sent from my iPad On Dec 30, 2012, at 8:25 PM, "hotwheels" wrote: > > N433RV RV-10 made her maiden flight on December 29th after nearly 9 years of building. > > My -10 is powered by a rebuilt Lyco IO-540, 2-blade Hartzell blended airfoil propeller, dual Light Speed electronic ignitions, dual B&C alternators and B&C starter. The panel includes Grand Rapids HXes and EIS, PS9000 Audio, Garmin 430W, SL30 and GTX330 xponder, TruTrak autopilot, Navworx UAT and a few steam gauges. It's a very nice ride. > > The plane has amazing performance. KFLY is at 6800' MSL and I was at pattern altitude before reaching the end of the runway. The controls were very responsive and the plane did exactly what I asked. I found that my -10 has a heavy left wing as has been reported by others. However, that should be easily remedied by adding some aileron trim. Speaking of trim, the Final Inspection document stated that "1/3 nose up travel" recommended for first flight. However, I found that to be way too much (50 lbs of sand in the baggage compartment for W&B). Neutral trim would have been a better choice - at least for me. > > My first flight was cut short due to a fuel issue after about 30 minutes. Fortunately, both pilot and plane made it safely back to the airport where I made a surprising good landing for an RV rookie. I can hardly wait to get back in the air after everything gets the once over. > > Thanks to my family who put up with riveting, cutting and dust in our garage... To the folks at Van's for providing a great design, to AlexD for quality transition training, to numerous EAA Tech Counselor visits and to my builder buddies (you know who you are!) and, of course, to tips provided by many of the folks on this list........ I couldn't have made the journey without lots of help from all of you! > > Cheers, > Jay > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391255#391255 > > > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_0382_lr_671.jpg > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 30, 2012
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna
Installat Once again, the Garmin GA-35 antenna recommends a ground plane. See http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=94658 Grounding the fasteners does not equal a ground plane. On 12/30/2012 10:30 AM, billz wrote: > > I've just completed antenna installations on my cabin top. After lengthy discussions with Folks who have installed the GTS800 as well as others, concerning the various GPS antennas, this is what I decided to do. > > 1. The GPS antennas do not need an additional ground plane. The base of the antenna provides an adequate ground plane. However, I did run some #10 wire between the antenna mounting fasteners and to my common ground point (on the firewall), to provide lightning protection. > > > > ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: N433RV First Flight
From: "hotwheels" <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Dec 30, 2012
Sure... I'll share. In preparation for landing, I turned the electric fuel pump on and smelled fuel in the cockpit. Immediately turned off the fuel pump and landed. Then engine stopped on the runway and I coasted off. Removed cowl and tunnel covers back at the hangar. The tunnel was dry. However, running the electric fuel pump resulted in fuel leakage at the low pressure input fitting to the mechanical engine driven pump. It was loose. This after numerous engine starts, taxi tests and run ups without leakage. What's interesting is that nothing was obviously amiss until running the electric pump. Maybe someone else has ideas about why that might be... Just goes to show the value of putting a wrench on as much as possible before flight and, of course, mentally preparing for engine out events. Regards, Jay [quote="bgill1(at)mediastreamus.n"]Way to go. I know the feeling. Any comments you care to share on the "fuel issue"? I always learn a lot from what other folks find. Byron N253RV Flying (just need some paint) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391262#391262 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 30, 2012
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: N433RV First Flight
You are fortunate. I had same situation in an injected certified plane, and the mechanical pump sucked enough air through the loose fitting that the engine quit. Only running the boost pump would restore power. Fortunately I was within 10 nm of home aerodrome. On 12/30/2012 9:20 PM, hotwheels wrote: > > Sure... I'll share. In preparation for landing, I turned the electric fuel pump on and smelled fuel in the cockpit. Immediately turned off the fuel pump and landed. Then engine stopped on the runway and I coasted off. > > Removed cowl and tunnel covers back at the hangar. The tunnel was dry. However, running the electric fuel pump resulted in fuel leakage at the low pressure input fitting to the mechanical engine driven pump. It was loose. This after numerous engine starts, taxi tests and run ups without leakage. > > What's interesting is that nothing was obviously amiss until running the electric pump. Maybe someone else has ideas about why that might be... > > Just goes to show the value of putting a wrench on as much as possible before flight and, of course, mentally preparing for engine out events. > > Regards, > Jay > > > [quote="bgill1(at)mediastreamus.n"]Way to go. I know the feeling. > > Any comments you care to share on the "fuel issue"? I always learn a lot from what other folks find. > > Byron > N253RV Flying (just need some paint) > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391262#391262 > > ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com>
Date: Dec 30, 2012
Subject: Re: N433RV First Flight
I think the boost pump was pressurizing that particular junction. With the boost pump off, that fitting would be under negative pressure, and Kelly's scenario would be the norm. One way to check for that loose fitting would be a leak check with the boost pump on--but I bet you've done that by now! Glad everything worked out. We'd all like to hear some cut and dried performance numbers from 6800 MSL this summer...I bet they're pretty good. Dave Dave Saylor 831-750-0284 CL On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 8:20 PM, hotwheels wrote: > > Sure... I'll share. In preparation for landing, I turned the electric fuel > pump on and smelled fuel in the cockpit. Immediately turned off the fuel > pump and landed. Then engine stopped on the runway and I coasted off. > > Removed cowl and tunnel covers back at the hangar. The tunnel was dry. > However, running the electric fuel pump resulted in fuel leakage at the low > pressure input fitting to the mechanical engine driven pump. It was loose. > This after numerous engine starts, taxi tests and run ups without leakage. > > What's interesting is that nothing was obviously amiss until running the > electric pump. Maybe someone else has ideas about why that might be... > > Just goes to show the value of putting a wrench on as much as possible > before flight and, of course, mentally preparing for engine out events. > > Regards, > Jay > > > [quote="bgill1(at)mediastreamus.n"]Way to go. I know the feeling. > > Any comments you care to share on the "fuel issue"? I always learn a lot > from what other folks find. > > Byron > N253RV Flying (just need some paint) > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391262#391262 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: N433RV First Flight
From: Patrick Pulis <rv10free2fly(at)yahoo.com.au>
Date: Dec 31, 2012
Well done Jay, Safe skies my friend. Warm regards Patrick On 31/12/2012, at 11:55 AM, "hotwheels" wrote: > > N433RV RV-10 made her maiden flight on December 29th after nearly 9 years of building. > > My -10 is powered by a rebuilt Lyco IO-540, 2-blade Hartzell blended airfoil propeller, dual Light Speed electronic ignitions, dual B&C alternators and B&C starter. The panel includes Grand Rapids HXes and EIS, PS9000 Audio, Garmin 430W, SL30 and GTX330 xponder, TruTrak autopilot, Navworx UAT and a few steam gauges. It's a very nice ride. > > The plane has amazing performance. KFLY is at 6800' MSL and I was at pattern altitude before reaching the end of the runway. The controls were very responsive and the plane did exactly what I asked. I found that my -10 has a heavy left wing as has been reported by others. However, that should be easily remedied by adding some aileron trim. Speaking of trim, the Final Inspection document stated that "1/3 nose up travel" recommended for first flight. However, I found that to be way too much (50 lbs of sand in the baggage compartment for W&B). Neutral trim would have been a better choice - at least for me. > > My first flight was cut short due to a fuel issue after about 30 minutes. Fortunately, both pilot and plane made it safely back to the airport where I made a surprising good landing for an RV rookie. I can hardly wait to get back in the air after everything gets the once over. > > Thanks to my family who put up with riveting, cutting and dust in our garage... To the folks at Van's for providing a great design, to AlexD for quality transition training, to numerous EAA Tech Counselor visits and to my builder buddies (you know who you are!) and, of course, to tips provided by many of the folks on this list........ I couldn't have made the journey without lots of help from all of you! > > Cheers, > Jay > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391255#391255 > > > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_0382_lr_671.jpg > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: N433RV First Flight
From: Bob Leffler <rv(at)thelefflers.com>
Date: Dec 31, 2012
Jay, Congrats on the first flight! I hope to be following you in another 6-8 weeks. I just have to wait to get this cast off my foot so I can finish final assembly. Bob Sent from my iPad On Dec 30, 2012, at 8:25 PM, "hotwheels" wrote: > > N433RV RV-10 made her maiden flight on December 29th after nearly 9 years of building. > > My -10 is powered by a rebuilt Lyco IO-540, 2-blade Hartzell blended airfoil propeller, dual Light Speed electronic ignitions, dual B&C alternators and B&C starter. The panel includes Grand Rapids HXes and EIS, PS9000 Audio, Garmin 430W, SL30 and GTX330 xponder, TruTrak autopilot, Navworx UAT and a few steam gauges. It's a very nice ride. > > The plane has amazing performance. KFLY is at 6800' MSL and I was at pattern altitude before reaching the end of the runway. The controls were very responsive and the plane did exactly what I asked. I found that my -10 has a heavy left wing as has been reported by others. However, that should be easily remedied by adding some aileron trim. Speaking of trim, the Final Inspection document stated that "1/3 nose up travel" recommended for first flight. However, I found that to be way too much (50 lbs of sand in the baggage compartment for W&B). Neutral trim would have been a better choice - at least for me. > > My first flight was cut short due to a fuel issue after about 30 minutes. Fortunately, both pilot and plane made it safely back to the airport where I made a surprising good landing for an RV rookie. I can hardly wait to get back in the air after everything gets the once over. > > Thanks to my family who put up with riveting, cutting and dust in our garage... To the folks at Van's for providing a great design, to AlexD for quality transition training, to numerous EAA Tech Counselor visits and to my builder buddies (you know who you are!) and, of course, to tips provided by many of the folks on this list........ I couldn't have made the journey without lots of help from all of you! > > Cheers, > Jay > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391255#391255 > > > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_0382_lr_671.jpg > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: N433RV First Flight
From: Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com>
Date: Dec 31, 2012
Well, a loose fitting there would mean that with the boost pump off, there is only slight suction at that fitting, so the engine driven pump might have been sucking a little bit of air (maybe what caused the engine to quit on the runway. With the boost pump on you are the pressurizing the fuel at that fitting, which caused it to leak. It could be that it was sealing ok with a finger tight fitting and that the vibration of flight caused it to loosen. Torque Seal is a great thing to use for this purpose. Not as much for Anti Sabatoge as much for reminding us if we torqued it or not. That reminds me, I need to order some more of that stuff. Good thing you caught it when you did. I've noticed that's one reason it's really nice to have blue dye in the 100LL, because slow leaks in the system show themselves. Glad it all turned out well. Jesse Saint I-TEC, Inc. jesse(at)itecusa.org www.itecusa.org www.mavericklsa.com C: 352-427-0285 O: 352-465-4545 F: 815-377-3694 Sent from my iPhone On Dec 30, 2012, at 11:20 PM, "hotwheels" wrote: > > Sure... I'll share. In preparation for landing, I turned the electric fuel pump on and smelled fuel in the cockpit. Immediately turned off the fuel pump and landed. Then engine stopped on the runway and I coasted off. > > Removed cowl and tunnel covers back at the hangar. The tunnel was dry. However, running the electric fuel pump resulted in fuel leakage at the low pressure input fitting to the mechanical engine driven pump. It was loose. This after numerous engine starts, taxi tests and run ups without leakage. > > What's interesting is that nothing was obviously amiss until running the electric pump. Maybe someone else has ideas about why that might be... > > Just goes to show the value of putting a wrench on as much as possible before flight and, of course, mentally preparing for engine out events. > > Regards, > Jay > > > > [quote="bgill1(at)mediastreamus.n"]Way to go. I know the feeling. > > Any comments you care to share on the "fuel issue"? I always learn a lot from what other folks find. > > Byron > N253RV Flying (just need some paint) > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391262#391262 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna Installa
From: "bill.peyton" <peyton.b(at)sbcglobal.net>
Date: Dec 31, 2012
The Garmin GNS 430W and the G3X install manuals do not specify a bonding nor a ground plane for the GPS antenna. I suspect that this may have been revised for the GTN manuals to add the requirement. I have not seen any issues with my installation, which does not have a ground plane on either GPS antenna. I found an old GPS antenna and decided to sacrifice it. Below is a photo of the inside of this certified GPS antenna. The actual antenna element is etched on the top surface of a copper clad ceramic wafer which has a copper surface covering the entire underside (not visible in photo). The combination of the thickness of the ceramic and the size of the element determines the electrical properties of the antenna. This type of design is called a "patch antenna". Under the patch antenna resides the low noise amplifier. You can see that the antenna itself is mounted approximately 1/2" above what might be considered the base. Any additional ground plane that may be added by mounting this antenna to the metallic skin of the aircraft would "appear" to this patch antenna to reside 1/2" above the actual patch antenna ground plane. This antenna is an old design, and is probably not representative of the new low noise semi-conductor technology nor GPS antenna design. The noise figure and gain of the newer antennas is so far improved over the some of the original designs that it is hardly a fair comparison. But I couldn't resist taking it apart! Bill -------- Bill WA0SYV Aviation Partners, LLC Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391273#391273 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn0026_571.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 31, 2012
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna
Installa The ground plane recommendation is in the install instructions for the GA35 antenna, which was released with the 430W upgrade. Whether the instructions were changed later to add the ground plane recommendation, I don't know, as I obtained my antenna this fall. One poster on VAF mentioned that he put his antenna forward of the firewall with minimal ground plane, then added bigger ground plane later and saw noticeable performance improvement. So yes, it works without one, but apparently works better with one. On 12/31/2012 8:20 AM, bill.peyton wrote: > > The Garmin GNS 430W and the G3X install manuals do not specify a bonding nor a ground plane for the GPS antenna. I suspect that this may have been revised for the GTN manuals to add the requirement. I have not seen any issues with my installation, which does not have a ground plane on either GPS antenna. > > ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna
Install
Date: Dec 31, 2012
This is the second RV where I took the easy way for GPS and XM antenna mounts - on top of the glare shield. I do take some black cloth and wrap the typically white antennas to eliminate glare off the windshield. This mounting location has worked perfectly for both RVs (GX-60 and Garmin 396 in the RV-8A, Garmin GTN-650 and Dynon SkyView GPS in the RV-10). Considering the ever increasing rate of change in avionics, the odds are high that the RVs will go through panel upgrades several times during their life (the RV-8A is 10 years old and on its third panel mod - the fourth will come next year or so). As such, maintaining ease of avionic and associated panel modification is an important design element for me. External GPS antenna mounting tends to go against this principle. My external antennas on the RV-10 are all on the belly; two bent whip communications, a blade transponder and a blade ADSB antenna. Carl -----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, December 31, 2012 10:32 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna Installa The ground plane recommendation is in the install instructions for the GA35 antenna, which was released with the 430W upgrade. Whether the instructions were changed later to add the ground plane recommendation, I don't know, as I obtained my antenna this fall. One poster on VAF mentioned that he put his antenna forward of the firewall with minimal ground plane, then added bigger ground plane later and saw noticeable performance improvement. So yes, it works without one, but apparently works better with one. On 12/31/2012 8:20 AM, bill.peyton wrote: > --> > > The Garmin GNS 430W and the G3X install manuals do not specify a bonding nor a ground plane for the GPS antenna. I suspect that this may have been revised for the GTN manuals to add the requirement. I have not seen any issues with my installation, which does not have a ground plane on either GPS antenna. > > ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carlos Trigo" <trigo(at)mail.telepac.pt>
Subject: Re: Antennae Install
Date: Dec 31, 2012
Carl Where exactly in your RV-10 belly did you install the antennae? Below the front seats? Below the feet of the rear passengers? Thanks Carlos -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carl Froehlich Sent: segunda-feira, 31 de Dezembro de 2012 16:35 Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna Install --> This is the second RV where I took the easy way for GPS and XM antenna mounts - on top of the glare shield. I do take some black cloth and wrap the typically white antennas to eliminate glare off the windshield. This mounting location has worked perfectly for both RVs (GX-60 and Garmin 396 in the RV-8A, Garmin GTN-650 and Dynon SkyView GPS in the RV-10). Considering the ever increasing rate of change in avionics, the odds are high that the RVs will go through panel upgrades several times during their life (the RV-8A is 10 years old and on its third panel mod - the fourth will come next year or so). As such, maintaining ease of avionic and associated panel modification is an important design element for me. External GPS antenna mounting tends to go against this principle. My external antennas on the RV-10 are all on the belly; two bent whip communications, a blade transponder and a blade ADSB antenna. Carl -----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, December 31, 2012 10:32 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna Installa The ground plane recommendation is in the install instructions for the GA35 antenna, which was released with the 430W upgrade. Whether the instructions were changed later to add the ground plane recommendation, I don't know, as I obtained my antenna this fall. One poster on VAF mentioned that he put his antenna forward of the firewall with minimal ground plane, then added bigger ground plane later and saw noticeable performance improvement. So yes, it works without one, but apparently works better with one. On 12/31/2012 8:20 AM, bill.peyton wrote: > --> > > The Garmin GNS 430W and the G3X install manuals do not specify a > bonding nor a ground plane for the GPS antenna. I suspect that this may have been revised for the GTN manuals to add the requirement. I have not seen any issues with my installation, which does not have a ground plane on either GPS antenna. > > ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 31, 2012
Subject: Naca Vents
From: Rick Lark <larkrv10(at)gmail.com>
Hi all, I'm getting ready to cut the NACA vent hole(s) in my tail cone for an overhead console and am wondering if I really need 2 vents. Seems to me I've read comments about one vent being sufficient. Also being in Southern Ontario, the summer temps aren't sustained for nearly as long as those of you south of the Mason Dixon line, thus the reason I question if 2 are needed. Any and all opinions are welcome. Happy New Year to everyone. Rick #40956 Southampton, Ont ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "bob-tcw" <rnewman(at)tcwtech.com>
Subject: Re: Naca Vents
Date: Dec 31, 2012
Rick, I went with just one Naca scoop in the tail cone area (just behind baggage door) feeding my overhead console. It has provided plenty of air from overhead. There=99s a few pictures in my web album starting with this one: https://picasaweb.google.com/102955683430141812381/CoolingFans#5576300260 864810306 Bob Newman N541RV From: Rick Lark Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 2:23 PM Subject: RV10-List: Naca Vents Hi all, I'm getting ready to cut the NACA vent hole(s) in my tail cone for an overhead console and am wondering if I really need 2 vents. Seems to me I've read comments about one vent being sufficient. Also being in Southern Ontario, the summer temps aren't sustained for nearly as long as those of you south of the Mason Dixon line, thus the reason I question if 2 are needed. Any and all opinions are welcome. Happy New Year to everyone. Rick #40956 Southampton, Ont ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Geoff Combs" <g.combs(at)aerosportmodeling.com>
Subject: Naca Vents
Date: Dec 31, 2012
Rick I would still put 2 in. I have 2 and in the summer you get some air from them when taxiing. It is not a lot but sure helps when it is hot. You can always close the vents or for you put in the NACA control valve from Aerosport Products. You can shut the whole system down in the winter with the controller and open it up in the summer. Its easier to do it now then later. It will take maybe 1 hour more for the extra vent. FWIW Geoff Combs Aerosport www.aerosportproducts.com _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick Lark Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 2:23 PM Subject: RV10-List: Naca Vents Hi all, I'm getting ready to cut the NACA vent hole(s) in my tail cone for an overhead console and am wondering if I really need 2 vents. Seems to me I've read comments about one vent being sufficient. Also being in Southern Ontario, the summer temps aren't sustained for nearly as long as those of you south of the Mason Dixon line, thus the reason I question if 2 are needed. Any and all opinions are welcome. Happy New Year to everyone. Rick #40956 Southampton, Ont ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "bob-tcw" <rnewman(at)tcwtech.com>
Subject: Re: Antennae Install
Date: Dec 31, 2012
Carl, On my -10, my two bent whip com antennas are under the rear passenger seats, my ADS-b UAT blade antenna is about 3 feet back from the rear baggage bulkhead, my transponder antenna is about 1 foot back from the firewall and pops up into the tunnel. My 3 gps antennas are mounted to a metal plate about 8 inch wide and 12 inches long, this plate of antennas is hidden in my overhead console, with the antennas looking through fiberglass top. (note I took signal strength readings with this plate of antennas inside the aircraft as described and out of the aircraft with no fiberglass between the antennas and the satellites, absolutely no change in signal strengths) Bob Newman N541RV -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Trigo Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 2:16 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Antennae Install Carl Where exactly in your RV-10 belly did you install the antennae? Below the front seats? Below the feet of the rear passengers? Thanks Carlos -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carl Froehlich Sent: segunda-feira, 31 de Dezembro de 2012 16:35 Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna Install --> This is the second RV where I took the easy way for GPS and XM antenna mounts - on top of the glare shield. I do take some black cloth and wrap the typically white antennas to eliminate glare off the windshield. This mounting location has worked perfectly for both RVs (GX-60 and Garmin 396 in the RV-8A, Garmin GTN-650 and Dynon SkyView GPS in the RV-10). Considering the ever increasing rate of change in avionics, the odds are high that the RVs will go through panel upgrades several times during their life (the RV-8A is 10 years old and on its third panel mod - the fourth will come next year or so). As such, maintaining ease of avionic and associated panel modification is an important design element for me. External GPS antenna mounting tends to go against this principle. My external antennas on the RV-10 are all on the belly; two bent whip communications, a blade transponder and a blade ADSB antenna. Carl -----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, December 31, 2012 10:32 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna Installa The ground plane recommendation is in the install instructions for the GA35 antenna, which was released with the 430W upgrade. Whether the instructions were changed later to add the ground plane recommendation, I don't know, as I obtained my antenna this fall. One poster on VAF mentioned that he put his antenna forward of the firewall with minimal ground plane, then added bigger ground plane later and saw noticeable performance improvement. So yes, it works without one, but apparently works better with one. On 12/31/2012 8:20 AM, bill.peyton wrote: > --> > > The Garmin GNS 430W and the G3X install manuals do not specify a > bonding nor a ground plane for the GPS antenna. I suspect that this may have been revised for the GTN manuals to add the requirement. I have not seen any issues with my installation, which does not have a ground plane on either GPS antenna. > > ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Antennae Install
Date: Dec 31, 2012
The transponder antenna is below the passenger's seat. Both communication antennas are mounted below the tunnel (but along the side edges of the tunnel, one left and one right). One just aft of the mid bell crank and the second one is mounted just aft of the rear seats. The are both positioned on the sides of the tunnel to preclude interference with the elevator push tubes. The ADSB blade antenna is mounted aft of the baggage compartment. I pick this location as I am mounting the ADSB receiver back there with it (Dynon unit), and it places it well away from the transponder antenna. All locations allow for access to the antennas for maintenance or replacement. Mounting antennas in areas like below the rear passenger's feet or seats is a problem as you will not have access to them - unless of course you add some access panels. Carl -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carlos Trigo Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 2:16 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Antennae Install Carl Where exactly in your RV-10 belly did you install the antennae? Below the front seats? Below the feet of the rear passengers? Thanks Carlos -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carl Froehlich Sent: segunda-feira, 31 de Dezembro de 2012 16:35 Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna Install --> This is the second RV where I took the easy way for GPS and XM antenna mounts - on top of the glare shield. I do take some black cloth and wrap the typically white antennas to eliminate glare off the windshield. This mounting location has worked perfectly for both RVs (GX-60 and Garmin 396 in the RV-8A, Garmin GTN-650 and Dynon SkyView GPS in the RV-10). Considering the ever increasing rate of change in avionics, the odds are high that the RVs will go through panel upgrades several times during their life (the RV-8A is 10 years old and on its third panel mod - the fourth will come next year or so). As such, maintaining ease of avionic and associated panel modification is an important design element for me. External GPS antenna mounting tends to go against this principle. My external antennas on the RV-10 are all on the belly; two bent whip communications, a blade transponder and a blade ADSB antenna. Carl -----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, December 31, 2012 10:32 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS Antenna Installa The ground plane recommendation is in the install instructions for the GA35 antenna, which was released with the 430W upgrade. Whether the instructions were changed later to add the ground plane recommendation, I don't know, as I obtained my antenna this fall. One poster on VAF mentioned that he put his antenna forward of the firewall with minimal ground plane, then added bigger ground plane later and saw noticeable performance improvement. So yes, it works without one, but apparently works better with one. On 12/31/2012 8:20 AM, bill.peyton wrote: > --> > > The Garmin GNS 430W and the G3X install manuals do not specify a > bonding nor a ground plane for the GPS antenna. I suspect that this may have been revised for the GTN manuals to add the requirement. I have not seen any issues with my installation, which does not have a ground plane on either GPS antenna. > > ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Antennae Install
From: Bob Leffler <rv(at)thelefflers.com>
Date: Dec 31, 2012
My antenna on the bottom are very similar to Bob's. I also have a nav antenna under the tail. I have two gps antenna just behind the cabin cover and another two on the glare shield. Sent from my iPad On Dec 31, 2012, at 2:53 PM, "bob-tcw" wrote: > > Carl, On my -10, my two bent whip com antennas are under the rear passenger seats, my ADS-b UAT blade antenna is about 3 feet back from the rear baggage bulkhead, my transponder antenna is about 1 foot back from the firewall and pops up into the tunnel. > > My 3 gps antennas are mounted to a metal plate about 8 inch wide and 12 inches long, this plate of antennas is hidden in my overhead console, with the antennas looking through fiberglass top. (note I took signal strength readings with this plate of antennas inside the aircraft as described and out of the aircraft with no fiberglass between the antennas and the satellites, absolutely no change in signal strengths) > > Bob Newman > N541RV > > > -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Trigo > Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 2:16 PM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Antennae Install > > > Carl > > Where exactly in your RV-10 belly did you install the antennae? Below the > front seats? Below the feet of the rear passengers? > > Thanks > Carlos > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carl Froehlich > Sent: segunda-feira, 31 de Dezembro de 2012 16:35 > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS > Antenna Install > > --> > > This is the second RV where I took the easy way for GPS and XM antenna > mounts - on top of the glare shield. I do take some black cloth and wrap > the typically white antennas to eliminate glare off the windshield. This > mounting location has worked perfectly for both RVs (GX-60 and Garmin 396 in > the RV-8A, Garmin GTN-650 and Dynon SkyView GPS in the RV-10). > > Considering the ever increasing rate of change in avionics, the odds are > high that the RVs will go through panel upgrades several times during their > life (the RV-8A is 10 years old and on its third panel mod - the fourth will > come next year or so). As such, maintaining ease of avionic and associated > panel modification is an important design element for me. External GPS > antenna mounting tends to go against this principle. > > My external antennas on the RV-10 are all on the belly; two bent whip > communications, a blade transponder and a blade ADSB antenna. > > Carl > > -----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, December 31, 2012 10:32 AM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Overhead Console Final Installation & TCAS > Antenna Installa > > > The ground plane recommendation is in the install instructions for the > GA35 antenna, which was released with the 430W upgrade. Whether the > instructions were changed later to add the ground plane recommendation, I > don't know, as I obtained my antenna this fall. > One poster on VAF mentioned that he put his antenna forward of the firewall > with minimal ground plane, then added bigger ground plane later and saw > noticeable performance improvement. So yes, it works without one, but > apparently works better with one. > > On 12/31/2012 8:20 AM, bill.peyton wrote: >> --> >> >> The Garmin GNS 430W and the G3X install manuals do not specify a >> bonding > nor a ground plane for the GPS antenna. I suspect that this may have been > revised for the GTN manuals to add the requirement. I have not seen any > issues with my installation, which does not have a ground plane on either > GPS antenna. > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Naca Vents
From: Bob Leffler <rv(at)thelefflers.com>
Date: Dec 31, 2012
I put a pair of them in, along with an Aerosport Products vent controller. Like Geoff mentioned, in the air one is probably enough, but while taxiing y ou'll want them both wide open in the summer. You might drop Ivan an email and see what his experiences are in Guelph. Bob Sent from my iPad On Dec 31, 2012, at 2:23 PM, Rick Lark wrote: > Hi all, I'm getting ready to cut the NACA vent hole(s) in my tail cone for an overhead console and am wondering if I really need 2 vents. Seems to me I've read comments about one vent being sufficient. Also being in Southern Ontario, the summer temps aren't sustained for nearly as long as those of y ou south of the Mason Dixon line, thus the reason I question if 2 are needed . > > Any and all opinions are welcome. Happy New Year to everyone. > > Rick > #40956 > Southampton, Ont > > > > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Naca Vents
From: Seano <sean(at)braunandco.com>
Date: Dec 31, 2012
