Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:56 AM - Re: Publications about Lyc 0320 (Aircraft Technical Book Company)
2. 07:15 AM - Power chart question (John Huft)
3. 07:26 AM - Re: Re: crimping big terminals (Larry Bowen)
4. 08:56 AM - Electricvs.manual Manual manual/electric Elev. trim- Elect vs manual (Arthur Nation)
5. 09:00 AM - Elev trim--Elect vs manual (Arthur Nation)
6. 09:23 AM - Re: Power chart question (Alex Peterson)
7. 09:34 AM - Re: Power chart question (Alex Peterson)
8. 09:37 AM - Re: Lycoming Service Instructions needed (Tracy Crook)
9. 09:38 AM - Re: Elev trim--Elect vs manual (Aircraft Technical Book Company)
10. 10:07 AM - Re: Power chart question (Kevin Horton)
11. 10:07 AM - Fw: FreeSpeed (DAVID REEL)
12. 10:14 AM - Re: Power chart question (kempthornes)
13. 10:48 AM - Re: Power chart question (Alex Peterson)
14. 11:24 AM - Re: Power chart question (Doug Gray)
15. 11:42 AM - > Re: Elev. trim elec-vs manual (Oldsfolks@aol.com)
16. 11:47 AM - Re:Lycoming 20Service Instructions needed (Jerry2DT@aol.com)
17. 12:45 PM - Re: RV-List Digest: 24 Msgs - 03/08/03 (PSPRV6A@aol.com)
18. 01:38 PM - Re: Power chart question (John Huft)
19. 03:24 PM - homebrew shrinking/stretching, whether or not to flute (Dan Checkoway)
20. 03:50 PM - cell phone wiring (Gary)
21. 04:33 PM - Re: Publications about Lyc 0320 (Charlie Kuss)
22. 05:41 PM - Flap/Aileron gap (Geoff Evans)
23. 07:07 PM - Installation of wing tip rib (Shirley Harding)
24. 07:18 PM - Re: homebrew shrinking/stretching, whether or not to flute (Larry Pardue)
25. 10:25 PM - [ John Foy ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! (Email List Photo Shares)
26. 10:59 PM - Re: Of Service (JNice51355@aol.com)
27. 11:06 PM - Re: Flap/Aileron gap (Bill Marvel)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Publications about Lyc 0320 |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Aircraft Technical Book Company" <winterland@rkymtnhi.com>
Richard,
The following publications are available for the Lycoming 0-320 in addition
to the Operators Manual. All are in stock and available for immediate
delivery
Basic Generic Information
Aircraft Reciprocating Engines
A&P Powerplant Textbook
Advanced Generic Information
Skyranch Engineering Manual (highly recommended)
0-320 overhaul - VHS
Specific Lycoming Publications
Direct Drive Engine Overhaul Manual
Specific to the D1A - Parts Catalog and Schematics
Lycoming Troubleshooting Guide
Lycoming Flyer Key Reprints
There are also several publications available for relevant components and
accessories such as:
Magneto Systems
Props and Controls
Fuel Metering Systems
MSA Carburetor - video on CD
RSA Fuel Injection - VHS and CD
Charging Systems - video on CD
Tony Bingelis On Engines is also and excellent reference for powerplant
installation on RVs. (Bingelis' Firewall Forward is not very applicable)
George Orndorff's Aircraft Engine Systems video is pretty good too.
For more details, go to http://buildersbooks.com
Then from the categories listed on the left, click into Engine/Installation,
Engines/Maintenance and Engines/Accessories
Andy
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley@att.net>
Subject: RV-List: Publications about Lyc 0320
> --> RV-List message posted by: Richard Dudley <rhdudley@att.net>
>
> Greetings Listers,
>
> I would appreciate your suggestions about any publications that you have
> found helpful in learning details about the O-320-D1A. So far, I have
> only the "Operator's Manual" which is good, as far as it goes. I would
> like more details about this engine as well as generic Lycoming engine
> and general care and feeding of aircraft engine information.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Richard Dudley
> -6A FWF
>
>
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: | Power chart question |
--> RV-List message posted by: "John Huft" <aflyer@direcway.com>
Hello all
This morning I have been perusing the power charts developed by Larry Pardue
and Kevin Horton, in preparation for my sun n fun trip, which will be the
first time I have been at low enough altitudes to worry about such things
(home field is 7650 msl).
