RV7-Archive.digest.vol-ai
June 15, 2005 - August 21, 2005
able to get a rivet in there and properly seated.
Is this normal do I possibly have a malformed/malpunched recess?
Thanks,
/\/elson
RV-7A - Fuselage
Austin, TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Walter Tondu <walter(at)tondu.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fitting the firewall recess 15, 2004) at 06/15/2005 08:10:25 |
AM, Serialize by Router on MailServ59-US/AUS/H/NIC(Release 6.5.3FP1|December
15, 2004) at 06/15/2005 08:10:26 AM, Serialize complete at 06/15/2005 08:10:26
AM
On 06/15 8:14, David E. Nelson wrote:
> Got started on the firewall and the fit of the recess is causing me fits. All
> the holes line up except the top two (#30's). I have to really bend/push/shove
> the cleco to get it in which isn't right. And there's no way I'm going to be
> able to get a rivet in there and properly seated.
>
> Is this normal do I possibly have a malformed/malpunched recess?
That's a fairly normal situation. Don't sweat it. You are going to
proseal that puppy in place anyhow. Just get it in as best as you
can. If there are small gaps, they'll be covered with the goop.
--
Walter Tondu
http://www.rv7-a.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Norman Younie <rv6capt(at)pacificcoast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: elevator counterbalance |
Use a rasp file.
Don Hall wrote:
>
>
>The plans call for a section of the counterbalance to be cut out. It was
>fun enough just drilling holes in lead. My bandsaw wasn't enjoying the job
>too much, but I suppose it'll work if I keep at it. But I wonder if there
>is an easier way... Any tips on the best tools for cutting out a section of
>lead and then shaping a radius into a corner?
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Meyette" <brianpublic(at)starband.net> |
| Subject: | Fitting the firewall recess 15, 2004) at 06/15/2005 08:10:25 |
AM, Serialize by Router on MailServ59-US/AUS/H/NIC(Release 6.5.3FP1|December
15, 2004) at 06/15/2005 08:10:26 AM, Serialize complete at 06/15/2005 08:10:26
AM
clamav-milter version 0.80j
on apophis.email.starband.net
Pro-seal?? Uh-oh Guess I missed that part - I just riveted mine in.
Well, I guess I'll have to just apply it around the edges from the inside.
brian
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Walter Tondu
Subject: Re: RV7-List: Fitting the firewall recess 15, 2004) at 06/15/2005
08:10:25 AM, Serialize by Router on MailServ59-US/AUS/H/NIC(Release
6.5.3FP1|December 15, 2004) at 06/15/2005 08:10:26 AM, Serialize complete at
06/15/2005 08:10:26 AM
On 06/15 8:14, David E. Nelson wrote:
> Got started on the firewall and the fit of the recess is causing me fits.
All
> the holes line up except the top two (#30's). I have to really
bend/push/shove
> the cleco to get it in which isn't right. And there's no way I'm going
to be
> able to get a rivet in there and properly seated.
>
> Is this normal do I possibly have a malformed/malpunched recess?
That's a fairly normal situation. Don't sweat it. You are going to
proseal that puppy in place anyhow. Just get it in as best as you
can. If there are small gaps, they'll be covered with the goop.
--
Walter Tondu
http://www.rv7-a.com
--
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Near" <bnjn(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dimple Problem |
While dimpling one of the skins on my QB wings, my son who has manning the
hammer while I manipulated the skin hit the dimpler before I was ready and
left a malpositioned dimple and hole. I did what everybody else has done,
tried to flatten it as best I could and then moved on. In twenty years, I
will look at that hole and praise God I was able to build an airplane with
my son.
Bill Near-Wiring
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Cook" <Dugcook(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: RV7-List: Dimple Problem
>
> Norm, I did the same thing on my HS. I smacked the booboo flat and
> re-dimpled. After everything was done, you can hardly tell.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel Storer" <dstorer(at)okwifi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: elevator counterbalance |
I second that warning! I also took off what the print said and it was too
light, and had to add some back. I wonder if the paint job will effect the
final balance of the elevator to the point of having to remove material?
Any words of wisdom from those completed RV's?
I used my band saw with a wood hook blade (6 teeth per inch) and several
relief cuts perpendicular to the direction of cut, and hand filed it smooth.
It worked like a champ just take your time.
Dan Storer
7A Oklahoma City
Wings
-------Original Message-------
From: Don Patterson
Date: 06/15/05 06:56:18
Subject: Re: RV7-List: elevator counterbalance
I used a band saw but used some lube on the blade. Watch how much you
remove... I followed the print and found later that I needed to add more
lead.
Don Patterson
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: RV7-List: elevator counterbalance
>
> You can use a chisel on lead. Sometimes even a razor blade.
>
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Don Hall" <dhall(at)donka.net>
> To:
> Subject: RV7-List: elevator counterbalance
>
>
> >
> >
> > The plans call for a section of the counterbalance to be cut out. It
was
> > fun enough just drilling holes in lead. My bandsaw wasn't enjoying the
> job
> > too much, but I suppose it'll work if I keep at it. But I wonder if
there
> > is an easier way... Any tips on the best tools for cutting out a
section
> of
> > lead and then shaping a radius into a corner?
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | al.herron(at)Aerojet.com (Herron, Al) |
| Subject: | Re: elevator counterbalance |
I was also surprised at how difficult it was to cut a soft metal like
lead. The problem is that the soft lead loads up the fine teeth of a
blade designed for harder metals and you wind up just polishing the
bottom of the cut. I solved the problem by using a cross-cut hand saw
for wood, took bigger "bites" out of the lead and cleared the chips
better. I just made two cuts, at 90 degrees, to near where the radius
needed to be. Then I used a sharp 1/4-inch wood chisel to cut out the
waste area, and a coarse round file to form the fillet. Kind of brute
force but it worked. In retrospect, a coping saw with a wood-cutting
blade might have been a more elegant solution. A wood-cutting blade in
your band saw at slow speed might also work.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | elevator counterbalance |
| From: | "Jim Robinette" <jim(at)rvator.net> |
Like Al said, I was surprised how difficult it was to cut lead, but
pleasantly surprised how easy it was to countersink the lead. Actually
used my Avery deburr tool and it worked quick and easy.
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Herron, Al
Subject: Re: RV7-List: elevator counterbalance
I was also surprised at how difficult it was to cut a soft metal like
lead. The problem is that the soft lead loads up the fine teeth of a
blade designed for harder metals and you wind up just polishing the
bottom of the cut. I solved the problem by using a cross-cut hand saw
for wood, took bigger "bites" out of the lead and cleared the chips
better. I just made two cuts, at 90 degrees, to near where the radius
needed to be. Then I used a sharp 1/4-inch wood chisel to cut out the
waste area, and a coarse round file to form the fillet. Kind of brute
force but it worked. In retrospect, a coping saw with a wood-cutting
blade might have been a more elegant solution. A wood-cutting blade in
your band saw at slow speed might also work.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Hall" <dhall(at)donka.net> |
| Subject: | elevator counterbalance |
Well, thanks for all the advice everyone! It's great to not to hear my echo
when I yell for help.
Anyway, I actually made it to the basement tonight without discovering any
more tools I needed, so I guess email fills that gap. I haven't yet added
rat tails or T7's to my growing tool collection, but I did spray the heck
out of my bandsaw with wd40 and what a difference.
No WD40: blade goes for 2 seconds and grabs the lead.
With Wd40: cuts like butter.
I wouldn't call the cut pretty but it somewhat resembles the drawing. I
tried to leave it a little thicker than the drawing.
(The drawing does say that the cut is about what you'd expect to need after
adding paint, so I won't worry that I've cut too much for another 2-3
years...)
***************************
Don Hall
N517DG (registered)
rv7 empennage
***************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: elevator counterbalance |
Herron, Al wrote:
>
>I was also surprised at how difficult it was to cut a soft metal like
>lead. The problem is that the soft lead loads up the fine teeth of a
>blade designed for harder metals and you wind up just polishing the
>bottom of the cut. I solved the problem by using a cross-cut hand saw
>for wood, took bigger "bites" out of the lead and cleared the chips
>better. I just made two cuts, at 90 degrees, to near where the radius
>needed to be. Then I used a sharp 1/4-inch wood chisel to cut out the
>waste area, and a coarse round file to form the fillet. Kind of brute
>force but it worked. In retrospect, a coping saw with a wood-cutting
>blade might have been a more elegant solution. A wood-cutting blade in
>your band saw at slow speed might also work.
>
I'm pretty sure no one will like this, but a table saw cuts them like
butter. Just secure it to a wood block big enough to keep your hands
away from the blade & feed it slow. 2 cuts 90 degrees apart & you are
done, with a slab left to put back after you discover you removed too much.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cory Emberson" <bootless(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Dan Checkoway's First Article in Kitplanes Magazine |
Hi Dan and all...
Just got my new (August) copy of Kitplanes magazine, and lo and behold,
there's the first in a series by Dan Checkoway ("Made in Metal" - Build Your
Skills series)! Way to go, Dan!
best, Cory
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Henry Hore ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Henry Hore <elsa-henry@darlor-watch.com>
Lists: RV-List,RV6-List,RV7-List,RV8-List,RV9-List
Subject: Leveling RV6-A Fuselage
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/elsa-henry@darlor-watch.com.06.18.2005/index.html
o Main Photo Share Index
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
o Submitting a Photo Share
If you wish to submit a Photo Share of your own, please include the
following information along with your email message and files:
1) Email List or Lists that they are related to:
2) Your Full Name:
3) Your Email Address:
4) One line Subject description:
5) Multi-line, multi-paragraph description of topic:
6) One-line Description of each photo or file:
Email the information above and your files and photos to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Oshkosh Get-together |
Wednesday July 27, 2005
Beginning at 6 p.m.
Camp Scholler
Back in 2003, we started the annual tradition of a get-together of RV7/7A
builders at some point during Oshkosh (AirVenture). It lasted one year
because the 2004 confab coincided with the Democratic National Convention in
Boston and covering that sort of stuff is what I do for a living. But the
get-together is back and this is your not-so-formal invitation to show up
anytime between 6 p.m. and 10 p.m.
When we did this a few years ago, we had about 20 people show up and it was
a fabulous time even though our meek little camp barbecue grill was way too
small, and a single campsite didn't allow us to spread out with the sort of
luxury and elbow room RV7/7A builders deserve. This year will be different.
Hope to see you there. Click the link for more particulars.
http://home.comcast.net/~bcollinsrv7a/eaa/
Bob
St. Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Merems" <merems(at)cox.net> |
"RV10 Group" ,
| Subject: | Paper or Plastic-A warning about primers |
Fellow builders,
Please take the time to read this email. I spent a bit of time writing it in the
hopes that it prevent another builder/builders from experiencing my blunder
this morning.
I will try my literary skills this morning to help entertain and educate. This
may be a little long winded but I need to vent.
Southern Arizona may sound like the great place to live. Warm winters, beautiful
sunsets, low humidity, wide open spaces and great flying weather makes this
state seem ideal. However, the summers can be another story.
At 5:30 this morning the temperature is 80 degrees and rising. The morning sun
is angling into the entrance of my shop (my garage door faces east). The temperature
is rising and I know I only have about an hour to setup and spray my primer
before Mother Nature forces me to quit for the day; I spray my primer outside
like many RV builders. You might be asking yourself why not primer late in
the day when the sun is going down or at least in the shade? Midday the temperature
is over 100, by late afternoon (when my garage casts a shadow providing
shade) the temperature is hovering around 104-106. This is way too hot to spray.
At this temp and low humidity most of the primer dries before it reaches
the parts. Not to mention the surface temperature of the parts is a bit too high.
In addition, the afternoons are a bit breezy while the mornings are pretty
calm. The mornings are the only option for me this time of year.
I proceeded to setup my 4'x8' wire mesh paint platform and drop clothes (painters
plastics) outside the entrance to my shop. I had decided to debur and prep
many of RV-7A fuselage parts so I could spray them at the same time-more efficient
I thought. I would guess that I had about 75% or more of the fuselage components
(excluding the skins) ready for primer painting. That is a very large
number of parts. It has taken a lot of time to clean and prep all these parts,
I started weeks back.
I am on my second RV. My first was an RV-4 years ago. Back then I used a wash primer
but I don't remember the brand, it was gray in color, very similar to the
Sherwin Williams (SW) wash primer. Unfortunately it was no longer available.
I decided to use the SW wash primer on my RV-7A. I used it on the empennage and
wings, but I was never happy with the results. Spitting chunks was a big problem.
I never had that problem with the old gray wash primer on my RV-4. When
I built my RV-4 I sprayed my primer using a Docken spray gun. This is a very
simple siphon gun that is similar to the Badger hobby store paint guns. It used
disposable 16 oz cups. It made cleaning up after spaying quick and easy, just
through the cup away when you were done.
As I mentioned, I was not happy with the results I was getting from the SW wash
primer. I decided to use the AKSO epoxy primer for the rest of my RV-7A project.
And since I was using a new primer, I bought a new gun (HVLP) to apply it.
Now this is where the paper or plastic fits into this long winded story.
Like the SW wash primer, the AKSO is a two component system. I had several 16 oz
cups left over from my Docken spray gun days and I have been using them for
mixing the SW wash primer prior to loading spray gun cup. These cups are wax-coated
paper cups (Dixie brand) and over 20 years old. These cups did the job,
but I was running out of them. They seemed to be the "perfect" size for the amount
of primer I was mixing.
A week ago I used the AKSO for the first time. The most significant difference
between the SW wash and the AKSO is the AKSO requires a 30 minute induction time.
This means you mix the two components and wait 30 minutes before spraying.
This gives the two components time to react with each other. The results were
great. I only had a short time to spray so I wanted to learn the behavior of
the new gun and primer to help me plan my larger primer session for this weekend.
Yesterday was a good day. I sprayed two groups of parts. By 7:30 in the morning
the temperature was approaching 90 degrees and I couldn't see through my goggles
well (yes I use a respirator). All the parts in the group were well coated
and it was time to cleanup. One more early morning primer session and all the
parts would be coated, then on to assembly, the fun stuff. So this morning I
would finish the job.
Everything was set in place; parts were on the spray platform and now it was time
to mix the paint. I have been using my Black and Decker Workmate (if you never
used one, they are great tool to have around the shop-one of my most used
tools) as a surface to mix my paints. I laid plastic over it to protect it from
any spills and it was also sitting on some plastic as well. The Workmate was
in the shop so the primers weren't exposed to the heat and sunlight.
I had used up all my 16 oz. cups the day before and I had shopped around weeks
earlier trying to find a replacement. I only found smaller paper cups available
in the local supermarkets but they had larger disposable plastic cups. So I
bought the plastic due to their size. I wanted paper but I needed the larger cup
size.
Life was good, everything was ready to primer and I mixed two batches of primer
(14 oz. each) in my new plastic cups. And off I went to work on a few other things
in the shop while I waited for the induction time (30 minutes) to pass.
After 15 minutes had passed, I went to stir the primer. I noticed one of the cups
was "sagging" a bit.
Alarm bells in my head went off immediately. I grabbed the trashcan. I knew what
was going to happen. The dam was leaking and it was about to rupture. Just as
I lifted up the trashcan the cup dissolved away. None of the primer made it
into the trashcan. Fourteen ounces of the best primer was now on the floor and
covering the base of the Workmate (the plastic covering the surface didn't extend
all the way down to the base). But I knew this was just the beginning. Within
seconds, the second cup dissolved before I could get the trashcan under it
and more epoxy made it onto the floor. Did I mention my shop floor is coated
with an epoxy (two part-water based-gray)? So now I am staring at a rather large
epoxy mess that only acetone will clean up. But acetone will also dissolve
my epoxy floor coating. Profanities flew and the odor of acetone filled the air.
All is cleaned up now. My epoxy coated floor looks chemically abused and my Workmate
base is camouflage colored and ready to report for military duty. I have
wasted precious primer and delayed my progress once again. Hopefully next Friday
I will have everything rapped up.
The moral of the story is:
When given the choice paper or plastic, choose paper.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DonVS" <dsvs(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Paper or Plastic-A warning about primers |
Paul,
As I was the one who recommended the AKZO, I guess I owe you an apology for
not warning you about its appetite for plastic. Glad to hear that
everything is well now. Don VS
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Merems
opticalprod(at)worldnet.att.net
Subject: RV7-List: Paper or Plastic-A warning about primers
Fellow builders,
Please take the time to read this email. I spent a bit of time writing it
in the hopes that it prevent another builder/builders from experiencing my
blunder this morning.
I will try my literary skills this morning to help entertain and educate.
This may be a little long winded but I need to vent.
Southern Arizona may sound like the great place to live. Warm winters,
beautiful sunsets, low humidity, wide open spaces and great flying weather
makes this state seem ideal. However, the summers can be another story.
At 5:30 this morning the temperature is 80 degrees and rising. The morning
sun is angling into the entrance of my shop (my garage door faces east). The
temperature is rising and I know I only have about an hour to setup and
spray my primer before Mother Nature forces me to quit for the day; I spray
my primer outside like many RV builders. You might be asking yourself why
not primer late in the day when the sun is going down or at least in the
shade? Midday the temperature is over 100, by late afternoon (when my garage
casts a shadow providing shade) the temperature is hovering around 104-106.
This is way too hot to spray. At this temp and low humidity most of the
primer dries before it reaches the parts. Not to mention the surface
temperature of the parts is a bit too high. In addition, the afternoons are
a bit breezy while the mornings are pretty calm. The mornings are the only
option for me this time of year.
I proceeded to setup my 4'x8' wire mesh paint platform and drop clothes
(painters plastics) outside the entrance to my shop. I had decided to debur
and prep many of RV-7A fuselage parts so I could spray them at the same
time-more efficient I thought. I would guess that I had about 75% or more of
the fuselage components (excluding the skins) ready for primer painting.
That is a very large number of parts. It has taken a lot of time to clean
and prep all these parts, I started weeks back.
I am on my second RV. My first was an RV-4 years ago. Back then I used a
wash primer but I don't remember the brand, it was gray in color, very
similar to the Sherwin Williams (SW) wash primer. Unfortunately it was no
longer available. I decided to use the SW wash primer on my RV-7A. I used it
on the empennage and wings, but I was never happy with the results. Spitting
chunks was a big problem. I never had that problem with the old gray wash
primer on my RV-4. When I built my RV-4 I sprayed my primer using a Docken
spray gun. This is a very simple siphon gun that is similar to the Badger
hobby store paint guns. It used disposable 16 oz cups. It made cleaning up
after spaying quick and easy, just through the cup away when you were done.
As I mentioned, I was not happy with the results I was getting from the SW
wash primer. I decided to use the AKSO epoxy primer for the rest of my RV-7A
project. And since I was using a new primer, I bought a new gun (HVLP) to
apply it.
Now this is where the paper or plastic fits into this long winded story.
Like the SW wash primer, the AKSO is a two component system. I had several
16 oz cups left over from my Docken spray gun days and I have been using
them for mixing the SW wash primer prior to loading spray gun cup. These
cups are wax-coated paper cups (Dixie brand) and over 20 years old. These
cups did the job, but I was running out of them. They seemed to be the
"perfect" size for the amount of primer I was mixing.
A week ago I used the AKSO for the first time. The most significant
difference between the SW wash and the AKSO is the AKSO requires a 30 minute
induction time. This means you mix the two components and wait 30 minutes
before spraying. This gives the two components time to react with each
other. The results were great. I only had a short time to spray so I wanted
to learn the behavior of the new gun and primer to help me plan my larger
primer session for this weekend.
Yesterday was a good day. I sprayed two groups of parts. By 7:30 in the
morning the temperature was approaching 90 degrees and I couldn't see
through my goggles well (yes I use a respirator). All the parts in the group
were well coated and it was time to cleanup. One more early morning primer
session and all the parts would be coated, then on to assembly, the fun
stuff. So this morning I would finish the job.
Everything was set in place; parts were on the spray platform and now it was
time to mix the paint. I have been using my Black and Decker Workmate (if
you never used one, they are great tool to have around the shop-one of my
most used tools) as a surface to mix my paints. I laid plastic over it to
protect it from any spills and it was also sitting on some plastic as well.
The Workmate was in the shop so the primers weren't exposed to the heat and
sunlight.
I had used up all my 16 oz. cups the day before and I had shopped around
weeks earlier trying to find a replacement. I only found smaller paper cups
available in the local supermarkets but they had larger disposable plastic
cups. So I bought the plastic due to their size. I wanted paper but I needed
the larger cup size.
Life was good, everything was ready to primer and I mixed two batches of
primer (14 oz. each) in my new plastic cups. And off I went to work on a few
other things in the shop while I waited for the induction time (30 minutes)
to pass. After 15 minutes had passed, I went to stir the primer. I noticed
one of the cups was "sagging" a bit.
Alarm bells in my head went off immediately. I grabbed the trashcan. I knew
what was going to happen. The dam was leaking and it was about to rupture.
Just as I lifted up the trashcan the cup dissolved away. None of the primer
made it into the trashcan. Fourteen ounces of the best primer was now on the
floor and covering the base of the Workmate (the plastic covering the
surface didn't extend all the way down to the base). But I knew this was
just the beginning. Within seconds, the second cup dissolved before I could
get the trashcan under it and more epoxy made it onto the floor. Did I
mention my shop floor is coated with an epoxy (two part-water based-gray)?
So now I am staring at a rather large epoxy mess that only acetone will
clean up. But acetone will also dissolve my epoxy floor coating. Profanities
flew and the odor of acetone filled the air.
All is cleaned up now. My epoxy coated floor looks chemically abused and my
Workmate base is camouflage colored and ready to report for military duty. I
have wasted precious primer and delayed my progress once again. Hopefully
next Friday I will have everything rapped up.
The moral of the story is:
When given the choice paper or plastic, choose paper.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com
Lists: RV-List,RV3-List,RV4-List,RV6-List,RV7-List,RV8-List,RV9-List,RV10-List
Subject: Brake Line Failure
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/eanderson@carolina.rr.com.07.02.2005/index.html
o Main Photo Share Index
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
o Submitting a Photo Share
If you wish to submit a Photo Share of your own, please include the
following information along with your email message and files:
1) Email List or Lists that they are related to:
2) Your Full Name:
3) Your Email Address:
4) One line Subject description:
5) Multi-line, multi-paragraph description of topic:
6) One-line Description of each photo or file:
Email the information above and your files and photos to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Cooper <sportflyer(at)emcity.net> (SquirrelMail authenticated |
user sportflyer) by webmail.emcity.net with HTTP; Sat,
2 Jul 2005 12:39:52.-0600(at)roxy.matronics.com (MDT)
| Subject: | Looking for Engine |
I'm looking for a used Rotax 912/912S or new in crate. Have cash ready to
purchase.
sportflyer(at)emcity.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Hall" <dhall(at)donka.net> |
| Subject: | Does this deburring tool exist? |
I'll be hunting this at Osh.
Ideal deburring tool: Can debur both sides of a hole simultaneously. 2nd
place to a tool that deburs only the under side of the hole (for getting at
the inside of a flange).
A friend of mine showed me a deburring bit that has a spring-loaded blade
that can do exactly that. You mount the bit into a drill, and it deburs the
front\top of the hole on the way through, then the bottom\under side of the
hole when you pull it out. He did not have one of those things for #40, so
cannot attest to how effective it is. I also question whether that spring
concept would work on a thin skin for a small #40 hole.
My only deburring tool is one of those countersinks that you mount into a
cordless screwdriver. It works great everywhere except those hard to reach
places like inside the bend of a skin or the inside holes of a flange. For
most tight spots, I remove the countersink shank from the screwdriver and
spin\rotate the sink manually. That works fine, but it's a pain so I'm
looking for a better tool for those spots.
If I come back from Osh with one thing, it'll be a deburring tool that makes
it real easy to debur inside flanges and spars. Anybody have any experience
with those deburring bits? Any other favorites?
***************************
Don Hall
N517DG (registered)
rv7 empennage
http://donka.net/rv7project.html
***************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brad Oliver" <brad(at)rv7factory.com> |
| Subject: | Does this deburring tool exist? |
Don,
I just ordered one for 3/32" / #40 holes direct from Cogsdill tools for
around $50. Works great and what a time saver! Pictures and link to
Cogsdill here... http://www.rv7factory.com/log/050624.html
Make sure you order it with a neutral rake blade as it is designed
specifically for aluminum. I ordered a replacement blade ($8), but they
don't recommend replacing the blades on the 3/32" version yourself... when I
got it I can see why... it is very small.
Good Luck,
Brad
RV-7
Livermore, CA
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Don Hall
Subject: RV7-List: Does this deburring tool exist?
I'll be hunting this at Osh.
Ideal deburring tool: Can debur both sides of a hole simultaneously. 2nd
place to a tool that deburs only the under side of the hole (for getting at
the inside of a flange).
A friend of mine showed me a deburring bit that has a spring-loaded blade
that can do exactly that. You mount the bit into a drill, and it deburs the
front\top of the hole on the way through, then the bottom\under side of the
hole when you pull it out. He did not have one of those things for #40, so
cannot attest to how effective it is. I also question whether that spring
concept would work on a thin skin for a small #40 hole.
My only deburring tool is one of those countersinks that you mount into a
cordless screwdriver. It works great everywhere except those hard to reach
places like inside the bend of a skin or the inside holes of a flange. For
most tight spots, I remove the countersink shank from the screwdriver and
spin\rotate the sink manually. That works fine, but it's a pain so I'm
looking for a better tool for those spots.
If I come back from Osh with one thing, it'll be a deburring tool that makes
it real easy to debur inside flanges and spars. Anybody have any experience
with those deburring bits? Any other favorites?
***************************
Don Hall
N517DG (registered)
rv7 empennage
http://donka.net/rv7project.html
***************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Hall" <dhall(at)donka.net> |
| Subject: | Does this deburring tool exist? |
Thanks, Very clean website of yours. I'm curious about the elaborate
condensor. Did it work? Would adding an inline moisture filter not work?
I live in Georgia, very humid, but interestingly my moisture filter hasn't
yet trapped much. I do empty my compressor frequently and a lot of water
comes out.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brad Oliver
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Does this deburring tool exist?
Don,
I just ordered one for 3/32" / #40 holes direct from Cogsdill tools for
around $50. Works great and what a time saver! Pictures and link to
Cogsdill here... http://www.rv7factory.com/log/050624.html
Make sure you order it with a neutral rake blade as it is designed
specifically for aluminum. I ordered a replacement blade ($8), but they
don't recommend replacing the blades on the 3/32" version yourself... when I
got it I can see why... it is very small.
Good Luck,
Brad
RV-7
Livermore, CA
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Don Hall
Subject: RV7-List: Does this deburring tool exist?
I'll be hunting this at Osh.
Ideal deburring tool: Can debur both sides of a hole simultaneously. 2nd
place to a tool that deburs only the under side of the hole (for getting at
the inside of a flange).
A friend of mine showed me a deburring bit that has a spring-loaded blade
that can do exactly that. You mount the bit into a drill, and it deburs the
front\top of the hole on the way through, then the bottom\under side of the
hole when you pull it out. He did not have one of those things for #40, so
cannot attest to how effective it is. I also question whether that spring
concept would work on a thin skin for a small #40 hole.
My only deburring tool is one of those countersinks that you mount into a
cordless screwdriver. It works great everywhere except those hard to reach
places like inside the bend of a skin or the inside holes of a flange. For
most tight spots, I remove the countersink shank from the screwdriver and
spin\rotate the sink manually. That works fine, but it's a pain so I'm
looking for a better tool for those spots.
If I come back from Osh with one thing, it'll be a deburring tool that makes
it real easy to debur inside flanges and spars. Anybody have any experience
with those deburring bits? Any other favorites?
***************************
Don Hall
N517DG (registered)
rv7 empennage
http://donka.net/rv7project.html
***************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brad Oliver" <brad(at)rv7factory.com> |
| Subject: | Does this deburring tool exist? |
Don, thanks for the nice comments (about the web site).
The condenser does pull more moisture out of the air than just my filter
alone. I built it because I was looking for a quick and easy solution to
water in vapor form. The filter I currently have traps water in liquid form
but the vapor passes through it unencumbered. We had a humid weekend (for
us) the day I had the water problems, but it has been very dry (normal)
since, so it is hard to compare. I would like to test it on another humid
day to see just how well it really works.
I also built the condenser because I couldn't seem to find an air dryer
(dryer not filter) locally at a reasonable price. Ironically, the day after
I finished the condenser I found this online ...
http://www.contractorstools.com/camp_at_filters_PA2085.html
I even found a few on eBay for around $75. If I had known about it prior,
and wasn't so time constrained, I probably would have ordered one of them
instead of building the condenser.
Happy building!
Brad
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Don Hall
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Does this deburring tool exist?
Thanks, Very clean website of yours. I'm curious about the elaborate
condensor. Did it work? Would adding an inline moisture filter not work?
I live in Georgia, very humid, but interestingly my moisture filter hasn't
yet trapped much. I do empty my compressor frequently and a lot of water
comes out.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brad Oliver
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Does this deburring tool exist?
Don,
I just ordered one for 3/32" / #40 holes direct from Cogsdill tools for
around $50. Works great and what a time saver! Pictures and link to
Cogsdill here... http://www.rv7factory.com/log/050624.html
Make sure you order it with a neutral rake blade as it is designed
specifically for aluminum. I ordered a replacement blade ($8), but they
don't recommend replacing the blades on the 3/32" version yourself... when I
got it I can see why... it is very small.
Good Luck,
Brad
RV-7
Livermore, CA
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Don Hall
Subject: RV7-List: Does this deburring tool exist?
I'll be hunting this at Osh.
Ideal deburring tool: Can debur both sides of a hole simultaneously. 2nd
place to a tool that deburs only the under side of the hole (for getting at
the inside of a flange).
A friend of mine showed me a deburring bit that has a spring-loaded blade
that can do exactly that. You mount the bit into a drill, and it deburs the
front\top of the hole on the way through, then the bottom\under side of the
hole when you pull it out. He did not have one of those things for #40, so
cannot attest to how effective it is. I also question whether that spring
concept would work on a thin skin for a small #40 hole.
