Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:40 AM - Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" (Jim Sears)
2. 03:38 AM - Re: Aerospace Logic Inc. (Dean Pichon)
3. 05:45 AM - Re: Reversity? NON RV (Denis Walsh)
4. 05:54 AM - Clear wingwalk material? (Ken Balch)
5. 06:03 AM - Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" (Larry Hawkins)
6. 06:12 AM - Mounting you Garmin ideas needed (James Bond)
7. 06:20 AM - Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" (glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com)
8. 06:28 AM - Re: Engine Question > "Hmmmm??" (Cy Galley)
9. 06:40 AM - Re: Clear wingwalk material? (Scott Bilinski)
10. 07:01 AM - Re: Aerospace Logic Inc. (Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club)
11. 07:13 AM - Re: Clear wingwalk material? (SportAV8R@aol.com)
12. 07:16 AM - Low Compression Engine Suggestions- Thanks (Don.Alexander@AstenJohnson.com)
13. 07:18 AM - Re: Reversity? NON RV (Konrad Werner)
14. 07:30 AM - Stick It-Your-Ear Headsets (Richard V. Reynolds)
15. 07:46 AM - Re: Stick It-Your-Ear Headsets ()
16. 07:46 AM - Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" (Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club)
17. 08:09 AM - Breakfast in Greeley, CO tommorow morning (Bill VonDane)
18. 08:15 AM - Re: Mounting you Garmin ideas needed (Randy Lervold)
19. 08:27 AM - Engine - Prop Considerations (was Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm") (Ken Brooks)
20. 08:38 AM - Re: Clear wingwalk material? (Larry Bowen)
21. 08:47 AM - Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" (Cy Galley)
22. 08:47 AM - Re: Engine Question > "Hmmmm??" (Chris W)
23. 09:27 AM - Re: Reversity? NON RV (kempthornes)
24. 10:04 AM - Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" (glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com)
25. 10:09 AM - Re: Clear wingwalk material? (Doug Weiler)
26. 10:43 AM - Re: Reversity? NON RV (Konrad Werner)
27. 10:56 AM - Re: Aerospace Logic Inc. (Tom & Cathy Ervin)
28. 11:02 AM - Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" (Chris W)
29. 11:25 AM - Re: Stick It-Your-Ear Headsets (Patty gillies)
30. 11:29 AM - Re: Engine - Prop Considerations (was Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm") (Randy Lervold)
31. 11:32 AM - Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" (Larry Hawkins)
32. 11:46 AM - Landoll balancer for sale (Randy Compton)
33. 11:48 AM - more Octane stuff. hit delete if you're sick of it. (Larry Hawkins)
34. 11:54 AM - Re: Clear wingwalk material? (Laird Owens)
35. 12:42 PM - RemovingBadlyDrivenRivets (DAVID REEL)
36. 12:45 PM - Kit + for sale(RV-6) (Bob Binzer)
37. 12:51 PM - Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" (glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com)
38. 01:49 PM - Re: Clear wingwalk material? (Laird Owens)
39. 02:06 PM - Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" (kempthornes)
40. 02:09 PM - Laird's most excellent adventure (OT) (David Burton)
41. 02:18 PM - Re: RemovingBadlyDrivenRivets (Elsa & Henry)
42. 02:22 PM - Re: Mounting you Garmin ideas needed (Charles Rowbotham)
43. 02:29 PM - Re: Engine Question > "Hmmmm??" (Jerry Springer)
44. 02:34 PM - Re: Landoll balancer for sale (Jerry Springer)
45. 02:54 PM - propane (Wheeler North)
46. 03:23 PM - Lead (Wheeler North)
47. 03:55 PM - Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" (Cy Galley)
48. 04:15 PM - MK-319-BS Rivets (Glenn Brasch)
49. 04:19 PM - Re: Laird's most excellent adventure (OT) (Laird Owens)
50. 04:27 PM - Re: Engine Question > "Hmmmm??" (Greg Young)
51. 05:12 PM - Adnair fuel valve concern (Jerry2DT@aol.com)
52. 05:28 PM - Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" (William Davis)
53. 05:53 PM - Re: Landoll balancer for sale (Randy Compton)
54. 06:00 PM - Re: Adnair fuel valve concern (Cy Galley)
55. 07:17 PM - How mush room.... (emrath)
56. 07:44 PM - RV transition training in Michigan (Dave Ford)
57. 08:02 PM - Re: Adnair fuel valve concern (Kevin Horton)
58. 09:56 PM - Re: How mush room.... (Jim Jewell)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Sears" <sears@searnet.com>
Folks, I've been reading this thread with interest because I currently use auto
gas in my RV. Maybe I don't know all of the answers; but, I do have some experience
with the stuff that may help reflect what can happen to our engines with
the use of auto gas.