Both charts show that at the same power setting, a change in altitude gives
a change in power. For example, (from Kevin's chart) at 24"mp and 2400 rpm,
at 6500 ft and 0 degrees C, we get 76.1% power. At the same setting and
temperature, but moving to sea level, we get only 71.5% power. If we use
standard temps at both altitudes, at 6500 ft msl we get 75.8%, and at sea
level, 69.6%.
This does not compute in my brain. When I think about it, since the air is
more dense at sea level (at the same pressure), the engine should make more
power at the lower altitude, rather than less.
Can any of you experts explain this to me?
Thanks in advance, John Huft, RV8 almost finished painting, Pagosa Springs,
CO
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: crimping big terminals |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
I used a hammer crimper recently to do my big cables. I did one cable
using the hammer. Then I tried putting the crimper in the vise instead.
I got a more 'controlled' crimp, and they seemed to turn out better.
-
Larry Bowen
Larry@BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
2003 - The year of flight!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> JusCash@aol.com
> Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 1:27 AM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: RE: crimping big terminals
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: JusCash@aol.com
>
> I have been reading this thread about crimping terminals and
> thought I might
> share my experiences. About 15 years ago I undertook the complete
> restoration of my 1949 A35 Bonanza. In replacing all of the
> "Big" wires I to
> wondered how am I going to crimp these things. The IA that
> was supervising
> me lent me his "Hammer Crimper" which I used to crimp the
> battery cables.
> After reading the post of concern about hammer crimpers I can
> tell you all
> that I haven't had any problems with my charging or starting
> systems. When I
> started the wiring of my RV6 I bought a hammer crimper of my
> own to do the
> battery cables and I don't expect any problems with them either.
>
> Cash Copeland
> RV6 N46FC
> Hayward, Ca
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Electricvs.manual Manual |
manual/electric
Elev. trim- Elect vs manual
--> RV-List message posted by: Arthur Nation <anation@eskimo.com>
Hi list,
Comments on the above regarding preferences and installation problems, if any.
Thanks,
Arthur
do not archive
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: | Elev trim--Elect vs manual |
--> RV-List message posted by: Arthur Nation <anation@eskimo.com>
Hi list,
Comments on the above regarding preferences and installation problems, if any.
Thanks,
Arthur
Sorry about the first post. My keyboard was not doing well!
do not archive
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Power chart question |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
> Both charts show that at the same power setting, a change in
> altitude gives a change in power. For example, (from Kevin's
> chart) at 24"mp and 2400 rpm, at 6500 ft and 0 degrees C, we
> get 76.1% power. At the same setting and temperature, but
> moving to sea level, we get only 71.5% power. If we use
> standard temps at both altitudes, at 6500 ft msl we get
> 75.8%, and at sea level, 69.6%.
>
> This does not compute in my brain. When I think about it,
> since the air is more dense at sea level (at the same
> pressure), the engine should make more power at the lower
> altitude, rather than less.
>
> Can any of you experts explain this to me?
John, I surely am no expert, but I know a thing or two about
thermodynamics...
I have to believe that the four parameters which matter on a given
engine's power (assuming mixture is set to peak power or some other
standard point) are: RPM, MAP, induction air temp and moisture content.
These things remain equal, and the power remains equal as well,
independent of altitude. Simply put, it is how many oxygen molecules
get sucked into each each cylinder's charge times RPM times some
constant. There are numerous other variables, but I don't believe they
are as important.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 265 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
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: | Power chart question |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
A good set of articles regarding how to run one's engine can be found by
going to www.avweb.com, and searching for Deakin. I believe these might
have been referenced before on this list, but they are worth telling
about again. There are four parts to the article.