My only deburring tool is one of those countersinks that you mount into a
cordless screwdriver. It works great everywhere except those hard to reach
places like inside the bend of a skin or the inside holes of a flange. For
most tight spots, I remove the countersink shank from the screwdriver and
spin\rotate the sink manually. That works fine, but it's a pain so I'm
looking for a better tool for those spots.
If I come back from Osh with one thing, it'll be a deburring tool that makes
it real easy to debur inside flanges and spars. Anybody have any experience
with those deburring bits? Any other favorites?
***************************
Don Hall
N517DG (registered)
rv7 empennage
http://donka.net/rv7project.html
***************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Merems" <merems(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Fitting the F-779 aft bottom skin? |
Fellow RV-7 builders,
I need some help. I am trying to fit my F-779 bottom skin and I am having a bit
of trouble. This is the 0.040 thick bottom skin that ties the last three bulkheads
together. My original skin didn't fit well. I tried to bend it by hand,
clamped it between wood blocks and put some muscle into it, but without much
success. I thought it might have been improperly formed at the factory so
I ordered an new one. Well this one is about as bad as the original. Once again
I tried to bend without success.
I may not be the strongest builder but maybe one of you have a great idea for me
to try before I break my wrists trying to muscle this skin.
Thanks in advance,
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DonVS" <dsvs(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Fitting the F-779 aft bottom skin? |
Paul,
See Dam C's site Sept 4 2004. If your parts are correct maybe you don't
have the flanges bent to the right shape, they need to taper as the tail
gets narrower. Don
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Merems
Subject: RV7-List: Fitting the F-779 aft bottom skin?
Fellow RV-7 builders,
I need some help. I am trying to fit my F-779 bottom skin and I am having a
bit of trouble. This is the 0.040 thick bottom skin that ties the last
three bulkheads together. My original skin didn't fit well. I tried to
bend it by hand, clamped it between wood blocks and put some muscle into it,
but without much success. I thought it might have been improperly formed at
the factory so I ordered an new one. Well this one is about as bad as the
original. Once again I tried to bend without success.
I may not be the strongest builder but maybe one of you have a great idea
for me to try before I break my wrists trying to muscle this skin.
Thanks in advance,
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fitting the F-779 aft bottom skin? |
| From: | Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com> |
Just dealt with that bit myself just recently ... it requires
quite a bit of "manipulation" according to Van's builder
support line.
Can you be a bit more explicit about what's not fitting against
what ? Maybe some photos ? There's a handful of "tricks" for
getting past this hurdle, I'm sure folks around can help ...
g
>
>
> Fellow RV-7 builders,
>
> I need some help. I am trying to fit my F-779 bottom skin and
> I am having a bit of trouble. This is the 0.040 thick bottom
> skin that ties the last three bulkheads together. My original
> skin didn't fit well. I tried to bend it by hand, clamped it
> between wood blocks and put some muscle into it, but without
> much success. I thought it might have been improperly formed
> at the factory so I ordered an new one. Well this one is about
> as bad as the original. Once again I tried to bend without
> success.
>
> I may not be the strongest builder but maybe one of you have a
> great idea for me to try before I break my wrists trying to
> muscle this skin.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
Tel: 415 203 9177
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Firwall planning |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Morning all...I started hanging stuff on the firewall yesterday and
realised I have to allow space for the inverted oil system which I don't
yet have as it is coming with the engine in a few weeks.
For those of you who fitted the invert, did you have to move stuff
around on the firewall or did the Van's locations leave enough room for
the tank ind invert valve.
I have an IO360 with forward induction, Sam James cowl and Odyssey
battery on the firewall.
Thanks
Frank....Airframe still almost finished...:)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Meyette" <brianpublic(at)starband.net> |
| Subject: | Does this deburring tool exist? |
clamav-milter version 0.80j
on hathor
This is really for bigger holes than rivet holes, but it works well for me:
http://brian76.mystarband.net/tools.htm#debur
It has easily interchangeable blades. The one shown in it will do both
sides of a hole. It's from MSC.
brian
http://brian76.mystarband.net/RV-7Ahome.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Don Hall
Subject: RV7-List: Does this deburring tool exist?
I'll be hunting this at Osh.
Ideal deburring tool: Can debur both sides of a hole simultaneously. 2nd
place to a tool that deburs only the under side of the hole (for getting at
the inside of a flange).
A friend of mine showed me a deburring bit that has a spring-loaded blade
that can do exactly that. You mount the bit into a drill, and it deburs the
front\top of the hole on the way through, then the bottom\under side of the
hole when you pull it out. He did not have one of those things for #40, so
cannot attest to how effective it is. I also question whether that spring
concept would work on a thin skin for a small #40 hole.
My only deburring tool is one of those countersinks that you mount into a
cordless screwdriver. It works great everywhere except those hard to reach
places like inside the bend of a skin or the inside holes of a flange. For
most tight spots, I remove the countersink shank from the screwdriver and
spin\rotate the sink manually. That works fine, but it's a pain so I'm
looking for a better tool for those spots.
If I come back from Osh with one thing, it'll be a deburring tool that makes
it real easy to debur inside flanges and spars. Anybody have any experience
with those deburring bits? Any other favorites?
***************************
Don Hall
N517DG (registered)
rv7 empennage
http://donka.net/rv7project.html
***************************
--
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fitting the F-779 aft bottom skin? |
| From: | "Jamie Painter" <jdpainter(at)jpainter.org> |
> I need some help. I am trying to fit my F-779 bottom skin and I am having a
> bit of trouble. This is the 0.040 thick bottom skin that ties the last three
> bulkheads together. My original skin didn't fit well. I tried to bend it by
> hand, clamped it between wood blocks and put some muscle into it, but without
> much success. I thought it might have been improperly formed at the factory
> so I ordered an new one. Well this one is about as bad as the original. Once
> again I tried to bend without success.
Yes, this piece doesn't fit so well out of the box. My bend radius didn't
seem to be quite right. Using my hand seamer I was able to increase the
radius enough that it fit like a glove.
You can see here for how it fit before and after I bent it a little.
http://rv.jpainter.org/?view=entry&date=2005-05-14
Also, it's been mentioned earlier...but make sure that you have bent the
flanges accordingly. The bulkhead webs should not be 90 degrees to the
flanges.
Best of luck,
Jamie
--
Jamie D. Painter
RV-7A fuselage N622JP (reserved)
http://rv.jpainter.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Brake pedals installation |
I'm mucking about assembling the brake pedals and just looking at the
schematics and trial fitting things, I notice the plans call for about 4
washers between the attachment angle and the master break cylinder. Wouldn't
it be better to cut a little spacer tube and stick that in that location
instead.
Bob
St. Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Brake pedals installation |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Yes but making the spacers is a fiddly task and its just a cosmetic
thing...There are plenty of things to needlessly spend your time on
later on. Personally I would just slap in the washers and move on.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Collins
Subject: RV7-List: Brake pedals installation
I'm mucking about assembling the brake pedals and just looking at the
schematics and trial fitting things, I notice the plans call for about 4
washers between the attachment angle and the master break cylinder.
Wouldn't it be better to cut a little spacer tube and stick that in that
location instead.
Bob
St. Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jolly dawson" <jollyd(at)ipns.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Brake pedals installation |
also with the "tubge type" spacers, you incerase the stress points in a
closer circle, where as the washers help even the load over a larger aerea..
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Brake pedals installation
>
> Yes but making the spacers is a fiddly task and its just a cosmetic
> thing...There are plenty of things to needlessly spend your time on
> later on. Personally I would just slap in the washers and move on.
>
> Frank
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Collins
> To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV7-List: Brake pedals installation
>
>
> I'm mucking about assembling the brake pedals and just looking at the
> schematics and trial fitting things, I notice the plans call for about 4
> washers between the attachment angle and the master break cylinder.
> Wouldn't it be better to cut a little spacer tube and stick that in that
> location instead.
>
> Bob
> St. Paul
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Meyette" <brianpublic(at)starband.net> |
"RV7and7A(at)yahoogroups. com" ,
"Eaa740(at)Thayer. Dartmouth. Edu"
| Subject: | FW: [BostonRVBuilders] Wiring workshop and this weekend's cookout |
in Plymouth, MA
clamav-milter version 0.80j
on hathor
fyi
Bob Nuckolls is the expert on wiring experimental planes. It should be a
most informative seminar.
brian
-----Original Message-----
From: BostonRVBuilders(at)yahoogroups.com
[mailto:BostonRVBuilders(at)yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of John Sannizzaro
Subject: [BostonRVBuilders] Wiring workshop and this weekend's cookout in
Plymouth, MA
Just an update, Folks!
almost 1 month away and have 15 signed up. We NEED 18 in order to make
it a go. Sign up here and NOW!
http://www.aeroelectric.com/seminars/Plymouth_2005.html
Also, if you need a room I am holding these rooms at the Comfort Inn
until TOMORROW! After that date, I would have to put my own money down
and I don't want to do that as I am doing this for education and
entertainment... not for profit!
For more details and up to date information, see my chapter's website at:
www.eaaul62.com
...where we will be offering last minute information regarding the event.
One more thing!
We are having a cookout, this coming weekend!On Saturday, July 16th we
will be cooking burgers, dogs and I plan on making my award winning
chili! The food is free, all we ask for is a donation.
The event on the 16th will be at Ace Helicopter on the south side of
the field!
By aircraft, you will taxi as though you are departing on runway 33...
but take the turnoff at the only hangar there. We will have a comm
radio tuned to Unicom, 123.00 if you have any questions. The grass
will be mowed for parking so taxi on up and have some lunch!
By car, the airport is on South Meadow in Plymouth. Enter at Gate 6
and follow the signs along the dirt road past the approach end of
runway 6, to the event.
We will be there from 11AM until the food is gone or the last plane
leaves!
Email me if you have any questions. N357JS at adelphia.net
See you there!
John S.
_____
* Visit your group " BostonRVBuilders
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BostonRVBuilders> " on the web.
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
BostonRVBuilders-unsubscribe(at)yahoogroups.com
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
_____
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Sam James Yahoogroup |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Hello all,
I have just set up a yahoo groups for those of us installing the Sam
James "Holy cowl" and plenum... James Aircraft are supporting the
endeavour and will be checking messages and answering questions.
Please feel free to join the groups at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Samjames/ and post your experiences.
This has just been set up in the last few hours and we will be inviting
the past James aircraft customers directly.
Thanks
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Hall" <dhall(at)donka.net> |
If the rank of Eagle is a flying RV, then I figure completing a tail is
somewhere around Tenderfoot. Gimme the patch.
In right at 2 months, I have successfully converted a box of aluminum into
an empennage. I consider myself one of those people whose mechanical
histories are sufficiently weak enough to suggest that I have no business
building an airplane. With the empennage now done, my doubts are
diminishing. At the same time, when I realize that I am maybe 10% done, it
is very easy to feel overwhelmed yet again. But with all of your help and
your websites so well documented, it is like having a dozen experts on hand
to keep me on track. A special thank you to those who have so well
documented your mistakes. You've saved me a few, and you've made me realize
that my own mistakes are normal and recoverable, albeit sometimes resolved
with $4 shipping and handling charges.
Oshkosh is coming. I will hope to meet a few of you there.
*************************************
Don Hall
N517DG (registered)
rv7 (waiting on slow-build wings...)
http://donka.net/rv7project.html
**************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com> |
| Subject: | Sam James Yahoogroup |
I *think* the group URL is:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JamesAircraft
James
| -----Original Message-----
| From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv7-list-
| server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
| Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 5:14 PM
| To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
| Subject: RV7-List: Sam James Yahoogroup
|
|
|
| Hello all,
|
| I have just set up a yahoo groups for those of us installing the Sam
| James "Holy cowl" and plenum... James Aircraft are supporting the
| endeavour and will be checking messages and answering questions.
|
| Please feel free to join the groups at
| http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Samjames/ and post your experiences.
|
| This has just been set up in the last few hours and we will be inviting
| the past James aircraft customers directly.
|
| Thanks
|
| Frank
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Sam James Yahoogroup |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Ha ha ...It is Now...:)... Liz James did not like the "Sam James"
reference and changed it on me...Thats what you get for for making
someone a groups moderator.
Thanks for the correction
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of James E. Clark
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Sam James Yahoogroup
-->
I *think* the group URL is:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JamesAircraft
James
| -----Original Message-----
| From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv7-list-
| server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
| Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 5:14 PM
| To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
| Subject: RV7-List: Sam James Yahoogroup
|
|
|
| Hello all,
|
| I have just set up a yahoo groups for those of us installing the Sam
| James "Holy cowl" and plenum... James Aircraft are supporting the
| endeavour and will be checking messages and answering questions.
|
| Please feel free to join the groups at
| http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Samjames/ and post your experiences.
|
| This has just been set up in the last few hours and we will be
| inviting the past James aircraft customers directly.
|
| Thanks
|
| Frank
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com> |
| Subject: | Sam James Yahoogroup |
Yup.
Liz is "good people".
I suspect that she wanted to be able to incorporate the stuff from **Will**
James (the son and her husband).
Will is who does the "new cowl" I referenced.
James
| -----Original Message-----
| From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv7-list-
| server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
| Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 6:39 PM
| To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
| Subject: RE: RV7-List: Sam James Yahoogroup
|
|
|
| Ha ha ...It is Now...:)... Liz James did not like the "Sam James"
| reference and changed it on me...Thats what you get for for making
| someone a groups moderator.
|
| Thanks for the correction
|
| Frank
|
| -----Original Message-----
| From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
| [mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of James E. Clark
| To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
| Subject: RE: RV7-List: Sam James Yahoogroup
|
| -->
|
| I *think* the group URL is:
|
| http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JamesAircraft
|
|
| James
|
|
| | -----Original Message-----
| | From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv7-list-
| | server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
| | Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 5:14 PM
| | To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
| | Subject: RV7-List: Sam James Yahoogroup
| |
| |
| |
| | Hello all,
| |
| | I have just set up a yahoo groups for those of us installing the Sam
|
| | James "Holy cowl" and plenum... James Aircraft are supporting the
| | endeavour and will be checking messages and answering questions.
| |
| | Please feel free to join the groups at
| | http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Samjames/ and post your experiences.
| |
| | This has just been set up in the last few hours and we will be
| | inviting the past James aircraft customers directly.
| |
| | Thanks
| |
| | Frank
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | List Digest Truncation Fixed!! |
Dear Listers,
I finally figured out today what was causing the occasional
truncation of the daily List Digest emails. Seems that every once in
a while a message would contain a single "." (period) on line all by
itself. The mailers would see this and assume that this was the
universal emailer signal for "end of message", and consequently
wouldn't process any of the rest of the Digest message.
I've put in a filter today to remove any of these sequences so we
should be back in business on the Digests.
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Admin.
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hull, Don" <Donald.C.Hull(at)nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | List Digest Truncation Fixed!! |
Ahhh, Matt, what a difference a little dot can make. Seriously, thanks for
all the work you do to make these lists available.
Don Hull
RV-7 emp
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt Dralle
Subject: RV7-List: List Digest Truncation Fixed!!
Dear Listers,
I finally figured out today what was causing the occasional
truncation of the daily List Digest emails. Seems that every once in
a while a message would contain a single "." (period) on line all by
itself. The mailers would see this and assume that this was the
universal emailer signal for "end of message", and consequently
wouldn't process any of the rest of the Digest message.
I've put in a filter today to remove any of these sequences so we
should be back in business on the Digests.
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Admin.
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551 925-606-1001
V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle@matronics.com Email http://www.matronics.com/
WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Franz Fux" <franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com> |
| Subject: | List Digest Truncation Fixed!! |
Thanks for your dedication to the group and hard work,
Franz
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Hull, Don
Subject: RE: RV7-List: List Digest Truncation Fixed!!
Ahhh, Matt, what a difference a little dot can make. Seriously, thanks for
all the work you do to make these lists available.
Don Hull
RV-7 emp
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt Dralle
Subject: RV7-List: List Digest Truncation Fixed!!
Dear Listers,
I finally figured out today what was causing the occasional
truncation of the daily List Digest emails. Seems that every once in
a while a message would contain a single "." (period) on line all by
itself. The mailers would see this and assume that this was the
universal emailer signal for "end of message", and consequently
wouldn't process any of the rest of the Digest message.
I've put in a filter today to remove any of these sequences so we
should be back in business on the Digests.
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Admin.
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551 925-606-1001
V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle@matronics.com Email http://www.matronics.com/
WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
--
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Franz Fux" <franz(at)lastfrontierheli.com> |
| Subject: | RE: antenna mounting |
Hi everybody,
for those of you with a slider canopy, where have you installed the ELT. As
I would like to have the ELT near me in case I have to leave the aircraft in
a hurry, I was thinking of mounting the unit itself on the tunnel cover
between the two seats, with the antenna mounted stationary somewhere behind
the seat. It can not be mounted on the slider and I don't want to mount it
outside on the fuselage.
Any ideas from the builders before me,
Thanks
Franz
RV7A
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stan & Aylene Bahrns" <bahrns(at)effingham.net> |
| Subject: | RE: antenna mounting |
I have the same problem. I think I am going to mount the ELT behind the seat
& I finally found an antenna that is just a wire as allthe ones I had
earlier had a spring on the end which lookes like lots of drag. I am
thinking about mounting it under the aircraft a little ahead of the tail as
in mosst cases the RV's end up on their top & then the antenna would be in
the right position. Unlike the tip up canopy there are no place to put them
inside that I can find. If you have any better ideas I would be interested
to hear them.
Thanks,
Stan Bahrns
RV7-A from IL
Phone (217)342-2909
Fax (217)342-4342
Work email: stanb(at)bahrns.com
Home email: bahrns(at)effingham.net
Hi everybody,
for those of you with a slider canopy, where have you installed the ELT. As
I would like to have the ELT near me in case I have to leave the aircraft in
a hurry, I was thinking of mounting the unit itself on the tunnel cover
between the two seats, with the antenna mounted stationary somewhere behind
the seat. It can not be mounted on the slider and I don't want to mount it
outside on the fuselage.
Any ideas from the builders before me,
Thanks
Franz
RV7A
--
--
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <fablef(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Electrical Tools-Wiring Supplies-Harnesses and More |
Hi Everyone,
With Matt Dralle's permission, I wanted to let everyone on the list know that Affordable
Panels has added electrical tools, electrical supplies, wiring harnesses
and more to our inventory. We have some of the lowest prices on everything
from tools, terminals, connectors, wire, electroluminescent lighting, etc.
Our wiring harnesses for all Trutrak Autopilots are available in "Standard" and
"Wing Root Disconnect" form, and we also offer harnesses for the Dynon EFIS,
Flightcom and many others at the very best prices.
Our full page catalog will be out in a couple of weeks. In the mean time, anyone
interested can download the electrical portion of our catalog here.
http://www.affordablepanels.com/electrical.htm
All electrical orders placed on-line or faxed with a total above $175.00 will ship
free via UPS GROUND.
Best Regards,
Fabian Lefler
www.affordablepanels.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Garey Wittich <gareywittich2000(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | A GUIDE TO AIRCRAFT PAINTING & CORROSION CONTROL |
> This Information comes from my own research which I
did for
> my RV-8A, which I am building. Information applies
to both Aluminum and Composite aircraft. This is the
3th printing.
>
> --------------- ------------- ------------
>
> SAVE YOURSELF hundreds of hours of research time and
> building time, by using the comprehensive
>
> "Guide to Painting & Corrosion Control of Aluminum
> and
> Composite Aircraft"
>
> This book took over 600+ hours of research time by
> me,
> a fussy RV-8A Builder. Contains 69 pages of the
> latest, practical information - summarized and
> gathered from MIL Standards, Paint Shops, Builders
> like you (what worked or didn't), Airframe Mfgs,
> etc.
> Covers products from PP&G, Dupont, Sherwin W'ms,
> Sterling, Poly Fiber, Deft, Randolph Paints, PRC De
> Soto, US Paints, Aircraft Finishing Systems, 3M,
> etc.
>
> Some of the Topics covered in the 30 Sections are:
> * Aircraft Paints vs Auto Paints and Other
> Considerations
> * Corrosion Control
> * Spray Guns - selecting, adjusting, using
> and painting problems
> * Brushes / Rollers used with Primers &
> Paints
> * Prep Methods for Painting - Fiberglass,
> Steel and Aluminum
> * Epoxy Primers for Aluminum - MIL &
> Commercial, Solvent & Water Reducible
> * Primers for Fiberglass & Steel
> * Wash Primers & Self Etching Primers
> * Other Primers - Zinc Chromate,Zinc Oxide,
> Enamel
> * Paint Types: MIL & Non MIL Polyurethanes
> Enamel Types
> Acrylics - Lacquers & Enamels
> * Acid Etch / Conversion Coatings (Alodine)
> * Selecting a Paint Shop
> * 3M Cleaning Pads, Liquid Cleaner
> compatibility
> * Paint Booths and their Construction
> * References - MIL Standards & Tech Orders
> * Directory of Aircraft Paint Mfgs, Distrib-
> utors, etc. E-Mail addresses, phone
> numbers, Application Notes
>
> YOUR AIRPLANE is judged by it's Paint Job and it is
> costly too, so have the latest "Information" in
> order
> to make good decisions. Contains plenty of "Do's"
> and
> "Don'ts" that save you time, money and frustration.
>
> Send a check for $26 to (includes Postage within the
> US) to:
> Garey Wittich RV-8A Builder
> 58 Village Parkway
> Santa Monica, CA. 90405
>
>
__________________________________
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel Storer" <dstorer(at)okwifi.com> |
| Subject: | Change of Heart 7A to 7 ??? |
Big question, but first the short story. I live on a grass field in
Oklahoma, and at one time we had three RV's on the field plus several
factory planes. So after much research and time making promises to my wife,
I decided to build an RV 7A. I've got the tail done and the wing almost
there (after a three month absence working honey do list). I also have the
fuselage kit on the shelf ready to start this fall.
So my big question is what if I wanted to change to a "7" tail dragger...
what would it take? Just looking at the two aircraft on Van's web site it
looks like the change is in the fuselage kit, so I would have to send my
engine mount and landing gear back and get the tail wheel, is this correct.
I'm sure I'm not the first to change their mind. One might wonder what
drive me to a big change in plans. Believe it or not it was safety. Grass
fields and tail wheels go together, plus don't forget the sexy look of a day
gone by.
Can anyone tell me if they've ever done the conversion at this point of the
game?
Thanks,
Dan S.
OKC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | DWG 28 hole callouts in two spots |
Hi folks:
Two questions based on notes on DWG 28 regarding fuselage skin holes to
be drilled.
1) One is a notation on the bottom skin where the corner rib fits. It says
"enlarge this hole for flap rod access" (or something like that), but does
not call out a dimension. I assume it's pretty small considering how close
it sits to rivets on either side, but I'm curious what size hole is called
for here.
2) The other is the static port. The location is clearly shown on DWG 28,
but not he size of the hole for the port. Anyone?
And thank you
Bob
St. Paul, Minn.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Reeves <n516dr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: DWG 28 hole callouts in two spots |
The hole for the flap pushrods is surprisingly large. It has to accommodate the
size of the rod end bearing. I waited until I mated the wings and had the flaps
on and then gradually enlarged the hole until there was no interference with
the pushrod. Then I traced the hole onto a piece of paper and transferred
it to the other side. I had a couple of pictures of other people's planes that
I used as a starting point. The hole is kind of an inverted V on the side
of the fuselage and kind of a slot on the bottom. The hole actually took out
2 rivets on the bottom.
Probably the best thing to do is wait until next week and trace someone else's
holes at Oshkosh and use that as a template for yours.
As far as the static port hole goes, I believe this is just a #30 hole for the
rivet. I'm not positive about this but if you track down the static port rivet
itself you should be able to tell for sure.
Dan
RV-7A
Just starting the canopy
Bob Collins wrote:
Hi folks:
Two questions based on notes on DWG 28 regarding fuselage skin holes to
be drilled.
1) One is a notation on the bottom skin where the corner rib fits. It says
"enlarge this hole for flap rod access" (or something like that), but does
not call out a dimension. I assume it's pretty small considering how close
it sits to rivets on either side, but I'm curious what size hole is called
for here.
2) The other is the static port. The location is clearly shown on DWG 28,
but not he size of the hole for the port. Anyone?
And thank you
Bob
St. Paul, Minn.
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | DWG 28 hole callouts in two spots |
OK, one more question. In taking off the left and right skins, I realized
today that there are 4 vertical rivets -- apparently #40s -- just forward
(maybe 4-5 inches) of the big center section bulkhead. They were not drilled
and nothing in the process up to this point apparently called for them to be
fitted to anything. But DWG 28 says these are dimpled rivets and if I'm
going to dimple these four, I need to do it now. I checked the various
drawings and could not find the use for these four rivets.
Anyone?
bob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Reeves
Subject: Re: RV7-List: DWG 28 hole callouts in two spots
The hole for the flap pushrods is surprisingly large. It has to accommodate
the size of the rod end bearing. I waited until I mated the wings and had
the flaps on and then gradually enlarged the hole until there was no
interference with the pushrod. Then I traced the hole onto a piece of paper
and transferred it to the other side. I had a couple of pictures of other
people's planes that I used as a starting point. The hole is kind of an
inverted V on the side of the fuselage and kind of a slot on the bottom.
The hole actually took out 2 rivets on the bottom.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Gill" <wgill10(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | DWG 28 hole callouts in two spots |
Hello Bob,
I think the holes you are referring to are the holes for the air vent
angle support. If so, don't dimple these yet as you will use them to
match drill the vent angle. You can dimple later with a pop rivet
dimpler.
Have a great day,
Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Collins
Subject: RE: RV7-List: DWG 28 hole callouts in two spots
OK, one more question. In taking off the left and right skins, I
realized
today that there are 4 vertical rivets -- apparently #40s -- just
forward
(maybe 4-5 inches) of the big center section bulkhead. They were not
drilled
and nothing in the process up to this point apparently called for them
to be
fitted to anything. But DWG 28 says these are dimpled rivets and if I'm
going to dimple these four, I need to do it now. I checked the various
drawings and could not find the use for these four rivets.
Anyone?
bob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Reeves
Subject: Re: RV7-List: DWG 28 hole callouts in two spots
The hole for the flap pushrods is surprisingly large. It has to
accommodate
the size of the rod end bearing. I waited until I mated the wings and
had
the flaps on and then gradually enlarged the hole until there was no
interference with the pushrod. Then I traced the hole onto a piece of
paper
and transferred it to the other side. I had a couple of pictures of
other
people's planes that I used as a starting point. The hole is kind of an
inverted V on the side of the fuselage and kind of a slot on the bottom.
The hole actually took out 2 rivets on the bottom.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: DWG 28 hole callouts in two spots |
>
> Hi folks:
> Two questions based on notes on DWG 28 regarding fuselage skin holes to
> be drilled.
>
> 1) One is a notation on the bottom skin where the corner rib fits. It says
> "enlarge this hole for flap rod access" (or something like that), but does
> not call out a dimension. I assume it's pretty small considering how close
> it sits to rivets on either side, but I'm curious what size hole is called
> for here. (((((((( I left this hole for cutting out until I mounted the
> flaps and could actually get to working it up and down. Better to wait
> unless you want to risk making it too small or in the slightly wrong
> place. The shape is irregular is the best way to say it. )))))))
>
> 2) The other is the static port. The location is clearly shown on DWG 28,
> but not he size of the hole for the port. Anyone?(((((((You should buy
> either Vans or someone else's static air kit first. That will tell you
> what size hole you need. I suggest you use Van's static air kit even
> though some think it is less than robust. I have used it now with 50
> hours flying and it works!!!!!! Indiana Larry, RV7, tip up,
> flying.)))))))))
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Merems" <merems(at)cox.net> |
"RV10 Group" ,
| Subject: | DRDT-2 dimpling tool at Oshkosh |
Fellow RV builders.
The DRDT-2 (www.experimentalaero.com) will be on display at the EAA sheet metal workshop and or the Avery Tool booth at Oshkosh. I will be at AirVenture from Monday through Saturday. Stop by and give the DRDT-2 a test drive.
For those of you who already own one, I'd enjoy meeting you so stop by and say
hi.
Paul Merems
ExperimentalAero
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Change of Heart 7A to 7 ??? |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Hey Dan,
It is certainly doable...I have a friend building a 7a form a 7...I.e
going the other way to you.
Now I wonder if I could set you guys and maybe you could help each other
out to swap the parts if you have all your on hand?
Let me know if your interested.
Frank in Oregon
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Storer
Subject: RV7-List: Change of Heart 7A to 7 ???
Big question, but first the short story. I live on a grass field in
Oklahoma, and at one time we had three RV's on the field plus several
factory planes. So after much research and time making promises to my
wife, I decided to build an RV 7A. I've got the tail done and the wing
almost there (after a three month absence working honey do list). I
also have the fuselage kit on the shelf ready to start this fall.
So my big question is what if I wanted to change to a "7" tail
dragger...
what would it take? Just looking at the two aircraft on Van's web site
it looks like the change is in the fuselage kit, so I would have to send
my engine mount and landing gear back and get the tail wheel, is this
correct.
I'm sure I'm not the first to change their mind. One might wonder what
drive me to a big change in plans. Believe it or not it was safety.
Grass fields and tail wheels go together, plus don't forget the sexy
look of a day gone by.
Can anyone tell me if they've ever done the conversion at this point of
the game?
Thanks,
Dan S.
OKC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Change of Heart 7A to 7 ??? |
| From: | "Gary Dwinal" <GDwinal(at)fisherplows.com> |
Dan,
The quick answer to your question is yes, it has been done, but in
reverse. The current factory model RV7/7A was originally built as a
tail dragger, and then converted over to the 7A which it is today. I am
sure it is just a matter of swapping some of your parts such as the
engine mount and landing gear legs. The brake line bracket for the
firewall is different and I am sure there are a few other parts.
Gary Dwinal
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Storer
Subject: RV7-List: Change of Heart 7A to 7 ???
Big question, but first the short story. I live on a grass field in
Oklahoma, and at one time we had three RV's on the field plus several
factory planes. So after much research and time making promises to my
wife, I decided to build an RV 7A. I've got the tail done and the wing
almost there (after a three month absence working honey do list). I
also have the fuselage kit on the shelf ready to start this fall.
