Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:43 AM - Re: Primer line question (Jim Jewell)
2. 06:44 AM - Re: proper torque for a AN509-10R16 screw (Scott Bilinski)
3. 06:44 AM - Re: Gyros (Doug Rozendaal)
4. 07:03 AM - leaky fuel tank (Aircraft Technical Book Company)
5. 07:06 AM - Re: ICOM A-200 (was Micro Air radio) (Jack Lockamy)
6. 07:30 AM - Retractable Steps (Rodney Woodard)
7. 08:13 AM - Re: Gyros (kempthornes)
8. 08:14 AM - Re: Primer line question (JDaniel343@aol.com)
9. 08:20 AM - Primer fittings (Wheeler North)
10. 08:31 AM - Re: Primer line question (DWENSING@aol.com)
11. 08:43 AM - Re: Retractable Steps (mitchf@netscape.com (Mitchell Faatz))
12. 08:54 AM - Outstanding RV-4 for sale (Doug Weiler)
13. 09:00 AM - Re: Which engine setup? (Stucklen, Frederic IFC)
14. 09:11 AM - Re: Primer line question (JDaniel343@aol.com)
15. 09:21 AM - Re: Prop Failure research (Rhett Westerman)
16. 09:23 AM - Outstanding RV-4 for sale (Doug Weiler)
17. 09:36 AM - More playing on the computer (Chris W)
18. 09:37 AM - Re: proper torque for a AN509-10R16 screw (Cy Galley)
19. 09:38 AM - test -- delete now (Chris W)
20. 09:44 AM - Re: Which engine setup? (Joshua Siler)
21. 09:58 AM - Re: Retractable Steps (Rodney Woodard)
22. 10:06 AM - Re: Primer line question (Cy Galley)
23. 10:14 AM - Retractable Steps (John)
24. 10:20 AM - Re: Primer line question (DAVID REEL)
25. 10:22 AM - Re: Prop Failure research (Kyle Boatright)
26. 10:22 AM - Re: Which engine setup? (Kyle Boatright)
27. 12:19 PM - Whelen lighting. (Dana Overall)
28. 12:20 PM - Re: leaky fuel tank (Vince Himsl)
29. 12:23 PM - Re: Primer fittings (HCRV6@aol.com)
30. 12:30 PM - Primer line question (HCRV6@aol.com)
31. 01:01 PM - Re: Retractable Steps (Wayne Reese)
32. 01:14 PM - Re: Retractable Steps (Jerry Springer)
33. 01:53 PM - Re: Retractable Steps (Rob Prior)
34. 02:39 PM - Re: leaky fuel tank (Elsa & Henry)
35. 02:43 PM - Fuel tank rivet leak (John)
36. 02:55 PM - Re: Prop test results posted (Rhett Westerman)
37. 03:58 PM - Re: Prop test results posted (van Bladeren, Ron)
38. 05:06 PM - Another builder! (Michael Saffold)
39. 05:35 PM - Re: Retractable Steps (Richard Scott)
40. 05:49 PM - Re: Prop test results posted (Dave Bristol)
41. 06:12 PM - 9th Annual Twin Cities RV Forum (Doug Weiler)
42. 06:13 PM - Re: leaky fuel tank (Denis Walsh)
43. 06:15 PM - Re: Prop test results posted (Jaye and Scott Jackson)
44. 07:19 PM - Re: Re: RV-List RV GRIN (Why) (Dave Bristol)
45. 08:43 PM - Re: Retractable Steps (Rodney Woodard)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Primer line question |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>
Hi GV,
I also used the thick wall silver soldered stainless tubes.
The application of primer fittings and lines into the unused injector ports
on carbureted engines is an alternate choice for the primer system location.
Some of the presumed advantages would be shorter lines, easier installation,
inspection and maintenance.
For the anal tendency types like me, all four cylinders can be primed.
The injector ports offer no perceived or proven advantage over the standard
lower primer mountings for priming and starting efficiency.
The whole primer system is in open view and reach once the upper cowling is
removed. Unless of course there is a plenum installed.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: <Vanremog@aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Primer line question
> --> RV-List message posted by: Vanremog@aol.com
>
> In a message dated 4/10/2003 4:03:01 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
HCRV6@aol.com
> writes:
>
> > Can anyone tell me if the 1/8" seamless stainless tubing with 0.035"
wall
> > that ACS sells is the right stuff to use for primer lines?
>
> Harry-
>
> That's what I used and it is properly silver soldered to the cone union
> fittings.
>
> I don't understand the comment from someone regarding putting primer
fittings
> into the upper cylinder ports. Why?
>
> -GV (RV-6A N1GV 596hrs)
> No ancient folk tale quotes from the bible appended here, just random
> musings:
> News flash cavemen and cavewomen, there are no gods.
> The earth is not the center of the universe.
> You will never be closer to heaven than you are right now.
> Try to enjoy the one life you have and be nice to one another, you won't
get
> another chance.
>
>
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: proper torque for a AN509-10R16 screw |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Where do you find friction torque values?
At 01:31 AM 4/11/03 -0500, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Point <jpoint@mindspring.com>
>
>Karie,
>
>http://www1.faa.gov/avr/afs/300/pdf/2u-ch7_2.pdf
>http://www1.faa.gov/avr/afs/300/pdf/2v-ch7_3.pdf
>
>AN509 are structural screws and use the same torque as AN3 bolts (20-25
>in-lbs.)
>
>I find that a Dremel tool with a cut-off wheel works the best for
>cutting Fglass, but snips can also be used.
>
>Jeff Point
>RV-6 FWF
>Milwaukee WI
>
>Karie Daniel wrote:
>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: "Karie Daniel" <karie4@attbi.com>
>>
>>I can't seem to locate on any torque chart the proper torque for a
>AN509-10R16 screw. This screw holds in the counterbalance weight in the top
>of the rudder for the RV-7 and 9. Also, what is the best method for cutting
>the fiberglass piece that fits the bottom of the rudder. It looks like I
>just follow the line but I'm not sure what to cut it with.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Karie Daniel
>> RV-7A
>> Sammamish, WA
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr@petroblend.com>
I will take a stab at this one Alex,
My experience is lubricating larger roller or ball bearings that you would
find in wheels or other machinery. I can not say that this applies to gyro
bearings, but I think it would.
When a bearing sits in one position the oil or grease that prevents metal to
metal contact migrates from between the two surfaces. The heating and
cooling cycles will create microscopic amounts of moisture in these areas.
This moisture will start corrosion that will look like a gray stripe or spot
on the race, depending on if you have roller or ball bearings. This
corrosion will start the cycle of failure. You will see this packing a
wheel bearing that has not failed as 2 or 3 stripes on the race. These
bearing will last for a while, but ultimately they will fail.
Farmers have a terrible time with this on combines. These machines only
operate for 60 days in the fall and then sit in unheated hi-humidity storage
for the remaining 10 months per year. Most of these machines have "sealed"
(which really means permanently lubricated) bearings, but it is still a
problem.