I have two in the back as well. I vote for two. Sent from my iPhone On Dec 31, 2012, at 13:58, Bob Leffler wrote: > I put a pair of them in, along with an Aerosport Products vent controller. Like Geoff mentioned, in the air one is probably enough, but while taxiin g you'll want them both wide open in the summer. > > You might drop Ivan an email and see what his experiences are in Guelph. > > Bob > > Sent from my iPad > > On Dec 31, 2012, at 2:23 PM, Rick Lark wrote: > >> Hi all, I'm getting ready to cut the NACA vent hole(s) in my tail cone fo r an overhead console and am wondering if I really need 2 vents. Seems to m e I've read comments about one vent being sufficient. Also being in Souther n Ontario, the summer temps aren't sustained for nearly as long as those of y ou south of the Mason Dixon line, thus the reason I question if 2 are needed . >> >> Any and all opinions are welcome. Happy New Year to everyone. >> >> Rick >> #40956 >> Southampton, Ont >> >> >> >> >> >> ========================= ========= >> ctric.com >> >www.buildersbooks.com >> uilthelp.com >> matronics.com/contribution >> ========================= ========= >> ://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >> ========================= ========= >> cs.com >> ========================= ========= >> > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Antennae Install
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Dec 31, 2012
Transponder under pilot seat. Com under passenger seat (yes, this is best done before installing the seat pan. I put a doubler with nutplates, and ran the coax, before closing it up.). GPS antenna behind the baggage bulkhead, on top of the tailcone. Archer wingtip for VOR/ LOC. Putting the GPS on top of the cabin looked best to me from a reception point of view, but worst as far as drag is concerned. Comments? Once in a while I have trouble with ATC when I am on the ground using the belly antenna. For those times my #2 com antenna, an Archer clone in the other wing tip, works better. In the air the belly whip is better. -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391301#391301 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Antennae Install
From: "bill.peyton" <peyton.b(at)sbcglobal.net>
Date: Jan 01, 2013
Comm 1 on top of fuse behind baggage bulkhead with doubler, comm 2 bottom under baggage floor with doubler. I did this for good communication on ground since I am mostly at towered airports. I located an Archer nav antenna in each wing tip, and the MB antenna is in the left wing tip. Both GPS and GPS/Xm antennas are centered on top of cabin cover. Xponder under pilot seat, ADSB is 2ft. behind baggage bulkhead. I can not complain about drag, I am still seeing 177kts @75% TAS -------- Bill WA0SYV Aviation Partners, LLC Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391329#391329 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 01, 2013
Subject: Re: Antennae Install
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
While slick skin appearance is appealing, I doubt the drag of a GPS antenna is all that much. While I would like the approach of putting GPS antenna under the canopy inside the overhead, it would be very tight and require right angle TNC connector at a minimum. I may still do that for the Dynon GPS, but the Garmin GA-35 is considerably taller. Also, the overhead being carbon fiber would limit antenna view of satellites low on the horizon. I was going to do what you plan with Com 1 on top, but as I debated positioning with wife, she didn't like looks of it up there, and the fact it couldn't go on center without cutting stiffener, so am going with 2 coms under rear seat. I've done plenty of testing with CI-122 antenna on belly of my Mooney and have no issues with ground communications using it, or compared to its com 1 that is on top of fuselage. I see a bit of difference between the two, but probably more that Com 1 is MAC1700/KX170B and com 2 is KX155. On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 8:37 AM, bill.peyton wrote: > > Comm 1 on top of fuse behind baggage bulkhead with doubler, comm 2 bottom > under baggage floor with doubler. I did this for good communication on > ground since I am mostly at towered airports. I located an Archer nav > antenna in each wing tip, and the MB antenna is in the left wing tip. Both > GPS and GPS/Xm antennas are centered on top of cabin cover. Xponder under > pilot seat, ADSB is 2ft. behind baggage bulkhead. > I can not complain about drag, I am still seeing 177kts @75% TAS > > -------- > Bill > WA0SYV > Aviation Partners, LLC > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391329#391329 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 01, 2013
From: Werner Schneider <glastar(at)gmx.net>
Subject: Re: Antennae Install
Bill, I plan for a similar setup (except remote transponder behind baggage compartment), any pictures about your mounting positions and doublers? Thanks and I wish everyone a good start into 2013! Werner On 01.01.2013 16:37, bill.peyton wrote: > > Comm 1 on top of fuse behind baggage bulkhead with doubler, comm 2 bottom under baggage floor with doubler. I did this for good communication on ground since I am mostly at towered airports. I located an Archer nav antenna in each wing tip, and the MB antenna is in the left wing tip. Both GPS and GPS/Xm antennas are centered on top of cabin cover. Xponder under pilot seat, ADSB is 2ft. behind baggage bulkhead. > I can not complain about drag, I am still seeing 177kts @75% TAS > > -------- > Bill > WA0SYV > Aviation Partners, LLC > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391329#391329 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Naca Vents
From: "bill.peyton" <peyton.b(at)sbcglobal.net>
Date: Jan 01, 2013
It's too easy to add that second vent now. -------- Bill WA0SYV Aviation Partners, LLC Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391357#391357 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Antennae Install
From: "johngoodman" <johngoodman(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Jan 02, 2013
Comm 1 and Comm 2 on the belly under the rear seats - I've never had a reception problem on the ground. Transponder on the belly a couple of feet behind the baggage bulkhead. Archer Nav ant in the wingtip along with an archer MB. Seems to work fine, although I've never found a marker beacon to fly over, yet. Garmin GPS on roof, and GRT GPS on glareshield. Both work fine, but only the Garmin does lose the signal in certain areas for a few seconds - avoid Senoia Georgia (g). 406 ELT on top, just aft of baggage bulkhead - you don't even notice it. Saving the space under the pilot seats for the ADS-B shark fin. Used 400U for all antenna runs. John -------- #40572 Phase One complete and flying. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391441#391441 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Billy Britton" <william(at)gbta.net>
Subject: W-1028 J-Stiffeners
Date: Jan 02, 2013
While drilling my inboard (short) J-stiffener for the bottom wing skins the last foot or so somehow moved on me. This resulted in off-centered holes on the last 8-10 inches of the stiffener. Is there any reason I cannot cut the end off and just replace it with a new piece overlapping maybe 3-4 holes? Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Proseal cartridges
From: "charliewaffles" <mcooper(at)live.com>
Date: Jan 02, 2013
You could do a hybrid solution. Those SEM catridges can be re-used. So you could get two of the cartridges and a quart of proseal. When the cartridge is used up, you pull the plunger and wait for it to cure, pull the proseal out and refill from the quart container. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391456#391456 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "JimVillani" <Jim(at)JimVillani.com>
Subject: Re: Proseal cartridges
Date: Jan 02, 2013
You could also go to Home Depot, Buy a $2 tube of latex calk, empty the cartridge and use it... Works GREAT!!! -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of charliewaffles Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 9:00 AM Subject: RV10-List: Re: Proseal cartridges You could do a hybrid solution. Those SEM catridges can be re-used. So you could get two of the cartridges and a quart of proseal. When the cartridge is used up, you pull the plunger and wait for it to cure, pull the proseal out and refill from the quart container. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391456#391456 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)live.com>
Subject: RV-10 nose gear failure
Date: Jan 02, 2013
http://www.faa.gov/data_research/accident_incident/preliminary_data/media /M_0102_N.txt ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 02, 2013
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: Proseal cartridges
On 1/2/2013 11:08 AM, JimVillani wrote: > > You could also go to Home Depot, Buy a $2 tube of latex calk, empty the > cartridge and use it... > Works GREAT!!! > You know, after seeing the reply on the empty tubes, I was thinking that same thing to myself....."why can't I just buy a nice plastic tube of caulk and do the same dang thing". That's a great idea. Sold! Tim ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: RV-10 nose gear failure
From: "rleffler" <rv(at)thelefflers.com>
Date: Jan 02, 2013
Looks like Bob Kaufman's RV-10. I don't think Bob participates on the list. Rick S., are your aware what happened? bob -------- Bob Leffler N410BL - Paint - 90% done, 90% to go stage RV-10 #40684 http://mykitlog.com/rleffler Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391469#391469 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Proseal cartridges
From: "rleffler" <rv(at)thelefflers.com>
Date: Jan 02, 2013
I bought empty cartridges to fill. I found it much easier just to mix on a paper plate and use a tongue depressor to apply, that to go through the fuss of filling the tube. It also cut down on your working time, but then it took me awhile to get the tube filled. You can buy empty cartridges from the local supply shops. They're pretty inexpensive. I do know somebody that has one of the large cartridges from Van's with I believe a 3/13 expiration that I'm sure he'll make a deal if somebody wanted it. Email me for the contact information if interested. bob -------- Bob Leffler N410BL - Paint - 90% done, 90% to go stage RV-10 #40684 http://mykitlog.com/rleffler Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391470#391470 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com>
Subject: W-1028 J-Stiffeners
Date: Jan 02, 2013
Bill, one RV I worked on the builder had cut a fuse J stiffener about a foot short. He didn't want to have a gap between the stiffener and the skin at the overlap so we cut a piece to butt up to the too-short stiffener and covered it with a section of J-stiffener, don't recall how many rivets we overlapped on each side. The Acceptable Methods book should be your guide to things like this. Keep building, it will be a ton of fun someday to fly. Albert Gardner RV-10 N991RV Yuma, AZ PS: I'm currently assisting on an RV-8 and a Murphy Rebel. We RV builders have the easy street I can tell you. From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Billy Britton Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 9:46 AM Subject: RV10-List: W-1028 J-Stiffeners While drilling my inboard (short) J-stiffener for the bottom wing skins the last foot or so somehow moved on me. This resulted in off-centered holes on the last 8-10 inches of the stiffener. Is there any reason I cannot cut the end off and just replace it with a new piece overlapping maybe 3-4 holes? Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)live.com>
Subject: Fw: RV-10 nose gear failure
Date: Jan 02, 2013
Came across some pictures of the plane. Looks like the front gear ripped off and there is oil all over the belly, not sure which one came first however. Not to spread a theory, but my understanding is that the plane did not flare completely when it contacted the runway, possible pushrod related. Only the NTSB report and Bob can confirm that. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 02, 2013
Subject: Re: Fw: RV-10 nose gear failure
From: Ed Kranz <ed.kranz(at)gmail.com>
Purely speculation, but I gotta figure that the oil on the belly was there before the nose gear collapse. There is a good amount of oil, and it's wind blown all the way back to the tail. On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Pascal wrote: > Came across some pictures of the plane. Looks like the front gear ripped > off and there is oil all over the belly, not sure which one came first > however. > > Not to spread a theory, but my understanding is that the plane did not > flare completely when it contacted the runway, possible pushrod related. > Only the NTSB report and Bob can confirm that. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Subject: Was: RV-10 nose gear failure Now: Uncle Doug
Date: Jan 03, 2013
Sort of reminds me of our uncle Doug during primary flight training: [cid:image009.jpg(at)01CDE909.55F06DD0] Doug is the one in front. He said not much he could do all of a sudden he w as pointing nose down. I sponsored a private BBQ fly-in for years and at one point flew Doug out t o see some of the planes he flew during WWII. [cid:image010.jpg(at)01CDE909.55F06DD0] Doug piloted over 30 missions in the B-25 (forgive me if I have the aircraf t wrong) He said he could not believe how big it was today as he use to jump into it like it was a Cherokee. [cid:image011.jpg(at)01CDE909.55F06DD0] Doug retired as a full Colonel and flew into his mid 70's. [cid:image012.jpg(at)01CDE909.55F06DD0] Robin ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "JimVillani" <Jim(at)JimVillani.com>
Subject: Fw: RV-10 nose gear failure
Date: Jan 02, 2013
The Elevator Rod came loose from the control stick Page 39-10. He lost control (the bolt fell out) about 75 ft off the ground at short final (After flying from Reno to Las Vegas....) Both pilot and passenger walked away... I was there... It happened 12-31-12 at North Las Vegas Airport. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Pascal Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 1:01 PM Subject: RV10-List: Fw: RV-10 nose gear failure Came across some pictures of the plane. Looks like the front gear ripped off and there is oil all over the belly, not sure which one came first however. Not to spread a theory, but my understanding is that the plane did not flare completely when it contacted the runway, possible pushrod related. Only the NTSB report and Bob can confirm that. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: RV-10 nose gear failure
From: "Rick S." <heeder777(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Jan 02, 2013
Jim, Do you mean the pushrod end that has the self locking nut and safety wire To secure the rod end. Not sure how you saw that flying around the pattern. I suggest you let Bob speak for himself and let the investigation take its course without speculation. Rick Sked -------- Rick S. RV-10 40185 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391508#391508 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)live.com>
Subject: Re: RV-10 nose gear failure
Date: Jan 02, 2013
Bob did tell me the oil on the belly was from the engine break in blow-by. Not engine related. . Many of us know that there are some steps we completely missed in the final inspection, it is quick possible something came loose and if so I hope it will reinforce to the rest of us to make sure we don't skim through anything. This goes for pre-flight. I agree, at this point Bob will need to update the group, on the facts, anything else is a theory. The good news is the plane did it's job and he and his passenger walked away. I am fascinated by NTSB reports, there is always something someone can gain from, sadly, someone elses accident, and hopefully not repeat it oneself. I received a invite to a webinar Jan 15, Gene Benson does a good job of reviewing cases and talking about how one can avoid doing the same thing. http://genebenson.com/call_the_ball/ctb_webinar.html hope it helps someone as much as his previous presentations have helped me. Pascal -----Original Message----- From: Rick S. Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 7:57 PM Subject: RV10-List: Re: RV-10 nose gear failure Jim, Do you mean the pushrod end that has the self locking nut and safety wire To secure the rod end. Not sure how you saw that flying around the pattern. I suggest you let Bob speak for himself and let the investigation take its course without speculation. Rick Sked -------- Rick S. RV-10 40185 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391508#391508 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 03, 2013
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: N433RV First Flight
Congratulations Jay!!! I didn't recognize the email but when I saw first flight, I was hoping it was you. Feels great... gets even better. Enjoy. Bill Watson On 12/30/2012 8:25 PM, hotwheels wrote: > > N433RV RV-10 made her maiden flight on December 29th after nearly 9 years of building. > > My -10 is powered by a rebuilt Lyco IO-540, 2-blade Hartzell blended airfoil propeller, dual Light Speed electronic ignitions, dual B&C alternators and B&C starter. The panel includes Grand Rapids HXes and EIS, PS9000 Audio, Garmin 430W, SL30 and GTX330 xponder, TruTrak autopilot, Navworx UAT and a few steam gauges. It's a very nice ride. > > The plane has amazing performance. KFLY is at 6800' MSL and I was at pattern altitude before reaching the end of the runway. The controls were very responsive and the plane did exactly what I asked. I found that my -10 has a heavy left wing as has been reported by others. However, that should be easily remedied by adding some aileron trim. Speaking of trim, the Final Inspection document stated that "1/3 nose up travel" recommended for first flight. However, I found that to be way too much (50 lbs of sand in the baggage compartment for W&B). Neutral trim would have been a better choice - at least for me. > > My first flight was cut short due to a fuel issue after about 30 minutes. Fortunately, both pilot and plane made it safely back to the airport where I made a surprising good landing for an RV rookie. I can hardly wait to get back in the air after everything gets the once over. > > Thanks to my family who put up with riveting, cutting and dust in our garage... To the folks at Van's for providing a great design, to AlexD for quality transition training, to numerous EAA Tech Counselor visits and to my builder buddies (you know who you are!) and, of course, to tips provided by many of the folks on this list........ I couldn't have made the journey without lots of help from all of you! > > Cheers, > Jay > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: RV-10 nose gear failure
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Jan 03, 2013
Preliminary reports: I noticed both reports said "passengers zero, crew two". Maybe anyone in the front must be a crew member! -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391553#391553 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 03, 2013
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: All New RV-14 List At Matronics!
Dear RV'rs, I've just setup an all new RV-14 email list and forum on the Matronics servers. Please surf over and register for and email account and access to the Forums. To get email distribution, sign up here: http://www.matronics.com/subscribe and to view the new RV-14 forum directly go here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewforum.php?f=79 Enjoy! Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator - 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: 172+ Hours TTSN - Rebuilding Fuselage After Landing Mishap... RV-6 #20916 N360EM "The Flyer" http://www.mattsrv6.com - Matt's RV-6 Revitalization Log Status: 129+ Hours Since Purchase - Upgrades Complete; Now In Full Flyer Mode ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Proseal cartridges
From: "Lenny Iszak" <lenard(at)rapiddecision.com>
Date: Jan 04, 2013
Tim, You could also use these: http://www.merrittsupply.com/products/27915-west-system-fillable-caulking-tube-pn-810-24.aspx They are just empty caulking tubes. Cheap enough to not have to worry about cleaning them up. Lenny Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391615#391615 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Proseal cartridges
From: "Ron B." <ronbelliveau(at)eastlink.ca>
Date: Jan 04, 2013
By utilizing used caulk tubes, are we not concerned about contamination and what it might do to proseal cure? Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391629#391629 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Control Column Deflection & Length
From: Patrick Pulis <rv10free2fly(at)yahoo.com.au>
Date: Jan 05, 2013
I have one of Geoff Coombs carbon fibre instrument panels and I need to trim the control column to enable my CS stick grip to clear the panel. The measured measured control column deflections with no interference on the instrument panel are as follows: Fore: 69.9 degrees Aft: 65.5 degrees Port: 60.2 degrees Starboard: 54.4 degrees It would be interested to see what others are getting in the way of control column deflections? In order of my stick to clear the bottom of the instrument panel I will not only need to cut the control column to its base, but also bend the control column to ensure that the stick grip clears the panel! I know of at least one other builder who has needed to both trim and bend the control column, I would be interested to hear what other builders who have/are fitting a carbon fibre panel have done please? Warm regards Patrick South Australia ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: GTS-800 Upper TCAS Antenna Installation - Another Option
From: Patrick Pulis <rv10free2fly(at)yahoo.com.au>
Date: Jan 05, 2013
For those that are interested, we just completed installing the upper TCAS a ntenna which needs to be mounted to as near as level as practicable, inclusi ve of a ground plane. We elected to make up a foam moulding which we covered with resin and cloth to suit the shape of the cabin top and of sufficient s ize to mount the antenna using nut plates. We placed a layer of tissue cloth and resin down over the cabin top before m ounting the antenna plinth on the cabin top to seal the top as we found the c abin top to be porous when we trialled a vacuum bag over the plinth moulding . Once cured (next night) we placed the plinth down (putting removable rubber p lugs in the nut plates to prevent resin from entering and blocking them up), then a layer of bronze wire mesh (about 18" x 18"), another layer of tissue cloth; wetted that down with resin, then a 4oz cloth to overlap over the ed ge of the mesh, wetting all down. We cut out the cloth to leave the mesh open where the antenna will be mounte d on the plinth, to enable the mesh to make contact with the base of the ant enna. We then vacuum bagged the whole affair down, until the bronze mesh profiled a round the moulding of the plinth and flat onto the cabin top. All up, we ke pt up the vacuum for about 3 hours until the resin cured. We removed the plastic vacuum bagging this afternoon and it was all silky sm ooth, with some minor feathering of the edges into the cabin top with some b ody filler. It was a little challenging but it worked out well. The plinth is about 1" h igh and the ground plane a little thicker than the thickness of the mesh and cloth. I hope this helps those out there who are contemplating a TCAS installation. The underside TCAS antenna will be mounted beneath the rear starboard seat near the tunnel. Warm regards Patrick Begin forwarded message: > > > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone

      
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 05, 2013
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Control Column Deflection & Length
Even with the install of a close to stock panel (I did a Stein), I had to both cut the stick down and bend it quite a bit. Works fine and clears everything but they did have to be worked a good bit. If I get out there in the cold, I'll try slapping a guage on the stick to see what deflections I'm getting. Bill On 1/5/2013 6:15 AM, Patrick Pulis wrote: > > I have one of Geoff Coombs carbon fibre instrument panels and I need to trim the control column to enable my CS stick grip to clear the panel. > > The measured measured control column deflections with no interference on the instrument panel are as follows: > Fore: 69.9 degrees > Aft: 65.5 degrees > Port: 60.2 degrees > Starboard: 54.4 degrees > > It would be interested to see what others are getting in the way of control column deflections? > > In order of my stick to clear the bottom of the instrument panel I will not only need to cut the control column to its base, but also bend the control column to ensure that the stick grip clears the panel! > > I know of at least one other builder who has needed to both trim and bend the control column, I would be interested to hear what other builders who have/are fitting a carbon fibre panel have done please? ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Control Column Deflection & Length
From: "g.combs" <g.combs(at)aerosportmodeling.com>
Date: Jan 05, 2013
Patrick You do not want your stick to go under the panel at all. You will need to do a little adjusting in the linkage but you should be able to get the amount of deflection that vans requires. You will need To probably put a elevator stop on for the down elevator to keep it from hitting the panel. I have also found that some sticks are not all the same. It also depends on which grips you are using. You will cut almost all of the straight portion at the top off no matter what sticks you are using. The sticks are way to long if adding aftermarket grips. I will send a picture of the elevator stop. It is very simple to install Geoff Sent from my iPad On Jan 5, 2013, at 6:15 AM, Patrick Pulis wrote: > > I have one of Geoff Coombs carbon fibre instrument panels and I need to trim the control column to enable my CS stick grip to clear the panel. > > The measured measured control column deflections with no interference on the instrument panel are as follows: > Fore: 69.9 degrees > Aft: 65.5 degrees > Port: 60.2 degrees > Starboard: 54.4 degrees > > It would be interested to see what others are getting in the way of control column deflections? > > In order of my stick to clear the bottom of the instrument panel I will not only need to cut the control column to its base, but also bend the control column to ensure that the stick grip clears the panel! > > I know of at least one other builder who has needed to both trim and bend the control column, I would be interested to hear what other builders who have/are fitting a carbon fibre panel have done please? > > Warm regards > > Patrick > South Australia > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Geoff Combs" <g.combs(at)aerosportmodeling.com>
Subject: Control Column Deflection & Length
Date: Jan 05, 2013
Patrick attached is a picture of the stop that I used. This idea was from another RV-10 pilot that had the same Problem with another brand of panel. They are very easy to install. I used 8-32 screws with locknuts and washers for the hardware only 2 required. You will need to cut a notch in the piece of angle aluminum to allow for the amount of deflection needed. Contact me if you have other questions or concerns with this. Which stick grips are you using? Also attached are Some pictures that show where the sticks should be located when cut to fit. I think on the grips in these pictures There was only about 1" left Geoff Geoff Combs Aerosport Modeling and Design 8090 howe industrial pkwy canal winchester, ohio 43110 614.834.5227p 614.834.5230f www.aerosportmodeling.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Pulis Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 6:15 AM Subject: RV10-List: Control Column Deflection & Length --> I have one of Geoff Coombs carbon fibre instrument panels and I need to trim the control column to enable my CS stick grip to clear the panel. The measured measured control column deflections with no interference on the instrument panel are as follows: Fore: 69.9 degrees Aft: 65.5 degrees Port: 60.2 degrees Starboard: 54.4 degrees It would be interested to see what others are getting in the way of control column deflections? In order of my stick to clear the bottom of the instrument panel I will not only need to cut the control column to its base, but also bend the control column to ensure that the stick grip clears the panel! I know of at least one other builder who has needed to both trim and bend the control column, I would be interested to hear what other builders who have/are fitting a carbon fibre panel have done please? Warm regards Patrick South Australia ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Subject: GTS-800 Upper TCAS Antenna Installation - Another Option
Date: Jan 05, 2013
Looks good Patrick! Robin -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Pulis Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 3:48 AM Subject: RV10-List: GTS-800 Upper TCAS Antenna Installation - Another Option For those that are interested, we just completed installing the upper TCAS antenna which needs to be mounted to as near as level as practicable, inclusive of a ground plane. We elected to make up a foam moulding which we covered with resin and cloth to suit the shape of the cabin top and of sufficient size to mount the antenna using nut plates. We placed a layer of tissue cloth and resin down over the cabin top before mounting the antenna plinth on the cabin top to seal the top as we found the cabin top to be porous when we trialled a vacuum bag over the plinth moulding. Once cured (next night) we placed the plinth down (putting removable rubber plugs in the nut plates to prevent resin from entering and blocking them up), then a layer of bronze wire mesh (about 18" x 18"), another layer of tissue cloth; wetted that down with resin, then a 4oz cloth to overlap over the edge of the mesh, wetting all down. We cut out the cloth to leave the mesh open where the antenna will be mounted on the plinth, to enable the mesh to make contact with the base of the antenna. We then vacuum bagged the whole affair down, until the bronze mesh profiled around the moulding of the plinth and flat onto the cabin top. All up, we kept up the vacuum for about 3 hours until the resin cured. We removed the plastic vacuum bagging this afternoon and it was all silky smooth, with some minor feathering of the edges into the cabin top with some body filler. It was a little challenging but it worked out well. The plinth is about 1" high and the ground plane a little thicker than the thickness of the mesh and cloth. I hope this helps those out there who are contemplating a TCAS installation. The underside TCAS antenna will be mounted beneath the rear starboard seat near the tunnel. Warm regards Patrick Begin forwarded message: > > > > ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "JimVillani" <Jim(at)JimVillani.com>
Subject: Control Column Deflection & Length
Date: Jan 05, 2013
Geoff, I had the same problem with my panel and Stick... And I used (strangely enough) the same solution. Works Great!!! Jim Villani -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Geoff Combs Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 7:27 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Control Column Deflection & Length Patrick attached is a picture of the stop that I used. This idea was from another RV-10 pilot that had the same Problem with another brand of panel. They are very easy to install. I used 8-32 screws with locknuts and washers for the hardware only 2 required. You will need to cut a notch in the piece of angle aluminum to allow for the amount of deflection needed. Contact me if you have other questions or concerns with this. Which stick grips are you using? Also attached are Some pictures that show where the sticks should be located when cut to fit. I think on the grips in these pictures There was only about 1" left Geoff Geoff Combs Aerosport Modeling and Design 8090 howe industrial pkwy canal winchester, ohio 43110 614.834.5227p 614.834.5230f www.aerosportmodeling.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Pulis Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 6:15 AM Subject: RV10-List: Control Column Deflection & Length --> I have one of Geoff Coombs carbon fibre instrument panels and I need to trim the control column to enable my CS stick grip to clear the panel. The measured measured control column deflections with no interference on the instrument panel are as follows: Fore: 69.9 degrees Aft: 65.5 degrees Port: 60.2 degrees Starboard: 54.4 degrees It would be interested to see what others are getting in the way of control column deflections? In order of my stick to clear the bottom of the instrument panel I will not only need to cut the control column to its base, but also bend the control column to ensure that the stick grip clears the panel! I know of at least one other builder who has needed to both trim and bend the control column, I would be interested to hear what other builders who have/are fitting a carbon fibre panel have done please? Warm regards Patrick South Australia ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "JimVillani" <Jim(at)JimVillani.com>
Subject: Re: Proseal cartridges
Date: Jan 05, 2013
Latex Calk, Soap and water clean up... -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron B. Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 4:05 PM Subject: RV10-List: Re: Proseal cartridges By utilizing used caulk tubes, are we not concerned about contamination and what it might do to proseal cure? Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391629#391629 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Control Column Deflection & Length
From: "bill.peyton" <peyton.b(at)sbcglobal.net>
Date: Jan 06, 2013
Geoff is correct. I have the Aerosport Panel also. You will end up with the stick cut down almost the entire amount. You should also cut the lower section so that it will insert into the control arm further and bring it further back. After you hook up the controls, you need to make an elevator stop which will prevent the stick from hitting the front panel on the inside corner. After that, you can adjust all of the push rods to obtain the correct amount of travel required by the spec. You need to make sure that the controls have enough clearance WITH your hands around the grip. -------- Bill WA0SYV Aviation Partners, LLC Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391703#391703 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_2596_203.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Control Column Deflection & Length
From: Patrick Pulis <rv10free2fly(at)yahoo.com.au>
Date: Jan 07, 2013
Many thanks Bill & Geoff. Warm regards Patrick On 07/01/2013, at 1:52 AM, "bill.peyton" wrote: > > Geoff is correct. I have the Aerosport Panel also. You will end up with the stick cut down almost the entire amount. You should also cut the lower section so that it will insert into the control arm further and bring it further back. After you hook up the controls, you need to make an elevator stop which will prevent the stick from hitting the front panel on the inside corner. After that, you can adjust all of the push rods to obtain the correct amount of travel required by the spec. You need to make sure that the controls have enough clearance WITH your hands around the grip. > > -------- > Bill > WA0SYV > Aviation Partners, LLC > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391703#391703 > > > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_2596_203.jpg > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Another RV-10 down?