So my big question is what if I wanted to change to a "7" tail
dragger... what would it take? Just looking at the two aircraft on
Van's web site it looks like the change is in the fuselage kit, so I
would have to send my engine mount and landing gear back and get the
tail wheel, is this correct. I'm sure I'm not the first to change their
mind. One might wonder what drive me to a big change in plans. Believe
it or not it was safety. Grass fields and tail wheels go together, plus
don't forget the sexy look of a day gone by.
Can anyone tell me if they've ever done the conversion at this point of
the game?
Thanks,
Dan S.
OKC
NOTICE: The information contained in this communication is intended solely for
use by the designated recipient(s). This communication may also contain confidential
or proprietary information and may be subject to confidentiality protection
under the law. If you are not a designated recipient, you may not review,
copy, or distribute this message. If you receive this message in error, please
notify the sender and destroy your copy.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Fisher Engineering, a division of Douglas Dynamics, LLC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Change of Heart 7A to 7 ??? |
Conversion from a *completed* -7A to -7...
Starting with the rear half...
Remove the rudder and elevators. Probably want to get the aft elevator
pushrod out to make room.
Drill the tiedown bracket off the rear bulkhead, no big deal. Cut the
"mouse hole" in the bottom of the tailcone skin for the tailwheel spring
mount.
But can you even get a tailwheel spring mount in there between F-711 and
F-712 once the aft deck is installed? Will it fit into the inspection hole?
And then can you phenagle it to get it oriented?
Probably doable, but I'm guessing it's tough at best. Good friggin' luck
getting back there to rivet that stuff in. I actually think you'd be better
off drilling out the aft rivets on the side skins, or at leastt one side,
and peeling that side skin back (forward) to gain access to the bay between
F-711 and F-712, and a little access forward of F-711 for
bucking/shooting/squeezing. I personally wouldn't want my tailwheel spring
installed with pop rivets, but that's just me.
Careful on the alignment when re-riveting that side skin and the tailcone
together. Take care not to introduce twist.
Install the tailwheel spring and tailwheel. Install chains or a rocket
steering link or what have you. Rig that up.
Moving forward...
Remove the steps, then you gotta patch those holes. Or just keep 'em on,
but you don't need 'em on the taildragger. If you do remove 'em, will you
have to drill out the baggage floor skins? Don't think so, since I believe
the steps just slide out and aren't fastened inboard, but I'm not positive.
Double check that.
Move to the front half...
Rip out all the brake lines. Most likely rip out your fuel supply tubing as
well (easy to redo once the weldments are gone).
Pull the engine. (yes, pull the engine)
Hoist the plane.
Remove the nose gear. Remove the engine mount. Replace it with a
taildragger engine mount...you will need to cut clearance notches into the
bottom corners of the firewall flange for the new location of the mains.
Remove the main gear legs. Install them in the new engine mount. Jeez, can
you even do that? I understand the mains are match-drilled to the engine
mount. You may need to get new gear legs that are match drilled for your
new engine mount. Figure that out.
Plane is now on gear again.
Remove the weldments from in front of F-704. Fill all the holes with
shorter bolts.
Now you've got exterior holes to patch:
- step holes
- old main gear holes in the fuselage
- lower cowl old nosegear "slot"
Cut new holes in the lower cowl, aft lower corners, for the new mains.
Install new brake lines through the firewall. Don't forget the
reinforcement "patch" on the firewall where the fittings pass through.
Possibly install new main gear leg fairings. New upper gear leg
intersection fairings.
Redo your weight and balance. Do the requisite flight testing.
....
I personally wouldn't want to go through all of this. Just build a
taildragger from the get-go if that's what you want!
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Dwinal" <GDwinal(at)fisherplows.com>
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Change of Heart 7A to 7 ???
>
>
> Dan,
> The quick answer to your question is yes, it has been done, but in
> reverse. The current factory model RV7/7A was originally built as a
> tail dragger, and then converted over to the 7A which it is today. I am
> sure it is just a matter of swapping some of your parts such as the
> engine mount and landing gear legs. The brake line bracket for the
> firewall is different and I am sure there are a few other parts.
>
> Gary Dwinal
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Storer
> To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV7-List: Change of Heart 7A to 7 ???
>
>
> Big question, but first the short story. I live on a grass field in
> Oklahoma, and at one time we had three RV's on the field plus several
> factory planes. So after much research and time making promises to my
> wife, I decided to build an RV 7A. I've got the tail done and the wing
> almost there (after a three month absence working honey do list). I
> also have the fuselage kit on the shelf ready to start this fall.
>
> So my big question is what if I wanted to change to a "7" tail
> dragger... what would it take? Just looking at the two aircraft on
> Van's web site it looks like the change is in the fuselage kit, so I
> would have to send my engine mount and landing gear back and get the
> tail wheel, is this correct. I'm sure I'm not the first to change their
> mind. One might wonder what drive me to a big change in plans. Believe
> it or not it was safety. Grass fields and tail wheels go together, plus
> don't forget the sexy look of a day gone by.
>
> Can anyone tell me if they've ever done the conversion at this point of
> the game?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dan S.
> OKC
>
>
> NOTICE: The information contained in this communication is intended solely
> for use by the designated recipient(s). This communication may also
> contain confidential or proprietary information and may be subject to
> confidentiality protection under the law. If you are not a designated
> recipient, you may not review, copy, or distribute this message. If you
> receive this message in error, please notify the sender and destroy your
> copy.
>
> Thank you for your cooperation.
>
> Fisher Engineering, a division of Douglas Dynamics, LLC
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Birkelbach <phil(at)petrasoft.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Change of Heart 7A to 7 ??? |
You might find someone in the area that is going to build a -7A and is
just about ready to order the fuse kit. Have them buy the -7 kit and
trade parts. Otherwise I think it's basically sending back your main
gear weldments, the engine mount, the rear tie down, and the nose gear
stuff. Then you'll get the tailwheel weldment, the tail wheel spring,
wheel, etc., the other engine mount, the little fuse gussets and
probably some hardware.
The only thing that I can think of that might bite you would be the
holes in the VS rear spar. On the -7 your not supposed to drill them
until you mount the VS to the fuse but I don't know about those "other"
planes. :-) I think the NG guys have four AN3 bolts and we TD guys have
three AN4 bolts. They probably don't interfere since the conversion has
been done on other aircraft. If you haven't drilled the holes in the VS
then it doesn't matter.
Since you haven't built the fuse then this is just a parts exchange.
Other than the VS attach holes there are no differences between the -7
and -7A on the tail or wings.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB - Finishing Up
http://www.myrv7.com
Daniel Storer wrote:
>
>
>Big question, but first the short story. I live on a grass field in
>Oklahoma, and at one time we had three RV's on the field plus several
>factory planes. So after much research and time making promises to my wife,
>I decided to build an RV 7A. I've got the tail done and the wing almost
>there (after a three month absence working honey do list). I also have the
>fuselage kit on the shelf ready to start this fall.
>
>So my big question is what if I wanted to change to a "7" tail dragger...
>what would it take? Just looking at the two aircraft on Van's web site it
>looks like the change is in the fuselage kit, so I would have to send my
>engine mount and landing gear back and get the tail wheel, is this correct.
>I'm sure I'm not the first to change their mind. One might wonder what
>drive me to a big change in plans. Believe it or not it was safety. Grass
>fields and tail wheels go together, plus don't forget the sexy look of a day
>gone by.
>
>Can anyone tell me if they've ever done the conversion at this point of the
>game?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Dan S.
>OKC
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel Storer" <dstorer(at)okwifi.com> |
| Subject: | Change of Heart 7A to 7 ??? |
Frank,
There is a good chance the swap out might work. If I do this I'll be
shipping parts back to Van's anyway, and I rather help out a fellow builder.
I'll be in Oshkosh next week speak to as many RV'ers as I can along with
pics of all the good stuff. I plan to stop by Van's booth and ask for their
input.
Regards
-------Original Message-------
From: Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
Date: 07/18/05 10:40:18
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Change of Heart 7A to 7 ???
hinde(at)hp.com>
Hey Dan,
It is certainly doable...I have a friend building a 7a form a 7...I.e
going the other way to you.
Now I wonder if I could set you guys and maybe you could help each other
out to swap the parts if you have all your on hand?
Let me know if your interested.
Frank in Oregon
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Storer
Subject: RV7-List: Change of Heart 7A to 7 ???
Big question, but first the short story. I live on a grass field in
Oklahoma, and at one time we had three RV's on the field plus several
factory planes. So after much research and time making promises to my
wife, I decided to build an RV 7A. I've got the tail done and the wing
almost there (after a three month absence working honey do list). I
also have the fuselage kit on the shelf ready to start this fall.
So my big question is what if I wanted to change to a "7" tail
dragger...
what would it take? Just looking at the two aircraft on Van's web site
it looks like the change is in the fuselage kit, so I would have to send
my engine mount and landing gear back and get the tail wheel, is this
correct.
I'm sure I'm not the first to change their mind. One might wonder what
drive me to a big change in plans. Believe it or not it was safety.
Grass fields and tail wheels go together, plus don't forget the sexy
look of a day gone by.
Can anyone tell me if they've ever done the conversion at this point of
the game?
Thanks,
Dan S.
OKC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Landing gear or not? |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Morning all,
Engine should be with me in the next week or so. The airframe is ready
but I was wondering whether to put the fuse on the landing gear or not?
I have a tractor with a front loader so lifting the airframe plus
engine(with a nylon strap under the fuse or around engine mount) up onto
its gear later would be no problem.
I have not installed any instruments/wiring so was thinking having to
not have to climb up into the plane with it on its gear might be an
ergonomic advantage.
Anyone have any thoughts on this approach??
Thanks
RV7a...fuse complete..almost..:)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing gear or not? |
My opinion is that you should finish as much of your wiring as humanly
possible before installing the engine. I had a much easier time wiring with
my engine NOT installed, and with the fuse on a short sawhorse, since I
could stand right in front of the firewall and reach back in.
Basically, here's my advice fwiw...
Finish the fuselage interior. Paint it if you want. Install the sub-panel
and associated front deck structure. Install your panel, instruments,
avionics. Wire everything up. Install as many firewall doodads as you can
before the engine goes on (battery box, contactors, transducer manifold,
brake fluid reservoir, nutplates for this and that, bulkhead fittings for
fuel & stuff, etc. Install the engine mount. Put it on gear. Hang the
engine.
Just my 2 cents,
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
Subject: RV7-List: Landing gear or not?
>
>
> Morning all,
>
> Engine should be with me in the next week or so. The airframe is ready
> but I was wondering whether to put the fuse on the landing gear or not?
>
> I have a tractor with a front loader so lifting the airframe plus
> engine(with a nylon strap under the fuse or around engine mount) up onto
> its gear later would be no problem.
>
> I have not installed any instruments/wiring so was thinking having to
> not have to climb up into the plane with it on its gear might be an
> ergonomic advantage.
>
> Anyone have any thoughts on this approach??
>
> Thanks
>
> RV7a...fuse complete..almost..:)
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Landing gear or not? |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Thanks Dan,
Certainly hard to argue with your success but unfortunatly the engine is
on its way and I can't quite afford the instruments yet. Van's said to
do the engine first and the wiring after. Oh well..Another couple of
months and I'll be ready to order instruments so it looks like I'm stuck
with hanging the engine before wiring.
I have the firewall just about ready but as the invert kit is coming
with the engine I wanted to have everything in hand before I bolt on the
battery box and contactors.
Sounds like having the thing down low is an advantage though so I can
easily lift it off its landing gear and set it back down on a low
sawhorse with the engine in place (might have to drop off the exhaust as
well I guess).
Its an adventure right?...:)
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
Subject: Re: RV7-List: Landing gear or not?
My opinion is that you should finish as much of your wiring as humanly
possible before installing the engine. I had a much easier time wiring
with my engine NOT installed, and with the fuse on a short sawhorse,
since I could stand right in front of the firewall and reach back in.
Basically, here's my advice fwiw...
Finish the fuselage interior. Paint it if you want. Install the
sub-panel and associated front deck structure. Install your panel,
instruments, avionics. Wire everything up. Install as many firewall
doodads as you can before the engine goes on (battery box, contactors,
transducer manifold, brake fluid reservoir, nutplates for this and that,
bulkhead fittings for fuel & stuff, etc. Install the engine mount. Put
it on gear. Hang the engine.
Just my 2 cents,
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
Subject: RV7-List: Landing gear or not?
>
>
> Morning all,
>
> Engine should be with me in the next week or so. The airframe is
ready
> but I was wondering whether to put the fuse on the landing gear or
not?
>
> I have a tractor with a front loader so lifting the airframe plus
> engine(with a nylon strap under the fuse or around engine mount) up
onto
> its gear later would be no problem.
>
> I have not installed any instruments/wiring so was thinking having to
> not have to climb up into the plane with it on its gear might be an
> ergonomic advantage.
>
> Anyone have any thoughts on this approach??
>
> Thanks
>
> RV7a...fuse complete..almost..:)
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Well, well.
Just talked to John Stark and he will sell me the trays for all my panel
toys now and build the wiring harness. He will then credit the full cost
of the trays towards my avionics when I purchase them.
This is very very cool because it means I can do all the wiring and
completely defray the cost of the avionics.
As I have to save for everything before I buy it (It's a function of
being an English tightwad) this allows me to install wiring before
engine as Dan suggested below.
Pretty neat huh?
My opinion is that you should finish as much of your wiring as humanly
possible before installing the engine. I had a much easier time wiring
with my engine NOT installed, and with the fuse on a short sawhorse,
since I could stand right in front of the firewall and reach back in.
Basically, here's my advice fwiw...
Finish the fuselage interior. Paint it if you want. Install the
sub-panel and associated front deck structure. Install your panel,
instruments, avionics. Wire everything up. Install as many firewall
doodads as you can before the engine goes on (battery box, contactors,
transducer manifold, brake fluid reservoir, nutplates for this and that,
bulkhead fittings for fuel & stuff, etc. Install the engine mount. Put
it on gear. Hang the engine.
Just my 2 cents,
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Taylor" <mtaylo17(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing gear or not? |
Yup, that's the best way, and the way I'm attacking mine. Practically all my
wiring is done now bar a few odds and ends, so I put the plane up on it's
gear the other week. It's funny, because when it's down on a sawhorse, it
makes progress seem so slow. When it goes up on the wheels though, it's like
WOW! I'm almost done! Well, seems like it anyway, but I know it's nowhere
even close still!
Mark
www.4sierratango.com
>From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
>Reply-To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Re: RV7-List: Landing gear or not?
>Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 10:06:04 -0700
>
>
>My opinion is that you should finish as much of your wiring as humanly
>possible before installing the engine. I had a much easier time wiring
>with
>my engine NOT installed, and with the fuse on a short sawhorse, since I
>could stand right in front of the firewall and reach back in.
>
>Basically, here's my advice fwiw...
>
>Finish the fuselage interior. Paint it if you want. Install the sub-panel
>and associated front deck structure. Install your panel, instruments,
>avionics. Wire everything up. Install as many firewall doodads as you can
>before the engine goes on (battery box, contactors, transducer manifold,
>brake fluid reservoir, nutplates for this and that, bulkhead fittings for
>fuel & stuff, etc. Install the engine mount. Put it on gear. Hang the
>engine.
>
>Just my 2 cents,
>)_( Dan
>RV-7 N714D
>http://www.rvproject.com
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
>To:
>Subject: RV7-List: Landing gear or not?
>
>
> >
> >
> > Morning all,
> >
> > Engine should be with me in the next week or so. The airframe is ready
> > but I was wondering whether to put the fuse on the landing gear or not?
> >
> > I have a tractor with a front loader so lifting the airframe plus
> > engine(with a nylon strap under the fuse or around engine mount) up onto
> > its gear later would be no problem.
> >
> > I have not installed any instruments/wiring so was thinking having to
> > not have to climb up into the plane with it on its gear might be an
> > ergonomic advantage.
> >
> > Anyone have any thoughts on this approach??
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > RV7a...fuse complete..almost..:)
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Hi guys,
The drawing for the map box shows cut out's in two different location on
the instrument pnel depending on whether it is a tip-up or slider
canopy.
The tip up is shown lower on theinstrument panel than the slider.
I have a tip up but want to pit the map box up higher like on the slider
to fit the Dynon engine instrument under the map box. It will fit but
only if the map box is up higher.
I can't see any reason the map box can't go up high but wondered if
anyone had any actual experience on this...i did phone Van's but guess
where they are?..:)
Thanks
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
The tip up frame, the C channel at the front of the canopy, comes down about
2 or 3 inches from the top. That's about all I can think of at the
moment...
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
Subject: RV7-List: Map Box
>
>
> Hi guys,
>
> The drawing for the map box shows cut out's in two different location on
> the instrument pnel depending on whether it is a tip-up or slider
> canopy.
>
> The tip up is shown lower on theinstrument panel than the slider.
>
> I have a tip up but want to pit the map box up higher like on the slider
> to fit the Dynon engine instrument under the map box. It will fit but
> only if the map box is up higher.
>
> I can't see any reason the map box can't go up high but wondered if
> anyone had any actual experience on this...i did phone Van's but guess
> where they are?..:)
>
> Thanks
>
> Frank
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alf Olav Frog <alfolavf(at)online.no> |
| Subject: | Right hand seat? |
Hello fellow-builders!
I live i Norway and am starting on the empennage on my RV-7A QB next week.
I'm considering building the cockpit so the right hand seat is the pilot-seat.
That way I can have the right hand on the stick and the left on throttle and prop-control.
That suits and ex-fighterpilot better! hehe!
I have not decided on engine or instruments yet, but the inndodyn turbine sure
is interesting!
Fuelprice for 100L here in Norway now is approx 6 USD per gallon!
Jet A-1 is almost 1/3 of this...
Diesel is approx half...
I'm planning to fly both aerobatics and x-country so the Eggenfellner engine is
no option I guess??. (price for autofuel is approx the same as for diesel)
Does any of you have built an RV-7 with the right hand seat as primary?
Will it be any big problems doing this?
For example have I ordered elec aileron and elevator trim and lighting system nr
6 from Vans. Will this be ok or do I have to modify these sets to fit the right
hand seat?
Can anyone give me a good reason for why the left seat is standard pilot seat??
Best regards Alf Olav Frog, a builder-to-be... :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Right hand seat? |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
I'm building mine from the left seat and am told it is easy to change
hands....But I'm nervous about it. If I can't deal with it it does not
look "THAT" big of a deal to install a little sub panel and mount the
cables on the left...Assuming the lengths will still work.
The reason the left seat is standard is because most the traffic
patterns turn to the left so its easier to see where your going.
Forget the Innodyn, I been following it for months...Highly unlikely its
going to work out.
As for the Eggenfelner, yes it is a good package but it is still
debatable as to what performance loss there is running a water cooled
moter (extra cooling drag) in a slippery RV...In the early versions it
was reputed to be 25 mph at cruise...or cruise at the same speed but use
a lot more fuel.
Until there is a head to head fly off I we won't know for sure.
Hae you thought about a Lycoming clone?...Word is they will run
perfectly well on autofuel and that is what I am planning albeit a
slightly different fuel pumping layout to be sure to avoid vapour lock,
and please don't all start a war on me...yes autofuel will lean
perfectly well too as long as a close eye is kept on the CHT monitor.
You have a quite a ways to go before ordering the engine plenty of time
to look at options.
All the best
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alf Olav Frog
Subject: RV7-List: Right hand seat?
Hello fellow-builders!
I live i Norway and am starting on the empennage on my RV-7A QB next
week.
I'm considering building the cockpit so the right hand seat is the
pilot-seat.
That way I can have the right hand on the stick and the left on throttle
and prop-control. That suits and ex-fighterpilot better! hehe!
I have not decided on engine or instruments yet, but the inndodyn
turbine sure is interesting!
Fuelprice for 100L here in Norway now is approx 6 USD per gallon!
Jet A-1 is almost 1/3 of this...
Diesel is approx half...
I'm planning to fly both aerobatics and x-country so the Eggenfellner
engine is no option I guess??. (price for autofuel is approx the same as
for diesel)
Does any of you have built an RV-7 with the right hand seat as primary?
Will it be any big problems doing this?
For example have I ordered elec aileron and elevator trim and lighting
system nr 6 from Vans. Will this be ok or do I have to modify these sets
to fit the right hand seat?
Can anyone give me a good reason for why the left seat is standard pilot
seat??
Best regards Alf Olav Frog, a builder-to-be... :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Right hand seat? |
| From: | Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com> |
One alternative might be to put the throttle quadrant on the
left and stay in the left seat - take a look at Dan Checkoway's
site for an example ...
http://www.rvproject.com
g
>
>
> Hello fellow-builders!
>
> I live i Norway and am starting on the empennage on my RV-7A QB
> next week.
>
> I'm considering building the cockpit so the right hand seat is
> the pilot-seat.
> That way I can have the right hand on the stick and the left on
> throttle and prop-control. That suits and ex-fighterpilot
> better! hehe!
>
> I have not decided on engine or instruments yet, but the
> inndodyn turbine sure is interesting!
> Fuelprice for 100L here in Norway now is approx 6 USD per gallon!
> Jet A-1 is almost 1/3 of this...
> Diesel is approx half...
> I'm planning to fly both aerobatics and x-country so the
> Eggenfellner engine is no option I guess??. (price for autofuel
> is approx the same as for diesel)
>
> Does any of you have built an RV-7 with the right hand seat as primary?
> Will it be any big problems doing this?
> For example have I ordered elec aileron and elevator trim and
> lighting system nr 6 from Vans. Will this be ok or do I have to
> modify these sets to fit the right hand seat?
>
> Can anyone give me a good reason for why the left seat is
> standard pilot seat??
>
> Best regards Alf Olav Frog, a builder-to-be... :-)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
Tel: 415 203 9177
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Prior (rv7)" <rv7(at)b4.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Right hand seat? |
On 2:25:18 2005-07-29 Alf Olav Frog wrote:
> Does any of you have built an RV-7 with the right hand seat as
> primary? Will it be any big problems doing this?
> For example have I ordered elec aileron and elevator trim and
> lighting system nr 6 from Vans. Will this be ok or do I have to modify
> these sets to fit the right hand seat?
I'm building mine this way as well. There are no technical limitations
that preclude putting the pilot's seat on the right side. Since you're
building it from the start, you can put anything you need where you want
it. Electric trim and lighting hardware can all be mounted for right seat
pilots.
Another option would be to install dual engine controls, one set in the
center of the panel and one on the left side of the left seat. Many people
have done this, but in my opinion the installations i've seen have all
looked like afterthoughts. The ones i've tried have all felt either too
loose or too tight, because of the extra hardware for the two systems.
> Can anyone give me a good reason for why the left seat is standard
> pilot seat??
Standard circuits are left-hand, so you are always on the side that can see
the airport. Not a problem in a military (tandem seating) airplane.
-Rob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Hall" <dhall(at)donka.net> |
| Subject: | Right hand seat? |
I thought it was the brits that liked sitting on the wrong side. ;>
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alf Olav Frog
Subject: RV7-List: Right hand seat?
Hello fellow-builders!
I live i Norway and am starting on the empennage on my RV-7A QB next week.
I'm considering building the cockpit so the right hand seat is the
pilot-seat.
That way I can have the right hand on the stick and the left on throttle and
prop-control. That suits and ex-fighterpilot better! hehe!
I have not decided on engine or instruments yet, but the inndodyn turbine
sure is interesting!
Fuelprice for 100L here in Norway now is approx 6 USD per gallon!
Jet A-1 is almost 1/3 of this...
Diesel is approx half...
I'm planning to fly both aerobatics and x-country so the Eggenfellner engine
is no option I guess??. (price for autofuel is approx the same as for
diesel)
Does any of you have built an RV-7 with the right hand seat as primary?
Will it be any big problems doing this?
For example have I ordered elec aileron and elevator trim and lighting
system nr 6 from Vans. Will this be ok or do I have to modify these sets to
fit the right hand seat?
Can anyone give me a good reason for why the left seat is standard pilot
seat??
Best regards Alf Olav Frog, a builder-to-be... :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | OneFighterPilot(at)AOL.com |
| Subject: | Re: Right hand seat? |
In a message dated 7/29/2005 12:42:17 PM Eastern Standard Time,
dhall(at)donka.net writes:
I'm considering building the cockpit so the right hand seat is the
pilot-seat.
That way I can have the right hand on the stick and the left on throttle and
prop-control. That suits and ex-fighterpilot better! hehe!
I am also an ex-fighter pilot. I decided to install a second throttle on
left siderail, and kept the original throttle all hooked up. Works great, can
fly from either seat now, with brakes on both sides too.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Right hand seat? |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Interesting, so if I understand correctly you left the mixture, prop,
and throttle in the middle and just added the second throttle?
How did you connect the throttles together?
I would love to do this method as I fly with the stick in my right
hand...no jokes please..:)
Frank
Cutting instrument panel, RV 7a
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
OneFighterPilot(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: RV7-List: Right hand seat?
In a message dated 7/29/2005 12:42:17 PM Eastern Standard Time,
dhall(at)donka.net writes:
I'm considering building the cockpit so the right hand seat is the
pilot-seat.
That way I can have the right hand on the stick and the left on
throttle and prop-control. That suits and ex-fighterpilot better! hehe!
I am also an ex-fighter pilot. I decided to install a second throttle
on left siderail, and kept the original throttle all hooked up. Works
great, can fly from either seat now, with brakes on both sides too.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | OneFighterPilot(at)AOL.com |
| Subject: | Re: Right hand seat? |
In a message dated 7/29/2005 3:23:05 PM Eastern Standard Time,
frank.hinde(at)hp.com writes:
Interesting, so if I understand correctly you left the mixture, prop,
and throttle in the middle and just added the second throttle?
How did you connect the throttles together?
Yes, only throttle on left. Contact FBO guy here at Spruce Creek Fly-In for
pix via email, etc.
Paul Brevard at _SpruceCreekAir(at)BellSouth.net_
(mailto:SpruceCreekAir(at)BellSouth.net) He installed it, and both trottles work in unison just lovely.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | OneFighterPilot(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Right hand seat? |
Hey, I spent a lot of years in the UK, and that comment did not come from
me. I love the Brits for many reasons, one of which is that they are usually
smarter than us here in America on a number of issues. Unfortunately, one of
them is not this frigging war.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William J. Applegate" <bigapple(at)gct21.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Right hand seat? |
Hi Alf,
At some very, very distant point in the future you will be transferring
ownership to someone else. I would not recommend building anything that
would lessen the appeal to the "new" owner. I am a retired Air Force
fighter pilot and now own an aircraft with two yokes and throttle, prop
and mixture controls located in the center of the panel. I had never
operated a prop before and was a little daunted by the concept, but it
all has been a non issue. I'm sure that flying from the left seat will
not be a problem for you. I would try to get a left seat ride with an
IP and check it out before I made the decision to fixate on a right seat
configuration.
Best regards.......Bill Applegate, Tucson, Arizona, USA
Alf Olav Frog wrote:
>
>Hello fellow-builders!
>
>I live i Norway and am starting on the empennage on my RV-7A QB next week.
>
>I'm considering building the cockpit so the right hand seat is the pilot-seat.
>That way I can have the right hand on the stick and the left on throttle and prop-control.
That suits and ex-fighterpilot better! hehe!
>
>I have not decided on engine or instruments yet, but the inndodyn turbine sure
is interesting!
>Fuelprice for 100L here in Norway now is approx 6 USD per gallon!
>Jet A-1 is almost 1/3 of this...
>Diesel is approx half...
>I'm planning to fly both aerobatics and x-country so the Eggenfellner engine is
no option I guess??. (price for autofuel is approx the same as for diesel)
>
>Does any of you have built an RV-7 with the right hand seat as primary?
>Will it be any big problems doing this?
>For example have I ordered elec aileron and elevator trim and lighting system
nr 6 from Vans. Will this be ok or do I have to modify these sets to fit the right
hand seat?
>
>Can anyone give me a good reason for why the left seat is standard pilot seat??
>
>Best regards Alf Olav Frog, a builder-to-be... :-)
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | OneFighterPilot(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Right hand seat? |
In a message dated 7/29/2005 3:55:40 PM Eastern Standard Time,
OneFighterPilot(at)aol.com writes:
Interesting, so if I understand correctly you left the mixture, prop,
and throttle in the middle and just added the second throttle?
How did you connect the throttles together?
Yes, only throttle on left. Contact FBO guy here at Spruce Creek Fly-In
for
pix via email, etc.
Paul Brevard at _SpruceCreekAir(at)BellSouth.net_
(mailto:SpruceCreekAir(at)BellSouth.net) He installed it, and both trottles
work in unison just lovely.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alf Olav Frog <alfolavf(at)online.no> |
| Subject: | 2 or 3 blade prop?? |
>
>
> Hello again!
>
> Thanks for all the inputs regarding the right hand seat! Great that there's a
forum like this for us who are living outside of the "action"!
>
> Since I got so good response on my first issue, here's another choice I've to
make: 2 or 3 blade prop?
>
> Ok, I know that the engine-choice is the first and biggest, but there I'm so
far looking into different options.... what IS decided however, is a CS-prop.
>
> When the engine-choice is made, I'll check out the producers opinon regarding
this, but what do you guys out there think??
> I was thinking that since I'm building a 7A, the distance to the ground from
the propellertips would be slightly greater (better) with a 3 blade since this
prop has a smaller diameter??
> Is there any big advantages or disadvantages with a 3 blade vs a 2 blade? (expect
for the price...)
> Is a 2 blade more efficient maybe??
>
>
>
> Best regards Alf Olav Frog
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Hall" <dhall(at)donka.net> |
| Subject: | 2 or 3 blade prop?? |
3-blade is less noisy. I bet that's a more important consideration in
Europe than here in the States.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alf Olav Frog
Subject: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>
>
> Hello again!
>
> Thanks for all the inputs regarding the right hand seat! Great that
there's a forum like this for us who are living outside of the "action"!
>
> Since I got so good response on my first issue, here's another choice I've
to make: 2 or 3 blade prop?