I repeat, I do not know if this applies to gyros. I do know it applies to
aircraft wheel bearings, and my guess is the failure mode is the same for
gyro bearings.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
Subject: RV-List: Gyros
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
>
> >
> > I wonder if the culprit isn't that the bearings sit for years, loaded
> > but not moving, while we build. I have been told that this kills gyro
> > bearings. The rollers/balls make tiny impressions in the
> > races. Maybe we need to rotate the wheels periodically? What
> > do you all think? Jim Bean RV-8 engine stuff
>
> I'm sorry, and I mean no disrespect to Jim, but what he has heard is
> junk science. Bearings don't simply "go soft" and allow the balls to
> make dents while they sit on a shelf. This stuff about gyros goes on
> and on, and comes up on the list about every six months. The most
> likely problem is crappy bearings coming from the factory. We need to
> apply judgement here - yes, it is still allowed. If someone told us the
> wing spar might break if our planes our not flown occasionally, would be
> believe it? Come on, apply critical thinking - some amount of
> skepticism can go a long way. Some of what we hear about gyros belongs
> in the cold fusion junkheap.
>
> Often, I have heard that oil "draining out" of the bearings is a big
> culprit, but is this reasonable? These gyros spin at rediculous rpms,
> and if oil could simply fall out of the bearings, what would happen to
> the oil under the g loads at 20 thousand rpms, or whatever these things
> spin at? I suspect there are many gyros out there that are older than I
> that have spun billions of revolutions without problems. Generally and
> generically speaking, bearings either fail quite early or go a long,
> long time. Early failures are usually craftsmanship problems.
>
> Maybe I'm full of crap, but I'd like to hear some sort of scientifically
> valid theories on some of this stuff, theories that can hold up to known
> engineering truths.
>
> Fire away -
>
> Alex Peterson
> Maple Grove, MN
> RV6-A N66AP 291 hours
> www.rvforum.org
> www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
>
>
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: "Aircraft Technical Book Company" <winterland@rkymtnhi.com>
After 5 years, the left tank on my -6 has developed a couple minor leaks at
a couple rivets. Not bad enough to be losing fuel or pose a danger, but
they are ugly and seepage from one is starting to remove some paint.
It's time to pull the tank and fix them, and while doing so, its probably a
good time to get rid of all the old sloshing compound, thats not flaking
yet, but probably will in the not to distant future.
Got a question about resealing those about-to-be-cut 5" diameter holes in
the rear tank baffle. It seems the "standard way" is to rivet in a
reinforcing ring and then attach a cover plate to it. I don't understand
why. Why not just take a 6" plate and proseal it over the 5" hole. A lot
less work and a lot fewer seams where new leaks can develop. What am I
missing?
Andy
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: ICOM A-200 (was Micro Air radio) |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy@att.net>
Speaking of the ICOM-A200 VHF Panel Mount radio..... I just ordered a SECOND one
from Global Aviation - Australia.... $650 plus FEDEX shipping to my front door.
Total price.... $700! Outstanding radio with a max. of 7 watts of output
power. I believe the Micro-Air radio and most others only put out about 5 watts.
Yes, the first radio is still working fine. At this price I have decided to get
myself a second COMM radio for some added flexibility in the cockpit and as
a present to myself. :-).
I can't say enough great things about these radios or Tom Boyd at Global Air.
You can see this special offer on the ICOM-A200 at: www.globalav.com.au.
Jack Lockamy
Camarillo, CA
RV-7A N174JL reserved
www.jacklockamy.com
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: | Retractable Steps |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Rodney Woodard" <rodney@woodardfamily.com>
Hello Listers,
I'm subscribed to the list again. Wooohooo! I've been
posting/participating on and off for just a little over 7 years. Wow,
how time flys! I now laugh that my first post was the standard "can I
learn to fly a tailwheel". Since that time, I built the tail and part of
RV-8 kit #80033, owned an Aeronca Champ and an RV-3. Enough of the
memory lane stuff.
I'm helping a friend (Russ Kamtz) get started in business selling and
marketing a retractable step kit for RVs. I've created a web page for
Russ and told him I would help get the word out. Check out the web page
at:
www.stepupaviation.com
I'm still s-l-o-w-l-y plugging away at my RV-3 kit. I'm hoping that real
progress can be made in May when my schedule changes somewhat.
Best regards to all,
Rod Woodard (webmaster & techno-geek for Step Up)
Northern Colorado
RV-3 #11339 in progress
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: kempthornes <kempthornes@earthlink.net>
Alex, Doug,
You must be about right, Doug. I once worked for a large forest products
company. They required all log trucks to be unloaded before being left to
sit such as overnight. They claimed it was because wheel bearings on the
trailers failed if left sitting under full loads - that you could see the
markings. I thought this ridiculous in view of the pounding those bearings
must take on rough (very rough) logging roads. But, when rolling, the
balls or rollers are riding on oil, not metal!
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK flying!
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
At 08:39 AM 4/11/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr@petroblend.com>
>
>I will take a stab at this one Alex,
>
>My experience is lubricating larger roller or ball bearings that you would
>find in wheels or other machinery. I can not say that this applies to gyro
>bearings, but I think it would.
>
>When a bearing sits in one position the oil or grease that prevents metal to
>metal contact migrates from between the two surfaces. The heating and
>cooling cycles will create microscopic amounts of moisture in these areas.
>This moisture will start corrosion that will look like a gray stripe or spot
>on the race, depending on if you have roller or ball bearings. This
>corrosion will start the cycle of failure. You will see this packing a
>wheel bearing that has not failed as 2 or 3 stripes on the race. These
>bearing will last for a while, but ultimately they will fail.
>
>Farmers have a terrible time with this on combines. These machines only
>operate for 60 days in the fall and then sit in unheated hi-humidity storage
>for the remaining 10 months per year. Most of these machines have "sealed"
>(which really means permanently lubricated) bearings, but it is still a
>problem.
>
>I repeat, I do not know if this applies to gyros. I do know it applies to
>aircraft wheel bearings, and my guess is the failure mode is the same for
>gyro bearings.
>
>Tailwinds,
>Doug Rozendaal
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RV-List: Gyros
>
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
> >
> > >
> > > I wonder if the culprit isn't that the bearings sit for years, loaded
> > > but not moving, while we build. I have been told that this kills gyro
> > > bearings. The rollers/balls make tiny impressions in the
> > > races. Maybe we need to rotate the wheels periodically? What
> > > do you all think? Jim Bean RV-8 engine stuff
> >
> > I'm sorry, and I mean no disrespect to Jim, but what he has heard is
> > junk science. Bearings don't simply "go soft" and allow the balls to
> > make dents while they sit on a shelf. This stuff about gyros goes on
> > and on, and comes up on the list about every six months. The most
> > likely problem is crappy bearings coming from the factory. We need to
> > apply judgement here - yes, it is still allowed. If someone told us the
> > wing spar might break if our planes our not flown occasionally, would be
> > believe it? Come on, apply critical thinking - some amount of
> > skepticism can go a long way. Some of what we hear about gyros belongs
> > in the cold fusion junkheap.
