RV10-Archive.digest.vol-co
September 12, 2007 - September 24, 2007
(913) 226-0106 (Pcs)
(913) 859-1234 (Fax)
Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 12:18 AM
| Subject: | Re: : Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. |
Dear Ray :
Thank you for your Email today,
We shall manufacture the ELT 406 MHz in the next few months. We are now at
the last step of FAA TSO Certification stage for ELT 406 MHz P/N AK-451.
However, we have been contact with the FAA almost everyday and confirmed
that there will not have any requirement from FAA about ELT 406 MHz in 2008.
May be there are strong opposition from AOPA.
The requirement of ELT 406.0 MHz will be for the Marine only in 2009. The
Military Satellites of 121.0/243.0 MHz will be available after 2009 for
sure.
If we distribute the new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 with the same footprints,
same sizes as our ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement.
We also have a program of exchange to ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 and credit to
your old ELT AK-450.
Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S
products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon.
BEST REGARDS,
VICTOR VAN
SALES MANAGER
AMERI-KING CORP.
17881 Sampson Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA
Tel (714) 842-8555
Fax (714) 842-4235
Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com
Web Site: www.ameri-king.com
-----Original Message-----
| From: | "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> |
Sent: 2007-09-10 12:02:36
Subject: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
I was hoping AmeriKing would create a 406 Mhz ELT using the same package as
the AK-450 ELT. Do you have any info you can share on this topic?
Thank You
Ray Doerr
CDNI Principal Engineer
Sprint PCS
16020 West 113th Street
Lenexa, KS 66219
Mailstop KSLNXK0101
(913) 859-1414 (Office)
(913) 226-0106 (Pcs)
(913) 859-1234 (Fax)
Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Masys <dmasys(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Second Airplane? |
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Second Airplane?
> From: "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com>
>
> Ron,
>
> That is my concern, that I go to all the trouble and
> expense of another build and find I don't NEED it or don't fly enough
> hours to satisfy both planes. I currently fly about 150 hours/ year
> (average since certified in early 2002). Is a 100 RV-10 hours & 50 7A
> hours/year reasonable? Maybe, but maybe all RV-10 time would be OK too?
> Hummmmm tough call.
I'm currently paying for two hangars and trying to fly both my -10 and -7A often
enough to keep them both healthy. The -10 isn't painted yet and the plan is
to keep the -7A at least until the -10 comes back from the paint shop. My current
experience is similar to that already posted -- whenever I really want to
go somewhere for travel purposes, the -10 is the hands down winner. A real
sweetheart of a cross country traveler in terms of comfort, speed, and information
systems.
But the -7A is such a hoot, with its 2500 fpm climb rate, aerobatic capability,
and responsive controls. I just love taking the -7A out on a yank and bank excursion
with a few aileron rolls after sitting in the plush cockpit of the -10
for a long x-country. When I take up Boy Scouts or Young Eagles and give them
the controls, its always in the -7A since the experience is not unlike an aerial
motorcycle, where the -10 is more like an aerial Lexus.
Since both of them are paid for, the controlling factor will almost certainly be
the long term maintenance. Both need attention, and time spent doing maintenance
is time not flying; hangar queens definitely don't age gracefully.
Having two airplanes definitely teaches you the meaning of the term "possessions"
-- they are things that possess you!
-Dan Masys
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Second Airplane? |
Even though I'm not yet flying. I've considered this myself. I just
can't conceive of selling my -10. just toooo much love has gone into it,
not to mention the sweat and tears. But the desire for a 'toy' never
goes away. I've considered a partnership in a -7 / -8, particularly if
the other partner/s held the repairman's certificate.
anybody in the PHX area want to share a -7 / -8?
Deems Davis # 406
Will this heat never end.....???????
http://deemsrv10.com/
Dan Masys wrote:
>
>
>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Second Airplane?
>> From: "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com>
>>
>> Ron,
>>
>> That is my concern, that I go to all the trouble and
>> expense of another build and find I don't NEED it or don't fly enough
>> hours to satisfy both planes. I currently fly about 150 hours/ year
>> (average since certified in early 2002). Is a 100 RV-10 hours & 50 7A
>> hours/year reasonable? Maybe, but maybe all RV-10 time would be OK too?
>> Hummmmm tough call.
>>
>
> I'm currently paying for two hangars and trying to fly both my -10 and -7A often
enough to keep them both healthy. The -10 isn't painted yet and the plan
is to keep the -7A at least until the -10 comes back from the paint shop. My
current experience is similar to that already posted -- whenever I really want
to go somewhere for travel purposes, the -10 is the hands down winner. A real
sweetheart of a cross country traveler in terms of comfort, speed, and information
systems.
>
> But the -7A is such a hoot, with its 2500 fpm climb rate, aerobatic capability,
and responsive controls. I just love taking the -7A out on a yank and bank
excursion with a few aileron rolls after sitting in the plush cockpit of the
-10 for a long x-country. When I take up Boy Scouts or Young Eagles and give
them the controls, its always in the -7A since the experience is not unlike an
aerial motorcycle, where the -10 is more like an aerial Lexus.
>
> Since both of them are paid for, the controlling factor will almost certainly
be the long term maintenance. Both need attention, and time spent doing maintenance
is time not flying; hangar queens definitely don't age gracefully.
>
> Having two airplanes definitely teaches you the meaning of the term "possessions"
-- they are things that possess you!
>
> -Dan Masys
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Second Airplane? |
I'm actually considering building a LongEZ once the -10 is done. Not too expensive
to build and cheaper to fly with speed equivalent to the 10. Of course I
have to do that pesky house remodel first in order to appease the wife. :-)
Bring on the fiberglass!
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 4:54 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Second Airplane?
Even though I'm not yet flying. I've considered this myself. I just
can't conceive of selling my -10. just toooo much love has gone into it,
not to mention the sweat and tears. But the desire for a 'toy' never
goes away. I've considered a partnership in a -7 / -8, particularly if
the other partner/s held the repairman's certificate.
anybody in the PHX area want to share a -7 / -8?
Deems Davis # 406
Will this heat never end.....???????
http://deemsrv10.com/
Dan Masys wrote:
>
>
>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Second Airplane?
>> From: "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com>
>>
>> Ron,
>>
>> That is my concern, that I go to all the trouble and
>> expense of another build and find I don't NEED it or don't fly enough
>> hours to satisfy both planes. I currently fly about 150 hours/ year
>> (average since certified in early 2002). Is a 100 RV-10 hours & 50 7A
>> hours/year reasonable? Maybe, but maybe all RV-10 time would be OK too?
>> Hummmmm tough call.
>>
>
> I'm currently paying for two hangars and trying to fly both my -10 and -7A often
enough to keep them both healthy. The -10 isn't painted yet and the plan
is to keep the -7A at least until the -10 comes back from the paint shop. My
current experience is similar to that already posted -- whenever I really want
to go somewhere for travel purposes, the -10 is the hands down winner. A real
sweetheart of a cross country traveler in terms of comfort, speed, and information
systems.
>
> But the -7A is such a hoot, with its 2500 fpm climb rate, aerobatic capability,
and responsive controls. I just love taking the -7A out on a yank and bank
excursion with a few aileron rolls after sitting in the plush cockpit of the
-10 for a long x-country. When I take up Boy Scouts or Young Eagles and give
them the controls, its always in the -7A since the experience is not unlike an
aerial motorcycle, where the -10 is more like an aerial Lexus.
>
> Since both of them are paid for, the controlling factor will almost certainly
be the long term maintenance. Both need attention, and time spent doing maintenance
is time not flying; hangar queens definitely don't age gracefully.
>
> Having two airplanes definitely teaches you the meaning of the term "possessions"
-- they are things that possess you!
>
> -Dan Masys
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Carpenter <jeff(at)westcottpress.com> |
| Subject: | Firewall Sealant |
I'm about to order my CS 1900 Firewall Sealant as I've reached the
point of riveting the forward rib subassemblies to the firewall and
the final instruction on page 27-6 is to "proseal any gaps around the
F-1001K Recess" etc.
While I'm doing that, would it make sense to put a thin coat across
the flush rivet lines on the engine side of the firewall?
Jeff Carpenter
40304
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Firewall Sealant |
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
The final texture of the CS 1900 is much different from the other
products.
Reserve your decision until after you watch the dried product on the rib
subassemblies. Then you should have no regrets.
Fire Annunciation, Fire Suppression, walking away for another day is
what it is all about.
John Cox
40600
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
Carpenter
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 4:50 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Firewall Sealant
I'm about to order my CS 1900 Firewall Sealant as I've reached the
point of riveting the forward rib subassemblies to the firewall and
the final instruction on page 27-6 is to "proseal any gaps around the
F-1001K Recess" etc.
While I'm doing that, would it make sense to put a thin coat across
the flush rivet lines on the engine side of the firewall?
Jeff Carpenter
40304
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com> |
| Subject: | Fitting cabin top |
I'm now to the point of fitting the fiberglass top to the fuse. Like
most of us with minimal fiberglass experience, I approached the fitting
with some trepidation. I wanted to pass along a way to help get
started. I did the rough cutting to within 1/16 th to 1/8 th of the
line around the doorsill. I then got some help and tried to muscle it
into place. After about two tries it became quickly obvious that about
1/4 inch needed to come off from the width of the door. The fiberglass
had to be trimmed just about to the curve on each side. It also becomes
obvious that the first place it must fit is between the door jambs.
Rather than take the top on and off with each bit of sanding, I thought
the best way might be to make a door sill template. Overall, I think it
speeded up the process as it "only " took 4 tries to get the top to
start fitting inside the sills.
To make the template, first of all don't try to measure anything.
Reverse engineer it. Take a 3/4 inch piece of plywood or MDF ( slightly
larger than the opening which is about 37 x 12 inches) and get (3) 12
inch x 2 inch boards.
Take one board and use a single screw along the base. This will support
the backer board along the sill. Now take another one of the 12 inch
boards and screw it vertically so it can be clamped to the back
upright. Make sure it is above the small flange in the corner. Now put
the third board up against the front upright and mark it's position
(outline ). Remove the boards and screw the front upright in place.
Now you have the width and size of the opening.
Take 3 more 2 inch wide boards. One about 40 inches long and two more
12 inches. Use the long one as the base and use the uprights from the
template to hold the vertical 12 inch boards. Screw them into the base
of the 40 inch board and then add some scrap triangles in the corner to
hold them square.
You now have a template that you can fit over the fiberglass while you
are sanding/trimming. Once the template will slide over the fiberglass
top it will fit between the door jambs and you can then see how the
joggle fits and needs to be trimmed and see how you need to radius the
corners.
I'll put some pics on my site at mykitlog.com in the next few days. I
just realized my access to the site was down. If anybody is about to
fit their top and needs pics I'll send them to you. Too many and too
large for the list.
Fred Williams
40515
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Sealant |
| From: | "orchidman" <gary(at)wingscc.com> |
AV8ORJWC wrote:
>
> Reserve your decision until after you watch the dried product on the rib
> subassemblies. Then you should have no regrets.
>
John,
Could you please expand on this. I will be starting Section 27 next week and want
to make sure I understand what you are saying.
--------
Gary Blankenbiller
RV10 - # 40674
Fuselage SB
(N410GB reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134170#134170
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. |
| From: | "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> |
No, Ameri-King did not indicate the price or timeframe for this new ELT, I was
just glad to hear we are going to have competition in this space.
As for the GPS option on the ELT, I for one was hoping to not have another GPS
in my airplane, when I already have 3. I have dual Garmin 430W which are WAAS
certified and a Garmin 496 handheld. I am wanting to connect the RS-232 aviation
output from one of my 430W to the ELT and then have the ELT keep a copy
of the latest GPS Sentence which has the Long/Lat and then transmit that, if the
ELT was activated. But so far, I think all ELT's with the GPS option are embedding
it into the ELT itself, so now you will likely need another GPS Antenna
mounted on top and I don't want that. With everything having GPS in it in
the future, I can see a time where we have 4+ GPS Antenna's on the plane. One
for you Panel Mount, Handheld, ADSB UAT and ELT. I am just trying to minimize
this. There is no reason the ADSB UAT and the ELT can't use the output from
my 430W!
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV (Going to LOE 07)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:13 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
>From what I have read, GPS data get's you a couple things. First and foremost
it gives rescuers immediate coordinates to begin their search within a 100 meter
radius. With just the 406 beacon, it will take several passes of low orbit
SAR satellites to narrow down your location using Doppler Shift. The feds also
say accuracy using DS is 1-3 miles, time & samples variable.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick ONeill
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 8:20 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
With regard to the GPS location data option, has anyone seen any statistics
on the benefit of this? How accurate is the satellite positioning on the
406 mhz units? Is the accuracy such that the GPS link makes a big
difference in locating the beacon?
Best Regards,
Patrick #40715
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doerr, Ray R
[NTK]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 5:29 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Here is the email chain I had with Ameri-King about there plans for
a 406 Mhz ELT.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV (Hobbs = 310)
Looking forward to LOE 07
-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:48 AM
Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Dear Ray :
Thank you for your Email today,
The new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 shall be the same footprint and size as our
ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement.
Another version of ELT 406.00 MHz is also available with an option of
included the GPS feature within the ELT.
Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S
products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon.
BEST REGARDS,
VICTOR VAN
SALES MANAGER
AMERI-KING CORP.
17881 Sampson Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA
Tel (714) 842-8555
Fax (714) 842-4235
Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com
Web Site: www.ameri-king.com
-----Original Message-----
From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com>
Sent: 2007-09-11 08:47:58
Subject: RE: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Thanks for your reply. Based on your reply, I was not clear if your AK-451
was the same footprint and size as the AK-450.
Will the AK-451 support an RS-232 Serial In Line from a Panel
Mounted GPS so that the AK-451 would transmit the last known Long and Lat
from the GPS Data? I would like to see the AK-451 read this GPS Data and
then save the most recent copy that it would then use if the ELT was
activated.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
CDNI Principal Engineer
Sprint PCS
16020 West 113th Street
Lenexa, KS 66219
Mailstop KSLNXK0101
(913) 859-1414 (Office)
(913) 226-0106 (Pcs)
(913) 859-1234 (Fax)
Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 12:18 AM
Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Dear Ray :
Thank you for your Email today,
We shall manufacture the ELT 406 MHz in the next few months. We are now at
the last step of FAA TSO Certification stage for ELT 406 MHz P/N AK-451.
However, we have been contact with the FAA almost everyday and confirmed
that there will not have any requirement from FAA about ELT 406 MHz in 2008.
May be there are strong opposition from AOPA.
The requirement of ELT 406.0 MHz will be for the Marine only in 2009. The
Military Satellites of 121.0/243.0 MHz will be available after 2009 for
sure.
If we distribute the new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 with the same footprints,
same sizes as our ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement.
We also have a program of exchange to ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 and credit to
your old ELT AK-450.
Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S
products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon.
BEST REGARDS,
VICTOR VAN
SALES MANAGER
AMERI-KING CORP.
17881 Sampson Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA
Tel (714) 842-8555
Fax (714) 842-4235
Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com
Web Site: www.ameri-king.com
-----Original Message-----
From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com>
Sent: 2007-09-10 12:02:36
Subject: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
I was hoping AmeriKing would create a 406 Mhz ELT using the same package as
the AK-450 ELT. Do you have any info you can share on this topic?
Thank You
Ray Doerr
CDNI Principal Engineer
Sprint PCS
16020 West 113th Street
Lenexa, KS 66219
Mailstop KSLNXK0101
(913) 859-1414 (Office)
(913) 226-0106 (Pcs)
(913) 859-1234 (Fax)
Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. |
When thinking about integrating devices, it's not always best to have all of
your eggs in one basket. In my mind I would want a completely independent system
when it comes to SAR. For instance, the ELT runs off its own internal power,
isolating it from ship faults. Another potential problem is what if you were
to lose ship power completely in IFR. It's totally feasible to carry on for
quite a while using vacuum instruments but your ELT would now have coordinates
that would have the SAR teams in a completely different area.
Integration is a good thing under normal conditions. But when your ELT needs
to be used, you are usually outside the normal envelope and all bets are off.
Really stop and think about what integration vs. stand alone get's you for saving
that extra couple bucks and a few ounces. To each his own but I want something
that is isolated from ship functions when it may make the difference between
finding me or being one of the 8 other aircraft out there that is found
years later while looking for someone famous. God speed to all those lost souls.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doerr, Ray R [NTK]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 8:11 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
No, Ameri-King did not indicate the price or timeframe for this new ELT,
I was just glad to hear we are going to have competition in this space.
As for the GPS option on the ELT, I for one was hoping to not have another
GPS in my airplane, when I already have 3. I have dual Garmin 430W which
are WAAS certified and a Garmin 496 handheld. I am wanting to connect the RS-232
aviation output from one of my 430W to the ELT and then have the ELT keep
a copy of the latest GPS Sentence which has the Long/Lat and then transmit that,
if the ELT was activated. But so far, I think all ELT's with the GPS option
are embedding it into the ELT itself, so now you will likely need another GPS
Antenna mounted on top and I don't want that. With everything having GPS in
it in the future, I can see a time where we have 4+ GPS Antenna's on the plane.
One for you Panel Mount, Handheld, ADSB UAT and ELT. I am just trying to
minimize this. There is no reason the ADSB UAT and the ELT can't use the output
from my 430W!
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV (Going to LOE 07)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:13 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
>From what I have read, GPS data get's you a couple things. First and foremost
it gives rescuers immediate coordinates to begin their search within a 100 meter
radius. With just the 406 beacon, it will take several passes of low orbit
SAR satellites to narrow down your location using Doppler Shift. The feds also
say accuracy using DS is 1-3 miles, time & samples variable.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick ONeill
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 8:20 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
With regard to the GPS location data option, has anyone seen any statistics
on the benefit of this? How accurate is the satellite positioning on the
406 mhz units? Is the accuracy such that the GPS link makes a big
difference in locating the beacon?
Best Regards,
Patrick #40715
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doerr, Ray R
[NTK]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 5:29 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Here is the email chain I had with Ameri-King about there plans for
a 406 Mhz ELT.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV (Hobbs = 310)
Looking forward to LOE 07
-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:48 AM
Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Dear Ray :
Thank you for your Email today,
The new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 shall be the same footprint and size as our
ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement.
Another version of ELT 406.00 MHz is also available with an option of
included the GPS feature within the ELT.
Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S
products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon.
BEST REGARDS,
VICTOR VAN
SALES MANAGER
AMERI-KING CORP.
17881 Sampson Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA
Tel (714) 842-8555
Fax (714) 842-4235
Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com
Web Site: www.ameri-king.com
-----Original Message-----
From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com>
Sent: 2007-09-11 08:47:58
Subject: RE: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Thanks for your reply. Based on your reply, I was not clear if your AK-451
was the same footprint and size as the AK-450.
Will the AK-451 support an RS-232 Serial In Line from a Panel
Mounted GPS so that the AK-451 would transmit the last known Long and Lat
from the GPS Data? I would like to see the AK-451 read this GPS Data and
then save the most recent copy that it would then use if the ELT was
activated.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
CDNI Principal Engineer
Sprint PCS
16020 West 113th Street
Lenexa, KS 66219
Mailstop KSLNXK0101
(913) 859-1414 (Office)
(913) 226-0106 (Pcs)
(913) 859-1234 (Fax)
Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 12:18 AM
Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Dear Ray :
Thank you for your Email today,
We shall manufacture the ELT 406 MHz in the next few months. We are now at
the last step of FAA TSO Certification stage for ELT 406 MHz P/N AK-451.
However, we have been contact with the FAA almost everyday and confirmed
that there will not have any requirement from FAA about ELT 406 MHz in 2008.
May be there are strong opposition from AOPA.
The requirement of ELT 406.0 MHz will be for the Marine only in 2009. The
Military Satellites of 121.0/243.0 MHz will be available after 2009 for
sure.
If we distribute the new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 with the same footprints,
same sizes as our ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement.
We also have a program of exchange to ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 and credit to
your old ELT AK-450.
Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S
products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon.
BEST REGARDS,
VICTOR VAN
SALES MANAGER
AMERI-KING CORP.
17881 Sampson Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA
Tel (714) 842-8555
Fax (714) 842-4235
Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com
Web Site: www.ameri-king.com
-----Original Message-----
From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com>
Sent: 2007-09-10 12:02:36
Subject: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
I was hoping AmeriKing would create a 406 Mhz ELT using the same package as
the AK-450 ELT. Do you have any info you can share on this topic?
Thank You
Ray Doerr
CDNI Principal Engineer
Sprint PCS
16020 West 113th Street
Lenexa, KS 66219
Mailstop KSLNXK0101
(913) 859-1414 (Office)
(913) 226-0106 (Pcs)
(913) 859-1234 (Fax)
Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. |
One other thing to add. When you survive a forced landing in the mountains,
it would be nice to pull the ELT and take it with you. If you are integrated
with the ships GPS it might get a bit messy ripping out a surviving GPS and rigging
up a cable to get the ELT to update your coordinates when you go and seek
shelter, water, or food. Then there is the problem of carrying around a heavy
battery, etc. You get my point. :-)
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Sausen On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 8:36 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
When thinking about integrating devices, it's not always best to have all of
your eggs in one basket. In my mind I would want a completely independent system
when it comes to SAR. For instance, the ELT runs off its own internal power,
isolating it from ship faults. Another potential problem is what if you were
to lose ship power completely in IFR. It's totally feasible to carry on for
quite a while using vacuum instruments but your ELT would now have coordinates
that would have the SAR teams in a completely different area.
Integration is a good thing under normal conditions. But when your ELT needs
to be used, you are usually outside the normal envelope and all bets are off.
Really stop and think about what integration vs. stand alone get's you for saving
that extra couple bucks and a few ounces. To each his own but I want something
that is isolated from ship functions when it may make the difference between
finding me or being one of the 8 other aircraft out there that is found
years later while looking for someone famous. God speed to all those lost souls.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doerr, Ray R [NTK]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 8:11 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
No, Ameri-King did not indicate the price or timeframe for this new ELT,
I was just glad to hear we are going to have competition in this space.
As for the GPS option on the ELT, I for one was hoping to not have another
GPS in my airplane, when I already have 3. I have dual Garmin 430W which
are WAAS certified and a Garmin 496 handheld. I am wanting to connect the RS-232
aviation output from one of my 430W to the ELT and then have the ELT keep
a copy of the latest GPS Sentence which has the Long/Lat and then transmit that,
if the ELT was activated. But so far, I think all ELT's with the GPS option
are embedding it into the ELT itself, so now you will likely need another GPS
Antenna mounted on top and I don't want that. With everything having GPS in
it in the future, I can see a time where we have 4+ GPS Antenna's on the plane.
One for you Panel Mount, Handheld, ADSB UAT and ELT. I am just trying to
minimize this. There is no reason the ADSB UAT and the ELT can't use the output
from my 430W!
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV (Going to LOE 07)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:13 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
>From what I have read, GPS data get's you a couple things. First and foremost
it gives rescuers immediate coordinates to begin their search within a 100 meter
radius. With just the 406 beacon, it will take several passes of low orbit
SAR satellites to narrow down your location using Doppler Shift. The feds also
say accuracy using DS is 1-3 miles, time & samples variable.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick ONeill
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 8:20 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
With regard to the GPS location data option, has anyone seen any statistics
on the benefit of this? How accurate is the satellite positioning on the
406 mhz units? Is the accuracy such that the GPS link makes a big
difference in locating the beacon?
Best Regards,
Patrick #40715
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doerr, Ray R
[NTK]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 5:29 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Here is the email chain I had with Ameri-King about there plans for
a 406 Mhz ELT.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV (Hobbs = 310)
Looking forward to LOE 07
-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:48 AM
Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Dear Ray :
Thank you for your Email today,
The new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 shall be the same footprint and size as our
ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement.
Another version of ELT 406.00 MHz is also available with an option of
included the GPS feature within the ELT.
Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S
products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon.
BEST REGARDS,
VICTOR VAN
SALES MANAGER
AMERI-KING CORP.
17881 Sampson Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA
Tel (714) 842-8555
Fax (714) 842-4235
Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com
Web Site: www.ameri-king.com
-----Original Message-----
From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com>
Sent: 2007-09-11 08:47:58
Subject: RE: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Thanks for your reply. Based on your reply, I was not clear if your AK-451
was the same footprint and size as the AK-450.
Will the AK-451 support an RS-232 Serial In Line from a Panel
Mounted GPS so that the AK-451 would transmit the last known Long and Lat
from the GPS Data? I would like to see the AK-451 read this GPS Data and
then save the most recent copy that it would then use if the ELT was
activated.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
CDNI Principal Engineer
Sprint PCS
16020 West 113th Street
Lenexa, KS 66219
Mailstop KSLNXK0101
(913) 859-1414 (Office)
(913) 226-0106 (Pcs)
(913) 859-1234 (Fax)
Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 12:18 AM
Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Dear Ray :
Thank you for your Email today,
We shall manufacture the ELT 406 MHz in the next few months. We are now at
the last step of FAA TSO Certification stage for ELT 406 MHz P/N AK-451.
However, we have been contact with the FAA almost everyday and confirmed
that there will not have any requirement from FAA about ELT 406 MHz in 2008.
May be there are strong opposition from AOPA.
The requirement of ELT 406.0 MHz will be for the Marine only in 2009. The
Military Satellites of 121.0/243.0 MHz will be available after 2009 for
sure.
If we distribute the new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 with the same footprints,
same sizes as our ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement.
We also have a program of exchange to ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 and credit to
your old ELT AK-450.
Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S
products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon.
BEST REGARDS,
VICTOR VAN
SALES MANAGER
AMERI-KING CORP.
17881 Sampson Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA
Tel (714) 842-8555
Fax (714) 842-4235
Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com
Web Site: www.ameri-king.com
-----Original Message-----
From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com>
Sent: 2007-09-10 12:02:36
Subject: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
I was hoping AmeriKing would create a 406 Mhz ELT using the same package as
the AK-450 ELT. Do you have any info you can share on this topic?
Thank You
Ray Doerr
CDNI Principal Engineer
Sprint PCS
16020 West 113th Street
Lenexa, KS 66219
Mailstop KSLNXK0101
(913) 859-1414 (Office)
(913) 226-0106 (Pcs)
(913) 859-1234 (Fax)
Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Sealant |
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
For those builders who have used PolySulfate (stinky) Thioxotrophic
(sticky shit) sealer known as "Proseal" by one brand name, and maligned
by other makers. The product used for fuel tank sealing is entirely
different than the product to sustain higher temperatures inside an
engine cowl.
It is wise to observe the appearance of the final "High Temperature"
sealant after cure before making a commitment to use it beyond its
intended purpose.
The manufacturer (You) has lots of products to chose from. A material,
B material and C material all have differing viscosities. 1/4 sets in
15 minutes, 1/2 sets in 30 and 2 sets in two hours. Each product number
change also changes the properties, color, flexibility and heat
resistance.
Is that what you wanted Gary?
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of orchidman
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 5:27 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: Firewall Sealant
AV8ORJWC wrote:
>
> Reserve your decision until after you watch the dried product on the
rib
> subassemblies. Then you should have no regrets.
>
John,
Could you please expand on this. I will be starting Section 27 next
week and want to make sure I understand what you are saying.
--------
Gary Blankenbiller
RV10 - # 40674
Fuselage SB
(N410GB reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134170#134170
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. |
| From: | "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com> |
Good point, maybe we can at least get them to design a integrated Antenna for
both GPS and 406 Mhz transmission.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 8:41 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
One other thing to add. When you survive a forced landing in the mountains,
it would be nice to pull the ELT and take it with you. If you are integrated
with the ships GPS it might get a bit messy ripping out a surviving GPS and rigging
up a cable to get the ELT to update your coordinates when you go and seek
shelter, water, or food. Then there is the problem of carrying around a heavy
battery, etc. You get my point. :-)
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Sausen On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 8:36 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
When thinking about integrating devices, it's not always best to have all of
your eggs in one basket. In my mind I would want a completely independent system
when it comes to SAR. For instance, the ELT runs off its own internal power,
isolating it from ship faults. Another potential problem is what if you were
to lose ship power completely in IFR. It's totally feasible to carry on for
quite a while using vacuum instruments but your ELT would now have coordinates
that would have the SAR teams in a completely different area.
Integration is a good thing under normal conditions. But when your ELT needs
to be used, you are usually outside the normal envelope and all bets are off.
Really stop and think about what integration vs. stand alone get's you for saving
that extra couple bucks and a few ounces. To each his own but I want something
that is isolated from ship functions when it may make the difference between
finding me or being one of the 8 other aircraft out there that is found
years later while looking for someone famous. God speed to all those lost souls.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doerr, Ray R [NTK]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 8:11 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
No, Ameri-King did not indicate the price or timeframe for this new ELT,
I was just glad to hear we are going to have competition in this space.
As for the GPS option on the ELT, I for one was hoping to not have another
GPS in my airplane, when I already have 3. I have dual Garmin 430W which
are WAAS certified and a Garmin 496 handheld. I am wanting to connect the RS-232
aviation output from one of my 430W to the ELT and then have the ELT keep
a copy of the latest GPS Sentence which has the Long/Lat and then transmit that,
if the ELT was activated. But so far, I think all ELT's with the GPS option
are embedding it into the ELT itself, so now you will likely need another GPS
Antenna mounted on top and I don't want that. With everything having GPS in
it in the future, I can see a time where we have 4+ GPS Antenna's on the plane.
One for you Panel Mount, Handheld, ADSB UAT and ELT. I am just trying to
minimize this. There is no reason the ADSB UAT and the ELT can't use the output
from my 430W!
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV (Going to LOE 07)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:13 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
>From what I have read, GPS data get's you a couple things. First and foremost
it gives rescuers immediate coordinates to begin their search within a 100 meter
radius. With just the 406 beacon, it will take several passes of low orbit
SAR satellites to narrow down your location using Doppler Shift. The feds also
say accuracy using DS is 1-3 miles, time & samples variable.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Patrick ONeill
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 8:20 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
With regard to the GPS location data option, has anyone seen any statistics
on the benefit of this? How accurate is the satellite positioning on the
406 mhz units? Is the accuracy such that the GPS link makes a big
difference in locating the beacon?
Best Regards,
Patrick #40715
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doerr, Ray R
[NTK]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 5:29 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Here is the email chain I had with Ameri-King about there plans for
a 406 Mhz ELT.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV (Hobbs = 310)
Looking forward to LOE 07
-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:48 AM
Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Dear Ray :
Thank you for your Email today,
The new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 shall be the same footprint and size as our
ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement.
Another version of ELT 406.00 MHz is also available with an option of
included the GPS feature within the ELT.
Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S
products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon.
BEST REGARDS,
VICTOR VAN
SALES MANAGER
AMERI-KING CORP.
17881 Sampson Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA
Tel (714) 842-8555
Fax (714) 842-4235
Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com
Web Site: www.ameri-king.com
-----Original Message-----
From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com>
Sent: 2007-09-11 08:47:58
Subject: RE: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Thanks for your reply. Based on your reply, I was not clear if your AK-451
was the same footprint and size as the AK-450.
