---------------------------------------------------------- RV-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 01/10/03: 49 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 06:06 AM - Re: F-1 accident preliminary report (Gordon or Marge Comfort) 2. 06:45 AM - Re: F-1 accident preliminary report (glenn williams) 3. 07:21 AM - Re: fuel vent exit fittings...anything cleaner? (Chris) 4. 07:29 AM - Re: F-1 accident preliminary report (mstewart@qa.butler.com) 5. 08:00 AM - Re: F-1 accident preliminary report (rv6tc) 6. 08:47 AM - Losing tails and helping your buddy (Denis Walsh) 7. 08:47 AM - Yaw stability ramblings, was F-1 accident preliminary report (Doug Rozendaal) 8. 08:59 AM - AN Hdwe. Reference Guide (Oldsfolks@aol.com) 9. 09:28 AM - Com radio kit (Stephen J. Soule) 10. 09:36 AM - Re: Substituting blind rivets for AN426-3 (lucky macy) 11. 10:05 AM - Cowl prep (Andy Karmy) 12. 10:18 AM - Re: Yaw stability ramblings, was F-1 accident preliminary report (JRWillJR@aol.com) 13. 10:35 AM - Re: Anywhere Map GPS (Paulbaird@aol.com) 14. 11:06 AM - latest bargain basement updates (Aircraft Technical Book Company) 15. 11:06 AM - Re: Cowl prep (mstewart@qa.butler.com) 16. 11:29 AM - Re: Hartwell Latch (czechsix@juno.com) 17. 11:42 AM - Re: Substituting blind rivets for AN426-3 (Joel Haynes) 18. 12:24 PM - Re: Re: Substituting blind rivets for AN426-3 (Dan Checkoway) 19. 12:24 PM - Re: Dynon EFIS-D10 Progress Update?? (Gillian Torode) 20. 01:29 PM - Re:Comm Radio Kit (Oldsfolks@aol.com) 21. 01:40 PM - Re: Com radio kit (Cy Galley) 22. 02:34 PM - RV4 front seat cushion (Bruce Bell) 23. 02:53 PM - Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems () 24. 02:54 PM - Re: Cowl prep (Jim Oke) 25. 03:32 PM - Re: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems (Cy Galley) 26. 03:35 PM - Re: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems (kempthornes) 27. 03:49 PM - Re: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems (George McNutt) 28. 03:53 PM - Re: Soldering torch on sale at Radio Shack thru 2 Feb - cancel incorrect info (David Carter) 29. 04:00 PM - Re: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems (Larry Pardue) 30. 04:09 PM - Re: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems (Alex Peterson) 31. 04:13 PM - Re: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems (Ross Scroggs) 32. 04:46 PM - Re: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems (Gary Zilik) 33. 04:46 PM - Re: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems (Michel) 34. 05:00 PM - Re: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems (Dave Bristol) 35. 05:16 PM - Re: Yaw stability ramblings, was F-1 accident preliminary (Jerry Springer) 36. 05:28 PM - Re: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems (Alex Peterson) 37. 06:22 PM - Pre-drilled hole misalignment (Geoff Evans) 38. 06:22 PM - Anybody doing Transition Training In Texas or Florida in a 6A? (Dan DeNeal) 39. 07:17 PM - Re: Pre-drilled hole misalignment (Kyle Boatright) 40. 07:44 PM - Wiring SL40 to Flightcom 403 (Steve J Hurlbut) 41. 07:56 PM - Re: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems (Craig Warner) 42. 08:03 PM - Re: Losing tails and helping your buddy (Eustace Bowhay) 43. 08:03 PM - Hoses (Eustace Bowhay) 44. 08:08 PM - Re: Wiring SL40 to Flightcom 403 (RGray67968@aol.com) 45. 09:34 PM - Re: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems (H.Ivan Haecker) 46. 10:00 PM - Re: Re: Round Headlamps or Taxi / landing light (Randall Henderson) 47. 10:00 PM - Re: Fuel selector valve attach (Randall Henderson) 48. 10:31 PM - Hartzell AD (Dan Checkoway) 49. 10:46 PM - Tubing spacers or washers between elevator control horns? (Dan Checkoway) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 06:06:42 AM PST US From: "Gordon or Marge Comfort" Subject: Re: RV-List: F-1 accident preliminary report --> RV-List message posted by: "Gordon or Marge Comfort" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rob Prior" Subject: RE: RV-List: F-1 accident preliminary report > --> RV-List message posted by: Rob Prior > > > > Just to add a couple of thoughts along the line of flight > > > without a vertical > > > stab. It probably depends on the aircraft and how > > > directionally stable it > > > is before loosing the fin & rudder. > > > > The Airbus that crashed in late 2001 in NYC yawed so bad after the > > rudder/fin separated that the engines were peeled off the wings. If a > > similar amount of side area is ahead of the CG as compared to aft of it, > > little yaw stability will be present without the fin/rudder. > > > Just to add some more variety, there are many anecdotal stories of WWII > bombers and fighters coming back from missions with missing control > surfaces, and i'm sure i've read more than one account of returning > without a fin/rudder. As I recall the return involved very carefully > chosen manoeuvers, ie. gentle 1-2 degree bank turns, etc. > > I wonder if varying the engine power would cause enough yaw to be > effective? At least in getting the aircraft back to it's base? The > landing may be awkward, but at least you'd be home... > > Do not archive. > > -RB4 Listers: My understanding of the tailless designs is that they have some other way to manage yaw, as some have mentioned. The Northrop flying wing (jet version), even with control surfaces intended to control yaw, required vertical surfaces to make it manageable. Even so, the military rejected it partly because it oscillated in yaw to the extent that it was thought not to make a good bombing platform. The B-2 has specialised control surfaces managed by a computer. The B-52 mentioned did not lose all its vertical surfaces, part of the fin remained and the pilot was clever enough to use differential thrust and his remaining controls to land the aircraft. Most of the military aircraft that lost control surfaces in combat and survived, retained some or all of the fixed surfaces. In conventional aircraft, especially those that are very maneuverable, the stability margins are somewhat lower. Also, the prop is destabilizing when in a tractor arrangement. Total loss of the vertical surfaces on a plane like the F1 Rocket would leave the pilot with no way to control yaw or even dampen it. The ailerons, if applied, would introduce yaw to a system that would likely be unstable and quite content to go sideways. Yaw induced by the ailerons would induce rolling excursions that would quickly become unmanageable. The elevators could increase the angle of attack but without control of yaw (and roll) the angle of attack increase would not be helpful. The positive pitch stability that remained would tend to put the nose down and that would be the end. The Airbus basically went ballistic, to coin a phrase. That's my belief anyway. It would be nice to have someone like Barnaby Wainfan do a good description of the F1 event Gordon Comfort N363GC ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 06:45:52 AM PST US From: glenn williams Subject: Re: RV-List: F-1 accident preliminary report --> RV-List message posted by: glenn williams Kevin thanks again for your input. You and I work for the same company. As I have been throught the 601, 604 and 45 schools I have been in the simulator and have failed certain flight controls. However being failed they are still "attached" My line of thinking was that if the aircraft was in stable forward flight and the vertical ripped off, the aircraft might still be able to be controllable. I have done exactly what you describe in flying a rubber band balsa model with no vertical stab attached. However the body is so small it does not have enough drag to "streamline" into the wind. I guess the rv is this way as well? Thanks again Glenn Williams do not archive - --- Kevin Horton wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton > > > Well, if you were to start reducing the size of the > VS to nothing, > and then start increasing the side area in the front > part of the > fuselage, at some point in this whole process the > aircraft's nose > would no longer want to point in the direction it > was going. I > really don't know at what point in the process this > point would be. > > It is interesting to note that all aircraft I know > of have some sort > of vertical stabilizing surface or surfaces. I > suspect that if > aircraft could keep the nose pointed into wind > without a VS that > someone would be flying one that way, as one less > surface would be > less weight and drag. The closest thing I know to > an aircraft > without a VS is the original prototype Gee Bee R-1, > which had no VS > on its first flight. The rudder was attached to the > rear of the > fuselage. However they added a VS after the first > flight, even > though this aircraft was a racer, and extra surface > area would slow > it down. > > http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/4515/bobtail22.JPG > http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/4515/geebeer2.html > > Try taking a rubber band powered model that was > designed to have a > VS, then remove the VS and rudder, and let us know > how it flies. > > Kevin > > At 7:01 AM -0800 9/1/03, Glenn Williams wrote: > >--> RV-List message posted by: glenn williams > > > > >I understand. But wouldnt the drag of the fuselage > >cause the aircraft to streamline in the relative > >direction of the wind? I mean you have a slipstream > >and a propeller out there in the front. It seems > that > >the aircraft would try to track in a somewhat > straight > >fashion and if you have elevator authority it would > >appear that you might be able to salvage some sort > of > >controlability of the aircraft unless you have a > total > >malfunction of the push rods going to the control > >surface. Would you agree? or disagree? > > > >Thanks for the input > > > >Glenn Williams > > > >do not archive > > > >--- Kevin Horton wrote: > >> --> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton > >> > >> > >> Well, if the VS came off, the aircraft would > >> probably no longer be > >> stable directionally, so the nose would likely > slice > >> left or right, > >> leading to a very large sideslip angle. The > >> aircraft