> >
> > Often, I have heard that oil "draining out" of the bearings is a big
> > culprit, but is this reasonable? These gyros spin at rediculous rpms,
> > and if oil could simply fall out of the bearings, what would happen to
> > the oil under the g loads at 20 thousand rpms, or whatever these things
> > spin at? I suspect there are many gyros out there that are older than I
> > that have spun billions of revolutions without problems. Generally and
> > generically speaking, bearings either fail quite early or go a long,
> > long time. Early failures are usually craftsmanship problems.
> >
> > Maybe I'm full of crap, but I'd like to hear some sort of scientifically
> > valid theories on some of this stuff, theories that can hold up to known
> > engineering truths.
> >
> > Fire away -
> >
> > Alex Peterson
> > Maple Grove, MN
> > RV6-A N66AP 291 hours
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: Primer line question |
--> RV-List message posted by: JDaniel343@aol.com
I used flare and compression fittings. Remember to use steel steel fittings in
this area, aluminum is a no-NO.
John Danielson
RV-6 140 HRS
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North <wnorth@sdccd.cc.ca.us>
Look up in your AN/MS charts.
These fittings are Type "A" fittings, as opposed to Type "B" fitting most
commonly used today.
Lycoming factory lines are SS, but, there are exceptions that I have seen in
many aircraft where copper was used, apparently from Lycoming.
Mine is set up with SS to the common line that is then adel clamped to one
of the hold down lugs for the governor pad (O-360). I went to -2 hose to the
firewall, and then to -2 Type B hdw. Lycoming often only primes 2 or 3
cylinders as well. I used a 1/8 pipe thread brass fitting to connect the
Type A to Type B as they both have those fittings in common, and I just
happened to have that mess in my pocket at the time.
Type A fittings come on and off with deep six point socket. Tape the fitting
threads to protect. A bent 12 pt box wrench with a small (3/16) slot cut
into it works very well for the line fittings.
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: Primer line question |
--> RV-List message posted by: DWENSING@aol.com
In a message dated 4/11/03 11:21:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
JDaniel343@aol.com writes:
> I used flare and compression fittings.
How were you able to connect to the nozzle cones using flare or compression
fittings?
Dale Ensing
do not archive
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: | Re: Retractable Steps |
--> RV-List message posted by: mitchf@netscape.com (Mitchell Faatz)
Hey Rod -
Maybe you could have your friend elaborate on the "noticed speed
improvements" part of this website. The induced drag from steps was
been calculated (in nauseating and wonderful detail) at .3 MPH (that's
for two steps at 185 mpg) which you can find in the archives.
Mitch Faatz RV-6A Finish Kit Auburn, CA
Rodney Woodard wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Rodney Woodard" <rodney@woodardfamily.com>
>
>Hello Listers,
>
>I'm subscribed to the list again. Wooohooo! I've been
>posting/participating on and off for just a little over 7 years. Wow,
>how time flys! I now laugh that my first post was the standard "can I
>learn to fly a tailwheel". Since that time, I built the tail and part of
>RV-8 kit #80033, owned an Aeronca Champ and an RV-3. Enough of the
>memory lane stuff.
>
>I'm helping a friend (Russ Kamtz) get started in business selling and
>marketing a retractable step kit for RVs. I've created a web page for
>Russ and told him I would help get the word out. Check out the web page
>at:
>
>www.stepupaviation.com
>
>I'm still s-l-o-w-l-y plugging away at my RV-3 kit. I'm hoping that real
>progress can be made in May when my schedule changes somewhat.
>
>Best regards to all,
>
>Rod Woodard (webmaster & techno-geek for Step Up)
>Northern Colorado
>RV-3 #11339 in progress
>
>
>
>
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: | Outstanding RV-4 for sale |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Weiler" <dougweil@pressenter.com>
Fellow Listers:
I am finally (after only 12 years of construction) nearing the point where
my RV-4 (N722DW) will soon be completed. So, with spring in the air, I feel
it is time to part with my "flying" RV-4, N464EM. This is probably one of
the best examples in the country. I have owned it for 2 1/2 years, and
flown it right at 200 hours. I intend to officially part with it in May
after the annual is completed. All the details are at this website. If
anyone is interested, or knows of someone who is, please let me know.
Thanks
Doug Weiler
pres, MN Wing
Hudson, WI
dougweil@pressenter.com
http://www.pressenter.com/~dougweil/N464EM/index.htm
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: Which engine setup? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <Fred.Stucklen@UTCFuelCells.com>
Bobby,
For most flying East of the Mississippi, an O-320 with a fixed pitch prop
is fine. Putting a constant speed up front gives you a lot of short/grass
field capability.... Save you money for the panel....
But they do require 100 Oct fuel. I've know some whom have put in hi-test
auto gas, but don't know how they faired over the long haul....
Fred Stucklen
RV-6A N926RV Reserved
RV-6A N925RV 2008 Hrs of great times!
--> RV-List message posted by: Bobby Hester
Ok, I've been thinking that I would go with a Brand new
0-360 from Van's
with fixed metal prop, but an offer of a 0-timed rebuilt
0-320 engine
has come up. Which would be the better setup 0-360 fixed
pitch prop or
0-320 constant speed prop and some money left for instrument
panel
goodies? Can I use auto fuel with the 0-320? What are the
good point and
the bad? Any help appreciated!
--
Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
Visit my web site at:
<http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/>
RV7A Slowbuild wings-QB Fuse :-)
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: Primer line question |
--> RV-List message posted by: JDaniel343@aol.com
Mine is a carburated engine.
John Danielson
RV-6
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: | Prop Failure research |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Rhett Westerman" <Rhettwesterman@cox.net>
BV,
Sorry to hear of your prop failure. I have owned two Aymar-demuth props and
can say that in my opinion they are the best wood props on the market bar
none. Best in construction and performance.
Wood props like any other props need the proper care. If nicks etc. are not
corrected incidents like yours do turn up. I mention this as I would guess
that most if not all wood prop failures by reputable makers occur due to
improper maintenance.
Aymar-demuth is also very fair in their business dealings. I suggest
speaking to them about how to move forward as I am sure they will work with
you. A legal approach with them is sure not to receive the same warm
welcome.
best,
Rhett
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Vaughn Brock
Capt ESC/AWXO
Subject: RV-List: Prop Failure research
--> RV-List message posted by: Vaughn Brock Capt ESC/AWXO
<Brock.Vaughn@hanscom.af.mil>
AYMAR DEMUTH PROP FAILURE.
I am searching for any information about Aymar DeMuth prop failures. As of
today I know of two. One can be found on the NTSB site involving a RV-4 and
the other was me in an RV-3 which will post to the NTSB in 60 days. The
reputation of Mr DeMuth precedes him. I understand he has denied any
responsibility and liability for what is clear evidence of delaminating
through inadequate technique or manufacturing. I am looking for any fact
based data to document any prop failures.
