RV10-Archive.digest.vol-jq
February 03, 2014 - March 02, 2014
Well, the Monster retreads do have a bigger diameter, but you can also add
diameter without the extra wt of the thicker Monster tread by using 6:00X6
tires instead of the specified 15X^:00X6 tires Vans calls for. Or you could
use 6:00X6 Monster retreads for a HiRider version.
On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 1:30 AM, woxofswa wrote:
>
> If you go with the Desser Monster retreads you'll sit a bit higher and
> have more clearance.
>
> --------
> Myron Nelson
> Mesa, AZ
> Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. FWF
> complete.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=417867#417867
>
>
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg McFarlane" <grbcmcfarlane(at)gmail.com> |
Not new ideas but could be of interest. The fab box & filter is mounting as per
plans, plus, to improve the integrity of the filter sealing a 63 aluminium plate
is epoxied and riveted to the outside bottom of the fab. (countersunk rivets
inside under filter) Four -3 bolts through the bottom plate just inside the
filter and through the top attachment plate holds everything in place and prevents
the fab box with heat/time etc from stretching and the filter becoming loose
allowing dirt etc to be ingested by the engine. By sizing the bolt length
carefully allowing for a washer on the bottom bolt head and the nylock nut on
top, the bolt when tightened and "bottomed" out on its threads can put enough
pressure to seal but not enough to crush the filter. The four bolt heads are
shown unpainted in photo. The 63 added plate also makes for a better attach for
the alternate air door which is epoxied & riveted with solid rivets, to reduce
the risk of rivets becoming loose and being sucked up into the engine. To improve
the door seal epoxy/flox is layed up for the door to close on, the spring
stops vibration and helps the seal. Cheers from Western Australia.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418019#418019
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_953.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com> |
I did something similar after my filter wore through the FAB, except I put
the plate on the inside. I only used (alot of) proseal to attach the
plate, so no extra fasteners. And I did rivet the alt air ring to the
plate and the FAB.
I use a thin bead of silicone around the edge of the alt air valve. That
keeps it from jiggling around, similar to your spring, and also seals it up
well. I consider it an emergency item so I only check it at the annual and
I just accept that it has to be reset as a maintenance item.
Dave Saylor
831-750-0284 CL
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 2:47 AM, Greg McFarlane wrote:
> >
>
> Not new ideas but could be of interest. The fab box & filter is mounting
> as per plans, plus, to improve the integrity of the filter sealing a 63
> aluminium plate is epoxied and riveted to the outside bottom of the fab.
> (countersunk rivets inside under filter) Four -3 bolts through the bottom
> plate just inside the filter and through the top attachment plate holds
> everything in place and prevents the fab box with heat/time etc from
> stretching and the filter becoming loose allowing dirt etc to be ingested
> by the engine. By sizing the bolt length carefully allowing for a washer on
> the bottom bolt head and the nylock nut on top, the bolt when tightened and
> "bottomed" out on its threads can put enough pressure to seal but not
> enough to crush the filter. The four bolt heads are shown unpainted in
> photo. The 63 added plate also makes for a better attach for the alternate
> air door which is epoxied & riveted with solid rivets, to reduce the risk
> of rivets becoming loose and being sucke!
> d up into the engine. To improve the door seal epoxy/flox is layed up for
> the door to close on, the spring stops vibration and helps the seal. Cheers
> from Western Australia.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418019#418019
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_953.jpg
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg McFarlane" <grbcmcfarlane(at)gmail.com> |
8 Just FYI, could be of interest, having a removable engine air intake has several
advantages and is well worth the effort. The bottom cowl is easier to put
on and take off because the intake is attached after the cowl is offered up and
before cowl removal. Because the 3inch scat is more flexible than the baffle
seal setup there is less strain on the fab box and the throttle body/carb'.
With the better seal that can be achieved with the slide in fitting expect a modest
increase in MP (the scat is left about inch and half longer so is compressed
holding the entry into the fab firm but is still flexible). The draggy flat
bit just above the standard air intake on the cowl can be fared around the
extended "dolphin Nosed" removable intake so........more speed. Cheers from Western
Australia.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418107#418107
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_900.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ben Westfall" <rv10(at)sinkrate.com> |
That's pretty slick. Do you have any pictures of how you secure the forward
portion into the cowling snort? I see a couple holes in your "adapter" did
you epoxy in some standoffs for screws? The 3 bladed prop guys might really
like this approach. Of course its fiberglass work so there's a solid month
of build time spent in the "layup, sand, layup, sand, cuss, redo, layup,
sand" loop!!
-Ben Westfall
-----Original Message-----
8 Just FYI, could be of interest, having a removable engine air intake has
several advantages and is well worth the effort. The bottom cowl is easier
to put on and take off because the intake is attached after the cowl is
offered up and before cowl removal. Because the 3inch scat is more flexible
than the baffle seal setup there is less strain on the fab box and the
throttle body/carb'. With the better seal that can be achieved with the
slide in fitting expect a modest increase in MP (the scat is left about inch
and half longer so is compressed holding the entry into the fab firm but is
still flexible). The draggy flat bit just above the standard air intake on
the cowl can be fared around the extended "dolphin Nosed" removable intake
so........more speed. Cheers from Western Australia.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418107#418107
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_900.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg McFarlane" <grbcmcfarlane(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks Ben, The Snorkel is held with three screws (one each side one under) into
nut plates that are riveted onto three small pieces of ally. The wings of the
nut plates are bent to conform with the bent ally pieces which are then epoxied
and riveted into place. On my 6 I got away with only two screws but the 10
is somewhat larger. Cheers from Western Australia
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418170#418170
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_157.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Patrick Pulis <rv10free2fly(at)yahoo.com.au> |
Greg
Many thanks. Does the scat tube inserted into the air filter fit permanently on
the lower cowl and then does that scat tube slide into the air filter when the
lower cowl is fitted?
If thus is the case, why is there a need for the front air scoop to be removable
please?
Your air inlet looks much larger than the standard, how much extra manifold pressure
gain due you anticipate?
Your modification appears to be a pseudo cold air induction. Well done.
Can I call you to discuss please?
Warm regards
Patrick
Tel: 08 8236 6808
Mob: 0418 850 156
> On 6 Feb 2014, at 20:34, "Greg McFarlane" wrote:
>
>
> Thanks Ben, The Snorkel is held with three screws (one each side one under) into
nut plates that are riveted onto three small pieces of ally. The wings of
the nut plates are bent to conform with the bent ally pieces which are then epoxied
and riveted into place. On my 6 I got away with only two screws but the
10 is somewhat larger. Cheers from Western Australia
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418170#418170
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_157.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: turf runways |
| From: | "johngoodman" <johngoodman(at)earthlink.net> |
> Well, the Monster retreads do have a bigger diameter, but you can also add diameter
without the extra wt of the thicker Monster tread by using 6:00X6 tires
instead of the specified 15X^:00X6 tires Vans calls for. Or you could use 6:00X6
Monster retreads for a HiRider version.
Kelly brings up an interesting point. Since I am "pantless", Van's 15x6:00x6 tires
aren't necessary. I obviously could go with regular 6:00x6 tires and get an
inch higher up for less money. However, that means the nose tire needs a little
"bump up" as well. The nose wheel has limitations due to the size of the fork.
How would you deal with that?
John
--------
#40572 Phase One complete and flying.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418191#418191
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: turf runways |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
Why would you need a bigger front tire? Bigger means more weight and
consequently more wear on nose fork even if it fit. Maybe the pivot for the
fork could be extended to raise the nose. If more prop clearance is needed,
perhaps a 3 blade with a little shorter blades would do the trick. I don't
think there is any significance to the slight change in angle of attack if
the mains are an inch taller, since you will lift the nose as soon as wings
and tail generate some lift.
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:16 AM, johngoodman wrote:
>
>
> > Well, the Monster retreads do have a bigger diameter, but you can also
> add diameter without the extra wt of the thicker Monster tread by using
> 6:00X6 tires instead of the specified 15X^:00X6 tires Vans calls for. Or
> you could use 6:00X6 Monster retreads for a HiRider version.
>
>
> Kelly brings up an interesting point. Since I am "pantless", Van's
> 15x6:00x6 tires aren't necessary. I obviously could go with regular 6:00x6
> tires and get an inch higher up for less money. However, that means the
> nose tire needs a little "bump up" as well. The nose wheel has limitations
> due to the size of the fork. How would you deal with that?
>
> John
>
> --------
> #40572 Phase One complete and flying.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418191#418191
>
>
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: turf runways |
| From: | "johngoodman" <johngoodman(at)earthlink.net> |
> Why would you need a bigger front tire? Bigger means more weight and consequently
more wear on nose fork even if it fit. Maybe the pivot for the fork could
be extended to raise the nose. If more prop clearance is needed, perhaps a 3
blade with a little shorter blades would do the trick. I don't think there is
any significance to the slight change in angle of attack if the mains are an inch
taller, since you will lift the nose as soon as wings and tail generate some
lift.
I only brought it up because there would be a tiny change in attitude on the ground.
Probably not significant, but nose down for sure. Would it be noticeable?
Probably not.
It just seems logical that a larger main tire, would suggest a larger nose tire,
as well. but I'm no expert.
I've flown in and out of grass strips, and it's not a problem. But, it gets a little
creepy taxiing on grass off the runway - always thinking of gopher holes....
John
--------
#40572 Phase One complete and flying.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418196#418196
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: turf runways |
I now have 400 hours operating out of the lit turf at 8NC8 in Durham
NC. Our field is considered 'rough'. I didn't do anything special
with my pants beyond the standard stuff for a build of my vintage
(finished Aug 2011). I did leave a healthy margin around the tires but
my pants are still too low for many airport's chocks and they still look
like they fully enclose the tire.
How rough? I found a cracked nose wheel during my last condition
inspection: Photo of cracked nosewheel
<http://www.mykitlog.com/users/display_log.php?user=MauleDriver&project=224&category=7984&log=180210&row=3>
I can honestly say that I've never even come close to any kind of nose
first or 3 point touchdown so I think this was from just normal wear and
tear on our turf.
The pants are showing some wear but are holding up just fine. My sense
is that long grass only stains the pants. You have to hit something to
damage them. I've never witnessed a landing of a '10 on my turf so I
can't speak to how it sounds or looks.
I did just crack a wheel pant when I got a flat tire in Pompano Beach.
My ten had been moved from tie down to front of the ramp for a morning
departure. It didn't have flat then since they managed to get chocks
under the pant but when it went flat, my pant was cracked front and
back. Fortunately I was able to continue on once the flat was fixed and
I'm glad it happened there instead of one of the airports I went to in
the Bahamas(!!).
Forty hours earlier I had swapped tires left and right for wear and
replaced the tubes with leak guards. I didn't get a chance to inspect
the tube so I can only guess what happened. There was quite a bit of
construction going on at KPMP and I had to taxi in areas shared with
construction equipment. I didn't have the flat when I landed.
I've landed my old Maule at Triple Tree. That is a smooooooth field,
especially where they fly models.
Anyway, that's the only damage I've really experienced despite operating
regularly out of a rough field. The pants do just fine.
Bill "it's pretty damn good in the Bahamas" Watson
On 1/27/2014 8:33 PM, rv10flyer wrote:
>
> I have flown into SC00 Triple Tree SC twice. We sat watching everyones pants
shake like crazy and that runway is supposedly golf course smooth. If I lived
on a grass strip I would beef up wheel pant mounts(switch to stainless) and fiberglass
or just remove them.
>
> Maybe we will hear from Bill "Living the life in an airpark with turf" Watson.
He might have to put some snow skis on this week.
>
> --------
> Wayne G.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: turf runways |
| From: | Cooprv7 <cooprv7(at)yahoo.com> |
Thanks Bill,
It's good to see all the positive turf runway reports. If you get a cha
nce, I'm sure we would all benefit from a trip report on your Bahama experie
nce.
Thanks again,
Marcus
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 6, 2014, at 16:38, Bill Watson wrote:
I now have 400 hours operating out of the lit turf at 8NC8 in Durham NC. O
ur field is considered 'rough'. I didn't do anything special with my pants b
eyond the standard stuff for a build of my vintage (finished Aug 2011). I d
id leave a healthy margin around the tires but my pants are still too low fo
r many airport's chocks and they still look like they fully enclose the tire
.
How rough? I found a cracked nose wheel during my last condition inspection
: Photo of cracked nosewheel
I can honestly say that I've never even come close to any kind of nose first
or 3 point touchdown so I think this was from just normal wear and tear on o
ur turf.
The pants are showing some wear but are holding up just fine. My sense is t
hat long grass only stains the pants. You have to hit something to damage t
hem. I've never witnessed a landing of a '10 on my turf so I can't speak t
o how it sounds or looks.
I did just crack a wheel pant when I got a flat tire in Pompano Beach. My t
en had been moved from tie down to front of the ramp for a morning departure
. It didn't have flat then since they managed to get chocks under the pant b
ut when it went flat, my pant was cracked front and back. Fortunately I was
able to continue on once the flat was fixed and I'm glad it happened there i
nstead of one of the airports I went to in the Bahamas(!!).
Forty hours earlier I had swapped tires left and right for wear and replaced
the tubes with leak guards. I didn't get a chance to inspect the tube so I
can only guess what happened. There was quite a bit of construction going o
n at KPMP and I had to taxi in areas shared with construction equipment. I d
idn't have the flat when I landed.
I've landed my old Maule at Triple Tree. That is a smooooooth field, especi
ally where they fly models.
Anyway, that's the only damage I've really experienced despite operating reg
ularly out of a rough field. The pants do just fine.
Bill "it's pretty damn good in the Bahamas" Watson
> On 1/27/2014 8:33 PM, rv10flyer wrote:
>
> I have flown into SC00 Triple Tree SC twice. We sat watching everyones pan
ts shake like crazy and that runway is supposedly golf course smooth. If I l
ived on a grass strip I would beef up wheel pant mounts(switch to stainless)
and fiberglass or just remove them.
>
> Maybe we will hear from Bill "Living the life in an airpark with turf" Wat
son. He might have to put some snow skis on this week.
>
> --------
> Wayne G.
>
>
==========================
========
==========================
========
==========================
========
==========================
========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "woxofswa" <woxof(at)aol.com> |
I'm not an engineer, but I recall reading about the development of NACA vent designs
about how a protrusion around an intake can cause a damming or even vacuum
effect when not pointed directly into the airstream, (such as a slip or crosswind
gust. Not trying to be alarmist but I would at least run the concept
by an expert.
--------
Myron Nelson
Mesa, AZ
Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. FWF complete.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418256#418256
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "rv10flyer" <wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com> |
When the SCAT is compressed 1.5", does it leave an aerodynamically smooth bore?
My stock lower cowl binds up more due to cooling air inlet ramp rubber seals
and only leaving 1/8" between spinner/cowl. Engine intake seems to be the easier
of the three difficult areas on mine during installation.
--------
Wayne G.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418257#418257
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg McFarlane" <grbcmcfarlane(at)gmail.com> |
Patrick, the whole thing as pictured with the fab box comes out when the screws
are removed, only modest increase in MP expect inch or two, flying aircraft when
this mod has been done have had increase when compared before/after. Wayne,
as you'd expect the scat when compressed is not nice and smooth as you'd like,
but it works, it's the compression that makes everything nice and snug. Myron,
NASA would certainly know all about stuff hanging out in the airstream, however
this extension nicely fared I guess could be compared with the other tube
we all rely on and have sticking out in the airstream..........the pitot. Cheers
from Western Australia
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418267#418267
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | It's Pretty Darn Good in the Bahamas - trip report |
Tigressa, my wife and I just completed our first ever trip to the
Bahamas. We'll be back and can recommend it highly.
N215TG performed flawlessly once it left the states. The Bahamian
government and people welcome fliers with many government supported
airports and friendly customs offices, long solid airstrips, and willing
Bonefish.
We flew from 8NC8 in Durham NC down to KPMP in Pompano Beach FL as our
jumping off point. One can leave the states from any airport once the
necessary stuff has been done with Homeland Security. Our only real
problem with the plane occurred on the KPMP ramp. We returned from an
overnight stay to fine a flat main tire and cracked wheel pants from the
squat down on to the chocks. We began to curse our bad luck until we
realized that it might have happened somewhere in the Bahamas. It
delayed us 2.5 hours but was otherwise nothing.
Flat Tire at KPMP
Our plan was a few days on Andros via Congo Town Airport (MYAK) to do
some Bonefishing. Then a few more days on Cat Island via New Bight
Airport (MYCB) to do as little as possible.
We ended up spending a couple more days at Staniel Cay on the Exuma
chain via Staniel Cay Airport (MYES) and fueling at North Eleuthera
Airport (MYEH) before returning home via Fort Pierce (KFPR) for our
customs re-entry. KFPR came recommended by others as the best place to
go thru US Customs. I agree.
Pre-flight research suggested that Nassau and Freeport be avoided as
unnecessary. Private flying enables one to fly to practically any and
all of the out islands and that's where the fun is. The exact
definition of the 'out islands' escapes me. A map suggests some
definitions based on distance but I'd just call everything except for
the islands where Nassau, Freeport and perhaps Marsh Harbor are 'out
islands.
How are the airports? A surprising number of airports are Airports of
Entry (AOE) meaning that they have a customs offices, and that means
they can be flown to and from the USA. That doesn't necessarily mean
that anything else is there but it generally implies that there are
semi-scheduled service to other islands and therefore there is some kind
of local airline office.
At first glance, the runways look rough and finished with gravel.
However they are generally long, wide, hard surfaced and clear of
debris. The coral based aggregate in the surface makes it blend in with
the surrounding coral giving them an unkempt and uneven appearance. The
strips we went into were quite good with Staniel being perhaps the
roughest; it being a smaller strip with lots of traffic, the touch down
area was broken up a bit but it was wide enough to easily operate off
to the sides of the center line and avoid the rough spot. No problem at
this popular stop.
The ramps are generally unkempt looking and lack tie downs. You may
find a random piece of rebar driven in somewhere but right-size coral
rocks are often nearby. We have yet to start carrying our own chocks
but I'd recommend it even for domestic use (see flat tire above).
How is security in the out islands? At our two main destinations,
Andros and Cat Island, locks and keys for our rooms weren't even made
available and we never felt they were needed. It's a good feeling. I
had made up a prop lock per Tim's site. Used it once then forgot about
it. There used to be a thriving drug transport business operating
through the Bahamas but it's long gone. It took awhile before we
realized there were both police and military people in our midst. Very
low key, almost invisible but definitely around. After 5 or 6 trips to
our airplane with a rented golf cart to load and off load various items,
the local police finally caught up with me to kindly ask that I not
drive the cart onto the ramp surface but rather park it behind the plane
on the rubble. They try to keep the ramp and runway clear. The
airports are government installations and the government wants you
there. Thanks to the officer for driving us back from the cart rental
place when we departed!
Fees, tips and such: All fees are posted locally and on the Web. They
change occasionally so make sure any Web page referenced is reasonably
current. For single engine airplanes and their pleasure seeking
passengers it costs $50 upon entry and $25/head upon exit. There are no
other fees we could find for SEL aircraft. ME aircraft and commercial
operators pay some fees. No one has their hand out for tips or
unexpected fees. No one jumps up to meet and greet you either. Polite
requests are honored, help is provided when needed. Flashing cash is
insulting. When and where a tip is passed, discreetly palming the bills
out of sight of others seems to be appreciated. You may find
inappropriate tips returned.
So, how was the fun? We stayed with the folks at Deneki for some
Bonefishing on South Andros. It was great! A seamless experience from
arrival to departure.
Deneki Outdoors <http://www.deneki.com/>
What's Bonefishing?
Catching a Bonefish on the Fly with Charlie and Alicia
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w96O_EaOteM>
At Cat Island we stayed at Fernandez Bay Village which is a couple of
hundred yards from the New Bight Runway and yet miles away from
everything...
Fernandez Bay Village <http://www.fernandezbayvillage.com/index.html>
We stayed in a particularly nice 2 story suite directly on the beach
(like all rooms) and it's own super friendly cat to snuggle with. A TV
was brought in so we could watch the S----Bowl. A flight of 8 other
planes from VA arrrived during our stay. We accompanied them on a side
trip to Staniel they had planned for an afternoon of snorkeling and pig
feeding. Pics from that group may appear on AOPA site/magazine.
Tigressa sharing New Bight ramp with a Cirrus
Cat on Cat Island
Swimming Pig
Random Notes:
Flying over water; it's a personal thing. Not much different than
flying over an undercast except you can see what you are over. The
great part is that it is difficult to plan a '10 trip that will put you
over water for more than 30 minutes without sight of land and most often
an airport. We had a raft and preservers.
Bahamas weather was as described by others during this period - there's
little of it. Blue skies, blue water, scattered cumulus with
occassional short lived buildups over land. Lots of hard VFR.
Fueling - most places in the out islands don't have fuel so planning is
required.
The people you meet: Bahamians are super friendly and laid back. Once
you get rid of all that 'edge' we live with, all is good. In the out
islands most tourists/travelers are on their own boat or plane. The
others fly-in to vacation at specific resorts. Lot's of high $$$ boats
and planes as well as low $$$ boats and planes.
It's fun watching the boat people try to bridge the time and space gap
between 5 knots, 15knots and 155knots. Personal flying in your own RV10
is fantastic.
Bill "It's Pretty Damn Good in the Bahamas" Watson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "woxofswa" <woxof(at)aol.com> |
The air in a pitot tube is pressurized higher than ambient because the consumptive
rate is restricted by design creating a reservoir supply of feed air.
Engine air intakes have consumption rates which often create a vacuum/venturi effect
that is much more sensitive to flow interruption.
Early turbojet designs with relative narrow diameters and long intake nacelles
were susceptible to compressor stalls due to airflow interruption which is one
reason why jets, even those with straight wings, are never intentionally slipped.
As jet engine design has progressed, the forward nacelle has shrunk relative to
the fan diameter and the problem of compressor stalls has become less and less
of an issue.
Just musings of a hobbiast. An expert opinion is always wise when modifying designs.
Build on.
--------
Myron Nelson
Mesa, AZ
Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. FWF complete.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418279#418279
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: It's Pretty Darn Good in the Bahamas - trip report |
| From: | "dmaib(at)me.com" <dmaib(at)me.com> |
Great trip report, Bill. We have enjoyed Staniel Cay so much the past three years
that we have not tried any of the other islands, since Stella Maris on Long
Island in 2009. You have inspired me to try some other places. Loved the "cat
on Cat Island" photo. Your airplane is gorgeous.
--------
David Maib
RV-10 #40559
Transition Trainer
New Smyrna Beach, FL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418288#418288
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: It's Pretty Darn Good in the Bahamas - trip report |
Thanks David.
Our original plan was stay a few days at the Staniel Cay Yacht Club but
couldn't get a room so we went to Cat. Much quieter and remote with a
nicer strip.
Ironically we flew to Staniel for lunch on the way to Cat, then went
back after Cat and found that rooms were readily available if you
showed up in person. Lots of boats and activity on Staniel.
On 2/7/2014 1:07 PM, dmaib(at)me.com wrote:
>
> Great trip report, Bill. We have enjoyed Staniel Cay so much the past three years
that we have not tried any of the other islands, since Stella Maris on Long
Island in 2009. You have inspired me to try some other places. Loved the "cat
on Cat Island" photo. Your airplane is gorgeous.
>
> --------
> David Maib
> RV-10 #40559
> Transition Trainer
> New Smyrna Beach, FL
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418288#418288
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alan Mekler MD <amekler(at)metrocast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Door Struts, |
I just got my heavy duty struts from Vans. Is there a trick to getting
them to move. Mine are extended and don=92t seem to want to compress for
installation.
Alan
N668G
On Nov 14, 2013, at 9:17 AM, Sean Stephens
wrote:
> Stabilus, Lift-O-Mat part number 2218LP
>
> On 11/14/13, 7:53 AM, Ed Kranz wrote:
>> Does anyone have the part number for the heavy duty strut? I'm
ordering new, not replacing.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 6:51 AM, Kelly McMullen
wrote:
>> IIRC you can google the part number on the strut and locate at one of
your favorite automotive sources. Shockingly, I don't believe they are
an aircraft part. ;-)
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Leffler" <rv(at)thelefflers.com> |
You can't move them by hand. They'll compress once you install them in the
door.
bob
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan Mekler MD
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2014 7:27 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Door Struts,
I just got my heavy duty struts from Vans. Is there a trick to getting them
to move. Mine are extended and don't seem to want to compress for
installation.
Alan
N668G
On Nov 14, 2013, at 9:17 AM, Sean Stephens wrote:
Stabilus, Lift-O-Mat part number 2218LP
On 11/14/13, 7:53 AM, Ed Kranz wrote:
Does anyone have the part number for the heavy duty strut? I'm ordering new,
not replacing.
