Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:46 AM - Re: Alternative Engine Questions (Jim Jewell)
2. 04:58 AM - Re: AD search - how (Jim Sears)
3. 05:02 AM - Re: alternative engines (Gordon or Marge Comfort)
4. 05:20 AM - Re: Taildragger Vs.Ti Gear (Mark Fowler)
5. 05:49 AM - Re: Fw: Tailwheel vs. Trigear (Randy Compton)
6. 06:04 AM - Cessna 140 Tailwheel Trainer (Paul Besing)
7. 06:57 AM - Re: Uninformed expertise. (Van Artsdalen, Scott)
8. 07:11 AM - Re: AD search - how why my frist post (WPAerial@aol.com)
9. 07:12 AM - Re: Alternative Engine Questions (barry pote)
10. 07:41 AM - Re: AD search - how why my frist post (Sam Buchanan)
11. 07:45 AM - Long First Flight Report (Great Story) (Paul Besing)
12. 08:06 AM - RV assessor values - WAS:Tailwheel blah blah (kempthornes)
13. 08:25 AM - Re: AD search - how (Mike Robertson)
14. 08:26 AM - Re: Uninformed expertise. (Rob Prior)
15. 08:43 AM - Re: alternative engines (Denis Walsh)
16. 08:50 AM - Re: AD search - how why my frist post (Mike Robertson)
17. 08:52 AM - Re: Prop (Randall Henderson)
18. 08:57 AM - insurance for a subie info (mstewart@qa.butler.com)
19. 08:57 AM - Re: Alternative Engine Questions (BELTEDAIR@aol.com)
20. 09:05 AM - Re: AD search - how (mstewart@qa.butler.com)
21. 09:07 AM - Re: AD search - how (Stein Bruch)
22. 09:21 AM - Re: AD search - how (Sam Buchanan)
23. 09:21 AM - Re: AD search - how (Mark Phillips)
24. 09:29 AM - Re: insurance for a subie info (John Helms)
25. 09:37 AM - Re: AD search - how (James E. Clark)
26. 09:51 AM - retractable tie down (ernie billing)
27. 09:51 AM - Re: alternative engines (Tedd McHenry)
28. 10:00 AM - Re: AD search - how (Larry Hawkins)
29. 10:06 AM - Way off topic but cool (MARSHALL,STEPHANIE (HP-Corvallis,ex1))
30. 10:08 AM - Re: AD search - how (mstewart@qa.butler.com)
31. 10:16 AM - Re: AD search - how why my frist post (N13eer@aol.com)
32. 10:22 AM - Re: alternative engines (cecilth@juno.com)
33. 10:42 AM - Re: alternative engines (Kevin P. Leathers, DC)
34. 11:13 AM - Re: Uninformed expertise. (Bert Forero)
35. 11:13 AM - Re: alternative engines insurance (Bartrim, Todd)
36. 11:17 AM - Re: AD search - how (Sam Buchanan)
37. 11:19 AM - Re: AD search - how (Mike Robertson)
38. 11:23 AM - Re: AD search - how (Mike Robertson)
39. 11:28 AM - Re: alternative engines (Tedd McHenry)
40. 11:36 AM - Re: AD search - how (Mike Robertson)
41. 11:48 AM - Re: alternative engines insurance (John Helms)
42. 12:04 PM - Re: AD search - how (Sam Buchanan)
43. 12:29 PM - Fw: Way off topic but cool (C. Rabaut)
44. 12:31 PM - Re: Alternative Engine Questions (Jim Jewell)
45. 12:42 PM - Re: AD search - how (Mike Robertson)
46. 12:58 PM - GPS Antenna (Jim Truitt)
47. 12:58 PM - Closing wing tips? (Andy Karmy)
48. 01:17 PM - Re: GPS Antenna (SportAV8R@aol.com)
49. 01:26 PM - Cabin Heat (Dick DeCramer)
50. 01:30 PM - Re: GPS Antenna (barry pote)
51. 01:46 PM - Re: Alternative Engine Questions (Tedd McHenry)
52. 01:51 PM - Re: GPS Antenna (Ken Balch)
53. 02:02 PM - Re: alternative engines (James E. Clark)
54. 02:17 PM - Re: AD search - how (James E. Clark)
55. 02:21 PM - Re: GPS Antenna (James E. Clark)
56. 02:22 PM - Re: GPS Antenna (Laird Owens)
57. 02:33 PM - Re: RV List - AD search (Oldsfolks@aol.com)
58. 02:37 PM - Re: Cabin Heat (Oldsfolks@aol.com)
59. 02:40 PM - Re: GPS Antenna (Dan Checkoway)
60. 02:56 PM - Re: alternative engines (Tedd McHenry)
61. 03:22 PM - Re: retractable tie down (Joe Hine)
62. 03:22 PM - Re: AD search - how why my frist post (Charlie and Tupper England)
63. 03:27 PM - Re: for sale O 320 E3D (Rquinn1@aol.com)
64. 03:28 PM - Re: Cabin Heat (Alex Peterson)
65. 04:40 PM - Re: GPS Antenna (Keith and Jean Williams)
66. 05:11 PM - Lakeland RV weekend at SnF facility (WALTER KERR)
67. 05:24 PM - Re: Cabin Heat (Alex Peterson)
68. 05:54 PM - Re: alternative engines (James E. Clark)
69. 05:54 PM - Re: GPS Antenna (George McNutt)
70. 06:01 PM - Elevator cover plate (Geoff Evans)
71. 06:01 PM - Re: alternative engines (James E. Clark)
72. 06:15 PM - Re: Fw: Tailwheel vs. Trigear (Jerry Springer)
73. 06:39 PM - Re: Elevator cover plate (Kyle Boatright)
74. 06:49 PM - Re: alternative engines (Jerry Springer)
75. 07:09 PM - Re: Elevator cover plate (Steve J Hurlbut)
76. 07:12 PM - Re: Elevator cover plate (Oldsfolks@aol.com)
77. 07:32 PM - Re: GPS Antenna (Larry Bowen)
78. 08:08 PM - RV8 Project for sale in Arizona (Joe Kramer)
79. 08:13 PM - Re: AD search - how - lota talk but no how (WPAerial@aol.com)
80. 09:01 PM - Re: alternative engines (Tedd McHenry)
81. 09:18 PM - Re: Alternative Engine Questions (Ed Holyoke)
82. 09:39 PM - Re: Elevator cover plate (Jim Oke)
83. 10:21 PM - Re: alternative engines (Jim Oke)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Alternative Engine Questions |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>
Actually Jim,
Getting a handle on the mysterious black art of cam grinding is easier than
most people think. Most cam grinding shops can utilize one or another set of
masters to modify a cam to suit an intended use. For some more dollars they
can make up new masters for a new application. They can put a 340 Dodge
grind on a Chevy cam if you like. As it happens this choice can work out
very well for the engine tuning capable types. There are a plethora of
grinds for Chevy ford Chrysler and all others. Shaddbolt Cams in Vancouver
BC. was almost a second home for a few years, way back there a while. I had
them regrind a nice custom ground cam for my Mazda pickup a few months ago.
Within reason, if you can describe an intended use any cam can be custom
ground to suit. While at Shaddbolt I conferred with Barry about this very
subject and can also say that grinding cams for Lycomings is really no
different than any other types.
It's only Rocket science if that's what you are building. :)!
Good flights, Greased landings,
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Oke" <wjoke@shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Alternative Engine Questions
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jim Oke <wjoke@shaw.ca>
>
> I was interested in the so-called Blanton Ford V-6 engine a few years ago
> and bought his package. One of the key work items was to have the cam
> re-ground to alter the torque-horsepower curves to something more useful
for
> aviation use. So the situation can be addressed. Of course, regrinding
cams
> is a bigger engineering task than most people can tackle and could be said
> to invalidate the automotive durability testing that was done no matter
how
> rigorous it was.
>
> Jim Oke
> Wpg., MB
> RV-6A - at the hangar now
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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Sears" <sears@searnet.com>
> The AD thing is still bogus for an experimental aircraft, however. There
> is no way you can have a "certified" engine on an RV because the RVs do
> not possess a type certificate. It is indeed possible to comply with all
> ADs and service bulletins on your Lycoming RV engine if that is your
> desire, and while it may help with resale value and piece of mind, it
> has absolutely no bearing on the certification status of the plane. The
> plane still possesses an experimental certificate just the same as one
> that is powered by a Rotax two-stroke.
>
Sam is probably right on this issue; but, it did give me peace of mind to
know that my engine was rebuilt with all ADs, SBs, etc. taken care of. My
engine was rebuilt to new conditions plus the addition of the Ney nozzle
STC. All crankcase parts, except the sump, were rebuilt and certified, as
well. I wish I'd done the sump because it bit me later. I just had to put
a rebuilt one on the engine, this month, to stop induction leaks at the
nipples. I'll know better the next time I do an overhaul.
> It seems that the FAA exercises some inconsistency in allowing us to
> have a 25 hour flyoff if we have a "certified engine and prop". However,
> since there really is no such animal in experimental-dom, this is just a
> quirk of the regulations. It seems not to matter whether or not you
> installed helicopter pistons, a carb from a lawnmower, and plugs from a
> Chevy, if it is a Lycoming O-320 with the 70 series Sensenich
> prop.......you get 25 instead of 40 hours.
This is not true in all cases. My engine and prop did get the 25 hour fly
off; but, a friend's engine and prop didn't because his was rebuilt to 160hp
without the proper paperwork to support the power increase. I'm not sure if
his log book showed the ADs, etc, were complied with, or not, either. The
friend got a 40 hour fly off.
With that, there seems to be a big difference in what DARs will do, just as
there are for our FAA inspectors. I'm hoping the new DAR-AB program will
help eliminate some of that. At least with that program, we may be lucky
enough to get more than one DAR's opinion. Right now, we only have one DAR
in our area who does our inspections. The FAA doesn't, at all, anymore.
Other than price, he's a pretty good one.
Jim Sears in KY
RV-6A N198JS
EAA Tech Counselor
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: alternative engines |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Gordon or Marge Comfort" <gcomfo@tc3net.com>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bartrim, Todd" <sbartrim@mail.canfor.ca>
Subject: RV-List: alternative engines
> When Van makes his usual recommendation to stick with Lycoming,
lets
> not forget that he is a Lycoming dealer.
>
> S. Todd Bartrim
> Turbo 13B rotary powered
Todd: I suspect that Van could be a dealer for any engine he chose. The
decision to go with Lycoming was made long before he became a dealer.
Gordon Comfort
N363GC
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: Taildragger Vs.Ti Gear |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Mark Fowler" <mark@fowlerssheetmetal.com>
Thanks everyone,
Wow, alot of great advice. I'm leaning toward the Trigear. I just really
love the way
the taildragger looks.
Thanks again for all the advice,
Mark Fowler
mark@fowlerssheetmetal.com
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: Fw: Tailwheel vs. Trigear |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Compton" <rdcompton@earthlink.net>
>
> I don't know, a tri gear with slider canopy back looks pretty cool
> taxing down in front of all the people at Oshkosh with your arm resting
> on the slider rail and silk scarf blowing in the wind. Pretty cool IMHO.
>
> Steve Eberhart
> RV-7A slider - working on fuel tanks, silk scarf on order :-)
Yeah, just as "cool" as one of those Grumman/American
Yankee/Traveler/Tiger/Cheetah et. al. airplanes.
Van's lucky he didn't get hit with a plagiarism charge with that, well, to
put it delicately, that less than sleek looking A-6, oops, I mean RV-6.
Randy Compton
RV-3 N84VF
Gulf Breeze, FL
Do Not Archive
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: | Cessna 140 Tailwheel Trainer |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Paul Besing" <azpilot@extremezone.com>
Sorry for the off topic post, but I'm in desparate need to sell my Cessna 140.
I'm going away on military duty in a few weeks. This would make a very cheap
tailwheel trainer. One could purchase this, get their tailwheel endorsement
and have something to fly while finishing their RV, then sell it for what they
paid for it. Not to mention, you could keep IFR current while practicing ILS
and VOR approaches.
Here is the information on my airplane:
http://www.kitlog.com/cessna140.htm
If anyone knows of someone looking for a cheap tailwheel airplane that burns 5
GPH, please let me know.
Paul Besing
do not archive
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: | Uninformed expertise. |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts@unionsafe.com>
And who gets to be the experts? What should I declare myself an expert in?
Is there a sign-up sheet?
I thought these were EXPERIMENTAL airplanes. No expertise needed to build
one. Just learn as you go.
Do not archive
--
Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA
Network Manager
Union Safe Deposit Bank
209-946-5116
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob W M Shipley [mailto:Rob@RobsGlass.com]
Subject: RV-List: Uninformed expertise.
--> RV-List message posted by: "Rob W M Shipley" <Rob@RobsGlass.com>
Snip from Tedd McHenry. ........."Which is what is so annoying about people
with no useful knowledge on
the subject trying to tell other people what they should or shouldn't do."
Hey Ted, guess you noticed that this seems to be SOP for some of the
listers. I suppose this is an eternal problem, I bet the Wright brothers had
their share of advice as well.
Do not archive.
Rob
Rob W M Shipley.
RV9A fuselage. N919RV resvd.
Message 8
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how why my frist post |
--> RV-List message posted by: WPAerial@aol.com
The FAA inspector has ask for the paper work from the AD search for this
fridays inspection. I guess if AD are not complete I will have to do 40 Hour
fly off.
Jerry Willken
Albany Oregon
N699WP
Message 9
| 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: Alternative Engine Questions |
--> RV-List message posted by: barry pote <barrypote@comcast.net>
With reference to cams, Brian Crower (Crower Cams) pulled out an old
master to make me one for the 4.3. Fred Carter, in Colorado wrote a
number of articles for CONTACT magazine, has built many engines. His 4.3
made strong power from 3000 to 5000 rpm. So I chose to use that grind. I
intend to never exceed 4500 and hopefully cruise at 3500 rpm.
3500 rpm is not much higher than I hit , on an open road, from Montclair
to Albany, to see my grand daughter. Hahaha. Radar detector is a must!
Barry Pote
> Actually Jim,
>
> Getting a handle on the mysterious black art of cam grinding is easier than
> most people think. Most cam grinding shops can utilize one or another set of
> masters to modify a cam to suit an intended use.
Message 10
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how why my frist post |
--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
Jerry, even though your inspector is making you jump through some
unnecessary hoops, you are still going to end up with a great plane! :-)
The forty hour fly off is not a bad thing. It takes forty hours to shake
out all the systems and gain confidence in your aimanship in the new
plane. Since you will be flying a lot, the forty hours will not steal
much calendar time, and once the test phase is over, you will fly with
assurance that you have a safe vehicle in which to transport your
valuable passengers.
Enjoy!
Sam Buchanan
P.S. *After* you have the pink slip in hand, hand a copy of the FARs to
the FAA man and request that he show you chapter and verse to justify
the AD search!!
==================================
WPAerial@aol.com wrote:
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: WPAerial@aol.com
>
> The FAA inspector has ask for the paper work from the AD search for this
> fridays inspection. I guess if AD are not complete I will have to do 40 Hour
> fly off.
>
> Jerry Willken
> Albany Oregon
> N699WP
>
Message 11
| 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: | Long First Flight Report (Great Story) |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Paul Besing" <azpilot@extremezone.com>
Reposted from last year. Originally written by Scott Revere (aka ABAYMAN). We
will miss him.
Paul Besing
>1st. flight log entry;
>
>Finally, the sun was shinning, a gentle wind was blowing down a dry runway
>27. The grass all around Peter O Knight Airport had just been cut short, and
>the smell was permeating the air. It was a comfortable 75 degrees this Sunday
>morning, and there wasn't a soul around. This was going to be the day. The
>day we all dream about. After years being cooped up in the poorly lit, shops,
>hangers and living rooms, all across the world, the homebuilder emerges from
>his garage, with the birth of a new flying contraption, created by his own
>two hands.
> I had gone over every checklist 3 times. I poked, prodded, wiggled,
>waggled, pulled, and pushed, everything on the new plane, everything seemed
>to be firmly attached. Then I clicked, flipped, spun, and turned, every
>electrical toy on the panel. Everything came to life and gyros started
>whining. I had no more excuses, I couldn't find a reason to put this day off
>any longer. It was a queasy feeling building in my stomach. A feeling of
>uncertainty, anxiousness, excitement, nervousness all rolled up in a large
>pit and sat there eating my stomach lining out. Although I had carefully
>handcrafted this pile of aluminum and wires into the magnificent machine it
>was into today, I didn't feel that I was competent enough, with my whole 100
>hours of flight time in Cessna 172's, to do the honors. I looked around for
>someone to double check all my work, but no one around had the qualifications
>to take on such a task.
>The test pilot who was on standby, is a fellow by the name Dee Olmernick. He
>is a retired airforce tests pilot who lives about 30 minutes away. So I
>called him up, and he said he wasn't surprised that I picked this day to do
>the first flight, as" all conditions were green", to put it in his words. He
>said he was getting dressed as we spoke, and he would be there to take the
>first flight, and deliver it to Vandenburg for me. There he would transition
>me into flying my own aircraft, and set me up on the flight-testing program
>he developed. You see, I had to take off from Peter O Knight, and fly to
>Vandenburg airport. Peter O Knight is under Tampa's class B airspace. The
>pattern altitude is 800 feet and at 1200 ft is where class B starts.