Will the AK-451 support an RS-232 Serial In Line from a Panel
Mounted GPS so that the AK-451 would transmit the last known Long and Lat
from the GPS Data? I would like to see the AK-451 read this GPS Data and
then save the most recent copy that it would then use if the ELT was
activated.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
CDNI Principal Engineer
Sprint PCS
16020 West 113th Street
Lenexa, KS 66219
Mailstop KSLNXK0101
(913) 859-1414 (Office)
(913) 226-0106 (Pcs)
(913) 859-1234 (Fax)
Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Van [mailto:sales@ameri-king.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 12:18 AM
Subject: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Dear Ray :
Thank you for your Email today,
We shall manufacture the ELT 406 MHz in the next few months. We are now at
the last step of FAA TSO Certification stage for ELT 406 MHz P/N AK-451.
However, we have been contact with the FAA almost everyday and confirmed
that there will not have any requirement from FAA about ELT 406 MHz in 2008.
May be there are strong opposition from AOPA.
The requirement of ELT 406.0 MHz will be for the Marine only in 2009. The
Military Satellites of 121.0/243.0 MHz will be available after 2009 for
sure.
If we distribute the new ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 with the same footprints,
same sizes as our ELT AK-450 for easy retrofit direct replacement.
We also have a program of exchange to ELT 406.0 MHz P/N AK-451 and credit to
your old ELT AK-450.
Please accept our sincere appreciation for your interest in AMERI-KING'S
products. I'll look forward to hearing from you soon.
BEST REGARDS,
VICTOR VAN
SALES MANAGER
AMERI-KING CORP.
17881 Sampson Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92648 USA
Tel (714) 842-8555
Fax (714) 842-4235
Email ameriking9(at)aol.com, Sales(at)ameri-king.com
Web Site: www.ameri-king.com
-----Original Message-----
From: "Doerr, Ray R [NTK]" <Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com>
Sent: 2007-09-10 12:02:36
Subject: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
I was hoping AmeriKing would create a 406 Mhz ELT using the same package as
the AK-450 ELT. Do you have any info you can share on this topic?
Thank You
Ray Doerr
CDNI Principal Engineer
Sprint PCS
16020 West 113th Street
Lenexa, KS 66219
Mailstop KSLNXK0101
(913) 859-1414 (Office)
(913) 226-0106 (Pcs)
(913) 859-1234 (Fax)
Ray.R.Doerr(at)sprint.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Sealant |
| From: | "orchidman" <gary(at)wingscc.com> |
AV8ORJWC wrote:
>
> Is that what you wanted Gary?
>
> John
>
> --
No, I am aware of the basic differences but the way I read your comment, there
was something in the way the Firewall product was used or ??? that I might need
to be aware of in where or how I would want to use it on the Firewall.
Sorry, it is late and today has been a hard day at work so I know I am not making
sense.
Gary
--------
Gary Blankenbiller
RV10 - # 40674
Fuselage SB
(N410GB reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134313#134313
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Sealant |
I think John was referring to the firewall version having a different
consistency, that perhaps doesn't flow as smooth or dry as smooth as the
tank sealing version..so you may want to be more cautious where you apply
it, to keep a nice looking firewall. I'm sure that if I am misinterpreting,
John will speak up in the morning after work.
On 9/13/07, orchidman wrote:
>
>
> AV8ORJWC wrote:
> >
> > Is that what you wanted Gary?
> >
> > John
> >
> > --
>
> No, I am aware of the basic differences but the way I read your comment,
> there was something in the way the Firewall product was used or ??? that I
> might need to be aware of in where or how I would want to use it on the
> Firewall.
> Sorry, it is late and today has been a hard day at work so I know I am not
> making sense.
>
> Gary
>
> --------
> Gary Blankenbiller
> RV10 - # 40674
> Fuselage SB
> (N410GB reserved)
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134313#134313
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. |
| From: | "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net> |
There was a new ELT presented at Oshkosh.
http://en.martec.fr/page/p-191/art_id-/
They claim to be better than the competition.
Michael
www.wellenzohn.net (just painted the interior)
--------
RV-10 builder (wings)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134341#134341
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <tdawson-townsend(at)aurora.aero> |
In related news, Pointer supposedly is working on a 406 MHz ELT also,
but they've been saying that for over a year with nothing seen yet.
TDT
Tim Dawson-Townsend
Aurora Flight Sciences
tdt(at)aurora.aero
617-500-4812 (office)
617-905-4800 (mobile)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Werner Schneider <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. |
Michael,
did you see their price? Christen sells one for close to 2300$ wonder
what the difference to the ME406 is as it seems currently the cheapest
on the market.
br Werner
Michael Wellenzohn wrote:
>
> There was a new ELT presented at Oshkosh.
>
> http://en.martec.fr/page/p-191/art_id-/
>
> They claim to be better than the competition.
>
> Michael
>
> www.wellenzohn.net (just painted the interior)
>
> --------
> RV-10 builder (wings)
> #511
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134341#134341
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Edgerton" <wayne.e(at)grandecom.net> |
| Subject: | Bad battery/bad experience |
I thought I would pass along to you an experience I've had with Tex-Air
Parts in Fort Worth on a Concorde battery I purchased from them. At the
beginning of the year I
purchase a Concorde RG25CX for my plane from Tex-Air but didn't use it
until May when I went to start the plane. The battery was DOA and I
returned it for exchange. They wouldn't exchange it outright but rather
I had to buy a new one and they said they would process the credit and
send it to me. As of today I still haven't received the credit. Below is
an e-mail I sent them on Aug 25th and I'm still waiting for the refund.
I guess what's irritating me is what appears to be their unwillingness
to refund my money for a bad battery they sold me. I'm just posting this
to give others heads up on where you purchase your items and be sure
they will stand behind what they sell.
Here is the e-mail I sent them on Aug 25th.
Also I've noticed that when starting the plane with this battery I get
an initial hesitation, like it's having difficulty turning the engine
over but when I try the second time it turns over fine. In hindsight I
might look at the Odyssey PC925 rather than the Concorde.
Wayne Edgerton N602WT
a little pissed off at Tex-Air
_________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
I WILL FWD YOUR EMAIL TO GENE. HE IS THE ONE THAT KNOWS ABOUT YOUR
BATTERY. SORRY YOU ARE HAVING SO MUCH TROUBLE.
THANKS,
DONNA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
From: Wayne Edgerton [mailto:wayne.e(at)grandecom.net]
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2007 6:20 AM
Subject: Return refund
To return credit manager,
On 5/18/07 I returned a Concorde battery RG25CX, see attachment. I
purchased the battery from your company for the RV10 that I was
building. When I was ready to start my engine on the RV10 it would not
start it. The battery was obviously defective somehow right out of the
box. So I returned the battery to your store in Fort Worth and purchased
another one, which has worked fine. I was told at the time that I would
have to pay for the new battery and then would receive credit for the
returned battery when it was tested.
After sometime I called into your FW store and asked about the progress
of the credit. I was told that there would be a charge of something like
$90 to test the battery and I think I had to pay the shipping charge
back to the supplier to have it tested. This obviously irritated me and
I told the person why don't I just write this experience off to a
company with a really bad return policy, but that I would be making a
posting to the RV blog about my experience with the battery and your
company. I was told to wait and lets see what can be done.
I did wait and nothing happened so I called back in and was told someone
in the back had to test it and they had been really busy. I have called
in on multiple occasion inquiring on the progress, probably 5 or 6
times, and have been told we're getting close. Let me explain that the
money for me is not the issue. The issue is I bought a battery from your
company that apparently was defective out of the box and now I'm getting
a complete run around on receiving back credit for it. Boy if you think
this type of customer service creates customer loyalty, you must have
attended the wrong business school.
I believe I've been really patient on this but the patience issue has
just about run it's coarse. I thought it only fair to inform you that if
something isn't forthcoming on this issue very soon my intentions are to
write a letter to the Better Business Bureau regarding your business
practices on this type of issue. I intend to also post this same
complaint and experience on the RV builders blog.
Again trust me this is not about the monies, hell if I'm building a
$250,000 airplane this is small potatoes, but rather that you appear to
be jerking me around on a return that should have been an exchange at
the time of the return. I was told that it's the battery company that is
the problem. Then I would suggest that you drop that line of product
from your inventory if you are unable to support it. If you went to a
department store and bought an item and then because it was defective
took it back, would you accept the explanation that I really can't give
you credit until the supplier oks it? I think not. If you take on a
product and sell it you have to take responsibility with the customer
for that product and you deal with the supplier or at least that's how I
always ran my business. I never had a vendor that had that much control
over me, it was actually the opposite. If they didn't want to support
their product they were gone.
Understand this is not a threat but rather I'm just letting you know in
advance what my intentions are so you are not surprised when it occurs.
Wayne Edgerton
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. |
On another note, AOPA plans to fight any mandatory upgrades to 406 because of the
large price difference.....
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2007/070913elt.html
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Werner Schneider
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 3:52 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Michael,
did you see their price? Christen sells one for close to 2300$ wonder
what the difference to the ME406 is as it seems currently the cheapest
on the market.
br Werner
Michael Wellenzohn wrote:
>
> There was a new ELT presented at Oshkosh.
>
> http://en.martec.fr/page/p-191/art_id-/
>
> They claim to be better than the competition.
>
> Michael
>
> www.wellenzohn.net (just painted the interior)
>
> --------
> RV-10 builder (wings)
> #511
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134341#134341
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Ritter <mritter509(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Bad battery/bad experience |
Wayne,
I'm using two Odyssey 680PC's and they are working great. They are going o
n two years of use. Are you going to LOE?
Mark
RV-10/N410MR
From: wayne.e(at)grandecom.netTo: rv10-list(at)matronics.comSubject: RV10-List: B
ad battery/bad experienceDate: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:18:45 -0500
I thought I would pass along to you an experience I've had with Tex-Air Par
ts in Fort Worth on a Concorde battery I purchased from them. At the beginn
ing of the year I
purchase a Concorde RG25CX for my plane from Tex-Air but didn't use it unti
l May when I went to start the plane. The battery was DOA and I returned it
for exchange. They wouldn't exchange it outright but rather I had to buy a
new one and they said they would process the credit and send it to me. As
of today I still haven't received the credit. Below is an e-mail I sent the
m on Aug 25th and I'm still waiting for the refund.
I guess what's irritating me is what appears to be their unwillingness to r
efund my money for a bad battery they sold me. I'm just posting this to giv
e others heads up on where you purchase your items and be sure they will st
and behind what they sell.
Here is the e-mail I sent them on Aug 25th.
Also I've noticed that when starting the plane with this battery I get an i
nitial hesitation, like it's having difficulty turning the engine over but
when I try the second time it turns over fine. In hindsight I might look at
the Odyssey PC925 rather than the Concorde.
Wayne Edgerton N602WT
a little pissed off at Tex-Air
___________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
I WILL FWD YOUR EMAIL TO GENE. HE IS THE ONE THAT KNOWS ABOUT YOUR BATTE
RY. SORRY YOU ARE HAVING SO MUCH TROUBLE.
THANKS,
DONNA
From: Wayne Edgerton [mailto:wayne.e(at)grandecom.net] Sent: Saturday, August
25, 2007 6:20 AMTo: texair(at)texair.comSubject: Return refund
To return credit manager,
On 5/18/07 I returned a Concorde battery RG25CX, see attachment. I purchase
d the battery from your company for the RV10 that I was building. When I wa
s ready to start my engine on the RV10 it would not start it. The battery w
as obviously defective somehow right out of the box. So I returned the batt
ery to your store in Fort Worth and purchased another one, which has worked
fine. I was told at the time that I would have to pay for the new battery
and then would receive credit for the returned battery when it was tested.
After sometime I called into your FW store and asked about the progress of
the credit. I was told that there would be a charge of something like $90 t
o test the battery and I think I had to pay the shipping charge back to the
supplier to have it tested. This obviously irritated me and I told the per
son why don't I just write this experience off to a company with a really b
ad return policy, but that I would be making a posting to the RV blog about
my experience with the battery and your company. I was told to wait and le
ts see what can be done.
I did wait and nothing happened so I called back in and was told someone in
the back had to test it and they had been really busy. I have called in on
multiple occasion inquiring on the progress, probably 5 or 6 times, and ha
ve been told we're getting close. Let me explain that the money for me is n
ot the issue. The issue is I bought a battery from your company that appare
ntly was defective out of the box and now I'm getting a complete run around
on receiving back credit for it. Boy if you think this type of customer se
rvice creates customer loyalty, you must have attended the wrong business s
chool.
I believe I've been really patient on this but the patience issue has just
about run it's coarse. I thought it only fair to inform you that if somethi
ng isn't forthcoming on this issue very soon my intentions are to write a l
etter to the Better Business Bureau regarding your business practices on th
is type of issue. I intend to also post this same complaint and experience
on the RV builders blog.
Again trust me this is not about the monies, hell if I'm building a $250,00
0 airplane this is small potatoes, but rather that you appear to be jerking
me around on a return that should have been an exchange at the time of the
return. I was told that it's the battery company that is the problem. Then
I would suggest that you drop that line of product from your inventory if
you are unable to support it. If you went to a department store and bought
an item and then because it was defective took it back, would you accept th
e explanation that I really can't give you credit until the supplier oks it
? I think not. If you take on a product and sell it you have to take respon
sibility with the customer for that product and you deal with the supplier
or at least that's how I always ran my business. I never had a vendor that
had that much control over me, it was actually the opposite. If they didn't
want to support their product they were gone.
Understand this is not a threat but rather I'm just letting you know in adv
ance what my intentions are so you are not surprised when it occurs.
Wayne Edgerton
_________________________________________________________________
Capture your memories in an online journal!
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. |
Michael...I know AOPA is fighting this with good cause for us...but also be
aware that the USAF informed the CAP folks that they will no be accepting the
old 121.5 code for SAR's in the future. The will only be responding to the 406
series for SAR's...I don't know how they are going to handle a physical
report for an over due aircraft, though.
When you read on these ELT's you'd believe they are all fail safe which they
are not. CAP still finds down aircraft via search in air and on ground
besides electronic methods...but it's not so immediate, though.
Patrick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Shawn Moon <moons1999(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. |
It seems to me that they are fighting the wrong battle. What they should
be doing is working on ways to get more companies to manufacture them so th
ere is more competition and (hopefully) lower prices. I will admit, though
, that it seems that in aerospace the first company to market sets the pric
e and then everyone else just seems to follow that pricing. It seems to me
that the 406 is a much better solution yet things like this only prove to
impede the acceptance of the newer standards.=0A =0A--Shawn=0A40366 - Wings
=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: RV Builder (Michael Sausen) <rvbu
ilder(at)sausen.net>=0ATo: "rv10-list(at)matronics.com"
=0ASent: Friday, September 14, 2007 8:56:53 AM=0ASubject: RE: RV10-List: Re
: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.=0A=0A--> RV10-List message po
sted by: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" =0A=0AOn anoth
er note, AOPA plans to fight any mandatory upgrades to 406 because of the l
arge price difference.....=0A=0Ahttp://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2007
/070913elt.html=0A=0AMichael=0A=0A-----Original Message-----=0AFrom: owner-
rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
] On Behalf Of Werner Schneider=0ASent: Friday, September 14, 2007 3:52 AM
=0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com=0ASubject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Is AmeriKing g
Schneider =0A=0AMichael,=0Adid you see their price? Chris
ten sells one for close to 2300$ wonder=0Awhat the difference to the ME406
is as it seems currently the cheapest=0Aon the market.=0A=0Abr Werner=0A=0A
lenzohn" =0A>=0A> There was a new ELT presented at Os
hkosh.=0A>=0A> http://en.martec.fr/page/p-191/art_id-/=0A>=0A> They claim t
o be better than the competition.=0A>=0A> Michael=0A>=0A> www.wellenzohn.ne
t (just painted the interior)=0A>=0A> --------=0A> RV-10 builder (wings)
=0A> #511=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A> Read this topic online here:=0A>=0A> http://f
orums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134341#134341=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>
=============0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A
=0A_______________________________________________________________________
_____________=0ABoardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now
oo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pascal" <rv10builder(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Bad battery/bad experience |
Looks like you were more patient than I. BBB needs to be advised. This
will speak louder for others who look at the Tex-Air company and see
that people have complained than anything else.
On a different perspective and this is related to tools. I had a a
countersink that broke shortly after using it for the empennage and I
wrote Brown tools asking if it was normal. Michael Brown himself took
the e-mail, expressed concern, asked for a picture with the writing so
he could track the source, than immediately shipped out 2 replacement
countersinks (different source). There are great support teams out there
and I'm sure using this forum and Tim's site we can steer those behind
us in the right direction. Tim has mentioned SteinAir as a resource
others other companies.
Pascal
----- Original Message -----
From: Wayne Edgerton
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 6:18 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Bad battery/bad experience
I thought I would pass along to you an experience I've had with
Tex-Air Parts in Fort Worth on a Concorde battery I purchased from them.
At the beginning of the year I
purchase a Concorde RG25CX for my plane from Tex-Air but didn't use it
until May when I went to start the plane. The battery was DOA and I
returned it for exchange. They wouldn't exchange it outright but rather
I had to buy a new one and they said they would process the credit and
send it to me. As of today I still haven't received the credit. Below is
an e-mail I sent them on Aug 25th and I'm still waiting for the refund.
I guess what's irritating me is what appears to be their unwillingness
to refund my money for a bad battery they sold me. I'm just posting this
to give others heads up on where you purchase your items and be sure
they will stand behind what they sell.
Here is the e-mail I sent them on Aug 25th.
Also I've noticed that when starting the plane with this battery I get
an initial hesitation, like it's having difficulty turning the engine
over but when I try the second time it turns over fine. In hindsight I
might look at the Odyssey PC925 rather than the Concorde.
Wayne Edgerton N602WT
a little pissed off at Tex-Air
_________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
I WILL FWD YOUR EMAIL TO GENE. HE IS THE ONE THAT KNOWS ABOUT YOUR
BATTERY. SORRY YOU ARE HAVING SO MUCH TROUBLE.
THANKS,
DONNA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: Wayne Edgerton [mailto:wayne.e(at)grandecom.net]
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2007 6:20 AM
To: texair(at)texair.com
Subject: Return refund
To return credit manager,
On 5/18/07 I returned a Concorde battery RG25CX, see attachment. I
purchased the battery from your company for the RV10 that I was
building. When I was ready to start my engine on the RV10 it would not
start it. The battery was obviously defective somehow right out of the
box. So I returned the battery to your store in Fort Worth and purchased
another one, which has worked fine. I was told at the time that I would
have to pay for the new battery and then would receive credit for the
returned battery when it was tested.
After sometime I called into your FW store and asked about the
progress of the credit. I was told that there would be a charge of
something like $90 to test the battery and I think I had to pay the
shipping charge back to the supplier to have it tested. This obviously
irritated me and I told the person why don't I just write this
experience off to a company with a really bad return policy, but that I
would be making a posting to the RV blog about my experience with the
battery and your company. I was told to wait and lets see what can be
done.
I did wait and nothing happened so I called back in and was told
someone in the back had to test it and they had been really busy. I have
called in on multiple occasion inquiring on the progress, probably 5 or
6 times, and have been told we're getting close. Let me explain that the
money for me is not the issue. The issue is I bought a battery from your
company that apparently was defective out of the box and now I'm getting
a complete run around on receiving back credit for it. Boy if you think
this type of customer service creates customer loyalty, you must have
attended the wrong business school.
I believe I've been really patient on this but the patience issue has
just about run it's coarse. I thought it only fair to inform you that if
something isn't forthcoming on this issue very soon my intentions are to
write a letter to the Better Business Bureau regarding your business
practices on this type of issue. I intend to also post this same
complaint and experience on the RV builders blog.
Again trust me this is not about the monies, hell if I'm building a
$250,000 airplane this is small potatoes, but rather that you appear to
be jerking me around on a return that should have been an exchange at
the time of the return. I was told that it's the battery company that is
the problem. Then I would suggest that you drop that line of product
from your inventory if you are unable to support it. If you went to a
department store and bought an item and then because it was defective
took it back, would you accept the explanation that I really can't give
you credit until the supplier oks it? I think not. If you take on a
product and sell it you have to take responsibility with the customer
for that product and you deal with the supplier or at least that's how I
always ran my business. I never had a vendor that had that much control
over me, it was actually the opposite. If they didn't want to support
their product they were gone.
Understand this is not a threat but rather I'm just letting you know
in advance what my intentions are so you are not surprised when it
occurs.
Wayne Edgerton
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. |
This is very true, but it gives people options like keeping your existing
ELT until prices drop a bit and using a portable 406 PLB like the MicroFix
. I expect that most airliners and many other aircraft will continue to fl
y with their second radio tuned to 121.5 as good members of the community.
For me this seems like a good compromise and allows for portability that y
ou just can't get in the on board units. When the on board units drop in p
rice to a reasonable figure I will then replace and have two levels of redu
ndancy for that rare case I need SAR to find me.
Yes for this to work it requires the PLB to be activated prior to an inci
dent in case of unconsciousness. I plan to mount it somewhere in arms reac
h so that I can add it to the emergency checklist. The nice thing with the
Microfix is it's just a matter of hitting one button and freeing the ante
nna. If it's secured someplace like under my legs, it has a very good chan
ce of surviving if I do. And with the canopy being made of fiberglass it i
s essentially transparent to the beacon.
My $0.02
Michael
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 9:21 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT.
Michael...I know AOPA is fighting this with good cause for us...but also be
aware that the USAF informed the CAP folks that they will no be accepting
the old 121.5 code for SAR's in the future. The will only be responding to
the 406 series for SAR's...I don't know how they are going to handle a phy
sical report for an over due aircraft, though.
When you read on these ELT's you'd believe they are all fail safe which the
y are not. CAP still finds down aircraft via search in air and on ground b
esides electronic methods...but it's not so immediate, though.
Patrick
________________________________
See what's new at Make AOL Your Homepage.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Schmidt <scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bad battery/bad experience |
The best in this business are Stein Air and Flightline Interiors. If every
company could replicate their customer service the world would be in harmo
ny. =0AYou can tell when a supplier loves their job, their product, and the
community they sell to. Even though Stein gives me crap about not wearing
his t-shirts during prime photo opportunities at Oshkosh, he still is a gr
eat supplier. =0AVan's does a good job too but you really get a personal ex
perience like working with Stein and Abby. =0Awww.steinair.com=0Ahttp://ww
w.flightlineinteriors.com/=0A =0AScott Schmidt=0Ascottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com=0A
=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: pascal <rv10builder(at)verizon.ne
t>=0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Friday, September 14, 2007 7:35:35
AM=0ASubject: Re: RV10-List: Bad battery/bad experience=0A=0A=0ALooks like
you were more patient than I. BBB needs to be advised. This will speak lou
der for others who look at the Tex-Air company and see that people have com
plained than anything else.=0A =0AOn a different perspective and this is re
lated to tools. I had a a countersink that broke shortly after using it for
the empennage and I wrote Brown tools asking if it was normal. Michael Bro
wn himself took the e-mail, expressed concern, asked for a picture with the
writing so he could track the source, than immediately shipped out 2 repla
cement countersinks (different source). There are great support teams out t
here and I'm sure using this forum and Tim's site we can steer those behind
us in the right direction. Tim has mentioned SteinAir as a resource others
other companies.=0APascal=0A =0A----- Original Message ----- =0AFrom: Wayn
e Edgerton =0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com =0ASent: Friday, September 14, 20
07 6:18 AM=0ASubject: RV10-List: Bad battery/bad experience=0A=0A=0AI thoug
ht I would pass along to you an experience I've had with Tex-Air Parts in F
ort Worth on a Concorde battery I purchased from them. At the beginning of
the year I =0Apurchase a Concorde RG25CX for my plane from Tex-Air but didn
't use it until May when I went to start the plane. The battery was DOA and
I returned it for exchange. They wouldn't exchange it outright but rather
I had to buy a new one and they said they would process the credit and send
it to me. As of today I still haven't received the credit. Below is an e-m
ail I sent them on Aug 25th and I'm still waiting for the refund.=0A =0AI g
uess what's irritating me is what appears to be their unwillingness to refu
nd my money for a bad battery they sold me. I'm just posting this to give o
thers heads up on where you purchase your items and be sure they will stand
behind what they sell.=0A =0AHere is the e-mail I sent them on Aug 25th.
=0A =0AAlso I've noticed that when starting the plane with this battery I g
et an initial hesitation, like it's having difficulty turning the engine ov
er but when I try the second time it turns over fine. In hindsight I might
look at the Odyssey PC925 rather than the Concorde.=0A =0AWayne Edgerton N
602WT =0Aa little pissed off at Tex-Air =0A =0A____________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________=0AI WILL FWD YOUR EMAIL TO GENE. H
E IS THE ONE THAT KNOWS ABOUT YOUR BATTERY. SORRY YOU ARE HAVING SO MUCH
TROUBLE.=0A =0ATHANKS,=0ADONNA=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AFrom: Wayne Edgerton [mailto:
wayne.e(at)grandecom.net] =0ASent: Saturday, August 25, 2007 6:20 AM=0ATo: tex
air(at)texair.com=0ASubject: Return refund=0A=0A=0ATo return credit manager,
=0A =0AOn 5/18/07 I returned a Concorde battery RG25CX, see attachment. I p
urchased the battery from your company for the RV10 that I was building. Wh
en I was ready to start my engine on the RV10 it would not start it. The ba
ttery was obviously defective somehow right out of the box. So I returned t
he battery to your store in Fort Worth and purchased another one, which has
worked fine. I was told at the time that I would have to pay for the new b
attery and then would receive credit for the returned battery when it was t
ested.=0A =0AAfter sometime I called into your FW store and asked about the
progress of the credit. I was told that there would be a charge of somethi
ng like $90 to test the battery and I think I had to pay the shipping charg
e back to the supplier to have it tested. This obviously irritated me and I
told the person why don't I just write this experience off to a company wi
th a really bad return policy, but that I would be making a posting to the
RV blog about my experience with the battery and your company. I was told t
o wait and lets see what can be done.=0A =0AI did wait and nothing happened
so I called back in and was told someone in the back had to test it and th
ey had been really busy. I have called in on multiple occasion inquiring on
the progress, probably 5 or 6 times, and have been told we're getting clos
e. Let me explain that the money for me is not the issue. The issue is I bo
ught a battery from your company that apparently was defective out of the b
ox and now I'm getting a complete run around on receiving back credit for i
t. Boy if you think this type of customer service creates customer loyalty,
you must have attended the wrong business school.=0A =0AI believe I've bee
n really patient on this but the patience issue has just about run it's coa
rse. I thought it only fair to inform you that if something isn't forthcomi
ng on this issue very soon my intentions are to write a letter to the Bette
r Business Bureau regarding your business practices on this type of issue.
I intend to also post this same complaint and experience on the RV builders
blog. =0A =0AAgain trust me this is not about the monies, hell if I'm buil
ding a $250,000 airplane this is small potatoes, but rather that you appear
to be jerking me around on a return that should have been an exchange at t
he time of the return. I was told that it's the battery company that is the
problem. Then I would suggest that you drop that line of product from your
inventory if you are unable to support it. If you went to a department sto
re and bought an item and then because it was defective took it back, would
you accept the explanation that I really can't give you credit until the s
upplier oks it? I think not. If you take on a product and sell it you have
to take responsibility with the customer for that product and you deal with
the supplier or at least that's how I always ran my business. I never had
a vendor that had that much control over me, it was actually the opposite.
If they didn't want to support their product they were gone.=0A =0AUndersta
nd this is not a threat but rather I'm just letting you know in advance wha
t my intentions are so you are not surprised when it occurs. =0A =0AWayne E
dgerton=0A=0A=0Ahref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http:
//www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List=0Ahref="http://forums.matronics.c
============
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rvmail(at)thelefflers.com> |
I'm about ready to purchase the wing kit and a used has popped up on VAF?
I'm curious as to what concerns and/or issues may arise by purchasing a used kit?
This particular kit has been sitting in the midwest, unopened for 3 years.
It looks like I could save about 10%, but is saving 10% worth the risk?
Some of thing things I've already thought about are:
- Corrision
- Missing parts (I believe Van's only warranties for 30 days)
- Blue plastic permanently adhered to the aluminum
Have there been any significant changes to the wing in the last 3 years? Any other
concerns that I haven't thought of?
thanks,
bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Free RV-10 W&B being offered |
| From: | "Tom Meeker" <tom(at)aoaircrafters.com> |
Hey, Alpha Omega Aircrafters is offering a free weight and balance to RV-10 owners on September 29 if you call in in time. They are having a little fly in there (KCID) with reps from Lycoming, MT Props, Tru-trak, B&C, Airflow Systems, maybe others. Looks like they are also offering free food. Could be a fun event for RV-10 owners or builders. The number to call for more information is 319-362-9055. The guy's name is Tom. The AOA web site is www.aoaircrafters.com. I attached the flyer to the event also. Check it out.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134435#134435
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/rv10_flyer_200.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | glare shield paint |
| From: | "jayb" <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com> |
What are folks using to paint / cover their glare shields? Someone mentioned "Plasticoat"
(spelling?) works well, but I couldn't find mention of it at Spruce.
Thanks,
Jay
Is glass work better than metal work?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134452#134452
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rene Felker" <rene(at)felker.com> |
| Subject: | glare shield paint |
I got the stuff Cleveland sells. Looks great.
Rene' Felker
N423CF
40322
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jayb
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 2:07 PM
Subject: RV10-List: glare shield paint
What are folks using to paint / cover their glare shields? Someone mentioned
"Plasticoat" (spelling?) works well, but I couldn't find mention of it at
Spruce.
Thanks,
Jay
Is glass work better than metal work?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134452#134452
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: glare shield paint |
| From: | "bcondrey" <bob.condrey(at)baesystems.com> |
Plasti-kote is rattle can paint that's available through auto part stores.
http://www.plastikote.com/plastikote/index.jsp
Bob #40105
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134486#134486
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Is AmeriKing going to create a 406 Mhz ELT. |
A friend reported he had a 406 unit self activate while the aircraft was in
hangar with no one around. I don't know how FAA will handle overdue and
reports of aircraft hearing ELT, but I would expect they would be relaying
to USAF expecting normal SAR treatment.
On 9/14/07, GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Michael...I know AOPA is fighting this with good cause for us...but also
> be aware that the USAF informed the CAP folks that they will no be accepting
> the old 121.5 code for SAR's in the future. The will only be responding
> to the 406 series for SAR's...I don't know how they are going to handle a
> physical report for an over due aircraft, though.
>
> When you read on these ELT's you'd believe they are all fail safe which
> they are not. CAP still finds down aircraft via search in air and on ground
> besides electronic methods...but it's not so immediate, though.