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 6:51 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
IIRC you can google the part number on the strut and locate at one of your
favorite automotive sources. Shockingly, I don't believe they are an
aircraft part. ;-)
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com/">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com/">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.mypilotstore.com/">www.mypilotstore.com
href="http://www.mrrace.com/">www.mrrace.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contri
bution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com
/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alan Mekler MD <amekler(at)metrocast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Door Struts, |
i see. i thought something was wrong with them. will install tomorrow.
alan
On Feb 7, 2014, at 7:49 PM, Bob Leffler wrote:
> You can=92t move them by hand. They=92ll compress once you install
them in the door.
>
> bob
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan Mekler
MD
> Sent: Friday, February 07, 2014 7:27 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Door Struts,
>
> I just got my heavy duty struts from Vans. Is there a trick to getting
them to move. Mine are extended and don=92t seem to want to compress for
installation.
> Alan
> N668G
> On Nov 14, 2013, at 9:17 AM, Sean Stephens
wrote:
>
>
> Stabilus, Lift-O-Mat part number 2218LP
>
> On 11/14/13, 7:53 AM, Ed Kranz wrote:
> Does anyone have the part number for the heavy duty strut? I'm
ordering new, not replacing.
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 6:51 AM, Kelly McMullen
wrote:
> IIRC you can google the part number on the strut and locate at one of
your favorite automotive sources. Shockingly, I don't believe they are
an aircraft part. ;-)
>
>
>
>
>
> href="http://www.aeroelectric.com/">www.aeroelectric.com
> href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersbooks.com
> href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com/">www.homebuilthelp.com
> href="http://www.mypilotstore.com/">www.mypilotstore.com
> href="http://www.mrrace.com/">www.mrrace.com
>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/co
ntribution
>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics
.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> http://forums.matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: It's Pretty Darn Good in the Bahamas - trip report |
Glad to see you went and had a great time, Bill!
I've never been to Cat before. I've wanted to go, but I'm not
sure that right now it's the place for me. There are times
I like low-key, but I'm not sure I'm capable of getting
to the point of just relaxing yet. :) The closest I've come
is on a live-aboard dive cruise in the Bahamas, but we were
actively diving 4 times per day. Did you notice if Diving was
available at Cat? If so, I may make that a stop on my next trip.
The Bahamas is one of those places I intend to go back to
at least every other year, if possible.
Regarding the prop lock, the only time I've ever brought it along
on a trip is to Mexico. There aren't many places in the US that
I'd worry about, and the Bahamas has a reputation of basically no
theft from tourists. Even in Mexico, the airport we stayed at
probably made it unnecessary, but there are smaller airports where
you may find it more essential. But to the Bahamas, I never bring
it. It's just unnecessary weight. I can't even afford to bring
a life raft, since we travel with the kids all the time.
You have to admit, if there's any place you would have to ditch
in the ocean, the Bahamas would be one of the better swimming
sites. :) (sharks excluded of course)
Nice to know that Staniel sometimes has rooms even when
technically "booked". I may do a pop-over trip this summer
where I don't book anything, and see what happens.
So how did your wife like the pigs? That side trip is always
fun. One thing not to miss is snorkeling in the grotto
at Staniel, also.
Tim
On 2/7/2014 2:13 PM, Bill Watson wrote:
>
> Thanks David.
>
> Our original plan was stay a few days at the Staniel Cay Yacht Club but
> couldn't get a room so we went to Cat. Much quieter and remote with a
> nicer strip.
>
> Ironically we flew to Staniel for lunch on the way to Cat, then went
> back after Cat and found that rooms were readily available if you
> showed up in person. Lots of boats and activity on Staniel.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: It's Pretty Darn Good in the Bahamas - trip report |
| From: | "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu> |
Did anyone ask to see your FCC radio station license?
Bob
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418365#418365
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: It's Pretty Darn Good in the Bahamas - trip report |
| From: | "rv10flyer" <wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com> |
Nice trip report, pics and fishing video.
--------
Wayne G.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418379#418379
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: It's Pretty Darn Good in the Bahamas - trip report |
Of course not!!
But thanks for reminding me to take my Restricted Radiotelephone
Operator Permit, dated December 20, 1977, out of my wallet and to put it
back in my flying archives.
Really, the Bahamian government really wants us there and goes out of
there way to make it as easy as they can.
Returning to KFPR, US Customs is a pretty friendly bunch there but they
will try to keep you on your toes. They checked my pilots license and
medical reminding me that my medical expires later this year. Didn't
expect that.
On 2/8/2014 1:09 PM, Bob Turner wrote:
>
> Did anyone ask to see your FCC radio station license?
>
> Bob
>
> --------
> Bob Turner
> RV-10 QB
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418365#418365
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jack(at)bedfordlandings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: It's Pretty Darn Good in the Bahamas - trip report |
Good thing we got that BFR out of the way, huh?
Jack Phillips
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Watson
Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2014 6:48 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: It's Pretty Darn Good in the Bahamas - trip
report
Of course not!!
But thanks for reminding me to take my Restricted Radiotelephone
Operator Permit, dated December 20, 1977, out of my wallet and to put it
back in my flying archives.
Really, the Bahamian government really wants us there and goes out of
there way to make it as easy as they can.
Returning to KFPR, US Customs is a pretty friendly bunch there but they
will try to keep you on your toes. They checked my pilots license and
medical reminding me that my medical expires later this year. Didn't
expect that.
On 2/8/2014 1:09 PM, Bob Turner wrote:
>
> Did anyone ask to see your FCC radio station license?
>
> Bob
>
> --------
> Bob Turner
> RV-10 QB
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418365#418365
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Door Struts, |
| From: | "johngoodman" <johngoodman(at)earthlink.net> |
I got tired of pushing the door up to get it to open all the way, so I bought the
heavy duty ones from Van. It's been a little over a year, and they are beginning
to require a push to get them up, again....
John
--------
#40572 Phase One complete and flying.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418412#418412
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don McDonald <building_partner(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: It's Pretty Darn Good in the Bahamas - trip report |
Ok, got to chime in here.... some of you may already know this, but most do
n't... Got the idea of flying while on our catamaran at Staniel Cay.- We
became friends with a couple who flew in, and were basically, Island hoppin
g.- That sounded kind of neat, so from the Bahamas, I contacted an old fr
iend/tenant to find out some info.- He said he sold his RV6, and was buil
ding a 10.- I had no idea what either of those were.- Long story short,
boats is sold, and have over 630 hours on the 10.=0AWould love to hook up
with any of you headed over there the next time around.- We spent about 3
months there, visiting Bimini, Exumas, Nassau (just to pick up people from
the airport), Cat, Long, Eleuthera, Abacos, and headed back to the states
from Walker.- From Walker to Charleston took us 55 hours, averaging over
11 kts, with a top speed of 14.2.- Just guessing, but it should be a litt
le quicker in the 10. - =0A=0APic1 is my wife, her sister, and her niece.
=0APic2 is her niece having fun... if you scratch their bellys, they just f
all over.- Me in the dinghy=0A=0APic3 is our cats idea of a glass panel.
=0APic4 is one of our favorite cays... Compass Cay, just north of Staniel.
=0ADon McDonald=0A0TX1 and loving it.=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AOn Saturday, February 8
, 2014 5:57 PM, Bill Watson wrote:=0A =0A--> RV10-L
ist message posted by: Bill Watson =0A=0AOf course n
ot!!=0A=0ABut thanks for reminding me to take my Restricted Radiotelephone
=0AOperator Permit, dated December 20, 1977, out of my wallet and to put it
=0Aback in my flying archives.=0A=0AReally, the Bahamian government really
wants us there and goes out of =0Athere way to make it as easy as they can
.=0A=0AReturning to KFPR, US Customs is a pretty friendly bunch there but t
hey =0Awill try to keep you on your toes.- They checked my pilots license
and =0Amedical reminding me that my medical expires later this year.- Di
dn't =0Aexpect that.=0A=0A=0AOn 2/8/2014 1:09 PM, Bob Turner wrote:=0A> -->
RV10-List message posted by: "Bob Turner" =0A>=0A>
Did anyone ask to see your FCC radio station license?=0A>=0A> Bob=0A>=0A>
--------=0A> Bob Turner=0A> RV-10 QB=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A> Read this topic on
line here:=0A>=0A> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418365#418
365=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A> -----=0A> No virus
=============
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Blue Skunk Electric Rudder Trim |
| From: | "bob88" <marty.crooks(at)comcast.net> |
I noticed that the ML Blue Skunk Works has an electric version of the previously
manual rudder trim system. Anyone with experience in an RV10?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418431#418431
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Winter Milestone |
| From: | "rvdave" <rv610dave(at)gmail.com> |
After last year of seeing mediocre progress on my 10 build and seeing and hearing
the advancements others have made, it's a little ironic that I would see a
milestone (to me) during the coldest months of the year -around 0 degF --huddling
around the 100K btu portable heater. I've had my fuselage mounted on a low
rolling square tube frame bolted to the wing spar and supporting the tail for
the last two years working on interior things, overhead console, carbon fiber
panel, electrical stuff--keeping it low for as long as I could to make it easier
for access to inside things. Enough of that, I needed to see progress so
bring out the gear legs---drilled and mounted. Grease main bearings & mount
wheels--done. Install nose gear, grease bearing, mount nose wheel---done. Remove
parasitic square tubed frame--done. It's standing on its own now! Slide
over engine hoist, lift engine & bolt to engine mount--done. Break out baffle
kit & begin install-- now in progress...
All in the last two weeks---for me a milestone. Had to share
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 flying
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418438#418438
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
Well, you can't get too far on those baffles until you have the engine
cowling done so that you can accurately trim the baffles to the cowling.
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 7:43 PM, rvdave wrote:
>
> After last year of seeing mediocre progress on my 10 build and seeing and
> hearing the advancements others have made, it's a little ironic that I
> would see a milestone (to me) during the coldest months of the year -around
> 0 degF --huddling around the 100K btu portable heater. I've had my
> fuselage mounted on a low rolling square tube frame bolted to the wing spar
> and supporting the tail for the last two years working on interior things,
> overhead console, carbon fiber panel, electrical stuff--keeping it low for
> as long as I could to make it easier for access to inside things. Enough
> of that, I needed to see progress so bring out the gear legs---drilled and
> mounted. Grease main bearings & mount wheels--done. Install nose gear,
> grease bearing, mount nose wheel---done. Remove parasitic square tubed
> frame--done. It's standing on its own now! Slide over engine hoist, lift
> engine & bolt to engine mount--done. Break out baffle kit & begin
> install-- now in progress...
> All in the last two weeks---for me a milestone. Had to share
>
> --------
> Dave Ford
> RV6 flying
> RV10 building
> Cadillac, MI
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418438#418438
>
>
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
And I KNOW how eager you are to do some more fiberglass.......
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
> Well, you can't get too far on those baffles until you have the engine
> cowling done so that you can accurately trim the baffles to the cowling.
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 7:43 PM, rvdave wrote:
>
>>
>> After last year of seeing mediocre progress on my 10 build and seeing and
>> hearing the advancements others have made, it's a little ironic that I
>> would see a milestone (to me) during the coldest months of the year -around
>> 0 degF --huddling around the 100K btu portable heater. I've had my
>> fuselage mounted on a low rolling square tube frame bolted to the wing spar
>> and supporting the tail for the last two years working on interior things,
>> overhead console, carbon fiber panel, electrical stuff--keeping it low for
>> as long as I could to make it easier for access to inside things. Enough
>> of that, I needed to see progress so bring out the gear legs---drilled and
>> mounted. Grease main bearings & mount wheels--done. Install nose gear,
>> grease bearing, mount nose wheel---done. Remove parasitic square tubed
>> frame--done. It's standing on its own now! Slide over engine hoist, lift
>> engine & bolt to engine mount--done. Break out baffle kit & begin
>> install-- now in progress...
>> All in the last two weeks---for me a milestone. Had to share
>>
>> --------
>> Dave Ford
>> RV6 flying
>> RV10 building
>> Cadillac, MI
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418438#418438
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Linn Walters <flying-nut(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
Thanks for sharing. I hate it when I have guys stop by and say 'looks
the same as the last time I saw it'. Depressing! It's a lot of little
things that take up so much time and show so little progress.
Linn BTDT
On 2/9/2014 9:43 PM, rvdave wrote:
>
> After last year of seeing mediocre progress on my 10 build and seeing and hearing
the advancements others have made, it's a little ironic that I would see
a milestone (to me) during the coldest months of the year -around 0 degF --huddling
around the 100K btu portable heater. I've had my fuselage mounted on a
low rolling square tube frame bolted to the wing spar and supporting the tail
for the last two years working on interior things, overhead console, carbon fiber
panel, electrical stuff--keeping it low for as long as I could to make it
easier for access to inside things. Enough of that, I needed to see progress
so bring out the gear legs---drilled and mounted. Grease main bearings & mount
wheels--done. Install nose gear, grease bearing, mount nose wheel---done.
Remove parasitic square tubed frame--done. It's standing on its own now! Slide
over engine hoist, lift engine & bolt to engine mount--done. Break out baffle
kit & begin install-- now in progress...
> All in the last two weeks---for me a milestone. Had to share
>
> --------
> Dave Ford
> RV6 flying
> RV10 building
> Cadillac, MI
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418438#418438
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Tim Olson latest post "My rv building prayer" |
| From: | "Jackm" <jackm(at)vinetechequipment.com> |
I do not know Tim personally but have been on his website numerous times as I think
many of us have. He has created a huge resource for us as builders and someday
would like to thank him in person ....but... the real reason for this post
is I have read his latest post numerous times again and love the message he
has in it. I too, can relate to many things Tim expresses in this post and I
believe any builder struggling should read that post. There is so much to life
and Tim nails it on the head what really is important but yet has followed a
dream as many of us are. Thank you Tim, Andrea and your children.
--------
Jackm
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418442#418442
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jack(at)bedfordlandings.com> |
| Subject: | Winter Milestone |
Try having your RV-10 project in a bunch of crates while you build a new
home. It's been 2 yers since I've seen the wings and tail of my -10, but
the house is finished (more or less) now and I'm about to break into the
crates and resume work on the RV-10 once again.
By the way, the house is actually a fly-in Bed & Breakfast, located adjacent
to the runway at Smith Mountain lake Airport (W91), near Roanoke, Virginia.
Check out our website at www.bedfordlandings.com and come stay a night or
two with us.
Jack Phillips
40610 - wings
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Linn Walters
Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2014 10:08 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Winter Milestone
Thanks for sharing. I hate it when I have guys stop by and say 'looks
the same as the last time I saw it'. Depressing! It's a lot of little
things that take up so much time and show so little progress.
Linn BTDT
On 2/9/2014 9:43 PM, rvdave wrote:
>
> After last year of seeing mediocre progress on my 10 build and seeing and
hearing the advancements others have made, it's a little ironic that I would
see a milestone (to me) during the coldest months of the year -around 0 degF
--huddling around the 100K btu portable heater. I've had my fuselage
mounted on a low rolling square tube frame bolted to the wing spar and
supporting the tail for the last two years working on interior things,
overhead console, carbon fiber panel, electrical stuff--keeping it low for
as long as I could to make it easier for access to inside things. Enough of
that, I needed to see progress so bring out the gear legs---drilled and
mounted. Grease main bearings & mount wheels--done. Install nose gear,
grease bearing, mount nose wheel---done. Remove parasitic square tubed
frame--done. It's standing on its own now! Slide over engine hoist, lift
engine & bolt to engine mount--done. Break out baffle kit & begin
install-- now in progress...
> All in the last two weeks---for me a milestone. Had to share
>
> --------
> Dave Ford
> RV6 flying
> RV10 building
> Cadillac, MI
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418438#418438
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
Hey Dave, I'm sitting here feeling good with you. Getting up off the
floor and up to full height is a major for sure! Strapping on that
beast of a Lycosaur is even better.
The '10 was my first but as a repeat offender.... is your 'six suddenly
getting smaller? I know my Maule was getting slower.
I remember the winter 2008 when I finally had all the big pieces ordered
and built up. The fuselage was still on it's rollers but I spent a day
just moving all the pieces around the hangar and taking pictures. It
started looking like a bunch of pieces that WOULD fly sometime soon.
The big January pick me up!
The glass work on the cowling was a piece of cake compared to the doors
and cabin work. The part you might want to skip is fitting the pants
but I'm sure you know better.
Thanks for sharing.
On 2/9/2014 9:43 PM, rvdave wrote:
>
> After last year of seeing mediocre progress on my 10 build and seeing and hearing
the advancements others have made, it's a little ironic that I would see
a milestone (to me) during the coldest months of the year -around 0 degF --huddling
around the 100K btu portable heater. I've had my fuselage mounted on a
low rolling square tube frame bolted to the wing spar and supporting the tail
for the last two years working on interior things, overhead console, carbon fiber
panel, electrical stuff--keeping it low for as long as I could to make it
easier for access to inside things. Enough of that, I needed to see progress
so bring out the gear legs---drilled and mounted. Grease main bearings & mount
wheels--done. Install nose gear, grease bearing, mount nose wheel---done.
Remove parasitic square tubed frame--done. It's standing on its own now! Slide
over engine hoist, lift engine & bolt to engine mount--done. Break out baffle
kit & begin install-- now in progress...
> All in the last two weeks---for me a milestone. Had to share
>
> --------
> Dave Ford
> RV6 flying
> RV10 building
> Cadillac, MI
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
| From: | Marcus Cooper <cooprv7(at)yahoo.com> |
Congrats Dave,
Very few people (if any) are able to press through a project as significant
as building an airplane without at least some pauses. There is nothing more
motivating than seeing progress! Well done and keep up the momentum, I guarantee
its worth it in the end.
Marcus
On Feb 9, 2014, at 9:43 PM, rvdave wrote:
After last year of seeing mediocre progress on my 10 build and seeing and hearing
the advancements others have made, it's a little ironic that I would see a
milestone (to me) during the coldest months of the year -around 0 degF --huddling
around the 100K btu portable heater. I've had my fuselage mounted on a low
rolling square tube frame bolted to the wing spar and supporting the tail for
the last two years working on interior things, overhead console, carbon fiber
panel, electrical stuff--keeping it low for as long as I could to make it easier
for access to inside things. Enough of that, I needed to see progress so
bring out the gear legs---drilled and mounted. Grease main bearings & mount
wheels--done. Install nose gear, grease bearing, mount nose wheel---done. Remove
parasitic square tubed frame--done. It's standing on its own now! Slide
over engine hoist, lift engine & bolt to engine mount--done. Break out baffle
kit & begin install-- now in progress...
All in the last two weeks---for me a milestone. Had to share
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 flying
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418438#418438
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
I agree that the cowling is easier than the doors and canopy.
However, just wondering if I am the only one where the cowl molding just
is not right.
While the inner nose behind spinner fits just fine, the outer nose,
outside the openings, the lower half extends 1/8 to 1/4" further forward
than the upper cowl.
Since this is some of the thickest part of the glass, it isn't a matter
of flexing or trimming. While I will fix it, I'm not happy that the fit
wasn't better right out of the mold. It is the pink version of the
cowling, and I've got the rest of it fitting fine. Oh well, at least
hangar temps are getting back to where needed (mid 70s to 80s) for
mixing epoxy, etc. Apologies to those stuck in cold country.
Kelly
On 2/10/2014 5:15 AM, Bill Watson wrote:
>
> Hey Dave, I'm sitting here feeling good with you. Getting up off the
> floor and up to full height is a major for sure! Strapping on that
> beast of a Lycosaur is even better.
>
> The '10 was my first but as a repeat offender.... is your 'six
> suddenly getting smaller? I know my Maule was getting slower.
>
> I remember the winter 2008 when I finally had all the big pieces
> ordered and built up. The fuselage was still on it's rollers but I
> spent a day just moving all the pieces around the hangar and taking
> pictures. It started looking like a bunch of pieces that WOULD fly
> sometime soon. The big January pick me up!
>
> The glass work on the cowling was a piece of cake compared to the
> doors and cabin work. The part you might want to skip is fitting the
> pants but I'm sure you know better.
>
> Thanks for sharing.
>
> On 2/9/2014 9:43 PM, rvdave wrote:
>>
>> After last year of seeing mediocre progress on my 10 build and seeing
>> and hearing the advancements others have made, it's a little ironic
>> that I would see a milestone (to me) during the coldest months of the
>> year -around 0 degF --huddling around the 100K btu portable heater.
>> I've had my fuselage mounted on a low rolling square tube frame
>> bolted to the wing spar and supporting the tail for the last two
>> years working on interior things, overhead console, carbon fiber
>> panel, electrical stuff--keeping it low for as long as I could to
>> make it easier for access to inside things. Enough of that, I needed
>> to see progress so bring out the gear legs---drilled and mounted.
>> Grease main bearings & mount wheels--done. Install nose gear, grease
>> bearing, mount nose wheel---done. Remove parasitic square tubed
>> frame--done. It's standing on its own now! Slide over engine hoist,
>> lift engine & bolt to engine mount--done. Break out baffle kit &
>> begin install-- now in progress...
>> All in the last two weeks---for me a milestone. Had to share
>>
>> --------
>> Dave Ford
>> RV6 flying
>> RV10 building
>> Cadillac, MI
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Clifford <davidsoutpost(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
I have the pink cowlings and they match up really well. IIRC, I had to do some
grinding and trimming on the lower cowling nose area mating flange and also the
upper cowling where it overlaps the flange. There was a lot of excess epoxy
bumps in that area and once they were removed, sanded flat and trimmed, I had
a nice fit. I was very pleased with all of the fiberglass parts supplied by Van's
except for the strut fairing cuffs.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kelly McMullen" <kellym(at)aviating.com>
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 9:39:53 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Winter Milestone
I agree that the cowling is easier than the doors and canopy.
However, just wondering if I am the only one where the cowl molding just
is not right.
While the inner nose behind spinner fits just fine, the outer nose,
outside the openings, the lower half extends 1/8 to 1/4" further forward
than the upper cowl.
Since this is some of the thickest part of the glass, it isn't a matter
of flexing or trimming. While I will fix it, I'm not happy that the fit
wasn't better right out of the mold. It is the pink version of the
cowling, and I've got the rest of it fitting fine. Oh well, at least
hangar temps are getting back to where needed (mid 70s to 80s) for
mixing epoxy, etc. Apologies to those stuck in cold country.
Kelly
On 2/10/2014 5:15 AM, Bill Watson wrote:
>
> Hey Dave, I'm sitting here feeling good with you. Getting up off the
> floor and up to full height is a major for sure! Strapping on that
> beast of a Lycosaur is even better.
>
> The '10 was my first but as a repeat offender.... is your 'six
> suddenly getting smaller? I know my Maule was getting slower.
>
> I remember the winter 2008 when I finally had all the big pieces
> ordered and built up. The fuselage was still on it's rollers but I
> spent a day just moving all the pieces around the hangar and taking
> pictures. It started looking like a bunch of pieces that WOULD fly
> sometime soon. The big January pick me up!
>
> The glass work on the cowling was a piece of cake compared to the
> doors and cabin work. The part you might want to skip is fitting the
> pants but I'm sure you know better.
>
> Thanks for sharing.
>
> On 2/9/2014 9:43 PM, rvdave wrote:
>>
>> After last year of seeing mediocre progress on my 10 build and seeing
>> and hearing the advancements others have made, it's a little ironic
>> that I would see a milestone (to me) during the coldest months of the
>> year -around 0 degF --huddling around the 100K btu portable heater.
>> I've had my fuselage mounted on a low rolling square tube frame
>> bolted to the wing spar and supporting the tail for the last two
>> years working on interior things, overhead console, carbon fiber
>> panel, electrical stuff--keeping it low for as long as I could to
>> make it easier for access to inside things. Enough of that, I needed
>> to see progress so bring out the gear legs---drilled and mounted.
>> Grease main bearings & mount wheels--done. Install nose gear, grease
>> bearing, mount nose wheel---done. Remove parasitic square tubed
>> frame--done. It's standing on its own now! Slide over engine hoist,
>> lift engine & bolt to engine mount--done. Break out baffle kit &
>> begin install-- now in progress...