>Vandenburg wasn't so close to the class B airspace of Tampa Bay. It also had
>a lot of cleared land around incase of an emergency landing of some sort. It
>would be the home base for all future flight-testing.
> After hanging up the phone with him, I realized I needed to get some
>pictures of the blessed event, and have someone do a once over my project,
>before it became an official airplane. So I summoned up old Ron Hughes, a
>nice fellow and a homebuilder as well. He didn't seem as excited about this
>moment as I was, perhaps I should have waited until he awoke, before I came
>calling. A few cups of coffee later, he was buzzing all around my pride and
>joy looking in every nook and cranny. He stepped back after a few minutes
>under the cowling, and gave her an eager thumbs up. Shucks, I thought, he's
>going to make me do this thing today. Then I finally came up with an excuse!
>I didn't have a chase plane, to follow Dee to the nearest airport. Ron ( the
>intelligent man that he is ), suggested that I rent an airplane for him to
>pilot, and be the chase plane, so I could get some air to air photos. He
>would then fly Dee back to his car at Peter O Knight, and drive my car back
>to Vandenburg. Before I could give him an " I didn't bring any money excuse "
>he reminded me that I still had a bunch of credit with the FBO, for
>installing an air conditioning system for them this summer.
> I agreed, and he went on to preflight the Warrior, on the rental
> line,
>while I would do some high speed taxi testing. I made two fast taxi runs down
>the runway, and everything was feeling OK. I looked over and saw Ron still
>doing the preflight, so I elected to do one more high-speed run.
> As I lined up with the centerline, a Mooney out of nowhere, called he
>was on a very short final. I pushed the throttle forward quickly to get to
>the first taxi way exit, but before I could think the plane lifted off the
>ground, and I was committed to go around the patch. My heart was pounding
>like a big band drum. I couldn't believe I was off the ground. This is not
>the plan. What do I do next. Oh yeah, get some altitude, keep the power in,
>don't let go of the throttle, careful don't stall, fly the plane,. I was
>frozen in time, with my eyes wide open, fixated on the instruments in front
>of me. Ok airspeed 110 kts,. Climbing, aircraft pulling to the left, oh yeah
>lots of right rudder, keep it centered, fighting with the very sensitive
>controls, over controlling all the way, as I kept climbing. A quick look
>back, I see Ron taxiing in the Warrior but nowhere near the runway, and
>nowhere near me to give instructions.
>When all of a sudden I hear over the radio, " aircraft over Peter O Knight,
>say your ID", Oh S%
T, I busted the class B airspace! , Should I lie about my
>tail number?, should I just get down without answering? Should I fly straight
>to Vandenburg, and hide in a hanger? What am I going to say, damn this thing
>is going everywhere, FLY THE PLANE!!!! I looked at my altimeter, Wow! 4
>thousand feet and climbing, how did I get up here so fast? Level out, hold
>her steady, man look at the airspeed climb, throttle back, get control. Again
>I hear, " aircraft off of Peter O Knight, your in Class B airspace and are
>about to enter McDill Airforce Base Airspace, Say Your Intentions And Your ID
>!! )
> Ok flying the airplane is not going to be enough, I'm going to
> have to
>say something. Let go of the throttle, what do I do with the blue knob? I
>hadn't been taught about that constant speed prop thing yet, but I did see my
>instructor pull it back after we took off in the Arrow the other day. Ok
>pull it back a little at a time, wait the engine is making a different noise.
>Ok, I need help, I have a death grip on the stick, and I'm biting hole in my
>lip, WHAT STILL CLIMBING!, 5 thousand feet, TRIM ! oh yeah, I need to take
>all the pressure off of the stick. Mac sure makes this easy, tap, tap, tap,
>ok getting close, nose down, a little left aileron, more left aileron, whoa!
>Ball way off center, let go of the rudder, damn, trim the other way
>now.
> Ok starting to settle down, " Aircraft You Have Entered Government
>Airspace And Are Demanded To Turn Around, Before Defensive Actions Will Be
>Taken." There is no getting out of this one. Let me confess now before they
>shoot a missile at me, and take me out. I flipped the audio panel to com 1
>and pressed the mic on the stick grip, " pa pah pa please don't shoot " I
>said. They quickly replied, " aircraft turn around and take a heading of 090,
>and say your ID" I couldn't think of any proper terminology or phraseology,
>so I just blurted everything out in 1 sentence. " I didn't mean to take off,
>I am flying a experimental RV6A, and supposed to land at Vandenburg." They
>replied " experimental you need to vacate McDill Airspace and tune your radio
>to 121.5" I had already made a gentle turn to 090 and I turned the radio to
>121.5. "ok I'm on 121.5 and on a 090 heading" a different guy responded, "
>experimental you just cleared the Mcdill Airspace but are in my final
>approach corridor, descend to 2000 feet, there is a 747 at your 3:o'clock." I
>responded "Wilco".
> Then they said the sweetest words every homebuilder wants to hear in
>there career of flying, "Experimental, slow to 200 " as nervous as I was, and
>as in as much trouble as I was in, I couldn't help but grin. I had pretty
>much acknowledged that this was going to be my last flight, as I knew if I
>survived, they would not only yank my ticket, they would take my plane away
>also. Now I'm over Tampa Bay, nothing but water everywhere, I have a good
>view of the Skyscrapers downtown Tampa, The St.Pete Peir, The Skyway Bridge,
>all very clear, and hey, what's that huge ship down there? That's the biggest
>military ship I'd ever seen in and around Tampa, I always thought the bay was
>too shallow to allow such a massive ship like that. Ohh, so that's what it
>is, it's an aircraft carrier. What's that doing here? Maybe that's why they
>were so pissed that I was in their space. Maybe that's how they were going to
>shoot me down?
> Ok back to flying the plane, slow down, maybe if I push the blue
> knob
>forward, yes, different noise, little back on the throttle, silence. Oh no my
>headphone went out, no its not my headphone, IT'S MY ENGINE !!!. push the
>throttle back where it was, nothing, push the red, no the blue, still
>nothing, This is it, I'm gonna go in the drink, come on, don't give up,
>starter , throttle, mixture prop, pushing , pulling, oh fuel valve, on , ok ,
>switch tanks, now throttle mix, props, pulling pushing , starter, still,
>nothing, power panel, still have electric, must be fuel, come on, pumping the
>throttles and mixture, playing with the prop settings, and hitting the
>starter in between each function. Come now think! Glide speed, what is the
>glide speed? Had no testing done yet, keep it at 90, that should be safe, but
>I'm loosing altitude, at 1500 feet. Settled at 90 dropping about 600
>fpm.
> Look for a landing spot, there nothing but a small sand bar, way to
>small, land is too far, I'll never make it, which way is the wind coming
>from? Doesn't matter, I only have 1 choice, by now the guy on the radio was
>barking vectors but I couldn't hear what he was saying, " mayday mayday
>mayday, experimental lost engine, can't get it to restart, send help, over
>the bay, off Mcdill Airforce Base, mayday, mayday, mayday." I thought about
>turning back, I looked and saw the aircraft carrier. Should I turn back? I
>always heard this was bad. Not enough altitude to make the turn. Wait, that's
>on take off when your about 500 to 600 feet up, I've got 1100 now, slow
>gentile turn , humm, this is not good, the deck has a bunch of people and
>boxes and I see the cables strung across the deck, 2 no 3 cables, that will
>surely flip me if I hit them, should I ditch in the water or try for the
>carrier, quick thinking led me to believe if I ditched in the salt water of
>the bay, I would probably survive, and the plane would be ruined. If I try
>and make the carrier, might flip on the cables, might hit those big boxes,
>don't know what is in them, might be real solid hit, might even hit some
>people. Still aimed at the carrier I think I can make it if I stretch it a
>little, ok 80 glide speed still settling down, try to restart again, no joy,
>S#$T !! this sucks.
> Ok tell them what I'm going to do. " Tampa Approach, experimental has no
>engine, only choice is the water or the carrier, I think I'll try to make the
>carrier, if I can't I'll ditch near it so I could have some help right away"
>They came back," experimental, we cannot warn the carrier, suggest you ditch.
>What is your aircraft ID!" at that moment, the people on the deck started
>scrambling as if a horn went off. Boxes quickly started disappearing off the
>deck, I could see that they were aware that I was going to try and make it on
>the deck, the only snag was the cables, and the length of the runway. I had
>no idea what the stalling speed was, or even if my airspeed indicator was
>accurate. I was afraid I would stall just at the threshold of the deck and
>hit that giant wall of iron. So I would have to land faster, than I would
>like, and that meant possibly going off the other end. That's if I didn't rip
>the gear off or flip over. At about 500 feet I decided t slow down a little
>to see if I could feel a buffet, but if I stalled, I don't know if I could
>recover in time at that altitude, surely I would plunge into the
>bay.
> I was amazed that they had cleared the flight deck. I mean there were
>a lot of big boxes there just a few seconds ago, now I had a wide open
>runway, although very short. All the sailors were taking positions of safety.
>I could now see a red siren light turning, so I'm sure, they were waiting for
>me to land, or was about to shoot me down. Keep in mind this is happening in
>slow motion as I remember it, it seems like it was seconds. I was lined up,
>got the airspeed down to 55 indicated and felt a little burble. Whoa! That's
>enough, fly 60 dropping fast deck coming up fast, man it is short, when a
>calm voice came over the radio. " aircraft in distress, this is the air boss,
>you have permission to land, I'll drop the cables and put up the net" What!
>What he say! He has a net that want let me go over the end?! All of a sudden,
>the cables dropped slacked on the deck, and 2 arms on each side of the deck
>came up, a large holed net made out of a twine looking material raised on the
>rails and tightened up. I couldn't believe it, I'm gonna make it, I've got
>the deck made, a little high, ok flaps, flaps, where's the flaps? Ok no
>flaps, slip, no don't slip at this airspeed, just put it down on the deck,
>hear it comes, holding my breath, I see I cleared the threshold still too
>high over the deck, gonna over fly the net, screw it slip!! Full right
>rudder left aileron , kaplunk, brakes, stand on the brakes!!! Brakes pulling
>to one side let off the other side, swinging back and forth. whammmmpppp. In
>the net, the prop blades wrap it up, in a knot, and the net cables gives a
>little with enough tension that it slows me to a stop.
> I'm alive, I'm alive. The plane, how much damage, what kind of
>trouble am I in? will I have to pay for the net, I just tore up? How am I
>gonna get this thing off of here? What happened to the engine, why did I have
>this trouble on the first flight. Where's Ron,? And Dee, man if my wife finds
>out about this. She will kill me. I wonder where they are and what they are
>doing. I wonder if they know where I'm at. Did I say thanks to the air boss,
>I can't remember. Just then about 10 sailors were untangling the net and
>trying to figure out how to open my tip up canopy. One sailor had a tool in
>his hand and was about to smash it open. I screamed at him, NNOOOO!!!!. I
>unlatched and opened it up.
> There were medical people everywhere, fire people everywhere. And
>they reminded me to secure the aircraft, I guess they meant, mags off,
>switches off, everything off, brakes off, but I think my foot is permanently
>attached to the brake pedals. The shoulder belts really did a good job, but I
>didn't hit all that hard. The way I was swerving when I hit, I thought I had
>broken an axle or wheel, but it was the rudder pedal that failed giving me a
>false sensation. Once I departed the aircraft, the air boss came up to me,
>and invited me to have a little "let's get to know each other session with
>the commander" meeting. Here it comes. Hung off the highest mask? Walk the
>plank? Shot out of a cannon? Which will it be, I asked embarrassed, at my
>stupidity. I was not expecting to here the words I heard next. The commander
>commended me on my landing, and congratulated me on the decision I made, then
>he asked if I built the RV6A myself. As he has a son building one, and is
>just about ready to fly it him self. What's this, a connection with the big
>guy? Could I be this lucky 2 times in 1 day?
> Thinks kinda got bogged down in paperwork after that. Licenses,
>insurance, pilots logs, aircraft papers, etc. I had everything they wanted
>back in my aircraft. I wanted to go back to my aircraft and do a thorough
>inspection, as they had wisked me away so fast, I couldn't get a good look at
>it. They took me down some stairs, I was wondering where they were taking
>me,( THE DUGEON ), but when they opened the door, I was under the flight deck
>and my plane was being tied down. They had somehow gotten my plane under the
>deck with some large elevator. I looked it over, no damage that I could tell,
>other than a little scratched paint where the cables on the edge of the net
>rubbed. The prop didn't even look bent, but I'll have to spin it to check it
>out. They asked if I wanted their mechanic to look at it, but I felt
>overwhelmed, and didn't want to impose more than I had
>already.
>
> After I gave them the paperwork they requested, I asked how was I
>going to get off the ship, how was I going to get the plane back to the
>airport, implying that I still could keep it. He said he would have a chopper
>from Lakeland fly down and strap it up and unload it at the airport. Peter O
>Knight wasn't far away. He said he was going to order it as a training
>exercise if I signed the appropriate forms waving responsibility, and I
>agreed whole-heartedly. I thought I would have to remove the wings, but he
>assured me, no it wasn't necessary.
> I showed my concern about violating the class B airspace, and what
>kind of trouble was I going to be in with them. He said he had no control
>over them. ( Darn, just when I was doing so good. ) he gave me a phone number
>to the person who was going to coordinate the helicopter mission, and
>escorted me to a little boat, where they dropped me off at he boat dock at
>the Davis Island Yacht Club. A very short walk to Peter O Knight Airport,
>where I meet Ron and Dee, sitting there wondering, what in the world happen
>to me. They had flown to Vandenburg together looking for me. Couldn't find
>me, so returned to Peter O Knight. Ron was busy preflighting to notice what
>happened when I took off. Millions of questions soon followed, especially
>when the manager of the airport came out to get my N number, as Tampa
>International never gotten it from me. I was caught hands down. So far, all I
>had to do was file an incident report. The news media caught wind of the
>event, but was denied permission to fly into Mcdill's Airspace to get video.
>The air boss did video the landing on their emergency-landing camera. I'll
>try and get a copy of it tomorrow. I think they will deliver my aircraft
>tomorrow at noon. I'll get some pictures of it on the helicopter. I have a
>few squawks about the airplane, but I don't have a good 1st. Flight report on
>flight testing. Wow what a day, I think how lucky I was, What a day dream
>I'll never forget.
>( No aircraft, persons, tools, chemicals, animals, or any organic or no so
>organic materials were hurt in the invention of this figment of my
>imagination. All persons, and or characters are purely fictional, and no way
>represent the actual guys in this story. Filmed in technicolor, and
>panorama. Copywrited in 2001.
>Would like to thank the US Air Force, Tampa International, Davis Island Yacht
>Club, Peter O Knight, and Vandenburg.
>Also the city of Tampa, and the Base of McDill
>
>Written and directed by: Awesome Powers
This bit of entertainment was brought to you by Scott Revera in Tampa,
Florida. (Sorry if I misspelled your last name Scott). Also known as
"ABAYMAN".
This bit of entertainment was brought to you by Scott Revera in Tampa,
Florida. (Sorry if I misspelled your last name Scott). Also known as
"ABAYMAN".
Won't you dig deep and consider giving a little something to Matt for this
great list.
You can make your contribution at the following web site:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Or send a personal check to:
Matronics Email Lists
c/o Matt Dralle
PO Box 347
Livermore CA 94551-0347
Al Mojzisik
Message 12
| 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: | RV assessor values - WAS:Tailwheel blah blah |
--> RV-List message posted by: kempthornes <kempthornes@earthlink.net>
At 11:31 PM 12/3/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Vanremog@aol.com
>
>In a message dated 12/3/2002 8:06:45 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>sbuc@hiwaay.net writes:
>
>And as long as the advertised price of RVs remains high in all the aviation
>rags, those of us in extortionist states will continue to pay huge personal
>property taxes as counties look to build their coffers. One way experimental
>aircraft are valued for tax purposes is by the assessor looking at the asking
>prices in Trade-a-Plane.
I've heard of people establishing the make of their RV as some unique
name. Maybe choosing one that suggests that the plane is an ultralight or
some such. How does the assessor evaluate a "Fogmoth"? He asks you to
supply the value!
I'm too square for such stuff, I guess.
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK flying!
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
Message 13
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
Aw contrar mon ami, An AD search for a Type Certificte product is not
bogus. While it is true that once the aircraft is issued its airworthiness
certificate ADs are not compulsory but are still very much a safety issue.
Nobody argues that point, I'm sure. But during the course of certification,
and this is where I'm sure you disagree, the inspector, be it FAA or a DAR,
is determining whether, in his/her opinion, the aircraft is safe to operate,
and what the chances are that the pilot will possibility hurt/kill anybody
else or somebody elses property. If part of that process is having the ADs
checked for installed equipment that is Type Certificated then so be it.