>
> Patrick
>
>
> ------------------------------
> See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Free RV-10 W&B being offered |
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
Randy Hartman bills himself as only one of six Build Assist facilities
in the US. Wonder if he counts Jesse? We have six just in Oregon and
will wait for the FAA to redefine the 51% rule before doing a new head
count on this growing trend.
Liability is going to be the bane of this unique and controversial
concept. If only the FAA did not give Repairmen certificates for
writing checks to such firms.
Its back to bucking my own rivets.. Thank you.
John C in Orygun
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom Meeker
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 11:22 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Free RV-10 W&B being offered
Hey, Alpha Omega Aircrafters is offering a free weight and balance to
RV-10 owners on September 29 if you call in in time. They are having a
little fly in there (KCID) with reps from Lycoming, MT Props, Tru-trak,
B&C, Airflow Systems, maybe others. Looks like they are also offering
free food. Could be a fun event for RV-10 owners or builders. The
number to call for more information is 319-362-9055. The guy's name is
Tom. The AOA web site is www.aoaircrafters.com. I attached the flyer
to the event also. Check it out.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134435#134435
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/rv10_flyer_200.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground wire |
termination
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
Much of the consternation in finalizing RV-10 kit completion is the
delay in choice of avionics, the choice of antenna, selecting antenna
placement, and then final ground strapping/ground plane/ ground wire
lug. No one is saying that the purchase of avionics needs to be done
any too early. That is a lot of money $$$, but the choice should drive
the choice of antenna. The choice of antenna should drive the location
and then the method of attachment. The distance from the mount to the
avionics is also important and the best performing wire (both coax and
AWG22 power and ground) chosen. Few are even talking about horizontal
and vertical polarity. Or =BD wave, 5/8 wave and associated wind load.
I know Sausen said it didn't amount to much but then we just replaced
all the antennae that got snapped off recently.
Seems some of the flying veterans should weigh in on how early during
the kit completion the antenna mount technique could be (should be)
resolved. I am seeing a lot of builds which delays this important choice
late into the canopy installation. I remember just one builder presented
a spreadsheet/ checkmark matrix as to what, where and why -fairly early
on, in his build. Composite canopies can play havoc with those choices.
It is humorous that so many VANs builders thing of these as aluminum
airplanes. Seems when it comes to antennae, they are more composite in
their mount location than most certificated metal aircraft. Make it
carbon fiber and its even worse.
Has anyone tried duplicating Archers with copper rather than aluminum
(inside the composite wingtip)?
Any takers? Tim's WSI post got me reflecting... which you all know may
not be a good thing. Plus with 1,000 subscribers there are sure a lot
of lurkers and I don't want to lose Michael Sausen's posts again.
Thanks Tim! Maybe some of you can rate your antenna performance and
make stronger recommendations to the next 700 builders.
John Cox
#600
W7COX - (Amateur Radio) for those not informed
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "mark verrill" <mverrill(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Top Wing Skin and Wing Walk Doublers |
Hi folks, just looking for verification from someone who has been past this part
before. Pg. 16-2 calls for several# 19 holes to be drilled, then countersunk.
This is a first for me to countersink a hole this large in other than solid
aluminum, like .060 plus. In this case, the top layer is the .025 top layer
of skin, the walk doublers at .020 and the rib at ~ .025. This seems to leave
some terrbly thin edges around this countersink. Based upon the other steps,
it appears this wiill have another layer of dimpled material then a screw...which
may make this less daunting, but without the manual section on fairning
for the wing roots, I really don't know exactly what will attach here and how.
I set up an example with some scraps of the same thickness and it appears that
with another dimpled layer inside this countersink that this will be solid
dispite the thin bevel. Someone reassure me please that I am reading this correctly
(specifically step 3 on pg. 16-2)
Thanks,
Mark Verrill ~ SB wings
mark verrill
mverrill(at)earthlink.net
EarthLink Revolves Around You.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Top Wing Skin and Wing Walk Doublers |
You are reading it correctly. On the top skin only all but one of the
inboard holes for #8 screws are countersunk, not dimpled. The aft most #8
screw hole is dimpled as it is beyond the area where here is a wing walk
doubler. The countersunk hole is bigger (wider) than it would be in a
thicker material but you will have the wing fairing in this hole under the
screw head. Note that only the hole for the #8 screw is countersunk. The
nut plate rivet holes on the skin are dimpled and all 3/32 holes are
countersunk on the doubler. For this area the ribs are not dimpled.
I just finished doing this on my left wing. Looking back however I might
just dimple the doubler and all #8 screw holes on the right wing. This was
the process when I built my 8A.
Carl Froehlich
Dogwood Airpark (VA-42)
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of mark verrill
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 3:40 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Top Wing Skin and Wing Walk Doublers
Hi folks, just looking for verification from someone who has been past this
part before. Pg. 16-2 calls for several# 19 holes to be drilled, then
countersunk. This is a first for me to countersink a hole this large in
other than solid aluminum, like .060 plus. In this case, the top layer is
the .025 top layer of skin, the walk doublers at .020 and the rib at ~ .025.
This seems to leave some terrbly thin edges around this countersink. Based
upon the other steps, it appears this wiill have another layer of dimpled
material then a screw...which may make this less daunting, but without the
manual section on fairning for the wing roots, I really don't know exactly
what will attach here and how. I set up an example with some scraps of the
same thickness and it appears that with another dimpled layer inside this
countersink that this will be solid dispite the thin bevel. Someone
reassure me please that I am reading this correctly (specifically step 3 on
pg. 16-2)
Thanks,
Mark Verrill ~ SB wings
mark verrill
mverrill(at)earthlink.net
EarthLink Revolves Around You.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pascal" <rv10builder(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Top Wing Skin and Wing Walk Doublers |
no idea about the answer but I'll throw a Wing Gotcha from Tim's site
out there for you since your on this page.
This clip comes from:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/wing/20040906/index.html
On page 16-2, the aft wing-walk doubler has a nutplate holes to drill.
Read ahead for the nutplate riveting and you will see that the forward
most hole in the aft wing-walk doubler is correct per plans. I
accidently drilled mine for a standard center-threaded nutplate, whereas
this gets the nutplate with the threads on the end, with 2 rivets side
by side.
Pascal
----- Original Message -----
From: mark verrill
To: RV10-List(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 12:40 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Top Wing Skin and Wing Walk Doublers
Hi folks, just looking for verification from someone who has been past
this part before. Pg. 16-2 calls for several# 19 holes to be drilled,
then countersunk. This is a first for me to countersink a hole this
large in other than solid aluminum, like .060 plus. In this case, the
top layer is the .025 top layer of skin, the walk doublers at .020 and
the rib at ~ .025. This seems to leave some terrbly thin edges around
this countersink. Based upon the other steps, it appears this wiill
have another layer of dimpled material then a screw...which may make
this less daunting, but without the manual section on fairning for the
wing roots, I really don't know exactly what will attach here and how.
I set up an example with some scraps of the same thickness and it
appears that with another dimpled layer inside this countersink that
this will be solid dispite the thin bevel. Someone reassure me please
that I am reading this correctly (specifically step 3 on pg. 16-2)
Thanks,
Mark Verrill ~ SB wings
mark verrill
mverrill(at)earthlink.net
EarthLink Revolves Around You.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground |
wire termination
I just stuck em where they look cool....lol, I pretty much followed the pla
cement by several builders, the location of my remote transponder led to th
at antenna located aft of the baggage compartment on the bottom right near
the elevator bellcrank. Com 1 is on the right bottom, near the rear seats.
GPS and GDL-69A antennas aft of the cabin top on the upper rear skin. Com 2
is an Archer in the right tip along with the MKR BCN made from stripped RG
-400 wire, Nav is an Archer in the left tip. I powered the panel the other
night the both=C2-COM's recieved very well but I'm inside the KVGT's clas
s D space at my house, didn't try to transmit. I was too busy looking for s
moke and playing with all the whistles and bells. I used a heat gun to warm
the cylinders, EGT and CHT started to show a rise from the 92 degress in t
he garage to about 110 before I stopped warming the cylinders, MAP was hold
ing=C2-a steady reading so far it looks OK.=C2-Thankfully all seemed to
be working as advertised. I could not tell you about the NAV antenna cause
the wings are in the hangar and I could not plug them in to see how it was
working.....I have only done continuity, short to ground and=C2-checked
the trim and lights=C2-on the wings, no real ops testing there yet....giv
e me about three months :)=C2-=C2-
Rick S.
40185
----- Original Message -----
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 11:13:58 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angel
es
Subject: RV10-List: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground w
ire termination
Much of the consternation in finalizing RV-10 kit completion is the delay i
n choice of avionics, the choice of antenna, selecting antenna placement, a
nd then final ground strapping/ ground plane/ ground wire lug.=C2- No one
is saying that the purchase of avionics needs to be done any too early.=C2
- That is a lot of money $$$ , but the choice should drive the choice of
antenna.=C2- The choice of antenna should drive the location and then the
method of attachment. =C2- The distance from the mount to the avionics i
s also important and the best performing wire (both coax and AWG22 power an
d ground) chosen . =C2- Few are even talking about horizontal and vertica
l polarity. =C2- Or =C2=BD wave, 5/8 wave and associated wind load.=C2-
I know Sausen said it didn =99 t amount to much but then we just rep
laced all the antenna e that got snapped off recently.
Seems some of the flying veterans should weigh in on how early during the k
it completion the antenna mount technique could be (should be) resolved. I
am seeing a lot of builds which delays this important choice late into the
canopy installation . I remember just one builder presented a spreadsheet/
checkmark matrix as to what, where and why - fairly early on , in his build
.=C2- Composite canopies can play havoc with those choices. =C2- It is
humorous that so many VANs builders thing of these as aluminum airplanes.
=C2- Seems when it comes to antenna e , they are more composite in their
mount location than most certificated metal aircraft . Make it carbon fiber
and its even worse.
Has anyone tried duplicating Archers with copper rather than aluminum (insi
de the composite wingtip) ?
Any takers? =C2- Tim =99 s WSI post got me reflecting whi
ch you all know may not be a good thing. =C2- Plus with 1,000 subscribers
there are sure a lot of lurkers and I don =99 t want to lose Michael
Sausen =99 s posts again.=C2- Thanks Tim! =C2- Maybe some of you
can rate your antenna performance and make stronger recommendations to the
next 700 builders.
John Cox
#600
W7COX =93 ( Amateur Radio ) for those not informed
====
=======================
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground |
wire termination
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
I will be patient. I think this kind of discussion is of value. Thanks
John C.
40600
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick Sked
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 2:28 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or
ground wire termination
I just stuck em where they look cool....lol, I pretty much followed the
placement by several builders, the location of my remote transponder led
to that antenna located aft of the baggage compartment on the bottom
right near the elevator bellcrank. Com 1 is on the right bottom, near
the rear seats. GPS and GDL-69A antennas aft of the cabin top on the
upper rear skin. Com 2 is an Archer in the right tip along with the MKR
BCN made from stripped RG-400 wire, Nav is an Archer in the left tip. I
powered the panel the other night the both COM's recieved very well but
I'm inside the KVGT's class D space at my house, didn't try to transmit.
I was too busy looking for smoke and playing with all the whistles and
bells. I used a heat gun to warm the cylinders, EGT and CHT started to
show a rise from the 92 degress in the garage to about 110 before I
stopped warming the cylinders, MAP was holding a steady reading so far
it looks OK. Thankfully all seemed to be working as advertised. I could
not tell you about the NAV antenna cause the wings are in the hangar and
I could not plug them in to see how it was working.....I have only done
continuity, short to ground and checked the trim and lights on the
wings, no real ops testing there yet....give me about three months :)
Rick S.
40185
----- Original Message -----
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 11:13:58 AM (GMT-0800)
America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RV10-List: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or
ground wire termination
Much of the consternation in finalizing RV-10 kit completion is the
delay in choice of avionics, the choice of antenna, selecting antenna
placement, and then final ground strapping/ground plane/ ground wire
lug. No one is saying that the purchase of avionics needs to be done
any too early. That is a lot of money $$$, but the choice should drive
the choice of antenna. The choice of antenna should drive the location
and then the method of attachment. The distance from the mount to the
avionics is also important and the best performing wire (both coax and
AWG22 power and ground) chosen. Few are even talking about horizontal
and vertical polarity. Or =BD wave, 5/8 wave and associated wind load.
I know Sausen said it didn't amount to much but then we just replaced
all the antennae that got snapped off recently.
Seems some of the flying veterans should weigh in on how early during
the kit completion the antenna mount technique could be (should be)
resolved. I am seeing a lot of builds which delays this important choice
late into the canopy installation. I remember just one builder presented
a spreadsheet/ checkmark matrix as to what, where and why -fairly early
on, in his build. Composite canopies can play havoc with those choices.
It is humorous that so many VANs builders thing of these as aluminum
airplanes. Seems when it comes to antennae, they are more composite in
their mount location than most certificated metal aircraft. Make it
carbon fiber and its even worse.
Has anyone tried duplicating Archers with copper rather than aluminum
(inside the composite wingtip)?
Any takers? Tim's WSI post got me reflecting... which you all know may
not be a good thing. Plus with 1,000 subscribers there are sure a lot
of lurkers and I don't want to lose Michael Sausen's posts again.
Thanks Tim! Maybe some of you can rate your antenna performance and
make stronger recommendations to the next 700 builders.
John Cox
#600
W7COX - (Amateur Radio) for those not informed
get=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
p://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ben Westfall" <rv10(at)sinkrate.com> |
| Subject: | Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground wire |
termination
John you=92re probably looking more for antenna performance than ease of
placement but I thought it relevant to contribute this=85
I opted to put both com antenna=92s on the belly just aft of the rear
spar
attach bulkhead (copied from Tim Olson
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/fuselage/20050522/index.html ). I was
crawling
all over Van=92s personal 10 at the homecoming this year and noticed
that he
actually mounted his com antenna forward of the rear spar attach
bulkhead.
The coax connector is then accessible by removing the cover over the
flap
actuator bar. The significance being the antenna wire is accessible w/o
cutting holes after final assembly. I think Tim opted to put his aux
batteries in this location. I failed to read ahead in the plans far
enough
to see this as a viable mounting location.
I cannot attest to performance of either location.
-Ben
#40579 Tailcone Attach
PDX
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 11:14 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or
ground
wire termination
Much of the consternation in finalizing RV-10 kit completion is the
delay in
choice of avionics, the choice of antenna, selecting antenna placement,
and
then final ground strapping/ground plane/ ground wire lug. No one is
saying
that the purchase of avionics needs to be done any too early. That is a
lot
of money $$$, but the choice should drive the choice of antenna. The
choice
of antenna should drive the location and then the method of attachment.
The
distance from the mount to the avionics is also important and the best
performing wire (both coax and AWG22 power and ground) chosen. Few are
even
talking about horizontal and vertical polarity. Or =BD wave, 5/8 wave
and
associated wind load. I know Sausen said it didn=92t amount to much but
then
we just replaced all the antennae that got snapped off recently.
Seems some of the flying veterans should weigh in on how early during
the
kit completion the antenna mount technique could be (should be)
resolved. I
am seeing a lot of builds which delays this important choice late into
the
canopy installation. I remember just one builder presented a
spreadsheet/
checkmark matrix as to what, where and why -fairly early on, in his
build.
Composite canopies can play havoc with those choices. It is humorous
that
so many VANs builders thing of these as aluminum airplanes. Seems when
it
comes to antennae, they are more composite in their mount location than
most
certificated metal aircraft. Make it carbon fiber and its even worse.
Has anyone tried duplicating Archers with copper rather than aluminum
(inside the composite wingtip)?
Any takers? Tim=92s WSI post got me reflecting=85 which you all know
may not be
a good thing. Plus with 1,000 subscribers there are sure a lot of
lurkers
and I don=92t want to lose Michael Sausen=92s posts again. Thanks Tim!
Maybe
some of you can rate your antenna performance and make stronger
recommendations to the next 700 builders.
John Cox
#600
W7COX ' (Amateur Radio) for those not informed
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ivo welch" <ivowel(at)gmail.com> |
Dear RV-10 list: I am about to start advertising my RV10 for sale
again. (http://welch.econ.brown.edu/n325hp). Moved to the standard
CS 2-blade prop. For sale at $199k---it would probably be very tough
to build with the ingredients that are in this plane, much less in the
pro quality it was built. alas, its not looking as nice as it should.
so, I would also like to spruce up the looks with some vinyl stripe
design to go on top of the existing paint. Does anyone have good
experiences with someone who produces nice vinyl stripes for easy
application? help appreciated.
regards,
/ivo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
Ivo - hoping for the best in your effort to sell N325HP.
Two questions -
#1 - Why would you give up a three blade and buy to install a two blade
prop? I have never heard of getting 325 HP six cylinder Lycoming with
those features.
#2 - Can you enlighten us?
/john
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ivo welch
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 5:50 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Vinyl?
Dear RV-10 list: I am about to start advertising my RV10 for sale
again. (http://welch.econ.brown.edu/n325hp). Moved to the standard
CS 2-blade prop. For sale at $199k---it would probably be very tough
to build with the ingredients that are in this plane, much less in the
pro quality it was built. alas, its not looking as nice as it should.
so, I would also like to spruce up the looks with some vinyl stripe
design to go on top of the existing paint. Does anyone have good
experiences with someone who produces nice vinyl stripes for easy
application? help appreciated.
regards,
/ivo
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground |
wire termination
With all this talk about antennas, I've got a question for the group. I
need to mount a XM weather antenna and an additional GPS antenna. I
already have the primary GPS mounted on the top of the tail cone aft of
the cabin top intersection. I am not keen on placing them on the cabin
top, primarily for aesthetics, so I'm planning on mounting them side by
side on a shelf on the firewall. This will make installation and the
cabling easier. The antennas don't require a ground plane as best as I
can tell. Mounting them in this location will make for a shorter cable
run and an easier installation. Anybody gone this route? Feedback? I
think I recall that Checkoway mounted one or more antennas in this manner.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
> *
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground wire |
| From: | "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net> |
Deems,
Rick Gray did the "antenna tray" on his RV10. Check out the "wet" pic.
Joe
--------
RV8 #80125
RV10 # 40512
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134601#134601
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08221_823.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground |
wire termination
Just wanted to provide feedback on the WSI antenna both location and
performance re: grounding.
Today I did 400nm with the new WSI AV-300. I've never EVER had my
weather work as perfectly as this before. It's fantastic. Before,
it was very nice to have, but clearly having only one satellite
and having a piss-poor antenna didn't make it all it could be. The
new Sirius system was great, with the standard antenna. To get the
best positioning, I mounted it on the cabin top, about a foot behind
the now GPS-only antenna for my GNS-480. It's too bad that
things take antennas in the first place, but now both of these guys
have a near level mount, with a full view in all directions.
No ground plane required for either of them, which is nice too.
The new WSI didn't hiccup once for the entire trip, and it kept
me fed with good quality weather. The coolest part is now when
I sign on from the test signal to the real deal, the price is
even lower than I previously paid. So the location and
ground-plane-less install worked great.
Now, if you want to mount a COM or NAV antenna, don't think you'll
get away without that ground plane. Same thing for the Avidyne
TAS from what it sounds like too...so if you're going that route,
think ahead as John states.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
John W. Cox wrote:
> Much of the consternation in finalizing RV-10 kit completion is the
> delay in choice of avionics, the choice of antenna, selecting antenna
> placement, and then final ground strapping/ground plane/ ground wire
> lug. No one is saying that the purchase of avionics needs to be done
> any too early. That is a lot of money $$$, but the choice should drive
> the choice of antenna. The choice of antenna should drive the location
> and then the method of attachment. The distance from the mount to the
> avionics is also important and the best performing wire (both coax and
> AWG22 power and ground) chosen. Few are even talking about horizontal
> and vertical polarity. Or wave, 5/8 wave and associated wind load. I
> know Sausen said it didnt amount to much but then we just replaced all
> the antennae that got snapped off recently.
>
> Seems some of the flying veterans should weigh in on how early during
> the kit completion the antenna mount technique could be (should be)
> resolved. I am seeing a lot of builds which delays this important choice
> late into the canopy installation. I remember just one builder presented
> a spreadsheet/ checkmark matrix as to what, where and why -fairly early
> on, in his build. Composite canopies can play havoc with those
> choices. It is humorous that so many VANs builders thing of these as
> aluminum airplanes. Seems when it comes to antennae, they are more
> composite in their mount location than most certificated metal aircraft.
> Make it carbon fiber and its even worse.
>
> Has anyone tried duplicating Archers with copper rather than aluminum
> (inside the composite wingtip)?
>
> Any takers? Tims WSI post got me reflecting which you all know may
> not be a good thing. Plus with 1,000 subscribers there are sure a lot
> of lurkers and I dont want to lose Michael Sausens posts again.
> Thanks Tim! Maybe some of you can rate your antenna performance and
> make stronger recommendations to the next 700 builders.
>
> John Cox
>
> #600
>
> W7COX (Amateur Radio) for those not informed
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Top Wing Skin and Wing Walk Doublers |
Yep, that's a big "gotcha" section, so proceed carefully when doing
those nutplates and countersinks so you do it just the way it's
intended. The countersunk holes are just for fastening the wing
root fairings later.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
pascal wrote:
> no idea about the answer but I'll throw a Wing Gotcha from Tim's site
> out there for you since your on this page.
>
> *This clip comes from:
> **http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/wing/20040906/index.html*
> On page 16-2
> <http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/wing/20040906/careful16-2.jpg>, the aft
> wing-walk doubler has a nutplate holes to drill. Read ahead for the
> nutplate riveting and you will see that the forward most hole in the aft
> wing-walk doubler is correct per plans. I accidently drilled mine for a
> standard center-threaded nutplate, whereas this gets the nutplate with
> the threads on the end, with 2 rivets side by side.
>
>
>
> Pascal
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* mark verrill
> *To:* RV10-List(at)matronics.com
> *Sent:* Saturday, September 15, 2007 12:40 PM
> *Subject:* RV10-List: Top Wing Skin and Wing Walk Doublers
>
> Hi folks, just looking for verification from someone who has been
> past this part before. Pg. 16-2 calls for several# 19 holes to be
> drilled, then countersunk. This is a first for me to countersink a
> hole this large in other than solid aluminum, like .060 plus. In
> this case, the top layer is the .025 top layer of skin, the walk
> doublers at .020 and the rib at ~ .025. This seems to leave some
> terrbly thin edges around this countersink. Based upon the other
> steps, it appears this wiill have another layer of dimpled material
> then a screw...which may make this less daunting, but without the
> manual section on fairning for the wing roots, I really don't know
> exactly what will attach here and how. I set up an example with
> some scraps of the same thickness and it appears that with another
> dimpled layer inside this countersink that this will be solid
> dispite the thin bevel. Someone reassure me please that I am
> reading this correctly (specifically step 3 on pg. 16-2)
>
> Thanks,
> Mark Verrill ~ SB wings
>
>
> mark verrill
> mverrill(at)earthlink.net
> EarthLink Revolves Around You.
>
>
> *
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Leach" <papadaddyo(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
I sent this yesterday but may have had the wrong to address. If it is a
duplicate, I apologize. I am just about ready to close up the top skin on
the tail. Is there anything that anyone could recommend that I add to the
tail or structure prior to putting on the top. As an example, Tim you have
some good photos on your site where you added angle to support the AHRS.
What about ELT installation, etc. I would love to see some pictures of any
installations that might be beneficial to copy. Also, where is the best
place for the ELT to go?
Thanks,
Rick Leach
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground |
wire termination
Have you considered mounting them under the cabin top, inside the
Accuracy Avionics overhead console? I know there are two layers of
fiberglass and a core, but that shouldn't interfere with the signals.
(in my non expert opinion). Any thoughts?
Larry Rosen
Deems Davis wrote:
>
> With all this talk about antennas, I've got a question for the group.
> I need to mount a XM weather antenna and an additional GPS antenna. I
> already have the primary GPS mounted on the top of the tail cone aft
> of the cabin top intersection. I am not keen on placing them on the
> cabin top, primarily for aesthetics, so I'm planning on mounting them
> side by side on a shelf on the firewall. This will make installation
> and the cabling easier. The antennas don't require a ground plane as
> best as I can tell. Mounting them in this location will make for a
> shorter cable run and an easier installation. Anybody gone this route?
> Feedback? I think I recall that Checkoway mounted one or more antennas
> in this manner.
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>> *
>>
>> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground |
wire termination
Zack thanks for the pic of Ricks install. Larry, I think it's going to
be easier to do the firewall shelf. I just spent 60 minutes in the
garage and bent up some .032" and riveted it into a decent 'shelf'. I've
already got 4 bolts that hold the voltage regulators to the inside of
the firewall that I'll use to attach this to. One thing I didn't account
for is the slight forward cant of the upper part of the firewall so
there is a bit of a tilt to the shelf that I'll have to take out with
some shims/standoffs. The cable/antenna runs for the cabin top install
are problematic for me.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
Larry Rosen wrote:
>
> Have you considered mounting them under the cabin top, inside the
> Accuracy Avionics overhead console? I know there are two layers of
> fiberglass and a core, but that shouldn't interfere with the signals.
> (in my non expert opinion). Any thoughts?
>
> Larry Rosen
>
> Deems Davis wrote:
>>
>> With all this talk about antennas, I've got a question for the group.
>> I need to mount a XM weather antenna and an additional GPS antenna. I
>> already have the primary GPS mounted on the top of the tail cone aft
>> of the cabin top intersection. I am not keen on placing them on the
>> cabin top, primarily for aesthetics, so I'm planning on mounting them
>> side by side on a shelf on the firewall. This will make installation
>> and the cabling easier. The antennas don't require a ground plane as
>> best as I can tell. Mounting them in this location will make for a
>> shorter cable run and an easier installation. Anybody gone this
>> route? Feedback? I think I recall that Checkoway mounted one or more
>> antennas in this manner.
>>
>> Deems Davis # 406
>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
>> http://deemsrv10.com/
>>> *
>>>
>>> *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> |
Seems to be 2 preferred locations for the elt. One under the far aft
under the vertical stab and the other is in the tail cone near the
baggage compartment bulkhead on the right side. Vans has a mounting
kit, but it is easy to make your self. The rear location puts the
weight far aft, and has a short wire run to the antenna.
Some items to complete prior to closing up the final skin on the tail
would be,
Any battery box modifications based on the battery you will be using.
Pitch servo installation
Wire pulls for battery, rear light and strobe, etc.
Strobe power supply mounting
AHARS (if you are mounting it in the rear and not a wing)
Static port tubing runs
Just a short list, but a start.
Larry Rosen
#356
Rick Leach wrote:
>
> I sent this yesterday but may have had the wrong to address. If it is
> a duplicate, I apologize. I am just about ready to close up the top
> skin on the tail. Is there anything that anyone could recommend that
> I add to the tail or structure prior to putting on the top. As an
> example, Tim you have some good photos on your site where you added
> angle to support the AHRS. What about ELT installation, etc. I would
> love to see some pictures of any installations that might be
> beneficial to copy. Also, where is the best place for the ELT to go?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Rick Leach
>
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DejaVu" <wvu(at)ameritel.net> |
Guys,
Some pictures attached for your viewing after 9 months and 90hrs since firs
t flight.
Anh
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net> |
DeJa,
Nicely done! A beautiful paint scheme. You should be very proud.
Zack
--------
RV8 #80125
RV10 # 40512
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134653#134653
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground |
wire termination
Deems,
You have a pic of that in your RV-10, OSH pics...dry version. Wish we didn't have
a plane to catch that day. I could have spent hours combing over Rick's RV.
Rick S.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Deems Davis" <deemsdavis(at)cox.net>
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 8:13:59 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground
wire termination
Zack thanks for the pic of Ricks install. Larry, I think it's going to
be easier to do the firewall shelf. I just spent 60 minutes in the
garage and bent up some .032" and riveted it into a decent 'shelf'. I've
already got 4 bolts that hold the voltage regulators to the inside of
the firewall that I'll use to attach this to. One thing I didn't account
for is the slight forward cant of the upper part of the firewall so
there is a bit of a tilt to the shelf that I'll have to take out with
some shims/standoffs. The cable/antenna runs for the cabin top install
are problematic for me.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
Larry Rosen wrote:
>
> Have you considered mounting them under the cabin top, inside the
> Accuracy Avionics overhead console? I know there are two layers of
> fiberglass and a core, but that shouldn't interfere with the signals.
> (in my non expert opinion). Any thoughts?
>
> Larry Rosen
>
> Deems Davis wrote:
>>
>> With all this talk about antennas, I've got a question for the group.
>> I need to mount a XM weather antenna and an additional GPS antenna. I
>> already have the primary GPS mounted on the top of the tail cone aft
>> of the cabin top intersection. I am not keen on placing them on the
>> cabin top, primarily for aesthetics, so I'm planning on mounting them
>> side by side on a shelf on the firewall. This will make installation
>> and the cabling easier. The antennas don't require a ground plane as
>> best as I can tell. Mounting them in this location will make for a
>> shorter cable run and an easier installation. Anybody gone this
>> route? Feedback? I think I recall that Checkoway mounted one or more
>> antennas in this manner.
>>
>> Deems Davis # 406
>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
>> http://deemsrv10.com/
>>> *
>>>
>>> *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com> |
Interesting...
I know nothing about the incident but I actually know something
about this plane.
While at my home airport (SBP) in California I saw an RV-10
parked in our transient restaurant parking. I was very excited to see
one in person and it looked kinda nice from a distance. As I got closer
my opinion changed considerably. First the good news... The wheel pants,
gear legs and the panel were very nice. Now the rest of the story...
The fit & finish was about the worst I had ever seen on an RV.
The fit around the cowl was horrendous, with several different type
screws used with different type washers and the cowl screws were not in
a row, some were offset high and low. The baggage door was not aligned
well and there was filler between some metal pieces that was only
partially filled and partially left "mounded" then painted over. It
looked awful!. The wing tips were not cut back to match the trailing
edge of the ailerons. (I have not started that part of the build yet but
I understand they should line up).
By far the worst part and something I thought was a real danger
were the back sides of the fiberglass tips to the horizontal stabilizer.
They were left hollow, rough cut and very flexible. I was actually
horrified that this portion of the build was not completed. I could not
imagine that that was airworthy. As you can guess the fit of the doors
was not acceptable to me but they were not that far off. And of course
there was complete cracking around each window. I did end up taking some
detailed photos of the plane and keep them filed in my "RV Pictures"
folder under the file name "Ugly RV-10." I don't intend to be cruel but
the attention to detail was completely lacking and all that hard work of
construction was wasted by not spending 200-400 more hours on doing
things right. One of my first thoughts was if the appearance items look
this bad I wonder what it's like in places you don't easily see.
As I was finishing my photo shoot the owner came out from the
restaurant and we had the opportunity to chat. She was an older lady
(~65) that had purchased the plane from Alabama/Mississippi or the like.
She was based at Santa Paula Airport (SZP) about 70 miles south of me.