>> All in the last two weeks---for me a milestone. Had to share
>>
>> --------
>> Dave Ford
>> RV6 flying
>> RV10 building
>> Cadillac, MI
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don McDonald <building_partner(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
Thanks.... now I have to go take a nap.... just reading all your accomplish
ments totally wiped me out.... Congrats.... it'll all be worth it.... to en
d up with the best traveling machine there is.=0ADon McDonald=0A=0A=0A=0A
=0A=0AOn Monday, February 10, 2014 10:12 AM, David Clifford wrote:=0A =0AI have the pink cowlings and they match up really
well.- IIRC, I had to do some grinding and trimming on the lower cowling
nose area mating flange and also the upper cowling where it overlaps the f
lange.- There was a lot of excess epoxy bumps in that area and once they
were removed, sanded flat and trimmed, I had a nice fit.- I was very plea
sed with all of the fiberglass parts supplied by Van's except for the strut
fairing cuffs.=0A=0A________________________________=0A=0AFrom: "Kelly McM
ullen" =0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Monday,
February 10, 2014 9:39:53 AM=0ASubject: Re: RV10-List: Winter Milestone=0A
=0AI agree that the cowling is easier than the doors and canopy.=0AHowever,
just wondering if I am the only one where the cowl molding just =0Ais not
right.=0AWhile the inner nose behind spinner fits just fine, the outer nose
, =0Aoutside the openings, the lower half extends 1/8 to 1/4" further forwa
rd =0Athan the upper cowl.=0ASince this is some of the thickest part of the
glass, it isn't a matter =0Aof flexing or trimming. While I will fix it, I
'm not happy that the fit =0Awasn't better right out of the mold. It is the
pink version of the =0Acowling, and I've got the rest of it fitting fine.
Oh well, at least =0Ahangar temps are getting back to where needed (mid 70s
to 80s) for =0Amixing epoxy, etc. Apologies to those stuck in cold country
.=0AKelly=0A=0AOn 2/10/2014 5:15 AM, Bill Watson wrote:=0A> --> RV10-List m
essage posted by: Bill Watson =0A>=0A> Hey Dave, I'm
sitting here feeling good with you. -Getting up off the =0A> floor and u
p to full height is a major for sure! -Strapping on that =0A> beast of a
-Lycosaur is even better.=0A>=0A> The '10 was my first but as a repeat of
fender.... is your 'six =0A> suddenly getting smaller? -I know my Maule w
as getting slower.=0A>=0A> I remember the winter 2008 when I finally had al
l the big pieces =0A> ordered and built up. -The fuselage was still on it
's rollers but I =0A> spent a day just moving all the pieces around the han
gar and taking =0A> pictures. -It started looking like a bunch of pieces
that WOULD fly =0A> sometime soon. -The big January pick me up!=0A>=0A> T
he glass work on the cowling was a piece of cake compared to the =0A> doors
and cabin work. -The part you might want to skip is fitting the =0A> pan
ts but I'm sure you know better.=0A>=0A> Thanks for sharing.=0A>=0A> On 2/9
=0A>>=0A>> After last year of seeing mediocre progres
s on my 10 build and seeing =0A>> and hearing the advancements others have
made, it's a little ironic =0A>> that I would see a milestone (to me) durin
g the coldest months of the =0A>> year -around 0 degF --huddling around the
100K btu portable heater. -=0A>> I've had my fuselage mounted on a low r
olling square tube frame =0A>> bolted to the wing spar and supporting the t
ail for the last two =0A>> years working on interior things, overhead conso
le, carbon fiber =0A>> panel, electrical stuff--keeping it low for as long
as I could to =0A>> make it easier for access to inside things. -Enough o
f that, I needed =0A>> to see progress so bring out the gear legs---drilled
and mounted. - =0A>> Grease main bearings & mount wheels--done. -Insta
ll nose gear, grease =0A>> bearing, mount nose wheel---done. -Remove para
sitic square tubed =0A>> frame--done. -It's standing on its own now! -S
lide over engine hoist, =0A>> lift engine & bolt to engine mount--done. -
Break out baffle kit & =0A>> begin install-- now in progress...=0A>> All i
n the last two weeks---for me a milestone. -Had to share=0A>>=0A>> ------
--=0A>> Dave Ford=0A>> RV6 flying=0A>> RV10 building=0A>> Cadillac, MI=0A>>
=0A>=0A&g; - - - - - - --Matt Dralle, List Admin.====
=====================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bruce Johnson <bruce1hwjohnson(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Door Struts, |
That's just how tough they are. I replaced my original ones with the heavy
duty ones and was impressed by the difference. Just push really hard and th
ey will move.=0A-=0AGod Bless America=0A(please) -:)=0A=0A=0ABruce=0A
=0A=0A=0AOn Sunday, February 9, 2014 8:03 AM, johngoodman =0A=0AI got tired of pushing the door up to get it t
o open all the way, so I bought the heavy duty ones from Van. It's been a l
ittle over a year, and they are beginning to require a push to get them up,
again....=0AJohn=0A=0A--------=0A#40572 Phase One complete and flying.=0A
=0A=0A=0A=0ARead this topic online here:=0A=0Ahttp://forums.matronics.com/v
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -Matt Dralle, List Adm
=====
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
| From: | "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu> |
My pink cowling is not cosmetically perfect, in the area you mentioned. But I had
a worse problem: the composite sandwich reinforcement around the aft end was
too far aft. (Vans questioned my measurement of the prop location; I replied
that there was no measurement, I had the prop installed). I had to cut away some
of that sandwich, lay in a flat area for the piano hinge, and then re-strengthen
the cowl in the area where I had removed the composite layer. For me this
was far and away the worst QC problem I encountered.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418472#418472
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Door Struts, |
| From: | "johngoodman" <johngoodman(at)earthlink.net> |
Bruce,
Not exactly right... I was referring to their strength, once installed.
My heavy duty ones are getting weaker....
John
--------
#40572 Phase One complete and flying.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418477#418477
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
| From: | "johngoodman" <johngoodman(at)earthlink.net> |
jack(at)bedfordlandings.c wrote:
> Try having your RV-10 project in a bunch of crates while you build a new
> home. It's been 2 yers since I've seen the wings and tail of my -10, but
> the house is finished (more or less) now and I'm about to break into the
> crates and resume work on the RV-10 once again.
>
> By the way, the house is actually a fly-in Bed & Breakfast, located adjacent
> to the runway at Smith Mountain lake Airport (W91), near Roanoke, Virginia.
> Check out our website at www.bedfordlandings.com and come stay a night or
> two with us.
>
> Jack Phillips
> 40610 - wings
> Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
> --
Jack,
Great looking place, and it's halfway between Atlanta and Newark - a trip I plan
on making a lot. Just might drop in one evening.
John
--------
#40572 Phase One complete and flying.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418479#418479
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
Hmm, they must have fixed that. I chose to go with Skybolt fasteners, which
some folks had to do a similar reduction of the foam sandwich area to have
room for the mounting strip for receptacles. Mine fit without modifiying
the rear of the cowl at all, beyond the normal trimming.
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Bob Turner wrote:
>
> My pink cowling is not cosmetically perfect, in the area you mentioned.
> But I had a worse problem: the composite sandwich reinforcement around the
> aft end was too far aft. (Vans questioned my measurement of the prop
> location; I replied that there was no measurement, I had the prop
> installed). I had to cut away some of that sandwich, lay in a flat area for
> the piano hinge, and then re-strengthen the cowl in the area where I had
> removed the composite layer. For me this was far and away the worst QC
> problem I encountered.
>
> --------
> Bob Turner
> RV-10 QB
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418472#418472
>
>
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ben Westfall" <rv10(at)sinkrate.com> |
| Subject: | Tim Olson latest post "My rv building prayer" |
Marcus and Jack I concur. Longer version follows...
Tim's accounts (and many others) mean so much to me as I've struggled to
consistently pickup working on our 10 kit with any steam since our first
child was born in Sept 2009. Fast forward to today... 2 kids, 1 house
addition, backyard and patio re-do, stint of unemployment w/o feeling
comfortable dropping additional $$ on the kit, starting a business to cure
the unemployment (that sucks all time known to man), having another side
business that eats even more time, juggling time w/wife and kids, and here
we are today 2013 w/the progress being a slow trickle.
My wife and I started building in May 2006 and we worked side by side most
the time till late spring 2009 midway through the first pregnancy. We
completed up to the cabin top install and a rough pass on the doors before
the CISD "child induced slow down" got a hold. I've struggled on and off
through the years thinking that it would improve my state of mind if I sold
the kit so I didn't have to look at it collecting dust in the garage. I
cannot quite come to that as truthfully I'd end up too resentful. I know it
will be such a good "family plane" that I hold out hope for completion while
the kids are young and impressionable. I struggle with how will I swallow
the last 600 or so hours of work in front of me when I'm lucky to get 10
hours a month in! Well that's what your knees are for I guess and I should
take a lesson from Tim and pray about it more. Oh yeah and during all this
try to fly enough to hopefully remember how when it comes to that.
It's helped having 2 local builders to share in their successes. Mark
Cooper and David Halmos, Mark has completed and flown and David just moved
his out of the garage to paint. Following w/them I've had flashes of
brilliance thinking I can get things done. In the last year or two I've had
2 or 3 hour stints for several weeks working on the project regularly before
slipping into another 3 month "hiatus". Gone is the "family project"
atmosphere though. The reality is it's time away from the wife and kids as
4 & 2 year olds don't "add" to the productivity.
If I look back over a longer period (a year to two) I have made progress it
just doesn't feel like it. Doors are done w/retrofit for mcmaster seals,
all windows glued in, cabin top is on for good, Geoff Comb's interior
installed and painted, it's on the gear, finished the wheel pants and gear
leg fairings using Dave Saylors intersection fairing method, completed all
the firewall pass trough's and prep for mounting the motor which is where
I'm currently at and I should have the motor in the next week or two. I'm
looking forward to something other than fiberglass as it's hard to get
motivated for that in the cold.
End ramble,
Ben Westfall
Portland, OR
PS. I stumbled on this video a while back and I thought it was pretty
special http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkOInCAxNm8. A real motivator to
keep me building as I watched and laughed along seeing the kids in this.
Quite funny and endearing at the same time.
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 11:10 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Tim Olson latest post "My rv building prayer"
I wanted to add a thanks for Tim's account as well and will PM him with more
details. However, this inspired me to relate a story of just how awesome
the RV-10 is and a particularly surprise benefit one night.
I've used the airplane to haul people and even furniture to my kids at
college and the RV-10s performance is simply astounding. However, on 28 Mar
of last year, my wife were at home in northern VA when I get a call from my
son-in-law near Chicago telling us that our daughter's water had broken and
they were on the way to the hospital for the delivery of our first
grandchild. It was 6:30 and after telling my wife the surprising news, as
she was 2 weeks early which is unheard of in our families, I checked the
airline schedules and there was one flight left that night with one open
seat. Although I have flown a great deal at night, it was usually either
sitting on an ejection seat or an airplane with at least 2 jet engines and
I've tended to shy away from night cross countries in the RV-10. However,
the airplane has been wonderfully reliable for over 600 hours at that point
so we headed to the airport and within 4 hours of getting the call were in
DuPage, IL and driving to !
the hospital. I had filed direct and while I normally get routed around
ORD via Joliet, when the reroute came over the radio I told the controller
"my daughter is in labor and we are on our way to see her, any chance of a
shortcut"."roger, cleared direct". This happened three times before the
next controller just said "congratulations, cleared direct" when I checked
in. In short, we got to the hospital before she even really started into
labor and thus experienced a number of blessings that night. While at
times a financial challenge to keep an airplane given all of the overhead,
my wife emphatically declared, "we are never selling this airplane!" ;) A
week later I flew the full size crib I had made for the little one with its
spring frame and mattress to them, this machine is amazing. The RV-10 has
afforded us many opportunities which would have been otherwise impossible,
most of which were unforseen, for which we are very thankful and I
appreciate Tim's perspective!
on such projects along with his indispensable website full of!
tips an
d suggestions.
Cheers,
Marcus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alan Mekler MD <amekler(at)metrocast.net> |
well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak and although the
pads had only 40 hours on them they wore unevenly. My regular mechanic said
to replace them.
Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
Alan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in the form
of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to remove the 5606 can
resurect a pad if there is enough thickness to justify. Also, if you decide
to replace, just do the caliper that needs pads. No need to do the other
side.
Kelly
A&P/IA
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>
> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak and
> although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore unevenly. My regular
> mechanic said to replace them.
> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>
> Alan
>
>
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alan Mekler MD <amekler(at)metrocast.net> |
kelly,
pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didn=92t like the the way they
looked.
alan
On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
> Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in the
form of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to remove the 5606
can resurect a pad if there is enough thickness to justify. Also, if you
decide to replace, just do the caliper that needs pads. No need to do
the other side.
> Kelly
> A&P/IA
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD
wrote:
>
> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak and
although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore unevenly. My
regular mechanic said to replace them.
> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>
> Alan
>
> ==========
> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> ==========
> http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> le, List Admin.
> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
Being experimental, it is your choice to take his advise or ignore it.
Looks are not one of my criteria.
On 2/10/2014 5:54 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
> kelly,
> pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didnt like the the way they
> looked.
> alan
> On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen > wrote:
>
>> Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in the
>> form of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to remove the
>> 5606 can resurect a pad if there is enough thickness to justify.
>> Also, if you decide to replace, just do the caliper that needs pads.
>> No need to do the other side.
>> Kelly
>> A&P/IA
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >
>>
>> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak
>> and although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore
>> unevenly. My regular mechanic said to replace them.
>> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> ==========
>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> ==========
>> http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> le, List Admin.
>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>> *
>>
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
| From: | "rvdave" <rv610dave(at)gmail.com> |
Now I see...cowl next, lots of trimming and sanding to fit--little by little...
> Well, you can't get too far on those baffles until you have the engine cowling
done so that you can accurately trim the baffles to the cowling.
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 flying
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418505#418505
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)live.com> |
I have a early version of the 112's and they have been working very nicely
and evenly. I gather you need a mechanic because you didnt build the plane?
I never let anyone touch my plane. Heard of too many planes going down
within 1 hour of a mechanic signing it off as good for the annual. I
replaced my pads last November with the Rapcos and they too were very well
work through.
pascal
-----Original Message-----
From: Kelly McMullen
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 6:16 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
Being experimental, it is your choice to take his advise or ignore it.
Looks are not one of my criteria.
On 2/10/2014 5:54 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
> kelly,
> pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didnt like the the way they
> looked.
> alan
> On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen > wrote:
>
>> Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in the form
>> of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to remove the 5606 can
>> resurect a pad if there is enough thickness to justify. Also, if you
>> decide to replace, just do the caliper that needs pads. No need to do the
>> other side.
>> Kelly
>> A&P/IA
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD > > wrote:
>>
>> >
>>
>> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak
>> and although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore
>> unevenly. My regular mechanic said to replace them.
>> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> ==========
>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> ==========
>> http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> le, List Admin.
>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>> *
>>
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
This raises an interesting question. For a type certified aircraft an IA is
required for annual inspection, which can be signed off as unairworthy with
a list of discrepancies. Any A&P can then fix the discrepancies and sign
them off, making the aircraft airworthy.
For a non-builder an A&P is only required for annual condition inspection.
Can someone advise from Ops Limits if anyone can take care of the
discrepancies found on the inspection? It would make sense to me, since
anyone can do maintenance on amateur built, without any certificate for
anything repair/maintenance/mod, but for the annual, where repairman or A&P
is needed.
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Pascal wrote:
>
> I have a early version of the 112's and they have been working very nicely
> and evenly. I gather you need a mechanic because you didn't build the
> plane? I never let anyone touch my plane. Heard of too many planes going
> down within 1 hour of a mechanic signing it off as good for the annual. I
> replaced my pads last November with the Rapcos and they too were very well
> work through.
> pascal
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Kelly McMullen
> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 6:16 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>
>
> Being experimental, it is your choice to take his advise or ignore it.
> Looks are not one of my criteria.
>
> On 2/10/2014 5:54 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>
>> kelly,
>> pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didn't like the the way they
>> looked.
>> alan
>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen > apilot2(at)gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in the
>>> form of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to remove the 5606 can
>>> resurect a pad if there is enough thickness to justify. Also, if you decide
>>> to replace, just do the caliper that needs pads. No need to do the other
>>> side.
>>> Kelly
>>> A&P/IA
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD >> amekler(at)metrocast.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak
>>> and although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore
>>> unevenly. My regular mechanic said to replace them.
>>> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>>>
>>> Alan
>>>
>>> ==========
>>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> ==========
>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>> ==========
>>> le, List Admin.
>>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> ==========
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>>> *
>>>
>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http:
>>> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.
>>> matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>
>
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alan Mekler MD <amekler(at)metrocast.net> |
no i didnt build my plane so i need a mechanic. both my A&Ps have built and own
RVs.
alan
On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:06 PM, Pascal wrote:
>
> I have a early version of the 112's and they have been working very nicely and
evenly. I gather you need a mechanic because you didnt build the plane? I never
let anyone touch my plane. Heard of too many planes going down within 1 hour
of a mechanic signing it off as good for the annual. I replaced my pads last
November with the Rapcos and they too were very well work through.
> pascal
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Kelly McMullen
> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 6:16 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>
>
> Being experimental, it is your choice to take his advise or ignore it.
> Looks are not one of my criteria.
>
> On 2/10/2014 5:54 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>> kelly,
>> pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didnt like the the way they looked.
>> alan
>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen > wrote:
>>
>>> Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in the form of
5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to remove the 5606 can resurect
a pad if there is enough thickness to justify. Also, if you decide to replace,
just do the caliper that needs pads. No need to do the other side.
>>> Kelly
>>> A&P/IA
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD > wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak
>>> and although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore
>>> unevenly. My regular mechanic said to replace them.
>>> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>>>
>>> Alan
>>>
>>> ==========
>>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> ==========
>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>> ==========
>>> le, List Admin.
>>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> ==========
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>>> *
>>>
>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> |
That is an interesting question. I doubt it works the same way. There is no a
irworthy or unairworthy signoff on an experimental. It's signed of as "in a c
ondition for safe operation." If an A&P signs it as "not in a condition...",
I think the discrepancies would need to be fixed then an A&P or the Repairm
an would need to sign it of as "in a condition...". I am not sure, though. I
know there is nothing in any of the Operating Limitations that I have looke
d through that allows it. They don't specifically give the authority to anyb
ody to do maintenance, they just specifically that the Condition Inspection m
ust be signed off by an A&P or the Repairman.
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 Feb 10, 2014, at 10:22 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
> This raises an interesting question. For a type certified aircraft an IA i
s required for annual inspection, which can be signed off as unairworthy wit
h a list of discrepancies. Any A&P can then fix the discrepancies and sign t
hem off, making the aircraft airworthy.
> For a non-builder an A&P is only required for annual condition inspection.
Can someone advise from Ops Limits if anyone can take care of the discrepan
cies found on the inspection? It would make sense to me, since anyone can do
maintenance on amateur built, without any certificate for anything repair/m
aintenance/mod, but for the annual, where repairman or A&P is needed.
>
>
>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Pascal wrote:
>>
>> I have a early version of the 112's and they have been working very nicel
y and evenly. I gather you need a mechanic because you didn=99t build t
he plane? I never let anyone touch my plane. Heard of too many planes going d
own within 1 hour of a mechanic signing it off as good for the annual. I rep
laced my pads last November with the Rapcos and they too were very well work
through.
>> pascal
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Kelly McMullen
>> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 6:16 PM
>> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>>
>>
>>
>> Being experimental, it is your choice to take his advise or ignore it.
>> Looks are not one of my criteria.
>>
>>> On 2/10/2014 5:54 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>>> kelly,
>>> pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didn=99t like the the wa
y they looked.
>>> alan
>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in the fo
rm of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to remove the 5606 can re
surect a pad if there is enough thickness to justify. Also, if you decide to
replace, just do the caliper that needs pads. No need to do the other side.
>>>> Kelly
>>>> A&P/IA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak
>>>> and although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore
>>>> unevenly. My regular mechanic said to replace them.
>>>> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>>>>
>>>> Alan
>>>>
>>>> ==========
>>>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>> ==========
>>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>>> ==========
>>>> le, List Admin.
>>>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>> ==========
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matron
ics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com
/contribution
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>>> *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> =========================
>> " target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> =========================
>> MS -
>> k">http://forums.matronics.com
>> =========================
>> e -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> =========================
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>
>
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dmaib(at)me.com" <dmaib(at)me.com> |
[quote="jesse(at)saintaviation.co"]That is an interesting question. I doubt it
works the same way. There is no airworthy or unairworthy signoff on an experimental.
It's signed of as "in a condition for safe operation." If an A&P signs
it as "not in a condition...", I think the discrepancies would need to be fixed
then an A&P or the Repairman would need to sign it of as "in a condition...".
I am not sure, though. I know there is nothing in any of the Operating Limitations
that I have looked through that allows it. They don't specifically give
the authority to anybody to do maintenance, they just specifically that the Condition
Inspection must be signed off by an A&P or the Repairman.
Jesse SaintI-TEC, Inc.
jesse(at)itecusa.org (jesse(at)itecusa.org)
www.itecusa.org (http://www.itecusa.org)
www.mavericklsa.com (http://www.mavericklsa.com)
C: 352-427-0285
O: 352-465-4545
F: 815-377-3694
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:22 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
[quote]This raises an interesting question. For a type certified aircraft an IA
is required for annual inspection, which can be signed off as unairworthy with
a list of discrepancies. Any A&P can then fix the discrepancies and sign them
off, making the aircraft airworthy.
For a non-builder an A&P is only required for annual condition inspection. Can
someone advise from Ops Limits if anyone can take care of the discrepancies found
on the inspection? It would make sense to me, since anyone can do maintenance
on amateur built, without any certificate for anything repair/maintenance/mod,
but for the annual, where repairman or A&P is needed.
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Pascal wrote:
>
> I have a early version of the 112's and they have been working very nicely and
evenly. I gather you need a mechanic because you didnt build the plane? I never
let anyone touch my plane. Heard of too many planes going down within 1 hour
of a mechanic signing it off as good for the annual. I replaced my pads last
November with the Rapcos and they too were very well work through.
> pascal
>
> --
I imagine if you are having an A&P sign off your Condition Inspection he or she
would not usually sign it as "not in a condition for safe operation" but would
say something like "once these discrepancies are taken care of I will then sign
it off as "in condition for safe operation". Anybody can work on the airplane
to fix the discrepancies.
--------
David Maib
RV-10 #40559
Transition Trainer
New Smyrna Beach, FL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418522#418522
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
I had the pink cowling (and the old green top). Evidence of the misfit
you describe remains evident on my finished aircraft, or at least
evidence of what I had to do to fix it. I thought the problem was mine
alone.
In retrospect, what I did was build up the inner surface with some
combination of flock/mill/chop. I don't think I added any cloth. Then I
ground away the outer surface until flush with the upper outer surface.
The 'trick' I used to do a precision grinding job was to use some sort
of fat (1/2") grinding bit mounted in a drill stop cage so I could drill
a series of holes with the exact depth that I wanted to grind away.
Then I filled those holes with black tinted filler (the black tint was
from the windshield fairing work). That enabled me to grind the surface
down with whatever tool I chose. When the black disappeared, I had
ground away the right amount of material.
I only remember all of that because it was completed post paint and
evidence is still visible underneath the spinner. Please don't look.
Bill "still enjoying playing with the composites and glass dust" Watson
On 2/10/2014 9:39 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
> I agree that the cowling is easier than the doors and canopy.
> However, just wondering if I am the only one where the cowl molding
> just is not right.
> While the inner nose behind spinner fits just fine, the outer nose,
> outside the openings, the lower half extends 1/8 to 1/4" further
> forward than the upper cowl.
> Since this is some of the thickest part of the glass, it isn't a
> matter of flexing or trimming. While I will fix it, I'm not happy that
> the fit wasn't better right out of the mold. It is the pink version of
> the cowling, and I've got the rest of it fitting fine. Oh well, at
> least hangar temps are getting back to where needed (mid 70s to 80s)
> for mixing epoxy, etc. Apologies to those stuck in cold country.
> Kelly
>
> On 2/10/2014 5:15 AM, Bill Watson wrote:
>>
>> Hey Dave, I'm sitting here feeling good with you. Getting up off the
>> floor and up to full height is a major for sure! Strapping on that
>> beast of a Lycosaur is even better.
>>
>> The '10 was my first but as a repeat offender.... is your 'six
>> suddenly getting smaller? I know my Maule was getting slower.
>>
>> I remember the winter 2008 when I finally had all the big pieces
>> ordered and built up. The fuselage was still on it's rollers but I
>> spent a day just moving all the pieces around the hangar and taking
>> pictures. It started looking like a bunch of pieces that WOULD fly
>> sometime soon. The big January pick me up!
>>
>> The glass work on the cowling was a piece of cake compared to the
>> doors and cabin work. The part you might want to skip is fitting the
>> pants but I'm sure you know better.
>>
>> Thanks for sharing.
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
I'm thinking it might easier to create close to matching profile with
Superfill, then put a couple layers of glass over that for outer strength,
without grinding away much of the existing. A few ounces heavier, but no
question of strength.
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:15 AM, Bill Watson wrote:
>
> I had the pink cowling (and the old green top). Evidence of the misfit
> you describe remains evident on my finished aircraft, or at least evidence
> of what I had to do to fix it. I thought the problem was mine alone.