I realize most experimental incidents go unreported due to various reasons
(lack of time to file, lack of knowledge of procedures to file, not knowing
who to contact, fear of FAA etc). I would speculate there are several prop
failures that are out there and I would like to learn of them. Particularly
Aymar DeMuth props. Rest assured, that there is no repercussion for
surviving a prop failure and not reporting it to the FAA and my purpose is
to simply scope the size of the problem.
The facts are my prop failed at 10,500 feet and shook enough to instantly
rip the spinner off. I was above a broken cloud deck and could not see the
ground clearly. I declared an emergency with NY approach and the controller
vectored me to the closest airport 8 miles away. I landed without event or
damage (other than the prop and spinner).
Put yourself in my position. Would you have made it? If so, would your
wife let you keep the plane after the fact? Do you have the disposable
income to buy a prop and press on? Is the risk of doubling your insurance
premium for the next 10 years sound like the solution?
I would like to write how well the prop worked and increased the top end by
18 knots and only lost 700 FPM climb performance. Unfortunately the prop
delaminated and failed.
BV
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: | Outstanding RV-4 for sale |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Weiler" <dougweil@pressenter.com>
If this is a repeat post, forgive me. I don't think the first attempt
worked...
Fellow Listers:
I am finally (after only 12 years of construction) nearing the point where
my RV-4 (N722DW) will soon be completed. So, with spring in the air, I feel
it is time to part with my "flying" RV-4, N464EM. This is probably one of
the best examples in the country. I have owned it for 2 1/2 years, and
flown it right at 200 hours. I intend to officially part with it in May
after the annual is completed. All the details are at this website. If
anyone is interested, or knows of someone who is, please let me know.
Thanks
Doug Weiler
pres, MN Wing
Hudson, WI
dougweil@pressenter.com
http://www.pressenter.com/~dougweil/N464EM/index.htm
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: | More playing on the computer |
--> RV-List message posted by: Chris W <chrisw3@cox.net>
Well I was playing on my computer and thought I would post this in case
anyone finds it usefull. It's a graphical reference for inch to mm to
numbered size drills.
http://cdw.homelinux.com:8088/chart.pdf
--
Chris Woodhouse
3147 SW 127th St.
Oklahoma City, OK 73170
405-691-5206
chrisw@programmer.net
N35 20.492'
W97 34.342'
"They that can give up essential liberty
to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 Historical Review of Pennsylvania
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: | Re: proper torque for a AN509-10R16 screw |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
http://av-info.faa.gov/dst/43-13/Ch_07-03.doc
Cy Galley - Bellanca Champion Club
Newsletter Editor & EAA TC
www.bellanca-championclub.com
We support Aeroncas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Bilinski" <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: proper torque for a AN509-10R16 screw
> --> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>
> Where do you find friction torque values?
>
>
> At 01:31 AM 4/11/03 -0500, you wrote:
> >--> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Point <jpoint@mindspring.com>
> >
> >Karie,
> >
> >http://www1.faa.gov/avr/afs/300/pdf/2u-ch7_2.pdf
> >http://www1.faa.gov/avr/afs/300/pdf/2v-ch7_3.pdf
> >
> >AN509 are structural screws and use the same torque as AN3 bolts (20-25
> >in-lbs.)
> >
> >I find that a Dremel tool with a cut-off wheel works the best for
> >cutting Fglass, but snips can also be used.
> >
> >Jeff Point
> >RV-6 FWF
> >Milwaukee WI
> >
> >Karie Daniel wrote:
> >
> >>--> RV-List message posted by: "Karie Daniel" <karie4@attbi.com>
> >>
> >>I can't seem to locate on any torque chart the proper torque for a
> >AN509-10R16 screw. This screw holds in the counterbalance weight in the
top
> >of the rudder for the RV-7 and 9. Also, what is the best method for
cutting
> >the fiberglass piece that fits the bottom of the rudder. It looks like I
> >just follow the line but I'm not sure what to cut it with.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Karie Daniel
> >> RV-7A
> >> Sammamish, WA
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> Scott Bilinski
> Eng dept 305
> Phone (858) 657-2536
> Pager (858) 502-5190
>
>
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: | test -- delete now |
--> RV-List message posted by: Chris W <chrisw3@cox.net>
do not archive do not archive do not archive
my last message didn't seem to go through so this is just a test.
--
Chris Woodhouse
3147 SW 127th St.
Oklahoma City, OK 73170
405-691-5206
chrisw@programmer.net
N35 20.492'
W97 34.342'
"They that can give up essential liberty
to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 Historical Review of Pennsylvania
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: | Which engine setup? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Joshua Siler" <joshs@ninatek.com>
I think the O-360 will get you better resale, and it gives you an
opportunity to slowly build up your avionics over time as finances allow.
It's hard to incrementally improve your engine once it's under the cowl!
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bobby Hester
--> RV-List message posted by: Bobby Hester <bhester@hopkinsville.net>
Ok, I've been thinking that I would go with a Brand new 0-360 from Van's
with fixed metal prop, but an offer of a 0-timed rebuilt 0-320 engine
has come up. Which would be the better setup 0-360 fixed pitch prop or
0-320 constant speed prop and some money left for instrument panel
goodies? Can I use auto fuel with the 0-320? What are the good point and
the bad? Any help appreciated!
--
Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
RV7A Slowbuild wings-QB Fuse :-)
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: | Retractable Steps |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Rodney Woodard" <rodney.woodard@attbi.com>
Russ and I talked about whether or not to include the language about a
speed improvement. I warned him about questions like this! :-) There are
so many variables involved in speed that he's not going to say a
specific number. I would say that it's a small enough improvement that
it'd be within the "measurement error" in any type of actual, in-the-air
testing.
Mostly, Russ is kind of a cross between a hot-rodder and a gadget freak.
When pushed, he'll admit that there is no rational reason to have
retractable steps. They're just "trick." Have 'em or don't have 'em.
That's the beauty of homebuilding. He has retractable steps on his -6A
for the same reason he had remote-controlled door openers on his '34
Ford hot rod.
Best regards,
Rod Woodard for
www.stepupaviation.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Mitchell Faatz
> Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 9:41 AM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Retractable Steps
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: mitchf@netscape.com (Mitchell Faatz)
>
> Hey Rod -
>
> Maybe you could have your friend elaborate on the "noticed speed
> improvements" part of this website. The induced drag from steps was
> been calculated (in nauseating and wonderful detail) at .3
> MPH (that's
> for two steps at 185 mpg) which you can find in the archives.
>
> Mitch Faatz RV-6A Finish Kit Auburn, CA
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: Primer line question |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
Why are you against aluminum fittings that are used my most certified
airplanes?
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: <JDaniel343@aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Primer line question
> --> RV-List message posted by: JDaniel343@aol.com
>
> I used flare and compression fittings. Remember to use steel steel
fittings in this area, aluminum is a no-NO.