That day she was giving a hangar neighbor acquaintance of mine a ride to
SZP to pick up his beautiful Cessna 170 from service. I remember
thinking to myself... well at least the plane has two pilots onboard in
case there is an "issue."
Please note I do not wish to be malicious but the plane had
obvious flaws in craftsmanship. Like most incidents it's usually pilot
problems before plane problems.
Attached are some photos from the visit.
Robin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Leach" <papadaddyo(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
Very nice
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of DejaVu
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 12:03 AM
Subject: RV10-List: All Painted
Guys,
Some pictures attached for your viewing after 9 months and 90hrs since first
flight.
Anh
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Fiberglass and antenna placement |
John W. Cox wrote:
. Fiberglass is not transparent
to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is
only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also requires
your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier
potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you
need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence
John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have always
heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is a loss
due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a 'false
positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally? Both of
the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite based systems.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Max" <MaxHegler(at)msn.com> |
"Alabama/Mississippi or the like"???
If you don't know where she purchased it, I would leave statements like this
out of your comments. You insult the many careful, diligent builders in
those areas. I know of many great builders from "Alabama/Mississippi or the
like."
That said, it would have been good if you had been diligent enough to get
the exact location so no one else would be duped by a lousy builder.
Max
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 11:26 AM
Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Incident
"that had purchased the plane from Alabama/Mississippi or the like."
Robin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Incident |
This plane was built by John Nys who is in Texas. He has built several
RV-10's and is one of the 'build for hire' gang. He had a couple of his
plane @ OSH in '06 and they displayed the same workmanship issues noted
in Robins e-mail. He boasted to some that he could build a plane in 3
months. To be fair I understand that he also built/assisted in the
construction of Alex D.'s -10 which is cosmetically better.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
Max wrote:
>
> "Alabama/Mississippi or the like"???
>
> If you don't know where she purchased it, I would leave statements like this
> out of your comments. You insult the many careful, diligent builders in
> those areas. I know of many great builders from "Alabama/Mississippi or the
> like."
> That said, it would have been good if you had been diligent enough to get
> the exact location so no one else would be duped by a lousy builder.
>
> Max
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks
> Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 11:26 AM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Incident
>
> "that had purchased the plane from Alabama/Mississippi or the like."
>
> Robin
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James Hein <n8vim(at)arrl.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement |
I am an extra-class ham radio operator, so here's my opinion:
Most fiberglass is relatively transparent to RF. Glass cloth and epoxy
don't attenuate RF much more than dust. If you put in carbon fiber, or
other additives then the situation changes.
The biggest issues typically are actually getting 1) a good ground
plane, and 2) good seperation from nearby antennas and other parallel
pieces of metal which can cause an impedance mismatch.
I have several antennas on top of my tower which are actually *encased*
in fiberglass.
Want a cheap tool for analyzing your antenna installation? Here's what I
use (a bit overkill for the aviation band):
http://www.mfjenterprises.com/products.php?prodid=MFJ-269
-Jim 40384
Deems Davis wrote:
>
>
> John W. Cox wrote:
>
> . Fiberglass is not transparent
> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is
> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also requires
> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier
> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you
> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence
>
> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have
> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is
> a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a
> 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally?
> Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite
> based systems.
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground |
wire termination
John W. Cox wrote:
>
> I understand you guys (Deems, Zack and Rick) are having an "offline
> party discussion" but can you share the photos of Rick's OSH aircraft
> for everyone? The suspense can be fatal.
No offline discussion going on John, Zack sent a pic. which was posted
to the list and Rick pointed out to me that I already had a similar copy
of it on my web site:
http://deemsrv10.com/album/OSHKOSH%202007/RV-10's/slides/DSC_0419.html.
page forward and back to see the rest of Rick's plane.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement |
James, Thanks for the feedback, Here's another naive question: In your
opinion would the heat which exists in the engine compartment adversely
affect the performance of these satellited antennas?
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
James Hein wrote:
>
> I am an extra-class ham radio operator, so here's my opinion:
>
> Most fiberglass is relatively transparent to RF. Glass cloth and epoxy
> don't attenuate RF much more than dust. If you put in carbon fiber, or
> other additives then the situation changes.
>
> The biggest issues typically are actually getting 1) a good ground
> plane, and 2) good seperation from nearby antennas and other parallel
> pieces of metal which can cause an impedance mismatch.
>
> I have several antennas on top of my tower which are actually
> *encased* in fiberglass.
>
> Want a cheap tool for analyzing your antenna installation? Here's what
> I use (a bit overkill for the aviation band):
> http://www.mfjenterprises.com/products.php?prodid=MFJ-269
>
> -Jim 40384
>
> Deems Davis wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> John W. Cox wrote:
>>
>> . Fiberglass is not transparent
>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is
>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also requires
>> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier
>> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you
>> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence
>>
>> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have
>> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is
>> a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a
>> 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally?
>> Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite
>> based systems.
>>
>> Deems Davis # 406
>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
>> http://deemsrv10.com/
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement |
I've always taken antenna reception quality as THE #1 reason to choose
an antenna or mounting location....especially important if you're
shooting for the same quality as a "certified" installation. I never
understood why as experimental builders, who build planes that we pride
as being built "better than factory", anyone would build absolutely
sub-standard to all of the advice by manufacturers regarding their
installation requirements....on purpose, no less. The fact that someone
would bother to hem and haw about a WAAS GPS antenna no less, really
makes me wonder, as the amount of drag off a small wart of an antenna
is way less than if you were talking about a Nav or Com antenna, and the
signal you're trying to receive is EXTREMELY faint in comparison.
Here's something I dug up recently:
http://www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/Dual%20Benefit/warner_gps_spoofing.html
"The GPS signal strength measured at the surface of the Earth is about
160dBw (1 x 1016 watts), which is roughly equivalent to viewing a
25-watt light bulb from a distance of 10,000 miles. This weak signal can
easily be blocked by destroying or shielding the GPS receivers antenna.
The GPS signal can also be effectively jammed by a signal of a similar
frequency but greater strength. "
So then think about the many electrical noise causing things in an
airplane....probably one of the loudest of which would be the spark
plugs and ignition system. And then to choose to actually mount
the antennas CLOSER to those items? I mean, I've seen TV's get
scrambled signals when a snowmobile drove by the house years
ago....not that the plane is going to be as poor, but we're
*really* talking some tiny electrical signals with GPS...and sorry, but
if someone even thinks they're going to pass by on flying ILS and VOR
approaches and instead favor trusting a WAAS approach, why sacrifice?
If they're going to sacrifice that, then why bother to look at the
actual LPV-spec GPS units in the first place....just fly them with
an autopilot or EFIS driven by a 396. (and no, I'm not REALLY
endorsing that thinking)
http://www.nap.edu/html/embedded_everywhere/ch2_b8.html
"What makes GPS reception difficult is that radio frequency (RF) signals
from the satellites are very weak. Special coding is used to allow
receivers to detect these weak signals, but even with coding, GPS
receivers generally work only if they have a direct line of sight to the
satellites. Performance inside buildings or in an area covered by
foliage is generally quite poor"
http://www.wowinfo.com/gps/gps/chapter2n3.htm
"This is an extremely low-powered systemso low-powered, in fact, that
the signal is really buried in the natural background radio noise. The
receiver recovers this weak signal from the satellites by using
spread-spectrum communication technology, a very tricky concept in
communication theory that works by means of pseudo-random codes."
http://www.dot.nd.gov/manuals/surveymanual/gps-operations.pdf
"Youd think that with all of these radio waves raining down on us from
dozens of satellites in space
wed all glow in the dark. Actually, the strength of the GPS signal is
very small, equivalent to the tail
light of a car seen from 2,500 kilometers away-halfway across the U.S.!
Weaker, in fact, than the
ordinary background radio noise thats all around us all of the time."
So then thinking about laying it underneath fiberglass, my thought is:
"Well, if fiberglass is transparent to GPS, then how many layers are
transparent to the GPS. Can you put it under 1/16", 1/8", 1", 5"?
At what point do you decide you've hidden the GPS from it enough?"
And, if it's under a cowl, or at some other point not mounted
horizontally with a full view of the sky in all directions, then
which of the available satellites that are now unavailable are you
happy to just toss aside from shadowing due to poor mounting? So
some of them aren't worth seeing.
I understand the love of building a cosmetically pleasing airplane, but
to sacrifice life-saving avionics signals really makes me wonder. And
nothing against Dan Checkoway, but it's amazing how one person's good
experience with a poor mounting choice can spread to such a universal
acceptance of the idea. It might be better to bounce mounting
and location questions off the antenna makers and companies like Garmin
and see how far they're willing to stick their neck out with an answer.
If it were harmless, they'd have no reason to avoid giving the advice.
I've had many phone calls to Comant and questions to other antenna
makers throughout the build, which in the end mostly just led me to
try to be as "conventional" as possible to attempt the same
reliability as the certified planes could have.
Now, if someone was building a VFR only airplane, I'd say "heck yeah,
may as well give it a try".
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
Deems Davis wrote:
>
>
> John W. Cox wrote:
>
> . Fiberglass is not transparent
> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is
> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also requires
> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier
> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you
> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence
>
> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have always
> heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is a loss
> due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a 'false
> positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally? Both of
> the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite based systems.
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James Hein <n8vim(at)arrl.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement |
The heat in the engine compartment would affect the antennas somewhat.
Why?
1. Matching components (if used - capacitors and/or inductors) values
will change with regard to temperature
2. Coax dielectric will soften, allowing the center conductor to migrate
closer to the shield over time, changing the impedance of the coax,
reducing performance.
In reality, #1 probably doesn't amount to much difference at all due to
the small values involved, but #2 needs to be protected against (heat
shield, etc.)
-Jim 40384
Deems Davis wrote:
>
> James, Thanks for the feedback, Here's another naive question: In your
> opinion would the heat which exists in the engine compartment
> adversely affect the performance of these satellited antennas?
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>
> James Hein wrote:
>
>>
>> I am an extra-class ham radio operator, so here's my opinion:
>>
>> Most fiberglass is relatively transparent to RF. Glass cloth and
>> epoxy don't attenuate RF much more than dust. If you put in carbon
>> fiber, or other additives then the situation changes.
>>
>> The biggest issues typically are actually getting 1) a good ground
>> plane, and 2) good seperation from nearby antennas and other parallel
>> pieces of metal which can cause an impedance mismatch.
>>
>> I have several antennas on top of my tower which are actually
>> *encased* in fiberglass.
>>
>> Want a cheap tool for analyzing your antenna installation? Here's
>> what I use (a bit overkill for the aviation band):
>> http://www.mfjenterprises.com/products.php?prodid=MFJ-269
>>
>> -Jim 40384
>>
>> Deems Davis wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> John W. Cox wrote:
>>>
>>> . Fiberglass is not transparent
>>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is
>>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also
>>> requires
>>> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier
>>> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you
>>> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence
>>>
>>> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have
>>> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there
>>> is a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is
>>> a 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums
>>> equally? Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are
>>> satellite based systems.
>>>
>>> Deems Davis # 406
>>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
>>> http://deemsrv10.com/
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pascal" <rv10builder(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 Incident |
and to think I worry if a rivet incorrectly squeezed will be a problem!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 9:25 AM
Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Incident
Interesting...
I know nothing about the incident but I actually know something
about this plane.
While at my home airport (SBP) in California I saw an RV-10
parked in our transient restaurant parking. I was very excited to see
one in person and it looked kinda nice from a distance. As I got closer
my opinion changed considerably. First the good news... The wheel pants,
gear legs and the panel were very nice. Now the rest of the story...
The fit & finish was about the worst I had ever seen on an RV.
The fit around the cowl was horrendous, with several different type
screws used with different type washers and the cowl screws were not in
a row, some were offset high and low. The baggage door was not aligned
well and there was filler between some metal pieces that was only
partially filled and partially left "mounded" then painted over. It
looked awful!. The wing tips were not cut back to match the trailing
edge of the ailerons. (I have not started that part of the build yet but
I understand they should line up).
By far the worst part and something I thought was a real danger
were the back sides of the fiberglass tips to the horizontal stabilizer.
They were left hollow, rough cut and very flexible. I was actually
horrified that this portion of the build was not completed. I could not
imagine that that was airworthy. As you can guess the fit of the doors
was not acceptable to me but they were not that far off. And of course
there was complete cracking around each window. I did end up taking some
detailed photos of the plane and keep them filed in my "RV Pictures"
folder under the file name "Ugly RV-10." I don't intend to be cruel but
the attention to detail was completely lacking and all that hard work of
construction was wasted by not spending 200-400 more hours on doing
things right. One of my first thoughts was if the appearance items look
this bad I wonder what it's like in places you don't easily see.
As I was finishing my photo shoot the owner came out from the
restaurant and we had the opportunity to chat. She was an older lady
(~65) that had purchased the plane from Alabama/Mississippi or the like.
She was based at Santa Paula Airport (SZP) about 70 miles south of me.
That day she was giving a hangar neighbor acquaintance of mine a ride to
SZP to pick up his beautiful Cessna 170 from service. I remember
thinking to myself... well at least the plane has two pilots onboard in
case there is an "issue."
Please note I do not wish to be malicious but the plane had
obvious flaws in craftsmanship. Like most incidents it's usually pilot
problems before plane problems.
Attached are some photos from the visit.
Robin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric_Kallio" <scout019(at)msn.com> |
Uncle Sam saw fit to send for some training for a few weeks and upon my return
I found my hanger infested with spiders. I HATE spiders!!!! But I spent all day
stomping and spraying and taking back my hanger and cleaning the exterior of
my parts. I am back to preventative spraying of the perimeter to keep them from
returning. My question is, does anyone know of a a non-corrosive fogger that
is safe to use around airplane parts? My interior is primed but with plenty
of untreated aluminum I am still very cautious about what I spray around my parts.
I am concerned that there may be more spiders in my wings and my tail control
surfaces.
Eric Kallio
40518 Upper forward fuse
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134720#134720
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Masys <dmasys(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Performance data |
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Bad battery/bad experience
> From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com>
>
> Okay Dan, It's been weeks and weeks since OSH '07 and almost months.
> Your flyoff hours were done in record time as I remember. Now we are
> all interested In the service ceiling, cruise at 8,500 MSL, climb rate
> and fuel consumption numbers. Just how is it going or was there a
> problem? This is not like you.
>
> John Cox
I know this was directed at the other Dan who got his fly-off done in a week in
order to get to OSH, but I did the same with my "PORV10" - Plain Ole RV10"
with box stock new Lycoming IO-540 and Hartzell CS prop. So here are my numbers:
Service ceiling: only tested to 17.5 K and airplane was climbing at 400 fpm between
17K and 17.5K. Handles really well up there, indicating 120 Kts and doing
165 KTAS.
Cruise at 8500: 172 KTAS at 13.5 gph. Interesting thing is it will reliably deliver
168-170 KTAS at 13,000-14,000 ft at best power settings, which makes it
a great platform for climbing up to the middle altitudes to get better winds.
Climb rate: exactly Vans numbers or slightly better at middle and gross weights.
With the stock Lycoming using magnetos, both CHTs and oil temps stay in acceptable
limits on protracted best rate climbs (after I removed the air dams from
both sides of the front cylinders).
This is one really fine airplane!
-Dan Masys
N104LD - 42 SNEW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement |
OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how much
attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed anywhere
in your clips, and still remains. The specified/recommended Commant
Antenna for the HeadsUP XM Weather receiver (used in Avidyne
installations in certified Cirrus 's) comes configured with a gain of
30-34 db. The receiver itself is preset to expect a gain of 22db
(+/-2db). The installation manual actually _recommends/requires_ some
additional attenuation and provides a formula for figuring the amount
available through several different types and lengths (feet & yards) of
coax. Turns out that you need quite a bit of coax to get it down to the
22db range (17-58 ' depending on type of coax) Alternatively you may
use a DC bias passing attenuator in line with the cable itself. (my
choice). The only caution from the mfg about placement was to keep it
away from transmitting antennas, (min 36's").
If, as James suggests, the fiberglass (1/16 - 3/32") of the cowl is not
an issue in signal loss, and there are no other blocking restrictions,
then why criticize someone who wants to make the installation
cosmetically attractive as well? the vast majority of the 396/496
Garmins w/ weather are flying with glareshield mounted antennas with the
same issues.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
Tim Olson wrote:
>
> I've always taken antenna reception quality as THE #1 reason to choose
> an antenna or mounting location....especially important if you're
> shooting for the same quality as a "certified" installation. I never
> understood why as experimental builders, who build planes that we pride
> as being built "better than factory", anyone would build absolutely
> sub-standard to all of the advice by manufacturers regarding their
> installation requirements....on purpose, no less. The fact that someone
> would bother to hem and haw about a WAAS GPS antenna no less, really
> makes me wonder, as the amount of drag off a small wart of an antenna
> is way less than if you were talking about a Nav or Com antenna, and the
> signal you're trying to receive is EXTREMELY faint in comparison.
>
> Here's something I dug up recently:
> http://www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/Dual%20Benefit/warner_gps_spoofing.html
>
>
> "The GPS signal strength measured at the surface of the Earth is about
> 160dBw (1 x 1016 watts), which is roughly equivalent to viewing a
> 25-watt light bulb from a distance of 10,000 miles. This weak signal
> can easily be blocked by destroying or shielding the GPS receivers
> antenna. The GPS signal can also be effectively jammed by a signal of
> a similar frequency but greater strength. "
>
> So then think about the many electrical noise causing things in an
> airplane....probably one of the loudest of which would be the spark
> plugs and ignition system. And then to choose to actually mount
> the antennas CLOSER to those items? I mean, I've seen TV's get
> scrambled signals when a snowmobile drove by the house years
> ago....not that the plane is going to be as poor, but we're
> *really* talking some tiny electrical signals with GPS...and sorry, but
> if someone even thinks they're going to pass by on flying ILS and VOR
> approaches and instead favor trusting a WAAS approach, why sacrifice?
> If they're going to sacrifice that, then why bother to look at the
> actual LPV-spec GPS units in the first place....just fly them with
> an autopilot or EFIS driven by a 396. (and no, I'm not REALLY
> endorsing that thinking)
>
>
> http://www.nap.edu/html/embedded_everywhere/ch2_b8.html
> "What makes GPS reception difficult is that radio frequency (RF)
> signals from the satellites are very weak. Special coding is used to
> allow receivers to detect these weak signals, but even with coding,
> GPS receivers generally work only if they have a direct line of sight
> to the satellites. Performance inside buildings or in an area covered
> by foliage is generally quite poor"
>
> http://www.wowinfo.com/gps/gps/chapter2n3.htm
> "This is an extremely low-powered systemso low-powered, in fact, that
> the signal is really buried in the natural background radio noise. The
> receiver recovers this weak signal from the satellites by using
> spread-spectrum communication technology, a very tricky concept in
> communication theory that works by means of pseudo-random codes."
>
> http://www.dot.nd.gov/manuals/surveymanual/gps-operations.pdf
> "Youd think that with all of these radio waves raining down on us
> from dozens of satellites in space
> wed all glow in the dark. Actually, the strength of the GPS signal is
> very small, equivalent to the tail
> light of a car seen from 2,500 kilometers away-halfway across the
> U.S.! Weaker, in fact, than the
> ordinary background radio noise thats all around us all of the time."
>
>
> So then thinking about laying it underneath fiberglass, my thought is:
> "Well, if fiberglass is transparent to GPS, then how many layers are
> transparent to the GPS. Can you put it under 1/16", 1/8", 1", 5"?
> At what point do you decide you've hidden the GPS from it enough?"
>
> And, if it's under a cowl, or at some other point not mounted
> horizontally with a full view of the sky in all directions, then
> which of the available satellites that are now unavailable are you
> happy to just toss aside from shadowing due to poor mounting? So
> some of them aren't worth seeing.
>
> I understand the love of building a cosmetically pleasing airplane, but
> to sacrifice life-saving avionics signals really makes me wonder. And
> nothing against Dan Checkoway, but it's amazing how one person's good
> experience with a poor mounting choice can spread to such a universal
> acceptance of the idea. It might be better to bounce mounting
> and location questions off the antenna makers and companies like Garmin
> and see how far they're willing to stick their neck out with an answer.
> If it were harmless, they'd have no reason to avoid giving the advice.
> I've had many phone calls to Comant and questions to other antenna
> makers throughout the build, which in the end mostly just led me to
> try to be as "conventional" as possible to attempt the same
> reliability as the certified planes could have.
>
> Now, if someone was building a VFR only airplane, I'd say "heck yeah,
> may as well give it a try".
>
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
>
> Deems Davis wrote:
>>
>>
>> John W. Cox wrote:
>>
>> . Fiberglass is not transparent
>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is
>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also requires
>> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier
>> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you
>> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence
>>
>> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have
>> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is
>> a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a
>> 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally?
>> Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite
>> based systems.
>>
>> Deems Davis # 406
>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
>> http://deemsrv10.com/
>>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | wiring runs and aC43.13-1B Chapter 11-Section 11-clamping |
| From: | "tomhanaway" <tomhanaway(at)adelphia.net> |
I see most builders run their wing wiring through the grommets in the wings and
in the side panels. Especially where surrounded by conduit. Makes sense to me.
I'm trying to figure out Section 11 of "acceptable methods" Aircraft Inspection,
Repair and Alterations which seems to call for a cushion clamp even when running
through a grommet where the wires are less than 3/8" from the hole edge.
Could someone give me some guidance.
Thanks,
Tom Hanaway
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134733#134733
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fiberglass and antenna placement |
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
Now you guys are getting with the program. Coax length, inline
connectors, combiners, splitters and fiberglas thickness equate to db
signal losses.
John #600
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 3:48 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement
OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how much
attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed anywhere
in your clips, and still remains. The specified/recommended Commant
Antenna for the HeadsUP XM Weather receiver (used in Avidyne
installations in certified Cirrus 's) comes configured with a gain of
30-34 db. The receiver itself is preset to expect a gain of 22db
(+/-2db). The installation manual actually _recommends/requires_ some
additional attenuation and provides a formula for figuring the amount
available through several different types and lengths (feet & yards) of
coax. Turns out that you need quite a bit of coax to get it down to the
22db range (17-58 ' depending on type of coax) Alternatively you may
use a DC bias passing attenuator in line with the cable itself. (my
choice). The only caution from the mfg about placement was to keep it
away from transmitting antennas, (min 36's").
If, as James suggests, the fiberglass (1/16 - 3/32") of the cowl is not
an issue in signal loss, and there are no other blocking restrictions,
then why criticize someone who wants to make the installation
cosmetically attractive as well? the vast majority of the 396/496
Garmins w/ weather are flying with glareshield mounted antennas with the
same issues.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
Tim Olson wrote:
>
> I've always taken antenna reception quality as THE #1 reason to choose
> an antenna or mounting location....especially important if you're
> shooting for the same quality as a "certified" installation. I never
> understood why as experimental builders, who build planes that we
pride
> as being built "better than factory", anyone would build absolutely
> sub-standard to all of the advice by manufacturers regarding their
> installation requirements....on purpose, no less. The fact that
someone
> would bother to hem and haw about a WAAS GPS antenna no less, really
> makes me wonder, as the amount of drag off a small wart of an antenna
> is way less than if you were talking about a Nav or Com antenna, and
the
> signal you're trying to receive is EXTREMELY faint in comparison.
>
> Here's something I dug up recently:
>
http://www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/Dual%20Benefit/warner_gps_spoof
ing.html
>
>
> "The GPS signal strength measured at the surface of the Earth is about
> -160dBw (1 x 10-16 watts), which is roughly equivalent to viewing a
> 25-watt light bulb from a distance of 10,000 miles. This weak signal
> can easily be blocked by destroying or shielding the GPS receiver's
> antenna. The GPS signal can also be effectively jammed by a signal of
> a similar frequency but greater strength. "
>
> So then think about the many electrical noise causing things in an
> airplane....probably one of the loudest of which would be the spark
> plugs and ignition system. And then to choose to actually mount
> the antennas CLOSER to those items? I mean, I've seen TV's get
> scrambled signals when a snowmobile drove by the house years
> ago....not that the plane is going to be as poor, but we're
> *really* talking some tiny electrical signals with GPS...and sorry,
but
> if someone even thinks they're going to pass by on flying ILS and VOR
> approaches and instead favor trusting a WAAS approach, why sacrifice?
> If they're going to sacrifice that, then why bother to look at the
> actual LPV-spec GPS units in the first place....just fly them with
> an autopilot or EFIS driven by a 396. (and no, I'm not REALLY
> endorsing that thinking)
>
>
> http://www.nap.edu/html/embedded_everywhere/ch2_b8.html
> "What makes GPS reception difficult is that radio frequency (RF)
> signals from the satellites are very weak. Special coding is used to
> allow receivers to detect these weak signals, but even with coding,
> GPS receivers generally work only if they have a direct line of sight
> to the satellites. Performance inside buildings or in an area covered
> by foliage is generally quite poor"
>
> http://www.wowinfo.com/gps/gps/chapter2n3.htm
> "This is an extremely low-powered system-so low-powered, in fact, that
> the signal is really buried in the natural background radio noise. The
> receiver recovers this weak signal from the satellites by using
> spread-spectrum communication technology, a very tricky concept in
> communication theory that works by means of pseudo-random codes."
>
> http://www.dot.nd.gov/manuals/surveymanual/gps-operations.pdf
> "You'd think that with all of these radio waves raining down on us
> from dozens of satellites in space
> we'd all glow in the dark. Actually, the strength of the GPS signal is
> very small, equivalent to the tail
> light of a car seen from 2,500 kilometers away-halfway across the
> U.S.! Weaker, in fact, than the
> ordinary background radio noise that's all around us all of the time."
>
>
> So then thinking about laying it underneath fiberglass, my thought is:
> "Well, if fiberglass is transparent to GPS, then how many layers are
> transparent to the GPS. Can you put it under 1/16", 1/8", 1", 5"?
> At what point do you decide you've hidden the GPS from it enough?"
>
> And, if it's under a cowl, or at some other point not mounted
> horizontally with a full view of the sky in all directions, then
> which of the available satellites that are now unavailable are you
> happy to just toss aside from shadowing due to poor mounting? So
> some of them aren't worth seeing.
>
> I understand the love of building a cosmetically pleasing airplane,
but
> to sacrifice life-saving avionics signals really makes me wonder. And
> nothing against Dan Checkoway, but it's amazing how one person's good
> experience with a poor mounting choice can spread to such a universal
> acceptance of the idea. It might be better to bounce mounting
> and location questions off the antenna makers and companies like
Garmin
> and see how far they're willing to stick their neck out with an
answer.
> If it were harmless, they'd have no reason to avoid giving the advice.
> I've had many phone calls to Comant and questions to other antenna
> makers throughout the build, which in the end mostly just led me to
> try to be as "conventional" as possible to attempt the same
> reliability as the certified planes could have.
>
> Now, if someone was building a VFR only airplane, I'd say "heck yeah,
> may as well give it a try".
>
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
>
> Deems Davis wrote:
>>
>>
>> John W. Cox wrote:
>>
>> . Fiberglass is not transparent
>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is
>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also
requires
>> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier
>> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you
>> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence
>>
>> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have
>> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is
>> a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a
>> 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally?
>> Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite
>> based systems.
>>
>> Deems Davis # 406
>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
>> http://deemsrv10.com/
>>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! |
| From: | "Chris Johnston" <CJohnston(at)popsound.com> |
yay! while we're arguing about stuff... could you guys argue about this
for me so i can decide? i'm trying to decide on some less leaky inner
tubes, and i think it's between Desser's "leak guard", and Michelin's
"airstop". what say you all? and is it reasonably self-explanatory to
order the right size inner tube? is it possible for me to screw it up?
cj
#40410
fuse/finishing
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement |
OK, I just redesigned my antenna installation : atop a 5 foot tall
pylon, made of spaceage transpardium mounted in the exact center/top
point of the cabin cover, equipped with a gyro stabilized gimble that
ensures stability of the antenna in all unusual attitudes.
I'm out of here
John W. Cox wrote:
>
> Now you guys are getting with the program. Coax length, inline
> connectors, combiners, splitters and fiberglas thickness equate to db
> signal losses.
>
> John #600
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
> Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 3:48 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement
>
>
> OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how much
> attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed anywhere
> in your clips, and still remains. The specified/recommended Commant
> Antenna for the HeadsUP XM Weather receiver (used in Avidyne
> installations in certified Cirrus 's) comes configured with a gain of
> 30-34 db. The receiver itself is preset to expect a gain of 22db
> (+/-2db). The installation manual actually _recommends/requires_ some
> additional attenuation and provides a formula for figuring the amount
> available through several different types and lengths (feet & yards) of
>
> coax. Turns out that you need quite a bit of coax to get it down to the
>
> 22db range (17-58 ' depending on type of coax) Alternatively you may
> use a DC bias passing attenuator in line with the cable itself. (my
> choice). The only caution from the mfg about placement was to keep it
> away from transmitting antennas, (min 36's").
>
> If, as James suggests, the fiberglass (1/16 - 3/32") of the cowl is not
> an issue in signal loss, and there are no other blocking restrictions,
> then why criticize someone who wants to make the installation
> cosmetically attractive as well? the vast majority of the 396/496
> Garmins w/ weather are flying with glareshield mounted antennas with the
>
> same issues.
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>
> Tim Olson wrote:
>
>>
>> I've always taken antenna reception quality as THE #1 reason to choose
>> an antenna or mounting location....especially important if you're
>> shooting for the same quality as a "certified" installation. I never
>> understood why as experimental builders, who build planes that we
>>
> pride
>
>> as being built "better than factory", anyone would build absolutely
>> sub-standard to all of the advice by manufacturers regarding their
>> installation requirements....on purpose, no less. The fact that
>>
> someone
>
>> would bother to hem and haw about a WAAS GPS antenna no less, really
>> makes me wonder, as the amount of drag off a small wart of an antenna
>> is way less than if you were talking about a Nav or Com antenna, and
>>
> the
>
>> signal you're trying to receive is EXTREMELY faint in comparison.
>>
>> Here's something I dug up recently:
>>
>>
> http://www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/Dual%20Benefit/warner_gps_spoof
> ing.html
>
>> "The GPS signal strength measured at the surface of the Earth is about
>>
>
>
>> -160dBw (1 x 10-16 watts), which is roughly equivalent to viewing a
>> 25-watt light bulb from a distance of 10,000 miles. This weak signal
>> can easily be blocked by destroying or shielding the GPS receiver's
>> antenna. The GPS signal can also be effectively jammed by a signal of
>> a similar frequency but greater strength. "
>>
>> So then think about the many electrical noise causing things in an
>> airplane....probably one of the loudest of which would be the spark
>> plugs and ignition system. And then to choose to actually mount
>> the antennas CLOSER to those items? I mean, I've seen TV's get
>> scrambled signals when a snowmobile drove by the house years
>> ago....not that the plane is going to be as poor, but we're
>> *really* talking some tiny electrical signals with GPS...and sorry,
>>
> but
>
>> if someone even thinks they're going to pass by on flying ILS and VOR
>> approaches and instead favor trusting a WAAS approach, why sacrifice?