>
> Ok, I know that the engine-choice is the first and biggest, but there I'm
so far looking into different options.... what IS decided however, is a
CS-prop.
>
> When the engine-choice is made, I'll check out the producers opinon
regarding this, but what do you guys out there think??
> I was thinking that since I'm building a 7A, the distance to the ground
from the propellertips would be slightly greater (better) with a 3 blade
since this prop has a smaller diameter??
> Is there any big advantages or disadvantages with a 3 blade vs a 2
> blade? (expect for the price...) Is a 2 blade more efficient maybe??
>
>
> Best regards Alf Olav Frog
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 or 3 blade prop?? |
Alf Olav Frog wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>Hello again!
>>
>>Thanks for all the inputs regarding the right hand seat! Great that there's a
forum like this for us who are living outside of the "action"!
>>
>>Since I got so good response on my first issue, here's another choice I've to
make: 2 or 3 blade prop?
>>
>>Ok, I know that the engine-choice is the first and biggest, but there I'm so
far looking into different options.... what IS decided however, is a CS-prop.
>>
>>When the engine-choice is made, I'll check out the producers opinon regarding
this, but what do you guys out there think??
>>I was thinking that since I'm building a 7A, the distance to the ground from
the propellertips would be slightly greater (better) with a 3 blade since this
prop has a smaller diameter??
>>Is there any big advantages or disadvantages with a 3 blade vs a 2 blade? (expect
for the price...)
>>Is a 2 blade more efficient maybe??
>>
>>
>>
>>Best regards Alf Olav Frog
>>
2 blades are usually cheaper & usually slightly faster. Someone will now
jump in with info that their particular 3 blade is faster. ;-) 3 blades
are usually smaller in diameter but there should be plenty of ground
clearance anyway. 3 blades are usually a bit quieter & can be a bit
smoother. Offsetting the quieter feature of the smaller diameter 3 blade
is the fact that at low speeds the larger the diameter the more
efficient (higher thrust per hp) the prop will be. Some pay the extra
money for the 'cool' factor of the 3 blades.
My opinion is that new modern airfoil 2 blades & 3 blades are close
enough that the decision for me would come down to money.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Williams <Tramsootru(at)direcway.com> |
Hey guys..
Does anyone know if ACS has a standalone EFIS or if they still only offer
the engine management system?
thanks
Jeff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "WILLIAM KELLY" <v1rotate(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 or 3 blade prop?? |
There is an excellent article on the benefits and tradeoffs of 2 blade
versus 3 blade props in the latest issue of "Aviation Consumer" magazine.
You might want to get a copy.
Bill Kelly
RV-7A wannabe builder
>> Hello again!
>>
>> Thanks for all the inputs regarding the right hand seat! Great that
>> there's a forum like this for us who are living outside of the "action"!
>>
>> Since I got so good response on my first issue, here's another choice
>> I've to make: 2 or 3 blade prop?
>>
>> Ok, I know that the engine-choice is the first and biggest, but there I'm
>> so far looking into different options.... what IS decided however, is a
>> CS-prop.
>>
>> When the engine-choice is made, I'll check out the producers opinon
>> regarding this, but what do you guys out there think??
>> I was thinking that since I'm building a 7A, the distance to the ground
>> from the propellertips would be slightly greater (better) with a 3 blade
>> since this prop has a smaller diameter??
>> Is there any big advantages or disadvantages with a 3 blade vs a 2 blade?
>> (expect for the price...)
>> Is a 2 blade more efficient maybe??
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards Alf Olav Frog
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Taylor" <mtaylo17(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 or 3 blade prop?? |
After flying a Diamond with a three blade MT, it was more than enough to
convince me. It was so smooth and quiet.
I ordered my prop at Oshkosh this past week. A three blade MT.
Mark.
>From: "WILLIAM KELLY" <v1rotate(at)verizon.net>
>Reply-To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Re: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2005 00:38:53 -0700
>
>
>There is an excellent article on the benefits and tradeoffs of 2 blade
>versus 3 blade props in the latest issue of "Aviation Consumer" magazine.
>You might want to get a copy.
>
>Bill Kelly
>RV-7A wannabe builder
>
> >> Hello again!
> >>
> >> Thanks for all the inputs regarding the right hand seat! Great that
> >> there's a forum like this for us who are living outside of the
>"action"!
> >>
> >> Since I got so good response on my first issue, here's another choice
> >> I've to make: 2 or 3 blade prop?
> >>
> >> Ok, I know that the engine-choice is the first and biggest, but there
>I'm
> >> so far looking into different options.... what IS decided however, is a
> >> CS-prop.
> >>
> >> When the engine-choice is made, I'll check out the producers opinon
> >> regarding this, but what do you guys out there think??
> >> I was thinking that since I'm building a 7A, the distance to the ground
> >> from the propellertips would be slightly greater (better) with a 3
>blade
> >> since this prop has a smaller diameter??
> >> Is there any big advantages or disadvantages with a 3 blade vs a 2
>blade?
> >> (expect for the price...)
> >> Is a 2 blade more efficient maybe??
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Best regards Alf Olav Frog
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | 2 or 3 blade prop?? |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
A bit controversial this one but from my desk research my conclusion was
the MT 3 blade prop reduced the speed of the airplane, but run smoother.
The Hartzell prop although heavy was not quite as fast as the fastest of
the bunch it's a lot cheaper. For me (highly personal decision) the
Hartzell was the best value for money and they seem to have resolved
their repair problems they were plagued with a few years ago....At least
I know of several examples oflate with high hours and no issues.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alf Olav Frog
Subject: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>
>
> Hello again!
>
> Thanks for all the inputs regarding the right hand seat! Great that
there's a forum like this for us who are living outside of the "action"!
>
> Since I got so good response on my first issue, here's another choice
I've to make: 2 or 3 blade prop?
>
> Ok, I know that the engine-choice is the first and biggest, but there
I'm so far looking into different options.... what IS decided however,
is a CS-prop.
>
> When the engine-choice is made, I'll check out the producers opinon
regarding this, but what do you guys out there think??
> I was thinking that since I'm building a 7A, the distance to the
ground from the propellertips would be slightly greater (better) with a
3 blade since this prop has a smaller diameter??
> Is there any big advantages or disadvantages with a 3 blade vs a 2
> blade? (expect for the price...) Is a 2 blade more efficient maybe??
>
>
>
> Best regards Alf Olav Frog
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Bob,
Thanks for hosting this. I had a great time.
You did an awful lot of work to make this happen. Please keep my email and
let me know how I can help next year.
John McDonnell
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Hall" <dhall(at)donka.net> |
I want to leave the protective blue film on my finished surfaces till it's
absolutely necessary to remove it. So that could be 2-3 years for the blue
film on all the finished tail feathers. I understand there is a chance that
the adhesive gets old, stickier, and harder to remove. Anybody experienced
that?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: that blue stuff |
Don Hall wrote:
>
>I want to leave the protective blue film on my finished surfaces till it's
>absolutely necessary to remove it. So that could be 2-3 years for the blue
>film on all the finished tail feathers. I understand there is a chance that
>the adhesive gets old, stickier, and harder to remove. Anybody experienced
>that?
>
I've been removing some that's about 2 years old over the last couple of
days. Most comes off easily. The sheets that are stubborn just leave
some adhesive on the metal. I've found that a heat gun used to head the
metal only a little (still not too hot to touch) has made mine release
easily. It even helps with the stuff that's releasing ok, making the job
go faster.
Some have seen corrosion problems under the plastic. I've only seen a
couple of very small spots at the edge of a piece that were less of a
problem than some scratches that were there when I unboxed the parts.
YMMV
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Imken" <skikrazi(at)centurytel.net> |
I built a map box and put it between the seats on my RV-7A tip
up.......something you may want to consider. With a flip over padded top,
it also serves as an arm rest for both pilot and passenger.
Chuck
N735RV
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
Subject: Re: RV7-List: Map Box
The tip up frame, the C channel at the front of the canopy, comes down about
2 or 3 inches from the top. That's about all I can think of at the
moment...
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
Subject: RV7-List: Map Box
>
>
> Hi guys,
>
> The drawing for the map box shows cut out's in two different location on
> the instrument pnel depending on whether it is a tip-up or slider
> canopy.
>
> The tip up is shown lower on theinstrument panel than the slider.
>
> I have a tip up but want to pit the map box up higher like on the slider
> to fit the Dynon engine instrument under the map box. It will fit but
> only if the map box is up higher.
>
> I can't see any reason the map box can't go up high but wondered if
> anyone had any actual experience on this...i did phone Van's but guess
> where they are?..:)
>
> Thanks
>
> Frank
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Imken" <skikrazi(at)centurytel.net> |
Heat gun helps but did not help much on my blue vinyl left on for 3 years.
I let the painter take off the sticky stuff when he painted it.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Charlie England
Subject: Re: RV7-List: that blue stuff
Don Hall wrote:
>
>I want to leave the protective blue film on my finished surfaces till it's
>absolutely necessary to remove it. So that could be 2-3 years for the blue
>film on all the finished tail feathers. I understand there is a chance
that
>the adhesive gets old, stickier, and harder to remove. Anybody experienced
>that?
>
I've been removing some that's about 2 years old over the last couple of
days. Most comes off easily. The sheets that are stubborn just leave
some adhesive on the metal. I've found that a heat gun used to head the
metal only a little (still not too hot to touch) has made mine release
easily. It even helps with the stuff that's releasing ok, making the job
go faster.
Some have seen corrosion problems under the plastic. I've only seen a
couple of very small spots at the edge of a piece that were less of a
problem than some scratches that were there when I unboxed the parts.
YMMV
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
I did think of this and have seen a few designs that might be easy to
retrofit. At the moment I'm dealing with the Wife who is making deamnds
like...I want a headrest, little pouches for everything, comfy seats etc
etc.
Now all of this is reasonable if I want her to travel long distances in
this airplane..Trouble is I also know how building time goes exponential
for all but the simplest of deviations from the plans..
OK so has put a PX headrest in their RV7 tip up?..:)
Frank
Finished cutting out the instrument panel....Coool!
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Imken
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Map Box
I built a map box and put it between the seats on my RV-7A tip
up.......something you may want to consider. With a flip over padded
top, it also serves as an arm rest for both pilot and passenger.
Chuck
N735RV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Norman Younie <rv6capt(at)pacificcoast.net> |
How are you going to get into the baggage area if you put in headrests??
Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis) wrote:
>
>I did think of this and have seen a few designs that might be easy to
>retrofit. At the moment I'm dealing with the Wife who is making deamnds
>like...I want a headrest, little pouches for everything, comfy seats etc
>etc.
>
>Now all of this is reasonable if I want her to travel long distances in
>this airplane..Trouble is I also know how building time goes exponential
>for all but the simplest of deviations from the plans..
>
>OK so has put a PX headrest in their RV7 tip up?..:)
>
>Frank
>Finished cutting out the instrument panel....Coool!
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Imken
>To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: RV7-List: Map Box
>
>
>I built a map box and put it between the seats on my RV-7A tip
>up.......something you may want to consider. With a flip over padded
>top, it also serves as an arm rest for both pilot and passenger.
>Chuck
>N735RV
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Brunke" <jwbrunk(at)attglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Right hand seat? |
Frank,
Would you mind going into some of the things you have found out about the
Innodyn engine that would not make it suitable for the RV? The simplicity
of parts and power for weight seem very promising.
John Brunke
St. Charles, IL
>
>" Forget the Innodyn, I been following it for months...Highly unlikely its
> going to work out."
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | OneFighterPilot(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: To the fighter pilots |
In a message dated 8/1/2005 11:15:00 AM Eastern Standard Time,
frank.hinde(at)hp.com writes:
What exactly is the appeal of an RV to an ex fighter pilot?....I mean
the RV's are fabulous to us ex spam can jockeys but I'm having a hard
time imagining why someone who has done aerobatics at 600mph for a
living would be interested in a measly 200mph on a good day...and spend
up to $100k getting there...
I mean are RV's really THAT good?...:)
VERY Good Point you make. I have nearly 5000 hours fighter time and hadn't
flown in about 25 years. So, being the romantic, I decided to get something
that looked neat, would pull Gs for gentleman's acro and get that old feeling
back-----that excitment, the rush. After 50 hours in my RV-6, I found out
that the RV just doesn't do it for me. It's for sale now, a beautiful bird
with fewer than 160 hours on it total time. You can't go home again, so to
speak, not in an RV.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Right hand seat? |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
There is an Innodyn "Yahoo groups" that has a number of informed
opinions...and a lot of hot air like any list..:)
Anyway, there are a few guys in there with actual design experience with
turbines and a number of high time jet pilots and flight engineers etc.
All of these folks are attracted to homebuilts with turbines because
they have been flying them for so long.
Anyway, the jist of the argument is there is now way a little turbine
with a single rotor with (I'm guessing a little) a 4:1 pressure ratio
will give anything like 7GPH for each 100HP.
Either the pressure ratio is much higher (like 14:1) not possible with a
single wheel or it doesn't make anywhere near the power they claim OR it
guzzles fuel at an eye watering rate!...Actually all turbines guzzle
fuel but they are suggesting this engine is more efficient than just
about any turbine out there.
Innodyn has been EXTREMLY evasive when repeatedly asked about fuel
consumption.
So there you have it..I know very little about turbines (except of
course like any patriotic Brit, it was invented by Sir Frank Whittle, a
noted Brit!)
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Brunke
Subject: Re: RV7-List: Right hand seat?
Frank,
Would you mind going into some of the things you have found out about
the
Innodyn engine that would not make it suitable for the RV? The
simplicity
of parts and power for weight seem very promising.
John Brunke
St. Charles, IL
>
>" Forget the Innodyn, I been following it for months...Highly unlikely
>its going to work out."
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: To the fighter pilots |
> Yes I have built a F1 Rocket and there is nothing out there like it. It
> will out climb and out roll the Extra 300.
Sounds fun.
What's your typical true airspeed in cruise, and at what fuel burn? How
about the cost of insurance?
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D (578 hours)
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel Storer" <dstorer(at)okwifi.com> |
| Subject: | 2 or 3 blade prop?? |
Most folks that fly aerobatics in RV's prefer the Hartzell prop over the MT
for the CS response time ......just a thought for the selection criteria
Dan S.
OKC 7A Wings/Fuse
-------Original Message-------
From: Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
Date: 07/31/05 11:30:13
Subject: RE: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
hinde(at)hp.com>
A bit controversial this one but from my desk research my conclusion was
the MT 3 blade prop reduced the speed of the airplane, but run smoother.
The Hartzell prop although heavy was not quite as fast as the fastest of
the bunch it's a lot cheaper. For me (highly personal decision) the
Hartzell was the best value for money and they seem to have resolved
their repair problems they were plagued with a few years ago....At least
I know of several examples oflate with high hours and no issues.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alf Olav Frog
Subject: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>
>
> Hello again!
>
> Thanks for all the inputs regarding the right hand seat! Great that
there's a forum like this for us who are living outside of the "action"!
>
> Since I got so good response on my first issue, here's another choice
I've to make: 2 or 3 blade prop?
>
> Ok, I know that the engine-choice is the first and biggest, but there
I'm so far looking into different options.... what IS decided however,
is a CS-prop.
>
> When the engine-choice is made, I'll check out the producers opinon
regarding this, but what do you guys out there think??
> I was thinking that since I'm building a 7A, the distance to the
ground from the propellertips would be slightly greater (better) with a
3 blade since this prop has a smaller diameter??
> Is there any big advantages or disadvantages with a 3 blade vs a 2
> blade? (expect for the price...) Is a 2 blade more efficient maybe??
>
>
> Best regards Alf Olav Frog
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Norman Younie <rv6capt(at)pacificcoast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: To the fighter pilots |
Fuel burn 10.6 at 190kts economy cruise.
Dan Checkoway wrote:
>
>
>
>>Yes I have built a F1 Rocket and there is nothing out there like it. It
>>will out climb and out roll the Extra 300.
>>
>>
>
>Sounds fun.
>
>What's your typical true airspeed in cruise, and at what fuel burn? How
>about the cost of insurance?
>
>)_( Dan
>RV-7 N714D (578 hours)
>http://www.rvproject.com
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Pflimlin" <pablo(at)phonewave.net> |
| Subject: | Re: To the fighter pilots |
Speed is relative!! 150 MPH is damn fast at ten feet above terrain or
water. Mach 1 or more, is just like floating in a balloon at Angels 30 and
that's where fighter pilots do their aerobatics. 4 G's is 4 G's at Mach 1
or 150 MPH. A Piper cub or a fully loaded C-47 landing with a 25 MPH 90o x
wind is real exciting. An A-6 Intruder flying nap of the earth at night
is exciting. Aerobatics in an RV or Citabria are both fun and exciting.
Aviation; wheather flying a TD a Helo a seaplane or night LDGs on a
Carrier are full of fun and thrills. After more than 50 years of doing it
you never get tired, at least I never have.
----- Original Message -----
From: <OneFighterPilot(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV7-List: To the fighter pilots
>
>
> In a message dated 8/1/2005 11:15:00 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> frank.hinde(at)hp.com writes:
>
>
> What exactly is the appeal of an RV to an ex fighter pilot?....I mean
> the RV's are fabulous to us ex spam can jockeys but I'm having a hard
> time imagining why someone who has done aerobatics at 600mph for a
> living would be interested in a measly 200mph on a good day...and spend
> up to $100k getting there...
>
> I mean are RV's really THAT good?...:)
>
>
> VERY Good Point you make. I have nearly 5000 hours fighter time and
> hadn't
> flown in about 25 years. So, being the romantic, I decided to get
> something
> that looked neat, would pull Gs for gentleman's acro and get that old
> feeling
> back-----that excitment, the rush. After 50 hours in my RV-6, I found
> out
> that the RV just doesn't do it for me. It's for sale now, a beautiful
> bird
> with fewer than 160 hours on it total time. You can't go home again, so
> to
> speak, not in an RV.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | 2 or 3 blade prop?? |
Doesn't the hydraulic CS MT uses the same governor as the Hartzell? If so
why would the speed of change differ? I know the electrically control CS MT
is slower but on a Lyc it could be the governor. Am I wrong here?
Bevan
RV7A fuse
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Storer
Subject: RE: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
Most folks that fly aerobatics in RV's prefer the Hartzell prop over the MT
for the CS response time ......just a thought for the selection criteria
Dan S.
OKC 7A Wings/Fuse
-------Original Message-------
From: Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
Date: 07/31/05 11:30:13
Subject: RE: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
hinde(at)hp.com>
A bit controversial this one but from my desk research my conclusion was the
MT 3 blade prop reduced the speed of the airplane, but run smoother.
The Hartzell prop although heavy was not quite as fast as the fastest of the
bunch it's a lot cheaper. For me (highly personal decision) the Hartzell was
the best value for money and they seem to have resolved their repair
problems they were plagued with a few years ago....At least I know of
several examples oflate with high hours and no issues.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alf Olav Frog
Subject: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>
>
> Hello again!
>
> Thanks for all the inputs regarding the right hand seat! Great that
there's a forum like this for us who are living outside of the "action"!
>
> Since I got so good response on my first issue, here's another choice
I've to make: 2 or 3 blade prop?
>
> Ok, I know that the engine-choice is the first and biggest, but there
I'm so far looking into different options.... what IS decided however, is a
CS-prop.
>
> When the engine-choice is made, I'll check out the producers opinon
regarding this, but what do you guys out there think??
> I was thinking that since I'm building a 7A, the distance to the
ground from the propellertips would be slightly greater (better) with a
3 blade since this prop has a smaller diameter??
> Is there any big advantages or disadvantages with a 3 blade vs a 2
> blade? (expect for the price...) Is a 2 blade more efficient maybe??
>
>
> Best regards Alf Olav Frog
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | OneFighterPilot(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: To the fighter pilots |
In a message dated 8/1/2005 9:36:58 PM Eastern Standard Time,
dhall(at)donka.net writes:
Also, if you like formation flying and you can afford a MiG or even a
jet-trainer like the L39, you might get like 1 other person who you can go
formation flying with every other month or two if you're lucky.
Here at Spruce Creek Fly-In there are over 20 RVs either flying or
abuilding. Every Saturday they and other aircraft have "gaggles", formation flights
out to breakfast somewhere or just playing in the local area-----some of the
damndest formations you have ever seen. And some can really fly. The rest
are " Navy pukes"-----Navy formation is two or more acft going in about the
same direction at about the same time at about the same airspeed and altitude.
(That's my AF humor, sorry) Personally, I opted out of that aspect. Over 20
years of formation was enough for me. Occassionally, we see a flight for
four Stearmans, Bonanzas, all manner of acft flying formation. You have to go
where its "at".
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Birkelbach <phil(at)petrasoft.net> |
| Subject: | Re: that blue stuff |
I just took all mine off, after 2-3 years. The blue stuff and the clear
stuff as easy as it was when new, but I had a couple of wing panels that
had the white stuff, and it was a bear. It got really brittle and came
off in really small pieces.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB - Finishing Up
http://www.myrv7.com
Don Hall wrote:
>
>I want to leave the protective blue film on my finished surfaces till it's
>absolutely necessary to remove it. So that could be 2-3 years for the blue
>film on all the finished tail feathers. I understand there is a chance that
>the adhesive gets old, stickier, and harder to remove. Anybody experienced
>that?
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | 2 or 3 blade prop?? |
| From: | "Francis, David CMDR" <David.Francis(at)defence.gov.au> |
The speed of pitch change tends to be dominated by the response rate of the governor.
As I understand it the MT governor, which is in fact a rebadged Johstroj
product (according to the data plate on mine)has the fastest response rate because
it has the smallest and lightest counterweights.
Regards,
David A Francis
VH-ZEE
Canberra, Australia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]
Subject: RE: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
Doesn't the hydraulic CS MT uses the same governor as the Hartzell? If so
why would the speed of change differ? I know the electrically control CS MT
is slower but on a Lyc it could be the governor. Am I wrong here?
Bevan
RV7A fuse
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Storer
Subject: RE: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
Most folks that fly aerobatics in RV's prefer the Hartzell prop over the MT
for the CS response time ......just a thought for the selection criteria
Dan S.
OKC 7A Wings/Fuse
-------Original Message-------
From: Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
Date: 07/31/05 11:30:13
Subject: RE: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
hinde(at)hp.com>
A bit controversial this one but from my desk research my conclusion was the
MT 3 blade prop reduced the speed of the airplane, but run smoother.
The Hartzell prop although heavy was not quite as fast as the fastest of the
bunch it's a lot cheaper. For me (highly personal decision) the Hartzell was
the best value for money and they seem to have resolved their repair
problems they were plagued with a few years ago....At least I know of
several examples oflate with high hours and no issues.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alf Olav Frog
Subject: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>
>
> Hello again!
>
> Thanks for all the inputs regarding the right hand seat! Great that
there's a forum like this for us who are living outside of the "action"!
>
> Since I got so good response on my first issue, here's another choice
I've to make: 2 or 3 blade prop?
>
> Ok, I know that the engine-choice is the first and biggest, but there
I'm so far looking into different options.... what IS decided however, is a
CS-prop.
>
> When the engine-choice is made, I'll check out the producers opinon
regarding this, but what do you guys out there think??
> I was thinking that since I'm building a 7A, the distance to the
ground from the propellertips would be slightly greater (better) with a
3 blade since this prop has a smaller diameter??
> Is there any big advantages or disadvantages with a 3 blade vs a 2
> blade? (expect for the price...) Is a 2 blade more efficient maybe??
>
>
> Best regards Alf Olav Frog
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Taylor" <mtaylo17(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | 2 or 3 blade prop?? |
MT & Johistroj used to be the same governor. It was developed by the two
companies to be sold as an MT unit, but when Johistroj started selling it
under their own name behind MT's back, MT broke ties with them and continued
development of the governor on their own. Now MT's governor is a little
different than the Johistroj. Not sure when all this happened, but it
must've been fairly recently. Reason I know this is I just ordered my prop
at Oshkosh, and I spoke with the MT guy Eric about this. I asked about the
governor specifically, and this was what he told me. Anyways, I ordered the
whole package. Chrome spinner and all.
Mark
www.4sierratango.com
>From: "Francis, David CMDR" <David.Francis(at)defence.gov.au>
>Reply-To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: SEC: UNCLASSIFIED RE: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 09:11:41 +1000
>
>
>
>The speed of pitch change tends to be dominated by the response rate of the
>governor. As I understand it the MT governor, which is in fact a rebadged
>Johstroj product (according to the data plate on mine)has the fastest
>response rate because it has the smallest and lightest counterweights.
>
>Regards,
>David A Francis
>VH-ZEE
>Canberra, Australia
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]
>To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>
>
>Doesn't the hydraulic CS MT uses the same governor as the Hartzell? If so
>why would the speed of change differ? I know the electrically control CS
>MT
>is slower but on a Lyc it could be the governor. Am I wrong here?
>
>Bevan
>RV7A fuse
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Storer
>To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>
>
>Most folks that fly aerobatics in RV's prefer the Hartzell prop over the MT
>for the CS response time ......just a thought for the selection criteria
>
>Dan S.
>OKC 7A Wings/Fuse
>
>-------Original Message-------
>
>From: Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
>Date: 07/31/05 11:30:13
>To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>
>hinde(at)hp.com>
>
>A bit controversial this one but from my desk research my conclusion was
>the
>MT 3 blade prop reduced the speed of the airplane, but run smoother.
>The Hartzell prop although heavy was not quite as fast as the fastest of
>the
>bunch it's a lot cheaper. For me (highly personal decision) the Hartzell
>was
>the best value for money and they seem to have resolved their repair
>problems they were plagued with a few years ago....At least I know of
>several examples oflate with high hours and no issues.
>
>Frank
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alf Olav Frog
>To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>
>
> >
> >
> > Hello again!
> >
> > Thanks for all the inputs regarding the right hand seat! Great that
>there's a forum like this for us who are living outside of the "action"!
> >
> > Since I got so good response on my first issue, here's another choice
>I've to make: 2 or 3 blade prop?
> >
> > Ok, I know that the engine-choice is the first and biggest, but there
>I'm so far looking into different options.... what IS decided however, is a
>CS-prop.
> >
> > When the engine-choice is made, I'll check out the producers opinon
>regarding this, but what do you guys out there think??
> > I was thinking that since I'm building a 7A, the distance to the
>ground from the propellertips would be slightly greater (better) with a
>3 blade since this prop has a smaller diameter??
> > Is there any big advantages or disadvantages with a 3 blade vs a 2
> > blade? (expect for the price...) Is a 2 blade more efficient maybe??
> >
> >
> > Best regards Alf Olav Frog
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Norman Younie <rv6capt(at)pacificcoast.net> |
| Subject: | constant speed prop |
Has anybody out there got any experience in a RV-6 or RV-7 with a
constant speed prop flying in the upper teens. Also have any of you got
super or turbo chargers on you engine. I am thinking of going for a
turbo-charged constant speed engine on my next plane and looking for any
info I can find. Right now at 15500 wot I get 170kts with 2670rpm and
would like to run the engine slower with the same speeds or better.
Any help would be appriecated.
Cheers
Norman
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | constant speed prop |
| From: | "Francis, David CMDR" <David.Francis(at)defence.gov.au> |
Norman,
Why dont you talk to Jon Johanson. He has some relevant experience. He flew his
RV4 around the world on a carburetted fixed pitch prop and flew the same plane
to Antarctica with a fuel injected, turbocharged constant speed deal.
Try him at jonj(at)flymore.com.au
He barely sips fuel at FL230.
Regards,
David Francis
Canberra, Australia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]
Subject: RV7-List: constant speed prop
Has anybody out there got any experience in a RV-6 or RV-7 with a
constant speed prop flying in the upper teens. Also have any of you got
super or turbo chargers on you engine. I am thinking of going for a
turbo-charged constant speed engine on my next plane and looking for any
info I can find. Right now at 15500 wot I get 170kts with 2670rpm and
would like to run the engine slower with the same speeds or better.
Any help would be appriecated.
Cheers
Norman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Meyette" <brianpublic(at)starband.net> |
| Subject: | constant speed prop |
You might want to check out the Eggenfellner Subaru offerings.
Web = http://eggenfellneraircraft.com
Mail list = http://groups.yahoo.com/group/subaruaircraft/
Constant speed MT prop, 2 models of supercharged engines - sounds like you
might like the single cam model
brian
http://brian76.mystarband.net/RV-7Ahome.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Norman Younie
Subject: RV7-List: constant speed prop
Has anybody out there got any experience in a RV-6 or RV-7 with a
constant speed prop flying in the upper teens. Also have any of you got
super or turbo chargers on you engine. I am thinking of going for a
turbo-charged constant speed engine on my next plane and looking for any
info I can find. Right now at 15500 wot I get 170kts with 2670rpm and
would like to run the engine slower with the same speeds or better.
Any help would be appriecated.
Cheers
Norman
--
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Engine decision time ... |
| From: | Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com> |
0.25 HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (DHCP)
0.74 HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (HCC)
1.40 HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (IP
addr 1)
Fellow builders,
Its that daunting and exciting time to decide what engine to
put in my RV9 (taildragger). I've decided to rule out the auto
conversions and go Lycosaur (IO-320 or 360) but I could use a
like a little help deciding which. The 9 fuselage is pretty
much identical to the 7, so it will take a 360. I know Van's
recommends the 320 as the max for the 9 presumably to limit the
possibility of exceeding Vne for the airframe etc etc.
I'm wondering if folks already flying their 9s are getting max
performance as advertised with the 320 and thus there's no
purpose to putting in the 360. My mission is fastest possible
cruise for frequent trips up and down the California coast from
my home base in San Francisco to destinations like LA, San
Diego, Tahoe, Portland, Seattle with the occassional coast to
coast jaunt. Resale value is probably less of a concern to me
- I can't ever see myself selling this puppy.
Any experiences, thoughts, rants, prejudices and musings will
be most welcome :)
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
Tel: 415 203 9177
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Engine decision time ... |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
If it were me...:)
I'd stuff an IO360 in there and get some close to red line cruise and
run LOP all the time in cruise and get some serious economy.
But then I'm bulding a 7a and could easily see me putting an IO540 in it
for the same reaon if it weren't so heavy.
The only other consideration is insurance cost.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gerry Filby
Subject: RV7-List: Engine decision time ...