From: "rv10flyer" <wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jan 07, 2013
N262NJ. -------- Wayne G. 12/01/2011 TT= 95 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391742#391742 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Subject: Another RV-10 down?
Date: Jan 07, 2013
V293LiBUaGUgcGhvdG8gbG9va3MgbGlrZSBhIGRpZmZpY3VsdCB0ZXJyYWluIHRvIHNldHRsZSBh bmQgc3RpbGwgd2FsayBhd2F5LiBTbyBoYXBweSBubyBmYXRhbGl0aWVzIGluIHRoZSByZWNlbnQg ZXZlbnRzLiBMZXQncyBrZWVwIGRvaW5nIG91ciBiZXN0IHRvIGJlIG1lY2hhbmljYWxseSwgcGh5 c2ljYWxseSAmIGVtb3Rpb25hbGx5IHJlYWR5IHRvIGZseSBzYWZlbHkuDQoNClJvYmluDQoNCltQ bGFuZSBjcmFzaGVzIG5lYXIgSnVsaWFuXQ0KDQpGcm9tOiBvd25lci1ydjEwLWxpc3Qtc2VydmVy QG1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20gW21haWx0bzpvd25lci1ydjEwLWxpc3Qtc2VydmVyQG1hdHJvbmljcy5j b21dIE9uIEJlaGFsZiBPZiBNaWNoYWVsIEtyYXVzDQpTZW50OiBTdW5kYXksIEphbnVhcnkgMDYs IDIwMTMgMToxMyBQTQ0KVG86IHJ2MTAtbGlzdEBtYXRyb25pY3MuY29tDQpTdWJqZWN0OiBSVjEw LUxpc3Q6IEFub3RoZXIgUlYtMTAgZG93bj8NCg0KaHR0cDovL3d3dy4xMG5ld3MuY29tL25ld3Mv ZXhwZXJpbWVudGFsLWFpcmNyYWZ0LWdvZXMtZG93bi1uZWFyLWp1bGlhbi1waWxvdC1ub3QtaW5q dXJlZC0wMTA1MjAxMw0KDQpEbyBub3QgYXJjaGl2ZQ0KDQotTWlrZSBLcmF1cw0KUlYtNCBzb2xk IDotKA0KUlYtMTAgZmx5aW5nIDotKQ0KS2l0Rm94IFNTNyBSYWRpYWwgYnVpbGRpbmcgOi0pDQoN Cg0KDQoNCg0KXy09M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9 M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9 M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9 M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0QNCg0KXy09M0QgICAgICAgICAgLSBUaGUgUlYxMC1MaXN0IEVt YWlsIEZvcnVtIC0NCg0KXy09M0QgVXNlIHRoZSBNYXRyb25pY3MgTGlzdCBGZWF0dXJlcyBOYXZp Z2F0b3IgdG8gYnJvd3NlDQoNCl8tPTNEIHRoZSBtYW55IExpc3QgdXRpbGl0aWVzIHN1Y2ggYXMg TGlzdCBVbi9TdWJzY3JpcHRpb24sDQoNCl8tPTNEIEFyY2hpdmUgU2VhcmNoICYgRG93bmxvYWQs IDctRGF5IEJyb3dzZSwgQ2hhdCwgRkFRLA0KDQpfLT0zRCBQaG90b3NoYXJlLCBhbmQgbXVjaCBt dWNoIG1vcmU6DQoNCl8tPTNEDQoNCl8tPTNEICAgLS0+IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNv bS9OYXZpZ2F0b3I/UlYxMC1MaXN0PDNEJTIyaHR0cDovd3d3Lm1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20vTmF2aWdh dG9yP1JWMTAtTGlzdCUyMj4NCg0KXy09M0QNCg0KXy09M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9 M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9 M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9 M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0Q9M0QNCg0KXy09M0QgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAtIE1BVFJPTklDUyBXRUIgRk9SVU1TIC0NCg0KXy09M0QgU2FtZSBncmVhdCBjb250 ZW50IGFsc28gYXZhaWxhYmxlIHZpYSB0aGUgV2ViIEZvcnVtcyENCg0KXy09M0QNCg0KXy09M0Qg ICAtLT4gaHR0cDovL2ZvcnVtcy5tYXRyb25pY3MuY29tPDNEJTIyaHR0cDovZm9ydW1zLm1hdHJv bmljcy5jb20lMjI+DQoNCl8tPTNEDQoNCl8tPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNE PTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNE PTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNE PTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEPTNEDQoNCl8tPTNEICAgICAgICAgICAg IC0gTGlzdCBDb250cmlidXRpb24gV2ViIFNpdGUgLQ0KDQpfLT0zRCAgVGhhbmsgeW91IGZvciB5 b3VyIGdlbmVyb3VzIHN1cHBvcnQhDQoNCl8tPTNEICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgLU1hdHQgRHJhbGxlLCBMaXN0IEFkbWluLg0KDQpfLT0zRCAgIC0tPiBodHRwOi8vd3d3Lm1h dHJvbmljcy5jb20vY29udHJpYnV0aW9uPDNEJTIyaHR0cDovd3d3Lm1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20vY29u dHJpYnV0aW9uJTIyPg0KDQpfLT0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0z RD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0z RD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0z RD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRD0zRA0KDQoNCg0KX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX18NCk5vIHZpcnVzIGZvdW5kIGluIHRoaXMgbWVzc2FnZS4NCkNoZWNrZWQgYnkg QVZHIC0gd3d3LmF2Zy5jb208aHR0cDovL3d3dy5hdmcuY29tPg0KVmVyc2lvbjogMjAxMy4wLjI4 MDUgLyBWaXJ1cyBEYXRhYmFzZTogMjYzNy82MDA4IC0gUmVsZWFzZSBEYXRlOiAwMS8wMy8xMw0K ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Control Column Deflection & Length
From: TRAVILLEH Houston <travilleh(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Jan 07, 2013
Do not bend your control stick! Wait until after you have rigged your elevators, flaps and ailerons. You should then notice that full deflection of flight controls does not interfere with instrument panel. In other words, the travel distance of the control stick is less after rigging the flight control surfaces. Sent from my iPad On Jan 5, 2013, at 6:15 AM, Patrick Pulis wrote: > > I have one of Geoff Coombs carbon fibre instrument panels and I need to trim the control column to enable my CS stick grip to clear the panel. > > The measured measured control column deflections with no interference on the instrument panel are as follows: > Fore: 69.9 degrees > Aft: 65.5 degrees > Port: 60.2 degrees > Starboard: 54.4 degrees > > It would be interested to see what others are getting in the way of control column deflections? > > In order of my stick to clear the bottom of the instrument panel I will not only need to cut the control column to its base, but also bend the control column to ensure that the stick grip clears the panel! > > I know of at least one other builder who has needed to both trim and bend the control column, I would be interested to hear what other builders who have/are fitting a carbon fibre panel have done please? > > Warm regards > > Patrick > South Australia > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Another RV-10 down?
From: "rv10flyer" <wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jan 07, 2013
Supposedly on with Ramona tower at 10,000' with low oil pressure and later engine seizure. He had three Garmin G3X's. Do they not have private strips on their database? Looks like several in that area. Glad he made it down safely. Another nose gear failure...maybe we need a beefier design. -------- Wayne G. 12/01/2011 TT= 95 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391751#391751 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Another RV-10 down?
From: Seano <sean(at)braunandco.com>
Date: Jan 07, 2013
G3X can show private strips. It's an option. Sent from my iPhone On Jan 7, 2013, at 7:28, "rv10flyer" wrote: > > Supposedly on with Ramona tower at 10,000' with low oil pressure and later engine seizure. He had three Garmin G3X's. Do they not have private strips on their database? Looks like several in that area. Glad he made it down safely. Another nose gear failure...maybe we need a beefier design. > > -------- > Wayne G. > 12/01/2011 > TT= 95 > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391751#391751 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Another RV-10 down?
From: "rv10flyer" <wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jan 07, 2013
It sure would have been nice if he could have made it to the 2,000' CA76, 5 nm NW of crash site. -------- Wayne G. 12/01/2011 TT= 95 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391760#391760 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Another RV-10 down?
From: "charliewaffles" <mcooper(at)live.com>
Date: Jan 07, 2013
This serial number is latterly the one right after mine (41146) and I thought I was on a fast past to fly (by March). This guy beat me to it. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391766#391766 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: John MacCallum <john.maccallum(at)bigpond.com>
Subject: Re: Another RV-10 down?
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Looks to me like he did a real good job and has touched down uphill as slow as he could get it. There doesn't appear to be much damage overall and I can only hope if I ever get into that situation I can do half as good! Cheers John MacCallum VH-DUU RV 10 # 41016 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of rv10flyer Sent: Tuesday, 8 January 2013 1:29 AM Subject: RV10-List: Re: Another RV-10 down? Supposedly on with Ramona tower at 10,000' with low oil pressure and later engine seizure. He had three Garmin G3X's. Do they not have private strips on their database? Looks like several in that area. Glad he made it down safely. Another nose gear failure...maybe we need a beefier design. -------- Wayne G. 12/01/2011 TT= 95 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391751#391751 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Fuel pump use
From: "Leeverett" <Leeverett(at)msn.com>
Date: Jan 07, 2013
I have finished my 10 except for paint and am ready for first flight. I finished transition training last weekend with Pierrie Smith. It was a great experience and I recommend him to anyone looking for a CFI. I noted we only used the electric fuel pump on engine start and not on takeoff, landing or fuel tank change. Is this everyone's practice or do other folks have different ideas. Thank. Leon Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391785#391785 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: John MacCallum <john.maccallum(at)bigpond.com>
Subject: Fuel pump use
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Hi Leon, I asked that question from my CFI when I was doing my Commercial Training in a 182T with an IO-540. The answer I got was that it is unnecessary and he was of the opinion you could over fuel and make the mixture too rich on a Lycoming with fuel Injection by using the boost pump. They are certainly sons of B**^^$@ to start if they are hot and you accidently use the Boost pump to prime! Cheers John MacCallum VH-DUU RV 10 # 41016 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Leeverett Sent: Tuesday, 8 January 2013 4:13 PM Subject: RV10-List: Fuel pump use I have finished my 10 except for paint and am ready for first flight. I finished transition training last weekend with Pierrie Smith. It was a great experience and I recommend him to anyone looking for a CFI. I noted we only used the electric fuel pump on engine start and not on takeoff, landing or fuel tank change. Is this everyone's practice or do other folks have different ideas. Thank. Leon Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391785#391785 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Jan 07, 2013
Running the electric pump does not make the mixture too rich. There are some TCM set ups where this is possible, but not the Lyc in the 10. I run it whenever a failure of the mechanical pump would be bad news, e.g. down low, takeoff, landing. -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391789#391789 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)live.com>
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
Date: Jan 08, 2013
from Lycoming's Key Operations manual: As an engine manufacturer, we are frequently asked about the proper use of the fuel boost pump with our power plants. Although we cant pretend to be an expert on the fuel boost pump itself, we have some positive recommendations concerning its use with our engines. Where a boost pump is provided by the airframe manufacturer, and the airframe Pilots Operating Handbook has a limited treatment of the use of the fuel boost pump, perhaps this discussion can provide the necessary fuel boost pump information for the pilot in order to operate his or her engine as safely as possible. It is necessary to supply the engine with a steady, uninterrupted flow of fuel for all operating conditions. Entrapped air, temperature changes, pressure drops, agitation in the fuel lines and other factors affect the release of air and vapor from the fuel system. Under some circumstances where an engine-mounted fuel pump is provided, it may not be able to pump a continuous fuel supply free of excessive vapor. An effective continuous fuel supply is provided by use of the fuel boost pump. As a general recommendation, the fuel boost pump should be used with Lycoming engines in all conditions where there is any possibility of excessive vapor formation, or when a temporary cessation of fuel flow would introduce undesirable hazards. The conditions under which Lycoming recommends operation of the fuel boost pump are as follows: 1. Every takeoff. 2. Climb after takeoff unless Pilots Operating Handbook says it is not necessary. 3. When switching fuel selectors from one separate fuel tank to another, the fuel boost pump should be on in the new tank until the operator is assured there will be no interruption of the fuel flow. 4. Every landing approach. 5. Any time the fuel pressure is fluctuating, and the engine is affected by the fluctuation. 6. Hot weather, hot engine ground operation where fuel vapor problems cause erratic engine operation. 7. Some General Aviation aircraft require the use of the fuel boost pump during high-altitude flight. This will be spelled out in the Pilots Operating Handbook. 8. If the engine-mounted fuel pump fails. If the fuel boost pump is used during ground operation, dont fail to check the condition of the engine-mounted fuel pump before takeoff by turning the boost pump off briefly, and then back on for takeoff. If the engine-mounted pump has failed, it would be safer to know that on the ground rather than in the air when the fuel boost pump is turned off. When in doubt, do the safest thing and use the fuel boost pump with Lycoming engines. Dont be stingy with the boost pump. In most cases, they last the overhaul life of the engine, and are then exchanged or overhauled themselves. AS A REMINDER, the airframe Pilots Operating Handbook is the authority if boost pump information is spelled out in it. -----Original Message----- From: Leeverett Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 9:12 PM Subject: RV10-List: Fuel pump use I have finished my 10 except for paint and am ready for first flight. I finished transition training last weekend with Pierrie Smith. It was a great experience and I recommend him to anyone looking for a CFI. I noted we only used the electric fuel pump on engine start and not on takeoff, landing or fuel tank change. Is this everyone's practice or do other folks have different ideas. Thank. Leon Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391785#391785 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2013
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
Good information. However, boost pumps generally have a finite life of xxx hours operation and are relatively expensive, especially in certified aircraft. So I make a habit of turning off the boost pump as soon as I have enough altitude to return to the runway I departed, good reminder point as you exit the traffic pattern or call departure. For arrival, since I currently fly a retractable, I turn on boost pump right after lowering the gear, which will be approx 5 miles from the runway or FAF. Kelly On 1/8/2013 7:20 AM, Pascal wrote: > > from Lycoming's Key Operations manual: > As an engine manufacturer, we are frequently asked about the proper > use of the fuel boost pump with our power plants. Although we cant > pretend to be an expert on the fuel boost pump itself, we have some > positive recommendations concerning its use with our engines. Where a > boost pump is provided by the airframe manufacturer, and the airframe > Pilots Operating Handbook has a limited treatment of the use of the > fuel boost pump, perhaps this discussion can provide the necessary > fuel boost pump information for the pilot in order to operate his or > her engine as safely as possible. > It is necessary to supply the engine with a steady, uninterrupted flow > of fuel for all operating conditions. Entrapped air, temperature > changes, pressure drops, agitation in the fuel lines and other factors > affect the release of air and vapor from the fuel system. Under some > circumstances where an engine-mounted fuel pump is provided, it may > not be able to pump a continuous fuel supply free of excessive vapor. > An effective continuous fuel supply is provided by use of the fuel > boost pump. As a general recommendation, the fuel boost pump should be > used with Lycoming engines in all conditions where there is any > possibility of excessive vapor formation, or when a temporary > cessation of fuel flow would introduce undesirable hazards. The > conditions under which Lycoming recommends operation of the fuel boost > pump are as follows: > 1. Every takeoff. > 2. Climb after takeoff unless Pilots Operating Handbook says it is > not necessary. > 3. When switching fuel selectors from one separate fuel tank to > another, the fuel boost pump should be on in the new tank until the > operator is assured there will be no interruption of the fuel flow. > 4. Every landing approach. > 5. Any time the fuel pressure is fluctuating, and the engine is > affected by the fluctuation. > 6. Hot weather, hot engine ground operation where fuel vapor problems > cause erratic engine operation. > 7. Some General Aviation aircraft require the use of the fuel boost > pump during high-altitude flight. This will be spelled out in the > Pilots Operating Handbook. > 8. If the engine-mounted fuel pump fails. > If the fuel boost pump is used during ground operation, dont fail to > check the condition of the engine-mounted fuel pump before takeoff by > turning the boost pump off briefly, and then back on for takeoff. If > the engine-mounted pump has failed, it would be safer to know that on > the ground rather than in the air when the fuel boost pump is turned > off. > When in doubt, do the safest thing and use the fuel boost pump with > Lycoming engines. Dont be stingy with the boost pump. In most > cases, they last the overhaul life of the engine, and are then > exchanged or overhauled themselves. AS A REMINDER, the airframe > Pilots Operating Handbook is the authority if boost pump information > is spelled out in it. > > -----Original Message----- From: Leeverett > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 9:12 PM > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV10-List: Fuel pump use > > > I have finished my 10 except for paint and am ready for first flight. I > finished transition training last weekend with Pierrie Smith. It was a > great > experience and I recommend him to anyone looking for a CFI. I noted we > only used the electric fuel pump on engine start and not on takeoff, > landing or fuel tank change. Is this everyone's practice or do other > folks > have different ideas. Thank. Leon > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391785#391785 > > ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2013
From: Bruce Johnson <bruce1hwjohnson(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
Good question Leon, I have got 85 hrs and have only used the electric pump for starting, I leave it on during cranking and it seems to start better th at way. I recently took a guy up and he said on low wing tanks its better t o use it on take off and landings????? On my 210 I only used it for start u p as well and it did over fuel the system if used in addition while running . On an Enstrom helicopter with gravity feed tanks they run them all the ti me. So I guess it will be your-preference-which way you go.=0A=0A=0A___ _____________________________=0A From: Leeverett <Leeverett(at)msn.com>=0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com =0ASent: Monday, January 7, 2013 10:12 PM=0ASubject t" =0A=0AI have finished my 10 except for paint and am r eady for first flight. I=0Afinished transition training last weekend with P ierrie Smith. It was a great =0Aexperience and I recommend him to anyone lo oking for a CFI. I noted we =0Aonly used the electric fuel pump on engine s tart and not on takeoff,=0Alanding or fuel tank change. Is this everyone's practice or do other folks=0Ahave different ideas. Thank. Leon=0A=0A=0A=0A =0ARead this topic online here:=0A=0Ahttp://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic. == ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
The main concept to understand about the boost pump is that it's there in case the engine-driven pump fails. The fuel injection system on our engines won't function (the engine won't run) without something in the neighborhood of 15 psi of fuel pressure. I might be off a few pounds, but the point is that without some kind of fuel pump, either engine driven or electrically driven, the engine won't run. Even the head pressure from a high-wing is insufficient to operate the fuel injection. What I take away from this is that if I can't tolerate a temporary loss of power then I use the boost pump. So I use it on take-off and landing, or any other time I'm busy and/or close to the ground. To my way of thinking, the boost pump is an important piece of redundant safety equipment, like a second mag or electrical supply. Starting is a whole other mode of operation, and another topic for discussion, but in flight the pump should be on whenever you wouldn't have time to mess with a restart due to engine pump failure. Fly safe! Dave Saylor 831-750-0284 CL On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote: > Good question Leon, I have got 85 hrs and have only used the electric pump > for starting, I leave it on during cranking and it seems to start better > that way. I recently took a guy up and he said on low wing tanks its better > to use it on take off and landings????? On my 210 I only used it for start > up as well and it did over fuel the system if used in addition while > running. On an Enstrom helicopter with gravity feed tanks they run them all > the time. So I guess it will be your preference which way you go. > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Leeverett > *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com > *Sent:* Monday, January 7, 2013 10:12 PM > *Subject:* RV10-List: Fuel pump use > > > I have finished my 10 except for paint and am ready for first flight. I > finished transition training last weekend with Pierrie Smith. It was a > great > experience and I recommend him to anyone looking for a CFI. I noted we > only used the electric fuel pump on engine start and not on takeoff, > landing or fuel tank change. Is this everyone's practice or do other folks > have different ideas. Thank. Leon > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391785#391785 > > > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale
From: "brunk" <robertbrunk(at)mac.com>
Date: Jan 08, 2013
I recently replaced my 3 Blade MT prop on my RV10 with a metal prop. I had the MT prop overhauled at the factory shop in Deland,Florida. It is a complete overhaul to new specs. It is in the shipping crate ready to go. I have all the paper work including the prop logbook entry showing the overhaul done. I am offering it for sale at $8000 including backing plate and nose bowl ready to go on your IO540 engine. You can reach me at 361 533 2383.I am located at KCRP.[/b] -------- Robert E. Brunkenhoefer Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391813#391813 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2013
From: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale
Robert, Are you willing to provide some explanation as to the reasoning behind the change? I have an MT on my 6A (IO360B1F6) - just want to make sure something isn't lurking out there for my future. Thanks, Ralph -----Original Message----- >From: brunk <robertbrunk(at)mac.com> >Sent: Jan 8, 2013 1:19 PM >To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: RV10-List: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale > > >I recently replaced my 3 Blade MT prop on my RV10 with a metal prop. I had the MT prop overhauled at the factory shop in Deland,Florida. It is a complete overhaul to new specs. It is in the shipping crate ready to go. I have all the paper work including the prop logbook entry showing the overhaul done. I am offering it for sale at $8000 including backing plate and nose bowl ready to go on your IO540 engine. You can reach me at 361 533 2383.I am located at KCRP.[/b] > >-------- >Robert E. Brunkenhoefer > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391813#391813 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Steve Farner <steve.farner(at)bellevue.edu>
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Subject: Fuel pump use
RGF2ZS0gSSBmbHkgYSBMYW5jZSBhbmQgYSBCb25hbnphLCBhbmQgaW4gdGhlIExhbmNlIHRoZSBw dW1wIGlzIHN1cHBvc2VkIHRvIGJlIG9uIGFzIHlvdSBzYXkgYmVsb3cgKDUwMCBmZWV0IGFuZCBs b3dlciB3YXMgaG93IEkgd2FzIHRhdWdodCkuICBUaGUgQm9uYW56YSBkb2VzIG5vdCByZXF1aXJl IHRoaXMgaW4gdGhlIGNoZWNrbGlzdCwgYW5kIGl0IGlzIG9ubHkgdXNlZCBmb3Igc3RhcnRpbmfi gKYubm90IHN1cmUgd2h5IHRoYXQgaXMgdGhlIGNhc2UsIGJ1dCBhbSBjdXJpb3VzIGlmIGFueW9u ZSBrbm93cy4NCg0KU3RldmUgRmFybmVyDQoNCkZyb206IG93bmVyLXJ2MTAtbGlzdC1zZXJ2ZXJA bWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbSBbbWFpbHRvOm93bmVyLXJ2MTAtbGlzdC1zZXJ2ZXJAbWF0cm9uaWNzLmNv bV0gT24gQmVoYWxmIE9mIERhdmUgU2F5bG9yDQpTZW50OiBUdWVzZGF5LCBKYW51YXJ5IDA4LCAy MDEzIDEyOjAxIFBNDQpUbzogcnYxMC1saXN0QG1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20NClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBS VjEwLUxpc3Q6IEZ1ZWwgcHVtcCB1c2UNCg0KVGhlIG1haW4gY29uY2VwdCB0byB1bmRlcnN0YW5k IGFib3V0IHRoZSBib29zdCBwdW1wIGlzIHRoYXQgaXQncyB0aGVyZSBpbiBjYXNlIHRoZSBlbmdp bmUtZHJpdmVuIHB1bXAgZmFpbHMuDQoNClRoZSBmdWVsIGluamVjdGlvbiBzeXN0ZW0gb24gb3Vy IGVuZ2luZXMgd29uJ3QgZnVuY3Rpb24gKHRoZSBlbmdpbmUgd29uJ3QgcnVuKSB3aXRob3V0IHNv bWV0aGluZyBpbiB0aGUgbmVpZ2hib3Job29kIG9mIDE1IHBzaSBvZiBmdWVsIHByZXNzdXJlLiAg SSBtaWdodCBiZSBvZmYgYSBmZXcgcG91bmRzLCBidXQgdGhlIHBvaW50IGlzIHRoYXQgd2l0aG91 dCBzb21lIGtpbmQgb2YgZnVlbCBwdW1wLCBlaXRoZXIgZW5naW5lIGRyaXZlbiBvciBlbGVjdHJp Y2FsbHkgZHJpdmVuLCB0aGUgZW5naW5lIHdvbid0IHJ1bi4gIEV2ZW4gdGhlIGhlYWQgcHJlc3N1 cmUgZnJvbSBhIGhpZ2gtd2luZyBpcyBpbnN1ZmZpY2llbnQgdG8gb3BlcmF0ZSB0aGUgZnVlbCBp bmplY3Rpb24uDQoNCldoYXQgSSB0YWtlIGF3YXkgZnJvbSB0aGlzIGlzIHRoYXQgaWYgSSBjYW4n dCB0b2xlcmF0ZSBhIHRlbXBvcmFyeSBsb3NzIG9mIHBvd2VyIHRoZW4gSSB1c2UgdGhlIGJvb3N0 IHB1bXAuICBTbyBJIHVzZSBpdCBvbiB0YWtlLW9mZiBhbmQgbGFuZGluZywgb3IgYW55IG90aGVy IHRpbWUgSSdtIGJ1c3kgYW5kL29yIGNsb3NlIHRvIHRoZSBncm91bmQuDQoNClRvIG15IHdheSBv ZiB0aGlua2luZywgdGhlIGJvb3N0IHB1bXAgaXMgYW4gaW1wb3J0YW50IHBpZWNlIG9mIHJlZHVu ZGFudCBzYWZldHkgZXF1aXBtZW50LCBsaWtlIGEgc2Vjb25kIG1hZyBvciBlbGVjdHJpY2FsIHN1 cHBseS4NCg0KU3RhcnRpbmcgaXMgYSB3aG9sZSBvdGhlciBtb2RlIG9mIG9wZXJhdGlvbiwgYW5k IGFub3RoZXIgdG9waWMgZm9yIGRpc2N1c3Npb24sIGJ1dCBpbiBmbGlnaHQgdGhlIHB1bXAgc2hv dWxkIGJlIG9uIHdoZW5ldmVyIHlvdSB3b3VsZG4ndCBoYXZlIHRpbWUgdG8gbWVzcyB3aXRoIGEg cmVzdGFydCBkdWUgdG8gZW5naW5lIHB1bXAgZmFpbHVyZS4NCg0KRmx5IHNhZmUhDQoNCkRhdmUg U2F5bG9yDQo4MzEtNzUwLTAyODQgQ0wNCg0KT24gVHVlLCBKYW4gOCwgMjAxMyBhdCA5OjMxIEFN LCBCcnVjZSBKb2huc29uIDxicnVjZTFod2pvaG5zb25AeWFob28uY29tPG1haWx0bzpicnVjZTFo d2pvaG5zb25AeWFob28uY29tPj4gd3JvdGU6DQpHb29kIHF1ZXN0aW9uIExlb24sIEkgaGF2ZSBn b3QgODUgaHJzIGFuZCBoYXZlIG9ubHkgdXNlZCB0aGUgZWxlY3RyaWMgcHVtcCBmb3Igc3RhcnRp bmcsIEkgbGVhdmUgaXQgb24gZHVyaW5nIGNyYW5raW5nIGFuZCBpdCBzZWVtcyB0byBzdGFydCBi ZXR0ZXIgdGhhdCB3YXkuIEkgcmVjZW50bHkgdG9vayBhIGd1eSB1cCBhbmQgaGUgc2FpZCBvbiBs b3cgd2luZyB0YW5rcyBpdHMgYmV0dGVyIHRvIHVzZSBpdCBvbiB0YWtlIG9mZiBhbmQgbGFuZGlu Z3M/Pz8/PyBPbiBteSAyMTAgSSBvbmx5IHVzZWQgaXQgZm9yIHN0YXJ0IHVwIGFzIHdlbGwgYW5k IGl0IGRpZCBvdmVyIGZ1ZWwgdGhlIHN5c3RlbSBpZiB1c2VkIGluIGFkZGl0aW9uIHdoaWxlIHJ1 bm5pbmcuIE9uIGFuIEVuc3Ryb20gaGVsaWNvcHRlciB3aXRoIGdyYXZpdHkgZmVlZCB0YW5rcyB0 aGV5IHJ1biB0aGVtIGFsbCB0aGUgdGltZS4gU28gSSBndWVzcyBpdCB3aWxsIGJlIHlvdXIgcHJl ZmVyZW5jZSB3aGljaCB3YXkgeW91IGdvLg0KDQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fXw0KRnJvbTogTGVldmVyZXR0IDxMZWV2ZXJldHRAbXNuLmNvbTxtYWlsdG86TGVldmVyZXR0 QG1zbi5jb20+Pg0KVG86IHJ2MTAtbGlzdEBtYXRyb25pY3MuY29tPG1haWx0bzpydjEwLWxpc3RA bWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbT4NClNlbnQ6IE1vbmRheSwgSmFudWFyeSA3LCAyMDEzIDEwOjEyIFBNDQpT dWJqZWN0OiBSVjEwLUxpc3Q6IEZ1ZWwgcHVtcCB1c2UNCg0KLS0+IFJWMTAtTGlzdCBtZXNzYWdl IHBvc3RlZCBieTogIkxlZXZlcmV0dCIgPExlZXZlcmV0dEBtc24uY29tPG1haWx0bzpMZWV2ZXJl dHRAbXNuLmNvbT4+DQoNCkkgaGF2ZSBmaW5pc2hlZCBteSAxMCBleGNlcHQgZm9yIHBhaW50IGFu ZCBhbSByZWFkeSBmb3IgZmlyc3QgZmxpZ2h0LiBJDQpmaW5pc2hlZCB0cmFuc2l0aW9uIHRyYWlu aW5nIGxhc3Qgd2Vla2VuZCB3aXRoIFBpZXJyaWUgU21pdGguIEl0IHdhcyBhIGdyZWF0DQpleHBl cmllbmNlIGFuZCBJIHJlY29tbWVuZCBoaW0gdG8gYW55b25lIGxvb2tpbmcgZm9yIGEgQ0ZJLiBJ IG5vdGVkIHdlDQpvbmx5IHVzZWQgdGhlIGVsZWN0cmljIGZ1ZWwgcHVtcCBvbiBlbmdpbmUgc3Rh cnQgYW5kIG5vdCBvbiB0YWtlb2ZmLA0KbGFuZGluZyBvciBmdWVsIHRhbmsgY2hhbmdlLiBJcyB0 aGlzIGV2ZXJ5b25lJ3MgcHJhY3RpY2Ugb3IgZG8gb3RoZXIgZm9sa3MNCmhhdmUgZGlmZmVyZW50 IGlkZWFzLiBUaGFuay4gTGVvbg0KDQoNCg0KDQpSZWFkIHRoaXMgdG9waWMgb25saW5lIGhlcmU6 DQoNCmh0dHA6Ly9mb3J1bXMubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS92aWV3dG9waWMucGhwP3A9MzkxNzg1IzM5 MTc4NQ0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQpnZXQ9Il9ibGFuayI+aHR0cDov L3d3dy5tYXRyb25pY3MuY29tL05hdmlnYXRvcj9SVjEwLUxpc3QNCg0KdHA6Ly9mb3J1bXMubWF0 cm9uaWNzLmNvbQ0KDQpfYmxhbmsiPmh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9jb250cmlidXRp b24NCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQpfLT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQ0KDQpfLT0gICAgICAgICAgLSBUaGUgUlYxMC1MaXN0 IEVtYWlsIEZvcnVtIC0NCg0KXy09IFVzZSB0aGUgTWF0cm9uaWNzIExpc3QgRmVhdHVyZXMgTmF2 aWdhdG9yIHRvIGJyb3dzZQ0KDQpfLT0gdGhlIG1hbnkgTGlzdCB1dGlsaXRpZXMgc3VjaCBhcyBM aXN0IFVuL1N1YnNjcmlwdGlvbiwNCg0KXy09IEFyY2hpdmUgU2VhcmNoICYgRG93bmxvYWQsIDct RGF5IEJyb3dzZSwgQ2hhdCwgRkFRLA0KDQpfLT0gUGhvdG9zaGFyZSwgYW5kIG11Y2ggbXVjaCBt b3JlOg0KDQpfLT0NCg0KXy09ICAgLS0+IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9OYXZpZ2F0 b3I/UlYxMC1MaXN0DQoNCl8tPQ0KDQpfLT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQ0KDQpfLT0gICAgICAgICAgICAgICAtIE1BVFJP TklDUyBXRUIgRk9SVU1TIC0NCg0KXy09IFNhbWUgZ3JlYXQgY29udGVudCBhbHNvIGF2YWlsYWJs ZSB2aWEgdGhlIFdlYiBGb3J1bXMhDQoNCl8tPQ0KDQpfLT0gICAtLT4gaHR0cDovL2ZvcnVtcy5t YXRyb25pY3MuY29tDQoNCl8tPQ0KDQpfLT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQ0KDQpfLT0gICAgICAgICAgICAgLSBMaXN0IENv bnRyaWJ1dGlvbiBXZWIgU2l0ZSAtDQoNCl8tPSAgVGhhbmsgeW91IGZvciB5b3VyIGdlbmVyb3Vz IHN1cHBvcnQhDQoNCl8tPSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIC1NYXR0IERyYWxs ZSwgTGlzdCBBZG1pbi4NCg0KXy09ICAgLS0+IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbS9jb250 cmlidXRpb24NCg0KXy09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0NCg0KDQo ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