>> If they're going to sacrifice that, then why bother to look at the
>> actual LPV-spec GPS units in the first place....just fly them with
>> an autopilot or EFIS driven by a 396. (and no, I'm not REALLY
>> endorsing that thinking)
>>
>>
>> http://www.nap.edu/html/embedded_everywhere/ch2_b8.html
>> "What makes GPS reception difficult is that radio frequency (RF)
>> signals from the satellites are very weak. Special coding is used to
>> allow receivers to detect these weak signals, but even with coding,
>> GPS receivers generally work only if they have a direct line of sight
>> to the satellites. Performance inside buildings or in an area covered
>> by foliage is generally quite poor"
>>
>> http://www.wowinfo.com/gps/gps/chapter2n3.htm
>> "This is an extremely low-powered system-so low-powered, in fact, that
>>
>
>
>> the signal is really buried in the natural background radio noise. The
>>
>
>
>> receiver recovers this weak signal from the satellites by using
>> spread-spectrum communication technology, a very tricky concept in
>> communication theory that works by means of pseudo-random codes."
>>
>> http://www.dot.nd.gov/manuals/surveymanual/gps-operations.pdf
>> "You'd think that with all of these radio waves raining down on us
>> from dozens of satellites in space
>> we'd all glow in the dark. Actually, the strength of the GPS signal is
>>
>
>
>> very small, equivalent to the tail
>> light of a car seen from 2,500 kilometers away-halfway across the
>> U.S.! Weaker, in fact, than the
>> ordinary background radio noise that's all around us all of the time."
>>
>>
>> So then thinking about laying it underneath fiberglass, my thought is:
>> "Well, if fiberglass is transparent to GPS, then how many layers are
>> transparent to the GPS. Can you put it under 1/16", 1/8", 1", 5"?
>> At what point do you decide you've hidden the GPS from it enough?"
>>
>> And, if it's under a cowl, or at some other point not mounted
>> horizontally with a full view of the sky in all directions, then
>> which of the available satellites that are now unavailable are you
>> happy to just toss aside from shadowing due to poor mounting? So
>> some of them aren't worth seeing.
>>
>> I understand the love of building a cosmetically pleasing airplane,
>>
> but
>
>> to sacrifice life-saving avionics signals really makes me wonder. And
>> nothing against Dan Checkoway, but it's amazing how one person's good
>> experience with a poor mounting choice can spread to such a universal
>> acceptance of the idea. It might be better to bounce mounting
>> and location questions off the antenna makers and companies like
>>
> Garmin
>
>> and see how far they're willing to stick their neck out with an
>>
> answer.
>
>> If it were harmless, they'd have no reason to avoid giving the advice.
>> I've had many phone calls to Comant and questions to other antenna
>> makers throughout the build, which in the end mostly just led me to
>> try to be as "conventional" as possible to attempt the same
>> reliability as the certified planes could have.
>>
>> Now, if someone was building a VFR only airplane, I'd say "heck yeah,
>> may as well give it a try".
>>
>>
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>>
>>
>>
>> Deems Davis wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> John W. Cox wrote:
>>>
>>> . Fiberglass is not transparent
>>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is
>>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also
>>>
> requires
>
>>> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier
>>> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you
>>> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence
>>>
>>> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have
>>> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is
>>>
>
>
>>> a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a
>>> 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally?
>>> Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite
>>> based systems.
>>>
>>> Deems Davis # 406
>>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
>>> http://deemsrv10.com/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground wi |
| From: | "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net> |
[quote="AV8ORJWC"]I understand you guys (Deems, Zack and Rick) are having an "offline
party discussion" but can you share the photos of Rick's OSH aircraft
for everyone? The suspense can be fatal.
OK John,
Here some shots I took of Rick's plane at OSH. You can also view more at the
link below.
Zack
http://rickygray.myphotoalbum.com/view_album.php?set_albumName=album04
--------
RV8 #80125
RV10 # 40512
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134752#134752
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08295_126.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08294_194.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08232_101.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08228_147.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08222_182.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08221_962.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc08220_797.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! |
Just fill it with nitrogen and forget about it.
Bob K
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Johnston
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 4:53 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
yay! while we're arguing about stuff... could you guys argue about this for
me so i can decide? i'm trying to decide on some less leaky inner tubes,
and i think it's between Desser's "leak guard", and Michelin's "airstop".
what say you all? and is it reasonably self-explanatory to order the right
size inner tube? is it possible for me to screw it up?
cj
#40410
fuse/finishing
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! |
Michelin all the way...they hold air best of any tube I have ever seen and worht
the extra dollars. Being cheap I'm going to swap mine out at the first tire
change.
Rick S.
40185
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Johnston" <CJohnston(at)popsound.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 5:52:45 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
yay! while we're arguing about stuff... could you guys argue about this for me
so i can decide? i'm trying to decide on some less leaky inner tubes, and i
think it's between Desser's "leak guard", and Michelin's "airstop". what say
you all? and is it reasonably self-explanatory to order the right size inner
tube? is it possible for me to screw it up?
cj
#40410
fuse/finishing
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
Also TruTrak's -10.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 12:37 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: RV-10 Incident
This plane was built by John Nys who is in Texas. He has built several
RV-10's and is one of the 'build for hire' gang. He had a couple of his
plane @ OSH in '06 and they displayed the same workmanship issues noted
in Robins e-mail. He boasted to some that he could build a plane in 3
months. To be fair I understand that he also built/assisted in the
construction of Alex D.'s -10 which is cosmetically better.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
Max wrote:
>
> "Alabama/Mississippi or the like"???
>
> If you don't know where she purchased it, I would leave statements like this
> out of your comments. You insult the many careful, diligent builders in
> those areas. I know of many great builders from "Alabama/Mississippi or the
> like."
> That said, it would have been good if you had been diligent enough to get
> the exact location so no one else would be duped by a lousy builder.
>
> Max
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks
> Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 11:26 AM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Incident
>
> "that had purchased the plane from Alabama/Mississippi or the like."
>
> Robin
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
John is in the Tulsa area.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Max
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 12:24 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: RV-10 Incident
"Alabama/Mississippi or the like"???
If you don't know where she purchased it, I would leave statements like this
out of your comments. You insult the many careful, diligent builders in
those areas. I know of many great builders from "Alabama/Mississippi or the
like."
That said, it would have been good if you had been diligent enough to get
the exact location so no one else would be duped by a lousy builder.
Max
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 11:26 AM
Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 Incident
"that had purchased the plane from Alabama/Mississippi or the like."
Robin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! |
Sorry buddy but although nitrogen molecules are larger than good ol' 79/19 % air
mixture you still will get leak down from a cheap tube, now nitrogen for stability
and moisture free is a different story. Use nitrogen in your Michelins
and your gonna be hard pressed to beat the combo but changing air temps will still
cause fluctuation of tire pressures so you can't just "forget about it"
Rick S.
40185
----- Original Message -----
From: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann(at)cox.net>
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 6:32:18 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Just fill it with nitrogen and forget about it.
Bob K
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Johnston
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 4:53 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
yay! while we're arguing about stuff... could you guys argue about this for
me so i can decide? i'm trying to decide on some less leaky inner tubes,
and i think it's between Desser's "leak guard", and Michelin's "airstop".
what say you all? and is it reasonably self-explanatory to order the right
size inner tube? is it possible for me to screw it up?
cj
#40410
fuse/finishing
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! |
Just my experience: 3 Desser leakguards. Mains are great, add air maybe
every 6 months. Nose tube...no such ruck. Leaks worse than the standard tube
previously there..have to add air every month.
On 9/16/07, Chris Johnston wrote:
>
> yay! while we're arguing about stuff... could you guys argue about this
> for me so i can decide? i'm trying to decide on some less leaky inner
> tubes, and i think it's between Desser's "leak guard", and Michelin's
> "airstop". what say you all? and is it reasonably self-explanatory to
> order the right size inner tube? is it possible for me to screw it up?
>
> cj
> #40410
> fuse/finishing
> www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Indran Chelvanayagam <dc71(at)netspace.net.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement |
After a real world test of holding a handheld GPS under the
On 17/09/2007, at 6:47 AM, Deems Davis wrote:
>
> OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how
> much attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed
> anywhere in your clips, and still remains.
>>> John W. Cox wrote:
>>>
>>> . Fiberglass is not transparent
>>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is
>>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Indran Chelvanayagam <dc71(at)netspace.net.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement |
After a real world test of holding a handheld GPS under the cabin top
then the cowl while watching the Satellite signal strength page, I'm
convinced that there is some attenuation from fibreglass - whether
it's significant or not is up to the individual builder. Personally I
have installed my antennae outside the cabin top.
Indran
On 17/09/2007, at 6:47 AM, Deems Davis wrote:
>
> OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how
> much attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed
> anywhere in your clips, and still remains.
>
>>> John W. Cox wrote:
>>>
>>> . Fiberglass is not transparent
>>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is
>>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance.
>>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Retractable Seat Belt Question |
| From: | "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com> |
I have a Retractable Seat Belt question especially for Grumpy and Chris
Johnston.
I was able to assemble a very nice combination to create a retractable
seat belt set with a rotary buckle release. My concern is the units
weight in at 5 lbs each . I assume the stock vans belts weigh a couple
of pounds each (including all hardware). Chris, Grumpy, how much did
your retractable units weigh? Anyone else out there using retracts? I
can't imagine any retractable systems weighing less than 3.5 lbs due to
all the metal in the retract housing so my units may not be out of line
but I sure don't want to hang another 20 lbs on my plane (net 12
additional lbs).
The good news is that these belts are ~$130.00 per set.
Thanks,
Robin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Patrick ONeill" <poneill(at)irealms.com> |
| Subject: | Fiberglass and antenna placement |
This comes as a huge relief. I thought I was the only one planning to equip
their RV-10 with AWACS.
Patrick
#40715
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 5:56 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement
OK, I just redesigned my antenna installation : atop a 5 foot tall
pylon, made of spaceage transpardium mounted in the exact center/top
point of the cabin cover, equipped with a gyro stabilized gimble that
ensures stability of the antenna in all unusual attitudes.
I'm out of here
John W. Cox wrote:
> -->
>
> Now you guys are getting with the program. Coax length, inline
> connectors, combiners, splitters and fiberglas thickness equate to db
> signal losses.
>
> John #600
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
> Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 3:48 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement
>
>
> OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how
> much
> attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed anywhere
> in your clips, and still remains. The specified/recommended Commant
> Antenna for the HeadsUP XM Weather receiver (used in Avidyne
> installations in certified Cirrus 's) comes configured with a gain of
> 30-34 db. The receiver itself is preset to expect a gain of 22db
> (+/-2db). The installation manual actually _recommends/requires_ some
> additional attenuation and provides a formula for figuring the amount
> available through several different types and lengths (feet & yards) of
>
> coax. Turns out that you need quite a bit of coax to get it down to
> the
>
> 22db range (17-58 ' depending on type of coax) Alternatively you may
> use a DC bias passing attenuator in line with the cable itself. (my
> choice). The only caution from the mfg about placement was to keep it
> away from transmitting antennas, (min 36's").
>
> If, as James suggests, the fiberglass (1/16 - 3/32") of the cowl is
> not
> an issue in signal loss, and there are no other blocking restrictions,
> then why criticize someone who wants to make the installation
> cosmetically attractive as well? the vast majority of the 396/496
> Garmins w/ weather are flying with glareshield mounted antennas with the
>
> same issues.
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/
>
> Tim Olson wrote:
>
>>
>> I've always taken antenna reception quality as THE #1 reason to
>> choose an antenna or mounting location....especially important if
>> you're shooting for the same quality as a "certified" installation.
>> I never understood why as experimental builders, who build planes
>> that we
>>
> pride
>
>> as being built "better than factory", anyone would build absolutely
>> sub-standard to all of the advice by manufacturers regarding their
>> installation requirements....on purpose, no less. The fact that
>>
> someone
>
>> would bother to hem and haw about a WAAS GPS antenna no less, really
>> makes me wonder, as the amount of drag off a small wart of an antenna
>> is way less than if you were talking about a Nav or Com antenna, and
>>
> the
>
>> signal you're trying to receive is EXTREMELY faint in comparison.
>>
>> Here's something I dug up recently:
>>
>>
> http://www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/Dual%20Benefit/warner_gps_spo
> of
> ing.html
>
>> "The GPS signal strength measured at the surface of the Earth is
>> about
>>
>
>
>> -160dBw (1 x 10-16 watts), which is roughly equivalent to viewing a
>> 25-watt light bulb from a distance of 10,000 miles. This weak signal
>> can easily be blocked by destroying or shielding the GPS receiver's
>> antenna. The GPS signal can also be effectively jammed by a signal of
>> a similar frequency but greater strength. "
>>
>> So then think about the many electrical noise causing things in an
>> airplane....probably one of the loudest of which would be the spark
>> plugs and ignition system. And then to choose to actually mount the
>> antennas CLOSER to those items? I mean, I've seen TV's get scrambled
>> signals when a snowmobile drove by the house years ago....not that
>> the plane is going to be as poor, but we're
>> *really* talking some tiny electrical signals with GPS...and sorry,
>>
> but
>
>> if someone even thinks they're going to pass by on flying ILS and VOR
>> approaches and instead favor trusting a WAAS approach, why sacrifice?
>> If they're going to sacrifice that, then why bother to look at the
>> actual LPV-spec GPS units in the first place....just fly them with an
>> autopilot or EFIS driven by a 396. (and no, I'm not REALLY endorsing
>> that thinking)
>>
>>
>> http://www.nap.edu/html/embedded_everywhere/ch2_b8.html
>> "What makes GPS reception difficult is that radio frequency (RF)
>> signals from the satellites are very weak. Special coding is used to
>> allow receivers to detect these weak signals, but even with coding,
>> GPS receivers generally work only if they have a direct line of sight
>> to the satellites. Performance inside buildings or in an area covered
>> by foliage is generally quite poor"
>>
>> http://www.wowinfo.com/gps/gps/chapter2n3.htm
>> "This is an extremely low-powered system-so low-powered, in fact,
>> that
>>
>
>
>> the signal is really buried in the natural background radio noise.
>> The
>>
>
>
>> receiver recovers this weak signal from the satellites by using
>> spread-spectrum communication technology, a very tricky concept in
>> communication theory that works by means of pseudo-random codes."
>>
>> http://www.dot.nd.gov/manuals/surveymanual/gps-operations.pdf
>> "You'd think that with all of these radio waves raining down on us
>> from dozens of satellites in space
>> we'd all glow in the dark. Actually, the strength of the GPS signal is
>>
>
>
>> very small, equivalent to the tail
>> light of a car seen from 2,500 kilometers away-halfway across the
>> U.S.! Weaker, in fact, than the
>> ordinary background radio noise that's all around us all of the time."
>>
>>
>> So then thinking about laying it underneath fiberglass, my thought
>> is: "Well, if fiberglass is transparent to GPS, then how many layers
>> are transparent to the GPS. Can you put it under 1/16", 1/8", 1",
>> 5"? At what point do you decide you've hidden the GPS from it
>> enough?"
>>
>> And, if it's under a cowl, or at some other point not mounted
>> horizontally with a full view of the sky in all directions, then
>> which of the available satellites that are now unavailable are you
>> happy to just toss aside from shadowing due to poor mounting? So
>> some of them aren't worth seeing.
>>
>> I understand the love of building a cosmetically pleasing airplane,
>>
> but
>
>> to sacrifice life-saving avionics signals really makes me wonder.
>> And nothing against Dan Checkoway, but it's amazing how one person's
>> good experience with a poor mounting choice can spread to such a
>> universal acceptance of the idea. It might be better to bounce
>> mounting and location questions off the antenna makers and companies
>> like
>>
> Garmin
>
>> and see how far they're willing to stick their neck out with an
>>
> answer.
>
>> If it were harmless, they'd have no reason to avoid giving the
>> advice. I've had many phone calls to Comant and questions to other
>> antenna makers throughout the build, which in the end mostly just led
>> me to try to be as "conventional" as possible to attempt the same
>> reliability as the certified planes could have.
>>
>> Now, if someone was building a VFR only airplane, I'd say "heck yeah,
>> may as well give it a try".
>>
>>
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>>
>>
>>
>> Deems Davis wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> John W. Cox wrote:
>>>
>>> . Fiberglass is not transparent
>>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is
>>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also
>>>
> requires
>
>>> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier
>>> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when
>>> you need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence
>>>
>>> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have
>>> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is
>>>
>
>
>>> a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a
>>> 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally?
>>> Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite
>>> based systems.
>>>
>>> Deems Davis # 406
>>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together' http://deemsrv10.com/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "McGANN, Ron" <ron.mcgann(at)baesystems.com> |
Hey all,
Getting to the final assembly stage. I pulled out the VS that was
completed over 3 years ago. Did not know any better at the time and
thought my first airplane part was just fine. But there is significant
oil canning on both of the large aft-lower panels. The only other oil
canning I have is very minor on one or two of the lower wing skin
panels, so the VS is really giving me the irrits. Any clues on how to
tighten the skins?
cheers,
Ron
187 finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com> |
Talk with Denny Demeter at Av Grafix (http://www.avgrafix.com/). He did
all the vinyl garaphics and stencils for my Pietenpol, which won awards
at OSH. Easy to apply and no thicker than paint.
Jack Phillips
#40610
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ivo welch
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 8:50 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Vinyl?
Dear RV-10 list: I am about to start advertising my RV10 for sale
again. (http://welch.econ.brown.edu/n325hp). Moved to the standard CS
2-blade prop. For sale at $199k---it would probably be very tough to
build with the ingredients that are in this plane, much less in the pro
quality it was built. alas, its not looking as nice as it should.
so, I would also like to spruce up the looks with some vinyl stripe
design to go on top of the existing paint. Does anyone have good
experiences with someone who produces nice vinyl stripes for easy
application? help appreciated.
regards,
/ivo
_________________________________________________
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify
the sender
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - Norsk
- Portuguese
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground wi |
| From: | "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net> |
Rick,
Rick Gray owns that site and put up those pics. You'll have to ask him.
Zack
--------
RV8 #80125
RV10 # 40512
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134805#134805
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "rtitsworth" <rtitsworth(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! |
Do inter tubes hold really Nitrogen better than air??? Air is composed of
~80% Nitrogen. So it would seem that if it is the "other" components of air
(mostly O2) that leak out, then the tube would still be ~80% full of
Nitrogen - and more so on successive re-fills. After the first subsequent
refill the air would be ~95% Nitrogen. After the second refill it would be
~99% Nitrogen.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list- Subject:
RE: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Just fill it with nitrogen and forget about it.
Bob K
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | Fiberglass and antenna placement |
Deems, make sure you rip all the fiberglass and plastic covering off those certified
antennas too. I think the most useful tip I have got out of this string
so far is don't by anything from Commant except for maybe VHF and Transponder.
Not a surprise as when I have asked them questions in OSH they basically
gave me a hand out, promptly ignored me, and walked away when they had no one
else at their booth.
Part of the reason that people are seeing better reception from the Bluetooth
"bugs" is because they are using much newer technologies than the "certified"
antennas. Does that surprise anyone that the certified vendors are probably
not really doing anything to improve the antennas because of the hassle to get
them recertified. Anyone else remember the horrors stories of the older certified
units giving the RAIM messages, usually at the worse possible times?
At this point I will probably have no less than 3-4 satellite antennas performing
various functions. Some will be under the canopy and some may not. Depends
on how well they function and how important they are. Will I stick an antenna
for a Garmin x96 on the outside? Not a chance. But for primary navigation
WAAS GPS, potentially. But only after I test it out.
So while everyone is super concerned about if the 1/4" of fiberglass is attenuating
the GPS signal in the UHF L Band microwave range (in which most outdoor
antennas are protected by fiberglass or ABS plastic), has anyone actually looked
at exactly how far they are running those antenna leads? Depending on the
cable type you can probably figure a loss of 0.5db for every meter of cable.
Or how about if your Bluetooth, cell phone, oscillation of that laptop clock,
or RF noise from your various "uncertified" personal electronics are causing
any interference in your nav systems that could induce an error? So who wants
to volunteer to do a SNR study for GPS locations on the RV-10 along with the
factory coverings of said antennas?
Just for the record I have a pair of Commant CI-121 Comm antennas, a pair of
archer wingtip antennas for nav, and a Commant CI-105 transponder antenna.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 7:56 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement
OK, I just redesigned my antenna installation : atop a 5 foot tall
pylon, made of spaceage transpardium mounted in the exact center/top
point of the cabin cover, equipped with a gyro stabilized gimble that
ensures stability of the antenna in all unusual attitudes.
I'm out of here
John W. Cox wrote:
>
> Now you guys are getting with the program. Coax length, inline
> connectors, combiners, splitters and fiberglas thickness equate to db
> signal losses.
>
> John #600
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
> Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 3:48 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement
>
>
> OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how much
> attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed anywhere
> in your clips, and still remains. The specified/recommended Commant
> Antenna for the HeadsUP XM Weather receiver (used in Avidyne
> installations in certified Cirrus 's) comes configured with a gain of
> 30-34 db. The receiver itself is preset to expect a gain of 22db
> (+/-2db). The installation manual actually _recommends/requires_ some
> additional attenuation and provides a formula for figuring the amount
> available through several different types and lengths (feet & yards) of
>
> coax. Turns out that you need quite a bit of coax to get it down to the
>
> 22db range (17-58 ' depending on type of coax) Alternatively you may
> use a DC bias passing attenuator in line with the cable itself. (my
> choice). The only caution from the mfg about placement was to keep it
> away from transmitting antennas, (min 36's").
>
> If, as James suggests, the fiberglass (1/16 - 3/32") of the cowl is not
> an issue in signal loss, and there are no other blocking restrictions,
> then why criticize someone who wants to make the installation
> cosmetically attractive as well? the vast majority of the 396/496
> Garmins w/ weather are flying with glareshield mounted antennas with the
>
> same issues.
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>
> Tim Olson wrote:
>
>>
>> I've always taken antenna reception quality as THE #1 reason to choose
>> an antenna or mounting location....especially important if you're
>> shooting for the same quality as a "certified" installation. I never
>> understood why as experimental builders, who build planes that we
>>
> pride
>
>> as being built "better than factory", anyone would build absolutely
>> sub-standard to all of the advice by manufacturers regarding their
>> installation requirements....on purpose, no less. The fact that
>>
> someone
>
>> would bother to hem and haw about a WAAS GPS antenna no less, really
>> makes me wonder, as the amount of drag off a small wart of an antenna
>> is way less than if you were talking about a Nav or Com antenna, and
>>
> the
>
>> signal you're trying to receive is EXTREMELY faint in comparison.
>>
>> Here's something I dug up recently:
>>
>>
> http://www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/Dual%20Benefit/warner_gps_spoof
> ing.html
>
>> "The GPS signal strength measured at the surface of the Earth is about
>>
>
>
>> -160dBw (1 x 10-16 watts), which is roughly equivalent to viewing a
>> 25-watt light bulb from a distance of 10,000 miles. This weak signal
>> can easily be blocked by destroying or shielding the GPS receiver's
>> antenna. The GPS signal can also be effectively jammed by a signal of
>> a similar frequency but greater strength. "
>>
>> So then think about the many electrical noise causing things in an
>> airplane....probably one of the loudest of which would be the spark
>> plugs and ignition system. And then to choose to actually mount
>> the antennas CLOSER to those items? I mean, I've seen TV's get
>> scrambled signals when a snowmobile drove by the house years
>> ago....not that the plane is going to be as poor, but we're
>> *really* talking some tiny electrical signals with GPS...and sorry,
>>
> but
>
>> if someone even thinks they're going to pass by on flying ILS and VOR
>> approaches and instead favor trusting a WAAS approach, why sacrifice?
>> If they're going to sacrifice that, then why bother to look at the
>> actual LPV-spec GPS units in the first place....just fly them with
>> an autopilot or EFIS driven by a 396. (and no, I'm not REALLY
>> endorsing that thinking)
>>
>>
>> http://www.nap.edu/html/embedded_everywhere/ch2_b8.html
>> "What makes GPS reception difficult is that radio frequency (RF)
>> signals from the satellites are very weak. Special coding is used to
>> allow receivers to detect these weak signals, but even with coding,
>> GPS receivers generally work only if they have a direct line of sight
>> to the satellites. Performance inside buildings or in an area covered
>> by foliage is generally quite poor"
>>
>> http://www.wowinfo.com/gps/gps/chapter2n3.htm
>> "This is an extremely low-powered system-so low-powered, in fact, that
>>
>
>
>> the signal is really buried in the natural background radio noise. The
>>
>
>
>> receiver recovers this weak signal from the satellites by using
>> spread-spectrum communication technology, a very tricky concept in
>> communication theory that works by means of pseudo-random codes."
>>
>> http://www.dot.nd.gov/manuals/surveymanual/gps-operations.pdf
>> "You'd think that with all of these radio waves raining down on us
>> from dozens of satellites in space
>> we'd all glow in the dark. Actually, the strength of the GPS signal is
>>
>
>
>> very small, equivalent to the tail
>> light of a car seen from 2,500 kilometers away-halfway across the
>> U.S.! Weaker, in fact, than the
>> ordinary background radio noise that's all around us all of the time."
>>
>>
>> So then thinking about laying it underneath fiberglass, my thought is:
>> "Well, if fiberglass is transparent to GPS, then how many layers are
>> transparent to the GPS. Can you put it under 1/16", 1/8", 1", 5"?
>> At what point do you decide you've hidden the GPS from it enough?"
>>
>> And, if it's under a cowl, or at some other point not mounted
>> horizontally with a full view of the sky in all directions, then
>> which of the available satellites that are now unavailable are you
>> happy to just toss aside from shadowing due to poor mounting? So
>> some of them aren't worth seeing.
>>
>> I understand the love of building a cosmetically pleasing airplane,
>>
> but
>
>> to sacrifice life-saving avionics signals really makes me wonder. And
>> nothing against Dan Checkoway, but it's amazing how one person's good
>> experience with a poor mounting choice can spread to such a universal
>> acceptance of the idea. It might be better to bounce mounting
>> and location questions off the antenna makers and companies like
>>
> Garmin
>
>> and see how far they're willing to stick their neck out with an
>>
> answer.
>
>> If it were harmless, they'd have no reason to avoid giving the advice.
>> I've had many phone calls to Comant and questions to other antenna
>> makers throughout the build, which in the end mostly just led me to
>> try to be as "conventional" as possible to attempt the same
>> reliability as the certified planes could have.
>>
>> Now, if someone was building a VFR only airplane, I'd say "heck yeah,
>> may as well give it a try".
>>
>>
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>>
>>
>>
>> Deems Davis wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> John W. Cox wrote:
>>>
>>> . Fiberglass is not transparent
>>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is
>>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also
>>>
> requires
>
>>> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier
>>> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when you
>>> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence
>>>
>>> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have
>>> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there is
>>>
>
>
>>> a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a
>>> 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally?
>>> Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite
>>> based systems.
>>>
>>> Deems Davis # 406
>>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
>>> http://deemsrv10.com/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! |
Now here is an off the wall thought, anyone give any consideration to usi
ng one of the leak sealant products in their tubes? Maybe something like S
lime? Pro's/Con's? Might be just the thing to reduce air loss and the dif
ference between being stuck on a backwoods strip or making it home. Though
ts from the peanut gallery? J
Michael
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 8:52 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Just my experience: 3 Desser leakguards. Mains are great, add air maybe eve
ry 6 months. Nose tube...no such ruck. Leaks worse than the standard tube p
reviously there..have to add air every month.
On 9/16/07, Chris Johnston > wrote:
yay! while we're arguing about stuff... could you guys argue about this fo
r me so i can decide? i'm trying to decide on some less leaky inner tubes,
and i think it's between Desser's "leak guard", and Michelin's "airstop".
what say you all? and is it reasonably self-explanatory to order the righ
t size inner tube? is it possible for me to screw it up?
cj
#40410
fuse/finishing
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net<http://www.perfectlygoodairplane.net>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! |
Some of the benefits to using Nitrogen is it's usually much dryer than compressed
air and a bit more stable through the temperature ranges we see. Also, Oxygen
is corrosive to rubber where Nitrogen is inert. If you believe the guys
at your local auto shop, they may tell you that you will get another 1/2 mile
to the gallon but I call horsepucky.
If you really want to use it almost every tire shop now will fill tires with
Nitrogen so you can just stop by one and have them fill them. You could also
get a small tank and regulator from your local welding gas supply and keep it
around the shop/hanger.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of rtitsworth
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 7:51 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Do inter tubes hold really Nitrogen better than air??? Air is composed of
~80% Nitrogen. So it would seem that if it is the "other" components of air
(mostly O2) that leak out, then the tube would still be ~80% full of
Nitrogen - and more so on successive re-fills. After the first subsequent
refill the air would be ~95% Nitrogen. After the second refill it would be
~99% Nitrogen.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list- Subject:
RE: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Just fill it with nitrogen and forget about it.
Bob K
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com> |
Other than the "unsightly wart" appearance, how much drag is there in a
GPS antennae on the top back of the canopy? Is there a measurable
speed difference?
Fred Williams
40515
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jay Brinkmeyer <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com> |
>From an archive I found a while back...
I painted my RV8 white,in stages, as I built the parts, then after final assembly, had vinyl stripes applied by Eric Mann, of Freedom Signs and Graphics (775 771-3937). I designed a paint scheme, e-mailed it Eric, who had actual RV8 dimensions in his program. He fine tuned the scheme, and sent me a rendering for approval. When I flew the RV8 to Reno, he applied the prepared stripes in about an hour. The cost was only a couple hundred bucks, and you can do it yourself. Go to my website and see it http://members.cox.net/cjhukill/ The stripes have been on about 5 years now, and look as good as the day they installed.
Need a vacation? Get great deals
to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
http://travel.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
That's the money question and the answer is probably well less than a knot depending
on where it goes. It's more likely to cause problems from buildup in
icing conditions or p-static signal degradation than have any real impact to performance.
I think most people are more interested in the clean lines that an
antenna free surface provides.
Dan had the most important point that I completely forgot to mention. Paint
type and water are the two biggest things that will attenuate a signal, especially
at those frequencies. You guys with satellite TV, how good does that work
when you get the big buildups outside. The fast glass guys bury everything
they can inside the fiberglass shell. How many antennas do you see sticking out
of a LongEZ, Cozy, or similar plans built glass? Granted I probably would
be more leery using one of those in hard IFR. Ever see what happens to glass
aircraft without protection when hit by lightning, not pretty but I digress.