could even end > >> so the tail was going first for a short period > (i.e. > >> greater than a > >> 90 deg sideslip angle). In any event, the wings > >> wouldn't provide > >> much lift if the sideslip angle got great > enough, > >> and if there is > >> less lift than weight the flight path will > become > >> more and more > >> vertical. > >> > >> If the nose isn't pointing somewhat in the > direction > >> of flight, it > >> doesn't matter what the pilot does with the > elevator > >> - he won't have > >> much control of things. > >> > >> Kevin Horton > >> > >> At 10:31 AM -0800 8/1/03, you wrote: > >> >--> RV-List message posted by: glenn williams > >> > >> > > >> >I have heard that the vertical stab departed > and I > >> >have heard the horizontal departed. If the > vertical > >> >stab departed, would the pilot still have had > >> elevator > >> >authority? I heard the aircraft went in almost > >> >vertical. If you lose the vertical stab you > lose > >> yaw > >> >not elevator authority if I am correct, Or did > the > >> >elevator push rod fail as a result of the > vertical > >> >pulling off? > >> > > >> >Just curious > >> > > >> >Glenn Williams > >> > > > > >do not archive > > > > Contributions > any other > Forums. > > latest messages. > List members. > > http://www.matronics.com/subscription > http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm > Digests:http://www.matronics.com/digest/rv-list > http://www.matronics.com/archives > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists > > > > > ===== Glenn Williams 8A A&P N81GW ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 07:21:35 AM PST US From: Chris Subject: Re: RV-List: fuel vent exit fittings...anything cleaner? --> RV-List message posted by: Chris Dan, I looked at the preview plans, and I don't like the way that works either. I don't like the idea I have come up with as much as I could either, but I think it is better than what is in the plans. It involves using what is known as an "O-Ring Face Seal" or as Parker calls it a "Seal-lok" fitting. So here is what I would do. First download the pdf file from Parker on their Seal-Lok fittings for reference at. http://www.parker.com/tfd/cat/pdffiles/B-Seallok.pdf There are a few different approaches but this is the general idea. Start by getting a Cap fitting (Parker p/n 4 FNL) drill a hole in it the size of the id of the fitting. Cut a screen to a size to fit in to the cap. Grind the surface of the cap at as much of an angle as you can, you won't be able to get the 45 degrees shown in the plans but I think it should still work fine. then put the screen in the cap and screw it on to a fitting like the Parker p/n 4 XHLO it should be able to mate up with that fitting sticking through the floor skin and then you can put your 37 degree flared tube on the other end. That fitting isn't a "bulkhead" fitting but I think it will work anyway. I didn't see any other fitting that would do the trick with out a bunch of adapters in-between. Dan Checkoway wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" > > RV-7 tailwheel tip-up...the plans call for using a bulkhead union fitting > where the fuel vent lines exit the floor. They call out slicing the forward > face at an angle and covering the opening with a piece of screen. I assume > it was the same on earlier models. > > Is there a more elegant solution, i.e. something you can buy off the shelf? > The thought of having to file off the threads and slice this thing, then > basically gluing on a screen sounds kludgy, although yeah, it works and it's > cheap. But what I'm after is a pre-made exit fitting that would look > prettier out of the box. > > Thanks in advance, > )_( Dan > RV-7 N714D (fuselage) > http://www.rvproject.com -- Chris Woodhouse 3147 SW 127th St. Oklahoma City, OK 73170 405-691-5206 (home) chrisw@programmer.net N35 20.492' W97 34.342' ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 07:29:45 AM PST US From: mstewart@qa.butler.com Subject: RE: RV-List: F-1 accident preliminary report --> RV-List message posted by: mstewart@qa.butler.com The description below by Gordon is a very good explanation. I was flying a 1/4 scale p-51(yes it was a monster) r/c doing inverted low passes over pavement, when I took the rudder and vert fin off the plane. I have placed in international events both in acro, free-style, and scale, so I would consider myself and expert r/c stick. As described below, the adverse yaw was quite apparent to me as the flight continued w/o any vert fin or rudder. About 4-6 oscillations and the plane snap rolled violently, then proceeded in a spin to the earth from about 300 feet, with absolutely no way to stop it. I had plenty of time to mess with the controls and try various deflections in an attempt to recover the plane. No Joy. This little scenario with an r/c of this size and type I would consider a very close resemblance to what would happen to an rv in the event of a loss of vert fin and rudder. Gordons description below describes exactly my real world experience. Mike Stewart Do not archive -----Original Message----- From: Gordon or Marge Comfort [mailto:gcomfo@tc3net.com] Subject: Re: RV-List: F-1 accident preliminary report --> RV-List message posted by: "Gordon or Marge Comfort" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rob Prior" Subject: RE: RV-List: F-1 accident preliminary report > --> RV-List message posted by: Rob Prior > > > > Just to add a couple of thoughts along the line of flight > > > without a vertical > > > stab. It probably depends on the aircraft and how > > > directionally stable it > > > is before loosing the fin & rudder. > > > > The Airbus that crashed in late 2001 in NYC yawed so bad after the > > rudder/fin separated that the engines were peeled off the wings. If a > > similar amount of side area is ahead of the CG as compared to aft of it, > > little yaw stability will be present without the fin/rudder. > > > Just to add some more variety, there are many anecdotal stories of WWII > bombers and fighters coming back from missions with missing control > surfaces, and i'm sure i've read more than one account of returning > without a fin/rudder. As I recall the return involved very carefully > chosen manoeuvers, ie. gentle 1-2 degree bank turns, etc. > > I wonder if varying the engine power would cause enough yaw to be > effective? At least in getting the aircraft back to it's base? The > landing may be awkward, but at least you'd be home... > > Do not archive. > > -RB4 Listers: My understanding of the tailless designs is that they have some other way to manage yaw, as some have mentioned. The Northrop flying wing (jet version), even with control surfaces intended to control yaw, required vertical surfaces to make it manageable. Even so, the military rejected it partly because it oscillated in yaw to the extent that it was thought not to make a good bombing platform. The B-2 has specialised control surfaces managed by a computer. The B-52 mentioned did not lose all its vertical surfaces, part of the fin remained and the pilot was clever enough to use differential thrust and his remaining controls to land the aircraft. Most of the military aircraft that lost control surfaces in combat and survived, retained some or all of the fixed surfaces. In conventional aircraft, especially those that are very maneuverable, the stability margins are somewhat lower. Also, the prop is destabilizing when in a tractor arrangement. Total loss of the vertical surfaces on a plane like the F1 Rocket would leave the pilot with no way to control yaw or even dampen it. The ailerons, if applied, would introduce yaw to a system that would likely be unstable and quite content to go sideways. Yaw induced by the ailerons would induce rolling excursions that would quickly become unmanageable. The elevators could increase the angle of attack but without control of yaw (and roll) the angle of attack increase would not be helpful. The positive pitch stability that remained would tend to put the nose down and that would be the end. The Airbus basically went ballistic, to coin a phrase. That's my belief anyway. It would be nice to have someone like Barnaby Wainfan do a good description of the F1 event Gordon Comfort N363GC ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 08:00:04 AM PST US From: "rv6tc" Subject: Re: RV-List: F-1 accident preliminary report --> RV-List message posted by: "rv6tc" The B-52 in question lost the majority of its vertical stab in mountain wave turbulence over the front range of Colorado near Colorado Springs. As said before, there was part of the tail remaining, which gave them a bit of yaw stability, but not enough. In a conference call with Boeing engineers, it was determined that the A/C could lower the rear trucks of it's landing gear, if the pulled a circuit breaker for the front trucks, thereby adding drag on the rear of the aircraft. That gave them sufficient stability to land the plane. Keith Denver ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gordon or Marge Comfort" Subject: Re: RV-List: F-1 accident preliminary report > The B-52 mentioned did not lose all its vertical > surfaces, part of the fin remained and the pilot was clever enough to use > differential thrust and his remaining controls to land the aircraft. ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 08:47:31 AM PST US Subject: RV-List: Losing tails and helping your buddy From: Denis Walsh --> RV-List message posted by: Denis Walsh Some excellent RV list comments on the possible consequences of losing the vertical stabilizer. I believe your chance of surviving an in flight tail departure in and RV is near the square root of zero. Having said that, I have very high confidence in the sturdiness of the RV tail when it is attached according to the plans, and operated within design limitations. I am fairly familiar with the B-52 incident in Colorado of some years ago. The crew was a Boeing highly qualified factory crew, who were seeking out turbulence in an instrumented B-52G. Their purpose was to get a handle on the forces involved in such low level flight. Several earlier models (taller tails) B-52s had lost their tails with fatal results in low level high speed flight conditions. In fact, the crew had carefully rehearsed what to do if the vertical tail departed the airplane. They did indeed lower the aft trucks. Also raised the outboard spoilers (aft of CL and CG) , opened the bomb bay doors, lowered the outrigger gear, and used differential thrust. They landed at a very long runway with a long long straight in approach. Allow me to make a couple observations for our benefit. First, none of these techniques is available to our little RVs. The RV series is the opposite of the B-52 in almost every respect in terms of stability. The bomber was designed with very high priority on yaw stability to make it a stable bombing platform. Second. The fix on the B-52 was to reinforce the bulkhead to which the tail was attached. I mention this to emphasize the importance of this area. With this in mind I implore all of you to check your tail attach hardware. Do it at every annual. Use mirrors and your hand to feel each nut and bolt threads. When someone asks you to check their plane before first flight, do the same. If it is not the exact model you have built, get the plans out and know for sure what is stipulated. Based on my observations of numerous FAA inspections and (non RV) Tech counselor inspections, you will provide a service not usually available to the new builder. Disclaimer. I am not an aero or structural engineer, but sometimes play one on the RV list. My expertise on the B-52 incidents was born of the fact I was flying an early model during all this. Denis ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 08:47:31 AM PST US From: "Doug Rozendaal" Subject: RV-List: Yaw stability ramblings, was F-1 accident preliminary report --> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" Just to be sure I don't forget, Do not archive > > I wonder if varying the engine power would cause enough yaw to be > effective? At least in getting the aircraft back to it's base? The > landing may be awkward, but at least you'd be home... > > Do not archive. > > -RB4 > One thing that is getting lost in this discussion is the difference between "stability" and "control" If the airplane was stable, even marginally so, then alternative methods of control, i.e. differential thrust in a multi-motor, could be employed to yaw the airplane. However, if the airplane was dynamically unstable, i.e., yaw oscillations increasing in amplitude, it is going to be a bad day. ( have I got this right Kevin?) Seaplanes have yaw stability issues because of the bow area of the floats or the hull. That is why many seaplanes have stakes on the belly or tri-tails when floats are added. The PBY Catalina is an extreme example with a very small vertical stabilizer and very little fuselage aft of the C.G. The bow is rather large, and the airplane is 105 feet wide and only 60 some feet long so what small vertical stabilizer there is has a short arm. This all makes for an interesting ride in turbulence. The PBY has 1400 sq ft of wing and the ailerons are about the size of the wings on a J-3. It has loads of adverse aileron yaw. So in moderate turbulence the airplane tries to swing back and forth in yaw. Holding the Rudder centered requires about the same amount of energy as a brisk walk or slow jog. If you take your feet of the pedals the airplane will start to yaw until the oscillations become so large that the rudder reaches full travel and then it stops and swings back the other way. At that point the airplane is statically unstable unstable in yaw. ( am I correct here too Kevin?) While this is going on, your Pax are in the back talking into plastic bags to a guy named "RALPH." Anybody want to hazard a guess what would happen if the rudder came off??? The rudder on the PBY also serves as a vertical stabilizer. I asked a WWII PBY pilot how they flew 24 hour missions in rough weather. It would kill anyone. He said the autopilot, which basically locked the rudder, was a "no go" item. The Fokker Tri-plane is also another example where the rudder serves as a vertical stabilizer. I have talked to the guys at Rhinebeck about the Tri-Plane. They say, "It takes some getting used to." Tailwinds, Doug Rozendaal ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 08:59:36 AM PST US From: Oldsfolks@aol.com Subject: RV-List: AN Hdwe. Reference Guide --> RV-List message posted by: Oldsfolks@aol.com [Unable to display image] ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 09:28:25 AM PST US From: "Stephen J. Soule" Subject: RV-List: Com radio kit --> RV-List message posted by: "Stephen J. Soule" Listers, I'm having so much fun building a Rocky Mountain uEncoder (while I wait for my RV-8 wing kit) that I was wondering if it would be possible to build a com radio for the airplane. Anyone ever market a kit or plans? Stephen Soule Huntington, Vermont Com radio kit Listers, I'm having so much fun building a Rocky Mountain uEncoder (while I wait for my RV-8 wing kit) that I was wondering if it would be possible to build a com radio for the airplane. Anyone ever market a kit or plans? Stephen Soule Huntington, Vermont ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 09:36:35 AM PST US From: "lucky macy" Subject: Re: RV-List: Substituting blind rivets for AN426-3 --> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" Actually, as I was reminded, anyone with formal training/built and RV could have answered this one. In ANY place that uses a platenut, the ONLY function of the rivets are to keep the platenut from twisting as you thread the bolt. Gus from Van's said I could use epoxy to hold the platenut in place if I wanted to. So, pop rivets are fine and the only version they carry that are the appropriate flush rivet type are CCR-264SS-3-2. lucky >From: "Jim Jewell" >Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com >To: >Subject: Re: RV-List: Substituting blind rivets for AN426-3 >Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 19:23:16 -0800 > >--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" > >Hi Lucky, > >Your question would be a prime candidate for the "call or email Van's and >ask them" category list of advise responses. > >Jim in Kelowna > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "lucky macy" >To: >Subject: RV-List: Substituting blind rivets for AN426-3 > > > > --> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" > > > > Anyone disagree with me substituting either the MK319BS or MSC-32 blind > > rivets for the plans called for AN426AD3-4 rivets used to attach the >root > > wing tank Z bracket to the rear of the main spar? I just don't want to >buck > > in such tight quarters near the spar doubler for a plate nut. > > > > thanks, > > lucky > > > > > > The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 10:05:34 AM PST US From: "Andy Karmy" Subject: RV-List: Cowl prep --> RV-List message posted by: "Andy Karmy" Ok, for those of you that flew before painting... How much work do you put into the cowl surfaces? I followed Van's instructions to sand it down and brush with Acetone thinned epoxy, but after 2 coats it's not level that's for sure. Seems to me that if I'm not going to paint right now that it's wasted effort to chase after surface perfection and pinholes etc, RIGHT??? - Andy Karmy RV9A Seattle WA Almost there...If I get past sanding fiberglass... ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 10:18:17 AM PST US From: JRWillJR@aol.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Yaw stability ramblings, was F-1 accident preliminary report --> RV-List message posted by: JRWillJR@aol.com I think the thing best done to insure stability is to attach the vertical stab in accordance with the plans, using all the hardware installed with proper ED and all required reinforcements. Usually, when this is done the tail will stay on and stability is ensured. Since the aircraft in question had missing parts and improper ED on holes per earlier comments that the tail failed during aggresive manuvering should not be surprising. I think this accident has no implications for any RV aircraft other than the obvious--stick to the plans when it comes to basic structure. Do Not Archive. JR ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 10:35:56 AM PST US From: Paulbaird@aol.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Anywhere Map GPS --> RV-List message posted by: Paulbaird@aol.com I love mine. The only thing I don't like about it is that you have to charge the battery of the Ipaq at about once a week or it will dump all the anywhere map software. Paul 90355 flying ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 11:06:15 AM PST US From: "Aircraft Technical Book Company" Subject: RV-List: latest bargain basement updates --> RV-List message posted by: "Aircraft Technical Book Company" Here's an update on whats left of the bargain basement items posted a couple days ago. These are either older editions, slightly worn items, or new sample books we are not going to carry. Most of these are 1 of a kind, so its first come first serve. If you want any of these, please order by return e-mail or phone at 800 780-4115 UNDERSTANDING COMPOSITES brand new and excellent aircraft composite working books. Normally $29.95 but I've got a few (7) with clipped covers at 1/2 price $15.00 ADVANCED COMPOSITES High tech materials such as carbon, kevlar, borons, honeycombs, etc... 2 left of the earlier edition. Was $32.95 Now $15.00 AVIONICS BEST SHOP PRACTICES 1 left of the 2002 edition Was $19.95 Now $10.00 GLEIM FLIGHT MANUALS Some like the Gleim books, some don't. I've got 3 as evaluation copies Private Pilot Flight Manuevers $10.00 Private Pilot Test guide $10.00 Gleim Aviation Weather $10.00 INTRO TO AVIATION LAW Another evaluation copy $15 AVIATION WEATHER absolutely best aviation weather book available. This one's got a slightly scratched up cover so I can't sell it as new Was $58 Now $30 INSTRUMENT MANUAL Jeppesens Instrument/Commercial Manual. Standard of the industry for IFR rating. Also with a scratched up cover Was $82 Now $40 FLIGHT LIBRARIES - CD You won't believe how much data fits on a CD. Standard library has all pilot relevant Advisory Circulars including 43.13, AC 65 