>
> In retrospect, what I did was build up the inner surface with some
> combination of flock/mill/chop. I don't think I added any cloth. Then I
> ground away the outer surface until flush with the upper outer surface.
>
>
> I only remember all of that because it was completed post paint and
> evidence is still visible underneath the spinner. Please don't look.
>
> Bill "still enjoying playing with the composites and glass dust" Watson
>
>
>>
>
>
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
| From: | "woxofswa" <woxof(at)aol.com> |
The trap I fell into was putting the cowl halves together but off off the airplane
and then making the front faces behind the prop perfectly flat. You can't
do that because the natural moulded-in contour state of the cowl halves, is slightly
different than the installed contour which creates a pursing effect of
the front lips. Perfectly planar off the airplane (easiest to work) gave me a
wider gap at the sides than the top and bottom once installed. I also had to
build up material behind the lip, especially on the bottom, to be able to make
a nice even gap all around when installed.
So glad that composite work is in the rear view mirror.
--------
Myron Nelson
Mesa, AZ
Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. FWF complete.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418529#418529
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> |
I would agree. With certified Annual Inspections, the rules say that an IA can
sign it as in airworthy and provide a list if discrepancies to the owner/operator
and a A&P can put it back into service by signing off the repair of those
discrepancies.
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 Feb 11, 2014, at 7:57 AM, "dmaib(at)me.com" wrote:
>
>
> [quote="jesse(at)saintaviation.co"]That is an interesting question. I doubt it
works the same way. There is no airworthy or unairworthy signoff on an experimental.
It's signed of as "in a condition for safe operation." If an A&P signs
it as "not in a condition...", I think the discrepancies would need to be fixed
then an A&P or the Repairman would need to sign it of as "in a condition...".
I am not sure, though. I know there is nothing in any of the Operating Limitations
that I have looked through that allows it. They don't specifically give
the authority to anybody to do maintenance, they just specifically that the
Condition Inspection must be signed off by an A&P or the Repairman.
>
> Jesse SaintI-TEC, Inc.
> jesse(at)itecusa.org (jesse(at)itecusa.org)
> www.itecusa.org (http://www.itecusa.org)
> www.mavericklsa.com (http://www.mavericklsa.com)
> C: 352-427-0285
> O: 352-465-4545
> F: 815-377-3694
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:22 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
>
> [quote]This raises an interesting question. For a type certified aircraft an
IA is required for annual inspection, which can be signed off as unairworthy with
a list of discrepancies. Any A&P can then fix the discrepancies and sign them
off, making the aircraft airworthy.
>
> For a non-builder an A&P is only required for annual condition inspection. Can
someone advise from Ops Limits if anyone can take care of the discrepancies
found on the inspection? It would make sense to me, since anyone can do maintenance
on amateur built, without any certificate for anything repair/maintenance/mod,
but for the annual, where repairman or A&P is needed.
>
>
>
>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Pascal wrote:
>>
>>
>> I have a early version of the 112's and they have been working very nicely and
evenly. I gather you need a mechanic because you didnt build the plane? I never
let anyone touch my plane. Heard of too many planes going down within 1 hour
of a mechanic signing it off as good for the annual. I replaced my pads last
November with the Rapcos and they too were very well work through.
>> pascal
>>
>> --
>
>
> I imagine if you are having an A&P sign off your Condition Inspection he or she
would not usually sign it as "not in a condition for safe operation" but would
say something like "once these discrepancies are taken care of I will then
sign it off as "in condition for safe operation". Anybody can work on the airplane
to fix the discrepancies.
>
> --------
> David Maib
> RV-10 #40559
> Transition Trainer
> New Smyrna Beach, FL
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418522#418522
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Cox <rv10pro(at)gmail.com> |
An all too common misunderstanding with holders of the Amateur Built
Repairman is its limit to the single aircraft built. Though the builder
has some knowledge they are not authorized to repair or sign other logbooks
beyond their single serial number aircraft. They are limited like all
pilots to Part 43 Preventative.
Many cross that line regularly. The work takes an A & P signing and at
least observing the compliant repair. Talk to your FSDO. Then get it in
writing. Good Luck with that.
Try a letter from the EAA home office.
The Operator who places it back into service assumes much but not ALL of
the repaired/inspected liability. Ask yourself "How will anyone Find
out?". Attorneys - after an incident or accident. The feds first
question...."you lost the logbooks Right?"
Not going to tell Ya All how I know.
John
On Feb 11, 2014 4:34 AM, "Jesse Saint" wrote:
> That is an interesting question. I doubt it works the same way. There is
> no airworthy or unairworthy signoff on an experimental. It's signed of as
> "in a condition for safe operation." If an A&P signs it as "not in a
> condition...", I think the discrepancies would need to be fixed then an A&P
> or the Repairman would need to sign it of as "in a condition...". I am not
> sure, though. I know there is nothing in any of the Operating Limitations
> that I have looked through that allows it. They don't specifically give the
> authority to anybody to do maintenance, they just specifically that the
> Condition Inspection must be signed off by an A&P or the Repairman.
>
> 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 Feb 10, 2014, at 10:22 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
> This raises an interesting question. For a type certified aircraft an IA
> is required for annual inspection, which can be signed off as unairworthy
> with a list of discrepancies. Any A&P can then fix the discrepancies and
> sign them off, making the aircraft airworthy.
> For a non-builder an A&P is only required for annual condition inspection.
> Can someone advise from Ops Limits if anyone can take care of the
> discrepancies found on the inspection? It would make sense to me, since
> anyone can do maintenance on amateur built, without any certificate for
> anything repair/maintenance/mod, but for the annual, where repairman or A&P
> is needed.
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Pascal wrote:
>
>>
>> I have a early version of the 112's and they have been working very
>> nicely and evenly. I gather you need a mechanic because you didn't build
>> the plane? I never let anyone touch my plane. Heard of too many planes
>> going down within 1 hour of a mechanic signing it off as good for the
>> annual. I replaced my pads last November with the Rapcos and they too were
>> very well work through.
>> pascal
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Kelly McMullen
>> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 6:16 PM
>> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>>
>>
>>
>> Being experimental, it is your choice to take his advise or ignore it.
>> Looks are not one of my criteria.
>>
>> On 2/10/2014 5:54 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>>
>>> kelly,
>>> pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didn't like the the way they
>>> looked.
>>> alan
>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen >> apilot2(at)gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in the
>>>> form of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to remove the 5606 can
>>>> resurect a pad if there is enough thickness to justify. Also, if you decide
>>>> to replace, just do the caliper that needs pads. No need to do the other
>>>> side.
>>>> Kelly
>>>> A&P/IA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD >>> amekler(at)metrocast.net>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak
>>>> and although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore
>>>> unevenly. My regular mechanic said to replace them.
>>>> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>>>>
>>>> Alan
>>>>
>>>> ==========
>>>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>> ==========
>>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>>> ==========
>>>> le, List Admin.
>>>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>> ==========
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http:
>>>> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.
>>>> matronics.com/contribution
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ===================================
>> " target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> ===================================
>> MS -
>> k">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ===================================
>> e -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ===================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>
> *
>
> D============================================
> List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> D============================================
> //forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
> D============================================
> ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> D============================================
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dmaib(at)me.com" <dmaib(at)me.com> |
rvf10pro, are you saying that holders of Amateur Built Repairman certificates are
routinely signing off work on other aircraft than the one they hold the Repairman
Certificate for? As long as the aircraft is an amateur built aircraft,
I don't see that as a problem. Anybody can work on an amateur built aircraft.
Now if you are saying they are signing off Condition Inspections on aircraft other
than the one they hold the Repairman Certificate for, then that is a problem.
(unless they also hold an A&P)
--------
David Maib
RV-10 #40559
Transition Trainer
New Smyrna Beach, FL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418535#418535
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Winter Milestone |
That sounds like a better approach.
I can't recall accurately but my guess is that I had already fit the
cowling to the fuselage and the top half gap at the prop was what I
wanted and the bottom turned out to be bit too tight. Probably a result
of spending more time getting the top half gap right and lazy about
getting underneath to insure a good fit on the bottom. By the time I
noticed the discrepancy it was too late.
On 2/11/2014 9:42 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
> I'm thinking it might easier to create close to matching profile with
> Superfill, then put a couple layers of glass over that for outer
> strength, without grinding away much of the existing. A few ounces
> heavier, but no question of strength.
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:15 AM, Bill Watson > wrote:
>
> >
>
> I had the pink cowling (and the old green top). Evidence of the
> misfit you describe remains evident on my finished aircraft, or at
> least evidence of what I had to do to fix it. I thought the
> problem was mine alone.
>
> In retrospect, what I did was build up the inner surface with some
> combination of flock/mill/chop. I don't think I added any cloth.
> Then I ground away the outer surface until flush with the upper
> outer surface.
>
>
> I only remember all of that because it was completed post paint
> and evidence is still visible underneath the spinner. Please
> don't look.
>
> Bill "still enjoying playing with the composites and glass dust"
> Watson
>
>
> ===================================
> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> ===================================
> http://forums.matronics.com
> ===================================
> le, List Admin.
> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
>
>
> --
>
> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
> *
>
>
> *
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
I'm not sure if "signing off" would be something that I'd
be comfortable doing in either case. At the point that a
signature goes to the paper, I'd think it should be the
repairman or an A&P. If I worked on your aircraft, and I'm
not the repairman, I'd expect YOU to sign it off because
YOU are the repairman. Kind of like I can work on a
Bonanza of mine (if I had one), but I'd have to have an A&P
sign off anything other than routine maintenance.
I know that may not fit with the real law....but I don't
know that I'd push my luck when I have no repairman
cert on anyone else's plane. It certainly could be
legal though I suppose.
Tim
On 2/11/2014 10:23 AM, dmaib(at)me.com wrote:
>
> rvf10pro, are you saying that holders of Amateur Built Repairman
> certificates are routinely signing off work on other aircraft than
> the one they hold the Repairman Certificate for? As long as the
> aircraft is an amateur built aircraft, I don't see that as a problem.
> Anybody can work on an amateur built aircraft. Now if you are saying
> they are signing off Condition Inspections on aircraft other than the
> one they hold the Repairman Certificate for, then that is a problem.
> (unless they also hold an A&P)
>
> -------- David Maib RV-10 #40559 Transition Trainer New Smyrna Beach,
> FL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dmaib(at)me.com" <dmaib(at)me.com> |
I totally agree with Tim. I routinely help my buddie's on their RV's and they help
me with mine. I would never expect any of them to sign anything in my maintenance
logs nor would I expect them to want me to sign off something in their
logs. There is not even any requirement to "sign off" or log routine maintenance
in the aircraft logs. I think the majority of us do log maintenance, but it
is not required.
I was a bit surprised to hear John's comment that this is something that happens
fairly frequently.
--------
David Maib
RV-10 #40559
Transition Trainer
New Smyrna Beach, FL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418542#418542
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu> |
I agree. After all it says right on the repairman certificate, "valid only for
serial number 1234".
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418543#418543
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fuel consumption test results |
| From: | "Mike Whisky" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net> |
Hi I just copied my request from VAF here as well to seek your feedback:
I did fuel consumption test runs with 55%, 65% and 75% at 3000 ft and 6000ft as
well as 9500 ft (55% & 65%). What did you guys measure or is there a chart to
see fuel consumption over altitude for different power settings?
This is how I did it.
1) Set power e.g. 2300 RPM, 20.7 MAP which gives me 55% HP
2) Autopilot alt hold e.g.. 3000ft
2) I lean slowly about .2 gal/2min until the last EGT peaked and runs about 15F
LOP stayed with this setting to record speeds and fuel flow. (My injection nozzle
restrictors still have a gami spread of about 0.9 gal).
My results are:
55% pwr
3000 ft 9.11 gal/h 134 TAS
6000 ft 9 gal/h 140 TAS
9000 ft 9.25 gal/h ? 154 TAS
65% pwr
3000 ft 10.7 gal/h 144 TAS
6000 ft 10.57 gal/h 157 TAS
9500 ft 10.4 gal/h 160 TAS
75% pwr
3000 ft 12.4 gal/h 162 TAS
6000 ft 12.28 gal/h 167 TAS
thanks
Michael
--------
RV-10 builder (flying, test phase)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418550#418550
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
John, lets make this very simple and clear.
Anyone can work on an experimental, subject to the discretion and sanity
of the owner.
Only a Repairman or A&P can do and sign off a Condition inspection, and
for Repairman, they can only do for the serial number/registration
number on their certificate. Now if they sell the plane they built and
buy another aircraft of the same model that someone elxe built they can
go to FSDO and get their repairman certificate transferred to that new
single serial number. They can work on any other experimental, they just
can't do the condition inspection.
A repairman is NOT limited to preventive maintenance, they can do any
maintenance or modification they want. If it is major, then they need to
notify the FSDO and negotiate an appropriate reversion to Phase 1 for
that mod, such as replacing the Lyc with an Orenda engine. ;-))
On 2/11/2014 8:41 AM, John Cox wrote:
>
> An all too common misunderstanding with holders of the Amateur Built
> Repairman is its limit to the single aircraft built. Though the
> builder has some knowledge they are not authorized to repair or sign
> other logbooks beyond their single serial number aircraft. They are
> limited like all pilots to Part 43 Preventative.
>
> Many cross that line regularly. The work takes an A & P signing and at
> least observing the compliant repair. Talk to your FSDO. Then get it
> in writing. Good Luck with that.
>
> Try a letter from the EAA home office.
>
> The Operator who places it back into service assumes much but not ALL
> of the repaired/inspected liability. Ask yourself "How will anyone
> Find out?". Attorneys - after an incident or accident. The feds first
> question...."you lost the logbooks Right?"
>
> Not going to tell Ya All how I know.
>
> John
>
> On Feb 11, 2014 4:34 AM, "Jesse Saint" > wrote:
>
> That is an interesting question. I doubt it works the same way.
> There is no airworthy or unairworthy signoff on an experimental.
> It's signed of as "in a condition for safe operation." If an A&P
> signs it as "not in a condition...", I think the discrepancies
> would need to be fixed then an A&P or the Repairman would need to
> sign it of as "in a condition...". I am not sure, though. I know
> there is nothing in any of the Operating Limitations that I have
> looked through that allows it. They don't specifically give the
> authority to anybody to do maintenance, they just specifically
> that the Condition Inspection must be signed off by an A&P or the
> Repairman.
>
> Jesse Saint
> I-TEC, Inc.
> jesse(at)itecusa.org
> www.itecusa.org <http://www.itecusa.org>
> www.mavericklsa.com <http://www.mavericklsa.com>
> C: 352-427-0285
> O: 352-465-4545
> F: 815-377-3694
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:22 PM, Kelly McMullen > wrote:
>
>> This raises an interesting question. For a type certified
>> aircraft an IA is required for annual inspection, which can be
>> signed off as unairworthy with a list of discrepancies. Any A&P
>> can then fix the discrepancies and sign them off, making the
>> aircraft airworthy.
>> For a non-builder an A&P is only required for annual condition
>> inspection. Can someone advise from Ops Limits if anyone can take
>> care of the discrepancies found on the inspection? It would make
>> sense to me, since anyone can do maintenance on amateur built,
>> without any certificate for anything repair/maintenance/mod, but
>> for the annual, where repairman or A&P is needed.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Pascal > > wrote:
>>
>> >
>>
>> I have a early version of the 112's and they have been
>> working very nicely and evenly. I gather you need a mechanic
>> because you didnt build the plane? I never let anyone touch
>> my plane. Heard of too many planes going down within 1 hour
>> of a mechanic signing it off as good for the annual. I
>> replaced my pads last November with the Rapcos and they too
>> were very well work through.
>> pascal
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Kelly McMullen
>> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 6:16 PM
>> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>>
>>
>> >
>>
>> Being experimental, it is your choice to take his advise or
>> ignore it.
>> Looks are not one of my criteria.
>>
>> On 2/10/2014 5:54 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>>
>> kelly,
>> pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didnt like the
>> the way they looked.
>> alan
>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen
>>
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum
>> on them in the form of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning
>> with BrakeKlean to remove the 5606 can resurect a pad
>> if there is enough thickness to justify. Also, if you
>> decide to replace, just do the caliper that needs
>> pads. No need to do the other side.
>> Kelly
>> A&P/IA
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD
>>
>> > >> wrote:
>>
>>
>> > >>
>>
>> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a
>> caliber leak
>> and although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore
>> unevenly. My regular mechanic said to replace them.
>> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> ==========
>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> ==========
>> http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> le, List Admin.
>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>> *
>>
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ===================================
>> " target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> ===================================
>> MS -
>> k">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ===================================
>> e -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ===================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>> *
>>
>> D============================================
>> List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> D============================================
>> //forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>> D============================================
>> ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> D============================================
>>
>> *
>
> *
>
> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> tp://forums.matronics.com
> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel consumption test results |
| From: | Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> |
I do have a power chart, but those numbers look pretty normal to me. It would be
good to note your map, rpm and density altitude with those numbers if possible.
You should be able to get the peak spread down to 0.2gph.
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 Feb 11, 2014, at 4:51 PM, "Mike Whisky" wrote:
>
>
> Hi I just copied my request from VAF here as well to seek your feedback:
>
> I did fuel consumption test runs with 55%, 65% and 75% at 3000 ft and 6000ft
as well as 9500 ft (55% & 65%). What did you guys measure or is there a chart
to see fuel consumption over altitude for different power settings?
>
> This is how I did it.
> 1) Set power e.g. 2300 RPM, 20.7 MAP which gives me 55% HP
> 2) Autopilot alt hold e.g.. 3000ft
> 2) I lean slowly about .2 gal/2min until the last EGT peaked and runs about 15F
LOP stayed with this setting to record speeds and fuel flow. (My injection
nozzle restrictors still have a gami spread of about 0.9 gal).
>
> My results are:
>
> 55% pwr
> 3000 ft 9.11 gal/h 134 TAS
> 6000 ft 9 gal/h 140 TAS
> 9000 ft 9.25 gal/h ? 154 TAS
>
> 65% pwr
> 3000 ft 10.7 gal/h 144 TAS
> 6000 ft 10.57 gal/h 157 TAS
> 9500 ft 10.4 gal/h 160 TAS
>
> 75% pwr
> 3000 ft 12.4 gal/h 162 TAS
> 6000 ft 12.28 gal/h 167 TAS
>
> thanks
> Michael
>
> --------
> RV-10 builder (flying, test phase)
> #511
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418550#418550
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alan Mekler MD <amekler(at)metrocast.net> |
On Feb 11, 2014, at 5:07 AM, Alan Mekler MD
wrote:
>
> no i didn=92t build my plane so i need a mechanic. both my A&Ps have
built and own RVs.
> alan
> On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:06 PM, Pascal wrote:
>
>>
>> I have a early version of the 112's and they have been working very
nicely and evenly. I gather you need a mechanic because you didn=92t
build the plane? I never let anyone touch my plane. Heard of too many
planes going down within 1 hour of a mechanic signing it off as good for
the annual. I replaced my pads last November with the Rapcos and they
too were very well work through.
>> pascal
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Kelly McMullen
>> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 6:16 PM
>> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>>
>>
>> Being experimental, it is your choice to take his advise or ignore
it.
>> Looks are not one of my criteria.
>>
>> On 2/10/2014 5:54 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>>> kelly,
>>> pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didn=92t like the the way
they looked.
>>> alan
>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in
the form of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to remove the
5606 can resurect a pad if there is enough thickness to justify. Also,
if you decide to replace, just do the caliper that needs pads. No need
to do the other side.
>>>> Kelly
>>>> A&P/IA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak
>>>> and although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore
>>>> unevenly. My regular mechanic said to replace them.
>>>> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>>>>
>>>> Alan
>>>>
>>>> ==========
>>>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>> ==========
>>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>>> ==========
>>>> le, List Admin.
>>>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>> ==========
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics
.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/co
ntribution
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>>> *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel consumption test results |
| From: | "dmaib(at)me.com" <dmaib(at)me.com> |
Michael, those numbers look like just what I would expect to see. There are charts
in the Lycoming manual. I believe you can find it online.
--------
David Maib
RV-10 #40559
Transition Trainer
New Smyrna Beach, FL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418562#418562
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)live.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel consumption test results |
I have mine from .4 to .1 depending on the altitude and power setting. If
you work on the LOP ops Airflow suggests doing it above 12GPH (2400 and
24MAP) the plane moved into yellow territory when I do this but for the
short time I did it I was able to get a decent idea of a real spread. I than
did it at 55-60% and checked to see if the same EGT order followed. With
that call Don and airflow and give him your results, he should be able to
get you started. Additionally Tim's webpage has a great writeup on how he
went from .9 down to 0.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jesse Saint
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 4:24 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fuel consumption test results
I do have a power chart, but those numbers look pretty normal to me. It
would be good to note your map, rpm and density altitude with those numbers
if possible. You should be able to get the peak spread down to 0.2gph.
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 Feb 11, 2014, at 4:51 PM, "Mike Whisky" wrote:
>
>
> Hi I just copied my request from VAF here as well to seek your feedback:
>
> I did fuel consumption test runs with 55%, 65% and 75% at 3000 ft and
> 6000ft as well as 9500 ft (55% & 65%). What did you guys measure or is
> there a chart to see fuel consumption over altitude for different power
> settings?
>
> This is how I did it.
> 1) Set power e.g. 2300 RPM, 20.7 MAP which gives me 55% HP
> 2) Autopilot alt hold e.g.. 3000ft
> 2) I lean slowly about .2 gal/2min until the last EGT peaked and runs
> about 15F LOP stayed with this setting to record speeds and fuel flow. (My
> injection nozzle restrictors still have a gami spread of about 0.9 gal).
>
> My results are:
>
> 55% pwr
> 3000 ft 9.11 gal/h 134 TAS
> 6000 ft 9 gal/h 140 TAS
> 9000 ft 9.25 gal/h ? 154 TAS
>
> 65% pwr
> 3000 ft 10.7 gal/h 144 TAS
> 6000 ft 10.57 gal/h 157 TAS
> 9500 ft 10.4 gal/h 160 TAS
>
> 75% pwr
> 3000 ft 12.4 gal/h 162 TAS
> 6000 ft 12.28 gal/h 167 TAS
>
> thanks
> Michael
>
> --------
> RV-10 builder (flying, test phase)
> #511
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418550#418550
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Fuel consumption test results |
Here is a data run after I did my last nozzle adjustment. The table lists
fuel flow when each cylinder peaked. The numbers in () are the nozzle size
for each cylinder. Air Flow Performance provides nozzles in .0005"
increments. The nozzles fit Bendix, Precision and AFP injectors. Data
taken solo, full fuel.
Altitude RPM MP #1 (.028) #2 (.029) #3 (.027)
#4 (.027) #5 (.029) #6 (.0275) Spread TAS
6500 2350 23.3 12.8 12.9 12.9
12.9 12.8 12.9 0.1 180
5500 2340 23.3 12.3 12.3 12.4
12.4 12.2 12.3 0.2 176
3000 2270 21 9.8 9.8 9.8
9.8 9.8 9.8 0.0 142
4500 2200 20.8 9.1 9.1 9
9 9 9.1 0.1 154
4500 2200 19.9 9.1 9.1 9.1
9.1 9.4 9.3 0.3 150
Typical cross country cruise is above 6500', 2350 RPM, WOT and ~20 degrees
LOP. I plan for 168kts TAS. Fuel burn is of course dependent on altitude
but is typically 10.5 - 11.5GPH (pilot, passenger and some bags).
Of interest, the fuel flow spread (first to peak, last to peak) on the new
from Van's stock IO-540 was 1 GPH (standard injectors were all the same
size: .028"). At that spread LOP was a real rough engine. Now LOP is as
smooth as ROP.
Carl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 7:24 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fuel consumption test results
I do have a power chart, but those numbers look pretty normal to me. It
would be good to note your map, rpm and density altitude with those numbers
if possible. You should be able to get the peak spread down to 0.2gph.
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 Feb 11, 2014, at 4:51 PM, "Mike Whisky" wrote:
>
>
> Hi I just copied my request from VAF here as well to seek your feedback:
>
> I did fuel consumption test runs with 55%, 65% and 75% at 3000 ft and
6000ft as well as 9500 ft (55% & 65%). What did you guys measure or is there
a chart to see fuel consumption over altitude for different power settings?
>
> This is how I did it.
> 1) Set power e.g. 2300 RPM, 20.7 MAP which gives me 55% HP
> 2) Autopilot alt hold e.g.. 3000ft
> 2) I lean slowly about .2 gal/2min until the last EGT peaked and runs
about 15F LOP stayed with this setting to record speeds and fuel flow. (My
injection nozzle restrictors still have a gami spread of about 0.9 gal).