Do the research, look at your mission profile, read all the facts and comments,
and make your own decisions. The data exist for and against such configurations.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fred Williams, M.D.
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 10:53 AM
Subject: RV10-List: GPS antennae
Other than the "unsightly wart" appearance, how much drag is there in a
GPS antennae on the top back of the canopy? Is there a measurable
speed difference?
Fred Williams
40515
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jay Brinkmeyer <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com> |
>From an archive I found a while back...
I painted my RV8 white,in stages, as I built the parts, then after final assembly, had vinyl stripes applied by Eric Mann, of Freedom Signs and Graphics (775 771-3937). I designed a paint scheme, e-mailed it Eric, who had actual RV8 dimensions in his program. He fine tuned the scheme, and sent me a rendering for approval. When I flew the RV8 to Reno, he applied the prepared stripes in about an hour. The cost was only a couple hundred bucks, and you can do it yourself. Go to my website and see it http://members.cox.net/cjhukill/ The stripes have been on about 5 years now, and look as good as the day they installed.
Need a vacation? Get great deals
to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
http://travel.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: glare shield paint |
| From: | "jayb" <jaybrinkmeyer(at)yahoo.com> |
Bob... Which item on poly website are you referring to?
Thanks,
Jay
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134898#134898
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fiberglass and antenna placement |
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
Don't forget the five degree forward cant to compensate for your
additional forward airspeed with the BPE Cold Air/Davis Induction
System.
Thanks for playing.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 5:56 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement
OK, I just redesigned my antenna installation : atop a 5 foot tall
pylon, made of spaceage transpardium mounted in the exact center/top
point of the cabin cover, equipped with a gyro stabilized gimble that
ensures stability of the antenna in all unusual attitudes.
I'm out of here
John W. Cox wrote:
>
> Now you guys are getting with the program. Coax length, inline
> connectors, combiners, splitters and fiberglas thickness equate to db
> signal losses.
>
> John #600
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
> Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 3:48 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fiberglass and antenna placement
>
>
> OK Tim, I get it, GPS signals are weak. But the question as to how
much
> attenuation is attributable to the Fiberglass is not addressed
anywhere
> in your clips, and still remains. The specified/recommended Commant
> Antenna for the HeadsUP XM Weather receiver (used in Avidyne
> installations in certified Cirrus 's) comes configured with a gain of
> 30-34 db. The receiver itself is preset to expect a gain of 22db
> (+/-2db). The installation manual actually _recommends/requires_ some
> additional attenuation and provides a formula for figuring the amount
> available through several different types and lengths (feet & yards)
of
>
> coax. Turns out that you need quite a bit of coax to get it down to
the
>
> 22db range (17-58 ' depending on type of coax) Alternatively you may
> use a DC bias passing attenuator in line with the cable itself. (my
> choice). The only caution from the mfg about placement was to keep it
> away from transmitting antennas, (min 36's").
>
> If, as James suggests, the fiberglass (1/16 - 3/32") of the cowl is
not
> an issue in signal loss, and there are no other blocking restrictions,
> then why criticize someone who wants to make the installation
> cosmetically attractive as well? the vast majority of the 396/496
> Garmins w/ weather are flying with glareshield mounted antennas with
the
>
> same issues.
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>
> Tim Olson wrote:
>
>>
>> I've always taken antenna reception quality as THE #1 reason to
choose
>> an antenna or mounting location....especially important if you're
>> shooting for the same quality as a "certified" installation. I never
>> understood why as experimental builders, who build planes that we
>>
> pride
>
>> as being built "better than factory", anyone would build absolutely
>> sub-standard to all of the advice by manufacturers regarding their
>> installation requirements....on purpose, no less. The fact that
>>
> someone
>
>> would bother to hem and haw about a WAAS GPS antenna no less, really
>> makes me wonder, as the amount of drag off a small wart of an antenna
>> is way less than if you were talking about a Nav or Com antenna, and
>>
> the
>
>> signal you're trying to receive is EXTREMELY faint in comparison.
>>
>> Here's something I dug up recently:
>>
>>
>
http://www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/Dual%20Benefit/warner_gps_spoof
> ing.html
>
>> "The GPS signal strength measured at the surface of the Earth is
about
>>
>
>
>> -160dBw (1 x 10-16 watts), which is roughly equivalent to viewing a
>> 25-watt light bulb from a distance of 10,000 miles. This weak signal
>> can easily be blocked by destroying or shielding the GPS receiver's
>> antenna. The GPS signal can also be effectively jammed by a signal of
>> a similar frequency but greater strength. "
>>
>> So then think about the many electrical noise causing things in an
>> airplane....probably one of the loudest of which would be the spark
>> plugs and ignition system. And then to choose to actually mount
>> the antennas CLOSER to those items? I mean, I've seen TV's get
>> scrambled signals when a snowmobile drove by the house years
>> ago....not that the plane is going to be as poor, but we're
>> *really* talking some tiny electrical signals with GPS...and sorry,
>>
> but
>
>> if someone even thinks they're going to pass by on flying ILS and VOR
>> approaches and instead favor trusting a WAAS approach, why sacrifice?
>> If they're going to sacrifice that, then why bother to look at the
>> actual LPV-spec GPS units in the first place....just fly them with
>> an autopilot or EFIS driven by a 396. (and no, I'm not REALLY
>> endorsing that thinking)
>>
>>
>> http://www.nap.edu/html/embedded_everywhere/ch2_b8.html
>> "What makes GPS reception difficult is that radio frequency (RF)
>> signals from the satellites are very weak. Special coding is used to
>> allow receivers to detect these weak signals, but even with coding,
>> GPS receivers generally work only if they have a direct line of sight
>> to the satellites. Performance inside buildings or in an area covered
>> by foliage is generally quite poor"
>>
>> http://www.wowinfo.com/gps/gps/chapter2n3.htm
>> "This is an extremely low-powered system-so low-powered, in fact,
that
>>
>
>
>> the signal is really buried in the natural background radio noise.
The
>>
>
>
>> receiver recovers this weak signal from the satellites by using
>> spread-spectrum communication technology, a very tricky concept in
>> communication theory that works by means of pseudo-random codes."
>>
>> http://www.dot.nd.gov/manuals/surveymanual/gps-operations.pdf
>> "You'd think that with all of these radio waves raining down on us
>> from dozens of satellites in space
>> we'd all glow in the dark. Actually, the strength of the GPS signal
is
>>
>
>
>> very small, equivalent to the tail
>> light of a car seen from 2,500 kilometers away-halfway across the
>> U.S.! Weaker, in fact, than the
>> ordinary background radio noise that's all around us all of the
time."
>>
>>
>> So then thinking about laying it underneath fiberglass, my thought
is:
>> "Well, if fiberglass is transparent to GPS, then how many layers are
>> transparent to the GPS. Can you put it under 1/16", 1/8", 1", 5"?
>> At what point do you decide you've hidden the GPS from it enough?"
>>
>> And, if it's under a cowl, or at some other point not mounted
>> horizontally with a full view of the sky in all directions, then
>> which of the available satellites that are now unavailable are you
>> happy to just toss aside from shadowing due to poor mounting? So
>> some of them aren't worth seeing.
>>
>> I understand the love of building a cosmetically pleasing airplane,
>>
> but
>
>> to sacrifice life-saving avionics signals really makes me wonder.
And
>> nothing against Dan Checkoway, but it's amazing how one person's good
>> experience with a poor mounting choice can spread to such a universal
>> acceptance of the idea. It might be better to bounce mounting
>> and location questions off the antenna makers and companies like
>>
> Garmin
>
>> and see how far they're willing to stick their neck out with an
>>
> answer.
>
>> If it were harmless, they'd have no reason to avoid giving the
advice.
>> I've had many phone calls to Comant and questions to other antenna
>> makers throughout the build, which in the end mostly just led me to
>> try to be as "conventional" as possible to attempt the same
>> reliability as the certified planes could have.
>>
>> Now, if someone was building a VFR only airplane, I'd say "heck yeah,
>> may as well give it a try".
>>
>>
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>>
>>
>>
>> Deems Davis wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> John W. Cox wrote:
>>>
>>> . Fiberglass is not transparent
>>> to RF it creates a false positive and measurable signal loss. It is
>>> only translucent with a clearly diminished performance. It also
>>>
> requires
>
>>> your output amp to work significantly harder leading to earlier
>>> potential failure and often a loss of valuable communication when
you
>>> need it most - rain fade, cloud obscuration and turbulence
>>>
>>> John, can you elaborate or point me to a reference source. I have
>>> always heard that fiberglass is transparent wrt antennas. If there
is
>>>
>
>
>>> a loss due to the fiberglass how big of a loss is it? and what is a
>>> 'false positive'? Does the fiberglass affect all spectrums equally?
>>> Both of the antennas in my case are receive only and are satellite
>>> based systems.
>>>
>>> Deems Davis # 406
>>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
>>> http://deemsrv10.com/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
Mathematically measurable using the formula found in the AC43.13.
Insignificant in the grand scheme of ROP/LOP operations.
John W. Cox 40600
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fred
Williams, M.D.
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 8:53 AM
Subject: RV10-List: GPS antennae
Other than the "unsightly wart" appearance, how much drag is there in a
GPS antennae on the top back of the canopy? Is there a measurable
speed difference?
Fred Williams
40515
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kevin Belue" <kdbelue(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna placement and adequate ground plane or ground |
wire termination
I mounted my Garmin 196 GPS antenna under the top cowling in my RV-6A. It
worked fine, although there was some attenuation - which was ok since this
was a VFR application. Then I painted my plane with metallic paint on top of
the cowling and the GPS no longer received enough signal to work, so I moved
the antenna. I don't like having antennas hanging out on the plane, but on
my RV-10 the GPS antennas are outside on the top. The GPS antenna may work
ok under the cowling as long as no metallic paint is over it, but I don't
want anything to attenuate the signal since this will be used for IFR
flying.
Kevin Belue
RV-6A N97KB
RV-10 finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS! |
I would not use it unless I had an emergency and needed to fix a flat. I
think, with no rational reason, is that the chance of it puddleing and
causing a grossly out of balance tire is to high.
Bob K
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder
(Michael Sausen)
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 6:52 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Now here is an off the wall thought, anyone give any consideration to
using one of the leak sealant products in their tubes? Maybe something like
Slime? Pro's/Con's? Might be just the thing to reduce air loss and the
difference between being stuck on a backwoods strip or making it home.
Thoughts from the peanut gallery? J
Michael
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 8:52 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Desser vs. Michelin... TUBE WARS!
Just my experience: 3 Desser leakguards. Mains are great, add air maybe
every 6 months. Nose tube...no such ruck. Leaks worse than the standard tube
previously there..have to add air every month.
On 9/16/07, Chris Johnston wrote:
yay! while we're arguing about stuff... could you guys argue about this for
me so i can decide? i'm trying to decide on some less leaky inner tubes,
and i think it's between Desser's "leak guard", and Michelin's "airstop".
what say you all? and is it reasonably self-explanatory to order the right
size inner tube? is it possible for me to screw it up?
cj
#40410
fuse/finishing
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Lenhardt" <av8or(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Retractable Seat Belt Question |
What belts are you using for that price?
John Lenhardt
----- Original Message -----
From: Robin Marks
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 11:43 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Retractable Seat Belt Question
I have a Retractable Seat Belt question especially for Grumpy and
Chris Johnston.
I was able to assemble a very nice combination to create a retractable
seat belt set with a rotary buckle release. My concern is the units
weight in at 5 lbs each . I assume the stock vans belts weigh a couple
of pounds each (including all hardware). Chris, Grumpy, how much did
your retractable units weigh? Anyone else out there using retracts? I
can't imagine any retractable systems weighing less than 3.5 lbs due to
all the metal in the retract housing so my units may not be out of line
but I sure don't want to hang another 20 lbs on my plane (net 12
additional lbs).
The good news is that these belts are ~$130.00 per set.
Thanks,
Robin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: GPS antennae |
You did that just to make me open AC 43.13, didn't you.........
Dr Fred.
John W. Cox wrote:
>
> Mathematically measurable using the formula found in the AC43.13.
> Insignificant in the grand scheme of ROP/LOP operations.
>
> John W. Cox 40600
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fred
> Williams, M.D.
> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 8:53 AM
> To: RV 10
> Subject: RV10-List: GPS antennae
>
>
>
> Other than the "unsightly wart" appearance, how much drag is there in a
> GPS antennae on the top back of the canopy? Is there a measurable
> speed difference?
>
> Fred Williams
> 40515
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com> |
| Subject: | Fuel Tank Calibration Problem (Dynon FliteDek 180) |
OK guys. I could use a little help here. I tried to calibrate my fuel gages
tonight but no joy. I have SW resistive floats and as I fill the tanks, the
Dynon system says the readings from the tank doesn't change as gas is added.
It's possible that the float is stuck, the wiring is incorrect, the Dynon is
bad or not setup correctly, or maybe the SW gage is bad. However, both tanks
act the same. I'm trying to remember how the gage is wired internally. There
is only 1 screw on the outside of the tank, that's probably the center tap
of the variable resistor attached to the float. How is the thing grounded
internally? I can't remember what it looks like inside. Does anyone have a
picture of their gage before it was installed in the tank they can share
with me? Did we have to ground the gage internally and I forgot to do that?
Thanks in advance,
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
N991RV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Saylor" <Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com> |
| Subject: | Fuel Tank Calibration Problem (Dynon FliteDek 180) |
Albert,
You should be able to bend a coat hanger 90 degrees and thread it throught
the sump hole, then push up gently on the float arm. With a meter you
should see the resistance change between the center pin and any good ground.
I think the resistance is 40 to 240 ohms. That should troubleshoot the
float.
Good Luck,
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert Gardner
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 9:56 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Fuel Tank Calibration Problem (Dynon FliteDek 180)
-->
OK guys. I could use a little help here. I tried to calibrate my fuel gages
tonight but no joy. I have SW resistive floats and as I fill the tanks, the
Dynon system says the readings from the tank doesn't change as gas is added.
It's possible that the float is stuck, the wiring is incorrect, the Dynon is
bad or not setup correctly, or maybe the SW gage is bad. However, both tanks
act the same. I'm trying to remember how the gage is wired internally. There
is only 1 screw on the outside of the tank, that's probably the center tap
of the variable resistor attached to the float. How is the thing grounded
internally? I can't remember what it looks like inside. Does anyone have a
picture of their gage before it was installed in the tank they can share
with me? Did we have to ground the gage internally and I forgot to do that?
Thanks in advance,
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
N991RV
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Retractable Seat Belt Question |
| From: | "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com> |
John,
I am not using these YET. I just cobbled these together
this weekend as a test. I think I prefer the rotary belt release but
didn't want the 3" wide racing belts so I opted for the 2" belt with
rotary release. Below is a photo of a set I found on ebay (sold to
drifters) for $50.00 delivered. They are a 4 point fixed location belt.
No retract. (retract portion below). 5 point also available for about
the same price.
I found these retract belts online. MSRP ~$99, I think I paid $79
delivered! They are built by Corbeau and may be good enough to use as-is
but I THINK I wanted the rotary release so I blended the two sets (both
black).
>From the Corbeau I used from the retract all they way down to the
shoulder adjustment buckle.
>From the Rotary Release I used from the bottom of the shoulder
adjustment buckle down; including the lap belt and rotary buckle.
Note: on the Corbeau there is a quick disconnect between the Y and the
retract assembly. Could be nice to remove when the rear seats are not
used (lap belt stays attached)
Again the Corbeau are probably good enough to use as is but I didn't
want the basic car belt buckle which may be more comfortable than the
Rotary Release (see padding behind the belt buckle).
http://www.corbeau.com/products/2_inch_belts/2_inch.shtml
Final note: the retract attaches with a single bolt. I believe we may
have to modify the attachment mechanism.
Robin
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Lenhardt
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 6:31 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Retractable Seat Belt Question
What belts are you using for that price?
John Lenhardt
----- Original Message ----- sing these
From: Robin Marks <mailto:robin1(at)mrmoisture.com>
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 11:43 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Retractable Seat Belt Question
I have a Retractable Seat Belt question especially for Grumpy
and Chris Johnston.
I was able to assemble a very nice combination to create a
retractable seat belt set with a rotary buckle release. My concern is
the units weight in at 5 lbs each . I assume the stock vans belts weigh
a couple of pounds each (including all hardware). Chris, Grumpy, how
much did your retractable units weigh? Anyone else out there using
retracts? I can't imagine any retractable systems weighing less than 3.5
lbs due to all the metal in the retract housing so my units may not be
out of line but I sure don't want to hang another 20 lbs on my plane
(net 12 additional lbs).
The good news is that these belts are ~$130.00 per set.
Thanks,
Robin
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronic
s
.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tank Calibration Problem (Dynon FliteDek 180) |
| From: | "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net> |
Hello Albert,
check out the linmk below. Hope that helps.
http://www.wellenzohn.net/RV10Wings/fuellevelsender.html
Michael
--------
RV-10 builder (fuselage)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=134984#134984
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tank Calibration Problem (Dynon FliteDek 180) |
| From: | "Jesse Saint" <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> |
The first thing to try would be to see what resistance you have to ground
on the lead wire. It is possible that you don't have the right wire
connected to the sender. If you read a resistance at one level, then add
fuel, the resistance should change if the float is working (or the coat
hangar trick is a good idea). It should start changing almost immediately
if the float is installed correctly, as it ready accurately usually from 0
to 24 or 26 gallons, at which time the float is all the way at the top of
the tank and can't read the last 4-6 gallons.
If you do get resistance changes when you check at the float, then make
sure you have the right wire going to the Dynon (I can't remember which
pin it is right now, but will be in your installation manual) and make
sure you have continuity from the sender end of the wire to the pin in the
back of the connector. If this is shorted that would cause it not to
work. Also, if you somehow have the wires switched so the left is going
to the right and vice versa, then you would also be getting this problem
most likely, since the Dynon is specifically reading one pin for left and
the other for right. If this is the case, you can either re-route those
two wires or just switch them in the connector, depending on how "buttoned
up" your wiring is.
Before draining the tank and trying anything else, I would just test the
resistance as you add fuel (or even as you rock the wings as the float
will move if there is fuel in the wings when you rock it). You could do
it just by jacking up one wing to fake the float out in case you end up
having to remove all of the fuel you have put in already and don't want to
add more for this reason.
Hope this helps.
GOD BLESS!
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse(at)saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
352-427-0285
Albert Gardner wrote:
>
>
> OK guys. I could use a little help here. I tried to calibrate my fuel
> gages
> tonight but no joy. I have SW resistive floats and as I fill the tanks,
> the
> Dynon system says the readings from the tank doesn't change as gas is
> added.
> It's possible that the float is stuck, the wiring is incorrect, the Dynon
> is
> bad or not setup correctly, or maybe the SW gage is bad. However, both
> tanks
> act the same. I'm trying to remember how the gage is wired internally.
> There
> is only 1 screw on the outside of the tank, that's probably the center tap
> of the variable resistor attached to the float. How is the thing grounded
> internally? I can't remember what it looks like inside. Does anyone have a
> picture of their gage before it was installed in the tank they can share
> with me? Did we have to ground the gage internally and I forgot to do
> that?
> Thanks in advance,
> Albert Gardner
> Yuma, AZ
> N991RV
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com> |
Everybody pray for Russ. (Texas Tech RV 10) He had an accident this
weekend and his right hand contacted a prop. (helping a friend with his
airplane) Lost at least 1/2 of his right index finger and had to have
surgery. The email stated he would post details when he is feeling
better. He stated he was out of the hospital and back home. Requested
not to get a bunch of emails as he probably wouldn't feel up to
answering all of them I wrote to Russ this weekend to find out how he
did his Kevlar panel.
Fred Williams
40515
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Russel Davis |
Russ? or Stein? Stein had an accident I don't believe it was Russ.
Rick S.
40185
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 7:33:11 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RV10-List: Russel Davis
Everybody pray for Russ. (Texas Tech RV 10) He had an accident this
weekend and his right hand contacted a prop. (helping a friend with his
airplane) Lost at least 1/2 of his right index finger and had to have
surgery. The email stated he would post details when he is feeling
better. He stated he was out of the hospital and back home. Requested
not to get a bunch of emails as he probably wouldn't feel up to
answering all of them I wrote to Russ this weekend to find out how he
did his Kevlar panel.
Fred Williams
40515
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch |
Fred,
I *think* you're wrong, I just called Russ, to verify his
10 digits. ;)
I've talked to Stein a bit the past couple days....he's been
a bit laid up after chopping off half his index finger in a
prop. Something about wanting to verify the tach by how
hard the prop hits the finger or some scientific test like
that. His spirits are as good as they can be, given the
event. Below I'll link his post on VAF to try to at least announce
the happening.
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?p=155476#post155476
Hi All,
I figured that this soon will filter out in the rumor mill because
enough people already know, so I'd make a quick post personally to let
you know what is going on.
This weekend I was helping a friend get his rotax powered quicksilver
running and had a rather unfortuneate and messy accident (don't worry
too much, it wasn't fatal).
Long story short. My right hand ended up contacting the running prop
(sharp nylon 3 bladed ultra prop).....as you can well imagine the prop
ended up much better than my right hand - which didn't fare too
well....but in the end not as bad as it could have been. The prop has a
tiny red stained nick on it from one of my bones, and we had to hunt (in
the grass of our runway) for the severed flesh if mine, but we did ok
and had everything on ice before heading to the hospital,
I'm home from the hospital now, had orthopedic surgery from a hand/upper
extremity specailist and am going to be fine, albeit with 1/2 less of a
missing digit on my right hand than I had last week at this time. They
were unable to use the last half of my index finger - but the rest
should be ok.......we hope!
Please bear with me while I'm slow to type (noy very fast with only 1
usable hand) and the other not feeling too good right now. I'll be
working reduced hours this week due to more appointments with the
surgeon, so to those of you waiting for "stuff" from me personally, your
patience is appreciated. I would kindly ask that you not deluge me with
lots of personal calls or emails because I just simply cannot respond
right now. I'm pretty doped up, really tired and in a wee bit of pain.
After I'm feeling a bit better I'll post a long, detailed (and probably
disturbing) account of the accident - becase that's all it is. After
having a dog bite my running prop on the RV some years ago, and sitting
in a cockpit when another old guy got hit by a prop many years before, I
treat them like bombs.....but it still happenend to me, so PLEASE BE
EXTRA carefull. I'm pretty carefull and it still happened in less than a
blink of an eye.
I can't overstate how emotionally and physically painfull of an
experience this is. I'm going to be fine in the end and won't be much
worse for it, but it's still a miserable thing to deal with. The silver
lining is I'm alive, didn't lose a hand or arm, and have most of my
fingers back. It's embarrassing, humiliating and painful to type this
note, but it needs to be done.
Thanks to all who have already sent their supprt, and I sincerely
appreciate everyone's patience while I get through this. I'm still
working as able, just reduced hours and reduced email responses. Again,
thanks for everything from such a great community of people, many of you
I'm proud to call friends,
Best Regards, God Bless and BE SAFE!
Stein Bruch
RV6, Minneapolis
Fred Williams, M.D. wrote:
>
>
> Everybody pray for Russ. (Texas Tech RV 10) He had an accident this
> weekend and his right hand contacted a prop. (helping a friend with his
> airplane) Lost at least 1/2 of his right index finger and had to have
> surgery. The email stated he would post details when he is feeling
> better. He stated he was out of the hospital and back home. Requested
> not to get a bunch of emails as he probably wouldn't feel up to
> answering all of them I wrote to Russ this weekend to find out how he
> did his Kevlar panel.
>
> Fred Williams
>
> 40515
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James Hein <n8vim(at)arrl.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch |
So..... He can't give any more helpful pointers?
Look on the bright side; You'll save 10% off manicure prices!
We had one guy at work who crushed a finger in a log splitter last year.
What did his coworkers do?
They placed these stickers all over his office upon his return:
How's that for sympathy!
Hope you had a good laugh from this email Stein! Get well soon!
-Jim 40384
Tim Olson wrote:
>
> Fred,
>
> I *think* you're wrong, I just called Russ, to verify his
> 10 digits. ;)
>
> I've talked to Stein a bit the past couple days....he's been
> a bit laid up after chopping off half his index finger in a
> prop. Something about wanting to verify the tach by how
> hard the prop hits the finger or some scientific test like
> that. His spirits are as good as they can be, given the
> event. Below I'll link his post on VAF to try to at least announce
> the happening.
>
> http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?p=155476#post155476
>
> Hi All,
>
> I figured that this soon will filter out in the rumor mill because
> enough people already know, so I'd make a quick post personally to let
> you know what is going on.
>
> This weekend I was helping a friend get his rotax powered quicksilver
> running and had a rather unfortuneate and messy accident (don't worry
> too much, it wasn't fatal).
>
> Long story short. My right hand ended up contacting the running prop
> (sharp nylon 3 bladed ultra prop).....as you can well imagine the prop
> ended up much better than my right hand - which didn't fare too
> well....but in the end not as bad as it could have been. The prop has
> a tiny red stained nick on it from one of my bones, and we had to hunt
> (in the grass of our runway) for the severed flesh if mine, but we did
> ok and had everything on ice before heading to the hospital,
>
> I'm home from the hospital now, had orthopedic surgery from a
> hand/upper extremity specailist and am going to be fine, albeit with
> 1/2 less of a missing digit on my right hand than I had last week at
> this time. They were unable to use the last half of my index finger -
> but the rest should be ok.......we hope!
>
> Please bear with me while I'm slow to type (noy very fast with only 1
> usable hand) and the other not feeling too good right now. I'll be
> working reduced hours this week due to more appointments with the
> surgeon, so to those of you waiting for "stuff" from me personally,
> your patience is appreciated. I would kindly ask that you not deluge
> me with lots of personal calls or emails because I just simply cannot
> respond right now. I'm pretty doped up, really tired and in a wee bit
> of pain.
>
> After I'm feeling a bit better I'll post a long, detailed (and
> probably disturbing) account of the accident - becase that's all it
> is. After having a dog bite my running prop on the RV some years ago,
> and sitting in a cockpit when another old guy got hit by a prop many
> years before, I treat them like bombs.....but it still happenend to
> me, so PLEASE BE EXTRA carefull. I'm pretty carefull and it still
> happened in less than a blink of an eye.
>
> I can't overstate how emotionally and physically painfull of an
> experience this is. I'm going to be fine in the end and won't be much
> worse for it, but it's still a miserable thing to deal with. The
> silver lining is I'm alive, didn't lose a hand or arm, and have most
> of my fingers back. It's embarrassing, humiliating and painful to type
> this note, but it needs to be done.
>
> Thanks to all who have already sent their supprt, and I sincerely
> appreciate everyone's patience while I get through this. I'm still
> working as able, just reduced hours and reduced email responses.
> Again, thanks for everything from such a great community of people,
> many of you I'm proud to call friends,
>
> Best Regards, God Bless and BE SAFE!
> Stein Bruch
> RV6, Minneapolis
>
>
> Fred Williams, M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>> Everybody pray for Russ. (Texas Tech RV 10) He had an accident this
>> weekend and his right hand contacted a prop. (helping a friend with
>> his airplane) Lost at least 1/2 of his right index finger and had to
>> have surgery. The email stated he would post details when he is
>> feeling better. He stated he was out of the hospital and back home.
>> Requested not to get a bunch of emails as he probably wouldn't feel
>> up to answering all of them I wrote to Russ this weekend to find
>> out how he did his Kevlar panel.
>>
>> Fred Williams
>>
>> 40515
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Williams, M.D." <drfred(at)suddenlinkmail.com> |
| Subject: | Fred Williams/ Hand injury |
I read that post totally wrong. Glad to hear it wasn't Russ, not glad
to hear that his friend Stein got hurt. It's all bad. Still needs a
prayer for recovery.
Fred Williams.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch |
| From: | "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com> |
If a handshake hurts too much we could welcome Stein back with a High 4
1/2
Robin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gary" <speckter(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch |
Back when I test flew my Glasair III I returned to my wood working shop to
find that the employees had made me a coffin, just in case! I don't know
what they would have done if I hadn't made it.
Gary
40274
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 3:51 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch
If a handshake hurts too much we could welcome Stein back with a High 4
1/2
Robin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder(at)sausen.net> |
| Subject: | Air Force Completes Transition of GPS Fleet to Upgraded Control |
System
This is good to see but it makes me a bit nervous to learn that the entire
GPS nav data command and control system is in one location and LA none the
less......
http://www.losangeles.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123068412
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Air Force Completes Transition of GPS Fleet to Upgraded |
Control System
| From: | John Jessen <n212pj(at)gmail.com> |
Flying United from east to west coast yesterday, I tuned into channel 9 and
listened to air traffic control to pass the time and practice writing down
freq changes and the like. One commercial coming out of LA asked Salt Lake
Center if they knew that the GPS was off line yet again, probably due to the
military practicing jamming. He felt that the controller should pass on the
information to other flights so there would be less confusion and other
pilots could be prepared. The controller thanked the pilot and said it
wasn't the first time.
Okay then.
John J
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder
(Michael Sausen)
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 1:58 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Air Force Completes Transition of GPS Fleet to Upgraded
Control System
This is good to see but it makes me a bit nervous to learn that the entire
GPS nav data command and control system is in one location and LA none the
less..
http://www.losangeles.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123068412
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch |
| From: | "orchidman" <gary(at)wingscc.com> |
Do we need to get a new sofa on wheels for Osh next year :D
Seat belts required for sure!
--------
Gary Blankenbiller
RV10 - # 40674
Fuselage SB
(N410GB reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135133#135133
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ddddsp1(at)juno.com" <ddddsp1(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch |
Stein,
Sorry to hear about your incident.........I do sell Pain meds........:
) Wanna trade some for an SL30? I have the kind that take the pai
n away and relax you to the point of NO CARES!
I am sure it was not your fault.........has to be one of those irrespo
nsible props that are not finger friendly. Know any good attorneys.....
..I am sure they can sue the prop for lost wages and emotional distress.
GET WELL!
DEAN
_____________________________________________________________
Click to find local singles for dating, romance and fun.
http://3rdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iif6R6CarDMR3qK0KqIv51ljI
Ieeq5467k4R0yUAN7Sftkub6/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "McGANN, Ron" <ron.mcgann(at)baesystems.com> |
Zero responses. Searched the RV-10 archives and there is very little
there. I guess I can only assume that no other RV-10 builder has any
oil canning. The general RV archives are only a little more
enlightening.
What happened to the good old days - when a basic building query met
with half a dozen or more immediate useful suggestions? I hope the
list has not not exhausted itself as a resource for builder assistance.