Fellow builders,
Its that daunting and exciting time to decide what engine to put in my
RV9 (taildragger). I've decided to rule out the auto conversions and go
Lycosaur (IO-320 or 360) but I could use a like a little help deciding
which. The 9 fuselage is pretty much identical to the 7, so it will
take a 360. I know Van's recommends the 320 as the max for the 9
presumably to limit the possibility of exceeding Vne for the airframe
etc etc.
I'm wondering if folks already flying their 9s are getting max
performance as advertised with the 320 and thus there's no purpose to
putting in the 360. My mission is fastest possible cruise for frequent
trips up and down the California coast from my home base in San
Francisco to destinations like LA, San Diego, Tahoe, Portland, Seattle
with the occassional coast to coast jaunt. Resale value is probably
less of a concern to me
- I can't ever see myself selling this puppy.
Any experiences, thoughts, rants, prejudices and musings will be most
welcome :)
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
Tel: 415 203 9177
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine decision time ... |
Interesting, you post a question for an RV9 on the RV7 list. ( do not
archive )
Gerry, You might be more of a test pilot than me,,,,,,,,,,but,,,,,,,,,,,My
suggestion: Better to send this question to Vans and challenge them as to
why they do not suggest or support putting an 360 in the RV9?
I have a friend that has an O-320 FP prop in an RV6. It does 185 mph very
easily.
I have heard other pilots say something like it doesn't matter how fast your
plane, you always want to go faster at times. So, will you be happy going
185 or even 190 if someone else is going 195?
I would not override the design of Vans without understanding fully what the
trade offs and risks are.
Also, Imagine what your insurance agent is going to say and charge when they
learn you are stepping beyond the kit design limit? It's no longer a kit
plane!! If you were the agent, would you insure yourself putting a bigger
engine in an airframe designed for 160 hp max.? The plane is designed for
certain stresses and the extra 20 hp and weight could be a problem. Think
about it and your motivations for considering a 360. You are the
pilot/owner however. Your life. Your insurance premiums.
You got to get there fast, right?. Maybe you could just take off the ramp 5
minutes earlier with the 320 and arrive there at the same time. Could
another way to look at it come down to time management? Your life. Think
about it.....
Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip Up It Flies
----- Original Message -----
>
>
> Fellow builders,
>
> Its that daunting and exciting time to decide what engine to
> put in my RV9 (taildragger). I've decided to rule out the auto
> conversions and go Lycosaur (IO-320 or 360) but I could use a
> like a little help deciding which. The 9 fuselage is pretty
> much identical to the 7, so it will take a 360. I know Van's
> recommends the 320 as the max for the 9 presumably to limit the
> possibility of exceeding Vne for the airframe etc etc.
>
snip
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Taylor" <mtaylo17(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Engine decision time ... |
You can use the 360, derated in the 9, then at altitude you get a little
more power. I think that it's derated by rpm restriction, but cant' be sure.
I remember reading an artical somewhere, but I can't remember where it was.
Anybody else remember that one?
I got mine from Mattituck. Their TMX is great value as far as Lycosaurs go,
and they can build it out of Superior parts if you should so desire. The TMX
is normally ECI based. I asked for the Ryton sump on mine so I could
eliminate the intake from the cowling. This basically means that Mattituck
have to order a complete XP-360 to get the sump as Superior do not sell the
sump separately.
On the flip side, Cameron a couple of hangars down has a 320 in his 9A and
is very pleased with the way it performs. Van's are pretty honest in
department too, which is nice as we all get a realistic guide as to how our
aircraft will perform.
Check out the Firewall Forward page on my website to see more info on the
engine.
Mark
www.4sierratango.com
>From: Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com>
>Reply-To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>To: rv9-list(at)matronics.com, rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV7-List: Engine decision time ...
>Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 10:08:44 -0700 0.25 HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP
>Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (DHCP) 0.74 HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC
> Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (HCC) 1.40
>HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (IP addr 1)
>
>
>Fellow builders,
>
>Its that daunting and exciting time to decide what engine to
>put in my RV9 (taildragger). I've decided to rule out the auto
>conversions and go Lycosaur (IO-320 or 360) but I could use a
>like a little help deciding which. The 9 fuselage is pretty
>much identical to the 7, so it will take a 360. I know Van's
>recommends the 320 as the max for the 9 presumably to limit the
>possibility of exceeding Vne for the airframe etc etc.
>
>I'm wondering if folks already flying their 9s are getting max
>performance as advertised with the 320 and thus there's no
>purpose to putting in the 360. My mission is fastest possible
>cruise for frequent trips up and down the California coast from
>my home base in San Francisco to destinations like LA, San
>Diego, Tahoe, Portland, Seattle with the occassional coast to
>coast jaunt. Resale value is probably less of a concern to me
>- I can't ever see myself selling this puppy.
>
>Any experiences, thoughts, rants, prejudices and musings will
>be most welcome :)
>
>__g__
>
>==========================================================
>Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
> Tel: 415 203 9177
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Hall" <dhall(at)donka.net> |
| Subject: | which pitot tube? |
Make of Pitot Model Amps Circuit Breaker to use
Wire Size
----
Aero Instruments AN5812 8A 10A
14 ga
Aero Instruments AN5814 12A 20A
12 ga
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank
George (Corvallis)
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Engine decision time ...
-->
If it were me...:)
I'd stuff an IO360 in there and get some close to red line cruise and run
LOP all the time in cruise and get some serious economy.
But then I'm bulding a 7a and could easily see me putting an IO540 in it for
the same reaon if it weren't so heavy.
The only other consideration is insurance cost.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gerry Filby
Subject: RV7-List: Engine decision time ...
Fellow builders,
Its that daunting and exciting time to decide what engine to put in my
RV9 (taildragger). I've decided to rule out the auto conversions and go
Lycosaur (IO-320 or 360) but I could use a like a little help deciding
which. The 9 fuselage is pretty much identical to the 7, so it will take a
360. I know Van's recommends the 320 as the max for the 9 presumably to
limit the possibility of exceeding Vne for the airframe etc etc.
I'm wondering if folks already flying their 9s are getting max performance
as advertised with the 320 and thus there's no purpose to putting in the
360. My mission is fastest possible cruise for frequent trips up and down
the California coast from my home base in San Francisco to destinations like
LA, San Diego, Tahoe, Portland, Seattle with the occassional coast to coast
jaunt. Resale value is probably less of a concern to me
- I can't ever see myself selling this puppy.
Any experiences, thoughts, rants, prejudices and musings will be most
welcome :)
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
Tel: 415 203 9177
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vern W" <vernw(at)pdq.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine decision time ... |
I recall a couple of messages by Mahlon Russel himself (of Mattituck)
actually recommend putting the 360 in the RV9. And IIRC, the reasoning was
that it wasn't any heavier than the 320, it would be derated (but just a
little?), and what you got was more power for climb performance and still
good fuel economy at cruise.
Still, before I did use a 360 in your RV9, I would recommend calling
someone personally to discuss all the issues. If you're thinking of going
with a Mattituck (my choice as well), call Mahlon in person. He's been known
to be very accessable and willing to spend time with potential customers
with these kind of questions.
Vern
RV7-A
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Taylor" <mtaylo17(at)msn.com>
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Engine decision time ...
>
> You can use the 360, derated in the 9, then at altitude you get a little
> more power. I think that it's derated by rpm restriction, but cant' be
sure.
> I remember reading an artical somewhere, but I can't remember where it
was.
> Anybody else remember that one?
>
> I got mine from Mattituck. Their TMX is great value as far as Lycosaurs
go,
> and they can build it out of Superior parts if you should so desire. The
TMX
> is normally ECI based. I asked for the Ryton sump on mine so I could
> eliminate the intake from the cowling. This basically means that Mattituck
> have to order a complete XP-360 to get the sump as Superior do not sell
the
> sump separately.
>
> On the flip side, Cameron a couple of hangars down has a 320 in his 9A and
> is very pleased with the way it performs. Van's are pretty honest in
> department too, which is nice as we all get a realistic guide as to how
our
> aircraft will perform.
>
> Check out the Firewall Forward page on my website to see more info on the
> engine.
>
> Mark
> www.4sierratango.com
>
>
> >From: Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com>
> >Reply-To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
> >To: rv9-list(at)matronics.com, rv7-list(at)matronics.com
> >Subject: RV7-List: Engine decision time ...
> >Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 10:08:44 -0700 0.25 HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP
> >Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (DHCP) 0.74
HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC
> > Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (HCC) 1.40
> >HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (IP addr 1)
> >
> >
> >
> >Fellow builders,
> >
> >Its that daunting and exciting time to decide what engine to
> >put in my RV9 (taildragger). I've decided to rule out the auto
> >conversions and go Lycosaur (IO-320 or 360) but I could use a
> >like a little help deciding which. The 9 fuselage is pretty
> >much identical to the 7, so it will take a 360. I know Van's
> >recommends the 320 as the max for the 9 presumably to limit the
> >possibility of exceeding Vne for the airframe etc etc.
> >
> >I'm wondering if folks already flying their 9s are getting max
> >performance as advertised with the 320 and thus there's no
> >purpose to putting in the 360. My mission is fastest possible
> >cruise for frequent trips up and down the California coast from
> >my home base in San Francisco to destinations like LA, San
> >Diego, Tahoe, Portland, Seattle with the occassional coast to
> >coast jaunt. Resale value is probably less of a concern to me
> >- I can't ever see myself selling this puppy.
> >
> >Any experiences, thoughts, rants, prejudices and musings will
> >be most welcome :)
> >
> >__g__
> >
> >==========================================================
> >Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
> > Tel: 415 203 9177
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Taylor" <mtaylo17(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine decision time ... |
I'll second that with Mahlon Russell. He's a great person to deal with. The
other cool thing about Mattituck is they don't pressure you into buying.
Their way is to inform you as best they can, answer your questions and let
theie engines sell themselves. It works. I know Mahlon was bombarded with
questions before I placed the order! If you have your heart set on a
Superior engine, that's no problem, because they can do that too since
they're one of superior's builders.
Mark.
www.4sierratango.com
>From: "Vern W" <vernw(at)pdq.net>
>Reply-To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Re: RV7-List: Engine decision time ...
>Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 06:43:06 -0500
>
>
> I recall a couple of messages by Mahlon Russel himself (of Mattituck)
>actually recommend putting the 360 in the RV9. And IIRC, the reasoning was
>that it wasn't any heavier than the 320, it would be derated (but just a
>little?), and what you got was more power for climb performance and still
>good fuel economy at cruise.
> Still, before I did use a 360 in your RV9, I would recommend calling
>someone personally to discuss all the issues. If you're thinking of going
>with a Mattituck (my choice as well), call Mahlon in person. He's been
>known
>to be very accessable and willing to spend time with potential customers
>with these kind of questions.
>
>Vern
>RV7-A
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Mark Taylor" <mtaylo17(at)msn.com>
>To:
>Subject: RE: RV7-List: Engine decision time ...
>
>
> >
> > You can use the 360, derated in the 9, then at altitude you get a little
> > more power. I think that it's derated by rpm restriction, but cant' be
>sure.
> > I remember reading an artical somewhere, but I can't remember where it
>was.
> > Anybody else remember that one?
> >
> > I got mine from Mattituck. Their TMX is great value as far as Lycosaurs
>go,
> > and they can build it out of Superior parts if you should so desire. The
>TMX
> > is normally ECI based. I asked for the Ryton sump on mine so I could
> > eliminate the intake from the cowling. This basically means that
>Mattituck
> > have to order a complete XP-360 to get the sump as Superior do not sell
>the
> > sump separately.
> >
> > On the flip side, Cameron a couple of hangars down has a 320 in his 9A
>and
> > is very pleased with the way it performs. Van's are pretty honest in
> > department too, which is nice as we all get a realistic guide as to how
>our
> > aircraft will perform.
> >
> > Check out the Firewall Forward page on my website to see more info on
>the
> > engine.
> >
> > Mark
> > www.4sierratango.com
> >
> >
> > >From: Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com>
> > >Reply-To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
> > >To: rv9-list(at)matronics.com, rv7-list(at)matronics.com
> > >Subject: RV7-List: Engine decision time ...
> > >Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 10:08:44 -0700 0.25 HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP
> > >Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (DHCP) 0.74
>HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC
> > > Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (HCC) 1.40
> > >HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (IP addr
>1)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Fellow builders,
> > >
> > >Its that daunting and exciting time to decide what engine to
> > >put in my RV9 (taildragger). I've decided to rule out the auto
> > >conversions and go Lycosaur (IO-320 or 360) but I could use a
> > >like a little help deciding which. The 9 fuselage is pretty
> > >much identical to the 7, so it will take a 360. I know Van's
> > >recommends the 320 as the max for the 9 presumably to limit the
> > >possibility of exceeding Vne for the airframe etc etc.
> > >
> > >I'm wondering if folks already flying their 9s are getting max
> > >performance as advertised with the 320 and thus there's no
> > >purpose to putting in the 360. My mission is fastest possible
> > >cruise for frequent trips up and down the California coast from
> > >my home base in San Francisco to destinations like LA, San
> > >Diego, Tahoe, Portland, Seattle with the occassional coast to
> > >coast jaunt. Resale value is probably less of a concern to me
> > >- I can't ever see myself selling this puppy.
> > >
> > >Any experiences, thoughts, rants, prejudices and musings will
> > >be most welcome :)
> > >
> > >__g__
> > >
> > >==========================================================
> > >Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
> > > Tel: 415 203 9177
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Imken" <skikrazi(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | Engine decision time ... |
My friend Ted put an O-360 from Aero Sport Power into his 9A-has over 100
hours on it and is very happy with it. With a half tank of gas, the 9A
climbs out at 2100 fpm over 100 MPH. I have an O-360 in my 7A with 10 to 1
pistons, Light Speed ignition, ceramic-coated exhausts (in and out) and I
can barely keep up the 9A. The 9A with an O-360 is awesome.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Mark Taylor
Subject: Re: RV7-List: Engine decision time ...
I'll second that with Mahlon Russell. He's a great person to deal with. The
other cool thing about Mattituck is they don't pressure you into buying.
Their way is to inform you as best they can, answer your questions and let
theie engines sell themselves. It works. I know Mahlon was bombarded with
questions before I placed the order! If you have your heart set on a
Superior engine, that's no problem, because they can do that too since
they're one of superior's builders.
Mark.
www.4sierratango.com
>From: "Vern W" <vernw(at)pdq.net>
>Reply-To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Re: RV7-List: Engine decision time ...
>Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 06:43:06 -0500
>
>
> I recall a couple of messages by Mahlon Russel himself (of Mattituck)
>actually recommend putting the 360 in the RV9. And IIRC, the reasoning was
>that it wasn't any heavier than the 320, it would be derated (but just a
>little?), and what you got was more power for climb performance and still
>good fuel economy at cruise.
> Still, before I did use a 360 in your RV9, I would recommend calling
>someone personally to discuss all the issues. If you're thinking of going
>with a Mattituck (my choice as well), call Mahlon in person. He's been
>known
>to be very accessable and willing to spend time with potential customers
>with these kind of questions.
>
>Vern
>RV7-A
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Mark Taylor" <mtaylo17(at)msn.com>
>To:
>Subject: RE: RV7-List: Engine decision time ...
>
>
> >
> > You can use the 360, derated in the 9, then at altitude you get a little
> > more power. I think that it's derated by rpm restriction, but cant' be
>sure.
> > I remember reading an artical somewhere, but I can't remember where it
>was.
> > Anybody else remember that one?
> >
> > I got mine from Mattituck. Their TMX is great value as far as Lycosaurs
>go,
> > and they can build it out of Superior parts if you should so desire. The
>TMX
> > is normally ECI based. I asked for the Ryton sump on mine so I could
> > eliminate the intake from the cowling. This basically means that
>Mattituck
> > have to order a complete XP-360 to get the sump as Superior do not sell
>the
> > sump separately.
> >
> > On the flip side, Cameron a couple of hangars down has a 320 in his 9A
>and
> > is very pleased with the way it performs. Van's are pretty honest in
> > department too, which is nice as we all get a realistic guide as to how
>our
> > aircraft will perform.
> >
> > Check out the Firewall Forward page on my website to see more info on
>the
> > engine.
> >
> > Mark
> > www.4sierratango.com
> >
> >
> > >From: Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com>
> > >Reply-To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
> > >To: rv9-list(at)matronics.com, rv7-list(at)matronics.com
> > >Subject: RV7-List: Engine decision time ...
> > >Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 10:08:44 -0700 0.25 HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP
> > >Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (DHCP) 0.74
>HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC
> > > Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (HCC) 1.40
> > >HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (IP addr
>1)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Fellow builders,
> > >
> > >Its that daunting and exciting time to decide what engine to
> > >put in my RV9 (taildragger). I've decided to rule out the auto
> > >conversions and go Lycosaur (IO-320 or 360) but I could use a
> > >like a little help deciding which. The 9 fuselage is pretty
> > >much identical to the 7, so it will take a 360. I know Van's
> > >recommends the 320 as the max for the 9 presumably to limit the
> > >possibility of exceeding Vne for the airframe etc etc.
> > >
> > >I'm wondering if folks already flying their 9s are getting max
> > >performance as advertised with the 320 and thus there's no
> > >purpose to putting in the 360. My mission is fastest possible
> > >cruise for frequent trips up and down the California coast from
> > >my home base in San Francisco to destinations like LA, San
> > >Diego, Tahoe, Portland, Seattle with the occassional coast to
> > >coast jaunt. Resale value is probably less of a concern to me
> > >- I can't ever see myself selling this puppy.
> > >
> > >Any experiences, thoughts, rants, prejudices and musings will
> > >be most welcome :)
> > >
> > >__g__
> > >
> > >==========================================================
> > >Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
> > > Tel: 415 203 9177
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mslev100(at)aol.com |
I have a few areas I want to fill countersubk rivet heads - what are people
using to fill these areas. I will use PPG primer and PPG polyurethane for
linished paint.
Appeciate any suggestions.
Mary Beth
RV7A just turned fuselage canoe over.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Filing rivets |
SuperFil will be one product that will work with filling rivet depressions
and with your paints and later on with fiber glass. It is epoxy based.
Great stuff, not too expensive and easy to work with but requires 24 hours
to dry and setup.
Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip Up It Flies
----- Original Message -----
>
> I have a few areas I want to fill countersubk rivet heads - what are
> people
> using to fill these areas. I will use PPG primer and PPG polyurethane for
> linished paint.
> Appeciate any suggestions.
>
> Mary Beth
> RV7A just turned fuselage canoe over.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brooks Wolfe" <slipstream13(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Interior thoughts.. |
I'm looking for a good interior set for my -7. Outside of Oregon Aero seats
I haven't really shopped around yet for interior kits. The fuselage is
about ready to close up, so it's time to make decisions on where to paint
and where to upholster, etc. I don't want to weigh my plane down with a
bunch of overstuffed padding, but Van's demonstrators are definitely more
Spartan than what I'm imagining.. Does anyone have some good references
for interior kit suppliers?
Brooks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | Interior thoughts.. |
I've heard penty of good stuff about
http://www.classicaerodesigns.com/default.asp and plan to use them myself.
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brooks Wolfe
Subject: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
-->
I'm looking for a good interior set for my -7. Outside of Oregon Aero seats
I haven't really shopped around yet for interior kits. The fuselage is
about ready to close up, so it's time to make decisions on where to paint
and where to upholster, etc. I don't want to weigh my plane down with a
bunch of overstuffed padding, but Van's demonstrators are definitely more
Spartan than what I'm imagining.. Does anyone have some good references
for interior kit suppliers?
Brooks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior thoughts.. |
http://www.classicaerodesigns.com
Looks great, very comfortable on some very long trips, and has stood up
remarkably to people getting in and out of the plane for hundreds of hours.
Still looks practically new, and I've never cleaned 'em.
Good stuff, highly recommended.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D (583 hours)
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brooks Wolfe" <slipstream13(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
>
>
> I'm looking for a good interior set for my -7. Outside of Oregon Aero
> seats
> I haven't really shopped around yet for interior kits. The fuselage is
> about ready to close up, so it's time to make decisions on where to paint
> and where to upholster, etc. I don't want to weigh my plane down with a
> bunch of overstuffed padding, but Van's demonstrators are definitely more
> Spartan than what I'm imagining.. Does anyone have some good references
> for interior kit suppliers?
>
> Brooks
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior thoughts.. |
Flightline Interiors. You can find their website with a Google search.
Talk with Abby. Easy to work with and quality work and materials.
Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip Up It Flies
Teamwork: " A lot of people doing exactly what I say."
(Marketing exec., Citrix Corp.)
----- Original Message -----
>
>
> I'm looking for a good interior set for my -7. Outside of Oregon Aero
> seats
> I haven't really shopped around yet for interior kits. The fuselage is
> about ready to close up, so it's time to make decisions on where to paint
> and where to upholster, etc. I don't want to weigh my plane down with a
> bunch of overstuffed padding, but Van's demonstrators are definitely more
> Spartan than what I'm imagining.. Does anyone have some good references
> for interior kit suppliers?
>
> Brooks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Hall" <dhall(at)donka.net> |
| Subject: | 2 or 3 blade prop?? |
FWIW, Aviation Consumer has an article on 2 vs 3 in this month's issue.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Taylor
Subject: RE: SEC: UNCLASSIFIED RE: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
MT & Johistroj used to be the same governor. It was developed by the two
companies to be sold as an MT unit, but when Johistroj started selling it
under their own name behind MT's back, MT broke ties with them and continued
development of the governor on their own. Now MT's governor is a little
different than the Johistroj. Not sure when all this happened, but it
must've been fairly recently. Reason I know this is I just ordered my prop
at Oshkosh, and I spoke with the MT guy Eric about this. I asked about the
governor specifically, and this was what he told me. Anyways, I ordered the
whole package. Chrome spinner and all.
Mark
www.4sierratango.com
>From: "Francis, David CMDR" <David.Francis(at)defence.gov.au>
>Reply-To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: SEC: UNCLASSIFIED RE: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 09:11:41 +1000
>
>
>
>The speed of pitch change tends to be dominated by the response rate of
>the governor. As I understand it the MT governor, which is in fact a
>rebadged Johstroj product (according to the data plate on mine)has the
>fastest response rate because it has the smallest and lightest
counterweights.
>
>Regards,
>David A Francis
>VH-ZEE
>Canberra, Australia
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]
>To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>
>
>Doesn't the hydraulic CS MT uses the same governor as the Hartzell? If
>so why would the speed of change differ? I know the electrically
>control CS MT is slower but on a Lyc it could be the governor. Am I
>wrong here?
>
>Bevan
>RV7A fuse
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Storer
>To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>
>
>Most folks that fly aerobatics in RV's prefer the Hartzell prop over
>the MT for the CS response time ......just a thought for the selection
>criteria
>
>Dan S.
>OKC 7A Wings/Fuse
>
>-------Original Message-------
>
>From: Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
>Date: 07/31/05 11:30:13
>To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>
>--> hinde(at)hp.com>
>
>A bit controversial this one but from my desk research my conclusion
>was the MT 3 blade prop reduced the speed of the airplane, but run
>smoother.
>The Hartzell prop although heavy was not quite as fast as the fastest
>of the bunch it's a lot cheaper. For me (highly personal decision) the
>Hartzell was the best value for money and they seem to have resolved
>their repair problems they were plagued with a few years ago....At
>least I know of several examples oflate with high hours and no issues.
>
>Frank
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alf Olav Frog
>To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV7-List: 2 or 3 blade prop??
>
>
> >
> >
> > Hello again!
> >
> > Thanks for all the inputs regarding the right hand seat! Great that
>there's a forum like this for us who are living outside of the "action"!
> >
> > Since I got so good response on my first issue, here's another
> > choice
>I've to make: 2 or 3 blade prop?
> >
> > Ok, I know that the engine-choice is the first and biggest, but
> > there
>I'm so far looking into different options.... what IS decided however,
>is a CS-prop.
> >
> > When the engine-choice is made, I'll check out the producers opinon
>regarding this, but what do you guys out there think??
> > I was thinking that since I'm building a 7A, the distance to the
>ground from the propellertips would be slightly greater (better) with a
>3 blade since this prop has a smaller diameter??
> > Is there any big advantages or disadvantages with a 3 blade vs a 2
> > blade? (expect for the price...) Is a 2 blade more efficient maybe??
> >
> >
> > Best regards Alf Olav Frog
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Allen Fulmer" <afulmer(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Interior thoughts.. |
I saw a beautiful leather interior at Oshkosh done by Becki Orndorff.
http://www.fly-gbi.com/
Allen Fulmer
RV7 Wings (QB Fuse on hand)
N808AF reserved
Alexander City, AL
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Brooks Wolfe
Subject: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
I'm looking for a good interior set for my -7.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Interior thoughts.. |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Speaking of which, I like the idea of not painting the interior so...
I was looking at the Fliteline Interiors interior kit for $600. I was
having a hard time understanding what I got for the money. I mean it
"looks" like a big sheet of fabric that you cut to suit....I note from
GBI they offer a "big sheet of fabric" for $75.
Anyone know what the extra $525 buys me?...
The Side panels are awesome. The airplane on the website belongs to a
friend of mine and they are sweet....But for a thousand bucks for two
side panels they are too rich for my taste.
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fw: RV9-List: Engine decision time ... |
| From: | Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com> |
Thanks to all of you for your helpful posts - lots of food for
thought !
g
>
> --> RV9-List message posted by: Gerry Filby
>
>
> Fellow builders,
>
> Its that daunting and exciting time to decide what engine to
> put in my RV9 (taildragger). I've decided to rule out the auto
> conversions and go Lycosaur (IO-320 or 360) but I could use a
> like a little help deciding which. The 9 fuselage is pretty
> much identical to the 7, so it will take a 360. I know Van's
> recommends the 320 as the max for the 9 presumably to limit the
> possibility of exceeding Vne for the airframe etc etc.
>
> I'm wondering if folks already flying their 9s are getting max
> performance as advertised with the 320 and thus there's no
> purpose to putting in the 360. My mission is fastest possible
> cruise for frequent trips up and down the California coast from
> my home base in San Francisco to destinations like LA, San
> Diego, Tahoe, Portland, Seattle with the occassional coast to
> coast jaunt. Resale value is probably less of a concern to me
> - I can't ever see myself selling this puppy.
>
> Any experiences, thoughts, rants, prejudices and musings will
> be most welcome :)
>
> __g__
>
> ==========================================================
> Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
> Tel: 415 203 9177
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
Tel: 415 203 9177
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior thoughts.. |
----- Original Message -----
>
>
> Speaking of which, I like the idea of not painting the interior so...
>
> I was looking at the Fliteline Interiors interior kit for $600. I was
> having a hard time understanding what I got for the money. I mean it
> "looks" like a big sheet of fabric that you cut to suit....I note from
> GBI they offer a "big sheet of fabric" for $75.
>
> Anyone know what the extra $525 buys me?...
((((((((((I imagine that is cutting and sewing together the seats and the
other parts included for the price. It has been a year and half since I
bought mine, so I would suggest you check the website or email Abby to see
what the current pricing covers. Like any business, I would be surprised if
there has not been some chances during the last 18 months. My kit kit
included the back and side walls and floors which were all custom cut with
99% of the fine cutouts already there. If you are handy with time and
sewing and fitting, the fabric from GBI could be the way to go. Indiana
Larry))))))))))))))
>
> The Side panels are awesome. The airplane on the website belongs to a
> friend of mine and they are sweet....But for a thousand bucks for two
> side panels they are too rich for my taste.
>
> Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Tasker <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior thoughts.. |
I have an upholstery kit from Abby. It is COMPLETE! Every part is cut
to shape for every exposed part in the cockpit and baggage area. About
the only area that is not covered is the firewall. All you have to do
is spray with adhesive and stick them in position.
It is awesome!
Of course if you have much more time than money, you could probably
start with a large piece of upholstery cloth and do the same. But you
would also have to know how to stitch pieces together and have an
industrial sewing machine to do so as well.
Well worth the money in my opinion!
Dick Tasker
Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis) wrote:
>
>Speaking of which, I like the idea of not painting the interior so...
>
>I was looking at the Fliteline Interiors interior kit for $600. I was
>having a hard time understanding what I got for the money. I mean it
>"looks" like a big sheet of fabric that you cut to suit....I note from
>GBI they offer a "big sheet of fabric" for $75.
>
>Anyone know what the extra $525 buys me?...
>
>The Side panels are awesome. The airplane on the website belongs to a
>friend of mine and they are sweet....But for a thousand bucks for two
>side panels they are too rich for my taste.
>
>Frank
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Schlatterer" <billschlatterer(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Interior thoughts.. |
Frank, it gets you 37 individually custom cut pieces that fit perfectly. It
includes the carpet also cut and the floor insulation as well as a firewall
blanket. It was worth it to me. I think the rear baggage wall cover and
baggage area cover is included as well. Talk to Abby, you won't be sorry.
Bill S
7a Ark fuse panel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank
George (Corvallis)
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
Speaking of which, I like the idea of not painting the interior so...
I was looking at the Fliteline Interiors interior kit for $600. I was
having a hard time understanding what I got for the money. I mean it
"looks" like a big sheet of fabric that you cut to suit....I note from
GBI they offer a "big sheet of fabric" for $75.
Anyone know what the extra $525 buys me?...
The Side panels are awesome. The airplane on the website belongs to a
friend of mine and they are sweet....But for a thousand bucks for two
side panels they are too rich for my taste.
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Interior thoughts.. |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
I just saw your pics, I must admit it looks hot!
Thanks for sending them to me...I have a raised center cover with a
large box into which I can throw kinck knacks (going to make a
lightweight cover to add cup holders just for a joke..:)..) So my front
carpet will have to be custom.
But apart from that..Boy yes she does good work!
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Schlatterer
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
-->
Frank, it gets you 37 individually custom cut pieces that fit perfectly.
It includes the carpet also cut and the floor insulation as well as a
firewall blanket. It was worth it to me. I think the rear baggage wall
cover and baggage area cover is included as well. Talk to Abby, you
won't be sorry.
Bill S
7a Ark fuse panel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank
George (Corvallis)
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
Speaking of which, I like the idea of not painting the interior so...