> John Danielson
> RV-6 140 HRS
>
>
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: | Retractable Steps |
--> RV-List message posted by: "John" <n1cxo320@salidaco.com>
As to speed change.... I hesitated for a long time before installing steps
on my RV6A because of the "reported" loss of speed....I finally got tired of
jumping off the wing, so I installed Van's standard steps, and have yet to
notice ANY speed reduction....it may be there, but without scientific
equipment to accurately measure it, any loss cannot be detected by the usual
GPS or TAS instruments.
FWIW
John at Salida, 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: | Re: Primer line question |
--> RV-List message posted by: "DAVID REEL" <dreel@cox.net>
Tony Bingellis on P68 of Firewall Forward recommends 1/8" aluminum. My AI sources
say certificated AC mostly use copper. The fitting AC spruce sells for attaching
the line to the spray ports at the engine end of the line is brass & may
silver solder onto 1/8" copper line the best. I elected to use copper which
AC Spruce also sells by the way.
Dave Reel RV8A
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: Prop Failure research |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Kyle Boatright" <kyle.boatright@adelphia.net>
Brock,
Welcome to the RV-list and congratulations on your safe landing. Certainly a
good outcome all things considered.
A few questions, mainly because I own an Aymar/Demuth prop:
1) Have you spoken with anyone from Aymar/Demuth? Your post doesn't make
that clear.
2) How carefully did you inspect your prop between flights? Could you have
missed damage or a crack that was beginning to form?
3) What type inspection was done that made it clear that there was a
manufacturing problem? Was the inspector qualified to make that
determination? The Forest Products Lab might be a good place to find a
qualified inspector.
To answer your question, no, I am not aware of any failures of A/D props.
In fact, A/D was recommended to me by both Mark Freidricks of Team Rocket
and Tom Green of Van's as a top supplier of wooden props. I've been flying
behind mine for about 200 hours over the course of the last two years, one
month, and 9 days (but who's counting) and I have not had any problems.
KB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vaughn Brock Capt ESC/AWXO" <Brock.Vaughn@hanscom.af.mil>
Subject: RV-List: Prop Failure research
> --> RV-List message posted by: Vaughn Brock Capt ESC/AWXO
<Brock.Vaughn@hanscom.af.mil>
>
> AYMAR DEMUTH PROP FAILURE.
> I am searching for any information about Aymar DeMuth prop failures. As
of
> today I know of two. One can be found on the NTSB site involving a RV-4
and
> the other was me in an RV-3 which will post to the NTSB in 60 days. The
> reputation of Mr DeMuth precedes him. I understand he has denied any
> responsibility and liability for what is clear evidence of delaminating
> through inadequate technique or manufacturing. I am looking for any fact
> based data to document any prop failures.
>
> I realize most experimental incidents go unreported due to various reasons
> (lack of time to file, lack of knowledge of procedures to file, not
knowing
> who to contact, fear of FAA etc). I would speculate there are several
prop
> failures that are out there and I would like to learn of them.
Particularly
> Aymar DeMuth props. Rest assured, that there is no repercussion for
> surviving a prop failure and not reporting it to the FAA and my purpose is
> to simply scope the size of the problem.
>
> The facts are my prop failed at 10,500 feet and shook enough to instantly
> rip the spinner off. I was above a broken cloud deck and could not see
the
> ground clearly. I declared an emergency with NY approach and the
controller
> vectored me to the closest airport 8 miles away. I landed without event
or
> damage (other than the prop and spinner).
>
> Put yourself in my position. Would you have made it? If so, would your
> wife let you keep the plane after the fact? Do you have the disposable
> income to buy a prop and press on? Is the risk of doubling your insurance
> premium for the next 10 years sound like the solution?
>
> I would like to write how well the prop worked and increased the top end
by
> 18 knots and only lost 700 FPM climb performance. Unfortunately the prop
> delaminated and failed.
>
> BV
>
>
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: Which engine setup? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Kyle Boatright" <kyle.boatright@adelphia.net>
Bobby,
You will get better all-around performance with the O-320/CS setup. In
particular, your takeoff and low speed (say under 120 mph) climb performance
will be better because your little 'ol 160 hp engine will be generating 160
hp. An 0-360 running a fixed pitch prop will be well below the engine's
rated RPM and horsepower at low speed, and will deliver less effective power
than the 0-320/CS.
At the top end, you might lose a few mph with the 0-320, but you'll have a
better climbing, more efficient machine, and I doubt you'll miss the extra 5
mph.
You'll probably need to use avgas on both engines, assuming they both have
the 8.5:1 compression ratio. Sure, you can usually get away with high octane
auto fuel, but on a hot day and/or at high altitude, auto fuel gives you a
much higher chance of vapor lock. What's $1.25 more a gallon when it is
your derriere' on the line?
This advice is worth every bit of what you paid for it...
KB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bobby Hester" <bhester@hopkinsville.net>
Subject: RV-List: Which engine setup?
> --> RV-List message posted by: Bobby Hester <bhester@hopkinsville.net>
>
> Ok, I've been thinking that I would go with a Brand new 0-360 from Van's
> with fixed metal prop, but an offer of a 0-timed rebuilt 0-320 engine
> has come up. Which would be the better setup 0-360 fixed pitch prop or
> 0-320 constant speed prop and some money left for instrument panel
> goodies? Can I use auto fuel with the 0-320? What are the good point and
> the bad? Any help appreciated!
>
> --
> Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
> Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
> RV7A Slowbuild wings-QB Fuse :-)
>
>
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: | Whelen lighting. |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dana Overall" <bo124rs@hotmail.com>
OK, since I am going to doing the fiberglass work on all my tips while
waiting for my next shipment from Van's I've got some lighting questions.
Van's sell units with one power supply or two power supplies. The guy at
the Whelen booth at SNF told me if I run all three lights off one power
supply, the wingtips will flash simultaneously and the rudder strobe will
flash separate. If I go with two power supplies, it is my understanding
that both wingtips will flash alternating and the rudder light will flash
simultaneously with one of the wing tip strobes that I couple it with. It
looks to me like simultaneous wingtip flashing will "only" provide 380 cp
instead of the legal 400 cp. In which case it would only come into play if
something would happen at night and my insurnance really was in the screwing
mood.
Am I thinking correctly or have I done way too many tax returns here lately
and am just looking to spend extra money with multiple power supplies??
Dana Overall
Richmond, KY
RV-7 slider/fuselage
http://rvflying.tripod.com
do not archive
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Vince Himsl" <vhimsl@turbonet.com>
Suggest you check archives for tank leak repair technique submitted by Scott McDaniels
from Van's regarding fixing leaks
without cutting a hole in the rear baffle. In short it involves removing the
leaking rivets and then using the same pop
rivets you used for the baffle (with some sealant)to seal the hole. Some bondo
to hide the fact it is a pop and you're
good to go. Might save you a lot of grief and hassle.