>
> My results are:
>
> 55% pwr
> 3000 ft 9.11 gal/h 134 TAS
> 6000 ft 9 gal/h 140 TAS
> 9000 ft 9.25 gal/h ? 154 TAS
>
> 65% pwr
> 3000 ft 10.7 gal/h 144 TAS
> 6000 ft 10.57 gal/h 157 TAS
> 9500 ft 10.4 gal/h 160 TAS
>
> 75% pwr
> 3000 ft 12.4 gal/h 162 TAS
> 6000 ft 12.28 gal/h 167 TAS
>
> thanks
> Michael
>
> --------
> RV-10 builder (flying, test phase)
> #511
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418550#418550
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel consumption test results |
| From: | Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> |
Some engines run LOP easier than others, but tuning the injectors helps a lot.
Airflow recommends putting a new set of 0.025" nozzles to start he process for
better atomization of fuel (up to 260hp in the 540, 0.026" over 260HP). I have
done this process with at least 8 engines all with very good results. I usually
do the tuning at the power setting that the owner likes to use for cruise.
I now stock nozzles to help people do all of the tuning in a short visit. This
and dynamic balancing are the best ways to get your engine running as smoothly
as possible, no matter what the power setting, and both LOP and ROP.
Jesse
Sent from my iPad
> On Feb 11, 2014, at 8:58 PM, "Carl Froehlich" wrote:
>
>
> Here is a data run after I did my last nozzle adjustment. The table lists
> fuel flow when each cylinder peaked. The numbers in () are the nozzle size
> for each cylinder. Air Flow Performance provides nozzles in .0005"
> increments. The nozzles fit Bendix, Precision and AFP injectors. Data
> taken solo, full fuel.
>
> Altitude RPM MP #1 (.028) #2 (.029) #3 (.027)
> #4 (.027) #5 (.029) #6 (.0275) Spread TAS
> 6500 2350 23.3 12.8 12.9 12.9
> 12.9 12.8 12.9 0.1 180
> 5500 2340 23.3 12.3 12.3 12.4
> 12.4 12.2 12.3 0.2 176
> 3000 2270 21 9.8 9.8 9.8
> 9.8 9.8 9.8 0.0 142
> 4500 2200 20.8 9.1 9.1 9
> 9 9 9.1 0.1 154
> 4500 2200 19.9 9.1 9.1 9.1
> 9.1 9.4 9.3 0.3 150
>
> Typical cross country cruise is above 6500', 2350 RPM, WOT and ~20 degrees
> LOP. I plan for 168kts TAS. Fuel burn is of course dependent on altitude
> but is typically 10.5 - 11.5GPH (pilot, passenger and some bags).
>
> Of interest, the fuel flow spread (first to peak, last to peak) on the new
> from Van's stock IO-540 was 1 GPH (standard injectors were all the same
> size: .028"). At that spread LOP was a real rough engine. Now LOP is as
> smooth as ROP.
>
> Carl
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
> Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 7:24 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fuel consumption test results
>
>
> I do have a power chart, but those numbers look pretty normal to me. It
> would be good to note your map, rpm and density altitude with those numbers
> if possible. You should be able to get the peak spread down to 0.2gph.
>
> 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 Feb 11, 2014, at 4:51 PM, "Mike Whisky" wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi I just copied my request from VAF here as well to seek your feedback:
>>
>> I did fuel consumption test runs with 55%, 65% and 75% at 3000 ft and
> 6000ft as well as 9500 ft (55% & 65%). What did you guys measure or is there
> a chart to see fuel consumption over altitude for different power settings?
>>
>> This is how I did it.
>> 1) Set power e.g. 2300 RPM, 20.7 MAP which gives me 55% HP
>> 2) Autopilot alt hold e.g.. 3000ft
>> 2) I lean slowly about .2 gal/2min until the last EGT peaked and runs
> about 15F LOP stayed with this setting to record speeds and fuel flow. (My
> injection nozzle restrictors still have a gami spread of about 0.9 gal).
>>
>> My results are:
>>
>> 55% pwr
>> 3000 ft 9.11 gal/h 134 TAS
>> 6000 ft 9 gal/h 140 TAS
>> 9000 ft 9.25 gal/h ? 154 TAS
>>
>> 65% pwr
>> 3000 ft 10.7 gal/h 144 TAS
>> 6000 ft 10.57 gal/h 157 TAS
>> 9500 ft 10.4 gal/h 160 TAS
>>
>> 75% pwr
>> 3000 ft 12.4 gal/h 162 TAS
>> 6000 ft 12.28 gal/h 167 TAS
>>
>> thanks
>> Michael
>>
>> --------
>> RV-10 builder (flying, test phase)
>> #511
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418550#418550
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
Yep, no question, replace.
On 2/11/2014 6:00 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>
> On Feb 11, 2014, at 5:07 AM, Alan Mekler MD > wrote:
>
>> >
>>
>> no i didnt build my plane so i need a mechanic. both my A&Ps have
>> built and own RVs.
>> alan
>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:06 PM, Pascal > > wrote:
>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> I have a early version of the 112's and they have been working very
>>> nicely and evenly. I gather you need a mechanic because you didnt
>>> build the plane? I never let anyone touch my plane. Heard of too
>>> many planes going down within 1 hour of a mechanic signing it off as
>>> good for the annual. I replaced my pads last November with the
>>> Rapcos and they too were very well work through.
>>> pascal
>>>
>>> -----Original Message----- From: Kelly McMullen
>>> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 6:16 PM
>>> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> Being experimental, it is your choice to take his advise or ignore it.
>>> Looks are not one of my criteria.
>>>
>>> On 2/10/2014 5:54 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>>>> kelly,
>>>> pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didnt like the the way
>>>> they looked.
>>>> alan
>>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen >>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in
>>>>> the form of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to remove
>>>>> the 5606 can resurect a pad if there is enough thickness to
>>>>> justify. Also, if you decide to replace, just do the caliper that
>>>>> needs pads. No need to do the other side.
>>>>> Kelly
>>>>> A&P/IA
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD
>>>>>
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak
>>>>> and although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore
>>>>> unevenly. My regular mechanic said to replace them.
>>>>> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>>>>>
>>>>> Alan
>>>>>
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> le, List Admin.
>>>>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>> ==========
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>>
>>>>> *
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>> http://www.matronics========================http://www.matronics.com/co================
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
Those don't look so good. Are there any strange environmental
situations that you store or fly the airplane in?
I've had Rapco pads for about the last 3 or so changes now,
and they really look just like the Cleaveland ones pretty much
when they're worn down....and they have worked well almost
all the way down to the rivets. So I'm curious if there is
some strange environmental things going on.
Tim
On 2/11/2014 7:00 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>
> On Feb 11, 2014, at 5:07 AM, Alan Mekler MD > wrote:
>
>> >
>>
>> no i didnt build my plane so i need a mechanic. both my A&Ps have
>> built and own RVs.
>> alan
>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:06 PM, Pascal > > wrote:
>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> I have a early version of the 112's and they have been working very
>>> nicely and evenly. I gather you need a mechanic because you didnt
>>> build the plane? I never let anyone touch my plane. Heard of too many
>>> planes going down within 1 hour of a mechanic signing it off as good
>>> for the annual. I replaced my pads last November with the Rapcos and
>>> they too were very well work through.
>>> pascal
>>>
>>> -----Original Message----- From: Kelly McMullen
>>> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 6:16 PM
>>> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> Being experimental, it is your choice to take his advise or ignore it.
>>> Looks are not one of my criteria.
>>>
>>> On 2/10/2014 5:54 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>>>> kelly,
>>>> pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didnt like the the way
>>>> they looked.
>>>> alan
>>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen >>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in
>>>>> the form of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to remove
>>>>> the 5606 can resurect a pad if there is enough thickness to
>>>>> justify. Also, if you decide to replace, just do the caliper that
>>>>> needs pads. No need to do the other side.
>>>>> Kelly
>>>>> A&P/IA
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD
>>>>>
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak
>>>>> and although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore
>>>>> unevenly. My regular mechanic said to replace them.
>>>>> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>>>>>
>>>>> Alan
>>>>>
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> le, List Admin.
>>>>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>> ==========
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>>
>>>>> *
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>> http://www.matronics========================http://www.matronics.com/co================
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: It's Pretty Darn Good in the Bahamas - trip report |
| From: | "rvdave" <rv610dave(at)gmail.com> |
I wanna go--gotta get it done!
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 flying
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418572#418572
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)live.com> |
what does the brake disc look like? these look like they are relatively
unused but almost like something effected them. Replacing was a good
call, but what caused this that may do the same thing to the new pads?
BTW- I did not mean any disrespect to the A&P, I was simply mentioning
that I don=92t always trust what they tell me about my airplane. in this
case he made a good call. It=92s not the Rapco its something the pads
are reacting to is my guess.
I would send this picture to Rapco and get their feedback.
Pascal
From: Alan Mekler MD
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
On Feb 11, 2014, at 5:07 AM, Alan Mekler MD
wrote:
no i didn=92t build my plane so i need a mechanic. both my A&Ps have
built and own RVs.
alan
On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:06 PM, Pascal wrote:
I have a early version of the 112's and they have been working very
nicely and evenly. I gather you need a mechanic because you didn=92t
build the plane? I never let anyone touch my plane. Heard of too many
planes going down within 1 hour of a mechanic signing it off as good for
the annual. I replaced my pads last November with the Rapcos and they
too were very well work through.
pascal
-----Original Message----- From: Kelly McMullen
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 6:16 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
Being experimental, it is your choice to take his advise or ignore
it.
Looks are not one of my criteria.
On 2/10/2014 5:54 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
kelly,
pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didn=92t like the the
way they looked.
alan
On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen > wrote:
Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in
the form of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to remove the
5606 can resurect a pad if there is enough thickness to justify. Also,
if you decide to replace, just do the caliper that needs pads. No need
to do the other side.
Kelly
A&P/IA
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD
> wrote:
>
well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber
leak
and although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore
unevenly. My regular mechanic said to replace them.
Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
Alan
==========
arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
==========
http://forums.matronics.com
==========
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
*
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ontribution
*
*
*
http://www.matronics==================
======http://www.matronics.com/co==========
======
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alan Mekler MD <amekler(at)metrocast.net> |
Not that i know of
Heated hangar in new hampshire
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 11, 2014, at 10:11 PM, Tim Olson wrote:
>
>
> Those don't look so good. Are there any strange environmental
> situations that you store or fly the airplane in?
> I've had Rapco pads for about the last 3 or so changes now,
> and they really look just like the Cleaveland ones pretty much
> when they're worn down....and they have worked well almost
> all the way down to the rivets. So I'm curious if there is
> some strange environmental things going on.
>
> Tim
>
>> On 2/11/2014 7:00 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>>
>> On Feb 11, 2014, at 5:07 AM, Alan Mekler MD > > wrote:
>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> no i didnt build my plane so i need a mechanic. both my A&Ps have
>>> built and own RVs.
>>> alan
>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:06 PM, Pascal >> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> I have a early version of the 112's and they have been working very
>>>> nicely and evenly. I gather you need a mechanic because you didnt
>>>> build the plane? I never let anyone touch my plane. Heard of too many
>>>> planes going down within 1 hour of a mechanic signing it off as good
>>>> for the annual. I replaced my pads last November with the Rapcos and
>>>> they too were very well work through.
>>>> pascal
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Kelly McMullen
>>>> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 6:16 PM
>>>> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>>>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> Being experimental, it is your choice to take his advise or ignore it.
>>>> Looks are not one of my criteria.
>>>>
>>>>> On 2/10/2014 5:54 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>>>>> kelly,
>>>>> pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didnt like the the way
>>>>> they looked.
>>>>> alan
>>>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen >>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in
>>>>>> the form of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to remove
>>>>>> the 5606 can resurect a pad if there is enough thickness to
>>>>>> justify. Also, if you decide to replace, just do the caliper that
>>>>>> needs pads. No need to do the other side.
>>>>>> Kelly
>>>>>> A&P/IA
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak
>>>>>> and although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore
>>>>>> unevenly. My regular mechanic said to replace them.
>>>>>> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ==========
>>>>>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>>>> ==========
>>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>>> ==========
>>>>>> le, List Admin.
>>>>>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>>> ==========
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>>>>>> *
>>>>>>
>>>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *
>>>>> http://www.matronics========================http://www.matronics.com/co================
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alan Mekler MD <amekler(at)metrocast.net> |
The disc looks fine
This was my first set of rapcos installed in may
Wll send the pictures to rapco.
This was the left side
If it wasn't for the caliber leaking i won't have found this. Brakes worked f
ine.
Didn't check the right side.
Will probably wait to annual in may.
Alan
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 11, 2014, at 10:46 PM, "Pascal" wrote:
>
> what does the brake disc look like? these look like they are relatively u
nused but almost like something effected them. Replacing was a good call, bu
t what caused this that may do the same thing to the new pads?
> BTW- I did not mean any disrespect to the A&P, I was simply mentioning th
at I don=99t always trust what they tell me about my airplane. in this
case he made a good call. It=99s not the Rapco its something the pads
are reacting to is my guess.
> I would send this picture to Rapco and get their feedback.
> Pascal
>
> From: Alan Mekler MD
> Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 5:00 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>
>
>> On Feb 11, 2014, at 5:07 AM, Alan Mekler MD wrote
:
>>
>>
>> no i didn=99t build my plane so i need a mechanic. both my A&Ps hav
e built and own RVs.
>> alan
>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:06 PM, Pascal wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I have a early version of the 112's and they have been working very nice
ly and evenly. I gather you need a mechanic because you didn=99t build
the plane? I never let anyone touch my plane. Heard of too many planes goin
g down within 1 hour of a mechanic signing it off as good for the annual. I r
eplaced my pads last November with the Rapcos and they too were very well wo
rk through.
>>> pascal
>>>
>>> -----Original Message----- From: Kelly McMullen
>>> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 6:16 PM
>>> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>>>
>>>
>>> Being experimental, it is your choice to take his advise or ignore it.
>>> Looks are not one of my criteria.
>>>
>>>> On 2/10/2014 5:54 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>>>> kelly,
>>>> pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didn=99t like the the w
ay they looked.
>>>> alan
>>>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in the f
orm of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to remove the 5606 can r
esurect a pad if there is enough thickness to justify. Also, if you decide t
o replace, just do the caliper that needs pads. No need to do the other side
.
>>>>> Kelly
>>>>> A&P/IA
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak
>>>>> and although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore
>>>>> unevenly. My regular mechanic said to replace them.
>>>>> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>>>>>
>>>>> Alan
>>>>>
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> le, List Admin.
>>>>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>> ==========
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matro
nics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.co
m/contribution
>>>>>
>>>>> *
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>> http://www.matronics=================
=======http://www.matronics.com/co==========
======
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
It actually could be the leaky caliper that caused them to look so bad. It'
ll be interesting to hear or see pictures of the other side that didn't have
that issue when you finally wear them out.
Rapco's done I'm sure 10's of thousands of pads for many models for many yea
rs and in many cases I'm sure the materials are the same as others, so I'd b
e surprised if there was a material problem. I even bought them years ago fo
r my certified plane. They're just "new" to us in RV10 land because it was a
more uncommon model of pad that they didn't make back when the rv10 was bor
n. The material isn't different than the material they've used for years th
ough.
Tim
> On Feb 12, 2014, at 3:17 AM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>
>
> The disc looks fine
> This was my first set of rapcos installed in may
> Wll send the pictures to rapco.
> This was the left side
> If it wasn't for the caliber leaking i won't have found this. Brakes worke
d fine.
> Didn't check the right side.
> Will probably wait to annual in may.
> Alan
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Feb 11, 2014, at 10:46 PM, "Pascal" wrote:
>>
>> what does the brake disc look like? these look like they are relatively u
nused but almost like something effected them. Replacing was a good call, bu
t what caused this that may do the same thing to the new pads?
>> BTW- I did not mean any disrespect to the A&P, I was simply mentioning t
hat I don=99t always trust what they tell me about my airplane. in thi
s case he made a good call. It=99s not the Rapco its something the pad
s are reacting to is my guess.
>> I would send this picture to Rapco and get their feedback.
>> Pascal
>>
>> From: Alan Mekler MD
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 5:00 PM
>> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 11, 2014, at 5:07 AM, Alan Mekler MD wrot
e:
>>>
>>>
>>> no i didn=99t build my plane so i need a mechanic. both my A&Ps ha
ve built and own RVs.
>>> alan
>>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:06 PM, Pascal wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have a early version of the 112's and they have been working very nic
ely and evenly. I gather you need a mechanic because you didn=99t buil
d the plane? I never let anyone touch my plane. Heard of too many planes goi
ng down within 1 hour of a mechanic signing it off as good for the annual. I
replaced my pads last November with the Rapcos and they too were very well w
ork through.
>>>> pascal
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Kelly McMullen
>>>> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 6:16 PM
>>>> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>>>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Being experimental, it is your choice to take his advise or ignore it.
>>>> Looks are not one of my criteria.
>>>>
>>>>> On 2/10/2014 5:54 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>>>>> kelly,
>>>>> pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didn=99t like the the w
ay they looked.
>>>>> alan
>>>>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in the f
orm of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to remove the 5606 can r
esurect a pad if there is enough thickness to justify. Also, if you decide t
o replace, just do the caliper that needs pads. No need to do the other side
.
>>>>>> Kelly
>>>>>> A&P/IA
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak
>>>>>> and although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore
>>>>>> unevenly. My regular mechanic said to replace them.
>>>>>> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ==========
>>>>>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>>>> ==========
>>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>>> ==========
>>>>>> le, List Admin.
>>>>>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>>> ==========
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>>>>>> *
>>>>>>
>>>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matr
onics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.c
om/contribution
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *
>>>>> http://www.matronics=================
=======http://www.matronics.com/co==========
======
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>
>
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
I agree. The material looks like it got overheated, possibly from
introduction of brake fluid on the pad.
Be careful. I don't recall hearing of fires on RV-10s (perhaps faulty
memory). There have been reported cases of Cirrus brake fires due to
excessive use of brakes during taxiing. Both aircraft lack nosewheel
steering that forces some use of the brakes.
On 2/12/2014 5:12 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
> It actually could be the leaky caliper that caused them to look so
> bad. It'll be interesting to hear or see pictures of the other side
> that didn't have that issue when you finally wear them out.
> Rapco's done I'm sure 10's of thousands of pads for many models for
> many years and in many cases I'm sure the materials are the same as
> others, so I'd be surprised if there was a material problem. I even
> bought them years ago for my certified plane. They're just "new" to
> us in RV10 land because it was a more uncommon model of pad that they
> didn't make back when the rv10 was born. The material isn't different
> than the material they've used for years though.
> Tim
>
> On Feb 12, 2014, at 3:17 AM, Alan Mekler MD > wrote:
>
>>
>> The disc looks fine
>> This was my first set of rapcos installed in may
>> Wll send the pictures to rapco.
>> This was the left side
>> If it wasn't for the caliber leaking i won't have found this. Brakes
>> worked fine.
>> Didn't check the right side.
>> Will probably wait to annual in may.
>> Alan
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Feb 11, 2014, at 10:46 PM, "Pascal" > > wrote:
>>
>>> what does the brake disc look like? these look like they are
>>> relatively unused but almost like something effected them. Replacing
>>> was a good call, but what caused this that may do the same thing to
>>> the new pads?
>>> BTW- I did not mean any disrespect to the A&P, I was simply
>>> mentioning that I dont always trust what they tell me about my
>>> airplane. in this case he made a good call. Its not the Rapco its
>>> something the pads are reacting to is my guess.
>>> I would send this picture to Rapco and get their feedback.
>>> Pascal
>>> *From:* Alan Mekler MD
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 11, 2014 5:00 PM
>>> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>>>
>>> On Feb 11, 2014, at 5:07 AM, Alan Mekler MD >> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> no i didnt build my plane so i need a mechanic. both my A&Ps have
>>>> built and own RVs.
>>>> alan
>>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:06 PM, Pascal >>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a early version of the 112's and they have been working
>>>>> very nicely and evenly. I gather you need a mechanic because you
>>>>> didnt build the plane? I never let anyone touch my plane. Heard
>>>>> of too many planes going down within 1 hour of a mechanic signing
>>>>> it off as good for the annual. I replaced my pads last November
>>>>> with the Rapcos and they too were very well work through.
>>>>> pascal
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Kelly McMullen
>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 6:16 PM
>>>>> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>>>>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> Being experimental, it is your choice to take his advise or ignore it.
>>>>> Looks are not one of my criteria.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/10/2014 5:54 PM, Alan Mekler MD wrote:
>>>>>> kelly,
>>>>>> pads had enough thickness but my mechanic didnt like the the way
>>>>>> they looked.
>>>>>> alan
>>>>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Kelly McMullen >>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Having pads uneven is not a problem. Having petroleum on them in
>>>>>>> the form of 5606 is. A thorough cleaning with BrakeKlean to
>>>>>>> remove the 5606 can resurect a pad if there is enough thickness
>>>>>>> to justify. Also, if you decide to replace, just do the caliper
>>>>>>> that needs pads. No need to do the other side.
>>>>>>> Kelly
>>>>>>> A&P/IA
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Alan Mekler MD
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> well i tried the cheaper rapco brake pads. i had a caliber leak
>>>>>>> and although the pads had only 40 hours on them they wore
>>>>>>> unevenly. My regular mechanic said to replace them.
>>>>>>> Has anyone else had problems with the Rapco pads?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ==========
>>>>>>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>>>>> ==========
>>>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>>>> ==========
>>>>>>> le, List Admin.
>>>>>>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>>>> ==========
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>>>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> http://www.matronics========================*http://www.matronics.com/co================
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>*
>>> *
>>> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>*
>> *
>>
>> D============================================
>> List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> D============================================
>> //forums.matronics.com
>> D============================================
>> ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> D============================================
>>
>> *
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
There have been fires on RV-10's from excessive braking.
I think at least one was a real fire, but I know that there
have been cases of melted tires too. One was during high
speed taxi that I know of. So it's worth repeating...one
of the biggest things you need to do as a pilot of an
RV-10 is not ride the brakes. You shouldn't do it on
any plane, but the RV-10 as Kelly mentions, doesn't have
that steering nosewheel so people tend to ride them more.
I went through my first set of brake pads MUCH faster than
the 2nd set.....I had to learn my lesson the hard way.
Tim
On 2/12/2014 8:29 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
> I agree. The material looks like it got overheated, possibly from
> introduction of brake fluid on the pad.
> Be careful. I don't recall hearing of fires on RV-10s (perhaps faulty
> memory). There have been reported cases of Cirrus brake fires due to
> excessive use of brakes during taxiing. Both aircraft lack nosewheel
> steering that forces some use of the brakes.
>
> On 2/12/2014 5:12 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
>> It actually could be the leaky caliper that caused them to look so
>> bad. It'll be interesting to hear or see pictures of the other side
>> that didn't have that issue when you finally wear them out.
>> Rapco's done I'm sure 10's of thousands of pads for many models for
>> many years and in many cases I'm sure the materials are the same as
>> others, so I'd be surprised if there was a material problem. I even
>> bought them years ago for my certified plane. They're just "new" to
>> us in RV10 land because it was a more uncommon model of pad that they
>> didn't make back when the rv10 was born. The material isn't different
>> than the material they've used for years though.
>> Tim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don McDonald <building_partner(at)yahoo.com> |
Ditto Tim... we have a few people here that just insist that you can't stee
r the 10 with the rudder.... "Most" of the time that isn't true.- The onl
y time it's a problem is when you have a low or idle power setting.... but
even then, use alllll the rudder you can and simply assist with the brakes.
... not the other way around.- Last annual I wrote on the pad the date, a
nd the thickness.- In 13 months it only wore off .035".- =0ADon McDonal
d=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AOn Wednesday, February 12, 2014 9:29 AM, Tim Olson =0A=0AThere have been fires on RV-10's from excessive braking.=0AI
think at least one was a real fire, but I know that there=0Ahave been case
s of melted tires too.- One was during high=0Aspeed taxi that I know of.
- So it's worth repeating...one=0Aof the biggest things you need to do as
a pilot of an=0ARV-10 is not ride the brakes.- You shouldn't do it on=0A
any plane, but the RV-10 as Kelly mentions, doesn't have=0Athat steering no
sewheel so people tend to ride them more.=0AI went through my first set of
brake pads MUCH faster than=0Athe 2nd set.....I had to learn my lesson the
hard way.=0ATim=0A=0AOn 2/12/2014 8:29 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:=0A> --> RV
10-List message posted by: Kelly McMullen =0A>=0A> I a
gree. The material looks like it got overheated, possibly from=0A> introduc
tion of brake fluid on the pad.=0A> Be careful. I don't recall hearing of f
ires on RV-10s (perhaps faulty=0A> memory). There have been reported cases
of Cirrus brake fires due to=0A> excessive use of brakes during taxiing. Bo
th aircraft lack nosewheel=0A> steering that forces some use of the brakes.