I was looking at the Fliteline Interiors interior kit for $600. I was
having a hard time understanding what I got for the money. I mean it
"looks" like a big sheet of fabric that you cut to suit....I note from
GBI they offer a "big sheet of fabric" for $75.
Anyone know what the extra $525 buys me?...
The Side panels are awesome. The airplane on the website belongs to a
friend of mine and they are sweet....But for a thousand bucks for two
side panels they are too rich for my taste.
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Interior thoughts.. |
| From: | Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com> |
Hey Folks,
This sounds like an interesting package to me too - somewhere
along the line I missed the URL of the supplier - could you
repost it ?
Many thanks,
g
>
>
>
> Frank, it gets you 37 individually custom cut pieces that fit
> perfectly. It
> includes the carpet also cut and the floor insulation as well
> as a firewall
> blanket. It was worth it to me. I think the rear baggage wall
> cover and
> baggage area cover is included as well. Talk to Abby, you
> won't be sorry.
>
> Bill S
> 7a Ark fuse panel
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank
> George (Corvallis)
> To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
>
>
>
>
> Speaking of which, I like the idea of not painting the interior so...
>
> I was looking at the Fliteline Interiors interior kit for $600. I was
> having a hard time understanding what I got for the money. I mean it
> "looks" like a big sheet of fabric that you cut to suit....I note from
> GBI they offer a "big sheet of fabric" for $75.
>
> Anyone know what the extra $525 buys me?...
>
> The Side panels are awesome. The airplane on the website belongs to a
> friend of mine and they are sweet....But for a thousand bucks for two
> side panels they are too rich for my taste.
>
> Frank
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
Tel: 415 203 9177
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior thoughts.. |
What does the complete Flightline interior kit weigh, roughly? Just curious
what the penalty for plushness is.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net>
Subject: Re: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
>
> I have an upholstery kit from Abby. It is COMPLETE! Every part is cut
> to shape for every exposed part in the cockpit and baggage area. About
> the only area that is not covered is the firewall. All you have to do
> is spray with adhesive and stick them in position.
>
> It is awesome!
>
> Of course if you have much more time than money, you could probably
> start with a large piece of upholstery cloth and do the same. But you
> would also have to know how to stitch pieces together and have an
> industrial sewing machine to do so as well.
>
> Well worth the money in my opinion!
>
> Dick Tasker
>
> Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis) wrote:
>
> >
> >Speaking of which, I like the idea of not painting the interior so...
> >
> >I was looking at the Fliteline Interiors interior kit for $600. I was
> >having a hard time understanding what I got for the money. I mean it
> >"looks" like a big sheet of fabric that you cut to suit....I note from
> >GBI they offer a "big sheet of fabric" for $75.
> >
> >Anyone know what the extra $525 buys me?...
> >
> >The Side panels are awesome. The airplane on the website belongs to a
> >friend of mine and they are sweet....But for a thousand bucks for two
> >side panels they are too rich for my taste.
> >
> >Frank
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior thoughts.. |
http://my.execpc.com/~erdmannb/index.htm
Dick Tasker
Gerry Filby wrote:
>
>
>Hey Folks,
>
>This sounds like an interesting package to me too - somewhere
>along the line I missed the URL of the supplier - could you
>repost it ?
>
>Many thanks,
>
>g
>
----
Please Note:
No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however,
that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced.
----
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Schlatterer" <billschlatterer(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Interior thoughts.. |
Just FYI. She did a custom rear wall cover for my golf club compartment and
baggage floor doors as well and they look great.
Bill S
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank
George (Corvallis)
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
I just saw your pics, I must admit it looks hot!
Thanks for sending them to me...I have a raised center cover with a
large box into which I can throw kinck knacks (going to make a
lightweight cover to add cup holders just for a joke..:)..) So my front
carpet will have to be custom.
But apart from that..Boy yes she does good work!
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Schlatterer
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
-->
Frank, it gets you 37 individually custom cut pieces that fit perfectly.
It includes the carpet also cut and the floor insulation as well as a
firewall blanket. It was worth it to me. I think the rear baggage wall
cover and baggage area cover is included as well. Talk to Abby, you
won't be sorry.
Bill S
7a Ark fuse panel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank
George (Corvallis)
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
Speaking of which, I like the idea of not painting the interior so...
I was looking at the Fliteline Interiors interior kit for $600. I was
having a hard time understanding what I got for the money. I mean it
"looks" like a big sheet of fabric that you cut to suit....I note from
GBI they offer a "big sheet of fabric" for $75.
Anyone know what the extra $525 buys me?...
The Side panels are awesome. The airplane on the website belongs to a
friend of mine and they are sweet....But for a thousand bucks for two
side panels they are too rich for my taste.
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior thoughts.. |
About 12 pounds including the adhesive to mount the pieces (and
including a couple extra large pockets for storage on the seat backs).
As mentioned, this is complete - essentially every surface covered,
including the floor, in the cockpit and the baggage area and includes a
tonneau cover for the baggage area to keep prying eyes out. If you are
worried about the extra weight and wanted to leave some off you could -
Abby is very amenable to modifications.
It should be noted that the kit is not just for "plushness" although it
certainly is that :-) - the upholstery and carpet act to make a much
quieter plane inside the cockpit. Probably warmer too at altitude
To me the extra ten pounds are worth it - but then again my wife and I
are well under the 170 lbs FAA "standard person" so we have more spare
pounds to play with than some :-) .
To each his own...
Dick Tasker
P.S. Did you ever build the warning tone circuit?
Dan Checkoway wrote:
>
>What does the complete Flightline interior kit weigh, roughly? Just curious
>what the penalty for plushness is.
>
>)_( Dan
>RV-7 N714D
>http://www.rvproject.com
>
----
Please Note:
No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however,
that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced.
----
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Schlatterer" <billschlatterer(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Interior thoughts.. |
Just went and picked it all up and it couldn't be more than a couple of
pounds 3-4 tops. It's very light and the carpet is nothing like what I
would have thought of as "carpet" for weight. On the other hand, she did a
fabulous job on my Oregon Aero seats and they are really heavy,.... but nice
on the tush ;-) but that's OA and not the covers. NO regrets there.
Bill S
7a Ark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
Subject: Re: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
What does the complete Flightline interior kit weigh, roughly? Just curious
what the penalty for plushness is.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net>
Subject: Re: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
>
> I have an upholstery kit from Abby. It is COMPLETE! Every part is cut
> to shape for every exposed part in the cockpit and baggage area. About
> the only area that is not covered is the firewall. All you have to do
> is spray with adhesive and stick them in position.
>
> It is awesome!
>
> Of course if you have much more time than money, you could probably
> start with a large piece of upholstery cloth and do the same. But you
> would also have to know how to stitch pieces together and have an
> industrial sewing machine to do so as well.
>
> Well worth the money in my opinion!
>
> Dick Tasker
>
> Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis) wrote:
>
> >
> >Speaking of which, I like the idea of not painting the interior so...
> >
> >I was looking at the Fliteline Interiors interior kit for $600. I was
> >having a hard time understanding what I got for the money. I mean it
> >"looks" like a big sheet of fabric that you cut to suit....I note from
> >GBI they offer a "big sheet of fabric" for $75.
> >
> >Anyone know what the extra $525 buys me?...
> >
> >The Side panels are awesome. The airplane on the website belongs to a
> >friend of mine and they are sweet....But for a thousand bucks for two
> >side panels they are too rich for my taste.
> >
> >Frank
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Campbell <1global(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior thoughts.. |
Golf club compartment? Do you have pictures? Can you fit 2 sets and
2 people with some baggage?
Thanks
Rob...
thinking about building
On Aug 8, 2005, at 6:02 PM, Bill Schlatterer wrote:
>
>
> Just FYI. She did a custom rear wall cover for my golf club
> compartment and
> baggage floor doors as well and they look great.
>
>
> Bill S
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank
> George (Corvallis)
> To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
>
>
>
>
> I just saw your pics, I must admit it looks hot!
>
> Thanks for sending them to me...I have a raised center cover with a
> large box into which I can throw kinck knacks (going to make a
> lightweight cover to add cup holders just for a joke..:)..) So my
> front
> carpet will have to be custom.
>
> But apart from that..Boy yes she does good work!
>
> Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
> Schlatterer
> To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
>
> -->
>
> Frank, it gets you 37 individually custom cut pieces that fit
> perfectly.
> It includes the carpet also cut and the floor insulation as well as a
> firewall blanket. It was worth it to me. I think the rear baggage
> wall
> cover and baggage area cover is included as well. Talk to Abby, you
> won't be sorry.
>
> Bill S
> 7a Ark fuse panel
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Hinde, Frank
> George (Corvallis)
> To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
>
>
>
>
> Speaking of which, I like the idea of not painting the interior so...
>
> I was looking at the Fliteline Interiors interior kit for $600. I was
> having a hard time understanding what I got for the money. I mean it
> "looks" like a big sheet of fabric that you cut to suit....I note from
> GBI they offer a "big sheet of fabric" for $75.
>
> Anyone know what the extra $525 buys me?...
>
> The Side panels are awesome. The airplane on the website belongs to a
> friend of mine and they are sweet....But for a thousand bucks for two
> side panels they are too rich for my taste.
>
> Frank
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | sportypilot(at)stx.rr.com |
| Subject: | Re: Interior thoughts.. |
Yes I have the same package with some extras added (abby is awesome to
work with)
and the quality / price can't be beat.. you won't be disapointed..
Danny..
----- Original Message -----
From: Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com>
Date: Monday, August 8, 2005 6:56 pm
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
>
>
> Hey Folks,
>
> This sounds like an interesting package to me too - somewhere
> along the line I missed the URL of the supplier - could you
> repost it ?
>
> Many thanks,
>
> g
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Frank, it gets you 37 individually custom cut pieces that fit
> > perfectly. It
> > includes the carpet also cut and the floor insulation as well
> > as a firewall
> > blanket. It was worth it to me. I think the rear baggage wall
> > cover and
> > baggage area cover is included as well. Talk to Abby, you
> > won't be sorry.
> >
> > Bill S
> > 7a Ark fuse panel
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Hinde,
> Frank> George (Corvallis)
> > To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: RE: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Speaking of which, I like the idea of not painting the interior
> so...>
> > I was looking at the Fliteline Interiors interior kit for $600.
> I was
> > having a hard time understanding what I got for the money. I
> mean it
> > "looks" like a big sheet of fabric that you cut to suit....I
> note from
> > GBI they offer a "big sheet of fabric" for $75.
> >
> > Anyone know what the extra $525 buys me?...
> >
> > The Side panels are awesome. The airplane on the website belongs
> to a
> > friend of mine and they are sweet....But for a thousand bucks
> for two
> > side panels they are too rich for my taste.
> >
> > Frank
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> __g__
>
> ==========================================================
> Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
> Tel: 415 203 9177
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jamie Painter <jamie(at)jpainter.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Interior thoughts.. |
Well, for those of us that don't like chemicals and spray guns, Abby's
interior kit looks like a great way to get out of painting almost every
piece of the interior.
- Jamie
RV-7A Forward Fuselage
http://rv.jpainter.org
sportypilot(at)stx.rr.com wrote:
>
>Yes I have the same package with some extras added (abby is awesome to
>work with)
>and the quality / price can't be beat.. you won't be disapointed..
>
>Danny..
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com>
>Date: Monday, August 8, 2005 6:56 pm
>Subject: RE: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>Hey Folks,
>>
>>This sounds like an interesting package to me too - somewhere
>>along the line I missed the URL of the supplier - could you
>>repost it ?
>>
>>Many thanks,
>>
>>g
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Frank, it gets you 37 individually custom cut pieces that fit
>>>perfectly. It
>>>includes the carpet also cut and the floor insulation as well
>>>as a firewall
>>>blanket. It was worth it to me. I think the rear baggage wall
>>>cover and
>>>baggage area cover is included as well. Talk to Abby, you
>>>won't be sorry.
>>>
>>>Bill S
>>>7a Ark fuse panel
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
>>>[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Hinde,
>>>
>>>
>>Frank> George (Corvallis)
>>
>>
>>>To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>>>Subject: RE: RV7-List: Interior thoughts..
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Speaking of which, I like the idea of not painting the interior
>>>
>>>
>>so...>
>>
>>
>>>I was looking at the Fliteline Interiors interior kit for $600.
>>>
>>>
>>I was
>>
>>
>>>having a hard time understanding what I got for the money. I
>>>
>>>
>>mean it
>>
>>
>>>"looks" like a big sheet of fabric that you cut to suit....I
>>>
>>>
>>note from
>>
>>
>>>GBI they offer a "big sheet of fabric" for $75.
>>>
>>>Anyone know what the extra $525 buys me?...
>>>
>>>The Side panels are awesome. The airplane on the website belongs
>>>
>>>
>>to a
>>
>>
>>>friend of mine and they are sweet....But for a thousand bucks
>>>
>>>
>>for two
>>
>>
>>>side panels they are too rich for my taste.
>>>
>>>Frank
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>--
>>__g__
>>
>>==========================================================
>>Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
>> Tel: 415 203 9177
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott R. Shook" <sshook(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Rudder Skin Question |
We are getting to the point that we are ready to rivet on the rudder skin
and there is nothing really indicating whether the R901L & R go over or
under the counter-balance skin. To me logic would suggest that the counter
balance skin goes on top but in the drawings it looks like the rudder skin
goes on top pointing into the wind.
I know it sounds like a simple question; I just want to make sure it is
right. Any experienced builders care to comment?
Thanks,
Scott
(Rudder ready to close out - wing kit still collecting dust)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel Storer" <dstorer(at)okwifi.com> |
| Subject: | Wing tip modification |
Has any one modified their wing tips for light storage? I remember seeing
this a few years ago at Oshkosh, and from what I remember it looked like
they cut a rectangle in the top with a hinge and lock. Does any one have
picture or pro's and con's stories? Looks like a good place to stow a
canopy cover and stuff like that....
Thanks,
Dan S.
Oklahoma City
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Rudder Skin Question |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Rudder skin goes on top of the counter balance skin...Taper the edge of
the rudder skin to give a smooth transition
Frank
RV 7a
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott R. Shook
Subject: RV7-List: Rudder Skin Question
We are getting to the point that we are ready to rivet on the rudder
skin and there is nothing really indicating whether the R901L & R go
over or under the counter-balance skin. To me logic would suggest that
the counter balance skin goes on top but in the drawings it looks like
the rudder skin goes on top pointing into the wind.
I know it sounds like a simple question; I just want to make sure it is
right. Any experienced builders care to comment?
Thanks,
Scott
(Rudder ready to close out - wing kit still collecting dust)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
And how about this idea....
Even with an IFR stack my space between the sub panel and firwall will
be almost completly empty. A lot of builders have cut access holes in
the top skin either side of the central stiffner. Looks to me like a lot
of space where a small locker could be fabricated. In the right place
from a W&B perspective too.
Sounds whacky but it looks doable and when your camping you always need
a little more space for hiking boots, food items, kitchen sink etc.
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Skin Question |
| From: | Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com> |
Definitely on top - you want overlapping edges pointing aft -
unless you're planning on flying backwads ;-)
g
>
>
> We are getting to the point that we are ready to rivet on the
> rudder skin
> and there is nothing really indicating whether the R901L & R go over or
> under the counter-balance skin. To me logic would suggest that
> the counter
> balance skin goes on top but in the drawings it looks like the
> rudder skin
> goes on top pointing into the wind.
>
> I know it sounds like a simple question; I just want to make sure it is
> right. Any experienced builders care to comment?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Scott
> (Rudder ready to close out - wing kit still collecting dust)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
Tel: 415 203 9177
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
rv7-list(at)matronics.com, rv8-list(at)matronics.com, rv9-list(at)matronics.com,
Listers,
Gary VanRemortel just sent me an update to the RV Yeller Pages and it
can be found here:
http://www.matronics.com/YellerPages/
Thanks Gary!!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Admin.
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Skin Question |
> Definitely on top - you want overlapping edges pointing aft -
> unless you're planning on flying backwads ;-)
Actually, the configuration where the gap faces *forward* apparently
produces less drag!
That said, my gaps face aft. I do know of one RV-6 with all gaps facing
forward, though.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Skin Question |
| From: | Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com> |
Wow, that does surprise me - can any of you aeronautical
engineers enlighten on how this works ? I'm pretty sure the
ailerons on the 9 have the counterbalance skins on top - at
least mine do :-))
I was also thinking of bugs, liquids and the like being drawn
into the interior, although it is protected somewhat by the
flight surface its hinged on.
g
>
>
> > Definitely on top - you want overlapping edges pointing aft -
> > unless you're planning on flying backwads ;-)
>
> Actually, the configuration where the gap faces *forward* apparently
> produces less drag!
>
> That said, my gaps face aft. I do know of one RV-6 with all gaps facing
> forward, though.
>
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
Tel: 415 203 9177
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott R. Shook" <sshook(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Rudder Skin Question |
I asked because in drawing 7 of the rudder, the counterbalance skin is drawn
with broken lines (that would put the gap facing forward and the rudder skin
is overlapping the counter balance skin). From my H.S. mechanical drawing
class I recall broken lines indicate that things are hidden.
That's why I was confused.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
Subject: Re: RV7-List: Rudder Skin Question
> Definitely on top - you want overlapping edges pointing aft -
> unless you're planning on flying backwads ;-)
Actually, the configuration where the gap faces *forward* apparently
produces less drag!
That said, my gaps face aft. I do know of one RV-6 with all gaps facing
forward, though.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Rudder Skin Question |
| From: | "Francis, David CMDR" <David.Francis(at)defence.gov.au> |
Scott,
I suspect that the main reason overlaps should face aft is that the slipstream
will blast rain into the overlap causing corrosion in the longer run.
At our speeds I suspect the aerodynamic effects are a secondary consideration.
In the case of the ailerons, I suspect the forward facing overlap is to ease construction.
Note that the trailing edge finish on RV ailerons is critical to
sweet handling and I suspect Van wants to avoid a riveted trailing aileron edge
at all costs. Obviously the rudder trailing edge is not as critical to rudder
effectiveness.
Just a lateral thought, David Francis, Canberra, Australia.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Rudder Skin Question
I asked because in drawing 7 of the rudder, the counterbalance skin is drawn
with broken lines (that would put the gap facing forward and the rudder skin
is overlapping the counter balance skin). From my H.S. mechanical drawing
class I recall broken lines indicate that things are hidden.
That's why I was confused.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
Subject: Re: RV7-List: Rudder Skin Question
> Definitely on top - you want overlapping edges pointing aft -
> unless you're planning on flying backwads ;-)
Actually, the configuration where the gap faces *forward* apparently
produces less drag!
That said, my gaps face aft. I do know of one RV-6 with all gaps facing
forward, though.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Nellis <truflite(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Skin Question |
Check your rudder drawing in section G-10. There are
notes there referring to bevelling the outside of the
skin to make a smooth transition for the rudder skin.
I beveled the inside to hide any errant scratches.
The rudder skin then goes over the counterbalance
skin. Bass ackwards, but the way Van's designed it.
If you peel the rudder skin back at the
counterbalance, you are flying way to fast.
Dave Nellis
N410DN (Res.)
--- Dan Checkoway wrote:
>
>
> > Definitely on top - you want overlapping edges
> pointing aft -
> > unless you're planning on flying backwads ;-)
>
> Actually, the configuration where the gap faces
> *forward* apparently
> produces less drag!
>
> That said, my gaps face aft. I do know of one RV-6
> with all gaps facing
> forward, though.
>
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Grieve <mark(at)macomb.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Skin Question |
Scott,
Although the plans are not clear and the instructions don't specifically
say so, the counterbalance skin laps over the top of the rudder skins.
There is a note on the plans to taper the aft edge of the counterbalance
skin. There would be no reason to do this if this part were covered by
the rudder skins. This way, the rudder skins lay flat on the spar all
the way up and the counterbalance skin makes a bit of a joggle as it
goes from the rib to the rudder skin. These skins are all of what, .016?
so it isn't much of a jump.
Call Van's if you want an official ruling.
Mark
Scott R. Shook wrote:
>
>We are getting to the point that we are ready to rivet on the rudder skin
>and there is nothing really indicating whether the R901L & R go over or
>under the counter-balance skin. To me logic would suggest that the counter
>balance skin goes on top but in the drawings it looks like the rudder skin
>goes on top pointing into the wind.
>
>I know it sounds like a simple question; I just want to make sure it is
>right. Any experienced builders care to comment?
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Scott
>(Rudder ready to close out - wing kit still collecting dust)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bradley Oliver" <brad(at)rv7factory.com> |
| Subject: | Rudder Skin Question |
Sorry, but you've got it backwards. The rudder skin goes ON TOP (as in
outside) of the counterbalance skin as per the plans. Hence the dashed line
for the outline of the rudder counterbalance skin as it sits behind the
rudder skin. As was stated earlier, you bevel the "outside" (quoted from
the plans) edges of the counterbalance skin (per the diagram) so that the
rudder skins lay flat as they transitions from the spar OVER the edge of
counterbalance skin. It does seem counterintuitive at first to have the
exposed edge of the rudder skins facing forward, but they fit very tight and
flush.
I don't know, but it may have been counterbalance skin over rudder skin in
the older style rudder (bent TE), but for the newer style rudder (riveted
TE) it IS rudder skin over counterbalance skin.
Regards,
Brad Oliver
RV-7 Livermore, CA
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Grieve
Subject: Re: RV7-List: Rudder Skin Question
Scott,
Although the plans are not clear and the instructions don't specifically
say so, the counterbalance skin laps over the top of the rudder skins.
There is a note on the plans to taper the aft edge of the counterbalance
skin. There would be no reason to do this if this part were covered by
the rudder skins. This way, the rudder skins lay flat on the spar all
the way up and the counterbalance skin makes a bit of a joggle as it
goes from the rib to the rudder skin. These skins are all of what, .016?
so it isn't much of a jump.
Call Van's if you want an official ruling.
Mark
Scott R. Shook wrote:
>
>We are getting to the point that we are ready to rivet on the rudder skin
>and there is nothing really indicating whether the R901L & R go over or
>under the counter-balance skin. To me logic would suggest that the counter
>balance skin goes on top but in the drawings it looks like the rudder skin
>goes on top pointing into the wind.
>
>I know it sounds like a simple question; I just want to make sure it is
>right. Any experienced builders care to comment?
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Scott
>(Rudder ready to close out - wing kit still collecting dust)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Van's Firewall Forward Kit ... worth the money ? |
| From: | Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com> |
0.25 HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (DHCP)
0.74 HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (HCC)
1.40 HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (IP
addr 1)
More shopping decisions ...
Van's Firewall Forward kit for the RV-9 (constant speed prop)
is some $4,300. Whilst Van's kits are usually very good value
for money, I was wondering what experiences people had with
this kit.
Were you happy with the qauality ?
Were there things missing or things not needed ?
Did you still have to fork out for extras ?
Would you buy it again ?
PS Most likely I'm going to get an IO-320 from Aerosport which
might have some bearing on the cost effectiveness of the FWF kit.
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
Tel: 415 203 9177
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Birkelbach <phil(at)petrasoft.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Van's Firewall Forward Kit ... worth the money ? |
Gerry Filby wrote:
>
>
>More shopping decisions ...
>
>Van's Firewall Forward kit for the RV-9 (constant speed prop)
>is some $4,300. Whilst Van's kits are usually very good value
>for money, I was wondering what experiences people had with
>this kit.
>
>Were you happy with the qauality ?
>
>
Yes
>Were there things missing or things not needed ?
>
>
The closer you are to standard (i.e. no funny fuel injection or
electronic ignition) the closer the kit will be to what you want. I
suspect that there would still be a few things here and there that would
not quite match up to your exact needs but it'll be close. I went with
one electronic ignition and an AFP fuel injection system on what would
normally be a carburated engine so I had to do a lot of deleting of
stuff from the kit but all in all it was pretty decent.
>Did you still have to fork out for extras ?
>
>
Of course.
>Would you buy it again ?
>
>
Absolutely! Just having the right hoses, and fittings made it worth
it. There is a lot of stuff in there. Some of it you'll decide not to
use and some of it will fall short but it sucks to spend $5 shipping a
$6 part because it's the only little fitting that you need.
>PS Most likely I'm going to get an IO-320 from Aerosport which
>might have some bearing on the cost effectiveness of the FWF kit.
>
>
Take a close look at the list of things that are in the IO-320 kit.
Van's will let you delete things from the kit. I deleted about half of
the O-360 kit stuff on mine and it worked out great. Call them, they
will work with you.
>__g__
>
>
>
>
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB - Finishing Up
http://www.myrv7.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jarvo" <jarvo(at)insightbb.com> |
| Subject: | Rudder/Counterweight Skin Over/Under Debate |
For those pondering which skin goes on top-- built my empennage at Alexander Technical Center (www.buildtofly.com), and they were adamant that, illogical as it may seem... it goes as shown on the drawing with
the rudder skin on top. Both edges do get tapered down to give as smooth a joint
as possible. They've built hundreds of these puppies down there.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sargentclt(at)cs.com |
| Subject: | Re: Van's Firewall Forward Kit ... worth the money ? |
absolutely worth the money.
Everything fits as is should and you have all the pieces you need to complete
the kit.
Tad S.
RV7A Painting
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sargentclt(at)cs.com |
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Skin Question |
Under, If it is the same as the 7A
Tad S.
Painting
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "sjevans" <sjevans(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Van's Firewall Forward Kit ... worth the money ? |
I did a little checking into the cost comparisons of the FWF kit &
separate parts. I priced everything listed on the sample FWF kit (I
think it was a 320 CS setup) and separate parts as listed in the Van's
catalog & their website. I may have had to look at Spruce for some
things. I could only come up with something like a $300 difference.
That was enough to convince me that the FWF kit was worth it.
Sam
7A @ABI
emp attached to fuse
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Sargentclt(at)cs.com
Subject: Re: RV7-List: Van's Firewall Forward Kit ... worth the money ?
absolutely worth the money.
Everything fits as is should and you have all the pieces you need to
complete
the kit.
Tad S.
RV7A Painting
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Van's Firewall Forward Kit ... worth the |
money ?
| From: | "Francis, David CMDR" <David.Francis(at)defence.gov.au> |
Gerry,
I got an injected 0360 with aerobatic sump, constant speed, from Aerosport. The
engine is just superb.
I had to do a lot of deleting from the Vans FWF kit to cater for my odd sump, but
must say that the baffle kit, oil cooler and hoses and connections alone make
life relatively easy and are very well priced.
I deleted the throttle/mixture/governor cables and exhaust due to my Sky Dynamics
sump, and the cost and delays in getting substitutes from Spruce is quite high.
So staying with Vans standard designs saves on freight and lots of labour
making up odd shaped brackets.
Standardisation really has big benefits.
One final comment, for fuel injection Vans plans do not include a gascolator to
trap water. If you elect to fit a gascolator you will need a high pressure Andair
gascolator, not a Vans low pressure one. Dont ask how I found out the difference.
Regards, David A Francis, Canberra, Australia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]
Subject: RV7-List: Van's Firewall Forward Kit ... worth the money ?
More shopping decisions ...
Van's Firewall Forward kit for the RV-9 (constant speed prop)
is some $4,300. Whilst Van's kits are usually very good value
for money, I was wondering what experiences people had with
this kit.
Were you happy with the qauality ?
Were there things missing or things not needed ?
Did you still have to fork out for extras ?
Would you buy it again ?
PS Most likely I'm going to get an IO-320 from Aerosport which
might have some bearing on the cost effectiveness of the FWF kit.
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
Tel: 415 203 9177
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Ping" <rpping(at)qwest.net> |
| Subject: | RE: RV9-List: Van's Firewall Forward Kit ... worth the money |
?
Definitely 80% of the wiring part of the kit was useless. Most of the
wires were for other models and unless you are going to install Vans
prepunched panel most of the smaller wires are useless also. I just cut
them up and used them as I could. Although, what do you do when you have
to crimp a 003 wire?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv9-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv9-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gerry Filby
Subject: RV9-List: Van's Firewall Forward Kit ... worth the money ?
--> RV9-List message posted by: Gerry Filby
More shopping decisions ...
Van's Firewall Forward kit for the RV-9 (constant speed prop)
is some $4,300. Whilst Van's kits are usually very good value
for money, I was wondering what experiences people had with
this kit.
Were you happy with the qauality ?
Were there things missing or things not needed ?
Did you still have to fork out for extras ?
Would you buy it again ?
PS Most likely I'm going to get an IO-320 from Aerosport which
might have some bearing on the cost effectiveness of the FWF kit.
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
Tel: 415 203 9177
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Grieve <mark(at)macomb.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Skin Question |
Bradley,
I was involved in the construction of 2 RV-9 rudders and thought sure
the counterbalance skin went on top. Humm, could my memory be going on
me here? That was 3 years ago. I am sorry for providing bad information
and trying to sound like such an authority all the while.
Thank you for setting me straight.
Mark
Bradley Oliver wrote:
>
>
>Sorry, but you've got it backwards. The rudder skin goes ON TOP (as in
>outside) of the counterbalance skin as per the plans. Hence the dashed line
>for the outline of the rudder counterbalance skin as it sits behind the
>rudder skin. As was stated earlier, you bevel the "outside" (quoted from
>the plans) edges of the counterbalance skin (per the diagram) so that the
>rudder skins lay flat as they transitions from the spar OVER the edge of
>counterbalance skin. It does seem counterintuitive at first to have the
>exposed edge of the rudder skins facing forward, but they fit very tight and
>flush.
>
>I don't know, but it may have been counterbalance skin over rudder skin in
>the older style rudder (bent TE), but for the newer style rudder (riveted
>TE) it IS rudder skin over counterbalance skin.
>
>Regards,
>Brad Oliver
>RV-7 Livermore, CA
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Grieve
>To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV7-List: Rudder Skin Question
>
>
>Scott,
>Although the plans are not clear and the instructions don't specifically
>say so, the counterbalance skin laps over the top of the rudder skins.
>There is a note on the plans to taper the aft edge of the counterbalance
>skin. There would be no reason to do this if this part were covered by
>the rudder skins. This way, the rudder skins lay flat on the spar all
>the way up and the counterbalance skin makes a bit of a joggle as it
>goes from the rib to the rudder skin. These skins are all of what, .016?