Hi Steve, Well, the Continental fuel system in a Bonanza is quite different from the Lyc. I don't have as much experience with Continentals (Kelly??) but I don't think they run without positive fuel pressure either. And, on some Continentals the engine quits if you run "high boost" at the wrong altitude/power setting...yuck. I'd stick with what Beech says. As far as the minimum "unboosted" altitude, it has more to do with time to respond to a failure than with any physical correlation to ambient pressure. Personally, I try to keep it on below 2000 AGL. Dave Saylor 831-750-0284 CL On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Steve Farner wr ote: > Dave- I fly a Lance and a Bonanza, and in the Lance the pump is supposed > to be on as you say below (500 feet and lower was how I was taught). The > Bonanza does not require this in the checklist, and it is only used for > starting.not sure why that is the case, but am curious if anyone knows. * > *** > > ** ** > > Steve Farner**** > > ** ** > > *From:* owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto: > owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Dave Saylor > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 08, 2013 12:01 PM > *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com > *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Fuel pump use**** > > ** ** > > The main concept to understand about the boost pump is that it's there in > case the engine-driven pump fails.**** > > ** ** > > The fuel injection system on our engines won't function (the engine won't > run) without something in the neighborhood of 15 psi of fuel pressure. I > might be off a few pounds, but the point is that without some kind of fue l > pump, either engine driven or electrically driven, the engine won't run. > Even the head pressure from a high-wing is insufficient to operate the > fuel injection.**** > > ** ** > > What I take away from this is that if I can't tolerate a temporary loss o f > power then I use the boost pump. So I use it on take-off and landing, or > any other time I'm busy and/or close to the ground.**** > > ** ** > > To my way of thinking, the boost pump is an important piece of redundant > safety equipment, like a second mag or electrical supply.**** > > ** ** > > Starting is a whole other mode of operation, and another topic for > discussion, but in flight the pump should be on whenever you wouldn't hav e > time to mess with a restart due to engine pump failure.**** > > ** ** > > Fly safe!**** > > > **** > > Dave Saylor > 831-750-0284 CL**** > > ** ** > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Bruce Johnson > wrote:**** > > Good question Leon, I have got 85 hrs and have only used the electric pum p > for starting, I leave it on during cranking and it seems to start better > that way. I recently took a guy up and he said on low wing tanks its bett er > to use it on take off and landings????? On my 210 I only used it for star t > up as well and it did over fuel the system if used in addition while > running. On an Enstrom helicopter with gravity feed tanks they run them a ll > the time. So I guess it will be your preference which way you go.**** > > ** ** > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Leeverett > *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com > *Sent:* Monday, January 7, 2013 10:12 PM > *Subject:* RV10-List: Fuel pump use**** > > > I have finished my 10 except for paint and am ready for first flight. I > finished transition training last weekend with Pierrie Smith. It was a > great > experience and I recommend him to anyone looking for a CFI. I noted we > only used the electric fuel pump on engine start and not on takeoff, > landing or fuel tank change. Is this everyone's practice or do other folk s > have different ideas. Thank. Leon > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391785#391785 > > > **** > > * * > > * * > > *get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List* > > *tp://forums.matronics.com* > > *_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution* > > * * > > ** ** > > * * > > * * > ============* > > ============* > > ============* > > ============* > > * * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Bonanza and 210 have TCM engines and fuel systems, which are, or can be, different. These usually require a fuel return line back to the tank. On some of these you can over-enrich the mixture with the aux pump. But to repeat: there is no good reason not to run the aux pump on the standard Lycoming/RV set up, and if the mechanical pump quits at the wrong time you will be glad you did. -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391818#391818 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2013
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
I use it for cold starts and takeoffs from fields where an engine failure would be really bad news... like my home field. It's a pre-takeoff checklist item. I really should use it for all TOs and Landings but it screws up the fuel totalizer measurement. Bill On 1/8/2013 12:12 AM, Leeverett wrote: > > I have finished my 10 except for paint and am ready for first flight. I > finished transition training last weekend with Pierrie Smith. It was a great > experience and I recommend him to anyone looking for a CFI. I noted we > only used the electric fuel pump on engine start and not on takeoff, > landing or fuel tank change. Is this everyone's practice or do other folks > have different ideas. Thank. Leon > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: Rob Kochman <rv10rob(at)gmail.com>
In addition to what's already been stated, I've found that if I don't have my electric pump on in a high power climb, my fuel pressure drops below my alarm threshold (15 psi), though the engine seems to run fine. -Rob On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Dave Saylor < dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Steve, > > Well, the Continental fuel system in a Bonanza is quite different from th e > Lyc. I don't have as much experience with Continentals (Kelly??) but I > don't think they run without positive fuel pressure either. And, on some > Continentals the engine quits if you run "high boost" at the wrong > altitude/power setting...yuck. I'd stick with what Beech says. > > As far as the minimum "unboosted" altitude, it has more to do with time t o > respond to a failure than with any physical correlation to ambient > pressure. Personally, I try to keep it on below 2000 AGL. > > Dave Saylor > 831-750-0284 CL > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Steve Farner wrote: > >> Dave- I fly a Lance and a Bonanza, and in the Lance the pump is supposed >> to be on as you say below (500 feet and lower was how I was taught). Th e >> Bonanza does not require this in the checklist, and it is only used for >> starting.not sure why that is the case, but am curious if anyon e knows. >> **** >> >> ** ** >> >> Steve Farner**** >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto: >> owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Dave Saylor >> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 08, 2013 12:01 PM >> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com >> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Fuel pump use**** >> >> ** ** >> >> The main concept to understand about the boost pump is that it's there i n >> case the engine-driven pump fails.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> The fuel injection system on our engines won't function (the engine won' t >> run) without something in the neighborhood of 15 psi of fuel pressure. I >> might be off a few pounds, but the point is that without some kind of fu el >> pump, either engine driven or electrically driven, the engine won't run. >> Even the head pressure from a high-wing is insufficient to operate the >> fuel injection.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> What I take away from this is that if I can't tolerate a temporary loss >> of power then I use the boost pump. So I use it on take-off and landing , >> or any other time I'm busy and/or close to the ground.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> To my way of thinking, the boost pump is an important piece of redundant >> safety equipment, like a second mag or electrical supply.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Starting is a whole other mode of operation, and another topic for >> discussion, but in flight the pump should be on whenever you wouldn't ha ve >> time to mess with a restart due to engine pump failure.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Fly safe!**** >> >> >> **** >> >> Dave Saylor >> 831-750-0284 CL**** >> >> ** ** >> >> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Bruce Johnson >> wrote:**** >> >> Good question Leon, I have got 85 hrs and have only used the electric >> pump for starting, I leave it on during cranking and it seems to start >> better that way. I recently took a guy up and he said on low wing tanks its >> better to use it on take off and landings????? On my 210 I only used it for >> start up as well and it did over fuel the system if used in addition whi le >> running. On an Enstrom helicopter with gravity feed tanks they run them all >> the time. So I guess it will be your preference which way you go.**** >> >> ** ** >> ------------------------------ >> >> *From:* Leeverett >> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com >> *Sent:* Monday, January 7, 2013 10:12 PM >> *Subject:* RV10-List: Fuel pump use**** >> >> >> >> I have finished my 10 except for paint and am ready for first flight. I >> finished transition training last weekend with Pierrie Smith. It was a >> great >> experience and I recommend him to anyone looking for a CFI. I noted we >> only used the electric fuel pump on engine start and not on takeoff, >> landing or fuel tank change. Is this everyone's practice or do other fol ks >> have different ideas. Thank. Leon >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391785#391785 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> **** >> >> * * >> >> * * >> >> *get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List* >> >> *tp://forums.matronics.com* >> >> *_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution* >> >> * * >> >> ** ** >> >> * * >> >> * * >> >> *===============* >> >> - The RV10-List Email Forum -**** >> >> *such as List Un/Subscription,* >> >> **** s.com/Navigator?RV10-List" target="_blank"> >> http://www.matronics.com/Navigu>** ============ ======****=EF=BD - >> MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -**** "_blank">http://forums.matronics.com >> **** >> >> **=EF=BD - List Contribution Web Site -****** >> >> -Matt Dralle, List Admit; >> http://www.matronics.com/contribution**** ========== ========**** >> >> * * >> >> > * > =========== =========== =========== =========== > * > > -- Rob Kochman RV-10 Flying since March 2011 Woodinville, WA http://kochman.net/N819K ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale
From: "brunk" <robertbrunk(at)mac.com>
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Two of my blade edges unluckily got dinged by FOD, so I submitted an insurance claim for repairs and got the prop overhauled while it was in the shop for repairs. Otherwise the prop performed perfectly. Robert -------- Robert E. Brunkenhoefer Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391822#391822 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk(at)mac.com>
Subject: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale
Date: Jan 08, 2013
I went with the metal prop so I could fly while the MT was being overhauled. When it was returned I decided I would keep the metal prop and sell the MT. I plan to fly to gravel runways which would not be good for my MT. Robert Begin forwarded message: > From: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk(at)mac.com> > Subject: Fwd: RV10-List: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale > Date: January 8, 2013 2:13:16 PM CST > To: Bill Gipson > > > Robert Brunkenhoefer > Brunkenhoefer Law Firm, P.C. > 606 N. Carancahua St. > Ste 1200 > Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 > Phone: 361-888-8808 > Facsimile: 361-888-6753 > robert(at)brunklaw.com > > > > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk(at)mac.com> >> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale >> Date: January 8, 2013 2:10:11 PM CST >> To: Bill Gipson >> >> Bill, While I did not quite get book speeds on my 10 with the MT prop, The rate of climb was dramatically better with my blended airfoil metal 2 bladed prop. Also the rate of decelleration when I throttled back took some adjusting to with the metal prop. I estimate a 5-7 Kt improvement in a/s with the metal prop and a 500 FPM loss of climb . I fly out of Ruidoso. I thought I needed the MT for a greater rate of climb, but the metal prop has plenty of climb power at the 6800 ft airport. >> On Jan 8, 2013, at 12:31 PM, Bill Gipson wrote: >> >>> Robert, Bill Gipson from Conroe here. I've got a MT prop on my 10 with the LS1 engine. Disappointed with the speeds I'm getting. Can you comment on what your performance was and did you see much difference with the metal prop? Which metal prop did you switch to? Regards, Bill >>> >>> > Subject: RV10-List: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale >>> > From: robertbrunk(at)mac.com >>> > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 10:19:38 -0800 >>> > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com >>> > >>> > >>> > I recently replaced my 3 Blade MT prop on my RV10 with a metal prop. I had the MT prop overhauled at the factory shop in Deland,Florida. It is a complete overhaul to new specs. It is in the shipping crate ready to go. I have all the paper work including the prop logbook entry showing the overhaul done. I am offering it for sale at $8000 including backing plate and nose bowl ready to go on your IO540 engine. You can reach me at 361 533 2383.I am located at KCRP.[/b] >>> > >>> > -------- >>> > Robert E. Brunkenhoefer >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > Read this topic online here: >>> > >>> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391813#391813 >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2013
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
You are correct. Every Lycoming powered fuel injected aircraft I have worked on, with Bendix RSA injection called for pump on for takeoff and landing. Cessna 210 and Bonanza have Continental injection system that is very sensitive to unmetered pressure coming into the fuel servo. Adding boost pump upsets the mixture calibration. Yes, boost pump off in climb is pilot's discretion for ability to respond if engine falters because mechanical pump failed. FWIW a 210 was totaled at my airport on New Year's eve because it appears mechanical pump failed at 100 ft. With most any injected engine it takes 5-10 seconds for fire to relight after a fuel delivery interruption. Fortunately they made a open soft field about 40 degrees off centerline and walked away uninjured. Kelly On 1/8/2013 11:57 AM, Dave Saylor wrote: > Hi Steve, > > Well, the Continental fuel system in a Bonanza is quite different from > the Lyc. I don't have as much experience with Continentals (Kelly??) > but I don't think they run without positive fuel pressure either. And, > on some Continentals the engine quits if you run "high boost" at the > wrong altitude/power setting...yuck. I'd stick with what Beech says. > > As far as the minimum "unboosted" altitude, it has more to do with > time to respond to a failure than with any physical correlation to > ambient pressure. Personally, I try to keep it on below 2000 AGL. > > Dave Saylor > 831-750-0284 CL > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Steve Farner > > wrote: > > Dave- I fly a Lance and a Bonanza, and in the Lance the pump is > supposed to be on as you say below (500 feet and lower was how I > was taught). The Bonanza does not require this in the checklist, > and it is only used for starting.not sure why that is the case, > but am curious if anyone knows. > > Steve Farner > > *From:*owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com > ] *On Behalf Of *Dave > Saylor > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 08, 2013 12:01 PM > *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com > *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Fuel pump use > > The main concept to understand about the boost pump is that it's > there in case the engine-driven pump fails. > > The fuel injection system on our engines won't function (the > engine won't run) without something in the neighborhood of 15 psi > of fuel pressure. I might be off a few pounds, but the point is > that without some kind of fuel pump, either engine driven or > electrically driven, the engine won't run. Even the head pressure > from a high-wing is insufficient to operate the fuel injection. > > What I take away from this is that if I can't tolerate a temporary > loss of power then I use the boost pump. So I use it on take-off > and landing, or any other time I'm busy and/or close to the ground. > > To my way of thinking, the boost pump is an important piece of > redundant safety equipment, like a second mag or electrical supply. > > Starting is a whole other mode of operation, and another topic for > discussion, but in flight the pump should be on whenever you > wouldn't have time to mess with a restart due to engine pump failure. > > Fly safe! > > > Dave Saylor > 831-750-0284 CL > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Bruce Johnson > > wrote: > > Good question Leon, I have got 85 hrs and have only used the > electric pump for starting, I leave it on during cranking and it > seems to start better that way. I recently took a guy up and he > said on low wing tanks its better to use it on take off and > landings????? On my 210 I only used it for start up as well and it > did over fuel the system if used in addition while running. On an > Enstrom helicopter with gravity feed tanks they run them all the > time. So I guess it will be your preference which way you go. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:*Leeverett > > *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com > *Sent:* Monday, January 7, 2013 10:12 PM > *Subject:* RV10-List: Fuel pump use > > > > > > I have finished my 10 except for paint and am ready for first > flight. I > finished transition training last weekend with Pierrie Smith. It > was a great > experience and I recommend him to anyone looking for a CFI. I > noted we > only used the electric fuel pump on engine start and not on takeoff, > landing or fuel tank change. Is this everyone's practice or do > other folks > have different ideas. Thank. Leon > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391785#391785 > > > * * > > * * > > *get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List* > > *tp://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>* > > *_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution* > > * * > > * * > > * * > > *===============* > > - The RV10-List Email Forum - > > *such as List Un/Subscription,* > > s.com/Navigator?RV10-List" > target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigu> > ================== - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -__ > "_blank">http://forums.matronics.com > > - List Contribution Web Site -__ > > -Matt Dralle, List Admit; > http://www.matronics.com/contribution ================= > > * * > > > * > > > * ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: Bob-TCW <rnewman(at)tcwtech.com>
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Rob. I'm curious, do you have your fuel flow transducer in the plans shown l ocation? Since my write-up on fuel flow (and corresponding change to fuel system), my fuel flow and pressure issues are completely gone. Bob Newman Sent from my iPhone On Jan 8, 2013, at 2:20 PM, Rob Kochman wrote: > In addition to what's already been stated, I've found that if I don't have my electric pump on in a high power climb, my fuel pressure drops below my a larm threshold (15 psi), though the engine seems to run fine. > > -Rob > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmai l.com> wrote: >> Hi Steve, >> >> Well, the Continental fuel system in a Bonanza is quite different from th e Lyc. I don't have as much experience with Continentals (Kelly??) but I do n't think they run without positive fuel pressure either. And, on some Conti nentals the engine quits if you run "high boost" at the wrong altitude/power setting...yuck. I'd stick with what Beech says. >> >> As far as the minimum "unboosted" altitude, it has more to do with time t o respond to a failure than with any physical correlation to ambient pressur e. Personally, I try to keep it on below 2000 AGL. >> >> Dave Saylor >> 831-750-0284 CL >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Steve Farner wrote: >>> Dave- I fly a Lance and a Bonanza, and in the Lance the pump is supposed to be on as you say below (500 feet and lower was how I was taught). The B onanza does not require this in the checklist, and it is only used for start ing.not sure why that is the case, but am curious if anyone knows. >>> >>> >>> >>> Steve Farner >>> >>> >>> >>> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-serve r(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Saylor >>> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 12:01 PM >>> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com >>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fuel pump use >>> >>> >>> >>> The main concept to understand about the boost pump is that it's there i n case the engine-driven pump fails. >>> >>> >>> >>> The fuel injection system on our engines won't function (the engine won' t run) without something in the neighborhood of 15 psi of fuel pressure. I m ight be off a few pounds, but the point is that without some kind of fuel pu mp, either engine driven or electrically driven, the engine won't run. Even the head pressure from a high-wing is insufficient to operate the fuel inje ction. >>> >>> >>> >>> What I take away from this is that if I can't tolerate a temporary loss o f power then I use the boost pump. So I use it on take-off and landing, or a ny other time I'm busy and/or close to the ground. >>> >>> >>> >>> To my way of thinking, the boost pump is an important piece of redundant safety equipment, like a second mag or electrical supply. >>> >>> >>> >>> Starting is a whole other mode of operation, and another topic for discu ssion, but in flight the pump should be on whenever you wouldn't have time t o mess with a restart due to engine pump failure. >>> >>> >>> >>> Fly safe! >>> >>> >>> >>> Dave Saylor >>> 831-750-0284 CL >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Good question Leon, I have got 85 hrs and have only used the electric pu mp for starting, I leave it on during cranking and it seems to start better t hat way. I recently took a guy up and he said on low wing tanks its better t o use it on take off and landings????? On my 210 I only used it for start up as well and it did over fuel the system if used in addition while running. O n an Enstrom helicopter with gravity feed tanks they run them all the time. S o I guess it will be your preference which way you go. >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Leeverett <Leeverett(at)msn.com> >>> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com >>> Sent: Monday, January 7, 2013 10:12 PM >>> Subject: RV10-List: Fuel pump use >>> >>> >>> >>> I have finished my 10 except for paint and am ready for first flight. I >>> finished transition training last weekend with Pierrie Smith. It was a g reat >>> experience and I recommend him to anyone looking for a CFI. I noted we >>> only used the electric fuel pump on engine start and not on takeoff, >>> landing or fuel tank change. Is this everyone's practice or do other fol ks >>> have different ideas. Thank. Leon >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Read this topic online here: >>> >>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391785#391785 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >>> tp://forums.matronics.com >>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ============== >>> - The RV10-List Email Forum - >>> such as List Un/Subscription, >>> s.com/Navigator?RV10-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Na vigu> ===================EF=BD - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - "_blank">http://forums.matronics.com >>> =EF=BD - List Contribution Web Site - >>> -Matt Dralle, List Admit; http://www.matronics.com /contribution ================= >>> >> >> >> >> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >> tp://forums.matronics.com >> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> > > > > -- > Rob Kochman > RV-10 Flying since March 2011 > Woodinville, WA > http://kochman.net/N819K > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2013
From: Bruce Johnson <bruce1hwjohnson(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
OK from now on mine is going on during take off and landing, thanks for enl ightening me and a great question Leon.=C2-=0A=0A=0A_____________________ ___________=0A From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>=0ATo: rv10-list@m atronics.com =0ASent: Tuesday, January 8, 2013 1:22 PM=0ASubject: Re: RV10- kellym(at)aviating.com>=0A=0AYou are correct. Every Lycoming powered fuel inje cted aircraft I have =0Aworked on, with Bendix RSA injection called for pum p on for takeoff and =0Alanding.=0ACessna 210 and Bonanza have Continental injection system that is very =0Asensitive to unmetered pressure coming int o the fuel servo. Adding boost =0Apump upsets the mixture calibration. Yes, boost pump off in climb is =0Apilot's discretion for ability to respond if engine falters because =0Amechanical pump failed.=0AFWIW a 210 was totaled at my airport on New Year's eve because it =0Aappears mechanical pump fail ed at 100 ft. With most any injected engine =0Ait takes 5-10 seconds for fi re to relight after a fuel delivery =0Ainterruption. Fortunately they made a open soft field about 40 degrees =0Aoff centerline and walked away uninju red.=0AKelly=0AOn 1/8/2013 11:57 AM, Dave Saylor wrote:=0A> Hi Steve,=0A> =0A> Well, the Continental fuel system in a Bonanza is quite different from =0A> the Lyc.=C2- I don't have as much experience with Continentals (Kel ly??) =0A> but I don't think they run without positive fuel pressure either . And, =0A> on some Continentals the engine quits if you run "high boost" a t the =0A> wrong altitude/power setting...yuck.=C2- I'd stick with what B eech says.=0A>=0A> As far as the minimum "unboosted" altitude, it has more to do with =0A> time to respond to a failure than with any physical correla tion to =0A> ambient pressure.=C2- Personally, I try to keep it on below 2000 AGL.=0A>=0A> Dave Saylor=0A> 831-750-0284 CL=0A>=0A>=0A> On Tue, Jan 8 , 2013 at 10:42 AM, Steve Farner =0A> > wrote:=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- Dave- I fly a Lance and a Bonanza, and in the Lance the pump is=0A>=C2- =C2- supposed to b e on as you say below (500 feet and lower was how I=0A>=C2- =C2- was t aught).=C2- The Bonanza does not require this in the checklist,=0A>=C2- =C2- and it is only used for starting.not sure why that is the case,=0A>=C2- =C2- but am curious if anyone knows.=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2 - Steve Farner=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- *From:*owner-rv10-list-server@matro nics.com=0A>=C2- =C2- =0A >=C2- =C2- [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com=0A>=C2- =C2 - ] *On Behalf Of *Dave=0A> =C2- =C2- Saylor=0A>=C2- =C2- *Sent:* Tuesday, January 08, 2013 1 2:01 PM=0A>=C2- =C2- *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com =0A>=C2- =C2- *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Fuel pump use=0A> =0A>=C2- =C2- The main concept to understand about the boost pump is t hat it's=0A>=C2- =C2- there in case the engine-driven pump fails.=0A> =0A>=C2- =C2- The fuel injection system on our engines won't function (the=0A>=C2- =C2- engine won't run) without something in the neighborh ood of 15 psi=0A>=C2- =C2- of fuel pressure.=C2- I might be off a fe w pounds, but the point is=0A>=C2- =C2- that without some kind of fuel pump, either engine driven or=0A>=C2- =C2- electrically driven, the e ngine won't run.=C2- Even the head pressure=0A>=C2- =C2- from a high -wing is insufficient to operate the fuel injection.=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- What I take away from this is that if I can't tolerate a temporary=0A>=C2 - =C2- loss of power then I use the boost pump.=C2- So I use it on t ake-off=0A>=C2- =C2- and landing, or any other time I'm busy and/or cl ose to the ground.=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- To my way of thinking, the boost p ump is an important piece of=0A>=C2- =C2- redundant safety equipment, like a second mag or electrical supply.=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- Starting is a whole other mode of operation, and another topic for=0A>=C2- =C2- dis cussion, but in flight the pump should be on whenever you=0A>=C2- =C2- wouldn't have time to mess with a restart due to engine pump failure.=0A> =0A>=C2- =C2- Fly safe!=0A>=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- Dave Saylor=0A>=C2 - =C2- 831-750-0284 CL=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- On Tue , Jan 8, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Bruce Johnson=0A>=C2- =C2- > wrote:=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- Good question Leon, I have got 85 hrs and have only used the=0A>=C2- =C2 - electric pump for starting, I leave it on during cranking and it=0A> =C2- =C2- seems to start better that way. I recently took a guy up and he=0A>=C2- =C2- said on low wing tanks its better to use it on take o ff and=0A>=C2- =C2- landings????? On my 210 I only used it for start u p as well and it=0A>=C2- =C2- did over fuel the system if used in addi tion while running. On an=0A>=C2- =C2- Enstrom helicopter with gravity feed tanks they run them all the=0A>=C2- =C2- time. So I guess it wil l be your preference which way you go.=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- -------------- ----------------------------------------------------------=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- *From:*Leeverett >=0A> =C2- =C2- *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com =0A>=C2- =C2- *Sent:* Monday, January 7, 2013 10:12 PM=0A>=C2- =C2 - *Subject:* RV10-List: Fuel pump use=0A>=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- --> RV10 -List message posted by: "Leeverett" =C2- =C2- < mailto:Leeverett(at)msn.com>>=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- I have finished my 10 exce pt for paint and am ready for first=0A>=C2- =C2- flight. I=0A>=C2- =C2- finished transition training last weekend with Pierrie Smith. It=0A >=C2- =C2- was a great=0A>=C2- =C2- experience and I recommend hi m to anyone looking for a CFI. I=0A>=C2- =C2- noted we=0A>=C2- =C2 - only used the electric fuel pump on engine start and not on takeoff, =0A>=C2- =C2- landing or fuel tank change. Is this everyone's practice or do=0A>=C2- =C2- other folks=0A>=C2- =C2- have different ideas . Thank. Leon=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- Read this topic online here :=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391785 #391785=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- *=C2 - *=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- *=C2- *=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- *get="_blank" >http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List*=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- *tp:// forums.matronics.com=C2- <http://forums.matronics.com>*=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2 - *_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution*=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- *=C2- *=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- *=C2- *=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- *=C2- * =0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- *===============*=0A> =0A>=C2- =C2- =C2- - The RV10-List Email Forum -=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2 - *such as List Un/Subscription,*=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- s.com/Navigator? RV10-List"=0A>=C2- =C2- target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Nav igu>=0A>=C2- =C2- ================= ==EF=BD=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -__=0A>=C2 - =C2- "_blank">http://forums.matronics.com=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- =EF =BD=C2- =C2- =C2- - List Contribution Web Site -__=0A>=0A>=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2 - =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admit;=0A>=C2- =C2- http://www.matronics .com/contribution ===================0A >=0A>=C2- =C2- *=C2- *=0A>=0A>=0A> *=0A>=0A>=0A> *=0A=0A=0A=0A----- =0ANo virus found in this message.=0AChecked by AVG - www.avg.com=0A=0A=0A_ -======================== ==C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ==C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fwd: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Jan 08, 2013
??? Isn't the 2 blade longer? I would have guessed the 3 blade would be better for gravel. -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391833#391833 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2013
From: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale
Thanks - I have gravel right in front of my hangar on a grass strip - I pull it out to the grass to start and I shut down in the grass. Even with the shorter blades on the three blade.... -----Original Message----- From: Robert Brunkenhoefer Sent: Jan 8, 2013 3:19 PM Subject: Fwd: RV10-List: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale I went with the metal prop so I could fly while the MT was being overhauled. When it was returned I decided I would keep the metal prop and sell the MT. I plan to fly to gravel runways which would not be good for my MT. Robert Begin forwarded message: From: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk(at)mac.com> Subject: Fwd: RV10-List: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale Date: January 8, 2013 2:13:16 PM CST Robert Brunkenhoefer Brunkenhoefer Law Firm, P.C. 606 N. Carancahua St.Ste 1200Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 Phone: 361-888-8808 Facsimile: 361-888-6753 robert(at)brunklaw.com Begin forwarded message: From: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk(at)mac.com> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale Date: January 8, 2013 2:10:11 PM CST Bill, While I did not quite get book speeds on my 10 with the MT prop, The rate of climb was dramatically better with my blended airfoil metal 2 bladed prop. Also the rate of decelleration when I throttled back took some adjusting to with the metal prop. I estimate a 5-7 Kt improvement in a/s with the metal prop and a 500 FPM loss of climb . I fly out of Ruidoso. I thought I needed the MT for a greater rate of climb, but the metal prop has plenty of climb power at the 6800 ft airport. On Jan 8, 2013, at 12:31 PM, Bill Gipson wrote: Robert, Bill Gipson from Conroe here. I've got a MT prop on my 10 with the LS1 engine. Disappointed with the speeds I'm getting. Can you comment on what your performance was and did you see much difference with the metal prop? Which metal prop did you switch to? Regards, Bill > Subject: RV10-List: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale > From: robertbrunk(at)mac.com > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 10:19:38 -0800 > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > > > I recently replaced my 3 Blade MT prop on my RV10 with a metal prop. I had the MT prop overhauled at the factory shop in Deland,Florida. It is a complete overhaul to new specs. It is in the shipping crate ready to go. I have all the paper work including the prop logbook entry showing the overhaul done. I am offering it for sale at $8000 including backing plate and nose bowl ready to go on your IO540 engine. You can reach me at 361 533 2383.I am located at KCRP.[/b] > > -------- > Robert E. Brunkenhoefer > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391813#391813 > > > > > > > > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronicshref="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com &href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution > ========== > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Subject: Re: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale
From: Ed Kranz <ed.kranz(at)gmail.com>
Robert, Having flown both propellers on the same plane, how do you compare them? Ed On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Ralph E. Capen wrote: > > Thanks - I have gravel right in front of my hangar on a grass strip - I > pull it out to the grass to start and I shut down in the grass. Even with > the shorter blades on the three blade.... > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Robert Brunkenhoefer > > Sent: Jan 8, 2013 3:19 PM > > To: Rv10 Web > > Subject: Fwd: RV10-List: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale > > > I went with the metal prop so I could fly while the MT was being > overhauled. When it was returned I decided I would keep the metal prop and > sell the MT. I plan to fly to gravel runways which would not be good for my > MT. Robert > > Begin forwarded message: > From: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk(at)mac.com> > Subject: Fwd: RV10-List: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale > Date: January 8, 2013 2:13:16 PM CST > To: Bill Gipson > > > Robert Brunkenhoefer > Brunkenhoefer Law Firm, P.C. > 606 N. Carancahua St.Ste 1200Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 > Phone: 361-888-8808 > Facsimile: 361-888-6753 > robert(at)brunklaw.com > > > Begin forwarded message: > From: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk(at)mac.com> > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale > Date: January 8, 2013 2:10:11 PM CST > To: Bill Gipson > > Bill, While I did not quite get book speeds on my 10 with the MT prop, The > rate of climb was dramatically better with my blended airfoil metal 2 > bladed prop. Also the rate of decelleration when I throttled back took some > adjusting to with the metal prop. I estimate a 5-7 Kt improvement in a/s > with the metal prop and a 500 FPM loss of climb . I fly out of Ruidoso. I > thought I needed the MT for a greater rate of climb, but the metal prop has > plenty of climb power at the 6800 ft airport. > On Jan 8, 2013, at 12:31 PM, Bill Gipson wrote: > Robert, Bill Gipson from Conroe here. I've got a MT prop on my 10 with > the LS1 engine. Disappointed with the speeds I'm getting. Can you comment > on what your performance was and did you see much difference with the metal > prop? Which metal prop did you switch to? Regards, Bill > > > Subject: RV10-List: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale > > From: robertbrunk(at)mac.com > > Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 10:19:38 -0800 > > To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com > > > > > > I recently replaced my 3 Blade MT prop on my RV10 with a metal prop. I > had the MT prop overhauled at the factory shop in Deland,Florida. It is a > complete overhaul to new specs. It is in the shipping crate ready to go. I > have all the paper work including the prop logbook entry showing the > overhaul done. I am offering it for sale at $8000 including backing plate > and nose bowl ready to go on your IO540 engine. You can reach me at 361 > 533 2383.I am located at KCRP.[/b] > > > > -------- > > Robert E. Brunkenhoefer > > > > > > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391813#391813 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List"> > http://www.matronicshref="http://forums.matronics.com/"> > http://forums.matronics.com > &href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution"> > http://www.matronics.com/contribution > > ========== > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fwd: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Jan 08, 2013
see this post for his MT vs Hartzel comparison. http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t-336 -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391843#391843 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fwd: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale
From: Robert Brunkenhoefer <robertbrunk(at)me.com>
Date: Jan 08, 2013
The 2 blade is longer but if the metal blade is damaged in some remote place an a&p can file it out. If the metal edge on the MT is damaged it cannot be filed. So I would be grounded. On Jan 8, 2013, at 2:55 PM, Bob Turner wrote: > > ??? Isn't the 2 blade longer? I would have guessed the 3 blade would be better for gravel. > > -------- > Bob Turner > RV-10 QB > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391833#391833 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: Rob Kochman <rv10rob(at)gmail.com>
Yes, Bob, it's in the tunnel, per plans. I did read your writeup and haven't noticed any of those issues, though. -Rob On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Bob-TCW wrote: > Rob. I'm curious, do you have your fuel flow transducer in the plans > shown location? Since my write-up on fuel flow (and corresponding chan ge > to fuel system), my fuel flow and pressure issues are completely gone. > > Bob Newman > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 2:20 PM, Rob Kochman wrote: > > In addition to what's already been stated, I've found that if I don't hav e > my electric pump on in a high power climb, my fuel pressure drops below m y > alarm threshold (15 psi), though the engine seems to run fine. > > -Rob > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Dave Saylor < > dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Steve, >> >> Well, the Continental fuel system in a Bonanza is quite different from >> the Lyc. I don't have as much experience with Continentals (Kelly??) bu t I >> don't think they run without positive fuel pressure either. And, on some >> Continentals the engine quits if you run "high boost" at the wrong >> altitude/power setting...yuck. I'd stick with what Beech says. >> >> As far as the minimum "unboosted" altitude, it has more to do with time >> to respond to a failure than with any physical correlation to ambient >> pressure. Personally, I try to keep it on below 2000 AGL. >> >> Dave Saylor >> 831-750-0284 CL >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Steve Farner wrote: >> >>> Dave- I fly a Lance and a Bonanza, and in the Lance the pump is suppose d >>> to be on as you say below (500 feet and lower was how I was taught). T he >>> Bonanza does not require this in the checklist, and it is only used for >>> starting.not sure why that is the case, but am curious if anyo ne knows. >>> **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Steve Farner**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto: >>> owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Dave Saylor >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 08, 2013 12:01 PM >>> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com >>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Fuel pump use**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> The main concept to understand about the boost pump is that it's there >>> in case the engine-driven pump fails.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> The fuel injection system on our engines won't function (the engine >>> won't run) without something in the neighborhood of 15 psi of fuel >>> pressure. I might be off a few pounds, but the point is that without s ome >>> kind of fuel pump, either engine driven or electrically driven, the eng ine >>> won't run. Even the head pressure from a high-wing is insufficient to >>> operate the fuel injection.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> What I take away from this is that if I can't tolerate a temporary loss >>> of power then I use the boost pump. So I use it on take-off and landin g, >>> or any other time I'm busy and/or close to the ground.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> To my way of thinking, the boost pump is an important piece of redundan t >>> safety equipment, like a second mag or electrical supply.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Starting is a whole other mode of operation, and another topic for >>> discussion, but in flight the pump should be on whenever you wouldn't h ave >>> time to mess with a restart due to engine pump failure.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Fly safe!**** >>> >>> >>> **** >>> >>> Dave Saylor >>> 831-750-0284 CL**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Bruce Johnson >>> wrote:**** >>> >>> Good question Leon, I have got 85 hrs and have only used the electric >>> pump for starting, I leave it on during cranking and it seems to start >>> better that way. I recently took a guy up and he said on low wing tanks its >>> better to use it on take off and landings????? On my 210 I only used it for >>> start up as well and it did over fuel the system if used in addition wh ile >>> running. On an Enstrom helicopter with gravity feed tanks they run them all >>> the time. So I guess it will be your preference which way you go.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> *From:* Leeverett >>> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com >>> *Sent:* Monday, January 7, 2013 10:12 PM >>> *Subject:* RV10-List: Fuel pump use**** >>> >>> >>> >>> I have finished my 10 except for paint and am ready for first flight. I >>> finished transition training last weekend with Pierrie Smith. It was a >>> great >>> experience and I recommend him to anyone looking for a CFI. I noted we >>> only used the electric fuel pump on engine start and not on takeoff, >>> landing or fuel tank change. Is this everyone's practice or do other >>> folks >>> have different ideas. Thank. Leon >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Read this topic online here: >>> >>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391785#391785 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> **** >>> >>> * * >>> >>> * * >>> >>> *get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List* >>> >>> *tp://forums.matronics.com* >>> >>> *_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution* >>> >>> * * >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> * * >>> >>> * * >>> >>> *===============* >>> >>> - The RV10-List Email Forum -**** >>> >>> *such as List Un/Subscription,* >>> >>> **** s.com/Navigator?RV10-List" target="_blank"> >>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigu>** ============ ======****=EF=BD - >>> MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -**** "_blank">http://forums.matronics.com >>> **** >>> >>> **=EF=BD - List Contribution Web Site -****** >>> >>> -Matt Dralle, List Admit; >>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution**** ========= =========**** >>> >>> * * >>> >>> >> * >> >> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >> >> tp://forums.matronics.com >> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> * >> >> > > > -- > Rob Kochman > RV-10 Flying since March 2011 > Woodinville, WA > http://kochman.net/N819K > > * > > ======================== > ://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List > ======================== ===========cs.com > ======================== ===========matronics.com/contribution > ======================== > * > > * > =========== =========== =========== =========== > * > > -- Rob Kochman RV-10 Flying since March 2011 Woodinville, WA http://kochman.net/N819K ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Subject: Re: Fwd: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Of the props Van's offers, the Hartzell 2 blade is 80", 3 blade composite 78"; and the MT 3 blade is 76". On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Bob Turner wrote: > > ??? Isn't the 2 blade longer? I would have guessed the 3 blade would be better for gravel. > > -------- > Bob Turner > RV-10 QB > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391833#391833 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: MT Prop(s)
From: "Kellym" <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Date: Jan 08, 2013
[quote="Deems Davis"]I'm off the ground before an unloadedMaule. And faster than a speeding bullet. In an airborne drag race, Iconsistently 'walk-away' from All RV10's with either a 2 bld Hartzellor 3bld MT . (the burn-outs are exhilarating!!,but waiting for the christmas tree lightsis still a bit problematic). Deems quote] You won't get any Christmas lights from the DVT tower, but CHD tower has them every holiday season. You get to flash all you frequency changes up there. Only airport I know of that takes 5 frequency changes to taxi from one side of the airport to the other. So you lose all your speed advantage in the taxi tantrums up there............. -------- Kelly McMullen A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286 KCHD Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391856#391856 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
I have yet to understand Van's logic, to make the mechanical pump have to draw the fuel through the pressure drop of the sending unit, when it takes enough effort just to pull from the tanks through the rise for the selector, and through the filter. All of the STC instructions for installing sending unit on certified aircraft place it AFTER the mechanical pump. On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Rob Kochman wrote: > Yes, Bob, it's in the tunnel, per plans. I did read your writeup and > haven't noticed any of those issues, though. > > -Rob ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Too many Roberts! Robert: Thanks for your reply. If you expect this to happen again you should have someone show you how to file the prop yourself. Of course there are limits as to how much material you can remove. Be interesting to see how this works out long term: Frequent filings near the end of the longer Hartzel, eventually bringing the blades below service limits; or rarer hits on the shorter MT but then need to go to the factory for repair. Rob: low pressure warning during full power climb. Mine does the same thing, but it's a "feature". Mine only does it as I climb above 5,000', so it is a reminder that it is time to lean! As soon as I do, even a bit, pressure comes back up. Bob: yes I have the per-plans set up, and have not seen any indication of vapor. I still wonder if your experience is related to your non standard filer set up. (signed), Still another Bob PS yes my FF reads a bit high with the aux pump on. But I would rather refuel when the FF says I only have 10 gal only to find I really had 13, than have the engine quit just after lift off because I did not have the aux pump on. -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391860#391860 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fwd: Newly Overhauled MT prop for sale
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Robert: Thanks for your reply. If you expect this to happen again you should have someone show you how to file the prop yourself. Of course there are limits as to how much material you can remove. Be interesting to see how this works out long term: Frequent filings near the end of the longer Hartzel, eventually bringing the blades below service limits; or rarer hits on the shorter MT but then need to go to the factory for repair. -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391862#391862 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Sorry, the above post to Robert is in the wrong thread. Bob -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391863#391863 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: Bob-TCW <rnewman(at)tcwtech.com>
Date: Jan 08, 2013
When I talked to vans about my observations, they told me they saw low fuel p ressure on long extended climb outs so they just turned on the boost pump an d the pressure came back up. No problem. Silence on my end, never mind.. ... Bob Newman Sent from my iPhone On Jan 8, 2013, at 7:31 PM, Rob Kochman wrote: > Yes, Bob, it's in the tunnel, per plans. I did read your writeup and have n't noticed any of those issues, though. > > -Rob > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Bob-TCW wrote: >> Rob. I'm curious, do you have your fuel flow transducer in the plans sho wn location? Since my write-up on fuel flow (and corresponding change to f uel system), my fuel flow and pressure issues are completely gone. >> >> Bob Newman >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Jan 8, 2013, at 2:20 PM, Rob Kochman wrote: >> >>> In addition to what's already been stated, I've found that if I don't ha ve my electric pump on in a high power climb, my fuel pressure drops below m y alarm threshold (15 psi), though the engine seems to run fine. >>> >>> -Rob >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters@gm ail.com> wrote: >>>> Hi Steve, >>>> >>>> Well, the Continental fuel system in a Bonanza is quite different from t he Lyc. I don't have as much experience with Continentals (Kelly??) but I d on't think they run without positive fuel pressure either. And, on some Cont inentals the engine quits if you run "high boost" at the wrong altitude/powe r setting...yuck. I'd stick with what Beech says. >>>> >>>> As far as the minimum "unboosted" altitude, it has more to do with time to respond to a failure than with any physical correlation to ambient press ure. Personally, I try to keep it on below 2000 AGL. >>>> >>>> Dave Saylor >>>> 831-750-0284 CL >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Steve Farner wrote: >>>>> Dave- I fly a Lance and a Bonanza, and in the Lance the pump is suppos ed to be on as you say below (500 feet and lower was how I was taught). The Bonanza does not require this in the checklist, and it is only used for sta rting.not sure why that is the case, but am curious if anyone knows . >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Steve Farner >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-ser ver(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Saylor >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 12:01 PM >>>>> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com >>>>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fuel pump use >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The main concept to understand about the boost pump is that it's there in case the engine-driven pump fails. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The fuel injection system on our engines won't function (the engine wo n't run) without something in the neighborhood of 15 psi of fuel pressure. I might be off a few pounds, but the point is that without some kind of fuel p ump, either engine driven or electrically driven, the engine won't run. Eve n the head pressure from a high-wing is insufficient to operate the fuel inj ection. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> What I take away from this is that if I can't tolerate a temporary los s of power then I use the boost pump. So I use it on take-off and landing, o r any other time I'm busy and/or close to the ground. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> To my way of thinking, the boost pump is an important piece of redunda nt safety equipment, like a second mag or electrical supply. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Starting is a whole other mode of operation, and another topic for dis cussion, but in flight the pump should be on whenever you wouldn't have time to mess with a restart due to engine pump failure. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Fly safe! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dave Saylor >>>>> 831-750-0284 CL >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Good question Leon, I have got 85 hrs and have only used the electric p ump for starting, I leave it on during cranking and it seems to start better that way. I recently took a guy up and he said on low wing tanks its better to use it on take off and landings????? On my 210 I only used it for start u p as well and it did over fuel the system if used in addition while running. On an Enstrom helicopter with gravity feed tanks they run them all the time . So I guess it will be your preference which way you go. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: Leeverett <Leeverett(at)msn.com> >>>>> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 7, 2013 10:12 PM >>>>> Subject: RV10-List: Fuel pump use >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I have finished my 10 except for paint and am ready for first flight. I >>>>> finished transition training last weekend with Pierrie Smith. It was a great >>>>> experience and I recommend him to anyone looking for a CFI. I noted we >>>>> only used the electric fuel pump on engine start and not on takeoff, >>>>> landing or fuel tank change. Is this everyone's practice or do other f olks >>>>> have different ideas. Thank. Leon >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Read this topic online here: >>>>> >>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391785#391785 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >>>>> tp://forums.matronics.com >>>>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ============== >>>>> - The RV10-List Email Forum - >>>>> such as List Un/Subscription, >>>>> s.com/Navigator?RV10-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/ Navigu> ===================EF=BD - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - "_blank">http://forums.matronics.com >>>>> =EF=BD - List Contribution Web Site - >>>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admit; http://www.matronics.c om/contribution ================= >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >>>> >>>> tp://forums.matronics.com >>>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Rob Kochman >>> RV-10 Flying since March 2011 >>> Woodinville, WA >>> http://kochman.net/N819K >>> >>> >>> ========= >>> ://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >>> ========= >>> cs.com >>> ========= >>> matronics.com/contribution >>> ========= >>> >> >> >> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >> tp://forums.matronics.com >> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> > > > > -- > Rob Kochman > RV-10 Flying since March 2011 > Woodinville, WA > http://kochman.net/N819K > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2013
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: Rob Kochman <rv10rob(at)gmail.com>
Yep, Bob, I do see that issue (I didn't remember that part from your report). On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Bob-TCW wrote: > When I talked to vans about my observations, they told me they saw low > fuel pressure on long extended climb outs so they just turned on the boos t > pump and the pressure came back up. No problem. Silence on my end, > never mind..... > > Bob Newman > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 7:31 PM, Rob Kochman wrote: > > Yes, Bob, it's in the tunnel, per plans. I did read your writeup and > haven't noticed any of those issues, though. > > -Rob > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Bob-TCW wrote: > >> Rob. I'm curious, do you have your fuel flow transducer in the plans >> shown location? Since my write-up on fuel flow (and corresponding cha nge >> to fuel system), my fuel flow and pressure issues are completely gone. >> >> Bob Newman >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Jan 8, 2013, at 2:20 PM, Rob Kochman wrote: >> >> In addition to what's already been stated, I've found that if I don't >> have my electric pump on in a high power climb, my fuel pressure drops >> below my alarm threshold (15 psi), though the engine seems to run fine. >> >> -Rob >> >> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Dave Saylor < >> dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Steve, >>> >>> Well, the Continental fuel system in a Bonanza is quite different from >>> the Lyc. I don't have as much experience with Continentals (Kelly??) b ut I >>> don't think they run without positive fuel pressure either. And, on som e >>> Continentals the engine quits if you run "high boost" at the wrong >>> altitude/power setting...yuck. I'd stick with what Beech says. >>> >>> As far as the minimum "unboosted" altitude, it has more to do with time >>> to respond to a failure than with any physical correlation to ambient >>> pressure. Personally, I try to keep it on below 2000 AGL. >>> >>> Dave Saylor >>> 831-750-0284 CL >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Steve Farner >> > wrote: >>> >>>> Dave- I fly a Lance and a Bonanza, and in the Lance the pump is >>>> supposed to be on as you say below (500 feet and lower was how I was >>>> taught). The Bonanza does not require this in the checklist, and it i s >>>> only used for starting.not sure why that is the case, but am curious if >>>> anyone knows. **** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> Steve Farner**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto: >>>> owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Dave Saylor >>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 08, 2013 12:01 PM >>>> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com >>>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Fuel pump use**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> The main concept to understand about the boost pump is that it's there >>>> in case the engine-driven pump fails.**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> The fuel injection system on our engines won't function (the engine >>>> won't run) without something in the neighborhood of 15 psi of fuel >>>> pressure. I might be off a few pounds, but the point is that without some >>>> kind of fuel pump, either engine driven or electrically driven, the en gine >>>> won't run. Even the head pressure from a high-wing is insufficient to >>>> operate the fuel injection.**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> What I take away from this is that if I can't tolerate a temporary los s >>>> of power then I use the boost pump. So I use it on take-off and landi ng, >>>> or any other time I'm busy and/or close to the ground.**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> To my way of thinking, the boost pump is an important piece of >>>> redundant safety equipment, like a second mag or electrical supply.*** * >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> Starting is a whole other mode of operation, and another topic for >>>> discussion, but in flight the pump should be on whenever you wouldn't have >>>> time to mess with a restart due to engine pump failure.**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> Fly safe!**** >>>> >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> Dave Saylor >>>> 831-750-0284 CL**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Bruce Johnson < >>>> bruce1hwjohnson(at)yahoo.com> wrote:**** >>>> >>>> Good question Leon, I have got 85 hrs and have only used the electric >>>> pump for starting, I leave it on during cranking and it seems to start >>>> better that way. I recently took a guy up and he said on low wing tank s its >>>> better to use it on take off and landings????? On my 210 I only used i t for >>>> start up as well and it did over fuel the system if used in addition w hile >>>> running. On an Enstrom helicopter with gravity feed tanks they run the m all >>>> the time. So I guess it will be your preference which way you go.**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> >>>> *From:* Leeverett >>>> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com >>>> *Sent:* Monday, January 7, 2013 10:12 PM >>>> *Subject:* RV10-List: Fuel pump use**** >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I have finished my 10 except for paint and am ready for first flight. I >>>> finished transition training last weekend with Pierrie Smith. It was a >>>> great >>>> experience and I recommend him to anyone looking for a CFI. I noted we >>>> only used the electric fuel pump on engine start and not on takeoff, >>>> landing or fuel tank change. Is this everyone's practice or do other >>>> folks >>>> have different ideas. Thank. Leon >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Read this topic online here: >>>> >>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=391785#391785 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> * * >>>> >>>> * * >>>> >>>> *get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List* >>>> >>>> *tp://forums.matronics.com* >>>> >>>> *_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution* >>>> >>>> * * >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> * * >>>> >>>> * * >>>> >>>> *===============* >>>> >>>> - The RV10-List Email Forum -**** >>>> >>>> *such as List Un/Subscription,* >>>> >>>> **** s.com/Navigator?RV10-List" target="_blank"> >>>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigu>** =========== =======****=EF=BD - >>>> MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -**** "_blank">http://forums.matronics.com >>>> **** >>>> >>>> **=EF=BD - List Contribution Web Site -****** >>>> >>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admit; >>>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution**** ========= =========**** >>>> >>>> * * >>>> >>>> >>> * >>> >>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >>> >>> tp://forums.matronics.com >>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >>> * >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Rob Kochman >> RV-10 Flying since March 2011 >> Woodinville, WA >> http://kochman.net/N819K >> >> * >> >> ========= >> ://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >> ==========cs.com >> ==========matronics.com/contribution >> ========= >> * >> >> * >> >> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >> tp://forums.matronics.com >> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> * >> >> > > > -- > Rob Kochman > RV-10 Flying since March 2011 > Woodinville, WA > http://kochman.net/N819K > > * > > ======================== > ://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List > ======================== ===========cs.com > ======================== ===========matronics.com/contribution > ======================== > * > > * > =========== > =========== =========== =========== > > * > > -- Rob Kochman RV-10 Flying since March 2011 Woodinville, WA http://kochman.net/N819K ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 09, 2013
From: Darton Steve <sfdarton(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Kit for sale
To all:=0A-=0AI have decided to list my kit 40212 for sale, it includes a completed tail and wings completed to the bottom skins. All workmanship is first rate. I'm located near KSLC. Email me for inquiries.=0A-=0AI also have some assorted tools for sale:=0APnumatic squeezer & assorted dies=0AHa nd squeezer=0AC frame=0ARivet gun &-accessories=0APnumatic drill & bits, reamers etc=0APnumatic sealant gun & accessories=0ASealant spoons=0AFull se t of Cogsdill deburring tools ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Kit for sale
From: Rob Kermanj <flysrv10(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jan 09, 2013
I am interested in the squeezer and c frame. Please contact me off line. Rob Kermanj Sent from my iPhone On Jan 9, 2013, at 1:34 PM, Darton Steve wrote: > To all: > > I have decided to list my kit 40212 for sale, it includes a completed tail and wings completed to the bottom skins. All workmanship is first rate. I'm located near KSLC. Email me for inquiries. > > I also have some assorted tools for sale: > Pnumatic squeezer & assorted dies > Hand squeezer > C frame > Rivet gun & accessories > Pnumatic drill & bits, reamers etc > Pnumatic sealant gun & accessories > Sealant spoons > Full set of Cogsdill deburring tools > > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: William Curtis <wwc4(at)njit.edu>
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
Date: Jan 09, 2013
Well, not quite Kelly. Look at the POH for the Cessna Cardinal RG for example. No fuel injected Lycoming powered high wing Cessna aircraft including the Cardinal RG have in their checklist, boost pump on takeoff and landing. The high wing is what makes the difference. Having gravity to help supply fuel to the engine, I think makes the difference. Boost pump on during takeoff and landing is normal procedure for low wing Lycoming powered aircraft but I have yet to see this in a POH for a high wing fuel injected Cessna. W. Curtis On Jan 8, 2013, at 15:22, Kelly McMullen wrote: > > You are correct. Every Lycoming powered fuel injected aircraft I have worked on, with Bendix RSA injection called for pump on for takeoff and landing. > Cessna 210 and Bonanza have Continental injection system that is very sensitive to unmetered pressure coming into the fuel servo. Adding boost pump upsets the mixture calibration. Yes, boost pump off in climb is pilot's discretion for ability to respond if engine falters because mechanical pump failed. > FWIW a 210 was totaled at my airport on New Year's eve because it appears mechanical pump failed at 100 ft. With most any injected engine it takes 5-10 seconds for fire to relight after a fuel delivery interruption. Fortunately they made a open soft field about 40 degrees off centerline and walked away uninjured. > Kelly > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 09, 2013
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com>
Bill, I don't remember what the C177RG POH said, as I haven't flown one for 30 years*. However, I doubt the head pressure from the wings is enough to produce the 15 psi minimum that the fuel servo needs to produce full power. I'd prefer to have it on for takeoff even in a C177 RG or C172 RG or any other Lycoming powered and injected Cessna. YMMV. *I decided one main actuator rod failure in flight was enough gear problems in a system design that has that as a moderately common failure with no backup method. On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 7:32 PM, William Curtis wrote: > > Well, not quite Kelly. Look at the POH for the Cessna Cardinal RG for > example. No fuel injected Lycoming powered high wing Cessna aircraft > including the Cardinal RG have in their checklist, boost pump on takeoff > and landing. The high wing is what makes the difference. Having gravity to > help supply fuel to the engine, I think makes the difference. Boost pump > on during takeoff and landing is normal procedure for low wing Lycoming > powered aircraft but I have yet to see this in a POH for a high wing fuel > injected Cessna. > > W. Curtis > > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 15:22, Kelly McMullen wrote: > > > > > You are correct. Every Lycoming powered fuel injected aircraft I have > worked on, with Bendix RSA injection called for pump on for takeoff and > landing. > > Cessna 210 and Bonanza have Continental injection system that is very > sensitive to unmetered pressure coming into the fuel servo. Adding boost > pump upsets the mixture calibration. Yes, boost pump off in climb is > pilot's discretion for ability to respond if engine falters because > mechanical pump failed. > > FWIW a 210 was totaled at my airport on New Year's eve because it > appears mechanical pump failed at 100 ft. With most any injected engine it > takes 5-10 seconds for fire to relight after a fuel delivery interruption. > Fortunately they made a open soft field about 40 degrees off centerline and > walked away uninjured. > > Kelly > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: William Curtis <wwc4(at)njit.edu>
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
Date: Jan 09, 2013
Kelly, Yes gravity alone will not provide the full 15 PSI required for maximum powe r but it is usually enough to provide partial power and prevent fuel starvat ion and give enough time to then turn on the boost pump in the event of a me chanical fuel pump failure. See page 4-8 in the POH below. www.nerv10.com/manuals/Cessna/C177RG_POH_1975.pdf The main gear actuator rod end with the zero fitting is a known failure poin t in the Cardinal RG gear system which is why I had it replaced with the upd ated non-zerk rod end in the first year of owner ship back in 1998. Once you identify and remediate the few known failure points of the Cardinal RG gear system, it is quite reliable. In 14 years of ownership, I have had very li ttle issues with the gear system and no "incidents." W. Curtis. On Jan 9, 2013, at 21:51, Kelly McMullen wrote: > Bill, I don't remember what the C177RG POH said, as I haven't flown one fo r 30 years*. However, I doubt the head pressure from the wings is enough to p roduce the 15 psi minimum that the fuel servo needs to produce full power. I 'd prefer to have it on for takeoff even in a C177 RG or C172 RG or any othe r Lycoming powered and injected Cessna. YMMV. > > *I decided one main actuator rod failure in flight was enough gear problem s in a system design that has that as a moderately common failure with no ba ckup method. > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 7:32 PM, William Curtis wrote: >> >> Well, not quite Kelly. Look at the POH for the Cessna Cardinal RG for exa mple. No fuel injected Lycoming powered high wing Cessna aircraft including the Cardinal RG have in their checklist, boost pump on takeoff and landing. The high wing is what makes the difference. Having gravity to help supply f uel to the engine, I think makes the difference. Boost pump on during takeo ff and landing is normal procedure for low wing Lycoming powered aircraft bu t I have yet to see this in a POH for a high wing fuel injected Cessna. >> >> W. Curtis ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 09, 2013
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
Yeah, the 1975 gear is much better than the 1971 that I had a failure on. My recollection from days of reading CFO Digest, none of the main gear actuator rod ends were truly free of failures, just the originals with zerks were much worse. A friend has one with the old turbo-normalizer STC. Watching him work on it and struggle with all the Cessna "features" I'll stick with the RV-10. There are times on takeoff that partial power would be a very bad thing, so I'll use the boost, thank you, high wing or low. On 1/9/2013 8:26 PM, William Curtis wrote: > Kelly, > > Yes gravity alone will not provide the full 15 PSI required for > maximum power but it is usually enough to provide partial power and > prevent fuel starvation and give enough time to then turn on the boost > pump in the event of a mechanical fuel pump failure. See page 4-8 in > the POH below. > > www.nerv10.com/ > <http://www.nerv10.com/>*manual*s/*Cessna*/C*177RG*_*POH*_1975.*pdf* > * > * > The main gear actuator rod end with the zero fitting is a known > failure point in the Cardinal RG gear system which is why I had it > replaced with the updated non-zerk rod end in the first year of owner > ship back in 1998. Once you identify and remediate the few known > failure points of the Cardinal RG gear system, it is quite reliable. > In 14 years of ownership, I have had very little issues with the gear > system and no "incidents." > > W. Curtis. > > On Jan 9, 2013, at 21:51, Kelly McMullen > wrote: > >> Bill, I don't remember what the C177RG POH said, as I haven't flown >> one for 30 years*. However, I doubt the head pressure from the wings >> is enough to produce the 15 psi minimum that the fuel servo needs to >> produce full power. I'd prefer to have it on for takeoff even in a >> C177 RG or C172 RG or any other Lycoming powered and injected Cessna. >> YMMV. >> >> *I decided one main actuator rod failure in flight was enough gear >> problems in a system design that has that as a moderately common >> failure with no backup method. >> >> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 7:32 PM, William Curtis > > wrote: >> >> > >> >> Well, not quite Kelly. Look at the POH for the Cessna Cardinal RG >> for example. No fuel injected Lycoming powered high wing Cessna >> aircraft including the Cardinal RG have in their checklist, boost >> pump on takeoff and landing. The high wing is what makes the >> difference. Having gravity to help supply fuel to the engine, I >> think makes the difference. Boost pump on during takeoff and >> landing is normal procedure for low wing Lycoming powered >> aircraft but I have yet to see this in a POH for a high wing fuel >> injected Cessna. >> >> W. Curtis >> > * > > > * ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 10, 2013
From: davidsoutpost(at)comcast.net
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
I agree with Kelly on this. Why would anyone not want to minimize the risk's at any phase of flight when it is available? David Clifford RV-10 Builder Howell, MI ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kelly McMullen" <kellym(at)aviating.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 9, 2013 10:36:47 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fuel pump use Yeah, the 1975 gear is much better than the 1971 that I had a failure on. My recollection from days of reading CFO Digest, none of the main gear actuator rod ends were truly free of failures, just the originals with zerks were much worse. A friend has one with the old turbo-normalizer STC. Watching him work on it and struggle with all the Cessna "features" I'll stick with the RV-10. There are times on takeoff that partial power would be a very bad thing, so I'll use the boost, thank you, high wing or low. On 1/9/2013 8:26 PM, William Curtis wrote: > Kelly, > > Yes gravity alone will not provide the full 15 PSI required for > maximum power but it is usually enough to provide partial power and > prevent fuel starvation and give enough time to then turn on the boost > pump in the event of a mechanical fuel pump failure. See page 4-8 in > the POH below. > > www.nerv10.com/ > <http://www.nerv10.com/>*manual*s/*Cessna*/C*177RG*_*POH*_1975.*pdf* > * > * > The main gear actuator rod end with the zero fitting is a known > failure point in the Cardinal RG gear system which is why I had it > replaced with the updated non-zerk rod end in the first year of owner > ship back in 1998. Once you identify and remediate the few known > failure points of the Cardinal RG gear system, it is quite reliable. > In 14 years of ownership, I have had very little issues with the gear > system and no "incidents." > > W. Curtis. > > On Jan 9, 2013, at 21:51, Kelly McMullen > wrote: > >> Bill, I don't remember what the C177RG POH said, as I haven't flown >> one for 30 years*. However, I doubt the head pressure from the wings >> is enough to produce the 15 psi minimum that the fuel servo needs to >> produce full power. I'd prefer to have it on for takeoff even in a >> C177 RG or C172 RG or any other Lycoming powered and injected Cessna. >> YMMV. >> >> *I decided one main actuator rod failure in flight was enough gear >> problems in a system design that has that as a moderately common >> failure with no backup method. >> >> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 7:32 PM, William Curtis > > wrote: >> >> > >> >> Well, not quite Kelly. Look at the POH for the Cessna Cardinal RG >> for example. No fuel injected Lycoming powered high wing Cessna >> aircraft including the Cardinal RG have in their checklist, boost >> pump on takeoff and landing. The high wing is what makes the >> difference. Having gravity to help supply fuel to the engine, I >> think makes the difference. Boost pump on during takeoff and >> landing is normal procedure for low wing Lycoming powered >> aircraft but I have yet to see this in a POH for a high wing fuel >> injected Cessna. >> >> W. Curtis >> > * > > > * ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: William Curtis <wwc4(at)njit.edu>
Date: Jan 10, 2013
The bottom line is to do what the airframe manufacturer suggest in the POH. A s a builder you are the airframe manufacturer. In addition to what may happen in case of a mechanical pump failure, there c ould be un-intended consequences of running a pump when it is not stated in t he POH. The reason Lycoming leaves it up to the airframe manufacturer is tha t engine performance is also dependent on the fuel system plumbing. In most Cessna fuel injected high wing, the boost pump is "in line" with the mechan ical pump and others it is "In parallel." Running a pump when it is not sta ted can cause un-intended behaviors such as over rich mixture that may lead t o reduced power. In the case of the RV10, I think the Vans suggested route of running the pum p during takeoff and landings should be followed. If you are in a high wing C essna however, the boost pump should not be run during takeoff and landings. William RV10 - 40237 On Jan 9, 2013, at 23:26, davidsoutpost(at)comcast.net wrote: > I agree with Kelly on this. Why would anyone not want to minimize the ris k's at any phase of flight when it is available? > > David Clifford > > RV-10 Builder > Howell, MI > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 10, 2013
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
On 01/10/2013 12:38 AM, William Curtis wrote: > If you are in a > high wing Cessna however, the boost pump should not be run during > takeoff and landings. As they say, "that depends"... :-) I have a high wing Glastar with a carburated O320. It was built without any pump at all (mechanical or electric), and has been flying fine for 13 years. I'm converting the carb to a Rotec TBI, and Rotec recommends the use of an electric boost pump for takeoff, even on a high wing plane. The reason is that at very high angles of attack (say like a short field takeoff), the difference in height between the engine and the wing decreases, which means that the fuel pressure given by gravity lessens. At really high angles of attack it is possible for the fuel pressure to get too low without the use of a boost pump. -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV - VP EAA Chapter 87 Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: William Curtis <wwc4(at)njit.edu>
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
Date: Jan 10, 2013
> > As they say, "that depends"... :-) > Actually, no it does not. This is comparing apples and oranges and underscores why I said to defer to the instructions in the POH. Clearly Rotec/Glastar has recognized the deficiencies of the TBI system at high AOA and has thus adjusted the procedures in the POH accordingly. This same procedure however would not apply in a high wing Cessna. First, a Glastar is not a Cessna; second, a Glastar does not have a mechanical fuel injection system; third, I'm sure the fuel plumbing on the Glastar is nowhere near the same as on a high wing Cessna. W. 177RG - N24DM RV10 - 40237 On Jan 10, 2013, at 14:03, Dj Merrill wrote: > > On 01/10/2013 12:38 AM, William Curtis wrote: >> If you are in a >> high wing Cessna however, the boost pump should not be run during >> takeoff and landings. > I have a high wing Glastar with a carburated O320. It was built > without any pump at all (mechanical or electric), and has been flying > fine for 13 years. I'm converting the carb to a Rotec TBI, and Rotec > recommends the use of an electric boost pump for takeoff, even on a high > wing plane. > > The reason is that at very high angles of attack (say like a short > field takeoff), the difference in height between the engine and the wing > decreases, which means that the fuel pressure given by gravity lessens. > At really high angles of attack it is possible for the fuel pressure to > get too low without the use of a boost pump. > > -Dj > > -- > Dj Merrill - N1JOV - VP EAA Chapter 87 > Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ > Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Subject: Cowl Replacement Update
Date: Jan 10, 2013
We are close to flying the replacement cowl. I wanted to share a few photos of the new cowl, baffles, oil cooler location including bracket. intake et c... Robin [cid:image013.jpg(at)01CDEF2B.D8032790] Can't you see the air molicules woooshing by the cowl? I like having only 2 inlet holes. [cid:image014.jpg(at)01CDEF2B.D8032790] Engine looks pretty clean for 325+ hours. Double Induction, double filter system. No Alt Air so yet. [cid:image015.jpg(at)01CDEF2B.D8032790] [cid:image016.jpg(at)01CDEF2B.D8032790] Nifty oil cooler bracket [cid:image017.jpg(at)01CDEF2B.D8032790] [cid:image018.jpg(at)01CDEF2B.D8032790] ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Cowl Replacement Update
From: Seano <sean(at)braunandco.com>
Date: Jan 10, 2013
Very cool! Excited to hear how she works in flight. Sent from my iPhone On Jan 10, 2013, at 13:13, Robin Marks wrote: > We are close to flying the replacement cowl. I wanted to share a few photo s of the new cowl, baffles, oil cooler location including bracket. intake et c > Robin > > Can't you see the air molicules woooshing by the cowl? > I like having only 2 inlet holes. > > > Engine looks pretty clean for 325+ hours. > Double Induction, double filter system. No Alt Air so yet. > > > Nifty oil cooler bracket > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 10, 2013
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
On 01/10/2013 02:57 PM, William Curtis wrote: >> >> As they say, "that depends"... :-) >> > > Actually, no it does not. Actually, it does. We are on an experimental aircraft forum talking about experimental airplanes, and your post started with "The bottom line is to do what the airframe manufacturer suggest in the POH. As a builder you are the airframe manufacturer." The above combined with your comment about the high wing Cessna could easily be construed as saying "if you are in a high wing experimental aircraft, there is no need for a boost pump" simply because you can write it that way in the POH. I was offering an example of a high wing experimental aircraft where the maker of one of the fuel system components (the Throttle Body Injector) recommends the use of a boost pump (not to be confused with the manufacturer of the experimental airframe kit (Stoddard Hamilton in the case of the Glastar) or the builder of the aircraft). Since Rotec recommends the boost pump for all aircraft, if the Cessna were put into the experimental category, and a Rotec TBI were installed in place of the carburator, the same recommendation for the boost pump would apply. I'm not trying to argue with you. I am merely saying that "it depends" on many things, such as the parts used in the fuel system and the recommendations from those manufacturers, in addition to recommendations from the kit company (Vans, Stoddard Hamilton, etc). I agree with you that on a factory produced certified aircraft, do what it says in the POH. On our airplanes, it isn't quite so clear due to the wide variety of options available to us. Yes, a Glastar is not a Cessna, however, it CAN have a mechanical fuel injection system, or a carb, or a TBI, or electronic fuel injection, etc, and the fuel system can be plumbed to be very similar to the Cessna should that be desired. -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV - VP EAA Chapter 87 Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: William Curtis <wwc4(at)njit.edu>
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
Date: Jan 10, 2013
Dj, Yup, I think we agree on the same thing, we just have different way of saying it. W. On Jan 10, 2013, at 15:36, Dj Merrill wrote: > > On 01/10/2013 02:57 PM, William Curtis wrote: >>> >>> As they say, "that depends"... :-) >>> >> >> Actually, no it does not. > > Actually, it does. We are on an experimental aircraft forum talking > about experimental airplanes, and your post started with "The bottom > line is to do what the airframe manufacturer suggest in the POH. As a > builder you are the airframe manufacturer." > > The above combined with your comment about the high wing Cessna could > easily be construed as saying "if you are in a high wing experimental > aircraft, there is no need for a boost pump" simply because you can > write it that way in the POH. > > I was offering an example of a high wing experimental aircraft where > the maker of one of the fuel system components (the Throttle Body > Injector) recommends the use of a boost pump (not to be confused with > the manufacturer of the experimental airframe kit (Stoddard Hamilton in > the case of the Glastar) or the builder of the aircraft). > > Since Rotec recommends the boost pump for all aircraft, if the Cessna > were put into the experimental category, and a Rotec TBI were installed > in place of the carburator, the same recommendation for the boost pump > would apply. > > I'm not trying to argue with you. I am merely saying that "it depends" > on many things, such as the parts used in the fuel system and the > recommendations from those manufacturers, in addition to recommendations > from the kit company (Vans, Stoddard Hamilton, etc). > > I agree with you that on a factory produced certified aircraft, do what > it says in the POH. On our airplanes, it isn't quite so clear due to > the wide variety of options available to us. > > Yes, a Glastar is not a Cessna, however, it CAN have a mechanical fuel > injection system, or a carb, or a TBI, or electronic fuel injection, > etc, and the fuel system can be plumbed to be very similar to the Cessna > should that be desired. > > -Dj > > > -- > Dj Merrill - N1JOV - VP EAA Chapter 87 > Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ > Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 10, 2013
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
On 01/10/2013 03:49 PM, William Curtis wrote: > Yup, I think we agree on the same thing, we just have different way of saying it. I think so too, after going back and re-reading the last several posts. Must be time for my nap... :-) -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV - VP EAA Chapter 87 Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 10, 2013
From: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Cowl Replacement Update
Is this a new SJ RV10 cowl? I don't see it on their website.... Would like to see a front view of the dual fiberglass intake runners. Guessing you're not using a plenum..... ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)live.com>
Subject: Re: Cowl Replacement Update
Date: Jan 10, 2013
you pull that cowling off a legacy? even with that supercharged engine I don=99t think the cowling is going to give you the speed of a Lancair.. sorry to disappoint Very nice fit and engine From: Robin Marks Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 12:13 PM Subject: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update We are close to flying the replacement cowl. I wanted to share a few photos of the new cowl, baffles, oil cooler location including bracket. intake etc Robin Can't you see the air molicules woooshing by the cowl? I like having only 2 inlet holes. Engine looks pretty clean for 325+ hours. Double Induction, double filter system. No Alt Air so yet. Nifty oil cooler bracket ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 10, 2013
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
On 01/10/2013 03:59 PM, n801bh(at)netzero.com wrote: > I have a VERY hard > time believing .86PSI is capable to keep a engine running properly with > NO fuel pump in the system......YMMV My Glastar (Lyc O-320-E2D) has flown for 13 years with no fuel pump at all, just gravity feed to a carb. I believe the min fuel pressure for a carb is 0.5 PSI, but I can't find the reference right now. FWIW, the Rotec TBI also has the 0.5 PSI min, and for most operations in a high wing airplane the boost pump is not required (gravity is enough). Rotec had a few reports of the engine burbling a little bit when very high angles of attack occurred in very aggressive takeoff maneuvers, which is why they now recommend the boost pump. http://www.rotecradialengines.com/TBI/TBI.htm -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV - VP EAA Chapter 87 Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 10, 2013