Sure to be controversial...
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 265 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
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: Lycoming Service Instructions needed |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Tracy Crook" <lors01@msn.com>
> --> RV-List message posted by: WFACT01@aol.com
>
> Tracy-roller rocker arms no valve problems ever plus about 20 more HP-TOM
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
> Tom Whelan
> President EAA Chapter 1097
20 HP from rocker arms...... *Very* impressive!
Tracy Crook
Definitely do not archive
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: Elev trim--Elect vs manual |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Aircraft Technical Book Company" <winterland@rkymtnhi.com>
My preference with all such choices: keep things simple - if its not there,
it can't break. I went with basic manual systems throughout my -6A and will
do so again with the -10
Andy
> --> RV-List message posted by: Arthur Nation <anation@eskimo.com>
>
> Hi list,
> Comments on the above regarding preferences and installation problems, if
any.
> Thanks,
> Arthur
>
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: Power chart question |
--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorto1537@rogers.com>
>--> RV-List message posted by: "John Huft" <aflyer@direcway.com>
>
>Hello all
>
>This morning I have been perusing the power charts developed by Larry Pardue
>and Kevin Horton, in preparation for my sun n fun trip, which will be the
>first time I have been at low enough altitudes to worry about such things
>(home field is 7650 msl).
>
>Both charts show that at the same power setting, a change in altitude gives
>a change in power. For example, (from Kevin's chart) at 24"mp and 2400 rpm,
>at 6500 ft and 0 degrees C, we get 76.1% power. At the same setting and
>temperature, but moving to sea level, we get only 71.5% power. If we use
>standard temps at both altitudes, at 6500 ft msl we get 75.8%, and at sea
>level, 69.6%.
>
>This does not compute in my brain. When I think about it, since the air is
>more dense at sea level (at the same pressure), the engine should make more
>power at the lower altitude, rather than less.
>
>Can any of you experts explain this to me?
>
>Thanks in advance, John Huft, RV8 almost finished painting, Pagosa Springs,
>CO
John,
I can explain some of this, but some of it will be just pure
speculation on my part, so it may or may not be correct. I'll
clearly indicate which parts are speculative as I go along.
First, you made one statement that is not correct "the air is more
dense at sea level (at the same pressure)". If we ignore the small
effect of humidity, the density of air is determined by the
temperature and pressure. The pressure of the air that the engine is
using is the manifold pressure. If the manifold pressure is the same
at altitude as it is at sea level, then it is the temperature that
will make the difference. The air at altitude is colder, so it is
more dense than the air at the same MP at sea level. So, part of the
explanation for a power increase with altitude (at the same MP) is
the colder temperatures at altitude leading to a higher density.
Now for the speculation - I think the lower pressure at altitude
helps in a couple of other ways too. First, the lower pressure at
the exit of the exhaust pipes will help scavenge the combustion air
out of the cylinder during the exhaust stroke. So I suspect that we
end up with a bit less of the exhaust gases from the last combustion
stroke still in the cylinder when the next intake stroke starts -
thus a bit more power.
More speculation - at altitude the air in the crankcase is at a lower
pressure. This is the air pressure that is on the lower side of the
rings. At the same MP, the combustion pressures should be about the
same in the cylinder (actually it would probably be a bit higher if
the air was colder, thus more dense), so the lower pressure in the
crankcase means more pressure differential from the top to the bottom
of the rings. I think this pressure differential helps force the
rings against the cylinder wall, so the rings may seal a bit better
at altitude, giving less leakage of combustion pressure, and more
power.
All the power charts I have looked at from Lycoming, Continental and
Wright (big radials) show that the engine makes more power at
altitude for the same MP and rpm. So I am satisfied that the effect
is real.
Take care,
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "DAVID REEL" <dreel@cox.net>
Curtis isn't on the list, but provided this reply.
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: CURTIS HINKLEY
Subject: Re: FreeSpeed
Hi Dave,
Sorry it took so long to get back with you. I've been looking for some pictures
of the new louvers I had punched in the new plates.
I'm taking the RV apart to paint it starting Sunday, so I'll take a picture of
the louver cover and send it to you. Also, I have my original vented covers if
someone wants to try one of them out. It's a standard Van's cover and should
work on a 4, 6, 7 or 9.
I have not noticed any change in static pressure or airspeed with the louvered
vents. But I pull my pressure from my pito tube and not from the side of the airplane.
Curtis
----- Original Message -----
From: DAVID REEL
To: rvlist ; n815rv@msn.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 10:41 AM
Subject: FreeSpeed
Curtis Hinkley replaced the access panels on the fuselage sides at the tail of
his RV8 with louvered versions from a home depot item. He reported this sucked
the canopy back down onto the fuselage, eliminating reverse airflow at the
rear and bulging at the sides. No data on whether this changed static pressure
or actual airspeed though. But it would be easy to swap panels. Do you have
any further info at this time Curtis?
Dave Reel - RV8A
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: Power chart question |
--> RV-List message posted by: kempthornes <kempthornes@earthlink.net>
At 08:23 AM 3/9/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "John Huft" <aflyer@direcway.com>
>
>Both charts show that at the same power setting, a change in altitude gives
>a change in power. For example, (from Kevin's chart) at 24"mp and 2400 rpm,
>at 6500 ft and 0 degrees C, we get 76.1% power. At the same setting and
>temperature, but moving to sea level, we get only 71.5% power. If we use
>standard temps at both altitudes, at 6500 ft msl we get 75.8%, and at sea
>level, 69.6%.
I am unsure of the term "same power setting".
If you descend in a airplane and you do not touch the controls, your engine
will produce more power. The mp will rise as you descend. If you don't
retard throttle as you descend you will soon exceed Vne in an RV.
But you knew that! Maybe your question is just about the chart?
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK flying!
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Power chart question |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
Kevin et. al.,
One other point of clarification - in my post today on the subject, I
did not discuss the impact of the throttle position and inefficiencies
associated with that. Specifically, for a MAP of 24" at sea level vs a
MAP of 24" at whatever altitude allows full throttle, there is a
difference in the output power in an engine. Yes, the cylinder charge
may be the same (assuming temp constant, RPM constant, leaning
consistent), but the engine "wastes" a little power sucking down the sea
level air to only 24". What this means is that the power output of an
engine will be a little more at altitude, with MAP, RPM, temp, leaning
same. Of course, the air charge temp in the case of partial throttle
will be less than ambient, due to the pressure drop through the
throttle. Time for me to get out of this discussion....
I guess it is best to just go fly.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 265 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 Kevin Horton
> Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 12:05 PM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Power chart question
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorto1537@rogers.com>
>
> >--> RV-List message posted by: "John Huft" <aflyer@direcway.com>
> >
> >Hello all
> >
> >This morning I have been perusing the power charts developed
> by Larry
> >Pardue and Kevin Horton, in preparation for my sun n fun trip, which
> >will be the first time I have been at low enough altitudes to worry
> >about such things (home field is 7650 msl).
> >
> >Both charts show that at the same power setting, a change in
> altitude
> >gives a change in power. For example, (from Kevin's chart)
> at 24"mp and
> >2400 rpm, at 6500 ft and 0 degrees C, we get 76.1% power. At
> the same
> >setting and temperature, but moving to sea level, we get only 71.5%
> >power. If we use standard temps at both altitudes, at 6500 ft msl we
> >get 75.8%, and at sea level, 69.6%.
> >
> >This does not compute in my brain. When I think about it,
> since the air
> >is more dense at sea level (at the same pressure), the engine should
> >make more power at the lower altitude, rather than less.
> >
> >Can any of you experts explain this to me?
> >
> >Thanks in advance, John Huft, RV8 almost finished painting, Pagosa
> >Springs, CO
>
> John,
>
> I can explain some of this, but some of it will be just pure
> speculation on my part, so it may or may not be correct. I'll
> clearly indicate which parts are speculative as I go along.
>
> First, you made one statement that is not correct "the air is more
> dense at sea level (at the same pressure)". If we ignore the small
> effect of humidity, the density of air is determined by the
> temperature and pressure. The pressure of the air that the engine is
> using is the manifold pressure. If the manifold pressure is the same
> at altitude as it is at sea level, then it is the temperature that
> will make the difference. The air at altitude is colder, so it is
> more dense than the air at the same MP at sea level. So, part of the
> explanation for a power increase with altitude (at the same MP) is
> the colder temperatures at altitude leading to a higher density.
>
> Now for the speculation - I think the lower pressure at altitude
> helps in a couple of other ways too. First, the lower pressure at
> the exit of the exhaust pipes will help scavenge the combustion air
> out of the cylinder during the exhaust stroke. So I suspect that we
> end up with a bit less of the exhaust gases from the last combustion
> stroke still in the cylinder when the next intake stroke starts -
> thus a bit more power.
>
> More speculation - at altitude the air in the crankcase is at a lower
> pressure. This is the air pressure that is on the lower side of the
> rings. At the same MP, the combustion pressures should be about the
> same in the cylinder (actually it would probably be a bit higher if
> the air was colder, thus more dense), so the lower pressure in the
> crankcase means more pressure differential from the top to the bottom
> of the rings. I think this pressure differential helps force the
> rings against the cylinder wall, so the rings may seal a bit better
> at altitude, giving less leakage of combustion pressure, and more
> power.
>
> All the power charts I have looked at from Lycoming, Continental and
> Wright (big radials) show that the engine makes more power at
> altitude for the same MP and rpm. So I am satisfied that the effect
> is real.
>
> Take care,
> --
> Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
> Ottawa, Canada
> http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
>
>
> ==========
> Matronics Forums.
> ==========
> List members.
> ==========
> ==========
>
>
>
>
>
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: Power chart question |
--> RV-List message posted by: Doug Gray <dgra1233@bigpond.net.au>
For clarification, did you use 0 degrees C at SL as well? And what
exactly to you mean by "standard temps at both altitudes"? It is not
clear that you reduced temperature with altitude.
Doug Gray
John Huft wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "John Huft" <aflyer@direcway.com>
>
> Hello all
>
> This morning I have been perusing the power charts developed by Larry Pardue
> and Kevin Horton, in preparation for my sun n fun trip, which will be the
> first time I have been at low enough altitudes to worry about such things
> (home field is 7650 msl).
>
> Both charts show that at the same power setting, a change in altitude gives
> a change in power. For example, (from Kevin's chart) at 24"mp and 2400 rpm,
> at 6500 ft and 0 degrees C, we get 76.1% power. At the same setting and
> temperature, but moving to sea level, we get only 71.5% power. If we use
> standard temps at both altitudes, at 6500 ft msl we get 75.8%, and at sea
> level, 69.6%.
>
> This does not compute in my brain. When I think about it, since the air is
> more dense at sea level (at the same pressure), the engine should make more
> power at the lower altitude, rather than less.
>
> Can any of you experts explain this to me?
>
> Thanks in advance, John Huft, RV8 almost finished painting, Pagosa Springs,
> CO
>
>
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: Elev. trim elec-vs manual |
--> RV-List message posted by: Oldsfolks@aol.com
I much prefer the manual trim. Both of our RV-4's have had manual trim. No
touchy switch ,just whatever adjustment you want. No electrical problems
with it, less cost
The position behind the throttle quadrant on the RV-4 is very good also.
do not archive
Bob Olds A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor
RV-4 , N1191X , Flying Now
Charleston, Arkansas
"Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers"
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Lycoming 20Service Instructions needed |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jerry2DT@aol.com
... no satisying, earth-shaking rumble... Sorry Tracy... :)
Jerry Cochran
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: RV-List Digest: 24 Msgs - 03/08/03 |
--> RV-List message posted by: PSPRV6A@aol.com
Crimping big terminals: I found that the 3-jaw chuck on my 13" metal lathe
did a fine job of crimping the big teminals. Takes but a moment, so if you
know anyone with a similar lathe, it's a good way to do the crimping. The
3-jaw chuck has top be a robust one as you need to reef on it quite hard.
Paul & Eric. Petersen RV6A, finishing
soon
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Power chart question |
--> RV-List message posted by: "John Huft" <aflyer@direcway.com>
I will try to explain this better...
If you go to
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/phplinks/index.php?show=pop
and download Kevin Horton's excellent spread sheet on IO-360 power curves,
you will understand better. Kevin's spreadsheet takes as inputs altitude,
RPM, MP, and temp, and outputs 4 values of horsepower (absolute, and percent
of max), one for the temp input, one for standard temp, one for standard
+20, and one for standard -20. So, it is easy to see the effect of
temperature variation. Larry's spreadsheet, in fact, says to add 1% power
for each 15 degrees below standard temp, and subtract 15 degrees for each 15
degrees over standard temp. But, the power varies almost 5 percent by
changing altitude 6500 feet.
It is not surprising, of course, that Kevin understood my question. The two
reasons he gave for increasing power with altitude make sense, but my
intuition is that these effects (lower crankcase pressure and lower exhaust
back pressure) are not the full explanation. I am thinking that with
combustion pressures of say, 1000 psi, reducing crankcase pressure and
exhaust back pressure by a few psi is not going to make 5% difference in
power output.
Kevin's response says that he has seen the same trend with many other
engines, which I believe, but I am not sure I understand the reasons yet.
Thank you all for trying though!!
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Doug Gray
Subject: Re: RV-List: Power chart question
--> RV-List message posted by: Doug Gray <dgra1233@bigpond.net.au>
For clarification, did you use 0 degrees C at SL as well? And what
exactly to you mean by "standard temps at both altitudes"? It is not
clear that you reduced temperature with altitude.
Doug Gray
John Huft wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "John Huft" <aflyer@direcway.com>
>
> Hello all
>
> This morning I have been perusing the power charts developed by Larry
Pardue
> and Kevin Horton, in preparation for my sun n fun trip, which will be the
> first time I have been at low enough altitudes to worry about such things
> (home field is 7650 msl).
>
> Both charts show that at the same power setting, a change in altitude
gives
> a change in power. For example, (from Kevin's chart) at 24"mp and 2400
rpm,
> at 6500 ft and 0 degrees C, we get 76.1% power. At the same setting and
> temperature, but moving to sea level, we get only 71.5% power. If we use
> standard temps at both altitudes, at 6500 ft msl we get 75.8%, and at sea
> level, 69.6%.
>
> This does not compute in my brain. When I think about it, since the air is
> more dense at sea level (at the same pressure), the engine should make
more
> power at the lower altitude, rather than less.
>
> Can any of you experts explain this to me?
>
> Thanks in advance, John Huft, RV8 almost finished painting, Pagosa
Springs,
> CO
>
>
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: | homebrew shrinking/stretching, whether or not to flute |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
Question for any tip-up builders/fliers out there:
My RV-7's tip-up canopy frame side weldments (WD-625) match the contour of
my longerons along the deck *almost* perfectly, but of course not quite. I
need to tweak 'em in a couple of spots. Looks like the weldments were given
their curve using a shrinker.
I need to stretch in one spot and shrink a tiny bit in another...but of
course I don't have a shrinker or stretcher. Is there any other "homebrew"
method for stretching or shrinking these puppies?
Of course I'm tempted to flute the flange instead of shrinking it, because
that's immediately within my means...is this a bad idea (i.e. would it cause
a gap that I'll regret)?
Also...please let me know if very slight misalignment of the canopy frame
side and the fuselage side is something I should even worry about at this
phase before the thing is riveted together and glass is attached. I assume
now's the time, but you never know! 8-)
If it makes sense not to worry about the edge now and just fill it out later
with some sort of SuperFil or microballoons, please clue me in.
Let me know if you want pictures to better understand what area I'm
inquiring about.
Thanks in advance,
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D (canopy)
http://www.rvproject.com
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | cell phone wiring |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Gary" <rv9er@3rivers.net>
Jeff, you may be interested in the "safety cell", a device that lets you plug
your cell phone into your headset. It mutes the phone during radio transmissions.
Plugs in like a portable push-to-talk switch. No wiring needed.
They say you should get the amplified version for aircraft use. Have a look at
http://www.headsetsetc.com/safetycell1.html
I don't have one, so don't know how well they work.
Gary
---
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Publications about Lyc 0320 |
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss@bellsouth.net>
At 07:53 AM 3/9/2003 -0700, you wrote:
Richard,
3 good general reference books are available on line from the FAA. They are the
A&P's Handbook of General Knowledge. AC65-9A Get it at:
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/ACNumber/A563729E3DAAC121862569F1005F80F1?OpenDocument
The A&P's Powerplant Handbook. AC 65-12A Get it at:
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/ACNumber/614BD958F4D610DF862569EE0077E5F0?OpenDocument
And the A&P's Airframe Handbook. AC 65-15A Download it at:
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/ACNumber/66AB237BAF7184A0862569F1005F7733?OpenDocument
Charlie Kuss
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Richard Dudley <rhdudley@att.net>
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RV-List: Publications about Lyc 0320
>
>
>> --> RV-List message posted by: Richard Dudley <rhdudley@att.net>
>>
>> Greetings Listers,
>>
>> I would appreciate your suggestions about any publications that you have
>> found helpful in learning details about the O-320-D1A. So far, I have
>> only the "Operator's Manual" which is good, as far as it goes. I would
>> like more details about this engine as well as generic Lycoming engine
>> and general care and feeding of aircraft engine information.
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> Richard Dudley
>> -6A FWF
>>
>>
>
>
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: | Flap/Aileron gap |
--> RV-List message posted by: Geoff Evans <hellothaimassage@yahoo.com>
I'm almost done with the QB wings on my -8. After mounting the control
surfaces, I discovered that the flap/aileron gap is about 3/32" wider than the
1/4" specified on the plans. I think this happened because when I drilled the
flap hinges, I measured the gap with the ailerons positioned as far inboard as
they would go, thinking that this would insure a *minimum* of 1/4" gap.
Well, I've subsequently had to slide the ailerons outboard a few 32nds to keep
the edges of the skins near the leading edges from banging into the heads of
the rivets that are holding the inboard mounting brackets together.
Unfortunately, this widened the gaps between the ailerons and the flaps.
I realize that the larger gaps will cause a drag penalty (hopefully
negligible), but the real question is will the inboard ends of the flaps
interfere with the fuselage since I now know they are 3/32" farther inboard
then they need to be.
I'm obviously a long way from mounting the wings, but if I'm going to have to
re-drill the flap hinges, I'd rather do it now as opposed to later. I saw some
things in the archives about a fuselage/flap interference problem in earlier
RV-6s, but no one has mentioned it with a totally pre-punched QB -8.
Thanks.
-Geoff
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Installation of wing tip rib |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Shirley Harding" <shirleyh@starwon.com.au>
Hi! Is there any reason why I shouldn't install the W-612 tip rib with the
flange facing into the fibreglass tip and the web facing the wing - ie the
reverse of what is shown on the plans? Just thought it would give a neater
finish to the wig tip but may be there's somethig I haven't thought of!
Do not archive
Cheers
Shirley Harding
RV6 QB
Perth, Western Australia.
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: homebrew shrinking/stretching, whether or not to flute |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Larry Pardue" <n5lp@carlsbad.net>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
>
> Question for any tip-up builders/fliers out there:
>
> My RV-7's tip-up canopy frame side weldments (WD-625) match the contour of
> my longerons along the deck *almost* perfectly, but of course not quite.
I
> need to tweak 'em in a couple of spots. Looks like the weldments were
given
> their curve using a shrinker.
>
> I need to stretch in one spot and shrink a tiny bit in another...but of
> course I don't have a shrinker or stretcher. Is there any other
"homebrew"
> method for stretching or shrinking these puppies?
>
> Of course I'm tempted to flute the flange instead of shrinking it, because
> that's immediately within my means...is this a bad idea (i.e. would it
cause
> a gap that I'll regret)?
>
My RV-6 instructions had a drawing of a "heavy duty fluting tool." It is a
piece of thick (3/4"?) aluminum with a hole drilled in it and a rod that
comes through the hole and bends 90 degrees to fit into a groove. The
apparatus can be clamped to put a big flute into heavy material.
I built this tool and used it on the canopy frame side weldments to try to
make them fit the fuselage. I ended up breaking one of the weldments and
had to order another. Finally I got the weldments to fit exactly -- until I
installed the plexi. The pressure it exerted completely changed the fit
again.
Oh well!
It still doesn't fit today and I don't think anyone has ever noticed it.
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP Flying
http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm
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: | [ John Foy ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
--> RV-List message posted by: Email List Photo Shares <pictures@matronics.com>
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: John Foy <foyboy6@hot.rr.com>
Subject:
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/foyboy6@hot.rr.com.03.09.2003/index.html
o Main Photo Share Index
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
o Submitting a Photo Share
If you wish to submit a Photo Share of your own, please include the
following information along with your email message and files:
1) Email List or Lists that they are related to:
2) Your Full Name:
3) Your Email Address:
4) One line Subject description:
5) Multi-line, multi-paragraph description of topic:
6) One-line Description of each photo or file:
Email the information above and your files and photos to:
pictures@matronics.com
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: JNice51355@aol.com
Folks
Did anybody receive a Zip file under the subject heading "Of Service" from
rv-list@matronics.com??? I did, and I am apprehensive about opening zip
files that do not have any messages with them.
Jim Nice
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: Flap/Aileron gap |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Marvel <bmarvel@cox.net>
Geoff:
> After mounting the control
> surfaces, I discovered that the flap/aileron gap is about 3/32" wider than the
> 1/4" specified on the plans. I think this happened because when I drilled the
> flap hinges, I measured the gap with the ailerons positioned as far inboard as
> they would go, thinking that this would insure a *minimum* of 1/4" gap.
The plans with my QB showed a set of spacers/washers to be used to postion the
ailerons correctly regarding inboard/outboard location. Did you get the same
info? If not, I don't think it is a big deal.
> I realize that the larger gaps will cause a drag penalty (hopefully
> negligible), but the real question is will the inboard ends of the flaps
> interfere with the fuselage since I now know they are 3/32" farther inboard
> then they need to be.
No way in hades are you going to detect any speed difference. This is like an
extra hair on the left hind leg of a flea. No biggie. As to the flaps, the truth
is that you cannot fit them until and unless the wings are installed. You have
to
cut quite a bit off of the inboard section of the flaps to get them to match the
contour of the fuselage. This can only be done with the wings installed, and is
an iterative process. I think I made about 10 cuts on the upper inboard surface
of the flaps before I got a good match to the fuselage. 3/32 of an inch is a joke
-- you'll be cutting off more like an inch and a half.
> I'm obviously a long way from mounting the wings, but if I'm going to have to
> re-drill the flap hinges, I'd rather do it now as opposed to later.
Don't worry about the flaps until you mount the wings. Once they are mounted,
you
will have the geometry pinned down that the flaps have to fit. Trim the flap
inboard ends accordingly. You do not have to re-drill anything. Don't even think
about doing that.
Bill Marvel
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! --
|