>so it isn't much of a jump.
>
>Call Van's if you want an official ruling.
>Mark
>
>Scott R. Shook wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>We are getting to the point that we are ready to rivet on the rudder skin
>>and there is nothing really indicating whether the R901L & R go over or
>>under the counter-balance skin. To me logic would suggest that the counter
>>balance skin goes on top but in the drawings it looks like the rudder skin
>>goes on top pointing into the wind.
>>
>>I know it sounds like a simple question; I just want to make sure it is
>>right. Any experienced builders care to comment?
>>
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Scott
>>(Rudder ready to close out - wing kit still collecting dust)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel Storer" <dstorer(at)okwifi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Storage mods |
Frank,
I like it, I'll keep this in mind when I get to that step on my fuse. It
might need a skin stiffener to transfer the load at the access door, but
that can be worked into the design. Still working on the wing tip storage
design, fiberglass....Ugh!
Thanks,
Dan S.
OKC
-------Original Message-------
From: Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
Date: 08/09/05 18:15:35
Subject: RV7-List: Storage mods
hinde(at)hp.com>
And how about this idea....
Even with an IFR stack my space between the sub panel and firwall will
be almost completly empty. A lot of builders have cut access holes in
the top skin either side of the central stiffner. Looks to me like a lot
of space where a small locker could be fabricated. In the right place
from a W&B perspective too.
Sounds whacky but it looks doable and when your camping you always need
a little more space for hiking boots, food items, kitchen sink etc.
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Norman Younie <rv6capt(at)pacificcoast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Storage mods |
Don't forget that the wiring for all the avionics takes up space and the
plumbing for your instruments. I wouldn't recommend it, it'll make
things too tight to work up under there and if you have to fix or add
something in the future you'll be learning how to cuss.
Cheers
Norman RV-6, RV-7, RV-7, F1 Rocket, working on a RV-9A
Daniel Storer wrote:
>
>Frank,
>
>I like it, I'll keep this in mind when I get to that step on my fuse. It
>might need a skin stiffener to transfer the load at the access door, but
>that can be worked into the design. Still working on the wing tip storage
>design, fiberglass....Ugh!
>
>Thanks,
>
>Dan S.
>OKC
>-------Original Message-------
>
>From: Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
>Date: 08/09/05 18:15:35
>To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV7-List: Storage mods
>
>hinde(at)hp.com>
>
>And how about this idea....
>
>Even with an IFR stack my space between the sub panel and firwall will
>be almost completly empty. A lot of builders have cut access holes in
>the top skin either side of the central stiffner. Looks to me like a lot
>of space where a small locker could be fabricated. In the right place
>from a W&B perspective too.
>
>Sounds whacky but it looks doable and when your camping you always need
>a little more space for hiking boots, food items, kitchen sink etc.
>
>Frank
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Andrew Olech" <olechap(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Firewall Recess undersized |
I'm just starting to match the F-601K recess to the firewall (RV-7) and am
having difficulty aligning the holes. The top sides of the recess (airframe
coordinates) on the upper section, where the metal is formed using bends at
two different angles, is crinkled slightly...but the bends were made such
that the overall width of the recessed piece is undersized ~ 0.150. I'd
expect someone else has had this problem, hopefully; I'm debating using a
wood block and a hammer to try and take some of the bend out but I'm afraid
of either overdoing it and not being able to bend it back (after cold
working) or crinkling the sidewalls such that other holes won't line up. I
suppose you can't really see it unless you're looking for it... but I can
wait to see if there are any tried and true tricks to widening it.
Any thoughts would be appreciated,
Andy Olech, RV-7
Ellington, CT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com |
| From: | "AYRES, JIMMY L" <JAYRES(at)entergy.com> |
"'rv7-list(at)matronics.com'"
Subject:
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 14:54:36 -0500
Hey guys,
>
>
> I am new to the RV list and recently purchased a RF7A QB from an
> individual. I was trying to fit up my HS/elevator and noticed that
> when clamped in place, there was almost no travel of down elevator
> allowed due to the down stop (F711E). When I called Vans, they told
> me that this piece had to be trimmed and almost seemed insulted by the
> question since this information was in my instructions.
>
>
> Well either I'm a complete idiot or I am missing something because I
> have been completely through my instructions and drawings and I have found no
reference to this nor have I found any information on elevator defection limits.
I am concerned that maybe I am missing some of my instruction manual.
>
>
> Can anyone out there tell me where this info is located?
Hey guys,
I am new to the RV list
and recently purchased a RF7A QB from an
individual. I was
trying to fit up my HS/elevator and noticed that
when clamped in place,
there was almost no travel of down elevator
allowed due to the down
stop (F711E). When I called Vans, they told
me that this piece had
to be trimmed and almost seemed insulted by the
question since this
information was in my instructions.
Well either I'm a
complete idiot or I am missing something because I
have been completely
through my instructions and drawings and I have found no reference to this nor
have I found any information on elevator defection limits. I am concerned that
maybe I am missing some of my instruction manual.
Can anyone out there
tell me where this info is located?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
----- Original Message -----
From: <owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com>
>
> From: "AYRES, JIMMY L" <JAYRES(at)entergy.com>
> To: "'rvsoutheast-list(at)matronics.com'" ,
> "'rv7-list(at)matronics.com'"
> Subject:
> Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 14:54:36 -0500
>
> Hey guys,
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> I am new to the RV list and recently purchased a RF7A QB from an
>
>> individual. I was trying to fit up my HS/elevator and noticed that
>
>> when clamped in place, there was almost no travel of down elevator
>
>> allowed due to the down stop (F711E). When I called Vans, they told
>
>> me that this piece had to be trimmed and almost seemed insulted by the
>
>> question since this information was in my instructions.
((((((((((I too have been convinced some needed facts were not in the
builder's manual or the drawings. After several humbling enlightenments, I
have learned that Vans knows their stuff and they have worked with the
instructions and our questions enough that they know what they are saying.
You are right to consult the RV-List to look for a quick answer or second
opinion. The best, final authority is alway Vans however. ))))))))))))
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> Well either I'm a complete idiot or I am missing something because I
>
>> have been completely through my instructions and drawings and I have
>> found no reference to this nor have I found any information on elevator
>> defection limits. I am concerned that maybe I am missing some of my
>> instruction manual.
((((((((((Vans can quote you page and paragraph where such instructions are
located. Take a humble attitude with Vans and I think you will great
cooperation and help. If you are missing something, they can help you but
when you need it, you need it. When it is all done and you are flying as I
and my wife did today to visit your son, you will nearly forget all those
days when you learned something new. ))))))))))))))))
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> Can anyone out there tell me where this info is located?
((((((((((NO not off hand, my plans and builder's manual are at the hangar.
But, I can tell you that they are there. You might look in the manual where
it instructs you to mount the elevators on the horizontal stabilizer. The
min and max angles are there somewhere. (I found them and used them during
the building process.)
Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip Up It Flies )))))))))))))))
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Patterson" <dpatterson14(at)wi.rr.com> |
| Subject: | cabin heat for RV 7a |
I understand that some RV builders have been installing the cabin heat system that
is offered from Glasair. The system has a rotary valve that can direct heat
to both pilot and passenger and windshield defrost. I was wondering if any
one had any knowledge of this unit and how well it works. Wisconsin gets real
cold in winter.
Thanks Don
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Herb Feldman <hfaz(at)yahoo.com> |
Jimmy - Instructions for setting the elevator travel
stops can be found on page 8-16, with the reference
drawing no. 27A.
Travel limits for the elevator and all the control
surfaces can be found on page 15-2
Herb
--- owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com wrote:
>
> From: "AYRES, JIMMY L" <JAYRES(at)entergy.com>
> To: "'rvsoutheast-list(at)matronics.com'"
> ,
> "'rv7-list(at)matronics.com'"
>
> Subject:
> Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 14:54:36 -0500
>
> Hey guys,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I am new to the RV list and recently purchased a
> RF7A QB from an
>
> > individual. I was trying to fit up my HS/elevator
> and noticed that
>
> > when clamped in place, there was almost no travel
> of down elevator
>
> > allowed due to the down stop (F711E). When I
> called Vans, they told
>
> > me that this piece had to be trimmed and almost
> seemed insulted by the
>
> > question since this information was in my
> instructions.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Well either I'm a complete idiot or I am missing
> something because I
>
> > have been completely through my instructions and
> drawings and I have found no reference to this nor
> have I found any information on elevator defection
> limits. I am concerned that maybe I am missing some
> of my instruction manual.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Can anyone out there tell me where this info is
> located?
>
>
>
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier
> New"'>Hey guys,
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>
> I am new to the RV list
> and recently purchased a RF7A QB from an
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>
> individual. I was
> trying to fit up my HS/elevator and noticed that
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>
> when clamped in place,
> there was almost no travel of down elevator
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>
> allowed due to the down
> stop (F711E). When I called Vans, they told
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>
> me that this piece had
> to be trimmed and almost seemed insulted by the
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>
> question since this
> information was in my instructions.
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>
> Well either I'm a
> complete idiot or I am missing something because I
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>
> have been completely
> through my instructions and drawings and I have
> found no reference to this nor
> have I found any information on elevator defection
> limits. I am concerned that
> maybe I am missing some of my instruction manual.
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>
>
>
> style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>
> Can anyone out there
> tell me where this info is located?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Taylor" <mtaylo17(at)msn.com> |
Section 15, Page 2 shows the angles for rigging control surfaces. It's not
where you'd expect to look for something when your working on your
empennage.
Good luck!
Mark.
www.4sierratango.com
>From: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net>
>Reply-To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: RV7-List: Re: Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 19:55:00 -0500
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com>
>
>
> >
> > From: "AYRES, JIMMY L" <JAYRES(at)entergy.com>
> > To: "'rvsoutheast-list(at)matronics.com'" ,
> > "'rv7-list(at)matronics.com'"
> > Subject:
> > Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 14:54:36 -0500
> >
> > Hey guys,
> >
> >>
> >
> >>
> >
> >> I am new to the RV list and recently purchased a RF7A QB from an
> >
> >> individual. I was trying to fit up my HS/elevator and noticed that
> >
> >> when clamped in place, there was almost no travel of down elevator
> >
> >> allowed due to the down stop (F711E). When I called Vans, they told
> >
> >> me that this piece had to be trimmed and almost seemed insulted by the
> >
> >> question since this information was in my instructions.
>
>((((((((((I too have been convinced some needed facts were not in the
>builder's manual or the drawings. After several humbling enlightenments, I
>have learned that Vans knows their stuff and they have worked with the
>instructions and our questions enough that they know what they are saying.
>You are right to consult the RV-List to look for a quick answer or second
>opinion. The best, final authority is alway Vans however. ))))))))))))
> >
> >>
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Well either I'm a complete idiot or I am missing something because I
> >
> >> have been completely through my instructions and drawings and I have
> >> found no reference to this nor have I found any information on elevator
> >> defection limits. I am concerned that maybe I am missing some of my
> >> instruction manual.
>
>((((((((((Vans can quote you page and paragraph where such instructions are
>located. Take a humble attitude with Vans and I think you will great
>cooperation and help. If you are missing something, they can help you but
>when you need it, you need it. When it is all done and you are flying as I
>and my wife did today to visit your son, you will nearly forget all those
>days when you learned something new. ))))))))))))))))
>
> >
> >>
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Can anyone out there tell me where this info is located?
>
>((((((((((NO not off hand, my plans and builder's manual are at the hangar.
>But, I can tell you that they are there. You might look in the manual
>where
>it instructs you to mount the elevators on the horizontal stabilizer. The
>min and max angles are there somewhere. (I found them and used them during
>the building process.)
>
>Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip Up It Flies )))))))))))))))
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ed clegg" <edwclg(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | RV 8 Gear Towers |
There has been some discussion relating to opening the towers for better
access.
What I would like is those that have and are flying to let us know how they
are holding up.
Also is there any engineering out there on the pros and cons.
I am thinking of this but still up in the air. I have had mixed opinions
from good sources.
Thanks,
Ed Clegg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com |
| Subject: | RV 8 Gear Towers |
Vans has indicated that the rivets which hold the 802C to the angles could
be replaced with #8 screws. I consequently went ahead and cut 802C cross
wise above the WD821 weldment and two rivet holes below the top lightening
hole. I also put two stout doubler plates to effect the junction. The
doubler plates are riveted into the removable part of 802C and screwed via
#8s into the top and bottom part of 802C. Have not flown yet so can't
report but if anyone is interested I can send pictures.
Michele Delsol
RV8 Fuselage
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv7-list-
> server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ed clegg
> Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 3:39 PM
> To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com; RV-8(at)yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RV7-List: RV 8 Gear Towers
>
>
> There has been some discussion relating to opening the towers for better
> access.
> What I would like is those that have and are flying to let us know how
> they
> are holding up.
> Also is there any engineering out there on the pros and cons.
> I am thinking of this but still up in the air. I have had mixed opinions
> from good sources.
> Thanks,
> Ed Clegg
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Roller tappets - another ~ - OUCH !! |
| From: | Gerry Filby <gerf(at)gerf.com> |
0.25 HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (DHCP)
0.74 HELO_DYNAMIC_HCC Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (HCC)
1.40 HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (IP
addr 1)
Folks,
Looks like adding the roller tappet option to your 320 or 360
is going to add another $3-4000 to the price (that's Aerosport's
current estimate).
I've been hunting around and haven't found much discussion on
the upgrade apart from various announcements from Delphi and
Lycoming. This "new technology" solves premature wear and
corrosion only ? They also enable alternate cam profiles ? (Not
likely for this first timer.)
Is it worth it ?
If the subject's been beaten to death already I'd happily take
a link to some reference ...
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
Tel: 415 203 9177
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Roller tappets - another ~ - OUCH !! |
| From: | "Francis, David CMDR" <David.Francis(at)defence.gov.au> |
Gerry,
As I understand it galled tappets are expensive to repair, probably more than the
cost of the installation of roller tappets. But the writings I have seen indicate
that galled tappets is most common in aircraft that fly infrequently.
If you fly a minimum of 30 minutes per week every week you will probably be safe.
The 30 minute figure is driven by a separate issue. It generally takes a bit
under 30 minutes of operation at normal temperatures to drive all moisture out
of the lubrication oil, and that prevents internal engine corrosion.
I fly a Pawnee glider tug that flies only on weekends, 1-3 hrs per week, since
1982, and its never had a galling problem.
Regards, David Francis, Canberra, Australia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]
Subject: RV7-List: Roller tappets - another ~ - OUCH !!
Folks,
Looks like adding the roller tappet option to your 320 or 360
is going to add another $3-4000 to the price (that's Aerosport's
current estimate).
I've been hunting around and haven't found much discussion on
the upgrade apart from various announcements from Delphi and
Lycoming. This "new technology" solves premature wear and
corrosion only ? They also enable alternate cam profiles ? (Not
likely for this first timer.)
Is it worth it ?
If the subject's been beaten to death already I'd happily take
a link to some reference ...
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf(at)gerf.com
Tel: 415 203 9177
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Gusset questions |
I have a couple of questions on gussets and Van's has been relatively curt
and unhelpful on one of them.
The first one involves the gusset on the seatbacks to the main longeron.
Here's my situation. Following Van's instructions, I have riveted onlyt he
"keeper" rivets in the longeron and no others. I have fitted, modified and
prepped the gusset (I think it's 656). There's that big honkin' piece of
angle I prepped months ago but did not drill to the 705 bulkhead,,,these are
the four prepunched holes in the bulkhead and in the gusset itself. But
after fitting the three. I drilled these four holes.
So the longeron rivets on the skin have not been shot. And I notice that
the large piece of angle -- the 705G -- is slightly blocking the side skin
to longeron holes. Being mindful of the warnings not to rivet the side skin
to the longeron except for the "keeper" rivet holes provided, I am thus
faced with riveting the gussets/705g and 705 bulkhead now...leaving me with
a real problem when I go to shoot those side skin-to-longeron rivets are
going to be blocked by the angle when I got to shoot them.
So it seems that the only logical solution is to shoot those side
skin-to-longeron rivets now....THEN rivet the 705G-bulkhead-and gusset
together and screw the instructions about the longeron rivets.
That's what I asked Van's. But they (well, Ken) sent me back this detailed
e-mail, "or rivet in 705g after skins are on as suggested in note 5."
Nice. Not only didn't I get an answer to the question I asked. I also got a
little "shot" for no extra charge. The point was, I know all about Note 5.
I read Note 5. I DID wait to rivet the 705G until the skins are already on.
THE SKINS _are_ ALREADY ON!! (Sorry). That's why I wrote you, Van's. The
skins are, you told me not to rivet the longerons, yo told me TO rivet the
gusset. If I rivet the gusset, my path to those longeron rivets is going to
be blocked by the 705G.
It seemed like a simple question. Van's punted. What do you folks say?
-0-
On the next gusset. The 695-- that connects the longeron to the firewall,
everything has fit perfectly and I've drilled it. Everything's great. But
I'm concerned that the rivet holes are too close to the web of the engine
mount reinforcement bracket... 7/32" as near as I can tell. Pretty tight.
Wondering if anyone has had similar measurements and whether you had any
problems setting those rivets?
I love Van's. I love this kit. I'm having a great time. But I wouldn't mind
seeing a full-time tech support guy to replace 5 guys who obviously have
other stuff to do.
Bob
St. Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Meyette" <brianpublic(at)starband.net> |
| Subject: | Gusset questions |
Ken isn't Van's most gushingly friendly employee - he can be rather curt &
sometimes unhelpful
brian
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bob Collins
Subject: RV7-List: Gusset questions
I have a couple of questions on gussets and Van's has been relatively curt
and unhelpful on one of them.
The first one involves the gusset on the seatbacks to the main longeron.
Here's my situation. Following Van's instructions, I have riveted onlyt he
"keeper" rivets in the longeron and no others. I have fitted, modified and
prepped the gusset (I think it's 656). There's that big honkin' piece of
angle I prepped months ago but did not drill to the 705 bulkhead,,,these are
the four prepunched holes in the bulkhead and in the gusset itself. But
after fitting the three. I drilled these four holes.
So the longeron rivets on the skin have not been shot. And I notice that
the large piece of angle -- the 705G -- is slightly blocking the side skin
to longeron holes. Being mindful of the warnings not to rivet the side skin
to the longeron except for the "keeper" rivet holes provided, I am thus
faced with riveting the gussets/705g and 705 bulkhead now...leaving me with
a real problem when I go to shoot those side skin-to-longeron rivets are
going to be blocked by the angle when I got to shoot them.
So it seems that the only logical solution is to shoot those side
skin-to-longeron rivets now....THEN rivet the 705G-bulkhead-and gusset
together and screw the instructions about the longeron rivets.
That's what I asked Van's. But they (well, Ken) sent me back this detailed
e-mail, "or rivet in 705g after skins are on as suggested in note 5."
Nice. Not only didn't I get an answer to the question I asked. I also got a
little "shot" for no extra charge. The point was, I know all about Note 5.
I read Note 5. I DID wait to rivet the 705G until the skins are already on.
THE SKINS _are_ ALREADY ON!! (Sorry). That's why I wrote you, Van's. The
skins are, you told me not to rivet the longerons, yo told me TO rivet the
gusset. If I rivet the gusset, my path to those longeron rivets is going to
be blocked by the 705G.
It seemed like a simple question. Van's punted. What do you folks say?
-0-
On the next gusset. The 695-- that connects the longeron to the firewall,
everything has fit perfectly and I've drilled it. Everything's great. But
I'm concerned that the rivet holes are too close to the web of the engine
mount reinforcement bracket... 7/32" as near as I can tell. Pretty tight.
Wondering if anyone has had similar measurements and whether you had any
problems setting those rivets?
I love Van's. I love this kit. I'm having a great time. But I wouldn't mind
seeing a full-time tech support guy to replace 5 guys who obviously have
other stuff to do.
Bob
St. Paul
--
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Merems" <merems(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Gusset questions |
Bob,
I am a month or so behind you and hope to learn from your posting.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Collins
To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 5:40 PM
Subject: RV7-List: Gusset questions
I have a couple of questions on gussets and Van's has been relatively curt
and unhelpful on one of them.
The first one involves the gusset on the seatbacks to the main longeron.
Here's my situation. Following Van's instructions, I have riveted onlyt he
"keeper" rivets in the longeron and no others. I have fitted, modified and
prepped the gusset (I think it's 656). There's that big honkin' piece of
angle I prepped months ago but did not drill to the 705 bulkhead,,,these are
the four prepunched holes in the bulkhead and in the gusset itself. But
after fitting the three. I drilled these four holes.
So the longeron rivets on the skin have not been shot. And I notice that
the large piece of angle -- the 705G -- is slightly blocking the side skin
to longeron holes. Being mindful of the warnings not to rivet the side skin
to the longeron except for the "keeper" rivet holes provided, I am thus
faced with riveting the gussets/705g and 705 bulkhead now...leaving me with
a real problem when I go to shoot those side skin-to-longeron rivets are
going to be blocked by the angle when I got to shoot them.
So it seems that the only logical solution is to shoot those side
skin-to-longeron rivets now....THEN rivet the 705G-bulkhead-and gusset
together and screw the instructions about the longeron rivets.
That's what I asked Van's. But they (well, Ken) sent me back this detailed
e-mail, "or rivet in 705g after skins are on as suggested in note 5."
Nice. Not only didn't I get an answer to the question I asked. I also got a
little "shot" for no extra charge. The point was, I know all about Note 5.
I read Note 5. I DID wait to rivet the 705G until the skins are already on.
THE SKINS _are_ ALREADY ON!! (Sorry). That's why I wrote you, Van's. The
skins are, you told me not to rivet the longerons, yo told me TO rivet the
gusset. If I rivet the gusset, my path to those longeron rivets is going to
be blocked by the 705G.
It seemed like a simple question. Van's punted. What do you folks say?
-0-
On the next gusset. The 695-- that connects the longeron to the firewall,
everything has fit perfectly and I've drilled it. Everything's great. But
I'm concerned that the rivet holes are too close to the web of the engine
mount reinforcement bracket... 7/32" as near as I can tell. Pretty tight.
Wondering if anyone has had similar measurements and whether you had any
problems setting those rivets?
I love Van's. I love this kit. I'm having a great time. But I wouldn't mind
seeing a full-time tech support guy to replace 5 guys who obviously have
other stuff to do.
Bob
St. Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | flutewitch <flutewitch(at)cox.net> |
I am building and RV-7. A friend of mine has a beautiful flying RV-8 and
suggested to me that I should run an additional center stringer down the
center of the aft fuselage from the back of the baggage compartment to the
last bulkhead to help prevent oil caning of the skins. The distance on the 7
between bulkheads is rather short and it doesn't appear that oil canning
would be an issue, I think the 8 has a slightly longer fuselage. Has any one
else considered doing this?
Bill Cormier
Sturbridge MA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Gusset questions |
Hi Paul:
I suspect that -- given my tendency to poke along -- you're about two
months away from being one month ahead of ME. (g)
So...likewise. (g)
Regards,
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Merems
Subject: Re: RV7-List: Gusset questions
Bob,
I am a month or so behind you and hope to learn from your posting.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Collins
To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 5:40 PM
Subject: RV7-List: Gusset questions
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dean Van Winkle" <dvanwinkle(at)royell.net> |
Bill
I had an obvious oil can in the bay just aft of the baggage area. I bridged
the can with a piece of J stringer between the two bulkheads. I saw no need
to extend the extra stringer any further aft.
Dean Van Winkle
RV-9A Fuselage/Finish
----- Original Message -----
From: "flutewitch" <flutewitch(at)cox.net>
Subject: RV7-List: Stringer
>
> I am building and RV-7. A friend of mine has a beautiful flying RV-8 and
> suggested to me that I should run an additional center stringer down the
> center of the aft fuselage from the back of the baggage compartment to the
> last bulkhead to help prevent oil caning of the skins. The distance on the
> 7
> between bulkheads is rather short and it doesn't appear that oil canning
> would be an issue, I think the 8 has a slightly longer fuselage. Has any
> one
> else considered doing this?
>
> Bill Cormier
> Sturbridge MA
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | pat morency <acwrench(at)yahoo.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: RV7-List Digest: 3 Msgs - 08/17/05 |
I enjoy reading these messages as I'm building an -6
and I'm getting close to the "gusset" area my self.
A friend of mine is building a -7 so I get to see his
drawings and because their much more clear than the -6
drawings it helps to move things along.
My point is, unless I'm wrong, my drawings put the
gussets, f-656, at the f606 an f607 bulkhead this
should be f706 and f707 for the -7 ( see drawing # 26
of the -7 package ) . I hope I'm right, I'd hate to
plug the extra holes in this thing.
Patrick in Calgary
--- RV7-List Digest Server
wrote:
> *
>
> ==================================================
> Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive
> ==================================================
>
> Today's complete RV7-List Digest can also be found
> in either of the
> two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes
> the Digest formatted
> in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features
> Hyperlinked Indexes
> and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the
> plain ASCII version
> of the RV7-List Digest and can be viewed with a
> generic text editor
> such as Notepad or with a web browser.
>
> HTML Version:
>
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/digest/rv7-list/Digest.RV7-List.2005-08-17.html
>
> Text Version:
>
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/digest/rv7-list/Digest.RV7-List.2005-08-17.txt
>
>
> ================================================
> EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
> ================================================
>
>
>
>
> RV7-List Digest Archive
> ---
> Total Messages Posted Wed
> 08/17/05: 3
>
>
>
>
> Today's Message Index:
> ----------------------
>
> 1. 05:40 PM - Gusset questions (Bob Collins)
> 2. 06:50 PM - Re: Gusset questions (Brian
> Meyette)
> 3. 08:54 PM - Re: Gusset questions (Merems)
>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 1
> _____________________________________
>
>
> From: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net>
> Subject: RV7-List: Gusset questions
>
>
>
>
> I have a couple of questions on gussets and Van's
> has been relatively curt
> and unhelpful on one of them.
>
> The first one involves the gusset on the seatbacks
> to the main longeron.
> Here's my situation. Following Van's instructions, I
> have riveted onlyt he
> "keeper" rivets in the longeron and no others. I
> have fitted, modified and
> prepped the gusset (I think it's 656). There's that
> big honkin' piece of
> angle I prepped months ago but did not drill to the
> 705 bulkhead,,,these are
> the four prepunched holes in the bulkhead and in the
> gusset itself. But
> after fitting the three. I drilled these four holes.
>
> So the longeron rivets on the skin have not been
> shot. And I notice that
> the large piece of angle -- the 705G -- is slightly
> blocking the side skin
> to longeron holes. Being mindful of the warnings not
> to rivet the side skin
> to the longeron except for the "keeper" rivet holes
> provided, I am thus
> faced with riveting the gussets/705g and 705
> bulkhead now...leaving me with
> a real problem when I go to shoot those side
> skin-to-longeron rivets are
> going to be blocked by the angle when I got to shoot
> them.
>
> So it seems that the only logical solution is to
> shoot those side
> skin-to-longeron rivets now....THEN rivet the
> 705G-bulkhead-and gusset
> together and screw the instructions about the
> longeron rivets.
>
> That's what I asked Van's. But they (well, Ken) sent
> me back this detailed
> e-mail, "or rivet in 705g after skins are on as
> suggested in note 5."
>
> Nice. Not only didn't I get an answer to the
> question I asked. I also got a
> little "shot" for no extra charge. The point was, I
> know all about Note 5.
> I read Note 5. I DID wait to rivet the 705G until
> the skins are already on.
> THE SKINS _are_ ALREADY ON!! (Sorry). That's why I
> wrote you, Van's. The
> skins are, you told me not to rivet the longerons,
> yo told me TO rivet the
> gusset. If I rivet the gusset, my path to those
> longeron rivets is going to
> be blocked by the 705G.
>
> It seemed like a simple question. Van's punted. What
> do you folks say?
>
> -0-
>
> On the next gusset. The 695-- that connects the
> longeron to the firewall,
> everything has fit perfectly and I've drilled it.
> Everything's great. But
> I'm concerned that the rivet holes are too close to
> the web of the engine
> mount reinforcement bracket... 7/32" as near as I
> can tell. Pretty tight.
> Wondering if anyone has had similar measurements and
> whether you had any
> problems setting those rivets?
>
> I love Van's. I love this kit. I'm having a great
> time. But I wouldn't mind
> seeing a full-time tech support guy to replace 5
> guys who obviously have
> other stuff to do.
>
> Bob
> St. Paul
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 2
> _____________________________________
>
>
> From: "Brian Meyette" <brianpublic(at)starband.net>
> Subject: RE: RV7-List: Gusset questions
>
>
>
> Ken isn't Van's most gushingly friendly employee -
> he can be rather curt &
> sometimes unhelpful
> brian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On
> Behalf Of Bob Collins
> Subject: RV7-List: Gusset questions
>
>
>
>
> I have a couple of questions on gussets and Van's
> has been relatively curt
> and unhelpful on one of them.
>
> The first one involves the gusset on the seatbacks
> to the main longeron.
> Here's my situation. Following Van's instructions, I
> have riveted onlyt he
> "keeper" rivets in the longeron and no others. I
> have fitted, modified and
> prepped the gusset (I think it's 656). There's that
> big honkin' piece of
> angle I prepped months ago but did not drill to the
> 705 bulkhead,,,these are
> the four prepunched holes in the bulkhead and in the
> gusset itself. But
> after fitting the three. I drilled these four holes.
>
> So the longeron rivets on the skin have not been
> shot.
=== message truncated ===
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
Yeah, in fact something I'm going to do at my semi-annual in a month or two
(mid-year inspection) is to put stiffeners on ALL tailcone skins below the
stringers. Lower side panels and belly panels.
They don't oil can, but they pucker a little. There's one which pushes in
when I fly, and as just as I'm slowing down to land you can hear it "pong"
back out.
Wish I had put stiffeners back there when I built it.