Regards,
Vince Himsl
RV-8 Fuselage/Finish
--> RV-List message posted by: "Aircraft Technical Book Company" <winterland@rkymtnhi.com>
After 5 years, the left tank on my -6 has developed a couple minor leaks at
a couple rivets. N..........about resealing those about-to-be-cut 5" diameter
holes in
the rear tank baffle. It seems the "standard way" .....What am I
missing?
Andy
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: Primer fittings |
--> RV-List message posted by: HCRV6@aol.com
In a message dated 4/11/03 8:25:22 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
wnorth@sdccd.cc.ca.us writes:
<< Look up in your AN/MS charts.
These fittings are Type "A" fittings, as opposed to Type "B" fitting most
commonly used today. >>
Thanks Wheeler, I think. Now can you shed some more light on the Type "A"
and Type "B" fittings issue. I checked my parts catalogs and Standard
Aircraft Handbook and can't find any reference to these descriptions. Where
should I look to get more educated on this?
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, firewall forward
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: | Primer line question |
--> RV-List message posted by: HCRV6@aol.com
Thanks everyone who responded to my questions.
Do not archive
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, firewall forward
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: | Retractable Steps |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Wayne Reese" <waynereese@qwest.net>
What mechanism works the step?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rodney Woodard
Subject: RE: RV-List: Retractable Steps
--> RV-List message posted by: "Rodney Woodard"
<rodney.woodard@attbi.com>
Russ and I talked about whether or not to include the language about a
speed improvement. I warned him about questions like this! :-) There are
so many variables involved in speed that he's not going to say a
specific number. I would say that it's a small enough improvement that
it'd be within the "measurement error" in any type of actual, in-the-air
testing.
Mostly, Russ is kind of a cross between a hot-rodder and a gadget freak.
When pushed, he'll admit that there is no rational reason to have
retractable steps. They're just "trick." Have 'em or don't have 'em.
That's the beauty of homebuilding. He has retractable steps on his -6A
for the same reason he had remote-controlled door openers on his '34
Ford hot rod.
Best regards,
Rod Woodard for
www.stepupaviation.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Mitchell Faatz
> Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 9:41 AM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Retractable Steps
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: mitchf@netscape.com (Mitchell Faatz)
>
> Hey Rod -
>
> Maybe you could have your friend elaborate on the "noticed speed
> improvements" part of this website. The induced drag from steps was
> been calculated (in nauseating and wonderful detail) at .3
> MPH (that's
> for two steps at 185 mpg) which you can find in the archives.
>
> Mitch Faatz RV-6A Finish Kit Auburn, CA
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Retractable Steps |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
Wayne Reese wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Wayne Reese" <waynereese@qwest.net>
>
> What mechanism works the step?
>
Just looking at the pictures there are cables that pull the step up as
you slide the slider canopy forwards, least that is what is looks like
to me. What they have inside the step well is not shown and probably for
good reason, everyone would make their own setup without buying his.
Jerry
do not archive
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: Retractable Steps |
--> RV-List message posted by: Rob Prior <rv7@b4.ca>
Jerry Springer wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: "Wayne Reese" <waynereese@qwest.net>
>>What mechanism works the step?
>
> Just looking at the pictures there are cables that pull the step up as
> you slide the slider canopy forwards, least that is what is looks like
> to me. What they have inside the step well is not shown and probably for
> good reason, everyone would make their own setup without buying his.
The photos on the website imply that there are independent cables on
each side... So my question is, what happens when an uninformed
passenger puts his foot on the partially-retracted step as he walks up
to your half-open canopy, thinking it'll support his weight? Is there
some kind of restraint that would prevent a person from twisting or
cracking your canopy?
Neat idea, though... If I wasn't putting the third wheel where it
belonged I might be interested. But you've got me thinking about
automatic canopy openers again... 8-)
-RB4
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: leaky fuel tank |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Elsa & Henry" <elsa-henry@darlor-watch.com>
I remember reading somewhere an article written by Scott McDaniels of Van's
about fixing "weepy" rivets where he used the AD-41-H pop-rivets as used on
the rear baffles. He made a female die to form the heads of those rivets to
a countersink configuration (like CS-4s) by tapping them with a hammer. He
used Pro-seal over the leaky rivets to catch the chips as he drilled them
out and then used the same sealant while pop-riveting the replacements. (If
these were on one of Van's RVs, could it be the use of pro-seal
"Sparingly"?- see my post of 9/4/03 on this thread)
Cheers!! Henry Hore
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: | Fuel tank rivet leak |
--> RV-List message posted by: "John" <n1cxo320@salidaco.com>
If you are searching for the Scott McDaniels 'fix' for a leaking rivet, it
can be found in the archives by searching for: Re: RD-List: fuel leak
John
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: | Prop test results posted |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Rhett Westerman" <Rhettwesterman@cox.net>
Jim,
As this is a forum for us all to learn, including myself, I decided to look
into this more. I have an 0-360 A1A (undampened or undamped)Lycoming and an
MT-MTV-15-B Two blade prop.
I questioned your earlier post about all Lycoming 360 undampened engines
having a prop restriction and asked for the source as I have one that has no
restriction, but your post got my attention as it was contrary to what I was
told and I always like to see something in writing from engineers rather
than opinions. I am also aware that I could have been told something not
true. That and the fact I always learn stuff here. After your many posts
about this in fact being true and the post about the MT three blade prop
with the restriction, I called MT to verify my 0-360 A1A had no RPM
restrictions with the MTV-15 Prop and MT did verify this to be the case.
So not all Lycoming 0-360 with Undampened crankshafts have an RPM
Restriction. My MT 2 blade prop does not have this and there are probably
other MT props without the restriction.
Adds more to the decision making process when selecting the engine prop
combo.
best,
Rhett
--> RV-List message posted by: LeastDrag93066@aol.com
I didn't write 2200 to 2300 RPM. I wrote 2000 to 2300 RPM.
I didn't write all Lycoming engines. I wrote Lycoming 360 engines with a
undampened crankshaft.
(The second definition of dampen is to check or stop. So undampened is one
possible spelling.)
It depends on the propellers response to the undampened crankshaft Lycoming
360 engine.
The MT Propeller engine RPM restriction is 2050 to 2300 RPM.
Applies to all Lycoming 360 engines with undampened crankshaft.
There is NOT a midrange engine RPM restriction on Lycoming 360 engines with
a dampened crankshaft.
Hartzell propellers respond diferently because of the difference in
propeller weight. I don't know the exact RPM range to avoid extended
operation with that propeller (other than somewhere between 2000 to 2300
RPM). It will be documented for each certified engine/propeller
combination.
Jim Ayers
EAA Flight Advisor
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: | Prop test results posted |
--> RV-List message posted by: "van Bladeren, Ron" <rwv@nwnatural.com>
Van's new Hartzell props for the O-360 A1A with the F7496 blades also do not
have the "avoid continuous operation between 2000 to 2250" restriction.
They do however, restrict MAP to 22" or below when in these ranges.
Ron.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rhett Westerman [mailto:Rhettwesterman@cox.net]
Subject: RE: RV-List: Prop test results posted
--> RV-List message posted by: "Rhett Westerman" <Rhettwesterman@cox.net>
Jim,
As this is a forum for us all to learn, including myself, I decided to look
into this more. I have an 0-360 A1A (undampened or undamped)Lycoming and an
MT-MTV-15-B Two blade prop.
I questioned your earlier post about all Lycoming 360 undampened engines
having a prop restriction and asked for the source as I have one that has no
restriction, but your post got my attention as it was contrary to what I was
told and I always like to see something in writing from engineers rather
than opinions. I am also aware that I could have been told something not
true. That and the fact I always learn stuff here. After your many posts
about this in fact being true and the post about the MT three blade prop
with the restriction, I called MT to verify my 0-360 A1A had no RPM
restrictions with the MTV-15 Prop and MT did verify this to be the case.
So not all Lycoming 0-360 with Undampened crankshafts have an RPM
Restriction. My MT 2 blade prop does not have this and there are probably
other MT props without the restriction.
Adds more to the decision making process when selecting the engine prop
combo.
best,
Rhett
--> RV-List message posted by: LeastDrag93066@aol.com
I didn't write 2200 to 2300 RPM. I wrote 2000 to 2300 RPM.
I didn't write all Lycoming engines. I wrote Lycoming 360 engines with a
undampened crankshaft.
(The second definition of dampen is to check or stop. So undampened is one
possible spelling.)
It depends on the propellers response to the undampened crankshaft Lycoming
360 engine.
The MT Propeller engine RPM restriction is 2050 to 2300 RPM.
Applies to all Lycoming 360 engines with undampened crankshaft.
There is NOT a midrange engine RPM restriction on Lycoming 360 engines with
a dampened crankshaft.
Hartzell propellers respond diferently because of the difference in
propeller weight. I don't know the exact RPM range to avoid extended
operation with that propeller (other than somewhere between 2000 to 2300
RPM). It will be documented for each certified engine/propeller
combination.
Jim Ayers
EAA Flight Advisor
Message 38
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Another builder! |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Michael Saffold" <michaelsaffold@hotmail.com>
Hello everyone, after lurking on this and a few other lists I finally took the
plunge and ordered my RV-7 tail!!
I will be building the tail at the week long BuildtoFly Empennage workshop at the
Alaxender Technical Center in Griffon GA. I have lots of questions (no surprise
there) as I prepare for the trip at the end of this month. First off, has
anyone built their tail there? What was your experience? What should I watch
out for?
I would also like to get some opinions on my basic building plan. My shop is pretty
much finished but I plan to order the bulk of my tools after the BuildtoFly
workshop. Hopefully I will have a better Idea of which ones I prefer. I did
already buy a used CP214 rivet squeezerJ. (Can't wait to mash my first rivet!)
I plan on ordering the quick build wings and the slow build fuselage. My thinking
is that with a 7-9 month lead time I won't really save any time ordering
both QB wings and fuse. Why pay for the full quick build if it won't be any quicker?
I hope to be about done with the slow build fuse by the time the QB wings
arrive. Is that a reasonable expectation?
Finally, although I did join the EAA I have yet to attend a meeting here in Phoenix.
I work in healthcare and my schedule is all over the place. I would really
like to hear from builders in the Phoenix area. There is nothing like making
new friends that have common interests. I will post this to the Matronics RV
list and the Yahoo RV-7 list.
Message 39
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Retractable Steps |
--> RV-List message posted by: Richard Scott <rscott@cascadeaccess.com>
But you live in Colorado! There's hardly any air, therefore, no drag! :)
Richard Scott
At 10:11 AM 4/11/03, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "John" <n1cxo320@salidaco.com>
>
>As to speed change.... I hesitated for a long time before installing steps
>on my RV6A because of the "reported" loss of speed....I finally got tired of
>jumping off the wing, so I installed Van's standard steps, and have yet to
>notice ANY speed reduction....it may be there, but without scientific
>equipment to accurately measure it, any loss cannot be detected by the usual
>GPS or TAS instruments.
>
>FWIW
>
>John at Salida, CO
>
>
Message 40
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Prop test results posted |
--> RV-List message posted by: Dave Bristol <bj034@lafn.org>
The RPM/vibration restriction is not an ENGINE restriction it's an engine/prop
COMBINATION restriction.
Many propellers work just fine on the O-360 without restrictions but some
propellers cause a vibration problem with that engine and so, are placarded
against continuous operation in that range.
Dave
EAA Technical Counselor
Rhett Westerman wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Rhett Westerman" <Rhettwesterman@cox.net>
>
> Jim,
>
> As this is a forum for us all to learn, including myself, I decided to look
> into this more. I have an 0-360 A1A (undampened or undamped)Lycoming and an
> MT-MTV-15-B Two blade prop.
>
> I questioned your earlier post about all Lycoming 360 undampened engines
> having a prop restriction and asked for the source as I have one that has no
> restriction, but your post got my attention as it was contrary to what I was
> told and I always like to see something in writing from engineers rather
> than opinions. I am also aware that I could have been told something not
> true. That and the fact I always learn stuff here. After your many posts
> about this in fact being true and the post about the MT three blade prop
> with the restriction, I called MT to verify my 0-360 A1A had no RPM
> restrictions with the MTV-15 Prop and MT did verify this to be the case.
>
> So not all Lycoming 0-360 with Undampened crankshafts have an RPM
> Restriction. My MT 2 blade prop does not have this and there are probably
> other MT props without the restriction.
>
> Adds more to the decision making process when selecting the engine prop
> combo.
>
> best,
>
> Rhett
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: LeastDrag93066@aol.com
>
> I didn't write 2200 to 2300 RPM. I wrote 2000 to 2300 RPM.
> I didn't write all Lycoming engines. I wrote Lycoming 360 engines with a
> undampened crankshaft.
> (The second definition of dampen is to check or stop. So undampened is one
> possible spelling.)
>
> It depends on the propellers response to the undampened crankshaft Lycoming
> 360 engine.
>
> The MT Propeller engine RPM restriction is 2050 to 2300 RPM.
> Applies to all Lycoming 360 engines with undampened crankshaft.
>
> There is NOT a midrange engine RPM restriction on Lycoming 360 engines with
> a dampened crankshaft.
>
> Hartzell propellers respond diferently because of the difference in
> propeller weight. I don't know the exact RPM range to avoid extended
> operation with that propeller (other than somewhere between 2000 to 2300
> RPM). It will be documented for each certified engine/propeller
> combination.
>
> Jim Ayers
> EAA Flight Advisor
>
Message 41
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | 9th Annual Twin Cities RV Forum |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Weiler" <dougweil@pressenter.com>
Fellow Listers:
Time to mark your calendars for the upcoming 9th Annual Twin Cities RV
Forum. Again this day-long event will be held at the Golden Wings Air
Museum at the Anoka County Airport in Minneapolis.