I got my first Petersen STC in January of 1986 when I bought my old 1965 C172.
I immediately started using 87 antiknock auto gas from a good source. I followed
Petersen's recommendations as well as I could around home; but, I usually
had to buy more 100LL than I wanted to when I was on trips. I did buy auto gas
at airports, when I could. Most of the time, I could actually find it. BTW,
Peterson recommended a tank full of 100LL at about 50 tanks full. That's a
lot less 100LL than one contributor stated when he said a tank of 100LL per 3
to 4 tanks of gas. I sold the C172 in 1990 and had put about 500 hours on it.
When I sold it, I had never pulled a cylinder; and, the owner after that put
another 160 hours on it before he sold it. This engine went over TBO by quite
a margin.
My second airplane, a 1977 Grumman-American Cheetah, was purchased in 1990. I
immediately bought a STC from Petersen. Alas, my luck ran out on this one.
At about two years and 200 tach hours after I'd purchased it, the engine needed
overhaul. When we opened it up, it was a mess. However, the valves showed
normal wear and tear, as well as the seats. The damage was attributed to a long
sitting period that the airplane experienced near Lake Erie while the guy
was trying to sell it. We're talking about six months, or so. That exposure
to moisture had ruined the cam, as well as many other pieces and parts. The intake
valves were used again; but, we replaced the exhaust valves because the
engine was expected to go another 2000 hours. Well, it did go for another seven
years. I put at least 600 more hours on it before I had a problem in #3, the
hot one, again. This time, I lost a valve seat. I can't remember which one
it was, though. I figured the damage was caused by the normal heat range that
#3 experienced in the Cheetah's close cowl. This was not abnormal for Grummans,
at the time. Unfortunately, the cylinder went out just as I was selling
the Cheetah. I put on another one and sold the airplane to a friend who kept
it until recently after he'd put another couple of hundred hours on it. It's
still running just fine on the other three cylinders that were not replaced since
the overhaul.
Now, I've got 225 hours showing on my RV's tach. It's a slow tach; so, I'm estimating
it's really got over 250 hours on it. I've sure logged more than that!
Anyway, I did just have to replace two cylinders. As best I can tell, the
damage on those two cylinders was caused by a procrastinating owner who did not
take care of his RV as he should have. When I overhauled my Lyc, I had opted
to not overhaul the oil sump because it looked fine. I made that decision
based on my IA's input. The oil sump started leaking air and caused an induction
leak at #2, last year. I did a temporary fix that I'd hoped would last until
my annual inspection. Little did I know that small cracks had also appeared
on #1 and #3 that did not show up for a while. They did later in the year
when I again had an induction leak bad enough to cause the engine to run rough.
I grounded the airplane and replaced the sump. When I removed the sump, I
had already noticed an increase in oil consumption. I watched that until I couldn't
stand it, anymore. I removed the two that showed oil usage and replaced
them. The two exhaust valves were ruined. The seats were just fine, though.
We replaced the valve guides as a precaution and put new exhaust valves back
in, along with other new parts. I'm currently doing the 100LL thing to break
in the cylinders. As best we can tell, the damage was due to my not removing
the sump earlier and had lean running cylinders on #1 and #3. That would surely
ruin the exhaust valves. What really bothers me on that is that the CHTs
didn't really reflect that much heat; so, I'm not sure how good the CHT is to
me. I do know those two cylinders did get hot enough to cause oil to cake up
enough in the oil rings to prevent their properly opening and holding the oil
in the engine. That was my clue to remove them.
Based on my own experiences that have spanned over three aircraft since 1986, and
many hundreds of hours on auto gas, I'm going to continue to follow the plan
recommended in the Pettersen STC. I'll put 100LL in the tanks a couple of times
a year, unless I'm on a trip. I did opt to start using 100LL on trips to
be sure I get fresher gas. If any of the problems I've had in the past were
attributed to auto gas, there was no indication of it. I strongly believe that
all were attributed to other causes. Granted, I didn't like to replace those
cylinders, this time; but, the money I saved during the over 200 hours of operation
by using auto gas more than paid for the repairs by a large margin.
