Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:39 AM - More free speed (Jim Nolan)
2. 04:11 AM - Re: More free speed (Jim Jewell)
3. 05:32 AM - Re: Whistle Slot vs. Oil on Belly (Randy Compton)
4. 07:21 AM - Re: Free speed (Jim Oke)
5. 07:31 AM - Re: More free speed (John Starn)
6. 08:45 AM - Re: More free speed (Bill Dube)
7. 08:48 AM - Black in front of cockpit. (Scott Bilinski)
8. 08:57 AM - Re: Black in front of cockpit. (Rob Miller)
9. 09:02 AM - Re: Dynon Update (dmedema@att.net)
10. 09:22 AM - Re: More free speed (Bill Marvel)
11. 10:05 AM - Black in front of cockpit. (RV_8 Pilot)
12. 10:15 AM - Re: Black in front of cockpit. (Rob Miller)
13. 11:04 AM - Re: Black in front of cockpit. (Sam Buchanan)
14. 11:31 AM - Re: Black in front of cockpit. (Jim Jewell)
15. 11:41 AM - Re: Re: Dynon Update (Dan Checkoway)
16. 11:59 AM - Anywhere Map & Navaid users (Jeff Point)
17. 12:10 PM - Re: Re: Dynon Update (Dan Checkoway)
18. 12:21 PM - Re: Free speed (Stan & Eilene VanGrunsven)
19. 01:03 PM - Re: More free speed (Pat Perry)
20. 01:38 PM - Harmonic Balancer W&B info for RV-4 (Van Artsdalen, Scott)
21. 01:51 PM - Altimeter heads up (Bill Marvel)
22. 02:04 PM - Re: Black in front of cockpit. (Scott Bilinski)
23. 02:28 PM - wing skeleton (Adam Boggs)
24. 02:49 PM - enlarging tooling holes in finished wing (Chris)
25. 03:18 PM - Re: wing skeleton (Jim Oke)
26. 03:19 PM - Re: Altimeter heads up (Jim Sears)
27. 03:19 PM - Re: wing skeleton (Phil Birkelbach)
28. 03:29 PM - Re: Altimeter heads up (Cy Galley)
29. 03:50 PM - Re: More free speed (N13eer@aol.com)
30. 03:55 PM - Re: More free speed (David Carter)
31. 04:28 PM - Re: Anywhere Map & Navaid users (Sam Buchanan)
32. 05:19 PM - RE : Free Speed (Martin Hone)
33. 06:56 PM - Re: Altimeter heads up (Charlie Kuss)
34. 07:28 PM - Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Halon (Alex Peterson)
35. 07:49 PM - RV9-A QB fuselage (Arthur Nation)
36. 08:10 PM - Re: RV9-A QB fuselage (Bill Marvel)
37. 08:17 PM - Re: RV9-A QB fuselage (Kyle Boatright)
Message 1
| 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 Nolan" <jimnolan@insightbb.com>
Guys,
I have my pitot/static system checked every two years. Mandatory. It isn't
that my airspeed indicator is off a lot, it's just that I don't bother with it.
It's a true airspeed indicator. I'm usually wanting ETA or Groundspeed and
I get all that information from the GPS. I use a piper blade for the Pitot and
Static. It's provided me with just as accurate airspeed readings as the other
10,000 RV's I've flown with.
As far as the canopy coming open in flight, I know that some have. Don't plan
on trying it myself. But the question of air pressure inside the cockpit verses
outside the cockpit interests me. My canopy is shaped like a wing on top.
If there were nothing under it at X miles per hour, the canopy would be sucked
up. But since there's a airplane directly under it I don't see how it could
have less pressure on the top, thus, where's the sucking sound. Is it that the
whole airplane is shaped like a wing on top and the canopy has more lift and
is trying to raise the airframe. Confusing.
One guy responded and I think he was trying to explain it to me but I couldn't
understand what he was talking about. If he would find a hillbilly and tell
him, maybe hillbilly could explain it to me. I understand that language.
Just another thought at 5:30 in the morning with no sleep and I have to go to
work in an hour and take orders from a little twerp half my age.
Jim Nolan
N444JN
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: More free speed |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>
Hi Jim,
So are we to take it then that the "little twerp half your age" is not a
"hillbilly" ? 8-)!
Do not archive Jim in Kelowna Yet!
---- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Nolan" <jimnolan@insightbb.com>
Subject: RV-List: More free speed
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Nolan" <jimnolan@insightbb.com>
>
> Guys,
> I have my pitot/static system checked every two years. Mandatory. It
isn't that my airspeed indicator is off a lot, it's just that I don't bother
with it. It's a true airspeed indicator. I'm usually wanting ETA or
Groundspeed and I get all that information from the GPS. I use a piper blade
for the Pitot and Static. It's provided me with just as accurate airspeed
readings as the other 10,000 RV's I've flown with.
> As far as the canopy coming open in flight, I know that some have.
Don't plan on trying it myself. But the question of air pressure inside the
cockpit verses outside the cockpit interests me. My canopy is shaped like a
wing on top. If there were nothing under it at X miles per hour, the canopy
would be sucked up. But since there's a airplane directly under it I don't
see how it could have less pressure on the top, thus, where's the sucking
sound. Is it that the whole airplane is shaped like a wing on top and the
canopy has more lift and is trying to raise the airframe. Confusing.
> One guy responded and I think he was trying to explain it to me but I
couldn't understand what he was talking about. If he would find a hillbilly
and tell him, maybe hillbilly could explain it to me. I understand that
language.
> Just another thought at 5:30 in the morning with no sleep and I have to
go to work in an hour and take orders from a little twerp half my age.
> Jim Nolan
> N444JN
>
>
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: Whistle Slot vs. Oil on Belly |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Compton" <rdcompton@earthlink.net>
Sorry it's taken so long to respond...been out of town for a while.
Anyhow, I put the whistle slot at the high point just before the breather
hose starts arcing downward. The slot is about 1 1/2 inches long. I just
used a Dremel cutting wheel and cut the slit in the hose. Worked it back
and forth to cut out just a sliver of material. The gap isn't much, maybe
the width of a dime.
So far I haven't noticed any oil on the inside of the cowling, but that
was/is a concern. I'll be keeping an eye out for any oil residue, but
again, so far so good.
Fly safe,
Randy Compton
RV-3 N84VF
Gulf Breeze, FL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Lervold" <randy@rv-8.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Whistle Slot vs. Oil on Belly
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Lervold" <randy@rv-8.com>
>
> Randy,
>
> Thanks for the post, good hard data. I think it's about time I tried this
> technique so can you tell us what sort of slot you put in the hose: how
big,
> what shape, etc.? And does it ever spit oil out of the whistle slot into
the
> engine compartment?
>
> Thanks,
> Randy Lervold
> RV-8, 295 hrs
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Oke <wjoke@shaw.ca>
Thanks for the input, Stan.
From your description, it would seem the low pressure area over the top of
the wing is powerful enough to draw air out past the canopy rail, even
despite the influence of the prop slipstream . The extracted air then gets
replaced by drawing air in from wherever it is available, such as the back
of the canopy or through the tail cone in some cases.
Classic low speed aerodynamics suggests the airfoil on an RV-6A (I believe
its a NACA 23012 or close relative) would have it's point of minimum
pressure at or just forward of the maximum chord point (the main spar
location in a -6). This would match your experience that sealing the canopy
gap above the wing had the best immediate payoff.
Interesting speed comparison you make between your "slow" RV-6A and the
"fast" one. Can you comment if the same engine/props are installed? Perhaps
it means that if accessories such as steps and such are intelligently
designed and installed they may not had that much of an effect on
performance. I know the glider "performance enhancement" experts spend huge
amounts of time and effort to get quite small performance gains from an
already efficient basic design.