The date is Saturday May 31. Our band of RV shakers and movers are planning
to attend including George and Becki Orndorff, Larry Vetterman, and Jerry
and Judy VanGrunsven and a roster of speakers. Details are at:
www.rvforum.org
Many thanks
Doug Weiler
pres, MN Wing
Message 42
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: leaky fuel tank |
--> RV-List message posted by: Denis Walsh <denis.walsh@attbi.com>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Aircraft Technical Book Company"
> <winterland@rkymtnhi.com>
>
> After 5 years, the left tank on my -6 has developed a couple minor leaks at
> a couple rivets. Not bad enough to be losing fuel or pose a danger, but
> they are ugly and seepage from one is starting to remove some paint.
>
> It's time to pull the tank and fix them, and while doing so, its probably a
> good time to get rid of all the old sloshing compound, thats not flaking
> yet, but probably will in the not to distant future.
>
> Got a question about resealing those about-to-be-cut 5" diameter holes in
> the rear tank baffle. It seems the "standard way" is to rivet in a
> reinforcing ring and then attach a cover plate to it. I don't understand
> why. Why not just take a 6" plate and proseal it over the 5" hole. A lot
> less work and a lot fewer seams where new leaks can develop. What am I
> missing?
>
> Andy
>
>
Beats me. That=B9s what I did.
Denis
Message 43
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Prop test results posted |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jaye and Scott Jackson <jayeandscott@shaw.ca>
Is it not something to do with the interaction between the power pulses and
the prop?
I thought the prop responds to each power pulse as if it had been hit by a
hammer- the whole thing sings like a tuning fork. If this singing is of a
frequency that allows a blocking of the prop's response to the next power
pulse, I thought it would be absorbed and build up in the crankshaft.
If not, well, it's still pretty close to April Fools' Day, isn't it?
Scott in Vancouver
-6,55hrs
I'm back.....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Bristol" <bj034@lafn.org>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Prop test results posted
> --> RV-List message posted by: Dave Bristol <bj034@lafn.org>
>
> The RPM/vibration restriction is not an ENGINE restriction it's an
engine/prop
> COMBINATION restriction.
> Many propellers work just fine on the O-360 without restrictions but some
> propellers cause a vibration problem with that engine and so, are
placarded
> against continuous operation in that range.
>
> Dave
> EAA Technical Counselor
>
> Rhett Westerman wrote:
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: "Rhett Westerman"
<Rhettwesterman@cox.net>
> >
> > Jim,
> >
> > As this is a forum for us all to learn, including myself, I decided to
look
> > into this more. I have an 0-360 A1A (undampened or undamped)Lycoming and
an
> > MT-MTV-15-B Two blade prop.
> >
> > I questioned your earlier post about all Lycoming 360 undampened engines
> > having a prop restriction and asked for the source as I have one that
has no
> > restriction, but your post got my attention as it was contrary to what I
was
> > told and I always like to see something in writing from engineers rather
> > than opinions. I am also aware that I could have been told something not
> > true. That and the fact I always learn stuff here. After your many posts
> > about this in fact being true and the post about the MT three blade prop
> > with the restriction, I called MT to verify my 0-360 A1A had no RPM
> > restrictions with the MTV-15 Prop and MT did verify this to be the case.
> >
> > So not all Lycoming 0-360 with Undampened crankshafts have an RPM
> > Restriction. My MT 2 blade prop does not have this and there are
probably
> > other MT props without the restriction.
> >
> > Adds more to the decision making process when selecting the engine prop
> > combo.
> >
> > best,
> >
> > Rhett
> >
> > --> RV-List message posted by: LeastDrag93066@aol.com
> >
> > I didn't write 2200 to 2300 RPM. I wrote 2000 to 2300 RPM.
> > I didn't write all Lycoming engines. I wrote Lycoming 360 engines with
a
> > undampened crankshaft.
> > (The second definition of dampen is to check or stop. So undampened is
one
> > possible spelling.)
> >
> > It depends on the propellers response to the undampened crankshaft
Lycoming
> > 360 engine.
> >
> > The MT Propeller engine RPM restriction is 2050 to 2300 RPM.
> > Applies to all Lycoming 360 engines with undampened crankshaft.
> >
> > There is NOT a midrange engine RPM restriction on Lycoming 360 engines
with
> > a dampened crankshaft.
> >
> > Hartzell propellers respond diferently because of the difference in
> > propeller weight. I don't know the exact RPM range to avoid extended
> > operation with that propeller (other than somewhere between 2000 to 2300
> > RPM). It will be documented for each certified engine/propeller
> > combination.
> >
> > Jim Ayers
> > EAA Flight Advisor
> >
>
>
Message 44
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-List RV GRIN (Why) |
--> RV-List message posted by: Dave Bristol <bj034@lafn.org>
Perhaps because Yahoo has one of the biggest collections of non-stop
commercials and pop-ups in existence?
And, you've got to admit that it's kind of fun to play "Find the Proceed
Button" trying to get past the pop-up ads.
I know, I know - it's "free". Right.
Dave
do not archive
P M Condon wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: P M Condon <pcondon@mitre.org>
>
> Time: 10:54:36 AM PST US
> From: "Terry Watson" <terry@tcwatson.com>
> Subject: RE: RV-List: RV Grin
>
> Why, Rick ?
>
> Does the Yahoo list offer a search engine by keyword ?? a CD of past
> chats ?? sorting by date, subject or author ?? What is missing from the
> Matronics list ??? Whats to be gained by creating a new chat group ??
Message 45
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Retractable Steps |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Rodney Woodard" <rodney.woodard@attbi.com>
Sorry, I've been away from the computer all day.
As somebody pointed out, the steps are retracted independently by a
cable from each side that is attached to a stainless rod that attaches
to the canopy frame.
I don't know what would happen if an unknowing passenger stepped on a
partially-extended step. I'll be back in town on Tuesday and do some
experimenting with Russ's step on his 6A.
The steps themselves are not supported with the cable mechanism at all.
They "bottom out"-for lack of a better phrase-when they are fully
extended and meet metal to metal.
Somebody suggested that the reason we didn't show the guts was to
prevent somebody from copying the setup. Maybe a little bit, but not as
much as you would think. Mostly it was a time constraint the particular
day I was out at the hangar taking pictures.
Russ has spent a considerable amount of time sourcing the materials for
the step. He's also spent a small fortune getting molds made for the
steps. They're actually cast out of aluminum... and yes, they're plenty
strong enough. My 240# hopping on the extended step didn't even phase
it! There's no doubt it'd be possible for reverse-engineer the kit, but
you can theoretically build most RV's from plans, too, so it's not a
huge concern.
Feel free to e-mail Russ directly at russ@stepupaviation.com.
Best regards to all,
Rod Woodard for
stepupaviation.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Wayne Reese
> Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 1:58 PM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV-List: Retractable Steps
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Wayne Reese" <waynereese@qwest.net>
>
> What mechanism works the step?
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! --
|