Call it blackmail, or what you will, but that is the way it is.
In 1998 there was a ruling from Washington DC that determined that ADs can
be made mandatory for experimental aircraft, but it was determined that,
because until the mid 80's engines and props were not part of the
information gathered for Amateur-built aircraft, there is no system to make
sure all owners get the information, and, therefore, it is not enforcable.
So our (the FAA) only system to ensure safety is have the ADs checked at the
time of certification. This is slowly getting out to all inspectors.
Granted, lots of them have either not gotten the info yet, or don't care.
I, for one, do care, because I am the one who has to face the wife and kids
when someone has an accident, and I want to be able to do that with as clean
a conscience as possible.
The bottom line is, yes they are not mandatory, but unless an AD search is
conducted on Type Certificated products installed on your aircraft, you may
not get your airworthiness certificate.
Sorry guys, but that is the cold hard truth. Now flame away all you want.
You're entitled. And, by the way, I am the one inspecting Jerry's RV.
Mike Robertson
Das Fed
RV-8A flying, RV-6A a-building, RV-9A a-building
>From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how
>Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 20:00:21 -0600
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
>
>Just a clarification:
>
>The Sensenich 70 series fixed metal prop for the O-320 is indeed
>certified with the FAA's blessing; the prop for the O-360 is not.
>
>The AD thing is still bogus for an experimental aircraft, however. There
>is no way you can have a "certified" engine on an RV because the RVs do
>not possess a type certificate. It is indeed possible to comply with all
>ADs and service bulletins on your Lycoming RV engine if that is your
>desire, and while it may help with resale value and piece of mind, it
>has absolutely no bearing on the certification status of the plane. The
>plane still possesses an experimental certificate just the same as one
>that is powered by a Rotax two-stroke.
>
>It seems that the FAA exercises some inconsistency in allowing us to
>have a 25 hour flyoff if we have a "certified engine and prop". However,
>since there really is no such animal in experimental-dom, this is just a
>quirk of the regulations. It seems not to matter whether or not you
>installed helicopter pistons, a carb from a lawnmower, and plugs from a
>Chevy, if it is a Lycoming O-320 with the 70 series Sensenich
>prop.......you get 25 instead of 40 hours. Install a wood prop on a
>box-stock, brand new out-of-the-crate Lycoming from Lycoming themselves,
>and you are rewarded with a 40 hour flyoff.
>
>Go figure.......
>
>Sam Buchanan
>
>=============================
>
>Stein Bruch wrote:
> >
> > --> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
> >
> > Jerry,
> >
> > Don't bother. With the sensenich prop, you are not eligible for the TCD
> > time period anyway. Since you'll end up with the 40hr test period with
>the
> > experimental prop, there is NO legal reason to do an AD search. While
>it is
> > a good idea, it is NOT required on your engine at this point. It's
> > technically no longer a "certified" engine/prop combination and does not
> > need current AD's. The FAA cannot legally mandate that all AD's be
>current
> > if you're not applying for the certified time period. If there is an AD
> > outstanding on the engine, the FAA cannot force you to comply with it
>unless
> > you're trying to keep it "certfied". Truth be told, you can
> > cast/carve/layup your own "homemade" prop, and assemble an engine from
>any
> > parts you wish, both certified and not...al-a Lightspeed ignition,
>Nippon
> > Alternator, etc.
> >
> > Just an FYI!
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Stein Bruch, Minneapolis.
> > RV6, Flying 60hrs
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of WPAerial@aol.com
> > To: rv-list@matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how
> >
> > --> RV-List message posted by: WPAerial@aol.com
> >
> > FAA is inspecting my RV6A Fri. He wants an AD search on the engine and
>prop.
> > what is the web address? I think I 've found though a link, but not sure
>how
> > to use it or what I am looking for to write down in my search what he
>wants.
> > I have a rebuilt lycoming 0-320D2A and Sensenich fixed prop. ?
> >
> > Jerry Wilken
> > Albany Oregon
> > N699WP
> >
>
>
Message 14
| 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: Uninformed expertise. |
--> RV-List message posted by: Rob Prior <rv7@b4.ca>
Van Artsdalen, Scott wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts@unionsafe.com>
>
> And who gets to be the experts? What should I declare myself an expert in?
> Is there a sign-up sheet?
>
> I thought these were EXPERIMENTAL airplanes. No expertise needed to build
> one. Just learn as you go.
I don't recall anyone here claiming that you *needed* to be an expert to
voice an opinion (this'd be a pretty quiet forum otherwise... 8-). I
think Tedd's comment was that people at both ends of the "expertise"
spectrum are making claims about the validity of Automotive conversions,
and neither are giving any background as to what makes their opinions
valid in their minds.
It would be like me claiming that it's way easier to build an RV with a
tailwheel than with a nosewheel, when i'm not even done my tail kit yet.
You'd think I was fruitier than a nutcake and flame me until I was a
little charred mass of RV-building carbon...
But if a builder with 6 RV's under his belt, some of each type, said
that building tailwheel was easier, then you might think they may be right.
> Do not archive
Agreed.
> --
> Scott VanArtsdalen, MCSE, CCNA
> Network Manager
> Union Safe Deposit Bank
> 209-946-5116
-RB4
RV7 Empennage
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob W M Shipley [mailto:Rob@RobsGlass.com]
> To: RV-List Digest Server
> Subject: RV-List: Uninformed expertise.
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Rob W M Shipley" <Rob@RobsGlass.com>
>
> Snip from Tedd McHenry. ........."Which is what is so annoying about people
> with no useful knowledge on
> the subject trying to tell other people what they should or shouldn't do."
>
> Hey Ted, guess you noticed that this seems to be SOP for some of the
> listers. I suppose this is an eternal problem, I bet the Wright brothers had
> their share of advice as well.
>
> Do not archive.
>
> Rob
> Rob W M Shipley.
> RV9A fuselage. N919RV resvd.
Message 15
| 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: alternative engines |
--> RV-List message posted by: Denis Walsh <deniswalsh@earthlink.net>
Actually I don't think he is a dealer. He can't sell you an engine unless
you buy a kit. Sounds to me like he is only an OEM supplier.
> From: "Gordon or Marge Comfort" <gcomfo@tc3net.com>
> Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 07:56:55 -0500
> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: RV-List: alternative engines
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Gordon or Marge Comfort" <gcomfo@tc3net.com>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bartrim, Todd" <sbartrim@mail.canfor.ca>
> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RV-List: alternative engines
>
>
>> When Van makes his usual recommendation to stick with Lycoming,
> lets
>> not forget that he is a Lycoming dealer.
>>
>> S. Todd Bartrim
>> Turbo 13B rotary powered
>
> Todd: I suspect that Van could be a dealer for any engine he chose. The
> decision to go with Lycoming was made long before he became a dealer.
>
> Gordon Comfort
> N363GC
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 16
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how why my frist post |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
Sam,
I can identify that reg right now. Take a look at FAR 39, as amended on SEP
27, 2002. There have been several changes to the reg. FAR 39.15
specifically states that ADs apply even if the individual product has been
changed by modifying, altering, or repairing it in the area addrerssed by
the AD. Then take a look at the new 39.3. It states that ADs apply to the
following products: aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, and appliances.
The times are changing, and the FAA is trying to close the loophole that
Experimenters have been enjoying for many years. With over 10% of the GA
registered aircraft in this country being Experimental Amateur-builts it had
to happen. Whether you, I , and anybody else likes it (or doesn't like it),
that is the way it is going to be.
Now don't go crazy quite yet. Because, as of right now, they still have not
figured out a way to ensure all owners of each product gets a copy of each
AD. Until they do, enforcment of ADs will not be able to happen. In my
opinion, and my opinion only, I think somebody will get smart and say that
for Experimental aircraft, ADs will become effective at the time of the
first annual condition inspection after the effective date of the AD. So at
each condition inspection, an AD search will be needed, and if any new ADs
are found they will then have to be dealt with. Again, this is my opinion
only.
Mike Robertson
Das Fed
>From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how why my frist post
>Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 09:41:09 -0600
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
>
>Jerry, even though your inspector is making you jump through some
>unnecessary hoops, you are still going to end up with a great plane! :-)
>
>The forty hour fly off is not a bad thing. It takes forty hours to shake
>out all the systems and gain confidence in your aimanship in the new
>plane. Since you will be flying a lot, the forty hours will not steal
>much calendar time, and once the test phase is over, you will fly with
>assurance that you have a safe vehicle in which to transport your
>valuable passengers.
>
>Enjoy!
>
>Sam Buchanan
>
>P.S. *After* you have the pink slip in hand, hand a copy of the FARs to
>the FAA man and request that he show you chapter and verse to justify
>the AD search!!
>
>==================================
>
>WPAerial@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > --> RV-List message posted by: WPAerial@aol.com
> >
> > The FAA inspector has ask for the paper work from the AD search for this
> > fridays inspection. I guess if AD are not complete I will have to do 40
>Hour
> > fly off.
> >
> > Jerry Willken
> > Albany Oregon
> > N699WP
> >
>
>
Message 17
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randall Henderson" <randallh@attbi.com>
> Randall,
> Did you ever find out if removing the paint and polishing the blades
voided
> the warranty?
> Did you do this by yourself?
Yes I did, and yes it does. Only found out after the fact however but
happily my prop has made it through the warranty period with no problems. As
far as I can tell their beef is with corrosion which is understandable. I do
keep it clean and polished (and in a hangar most of the time) so that
shouldn't be a problem.
I had my plane painted professionaly by a guy who does a lot of
experimentals (and warbirds) -- all custom stuff and he'd done the same
thing to a lot of props prior to mine so I felt comfortable him doing it on
mine. I did have it balanced afterward and it was nearly perfect already.
Randall
Message 18
| 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: | insurance for a subie info |
--> RV-List message posted by: mstewart@qa.butler.com
Well after reading many recent posts on the ins. ?, I checked with my subie
buddie Bob Goodman, flying a subie for 3 years, 300 hours on the plane. It
is a terrific plane, and not an Egg package. Here is his info on insurance:
======
Mike,
I have had insurance on my Subaru since 1999, current rate is $ 1400/yr.
with Travers & Associates (800) 888-9859. They don't seen to care too much
about the engine, but are picky about pilot experience and use of aircraft.
in response to your attachemnt of :
"You cannot compare the Eggenfellner FWF package to a one-off home brew auto
conversion, that is simply not relevant"
Robert Paisley
RV-7, Eggenfellner Subaru
Builder's site"
http://www.protekperformance.com/rv7
Answer:
This is true, the Eggenfellner will never have the performance of mine, and
could never fit in an RV-4.
Bob Goodman
N311U
1st place 160 hp division, Sun 100, 2002.
===========
Mike Stewart
Flying next this funny sounding engine, and very nice guy, all the time.
Message 19
| 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: Alternative Engine Questions |
--> RV-List message posted by: BELTEDAIR@aol.com
Dear List. We at Belted Air Power have been flying auto power for 20 years
this Dec. 8th. We have 750 hrs. experience on the Buick V-8s and 425 hours on
the Chevy 4.3L V6 engine. On our part we have found that with the auto
engines people tend to get complacent. The engines don't use oil, don't leak
coolant etc. It's true we could use a better prop at altitude, but for
general all around flying the cost and fun is hard to beat. Our packages have
been engineered and flight proven. I don't want this to sound commercial, but
if any of you get to Las Vegas and call ahead of time to make sure were here,
fly ours and compare it for yourself. Jess
Message 20
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: mstewart@qa.butler.com
I have a NEW o-360 from lyc, a NEW hatrz c/s prop, and I got 40.
Dar said he "felt more comfortable if I flew the 40 than 25."
There is no consistency and there was no recourse.
FSDO said its his call. By the time I got done messing with the feds, I had
200 hours on her anyway. I had several changes made to my op lims I did not
like and FSDO removed many restrictions from my phase 2 at my request.
Mike Stewart
670hrs since x-mas.
Message 21
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
No Flaming necessary Mike,
In my earlier post, I did not fully realize that the aircraft was using a
"certified engine/prop" combination. Had I know that I would totally agree
with you. In a case where they engine prop are not certified and my
inspector came to me with the same requirements for a non-certified
combination I would disagree.
If an inspector still tried to push the issue with a "non-certified"
combination, I would simply rip off the engine data plate, make up one of my
own and declare it airworthy. What would you as an inspector do in this
situation??
That isn't necessarily a prudent course of action, but more to prove a
point. I agree wholeheartedly that for safety reasons, one should make sure
they're complied with. My issue comes in from a regulatory standpoint and
differing interpretations of vague rules.
Thanks for your informative and usefull posts.
Cheers,
Stein Bruch
RV6, Minneapolis
RV7 getting ready to start!
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Mike Robertson
Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how
--> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
Aw contrar mon ami, An AD search for a Type Certificte product is not
bogus. While it is true that once the aircraft is issued its airworthiness
certificate ADs are not compulsory but are still very much a safety issue.
Nobody argues that point, I'm sure. But during the course of certification,
and this is where I'm sure you disagree, the inspector, be it FAA or a DAR,
is determining whether, in his/her opinion, the aircraft is safe to operate,
and what the chances are that the pilot will possibility hurt/kill anybody
else or somebody elses property. If part of that process is having the ADs
checked for installed equipment that is Type Certificated then so be it.
Call it blackmail, or what you will, but that is the way it is.
In 1998 there was a ruling from Washington DC that determined that ADs can
be made mandatory for experimental aircraft, but it was determined that,
because until the mid 80's engines and props were not part of the
information gathered for Amateur-built aircraft, there is no system to make
sure all owners get the information, and, therefore, it is not enforcable.
So our (the FAA) only system to ensure safety is have the ADs checked at the
time of certification. This is slowly getting out to all inspectors.
Granted, lots of them have either not gotten the info yet, or don't care.
I, for one, do care, because I am the one who has to face the wife and kids
when someone has an accident, and I want to be able to do that with as clean
a conscience as possible.
The bottom line is, yes they are not mandatory, but unless an AD search is
conducted on Type Certificated products installed on your aircraft, you may
not get your airworthiness certificate.
Sorry guys, but that is the cold hard truth. Now flame away all you want.
You're entitled. And, by the way, I am the one inspecting Jerry's RV.
Mike Robertson
Das Fed
RV-8A flying, RV-6A a-building, RV-9A a-building
Message 22
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
Mike, thanks for your reply. I do have a couple questions, however. :-)
Suppose (and this example is not an attempt to prompt a confrontation
but an effort to explore issues that could appear with an experimental
engine installation) I install a Lycoming in my RV-6 project and you are
assigned the task of inspection in regards to issuing the airworthiness
certificate. However, I have come up with an alternative way to supply
oil to the engine (dry sump with integrated pump) which means the
standard oil pump is no longer the primary source of oil pressure, and I
elect to retain the sintered iron pump gears in conflict with the oil
pump AD. I also have adapted automotive pistons to the Lycoming because
I feel my design promotes better combustion. In addition to that, the
ignition system is a design I have adapted from various automotive and
stationary powerplant components because I am convinced it works better
than the old mags.
How do you approach this engine? Is it a candidate for an airworthiness
certificate? Is it still a "Lycoming, type certificated" engine?
Does the installation of non-TSOed ignition systems, exhaust systems,
injection systems, and engine components jeopardize the issuance of an
airworthiness certificate to Lycoming-powered experimental aircraft due
to the guidelines you have outlined?
If not, why not? If so..........we got major problems......... :-)
Thanks in advance for your continued dialog on this very important
topic.
Sam Buchanan (still learning......)
============================
Mike Robertson wrote:
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
>
> Aw contrar mon ami, An AD search for a Type Certificte product is not
> bogus. While it is true that once the aircraft is issued its airworthiness
> certificate ADs are not compulsory but are still very much a safety issue.
> Nobody argues that point, I'm sure. But during the course of certification,
> and this is where I'm sure you disagree, the inspector, be it FAA or a DAR,
> is determining whether, in his/her opinion, the aircraft is safe to operate,
> and what the chances are that the pilot will possibility hurt/kill anybody
> else or somebody elses property. If part of that process is having the ADs
> checked for installed equipment that is Type Certificated then so be it.
> Call it blackmail, or what you will, but that is the way it is.
>
> In 1998 there was a ruling from Washington DC that determined that ADs can
> be made mandatory for experimental aircraft, but it was determined that,
> because until the mid 80's engines and props were not part of the
> information gathered for Amateur-built aircraft, there is no system to make
> sure all owners get the information, and, therefore, it is not enforcable.
> So our (the FAA) only system to ensure safety is have the ADs checked at the
> time of certification. This is slowly getting out to all inspectors.
> Granted, lots of them have either not gotten the info yet, or don't care.
> I, for one, do care, because I am the one who has to face the wife and kids
> when someone has an accident, and I want to be able to do that with as clean
> a conscience as possible.
>
> The bottom line is, yes they are not mandatory, but unless an AD search is
> conducted on Type Certificated products installed on your aircraft, you may
> not get your airworthiness certificate.
>
> Sorry guys, but that is the cold hard truth. Now flame away all you want.
> You're entitled. And, by the way, I am the one inspecting Jerry's RV.
>
> Mike Robertson
> Das Fed
> RV-8A flying, RV-6A a-building, RV-9A a-building
>
> >From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
> >Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
> >To: rv-list@matronics.com
> >Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how
> >Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 20:00:21 -0600
> >
> >--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
> >
> >Just a clarification:
> >
> >The Sensenich 70 series fixed metal prop for the O-320 is indeed
> >certified with the FAA's blessing; the prop for the O-360 is not.
> >
> >The AD thing is still bogus for an experimental aircraft, however. There
> >is no way you can have a "certified" engine on an RV because the RVs do
> >not possess a type certificate. It is indeed possible to comply with all
> >ADs and service bulletins on your Lycoming RV engine if that is your
> >desire, and while it may help with resale value and piece of mind, it
> >has absolutely no bearing on the certification status of the plane. The
> >plane still possesses an experimental certificate just the same as one
> >that is powered by a Rotax two-stroke.
> >
> >It seems that the FAA exercises some inconsistency in allowing us to
> >have a 25 hour flyoff if we have a "certified engine and prop". However,
> >since there really is no such animal in experimental-dom, this is just a
> >quirk of the regulations. It seems not to matter whether or not you
> >installed helicopter pistons, a carb from a lawnmower, and plugs from a
> >Chevy, if it is a Lycoming O-320 with the 70 series Sensenich
> >prop.......you get 25 instead of 40 hours. Install a wood prop on a
> >box-stock, brand new out-of-the-crate Lycoming from Lycoming themselves,
> >and you are rewarded with a 40 hour flyoff.
> >
> >Go figure.......
> >
> >Sam Buchanan
> >
Message 23
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: Mark Phillips <ripsteel@edge.net>
Mike Robertson wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
>
> Aw contrar mon ami, An AD search for a Type Certificte product is not
> bogus.
So can the FAA/DAR deny me an airworthiness certificate if an AD is not complied
with? Their discretion?
Thanks Mike - glad you're here, bad news or not!
Mark Phillips - do not archive -
Message 24
| 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: insurance for a subie info |
--> RV-List message posted by: "John Helms" <jhelms@i1.net>
Your friends insurance that he's paid for for 3 years likely would not have
paid out. Since none of the companies will cover them (knowingly) then that
means the company does not know about it. If he crashes, they could have
reason to deny the claim.
Your friend may have one heck of a lawsuit against an agent, though (if the
agent knew about the engine, and didn't inform the insurance company, and a
resulting claim was denied based on that info).
John "JT" Helms
Branch Manager
NationAir Insurance Agency
Pleasure and Business Branch
----- Original Message -----
From: <mstewart@qa.butler.com>
Subject: RV-List: insurance for a subie info
--> RV-List message posted by: mstewart@qa.butler.com
Well after reading many recent posts on the ins. ?, I checked with my subie
buddie Bob Goodman, flying a subie for 3 years, 300 hours on the plane. It
is a terrific plane, and not an Egg package. Here is his info on insurance:
======
Mike,
I have had insurance on my Subaru since 1999, current rate is $ 1400/yr.
with Travers & Associates (800) 888-9859. They don't seen to care too much
about the engine, but are picky about pilot experience and use of aircraft.
in response to your attachemnt of :
"You cannot compare the Eggenfellner FWF package to a one-off home brew auto
conversion, that is simply not relevant"
Robert Paisley
RV-7, Eggenfellner Subaru
Builder's site"
http://www.protekperformance.com/rv7
Answer:
This is true, the Eggenfellner will never have the performance of mine, and
could never fit in an RV-4.
Bob Goodman
N311U
1st place 160 hp division, Sun 100, 2002.
===========
Mike Stewart
Flying next this funny sounding engine, and very nice guy, all the time.
Message 25
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <jclark@conterra.com>
Maybe a slightly different perspective, though consistent with Jim's, I
think (your opinion may vary) ...
1. After all that is invested in making these planes our "dream planes",
what's so bad about having an AD search. So what if it costs a few more
dollars or hours. We have spent tens of thousand of dollars and thousands of
hours. This "check" is hopefully just a bit more insurance that we are AWARE
of any issues that may exist with the engine we are using. And THAT is a
good thing. Just because the engine out of Granma's Buick (or Subie, or
'Vette) doesn't come with AD's does not mean that it is not a good idea to
check those for the Lycoming or Continental.
2. Forty hours vs twenty five is not as bad as some people seem to think. My
partner and I have 40 hours on our RV6 (Lycoming [re-worked by Bart] +
Sterba Prop). We have passed the 25 hour mark and STILL have not done all
the testing we need to do at a MINIMUM. There are lots of "little" things
that you will find that you will want to get fixed. There will be time when
you are just becoming "at one" with the plane so you can realistically FLY
the tests. And there are times when you simply will want to go out and enjoy
the plane (of course all done for familiarization :-) )
3. Let's give these DAR's a bit of a break. They are signing off on a
contraption that we built in our basements or hangars and saying to the
world that THEY think it is safe for humankind. If **you** had to sign off
on a person's work that you had not seen before, what would be your
"minimums"? Given what I suspect is the quality of work many of us do, I
think they would be very high as your credibility and concern for life
would be on the line.
So, I for one WANT to know about all AD's and SB's that apply to the engine
I fly behind and even though you will want to get it all done quickly, the
40 hours seems about right.
James
Do Not Archive
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jim Sears
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 7:43 AM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Sears" <sears@searnet.com>
>
> > The AD thing is still bogus for an experimental aircraft, however. There
> > is no way you can have a "certified" engine on an RV because the RVs do
> > not possess a type certificate. It is indeed possible to comply with all
> > ADs and service bulletins on your Lycoming RV engine if that is your
> > desire, and while it may help with resale value and piece of mind, it
> > has absolutely no bearing on the certification status of the plane. The
> > plane still possesses an experimental certificate just the same as one
> > that is powered by a Rotax two-stroke.
> >
>
> Sam is probably right on this issue; but, it did give me peace of mind to
> know that my engine was rebuilt with all ADs, SBs, etc. taken care of. My
> engine was rebuilt to new conditions plus the addition of the Ney nozzle
> STC. All crankcase parts, except the sump, were rebuilt and certified, as
> well. I wish I'd done the sump because it bit me later. I just
> had to put
> a rebuilt one on the engine, this month, to stop induction leaks at the
> nipples. I'll know better the next time I do an overhaul.
>
>
> > It seems that the FAA exercises some inconsistency in allowing us to
> > have a 25 hour flyoff if we have a "certified engine and prop". However,
> > since there really is no such animal in experimental-dom, this is just a
> > quirk of the regulations. It seems not to matter whether or not you
> > installed helicopter pistons, a carb from a lawnmower, and plugs from a
> > Chevy, if it is a Lycoming O-320 with the 70 series Sensenich
> > prop.......you get 25 instead of 40 hours.
>
> This is not true in all cases. My engine and prop did get the 25 hour fly
> off; but, a friend's engine and prop didn't because his was
> rebuilt to 160hp
> without the proper paperwork to support the power increase. I'm
> not sure if
> his log book showed the ADs, etc, were complied with, or not, either. The
> friend got a 40 hour fly off.
>
> With that, there seems to be a big difference in what DARs will
> do, just as
> there are for our FAA inspectors. I'm hoping the new DAR-AB program will
> help eliminate some of that. At least with that program, we may be lucky
> enough to get more than one DAR's opinion. Right now, we only
> have one DAR
> in our area who does our inspections. The FAA doesn't, at all, anymore.
> Other than price, he's a pretty good one.
>
> Jim Sears in KY
> RV-6A N198JS
> EAA Tech Counselor
>
>
Message 26
| 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: | retractable tie down |
--> RV-List message posted by: ernie billing <ebilling@yahoo.com>
Anyone designed retractable tie down eyes for their
RV?
I'm starting the wings on my RV7, and although I like
the simplicity of the screw in tie down bolt, I'm
partial to the retractable tie down on my Cardinal RG.
Its out of the way, but always there when I need it.
Don't have to dig throught the cabin for eye bolts.
I looked into getting the hooks from Cessna, but
balked at the $150 price.
I may just design my own and kit it if enough people
are interested.
Ernie Billing
RV7 - beginning wings
San Luis Obispo, CA
ebilling@yahoo.com
Message 27
| 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: alternative engines |
--> RV-List message posted by: Tedd McHenry <tedd@vansairforce.org>
> Todd: I suspect that Van could be a dealer for any engine he chose. The
> decision to go with Lycoming was made long before he became a dealer.
Yes, and also long before any of the current alternatives were available. Now
that he's committed to Lycoming, should we assume that his publicly expressed
option is completely objective, or is it reasonable to assume that it might be
slightly coloured by the need to maintain a good relationship with Lycoming? I
don't mean that as a slight against Van. I have great respect for him as a
person and as an engineer. But also as an astute businessman. Is it a
coincidence that his publicly expressed opinion is also exactly the opinion
that's best for his business?
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
-6 wings
Message 28
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: Larry Hawkins <lhawkins@giant.com>
Mike is right, we should all try to stay up with the AD's on our engines and
props, it's for our own good. With internet access, it's easy. Tedious but
easy, once a year do a search for AD's issued in the past year.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
By the way we are very fortunate to have Mike Robertson lurking on this
list, Thanks Mike.
Larry Hawkins, RV-4 Farmington, NM, N-345SL, flying soon! Waiting on new
mag.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Robertson [mailto:mrobert569@hotmail.com]
Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how
--> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
Aw contrar mon ami, An AD search for a Type Certificte product is not
bogus.
Mike Robertson
Das Fed
RV-8A flying, RV-6A a-building, RV-9A a-building
>
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<META NAME"Generator" CONTENT"MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2655.35">
RE: RV-List:AD search - how
Mike is right, we should all try to stay up with the AD's on our engines and props,
it's for our own good. With internet access, it's easy. Tedious but easy,
once a year do a search for AD's issued in the past year.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
By the way we are very fortunate to have Mike Robertson lurking on this list, Thanks
Mike.
Larry Hawkins, RV-4 Farmington, NM, N-345SL, flying soon! Waiting on new mag.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Robertson [<A HREF"mailto:mrobert569@hotmail.com">mailto:mrobert569@hotmail.com]
Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how
-- RV-List message posted by: Mike Robertson mrobert569@hotmail.com
Aw contrar mon ami, An AD search for a Type Certificte product is not
bogus.
Mike Robertson
Das Fed
RV-8A flying, RV-6A a-building, RV-9A a-building
Message 29
| 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: | Way off topic but cool |
--> RV-List message posted by: "MARSHALL,STEPHANIE (HP-Corvallis,ex1)" <stephanie.marshall@hp.com>
I know this is off topic, but check out what you can buy on ebay.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1791560632
Stephanie Marshall
Message 30
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: mstewart@qa.butler.com
Mike, that is correct, he can deny it if he feels there is a safety of
flight issue. You would have recourse with FSDO however. But the DAR can
complete autonomy here, subject to guidlines spelled out to him in the
FAR's, which are his to interpret.
Now Sam,
You know I am no expert here, but I have been through a few inspections and
have friends at FSDO where we have exhaustively discussed the matter.
The spirit of the 25 hours would indicate a mod of oil, heads, ignition, or
fuel delivery should push it out to 40, IMHO.
In the spirit of the 25 hours that is.
With or without these mods, as soon as you hang the bugger on, your not a
cert'd engine engine. It would absolutely be a candidate for an
airworthyness cert under the experimental category regardless.
I would not put 40 hours on a non-tso'd exhaust if I were the DAR.
Mike Stewart
Not an expert here
Do not archive, unless you wanna
Mike Robertson wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
>
> Aw contrar mon ami, An AD search for a Type Certificte product is not
> bogus.
So can the FAA/DAR deny me an airworthiness certificate if an AD is not
complied
with? Their discretion?
Thanks Mike - glad you're here, bad news or not!
Message 31
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how why my frist post |
--> RV-List message posted by: N13eer@aol.com
In a message dated 12/4/2002 10:08:16 AM Eastern Standard Time, WPAerial writes:
> The FAA inspector has ask for the paper work from the AD search for this
> fridays inspection. I guess if AD are not complete I will
> have to do 40 Hour
> fly off.
--------------------------------------------------
Jerry,
Are you sure the inspector was really looking for a list of ADs on the engine and
prop? There is a field that needs to be filled in on form 8130-6 Application
for airworthiness. This is talked about in AC 20-27e. Basically you have
to go to the FAA web sight and find the latest version on the AD SUPPLEMENT and
verify your aircraft is not listed. (I'm not sure how it could be since it is
unique and has never flown.) Then record the number on the 8130-6 form in the
Airworthiness Directives space.
Hope this helps,
Alan Kritzman
Cedar Rapids, IA
RV-8 2 hours (waiting for Airspeed indicator to be returned after I determined
it was 30 MPH slow.)
Message 32
| 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: alternative engines |
--> RV-List message posted by: cecilth@juno.com
I really believe Van thinks of insurance liability, close to the top of
the list, when he says use a Lycoming engine. He (and the company) is
pretty safe that way.
Cecil
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002 09:51:37 -0800 (PST) Tedd McHenry
<tedd@vansairforce.org> writes:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Tedd McHenry <tedd@vansairforce.org>
>
> > Todd: I suspect that Van could be a dealer for any engine he
> chose. The
> > decision to go with Lycoming was made long before he became a
> dealer.
>
> Yes, and also long before any of the current alternatives were
> available. Now
> that he's committed to Lycoming, should we assume that his publicly
> expressed
> option is completely objective, or is it reasonable to assume that
> it might be
> slightly coloured by the need to maintain a good relationship with
> Lycoming? I
> don't mean that as a slight against Van. I have great respect for
> him as a
> person and as an engineer. But also as an astute businessman. Is
> it a
> coincidence that his publicly expressed opinion is also exactly the
> opinion
> that's best for his business?
>
> Tedd McHenry
> Surrey, BC
> -6 wings
>
>
>
> _->
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 33
| 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: alternative engines |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Kevin P. Leathers, DC" <DrLeathers@822heal.com>
It seems to me that if I will not be able to insure my investment, that
Subaru engines are a mute point. Even if they are vastly superior, which I
suspect they are, I for one can not fly uninsured. Even if my hull insurance
was not an issue, I suspect that my life insurance company might try to
avoid payment because of the engine discrepancy as well.
I'm going to Van's in Aurora this Saturday, Dec. 7th. If I can save anyone
some shipping costs let me know. I live in Kirkland, WA You can e-mail me at
DrLeathers@822heal.com or call me at 425-260-0657. I'll be driving a Range
Rover SUV with a roof rack, so I could bring back most smaller items.
DOC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tedd McHenry" <tedd@vansairforce.org>
Subject: Re: RV-List: alternative engines
> --> RV-List message posted by: Tedd McHenry <tedd@vansairforce.org>
>
> > Todd: I suspect that Van could be a dealer for any engine he chose.
The
> > decision to go with Lycoming was made long before he became a dealer.
>
> Yes, and also long before any of the current alternatives were available.
Now
> that he's committed to Lycoming, should we assume that his publicly
expressed
> option is completely objective, or is it reasonable to assume that it
might be
> slightly coloured by the need to maintain a good relationship with
Lycoming? I
> don't mean that as a slight against Van. I have great respect for him as
a
> person and as an engineer. But also as an astute businessman. Is it a
> coincidence that his publicly expressed opinion is also exactly the
opinion
> that's best for his business?
>
> Tedd McHenry
> Surrey, BC
> -6 wings
>
>
Message 34
| 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: | Uninformed expertise. |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bert Forero" <bert6@mybluelight.com>
Scott:
You do not think that there are experts;? I have met
a few here in Orlando, these are the pople that have
built, not one but many experimental aircrafts, different
types etc...
Some are A&p'S, ETC.. when they tell you how
to do, or not to do something I lisen, it have saved
me a lot of grief, and money..;many times I thought
I have solved a problem during the construction process,
to find I was totally wrong. A friend,one of those
experts I mentioned, took the time, to show and explain
what I was doing wrong....that is an expert...
So for me, thanks for friends here in Orlando,
that have helped me with their expertise...
Just my opinion, Am I an expert? in one thing
Building an emmpenage, for rv6a...had to do it twice....
Bert
rv6a
Do Not Archive
Do Not Archive
Sign up for Internet Service under $10 dollars a month, at http://isp.BlueLight.com
Message 35
| 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: | alternative engines insurance |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bartrim, Todd" <sbartrim@mail.canfor.ca>
Hi John;
After reading your response, I went searching for the info on Subaru
insurance, as I couldn't remember the details of it. I found it on
Eggenfeller's web site on the FAQ page. It turns out it is everybody's
favorite.... Avemco. So maybe the insurance argument is still valid.
I'm currently insured with Avemco for builders insurance. When I
first began my project, I told them my intention to use a rotary engine and
asked about flight insurance. The agent on the phone said it would not be a
problem, but could not quote me any rates. He merely said that we could deal
with that when we get there. I should have pushed him a little further. He
did however express his personal opinion that it was a better engine choice,
but that doesn't count for much.