BTW, those of you who have watched the auto gas saga for some time will remember
the testing done by the aviation industry and the Feds to see if they can find
a replacement for 100LL due to its high levels of lead. One fuel that was
mentioned many times was 82UL. That fuel is none other than 87 antiknock auto
gas. I don't know where the studies are on that, now; but, I thought that was
kind of neat. Why? It would surely be funny if those who preach so hard against
its use would end up having to use it because that's all they could get.
:-)
Jim Sears in KY
RV-6A N198JS
EAA Tech Counselor
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: Aerospace Logic Inc. |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dean Pichon" <DeanPichon@msn.com>
I just installed an Aerospace Logic Dual Fuel Level Gage in my -4. The unit seems
to be of very high quality. The directions were clear and complete. Calibrating
the unit was a pain as it required draining both tanks and refilling one
gallon at a time. I had additional problems as the senders in the tank did
not accurately represent full and empty - but this had nothing to do with Aerospace
Logic.
Technical help was excellent. I placed several calls looking for a work-around
for my issues and found the Aerospace Logic people very prompt and helpful I
would say these instruments rival those of Electronics International, but have
an even nicer display.
Dean
----- Original Message -----
From: Konrad Werner
Subject: RV-List: Aerospace Logic Inc.
--> RV-List message posted by: "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner@wans.net>
Does anyone have any *actual* experience with Instruments made/sold by Aerospace
Logic, Inc.?
I am more specifically interested in their individual EGT & CHT -Gauges/Scanners.
http://www.aerospacelogic.com/
Any input by an actual user would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Konrad
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: Reversity? NON RV |
--> RV-List message posted by: Denis Walsh <denis.walsh@attbi.com>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner@wans.net>
>
> Dear Matt,
> Sometimes I receive an answer to someone's question on the List's I subscribe
> to, before I even get the original question??
> I am not a PC-Guru, so I' thought I'll ask you how this works? NON RV RELATED
> and do not archive.
> (Could it possibly have to do with high speed / low speed connections of the
> individual users, or what?)
> Any insight would be appreciated, and do not archive.
> Thanks,
> Konrad
>
ME TOO. But I thought it was called reversititis. Maybe our email
thingies are just =B3out of sorts=B2 and sort them wrong?
Frankly I prefer to get them that way.
But then I frequently read books from the back first, too. Why wait to find
out how it comes out?
Could be the aluminum dust.
Denis
DNA (Dump mine first)
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: | Clear wingwalk material? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Ken Balch <kbalch1@attbi.com>
With my paint job underway, I've been trying to locate some clear
wingwalk material which I remember seeing a year or two back.
Unfortunately, either I didn't bookmark the site or it's just
disappeared back into the mists of time.
Can anyone point me toward this stuff?
Regards,
Ken Balch
RV-8 N118KB
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: | Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" |
--> RV-List message posted by: Larry Hawkins <lhawkins@giant.com>
As a person who has worked in the refining industry for many years I would
like to throw in my 2 cents worth. Tetra-ethyl-lead (TEL) made it easy to
increase the octane value (better describe as the ability of the fuel to not
detonate, but to burn relatively slow) as in the 50's and 60's we wanted
more horse power which equates to higher compression. Higher compression
means the fuel wants to detonate rather than burn. When the
environmentalists got involved and said lead was very bad and you have to
quit putting in car gas. Well the refiners had to get the octane the hard
way, that is to "reform" the molecules to resist detonation (remember
PLatformate). Now I'm no engineer but I can tell you that the process and
the equipment to do this is very expensive. If you adjust for inflation gas
is about the same or maybe a little more but compared to many consumable
products it's a bargain.
do not archive
Larry Hawkins, RV-4 Farmington, NM, N-345SL, flying
-----Original Message-----
From: John Starn [mailto:jhstarn@earthlink.net]
Subject: Re: RV-List: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm"
--> RV-List message posted by: "John Starn" <jhstarn@earthlink.net>
And all along I thought "Ethyl" was a better grade of gasoline. In the '50's
it was an additional cost item that raised the price per gallon of gasoline
and then when the oil companies were forced to remove/eliminate same we were
told that leaving it out would again raise the price per gallon. Next we'll
be told that doing nothing will also increase the price per gallon. Huh...