series, plus FARs, dictionary, test standards, instrument handbook, helicopter handbook, etc...... Pro Library ads every AC and AD since 1941, all STCs, TERPs, Law & interpretations, carrier regs, NTSB regs, etc... 2002 editions Standard was $44 Now $28 Pro was $80 Now $55 AMT LOGBOOK Made for AMTs to log their working time but equally good for logging building time. This one's a prototype that never made it to print $10 .....and some new stuff that not yet posted on Builder's Bookstore. We'll o ffer them for 20% off for a few days until they are actually posted. Private Pilot Manual - Jeppesen $72 - now $57.60 Instrument Pilot Manual - Jeppesen $82 - now $65.60 CFI Manual - Jeppesen $73 - now $58.40 Multi Engine Manual - Jeppesen $60 - $48.00 Private Fliteschool Homestudy CD $155 now $124.95 Instrument Fliteschool Homestudy CD $160 now $128.00 FAR/AIM-AMT on CD $30 now $24.00 Human Factors for Aviation $42 now $33.60 Flight Theory for Pilots $24 now $19.20 Thanks, Andy Builder's Bookstore http://buildersbooks.com 800 780-4115 do not archive ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 11:06:26 AM PST US From: mstewart@qa.butler.com Subject: RE: RV-List: Cowl prep --> RV-List message posted by: mstewart@qa.butler.com Use any rationale you want Andy to put it off. Its work... and a lot of it. Now or later, pick your poison. But like Momma said, 'You will get it done!' Mike Stewart Glad I could help Do not archive -----Original Message----- From: Andy Karmy [mailto:andy@karmy.com] Subject: RV-List: Cowl prep --> RV-List message posted by: "Andy Karmy" Ok, for those of you that flew before painting... How much work do you put into the cowl surfaces? I followed Van's instructions to sand it down and brush with Acetone thinned epoxy, but after 2 coats it's not level that's for sure. Seems to me that if I'm not going to paint right now that it's wasted effort to chase after surface perfection and pinholes etc, RIGHT??? - Andy Karmy RV9A Seattle WA Almost there...If I get past sanding fiberglass... ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 11:29:50 AM PST US Subject: RV-List: Re: Hartwell Latch From: czechsix@juno.com --> RV-List message posted by: czechsix@juno.com Rick, I'm not sure exactly what the Hartwell Latch is (isn't that one of the rectangular flush latches?), but I used one of the round "button" looking latches (I think it's actually made by Camloc but it's not the twist and turn camloc commonly used as a cowl fastener). Lots of spam cans, especially Cessna's, use them. You just push it in to release it. Anyway I like the nice flush look and quicker operation than the two protruding wing-nut things that Vans specifies. I got a used one from Air Salvage of Dallas, their # is in the yeller pages or I think their website is www.asod.com. I think I paid about $10 or $15 for it, but it's several times that price new. When I installed it in my oil door I had to add a couple pieces of .063 angle fluted to match the curvature of the oil door and riveted to the door from the hinge down to the outboard end of the door on either side of the latch. Without the stiffeners it would pucker out from the cowl and not hold its correct shape. I'm very happy with it and would do the same thing over again, it looks great. --Mark Navratil Cedar Rapids, Iowa RV-8A N2D finishing... Time: 06:44:02 AM PST US From: "Rick Galati" Subject: RV-List: Hartwell Latch --> RV-List message posted by: "Rick Galati" Where can a find a couple of Hartwell Latches suitable for installation on the oil access door? The commonly available H-2000-2 is not suitable, I'm told the H-4600-C model works perfectly since it has a catch setback more suitable for this particular installation. A builder who successfully installed these latches on his RV-6 oil access door told me he bought them used at Arlington years ago. Anyone know of a source new or used? --- Rick Galati ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 11:42:41 AM PST US From: Joel Haynes Subject: RV-List: Re: Substituting blind rivets for AN426-3 --> RV-List message posted by: Joel Haynes That's what I did for the top and bottom nutplates for the inboard most z bracket. I was able to buck the rivets for the middle nutplate w/o any problem. Joel Haynes 7a wing Mazomanie, WI > > Time: 05:39:33 PM PST US > From: "lucky macy" > Subject: RV-List: Substituting blind rivets for AN426-3 > > --> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" > > Anyone disagree with me substituting either the MK319BS or MSC-32 blind > rivets for the plans called for AN426AD3-4 rivets used to attach the root > wing tank Z bracket to the rear of the main spar? I just don't want to buck > in such tight quarters near the spar doubler for a plate nut. > > thanks, > lucky > > > ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 12:24:38 PM PST US From: "Dan Checkoway" Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Substituting blind rivets for AN426-3 --> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" Just a word of advice to those who haven't built their wings yet...install these nutplates early in the process, like right when you start working on the spars. That's when it's easiest to install them with solid rivets. At least do it before the wing goes up in the jig (people still jig wings, right?) and access gets limited. )_( Dan RV-7 N714D (fuselage) http://www.rvproject.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joel Haynes" Subject: RV-List: Re: Substituting blind rivets for AN426-3 > --> RV-List message posted by: Joel Haynes > > > That's what I did for the top and bottom nutplates for the inboard most z bracket. I was able to buck the rivets for the middle nutplate w/o any problem. > > Joel Haynes > 7a wing > Mazomanie, WI > > > > > Time: 05:39:33 PM PST US > > From: "lucky macy" > > Subject: RV-List: Substituting blind rivets for AN426-3 > > > > --> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" > > > > Anyone disagree with me substituting either the MK319BS or MSC-32 blind > > rivets for the plans called for AN426AD3-4 rivets used to attach the root > > wing tank Z bracket to the rear of the main spar? I just don't want to buck > > in such tight quarters near the spar doubler for a plate nut. > > > > thanks, > > lucky > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 12:24:38 PM PST US From: "Gillian Torode" Subject: RV-List: RE: Dynon EFIS-D10 Progress Update?? --> RV-List message posted by: "Gillian Torode" Thank you for your patience and your continued interest in the EFIS-D10. We are meeting this week to decide when to start production of the first 100 production units. This will be followed shortly by a 1000 unit production run. We will announce the date for shipping the first unit by the end of January. Gillian C. D'Ancicco Business Manager Dynon Development Inc. 19501 144th Ave NE Suite C-500 Woodinville, WA 98072 (425)402-4404 Phone (425)984-1751 Fax -----Original Message----- From: Richard V. Reynolds [mailto:rvreynolds@macs.net] Subject: Dynon EFIS-D10 Progress Update?? Gillian C. Torode Gillian Could you please provide an update on your progress and expected delivery date on the D10? Richard Reynolds ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 01:29:57 PM PST US From: Oldsfolks@aol.com Subject: RV-List: Re:Comm Radio Kit --> RV-List message posted by: Oldsfolks@aol.com Back in the early 80's , Radio Systems Technology (RST) in Grass Valley California produced a 360 nav/com kit. I built one for our first RV-4 and used it for 7 years until I sold the plane. Jim Weir is the design guru there < rst.com >. He is on Google Search.rec.aviation.homebuilt pretty often. I don't know of any other kit comm radio., but Jim would know if there is one available. I had a lot of enjoyment building that one. 9 3X6 circuit boards with approx. 1000 components. Bob Olds A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor RV-4 , N1191X , Flying Now Charleston, Arkansas "Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers" ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 01:40:52 PM PST US From: "Cy Galley" Subject: Re: RV-List: Com radio kit --> RV-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" RST used to have such a kit. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen J. Soule" Subject: RV-List: Com radio kit > --> RV-List message posted by: "Stephen J. Soule" > > Listers, > > I'm having so much fun building a Rocky Mountain uEncoder (while I wait for > my RV-8 wing kit) that I was wondering if it would be possible to build a > com radio for the airplane. Anyone ever market a kit or plans? > > Stephen Soule > Huntington, Vermont > > > > > > Com radio kit > > > Listers, > > > I'm having so much fun building a Rocky Mountain uEncoder (while I wait for my RV-8 wing kit) that I was wondering if it would be possible to build a com radio for the airplane. Anyone ever market a kit or plans? > > > Stephen Soule > > Huntington, Vermont > > ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 02:34:19 PM PST US From: "Bruce Bell" Subject: RV-List: RV4 front seat cushion --> RV-List message posted by: "Bruce Bell" RV4 pilots, Would like to hear from RV4 owners that have the Oregon Aero RV4 Front Seat ULTRA II Custom Cushion Set installed and flying. Please state body size. Height and weight! Regards, Bruce Bell Lubbock, Texas RV4 # 2888 DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 02:53:29 PM PST US From: Subject: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems --> RV-List message posted by: I have a O-320-D1A with a Hartzell in my -6A. Both were bought new and have 500 hours on them. Lately the engine has been giving me problems starting and I'm hoping that some of the engine experts here can help point me in the right direction. For as long as I can remember, the engine has always been very easy to start. It would normally fire on the second or third blade. It now takes over a minute of combined cranking time to get it to fire. Obviously, when it is cold it is at its worst, but it still gives problems when it is warm and recently run. While cranking, it will almost 'catch'. When I release the starter, it will usually continue through a few