Now that I'm getting close to first flight, I've been considering
upgrading my insurance, when I recently received notice from Avemco that
they will not be renewing my policy as they are pulling out of Canada. I
think my only option now is Marsh insurance, but when I called them last
week the person who answered spoke French, when I asked for English she
passed me to someone who spoke English with such a heavy French accent that
I still didn't understand a damn thing he said. Maybe I'll try email. Too
bad you can't deal in Canada, you would certainly get my business.
S. Todd Bartrim
Turbo 13B rotary powered
RX-9endurance (FWF)
C-FSTB (reserved)
http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Helms [SMTP:jhelms@i1.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 4:38 PM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: alternative engines
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "John Helms" <jhelms@i1.net>
>
> Reposted from VansAirforce Yahoo group in response to a claim that several
> insurance companies were writing coverage for Suburu's....
>
> My initial response was "None of the companies (I work with all of them
> except AVEMCO) will do Suburu engine powered RVs." It had been a while
> since I had polled each and every company about this specific issue. So I
> decided to do it again, and I must admit that I was wrong. Here were my
> findings:
>
> I just verified that with the underwriters of the new EAA "program"
> (Global/AAU) and US Specialty Insurance company (which has always been
> into
> writing homebuilt coverages) and neither will do Suburu engines. I know
> AIG, USAIG, Phoenix won't do it (I've asked them again as recently as last
> week). That leaves W. Brown (which doesn't really even do airplanes
> smaller
> than a Baron, and their prices are too high anyway) and Aerospace
> Insurance
> Managers (AIM).
>
> I got a very interesting answer from AIM. Let me preface their answer by
> saying that they write for 2 different companies (one A rated and one B+
> rated.) You may get either one depending on the state you live in.
> Almost
> all the other companies left in Aviation are A+ rated or better.
>
> AIM said generally no, but if we had trouble placing coverage (which we
> would since no one else will do it but AVEMCO the direct writer) they
> would
> consider it. They added that they would consider it as long as nothing
> was
> too "weird" about the risk. I would take that to mean a pilot over the
> age
> of 65, in a state they don't like, based on a less than 2000' grass strip,
> or something like that. This is a much more positive answer than I've
> ever
> received about these engines. It is a step in a positive direction for
> those of you dead set (sorry) about using them.
>
> As I said before, I am glad AVEMCO will do them. Please remember, though,
> the differences in AVEMCO's policy vs. any other. They limit the
> liability
> payout to everyone not just passengers inside your plane (they do per
> person
> sub-limits instead of the per passenger which all other companies do.)
> And
> they further sublimit your family members (which no other companies do) to
> 25% of the sub-limit.
>
> There may be isolated instances where these engines are being covered by
> the
> other companies, but that does not mean they will or intend to write
> coverage for these engines. Those are mistakes. I have my fair share of
> mistakes that I have written and are currently on the books, as I
> mentioned
> before.
>
> John "JT" Helms
> Branch Manager
> NationAir Insurance Agency
> Pleasure and Business Branch
>
>
Message 36
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
"James E. Clark" wrote:
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <jclark@conterra.com>
>
> Maybe a slightly different perspective, though consistent with Jim's, I
> think (your opinion may vary) ...
>
> 1. After all that is invested in making these planes our "dream planes",
> what's so bad about having an AD search. So what if it costs a few more
> dollars or hours. We have spent tens of thousand of dollars and thousands of
> hours. This "check" is hopefully just a bit more insurance that we are AWARE
> of any issues that may exist with the engine we are using. And THAT is a
> good thing. Just because the engine out of Granma's Buick (or Subie, or
> 'Vette) doesn't come with AD's does not mean that it is not a good idea to
> check those for the Lycoming or Continental.
========================
Jim, how do you run an AD search on an engine that has no logs? Some of
the ADs reference internal engine parts; are you willing to disassemble
what you feel is a good engine just to satisfy the desires of the DAR?
Is it reasonable to require the owner of a Lycoming to disassemble his
engine to satisfy ADs when the builder who has installed a Subaru or
Honda or Mazda or turbine does not have to do the same?
Folks, we are talking about a MONUMENTAL shift in the FAA's approach to
experimental certification! I press this point not to disallow the value
of conformance to ADs; I satisfied all ADs and used only yellow-tagged
parts in my O-320 rebuild precisely because I wanted the best engine I
could build.
But, being FORCED to do this via regulation is something far removed
from what we have up to this point enjoyed in the experimental
community! This recent amendment to FARs has the potential of having
far-reaching ramifications to any of us that use "certificated" engines,
and may very well be the end of alternative engines if only engines that
have been blessed by the FAA are approved. The next issue to fall into
place behind this amendment will be insurance.....just wait until you
start seeing claims refused due to lack of conformance to ADs......
My apologies to those who think I may be overbearing on this point, but
as an EAA Technical Counselor, and someone who fields a LOT of RV
questions, I need to know what to tell potential, new, and current
builders when they raise powerplant/certification questions.
Sam Buchanan
Message 37
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
Even if the engine/prop combination is not an "approved" grouping, it does
not matter. If you use a Lycoming o-320 with a non-certificated prop, the
engine AD search would still be applicable. Any product installed that has
a Type Certificate, a TSO, a PMA, or STC MAY have had an AD published
against it.
For a more clear explanation see AC 39-7C at:
http://av-info.faa.gov/dst/amateur/
Since this AC was published in 1995, further ruling in 1998 concluded that
ADs for Amateur-built aircraft are not enforceable at this time, although
they are applicable. That means that, yes, they do apply, but if you chose
to not do them, the FAA can't do anything about it, other than to point out
to that they are for your own (and the public's) safety and that you really
should do them.
Sorry to those who don't want to hear this. I am off of my soap box. Keep
flying, and building, and have fun.
Mike Robertson
Das Fed
>From: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RE: RV-List:AD search - how
>Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 11:13:52 -0600
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
>
>No Flaming necessary Mike,
>
>In my earlier post, I did not fully realize that the aircraft was using a
>"certified engine/prop" combination. Had I know that I would totally agree
>with you. In a case where they engine prop are not certified and my
>inspector came to me with the same requirements for a non-certified
>combination I would disagree.
>
>If an inspector still tried to push the issue with a "non-certified"
>combination, I would simply rip off the engine data plate, make up one of
>my
>own and declare it airworthy. What would you as an inspector do in this
>situation??
>
>That isn't necessarily a prudent course of action, but more to prove a
>point. I agree wholeheartedly that for safety reasons, one should make
>sure
>they're complied with. My issue comes in from a regulatory standpoint and
>differing interpretations of vague rules.
>
>Thanks for your informative and usefull posts.
>
>Cheers,
>Stein Bruch
>RV6, Minneapolis
>RV7 getting ready to start!
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Mike Robertson
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how
>
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
>
>Aw contrar mon ami, An AD search for a Type Certificte product is not
>bogus. While it is true that once the aircraft is issued its airworthiness
>certificate ADs are not compulsory but are still very much a safety issue.
>Nobody argues that point, I'm sure. But during the course of
>certification,
>and this is where I'm sure you disagree, the inspector, be it FAA or a DAR,
>is determining whether, in his/her opinion, the aircraft is safe to
>operate,
>and what the chances are that the pilot will possibility hurt/kill anybody
>else or somebody elses property. If part of that process is having the ADs
>checked for installed equipment that is Type Certificated then so be it.
>Call it blackmail, or what you will, but that is the way it is.
>
>In 1998 there was a ruling from Washington DC that determined that ADs can
>be made mandatory for experimental aircraft, but it was determined that,
>because until the mid 80's engines and props were not part of the
>information gathered for Amateur-built aircraft, there is no system to make
>sure all owners get the information, and, therefore, it is not enforcable.
>So our (the FAA) only system to ensure safety is have the ADs checked at
>the
>time of certification. This is slowly getting out to all inspectors.
>Granted, lots of them have either not gotten the info yet, or don't care.
>I, for one, do care, because I am the one who has to face the wife and kids
>when someone has an accident, and I want to be able to do that with as
>clean
>a conscience as possible.
>
>The bottom line is, yes they are not mandatory, but unless an AD search is
>conducted on Type Certificated products installed on your aircraft, you may
>not get your airworthiness certificate.
>
>Sorry guys, but that is the cold hard truth. Now flame away all you want.
>You're entitled. And, by the way, I am the one inspecting Jerry's RV.
>
>Mike Robertson
>Das Fed
>RV-8A flying, RV-6A a-building, RV-9A a-building
>
>
Message 38
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
Oh Boy, This one you really don't want to hear. Yes, If, in his
profesional opinion, he deems that non-accomplishment of the AD makes the
aircraft not safe to operate, he can deny the certificate requested. 99 %
will just shake their head, educate you the best he/she can, and issue you
your certificate.
Mike Robertson
Das Fed
>From: Mark Phillips <ripsteel@edge.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how
>Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 11:19:13 -0600
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: Mark Phillips <ripsteel@edge.net>
>
>Mike Robertson wrote:
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
> >
> > Aw contrar mon ami, An AD search for a Type Certificte product is not
> > bogus.
>
>So can the FAA/DAR deny me an airworthiness certificate if an AD is not
>complied
>with? Their discretion?
>
>Thanks Mike - glad you're here, bad news or not!
>
>Mark Phillips - do not archive -
>
>
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
Message 39
| 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: alternative engines |
--> RV-List message posted by: Tedd McHenry <tedd@vansairforce.org>
> --> RV-List message posted by: cecilth@juno.com
>
> I really believe Van thinks of insurance liability, close to the top of
> the list, when he says use a Lycoming engine. He (and the company) is
> pretty safe that way.
Exactly. When Van says, "We only recommend Lycoming engines," he's considering
much more than just engineering issues.
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
-6 wings
do not archive
Message 40
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
Interesting Scenario, and things similar to this have come up.
Every AD has a provision for an alternate means of compliance. If, in the
opinion of the inspector, you kept the sintered oil gears, but your other
means of supplying oil was satisfactory, he has the authority to accept
that, or ignore it and just educate you, or say "no" the sintered gears need
to go if you want the airworthiness certificate. The same goes with any
other mod, although if the engine was modified that much he may question
leaving the data plate on it. The bottom line is that there are not many
hard and fast rules. Issuance of the Special Airworthiness Certificate is
based on the opinion of the Inspector at the time of the inspection if the
aircraft is safe to operate. You may not agree with him/her, and
can/may/should, go over their head to get it if you think you are in the
right, but they also have the right to say "no" if they feel they have a
good reason.
If the products are non-TSO'd,etc, they do not have ADs, therefore there is
nothing to issue an AD against/for.
Mike Robertson
Das Fed
>From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how
>Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 11:20:28 -0600
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
>
>Mike, thanks for your reply. I do have a couple questions, however. :-)
>
>Suppose (and this example is not an attempt to prompt a confrontation
>but an effort to explore issues that could appear with an experimental
>engine installation) I install a Lycoming in my RV-6 project and you are
>assigned the task of inspection in regards to issuing the airworthiness
>certificate. However, I have come up with an alternative way to supply
>oil to the engine (dry sump with integrated pump) which means the
>standard oil pump is no longer the primary source of oil pressure, and I
>elect to retain the sintered iron pump gears in conflict with the oil
>pump AD. I also have adapted automotive pistons to the Lycoming because
>I feel my design promotes better combustion. In addition to that, the
>ignition system is a design I have adapted from various automotive and
>stationary powerplant components because I am convinced it works better
>than the old mags.
>
>How do you approach this engine? Is it a candidate for an airworthiness
>certificate? Is it still a "Lycoming, type certificated" engine?
>
>Does the installation of non-TSOed ignition systems, exhaust systems,
>injection systems, and engine components jeopardize the issuance of an
>airworthiness certificate to Lycoming-powered experimental aircraft due
>to the guidelines you have outlined?
>
>If not, why not? If so..........we got major problems......... :-)
>
>Thanks in advance for your continued dialog on this very important
>topic.
>
>Sam Buchanan (still learning......)
>
>============================
>
>
>Mike Robertson wrote:
> >
> > --> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
> >
> > Aw contrar mon ami, An AD search for a Type Certificte product is not
> > bogus. While it is true that once the aircraft is issued its
>airworthiness
> > certificate ADs are not compulsory but are still very much a safety
>issue.
> > Nobody argues that point, I'm sure. But during the course of
>certification,
> > and this is where I'm sure you disagree, the inspector, be it FAA or a
>DAR,
> > is determining whether, in his/her opinion, the aircraft is safe to
>operate,
> > and what the chances are that the pilot will possibility hurt/kill
>anybody
> > else or somebody elses property. If part of that process is having the
>ADs
> > checked for installed equipment that is Type Certificated then so be it.
> > Call it blackmail, or what you will, but that is the way it is.
> >
> > In 1998 there was a ruling from Washington DC that determined that ADs
>can
> > be made mandatory for experimental aircraft, but it was determined that,
> > because until the mid 80's engines and props were not part of the
> > information gathered for Amateur-built aircraft, there is no system to
>make
> > sure all owners get the information, and, therefore, it is not
>enforcable.
> > So our (the FAA) only system to ensure safety is have the ADs checked at
>the
> > time of certification. This is slowly getting out to all inspectors.
> > Granted, lots of them have either not gotten the info yet, or don't
>care.
> > I, for one, do care, because I am the one who has to face the wife and
>kids
> > when someone has an accident, and I want to be able to do that with as
>clean
> > a conscience as possible.
> >
> > The bottom line is, yes they are not mandatory, but unless an AD search
>is
> > conducted on Type Certificated products installed on your aircraft, you
>may
> > not get your airworthiness certificate.
> >
> > Sorry guys, but that is the cold hard truth. Now flame away all you
>want.
> > You're entitled. And, by the way, I am the one inspecting Jerry's RV.
> >
> > Mike Robertson
> > Das Fed
> > RV-8A flying, RV-6A a-building, RV-9A a-building
> >
> > >From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
> > >Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
> > >To: rv-list@matronics.com
> > >Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how
> > >Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 20:00:21 -0600
> > >
> > >--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
> > >
> > >Just a clarification:
> > >
> > >The Sensenich 70 series fixed metal prop for the O-320 is indeed
> > >certified with the FAA's blessing; the prop for the O-360 is not.
> > >
> > >The AD thing is still bogus for an experimental aircraft, however.
>There
> > >is no way you can have a "certified" engine on an RV because the RVs do
> > >not possess a type certificate. It is indeed possible to comply with
>all
> > >ADs and service bulletins on your Lycoming RV engine if that is your
> > >desire, and while it may help with resale value and piece of mind, it
> > >has absolutely no bearing on the certification status of the plane. The
> > >plane still possesses an experimental certificate just the same as one
> > >that is powered by a Rotax two-stroke.
> > >
> > >It seems that the FAA exercises some inconsistency in allowing us to
> > >have a 25 hour flyoff if we have a "certified engine and prop".
>However,
> > >since there really is no such animal in experimental-dom, this is just
>a
> > >quirk of the regulations. It seems not to matter whether or not you
> > >installed helicopter pistons, a carb from a lawnmower, and plugs from a
> > >Chevy, if it is a Lycoming O-320 with the 70 series Sensenich
> > >prop.......you get 25 instead of 40 hours. Install a wood prop on a
> > >box-stock, brand new out-of-the-crate Lycoming from Lycoming
>themselves,
> > >and you are rewarded with a 40 hour flyoff.
> > >
> > >Go figure.......
> > >
> > >Sam Buchanan
> > >
>
>
Message 41
| 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: alternative engines insurance |
--> RV-List message posted by: "John Helms" <jhelms@i1.net>
for Canadian risks you might try Grant Robinson at Jones-Brown in Calgary at
(403) 265-1920
JT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bartrim, Todd" <sbartrim@mail.canfor.ca>
Subject: RE: RV-List: alternative engines insurance
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bartrim, Todd" <sbartrim@mail.canfor.ca>
Hi John;
After reading your response, I went searching for the info on Subaru
insurance, as I couldn't remember the details of it. I found it on
Eggenfeller's web site on the FAQ page. It turns out it is everybody's
favorite.... Avemco. So maybe the insurance argument is still valid.
I'm currently insured with Avemco for builders insurance. When I
first began my project, I told them my intention to use a rotary engine and
asked about flight insurance. The agent on the phone said it would not be a
problem, but could not quote me any rates. He merely said that we could deal
with that when we get there. I should have pushed him a little further. He
did however express his personal opinion that it was a better engine choice,
but that doesn't count for much.
Now that I'm getting close to first flight, I've been considering
upgrading my insurance, when I recently received notice from Avemco that
they will not be renewing my policy as they are pulling out of Canada. I
think my only option now is Marsh insurance, but when I called them last
week the person who answered spoke French, when I asked for English she
passed me to someone who spoke English with such a heavy French accent that
I still didn't understand a damn thing he said. Maybe I'll try email. Too
bad you can't deal in Canada, you would certainly get my business.
S. Todd Bartrim
Turbo 13B rotary powered
RX-9endurance (FWF)
C-FSTB (reserved)
http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Helms [SMTP:jhelms@i1.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 4:38 PM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: alternative engines
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "John Helms" <jhelms@i1.net>
>
> Reposted from VansAirforce Yahoo group in response to a claim that several
> insurance companies were writing coverage for Suburu's....
>
> My initial response was "None of the companies (I work with all of them
> except AVEMCO) will do Suburu engine powered RVs." It had been a while
> since I had polled each and every company about this specific issue. So I
> decided to do it again, and I must admit that I was wrong. Here were my
> findings:
>
> I just verified that with the underwriters of the new EAA "program"
> (Global/AAU) and US Specialty Insurance company (which has always been
> into
> writing homebuilt coverages) and neither will do Suburu engines. I know
> AIG, USAIG, Phoenix won't do it (I've asked them again as recently as last
> week). That leaves W. Brown (which doesn't really even do airplanes
> smaller
> than a Baron, and their prices are too high anyway) and Aerospace
> Insurance
> Managers (AIM).
>
> I got a very interesting answer from AIM. Let me preface their answer by
> saying that they write for 2 different companies (one A rated and one B+
> rated.) You may get either one depending on the state you live in.
> Almost
> all the other companies left in Aviation are A+ rated or better.
>
> AIM said generally no, but if we had trouble placing coverage (which we
> would since no one else will do it but AVEMCO the direct writer) they
> would
> consider it. They added that they would consider it as long as nothing
> was
> too "weird" about the risk. I would take that to mean a pilot over the
> age
> of 65, in a state they don't like, based on a less than 2000' grass strip,
> or something like that. This is a much more positive answer than I've
> ever
> received about these engines. It is a step in a positive direction for
> those of you dead set (sorry) about using them.
>
> As I said before, I am glad AVEMCO will do them. Please remember, though,
> the differences in AVEMCO's policy vs. any other. They limit the
> liability
> payout to everyone not just passengers inside your plane (they do per
> person
> sub-limits instead of the per passenger which all other companies do.)
> And
> they further sublimit your family members (which no other companies do) to
> 25% of the sub-limit.
>
> There may be isolated instances where these engines are being covered by
> the
> other companies, but that does not mean they will or intend to write
> coverage for these engines. Those are mistakes. I have my fair share of
> mistakes that I have written and are currently on the books, as I
> mentioned
> before.
>
> John "JT" Helms
> Branch Manager
> NationAir Insurance Agency
> Pleasure and Business Branch
>
>
Message 42
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
Thanks again, Mike. I just read the updated FAR39 you referenced and it
really is a new development for us experimental types.
So......are you saying I could just remove the data plate from my
Lycoming and it would no longer be subject to ADs under the umbrella of
FAR 39? Or would it need to be modified to the point that the DAR no
longer "recognizes" it as a Lycoming?
This could get get VERY interesing.........and expensive.........and
frustrating......... ;-)
Sam Buchanan
=====================
Mike Robertson wrote:
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
>
> Interesting Scenario, and things similar to this have come up.
>
> Every AD has a provision for an alternate means of compliance. If, in the
> opinion of the inspector, you kept the sintered oil gears, but your other
> means of supplying oil was satisfactory, he has the authority to accept
> that, or ignore it and just educate you, or say "no" the sintered gears need
> to go if you want the airworthiness certificate. The same goes with any
> other mod, although if the engine was modified that much he may question
> leaving the data plate on it. The bottom line is that there are not many
> hard and fast rules. Issuance of the Special Airworthiness Certificate is
> based on the opinion of the Inspector at the time of the inspection if the
> aircraft is safe to operate. You may not agree with him/her, and
> can/may/should, go over their head to get it if you think you are in the
> right, but they also have the right to say "no" if they feel they have a
> good reason.
>
> If the products are non-TSO'd,etc, they do not have ADs, therefore there is
> nothing to issue an AD against/for.
>
> Mike Robertson
> Das Fed
>
> >From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
> >Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
> >To: rv-list@matronics.com
> >Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how
> >Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 11:20:28 -0600
> >
> >--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
> >
> >Mike, thanks for your reply. I do have a couple questions, however. :-)
> >
> >Suppose (and this example is not an attempt to prompt a confrontation
> >but an effort to explore issues that could appear with an experimental
> >engine installation) I install a Lycoming in my RV-6 project and you are
> >assigned the task of inspection in regards to issuing the airworthiness
> >certificate. However, I have come up with an alternative way to supply
> >oil to the engine (dry sump with integrated pump) which means the
> >standard oil pump is no longer the primary source of oil pressure, and I
> >elect to retain the sintered iron pump gears in conflict with the oil
> >pump AD. I also have adapted automotive pistons to the Lycoming because
> >I feel my design promotes better combustion. In addition to that, the
> >ignition system is a design I have adapted from various automotive and
> >stationary powerplant components because I am convinced it works better
> >than the old mags.
> >
> >How do you approach this engine? Is it a candidate for an airworthiness
> >certificate? Is it still a "Lycoming, type certificated" engine?
> >
> >Does the installation of non-TSOed ignition systems, exhaust systems,
> >injection systems, and engine components jeopardize the issuance of an
> >airworthiness certificate to Lycoming-powered experimental aircraft due
> >to the guidelines you have outlined?
> >
> >If not, why not? If so..........we got major problems......... :-)
> >
> >Thanks in advance for your continued dialog on this very important
> >topic.
> >
> >Sam Buchanan (still learning......)
> >
> >============================
> >
Message 43
| 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: | Way off topic but cool |
--> RV-List message posted by: "C. Rabaut" <crabaut@coalinga.com>
Stephanie,
Hey girlfriend, you've got WAAAAAY too much time on your hands.
Shouldn't you be squeezing rivets or something?
Chuck
----- Original Message -----
From: MARSHALL,STEPHANIE (HP-Corvallis,ex1) <stephanie.marshall@hp.com>
Subject: RV-List: Way off topic but cool
> --> RV-List message posted by: "MARSHALL,STEPHANIE (HP-Corvallis,ex1)"
<stephanie.marshall@hp.com>
>
> I know this is off topic, but check out what you can buy on ebay.
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1791560632
>
> Stephanie Marshall
>
>
Message 44
| 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: Alternative Engine Questions |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>
Hi Barry,
Lets suppose that a guy with some coin in his pockets and some time on his
hands decided to go this 4.3 L V6 rout.
If he where to order a custom built aluminum block with the biggest bore
that can be utilized (4+ inches I believe) and also a the longest stroked
crankshaft that would be workable. (?) This stuff is available in the
market place.
Some time spent with a cam grinder to provide a cam that could supply good
torque and horsepower at even lower RPM., say somewhere closer to 2000 to
4000 RPM.
From this he might realize some operational benefits such as lower engine
speed would allow a less tall PRSU. reduction thereby delivering more energy
to the prop.(less gallons per hr.). Potentially more durability and
reliability due to better power at lower RPM..
Add aluminum heads with sodium cooled valves, flow benched and ported with
an eye toward the intended use.
Now with the weight of the cast iron bits gone. The power band and RPM range
closer to his applications demands and his pockets no longer pulling his
pants down off his hips. Would he be on the road to his ultimate goal?
At Vans good price, $31300.00 for a new 200 HP. Lycoming, the above power
plant could be configured for similar and arguably but possibly less money.
As others have said the overhaul cost for this unit would be significantly
less than any aircraft industry manufactured engine. A few thousand dollars
as opposed to somewhere near two thirds of the original engine purchase
price.
So far there has been little reference to the many light weight high output
engine designs that have arrived and continue to arrive on the scene. Who's
to say which one of these 250 lb. 245 HP type units might jump up onto a
firewall. The Cadillac North Star engine has pulled an aircraft through the
sky for one example.
Just fueling the fire a bit :)!
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "barry pote" <barrypote@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Alternative Engine Questions
> --> RV-List message posted by: barry pote <barrypote@comcast.net>
>
> With reference to cams, Brian Crower (Crower Cams) pulled out an old
> master to make me one for the 4.3. Fred Carter, in Colorado wrote a
> number of articles for CONTACT magazine, has built many engines. His 4.3
> made strong power from 3000 to 5000 rpm. So I chose to use that grind. I
> intend to never exceed 4500 and hopefully cruise at 3500 rpm.
> 3500 rpm is not much higher than I hit , on an open road, from Montclair
> to Albany, to see my grand daughter. Hahaha. Radar detector is a must!
>
> Barry Pote
>
>
> > Actually Jim,
> >
> > Getting a handle on the mysterious black art of cam grinding is easier
than
> > most people think. Most cam grinding shops can utilize one or another
set of
> > masters to modify a cam to suit an intended use.
>
>
Message 45
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
Sam,
Yep, just remove the data plate and it is no longer considered an aircraft
product, therefore no way to track the ADs. And I completely agree with you
last statement. Hang on!!
Mike
>From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how
>Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 14:03:39 -0600
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
>
>Thanks again, Mike. I just read the updated FAR39 you referenced and it
>really is a new development for us experimental types.
>
>So......are you saying I could just remove the data plate from my
>Lycoming and it would no longer be subject to ADs under the umbrella of
>FAR 39? Or would it need to be modified to the point that the DAR no
>longer "recognizes" it as a Lycoming?
>
>This could get get VERY interesing.........and expensive.........and
>frustrating......... ;-)
>
>Sam Buchanan
>
>=====================
>
>Mike Robertson wrote:
> >
> > --> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
> >
> > Interesting Scenario, and things similar to this have come up.
> >
> > Every AD has a provision for an alternate means of compliance. If, in
>the
> > opinion of the inspector, you kept the sintered oil gears, but your
>other
> > means of supplying oil was satisfactory, he has the authority to accept
> > that, or ignore it and just educate you, or say "no" the sintered gears
>need
> > to go if you want the airworthiness certificate. The same goes with any
> > other mod, although if the engine was modified that much he may question
> > leaving the data plate on it. The bottom line is that there are not
>many
> > hard and fast rules. Issuance of the Special Airworthiness Certificate
>is
> > based on the opinion of the Inspector at the time of the inspection if
>the
> > aircraft is safe to operate. You may not agree with him/her, and
> > can/may/should, go over their head to get it if you think you are in the
> > right, but they also have the right to say "no" if they feel they have a
> > good reason.
> >
> > If the products are non-TSO'd,etc, they do not have ADs, therefore there
>is
> > nothing to issue an AD against/for.
> >
> > Mike Robertson
> > Das Fed
> >
> > >From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
> > >Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
> > >To: rv-list@matronics.com
> > >Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how
> > >Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 11:20:28 -0600
> > >
> > >--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
> > >
> > >Mike, thanks for your reply. I do have a couple questions, however. :-)
> > >
> > >Suppose (and this example is not an attempt to prompt a confrontation
> > >but an effort to explore issues that could appear with an experimental
> > >engine installation) I install a Lycoming in my RV-6 project and you
>are
> > >assigned the task of inspection in regards to issuing the airworthiness
> > >certificate. However, I have come up with an alternative way to supply
> > >oil to the engine (dry sump with integrated pump) which means the
> > >standard oil pump is no longer the primary source of oil pressure, and
>I
> > >elect to retain the sintered iron pump gears in conflict with the oil
> > >pump AD. I also have adapted automotive pistons to the Lycoming because
> > >I feel my design promotes better combustion. In addition to that, the
> > >ignition system is a design I have adapted from various automotive and
> > >stationary powerplant components because I am convinced it works better
> > >than the old mags.
> > >
> > >How do you approach this engine? Is it a candidate for an airworthiness
> > >certificate? Is it still a "Lycoming, type certificated" engine?
> > >
> > >Does the installation of non-TSOed ignition systems, exhaust systems,
> > >injection systems, and engine components jeopardize the issuance of an
> > >airworthiness certificate to Lycoming-powered experimental aircraft due
> > >to the guidelines you have outlined?
> > >
> > >If not, why not? If so..........we got major problems......... :-)
> > >
> > >Thanks in advance for your continued dialog on this very important
> > >topic.
> > >
> > >Sam Buchanan (still learning......)
> > >
> > >============================
> > >
>
>
Message 46
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Truitt <Jim.Truitt@usdoj.gov>
Has anyone installed their GPS antenna under the front cowling at the
top of the firewall? I spoke to someone at Oshkosh this year, the name
escapes me, who told me it works well in that location. I'm wondering
about any heat related problems, or any other problems I may not be
considering.
The antenna cable I have is rated to 80C, but I'm not sure just how much
heat will be in the cowling, on a tarmac, on hot Indiana days.
Message 47
| 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: | Closing wing tips? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Andy Karmy" <andy@karmy.com>
Have any of the rest of you done anything to close the gaps in the wing tips that
match up to the ailerons? Similar to what we do to the tail tips? There are
various holes and openings left around the one short rib that is riveted into
the opening...
- Andy Karmy
RV9A Seattle WA - working on the glass...
Message 48
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
In a message dated 12/04/2002 4:02:57 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Jim.Truitt@usdoj.gov writes:
> Has anyone installed their GPS antenna under the front cowling at the
> top of the firewall? I spoke to someone at Oshkosh this year, the name
> escapes me, who told me it works well in that location. I'm wondering
> about any heat related problems, or any other problems I may not be
> considering.
>
Mine works wonderfully atop the glareshield in my tip-up 6A. Seems like a
GPS patch antenna forward of the firewall would be very much in the way when
working on the engine accessories, in additon to the heat issues you already
mentioned. Also, some shielding at the horizon from the top edge of the
firewall is bound to occur. Why mess with success?
Your mileage may vary.
-Bill B
270 hours behind a Lowrance AirMap 300
Message 49
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dick DeCramer" <diesel@rconnect.com>
I fly in cold climate here in Minnesota so I have two heat valves on the firewall
with the idea of having two heat muffs (Rick Robbins on Vetterman crossover
for an RV6). I have seen the air pick up in two differant locations... (1)
on the forward baffles just inside the cowling air intake scoops ahead of the
engine cylinders and (2) on the aft baffle above the engine accessory case and
then via scat tubing to the muffs. My question is which location produces the
best heat and performance for the cockpit? Pros and cons appreciated especially
from other cold climate flyers.
Dick DeCramer
N500DD
RV6 slider 160/ Sensenich
engine installation
Message 50
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: barry pote <barrypote@comcast.net>
Laird did it on his. I saw it when looking through a site that was
mentioned yesterday, about mounting ELTs under the floor.
Barry Pote
do not archive
Jim Truitt wrote:
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jim Truitt <Jim.Truitt@usdoj.gov>
>
> Has anyone installed their GPS antenna under the front cowling at the
> top of the firewall? I spoke to someone at Oshkosh this year, the name
> escapes me, who told me it works well in that location. I'm wondering
> about any heat related problems, or any other problems I may not be
> considering.
> The antenna cable I have is rated to 80C, but I'm not sure just how much
> heat will be in the cowling, on a tarmac, on hot Indiana days.
>
Message 51
| 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: Alternative Engine Questions |
--> RV-List message posted by: Tedd McHenry <tedd@vansairforce.org>
Jim:
> The Cadillac North Star engine has pulled an aircraft through the
> sky for one example.
The North Star's a good engine, but apparently it's not as light as you might
think. The OHC adds a lot of weight. An aluminum small-block V6 would be
lighter. You can also build a 272 ci Buick V6 with an aluminum block from GM,
which would be quite a bit lighter than the Chevy (but you'd give up some cubic
inches, too). Higher cost per horsepower, but for the very weight-conscious it
would be a good choice.
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
-6 wings
Message 52
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Ken Balch <kbalch1@attbi.com>
Jim Truitt wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Truitt <Jim.Truitt@usdoj.gov>
>
>Has anyone installed their GPS antenna under the front cowling at the
>top of the firewall? I spoke to someone at Oshkosh this year, the name escapes
me, who told me it works well in that location. I'm wondering about any heat
related problems, or any other problems I may not be considering.
>The antenna cable I have is rated to 80C, but I'm not sure just how much heat
will be in the cowling, on a tarmac, on hot Indiana days.
>
I did this and it's been working fine. I saw it on an -8 at SnF two
years ago (maybe Dick Martin's?) and shamelessly copied the installation.
Regards,
Ken Balch
RV-8 N118KB
Message 53
| 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: | alternative engines |
--> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <jclark@conterra.com>
At this stage, why does Van **need** Lycoming for his business???
Given the prices we pay him for the Lyc, he does not seem to be making a
killing selling them. His planes are set up to accept Lycomings from him or
Bart or your favorite overhauler. There are even Subie kits and Rotaries
available for the RV series. It is not like the RV would die off if Van
stopped selling Lycoming engines or if Lycoming all of a sudden said "your
deal is off, all sales are now direct, and at a higher price".
It seems that his publicly expressed opinion has always been backed up with
data, seemingly very logical data. He also seems to be open to BETTER ideas
and concepts when there is data to prove it. I have **ZERO** knowledge of
anything in this area but I would suspect that if the Subies continue on the
path they SEEM to be on then one of these days even Van himself may say they
are "cool" (based on the data made available to him).
On the other hand he could just be "old fashioned" ... aluminum
construction, basic instruments, Lycoming engines. :-)
James
... not as sceptical of Van's views on engines
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tedd McHenry
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 12:52 PM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: alternative engines
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Tedd McHenry <tedd@vansairforce.org>
>
> > Todd: I suspect that Van could be a dealer for any engine he
> chose. The
> > decision to go with Lycoming was made long before he became a dealer.
>
> Yes, and also long before any of the current alternatives were
> available. Now
> that he's committed to Lycoming, should we assume that his
> publicly expressed
> option is completely objective, or is it reasonable to assume
> that it might be
> slightly coloured by the need to maintain a good relationship
> with Lycoming? I
> don't mean that as a slight against Van. I have great respect
> for him as a
> person and as an engineer. But also as an astute businessman. Is it a
> coincidence that his publicly expressed opinion is also exactly
> the opinion
> that's best for his business?
>
> Tedd McHenry
> Surrey, BC
> -6 wings
>
>
Message 54
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how |
--> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <jclark@conterra.com>
Good points Sam ...
As to your first question ... I don't know.
My partner and I puchased an "RV project" that included an engine that had
been "overhauled". I mentioned to her (my RV partner) that all we could view
it as was a CORE since it did NOT have logs or a data plate. I even tracked
down the owner before the owner (and th rebuilder) to discuss the engine. He
was going to fly behind it, which made me feel a little better, but to
answer your next quest, YES!. We sent that engine off to Bart to have it
torn down (which he did for a reasonable fee) and put back together in only
the "right way".
THat is what we did. Others may take more of a chance.
Now about changing the regulations and being forced to do something that is
a big change, that is another discussion (very worthwhile one I might add).
It probably needs to be phrased more like you put it in this message.
I am nowhere near being a Technical Counselor but I would advise anyone who
asked to do exactly what you and we did. Then if they feel they know enough
and can tolerate the risk of doing otherwise, so be it for them. Maybe we
will all gain (positively) from their experience.
James
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Sam Buchanan
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 2:17 PM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List:AD search - how
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
>
>
> "James E. Clark" wrote:
> >
> > --> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <jclark@conterra.com>
> >
> > Maybe a slightly different perspective, though consistent with Jim's, I
> > think (your opinion may vary) ...
> >
> > 1. After all that is invested in making these planes our "dream planes",
> > what's so bad about having an AD search. So what if it costs a few more
> > dollars or hours. We have spent tens of thousand of dollars and
> thousands of
> > hours. This "check" is hopefully just a bit more insurance that
> we are AWARE
> > of any issues that may exist with the engine we are using. And THAT is a
> > good thing. Just because the engine out of Granma's Buick (or Subie, or
> > 'Vette) doesn't come with AD's does not mean that it is not a
> good idea to
> > check those for the Lycoming or Continental.
>
> ========================
>
> Jim, how do you run an AD search on an engine that has no logs? Some of
> the ADs reference internal engine parts; are you willing to disassemble
> what you feel is a good engine just to satisfy the desires of the DAR?
>
> Is it reasonable to require the owner of a Lycoming to disassemble his
> engine to satisfy ADs when the builder who has installed a Subaru or
> Honda or Mazda or turbine does not have to do the same?
>
> Folks, we are talking about a MONUMENTAL shift in the FAA's approach to
> experimental certification! I press this point not to disallow the value
> of conformance to ADs; I satisfied all ADs and used only yellow-tagged
> parts in my O-320 rebuild precisely because I wanted the best engine I
> could build.
>
> But, being FORCED to do this via regulation is something far removed
> from what we have up to this point enjoyed in the experimental
> community! This recent amendment to FARs has the potential of having
> far-reaching ramifications to any of us that use "certificated" engines,
> and may very well be the end of alternative engines if only engines that
> have been blessed by the FAA are approved. The next issue to fall into
> place behind this amendment will be insurance.....just wait until you
> start seeing claims refused due to lack of conformance to ADs......
>
> My apologies to those who think I may be overbearing on this point, but
> as an EAA Technical Counselor, and someone who fields a LOT of RV
> questions, I need to know what to tell potential, new, and current
> builders when they raise powerplant/certification questions.
>
> Sam Buchanan
>
>
Message 55
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <jclark@conterra.com>
Yes.
Others have and we "borrowed" the concept. In our case an RV6 tip up (I
doubt if that matters).
Still in 40 hour test phase. No problems seen yet.
Before final comit though I did power up the GPS, get a measure of the
signal quality BEFORE and AFTER cowl and saw no difference.
Also, regarding het, my logic was that if it too hot for the antenna then
the cowl would probably be too hot to touch and we would have other
problems.
James
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jim Truitt
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 5:02 PM
> To: Receipt Notification Requested
> Subject: RV-List: GPS Antenna
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jim Truitt <Jim.Truitt@usdoj.gov>
>
> Has anyone installed their GPS antenna under the front cowling at the
> top of the firewall? I spoke to someone at Oshkosh this year, the name
> escapes me, who told me it works well in that location. I'm wondering
> about any heat related problems, or any other problems I may not be
> considering.
> The antenna cable I have is rated to 80C, but I'm not sure just how much
> heat will be in the cowling, on a tarmac, on hot Indiana days.
>
>
Message 56
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Laird Owens <owens@aerovironment.com>
It works fine up there. Picture at:
http://members3.clubphoto.com/socal230330/429050/guest.phtml
scroll down a bit.
Laird
>--> RV-List message posted by: barry pote <barrypote@comcast.net>
>
>Laird did it on his. I saw it when looking through a site that was
>mentioned yesterday, about mounting ELTs under the floor.
>Barry Pote
>do not archive
>
>Jim Truitt wrote:
>>
>> --> RV-List message posted by: Jim Truitt <Jim.Truitt@usdoj.gov>
>>
>> Has anyone installed their GPS antenna under the front cowling at the
>> top of the firewall? I spoke to someone at Oshkosh this year, the name
>> escapes me, who told me it works well in that location. I'm wondering
>> about any heat related problems, or any other problems I may not be
>> considering.
>> The antenna cable I have is rated to 80C, but I'm not sure just how much
> > heat will be in the cowling, on a tarmac, on hot Indiana days.
>>
Message 57
| 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: RV List - AD search |
--> RV-List message posted by: Oldsfolks@aol.com
My DAR wanted AD's on my Lycoming listed and complied with . The engine had
been o'hauled 10 years prior , and a different owner ; so I could not show
compliance without completely disassembling the engine . WHEW ! I chose to
de-certify the engine - Remove the data plate and install a new data plate -(
Bob Olds experimental O-320-B3A )
NO problem - it'll outlive me anyway..
RV-4 , N1191X , Flying Now
Charleston, Arkansas
Message 58
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Oldsfolks@aol.com
On our RV-4 I took the heater air from the back baffle above the engine .
I use 1" SCAT to the muff - which has a screendoor spring wound around inside
the muff - and 2" SCAT to the heater valve . I used the horizontal baffle
inlet on our first RV-4 , and I can't tell any difference ( also 1" inlet &
2" outlet ) That spring must help the air heat & expand .
Tyr it - You'll like it !
RV-4 , N1191X , Flying Now
Charleston, Arkansas
Message 59
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
Pretty sure Laird Owens did that in his beautiful RV-6. If I recall, he has
a picture of it in an album somewhere...I think it's:
http://members3.clubphoto.com/socal230330/429050/guest.phtml
And here's the full image:
http://members3.clubphoto.com/_cgi-bin/getImage.pl?imgID=4846103-590e&trans
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D (fuselage)
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Truitt" <Jim.Truitt@usdoj.gov>
Subject: RV-List: GPS Antenna
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jim Truitt <Jim.Truitt@usdoj.gov>
>
> Has anyone installed their GPS antenna under the front cowling at the
> top of the firewall? I spoke to someone at Oshkosh this year, the name
> escapes me, who told me it works well in that location. I'm wondering
> about any heat related problems, or any other problems I may not be
> considering.
> The antenna cable I have is rated to 80C, but I'm not sure just how much
> heat will be in the cowling, on a tarmac, on hot Indiana days.
>
>
Message 60
| 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: | alternative engines |
--> RV-List message posted by: Tedd McHenry <tedd@vansairforce.org>
> It is not like the RV would die off if Van
> stopped selling Lycoming engines or if Lycoming all of a sudden said "your
> deal is off, all sales are now direct, and at a higher price".
You have to be kidding. Van sells the engines that are preferred by 99 percent
of his customers, and demanded by most, at 2/3 market value, and you're
suggesting that arrangment isn't valuable to his business?
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
-6 wings
Message 61
| 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: | retractable tie down |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Joe Hine" <joehine@nbnet.nb.ca>
Ernie
There was an artical in a RVator many years ago with good photos about
building retractable tie down rings. I have no idea what year or issue but
I will try and find it again and let you and the list know. If anyone else
finds it feel free to post it before me.
Joe Hine
RV4 C-FYTQ
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of ernie billing
Subject: RV-List: retractable tie down
--> RV-List message posted by: ernie billing <ebilling@yahoo.com>
Anyone designed retractable tie down eyes for their
RV?
I'm starting the wings on my RV7, and although I like
the simplicity of the screw in tie down bolt, I'm
partial to the retractable tie down on my Cardinal RG.
Its out of the way, but always there when I need it.
Don't have to dig throught the cabin for eye bolts.
I looked into getting the hooks from Cessna, but
balked at the $150 price.
I may just design my own and kit it if enough people
are interested.
Ernie Billing
RV7 - beginning wings
San Luis Obispo, CA
ebilling@yahoo.com
Message 62
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how why my frist post |
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie and Tupper England <cengland@netdoor.com>
Mike Robertson wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" <mrobert569@hotmail.com>
>
> Sam,
>
> I can identify that reg right now. Take a look at FAR 39, as amended on SEP
> 27, 2002. There have been several changes to the reg. FAR 39.15
> specifically states that ADs apply even if the individual product has been
> changed by modifying, altering, or repairing it in the area addrerssed by
> the AD. Then take a look at the new 39.3. It states that ADs apply to the
> following products: aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, and appliances.
> The times are changing, and the FAA is trying to close the loophole that
> Experimenters have been enjoying for many years. With over 10% of the GA
> registered aircraft in this country being Experimental Amateur-builts it had
> to happen. Whether you, I , and anybody else likes it (or doesn't like it),
> that is the way it is going to be.
>
> Now don't go crazy quite yet. Because, as of right now, they still have not
> figured out a way to ensure all owners of each product gets a copy of each
> AD. Until they do, enforcment of ADs will not be able to happen. In my
> opinion, and my opinion only, I think somebody will get smart and say that
> for Experimental aircraft, ADs will become effective at the time of the
> first annual condition inspection after the effective date of the AD. So at
> each condition inspection, an AD search will be needed, and if any new ADs
> are found they will then have to be dealt with. Again, this is my opinion
> only.
>
> Mike Robertson
> Das Fed
>
>
Well Mike, this is a really interesting way for the FAA to drag all those
superstitious pilots kicking & screaming into the future of aviation powerplants.
(See concurrent thread on [GASP!] Alternative Engines.)
Charlie
obligatory ;-)
Message 63
| 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: for sale O 320 E3D |
--> RV-List message posted by: Rquinn1@aol.com
Terry, we need a new prop and spinner. Can you provide more information such
as bolt size and prop pitch and diameter?
Thanks
Rollie & Rod
Message 64
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
Dick, since you are building both into your plane, it looks like you
will be the best source of the difference, if any, of where the air is
picked up for the heaters. I suspect no difference will be found.
A couple of thoughts - 1) a very small inlet area is needed, I have
ground adjustable throttles on the heater air pickup points behind #3,
and they are almost entirely closed off, 2) use a counter-flow technique
on the muff, i.e., run the heater air the opposite direction as the
exhaust. The key to staying warm in these planes is to put a large
volume of heated air into them, minimizing cold drafts. A small volume
of very hot air is not as good as a large volume of not so hot air.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 235 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
> I fly in cold climate here in Minnesota so I have two heat
> valves on the firewall with the idea of having two heat
> muffs (Rick Robbins on Vetterman crossover for an RV6). I
> have seen the air pick up in two differant locations... (1)
> on the forward baffles just inside the cowling air intake
> scoops ahead of the engine cylinders and (2) on the aft
> baffle above the engine accessory case and then via scat
> tubing to the muffs. My question is which location produces
> the best heat and performance for the cockpit? Pros and cons
> appreciated especially from other cold climate flyers.
>
> Dick DeCramer
> N500DD
> RV6 slider 160/ Sensenich
> engine installation
Message 65
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Keith and Jean Williams" <kandjwilliams@earthlink.net>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jim Truitt <Jim.Truitt@usdoj.gov>
>
> Has anyone installed their GPS antenna under the front cowling at the
> top of the firewall?
Jim,
Several of the RVs around here (Western Illinois, Eastern Iowa) including
mine (flying since 1999) have the antenna in that location and it works
fine. I checked with II Morrow (now UPS) and they said no problem so long
as I avoid metallic paint on cowl top.
Keith Williams
RV6 Moline, IL
>
Message 66
| 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: | Lakeland RV weekend at SnF facility |
--> RV-List message posted by: "WALTER KERR" <kerrjb@msn.com>
The second annual event will be held Friday and Saturday, Jan 10th and 11th.
They really did a bang up job last year and we really should support it with a
great turnout this year. You can camp free or someone will drop you at a local
motel if you prefer, but camping is great with campfire and lots of loose hangar
flying! It would be a good time for some of you to check out Key West maybe
on Sat nite.
You can keep up with the status by checking Laura Crook's site at www.rotaryaviation.com
and clicking on the Florida Van's AF spot.
Bernie Kerr
Message 67
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
> Dick, since you are building both into your plane, it looks
> like you will be the best source of the difference, if any,
> of where the air is picked up for the heaters. I suspect no
> difference will be found.
>
Dick, sorry, I misread your original post, which generated my above
erroneous comment... However, I don't think it matters where you pick up
the heat. Robbins claims some additional heat is garnered by putting
the pickup low behind #3. Maybe so.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 235 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
Message 68
| 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: | alternative engines |
--> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <jclark@conterra.com>
No what I am suggesting is that is is not the most critical thing for his
business at this stage. If Lycoming got out of the engine business and
Continental had a replacement Van would continue to sell kits.
If Jan's Subie conversion continues to prove to be a BIG TIME winner and
Lycoming drops off the face of the earth, Van will still sell kits.
Van sells Lycomings but so do a LOT of other people and ***SOME*** of them
are viewed as "competitive" with Van on this.
If Van STOPS selling kits **then** his business goes away (at least the
business we know). If he stops selling Lycoming engines and simply gives us
a phone number or web site where we can order an engine, I say his business
is not significantly impaired. Of course it is more convenient for all of us
to be able to get engines and props from Van but it is not absolutely
critical, just like it is not critical that we get a Hartzell Constant speed
prop from him.
I bought a Lycoming from Van. My partner and I bought one from someone and
sent it to Bart. I have looked many times at the Subie site. None of this
though had any affect on the fundamental decision to build an RV. That
decision is the one that Van has to (and I believe does) keep his eye on so
his business continues to thrive ... make the best value aircraft kits out
there that are built to the needds and desires of real potential customers.
James
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tedd McHenry
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 5:57 PM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV-List: alternative engines
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Tedd McHenry <tedd@vansairforce.org>
>
> > It is not like the RV would die off if Van
> > stopped selling Lycoming engines or if Lycoming all of a sudden
> said "your
> > deal is off, all sales are now direct, and at a higher price".
>
> You have to be kidding. Van sells the engines that are preferred
> by 99 percent
> of his customers, and demanded by most, at 2/3 market value, and you're
> suggesting that arrangment isn't valuable to his business?
>
> Tedd McHenry
> Surrey, BC
> -6 wings
>
>
Message 69
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "George McNutt" <gmcnutt@intergate.ca>
--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Truitt <Jim.Truitt@usdoj.gov>
Has anyone installed their GPS antenna under the front cowling at the
top of the firewall?
Hi Jim
This answer is off topic - for others who are planning a location for their
GPS antenna, especially for IFR use, make sure to keep your GPS antenna away
from the ELT antenna. Some ELT's pick up comm radio transmissions
(frequencies close to 121.17) and re-radiate a 13th order harmonic that will
bother or shut down the GPS.
George McNutt
Langley, B.C.
Message 70
| 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: | Elevator cover plate |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Geoff Evans" <gwevans@attbi.com>
I need some advice regarding the cover plate on the bottom of the left elevator
where the trim tab cable passes through.
Unfortunately, I didn't dimple the screw holes before installing the nutplates
in the elevator. What can I do to fix this problem?
Here are the options I can think of:
1. Don't dimple the cover plate itself and use pan head screws instead of the flush
screws. This would be the easiest, but the
screw heads will stick out.
2. Countersink the screw holes, without removing the nutplates, to provide a place
for the cover plate dimples to go. This will
remove a lot of material (perhaps all of it) if I countersink enough to accept
the dimple in the cover plate.
3. Drill out the rivets and remove the nutplates. Dimple the screw holes and then
reinstall the nutplates.