=0A>=0A> On 2/12/2014 5:12 AM, Tim Olson wrote:=0A>> It actually could be t
he leaky caliper that caused them to look so=0A>> bad.- It'll be interest
ing to hear or see pictures of the other side=0A>> that didn't have that is
sue when you finally wear them out.=0A>> Rapco's done I'm sure 10's of thou
sands of pads for many models for=0A>> many years and in many cases I'm sur
e the materials are the same as=0A>> others, so I'd be surprised if there w
as a material problem. I even=0A>> bought them years ago for my certified p
lane.- They're just "new" to=0A>> us in RV10 land because it was a more u
ncommon model of pad that they=0A>> didn't make back when the rv10 was born
.- The material isn't different=0A>> than the material they've used for y
=========================0A
======================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alan Mekler MD <amekler(at)metrocast.net> |
Good advice Tim
I was a former mooney pilot
Easy to flat spot a tire if you braked above 45 kts
Alan
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 12, 2014, at 10:16 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
>
>
> There have been fires on RV-10's from excessive braking.
> I think at least one was a real fire, but I know that there
> have been cases of melted tires too. One was during high
> speed taxi that I know of. So it's worth repeating...one
> of the biggest things you need to do as a pilot of an
> RV-10 is not ride the brakes. You shouldn't do it on
> any plane, but the RV-10 as Kelly mentions, doesn't have
> that steering nosewheel so people tend to ride them more.
> I went through my first set of brake pads MUCH faster than
> the 2nd set.....I had to learn my lesson the hard way.
> Tim
>
>> On 2/12/2014 8:29 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>>
>> I agree. The material looks like it got overheated, possibly from
>> introduction of brake fluid on the pad.
>> Be careful. I don't recall hearing of fires on RV-10s (perhaps faulty
>> memory). There have been reported cases of Cirrus brake fires due to
>> excessive use of brakes during taxiing. Both aircraft lack nosewheel
>> steering that forces some use of the brakes.
>>
>>> On 2/12/2014 5:12 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
>>> It actually could be the leaky caliper that caused them to look so
>>> bad. It'll be interesting to hear or see pictures of the other side
>>> that didn't have that issue when you finally wear them out.
>>> Rapco's done I'm sure 10's of thousands of pads for many models for
>>> many years and in many cases I'm sure the materials are the same as
>>> others, so I'd be surprised if there was a material problem. I even
>>> bought them years ago for my certified plane. They're just "new" to
>>> us in RV10 land because it was a more uncommon model of pad that they
>>> didn't make back when the rv10 was born. The material isn't different
>>> than the material they've used for years though.
>>> Tim
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Danny Riggs <jdriggs49(at)msn.com> |
I burned up a tire before I discovered that the master cylinder wasn't rele
asing pressure after the brakes had been released. Carbonized the sidewall
and started really smoking. Had to replace the tire and also had to put som
e springs on the master cylinders so that they would release. My A&P said t
hat he had to also put springs on the master cylinder of the Pitts S-2 he b
uilt. Apparently that is a common problem with these things.
> Date: Wed=2C 12 Feb 2014 09:16:55 -0600
> From: Tim(at)MyRV10.com
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>
>
> There have been fires on RV-10's from excessive braking.
> I think at least one was a real fire=2C but I know that there
> have been cases of melted tires too. One was during high
> speed taxi that I know of. So it's worth repeating...one
> of the biggest things you need to do as a pilot of an
> RV-10 is not ride the brakes. You shouldn't do it on
> any plane=2C but the RV-10 as Kelly mentions=2C doesn't have
> that steering nosewheel so people tend to ride them more.
> I went through my first set of brake pads MUCH faster than
> the 2nd set.....I had to learn my lesson the hard way.
> Tim
>
> On 2/12/2014 8:29 AM=2C Kelly McMullen wrote:
> >
> > I agree. The material looks like it got overheated=2C possibly from
> > introduction of brake fluid on the pad.
> > Be careful. I don't recall hearing of fires on RV-10s (perhaps faulty
> > memory). There have been reported cases of Cirrus brake fires due to
> > excessive use of brakes during taxiing. Both aircraft lack nosewheel
> > steering that forces some use of the brakes.
> >
> > On 2/12/2014 5:12 AM=2C Tim Olson wrote:
> >> It actually could be the leaky caliper that caused them to look so
> >> bad. It'll be interesting to hear or see pictures of the other side
> >> that didn't have that issue when you finally wear them out.
> >> Rapco's done I'm sure 10's of thousands of pads for many models for
> >> many years and in many cases I'm sure the materials are the same as
> >> others=2C so I'd be surprised if there was a material problem. I even
> >> bought them years ago for my certified plane. They're just "new" to
> >> us in RV10 land because it was a more uncommon model of pad that they
> >> didn't make back when the rv10 was born. The material isn't different
> >> than the material they've used for years though.
> >> Tim
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | AOG in Santa Barbara |
| From: | Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com> |
Guys, I could use a little help. My airplane partner is AOG in Santa
Barbara with a starting problem. I think the retard points are off a
little, making it hard to start. The battery is dead and the FBO isn't much
help with charging or timing. Is anyone close by that could set the retard
points for him? If so please PM me or give me a call. Many thanks,
Dave Saylor
831-750-0284
--
--Dave Saylor
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net> |
I had a dragging brake problem. It turned out to be a rolled 'O' ring in
the brake caliper. It took just a couple of take offs and landings for me
to realize I had a problem but in that short amount of time it trashed the
pads and tire on that side. I attribute the uneven tire wear to the brake
dragging during taxi, but stopping the tire enough to let it scuff the
runway for the short period of time before liftoff and on landing.
If you see such an uneven tire wear - check the pads.
Carl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan Mekler MD
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 10:40 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
Good advice Tim
I was a former mooney pilot
Easy to flat spot a tire if you braked above 45 kts Alan
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 12, 2014, at 10:16 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
>
>
> There have been fires on RV-10's from excessive braking.
> I think at least one was a real fire, but I know that there have been
> cases of melted tires too. One was during high speed taxi that I know
> of. So it's worth repeating...one of the biggest things you need to
> do as a pilot of an
> RV-10 is not ride the brakes. You shouldn't do it on any plane, but
> the RV-10 as Kelly mentions, doesn't have that steering nosewheel so
> people tend to ride them more.
> I went through my first set of brake pads MUCH faster than the 2nd
> set.....I had to learn my lesson the hard way.
> Tim
>
>> On 2/12/2014 8:29 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>>
>> I agree. The material looks like it got overheated, possibly from
>> introduction of brake fluid on the pad.
>> Be careful. I don't recall hearing of fires on RV-10s (perhaps faulty
>> memory). There have been reported cases of Cirrus brake fires due to
>> excessive use of brakes during taxiing. Both aircraft lack nosewheel
>> steering that forces some use of the brakes.
>>
>>> On 2/12/2014 5:12 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
>>> It actually could be the leaky caliper that caused them to look so
>>> bad. It'll be interesting to hear or see pictures of the other side
>>> that didn't have that issue when you finally wear them out.
>>> Rapco's done I'm sure 10's of thousands of pads for many models for
>>> many years and in many cases I'm sure the materials are the same as
>>> others, so I'd be surprised if there was a material problem. I even
>>> bought them years ago for my certified plane. They're just "new" to
>>> us in RV10 land because it was a more uncommon model of pad that
>>> they didn't make back when the rv10 was born. The material isn't
>>> different than the material they've used for years though.
>>> Tim
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
Staying off the brakes as much as possible works.
I'm at 400 hours - at 350 hours I still had more original pad than I
could justify replacing. A big part is probably basing on a grass field
where high speed braking is redundant. The other part is being a
tailwheel guy. At first I tried to break my habit of taxiing with
sometimes frequent full rudder deflections, then I realized that it was
perfectly appropriated for a swiveling nose wheel on grass.
Otherwise I try to limit high speed braking to hard surface landings
when the roll-out speed drops to the main gear flutter speed. Then I
brake to get below the flutter speed. Otherwise I try to let taxiways
slip by until slow enough to exit with minimal braking.
On 2/12/2014 10:36 AM, Don McDonald wrote:
> Ditto Tim... we have a few people here that just insist that you can't
> steer the 10 with the rudder.... "Most" of the time that isn't true.
> The only time it's a problem is when you have a low or idle power
> setting.... but even then, use alllll the rudder you can and simply
> assist with the brakes.... not the other way around. Last annual I
> wrote on the pad the date, and the thickness. In 13 months it only
> wore off .035".
> Don McDonald
>
>
> On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 9:29 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
> >
>
> There have been fires on RV-10's from excessive braking.
> I think at least one was a real fire, but I know that there
> have been cases of melted tires too. One was during high
> speed taxi that I know of. So it's worth repeating...one
> of the biggest things you need to do as a pilot of an
> RV-10 is not ride the brakes. You shouldn't do it on
> any plane, but the RV-10 as Kelly mentions, doesn't have
> that steering nosewheel so people tend to ride them more.
> I went through my first set of brake pads MUCH faster than
> the 2nd set.....I had to learn my lesson the hard way.
> Tim
>
> On 2/12/2014 8:29 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
> >
> >
> > I agree. The material looks like it got overheated, possibly from
> > introduction of brake fluid on the pad.
> > Be careful. I don't recall hearing of fires on RV-10s (perhaps faulty
> > memory). There have been reported cases of Cirrus brake fires due to
> > excessive use of brakes during taxiing. Both aircraft lack nosewheel
> > steering that forces some use of the brakes.
> >
> > On 2/12/2014 5:12 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
> >> It actually could be the leaky caliper that caused them to look so
> >> bad. It'll be interesting to hear or see pictures of the other side
> >> that didn't have that issue when you finally wear them out.
> >> Rapco's done I'm sure 10's of thousands of pads for many models for
> >> many years and in many cases I'm sure the materials are the same as
> >> others, so I'd be surprised if there was a material problem. I even
> >> bought them years ago for my certified plane. They're just "new" to
> >> us in RV10 land because it was a more uncommon model of pad that they
> >> didn't make back when the rv10 was born. The material isn't different
> >> than the m/www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List"
> ="http://forums.matronics.com/"
> target="_blank">http://forums.matronics
> tronics.com/contribution"
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contri===============
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu> |
I was wondering if the brake fluid on the pad burned?
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418623#418623
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alan Mekler MD <amekler(at)metrocast.net> |
Don't think so
Alan
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 12, 2014, at 2:48 PM, "Bob Turner" wrote:
>
>
> I was wondering if the brake fluid on the pad burned?
>
> --------
> Bob Turner
> RV-10 QB
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418623#418623
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rene Felker" <rene(at)felker.com> |
I have a dragging right break...do you have any instructions for the
springs. The problem comes and goes...
Rene' Felker
N423CF
801-721-6080
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Danny Riggs
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 9:13 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: rapco pads
I burned up a tire before I discovered that the master cylinder wasn't
releasing pressure after the brakes had been released. Carbonized the
sidewall and started really smoking. Had to replace the tire and also had to
put some springs on the master cylinders so that they would release. My A&P
said that he had to also put springs on the master cylinder of the Pitts S-2
he built. Apparently that is a common problem with these things.
> Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 09:16:55 -0600
> From: Tim(at)MyRV10.com
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: rapco pads
>
>
> There have been fires on RV-10's from excessive braking.
> I think at least one was a real fire, but I know that there
> have been cases of melted tires too. One was during high
> speed taxi that I know of. So it's worth repeating...one
> of the biggest things you need to do as a pilot of an
> RV-10 is not ride the brakes. You shouldn't do it on
> any plane, but the RV-10 as Kelly mentions, doesn't have
> that steering nosewheel so people tend to ride them more.
> I went through my first set of brake pads MUCH faster than
> the 2nd set.....I had to learn my lesson the hard way.
> Tim
>
> On 2/12/2014 8:29 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
> >
> > I agree. The material looks like it got overheated, possibly from
> > introduction of brake fluid on the pad.
> > Be careful. I don't recall hearing of fires on RV-10s (perhaps faulty
> > memory). There have been reported cases of Cirrus brake fires due to
> > excessive use of brakes during taxiing. Both aircraft lack nosewheel
> > steering that forces some use of the brakes.
> >
> > On 2/12/2014 5:12 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
> >> It actually could be the leaky caliper that caused them to look so
> >> bad. It'll be interesting to hear or see pictures of the other side
> >> that didn't have that issue when you finally wear them out.
> >> Rapco's done I'm sure 10's of thousands of pads for many models for
> >> many years and in many cases I'm sure the materials are the same as
> >> others, so I'd be surprised if there was a material problem. I even
> >> bought them years ago for my certified plane. They're just "new" to
> >> us in RV10 land because it was a more uncommon model of pad that they
> >> didn't make back when the rv10 was born. The material isn't different
> >> than the material they've used for years though.
================
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <lewgall(at)charter.net> |
Hey Rene=99,
We had this problem years ago. I rigged up some springs to totally
retract the brake pedals and that fixed it. Then others posted on here
that the fix is to simply drill the holes for the axis of the pedal
bolts so that a rod passes through both with no friction =93 so
there is no bind in the pedals and they retract very easily. Try that
first.
Later, =93 Lew
From: Rene Felker
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 4:54 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: rapco pads
I have a dragging right break..do you have any instructions for
the springs. The problem comes and goes..
Rene' Felker
N423CF
801-721-6080
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dmaib(at)me.com" <dmaib(at)me.com> |
rene(at)felker.com wrote:
> I have a dragging right break..do you have any instructions for the springs.
The problem comes and goes..
>
> Rene' Felker
> N423CF
> 801-721-6080
>
>
>
>
>
I had a dragging brake problem that seemed to come and go back in 2008 during my
Phase 1 testing. I finally figured out that the co-pilot brakes were not completely
releasing on the RH side. The problem was the hinge bolt through the bottom
of the pedal was dragging just enough to keep the cylinder from completely
retracting when I would occasionally fly the airplane from the right seat.
I have one long bolt in each pedal instead of the two short bolts as shown in
the plans. Somebody on the forums came up with a source for the one long bolt
back when I was building. Simply making sure that there was absolutely no drag
on the pedal/bolt took care of the problem. 720 hours with no problems dragging
brakes. I got over 300 hours out of my first pads and when I changed them there
was still some life left in them. I work very hard to use the brakes as little
as possible while taxiing, and it pays off. I switched to Rapco a while
back and they are fine. I really like that they have the wear indicator notch
in the end of the pad so you are able to tell very easily if it is getting to
be time for new pads.
--------
David Maib
RV-10 #40559
Transition Trainer
New Smyrna Beach, FL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418632#418632
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel consumption test results |
| From: | "Mike Whisky" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net> |
Thank you all for your feedback.
I am currently running all cylinders on .045 nozzles from Airflowperformance and
did send my data to Don. He is sending me now some nozzles to reduce the spread.
Regards
Michael
--------
RV-10 builder (flying, test phase)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418669#418669
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel consumption test results |
| From: | Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> |
I hope you mean 0.025" nozzles.
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 Feb 13, 2014, at 2:57 PM, "Mike Whisky" wrote:
>
>
> Thank you all for your feedback.
> I am currently running all cylinders on .045 nozzles from Airflowperformance
and did send my data to Don. He is sending me now some nozzles to reduce the spread.
>
> Regards
> Michael
>
> --------
> RV-10 builder (flying, test phase)
> #511
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418669#418669
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Carpenter <jeff(at)westcottpress.com> |
| Subject: | Bugatti 100P... I wonder if they make a kit? |
The Bugatti 100P Airplane at Mullin Museum - News - Road & Track
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel consumption test results |
| From: | "Mike Whisky" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net> |
Jesse my RPM is limited to 2500 due to noise regulations
Therefore Don suggested .024 nozzles
Mike
--------
RV-10 builder (flying, test phase)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418684#418684
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)live.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel consumption test results |
Let us know how the whole rejetting works out.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Whisky
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 1:12 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: Fuel consumption test results
Jesse my RPM is limited to 2500 due to noise regulations
Therefore Don suggested .024 nozzles
Mike
--------
RV-10 builder (flying, test phase)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418684#418684
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Forward baffle & governor cable |
| From: | "rvdave" <rv610dave(at)gmail.com> |
I made it to the point of the forward baffle and front plate that wraps around
the governor and came to realize all the holes I've been drilling for the cable
bracket and hole for governor cable were possibly call outs only for the MT
governor? The McCaulley gov I'm using is extended another approx 1" outward so
I'm wondering how the cable comes up through the baffle--- will it be maneuverable
enough to link to and operate the arm smoothly --a little offset? Or do
I need to move the bracket to align the cable perfectly in line with the bracket,
baffle, and arm?
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 flying
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418754#418754
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Forward baffle & governor cable |
| From: | "bill.peyton" <peyton.b(at)sbcglobal.net> |
You should use the gov. to determine were to drill the hole and install the bracket.
The cable penetration should be slightly offset with the actuation arm
since it attaches to the side of the arm. The photo is shown with a Hartzell
governor with the extended arm, which is required to get the full throw when using
the quadrant style control.
--------
Bill
WA0SYV
Aviation Partners, LLC
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418771#418771
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_2600_192.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_2600_181.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Forward baffle & governor cable |
| From: | "rvdave" <rv610dave(at)gmail.com> |
Got it, thanks Bill--did you use the Vans supplied bracket underneath per plans?
Or something else? I see you placed the cable bracket across the bend for
positioning? I may also have to place the bracket on the other side of the bend,
not sure if I have to modify it or not.
But it looks like I'll be ordering a new front baffle--another delay...
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 flying
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418775#418775
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Forward baffle & governor cable |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
Unless you are seeking a show award, should be easy to place a doubler on
the underside to cover the hole and move on.
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 10:02 PM, rvdave wrote:
>
> Got it, thanks Bill--did you use the Vans supplied bracket underneath per
> plans? Or something else? I see you placed the cable bracket across the
> bend for positioning? I may also have to place the bracket on the other
> side of the bend, not sure if I have to modify it or not.
> But it looks like I'll be ordering a new front baffle--another delay...
>
> --------
> Dave Ford
> RV6 flying
> RV10 building
> Cadillac, MI
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418775#418775
>
>
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel consumption test results |
| From: | "Mike Whisky" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net> |
Sure will do. So far I did test flights at different altitudes and power settings
. It world like this: I noted EGTs from .5 gal fuel flow before the first cylinder
peaks in .2gal steps down untilgbar all EGTs peaked. The data I sent to
Don at airflow performance and he suggested to try first a .025 In # 5, a .0245
in #6
and maybe cylinder #2, and a .0235 in #1. I will update the data once I have installed
and tested the nozzles.
Regards
Michael
--------
RV-10 builder (flying, test phase)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418780#418780
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sean Stephens <sean(at)stephensville.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Forward baffle & governor cable |
That's exactly what I did after misplacing the hole. Here's a pic:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephensville/8500973713/in/set-72157627874989973
Enlarged the misplaced hole and added doubler on to. Looks fine
-Sean #40303 (still 90% done, 90% to go)
> Kelly McMullen
> February 15, 2014 at 11:19 PM
> Unless you are seeking a show award, should be easy to place a doubler
> on the underside to cover the hole and move on.
>
>
> --
>
> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Forward baffle & governor cable |
| From: | "bill.peyton" <peyton.b(at)sbcglobal.net> |
Yes Dave, I used the stock bracket. When positioning the bracket it will come
right next to the air inlet flange, just keep that in mind when positioning it.
Also, be careful not to put the air inlet too close to the front of the ramp
in case you end up wanting to trim it later on for clearance. with the cowl.
--------
Bill
WA0SYV
Aviation Partners, LLC
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418784#418784
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel consumption test results |
| From: | PReid <Rv10flyer(at)live.com> |
I can use some education here. If Lycoming is putting in .0280 and some are t
aking the restrictor down to .025, what does that do to WOT on takeoff? Is t
he 22-23 gph still being seen on takeoffs to cool the CHT?
Why wouldn't lycoming just put .025 restrictors in to start with?
Pascal
> On Feb 16, 2014, at 12:25 AM, "Mike Whisky" wrote:
>
>
> Sure will do. So far I did test flights at different altitudes and power s
ettings . It world like this: I noted EGTs from .5 gal fuel flow before the f
irst cylinder peaks in .2gal steps down untilgbar all EGTs peaked. The data I
sent to Don at airflow performance and he suggested to try first a .025 In #
5, a .0245 in #6
> and maybe cylinder #2, and a .0235 in #1. I will update the data once I ha
ve installed and tested the nozzles.
> Regards
> Michael
>
> --------
> RV-10 builder (flying, test phase)
> #511
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418780#418780
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel consumption test results |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
I suspect the effort is to have the pressure to the injectors be a bit
higher for better atomization, however, I think it is a valid question,
especially if it changes the minimum pressure needed to develop full power.
IIRC that is somewhere around 15 psi in stock form.
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 9:37 AM, PReid wrote:
> I can use some education here. If Lycoming is putting in .0280 and some
> are taking the restrictor down to .025, what does that do to WOT on
> takeoff? Is the 22-23 gph still being seen on takeoffs to cool the CHT?
> Why wouldn't lycoming just put .025 restrictors in to start with?
> Pascal
>
> On Feb 16, 2014, at 12:25 AM, "Mike Whisky" wrote:
>
>
> Sure will do. So far I did test flights at different altitudes and power
> settings . It world like this: I noted EGTs from .5 gal fuel flow before
> the first cylinder peaks in .2gal steps down untilgbar all EGTs peaked. The
> data I sent to Don at airflow performance and he suggested to try first a
> .025 In # 5, a .0245 in #6
> and maybe cylinder #2, and a .0235 in #1. I will update the data once I
> have installed and tested the nozzles.
> Regards
> Michael
>
>
> --------
> RV-10 builder (flying, test phase)
> #511
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418780#418780
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> ===============================================
> http://www.mat=================================================
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick & Vicki Sipp" <rsipp(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel consumption test results |
This is what Don had me do as well saying at the time that the .028 to
.025 trade off is around 260HP and is done for better spray patterns.
We also checked for adequate takeoff fuel flow; I don=99t remember
the exact number but I think it was appox. 23-25 gph. I usually see at
least 25 gph.
Dick Sipp
530 hours
From: Kelly McMullen
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2014 2:29 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Fuel consumption test results
I suspect the effort is to have the pressure to the injectors be a bit
higher for better atomization, however, I think it is a valid question,
especially if it changes the minimum pressure needed to develop full
power. IIRC that is somewhere around 15 psi in stock form.
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 9:37 AM, PReid wrote:
I can use some education here. If Lycoming is putting in .0280 and
some are taking the restrictor down to .025, what does that do to WOT on
takeoff? Is the 22-23 gph still being seen on takeoffs to cool the CHT?
Why wouldn't lycoming just put .025 restrictors in to start with?
Pascal
mber
On Feb 16, 2014, at 12:25 AM, "Mike Whisky"
wrote:
Sure will do. So far I did test flights at different altitudes and
power settings . It world like this: I noted EGTs from .5 gal fuel flow
before the first cylinder peaks in .2gal steps down untilgbar all EGTs
peaked. The data I sent to Don at airflow performance and he suggested
to try first a .025 In # 5, a .0245 in #6
and maybe cylinder #2, and a .0235 in #1. I will update the data
once I have installed and tested the nozzles.
Regards
Michael
--------
RV-10 builder (flying, test phase)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418780#418780
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List==========
============
http://www.mat====================
====
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bob88" <marty.crooks(at)comcast.net> |
I have an IO540 C4B5 engine (narrow deck). Does anyone know if the governor sold
by Vans is correct for this engine? I understand there is different gearing
for narrow vs wide deck 540s.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418909#418909
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Kraus <n223rv(at)wolflakeairport.net> |
Search the archives. If my poor memory served me correctly, Vans sold the narrow
deck version, which was odd as there aren't as many narrow deck engines. To
be safe, better search the archives and ask Vans, what they used to sell may
be different than what they sell today.... I ordered my governor with my prop
from MT.
-Mike
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 17, 2014, at 7:48 PM, "bob88" wrote:
>
>
> I have an IO540 C4B5 engine (narrow deck). Does anyone know if the governor sold
by Vans is correct for this engine? I understand there is different gearing
for narrow vs wide deck 540s.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418909#418909
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> |
It works fine on our C4B5.
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 Feb 17, 2014, at 7:48 PM, "bob88" wrote:
>
>
> I have an IO540 C4B5 engine (narrow deck). Does anyone know if the governor sold
by Vans is correct for this engine? I understand there is different gearing
for narrow vs wide deck 540s.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418909#418909
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
Yes, the MT governor Van's offers is correct for the narrow deck engines.