That's what Gov. Davis is telling us in California. 8*) KABONG (GBA) Do
Not Archive
P.S. : I picked the '50's 'cause that's when I started buying gasoline, I
think Ethyl was about .23 a gallon in 1956 but then again at my age I.C.R.
S. sets in.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm"
>
> The only thing that Tetra Ethyl Lead every did was to enhance octane. The
> rest is Baloney from the sales department.
DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail message may be
privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the
intended recipient, any further disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution
or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you
think you have received this e-mail message in error, please e-mail the
sender at the above address and permanently delete the e-mail. Although this
e-mail and any attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other
defect that might affect any computer system into which they are received
and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that they
are virus free and no responsibility is accepted by Giant Industries, Inc.
or its affiliates for any loss or damage arising in any way from their use.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<META NAME"Generator" CONTENT"MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2656.60">
RE: RV-List: Engine Question...things that make you go Hmmmm
As a person who has worked in the refining industry for many years I would like
to throw in my 2 cents worth. Tetra-ethyl-lead (TEL) made it easy to increase
the octane value (better describe as the ability of the fuel to not detonate,
but to burn relatively slow) as in the 50's and 60's we wanted more horse power
which equates to higher compression. Higher compression means the fuel wants
to detonate rather than burn. When the environmentalists got involved and said
lead was very bad and you have to quit putting in car gas. Well the refiners
had to get the octane the hard way, that is to reform the molecules to resist
detonation (remember PLatformate). Now I'm no engineer but I can tell you that
the process and the equipment to do this is very expensive. If you adjust for
inflation gas is about the same or maybe a little more but compared to many
consumable products it's a bargain.
do not archive
Larry Hawkins, RV-4 Farmington, NM, N-345SL, flying
-----Original Message-----
From: John Starn [<A HREF"mailto:jhstarn@earthlink.net">mailto:jhstarn@earthlink.net]
Subject: Re: RV-List: Engine Question...things that make you go Hmmmm
-- RV-List message posted by: John Starn jhstarn@earthlink.net
And all along I thought Ethyl was a better grade of gasoline. In the '50's
it was an additional cost item that raised the price per gallon of gasoline
and then when the oil companies were forced to remove/eliminate same we were
told that leaving it out would again raise the price per gallon. Next we'll
be told that doing nothing will also increase the price per gallon. Huh...
That's what Gov. Davis is telling us in California. 8*) KABONG (GBA) Do
Not Archive
P.S. : I picked the '50's 'cause that's when I started buying gasoline, I
think Ethyl was about .23 a gallon in 1956 but then again at my age I.C.R.
S. sets in.
----- Original Message -----
From: Cy Galley cgalley@qcbc.org
Subject: Re: RV-List: Engine Question...things that make you go Hmmmm
The only thing that Tetra Ethyl Lead every did was to enhance octane. The
rest is Baloney from the sales department.
DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient,
any further disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this
message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you think you have received
this e-mail message in error, please e-mail the sender at the above address
and permanently delete the e-mail. Although this e-mail and any attachments
are believed to be free of any virus or other defect that might affect any
computer system into which they are received and opened, it is the responsibility
of the recipient to ensure that they are virus free and no responsibility
is accepted by Giant Industries, Inc. or its affiliates for any loss or damage
arising in any way from their use.
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: | Mounting you Garmin ideas needed |
--> RV-List message posted by: James Bond <rvflyingisfun@yahoo.com>
Hello all, with all this talk about Garmin GPS handhelds. I would like to see some
ideas on mounting places as my panel is limited on space. So any pic you may
have would be great. So please send some pic's to me needs some ideas.
Thanks
James Bond
RV6-A
rvflyingisfun@yahoo.com
---------------------------------
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: | Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" |
22, 2002) at 05/23/2003 09:20:30 AM
--> RV-List message posted by: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
Cy sorry but you are partly wrong. Lead does in fact foul plugs and in
general makes for a dirty combustion liner. However lead does not enhance
octane. In 100 low lead the process is better but you will still have
fouled plugs and dirty heads. That is the reason we relocate the plugs
during the annual inspection. Lead is made purely for the lubrication of
the valve train. The fuel manufacturers have to put lead in the fuel it is
not a natural part of the fuel. I would suggest that you look at any fuel
manufacturers web site and get further information. That way you know I am
not blowing hot air in your direction.