blades, act as if it may start, and then stop. When it does eventually start, it will run slightly rougher than normal for a few seconds and then run just fine. The idle and mag checks are all normal, The engine runs throughout its entire power range normally. My technique for starting has not changed and I have 500 hours in this plane. Another, very experienced pilot, has these same problems with starting my plane. I doubt that it is being caused by 'pilot error'. My normal start sequence is master on, prop high, mixture rich, crack the throttle, prime according to the conditions, engage starter, release starter when it starts. The engine is carburated, the starter is the old style prestolite 'boat anchor', Concord RG-25 battery (replaced 4-01), electric primer through cylinders 1,2&4. So far I have replaced the primer ports, checked the plugs and checked the engine timing. None of this has helped. The electric primer solenoid is working as I can see positive fuel flow during the priming sequence. The speed at which the starter spins the prop is also normal. This thing just doesn't want to start. Any advice will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Scott Gesele N506RV -500+ hrs ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 02:54:27 PM PST US From: Jim Oke Subject: Re: RV-List: Cowl prep --> RV-List message posted by: Jim Oke Hi Andy; I was dealing with my cowling (Type S for an RV-6A0 just a few months ago. My suggestions: 1. Begin with a light over all sanding 2. Apply a coat of expoxy squeeged on with a body filler applicator, this should be fairly thick (viscous not depth) stuff that will fill any open weave and pinholes on the surface (they will be lots) 3. After the epoxy is cured, look for a product called a "surfacer sealer" at a local body shop supply. This can be sprayed on but will form sort of a thick fuzzy surface with a hard undersurface, the out stuff will sand away nicely leaving a surprisingly smooth surface. 4. Apply a suitable primer of your choice and then go after any remaining defects with some spot filler. Reprime as needed. 5 Paint to taste. No real shortcuts but using the right surfacer will help a lot. Jim Oke RV-6A Winnipeg, MB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andy Karmy" Subject: RV-List: Cowl prep > --> RV-List message posted by: "Andy Karmy" > > Ok, for those of you that flew before painting... > > How much work do you put into the cowl surfaces? I followed Van's instructions to sand it down and brush with Acetone thinned epoxy, but after 2 coats it's not level that's for sure. Seems to me that if I'm not going to paint right now that it's wasted effort to chase after surface perfection and pinholes etc, RIGHT??? > > - Andy Karmy > RV9A Seattle WA > Almost there...If I get past sanding fiberglass... > > ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 03:32:16 PM PST US From: "Cy Galley" Subject: Re: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems --> RV-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" Did you Clean and re-gap the plugs. A visual just doesn't do it. Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh Editor, EAA Safety Programs cgalley@qcbc.org or experimenter@eaa.org Always looking for articles for the Experimenter ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems > --> RV-List message posted by: > > I have a O-320-D1A with a Hartzell in my -6A. Both > were bought new and have 500 hours on them. Lately > the engine has been giving me problems starting and > I'm hoping that some of the engine experts here can > help point me in the right direction. > > For as long as I can remember, the engine has always > been very easy to start. It would normally fire on > the second or third blade. It now takes over a minute > of combined cranking time to get it to fire. > Obviously, when it is cold it is at its worst, but it > still gives problems when it is warm and recently run. > While cranking, it will almost 'catch'. When I > release the starter, it will usually continue through > a few blades, act as if it may start, and then stop. > When it does eventually start, it will run slightly > rougher than normal for a few seconds and then run > just fine. The idle and mag checks are all normal, > The engine runs throughout its entire power range > normally. > > My technique for starting has not changed and I have > 500 hours in this plane. Another, very experienced > pilot, has these same problems with starting my plane. > I doubt that it is being caused by 'pilot error'. My > normal start sequence is master on, prop high, mixture > rich, crack the throttle, prime according to the > conditions, engage starter, release starter when it > starts. > > The engine is carburated, the starter is the old style > prestolite 'boat anchor', Concord RG-25 battery > (replaced 4-01), electric primer through cylinders > 1,2&4. So far I have replaced the primer ports, > checked the plugs and checked the engine timing. None > of this has helped. The electric primer solenoid is > working as I can see positive fuel flow during the > priming sequence. The speed at which the starter > spins the prop is also normal. This thing just > doesn't want to start. > > Any advice will be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks in advance, > > Scott Gesele > N506RV -500+ hrs > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 03:35:46 PM PST US From: kempthornes Subject: Re: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems --> RV-List message posted by: kempthornes Engines need three things to start - as you know: Fuel - air mixture Sparks - in the right place at the right time Compression I'd first pull a plug after 30 seconds of trying to start. Is there fuel? Put the plug in the ignition cable and crank. Is there usual strength spark? Stick a compression gauge in the hole and crank. Is there pressure enough? (Pulling the prop thru tells something too.) If yes to all, check timing. Check quality of fuel. Since the engine is so new and fuel flow seems to exist and since it runs well once started, one would expect spark. Take this with this disclaimer: I have overhauled several hundred non-aircraft engines but have little aircraft engine experience. K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne RV6-a N7HK flying! PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA) ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 03:49:47 PM PST US From: "George McNutt" Subject: RE: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems --> RV-List message posted by: "George McNutt" - --> RV-List message posted by: I have a O-320-D1A with a Hartzell in my -6A. Both were bought new and have 500 hours on them. Lately the engine has been giving me problems starting and I'm hoping that some of the engine experts here can help point me in the right direction. snip -------- normal start sequence is master on, prop high, mixture rich, crack the throttle, prime according to the conditions, engage starter, release starter when it starts. The electric primer solenoid is working as I can see positive fuel flow during the priming sequence. The speed at which the starter spins the prop is also normal. This thing just doesn't want to start. Any advice will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Scott Gesele N506RV -500+ hrs Hi Scott When I first read your post I thought it sounded like the engine is rich or over primed. Have someone watch for black smoke from exhaust during start attempt. Any chance that the primer solenoid is hanging up and not closing completely until there is some engine/airframe vibration. George McNutt Langley B.C. ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 03:53:01 PM PST US From: "David Carter" "RV-list" Subject: Re: RV-List: Soldering torch on sale at Radio Shack thru 2 Feb - cancel incorrect info --> RV-List message posted by: "David Carter" Hey, RV-list & Aeroelectric List - the "torch" I told you all about is a "butane heated tip IRON" - not a torch. Found one at another Radio Shack last night and realized I "saw what I wanted to see" at the first RS where it was out of stock and all I had to go by was the tiny letters on the pegboard label - probably didn't have my reading glasses on. Anyway, its not a torch. Sorry. So, where's a good place to buy a torch for working away from where there is electricity for solder guns? David Carter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Jory" Subject: Re: RV-List: Soldering torch on sale at Radio Shack thru 2 Feb > --> RV-List message posted by: "Rick Jory" > > Why not splice via the splices that you crimp? Fast, easy, secure. I'm not > one to "teach", but I've read solder and planes don't go together. Most of > the wiring we use is stranded, not solid core . . . so that it can vibrate, > flex, etc. without breaking. Solder adds, in effect, a "solid core" > section. Anyway, that's my two cents. > Rick Jory RV8A > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: David Carter > To: RV-list ; aeroelectric-list > > Subject: RV-List: Soldering torch on sale at Radio Shack thru 2 Feb > > > > --> RV-List message posted by: "David Carter" > > > > On my RV-6 I'm splicing in extra lengths of wire (14 or 16 awg - > definitely bigger than 20 or 22) on my Whelen tail/strobe lights so have > enough wire for service loop, etc. for maintenance/light fixture removal, > etc. First tried to solder with a regular soldering gun but got cold > solder joints due to wires wiggling with gun tip physically pressing on the > wires. > > > > So, am going to buy a soldering torch - so don't have to physically touch > the wires except with the thin solder strand. Had previously figured the > torch was only for real pros like Bob Nuckolls - now I can see that an > amateur like me needs one, too. > > > > Went to Radio Shack and found they are on sale for $5 off the normal > $19.99 price thru 2 Feb or some such date. Anyone needs one, enjoy the > price. > > > > David Carter > > RV-6 - about to close the aft fuselage with top aft skins > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 04:00:03 PM PST US Subject: Re: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems From: Larry Pardue --> RV-List message posted by: Larry Pardue > >--> RV-List message posted by: > >I have a O-320-D1A with a Hartzell in my -6A. Both >were bought new and have 500 hours on them. Lately >the engine has been giving me problems starting and >I'm hoping that some of the engine experts here can >help point me in the right direction. > It is possible for the impulse coupler to get intermittent. This can be checked by turning the engine over by hand (after taking the proper precautions). It should click strongly on every compression stroke. A friend recently had starting problems that were just as you describe your's. It was a worn impulse coupler. Sometimes it would click and sometimes it wouldn't. Larry Pardue Carlsbad, NM RV-6 N441LP Flying http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 04:09:32 PM PST US From: "Alex Peterson" Subject: RE: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems --> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" What about the impulse coupling in one mag? Maybe it is stuck or busted. Alex Peterson Maple Grove, MN RV6-A N66AP 247 hours www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 04:13:30 PM PST US From: "Ross Scroggs" Subject: Re: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems --> RV-List message posted by: "Ross Scroggs" Scott, Lycomings normally use the left magneto for starting, unless you have electronic ignition. The left mag has an impulse coupling which delays the firing of the plugs until somewhere around top dead center. If it was me, I'd check the left mag points for the proper gap and that the points are set to open at the proper location. This can happen due to normal wear and may not show up on a mag check due to both mags having the same amount of time and wear on them. At start up, this could make the engine harder to start. Just a suggestion, Ross Scroggs, A&P Conyers, Ga. RV4 #3911 Wings ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems > --> RV-List message posted by: > > I have a O-320-D1A with a Hartzell in my -6A. Both > were bought new and have 500 hours on them. Lately > the engine has been giving me problems starting and > I'm hoping that some of the engine experts here can > help point me in the right direction. > > For as long as I can remember, the engine has always > been very easy to start. It would normally fire on > the second or third blade. It now takes over a minute > of combined cranking time to get it to fire. > Obviously, when it is cold it is at its worst, but it > still gives problems when it is warm and recently run. > While cranking, it will almost 'catch'. When I > release the starter, it will usually continue through > a few blades, act as if it may start, and then stop. > When it does eventually start, it will run slightly > rougher than normal for a few seconds and then run > just fine. The idle and mag checks are all normal, > The engine runs throughout its entire power range > normally. > > My technique for starting has not changed and I have > 500 hours in this plane. Another, very experienced > pilot, has these same problems with starting my plane. > I doubt that it is being caused by 'pilot error'. My > normal start sequence is master on, prop high, mixture > rich, crack the throttle, prime according to the > conditions, engage starter, release starter when it > starts. > > The engine is carburated, the starter is the old style > prestolite 'boat anchor', Concord RG-25 battery > (replaced 4-01), electric primer through cylinders > 1,2&4. So far I have replaced the primer ports, > checked the plugs and checked the engine timing. None > of this has helped. The electric primer solenoid is > working as I can see positive fuel flow during the > priming sequence. The speed at which the starter > spins the prop is also normal. This thing just > doesn't want to start. > > Any advice will be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks in advance, > > Scott Gesele > N506RV -500+ hrs > > ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 04:46:12 PM PST US From: Gary Zilik Subject: Re: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems --> RV-List message posted by: Gary Zilik My first thought was your primer ports may be plugged. But you said you changed them out with new. I would at least visually check that fuel is indeed going through the priming system. You might try pumping the throttle once or twice while cranking to see if that helps. Clean and gap all the plugs. You did not say if you did this. If you have regular slick mags check to make sure the impulse coupling is doing its job. This can be done by pulling through with the prop and listening for clicks at each revolution.. BE CAREFULL HERE!!! Check mag timing. Check point gaps If you have a Lasar system, I think you may have a electronic problem. You did not say what kind of mags your running. Compression test. Do we have good compression when cold? Low compression can make for hard starts. Air, Fuel and Spark are necessary. One of them is missing and I bet it aint the air. Gary sgesele@yahoo.com wrote: >--> RV-List message posted by: > >I have a O-320-D1A with a Hartzell in my -6A. Both >were bought new and have 500 hours on them. Lately >the engine has been giving me problems starting and >I'm hoping that some of the engine experts here can >help point me in the right direction. > >For as long as I can remember, the engine has always >been very easy to start. It would normally fire on >the second or third blade. It now takes over a minute >of combined cranking time to get it to fire. >Obviously, when it is cold it is at its worst, but it >still gives problems when it is warm and recently run. > While cranking, it will almost 'catch'. When I >release the starter, it will usually continue through >a few blades, act as if it may start, and then stop. >When it does eventually start, it will run slightly >rougher than normal for a few seconds and then run >just fine. The idle and mag checks are all normal, >The engine runs throughout its entire power range >normally. > >My technique for starting has not changed and I have >500 hours in this plane. Another, very experienced >pilot, has these same problems with starting my plane. > I doubt that it is being caused by 'pilot error'. My >normal start sequence is master on, prop high, mixture >rich, crack the throttle, prime according to the >conditions, engage starter, release starter when it >starts. > >The engine is carburated, the starter is the old style >prestolite 'boat anchor', Concord RG-25 battery >(replaced 4-01), electric primer through cylinders >1,2&4. So far I have replaced the primer ports, >checked the plugs and checked the engine timing. None >of this has helped. The electric primer solenoid is >working as I can see positive fuel flow during the >priming sequence. The speed at which the starter >spins the prop is also normal. This thing just >doesn't want to start. > >Any advice will be greatly appreciated. > >Thanks in advance, > >Scott Gesele >N506RV -500+ hrs > > > > ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 04:46:30 PM PST US From: "Michel" Subject: RE: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems --> RV-List message posted by: "Michel" If the impulse acts up usually your starts would have kick backs. If fuel is OK the other item I would recommend is check for any intake leaks. Michel Do not archive ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 05:00:43 PM PST US From: Dave Bristol Subject: Re: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems --> RV-List message posted by: Dave Bristol Scott, Sounds like an impulse coupler to me. I think that Slick recommends an inspection at 500 hours, so with that in mind I'd pull the mags and give them a good look-even though it's running ok. Dave RV6, So Cal, EAA Tech Counselor sgesele@yahoo.com wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: > > I have a O-320-D1A with a Hartzell in my -6A. Both > were bought new and have 500 hours on them. Lately > the engine has been giving me problems starting and > I'm hoping that some of the engine experts here can > help point me in the right direction. ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 05:16:57 PM PST US From: Jerry Springer Subject: Re: RV-List: Yaw stability ramblings, was F-1 accident preliminary report --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer JRWillJR@aol.com wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: JRWillJR@aol.com > > I think the thing best done to insure stability is to attach the vertical > stab in accordance with the plans, using all the hardware installed with > proper ED and all required reinforcements. Usually, when this is done the > tail will stay on and stability is ensured. Since the aircraft in question > had missing parts and improper ED on holes per earlier comments that the tail > failed during aggresive manuvering should not be surprising. I think this > accident has no implications for any RV aircraft other than the > obvious--stick to the plans when it comes to basic structure. Do Not Archive. > JR > > Very good observation JR. I also believe that if the vertical stab was ripped off there is also good reason to believe that there could have been damage to the elevators in some way so it could not be used for pitch control. Jerry do not archive ________________________________ Message 36 ____________________________________ Time: 05:28:48 PM PST US From: "Alex Peterson" Subject: RE: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems --> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" The impulse coupling is to increase the spark, not just to retard it, for starting. My money (0.02$) is on the impulse coupling. Alex Peterson Maple Grove, MN RV6-A N66AP 247 hours www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michel > Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 6:46 PM > To: rv-list@matronics.com > Subject: RE: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems > > > --> RV-List message posted by: "Michel" > > > If the impulse acts up usually your starts would have kick > backs. If fuel is OK the other item I would recommend is > check for any intake leaks. > > Michel > > Do not archive > > > ========== > Matronics Forums. > ========== > List members. > ========== > ========== > > > > > ________________________________ Message 37 ____________________________________ Time: 06:22:39 PM PST US From: "Geoff Evans" Subject: RV-List: Pre-drilled hole misalignment --> RV-List message posted by: "Geoff Evans" One of the pre-drilled holes in one of my aileron gap fairings doesn't line up with the hole in the rear spar. It's about 2/3 diameter out of whack. I'd like to solve the problem without drilling more holes in the fairing/spar. Can I use the misaligned hole in the fairing as a drill guide (thereby elongating the hole in the spar and making it unsuitable to back a rivet) and put an extra small piece of aluminum on the other side of the spar for the shop head of the rivet to set against? Or is this a bad thing to do? The other option is to drill a hole next to the misaligned one and put a rivet in the good hole. Of course, this leaves a misaligned empty hole visible. Thanks. -Geoff Evans RV-8 QB wings ________________________________ Message 38 ____________________________________ Time: 06:22:39 PM PST US From: Dan DeNeal Subject: RV-List: Anybody doing Transition Training In Texas or Florida in a 6A? --> RV-List message posted by: Dan DeNeal My rv6a is ready to fly. I still need a DAR for inspection but after 8 1/2 years of building it's time to change hats. I will be in Florida the last part of this month or will be willing to fly to Texas. The weather around Illinois this time of year is pretty iffy, so would like to find a warmer place on earth. I would prefer a 6A to transition in. Dan DeNeal RV6A - N256GD Hoopeston, Illinois (217) 283-6157 ________________________________ Message 39 ____________________________________ Time: 07:17:59 PM PST US From: "Kyle Boatright" Subject: Re: RV-List: Pre-drilled hole misalignment --> RV-List message posted by: "Kyle Boatright" Based on general principle, I would recommend against enlarging a hole in the spar. Drill another hole at a reasonable edge distance. Nobody (other than you) will ever notice, and it is a better solution than creating a larger hole. You can always use proseal to fill the unused hole, then paint it when that time comes. KB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Geoff Evans" Subject: RV-List: Pre-drilled hole misalignment > --> RV-List message posted by: "Geoff Evans" > > One of the pre-drilled holes in one of my aileron gap fairings doesn't line up with the hole in the rear spar. It's about 2/3 diameter out of whack. > > I'd like to solve the problem without drilling more holes in the fairing/spar. Can I use the misaligned hole in the fairing as a drill guide (thereby elongating the hole in the spar and making it unsuitable to back a rivet) and put an extra small piece of aluminum on the other side of the spar for the shop head of the rivet to set against? Or is this a bad thing to do? > > The other option is to drill a hole next to the misaligned one and put a rivet in the good hole. Of course, this leaves a misaligned empty hole visible. > > Thanks. > -Geoff Evans > RV-8 QB wings > > ________________________________ Message 40 ____________________________________ Time: 07:44:35 PM PST US From: "Steve J Hurlbut" Subject: RV-List: Wiring SL40 to Flightcom 403 --> RV-List message posted by: "Steve J Hurlbut" A few weeks ago I asked about anybody experienced with wiring a SL40 comm to a Flightcom 403 and I got some great help. Along with the help of Apollo and Flightcom everything works (on the workbench anyway) so I thought I'd publish the wiring diagram (in writing anyway) for future builders. It was the 'mic ground' connection on the radio that was confusing me since the intercom gets wired to the mic ground terminal. Turns out to wire the mic ground (pin 7 on radio) to pin 1 of the intercom and everything works great! Ref page 11 SL40 installation "SL40 Typical Audio Panel Connections" Radio pin 1 (power) - power Radio pin 9 (ground) - ground Radio pin 14 (headphone) - Intercom pin 21 (Receive audio) Radio pin 13 (audio ground) - ground Radio pin 8 (Mic 1) - Intercom pin 17 (Transmit audio) Radio pin 7 (Mic Ground) - Intercom pin 1 (avionics ground) Radio pin 4 (TxKey) - Intercom pin 8 (Transmit Keyline) All the intercom connections are then made exactly like the Flightcom 403 installtion diagram shows on page 10 of their manual. Steve Hurlbut RV7A Houston, we have established communications!! ________________________________ Message 41 ____________________________________ Time: 07:56:32 PM PST US From: "Craig Warner" Subject: Re: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems --> RV-List message posted by: "Craig Warner" Try priming the engine with the enginw cowl off. A leaking primer line could cause this. ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems > --> RV-List message posted by: > > I have a O-320-D1A with a Hartzell in my -6A. Both > were bought new and have 500 hours on them. Lately > the engine has been giving me problems starting and > I'm hoping that some of the engine experts here can > help point me in the right direction. > > For as long as I can remember, the engine has always > been very easy to start. It would normally fire on > the second or third blade. It now takes over a minute > of combined cranking time to get it to fire. > Obviously, when it is cold it is at its worst, but it > still gives problems when it is warm and recently run. > While cranking, it will almost 'catch'. When I > release the starter, it will usually continue through > a few blades, act as if it may start, and then stop. > When it does eventually start, it will run slightly > rougher than normal for a few seconds and then run > just fine. The idle and mag checks are all normal, > The engine runs throughout its entire power range > normally. > > My technique for starting has not changed and I have > 500 hours in this plane. Another, very experienced > pilot, has these same problems with starting my plane. > I doubt that it is being caused by 'pilot error'. My > normal start sequence is master on, prop high, mixture > rich, crack the throttle, prime according to the > conditions, engage starter, release starter when it > starts. > > The engine is carburated, the starter is the old style > prestolite 'boat anchor', Concord RG-25 battery > (replaced 4-01), electric primer through cylinders > 1,2&4. So far I have replaced the primer ports, > checked the plugs and checked the engine timing. None > of this has helped. The electric primer solenoid is > working as I can see positive fuel flow during the > priming sequence. The speed at which the starter > spins the prop is also normal. This thing just > doesn't want to start. > > Any advice will be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks in advance, > > Scott Gesele > N506RV -500+ hrs > > ________________________________ Message 42 ____________________________________ Time: 08:03:24 PM PST US From: "Eustace Bowhay" Subject: Re: RV-List: Losing tails and helping your buddy --> RV-List message posted by: "Eustace Bowhay" An excellent post Denis, the cause of the F1 crash should have been picked up on the final inspection. However the final inspection may well be done by someone who is not completely familiar with the construction of the particular aircraft he or she is inspecting and is more concerned to see that the builder has followed good aircraft construction practices. It is hard to imagine someone deviating from the drawings especially if it is a structural item. One of the best ways to prevent an accident like this from happening is to have one or more builders of the same type aircraft take a look during and before the final inspection. Eustace Bowhay Blind Bay, B.C. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Denis Walsh" Subject: RV-List: Losing tails and helping your buddy > --> RV-List message posted by: Denis Walsh > > Some excellent RV list comments on the possible consequences of losing the > vertical stabilizer. I believe your chance of surviving an in flight tail > departure in and RV is near the square root of zero. Having said that, I > have very high confidence in the sturdiness of the RV tail when it is > attached according to the plans, and operated within design limitations. > > I am fairly familiar with the B-52 incident in Colorado of some years ago. > The crew was a Boeing highly qualified factory crew, who were seeking out > turbulence in an instrumented B-52G. Their purpose was to get a handle on > the forces involved in such low level flight. Several earlier models > (taller tails) B-52s had lost their tails with fatal results in low level > high speed flight conditions. > > In fact, the crew had carefully rehearsed what to do if the vertical tail > departed the airplane. They did indeed lower the aft trucks. Also raised > the outboard spoilers (aft of CL and CG) , opened the bomb bay doors, > lowered the outrigger gear, and used differential thrust. They landed at a > very long runway with a long long straight in approach. > > Allow me to make a couple observations for our benefit. First, none of > these techniques is available to our little RVs. The RV series is the > opposite of the B-52 in almost every respect in terms of stability. The > bomber was designed with very high priority on yaw stability to make it a > stable bombing platform. > > Second. The fix on the B-52 was to reinforce the bulkhead to which the tail > was attached. I mention this to emphasize the importance of this area. > > With this in mind I implore all of you to check your tail attach hardware. > Do it at every annual. Use mirrors and your hand to feel each nut and bolt > threads. When someone asks you to check their plane before first flight, do > the same. If it is not the exact model you have built, get the plans out > and know for sure what is stipulated. Based on my observations of numerous > FAA inspections and (non RV) Tech counselor inspections, you will provide a > service not usually available to the new builder. > > Disclaimer. I am not an aero or structural engineer, but sometimes play one > on the RV list. My expertise on the B-52 incidents was born of the fact I > was flying an early model during all this. > > Denis > > ________________________________ Message 43 ____________________________________ Time: 08:03:29 PM PST US From: "Eustace Bowhay" Subject: RV-List: Hoses --> RV-List message posted by: "Eustace Bowhay" Someone mentioned the service bulletin on the hoses Van supplies and this twigged a sensitive spot for me and re-emphasizes the need for the proper tools and assembly of the hose ends. One of the serious incidents in my flying revolved around the improper installation of a hose end. Years ago I was asked if I would go with the owner and pick up a Aero Commander he had just purchased in Oklahoma City and fly it to Calgary. The owner had little twin time and no Commander time, and the aircraft had just had both engines and propellers overhauled and only had a test flight. I was flying twins on a daily basis and had some two hundred hours in Commanders so was happy to get a little break and help him out. We arrived in Oklahoma City expecting to fly directly back to Calgary but it turned out the sale was through a company in Mesa, Arizona and the salesman informed us we would be flying with him back to Mesa and then complete the paper work and take delivery there. Since he was in charge I asked him what the plan was, he advised we would be flying to Mesa via Albuquerque. We didn't get out of OK until about three hours before dark meaning it would be a night flight from Albuquerque on to Mesa (First mistake, doing a five hour plus first flight on a newly overhauled aircraft nearly half of it after dark). Flying out of OK the salesman was flying I was in the right front seat and the owner in a center seat behind me. The salesman was doing a reasonable job of flying and the aircraft seemed to be more or less snag free. A couple of hours into the flight I noticed that the fuel pressure on the left engine was gradually dropping, these were fuel injected engines. Approaching Albuquerque the fuel pressure had degraded to about half of normal and I was wondering why we weren't starting a decent into Albuquerque. I pointed out the fuel pressure issue and he just shrugged and mumbled something to the effect that it will be OK and we will take care or it in Mesa. Darkness was now approaching and I was starting to get real uncomfortable with this guy. It was becoming obvious that we were flying with someone who lacked a great deal in good judgment and was wondering how well he was going to be able to handle things when the engine quit producing power. It wasn't going to be long before I found out, About thirty minutes passed AB with the fuel pressure still dropping the airspeed started to decay very gradually as the engine began starving for fuel, there was still time to return to AB but it seemed that he didn't fully realize what was going on and just kept going. I still wasn't too concerned for our safety as the Commander does reasonably well on one engine and we were fairly light with only three of us on board and had already burned of nearly four hours fuel. With the airspeed gradually falling off I asked him when he was going to feather the engine so we could maintain altitude. Again he just shrugged and said the engine would be OK. By now we are starting to loose altitude, The engines were non turboed and we had been flying at a altitude that allowed full throttle operation in cruise. I wasn't real familiar with the route we were flying and didn't know what the MEA was but I knew that it was fairly high country until you dropped off into the Phoenix area. We are now flying with full throttle on the right engine with the left engine basically windmilling and gradually loosing altitude and no indication that this guy was going to feather the left engine and get things under control. One thing I was sure of I wasn't going to let this guy kill us if I could help it. I got out of my seat and asked the owner to take my place and I sat behind the pilot. My plan was to get control of the aircraft if I could before we hit the ground. Sitting behind the pilot away from the instrument panel lights and looking out the side I could make out our height above the ground and realized we still had some time. I removed the fire extinguisher from its holder and got ready to nail this guy on the back of the head. About this time I could see the glare of the lights from Phoenix coming up on the horizon and hoped that we would drop over the rim and get into Falcon Field without having to nail this guy. That's the way it finished with a straight in to Falcon Field, why he didn't loose it on final with the left engine windmilling and everything hanging out I will never know. The left engine quit turning as he flared. Needless to say the atmosphere was a little chilly when we got out of the aircraft. He offered us a ride to a motel and my comment was "if you drive the same way you fly, no thanks will take a cab". At the airport the next morning the maintenance people said the aircraft was ready to go and showed us a neatly cut oval of rubber they had taken out of the fuel line that goes between the throttle body and the distributor body on top of the engine. The salesman didn't show up to see us off, but we got our papers and had an uneventful flight back to Calgary. Eustace Bowhay Blind Bay, B.C. Do not archive ________________________________ Message 44 ____________________________________ Time: 08:08:53 PM PST US From: RGray67968@aol.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Wiring SL40 to Flightcom 403 --> RV-List message posted by: RGray67968@aol.com In a message dated 1/10/03 7:45:32 PM Pacific Standard Time, sjhdcl@kingston.net writes: > All the intercom connections are then made exactly like the Flightcom 403 > installtion > diagram shows on page 10 of their manual. > > Steve Hurlbut > Steve, Congrats........."told ya' so" : ) Rick Gray RV6 (Ohio) at the Buffalo Farm do not archive ________________________________ Message 45 ____________________________________ Time: 09:34:45 PM PST US From: "H.Ivan Haecker" Subject: Re: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems --> RV-List message posted by: "H.Ivan Haecker" ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: RV-List: Lycoming O-320 Starting Problems > --> RV-List message posted by: > > I have a O-320-D1A with a Hartzell in my -6A. Both > were bought new and have 500 hours on them. Lately > the engine has been giving me problems starting and > I'm hoping that some of the engine experts here can > help point me in the right direction. > I am certainly not an engine expert by any means, but I have experienced the same problem twice on my rv-4 with O-320. Both times the culprit was the coil in the left mag. It would run fine once started but was a real bear to get going. Ivan Haecker ________________________________ Message 46 ____________________________________ Time: 10:00:55 PM PST US From: "Randall Henderson" Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Round Headlamps or Taxi / landing light --> RV-List message posted by: "Randall Henderson" > The HID kits and upgrades are available thru DUCKWORTH and RMD. > I do not have the URL for either of them handy. That's DuckWORKS -- www.duckworksaviation.com. ________________________________ Message 47 ____________________________________ Time: 10:00:58 PM PST US From: "Randall Henderson" Subject: Re: RV-List: Fuel selector valve attach --> RV-List message posted by: "Randall Henderson" > Here we go again! Van's recommended installation of this plate works just fine. > It might be easier to to remove the floors with the plate mounted otherwise, but > it is NOT "ANOTHER VAN'S DESIGN SNAFU". Build it either way you want but let's > quit bashing Van when he didn't do anything wrong No Van bashing here (jeez some people are so sensitive!) but I mounted mine per the plans and would definitely recommend instead just hacking off the tab that overlaps the spar. I guess it depends on how much gap you have on the seat floor sides and maybe other factors but for me its a big PITA to get them in and out. If I'd cut off the tab it would be much easier and considering that the fuel selector uprights are bolted to the spar with 4 big bolts, I'd say its on there plenty strong without any overlap attachment. I think the overlap is merely cosmetic so if the builder likes it better with, then leave it, but its way easier maintenance-wise (for me it would be anyway) with the tab cut off. Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (~450 hrs) Portland, OR www.vanshomewing.org PS I guess I was wrong before about saying "its not on the plans". Whats not on the plans (at least anywhere I could find) is the angle of the uprights and the fact that the uprights are intended to nest between, and be bolted to, the floor stiffeners at the bottom, which ties the stiffeners to the spar. ________________________________ Message 48 ____________________________________ Time: 10:31:33 PM PST US From: "Dan Checkoway" Subject: RV-List: Hartzell AD --> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" FYI, there's a new Hartzell AD out that mandates the replacement of certain aluminum propeller hub assemblies. Apparently Hartzell is covering the parts & labor cost. http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/regulatory/reghartzell.html )_( Dan RV-7 N714D (fuselage) http://www.rvproject.com ________________________________ Message 49 ____________________________________ Time: 10:46:52 PM PST US From: "Dan Checkoway" Subject: RV-List: Tubing spacers or washers between elevator control horns? --> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" The plans call for using an AN3-10A to attach the aft elevator pushrod to the control horns. That's way too short for my setup since my control horns are spaced apart. An AN3-12A works fine, but there are obviously some gaps in there that need to be filled. I'm curious what people generally feel is most acceptable...aluminum tubing cut to fill the gaps, or washers as required? I haven't called Van's yet since it's about 10:45pm on Friday night... Thanks in advance, )_( Dan RV-7 N714D (fuselage) http://www.rvproject.com