On 2/17/2014 5:48 PM, bob88 wrote:
>
> I have an IO540 C4B5 engine (narrow deck). Does anyone know if the governor sold
by Vans is correct for this engine? I understand there is different gearing
for narrow vs wide deck 540s.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418909#418909
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Greenley" <wgreenley(at)gmail.com> |
Jesse,
I just bought a low time C4B5, did you find special considerations with
using that instead of the D4A5?
Bill Greenley
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Governor
It works fine on our C4B5.
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 Feb 17, 2014, at 7:48 PM, "bob88" wrote:
>
>
> I have an IO540 C4B5 engine (narrow deck). Does anyone know if the
governor sold by Vans is correct for this engine? I understand there is
different gearing for narrow vs wide deck 540s.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418909#418909
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
The only difference anyone has found is the data plate and redline. The
D4A5 is same engine with higher redline. If you want to be conservative,
use the 2575 redline, but calculate your power percentages off of 260 hp,
eg 75% equals 195 hp.
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 7:18 PM, William Greenley wrote:
>
> Jesse,
> I just bought a low time C4B5, did you find special considerations with
> using that instead of the D4A5?
> Bill Greenley
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
> Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 8:56 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Governor
>
>
> It works fine on our C4B5.
>
> 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 Feb 17, 2014, at 7:48 PM, "bob88" wrote:
> >
> >
> > I have an IO540 C4B5 engine (narrow deck). Does anyone know if the
> governor sold by Vans is correct for this engine? I understand there is
> different gearing for narrow vs wide deck 540s.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418909#418909
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> |
We had to change the ears to the small holes. Other than that it fit fine. There
were some slight differences to be adapted with the baffles, but nothing serious.
My understanding is the C4B5, while redlined at 2,575, has the correct crank,
counterweights and connecting rods to run 2,700 like the D4A5.
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 Feb 17, 2014, at 9:18 PM, "William Greenley" wrote:
>
>
> Jesse,
> I just bought a low time C4B5, did you find special considerations with
> using that instead of the D4A5?
> Bill Greenley
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
> Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 8:56 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Governor
>
>
> It works fine on our C4B5.
>
> 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 Feb 17, 2014, at 7:48 PM, "bob88" wrote:
>>
>>
>> I have an IO540 C4B5 engine (narrow deck). Does anyone know if the
> governor sold by Vans is correct for this engine? I understand there is
> different gearing for narrow vs wide deck 540s.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418909#418909
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)live.com> |
The only thing that I recall is you'll need different mounts to install
on -10
-----Original Message-----
From: William Greenley
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 6:18 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Governor
Jesse,
I just bought a low time C4B5, did you find special considerations with
using that instead of the D4A5?
Bill Greenley
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Governor
It works fine on our C4B5.
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 Feb 17, 2014, at 7:48 PM, "bob88" wrote:
>
>
> I have an IO540 C4B5 engine (narrow deck). Does anyone know if the
governor sold by Vans is correct for this engine? I understand there is
different gearing for narrow vs wide deck 540s.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418909#418909
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Greenley <wgreenley(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks, got them include the different ears when I bought. So I should be
good.
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Pascal wrote:
>
> The only thing that I recall is you'll need different mounts to install on
> -10
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: William Greenley
> Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 6:18 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Governor
>
>
> Jesse,
> I just bought a low time C4B5, did you find special considerations with
> using that instead of the D4A5?
> Bill Greenley
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
> Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 8:56 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Governor
>
>
> It works fine on our C4B5.
>
> 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 Feb 17, 2014, at 7:48 PM, "bob88" wrote:
>>
>>
>> I have an IO540 C4B5 engine (narrow deck). Does anyone know if the
>>
> governor sold by Vans is correct for this engine? I understand there is
> different gearing for narrow vs wide deck 540s.
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418909#418909
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Leikam <arplnplt(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | No RV-10's on Trade-A-Plane |
I find it interesting there are no RV-10s listed for sale in the Feb. issue of
Trade-A-Plane.
Does anyone have a recent number of flying RV-10s?
Dave Leikam
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: No RV-10's on Trade-A-Plane |
| From: | Ed Kranz <ed.kranz(at)gmail.com> |
645 according to the Van's website.
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 6:47 PM, David Leikam wrote:
>
> I find it interesting there are no RV-10's listed for sale in the Feb.
> issue of Trade-A-Plane.
>
> Does anyone have a recent number of flying RV-10's?
>
> Dave Leikam
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Leffler <rv(at)thelefflers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: No RV-10's on Trade-A-Plane |
Wow, that's about ten per month. I was 609 in October.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 24, 2014, at 9:00 AM, Ed Kranz wrote:
645 according to the Van's website.
> On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 6:47 PM, David Leikam wrote:
>
> I find it interesting there are no RV-10=99s listed for sale in the
Feb. issue of Trade-A-Plane.
>
> Does anyone have a recent number of flying RV-10=99s?
>
> Dave Leikam
>
> ==========
> " target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> ==========
> MS -
> k">http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> e -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
>
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: No RV-10's on Trade-A-Plane |
| From: | "rv10flyer" <wayne.gillispie(at)gmail.com> |
Most probably in Brazil.
--------
Wayne G.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419303#419303
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sean Stephens <sean(at)stephensville.com> |
I'm in the process of adjusting my pushrods and elevator stops for panel
clearance and travel limits. I've reviewed all the archived posts on
adding stops and other techniques for getting panel clearance. I think
I have a good handle on that.
What I was curious about is the travel limits of the elevator. In
particular the elevator up limits. I assume that because of the nose
heavy aspect of the RV-10 that one would want to make sure that the up
travel limit of the elevator is at the higher end of the limits? I'm
imagining that with the loading at the forward most CG you'd want max
throw there for landing flare?
I know I am going to have to add a stop to prevent panel interference,
but as that only effects the down travel, as long as I am at or above
the elevator down limit of 20 degrees I should be fine? I'm imagining
the down limit being important for stall recovery and with the
relatively easy stall recovery of the rv-10 that the lower limit of 20
degrees is ok?
So long story short, is it better to be at the higher side of the up
elevator limits and ok to be at the lower side of the down limits?
-Sean #40303 (light at the end of the tunnel phase)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Clifford <davidsoutpost(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator Limits |
Mine were adjusted per plans when I built. I am in Phase 1 testing and found last
week when I was loaded up forward CG, I had trouble getting the nose up in
the landing flair. I used full up elevator trim to help but still landed three
point. Part of the reason is I have short legs and like the seat track pin in
the third position aft of front. With the big rotary knob on the Crow seat belt
harness, the stick grip hits that first and can not go to the full aft stop
limit. I adjusted the control tube for more nose up authority in this position
however I am going to come up with pedal extensions to get the seat further
back.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sean Stephens" <sean(at)stephensville.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 10:49:11 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Elevator Limits
I'm in the process of adjusting my pushrods and elevator stops for panel
clearance and travel limits. I've reviewed all the archived posts on
adding stops and other techniques for getting panel clearance. I think
I have a good handle on that.
What I was curious about is the travel limits of the elevator. In
particular the elevator up limits. I assume that because of the nose
heavy aspect of the RV-10 that one would want to make sure that the up
travel limit of the elevator is at the higher end of the limits? I'm
imagining that with the loading at the forward most CG you'd want max
throw there for landing flare?
I know I am going to have to add a stop to prevent panel interference,
but as that only effects the down travel, as long as I am at or above
the elevator down limit of 20 degrees I should be fine? I'm imagining
the down limit being important for stall recovery and with the
relatively easy stall recovery of the rv-10 that the lower limit of 20
degrees is ok?
So long story short, is it better to be at the higher side of the up
elevator limits and ok to be at the lower side of the down limits?
-Sean #40303 (light at the end of the tunnel phase)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator Limits |
Has anyone looked at adding ballast back by the tail? or how about
moving the battery further aft? Seems that this issue can also be
remedied with a further aft CG. Even a LB or two ballast in the tail
can make a HUGE difference! Obviously do the W&B calculations, but you
may be able to add a negligible amount of weight to the airframe in the
tail section and make it work for you. I am sure it has much more docile
handling when the CG is further aft.
Safe flying!
On Feb 26, 2014, at 7:19 PM, David Clifford
wrote:
> Mine were adjusted per plans when I built. I am in Phase 1 testing
and found last week when I was loaded up forward CG, I had trouble
getting the nose up in the landing flair. I used full up elevator trim
to help but still landed three point. Part of the reason is I have
short legs and like the seat track pin in the third position aft of
front. With the big rotary knob on the Crow seat belt harness, the
stick grip hits that first and can not go to the full aft stop limit. I
adjusted the control tube for more nose up authority in this position
however I am going to come up with pedal extensions to get the seat
further back.
>
> From: "Sean Stephens" <sean(at)stephensville.com>
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 10:49:11 PM
> Subject: RV10-List: Elevator Limits
>
>
> I'm in the process of adjusting my pushrods and elevator stops for
panel
> clearance and travel limits. I've reviewed all the archived posts on
> adding stops and other techniques for getting panel clearance. I
think
> I have a good handle on that.
>
> What I was curious about is the travel limits of the elevator. In
> particular the elevator up limits. I assume that because of the nose
> heavy aspect of the RV-10 that one would want to make sure that the up
> travel limit of the elevator is at the higher end of the limits? I'm
> imagining that with the loading at the forward most CG you'd want max
> throw there for landing flare?
>
> I know I am going to have to add a stop to prevent panel interference,
> but as that only effects the down travel, as long as I am at or above
> the elevator down limit of 20 degrees I should be fine? I'm imagining
> the down limit being important for stall recovery and with the
> relatively easy stall recovery of the rv-10 that the lower limit of 20
> degrees is ok?
>
> So long story short, is it better to be at the higher side of the up
> elevator limits and ok to be at the lower side of the down limits?
>
> -Sean #40303 (light at the end of the tunnel phase)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Elevator Limits |
| From: | "charliewaffles" <mcooper(at)live.com> |
The mothership runs with ballast in the baggage compartment most of the time. I
have a bag with 20lbs of Shot in there now. I started with 40lbs, for solo work,
but since I have added a survival/maintenance bag that weight 20lbs, I reduced
the shot. Definitely helps with the landing flare. Some people use water
jugs as they can just be dumped out and refilled as needed if the scenario dictates
a change at a remote location.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419411#419411
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick & Vicki Sipp" <rsipp(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator Limits |
An item that has not been mentioned so far is the flap position for
landing.
With a forward cg (solo or two light front seat passengers) a half flap
landing can be more comfortable, full up trim probably not required in
this configuration.
I use full flaps on landing 95% of the time. I always have 15 lbs. or
so in the back of the baggage compartment. This does require (in my
airplane) full up trim and about 2-3 pounds aft stick pressure to hold
65-70 KIAS on final. Full aft stick on roll out to hold the nose off
does not require unusual aft pressure.
I rigged the elevator as best I could to the factory spec limits.
Standard 4 point harness, no crotch strap (control stop is limiting). I
have always felt a concern for any airplane that had something limiting
the controls other than the design stops (i.e. panel or other
obstruction). All of the airplanes will be different to a degree based
on empty CG.
Oh, on takeoff like Van says, I use half flap on all the RVs.
It=99s cool to get off the runway before anybody else accept the
Alaska bush guys.
Dick Sipp
RV4 750 hours sold
RV12 50 hours built for friend
RV10 530 hours and counting
From: David Clifford
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 11:19 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Elevator Limits
Mine were adjusted per plans when I built. I am in Phase 1 testing and
found last week when I was loaded up forward CG, I had trouble getting
the nose up in the landing flair. I used full up elevator trim to help
but still landed three point. Part of the reason is I have short legs
and like the seat track pin in the third position aft of front. With
the big rotary knob on the Crow seat belt harness, the stick grip hits
that first and can not go to the full aft stop limit. I adjusted the
control tube for more nose up authority in this position however I am
going to come up with pedal extensions to get the seat further back.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
From: "Sean Stephens" <sean(at)stephensville.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 10:49:11 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Elevator Limits
I'm in the process of adjusting my pushrods and elevator stops for panel
clearance and travel limits. I've reviewed all the archived posts on
adding stops and other techniques for getting panel clearance. I think
I have a good handle on that.
What I was curious about is the travel limits of the elevator. In
particular the elevator up limits. I assume that because of the nose
heavy aspect of the RV-10 that one would want to make sure that the up
travel limit of the elevator is at the higher end of the limits? I'm
imagining that with the loading at the forward most CG you'd want max
throw there for landing flare?
I know I am going to have to add a stop to prevent panel interference,
but as that only effects the down travel, as long as I am at or above
the elevator down limit of 20 degrees I should be fine? I'm imagining
the down limit being important for stall recovery and with the
relatively easy stall recovery of the rv-10 that the lower limit of 20
degrees is ok?
So long story short, is it better to be at the higher side of the up
elevator limits and ok to be at the lower side of the down limits?
-Sean #40303 (light at the end of the tunnel phase)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Justin Jones <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator Limits |
You bring up a good point on flap position. The less flaps one has in,
the higher the angle of attack will be to produce the same amount of
lift. The catch with this is runway length. I fly C-130s and on our no
flap landings are fast and we have to be careful not to strike the tail
on landing during the flare. The extra speed and higher angle of attack
is required to produce enough lift. This being said, keep an eye on
your runway length required if you intend on using low or no flap
settings.
Remember that there are some cracks that Vans is tracking in the RV8
series horizontal stabilizers. Some owners are finding this but most are
not. Be sure to take into account the stress that the stabilizer will
see. It is an inverted wing and has stresses as such during all phases
of flight.
I am building a bush caddy L164 for the bush in Alaska. Slow flying
bird with huge amounts of lift. The takeoff run at a max gross of 2550
is just 200 feet! Light takeoffs are shorter.
On Feb 26, 2014, at 8:35 PM, Dick & Vicki Sipp
wrote:
> An item that has not been mentioned so far is the flap position for
landing.
>
> With a forward cg (solo or two light front seat passengers) a half
flap landing can be more comfortable, full up trim probably not required
in this configuration.
>
> I use full flaps on landing 95% of the time. I always have 15 lbs. or
so in the back of the baggage compartment. This does require (in my
airplane) full up trim and about 2-3 pounds aft stick pressure to hold
65-70 KIAS on final. Full aft stick on roll out to hold the nose off
does not require unusual aft pressure.
>
> I rigged the elevator as best I could to the factory spec limits.
Standard 4 point harness, no crotch strap (control stop is limiting). I
have always felt a concern for any airplane that had something limiting
the controls other than the design stops (i.e. panel or other
obstruction). All of the airplanes will be different to a degree based
on empty CG.
>
> Oh, on takeoff like Van says, I use half flap on all the RVs. It=92s
cool to get off the runway before anybody else accept the Alaska bush
guys.
>
>
> Dick Sipp
> RV4 750 hours sold
> RV12 50 hours built for friend
> RV10 530 hours and counting
>
>
>
> From: David Clifford
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 11:19 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Elevator Limits
>
> Mine were adjusted per plans when I built. I am in Phase 1 testing
and found last week when I was loaded up forward CG, I had trouble
getting the nose up in the landing flair. I used full up elevator trim
to help but still landed three point. Part of the reason is I have
short legs and like the seat track pin in the third position aft of
front. With the big rotary knob on the Crow seat belt harness, the
stick grip hits that first and can not go to the full aft stop limit. I
adjusted the control tube for more nose up authority in this position
however I am going to come up with pedal extensions to get the seat
further back.
>
> From: "Sean Stephens" <sean(at)stephensville.com>
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 10:49:11 PM
> Subject: RV10-List: Elevator Limits
>
>
> I'm in the process of adjusting my pushrods and elevator stops for
panel
> clearance and travel limits. I've reviewed all the archived posts on
> adding stops and other techniques for getting panel clearance. I
think
> I have a good handle on that.
>
> What I was curious about is the travel limits of the elevator. In
> particular the elevator up limits. I assume that because of the nose
> heavy aspect of the RV-10 that one would want to make sure that the up
> travel limit of the elevator is at the higher end of the limits? I'm
> imagining that with the loading at the forward most CG you'd want max
> throw there for landing flare?
>
> I know I am going to have to add a stop to prevent panel interference,
> but as that only effects the down travel, as long as I am at or above
> the elevator down limit of 20 degrees I should be fine? I'm imagining
> the down limit being important for stall recovery and with the
> relatively easy stall recovery of the rv-10 that the lower limit of 20
> degrees is ok?
>
> So long story short, is it better to be at the higher side of the up
> elevator limits and ok to be at the lower side of the down limits?
>
> -Sean #40303 (light at the end of the tunnel phase)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics
.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Clifford <davidsoutpost(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator Limits |
No Kidding. This is phase one TESTING!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Justin Jones" <jmjones2000(at)mindspring.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 11:57:04 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Elevator Limits
Has anyone looked at adding ballast back by the tail? or how about moving the battery
further aft? Seems that this issue can also be remedied with a further
aft CG. Even a LB or two ballast in the tail can make a HUGE difference! Obviously
do the W&B calculations, but you may be able to add a negligible amount of
weight to the airframe in the tail section and make it work for you. I am sure
it has much more docile handling when the CG is further aft.
Safe flying!
On Feb 26, 2014, at 7:19 PM, David Clifford < davidsoutpost(at)comcast.net > wrote:
Mine were adjusted per plans when I built. I am in Phase 1 testing and found last
week when I was loaded up forward CG, I had trouble getting the nose up in
the landing flair. I used full up elevator trim to help but still landed three
point. Part of the reason is I have short legs and like the seat track pin in
the third position aft of front. With the big rotary knob on the Crow seat belt
harness, the stick grip hits that first and can not go to the full aft stop
limit. I adjusted the control tube for more nose up authority in this position
however I am going to come up with pedal extensions to get the seat further
back.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sean Stephens" < sean(at)stephensville.com >
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 10:49:11 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Elevator Limits
I'm in the process of adjusting my pushrods and elevator stops for panel
clearance and travel limits. I've reviewed all the archived posts on
adding stops and other techniques for getting panel clearance. I think
I have a good handle on that.
What I was curious about is the travel limits of the elevator. In
particular the elevator up limits. I assume that because of the nose
heavy aspect of the RV-10 that one would want to make sure that the up
travel limit of the elevator is at the higher end of the limits? I'm
imagining that with the loading at the forward most CG you'd want max
throw there for landing flare?
I know I am going to have to add a stop to prevent panel interference,
but as that only effects the down travel, as long as I am at or above
the elevator down limit of 20 degrees I should be fine? I'm imagining
the down limit being important for stall recovery and with the
relatively easy stall recovery of the rv-10 that the lower limit of 20
degrees is ok?
So long story short, is it better to be at the higher side of the up
elevator limits and ok to be at the lower side of the down limits?
-Sean #40303 (light at the end of the tunnel phase)
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Elevator Limits |
| From: | "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu> |
I have the seat in the second from the front notch, and aft stick is limited by
the control stop - not me or the seat belt. Anything limiting control throw is
just not acceptable to me.
I carry 20 lbs of water in the baggage area when flying solo. Doubles as emergency
supply, and easy to pour out if I take on rear seat passengers.
Always check c.g. at zero fuel. If you're at the limit at takeoff you'll be out
of limits on landing. Vans just gives you an average moment arm for the front
seats, but I calculate cg using the actual seat location.
BTW, not trimming full nose up will give you a bit more nose up elevator authority;
of course, it will take more force on the stick.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419421#419421
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator Limits |
Like so many others with custom panels, I had panel interference as
well. Why wouldn't the preferred approach be to modify the stick (or
panel) so that you have full stop to stop travel? (I know you aren't
asking this but had to say it).
Anyway, I've flown at both ends of the CG range. I have more pitch down
authority than I need in any maneuver I can imagine. With the CG at the
forward limit and full flaps, I can land, power off, with the stick at
the limit though the forces become so high that the moment I hit the
stop is hard to detect. When trimmed for final approach, pitch forces
in the flare go from light to very heavy in a nose heavy configuration.
A perfect setup in my estimation.
This was quite satisfying after flying my old Maule. In the Maule, when
forward loaded (nothing in back), it was easy to run out of pitch
authority in a power off flare. A bit of power was required to arrest a
slow and steep approach or else. Not a good situation - definitely a
dark spot in it's flying qualities. Not so in the '10. So I'd say you
need full pitch up authority.
On 2/26/2014 10:49 PM, Sean Stephens wrote:
>
> I'm in the process of adjusting my pushrods and elevator stops for
> panel clearance and travel limits. I've reviewed all the archived
> posts on adding stops and other techniques for getting panel
> clearance. I think I have a good handle on that.
>
> What I was curious about is the travel limits of the elevator. In
> particular the elevator up limits. I assume that because of the nose
> heavy aspect of the RV-10 that one would want to make sure that the up
> travel limit of the elevator is at the higher end of the limits? I'm
> imagining that with the loading at the forward most CG you'd want max
> throw there for landing flare?
>
> I know I am going to have to add a stop to prevent panel interference,
> but as that only effects the down travel, as long as I am at or above
> the elevator down limit of 20 degrees I should be fine? I'm imagining
> the down limit being important for stall recovery and with the
> relatively easy stall recovery of the rv-10 that the lower limit of 20
> degrees is ok?
>
> So long story short, is it better to be at the higher side of the up
> elevator limits and ok to be at the lower side of the down limits?
>
> -Sean #40303 (light at the end of the tunnel phase)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Linn Walters <flying-nut(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator Limits |
Since I'm still building my comment may not be -10 specific. I agree
with Bill .... how many of us need full forward stick (panel or no
panel)? I hope none of us will try an outside loop or fly inverted in
an airplane that's */_not_/* certified for aerobatics. Bending the
stick so it can hit the forward stop instead of the panel has been
discussed here before. But why do that??? Heavy nose is a reality so
why not move that 'unusable down travel' to the up travel, keeping the
full range of elevator travel? What, if any, downsides are there when
doing that??? I have to admit to using all the available stick motion
in my Pitts but I don't plan on flying my -10 like that!!!! ;-)
Linn
On 2/27/2014 7:52 AM, Bill Watson wrote:
>
> Like so many others with custom panels, I had panel interference as
> well. Why wouldn't the preferred approach be to modify the stick (or
> panel) so that you have full stop to stop travel? (I know you aren't
> asking this but had to say it).
>
> Anyway, I've flown at both ends of the CG range. I have more pitch
> down authority than I need in any maneuver I can imagine. With the CG
> at the forward limit and full flaps, I can land, power off, with the
> stick at the limit though the forces become so high that the moment I
> hit the stop is hard to detect. When trimmed for final approach,
> pitch forces in the flare go from light to very heavy in a nose heavy
> configuration. A perfect setup in my estimation.
>
> This was quite satisfying after flying my old Maule. In the Maule,
> when forward loaded (nothing in back), it was easy to run out of pitch
> authority in a power off flare. A bit of power was required to arrest
> a slow and steep approach or else. Not a good situation - definitely
> a dark spot in it's flying qualities. Not so in the '10. So I'd say
> you need full pitch up authority.
>
> On 2/26/2014 10:49 PM, Sean Stephens wrote:
>>
>> I'm in the process of adjusting my pushrods and elevator stops for
>> panel clearance and travel limits. I've reviewed all the archived
>> posts on adding stops and other techniques for getting panel
>> clearance. I think I have a good handle on that.
>>
>> What I was curious about is the travel limits of the elevator. In
>> particular the elevator up limits. I assume that because of the nose
>> heavy aspect of the RV-10 that one would want to make sure that the
>> up travel limit of the elevator is at the higher end of the limits?
>> I'm imagining that with the loading at the forward most CG you'd want
>> max throw there for landing flare?
>>
>> I know I am going to have to add a stop to prevent panel
>> interference, but as that only effects the down travel, as long as I
>> am at or above the elevator down limit of 20 degrees I should be
>> fine? I'm imagining the down limit being important for stall
>> recovery and with the relatively easy stall recovery of the rv-10
>> that the lower limit of 20 degrees is ok?
>>
>> So long story short, is it better to be at the higher side of the up
>> elevator limits and ok to be at the lower side of the down limits?
>>
>> -Sean #40303 (light at the end of the tunnel phase)
>>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Elevator Limits |
| From: | "johngoodman" <johngoodman(at)earthlink.net> |
The more ballast in the baggage compartment, the better mine flies; but there is
a limit, of course. I have started using half flaps for landing and it is much
better than full flaps - when it comes to trim & stick issues. More importantly,
if you have to do a go-around, you're not frantically trimming like you
would with full flaps.
But back to the original issue. I would not "bend" the stick. Make the panel clear
the stick, first. Then do what you have to do with the elevator stop to make
it so. You will never use the forward limit, but that panicky near-miss could
find you pushing the stick under the panel; you don't want it caught.