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
On 01/10/2013 04:30 PM, William Curtis wrote: > I don't > think anyone has said or would think an engine would "run properly" with > fuel fed only with gravity This is exactly what I am saying - my Glastar has never had any kind of fuel pump installed, mechanical or electrical, and it runs just fine with gravity fed only to a carb. I've been told there are older certified aircraft that are setup the same way, but I don't have any specific references to share. -Dj -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV - VP EAA Chapter 87 Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Subject: Re: Cowl Replacement Update
Date: Jan 10, 2013
Ralph, This cowl replaces the SJ cowl and plenum. Adios! This is the new Showplanes and intake system for the FM300. No Plenum for me ever again. If one were to visit the Showplane website you can see the induction system from the front view. Basically the bottom quarter of each inlet is dedicated to the FI induction system. Robin "Ralph E. Capen" wrote: Is this a new SJ RV10 cowl? I don't see it on their website.... Would like to see a front view of the dual fiberglass intake runners. Guessing you're not using a plenum..... ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 10, 2013
From: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Cowl Replacement Update
Thanks! -----Original Message----- >From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com> >Sent: Jan 10, 2013 5:01 PM >To: "rv10-list(at)matronics.com" >Subject: Re: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update > > >Ralph, >This cowl replaces the SJ cowl and plenum. Adios! > This is the new Showplanes and intake system for the FM300. No Plenum for me ever again. >If one were to visit the Showplane website you can see the induction system from the front view. Basically the bottom quarter of each inlet is dedicated to the FI induction system. > >Robin > >"Ralph E. Capen" wrote: > > >Is this a new SJ RV10 cowl? I don't see it on their website.... > >Would like to see a front view of the dual fiberglass intake runners. > >Guessing you're not using a plenum..... > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "William Greenley" <wgreenley(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Cowl Replacement Update
Date: Jan 10, 2013
9-12 months from needing to order a cowl. This is a new area for me, what is the reason for using the showplanes cowl over vans regular cowl? Bill Greenley RV-10 builder -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 5:02 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update Ralph, This cowl replaces the SJ cowl and plenum. Adios! This is the new Showplanes and intake system for the FM300. No Plenum for me ever again. If one were to visit the Showplane website you can see the induction system from the front view. Basically the bottom quarter of each inlet is dedicated to the FI induction system. Robin "Ralph E. Capen" wrote: --> Is this a new SJ RV10 cowl? I don't see it on their website.... Would like to see a front view of the dual fiberglass intake runners. Guessing you're not using a plenum..... ________________________________________________________________________________
From: William Curtis <wwc4(at)njit.edu>
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
Date: Jan 10, 2013
Agreed, which is why I prefaced most by specifying "fuel injected high wing. " The high wing Cessna 150/152 that I trained in also did not have boost pum ps. Most high wing carbureted engine aircraft can and do run perfectly fine f ull power with only gravity feeding the fuel. I know we are "out in the weeds" on this thread now but I'll restate my orig inal statement with clarification and expansion-- I hope: -In the case of the RV10 with a Lycoming fuel injected engine, follow the Va ns suggested recommendation of running the boost pump during takeoff and lan dings. This is normal procedure for most low wing aircraft. -For high wing fuel injected Cessnas, all POH that I have seen DO NOT indica te running the fuel pump during takeoff and landings. -Many, if not all, high wing carbureted aircraft, including the Cessna 150/1 52/172, DO NOT specify in the POH running the boost pump during takeoff and l andings. W. On Jan 10, 2013, at 16:51, Dj Merrill wrote: > > On 01/10/2013 04:30 PM, William Curtis wrote: > >> I don't >> think anyone has said or would think an engine would "run properly" with >> fuel fed only with gravity > > > This is exactly what I am saying - my Glastar has never had any kind of > fuel pump installed, mechanical or electrical, and it runs just fine > with gravity fed only to a carb. > > I've been told there are older certified aircraft that are setup the > same way, but I don't have any specific references to share. > > -Dj > > > -- > Dj Merrill - N1JOV - VP EAA Chapter 87 > Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ > Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/ > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Jan 10, 2013
You guys are mixing apples and oranges. I know of no injected engine that will run properly with just gravity feed. There are lots of high wing carb engines that do run on just gravity feed. And there are some high wing, carb engines, that have an aux pump for very nose high situations (172RG, for example). -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=392021#392021 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Cowl Replacement Update
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Jan 10, 2013
Do you plan to stuff some insulation between the induction air and the #1 exhaust? -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=392024#392024 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Subject: Cowl Replacement Update
Date: Jan 10, 2013
I originally placed the SJ cowl on the -10 based on the 2 place RV fleet history with the SJ unit. I was probably the 3rd -10 SJ cowl flying. Unfortunately the SJ -10 cowl well documented problems meant that I needed to replace the cowl on my flying -10. The smart move would have been to go with the proven factory cowl. It does everything you need it to do and there are 350 other -10 pilots you can have something in common with when installing the Vans cowl. When my 8A came on line it was time to replace the -10 cowl. I opted for the new cowl even though I will most likely be the first flying production Showplanes -10 cowl because the builder has a long history of RV aftermarket product development and I had been in discussions with Bryan for about 2 years tracking his progress. He is extremely methodical in his development approach vs. just blowing up a smaller cowl and plenum hoping it works. My prior cowl & plenum were sold as a set intended to be used together but even a basic measurement like the inlet holes weren't aligned. That should have been a warning to me but I already had started the assembly. Bryan on the other hand had done so much R&D and his goal was to develop a "no compromises" cowl. A cowl that can fly with the standard Vans oil cooler on the wedge with no added louvers and cobbled together solutions required. When it came time I decided to support a builder & designer that gave great care in his development. I can say the quality of fiberglass far exceeds anything ever shipped from Vans. Long story / short. The smartest solution would have been the Standard Vans cowl and it will remain so for most builders. But this cowl is great looking and works with the FM200 & FM300 so I am giving it a try. That is why I fly in the Experimental category for gosh sakes. Of course the first 325 hours I flew in the Disgruntled category but hopefully this new cowl will resolve those issues. The rest of the plane is a dream to own & fly. Robin RV-4 Sold RV-6A Sold RV-10 Flying RV-8A Flying -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Greenley Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 2:24 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update --> 9-12 months from needing to order a cowl. This is a new area for me, what is the reason for using the showplanes cowl over vans regular cowl? Bill Greenley RV-10 builder -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 5:02 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update Ralph, This cowl replaces the SJ cowl and plenum. Adios! This is the new Showplanes and intake system for the FM300. No Plenum for me ever again. If one were to visit the Showplane website you can see the induction system from the front view. Basically the bottom quarter of each inlet is dedicated to the FI induction system. Robin "Ralph E. Capen" wrote: --> Is this a new SJ RV10 cowl? I don't see it on their website.... Would like to see a front view of the dual fiberglass intake runners. Guessing you're not using a plenum..... ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Subject: Re: Cowl Replacement Update
Date: Jan 10, 2013
Yes. It's tight up there. R -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Turner Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 3:03 PM Subject: RV10-List: Re: Cowl Replacement Update Do you plan to stuff some insulation between the induction air and the #1 exhaust? -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=392024#392024 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Antenna Opinions, experiance and thoughts appreciated
From: Terry Moushon <tmoushon(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jan 10, 2013
I am about to start my RV10 wings... I plan to use Pulsar NS90 wingtip lights and Duckworth 35W HID landing lights. My plan is to install an Archer design communication antenna in the right wing and an Archer design antenna in the left which would be split for both VOR and Glideslope. All will be tied together with RG-58C/U. My question is simple. Do these components play well together given their close proximity? Any suggestions? Terry Builder #41393 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Another RV-10 down?
From: "rv10flyer" <wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jan 10, 2013
Dave, Thank you for keeping us updated. We are glad he made it down safely and is sharing his experiences with us. We will all learn from this. Let us know what you find out on the RH side oil leak. -------- Wayne G. 12/01/2011 TT= 95 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=392032#392032 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Antenna Opinions, experiance and thoughts appreciated
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Jan 10, 2013
I presume you've read all the posts about the Archer antennas, e.g. Most would say the nav is pretty good, the com is fair, compared to an external antenna. Be sure to bend the com to get as much vertical run as possible in the arm with the feedline attachment. I know RG400 is more expensive than RG58 but the 400 should buy you a bit less loss, why run cheap coax in a new plane? I have a Duckworks HD in the same wingtip as my Archer clone com antenna. When I turn it on there is a just perceptible reduction in signal to noise, e.g.,if I can just barely make out the ATIS with the HD off, then I cannot quite understand it with the HD on. If the signal is already strong then I cannot hear the difference. I have no experience with the strobe/nav lights you mention, except to say that I know some have had trouble with high power LED's generating a lot of RF interference. Question: most LEDs tend to be pretty directional. Do these meet the requirements for night flight? -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=392033#392033 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Cowl Replacement Update
Date: Jan 10, 2013
Just to offer another opinion on the James Cowl and plenum... I'm running a stock IO-540 from Van's with the Hartzell BA prop, a single oil cooler (but not mounted like Van's suggests) and bottom cowl louvers about the same area size as specified for the stock Van's cowl. I do not have oil temp problems and control CHTs below 400 degrees. Comparing my cruise and top speeds to Van's performance specifications I am enjoying measurable gains (data run taken before recent rigging tweaks yielded 187kts TAS, 6500', 2500 RPM, 23.3"MP - about 73% power). Tracking this discussion on the list for a few years now it seems I have a much later cowl than Robin as I did not have plenum alignment problems and started off with the larger inlet rings. The James Cowl is not magic. It offers reduced drag over the Van's cowl by a smaller inlet area but (theoretically) more efficient use of the cooling air that is taken in. The trade off is on a hot day I have to put the nose down a little more on an extended climb (say 135 knots instead of the 120 I use in my RV-8A). The set up does add significant work over the stock Van's cowl. I decided to go down this path for the same reason it seems Robin did; the positive James Cowl track record in 2 place RVs. When I ordered mine Will James was straight with me on customer reports of heating problems - and what action he took to address them. This was enough to mitigate my concerns. The last time I checked however Will no longer offers the RV-10 cowl. As Robin states the least risk, lowest work option is to stick with the stock Van's cowl. My decision tree was biased toward fuel efficient cross country performance. With just 60 hours and only one long cross country, I am pleased with the results. I've had the plane down for the holidays to back fit the ADSB receiver and to work the gripe list but this weekend it comes back out of the hangar. It's a shame the day job keeps getting in the way of flying. Carl -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 6:14 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update I originally placed the SJ cowl on the -10 based on the 2 place RV fleet history with the SJ unit. I was probably the 3rd -10 SJ cowl flying. Unfortunately the SJ -10 cowl well documented problems meant that I needed to replace the cowl on my flying -10. The smart move would have been to go with the proven factory cowl. It does everything you need it to do and there are 350 other -10 pilots you can have something in common with when installing the Vans cowl. When my 8A came on line it was time to replace the -10 cowl. I opted for the new cowl even though I will most likely be the first flying production Showplanes -10 cowl because the builder has a long history of RV aftermarket product development and I had been in discussions with Bryan for about 2 years tracking his progress. He is extremely methodical in his development approach vs. just blowing up a smaller cowl and plenum hoping it works. My prior cowl & plenum were sold as a set intended to be used together but even a! basic measurement like the inlet holes weren't aligned. That should have been a warning to me but I already had started the assembly. Bryan on the other hand had done so much R&D and his goal was to develop a "no compromises" cowl. A cowl that can fly with the standard Vans oil cooler on the wedge with no added louvers and cobbled together solutions required. When it came time I decided to support a builder & designer that gave great care in his development. I can say the quality of fiberglass far exceeds anything ever shipped from Vans. Long story / short. The smartest solution would have been the Standard Vans cowl and it will remain so for most builders. But this cowl is great looking and works with the FM200 & FM300 so I am giving it a try. That is why I fly in the Experimental category for gosh sakes. Of course the first 325 hours I flew in the Disgruntled category but hopefully this new cowl will resolve those issues. The rest of the plane is a dream to own & fly. Robin RV-4 Sold RV-6A Sold RV-10 Flying RV-8A Flying -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Greenley Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 2:24 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update --> 9-12 months from needing to order a cowl. This is a new area for me, what is the reason for using the showplanes cowl over vans regular cowl? Bill Greenley RV-10 builder -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 5:02 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update Ralph, This cowl replaces the SJ cowl and plenum. Adios! This is the new Showplanes and intake system for the FM300. No Plenum for me ever again. If one were to visit the Showplane website you can see the induction system from the front view. Basically the bottom quarter of each inlet is dedicated to the FI induction system. Robin "Ralph E. Capen" wrote: --> Is this a new SJ RV10 cowl? I don't see it on their website.... Would like to see a front view of the dual fiberglass intake runners. Guessing you're not using a plenum..... ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 10, 2013
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
Boy are you confused. The Cessna 177RG for a long time was the only Bendix fuel injected, Lycoming engined high wing Cessna. I haven't looked at later models that got Lycoming engines, but there is no question that your high wing will NOT produce the fuel pressure needed for full power without a boost pump. Period. The models you cite are all carbureted, and most do not have a boost pump or mechanical pump because it isn't needed as it takes almost no pressure to feed fuel past the needle valve when the fuel in bowl drops and lets the valve open. Totally different than the Bendix fuel injection that requires nearly 15 psi to allow for full power, which you won't get from a wing that is only 6 ft above the wheels and much less above the fuel injection servo, and probably only 2 ft or less above it in a 15 degree pitch attitude. That Cessna is idiotic enough to not change their POH after there have been enough documented cases of mechanical fuel pump failure that resulted in an AD on Lycoming high pressure mechanical pumps, is simply negligence on Cessna's part, and yes, if it came to testifying at a litigation trial, that is exactly what I would say. Cessna in the early 210s also did not recognize the problem and didn't even put in boost pumps adequate to run the engine after mechanical pump failure. All you are doing is pointing out the deficiencies of the 38 year old POH. It also has no emergency checklist items to restore power before reaching cruise altitude. How dumb is that? You aren't going to switch on boost pump, switch tanks and check mags for both until you are at the leisure of cruise altitude if the engine quits at 2000 ft????? Yes, I would ignore the POH and use the boost pump for takeoff and landing, just as the low wing planes with the same engine and injection system recommend, because the wing position can't make enough a difference to generate the pressure needed. Would you rather follow POH and risk an off airport landing if your mechanical pump fails at 100 ft in the air, or be more informed and keep flying until you are at altitude you can return to runway when engine quits as you turn off the boost pump at above 1000ft? Since I saw a 210 totaled for that exact reason 10 days ago, I know my choice. Kelly On 1/10/2013 3:50 PM, William Curtis wrote: > Agreed, which is why I prefaced most by specifying "fuel injected high > wing." The high wing Cessna 150/152 that I trained in also did not > have boost pumps. Most high wing carbureted engine aircraft can and do > run perfectly fine full power with only gravity feeding the fuel. > > I know we are "out in the weeds" on this thread now but I'll restate > my original statement with clarification and expansion-- I hope: > > -In the case of the RV10 with a Lycoming fuel injected engine, follow > the Vans suggested recommendation of *running the boost pump during > takeoff and landing*s. This is normal procedure for most low wing > aircraft. > > -For *high wing fuel injected* Cessnas, all POH that I have seen DO > NOT indicate running the fuel pump during takeoff and landings. > > -Many, if not all, *high wing **carbureted *aircraft, including the > Cessna 150/152/172, DO NOT specify in the POH running the boost pump > during takeoff and landings. > > W. > > On Jan 10, 2013, at 16:51, Dj Merrill > wrote: > >> > >> >> On 01/10/2013 04:30 PM, William Curtis wrote: >> >>> I don't >>> think anyone has said or would think an engine would "run properly" with >>> fuel fed only with gravity >> >> >> This is exactly what I am saying - my Glastar has never had any >> kind of >> fuel pump installed, mechanical or electrical, and it runs just fine >> with gravity fed only to a carb. >> >> I've been told there are older certified aircraft that are setup the >> same way, but I don't have any specific references to share. >> >> -Dj >> >> >> -- >> Dj Merrill - N1JOV - VP EAA Chapter 87 >> Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ >> Glastar Flyer N866RH - >> http://deej.net/glastar/<========================== - The >> RV10-List >> Emailnics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List====================================================; - >> List Contribution Web Site >> -*http://www.m================================================= >> >> >> >> * > * > * > > > * > * ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 10, 2013
From: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Subject: Re: Antenna Opinions, experiance and thoughts appreciated
Well, whatever you are saving by using an Archer antenna for com, you are losing in both cost of coax and in performance. A good external com antenna may cost you 50-70 more, but will need 1/2 the coax to reach it, give you double the reception/transmission range. Also, having wingtip antennas precludes using any metallic variety of paint on the wingtips, and makes them vulnerable to any noise the nav/strobe lights generate. IIRC some folks have had some RF noise issues with the AeroLED lights, but could be wrong. Yes, the external antenna might cost you .5 kts in cruise speed, but good rigging will do more for you than any antenna drag reduction efforts. Kelly On 1/10/2013 5:45 PM, Terry Moushon wrote: > > I am about to start my RV10 wings... I plan to use Pulsar NS90 wingtip lights and Duckworth 35W HID landing lights. My plan is to install an Archer design communication antenna in the right wing and an Archer design antenna in the left which would be split for both VOR and Glideslope. All will be tied together with RG-58C/U. My question is simple. Do these components play well together given their close proximity? Any suggestions? > > Terry > Builder #41393 > > ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 11, 2013
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: Another RV-10 down?
Actually, Scott and I are over 900. :) One of the reasons we went with Aerosport was the positive feedback on reliability. I actually trust them very much and have had nothing but a positive experience from them. I get the feeling that they will bend over backwards and go further than they even should be willing to, to support your engine. They've sent me seals and gaskets that I should have paid for, for free, and things like that. Over and above. I can tell you that on my engine, my experience with those copper crush gaskets hasn't always been positive. It seems that over time those can be prone to leakage. I had a leak on the right side of my engine that was fixed by replacing the copper crush gasket under my oil pressure adjuster on the right side. Certainly this isn't absolving the engine builder from any possibility of improper torquing or a faulty component causing an issue...nobody knows what happened yet. But, I'm just saying, I think there are far more happy customers of this one than disappointed ones. If you really want an eye opener, read the Lancair list for threads on the Performance Engines (Continental models) that they have, and what kinds of issues they have. That can be scary. It will be interesting to see what was the cause on this one....valve cover gasket? Copper crush gasket? Oil return line? Could have been a bunch of things....could also be an automatic quick/drain. We'll see. Tim On 1/11/2013 8:42 AM, Seano wrote: > I actually thought the same thing, who wouldn't? It could have been a > lot of other connections or accessories so we will have to wait to see > what exactly happened. Just for reference, I have an Aerosport > IO-540-N1A5 with 300 hours. Tim O and Scott S have them too with over > 800 hours each. > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Richard McBride > *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com > *Sent:* Friday, January 11, 2013 5:51 AM > *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Re: Another RV-10 down? > > Please disregard my previous post. I was having a conversation off > the list but inadvertently sent it to the group. It's out of > context and in no way a negative statement. Sorry. > > Rick > > On Jan 11, 2013, at 5:37 AM, Richard McBride > wrote: > >> But did you notice where his engine came from? >> >> Rick >> >> On Jan 10, 2013, at 10:15 PM, Pascal > > wrote: >> >>> Unlike some other 10 accidents Jerry did everything right. I >>> recall doing the engine review by pulling the cowl after every >>> flight and thinking it might be overkill, looks like Jerry did >>> the same thing, so whatever caused that loss of oil pressure >>> happened quickly and without any sign of it in his last >>> inspection, recall that we can fly these planes with as a little >>> as 2.75 quarts of oil, so at least 6 quarts drained out quickly >>> (if that is what happened). Much can be learned from what >>> happened. BTW, I flew into aqua caliente once, and only once, >>> swore I would never go back there again. (gas was .15c cheaper a >>> gallon) I got beat up from the steep terrain, high cross winds >>> and high oil temperatures. What Jerry did in that terrain is >>> amazing, one needs to see how tough that terrain is to set a >>> plane down anywhere to understand the level of difficulty. >>> Pascal >>> *From:* Miller John >>> *Sent:* Thursday, January 10, 2013 6:12 PM >>> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com >>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Re: Another RV-10 down? >>> Hope Jerry will forward to the list what happened to his >>> engine...... >>> grumpy ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 11, 2013
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Antenna Opinions, experiance and thoughts appreciated
What Kelly and Bob said. I originally had the two Archers, the Duckworths and some no longer available LED tip lights. Can't speak to interference but I did do everything in the Archer installs to optimize their performance. The Archer Nav works fine, especially in the GPS era we're in. Tim and perhaps others have tested and documented Archer Nav performance relative to standard external Nav antennas. They are sub-optimal but work acceptably. I too have two Nav radios attached to the single antenna - they both work acceptably for nav and approach work. I'd do it again. The Archer Comm antenna is another matter. I have two comm radios and treated the G430 comm and Archer combination as my "backup" with an SL30 and a bottom mounted whip as my primary comm. I knew long before I flew that I would prefer the SL30 for most communications. I prefer to stick to navigation-only on the G430 - just a personal preference and perhaps a lack of synapses. This primary/backup thing worked fine as long as both were working. I'd use the backup G430 before takeoff for ATIS and Clearances. Sometimes I'd plug in ground control at a busy airport. Though others have reported some blanking of the signal if the Archer wing tip was oppposite the ATC antenna, I never experienced even a "say again" when on the ground or close-in to an airport. In fact, I occassionally used the Archer in cruise without much of a thought. But it was clear that the SL30/whip was better. On my longest trip, at the furthest possible point away from home base (8nc8 to KSDL), my SL30 got zapped by some convective electrical activity. (Perversely, it only partially failed and took unnecessary time and $$$ to fix but that's another story). Immediately going to my 'backup' radio and antenna, I found my communications garbled and inconsistent as I entered the Phoenix Class B while exiting an electrically active snow squall line. Ouch. After doing a little local flying with the backup, it seemed to work okay in most situations. It probably had a little less range and sometimes was a bit garbled. But notably, I would get some "say agains" as I manuevered. This would be fine for a VFR leg or two to get home but not acceptable for 3 long IFR legs through busy airspace. The point I want to make is that the Archer Comm works okay as a comm2 as long as you have a comm1. Or for perhaps for casual VFR work. But for me, it didn't work as part of a "backup" comm2 when backup function was truly needed. And that's why I put two comms in. I suggest sticking 1 or 2 whips on the bottom. There's plenty of room and lot's of advice here on where and how to install them. People have reported some possible blanking of the signals by the fuselage when on the ground. I've never experienced that. In any case, that's manageable. Without facts or experience to back me up..... Crikey, use the 400!! or not. (Thanks again Kelly for your help out in Phoenix!!) Bill "prepped to do some proficiency work in some actual but the runway got too wet" Watson N215TG Durham NC On 1/10/2013 7:45 PM, Terry Moushon wrote: > > I am about to start my RV10 wings... I plan to use Pulsar NS90 wingtip lights and Duckworth 35W HID landing lights. My plan is to install an Archer design communication antenna in the right wing and an Archer design antenna in the left which would be split for both VOR and Glideslope. All will be tied together with RG-58C/U. My question is simple. Do these components play well together given their close proximity? Any suggestions? > > Terry > Builder #41393 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 11, 2013
From: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Another RV-10 down?