Jim Oke
RV-3 / RV-6A / ASW-20
(too many airplanes, not enough time)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stan & Eilene VanGrunsven" <stanvan@pacifier.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Free speed
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Stan & Eilene VanGrunsven"
<stanvan@pacifier.com>
>
> I can talk of RV-6A slider canopies. When Jerry and I finished ours, He
> did all the initial flights. He flew through a not so rare rain shower
> which left much water on the baggage area cover. I went up with him as
> leak observer; in the fumbling around, my jacket sleeve nearly got sucked
> out the canopy side gap above the wing, which makes sense. When we put a
> good "V" seal in this area to keep the outflow in check, the inflow from
> the rear skirt diminished substantially. We did use "V" seal on the rear
> skirt facing backward to further hamper inflow.
> SEAL THE OUTFLOW ABOVE THE WING FIRST, then work on the incidentals.
> Our 6A has all the old "go slow" leg fairings, wheel pants, step on each
> side; and when flown beside an identical 6A with no steps, "go fast"
> fairings and pants, weighing 220 lbs. less; he had a 3 mph advantage
> (GPS measured).
>
> Best Wishes,
> Stan VanGrunsven
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Oke" <wjoke@shaw.ca>
> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Free speed
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jim Oke <wjoke@shaw.ca>
>
> Sound advice about the lack of a "free lunch" (or airspeed in this case).
>
> In principle, yes, there will always be reduced pressure outside the
> canopy/fuselage compared to inside. If a canopy air leak is present, the
> leaking "high pressure" air could in theory disrupt the flow in the
> canopy
> area causing flow separation and a corresponding drag increase. Glider
> pilots go to some lengths in sealing their canopies for this reason and
> also
> often seal aileron and elevator hinge gaps to avoid lower surface to
> upper
> surface (high to low) pressure air leakage.
>
> Having said this, an RV-6 canopy will be subjected to a highly turbulent,
> swirling flow from the propeller and it is hard to imagine a canopy air
> leak
> big enough to compete with this sort of flow and cause an unusual flow
> separation.
>
> The question is if there is an area of separated flow around an RV-6
> canopy
> that can be shown to be caused by air leaking out past the edges of the
> canopy. If yes, then the trade off to consider is if the drag caused by
> an
> additional air inlet in the fuselage underside is greater or lesser than
> the
> drag resulting from the flow separation caused by the leaking air. That
> would be the "lunch deal" that is actually on offer.
>
> Can anyone else report on the "before vs. after" results of sealing an RV
> canopy? A 5 mph increase in cruise speed would represent a fair bit of
> drag
> reduction in horsepower terms.
>
> Jim Oke
> RV-6A (at the airport, but still too $%
> & cold for an engine run)
> Winnipeg, MB
>
>
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: More free speed |
--> RV-List message posted by: "John Starn" <jhstarn@earthlink.net>
Wez be awantin to be call "Mountian Williams" nows dat wez liven in
kaliphornia. 8-) KABONG
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Nolan" <jimnolan@insightbb.com>
. If he would find a hillbilly and tell him, maybe hillbilly could explain
it to me. I understand that language.
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: More free speed |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Dube <bdube@boulder.nist.gov>
>
> As far as the canopy coming open in flight, I know that some have.
> Don't plan on trying it myself. But the question of air pressure inside
> the cockpit verses outside the cockpit interests me. My canopy is shaped
> like a wing on top. If there were nothing under it at X miles per hour,
> the canopy would be sucked up. But since there's a airplane directly
> under it I don't see how it could have less pressure on the top, thus,
> where's the sucking sound. Is it that the whole airplane is shaped like a
> wing on top and the canopy has more lift and is trying to raise the
> airframe. Confusing.
It's an airfoil. On the upper surface, anything in the rear that
slopes downward has reduced pressure on its outside surface. If the
interior is at (or near) static atmospheric pressure, there is a
significant difference of pressure between the inside and the outside.
There are lots of ways to explain it. Here is my favorite: When
the airfoil changes the direction of the air, the air exerts a force on the
surface opposite to that change of direction. The air is redirected
downward by the rear surface of the canope. This air "pulls" up on the back
of the canope because it would prefer not to be redirected downward, but
wants to go straight instead.
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: | Black in front of cockpit. |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
I am going to be painting in the next week or so and am not sure how/where
to mask for the black anti glare paint in front of the canopy. Any ideas on
where to start at the canopy (or how wide) and how wide to finish up at the
front of the cowl? Any advice/pictures appreciated.
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
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: Black in front of cockpit. |
--> RV-List message posted by: Rob Miller <rmill2000@yahoo.com>
Scott
I used flat rough-textured black Krylon spray paint on the glare shield.
Also, I sprayed 1" of flat black spray paint on the inside one inch of
plexi windshield--that way you can't see the fiberglass layups from the
inside out.
Rob Miller
-8 N262RM "Bad Cat" 47 hours
--- Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com> wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
> <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>
> I am going to be painting in the next week or so and am not sure
> how/where
> to mask for the black anti glare paint in front of the canopy. Any ideas
> on
> where to start at the canopy (or how wide) and how wide to finish up at
> the
> front of the cowl? Any advice/pictures appreciated.
>
>
> Scott Bilinski
> Eng dept 305
> Phone (858) 657-2536
> Pager (858) 502-5190
>
>
>
>
>
>
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
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: Dynon Update |
--> RV-List message posted by: dmedema@att.net
Just want to post a quick update from Dynon in response to
Dan Checkoway's recent post. Some of the information he
posted is not quite correct.
>2) As of right now, a "user calibration procedure" is required
>to ensure that the magnetic heading feature will work properly.
>I was told it WILL NOT work out of the box without this procedure,
>which involves going up with a laptop connected to the unit to
>perform the calibration. This is required to get the magnetic
>heading to read properly.
>
>3) In approximately one month, the user calibration procedure will
>no longer be required on units shipped thereafter.
First of all, I want to reiterate that the only feature of the
instrument that is affected is the heading. All other features such
as the attitude, airspeed, altimeter, etc. are not affected by the
need for magnetic calibration.
Any steel (iron) near the magnetic field sensors will distort the
field the sensors "see." Any magnets (such as in an electric motor)
will distort the field the sensors "see." Since the EFIS-D10 is
panel mounted, it is highly likely that there will be some distortion
of the earth's magnetic field near the EFIS-D10. The only way to
accommodate this is by having the user perform a magnetic calibration
process. Thus, there will always be a required user magnetic
calibration process. Our first generation process will require that
a PC laptop be connected to the EFIS-D10 during several flight
maneuvers. The laptop acquires the data and determines the calibration
constants. These are uploaded automatically into the EFIS-D10 which
completes the calibration process. This process will require no
interaction between the user and the laptop once the calibration
program has been started. We are in the process of developing a
small stand-alone box that will replace the laptop during the
calibration process. The user will hook it up to the EFIS-D10 as
if it were a PC.
Our optional remote compass module allows you to place the magnetic
sensors in a location away from any interference and thus minimizes
the problems stated above. However, for it to be accurate, it has
to be precisely aligned with the EFIS-D10 (including any tilt.)
The calibration process described above will relax the requirements
on alignment and allow for an easier installation of the remote
compass module.
>5) Before any price increase goes into effect, we will have "adequate
>notice" and an opportunity to buy at the original price. I interpret
>this to mean: keep an eye on the web site, because that's where the
>price increase will be announced.
We have carefully controlled our costs and anticipate no price increase
at this time. If we determine we need a price increase in the future,
we will give at least 90 days of notice both on our web site and via
an email to everyone on our list.
Thank you,
Doug Medema
Dynon Avionics
RV-6A N276DM (reserved) almost ready to move to the airport!
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: More free speed |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Marvel <bmarvel@cox.net>
To any and all canopy air leak types:
OK, folks, you've left me confused. From reading through the recent thread and
a review of the archives, I get two distinct impressions -- one is that my -8A
ought to have air flow from inside the canopy to outside and conversely, it
ought to have flow from outside to inside. Or most likely, both.
Several private msgs came in and I appreciate them all. Most had to do with
using some type of foam blocking arrangement attached to the canopy skirt to
prevent the irritating flow from under the aft skirt and moving forward. In my
airplane the front seater cooks from cabin heat and the back seater freezes
from forward moving outside air. There is a stalled cold front midway in my
cockpit!