John
--------
#40572 Phase One complete in 2011
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419433#419433
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fwd: B: Stolen Avionics |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
From Beech list:
http://tinyurl.com/md9rjc6
is shorter link to listing below
Saw this on Ebay, hope they catch the bastard.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stolen-Garmin-430-Reward-g430-g530-avionics-theft-in-houston-/291079776984?pt=Motors_Aviation_Parts_Gear&hash=item43c5b4ead8&vxp=mtr#ht_525wt_1357
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Linn Walters <flying-nut(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: B: Stolen Avionics |
I hope the guy catches the perp first! His posting on Ebay beggs the
question .... is there an aviation-related web site that's like Angies
list??? We aviators really need a single place to go to search for
shoddy work, bad service, bad parts etc. ..... and even kudos if warranted.
Linn
On 2/27/2014 9:53 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
>
> From Beech list:
> http://tinyurl.com/md9rjc6
> is shorter link to listing below
>
>
> Saw this on Ebay, hope they catch the bastard.
>
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stolen-Garmin-430-Reward-g430-g530-avionics-theft-in-houston-/291079776984?pt=Motors_Aviation_Parts_Gear&hash=item43c5b4ead8&vxp=mtr#ht_525wt_1357
>
>
> --
>
> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>
>
> --
>
> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
> *
>
>
> *
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator Limits |
Just to be clear, I am in favor of bending the stick or modifying the
panel so that the full down stop can be hit without any interference.
While I don't see a situation where that is needed, I'd prefer to have
the throw as specified in the design.
Bending the stick (which I did) is a simple solution to retaining full
throw, which I find very acceptable.
Panel modification, the root cause of this issue, is also an acceptable
solution.
Panel interference at the forward limit is unacceptable.
But all of that is just my thinking and not necessarily well informed
thinking.
On 2/27/2014 7:52 AM, Bill Watson wrote:
>
> Like so many others with custom panels, I had panel interference as
> well. Why wouldn't the preferred approach be to modify the stick (or
> panel) so that you have full stop to stop travel? (I know you aren't
> asking this but had to say it).
>
> Anyway, I've flown at both ends of the CG range. I have more pitch
> down authority than I need in any maneuver I can imagine. With the CG
> at the forward limit and full flaps, I can land, power off, with the
> stick at the limit though the forces become so high that the moment I
> hit the stop is hard to detect. When trimmed for final approach,
> pitch forces in the flare go from light to very heavy in a nose heavy
> configuration. A perfect setup in my estimation.
>
> This was quite satisfying after flying my old Maule. In the Maule,
> when forward loaded (nothing in back), it was easy to run out of pitch
> authority in a power off flare. A bit of power was required to arrest
> a slow and steep approach or else. Not a good situation - definitely
> a dark spot in it's flying qualities. Not so in the '10. So I'd say
> you need full pitch up authority.
>
> On 2/26/2014 10:49 PM, Sean Stephens wrote:
>>
>> I'm in the process of adjusting my pushrods and elevator stops for
>> panel clearance and travel limits. I've reviewed all the archived
>> posts on adding stops and other techniques for getting panel
>> clearance. I think I have a good handle on that.
>>
>> What I was curious about is the travel limits of the elevator. In
>> particular the elevator up limits. I assume that because of the nose
>> heavy aspect of the RV-10 that one would want to make sure that the
>> up travel limit of the elevator is at the higher end of the limits?
>> I'm imagining that with the loading at the forward most CG you'd want
>> max throw there for landing flare?
>>
>> I know I am going to have to add a stop to prevent panel
>> interference, but as that only effects the down travel, as long as I
>> am at or above the elevator down limit of 20 degrees I should be
>> fine? I'm imagining the down limit being important for stall
>> recovery and with the relatively easy stall recovery of the rv-10
>> that the lower limit of 20 degrees is ok?
>>
>> So long story short, is it better to be at the higher side of the up
>> elevator limits and ok to be at the lower side of the down limits?
>>
>> -Sean #40303 (light at the end of the tunnel phase)
>>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sean Stephens <sean(at)stephensville.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator Limits |
Just to be clear. When I speak of adding stops I am not meaning adding
stops to throw it under the Vans min spec'd degrees.
As far as bending the sticks, I tried that and ended up with the sticks
too far in my and the co-pilots lap when full aft. That presented other
issues like hitting the trim hat switch with my stomach. Not a desired
event when in full flare for landing.
So, lets say I was able to achieve 30 degrees up and 20 degrees down on
the elevator. Both within specs. Up at max and down at min. Full
panel clearance. Sounds like that is ok for the way the -10 handles.
> Bill Watson
> February 27, 2014 at 9:15 AM
>
> Just to be clear, I am in favor of bending the stick or modifying the
> panel so that the full down stop can be hit without any interference.
> While I don't see a situation where that is needed, I'd prefer to have
> the throw as specified in the design.
>
> Bending the stick (which I did) is a simple solution to retaining full
> throw, which I find very acceptable.
>
> Panel modification, the root cause of this issue, is also an
> acceptable solution.
>
> Panel interference at the forward limit is unacceptable.
>
> But all of that is just my thinking and not necessarily well informed
> thinking.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator Limits |
Yep, I'd say so based on my 400 hours so far.
On 2/27/2014 10:32 AM, Sean Stephens wrote:
>
> Just to be clear. When I speak of adding stops I am not meaning
> adding stops to throw it under the Vans min spec'd degrees.
>
> As far as bending the sticks, I tried that and ended up with the
> sticks too far in my and the co-pilots lap when full aft. That
> presented other issues like hitting the trim hat switch with my
> stomach. Not a desired event when in full flare for landing.
>
> So, lets say I was able to achieve 30 degrees up and 20 degrees down
> on the elevator. Both within specs. Up at max and down at min. Full
> panel clearance. Sounds like that is ok for the way the -10 handles.
>
>
>> Bill Watson
>> February 27, 2014 at 9:15 AM
>>
>> Just to be clear, I am in favor of bending the stick or modifying the
>> panel so that the full down stop can be hit without any
>> interference. While I don't see a situation where that is needed,
>> I'd prefer to have the throw as specified in the design.
>>
>> Bending the stick (which I did) is a simple solution to retaining
>> full throw, which I find very acceptable.
>>
>> Panel modification, the root cause of this issue, is also an
>> acceptable solution.
>>
>> Panel interference at the forward limit is unacceptable.
>>
>> But all of that is just my thinking and not necessarily well informed
>> thinking.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: B: Stolen Avionics |
My understanding is that a smart crook will swap the stolen radios into
another plane, then sell the radios with the unsuspected serial numbers.
No one suspects anything til the other owner has a reason to check his
serial numbers.
I'm not sure how to circumvent that without having to document the entire
chain of custody. Maybe a software update would alert the buyer.
I had radios stolen from a borrowed Bonanza early in my flying career.
They took the cans and connectors too, just cut all the wires and left the
spaghetti hanging. Made me ill.
Dave Saylor
831-750-0284 CL
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
>
> From Beech list:
> http://tinyurl.com/md9rjc6
> is shorter link to listing below
>
>
> Saw this on Ebay, hope they catch the bastard.
>
>
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stolen-Garmin-430-Reward-g430-g530-avionics-theft-in-houston-/291079776984?pt=Motors_Aviation_Parts_Gear&hash=item43c5b4ead8&vxp=mtr#ht_525wt_1357
>
>
> --
>
> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>
>
> --
>
> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: B: Stolen Avionics |
| From: | Phillip Perry <philperry9(at)gmail.com> |
Yeah, in total they had 3 aircraft broken into that night. Two of them
belonged to a flight school.
EYQ is really easy access for anyone looking for trouble. Right on a main
highway, easy to get into and out of, dark and unpopulated at night. It's
an easy target.
Phil
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Dave Saylor <
dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com> wrote:
> My understanding is that a smart crook will swap the stolen radios into
> another plane, then sell the radios with the unsuspected serial numbers.
> No one suspects anything til the other owner has a reason to check his
> serial numbers.
>
> I'm not sure how to circumvent that without having to document the entire
> chain of custody. Maybe a software update would alert the buyer.
>
> I had radios stolen from a borrowed Bonanza early in my flying career.
> They took the cans and connectors too, just cut all the wires and left the
> spaghetti hanging. Made me ill.
>
>
> Dave Saylor
> 831-750-0284 CL
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> From Beech list:
>> http://tinyurl.com/md9rjc6
>> is shorter link to listing below
>>
>>
>>
>> Saw this on Ebay, hope they catch the bastard.
>>
>>
>> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stolen-Garmin-430-Reward-g430-g530-avionics-theft-in-houston-/291079776984?pt=Motors_Aviation_Parts_Gear&hash=item43c5b4ead8&vxp=mtr#ht_525wt_1357
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>>
>> *
>>
>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> tp://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>> *
>>
>>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Leffler <rv(at)thelefflers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: B: Stolen Avionics |
Garmin has made that more difficult with the 600 series, since the databases
are encrypted with a key in the dongle in one of the connectors. If the u
nits are swapped, it will be obvious the first time they are powered on
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 27, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Dave Saylor
wrote:
My understanding is that a smart crook will swap the stolen radios into anot
her plane, then sell the radios with the unsuspected serial numbers. No one
suspects anything til the other owner has a reason to check his serial numb
ers.
I'm not sure how to circumvent that without having to document the entire ch
ain of custody. Maybe a software update would alert the buyer.
I had radios stolen from a borrowed Bonanza early in my flying career. They
took the cans and connectors too, just cut all the wires and left the spagh
etti hanging. Made me ill.
Dave Saylor
831-750-0284 CL
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
>
> =46rom Beech list:
> http://tinyurl.com/md9rjc6
> is shorter link to listing below
>
>
>
> Saw this on Ebay, hope they catch the bastard.
>
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stolen-Garmin-430-Reward-g430-g530-avionics-theft-
in-houston-/291079776984?pt=Motors_Aviation_Parts_Gear&hash=item43c5b4ea
d8&vxp=mtr#ht_525wt_1357
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>
>
>
> --
>
> - sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
>
>
> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> tp://forums.matronics.com
> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Cabin doors fitting problem |
| From: | "bob88" <marty.crooks(at)comcast.net> |
I'm at stage I of cabin door fitting and have a larger than specified gap varying
from 1/4 inch to 3/8 inch (widest along the bottom edge). When cutting the
cabin cover I followed the scribe lines as best I could but apparently took off
a bit too much. Is this a lethal problem? Should I try to build up the cabin
cover door jamb with epoxy and glass? Will wider insulation eventually solve
the problem? I'd definitely appreciate some thoughts on this from someone who
may have had a similar problem.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419479#419479
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Linn Walters <flying-nut(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator Limits |
On 2/27/2014 9:21 AM, johngoodman wrote:
>
> The more ballast in the baggage compartment, the better mine flies; but there
is a limit, of course. I have started using half flaps for landing and it is
much better than full flaps - when it comes to trim & stick issues. More importantly,
if you have to do a go-around, you're not frantically trimming like you
would with full flaps.
> But back to the original issue. I would not "bend" the stick. Make the panel
clear the stick, first. Then do what you have to do with the elevator stop to
make it so. You will never use the forward limit, but that panicky near-miss could
find you pushing the stick under the panel; you don't want it caught.
Which causes me to wonder why we don't shift the full elevator movement
towards the up or aft limit instead of modifying everything ....
That seems so simple to me.
Linn
>
> John
>
> --------
> #40572 Phase One complete in 2011
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419433#419433
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cabin doors fitting problem |
| From: | Tcwtech <rnewman(at)tcwtech.com> |
My scribe lines were way off too. Resulting in wide and varied gaps. After fitting
up the doors I went back and used layers if duct tape to mould the shape
of the missing door sill area, then filled in the missing area not only with
epoxy with adhesive filler but added strands of fiberglass cloth. I took some
cloth and pulled it apart to harvest long strands. I used the long strands
to line the mould area. After the build up of the missing door sill, reshape
and trim as needed.
Bob Newman
N541RV
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 28, 2014, at 2:01 AM, "bob88" wrote:
>
> I'm at stage I of cabin door fitting and have a larger than specified gap varying
from 1/4 inch to 3/8 inch (widest along the bottom edge). When cutting the
cabin cover I followed the scribe lines as best I could but apparently took
off a bit too much. Is this a lethal problem? Should I try to build up the cabin
cover door jamb with epoxy and glass? Will wider insulation eventually solve
the problem? I'd definitely appreciate some thoughts on this from someone who
may have had a similar problem.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419479#419479
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Saylor <dave.saylor.aircrafters(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cabin doors fitting problem |
3/8" along the bottom is fine, maybe even a little on the narrow side. A
lot of them get trimmed so the bottom of the opening just forms an L,
without any part of the lower edge returning back towards the door. That
leaves a little more than 3/8.
The rest of the opening formed by the cabin frame should ideally be trimmed
to allow for whatever door seal you choose. In some cases it's as small as
1/16. But you can use 3/8" foam seal that will very nicely close up a 1/4"
gap.
A couple points to consider:
The channel formed by the frame serves as a water gutter, so if too much is
removed you'll lose that function. Foam seal on the door will work the
same way but only when the door is closed.
I *think* the door frame serves a significant structural function. I don't
have any engineering data to back that up but Vans has warned me not to
drill holes for sun visors (did it anyway) or to remove too much
material...but I can't tell you how much is too much. If you have enough
material to form a water channel then you should be fine.
Dave Saylor
831-750-0284 CL
=8BN921AC 1300+ hrs=8B
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 11:01 PM, bob88 wrote:
>
> I'm at stage I of cabin door fitting and have a larger than specified gap
> varying from 1/4 inch to 3/8 inch (widest along the bottom edge). When
> cutting the cabin cover I followed the scribe lines as best I could but
> apparently took off a bit too much. Is this a lethal problem? Should I tr
y
> to build up the cabin cover door jamb with epoxy and glass? Will wider
> insulation eventually solve the problem? I'd definitely appreciate some
> thoughts on this from someone who may have had a similar problem.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419479#419479
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Berck E. Nash" <flyboy(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Greetings ... and minimalist priming questions. |
Hi there. I've just started on an RV-10 and have a few questions that
searching has not yielded answers to. I know everyone loves priming
questions, but I really have tried to search for the answers first.
I've decided to only prime things that absolutely must be primed, but
I'm having trouble figuring out which things those are. I've read in
some places that "mating surfaces" must be primed. Is that all mating
surfaces? Everywhere a skin touches a rib? Or is this just mating
surfaces where one of the parts is not alclad?
Is everything that isn't alclad obviously not alclad? For instance, the
VS-1014 spar caps look different from most of the sheet metal. Is it
alclad? Does it need to be primed? Or should it be primed anyway
because it sits on top of the VS rear spar?
What about the edges of everything? Clearly there's no alclad there...
should I be worried about that? I really don't want to prime where it's
not necessary (time, weight, and the aircraft is going to be in Colorado
where nothing ever corrodes), but finding guidance for what's required
is tough.
Thanks,
Berck
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Archer wingtip antenna |
| From: | "woxofswa" <woxof(at)aol.com> |
The Archer instructions say to mount the Ant as far forward as possible, but I
am concerned about interference from the heat shield foil around the landing
light area.
Any suggestions appreciated.
TIA
--------
Myron Nelson
Mesa, AZ
Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. FWF complete.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419544#419544
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Archer wingtip antenna |
| From: | Bob Condrey <condreyb(at)gmail.com> |
When I did mine I had the same concern and talked with Bob A. - he said
close but not touching. I had about a 1/8" to 1/4" gap as I recall. Also
important, route the wiring along the leading edge as directed. His nav
antennas are great when installed exactly per directions!
Bob
On Saturday, March 1, 2014, woxofswa wrote:
>
> The Archer instructions say to mount the Ant as far forward as possible,
> but I am concerned about interference from the heat shield foil around the
> landing light area.
> Any suggestions appreciated.
> TIA
>
> --------
> Myron Nelson
> Mesa, AZ
> Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. FWF
> complete.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419544#419544
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Greetings ... and minimalist priming questions. |
| From: | Bob Condrey <condreyb(at)gmail.com> |
Minimal is to prime only the non-alclad aluminum. The limits priming to
parts you make from the extruded angle and stock. Skins, ribs and the
stamped out parts are all alclad. Don't worry about the edges.
Bob
On Saturday, March 1, 2014, Berck E. Nash wrote:
> >
>
> Hi there. I've just started on an RV-10 and have a few questions that
> searching has not yielded answers to. I know everyone loves priming
> questions, but I really have tried to search for the answers first.
>
> I've decided to only prime things that absolutely must be primed, but
> I'm having trouble figuring out which things those are. I've read in
> some places that "mating surfaces" must be primed. Is that all mating
> surfaces? Everywhere a skin touches a rib? Or is this just mating
> surfaces where one of the parts is not alclad?
>
> Is everything that isn't alclad obviously not alclad? For instance, the
> VS-1014 spar caps look different from most of the sheet metal. Is it
> alclad? Does it need to be primed? Or should it be primed anyway
> because it sits on top of the VS rear spar?
>
> What about the edges of everything? Clearly there's no alclad there...
> should I be worried about that? I really don't want to prime where it's
> not necessary (time, weight, and the aircraft is going to be in Colorado
> where nothing ever corrodes), but finding guidance for what's required
> is tough.
>
> Thanks,
> Berck
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Greetings ... and minimalist priming questions. |
If you going to go to the trouble of priming all those hard to prime
non-alclad parts then prime everything. The additional work is minimal
considering the total build. The other consideration is even if you
don=99t view the need to prime at some point you may want to sell
and this may make a difference to the new buyer.
I never thought I would sell my RV-8A =93 but it is now flying
with a happy new owner.
Carl
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Condrey
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 7:09 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Greetings ... and minimalist priming questions.
Minimal is to prime only the non-alclad aluminum. The limits priming to
parts you make from the extruded angle and stock. Skins, ribs and the
stamped out parts are all alclad. Don't worry about the edges.
Bob
On Saturday, March 1, 2014, Berck E. Nash wrote:
>
Hi there. I've just started on an RV-10 and have a few questions that
searching has not yielded answers to. I know everyone loves priming
questions, but I really have tried to search for the answers first.
I've decided to only prime things that absolutely must be primed, but
I'm having trouble figuring out which things those are. I've read in
some places that "mating surfaces" must be primed. Is that all mating
surfaces? Everywhere a skin touches a rib? Or is this just mating
surfaces where one of the parts is not alclad?
Is everything that isn't alclad obviously not alclad? For instance, the
VS-1014 spar caps look different from most of the sheet metal. Is it
alclad? Does it need to be primed? Or should it be primed anyway
because it sits on top of the VS rear spar?
What about the edges of everything? Clearly there's no alclad there...
should I be worried about that? I really don't want to prime where it's
not necessary (time, weight, and the aircraft is going to be in Colorado
where nothing ever corrodes), but finding guidance for what's required
is tough.
Thanks,
Berck
" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
MS -
k">http://forums.matronics.com
e -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Greetings ... and minimalist priming questions. |
Oh boy, here go the primer wars!
The contrarian view is that primer just adds weight to the overall
aircraft. There are many Cessnas flying from the early 50s that had no
primer used at all.
Priming any steel that isn't already powder coated will prevent
dissimilar metal corrosion. Takes very little effort to prime extruded
aluminum parts with rattle can self etching primer. Only reason to prime
any alclad is if your scotchbrite efforts remove the alclad layer.
Mow, if you base the plane in Florida, Kalifornia and other corrosive
atmospheres, priming might be desirable. Resale would be the last reason
in my mind to do priming, since most builders are doing it to have the
plane for themselves. If you are worried about how the plane will sell
when you either quit flying or start a new project, maybe this isn't the
right project to build in the first place.
On 3/1/2014 6:41 AM, Carl Froehlich wrote:
>
> If you going to go to the trouble of priming all those hard to prime
> non-alclad parts then prime everything. The additional work is
> minimal considering the total build. The other consideration is even
> if you dont view the need to prime at some point you may want to sell
> and this may make a difference to the new buyer.
>
> I never thought I would sell my RV-8A but it is now flying with a
> happy new owner.
>
> Carl
>
> *From:*owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Bob Condrey
> *Sent:* Saturday, March 01, 2014 7:09 AM
> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Greetings ... and minimalist priming questions.
>
> Minimal is to prime only the non-alclad aluminum. The limits priming
> to parts you make from the extruded angle and stock. Skins, ribs and
> the stamped out parts are all alclad. Don't worry about the edges.
>
> Bob
>
> On Saturday, March 1, 2014, Berck E. Nash > wrote:
>
> >
>
> Hi there. I've just started on an RV-10 and have a few questions that
> searching has not yielded answers to. I know everyone loves priming
> questions, but I really have tried to search for the answers first.
>
> I've decided to only prime things that absolutely must be primed, but
> I'm having trouble figuring out which things those are. I've read in
> some places that "mating surfaces" must be primed. Is that all mating
> surfaces? Everywhere a skin touches a rib? Or is this just mating
> surfaces where one of the parts is not alclad?
>
> Is everything that isn't alclad obviously not alclad? For instance, the
> VS-1014 spar caps look different from most of the sheet metal. Is it
> alclad? Does it need to be primed? Or should it be primed anyway
> because it sits on top of the VS rear spar?
>
> What about the edges of everything? Clearly there's no alclad there...
> should I be worried about that? I really don't want to prime where it's
> not necessary (time, weight, and the aircraft is going to be in Colorado
> where nothing ever corrodes), but finding guidance for what's required
> is tough.
>
> Thanks,
> Berck
>
> ==========
> " target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> ==========
> MS -
> k">http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> e -
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
> * *
> * *
> **
> **
> **
> **
> **
> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List*
> **
> **
> *http://forums.matronics.com*
> **
> **
> **
> **
> *http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
> **
> * *
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Leikam <arplnplt(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Greetings ... and minimalist priming questions. |
I used T9-BOESHIELD on most parts and skins rather than prime. Good
protection. Penetrates very well. Can easily be applied after assembly
of parts. Just spray on and lightly wipe excess off. Little affect on
weight. Easy.
ACF-50 works the same.
http://boeshield.com
Dave Leikam
On Mar 1, 2014, at 8:25 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
> Oh boy, here go the primer wars!
> The contrarian view is that primer just adds weight to the overall
aircraft. There are many Cessnas flying from the early 50s that had no
primer used at all.
> Priming any steel that isn't already powder coated will prevent
dissimilar metal corrosion. Takes very little effort to prime extruded
aluminum parts with rattle can self etching primer. Only reason to prime
any alclad is if your scotchbrite efforts remove the alclad layer.
> Mow, if you base the plane in Florida, Kalifornia and other corrosive
atmospheres, priming might be desirable. Resale would be the last reason
in my mind to do priming, since most builders are doing it to have the
plane for themselves. If you are worried about how the plane will sell
when you either quit flying or start a new project, maybe this isn't the
right project to build in the first place.
>
> On 3/1/2014 6:41 AM, Carl Froehlich wrote:
>>
>> If you going to go to the trouble of priming all those hard to prime
non-alclad parts then prime everything. The additional work is minimal
considering the total build. The other consideration is even if you
don=92t view the need to prime at some point you may want to sell and
this may make a difference to the new buyer.
>>
>> I never thought I would sell my RV-8A ' but it is now flying with a
happy new owner.
>>
>> Carl
>>
>> *From:*owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Bob Condrey
>> *Sent:* Saturday, March 01, 2014 7:09 AM
>> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com
>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Greetings ... and minimalist priming
questions.
>>
>> Minimal is to prime only the non-alclad aluminum. The limits priming
to parts you make from the extruded angle and stock. Skins, ribs and
the stamped out parts are all alclad. Don't worry about the edges.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>> On Saturday, March 1, 2014, Berck E. Nash > wrote:
>>
>
>>
>> Hi there. I've just started on an RV-10 and have a few questions
that
>> searching has not yielded answers to. I know everyone loves priming
>> questions, but I really have tried to search for the answers first.
>>
>> I've decided to only prime things that absolutely must be primed, but
>> I'm having trouble figuring out which things those are. I've read in
>> some places that "mating surfaces" must be primed. Is that all
mating
>> surfaces? Everywhere a skin touches a rib? Or is this just mating
>> surfaces where one of the parts is not alclad?
>>
>> Is everything that isn't alclad obviously not alclad? For instance,
the
>> VS-1014 spar caps look different from most of the sheet metal. Is it
>> alclad? Does it need to be primed? Or should it be primed anyway
>> because it sits on top of the VS rear spar?
>>
>> What about the edges of everything? Clearly there's no alclad
there...
>> should I be worried about that? I really don't want to prime where
it's
>> not necessary (time, weight, and the aircraft is going to be in
Colorado
>> where nothing ever corrodes), but finding guidance for what's
required
>> is tough.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Berck
>>
>> ==========
>> " target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> ==========
>> MS -
>> k">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> e -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>>
>>
>> * *
>> * *
>> **
>> **
>> **
>> **
>> **
>> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List*
>> **
>> **
>> *http://forums.matronics.com*
>> **
>> **
>> **
>> **
>> *http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
>> **
>> * *
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | |