Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:40 AM - Re: MGL EFIS and autopilot (AirEupora)
2. 06:42 AM - Re: MGL EFIS and autopilot (AirEupora)
3. 06:59 AM - Re: Airbox for 912S (budyerly@msn.com)
4. 07:16 AM - Re: Nose Wheel Shimmy (budyerly@msn.com)
5. 11:25 AM - Re: Stall Warner (budyerly@msn.com)
6. 02:03 PM - Re: MGL EFIS and autopilot (pestar)
7. 02:11 PM - Rear wing root socket problems (=?UTF-8?Q?Erik_Dahlb=c3=a4ck?=)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: MGL EFIS and autopilot |
I had the MGL Vogager EFIS and used the Trio Servos. I could not get them to
work correctly. MGL Torrance sold them to me, but they told me that Trio was
the problem and Trio told me that the problem was with MGL.
Before you buy an autopilot system for the Europa you need to determine if your
plane flies straight & level. How much force is needed to bring the nose up
or down once it leaves altitude. For whatever reason by plane took more force
to bring it back to lever than the Trio servo could deliver and would trip and
shut down after a few minutes of trying. If you go back into this Forum you
find a lot of question on how to get them set up. The roll axles worked and
it was easy to install in the co-pilot seat area. The big problem is the pitch
servo and how it connects to the pitch torque tube. I have to manufacture
a clamp with a horn on it. Europa now makes a pitch tube with the horn welded
to it.
I know that the MGL servos worked very well with the later model of the MGL EFIS
. You might check out their forum.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=498157#498157
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: MGL EFIS and autopilot |
I had the MGL Vogager EFIS and used the Trio Servos. I could not get them to
work correctly. MGL Torrance sold them to me, but they told me that Trio was
the problem and Trio told me that the problem was with MGL.
Before you buy an autopilot system for the Europa you need to determine if your
plane flies straight & level. How much force is needed to bring the nose up
or down once it leaves altitude. For whatever reason by plane took more force
to bring it back to level than the Trio servo could deliver and would trip and
shut down after a few minutes of trying. If you go back into this Forum you
find a lot of question on how to get them set up. The roll axles worked and
it was easy to install in the co-pilot seat area. The big problem is the pitch
servo and how it connects to the pitch torque tube. I had to manufacture a
clamp with a horn on it. Europa now makes a pitch tube with the horn welded
to it.
I know that the MGL servos worked very well with the later models of the MGL EFIS
. You might check out their forum.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=498158#498158
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Airbox for 912S |
Steve,
The bing 64 has a 50mm OD inlet for the filter or airbox attachment. The bore
is nominally 36mm.
The airbox (aka really cheap polyester chop and glass bit from Europa) have ends
that attach to the carb are 50 mm tapering up 52 mm ish. The chop on some of
these is so bad I had to reinforce it for the pop rivets on the nutplate it
shattered so bad.
Jeff Roberts was the first I had seen modify his airbox due to cracking. It appeared
he used a piece of two inch aluminum tubing and slid it into the well ground
out holes in his airbox and aligned the tubes with his carbs and allowed
the floxed tubes to cure, then wrapped the glass around the tube outside the
rubber tube to final bond the outside of his tubing.
I copied Jeffs later on using the 1 7/8 inch aluminum tube left over from the main
pitch rod. I ground out the cracked airbox and inserted the 1 7/8 (47.6 mm)
tube with flox and Redux (any epoxy will do) and then wrapped layers of bid
around until I was about 50 mm or 1 15/16 inches diameter. Then shaped to get
an easy fit of my two inch rubber hose. I was OK with this method since the
connecting hose allowed the two inlets on the bing carb inlet sufficient clean
air for normal operation. On a later aircraft I used 2 inch tube. The hose
clamp clearly compressed the hose more on the carb side than on the inlet box
with the two inch tube.
Epoxy sticks to just about anything but oil and grease so it will make a good repair
bond to the clean and roughed up polyester without a problem of bonding.
Remember to rough up the aluminum as usual also.
So you have two methods, either an innie or outie method.
Note: The airbox does not have to be really smooth on the inside. It is a plenum
not a tuned inlet. The bing carb sucks air rather than ram air entering the
carb on the 912S. The transition humps and bumps should be minimized but just
make both ends about the same and all will be fine. Remember, the bing has
an inlet on the inside above and below the bore so make sure they can get reasonably
clear air...
Of course Rotax wants you to buy their $1000 intake plenum. The only problem is
it tends to lack support and since it hangs on the carb, it cracks those expensive
43mm rubber carb manifold to carb flange. Support the inlet plenum, that
supports the carb and those rubber carb flange adapters last almost forever.
Just my opinion,
Best Regards to Mary also,
Bud Yerly
Best Regards,
Bud Yerly
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=498159#498159
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Nose Wheel Shimmy |
Replace the plastic disk if it shows signs of wear. Inspect your fork properly.
The nose tire pressure has much to do with the shimmy. If below 20 pounds it is
terrible. 35 pounds and it is a delight.
I set my dampener friction between 19 and 21 pounds of pull at the back of the
tire. Use a loop of safety wire around the nut long enough to go around the back
of the tire (wheel pant off please) and use a fish scale to do the pull test.
Typically the break out force is higher than the running or turning force
required to maintain the nose fork turn. If it breaks initially at 21 it is
fine for asphalt surfaces and for use on grass go a bit lower. 16 pounds is a
bit too low for initial break out in my opinion.
Various sticky greases Nylogel or similar help for dynamic steering and taxi ease
with the rudder. I find them useful but not necessary with a nice slick plastic
disk and smooth surfaces on the metal plates.
If the metal surface is worn with groves, fix it. If the spindle is loose, get
a new fork or find someone to fix it dead vertical.
Finally, never inject grease under pressure to lube the nose fork. Grease blows
by the O ring and screws up the friction and makes a mess. On my annual condition
inspection, I simply remove my fork and tire, inspect the components, check
for tightness and lube with a finger full of thick grease (Aeroshell 22)
on the recess in the strut receptacle, and bearing area and I'm good for another
year. It's been 14 years and still doing well enough.
Bud Yerly
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=498160#498160
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Stall Warner |
I've attached an old paper to a current document I have for working on second hand
purchases and stall spin accidents in experimental aircraft.
It is from notes and early papers I kept at Custom Flight Creations.
It should at least lead you to making an informed decision.
Bud Yerly
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=498162#498162
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/stall_warning_types_for_the_europa_with_evaluation_of_stall_strips_130.pdf
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: MGL EFIS and autopilot |
I have a DynAero MCR-4S based in Auckland NZ that has two Voyagers originally fitted
with Trio servos which worked very well. I replaced the Trios with MGL
servos because I am going from a 2 to 3 axis auto pilot and can use the same
CAN bus to control all 3.
Currently flying 2 axis, it took a little more tweaking to get the MGL's servos
tuned and used the MGL forum to get help from an European colleague operating
a MCR-4S (sad to see the old MGL forum disappear).
PM me if you require further information.
Cheers Peter
--------
Peter Armstrong
Auckland, New Zealand
DynAero MCR-4S (Do not shoot me :) ).
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=498163#498163
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Rear wing root socket problems |
Hello,
First time posting here, hoping my attached photos are small enough, etc...
I'm trying to get Europa SE-XRX airworthy again after being grounded for
two years. At first due to some hard-to-diagnose carburettor problems.
914 float bowls, enough said... If interested, I have a post about it
over at Rotax-Owners:
https://www.rotax-owner.com/en/912-914-technical-questions/6881-914ul-carburettor-gremlins?start=15
PROBLEM NO 1
Anyway, after fixing the engine and while doing the annual together with
the previous owner/builder, it was discovered that the rear wing socket
housing, part W26B, starboard side, was cracked in two parts. Further
inspection showed that also the port side was cracked, albeit not having
split in two just yet. Please see attached photos.
I've got the spares from the manufacturer however, I'm curious if this
is a known problem? Any thoughts on what could be the cause? Anything
further to look out for?
My local mechanic seemed just as puzzled as I was when looking at how
thin this part is. I mean what is it, 2 mm?
One thing to consider: The aircraft was built as a monowheel but crashed
on takeoff during flight testing, making a hard landing and a ground
loop. The incident was traced to a construction error in the control
line attachment to the rudder, causing alterations in the design (some
of might be familiar with this). The aircraft was then repaired (by some
sailplane workshop that seemed to know what they were doing, I've seen
the photos at least). Among other things it got a new tail, a CS prop
and was rebuilt as a trigear. Might this new discovery simply be residue
of that old incident?
Also, the builder's manual states that the W26B and C parts should be
loctited together. However, there was no trace of this. I'm not sure if
that instruction has been there since the beginning or if it could be a
later revision? However, I sort of have my doubts as to some loctite
being able to strenghten this construction enough to not break from
whatever broke this...?
Finally, any thoughts on how to reassemble these parts? Where does the
Loctite go? Just on the barrel and make sure the holes align before i
dries? How to you avoid getting loctite on the surfaces between the
barrel and the socket body (W26A)?
PROBLEM NO 2
Due to various reasons, I only got around to cleaning the grease off the
rear socket assemblies, in preparation for reassembly, but doing the
loctite-work in a cold hangar, etc, and also enlisting the help of the
very busy local mechanic, was more than I could get done before last winter.
Now, on inspection, the W26A socket bodies show signs of corrosion.
Please see the other attached photos. Anyone have an opinion on just how
bad this is? Do they also need changing? And does that require
composite-work? I've been looking through the builder's manual but I'm
afraid I'm not quite up to understanding all of it.
Any thoughts on both of the above issues would be greatly appreciated!
Sincerely,
Erik Gunneland Dahlbck
Linkping, Sweden
Europa SE-XRX
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|