I know oil canning is common on all metal aircraft, but I am interested
in solutions that the -10 crowd may have deployed to reduce or eliminate
the problem - unless of course I am the ONLY crappy builder with oil
canning.
cheers,
Ron
187 finishing
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron
Sent: Monday, 17 September 2007 8:38 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV10-List: Oil Canning
Hey all,
Getting to the final assembly stage. I pulled out the VS that
was completed over 3 years ago. Did not know any better at the time and
thought my first airplane part was just fine. But there is significant
oil canning on both of the large aft-lower panels. The only other oil
canning I have is very minor on one or two of the lower wing skin
panels, so the VS is really giving me the irrits. Any clues on how to
tighten the skins?
cheers,
Ron
187 finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com> |
No, you're not the only one. When I mounted my horizontal stabilizer on
the tail cone I found a couple of areas that weren't as tight as the
rest. I've been watching to see what response you get.
Jack Phillips
#40610
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 7:00 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Oil Canning
Zero responses. Searched the RV-10 archives and there is very little
there. I guess I can only assume that no other RV-10 builder has any
oil canning. The general RV archives are only a little more
enlightening.
What happened to the good old days - when a basic building query met
with half a dozen or more immediate useful suggestions? I hope the
list has not not exhausted itself as a resource for builder assistance.
I know oil canning is common on all metal aircraft, but I am interested
in solutions that the -10 crowd may have deployed to reduce or eliminate
the problem - unless of course I am the ONLY crappy builder with oil
canning.
cheers,
Ron
187 finishing
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron
Sent: Monday, 17 September 2007 8:38 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV10-List: Oil Canning
Hey all,
Getting to the final assembly stage. I pulled out the VS that
was completed over 3 years ago. Did not know any better at the time and
thought my first airplane part was just fine. But there is significant
oil canning on both of the large aft-lower panels. The only other oil
canning I have is very minor on one or two of the lower wing skin
panels, so the VS is really giving me the irrits. Any clues on how to
tighten the skins?
cheers,
Ron
187 finishing
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics
.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
_________________________________________________
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privilege
d, proprietary
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender
immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is p
rohibited.
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - N
orsk - Portuguese
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Russel Davis .... Actually Stein Bruch |
| From: | John Jessen <n212pj(at)gmail.com> |
Man, oh man, Stein! What the heck!
That must have given the old ticker a shock. Might have needed the ever
popular Digitalis purpurea to settle things down or get them going again.
My goodness! Well at least we know about this given that we can all
communicate easily and instantaneously in this digital age we're in. Not
that in other times we wouldn't have had a pulse on this type of news, but
you might never have heard of such a thing, and who knows the spin they'd
put on it. Did you have to prop yourself up, afterwards?
All the best, my friend.
John Jessen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Leikam" <DAVELEIKAM(at)wi.rr.com> |
Oil CanningI have an area on one elevator with a lose skin. I went to
see my tech counselors RV-6 and he had a few of the same in different
sections. He said it happens and if it is not dramatic, not to worry.
Sorry, I can't offer more info.
Dave Leikam
40496
Wing guts
----- Original Message -----
From: McGANN, Ron
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 4:59 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Oil Canning
Zero responses. Searched the RV-10 archives and there is very little
there. I guess I can only assume that no other RV-10 builder has any
oil canning. The general RV archives are only a little more
enlightening.
What happened to the good old days - when a basic building query met
with half a dozen or more immediate useful suggestions? I hope the
list has not not exhausted itself as a resource for builder assistance.
I know oil canning is common on all metal aircraft, but I am
interested in solutions that the -10 crowd may have deployed to reduce
or eliminate the problem - unless of course I am the ONLY crappy builder
with oil canning.
cheers,
Ron
187 finishing
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron
Sent: Monday, 17 September 2007 8:38 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV10-List: Oil Canning
Hey all,
Getting to the final assembly stage. I pulled out the VS that was
completed over 3 years ago. Did not know any better at the time and
thought my first airplane part was just fine. But there is significant
oil canning on both of the large aft-lower panels. The only other oil
canning I have is very minor on one or two of the lower wing skin
panels, so the VS is really giving me the irrits. Any clues on how to
tighten the skins?
cheers,
Ron
187 finishing
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Carpenter <jeff(at)westcottpress.com> |
Hi Ron,
I've got quite a bit of oil canning in my elevators. My tech
counselor shrugged and said don't worry about it... but I'm not happy
with it and may re do those parts if I've got some time to kill while
waiting on panel parts.
I showed it to a cousin of mine who's done repair work on Airforce
1. He suggested drilling a hole in the middle of it, dimpling and
flush riveting the hole.
I've not tried it... can't tell you if it works... but if you do, and
it does... please let me know.
Jeff Carpenter
40304
N410CF
On Sep 18, 2007, at 3:59 PM, McGANN, Ron wrote:
> Zero responses. Searched the RV-10 archives and there is very
> little there. I guess I can only assume that no other RV-10
> builder has any oil canning. The general RV archives are only a
> little more enlightening.
>
> What happened to the good old days - when a basic building query
> met with half a dozen or more immediate useful suggestions? I
> hope the list has not not exhausted itself as a resource for
> builder assistance.
>
> I know oil canning is common on all metal aircraft, but I am
> interested in solutions that the -10 crowd may have deployed to
> reduce or eliminate the problem - unless of course I am the ONLY
> crappy builder with oil canning.
>
> cheers,
> Ron
> 187 finishing
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-
> server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron
> Sent: Monday, 17 September 2007 8:38 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: Oil Canning
>
>
> Hey all,
>
> Getting to the final assembly stage. I pulled out the VS that was
> completed over 3 years ago. Did not know any better at the time
> and thought my first airplane part was just fine. But there is
> significant oil canning on both of the large aft-lower panels. The
> only other oil canning I have is very minor on one or two of the
> lower wing skin panels, so the VS is really giving me the irrits.
> Any clues on how to tighten the skins?
>
> cheers,
> Ron
> 187 finishing
>
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://
> www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | EFDsteve(at)aol.com |
Dan Checkoway has something on his RV-7 site about this. He just used some
RTV to attach some pieces of "J" channel to the inside of the tailcone,
between the ribs to stiffen the skins. His entry on this is Sept. 2, 2005.
Steve Weinstock
40230
In a message dated 9/18/2007 6:12:04 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com writes:
No, you're not the only one. When I mounted my horizontal stabilizer on the
tail cone I found a couple of areas that weren't as tight as the rest. I've
been watching to see what response you get.
Jack Phillips
#40610
____________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 7:00 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Oil Canning
Zero responses. Searched the RV-10 archives and there is very little there.
I guess I can only assume that no other RV-10 builder has any oil canning.
The general RV archives are only a little more enlightening.
What happened to the good old days - when a basic building query met with
half a dozen or more immediate useful suggestions? I hope the list has not
not exhausted itself as a resource for builder assistance.
I know oil canning is common on all metal aircraft, but I am interested in
solutions that the -10 crowd may have deployed to reduce or eliminate the
problem - unless of course I am the ONLY crappy builder with oil canning.
cheers,
Ron
187 finishing
____________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron
Sent: Monday, 17 September 2007 8:38 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Oil Canning
Hey all,
Getting to the final assembly stage. I pulled out the VS that was completed
over 3 years ago. Did not know any better at the time and thought my first
airplane part was just fine. But there is significant oil canning on both of
the large aft-lower panels. The only other oil canning I have is very minor
on one or two of the lower wing skin panels, so the VS is really giving me
the irrits. Any clues on how to tighten the skins?
cheers,
Ron
187 finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft renters insurance |
| From: | Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net> |
Dave Leikam wrote:
> Can anyone recommend a good aircraft renters insurance company? I have
> to start renting from the FBO as my friend sold the Archer I was
> flying. A bit off subject but this is the largest pilot group I can
> talk to at once. Thanks.
Hi Dave,
I use:
Melissa Perkins
NationAir
603-883-0033
603-883-1299 Fax
They have treated me very well over the years.
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill
Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118
http://econ.duke.edu/~deej/sportsman/
"Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an
airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DLIUDVINAITIS(at)aol.com |
Ron,
I myself have not had any signs of oil canning. Have done my Hs, wings, Vs,
tailcone 1.5 years ago still have not seen any. Maybe when you were
assembling Hs, wings, Vs, etc. you started at the ends and worked riveting inward
towards centers. I myself started in center of assembles and worked outward
this I thought would help by letting metal shrink/strech outwards towards the
ends of assembles. worked for me I have no oil canning visible as for solving
problem. shrinking metal/streching I would go with tech recommendations
an/or move on and keep building.
Dave Liudvinaitis
#40466
fuselage, side skins
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "McGANN, Ron" <ron.mcgann(at)baesystems.com> |
Thanks all for the responses.
As mentioned, I am at the stages of final assembly and the vast majority
of panels are tighter than a drum. I religiously started riveting from
the centre and worked towards the edges - as you have done Dave. On
perhaps a handful of panels, the skin is not quite so tight and exhibits
a slight 'wobble' when pressed in just the right spot, but the skin
always recovers to the relaxed condition. The VS is just way too loose
in my mind and needs to be tightened. I have heard other descriptions
of oil canning as the skin popping out when pressed in a particular
place - and staying there until pressed again. Am I confusing some flex
in the panels with something more insidious?
cheers,
Ron
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
DLIUDVINAITIS(at)aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, 19 September 2007 11:37 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Oil Canning
Ron,
I myself have not had any signs of oil canning. Have done my Hs,
wings, Vs, tailcone 1.5 years ago still have not seen any. Maybe when
you were assembling Hs, wings, Vs, etc. you started at the ends and
worked riveting inward towards centers. I myself started in center of
assembles and worked outward this I thought would help by letting metal
shrink/strech outwards towards the ends of assembles. worked for me I
have no oil canning visible as for solving problem. shrinking
metal/streching I would go with tech recommendations an/or move on and
keep building.
Dave Liudvinaitis
#40466
fuselage, side skins
________________________________
Make AOL Your Homepage.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
Well, when there's so much stress that it goes "pop pop" as you
press and release, where it makes a concave and then when you
push opposite, it "pops" loudly out, then I'd think it might
be worth doing something about. The skin will have areas
where it will flex some though, and although I'm not addressing
any known engineering things on this plane or any other, I'm guessing
that you don't want it always stretched super tight, as wings and
surfaces need to flex. Maybe John can comment a bit. If you do
have a section oil canning, and it can't be easily fixed by some
riveting, it may be time for taking one of a few measures. I've heard
of stiffners either being riveted in or prosealed in. The access area
around my stall warning plate got oil-canning like that. I added
stiffners in that particular area around the hole...2 of them, one
in each direction. That took care of it. But, I'm cautious to offer
that as general advice, because I'm sure there are some areas where
adding stiffners might make things too...well...stiff.
I'm not sure that the list can give a definite answer on it, and it's
something that either might be best referred to a tech counselor
locally, or played by "ear" (with the popping noise). That's probably
why you didn't get quick answers....most people are just waiting to
hear what someone has to say, because the exact magnitude isn't known
without standing there by it.
Sorry, I know that didn't help, but it was a shot.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
McGANN, Ron wrote:
> Thanks all for the responses.
>
> As mentioned, I am at the stages of final assembly and the vast majority
> of panels are tighter than a drum. I religiously started riveting from
> the centre and worked towards the edges - as you have done Dave. On
> perhaps a handful of panels, the skin is not quite so tight and exhibits
> a slight 'wobble' when pressed in just the right spot, but the skin
> always recovers to the relaxed condition. The VS is just way too loose
> in my mind and needs to be tightened. I have heard other descriptions
> of oil canning as the skin popping out when pressed in a particular
> place - and staying there until pressed again. Am I confusing some flex
> in the panels with something more insidious?
>
> cheers,
> Ron
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of
> *DLIUDVINAITIS(at)aol.com
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 19 September 2007 11:37 AM
> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Oil Canning
>
> Ron,
> I myself have not had any signs of oil canning. Have done my Hs,
> wings, Vs, tailcone 1.5 years ago still have not seen any. Maybe
> when you were assembling Hs, wings, Vs, etc. you started at the ends
> and worked riveting inward towards centers. I myself started in
> center of assembles and worked outward this I thought would help by
> letting metal shrink/strech outwards towards the ends of
> assembles. worked for me I have no oil canning visible as for
> solving problem. shrinking metal/streching I would go with tech
> recommendations an/or move on and keep building.
>
> Dave Liudvinaitis
> #40466
> fuselage, side skins
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Make AOL Your Homepage.
>
> *
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris and Susie McGough" <VHMUM(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rivethead-aero |
I just received this email from rivethead aero. Hopefully David comes good
and it seems by temporarily closing his website he is doing something
positive to fill backorders.
regards Chris 388
RV Builder / Owner:
I apologize for the lack of communication concerning the status
of your order. Over the past weeks I have been working to complete open
orders. If your parts have not shipped yet, they will be on the way very
shortly. I appreciate your frustration.
I assure you Full Throttle Concepts will continue to provide and support
these products. I am very thankful to every member of the RV community for
their support. My intent is to provide parts of good quality, and I want
each person to be satisfied years after their purchase.
I will be temporarily suspending new web orders as I concentrate on
completing orders and building inventory. I will also use this time
implement more efficient tooling and programming in the production
processes. I will open web orders again on 10/12/2007. In an effort to
provide better communication concerning order status, stock level and lead
time information will be added to the website.
Again, I am very thankful to all of the people in the RV community for their
support over the years. Keeping pace with this group can be challenging,
but for me it is very rewarding. I enjoy this work very much and I will
continue to improve my service.
Sincerely,
David Czachorowski
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Edgerton" <wayne.e(at)grandecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rivethead-aero |
I received my order from Rivethead yesterday, which was the metal door
guides and new polished outside door handles. They really look great. I
have been communicating with Dave's nephew Joe and here is his last
e-mail to me. Dave apparently has a regular job and does the RV stuff on
the side.
Wayne Edgerton N602WT
_________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
Wayne,
Glad you got your parts. Dave has been extremely busy with his job,
and I mean extremely! Hopefully soon for the interior handles. I have
seen his design on Solid Works. I actually got to see them work with
this software. Pretty cool. It will be well worth the wait and the
good news is that you can still use your Vans handles because these are
bolt on replacements.
Glad to hear your painting is coming along. I look forward to seeing
some pics.
Joe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Hadath" <whadath(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Looking for friends |
Fellow RV 10 Builders
I have purchased Serial number 40732. I have just mounted the tail cone and
am currently working on the baggage door. What a terrific kit!!
I am located in Kitchener, Ontario, Canada and I am building at my hangar at
CYKF.
I heard recently that there is a builder located in Salem, which is not far
from here. If you monitor the list may be you could contact me. Are there
any other builders in the Kitchener area?
I still have not decided on prop yet but I am leaning towards the 3 blade
MT. I don't like the fact it is a wooden prop but I am familiar with the
smoothness of the 3 blades.
Hopefully in the next while there will be a bit more clarity on the ELT
situation so an informed decision can be made.
Thanks
Wayne Hadath
RV 10 Quickbuild, hoping for first flight, 1st day of summer 08.
F1 Rocket (Parts kit) 200 hours flying
http://www.justplaneworks.com/
Just Plane Works Inc.
23 Jadestone Court
Kitchener, Ontario
Canada
N2A 3X7
519-648-3375
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Ritter <mritter509(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Looking for friends |
Wayne,
I have an MT three blade prop on my RV-10 and love the takeoff power and vi
bration free operation (I understand the two blade is also very smooth and
has all the push you need for takeoff). Probably a tad slower than the two
blade but it does look sexy. Little nicks are easy to fix on the composite
cover. I got a few in Mexico and fixed them with some five minute epoxy pe
r the MT manuel.
Mark
RV-10/N410MR
From: whadath(at)rogers.comTo: rv10-list(at)matronics.comSubject: RV10-List: Look
ing for friendsDate: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:19:11 -0400
Fellow RV 10 Builders
I have purchased Serial number 40732. I have just mounted the tail cone and
am currently working on the baggage door. What a terrific kit!!
I am located in Kitchener, Ontario, Canada and I am building at my hangar a
t CYKF.
I heard recently that there is a builder located in Salem, which is not far
from here. If you monitor the list may be you could contact me. Are there
any other builders in the Kitchener area?
I still have not decided on prop yet but I am leaning towards the 3 blade M
T. I don=92t like the fact it is a wooden prop but I am familiar with the s
moothness of the 3 blades.
Hopefully in the next while there will be a bit more clarity on the ELT sit
uation so an informed decision can be made.
Thanks
Wayne Hadath
RV 10 Quickbuild, hoping for first flight, 1st day of summer 08.
F1 Rocket (Parts kit) 200 hours flying
http://www.justplaneworks.com/
Just Plane Works Inc.
23 Jadestone Court
Kitchener, Ontario
Canada
N2A 3X7
519-648-3375
_________________________________________________________________
Gear up for Halo=AE 3 with free downloads and an exclusive offer. It=92s ou
r way of saying thanks for using Windows Live=99.
http://gethalo3gear.com?ocid=SeptemberWLHalo3_WLHMTxt_2
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com> |
I weighed N991RV yesterday as part of getting ready for the DAR.
Left wheel: 659 lbs., right wheel: 665 lbs., nose wheel: 310 lbs.
Total: 1634 lbs.
Eguipment: Dynon 180 & 100, sl30, sl40, ps8000 audio, truetrak, full
flightline interior (not leather) overhead console, painted, aerocomposits
3 blade prop, soundproofing under floor.
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
Albert, valuable post...knowing the left to right differential is
important and great to read. Did you mount your batteries right of the
longitudinal centerline?
John Cox
Oregon
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert
Gardner
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 10:00 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Empty weight
I weighed N991RV yesterday as part of getting ready for the DAR.
Left wheel: 659 lbs., right wheel: 665 lbs., nose wheel: 310 lbs.
Total: 1634 lbs.
Eguipment: Dynon 180 & 100, sl30, sl40, ps8000 audio, truetrak, full
flightline interior (not leather) overhead console, painted,
aerocomposits
3 blade prop, soundproofing under floor.
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | German Alvarez <german.alvarez(at)playalinda.net> |
| Subject: | The end of Selective Availability (SA) on GPS |
Not specific to the RV-10, but good news, future GPS satellites will not
even have the SA feature.
http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/09/us-ends-gps-cri.html
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=&ie=UTF-8&q=GPS+%22Selective+Availability%22&btnG=Search
--ga
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Sipp" <rsipp(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Empty weight |
Great data point Albert, thanks for sharing. How about the same for more of
the finished airplanes? Also the empty CG location would be nice to know.
Dick Sipp
N110DV 40065
finishing frenzy at airport
> I weighed N991RV yesterday as part of getting ready for the DAR.
> Left wheel: 659 lbs., right wheel: 665 lbs., nose wheel: 310 lbs.
> Total: 1634 lbs.
>
> Eguipment: Dynon 180 & 100, sl30, sl40, ps8000 audio, truetrak, full
> flightline interior (not leather) overhead console, painted, aerocomposits
> 3 blade prop, soundproofing under floor.
>
> Albert Gardner
> Yuma, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com> |
The battery is in Vans location on the centerline. I was a little surprised
to see the extra 6 lbs. on the right wheel. The trutrak servo is in the
right wing so that's certainly part of the difference but I didn't weigh it
before I installed it.
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
-----Original Message-----
Albert, valuable post...knowing the left to right differential is
important and great to read. Did you mount your batteries right of the
longitudinal centerline?
John Cox
Oregon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Albert Gardner" <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com> |
OK Dick, here are the calculations of empty C.G. The main wheel arm
lengths
(and all other arm lengths as well) came from Vans. I didn't measure
them
myself.
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
Datum 99.44 Inches forward of wing
leading
edge. (L.E.)
Design C.G. Range 15%-30% of wing chord, or 8.4 - 16.8
inches
from L.E., or 107.84 - 116.24 inches aft of Datum.
Wing L.E. 99.44 inches aft of Datum.
Fuel 108.9" aft of datum
Pilot & Front Seat Passenger 114.58" aft of datum.
Rear Seat Passenger(s) 151.26" aft of datum.
Baggage 173.5" aft of datum.
Max
100 lbs.
Aircraft is initially weighed empty in level flight attitude. Includes
all
engine fluids and non usable fuel.
Airplane CG Weight Arm
Moment
Main wheel, right 665 124.44
82,752.60
Main wheel, left 659 124.31
81,920.29
Nose wheel 310 50.44
15,636.40
Totals 1,634
180,309.29
C.G. 110.35
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rivethead-aero |
| From: | "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net> |
I wish I also had received a mail or order confirmation.
Still hoping
Michael
www.wellenzohn.net
(engine mounted yesterday and put her on the wheels the day before)
--------
RV-10 builder (fuselage)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135433#135433
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Brake cylinder assembly question |
| From: | "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net> |
Hello,
just a quick question on the brake cylinder as described on page 46-07 Step 2&3.
Both cylinder are identical that means I have two "left sides" because the bleeder
valve on the right side points up and not down. Was it the same with yours?
Also it calls for AD822-4D elbow fittings but they wont fit in the threaded
holes in the cylinder (hole is too small).
2.Question Front tire tube installation, did you remove all washers even the one
which protects the tube see attached picture (washer on the right).
--------
RV-10 builder (fuselage)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135434#135434
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/wheels026_787.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Dunne" <acs(at)acspropeller.com.au> |
| Subject: | Brake cylinder assembly question |
Michael, page 46-07 step 2 tells you to remove one of the fittings from the
top to the bottom effectively creating a "right side". Have you correctly
identified the elbow fitting, (AN822-4D) I don't recall a problem here.
John 40315
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Wellenzohn
Sent: Thursday, 20 September 2007 4:27 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Brake cylinder assembly question
Hello,
just a quick question on the brake cylinder as described on page 46-07 Step
2&3.
Both cylinder are identical that means I have two "left sides" because the
bleeder valve on the right side points up and not down. Was it the same with
yours? Also it calls for AD822-4D elbow fittings but they wont fit in the
threaded holes in the cylinder (hole is too small).
2.Question Front tire tube installation, did you remove all washers even the
one which protects the tube see attached picture (washer on the right).
--------
RV-10 builder (fuselage)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135434#135434
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/wheels026_787.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Sked <ricksked(at)embarqmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Brake cylinder assembly question |
Michael,
Yes, it's the same, you need to remove a bleeder and move it to the other side
to create a "right" caliper. The plans have instructions on doing this.
Yes, remove all the washers from the tube and beofre you install it for good, make
a bend so the fill valve does not hit the fork unless you swapped out the
wheel assembly and are not using the Van's supplied wheel.
Rick S.
40185
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net>
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 11:27:29 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RV10-List: Brake cylinder assembly question
Hello,
just a quick question on the brake cylinder as described on page 46-07 Step 2&3.
Both cylinder are identical that means I have two "left sides" because the bleeder
valve on the right side points up and not down. Was it the same with yours?
Also it calls for AD822-4D elbow fittings but they wont fit in the threaded
holes in the cylinder (hole is too small).
2.Question Front tire tube installation, did you remove all washers even the one
which protects the tube see attached picture (washer on the right).
--------
RV-10 builder (fuselage)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135434#135434
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/wheels026_787.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Marlow <sam(at)fr8dog.net> |
| Subject: | Removing the front seats |
Just finished installing the interior, but now I need to crawl under the
panel again. How do I remove the front seats without removing the rear
carpet and flap drive cover? That's a lot of work! I think someone had a
solution back a year or so ago, but I couldn't locate it in the archives.
Thanks!
Sam Marlow
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Removing the front seats |
It takes a little work, but it's possible. What you do is to trim a
bevel into that nylon slide runner on the seat side of the rails.
You trim it on the front side of the rails, so that when you pull
the seat latch off and slide it all the way back, there's enough
slop that you can tip the back of the seat upwards. It's much
harder to explain than to see...but it's just loosening up the first
3/4" or so of that nylon glide.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
Sam Marlow wrote:
> Just finished installing the interior, but now I need to crawl under the
> panel again. How do I remove the front seats without removing the rear
> carpet and flap drive cover? That's a lot of work! I think someone had a
> solution back a year or so ago, but I couldn't locate it in the archives.
> Thanks!
> Sam Marlow
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <tdawson-townsend(at)aurora.aero> |
"Hopefully in the next while there will be a bit more clarity on the ELT
situation so an informed decision can be made.
Thanks
Wayne Hadath"
Wayne, maybe it doesn't apply to homebuilts, but I think 406 MHz ELTs
are mandatory for certificated aircraft in Canada, or at least new ones
. . ..
TDT
Tim Dawson-Townsend
Aurora Flight Sciences
tdt(at)aurora.aero
617-500-4812 (office)
617-905-4800 (mobile)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | OT: Positive Customer Service Experience - Randolph Engineering |
I figure when someone really comes through beaming, it's
nice to pass it on.
A year ago after my Lasik I went looking for some good
sunglasses for flying, and yeah, I bought the marketing
and decided to go with a pair made by Randolph Engineering.
They make them for the military and they have a few various
types and lens shades.
Well, I dropped them on the blacktop and chipped a lens a
little. Decided I liked them after a year, so I bought 2
more pair...one for spare in the plane and one for
the car or other. I sent the original pair in, with
a note telling them the age of them, and that I personally
dropped them and chipped them, but would like to buy new
lenses and that they should just bill me accordingly.
They sent back a brand new pair of glasses for ZERO dollars.
Sure, to them I'm sure that's a simple and cheap thing.
To me, it shows great customer service. I figured a
public "thanks" would be nice, hence this post.
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Dunne" <acs(at)acspropeller.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: OT: Positive Customer Service Experience - Randolph Engineering |
Tim, 12 months on are you still happy with your Lasik surgery?
John 40315
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson" <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 6:08 AM
Subject: RV10-List: OT: Positive Customer Service Experience - Randolph
Engineering
>
> I figure when someone really comes through beaming, it's
> nice to pass it on.
>
> A year ago after my Lasik I went looking for some good
> sunglasses for flying, and yeah, I bought the marketing
> and decided to go with a pair made by Randolph Engineering.
> They make them for the military and they have a few various
> types and lens shades.
>
> Well, I dropped them on the blacktop and chipped a lens a
> little. Decided I liked them after a year, so I bought 2
> more pair...one for spare in the plane and one for
> the car or other. I sent the original pair in, with
> a note telling them the age of them, and that I personally
> dropped them and chipped them, but would like to buy new
> lenses and that they should just bill me accordingly.
>
> They sent back a brand new pair of glasses for ZERO dollars.
>
> Sure, to them I'm sure that's a simple and cheap thing.
> To me, it shows great customer service. I figured a
> public "thanks" would be nice, hence this post.
>
> --
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Marlow <sam(at)fr8dog.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Removing the front seats |
Thanks Tim, do you have a pic by chance on your website?
Tim Olson wrote:
>
> It takes a little work, but it's possible. What you do is to trim a
> bevel into that nylon slide runner on the seat side of the rails.
> You trim it on the front side of the rails, so that when you pull
> the seat latch off and slide it all the way back, there's enough
> slop that you can tip the back of the seat upwards. It's much
> harder to explain than to see...but it's just loosening up the first
> 3/4" or so of that nylon glide.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
>
> Sam Marlow wrote:
>> Just finished installing the interior, but now I need to crawl under
>> the panel again. How do I remove the front seats without removing the
>> rear carpet and flap drive cover? That's a lot of work! I think
>> someone had a solution back a year or so ago, but I couldn't locate
>> it in the archives.
>> Thanks!
>> Sam Marlow
>>
>> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: How's things in Oz? |
| From: | "marcausman" <marc(at)verticalpower.com> |
rleffler wrote:
>
> So here's my request:
>
> Develop a white paper of exactly was is the cost comparison would be using traditional
technology versus your product. If the cost is as close as you indicate,
then the white paper should help convince us with tight budgets to take
the plunge.
>
> I did enjoy meeting and talking with your team at Michael's last week. I think
you have a great product, I just can't afford it at the moment.
>
> bob
>
Bob,
There's a white paper here at the top of the page: http://www.verticalpower.com/purchase.html
The goal is to help you determine if it makes sense for your particular situation,
taking into account price and other factors as well.
Marc
--------
Marc Ausman
http://www.verticalpower.com
RV-7 IO-390 Flying
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135596#135596
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DejaVu" <wvu(at)ameritel.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Removing the front seats |
Nah, not that much work. A pointy exacto carves the nylon away nicely.
Just pull the seat back as far as it will go. Look at the front side of the
seat rails and carve away the nylon portion that's preventing the seat back
from coming up.
Anh
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson" <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 1:12 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Removing the front seats
>
>
> It takes a little work, but it's possible. What you do is to trim a bevel
> into that nylon slide runner on the seat side of the rails.
> You trim it on the front side of the rails, so that when you pull
> the seat latch off and slide it all the way back, there's enough
> slop that you can tip the back of the seat upwards. It's much
> harder to explain than to see...but it's just loosening up the first
> 3/4" or so of that nylon glide.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
>
> Sam Marlow wrote:
>> Just finished installing the interior, but now I need to crawl under the
>> panel again. How do I remove the front seats without removing the rear
>> carpet and flap drive cover? That's a lot of work! I think someone had a
>> solution back a year or so ago, but I couldn't locate it in the archives.
>> Thanks!
>> Sam Marlow
>>
>> *
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <rvmail(at)thelefflers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: How's things in Oz? |
Thanks for the update!
I'm on the road and will read later this weekend.
bob
>
> From: "marcausman" <marc(at)verticalpower.com>
> Date: 2007/09/20 Thu PM 09:50:20 EST
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: Re: How's things in Oz?
>
>
>
> rleffler wrote:
> >
> > So here's my request:
> >
> > Develop a white paper of exactly was is the cost comparison would be using
traditional technology versus your product. If the cost is as close as you indicate,
then the white paper should help convince us with tight budgets to take
the plunge.
> >
> > I did enjoy meeting and talking with your team at Michael's last week. I think
you have a great product, I just can't afford it at the moment.
> >
> > bob
> >
>
>
> Bob,
>
> There's a white paper here at the top of the page: http://www.verticalpower.com/purchase.html
>
> The goal is to help you determine if it makes sense for your particular situation,
taking into account price and other factors as well.
>
> Marc
>
> --------
> Marc Ausman
> http://www.verticalpower.com
> RV-7 IO-390 Flying
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135596#135596
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fuel Tanks - To Alodine or Not to Alodine - That is the Question? |
| From: | "Patrick Pulis" <patrick.pulis(at)seagas.com.au> |
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Brake cylinder assembly question |
| From: | "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net> |
Great thanks for your answers.
Michael
--------
RV-10 builder (fuselage)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135619#135619
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | FW: Fuel Tanks - To Alodine or Not to Alodine - That is the |
Question?
| From: | "Patrick Pulis" <patrick.pulis(at)seagas.com.au> |
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tank Calibration Problem (Dynon FliteDek 180) |
| From: | "johngoodman" <johngoodman(at)earthlink.net> |
Albert,
I just finished installing mine and pressure tested it. I think the ground is the
mount's screws attached to the airplane. The center screw picks up the resistance.
Frankly, I don't think it makes any difference which way you wire it since
it's just ohms, but I ain't no electrician....