Before resorting to heroic methods like I saw at the homecoming, with all sorts
of sealing methods being used, I am really curious if the problem can be
initially addressed by altering air flow and then the rest by sealing any
remaining leaks. For instance, I would really like flow to enter the cockpit
from the heater or the vents and then exit aft, thus allowing either cool or
warm air, as selected, to go from front to rear in the cockpit. Evidently I am
not the only person wanting this outcome.
One post mentioned someone else using louvers from Home Depot in the aft
inspection panels of the airplane that seemed to work. Is the person who
actually did this on the list? Would like to know more about that. However,
it seems that pulling air out of the fuselage just might result in more air
coming in under the skirt to replace it, not less.
Has anyone done any tufting or other testing around the 8/8A canopy aft skirt
to get a feel for air flows? I don't want to reinvent the wheel and hope there
is some type of alteration that has been made to change the pressure
differentials to address this problem. One question I still can't answer is
that if all this air is coming into the plane continually from under the aft
skirt, where is it going? What comes in has to get back out for the flow to
continue. Any smokers out there with 8s who can light one up for me and answer
that?? In fact, anyone know of a harmless smoke source (smoke in an aerosol
can?) that can be acquired to test this flow path? That would be most helpful.
Bill Marvel
Bill Dube wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Bill Dube <bdube@boulder.nist.gov>
>
> >
> > As far as the canopy coming open in flight, I know that some have.
> > Don't plan on trying it myself. But the question of air pressure inside
> > the cockpit verses outside the cockpit interests me. My canopy is shaped
> > like a wing on top. If there were nothing under it at X miles per hour,
> > the canopy would be sucked up. But since there's a airplane directly
> > under it I don't see how it could have less pressure on the top, thus,
> > where's the sucking sound. Is it that the whole airplane is shaped like a
> > wing on top and the canopy has more lift and is trying to raise the
> > airframe. Confusing.
>
> It's an airfoil. On the upper surface, anything in the rear that
> slopes downward has reduced pressure on its outside surface. If the
> interior is at (or near) static atmospheric pressure, there is a
> significant difference of pressure between the inside and the outside.
>
> There are lots of ways to explain it. Here is my favorite: When
> the airfoil changes the direction of the air, the air exerts a force on the
> surface opposite to that change of direction. The air is redirected
> downward by the rear surface of the canope. This air "pulls" up on the back
> of the canope because it would prefer not to be redirected downward, but
> wants to go straight instead.
>
--
Bill Marvel Home/office 310 832 7617
P.O. Box 784 Cell 310 293 2013
San Pedro, CA 90733 Fax 310 832 5334
One good deed beats 100 good intentions...
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: | Black in front of cockpit. |
--> RV-List message posted by: "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot@hotmail.com>
Second on this. Flat black spray paint on the inst panel glare shield.
Works well for me.
What's you do to prep the plexi, Rob? anything? I need to do the same.
do not archive
Bryan Jones -8
Pearland, Texas
>I used flat rough-textured black Krylon spray paint on the glare shield.
>Also, I sprayed 1" of flat black spray paint on the inside one inch of
>plexi windshield--that way you can't see the fiberglass layups from the
>inside out.
>
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: | Re: Black in front of cockpit. |
--> RV-List message posted by: Rob Miller <rmill2000@yahoo.com>
Just mask it off with some electrical tape and lightly sand the plexi in
order to give it some tooth.
Rob
Do not archive
--- RV_8 Pilot <rv_8pilot@hotmail.com> wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot@hotmail.com>
>
> Second on this. Flat black spray paint on the inst panel glare shield.
>
> Works well for me.
>
> What's you do to prep the plexi, Rob? anything? I need to do the same.
>
> do not archive
>
> Bryan Jones -8
> Pearland, Texas
>
> >I used flat rough-textured black Krylon spray paint on the glare
> shield.
> >Also, I sprayed 1" of flat black spray paint on the inside one inch of
> >plexi windshield--that way you can't see the fiberglass layups from the
> >inside out.
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
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: Black in front of cockpit. |
--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
I believe the responders to Scott's post have misunderstood his
question. He is not asking about painting the glareshield but the
forward fuselage deck in FRONT of the canopy.
Scott, I have flown in several RVs and none of them have had black areas
painted in front of the canopy. And, none of these RVs have presented me
or their pilots with glare problems. The level flight attitude of an RV
puts the nose considerably lower in respect to the horizon than many
pilots of spam cans are accustomed to seeing which means you really
can't see much of the forward deck.
Matter of fact, in the many RVs I have seen at major and minor flyins, I
can't recall seeing any with a black area forward of the canopy unless
it was part of the overall paint scheme. It seems that if glare was a
problem, you would probably see black forward decks on the factory
demonstrators.
Sam Buchanan (RV-6 with white, glareless forward deck)
========================
Rob Miller wrote:
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Rob Miller <rmill2000@yahoo.com>
>
> Scott
>
> I used flat rough-textured black Krylon spray paint on the glare shield.
> Also, I sprayed 1" of flat black spray paint on the inside one inch of
> plexi windshield--that way you can't see the fiberglass layups from the
> inside out.
>
> Rob Miller
> -8 N262RM "Bad Cat" 47 hours
>
> --- Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com> wrote:
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
> > <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
> >
> > I am going to be painting in the next week or so and am not sure
> > how/where
> > to mask for the black anti glare paint in front of the canopy. Any ideas
> > on
> > where to start at the canopy (or how wide) and how wide to finish up at
> > the
> > front of the cowl? Any advice/pictures appreciated.
> >
> >
> > Scott Bilinski
> > Eng dept 305
> > Phone (858) 657-2536
> > Pager (858) 502-5190
> >
> >
> >
> >
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: Black in front of cockpit. |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>
I am concerned about what kinds of paint will work with our canopy material
without eventual adverse effects such as crazing and cracking.
does anyone have information in this regard.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot@hotmail.com>
Subject: RV-List: Black in front of cockpit.
> --> RV-List message posted by: "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot@hotmail.com>
>
> Second on this. Flat black spray paint on the inst panel glare shield.
> Works well for me.
>
> What's you do to prep the plexi, Rob? anything? I need to do the same.
>
> do not archive
>
> Bryan Jones -8
> Pearland, Texas
>
> >I used flat rough-textured black Krylon spray paint on the glare shield.
> >Also, I sprayed 1" of flat black spray paint on the inside one inch of
> >plexi windshield--that way you can't see the fiberglass layups from the
> >inside out.
> >
>
>
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: RE: Dynon Update |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
> Just want to post a quick update from Dynon in response to
> Dan Checkoway's recent post. Some of the information he
> posted is not quite correct.
Sorry 'bout that...thanks for the clarification! And I'm glad to know
you're on this list. 8-)
Keep up the good work!
do not archive
)_( Dan
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: | Anywhere Map & Navaid users |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Point <jpoint@mindspring.com>
To anyone using the Anywhere Map and the Navaid AP with built-in Smart
Coupler:
How difficult is it to get the Smart Coupler to lock on to a course set
into the AWM? My understanding is that you must steer the plane onto
the course and get it on heading, then engage the Smart Coupler to
follow the course. How close to the course must one be for it to lock
on? I see that there is another (external) version of the Smart Coupler
with an intercept function, which will intercept a course and turn on to
it, and I am trying to decide if this function is worth the extra money
and panel space.
Thanks
Jeff Point
RV-6 finish kit
Milwaukee WI
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: Dynon Update |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
> Our optional remote compass module allows you to place the magnetic
> sensors in a location away from any interference and thus minimizes
> the problems stated above. However, for it to be accurate, it has
> to be precisely aligned with the EFIS-D10 (including any tilt.)
> The calibration process described above will relax the requirements
> on alignment and allow for an easier installation of the remote
> compass module.
Doug,
This seems like the best way to go...putting the remote sensor in the aft
fuselage (i.e. RV-7) where there's little or no steel nearby. And with a
SmartTool or digital protractor I'm sure getting the thing precisely aligned
wouldn't be a huge deal.