Well, we know he didn't leave the dip stick out. You know about that almost before you get off the ground. Bill "don't ask" Watson > > It will be interesting to see what was the cause on this > one....valve cover gasket? Copper crush gasket? Oil return > line? Could have been a bunch of things....could also be > an automatic quick/drain. > > We'll see. > Tim ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jan 11, 2013
Subject: Re: Another RV-10 down?
Jerry didn't seem to have any lack of faith in Aerosport. That says a lot. If I had to order an engine today, that's where I'd go. Dave Saylor 831-750-0284 CL On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 7:28 AM, Tim Olson wrote: > > Actually, Scott and I are over 900. :) > > One of the reasons we went with Aerosport was the positive feedback > on reliability. I actually trust them very much and have had > nothing but a positive experience from them. I get the feeling that > they will bend over backwards and go further than they even > should be willing to, to support your engine. They've sent me > seals and gaskets that I should have paid for, for free, and > things like that. Over and above. > > I can tell you that on my engine, my experience with those > copper crush gaskets hasn't always been positive. It seems that > over time those can be prone to leakage. I had a leak on the > right side of my engine that was fixed by replacing the copper > crush gasket under my oil pressure adjuster on the right side. > > Certainly this isn't absolving the engine builder from > any possibility of improper torquing or a faulty component > causing an issue...nobody knows what happened yet. But, > I'm just saying, I think there are far more happy customers > of this one than disappointed ones. If you really want > an eye opener, read the Lancair list for threads on the > Performance Engines (Continental models) that they have, and > what kinds of issues they have. That can be scary. > > It will be interesting to see what was the cause on this > one....valve cover gasket? Copper crush gasket? Oil return > line? Could have been a bunch of things....could also be > an automatic quick/drain. > > We'll see. > Tim > > > On 1/11/2013 8:42 AM, Seano wrote: > >> I actually thought the same thing, who wouldn't? It could have been a >> lot of other connections or accessories so we will have to wait to see >> what exactly happened. Just for reference, I have an Aerosport >> IO-540-N1A5 with 300 hours. Tim O and Scott S have them too with over >> 800 hours each. >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* Richard McBride >> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com >> > >> *Sent:* Friday, January 11, 2013 5:51 AM >> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Re: Another RV-10 down? >> >> Please disregard my previous post. I was having a conversation off >> the list but inadvertently sent it to the group. It's out of >> context and in no way a negative statement. Sorry. >> >> Rick >> >> On Jan 11, 2013, at 5:37 AM, Richard McBride > > wrote: >> >> But did you notice where his engine came from? >>> >>> Rick >>> >>> On Jan 10, 2013, at 10:15 PM, Pascal >> > wrote: >>> >>> Unlike some other =9310 accidents Jerry did everything right . I >>>> recall doing the engine review by pulling the cowl after every >>>> flight and thinking it might be overkill, looks like Jerry did >>>> the same thing, so whatever caused that loss of oil pressure >>>> happened quickly and without any sign of it in his last >>>> inspection, recall that we can fly these planes with as a little >>>> as 2.75 quarts of oil, so at least 6 quarts drained out quickly >>>> (if that is what happened). Much can be learned from what >>>> happened. BTW, I flew into aqua caliente once, and only once, >>>> swore I would never go back there again. (gas was .15c cheaper a >>>> gallon) I got beat up from the steep terrain, high cross winds >>>> and high oil temperatures. What Jerry did in that terrain is >>>> amazing, one needs to see how tough that terrain is to set a >>>> plane down anywhere to understand the level of difficulty. >>>> Pascal >>>> *From:* Miller John >>>> *Sent:* Thursday, January 10, 2013 6:12 PM >>>> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com >>>> > >>>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Re: Another RV-10 down? >>>> Hope Jerry will forward to the list what happened to his >>>> engine...... >>>> grumpy >>>> >>> =====**=================== ===========**= ronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List> =====**=================== ===========**= =====**=================== ===========**= com/contribution> =====**=================== ===========**= > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: William Curtis <wwc4(at)njit.edu>
Subject: Re: Fuel pump use
Date: Jan 11, 2013
Kelly, I see my attempts at clarification has failed miserably. As this is an RV10 l ist, I won't drag this out further. I would suggest however that you review s ection 3 (Emergency Procedures) of the POH link I included previously and al so my post(s) on exactly what I said about how much power is available follo wing a mechanical fuel pump failure in each type of aircraft. The only reason I responded to this thread initially was because you made th e following statement: You are correct. Every Lycoming powered fuel injected aircraft I have worked on, with Bendix RSA injection called for pump on for takeoff and landing. Since I knew this not to be the case, I sought to correct the statement. At t his point I am unsure what you are still defending but alas, I will concede. Lastly, I see you are now an accident investigator. Can you cite for me the 2 10 accident that you have concluded was brought down 10 days ago due to not r unning the fuel pump on takeoff? W. On Jan 11, 2013, at 0:44, Kelly McMullen wrote: > > Boy are you confused. The Cessna 177RG for a long time was the only Bendix fuel injected, Lycoming engined high wing Cessna. I haven't looked at later models that got Lycoming engines, but there is no question that your high w ing will NOT produce the fuel pressure needed for full power without a boost pump. Period. > The models you cite are all carbureted, and most do not have a boost pump o r mechanical pump because it isn't needed as it takes almost no pressure to f eed fuel past the needle valve when the fuel in bowl drops and lets the valv e open. Totally different than the Bendix fuel injection that requires nearl y 15 psi to allow for full power, which you won't get from a wing that is on ly 6 ft above the wheels and much less above the fuel injection servo, and p robably only 2 ft or less above it in a 15 degree pitch attitude. > That Cessna is idiotic enough to not change their POH after there have bee n enough documented cases of mechanical fuel pump failure that resulted in a n AD on Lycoming high pressure mechanical pumps, is simply negligence on Ces sna's part, and yes, if it came to testifying at a litigation trial, that is exactly what I would say. > Cessna in the early 210s also did not recognize the problem and didn't eve n put in boost pumps adequate to run the engine after mechanical pump failur e. > > All you are doing is pointing out the deficiencies of the 38 year old POH. It also has no emergency checklist items to restore power before reaching c ruise altitude. How dumb is that? You aren't going to switch on boost pump, s witch tanks and check mags for both until you are at the leisure of cruise a ltitude if the engine quits at 2000 ft????? Yes, I would ignore the POH and u se the boost pump for takeoff and landing, just as the low wing planes with t he same engine and injection system recommend, because the wing position can 't make enough a difference to generate the pressure needed. Would you rathe r follow POH and risk an off airport landing if your mechanical pump fails a t 100 ft in the air, or be more informed and keep flying until you are at a ltitude you can return to runway when engine quits as you turn off the boost pump at above 1000ft? Since I saw a 210 totaled for that exact reason 10 da ys ago, I know my choice. > Kelly > > On 1/10/2013 3:50 PM, William Curtis wrote: >> Agreed, which is why I prefaced most by specifying "fuel injected high wi ng." The high wing Cessna 150/152 that I trained in also did not have boost p umps. Most high wing carbureted engine aircraft can and do run perfectly fin e full power with only gravity feeding the fuel. >> >> I know we are "out in the weeds" on this thread now but I'll restate my o riginal statement with clarification and expansion-- I hope: >> >> -In the case of the RV10 with a Lycoming fuel injected engine, follow the Vans suggested recommendation of *running the boost pump during takeoff and landing*s. This is normal procedure for most low wing aircraft. >> >> -For *high wing fuel injected* Cessnas, all POH that I have seen DO NOT i ndicate running the fuel pump during takeoff and landings. >> >> -Many, if not all, *high wing **carbureted *aircraft, including the Cessn a 150/152/172, DO NOT specify in the POH running the boost pump during takeo ff and landings. >> >> W. >> >> On Jan 10, 2013, at 16:51, Dj Merrill > wrote: >> deej.net>> >>> >>> On 01/10/2013 04:30 PM, William Curtis wrote: >>> >>>> I don't >>>> think anyone has said or would think an engine would "run properly" wit h >>>> fuel fed only with gravity >>> >>> >>> This is exactly what I am saying - my Glastar has never had any kind o f >>> fuel pump installed, mechanical or electrical, and it runs just fine >>> with gravity fed only to a carb. >>> >>> I've been told there are older certified aircraft that are setup the >>> same way, but I don't have any specific references to share. >>> >>> -Dj >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Dj Merrill - N1JOV - VP EAA Chapter 87 >>> Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/ >>> Glastar Flyer N866RH - http://deej.net/glastar/<======== ================== - The RV10-L ist Emailnics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV 10-List======================= ========================== ===; - List Contribution Web Site -*http://www.m====== ========================== ================= >>> >>> >>> >>> * >> * >> * >> >> >> * >> * > > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Another RV-10 down?
From: "rv10flyer" <wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jan 11, 2013
Did we ever find out what caused the hole in oil sump in Rck Gray's RV-10 emergency landing and fire? -------- Wayne G. 12/01/2011 TT= 95 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=392075#392075 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Subject: Cowl Replacement Update
Date: Jan 11, 2013
Carl, I would not necessarily dispute your observations. I just can't consistentl y keep my cylinders under 400 F and I fly in CA often out of the San Fernan do Valley. Just no way to fly the plane and not feel you are reducing the e ngine life at those temps. Plus I could not fly LOP with the SJ cowl which would have given my CHT's a rest for the bulk of each leg. The thought of l anding at temp and a quick turnaround with a heat soaked engine makes me gr oan for my Barrett special. I figured I could pay now or pay later. In gene ral while 187 TAS at 2,500 RPM sounds good my long term preference is targe ting 10 GPH, Low CHT's and an engine that makes it to 2,000 TBO. Robin [cid:image005.jpg(at)01CDEFE7.8BE00290] [cid:image006.jpg(at)01CDEFE7.8BE00290] -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m atronics.com] On Behalf Of Carl Froehlich Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 7:40 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update Just to offer another opinion on the James Cowl and plenum... I'm running a stock IO-540 from Van's with the Hartzell BA prop, a single o il cooler (but not mounted like Van's suggests) and bottom cowl louvers abo ut the same area size as specified for the stock Van's cowl. I do not have oil temp problems and control CHTs below 400 degrees. Comparing my cruise and top speeds to Van's performance specifications I am enjoying measurabl e gains (data run taken before recent rigging tweaks yielded 187kts TAS, 65 00', 2500 RPM, 23.3"MP - about 73% power). Tracking this discussion on the list for a few years now it seems I have a much later cowl than Robin as I did not have plenum alignment problems and started off with the larger inl et rings. The James Cowl is not magic. It offers reduced drag over the Van's cowl by a smaller inlet area but (theoretically) more efficient use of the cooling air that is taken in. The trade off is on a hot day I have to put the nos e down a little more on an extended climb (say 135 knots instead of the 120 I use in my RV-8A). The set up does add significant work over the stock V an's cowl. I decided to go down this path for the same reason it seems Rob in did; the positive James Cowl track record in 2 place RVs. When I ordere d mine Will James was straight with me on customer reports of heating probl ems - and what action he took to address them. This was enough to mitigate my concerns. The last time I checked however Will no longer offers the RV-10 cowl. As Robin states the least risk, lowest work option is to stick with the sto ck Van's cowl. My decision tree was biased toward fuel efficient cross cou ntry performance. With just 60 hours and only one long cross country, I am pleased with the results. I've had the plane down for the holidays to bac k fit the ADSB receiver and to work the gripe list but this weekend it come s back out of the hangar. It's a shame the day job keeps getting in the wa y of flying. Carl -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com<mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@ma tronics.com> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 6:14 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update robin(at)painttheweb.com>> I originally placed the SJ cowl on the -10 based on the 2 place RV fleet hi story with the SJ unit. I was probably the 3rd -10 SJ cowl flying. Unfortunately the SJ -10 cowl well documented problems meant that I needed to replace the cowl on my flying -10. The smart move would have been to go with the proven factory cowl. It does everything you need it to do and ther e are 350 other -10 pilots you can have something in common with when insta lling the Vans cowl. When my 8A came on line it was time to replace the -10 cowl. I opted for the new cowl even though I will most likely be the fi rst flying production Showplanes -10 cowl because the builder has a long hi story of RV aftermarket product development and I had been in discussions w ith Bryan for about 2 years tracking his progress. He is extremely methodic al in his development approach vs. just blowing up a smaller cowl and plenu m hoping it works. My prior cowl & plenum were sold as a set intended to be used together but even a! basic measurement like the inlet holes weren't aligned. That should have been a warning to me but I already had started the assembly. Bryan on the o ther hand had done so much R&D and his goal was to develop a "no compromise s" cowl. A cowl that can fly with the standard Vans oil cooler on the wedge with no added louvers and cobbled together solutions required. When it came time I decided to support a builder & designer that gave great care in his development. I can say the quality of fiberglass far exceeds a nything ever shipped from Vans. Long story / short. The smartest solution would have been the Standard Vans cowl and it will remain so for most builders. But this cowl is great looki ng and works with the FM200 & FM300 so I am giving it a try. That is why I fly in the Experimental category for gosh sakes. Of course the first 325 ho urs I flew in the Disgruntled category but hopefully this new cowl will res olve those issues. The rest of the plane is a dream to own & fly. Robin RV-4 Sold RV-6A Sold RV-10 Flying RV-8A Flying -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com<mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@ma tronics.com> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Greenley Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 2:24 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update --> > 9-12 months from needing to order a cowl. This is a new area for me, what i s the reason for using the showplanes cowl over vans regular cowl? Bill Greenley RV-10 builder -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com<mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@ma tronics.com> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 5:02 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update robin(at)painttheweb.com>> Ralph, This cowl replaces the SJ cowl and plenum. Adios! This is the new Showplanes and intake system for the FM300. No Plenum for m e ever again. If one were to visit the Showplane website you can see the induction system from the front view. Basically the bottom quarter of each inlet is dedicat ed to the FI induction system. Robin "Ralph E. Capen" > wrot e: --> > Is this a new SJ RV10 cowl? I don't see it on their website.... Would like to see a front view of the dual fiberglass intake runners. Guessing you're not using a plenum..... ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Cowl Replacement Update
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Date: Jan 11, 2013
How did the cowl affect the ability to fly LOP? Is this the odd air pressure on the injector bleed holes issue? -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=392082#392082 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Cowl Replacement Update
Date: Jan 11, 2013
Interesting that you were not able to run LOP. Even with mags I am able to do that - and do so consistently. I do miss the eMag ignitions that I have on my 8A as LOP operation is much better with them (and for all engine operations for that matter). Maybe Brad will have the IO-540 ignition out before to many more years. I agree on the speed aspect. 10 GPH or so LOP is the 90% of the time flying mode. The fuel save, range gain and engine life enhancement for the slight cruise speed penalty makes this a simple choice. Carl From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 1:37 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update Carl, I would not necessarily dispute your observations. I just can't consistently keep my cylinders under 400 F and I fly in CA often out of the San Fernando Valley. Just no way to fly the plane and not feel you are reducing the engine life at those temps. Plus I could not fly LOP with the SJ cowl which would have given my CHT's a rest for the bulk of each leg. The thought of landing at temp and a quick turnaround with a heat soaked engine makes me groan for my Barrett special. I figured I could pay now or pay later. In general while 187 TAS at 2,500 RPM sounds good my long term preference is targeting 10 GPH, Low CHT's and an engine that makes it to 2,000 TBO. Robin -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carl Froehlich Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 7:40 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update Just to offer another opinion on the James Cowl and plenum... I'm running a stock IO-540 from Van's with the Hartzell BA prop, a single oil cooler (but not mounted like Van's suggests) and bottom cowl louvers about the same area size as specified for the stock Van's cowl. I do not have oil temp problems and control CHTs below 400 degrees. Comparing my cruise and top speeds to Van's performance specifications I am enjoying measurable gains (data run taken before recent rigging tweaks yielded 187kts TAS, 6500', 2500 RPM, 23.3"MP - about 73% power). Tracking this discussion on the list for a few years now it seems I have a much later cowl than Robin as I did not have plenum alignment problems and started off with the larger inlet rings. The James Cowl is not magic. It offers reduced drag over the Van's cowl by a smaller inlet area but (theoretically) more efficient use of the cooling air that is taken in. The trade off is on a hot day I have to put the nose down a little more on an extended climb (say 135 knots instead of the 120 I use in my RV-8A). The set up does add significant work over the stock Van's cowl. I decided to go down this path for the same reason it seems Robin did; the positive James Cowl track record in 2 place RVs. When I ordered mine Will James was straight with me on customer reports of heating problems - and what action he took to address them. This was enough to mitigate my concerns. The last time I checked however Will no longer offers the RV-10 cowl. As Robin states the least risk, lowest work option is to stick with the stock Van's cowl. My decision tree was biased toward fuel efficient cross country performance. With just 60 hours and only one long cross country, I am pleased with the results. I've had the plane down for the holidays to back fit the ADSB receiver and to work the gripe list but this weekend it comes back out of the hangar. It's a shame the day job keeps getting in the way of flying. Carl -----Original Message----- From: <mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com> owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [ mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 6:14 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update robin(at)painttheweb.com> I originally placed the SJ cowl on the -10 based on the 2 place RV fleet history with the SJ unit. I was probably the 3rd -10 SJ cowl flying. Unfortunately the SJ -10 cowl well documented problems meant that I needed to replace the cowl on my flying -10. The smart move would have been to go with the proven factory cowl. It does everything you need it to do and there are 350 other -10 pilots you can have something in common with when installing the Vans cowl. When my 8A came on line it was time to replace the -10 cowl. I opted for the new cowl even though I will most likely be the first flying production Showplanes -10 cowl because the builder has a long history of RV aftermarket product development and I had been in discussions with Bryan for about 2 years tracking his progress. He is extremely methodical in his development approach vs. just blowing up a smaller cowl and plenum hoping it works. My prior cowl & plenum were sold as a set intended to be used together but even a! basic measurement like the inlet holes weren't aligned. That should have been a warning to me but I already had started the assembly. Bryan on the other hand had done so much R&D and his goal was to develop a "no compromises" cowl. A cowl that can fly with the standard Vans oil cooler on the wedge with no added louvers and cobbled together solutions required. When it came time I decided to support a builder & designer that gave great care in his development. I can say the quality of fiberglass far exceeds anything ever shipped from Vans. Long story / short. The smartest solution would have been the Standard Vans cowl and it will remain so for most builders. But this cowl is great looking and works with the FM200 & FM300 so I am giving it a try. That is why I fly in the Experimental category for gosh sakes. Of course the first 325 hours I flew in the Disgruntled category but hopefully this new cowl will resolve those issues. The rest of the plane is a dream to own & fly. Robin RV-4 Sold RV-6A Sold RV-10 Flying RV-8A Flying -----Original Message----- From: <mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com> owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [ mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Greenley Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 2:24 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update --> < wgreenley(at)gmail.com> 9-12 months from needing to order a cowl. This is a new area for me, what is the reason for using the showplanes cowl over vans regular cowl? Bill Greenley RV-10 builder -----Original Message----- From: <mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com> owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [ mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 5:02 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update robin(at)painttheweb.com> Ralph, This cowl replaces the SJ cowl and plenum. Adios! This is the new Showplanes and intake system for the FM300. No Plenum for me ever again. If one were to visit the Showplane website you can see the induction system from the front view. Basically the bottom quarter of each inlet is dedicated to the FI induction system. Robin "Ralph E. Capen" < recapen(at)earthlink.net> wrote: --> < recapen(at)earthlink.net> Is this a new SJ RV10 cowl? I don't see it on their website.... Would like to see a front view of the dual fiberglass intake runners. Guessing you're not using a plenum..... ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Subject: Re: Cowl Replacement Update
Date: Jan 11, 2013
Bob, It's been years since I addressed the issue so I don't want to tell you something that is partially correct but not totally accurate. I have a feeling that some of my temp issues and LOP issues had to do with such a minor difference in top & bottom deck pressure which limited the amount of cooling air passing through the cylinder fins. I did however swap out my standard injectors to a Turbo Rail type of set up (AFP Products) which helped but never got me balanced all the way to LOP flight w/o a rough running engine. At that point I knew I was a year out from scrapping the cowl all together so no further development was undertaken. Just too many patches & band aids for me. Hopefully v.2.0 will work out better. Robin -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Turner Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 11:05 AM Subject: RV10-List: Re: Cowl Replacement Update How did the cowl affect the ability to fly LOP? Is this the odd air pressure on the injector bleed holes issue? -------- Bob Turner RV-10 QB Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=392082#392082 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 11, 2013
Subject: Re: Antenna Opinions, experiance and thoughts appreciated
From: Rob Kochman <rv10rob(at)gmail.com>
My suggestion is that if you're going to use the nav antenna to fly real IFR with real approaches, get an externally-mounted antenna to ensure maximum reception. On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Terry Moushon wrote: > > I am about to start my RV10 wings... I plan to use Pulsar NS90 wingtip > lights and Duckworth 35W HID landing lights. My plan is to install an > Archer design communication antenna in the right wing and an Archer design > antenna in the left which would be split for both VOR and Glideslope. All > will be tied together with RG-58C/U. My question is simple. Do these > components play well together given their close proximity? Any suggestions? > > Terry > Builder #41393 > > -- Rob Kochman RV-10 Flying since March 2011 Woodinville, WA http://kochman.net/N819K ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Robin Marks <robin(at)PaintTheWeb.com>
Subject: Cowl Replacement Update
Date: Jan 11, 2013
No LOP for me on the -10 with LOTS of R&D. My 8A flew LOP out of the box wi th Mag/Pmag. I love my 4 cylinder Pmag. I get 152-157 KTAS on 6.2-6.7 GPH t hat makes me very happy. Either side of 30 MPG. I have a 1 hour commute and after my round trip I look in the tanks and there is lots of fuel remainin g. Again very happy! RV-8A round trip ~13 Gallons LOP. Current RV-10 cowl R OP round trip ~30 gallons. I am near the top of the mythical list for a 6 cylinder Pmag. At this point I am not sure I want one of the first units. Robin From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m atronics.com] On Behalf Of Carl Froehlich Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 11:23 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update Interesting that you were not able to run LOP. Even with mags I am able to do that - and do so consistently. I do miss the eMag ignitions that I hav e on my 8A as LOP operation is much better with them (and for all engine op erations for that matter). Maybe Brad will have the IO-540 ignition out be fore to many more years. I agree on the speed aspect. 10 GPH or so LOP is the 90% of the time flyin g mode. The fuel save, range gain and engine life enhancement for the slig ht cruise speed penalty makes this a simple choice. Carl From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com<mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@ma tronics.com> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob in Marks Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 1:37 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update Carl, I would not necessarily dispute your observations. I just can't consistentl y keep my cylinders under 400 F and I fly in CA often out of the San Fernan do Valley. Just no way to fly the plane and not feel you are reducing the e ngine life at those temps. Plus I could not fly LOP with the SJ cowl which would have given my CHT's a rest for the bulk of each leg. The thought of l anding at temp and a quick turnaround with a heat soaked engine makes me gr oan for my Barrett special. I figured I could pay now or pay later. In gene ral while 187 TAS at 2,500 RPM sounds good my long term preference is targe ting 10 GPH, Low CHT's and an engine that makes it to 2,000 TBO. Robin [cid:image001.jpg(at)01CDEFFC.C1671DD0] [cid:image002.jpg(at)01CDEFFC.C1671DD0] -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com<mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@ma tronics.com> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Car l Froehlich Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 7:40 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cowl Replacement Update Just to offer another opinion on the James Cowl and plenum... I'm running a stock IO-540 from Van's with the Hartzell BA prop, a single o il cooler (but not mounted like Van's suggests) and bottom cowl louvers abo ut the same area size as specified for the stock Van's cowl. I do not have oil temp problems and control CHTs below 400 degrees. Comparing my cruise


December 15, 2012 - January 11, 2013

RV10-Archive.digest.vol-jd