The guy at Van's said to lube up one of the screws, screw it in, and wang on it
enough to form the dimple with the screw head. I
looked at this option, but the screws are very tight in the nutplates and I don't
think I can do this without stripping the screw
head.
What should I do?
Thanks.
Geoff Evans
RV-8
Message 71
| 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: | alternative engines |
--> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <jclark@conterra.com>
No what I am suggesting is that is is not the most critical thing for his
business at this stage. If Lycoming got out of the engine business and
Continental had a replacement Van would continue to sell kits.
If Jan's Subie conversion continues to prove to be a BIG TIME winner and
Lycoming drops off the face of the earth, Van will still sell kits.
Van sells Lycomings but so do a LOT of other people and ***SOME*** of them
are viewed as "competitive" with Van on this.
If Van STOPS selling kits **then** his business goes away (at least the
business we know). If he stops selling Lycoming engines and simply gives us
a phone number or web site where we can order an engine, I say his business
is not significantly impaired. Of course it is more convenient for all of us
to be able to get engines and props from Van but it is not absolutely
critical, just like it is not critical that we get a Hartzell Constant speed
prop from him.
I bought a Lycoming from Van. My partner and I bought one from someone and
sent it to Bart. I have looked many times at the Subie site. None of this
though had any affect on the fundamental decision to build an RV. That
decision is the one that Van has to (and I believe does) keep his eye on so
his business continues to thrive ... make the best value aircraft kits out
there that are built to the needds and desires of real potential customers.
James
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tedd McHenry
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 5:57 PM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV-List: alternative engines
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Tedd McHenry <tedd@vansairforce.org>
>
> > It is not like the RV would die off if Van
> > stopped selling Lycoming engines or if Lycoming all of a sudden
> said "your
> > deal is off, all sales are now direct, and at a higher price".
>
> You have to be kidding. Van sells the engines that are preferred
> by 99 percent
> of his customers, and demanded by most, at 2/3 market value, and you're
> suggesting that arrangment isn't valuable to his business?
>
> Tedd McHenry
> Surrey, BC
> -6 wings
>
>
Message 72
| 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: Fw: Tailwheel vs. Trigear |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
Randy Compton wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Compton" <rdcompton@earthlink.net>
>
>>I don't know, a tri gear with slider canopy back looks pretty cool
>>taxing down in front of all the people at Oshkosh with your arm resting
>>on the slider rail and silk scarf blowing in the wind. Pretty cool IMHO.
>>
>>Steve Eberhart
>>RV-7A slider - working on fuel tanks, silk scarf on order :-)
>
>
> Yeah, just as "cool" as one of those Grumman/American
> Yankee/Traveler/Tiger/Cheetah et. al. airplanes.
>
> Van's lucky he didn't get hit with a plagiarism charge with that, well, to
> put it delicately, that less than sleek looking A-6, oops, I mean RV-6.
>
> Randy Compton
> RV-3 N84VF
> Gulf Breeze, FL
>
> Do Not Archive
>
>
Oh, you are talking about the Vangrumman. :)
Jerry
do not archive
Message 73
| 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: Elevator cover plate |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Kyle Boatright" <kyle.boatright@adelphia.net>
How about grinding off the threaded portion of a screw of the appropriate
size. Next, use double sided tape to secure this screw to the flat set in
your squeezer. Finally, dimple the hole using your new squeezer die on the
outside and a flat set on the inside.
KB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Geoff Evans" <gwevans@attbi.com>
Subject: RV-List: Elevator cover plate
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Geoff Evans" <gwevans@attbi.com>
>
> I need some advice regarding the cover plate on the bottom of the left
elevator where the trim tab cable passes through.
>
> Unfortunately, I didn't dimple the screw holes before installing the
nutplates in the elevator. What can I do to fix this problem?
> Here are the options I can think of:
>
> 1. Don't dimple the cover plate itself and use pan head screws instead of
the flush screws. This would be the easiest, but the
> screw heads will stick out.
>
> 2. Countersink the screw holes, without removing the nutplates, to provide
a place for the cover plate dimples to go. This will
> remove a lot of material (perhaps all of it) if I countersink enough to
accept the dimple in the cover plate.
>
> 3. Drill out the rivets and remove the nutplates. Dimple the screw holes
and then reinstall the nutplates.
>
> The guy at Van's said to lube up one of the screws, screw it in, and wang
on it enough to form the dimple with the screw head. I
> looked at this option, but the screws are very tight in the nutplates and
I don't think I can do this without stripping the screw
> head.
>
> What should I do?
>
> Thanks.
> Geoff Evans
> RV-8
>
>
Message 74
| 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: alternative engines |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
Tedd McHenry wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Tedd McHenry <tedd@vansairforce.org>
>
>>Todd: I suspect that Van could be a dealer for any engine he chose. The
>>decision to go with Lycoming was made long before he became a dealer.
>
>
> Yes, and also long before any of the current alternatives were available. Now
> that he's committed to Lycoming, should we assume that his publicly expressed
> option is completely objective, or is it reasonable to assume that it might be
> slightly coloured by the need to maintain a good relationship with Lycoming?
As I live 6 miles from Van's and have know him since his RV-3 days I can tell you
his
publicly expressed opinion has never changed. It has always been if you want a
conversion "take cash and convert it into an aircraft engine."
Jerry
do not archive
> I don't mean that as a slight against Van. I have great respect for him as a
> person and as an engineer. But also as an astute businessman. Is it a
> coincidence that his publicly expressed opinion is also exactly the opinion
> that's best for his business?
> Tedd McHenry
> Surrey, BC
> -6 wings
>
>
Message 75
| 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: Elevator cover plate |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Steve J Hurlbut" <sjhdcl@kingston.net>
I would remove the nutplates and dimple, re-install.
If you run a #6 tap though the nutplate you should be able to make the
dimple
with the screw head as suggested by Van's.
Steve
Rv7A
panel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Geoff Evans" <gwevans@attbi.com>
Subject: RV-List: Elevator cover plate
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Geoff Evans" <gwevans@attbi.com>
>
> I need some advice regarding the cover plate on the bottom of the left
elevator where the trim tab cable passes through.
>
> Unfortunately, I didn't dimple the screw holes before installing the
nutplates in the elevator. What can I do to fix this problem?
> Here are the options I can think of:
>
> 1. Don't dimple the cover plate itself and use pan head screws instead of
the flush screws. This would be the easiest, but the
> screw heads will stick out.
>
> 2. Countersink the screw holes, without removing the nutplates, to provide
a place for the cover plate dimples to go. This will
> remove a lot of material (perhaps all of it) if I countersink enough to
accept the dimple in the cover plate.
>
> 3. Drill out the rivets and remove the nutplates. Dimple the screw holes
and then reinstall the nutplates.
>
> The guy at Van's said to lube up one of the screws, screw it in, and wang
on it enough to form the dimple with the screw head. I
> looked at this option, but the screws are very tight in the nutplates and
I don't think I can do this without stripping the screw
> head.
>
> What should I do?
>
> Thanks.
> Geoff Evans
> RV-8
>
>
Message 76
| 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: Elevator cover plate |
--> RV-List message posted by: Oldsfolks@aol.com
By "Lube up " the screws he means the threads too .
RV-4 , N1191X , Flying Now
Charleston, Arkansas
Message 77
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
Does this advice apply to both the 'big' antennas that come, I think,
with the panel mount GPSs as well as the smaller ones that come with the
handhelds? I was wondering about putting my handheld antenna in under
the cowl.......
-
Larry Bowen
Larry@BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Keith and Jean Williams
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 7:40 PM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV-List: GPS Antenna
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Keith and Jean Williams"
> --> <kandjwilliams@earthlink.net>
>
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Jim Truitt <Jim.Truitt@usdoj.gov>
> >
> > Has anyone installed their GPS antenna under the front
> cowling at the
> > top of the firewall?
>
> Jim,
>
> Several of the RVs around here (Western Illinois, Eastern
> Iowa) including mine (flying since 1999) have the antenna in
> that location and it works fine. I checked with II Morrow
> (now UPS) and they said no problem so long as I avoid
> metallic paint on cowl top.
>
> Keith Williams
> RV6 Moline, IL
> >
>
Message 78
| 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: | RV8 Project for sale in Arizona |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Joe Kramer" <JRKramer@cox.net>
RV8 project for sale. Cut some building time down!! Empennage and wing
with builder's manual. Empennage is completed. Left wing and gas tank
65% completed. Would include combo wing jig and work bench with lots of
space for tools and parts storage on bottom. Buyer must pick up in west
Phoenix area. Asking $6000. Contact Joe at 623-202-8223
Message 79
| 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: RV-List:AD search - how - lota talk but no how |
--> RV-List message posted by: WPAerial@aol.com
went to the FBO today, paid him $20.00, got the search.
Jerry Wilken
N699WP
Message 80
| 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: alternative engines |
--> RV-List message posted by: Tedd McHenry <tedd@vansairforce.org>
> As I live 6 miles from Van's and have know him since his RV-3 days I can tell
you his
> publicly expressed opinion has never changed. It has always been if you want
a
> conversion "take cash and convert it into an aircraft engine."
Exactly. Despite all the changes in the market, not much change in Van's
stance yet. I wouldn't want anyone to think I'm putting Van down. I'm not. I
have tremendous respect for him as a person and as an engineer. But I've never
been a fan of argument-by-authority, and invoking Van as an authority on
engines isn't even a particularly good choice of authority. There are people
on this list who know a lot more about engines than Van does, and some of them
are building (or support building) auto conversions.
Van's postion is perfectly reasonable considering his postion. It wouldn't be
prudent for him to recommend something for his products that he hasn't tried
and been satisfied with himself. But his opinion on this subject shouldn't be
treated as gospel. And nobody's opinion on anything should thought of as a
trump card in a debate. Arguments have to stand on their own merits.
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
-6 wings
Message 81
| 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: | Alternative Engine Questions |
--> RV-List message posted by: Ed Holyoke <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
Steve Wittman, if you remember, converted a buick or olds aluminum V8
for his Tailwind by turning it upside down and running the prop direct
drive using a bell housing for prop bearing. No reduction unit. I think
he ran it at around 3000 or 3300 rpm with a smaller diameter prop to
make up for lack of cubic inches. Claimed 150 hp. He sold conversion
plans for years.
If one didn't want to turn the prop so fast, he'd need more displacement
than 4.3 liters. That's only 262 cu. Even bored and stroked you'd need
more inches to get 160 or 180 horses at 2700 rpm.
If you're going the alum vee engine route, why not a 350 cu V8, inverted
(to keep the thrust line right), direct drive. You should be able to get
close to 180 hp out of it at 2700 rpm. Even with all the light race
stuff, it's still gonna be heavier than a Lycoming though, if only
because of the radiator and stuff.
By the way, I have no intention of doing this myself. I thought about it
and talked myself out of the idea some years back.
Ed Holyoke
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>
>
> Hi Barry,
>
> Lets suppose that a guy with some coin in his pockets and some time on
his
> hands decided to go this 4.3 L V6 rout.
> If he where to order a custom built aluminum block with the biggest
bore
> that can be utilized (4+ inches I believe) and also a the longest
stroked
> crankshaft that would be workable. (?) This stuff is available in the
> market place.
> Some time spent with a cam grinder to provide a cam that could supply
good
> torque and horsepower at even lower RPM., say somewhere closer to 2000
to
> 4000 RPM.
> From this he might realize some operational benefits such as lower
engine
> speed would allow a less tall PRSU. reduction thereby delivering more
> energy
> to the prop.(less gallons per hr.). Potentially more durability and
> reliability due to better power at lower RPM..
> Add aluminum heads with sodium cooled valves, flow benched and ported
with
> an eye toward the intended use.
> Now with the weight of the cast iron bits gone. The power band and RPM
> range
> closer to his applications demands and his pockets no longer pulling
his
> pants down off his hips. Would he be on the road to his ultimate goal?
>
> At Vans good price, $31300.00 for a new 200 HP. Lycoming, the above
power
> plant could be configured for similar and arguably but possibly less
> money.
> As others have said the overhaul cost for this unit would be
significantly
> less than any aircraft industry manufactured engine. A few thousand
> dollars
> as opposed to somewhere near two thirds of the original engine
purchase
> price.
>
> So far there has been little reference to the many light weight high
> output
> engine designs that have arrived and continue to arrive on the scene.
> Who's
> to say which one of these 250 lb. 245 HP type units might jump up onto
a
> firewall. The Cadillac North Star engine has pulled an aircraft
through
> the
> sky for one example.
>
> Just fueling the fire a bit :)!
>
> Jim in Kelowna
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "barry pote" <barrypote@comcast.net>
> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Alternative Engine Questions
>
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: barry pote <barrypote@comcast.net>
> >
> > With reference to cams, Brian Crower (Crower Cams) pulled out an old
> > master to make me one for the 4.3. Fred Carter, in Colorado wrote a
> > number of articles for CONTACT magazine, has built many engines. His
4.3
> > made strong power from 3000 to 5000 rpm. So I chose to use that
grind. I
> > intend to never exceed 4500 and hopefully cruise at 3500 rpm.
> > 3500 rpm is not much higher than I hit , on an open road, from
Montclair
> > to Albany, to see my grand daughter. Hahaha. Radar detector is a
must!
> >
> > Barry Pote
> >
> >
> > > Actually Jim,
> > >
> > > Getting a handle on the mysterious black art of cam grinding is
easier
> than
> > > most people think. Most cam grinding shops can utilize one or
another
> set of
> > > masters to modify a cam to suit an intended use.
> >
> >
>
>
>
=
> _->
>
>
>
>
Message 82
| 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: Elevator cover plate |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Oke <wjoke@shaw.ca>
Geoff,
Your RV-8 is obviously yours to manufacture and configure as you personally
see fit. However, shop for some low profile stainless pan head screws, put
them in the elevator as you have constructed it, and imagine that it is
mounted on the finished aircraft. Realistically, how many people are going
to see this tiny panel or be surprised that the screws are not completely
flush? I think you can be assured that the type of screw head is irrelevant
to the performance or future operation of the aircraft.
A reasonable alternative is to cut the threaded portion off a flush head
screw, place it in the hole, and then to use a squeezer to form the dimple.
Jim Oke
Winnipeg, MB
RV-6A
----- Original Message -----
From: "Geoff Evans" <gwevans@attbi.com>
Subject: RV-List: Elevator cover plate
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Geoff Evans" <gwevans@attbi.com>
>
> I need some advice regarding the cover plate on the bottom of the left
elevator where the trim tab cable passes through.
>
> Unfortunately, I didn't dimple the screw holes before installing the
nutplates in the elevator. What can I do to fix this problem?
> Here are the options I can think of:
>
> 1. Don't dimple the cover plate itself and use pan head screws instead of
the flush screws. This would be the easiest, but the
> screw heads will stick out.
>
> 2. Countersink the screw holes, without removing the nutplates, to provide
a place for the cover plate dimples to go. This will
> remove a lot of material (perhaps all of it) if I countersink enough to
accept the dimple in the cover plate.
>
> 3. Drill out the rivets and remove the nutplates. Dimple the screw holes
and then reinstall the nutplates.
>
> The guy at Van's said to lube up one of the screws, screw it in, and wang
on it enough to form the dimple with the screw head. I
> looked at this option, but the screws are very tight in the nutplates and
I don't think I can do this without stripping the screw
> head.
>
> What should I do?
>
> Thanks.
> Geoff Evans
> RV-8
>
>
Message 83
| 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: alternative engines |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Oke <wjoke@shaw.ca>
I agree with Tedd. Surely, it is in Van's business interest to do whatever
he can to help RV builders over the engine installation stumbling block - a
major hurdle in any homebuilt project. This helps get completed RV's into
the air, results in more satisfied customers, and thus should lead to
increased future kits sales - his core business activity.
So, from this viewpoint, it is a quite reasonable strategy to stock parts
and offer support for a reliable and proven engine choice for the RV product
line - and he has chosen the Lycoming engine series for this purpose. It
would also make sense to act as an OEM source for new Lycomings at a minimal
mark-up just to get them into the hands of his customers as another way of
influencing future kit sales. From Lycoming's position, they get to sell
more engines to RV builders in this way rather than forcing them to go some
other route and they are happy too.
Attempting to stock parts for and support a variety of "alternative"
engines, be they auto conversions or straight aircraft engines, would take a
lot of time and effort and not help sell that many more kits. So why do it?
Jim Oke
Winnipeg, MB
RV-3
RV-6A
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tedd McHenry" <tedd@vansairforce.org>
Subject: RE: RV-List: alternative engines
> --> RV-List message posted by: Tedd McHenry <tedd@vansairforce.org>
>
> > It is not like the RV would die off if Van
> > stopped selling Lycoming engines or if Lycoming all of a sudden said
"your
> > deal is off, all sales are now direct, and at a higher price".
>
> You have to be kidding. Van sells the engines that are preferred by 99
percent
> of his customers, and demanded by most, at 2/3 market value, and you're
> suggesting that arrangment isn't valuable to his business?
>
> Tedd McHenry
> Surrey, BC
> -6 wings
>
>
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! --
|