1) Does the thin but still stainless steel firewall about 12-14" away from
the display unit present enough of a potential magnetic snag to worry about
it, or would nearby TC gyro motors and avionics and stuff like that be more
likely culprits?
2) Assuming we go with a remote magnetic sensor, what's the wiring
requirement there...what size/# of wires, any length limitations, etc.?
Thanks again,
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D (canopy)
http://www.rvproject.com
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stan & Eilene VanGrunsven" <stanvan@pacifier.com>
Hi Jim,
Both were powered with factory new O-360's, factory new Hartzel C/S's.
Not a true
apples/apples comparison for each speed mod.; What I'm saying is "do the
best you
can and go fly and have fun".
Stan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Oke" <wjoke@shaw.ca>
:
Subject: Re: RV-List: Free speed
Thanks for the input, Stan.
From your description, it would seem the low pressure area over the top
of
the wing is powerful enough to draw air out past the canopy rail, even
despite the influence of the prop slipstream . The extracted air then
gets
replaced by drawing air in from wherever it is available, such as the
back
of the canopy or through the tail cone in some cases.
Classic low speed aerodynamics suggests the airfoil on an RV-6A (I
believe
its a NACA 23012 or close relative) would have it's point of minimum
pressure at or just forward of the maximum chord point (the main spar
location in a -6). This would match your experience that sealing the
canopy
gap above the wing had the best immediate payoff.
Interesting speed comparison you make between your "slow" RV-6A and the
"fast" one. Can you comment if the same engine/props are installed?
Perhaps
it means that if accessories such as steps and such are intelligently
designed and installed they may not had that much of an effect on
performance. I know the glider "performance enhancement" experts spend
huge
amounts of time and effort to get quite small performance gains from an
already efficient basic design.
Jim Oke
RV-3 / RV-6A / ASW-20
(too many airplanes, not enough time)
----- Original Message -----
Subject: Re: RV-List: Free speed
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Stan & Eilene VanGrunsven"
<stanvan@pacifier.com>
>
> I can talk of RV-6A slider canopies. When Jerry and I finished ours, He
> did all the initial flights. He flew through a not so rare rain shower
> which left much water on the baggage area cover. I went up with him as
> leak observer; in the fumbling around, my jacket sleeve nearly got
sucked
> out the canopy side gap above the wing, which makes sense. When we put
a
> good "V" seal in this area to keep the outflow in check, the inflow
from
> the rear skirt diminished substantially. We did use "V" seal on the
rear
> skirt facing backward to further hamper inflow.
> SEAL THE OUTFLOW ABOVE THE WING FIRST, then work on the incidentals.
> Our 6A has all the old "go slow" leg fairings, wheel pants, step on
each
> side; and when flown beside an identical 6A with no steps, "go fast"
> fairings and pants, weighing 220 lbs. less; he had a 3 mph advantage
> (GPS measured).
>
> Best Wishes,
> Stan VanGrunsven
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: More free speed |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Pat Perry" <pperryrv@hotmail.com>
Check your local sporting goods store archery department for an artificial
smoke tube. Its a small squeeze tube full of a very fine powder that makes
a small puff when sqeezed. Archery hunters use them to check wind direction
and speed.
Pat Perry
Dallas, PA
RV-4 N154PK Flies great!
>From: Bill Marvel <bmarvel@cox.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: More free speed
>Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 09:20:07 -0800
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Marvel <bmarvel@cox.net>
>
>To any and all canopy air leak types:
>
>OK, folks, you've left me confused. From reading through the recent thread
>and
>a review of the archives, I get two distinct impressions -- one is that my
>-8A
>ought to have air flow from inside the canopy to outside and conversely, it
>ought to have flow from outside to inside. Or most likely, both.
>
>Several private msgs came in and I appreciate them all. Most had to do
>with
>using some type of foam blocking arrangement attached to the canopy skirt
>to
>prevent the irritating flow from under the aft skirt and moving forward.
>In my
>airplane the front seater cooks from cabin heat and the back seater freezes
>from forward moving outside air. There is a stalled cold front midway in
>my
>cockpit!
>
>Before resorting to heroic methods like I saw at the homecoming, with all
>sorts
>of sealing methods being used, I am really curious if the problem can be
>initially addressed by altering air flow and then the rest by sealing any
>remaining leaks. For instance, I would really like flow to enter the
>cockpit
>from the heater or the vents and then exit aft, thus allowing either cool
>or
>warm air, as selected, to go from front to rear in the cockpit. Evidently
>I am
>not the only person wanting this outcome.
>
>One post mentioned someone else using louvers from Home Depot in the aft
>inspection panels of the airplane that seemed to work. Is the person who
>actually did this on the list? Would like to know more about that.
>However,
>it seems that pulling air out of the fuselage just might result in more air
>coming in under the skirt to replace it, not less.
>
>Has anyone done any tufting or other testing around the 8/8A canopy aft
>skirt
>to get a feel for air flows? I don't want to reinvent the wheel and hope
>there
>is some type of alteration that has been made to change the pressure
>differentials to address this problem. One question I still can't answer
>is
>that if all this air is coming into the plane continually from under the
>aft
>skirt, where is it going? What comes in has to get back out for the flow
>to
>continue. Any smokers out there with 8s who can light one up for me and
>answer
>that?? In fact, anyone know of a harmless smoke source (smoke in an
>aerosol
>can?) that can be acquired to test this flow path? That would be most
>helpful.
>
>Bill Marvel
>
>
>Bill Dube wrote:
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Bill Dube <bdube@boulder.nist.gov>
> >
> > >
> > > As far as the canopy coming open in flight, I know that some
>have.
> > > Don't plan on trying it myself. But the question of air pressure
>inside
> > > the cockpit verses outside the cockpit interests me. My canopy is
>shaped
> > > like a wing on top. If there were nothing under it at X miles per
>hour,
> > > the canopy would be sucked up. But since there's a airplane directly
> > > under it I don't see how it could have less pressure on the top, thus,
> > > where's the sucking sound. Is it that the whole airplane is shaped
>like a
> > > wing on top and the canopy has more lift and is trying to raise the
> > > airframe. Confusing.
> >
> > It's an airfoil. On the upper surface, anything in the rear
>that
> > slopes downward has reduced pressure on its outside surface. If the
> > interior is at (or near) static atmospheric pressure, there is a
> > significant difference of pressure between the inside and the outside.
> >
> > There are lots of ways to explain it. Here is my favorite: When
> > the airfoil changes the direction of the air, the air exerts a force on
>the
> > surface opposite to that change of direction. The air is redirected
> > downward by the rear surface of the canope. This air "pulls" up on the
>back
> > of the canope because it would prefer not to be redirected downward, but
> > wants to go straight instead.
> >
>
>
>--
>Bill Marvel Home/office 310 832 7617
>P.O. Box 784 Cell 310 293 2013
>San Pedro, CA 90733 Fax 310 832 5334
>
>One good deed beats 100 good intentions...
>
>
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 |
|
"'rv4-list@matronics.com'" <rv4-list@matronics.com>
| Subject: | Harmonic Balancer W&B info for RV-4 |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts@unionsafe.com>
I just installed Landoll's harmonic balancer yesterday on my -4. There
weren't any instructions so I just put it on they way that looked right.
I'm going to try to fly with it either tonight or tomorrow morning. Does
anyone have any weight and balance info for it. I believe it weighs 12 lbs.
Anyone know what the station of the ring gear on a Lycoming is for an RV-4?
PS. I'm going to check the archives now. :-)
--
Scott VanArtsdalen
Network Manager
Union Safe Deposit Bank
209-946-5116
<html xmlns:o"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word"
xmlns:st1"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<meta nameProgId contentWord.Document>
<link relFile-List href"cid:filelist.xml@01C2E31B.CD4616E0">
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name"PersonName"/>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:DoNotRelyOnCSS/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:SpellingState>Clean</w:SpellingState>
<w:GrammarState>Clean</w:GrammarState>
<w:DocumentKind>DocumentEmail</w:DocumentKind>
<w:EnvelopeVis/>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;
mso-font-charset:2;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:0 268435456 0 0 -2147483648 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial;
mso-ascii-font-family:Arial;
mso-hansi-font-family:Arial;
mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;
color:windowtext;}
span.SpellE
{mso-style-name:"";
mso-spl-e:yes;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<body langEN-US linkblue vlinkpurple style'tab-interval:.5in'>
<span style'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>I just installed Landoll's
harmonic balancer yesterday on my -4.
There weren't any instructions so I just put it on they way that
looked right. I'm going to
try to fly with it either tonight or tomorrow morning. <span
style'mso-spacerun:yes'>Does anyone have any weight and balance
info for it. I believe it weighs 12
lbs. Anyone know what the station
of the ring gear on a Lycoming is for an RV-4?<o:p></o:p>
<span style'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p></o:p>
<span style'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>PS. I'm
going to check the archives now. <font
size2 faceWingdings><span style'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Wingdings;
mso-ascii-font-family:Arial;mso-hansi-font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:
Arial;mso-char-type:symbol;mso-symbol-font-family:Wingdings'><span
style'mso-char-type:symbol;mso-symbol-font-family:Wingdings'>J<font
size2 faceArial><span style'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'><o:p></o:p>
<span style'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p></o:p>
<span style'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial;mso-no-proof:yes'>--<span style'mso-no-proof:
yes'><o:p></o:p>
<st1:PersonName><font size3 colornavy
faceArial><span style'font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy;
mso-no-proof:yes'>Scott VanArtsdalen</st1:PersonName><span
style'mso-no-proof:yes'><o:p></o:p>
<span style'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:gray;mso-no-proof:yes'>Network Manager<span
style'mso-no-proof:yes'><o:p></o:p>
<span style'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:gray;mso-no-proof:yes'>Union Safe Deposit Bank<span
style'mso-no-proof:yes'><o:p></o:p>
<span style'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:gray;mso-no-proof:yes'>209-946-5116<o:p></o:p>
<span style'font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p></o:p>
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 |
|
So Cal RV Group <SoCAL-RVlist@yahoogroups.com>
| Subject: | Altimeter heads up |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Marvel <bmarvel@cox.net>
Hi all:
For those of you in the market for altimeters, you are probably going to
choose between Aerosonic and United. I chose Aerosonic. A year later,
I now have a United altimeter. You may be interested in why.
The short story -- Aerosonic altimeters have an internal mechanism to
diminish needle vibration that United instruments don't have. This
means that they also have more internal friction than does the United
version. My initial pitot static check was fine, but a year later I had
to troubleshoot a mode C problem. In the investigation process we did
another pitot static check and the altimeter flunked the friction test
-- by a lot. It was not yet two years old. What I learned from three
instrument repair shops and one technician who does nothing but pitot
static checks caused me to change over to the United altimeter and put
the other on the shelf. It is not uncommon for the newer Aerosonic
altimeters to fail the friction test, sometimes every two years. This
results in repeated repairs and overhauls. United altimeters don't have
the same problem.
The longer story. When this happened, the tech doing the test asked me
what type of altimeter I had (you could not tell from the front). When
I told him it was an Aerosonic, his eyes rolled. He then told me that
he had been having problems with their new units for several years,
sometimes failing right out of the box and thereafter, mostly due to
excess friction.
I Fed Ex'd the instrument to Aerosonic and then called them to ask what
was going on. After all, this unit was almost new and had failed a
friction test. I queried them as to manufacturing problems, etc. but
they said they were not aware of any and had received no feedback on
this problem. They also said they had confirmed the problem, that their
warranty was only good for one year and since the unit was out of
warranty, I would have to pay to have it repaired. I told them I would
be happy to pay for them to tell me why it failed and that I was
surprised they weren't interested themselves to find out what had
happened so early in its life. They started into the work.
In the interim, I called the technician back and he gave me the numbers
of three major instrument shops -- one in Wichita, one in Van Nuys and
the third in Huntington Beach. The one in Wichita said they'd had this
problem for a good 10 years and had repeatedly told the factory about
it. He also explained to me the design feature Aerosonics had to
address the needle vibration seen in United altimeters and how this is
the cause of the friction problem. The other two shops said the same
thing and that they recommended United altimeters for that reason.
Aerosonic had told me nothing of this design matter and only that they
had no problems reported from the field.
I ordered, installed and starting flying the United instrument, which
passed the pitot/static check fine. I called Aerosonic back and told
them what I had learned about the design and the problems that had been
experienced in the field. I gave them names and phone numbers. They
stuck to their story -- no problems with their instrument. The
president of the company later called me and said that they were going
to fix mine under warranty and send it back, and that they would call me
to keep me advised of what they learned. I got the altimeter back
without the phone call. I called and left a message. No return call.
I called again today and finally got through. All they did was
disassemble, clean, lube and reassemble the unit and it tested fine. It
is now sitting on my spares shelf.
I have no ax to grind with Aerosonic and no kudos to toss at United. I
have no involvement with either of them, either directly or indirectly.
But this is what happened to me and what I learned about it. Your
mileage may vary.
Bill Marvel
--
Bill Marvel Home/office 310 832
7617
P.O. Box 784 Cell 310 293 2013
San Pedro, CA 90733 Fax 310 832 5334
One good deed beats 100 good intentions...
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: Black in front of cockpit. |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Your right about the misunderstanding. Yes it is also part of a quasi
military paint job.
At 01:02 PM 3/5/03 -0600, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
>
>I believe the responders to Scott's post have misunderstood his
>question. He is not asking about painting the glareshield but the
>forward fuselage deck in FRONT of the canopy.
>
>Scott, I have flown in several RVs and none of them have had black areas
>painted in front of the canopy. And, none of these RVs have presented me
>or their pilots with glare problems. The level flight attitude of an RV
>puts the nose considerably lower in respect to the horizon than many
>pilots of spam cans are accustomed to seeing which means you really
>can't see much of the forward deck.
>
>Matter of fact, in the many RVs I have seen at major and minor flyins, I
>can't recall seeing any with a black area forward of the canopy unless
>it was part of the overall paint scheme. It seems that if glare was a
>problem, you would probably see black forward decks on the factory
>demonstrators.
>
>Sam Buchanan (RV-6 with white, glareless forward deck)
>
>========================
>
>Rob Miller wrote:
>>
>> --> RV-List message posted by: Rob Miller <rmill2000@yahoo.com>
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> I used flat rough-textured black Krylon spray paint on the glare shield.
>> Also, I sprayed 1" of flat black spray paint on the inside one inch of
>> plexi windshield--that way you can't see the fiberglass layups from the
>> inside out.
>>
>> Rob Miller
>> -8 N262RM "Bad Cat" 47 hours
>>
>> --- Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com> wrote:
>> > --> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
>> > <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>> >
>> > I am going to be painting in the next week or so and am not sure
>> > how/where
>> > to mask for the black anti glare paint in front of the canopy. Any ideas
>> > on
>> > where to start at the canopy (or how wide) and how wide to finish up at
>> > the
>> > front of the cowl? Any advice/pictures appreciated.
>> >
>> >
>> > Scott Bilinski
>> > Eng dept 305
>> > Phone (858) 657-2536
>> > Pager (858) 502-5190
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Adam Boggs <boggs@cs.colorado.edu>
Hello fellow RVers...
I'm just finishing up preparing the wing ribs on my RV7A. Maybe I'm
going overboard with it, but it sure took me a long time to get them all
nice and smooth. Oh well, you only do it once, right?
So here's my question. With the other pieces in the empennage I would
cleco the skeleton together, cleco the skins on, then drill the skins to
the ribs and spars. This was nice because I could pull it all apart,
deburr the holes, dimple the skins and skeleton, and then prime the whole
thing together before riveting. I like to prime as much as possible at a
time since it's one of my least favorite things to do, and also because
it's pretty chilly in colorado these days so it would be nice to put it
off for slightly warmer weather.