Maybe you don't have a good ground. Put an ohmmeter to the big screw and one of
the mounting screws to see what you got. The swing on mine was 31 full, 245 empty.
Good luck.
--------
#40572 Empennage done, starting QB Wings
N711JG reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135698#135698
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "johngoodman" <johngoodman(at)earthlink.net> |
Get a dehumidifier. Make it bone dry in there if you can and you'll have nothing
but dessicated spiders that can be vacuumed out.
John
--------
#40572 Empennage done, starting QB Wings
N711JG reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135700#135700
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Pitot/Static fittings on TruTrak Digflight ll VSVG |
Has anyone had any difficulty with attaching pitot/static lines to the
Tru-Trak A/P?
I've got the pitot/static kit from Safeair, and it has the 'instant'
brass fittings that you screw into the various instruments and then push
the poly tubing into. The brass fittings fit into the encoder, the ADC,
the Dynon EFIS, but NOT the Tru Trak, When I attempt to screw them in
they begin to cock to one side, forcing it will result in the threads
being stripped. it appears that the holes that are tapped in what
appears to be a black plastic fitting on the rear of the Tru Trak are
slightly smaller (rough measurement w/ caliper confirms. Anybody know
what size threads these are? I checked the install manual but nothing
referenced there.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Dynon heated AOA/Pitot |
| From: | "johngoodman" <johngoodman(at)earthlink.net> |
What are others doing to route the second tube, wiring, and controller in the wing?
I'm thinking of enlarging the Vans pitot snap bushings to a larger size and
mounting the controller to the inside of the bottom skin with an access panel.
I'm reluctant to route tubing through lightening holes.
John
--------
#40572 Empennage done, starting QB Wings
N711JG reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135704#135704
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rene Felker" <rene(at)felker.com> |
| Subject: | Pitot/Static fittings on TruTrak Digflight ll VSVG |
I had a similar problem. Once I got them started they went in easy.....to
easy for me and I ended up cracking the piece of plastic. I emailed
Tru-Trak and they told me I had to send the unit back. The fittings are
supposed to be finger tight and then a quarter turn, no more. I sent my unit
back and they replaced the plastic piece and put the fitting in for
me......I sent the fitting back with the unit and asked them to do it.
Other than my shipping cost to them, they did it for free. Only took about
10 days. Great company, great support.
Rene' Felker
N423CF
40322
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 7:37 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Pitot/Static fittings on TruTrak Digflight ll VSVG
Has anyone had any difficulty with attaching pitot/static lines to the
Tru-Trak A/P?
I've got the pitot/static kit from Safeair, and it has the 'instant'
brass fittings that you screw into the various instruments and then push
the poly tubing into. The brass fittings fit into the encoder, the ADC,
the Dynon EFIS, but NOT the Tru Trak, When I attempt to screw them in
they begin to cock to one side, forcing it will result in the threads
being stripped. it appears that the holes that are tapped in what
appears to be a black plastic fitting on the rear of the Tru Trak are
slightly smaller (rough measurement w/ caliper confirms. Anybody know
what size threads these are? I checked the install manual but nothing
referenced there.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Leikam" <DAVELEIKAM(at)wi.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Gretz pitot and Tru-Trak |
Three questions for ya'll,
For those with a Gretz pitot, where did you mount the control circuit
board? I have Safe Air static kit, did you use the green nylon tube all
the way to the pitot or Van's aluminum tube?
(Tim I know you used AL tube from your site.)
On my Tru-Trak roll servo there is a "stop limit bracket." Did you
install this?
Thanks!!!
Dave Leikam
40496
Wing guts
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Pitot/Static fittings on TruTrak Digflight ll VSVG |
Thanks to All, a little careful perseverance and they are in, it just
didn't make sense that they would be a different size than the others.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
Jesse Saint wrote:
>
> I have had this happen in the past. You just have to work at it a little
> bit to get it straight then it goes in with out trouble. It is the same
> threads as all the other instruments I have used, just a little tougher to
> get started.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Gretz pitot and Tru-Trak |
Check these pics re Gretz location
:http://deemsrv10.com/album/Sec%2020%20Bottom%20Wing%20Skin/slides/DSC02110.html
I used the green tube all the way to the pitot, im not sure this is the
best way, I tried contacting Gretz, but couldn't get an answer. My
reasoning was that the benefit of the Gretz is that it cycles the
current on & off as required so that the pitot head isn't always hot,
and therefore it shouldn't get as hot as the traditional installations ?????
Re stop limit bracket : Yes I did :
http://deemsrv10.com/album/Sec%2020%20Bottom%20Wing%20Skin/slides/DSC02106.html
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
Dave Leikam wrote:
> Three questions for ya'll,
>
> For those with a Gretz pitot, where did you mount the control circuit
> board? I have Safe Air static kit, did you use the green nylon tube
> all the way to the pitot or Van's aluminum tube?
> (Tim I know you used AL tube from your site.)
>
> On my Tru-Trak roll servo there is a "stop limit bracket." Did you
> install this?
> *
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Edgerton" <wayne.e(at)grandecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Gretz pitot and Tru-Trak |
Hi Dave,
I mounted the circuit board on the inside to the access panel right next
to the pitot tube. I also have the Safe Air but ran the aluminum tubing.
Wayne Edgerton N602WT
in the paint shop hoping to make it to LOE this year ??
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
Oil Canning
A moderate deformation or buckling of sheet material, particularly
common with flat sheet metal surfaces. Typically caused by uneven
stresses at the fastening points. This terminology also refers to the
popping sound made when pressure is applied to the deformed sheet
forcing the deformation in the opposite direction.
Oil canning can be defined as the actual waviness in the flat areas of
roofing and siding panels. Generally the period and amplitude of the
wave depend on the continuous width of the flat.
Oil canning is an inherent part of light gauge cold formed metal
products, particularly those with broad flat areas. Profiles having wide
flat surfaces are often referred to as "architectural" roofing and
siding panels. Such panels are distinguished from corrugated shapes as
the latter are more fluted in design, have much narrower flats, and are
less likely to exhibit oil canning.
Background
Oil canning has a number of causes:
1. Metal coil
Residual stresses induced during coil production can contribute.
Examples of other contributing features are:
a. Full center - the coil is longer in the middle of the strip; this is
the most common example. (The gradation manifests as ripples or buckles
near mid-coil.)
b. Wavy edge - the coil is longer on the edge of the strip.
c. Camber - the deviation of a side edge from a straight line. (This is
not always a problem.)
These conditions exist to some extent in all metal and tend to become
more exaggerated as the strength level of the rolled sheet product
increases and also for thinner and wider sheet product. When excessive,
each circumstance may cause oil canning after roll forming by the
manufacturer.
2. Fabrication
a. Slitting - The slitting of a master coil can release and redistribute
residual forces. The coil's esponse can create or increase oil canning.
The economics of rolling and coating wider coils makes slitting almost
mandatory.
b.Forming - New residual stresses can be created during some forming
operations. Architectural panel profiles typically require more forming
along sides than in the middle, and often require more forming along one
side than the other. This dictates that forming commences along the
sides. This sequential "working" of the sheet will have a tendency to
"trap" uneven metal contained within the coil in the panel central areas
(corrugated ribbed profiles are most often worked from the center out,
thereby "pushing" the uneven metal to the edges).
3. Installation
a. Misalignment of the support system - Structural supports that are
produced, fabricated and installed within allowable tolerances can
create a "non-planar" or contoured bearing surface. Stresses induced
while panels conform to this surface can contribute to oil canning.
b. Over engagement of panels - Most panels accommodate transverse
thermal expansion by flexing of webs and by "take up" at side joints.
When panels are over engaged, these relief features are hindered or
eliminated. In the extreme the "over engagement" process itself can
generate waviness. Either cause can contribute to oil canning.
c. Over driving of fasteners - This operation creates stresses in the
panel and provides a "reading line" at the fasteners.
d. Longitudinal Expansion - The surface temperature of exposed panels
cycles throughout the year and even fluctuates daily. The temperature
and the cycle depend on many variables, e.g. project location and
orientation, cloud cover, panel inclination, surface finish or color,
system thermal insulation characteristics. The panels' physical response
is to expand or contract. If panels are restrained by "thru-fasteners",
clips, or perimeter details, they try to accommodate or relieve thermal
forces through several mechanisms, i.e. "slotting" around fasteners,
out-of plane "bowing", local distortion of flat areas - "waviness". The
magnitude of thermal force depends on the restraint provided (hence the
panel stiffness and support stiffness), on the base materials' physical
properties, and on the temperature differential between the support
structure and the external skin. Waviness can be amplified when there is
uneven fastener restraint along the panel. Such restraint is common on
"concealed fastener" systems having fasteners along one edge and an
interlock along the other. Waviness caused by thermal forces differs
from other forms of oil canning in that waves can appear and disappear
as the sun rises and moves around the building.
e. Movement of the primary structure - Excessive differential
deflection, racking, drift, or settlement within the primary structure
can cause noticeable waviness within panel flats. This distortion can be
temporary or sustained.
f. Handling - Carrying of panels in the flat or twisting of panels can
induce a wavy appearance to a previously flat panel. Twisting can occur
if one corner of a panel is used to lift a panel or to remove the panel
from a bundle.
Coil producers and panel manufacturers attempt to minimize these
conditions and produce quality products. On going research seeks
improved production methods. All of the above factors can and do occur
and can cause oil canning in architectural roofing or siding products.
While a number of factors dictate the panel design, the following are
items that the designer, panel manufacturer, and erector may consider in
reducing the occurrence of oil canning:
1. Coil:
Tension or stretcher leveling, a process whereby the metal is
"stretched" in coil form beyond its yield point, will provide a flatter
surface less prone to oil canning. In general the heavier the gauge the
less likely a product is to oil can. The possibility of oil canning can
be reduced by ordering tension leveled and re-squared material.
2. Design:
The addition of stiffening beads "breaks-up" the flat surface and makes
oil canning less apparent. Embossing will also help hide surface
waviness in the metal. The selection of lower gloss coatings and lighter
colors tend to minimize the visual effect of oil canning.
3. Installation:
More stringent specifications regarding the alignment of the supporting
structure will focus attention on this critical aspect. Instructions to
the erection forces regarding proper handling, spacing, and fastening
should be a part of the manufacturers' delivery packet.
Conclusion
Oil canning is an aesthetic problem. Normally structural integrity is
not affected. However, structural integrity must be reviewed if the
distortion results from an extreme external influence. Since many
uncontrollable factors are involved, no manufacturer can realistically
assure the total elimination of oil canning. With careful attention to
the production and selection of material, to the panel design, and to
installation practice, oil canning can be effectively minimized.
Unless specified tolerances have been accepted by the panel provider and
panel manufacturer and are incorporated into the contract documents
prior to fabrication, and if reasonable precautions have been taken, oil
canning is not grounds for panel rejection.
John Cox
#600
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Reynolds <rvreynolds(at)macs.net> |
I just downloaded a demo of this program on my MAC.
Are there any instructions on how to get started, ie, set it up for
my log book, airplane?
Richard Reynolds
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Dunne" <acs(at)acspropeller.com.au> |
Off to the shed this morning to fix yesterdays mistake.....thought I had
placed the wingtip in the correct position, that is, centrally located
inside the nose of the wing skin, and started fixing. Turns out I was
off by around 1/4" and multiplying the error as I tried to coax the rest
of the tip into shape. By the end I had introduced a substantial reflex
on the trailing edge creating a mini,"up elevator".
I was initially tempted to make the adjustment by splitting the trailing
edge, since you have to trim it to size in any case but was worried by
the result Tim Olson ended up with (see his website for info) and
decided just to do it again properly. In hindsight I should've packed
out the substantially flattened tip with something to encourage the
correct shape before commencing with the fitting.
When I re-tried the fit, I found a sweeter position 1/4'' away, but it
was by no means obvious.
Today I'll be fibreglassing over the incorrect holes.
Something for someone yet to do this step.
John 40315 (Finishing all the things I put off 'till tomorrow)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Puzzled, perplex & confused in the fuse .... |
Hi
As I continue to build I have found that when anything didn't seem right in
the kit, it was because of the then builder not getting the right slot "a"
lined up with the right slot "b". Until now that is..
I have spent the priming and deburring parts associated with Secton 28 - the
mid fuse. I started to assemble the forward fuselage bulkhead sub-assembly
(Page 28-4) and found that the inboard forward seat rail support just won't
fit. The bolt / rivet holes that should match the corresponding holes on the
F1043A L/R & F1043B L/R bulkheads are two close by about 1/8". The nut
plate hole that should match the hole in the F1043B L/R flange is too far
forward by 1/16" inch.
The outboard seat rail supports fix perfectly.
I have assembled the inboard seat rail supports correctly (see page 28-3)
(there is really only one way to make the supports).
Has anyone else run into this problem? Any suggestions? I would like to
press on building this weekend and plan to call Van's on Monday.
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643 - frustrated in the fuse ..
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Puzzled, perplex & confused in the fuse .... |
| From: | "egohr1" <EGOHR86(at)alumni.carnegiemellon.edu> |
I had the same problem. If you look at the parts in question and compare them
to the other seat rail supports and find one of the legs on the angle to be short
call Vans, they sent me new parts.
--------
eric gohr
EGOHR86(at)alumni.carnegiemellon.edu
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135864#135864
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DLIUDVINAITIS(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Puzzled, perplex & confused in the fuse .... |
LES
HAD SAME PROBLEM . THE F1043F-L&R ARE DRILLED WRONG. LOOK AT THE ANGLE AT
ITS SIDE VIEW. HOLES TO JOIN BOTH F1043F PARTS TOGETHER ARE ON THE LARGER WIDTH
SIDE WHEN IT NEEDS TO BE ON THE SMALLER. CALLED VANS THEY REPLACED BOTH SETS
AOK! HOPE THIS HELPS.
DAVE LIUDVINAITIS
#40466
FUSELAGE
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Aluminum aircraft - basis for corrosion |
| From: | "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> |
Slow Sunday. One of my co-members at my aviation group (Columbia
Aviation Association) is the North American, CEO for SAPA RC one of the
world's largest specialty manufacturer's of aluminum products. His firm
has contributed to an interactive website to help users of aluminum to
better understand important issues - "Aluminum Matter".
John Noordwijk, is both an avid sailor and pilot (owning a Cirrus) but
also curious on the RV-10 build and issues which arise. Several of
SAPA's engineers provide technical support to this website.
http://aluminium.matter.org.uk/content/html/eng/default.asp?catid=180&p
a
geid=2144416690
If you take the time to core deeper, you will find a wealth of
explanations, graphics and questions (for you to answer) that can make
us all better manufacturers of aircraft. Three of their products are
2024, 3003 and 7075 which hold value with aviation construction. I am
seeing several of the forms of corrosion in the aircraft I work on.
Understanding what contributes to it allows us a path towards
causal/corrective actions.
John Cox
#600
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Puzzled, perplex & confused in the fuse .... |
Eric / Dave
Thanks for the timely response. I am glad I wasn't seeing things .
Perhaps this should be added to Tim's "Gotcha" list so that builders can
check for this problem before they need the parts.
Cheers
Les
#40643 - now only partially confused in the fuse.
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney
Sent: September-22-07 11:33 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Puzzled, perplex & confused in the fuse ....
Hi
As I continue to build I have found that when anything didn't seem right in
the kit, it was because of the then builder not getting the right slot "a"
lined up with the right slot "b". Until now that is..
I have spent the priming and deburring parts associated with Secton 28 - the
mid fuse. I started to assemble the forward fuselage bulkhead sub-assembly
(Page 28-4) and found that the inboard forward seat rail support just won't
fit. The bolt / rivet holes that should match the corresponding holes on the
F1043A L/R & F1043B L/R bulkheads are two close by about 1/8". The nut
plate hole that should match the hole in the F1043B L/R flange is too far
forward by 1/16" inch.
The outboard seat rail supports fix perfectly.
I have assembled the inboard seat rail supports correctly (see page 28-3)
(there is really only one way to make the supports).
Has anyone else run into this problem? Any suggestions? I would like to
press on building this weekend and plan to call Van's on Monday.
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643 - frustrated in the fuse ..
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | throttle, etc cables |
| From: | <tdawson-townsend(at)aurora.aero> |
I ran my throttle, prop, and mixture cables over the bottom bar of the
engine mount, like shown on the FF plans. Seems like not a lot of room
in there and potential for rubbing. Did other folks do the same, or let
the cables go under the bottom bar of the engine mount?
Thanks,
TDT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris and Susie McGough" <VHMUM(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Re: throttle, etc cables |
throttle, etc cablesMy cables were not long enough as supplied by FF kit
and using the pre punched holes in firewall so I made new holes in the
fire wall and run the cables under the bar and clamped them.
regards Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: tdawson-townsend(at)aurora.aero
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 6:10 AM
Subject: RV10-List: throttle, etc cables
I ran my throttle, prop, and mixture cables over the bottom bar of the
engine mount, like shown on the FF plans. Seems like not a lot of room
in there and potential for rubbing. Did other folks do the same, or let
the cables go under the bottom bar of the engine mount?
Thanks,
TDT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris and Susie McGough" <VHMUM(at)bigpond.com> |
throttle, etc cablesWith the spinner instalation are people turning the
prop to make sure the spinner is true? Just wondering as the engine is
preserved and did not want to turn?
regards Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Vertical Power |
| From: | "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net> |
Jesse,
I expect mine to be shipped next week. I'll also publish me progress and experience
here in the forum. But it might take a little longer since I will go on vacation
soon.
Michael
--------
RV-10 builder (fuselage)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=135961#135961
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jay Rowe" <jfrjr(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | engine baffling--paint? |
Just starting the engine baffling. Could/should I paint the baffling or
just leave it as shiny alum? If painting is advised what do I use for
paint, and what kind of prep works needs to be done on the alum?
Thanks 10'ers. Jay Rowe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | engine baffling--paint? |
I used a dark gray, single stage Imron paint over PPG DP40LF primer for the
baffles on my 8A. I used the same paint with a lighter gray Imron contrast
color for the interior. This is a hard, durable paint. After 5 years it
still looks brand new.
PPG Concept single stage paint is also a good choice. For the exterior I
used PPG Concept clear/base coat. The product is very forgiving to the
amateur painter.
Carl Froehlich
RV-8A (350 hrs)
RV-10 (wings)
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Rowe
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 7:45 PM
Subject: RV10-List: engine baffling--paint?
Just starting the engine baffling. Could/should I paint the baffling or
just leave it as shiny alum? If painting is advised what do I use for
paint, and what kind of prep works needs to be done on the alum? Thanks
10'ers. Jay Rowe
<http://promos.hotbar.com/promos/promodll.dll?RunPromo&El=&SG=&RAND=47770&pa
rtner=seekmo> Upgrade Your Email - Click here!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Saylor" <Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com> |
Chris,
You won't "de-preserve" it by turning the prop through by hand. Take the
top plugs out so it's easier, and put a pointer at the tip of the spinner to
check how true it turns. You will displace the spinner a bit when turning
the prop, but if you kind of average it out the fit is just fine.
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris and Susie
McGough
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 1:34 PM
Subject: RV10-List: spinner
With the spinner instalation are people turning the prop to make sure the
spinner is true? Just wondering as the engine is preserved and did not want
to turn?
regards Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Byron Gillespie" <bgill1(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | throttle, etc cables |
I ran mine under the bar - but also did not have enough cable length. I
am using a canted center panel that my knobs mount on - this takes up an
extra inch or so leaving me buying a new set of cables. But like you,
It looked like over time it might get a little close - so I didn't want
to take a chance.
Byron
Wrapping up the panel install
N253RV Assigned
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
tdawson-townsend(at)aurora.aero
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 4:11 PM
Subject: RV10-List: throttle, etc cables
I ran my throttle, prop, and mixture cables over the bottom bar of the
engine mount, like shown on the FF plans. Seems like not a lot of room
in there and potential for rubbing. Did other folks do the same, or let
the cables go under the bottom bar of the engine mount?
Thanks,
TDT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Fast Stack Wiring Harness |
Hi
As I look through the brochures I picked up at KOSH, I keep coming back to
one from Approach Avionics. They make a wiring harness / hub system that on
the surface seems like it would simplify wiring of just about any panel
configuration.
Does anyone have any experience with this system? Any comments positive /
negative welcome. I want to wire my own panel but at this point it seems
like a dark art to me (then again so was riveting a year ago).
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fast Stack Wiring Harness |
| From: | "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com> |
Les,
I believe my business partner used them to rewire /
interconnect avionics in our D-35 Bonanza (1953). From what I recall it
was plug N play and all went well. He was very impressed and could not
think of a better way to integrate a Garmin stack into a 50 year old
airplane.
Robin
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 7:32 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Fast Stack Wiring Harness
Hi
As I look through the brochures I picked up at KOSH, I keep coming back
to one from Approach Avionics. They make a wiring harness / hub system
that on the surface seems like it would simplify wiring of just about
any panel configuration.
Does anyone have any experience with this system? Any comments positive
/ negative welcome. I want to wire my own panel but at this point it
seems like a dark art to me (then again so was riveting a year ago).
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Fast Stack Wiring Harness |
Hi Robin
Thanks for the info. Their website says they are OEM for an a/c
manufacturer. I plan to call them tomorrow to find out who uses them. All in
all, it seems like a better way to go versus hand wiring if:
* The harnesses are of a high quality
* They are reliable and will be around to support their product
* The hub will withstand the temperature extremes of a G/A aircraft in
Canada
* It will support whatever avionics I decide to install (that is still
yet another question)
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks
Sent: September-23-07 8:50 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Fast Stack Wiring Harness
Les,
I believe my business partner used them to rewire /
interconnect avionics in our D-35 Bonanza (1953). From what I recall it was
plug N play and all went well. He was very impressed and could not think of
a better way to integrate a Garmin stack into a 50 year old airplane.
Robin
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 7:32 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Fast Stack Wiring Harness
Hi
As I look through the brochures I picked up at KOSH, I keep coming back to
one from Approach Avionics. They make a wiring harness / hub system that on
the surface seems like it would simplify wiring of just about any panel
configuration.
Does anyone have any experience with this system? Any comments positive /
negative welcome. I want to wire my own panel but at this point it seems
like a dark art to me (then again so was riveting a year ago).
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jesse Saint" <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> |
| Subject: | Fast Stack Wiring Harness |
Les,
I was actually going to ask the same thing to the list. I have been talking
to them and am going to be installing a Fast Stack system soon. I will let
you know how the installation goes. I have heard some say the installation
doesn't save much time, but I don't know yet. It actually costs less than
buying all of the different wiring harnesses you would need to wire up a
Radio Stack with A/P and a Dynon screen, so I think it may be a hard system
to beat if it works anything like it is advertised to. Stein would probably
be able to offer a little insight here. I know they use all shielded wire
and shielded connectors on the hub side. Keep in mind, though, that they
just handle the signal wires, not power, ground, headsets, etc. Tim will
give you a good run-down on what things he can integrate with, but I think
the list is fairly extensive.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse(at)saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
_____
From: Les Kearney [mailto:kearney(at)shaw.ca]
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 10:32 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Fast Stack Wiring Harness
Hi
As I look through the brochures I picked up at KOSH, I keep coming back to
one from Approach Avionics. They make a wiring harness / hub system that on
the surface seems like it would simplify wiring of just about any panel
configuration.
Does anyone have any experience with this system? Any comments positive /
negative welcome. I want to wire my own panel but at this point it seems
like a dark art to me (then again so was riveting a year ago).
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Rivethead-Aero Door Guide - help |
I am one of the fortunate ones that have received my door guides from
rivethead-aero. While trying to install them they are to wide (the
distance between the door frame to the door) and prevent the door from
closing properly. In my case it is for 3 of the 4 guides. Has anyone
else had this problem and what is the solution?
Larry Rosen
#356
still working on the doors
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rene Felker" <rene(at)felker.com> |
| Subject: | Rivethead-Aero Door Guide - help |
I had the same problem. I cut down the nylon guides on the door. I was
able to cut enough off so that they did not contact. I have not put the
doors back on since I got the fuselage back from the paint shop....hope they
still fit.
Rene' Felker
N423CF
40322
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry Rosen
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 7:16 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Rivethead-Aero Door Guide - help
I am one of the fortunate ones that have received my door guides from
rivethead-aero. While trying to install them they are to wide (the
distance between the door frame to the door) and prevent the door from
closing properly. In my case it is for 3 of the 4 guides. Has anyone
else had this problem and what is the solution?
Larry Rosen
#356
still working on the doors
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rivethead-Aero Door Guide - help |
| From: | "zackrv8" <zackrv8(at)verizon.net> |
Larry,
The door guides were made that way to accommodate every application. Every door
to fuselage distance is not the same on every RV10. So, you have to trim
the backside of the guides to make it fit. I guess you could trim some off the
delrin on the door if you wanted to, but I didn't do that.
Zack
--------
RV8 #80125
RV10 # 40512
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136080#136080
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Rosen <LarryRosen(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rivethead-Aero Door Guide - help |
"trim the backside" Thats what I thought but, how? If I had a mill
it would be easy, but then I could have made the part ;-) . I
could use a grinder or sanding disk, but that seems a crude way to fit
such a beautiful piece of machine work. Suggestions.
Larry
zackrv8 wrote:
>
> Larry,
>
> The door guides were made that way to accommodate every application. Every
door to fuselage distance is not the same on every RV10. So, you have to trim
the backside of the guides to make it fit. I guess you could trim some off
the delrin on the door if you wanted to, but I didn't do that.
>
>
> Zack
>
> --------
> RV8 #80125
> RV10 # 40512
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136080#136080
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Schmidt <scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com> |
I just pushed it on, drilled the holes and it came out perfect. As long as
it is even on the inside of the spinner it should be fine.=0AI never turne
d the engine to check it. =0A=0AScott Schmidt=0Ascottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com=0A
=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: Chris and Susie McGough <VHMUM
(at)bigpond.com>=0ATo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Sunday, September 23, 2
007 1:34:09 PM=0ASubject: RV10-List: spinner=0A=0A=0AWith the spinner insta
lation are people turning the prop to make sure the spinner is true? Just w
ondering as the engine is preserved and did not want to turn?=0A =0Aregards
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rivethead-Aero Door Guide - help |
This is definately NOT an elegant way to do it, but since I didn't have
a milling machine. I used a flat 1/2" router bit, chucked in a drill
press. Put the part in a drill press vise and 'milled' off very small
amounts at a time. cleaned it up with the vixen file.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
Larry Rosen wrote:
>
> "trim the backside" Thats what I thought but, how? If I had a mill
> it would be easy, but then I could have made the part ;-) . I
> could use a grinder or sanding disk, but that seems a crude way to fit
> such a beautiful piece of machine work. Suggestions.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fast Stack Wiring Harness |
| From: | "Robin Marks" <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com> |
Les,
I was wrong... again. My partner used custom harnesses
built by:
http://www.approachfaststack.com/index.html
Product cross reference:
http://www.approachfaststack.com/products.html
Again he was impressed with their plug-n-plan function
as well as the quality of the assemblies.
Robin
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 8:24 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Fast Stack Wiring Harness
Hi Robin
Thanks for the info. Their website says they are OEM for an a/c
manufacturer. I plan to call them tomorrow to find out who uses them.
All in all, it seems like a better way to go versus hand wiring if:
=D8 The harnesses are of a high quality
=D8 They are reliable and will be around to support their product
=D8 The hub will withstand the temperature extremes of a G/A aircraft
in Canada
=D8 It will support whatever avionics I decide to install (that is
still yet another question)
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks
Sent: September-23-07 8:50 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Fast Stack Wiring Harness
Les,
I believe my business partner used them to rewire /
interconnect avionics in our D-35 Bonanza (1953). From what I recall it
was plug N play and all went well. He was very impressed and could not
think of a better way to integrate a Garmin stack into a 50 year old
airplane.
Robin
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Les Kearney
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 7:32 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Fast Stack Wiring Harness
Hi
As I look through the brochures I picked up at KOSH, I keep coming back
to one from Approach Avionics. They make a wiring harness / hub system
that on the surface seems like it would simplify wiring of just about
any panel configuration.
Does anyone have any experience with this system? Any comments positive
/ negative welcome. I want to wire my own panel but at this point it
seems like a dark art to me (then again so was riveting a year ago).
Cheers
Les Kearney
#40643
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Prop Governor Question |
| From: | "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10(at)wellenzohn.net> |
I installed the prop governor a couple days ago but I thing that the orientation
of the lever is wrong.
Before I cut the hole for the cable in the baffeling assembly I want to be sure
that this is right?
If you could attach a picture of your installation that would help most. I used
the MT FWF Kit and the governor came as you see in the picture.
Michael
--------
RV-10 builder (fuselage)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136112#136112
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc01635_302.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Edgerton" <wayne.e(at)grandecom.net> |
I haven't seen much said about people planning on attending the Land of
Enchantment flyin event the weekend of Oct 5th. Are many of you planning
on attending? If I get my plane out of the paint shop and ready to go I
plan on being there. I know Russ Daves was over this weekend and told me
that he is going to be there. There will be a couple of us flying in
from 16X. I'm trying to get my wife braved up to be able to come with.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Free RV-10 W&B being offered |
| From: | "Tom Meeker" <tom(at)aoaircrafters.com> |
Looks like the RV-10 weight and balance flyin at Alpha Omega Aircrafters is being
postponed. It was scheduled for next Saturday, the 29 but isn't going to happen
then. So if you or anyone you know was thinking of going, spread the word
around. It says on their web site that it is postponed but no re-do date is
given.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136113#136113
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RV-10 Weigh-in Fly-in at AOA is POSPONED. |
| From: | "Tom Meeker" <tom(at)aoaircrafters.com> |
Looks like Alpha Omega Aircrafters is postponing their announced weigh-in fly-in
for RV-10 owners that was suppose to take place next Saturday, the 29th. No
date for for re-scheduling is given. Spread the word around to anyone who might
have been thinking about going.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136114#136114
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <tdawson-townsend(at)aurora.aero> |
Don't the milled aluminum door guides REPLACE the delrin blocks on the
door frame?
TDT
40025
Tim Dawson-Townsend
Aurora Flight Sciences
tdt(at)aurora.aero
617-500-4812 (office)
617-905-4800 (mobile)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rene Felker" <rene(at)felker.com> |
Yes, I cut my blocks on the door.
Rene' Felker
N423CF
40322
801-721-6080
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
tdawson-townsend(at)aurora.aero
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 9:55 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Door Guides
Don't the milled aluminum door guides REPLACE the delrin blocks on the door
frame?
TDT
40025
Tim Dawson-Townsend
Aurora Flight Sciences
tdt(at)aurora.aero
617-500-4812 (office)
617-905-4800 (mobile)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net> |
Yes, however, I think the post was was referring to the delrin blocks
that are on the door itself vs on the door frame.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
September 12, 2007 - September 24, 2007
RV10-Archive.digest.vol-co