I'm just going to proseal some lightweight .025 angle back there, either
diagonally or straight across each large quadrant of skin.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "flutewitch" <flutewitch(at)cox.net>
Subject: RV7-List: Stringer
>
> I am building and RV-7. A friend of mine has a beautiful flying RV-8 and
> suggested to me that I should run an additional center stringer down the
> center of the aft fuselage from the back of the baggage compartment to the
> last bulkhead to help prevent oil caning of the skins. The distance on the
> 7
> between bulkheads is rather short and it doesn't appear that oil canning
> would be an issue, I think the 8 has a slightly longer fuselage. Has any
> one
> else considered doing this?
>
> Bill Cormier
> Sturbridge MA
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sargentclt(at)cs.com |
Not an issue. I think Van has this figured out.
Tad S
RV7A painting
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net |
| Subject: | Re: More gusset questions |
> My 2 cents is...follow the order as laid out in the construction manual.
That's my point. It's impossible to follow the order laid out in the construction
manual/plans.
1. The plans say don't rivet the side skins to the longeron.
2. The plans say rivet the gusset to the 705G/705 bulkhead.
3. The 705G interferes with the side-skins-to-longeron rivets in those 2 (and
possibly 3) holes.
It seems to me the only way to do this would be to rivet the side skins to longerons
in those locations now, THEN rivet the 705 bulkhead, 705G and gusset.
Either way, I'm going to have to ignore someting in the manual/plans. What I was
asking Van's was which one should it be? I ended up being Ken Scott's straight
man instead.
>
> But I don't know about this half bucktail thing.
Ah, then if you want to know how to make a half-bucktail, you've come to the master,
Grasshopper.
>If you centered the
> skin-to-longeron holes on the longeron, I don't see the issue with bucking
> the skin rivets. Are your skin-to-longeron holes up high, near the vertex
> of the longeron, or something?
A portion of the top of the 705G web -- I THINK -- fits inside the longeron.
This is not entirely dissimillar to those brackets on the firewall where you
put the blind rivet.
> If you'll have an issue bucking rivets due to other rivet heads. It
It' s not the rivet heads, it's the 705 G.
> Maybe if you have some photos handy I can make a more educated guess as to
> what advice you want to hear!
I'll have to take some tonight. I must be doing SOMETHING wrong because apparently
nobody else has ever run into this.
My 2 cents is...follow the order as laid out in the construction manual.
That's my point. It's impossible to follow the order laid out in the construction
manual/plans.
1. The plans say don't rivet the side skins to the longeron.
2. The plans say rivet the gusset to the 705G/705 bulkhead.
3. The 705G interferes with the side-skins-to-longeron rivets in those 2 (and possibly
3) holes.
It seems to me the only way to do this would be to rivet the side skins to longerons
in those locations now, THEN rivet the 705 bulkhead, 705G and gusset.
Either way, I'm going to have to ignore someting in the manual/plans. What I was
asking Van's was which one should it be? I ended up being Ken Scott's straight
man instead.
But I don't know about this half bucktail thing.
Ah, then if you want to know how to make a half-bucktail, you've come to the master,
Grasshopper.
If you centered the
skin-to-longeron holes on the longeron, I don't see the issue with bucking
the skin rivets. Are your skin-to-longeron holes up high, near the vertex
of the longeron, or something?
A portion of the top of the 705G web-- I THINK -- fits inside the longeron. This
is not entirely dissimillar to those brackets on the firewall where you put
the blind rivet.
If you'll have an issue bucking rivets due to other rivet heads. It
It' s not the rivet heads, it's the 705 G.
Maybe if you have some photos handy I can make a more educated guess as to
what advice you want to hear!
I'll have to take some tonight. I must be doing SOMETHING wrong because apparently
nobody else has ever run into this.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: More gusset questions |
> That's my point. It's impossible to follow the order laid out in the
> construction manual/plans.
>
> 1. The plans say don't rivet the side skins to the longeron.
> 2. The plans say rivet the gusset to the 705G/705 bulkhead.
> 3. The 705G interferes with the side-skins-to-longeron rivets in those 2
> (and possibly 3) holes.
>
> It seems to me the only way to do this would be to rivet the side skins to
> longerons in those locations now, THEN rivet the 705 bulkhead, 705G and
> gusset.
Ah. F-705. For some reason I thought you were talking about the gussets up
at the firewall. I must be confusing this thread with another thread you
posted very recently.
Yeah, it's almost impossible to buck those side skin rivets. Just use pop
rivets on the side skin. Or wait to rivet the gussets in, but that might
cause a cascade of other chicken-and-egg issues.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net |
| Subject: | Re: More gusset questions |
>
> Ah. F-705. For some reason I thought you were talking about the gussets up
> at the firewall. I must be confusing this thread with another thread you
> posted very recently.
Well, actually that was the other part of the question. But I looked again last
night (OK, I admit it, I often stroll out to the garage late at night just to
...you know...be with the plane) and realized those aren't going to be a big
deal.
Thanks for the assist. That's more than I got from Bend.
Ah. F-705. For some reason I thought you were talking about the gussets up
at the firewall. I must be confusing this thread with another thread you
posted very recently.
Well, actually that was the other part of the question. But I looked again last
night (OK, I admit it, I often stroll out to the garage late at night just to
...you know...be with the plane) and realized those aren't going to be a big
deal.
Thanks for the assist. That's more than I got from Bend.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: More gusset questions |
//I'm working on this right now and all my bucktails are easily
accessible w/ a bucking bar. Something must be off. How about a
picture, Bob?
- Jamie, RV-7A Fuselage
I think I've done everything correctly. The picture is here. The .125 of
the 705G DOES interfere with getting good access at those two
skin-to-longeron rivets. It would think the opportunity to slice a bucktail
or beat up the angle pretty good is quite prevalent here.
http://home.comcast.net/~bcollinsrv7a/eaa/rv.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: More gusset questions |
> I think I've done everything correctly. The picture is here. The .125 of
> the 705G DOES interfere with getting good access at those two
> skin-to-longeron rivets. It would think the opportunity to slice a
> bucktail
> or beat up the angle pretty good is quite prevalent here.
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~bcollinsrv7a/eaa/rv.html
Bob,
We all go through this. Two things you need to do...
1) Gouge out a big of the gusset where the rivets will go.
2) Use pop rivets (skin to longeron) in that area.
The reason for gouging out the gusset is to provide enough depth for the pop
rivet to insert before it gets pulled.
Trust me, this is the fastest method. Pop a little filler in the pop rivet,
nobody will ever be the wiser.
Moving right along...
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: More gusset questions |
I think all who have been there and done it remember now what you are
talking about. You can only do the best you can do. I think I took a small
piece of spring steel and ground it down on half its side and slipped it in
there to do the bucking chore. It turned out about half right and I moved
on. Happy to report, my plane has flown for 57 hours without that incision
tearing loose.
Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip Up It Flies
Teamwork: " A lot of people doing exactly what I say."
(Marketing exec., Citrix Corp.)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net>
Subject: RV7-List: Re: More gusset questions
>
> //I'm working on this right now and all my bucktails are easily
> accessible w/ a bucking bar. Something must be off. How about a
> picture, Bob?
>
> - Jamie, RV-7A Fuselage
>
> I think I've done everything correctly. The picture is here. The .125 of
> the 705G DOES interfere with getting good access at those two
> skin-to-longeron rivets. It would think the opportunity to slice a
> bucktail
> or beat up the angle pretty good is quite prevalent here.
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~bcollinsrv7a/eaa/rv.html
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Merems" <merems(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Nosewheel collapse another view |
Gents,
I too am building an RV-7A and have been following the discussions about the recent
nosewheel collapse. I am concerned about this situation as many of you are.
I have talked with Ken Krueger (Van's engineering), who I have a tremendous respect
for, about some of these recent accidents. I am certain Van's Aircraft takes
this situation very seriously. However if you step back and ask yourself
are there a few RV'As out there that have had the highest number of landings
to date, where would you find them? What kind of landing have they seen? Grass
or paved runways? My best guess is these are the RV-7A and RV-9A prototypes
at Van's Aircraft. Who flies these? Van's staff. Where have they landed?
Grass or pavement? Both. Have they taxied on grass? Yes. Have they botched
a few landing? I would think so. Now I would bet these two aircraft have 10
times or more the numbers of landing then any another RV's out there and their
nose gears haven't collapsed.
I am not saying there isn't a issue, I am just giving you another view to understand
possibly why Van's Aircraft appears to have "no comment" when it comes to
this issue.
In all the postings about this issue, no one has mentioned the possibility of improper
heat treating of the gear leg. If I recall this was an issue sometime
ago with some main gear legs on RV's. This might be the root cause. This can
be easily determined by sending the nose gear leg off to any qualified machine
shop who can perform a hardness test on the leg. This will help determine
if the gear was heat treated properly.
Food for thought.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | Nosewheel collapse another view |
I've wondered whether powder coating affects the heat treating since it
involves considerable heat. Anyone KNOW the answer.
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Merems
Subject: RV7-List: Nosewheel collapse another view
Gents,
I too am building an RV-7A and have been following the discussions about the
recent nosewheel collapse. I am concerned about this situation as many of
you are.
I have talked with Ken Krueger (Van's engineering), who I have a tremendous
respect for, about some of these recent accidents. I am certain Van's
Aircraft takes this situation very seriously. However if you step back and
ask yourself are there a few RV'As out there that have had the highest
number of landings to date, where would you find them? What kind of landing
have they seen? Grass or paved runways? My best guess is these are the
RV-7A and RV-9A prototypes at Van's Aircraft. Who flies these? Van's
staff. Where have they landed? Grass or pavement? Both. Have they taxied
on grass? Yes. Have they botched a few landing? I would think so. Now I
would bet these two aircraft have 10 times or more the numbers of landing
then any another RV's out there and their nose gears haven't collapsed.
I am not saying there isn't a issue, I am just giving you another view to
understand possibly why Van's Aircraft appears to have "no comment" when it
comes to this issue.
In all the postings about this issue, no one has mentioned the possibility
of improper heat treating of the gear leg. If I recall this was an issue
sometime ago with some main gear legs on RV's. This might be the root
cause. This can be easily determined by sending the nose gear leg off to
any qualified machine shop who can perform a hardness test on the leg. This
will help determine if the gear was heat treated properly.
Food for thought.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard McCraw" <rmccraw(at)s4t.net> |
| Subject: | Nosewheel collapse another view |
Maybe I've been asleep, but I haven't seen a discussion of nosewheel
collapses on either the RV or the RV-7 lists. Can someone please point me
at this discussion?
Rick
RV-7(A?)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of B Tomm
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Nosewheel collapse another view
I've wondered whether powder coating affects the heat treating since it
involves considerable heat. Anyone KNOW the answer.
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Merems
Subject: RV7-List: Nosewheel collapse another view
Gents,
I too am building an RV-7A and have been following the discussions about the
recent nosewheel collapse. I am concerned about this situation as many of
you are.
I have talked with Ken Krueger (Van's engineering), who I have a tremendous
respect for, about some of these recent accidents. I am certain Van's
Aircraft takes this situation very seriously. However if you step back and
ask yourself are there a few RV'As out there that have had the highest
number of landings to date, where would you find them? What kind of landing
have they seen? Grass or paved runways? My best guess is these are the
RV-7A and RV-9A prototypes at Van's Aircraft. Who flies these? Van's
staff. Where have they landed? Grass or pavement? Both. Have they taxied
on grass? Yes. Have they botched a few landing? I would think so. Now I
would bet these two aircraft have 10 times or more the numbers of landing
then any another RV's out there and their nose gears haven't collapsed.
I am not saying there isn't a issue, I am just giving you another view to
understand possibly why Van's Aircraft appears to have "no comment" when it
comes to this issue.
In all the postings about this issue, no one has mentioned the possibility
of improper heat treating of the gear leg. If I recall this was an issue
sometime ago with some main gear legs on RV's. This might be the root
cause. This can be easily determined by sending the nose gear leg off to
any qualified machine shop who can perform a hardness test on the leg. This
will help determine if the gear was heat treated properly.
Food for thought.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Darrell Reiley <lifeofreiley2003(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Nosewheel collapse another view |
First quarter of 2005 on the RV7 yahoo group, just before the bulletin was issued...
Maybe I've been asleep, but I haven't seen a discussion of nosewheel
collapses on either the RV or the RV-7 lists. Can someone please point me
at this discussion?
Rick
RV-7(A?)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of B Tomm
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Nosewheel collapse another view
I've wondered whether powder coating affects the heat treating since it
involves considerable heat. Anyone KNOW the answer.
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Merems
Subject: RV7-List: Nosewheel collapse another view
Gents,
I too am building an RV-7A and have been following the discussions about the
recent nosewheel collapse. I am concerned about this situation as many of
you are.
I have talked with Ken Krueger (Van's engineering), who I have a tremendous
respect for, about some of these recent accidents. I am certain Van's
Aircraft takes this situation very seriously. However if you step back and
ask yourself are there a few RV'As out there that have had the highest
number of landings to date, where would you find them? What kind of landing
have they seen? Grass or paved runways? My best guess is these are the
RV-7A and RV-9A prototypes at Van's Aircraft. Who flies these? Van's
staff. Where have they landed? Grass or pavement? Both. Have they taxied
on grass? Yes. Have they botched a few landing? I would think so. Now I
would bet these two aircraft have 10 times or more the numbers of landing
then any another RV's out there and their nose gears haven't collapsed.
I am not saying there isn't a issue, I am just giving you another view to
understand possibly why Van's Aircraft appears to have "no comment" when it
comes to this issue.
In all the postings about this issue, no one has mentioned the possibility
of improper heat treating of the gear leg. If I recall this was an issue
sometime ago with some main gear legs on RV's. This might be the root
cause. This can be easily determined by sending the nose gear leg off to
any qualified machine shop who can perform a hardness test on the leg. This
will help determine if the gear was heat treated properly.
Food for thought.
Paul
Darrell Reiley
Round Rock, Texas
RV 7A "Reiley Rocket"
N622DR (reserved)
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sportypilot" <sportypilot(at)stx.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Nosewheel collapse another view |
www.vansairforce.net
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=2846&highlight=nosewheel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Darrell Reiley" <lifeofreiley2003(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Nosewheel collapse another view
>
>
> First quarter of 2005 on the RV7 yahoo group, just before the bulletin was
> issued...
>
> "Richard McCraw"
>
> Maybe I've been asleep, but I haven't seen a discussion of nosewheel
> collapses on either the RV or the RV-7 lists. Can someone please point me
> at this discussion?
>
> Rick
> RV-7(A?)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of B Tomm
> To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV7-List: Nosewheel collapse another view
>
>
> I've wondered whether powder coating affects the heat treating since it
> involves considerable heat. Anyone KNOW the answer.
>
> Bevan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Merems
> To: RV7and7A(at)yahoogroups.com; rv9-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV7-List: Nosewheel collapse another view
>
>
> Gents,
>
> I too am building an RV-7A and have been following the discussions about
> the
> recent nosewheel collapse. I am concerned about this situation as many of
> you are.
>
> I have talked with Ken Krueger (Van's engineering), who I have a
> tremendous
> respect for, about some of these recent accidents. I am certain Van's
> Aircraft takes this situation very seriously. However if you step back and
> ask yourself are there a few RV'As out there that have had the highest
> number of landings to date, where would you find them? What kind of
> landing
> have they seen? Grass or paved runways? My best guess is these are the
> RV-7A and RV-9A prototypes at Van's Aircraft. Who flies these? Van's
> staff. Where have they landed? Grass or pavement? Both. Have they taxied
> on grass? Yes. Have they botched a few landing? I would think so. Now I
> would bet these two aircraft have 10 times or more the numbers of landing
> then any another RV's out there and their nose gears haven't collapsed.
>
> I am not saying there isn't a issue, I am just giving you another view to
> understand possibly why Van's Aircraft appears to have "no comment" when
> it
> comes to this issue.
>
> In all the postings about this issue, no one has mentioned the possibility
> of improper heat treating of the gear leg. If I recall this was an issue
> sometime ago with some main gear legs on RV's. This might be the root
> cause. This can be easily determined by sending the nose gear leg off to
> any qualified machine shop who can perform a hardness test on the leg.
> This
> will help determine if the gear was heat treated properly.
>
> Food for thought.
>
> Paul
>
>
> Darrell Reiley
> Round Rock, Texas
>
> RV 7A "Reiley Rocket"
> N622DR (reserved)
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JohnCClarkVA(at)cs.com |
| Subject: | More data - Nosewheel collapse another view |
Ok folks, more time to spare - too hot to work in the hangar. Besides, I
have just finished working off the FAA squawks on my -9A, made the cowl much
easier to remove and install, and will call the FAA Monday to hopefully get an
airworthiness certificate.
What we have been missing in this discussion is the exposure to accidents,
that is, how may RV taildraggers are there, how many A models, how long has
each model been in service?
For example, IF most of the 7s and 9s are A models, then anything that ends
up inverted is going to be an A model. Here are the numbers I found.
The data below with "Airplanes" in service, and those "inverted", flipped, or
nosed over. I took out the fatal because you can crash inverted, which is
not the issue here.
For -6, 672 airplanes and 34 inverted, flipped, or nosed over
-6A, 642 airplanes and 33 inverted
About even for both
For -7, 57 airplanes and 0 inverted
-7A, 98 airplanes and 3 inverted
not a significant difference, one or two either way can even it up
For -8, 298 airplanes and 7 inverted
-8A, 84 airplanes and 5 inverted
may show some significance, not much though, again, one or two out of the -8A
and numbers would even up
For -9, 15 airplanes and 0 inverted
-9A, 107 airplanes and 3 inverted
the first -9 that goes inverted, and we can wait for 7 more -9As to even the
score, just kidding.
Also, the 6 and 6A have been around much longer so with 33 hits each, on
average 3 "inverted" a year (for 10 years, just a WAG by me, suggest a better
number of years if you will).
To me, it does not seem that 7, 8 and 9As are on pace to match the 6As.
Too bad we can't get the number of hours flown, or number of flights, etc.
Also, I have no idea if the 6A gear is significantly different that the 7, 8
or 9A.
Right now, I don't see a significant difference between the models. Of
course, the situation may become much clearer as the number of RVs come into
service and the years add up.
Clearly, ditches and soft ground are a menace to the A models,as they are for
many of the certified airplanes. Also, engine problems, fuel starvation,
fuel exhaustion, etc are a significant factor that can be better controlled.
This was a very quick look, so there may be some glaring mistakes. Also,
there are some double counts in some cases where, for example, "flip" and
"inverted" both are in a file. Let me know if there are other ways to parse out
the
numbers. Also, I would encourage you to go to the NTSB web site and use the
query system, read some of the reports (www.ntsb.gov, select AVIATION at the
top, select ACCIDENT DATA BASE at the top, select QUERY at the top) . The FAA
data base has the registration data, that is, the number of RVs registered.
With that said, practice the slow flight, spot landings, stick all the way
back, at least for the A models.
I should have stayed at the hangar and finished my flight test cards.
Regards, John.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jamie Painter <jdpainter(at)jpainter.org> |
| Subject: | Re: More data - Nosewheel collapse another view |
On Aug 20, 2005, at 6:47 PM, JohnCClarkVA(at)cs.com wrote:
> Clearly, ditches and soft ground are a menace to the A models,as they
> are for
> many of the certified airplanes. Also, engine problems, fuel
> starvation,
> fuel exhaustion, etc are a significant factor that can be better
> controlled.
How true this is. MANY certified nosedraggers have gone over during
off-field landings...it's one of the caveats of the design. The FBO
that I currently rent from had a 150 go over a few years back when the
woman flying it got lost and decided to put it down on a grass field to
ask for directions (I kid you not). The nosewheel sank in the ground
and up and over it went.
That being said. the flip-overs on paved surfaces do require further
examination and I believe it has been pretty well established that
pilot error is the biggest cause. These airplanes are not trainers.
They should not be landed on the nose gear. It's been demonstrated
that these nose-draggers can land on almost any decent field, so that
indicates to me that there's no fundamental problem in the design.
There just isn't much room for inattention or carelessness in the
design.
All the best,
Jamie D. Painter
N622JP (reserved) Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | More data - Nosewheel collapse another view |
//the woman flying it got lost and decided to put it down on a grass field
to
ask for directions (I kid you not).
I often wonder why more people don't just drop down and look at the water
towers when they get lost.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Meyette" <brianpublic(at)starband.net> |
| Subject: | Nosewheel collapse another view |
clamav-milter version 0.80j
on hathor
So what did he have to say about it?
brian
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Merems
Subject: RV7-List: Nosewheel collapse another view
I have talked with Ken Krueger (Van's engineering), who I have a tremendous
respect for, about some of these recent accidents. I am certain Van's
Aircraft takes this situation very seriously
Paul
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Merems" <merems(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Nosewheel collapse another view |
I spoke with Ken Krueger a while back when there were discussions on the newsgroups
about the new nosegear yoke. I was concerned about the latest RV-7A nose
over after seeing some photos of the accident. He believed that the new fork
design was not a significant change that have effected the outcome of the landing.
The change was due to other reasons (I believe manufacturing issues).
He had personal experienced bad landing in the RV-7/9A and had taxied many times
on grass without incident.
I was up at Oshkosh this year. There were hundreds of RV's, many of them A's.
They were parked all over and many had to taxi their aircraft in the grass great
distances. The grass was cut and smooth, but wasn't exactly flat. I understand
that many had to fast taxi due to the large numbers of aircraft landing
and parking. I personally saw production aircraft fast taxi on the grass and
start to "porpoise", not a good sight. I talked with on of the RV-10 owners
there (aircraft was painted light tan) who fast taxied and the rudder bottom hit
the ground (must have been fully loaded). The rudder bottom was cracked and
rear position/strobe was broken. The rudder wasn't bent.
I didn't see or hear of any A's having any issue with there gear collapsing.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: Brian Meyette
To: rv7-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2005 6:02 AM
Subject: RE: RV7-List: Nosewheel collapse another view
So what did he have to say about it?
brian
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv7-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Merems
To: RV7and7A(at)yahoogroups.com; rv9-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV7-List: Nosewheel collapse another view
I have talked with Ken Krueger (Van's engineering), who I have a tremendous
respect for, about some of these recent accidents. I am certain Van's
Aircraft takes this situation very seriously
Paul
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Merems" <merems(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Shimming required? |
Gents,
Have any other builders needed to shim about 0.063" (1/16") between the F-724 (Aft
Fuselage Bulkhead) bottom flange and the F-623 (Corner Rib). To refresh some
of your memory this is the F-623 is bottom corner rib that extends to the
side of the baggage bay to the side skins. This is the rib that get notched for
the flap pushrod and also get trimmed for the step tube to clear. The F-724
is the vertical bulkhead in the baggage bay. It appears that without shimming
the side skins will not line up properly with the bottom skin and corner rib
flange.
Attached is a image from the plan set.
Any thoughts?
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: More data - Nosewheel collapse another view |
Yea, BUT John & Jamie:
Thanks for the data, but I think statistics and getting into a tail dragger vs.
nosedragger comparison debate is not really useful at this point. I DON'T want
to turn this into a defense mode of tail draggers Vs. tri-gear, which always
turns into a heated debate. Lets just focus on the Tri-gear and the physics
of what happens to the nose gear. I think the pros-cons of TRI vs TD has been
beat to death.
By saying SEE TAILDRAGGERS FLIP TO, does nothing to explain or explore possible
improvements to the RV-A design.
The fact that gears his gears have folded, by justifying it gets into a non-value
added event at a certain point. Clearly pilot skill and poor tire clearance
has been factors, but Why/How do taildraggers flip? No doubt it for totally
different reasons than a nose dragger. In fact the Tri-gear should be more stable
in some ways. To tie with taildragger accidents should not be a plus for the
Tri-gear configuration or justification of its service history.
If the nose gear was stiffer would the flip rate go to zero?
Fact a RV-7A folded a nose gear during taxi. Fact, another folded the gear during
take-off roll. In either of these two cases, they flip not flip, but they are
not in your STATS.
Regardless, flip or not, gears of any kind that bend during seemingly normal operations
is not super acceptable. In the takeoff case, tire interference was thought
to cause a jam or drag. That is a reasonable explanation and the solution
is tire clearance and proper tire pressure. In many others is thought to be
pilot error, which is also likely are reasonable. The 4kt taxi case? Did a combo
of grass jamming, bump, soft ground and aircraft weight conspire to cause
this folded gear? Is that acceptable. ( Sorry for the comparison but I feel confident
in saying a tail dragger would not have been damaged gear (or nosed over)
in the same 4kt taxi condition.)
Of your data/stats, how many taildragger's flipped over during taxi or initial
takeoff?
When it comes to statistics, figures lie. I mean it is useful info and interesting
but conclusions can not be made without detailed understanding and failure
analysis of every case, beyond the plane ended up on its back. Loss of control
during landing resulting in a ground loop can flip any plane, especially a TD.
If this is the reason, it is pilot error. Bottom line it should be in pilot
control and the structure should be robust enough to take abuse or extreme conditions.
A Mooney is NOT a soft field plane. Taxi on dirt with a Mooney is asking
for a bent prop. IN a RV billed as total performance we expect soft field
capability. There does seem to be a correlation to soft surface and nose gear
problems.
Why do A-models flip and why do taildragger flip?
I know the data you are using, and it is hard to compare apples and apples with
the broad brush information available, with out detail analysis of each case,
which is just not available unless you investigated and interviewed every case.
However what you did is great, but what does it matter if you bend your plane.
The idea is not become a statistic. I would like to see that A-model flip rate
go to zero, not tie with a taildragger. I like tail draggers but the A-model
should have better stats than the TD for landing (taxi) accidents. That is the
whole idea of this easier more stable (directionally) configuration in theory.
Historically when Cessna or Piper went from TD to Tri ground handling improved
and landing accidents improved. You would expect the same from the RV-A model.
Statistics is a great place to start but I think we are past that now. Lets
get the Tri gear down to Zero gear issues or flips.
Cheers George
PS Van's Aircraft did check heat treat on some of the nose gear struts and they
where good.
RV7-List Digest Server wrote:
4. 03:48 PM - More data - Nosewheel collapse another view (JohnCClarkVA(at)cs.com)
5. 08:25 PM - Re: More data - Nosewheel collapse another view (Jamie Painter)
________________________________ Message 4
From: JohnCClarkVA(at)cs.com
Subject: RV7-List: More data - Nosewheel collapse another view
Ok folks, more time to spare - too hot to work in the hangar. Besides, I
have just finished working off the FAA squawks on my -9A, made the cowl much
easier to remove and install, and will call the FAA Monday to hopefully get an
airworthiness certificate.
What we have been missing in this discussion is the exposure to accidents,
that is, how may RV taildraggers are there, how many A models, how long has
each model been in service?
For example, IF most of the 7s and 9s are A models, then anything that ends
up inverted is going to be an A model. Here are the numbers I found.
The data below with "Airplanes" in service, and those "inverted", flipped, or
nosed over. I took out the fatal because you can crash inverted, which is
not the issue here.
For -6, 672 airplanes and 34 inverted, flipped, or nosed over
-6A, 642 airplanes and 33 inverted
About even for both
For -7, 57 airplanes and 0 inverted
-7A, 98 airplanes and 3 inverted
not a significant difference, one or two either way can even it up
For -8, 298 airplanes and 7 inverted
-8A, 84 airplanes and 5 inverted
may show some significance, not much though, again, one or two out of the -8A
and numbers would even up
For -9, 15 airplanes and 0 inverted
-9A, 107 airplanes and 3 inverted
the first -9 that goes inverted, and we can wait for 7 more -9As to even the
score, just kidding.
Also, the 6 and 6A have been around much longer so with 33 hits each, on
average 3 "inverted" a year (for 10 years, just a WAG by me, suggest a better
number of years if you will).
To me, it does not seem that 7, 8 and 9As are on pace to match the 6As.
Too bad we can't get the number of hours flown, or number of flights, etc.
Also, I have no idea if the 6A gear is significantly different that the 7, 8
or 9A.
Right now, I don't see a significant difference between the models. Of
course, the situation may become much clearer as the number of RVs come into
service and the years add up.
Clearly, ditches and soft ground are a menace to the A models,as they are for
many of the certified airplanes. Also, engine problems, fuel starvation,
fuel exhaustion, etc are a significant factor that can be better controlled.
This was a very quick look, so there may be some glaring mistakes. Also,
there are some double counts in some cases where, for example, "flip" and
"inverted" both are in a file. Let me know if there are other ways to parse out
the
numbers. Also, I would encourage you to go to the NTSB web site and use the
query system, read some of the reports (www.ntsb.gov, select AVIATION at the
top, select ACCIDENT DATA BASE at the top, select QUERY at the top) . The FAA
data base has the registration data, that is, the number of RVs registered.
With that said, practice the slow flight, spot landings, stick all the way
back, at least for the A models.
I should have stayed at the hangar and finished my flight test cards.
Regards, John.
________________________________ Message 5
From: Jamie Painter
Subject: Re: RV7-List: More data - Nosewheel collapse another view
On Aug 20, 2005, at 6:47 PM, JohnCClarkVA(at)cs.com wrote:
> Clearly, ditches and soft ground are a menace to the A models,as they
> are for
> many of the certified airplanes. Also, engine problems, fuel
> starvation,
> fuel exhaustion, etc are a significant factor that can be better
> controlled.
How true this is. MANY certified nosedraggers have gone over during
off-field landings...it's one of the caveats of the design. The FBO
that I currently rent from had a 150 go over a few years back when the
woman flying it got lost and decided to put it down on a grass field to
ask for directions (I kid you not). The nosewheel sank in the ground
and up and over it went.
That being said. the flip-overs on paved surfaces do require further
examination and I believe it has been pretty well established that
pilot error is the biggest cause. These airplanes are not trainers.
They should not be landed on the nose gear. It's been demonstrated
that these nose-draggers can land on almost any decent field, so that
indicates to me that there's no fundamental problem in the design.
There just isn't much room for inattention or carelessness in the
design.
All the best,
Jamie D. Painter
N622JP (reserved) Fuselage
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard McCraw" <rmccraw(at)s4t.net> |
| Subject: | More data - Nosewheel collapse another view |
Just for the heck of it I converted John Clark's statistics to percentages,
as follows:
June 15, 2005 - August 21, 2005
RV7-Archive.digest.vol-ai