With the wing, the manual says to prime and rivet the skeleton together
before drilling the skins. Does anyone see any issue with just clecoing
the skeleton together so I don't have to prime it, then drill the primed
pieces, and then prime the skins separately later? I'm concerned about
the skeleton clecos possibly being in the way of the skin or other
components.
Are there any other ideas on how to get the desired effect?
Thanks in advance,
-Adam Boggs
RV7A Wings
Boulder, CO
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: | enlarging tooling holes in finished wing |
--> RV-List message posted by: Chris <chrisw3@cox.net>
I remember someone on the list talking about enlarging tooling holes in
the wing for running more wiring; well while looking through the
McMaster-Carr catalog for another project I had an inspiration. You
could get a Set-Screw Coupling with a 1/4" or 3/8" or whatever bore you
need for your Unibit and then get the same diameter steel rod, 6' long,
and you have a drill extension for less than $10 that can be any length
from 0 to 6 feet.
--
Chris Woodhouse
3147 SW 127th St.
Oklahoma City, OK 73170
405-691-5206
chrisw@programmer.net
N35 20.492'
W97 34.342'
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: wing skeleton |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Oke <wjoke@shaw.ca>
Hello Adam;
That's essentially how I built my pre-punched RV-6 wing: competed spars,
clecoed ribs to spars, drilled skins to spars & ribs, disassembled
everything, primed as much as I wanted to, riveted ribs to spars, riveted
skins to ribs.
The main issue I think with using clecoes vice rivets to hold the ribs in
place while doing the skins is the possibility of slight relative movement
of the components as clecoes do have a bit of "give" to them. If you are
concerned about this, you could try using low cost (=soft) aluminium pop
rivets as temporary fasteners instead. They will hold things securely
together while you are working and then should drill out easily enough when
you are done with no significant effect on your parts. Make sure they are
relatively soft aluminium to avoid deforming any of the rivet holes for
later on.
Good luck and happy building.
Jim Oke
RV-6A
Winnipeg, MB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Boggs" <boggs@cs.colorado.edu>
Subject: RV-List: wing skeleton
> --> RV-List message posted by: Adam Boggs <boggs@cs.colorado.edu>
>
>
> Hello fellow RVers...
>
> I'm just finishing up preparing the wing ribs on my RV7A. Maybe I'm
> going overboard with it, but it sure took me a long time to get them all
> nice and smooth. Oh well, you only do it once, right?
>
> So here's my question. With the other pieces in the empennage I would
> cleco the skeleton together, cleco the skins on, then drill the skins to
> the ribs and spars. This was nice because I could pull it all apart,
> deburr the holes, dimple the skins and skeleton, and then prime the whole
> thing together before riveting. I like to prime as much as possible at a
> time since it's one of my least favorite things to do, and also because
> it's pretty chilly in colorado these days so it would be nice to put it
> off for slightly warmer weather.
>
> With the wing, the manual says to prime and rivet the skeleton together
> before drilling the skins. Does anyone see any issue with just clecoing
> the skeleton together so I don't have to prime it, then drill the primed
> pieces, and then prime the skins separately later? I'm concerned about
> the skeleton clecos possibly being in the way of the skin or other
> components.
>
> Are there any other ideas on how to get the desired effect?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> -Adam Boggs
> RV7A Wings
> Boulder, CO
>
>
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: | Re: Altimeter heads up |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Sears" <sears@searnet.com>
Bill, thanks for the heads up. It ticks me off when companies think we're
so gullible as to believe that they never have problems with their products.
I've even gotten that kind of response from Van's on problems I encountered
with their kits! We're not stupid; so, why do they treat us like we are?
Don't they know we'll just spend our money elsewhere, next time? I don't
spend my money at Aircraft Spruce for that reason, now. Yeah, I know Van's
reps have told me that, as well; but, I also know they do have a great bang
for the buck. However, had they had any kind of competition, I'd probably
shop elsewhere because it really ticks me off to have them lie to me when
there is a problem with their product. Again, thanks for the heads up.
Jim Sears in KY
RV-6A N198JS
EAA Tech Counselor
do not archive
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: wing skeleton |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Phil Birkelbach" <phil@petrasoft.net>
The only issue that I could see would be that you really need to remove the
wing from the H jig (err wing stand) when you rivet the ribs to the spars.
It is much easier on the table. So you'll delete one priming session and
add one wing hanging.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Fuselage
http://www.myrv7.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Boggs" <boggs@cs.colorado.edu>
Subject: RV-List: wing skeleton
> --> RV-List message posted by: Adam Boggs <boggs@cs.colorado.edu>
>
>
> Hello fellow RVers...
>
> I'm just finishing up preparing the wing ribs on my RV7A. Maybe I'm
> going overboard with it, but it sure took me a long time to get them all
> nice and smooth. Oh well, you only do it once, right?
>
> So here's my question. With the other pieces in the empennage I would
> cleco the skeleton together, cleco the skins on, then drill the skins to
> the ribs and spars. This was nice because I could pull it all apart,
> deburr the holes, dimple the skins and skeleton, and then prime the whole
> thing together before riveting. I like to prime as much as possible at a
> time since it's one of my least favorite things to do, and also because
> it's pretty chilly in colorado these days so it would be nice to put it
> off for slightly warmer weather.
>
> With the wing, the manual says to prime and rivet the skeleton together
> before drilling the skins. Does anyone see any issue with just clecoing
> the skeleton together so I don't have to prime it, then drill the primed
> pieces, and then prime the skins separately later? I'm concerned about
> the skeleton clecos possibly being in the way of the skin or other
> components.
>
> Are there any other ideas on how to get the desired effect?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> -Adam Boggs
> RV7A Wings
> Boulder, CO
>
>
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: Altimeter heads up |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
You should have gotten an altimeter built by a "real" instrument builder ---
C.G. Conn. That's what mine is and still works fine after being delivered
to the AF in 1944.
Of course my French Horn was also made in the same instrument factory in
Elkhart Indiana.
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: "Bill Marvel" <bmarvel@cox.net>
<SoCAL-RVlist@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RV-List: Altimeter heads up
> --> RV-List message posted by: Bill Marvel <bmarvel@cox.net>
>
> Hi all:
>
> For those of you in the market for altimeters, you are probably going to
> choose between Aerosonic and United. I chose Aerosonic. A year later,
> I now have a United altimeter. You may be interested in why.
>
> The short story -- Aerosonic altimeters have an internal mechanism to
> diminish needle vibration that United instruments don't have. This
> means that they also have more internal friction than does the United
> version. My initial pitot static check was fine, but a year later I had
> to troubleshoot a mode C problem. In the investigation process we did
> another pitot static check and the altimeter flunked the friction test
> -- by a lot. It was not yet two years old. What I learned from three
> instrument repair shops and one technician who does nothing but pitot
> static checks caused me to change over to the United altimeter and put
> the other on the shelf. It is not uncommon for the newer Aerosonic
> altimeters to fail the friction test, sometimes every two years. This
> results in repeated repairs and overhauls. United altimeters don't have
> the same problem.
>
> The longer story. When this happened, the tech doing the test asked me
> what type of altimeter I had (you could not tell from the front). When
> I told him it was an Aerosonic, his eyes rolled. He then told me that
> he had been having problems with their new units for several years,
> sometimes failing right out of the box and thereafter, mostly due to
> excess friction.
>
> I Fed Ex'd the instrument to Aerosonic and then called them to ask what
> was going on. After all, this unit was almost new and had failed a
> friction test. I queried them as to manufacturing problems, etc. but
> they said they were not aware of any and had received no feedback on
> this problem. They also said they had confirmed the problem, that their
> warranty was only good for one year and since the unit was out of
> warranty, I would have to pay to have it repaired. I told them I would
> be happy to pay for them to tell me why it failed and that I was
> surprised they weren't interested themselves to find out what had
> happened so early in its life. They started into the work.
>
> In the interim, I called the technician back and he gave me the numbers
> of three major instrument shops -- one in Wichita, one in Van Nuys and
> the third in Huntington Beach. The one in Wichita said they'd had this
> problem for a good 10 years and had repeatedly told the factory about
> it. He also explained to me the design feature Aerosonics had to
> address the needle vibration seen in United altimeters and how this is
> the cause of the friction problem. The other two shops said the same
> thing and that they recommended United altimeters for that reason.
> Aerosonic had told me nothing of this design matter and only that they
> had no problems reported from the field.
>
> I ordered, installed and starting flying the United instrument, which
> passed the pitot/static check fine. I called Aerosonic back and told
> them what I had learned about the design and the problems that had been
> experienced in the field. I gave them names and phone numbers. They
> stuck to their story -- no problems with their instrument. The
> president of the company later called me and said that they were going
> to fix mine under warranty and send it back, and that they would call me
> to keep me advised of what they learned. I got the altimeter back
> without the phone call. I called and left a message. No return call.
> I called again today and finally got through. All they did was
> disassemble, clean, lube and reassemble the unit and it tested fine. It
> is now sitting on my spares shelf.
>
> I have no ax to grind with Aerosonic and no kudos to toss at United. I
> have no involvement with either of them, either directly or indirectly.
> But this is what happened to me and what I learned about it. Your
> mileage may vary.
>
> Bill Marvel
>
>
> --
> Bill Marvel Home/office 310 832
> 7617
> P.O. Box 784 Cell 310 293 2013
> San Pedro, CA 90733 Fax 310 832 5334
>
> One good deed beats 100 good intentions...
>
>
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: | Re: More free speed |
--> RV-List message posted by: N13eer@aol.com
Bill,
Here are my comments on sealing the canopy. First I have one heat muff and anything
colder than 30 degrees F was not pleasant. I has a cold draft on the back
of my head and hardly any heat coming out. My solution was to seal the canopy
first. I went to Home Depot and got some sticky screen door gasket material.
This stuff is "D" shaped and hollow. I put this around the back of the canopy.
I also got 1/2" backer rod. This is a solid 1/2 round foam piece. After
closing the canopy I lay the backer rod between the skirt and the slider rails.
It stays loose until I takeoff then it is sucked into place. Flying with
these changes I have flown with the temps down to 15 degrees and did not freeze.
Just my experience in the short time I have been flying.
Alan Kritzman
Cedar Rapids, IA
RV-8, 13 hours
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: More free speed |
--> RV-List message posted by: "David Carter" <dcarter@datarecall.net>
Hey, we "tuft" airplanes on the outside to visualize airflow. May need to
tuft baggage compartment of -6s & -7s and front and rear seats of -4s, -8s,
etc, and also tuft near bottom of canopies (sides and rear). Maybe some
tufts in rear fuselage with video camera & light temporarily mounted to view
what is happening in flt.
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pat Perry" <pperryrv@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: More free speed
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Pat Perry" <pperryrv@hotmail.com>
>
>
> Check your local sporting goods store archery department for an artificial
> smoke tube. Its a small squeeze tube full of a very fine powder that
makes
> a small puff when sqeezed. Archery hunters use them to check wind
direction
> and speed.
>
>
> Pat Perry
> Dallas, PA
> RV-4 N154PK Flies great!
>
>
> >From: Bill Marvel <bmarvel@cox.net>
> >Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
> >To: rv-list@matronics.com
> >Subject: Re: RV-List: More free speed
> >Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 09:20:07 -0800
> >
> >--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Marvel <bmarvel@cox.net>
> >
> >To any and all canopy air leak types:
> >
> >OK, folks, you've left me confused. From reading through the recent
thread
> >and
> >a review of the archives, I get two distinct impressions -- one is that
my
> >-8A
> >ought to have air flow from inside the canopy to outside and conversely,
it
> >ought to have flow from outside to inside. Or most likely, both.
> >
> >Several private msgs came in and I appreciate them all. Most had to do
> >with
> >using some type of foam blocking arrangement attached to the canopy skirt
> >to
> >prevent the irritating flow from under the aft skirt and moving forward.
> >In my
> >airplane the front seater cooks from cabin heat and the back seater
freezes
> >from forward moving outside air. There is a stalled cold front midway in
> >my
> >cockpit!
> >
> >Before resorting to heroic methods like I saw at the homecoming, with all
> >sorts
> >of sealing methods being used, I am really curious if the problem can be
> >initially addressed by altering air flow and then the rest by sealing any
> >remaining leaks. For instance, I would really like flow to enter the
> >cockpit
> >from the heater or the vents and then exit aft, thus allowing either cool
> >or
> >warm air, as selected, to go from front to rear in the cockpit.
Evidently
> >I am
> >not the only person wanting this outcome.
> >
> >One post mentioned someone else using louvers from Home Depot in the aft
> >inspection panels of the airplane that seemed to work. Is the person who
> >actually did this on the list? Would like to know more about that.
> >However,
> >it seems that pulling air out of the fuselage just might result in more
air
> >coming in under the skirt to replace it, not less.
> >
> >Has anyone done any tufting or other testing around the 8/8A canopy aft
> >skirt
> >to get a feel for air flows? I don't want to reinvent the wheel and hope
> >there
> >is some type of alteration that has been made to change the pressure
> >differentials to address this problem. One question I still can't answer
> >is
> >that if all this air is coming into the plane continually from under the
> >aft
> >skirt, where is it going? What comes in has to get back out for the flow
> >to
> >continue. Any smokers out there with 8s who can light one up for me and
> >answer
> >that?? In fact, anyone know of a harmless smoke source (smoke in an
> >aerosol
> >can?) that can be acquired to test this flow path? That would be most
> >helpful.
> >
> >Bill Marvel
> >
> >
> >Bill Dube wrote:
> >
> > > --> RV-List message posted by: Bill Dube <bdube@boulder.nist.gov>
> > >
> > > >
> > > > As far as the canopy coming open in flight, I know that some
> >have.
> > > > Don't plan on trying it myself. But the question of air pressure
> >inside
> > > > the cockpit verses outside the cockpit interests me. My canopy is
> >shaped
> > > > like a wing on top. If there were nothing under it at X miles per
> >hour,
> > > > the canopy would be sucked up. But since there's a airplane directly
> > > > under it I don't see how it could have less pressure on the top,
thus,
> > > > where's the sucking sound. Is it that the whole airplane is shaped
> >like a
> > > > wing on top and the canopy has more lift and is trying to raise the
> > > > airframe. Confusing.
> > >
> > > It's an airfoil. On the upper surface, anything in the rear
> >that
> > > slopes downward has reduced pressure on its outside surface. If the
> > > interior is at (or near) static atmospheric pressure, there is a
> > > significant difference of pressure between the inside and the outside.
> > >
> > > There are lots of ways to explain it. Here is my favorite:
When
> > > the airfoil changes the direction of the air, the air exerts a force
on
> >the
> > > surface opposite to that change of direction. The air is redirected
> > > downward by the rear surface of the canope. This air "pulls" up on the
> >back
> > > of the canope because it would prefer not to be redirected downward,
but
> > > wants to go straight instead.
> > >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Bill Marvel Home/office 310 832
7617
> >P.O. Box 784 Cell 310 293 2013
> >San Pedro, CA 90733 Fax 310 832 5334
> >
> >One good deed beats 100 good intentions...
> >
> >
>
>
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: Anywhere Map & Navaid users |
--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
Jeff Point wrote:
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Point <jpoint@mindspring.com>
>
> To anyone using the Anywhere Map and the Navaid AP with built-in Smart
> Coupler:
>
> How difficult is it to get the Smart Coupler to lock on to a course set
> into the AWM? My understanding is that you must steer the plane onto
> the course and get it on heading, then engage the Smart Coupler to
> follow the course. How close to the course must one be for it to lock
> on? I see that there is another (external) version of the Smart Coupler
> with an intercept function, which will intercept a course and turn on to
> it, and I am trying to decide if this function is worth the extra money
> and panel space.
>
> Thanks
> Jeff Point
> RV-6 finish kit
> Milwaukee WI
Jeff, Navaid duty on my Navaid has been returned to the Lowrance Airmap
from AWM for various reasons, but I think the intercept capabilities
will be the same with the Smart Coupler regardless of the GPS system
used.
Sometimes I can get my Navaid to intercept many degrees off course, and
sometimes it won't; I am not sure why the inconsistency. In actual use,
I find that I routinely activate tracking after I have established an
on-course heading (prevents the Navaid from making S-turns as it zeros
in on the heading, and keeps the gang following me from griping about my
navigational skills.....), so for my use, the issue of off-course
intercepts in a non-issue. I just haven't found a time when I *really
needed* course intercept.
But, your needs may be different from mine. Either way, you will find
the Navaid to be a very handy device to have in the panel. :-)
Sam Buchanan
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Martin Hone" <martin.hone@tradergroup.com.au>
All this free speed / aerodynamic stuff is interesting, but if one of the problems
with a sliding canopy has to do with the rear skirt not sealing and/or lifting,
wouldn't this tend to make the lift up canopy version a wee bit faster -
if everything else is equal ?
Cheers
Martin in Oz
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: Altimeter heads up |
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss@bellsouth.net>
Bill,
For me, your post is impeccable timing. I've reached the point where I need to
purchase an air speed indicator and altimeter. I stopped by JDC Avionics in Fort
Lauderdale to pick up an overhauled Turn & Bank instrument. I've developed
a friendship with the owner. He's interested in building an RV-8. I met him when
he called me to check out my 8A project. He told me that the United instruments
were fine for the needs of an RV flyer. I'll ask him his thoughts on Aerosonic,
next time I see him. Thanks for the information.
Charlie Kuss
>--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Marvel <bmarvel@cox.net>
>
>Hi all:
>
>For those of you in the market for altimeters, you are probably going to
>choose between Aerosonic and United. I chose Aerosonic. A year later,
>I now have a United altimeter. You may be interested in why.
>
>The short story -- Aerosonic altimeters have an internal mechanism to
>diminish needle vibration that United instruments don't have. This
>means that they also have more internal friction than does the United
>version. My initial pitot static check was fine, but a year later I had
>to troubleshoot a mode C problem. In the investigation process we did
>another pitot static check and the altimeter flunked the friction test
>-- by a lot. It was not yet two years old. What I learned from three
>instrument repair shops and one technician who does nothing but pitot
>static checks caused me to change over to the United altimeter and put
>the other on the shelf. It is not uncommon for the newer Aerosonic
>altimeters to fail the friction test, sometimes every two years. This
>results in repeated repairs and overhauls. United altimeters don't have
>the same problem.
>
>The longer story. When this happened, the tech doing the test asked me
>what type of altimeter I had (you could not tell from the front). When
>I told him it was an Aerosonic, his eyes rolled. He then told me that
>he had been having problems with their new units for several years,
>sometimes failing right out of the box and thereafter, mostly due to
>excess friction.
>
>I Fed Ex'd the instrument to Aerosonic and then called them to ask what
>was going on. After all, this unit was almost new and had failed a
>friction test. I queried them as to manufacturing problems, etc. but
>they said they were not aware of any and had received no feedback on
>this problem. They also said they had confirmed the problem, that their
>warranty was only good for one year and since the unit was out of
>warranty, I would have to pay to have it repaired. I told them I would
>be happy to pay for them to tell me why it failed and that I was
>surprised they weren't interested themselves to find out what had
>happened so early in its life. They started into the work.
>
>In the interim, I called the technician back and he gave me the numbers
>of three major instrument shops -- one in Wichita, one in Van Nuys and
>the third in Huntington Beach. The one in Wichita said they'd had this
>problem for a good 10 years and had repeatedly told the factory about
>it. He also explained to me the design feature Aerosonics had to
>address the needle vibration seen in United altimeters and how this is
>the cause of the friction problem. The other two shops said the same
>thing and that they recommended United altimeters for that reason.
>Aerosonic had told me nothing of this design matter and only that they
>had no problems reported from the field.
>
>I ordered, installed and starting flying the United instrument, which
>passed the pitot/static check fine. I called Aerosonic back and told
>them what I had learned about the design and the problems that had been
>experienced in the field. I gave them names and phone numbers. They
>stuck to their story -- no problems with their instrument. The
>president of the company later called me and said that they were going
>to fix mine under warranty and send it back, and that they would call me
>to keep me advised of what they learned. I got the altimeter back
>without the phone call. I called and left a message. No return call.
>I called again today and finally got through. All they did was
>disassemble, clean, lube and reassemble the unit and it tested fine. It
>is now sitting on my spares shelf.
>
>I have no ax to grind with Aerosonic and no kudos to toss at United. I
>have no involvement with either of them, either directly or indirectly.
>But this is what happened to me and what I learned about it. Your
>mileage may vary.
>
>Bill Marvel
>
>
>--
>Bill Marvel Home/office 310 832
>7617
>P.O. Box 784 Cell 310 293 2013
>San Pedro, CA 90733 Fax 310 832 5334
>
>One good deed beats 100 good intentions...
>
>
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: | Re: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Halon |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
I talked to an engineer at the outfit that makes halotron, and asked him
what the scoop was between halon and halotron. He said that pound for
pound, halotron is about 80% (going on memory here, but the number is
close) as effective in fire fighting as halon. Shouldn't be any
more/less safe than halon for us, but it makes the greenies happy. Of
course, we need to burn more fuel to lift the extra pound of halotron
around, so I guess there are no free lunches. The halon that is still
available is from reclaimed sources, as it is no longer legal to
manufacture halon. Either one puts out fires by displacing oxygen and
removing enormous amounts of heat through evaporation.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 265 hours, dragging an extra pound of extinguisher with the
whole way
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
>
> I have a Halotron I extinguisher for my plane. Isn't that's
> all that's available now? I thought they no longer sold
> Halon. Does anyone know if it any safer for us or just the
> atmosphere? R
>
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: | RV9-A QB fuselage |
--> RV-List message posted by: Arthur Nation <anation@eskimo.com>
Hi list,
Assume the QB kit comes with firewall hard-wired. How much pain does this
cause installing wiring, brakes etc compared to a standard kit.
Comments please
Arthur
prospective RV9er
do not archive
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: RV9-A QB fuselage |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Marvel <bmarvel@cox.net>
Arthur:
Don't know what you mean by "hard wired," but in my -8A QB the fact that the
firewall was already installed caused no problems at all. There aren't any
holes in it because Van can't know where you plan to route wires, cables,
hoses, etc. With his FWF kit, maybe something is pre-drilled for those
getting the QB and FWF at the same time, but I doubt it.
In short, the QB is, in my view, a very good value. Yes it costs more but
you will still get plenty of building experience. You will have to make all
the decisions as to how to penetrate the firewall, and where, but this is
true with the full build also.
Bill Marvel
Arthur Nation wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Arthur Nation <anation@eskimo.com>
>
> Hi list,
> Assume the QB kit comes with firewall hard-wired. How much pain does this
> cause installing wiring, brakes etc compared to a standard kit.
> Comments please
>
> Arthur
> prospective RV9er
>
> do not archive
>
--
Bill Marvel Home/office 310 832 7617
P.O. Box 784 Cell 310 293 2013
San Pedro, CA 90733 Fax 310 832 5334
One good deed beats 100 good intentions...
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: RV9-A QB fuselage |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Kyle Boatright" <kyle.boatright@adelphia.net>
There is no difference. Most people build the fuselage shell, then cut
holes and fit systems later.
KB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Arthur Nation" <anation@eskimo.com>
Subject: RV-List: RV9-A QB fuselage
> --> RV-List message posted by: Arthur Nation <anation@eskimo.com>
>
> Hi list,
> Assume the QB kit comes with firewall hard-wired. How much pain does this
> cause installing wiring, brakes etc compared to a standard kit.
> Comments please
>
> Arthur
> prospective RV9er
>
> do not archive
>
>
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! --
|