Regards
Glenn Williams
A&P
Fort Worth, Texas
do not archive
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: Engine Question > "Hmmmm??" |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
I'm sorry but just seeing a reprint of "Light Plane Maintenance" article by
an airline captain running all the OWTs doesn't change my mind. As an author
I can write just as authoritative article and have it published in a
national magazine. Would my facts be any better just because it has been
printed? I don't believe so.
Cy Galley - Bellanca Champion Club
Newsletter Editor & EAA TC
www.bellanca-championclub.com
Actively supporting Aeroncas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner@wans.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Engine Question > "Hmmmm??"
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner@wans.net>
>
> Dear Chris W. / Cy G., etc.,
>
> Did you ever read this EAA Document in regards to the subject (...courtesy
of Larry in Indiana / Thanks Larry)
>
> http://www.eaa.org/education/fuel/autogas_vs_avgas.pdf
>
> See the bottom right corner (next to the pic of the DC-3) for a little
insight on lead's qualities in regards to Octane vs. Lubrication.
> Don't stop there, but rather read the whole 4-Pages to make an educated
decission for yourself.
> KLW
>
>
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: Clear wingwalk material? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
ACS, 16" x 30", P/N 09-31810, $33.00 (old catalog)
At 08:54 AM 5/23/03 -0400, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Ken Balch <kbalch1@attbi.com>
>
>With my paint job underway, I've been trying to locate some clear
>wingwalk material which I remember seeing a year or two back.
> Unfortunately, either I didn't bookmark the site or it's just
>disappeared back into the mists of time.
>
>Can anyone point me toward this stuff?
>
>Regards,
>Ken Balch
>RV-8 N118KB
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
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: Aerospace Logic Inc. |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson@consolidated.net>
Dean Pichon wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Dean Pichon" <DeanPichon@msn.com>
>
> I just installed an Aerospace Logic Dual Fuel Level Gage in my -4. The unit
seems to be of very high quality. The directions were clear and complete. Calibrating
the unit was a pain as it required draining both tanks and refilling
one gallon at a time. I had additional problems as the senders in the tank did
not accurately represent full and empty - but this had nothing to do with Aerospace
Logic.
>
> Technical help was excellent. I placed several calls looking for a work-around
for my issues and found the Aerospace Logic people very prompt and helpful
I would say these instruments rival those of Electronics International, but have
an even nicer display.
>
> Dean
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Konrad Werner
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: Aerospace Logic Inc.
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner@wans.net>
>
> Does anyone have any *actual* experience with Instruments made/sold by Aerospace
Logic, Inc.?
> I am more specifically interested in their individual EGT & CHT -Gauges/Scanners.
>
> http://www.aerospacelogic.com/
>
> Any input by an actual user would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Konrad
Like Dean above, I have the fuel gage. I am not flying yet, but I have done simulated
calibrations with Van's floats. As dean stated, calibration would be tedious,
but hopefully one time. The calibration takes into consideration of the
non-linear shape of the tank and gives a true readout in gallons or even less
if you set it up like that.
One thing I found on mine is that it was not 2 1/4", It was over that. So if you
are installing new, you might want to measure before you cut. If you are installing
in old holes, you may have to enlarge them just a little. After seeing
the quality of it, I wish I would have went with all their instruments.
Phil
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: Clear wingwalk material? |
--> RV-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
In a message dated 05/23/2003 8:55:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
kbalch1@attbi.com writes:
> With my paint job underway, I've been trying to locate some clear
> wingwalk material
I'm not sure you want this; it's what I used and is very cloudy to begin with
and yellows terribly with foot trraffic (ground-in dirt). Your paint color
will not show through (unless it's white, and then only at the beginning).
After trying unsuccessfully to clean mine, I ended up masking it off and painting
it black. The Rust-Oleum balck spray paint has held up remarkably well, and
will be a cinch to touch up when the time comes. Fortunately, Black looked
okay with my paint job.
-Bill
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: | Low Compression Engine Suggestions- Thanks |
05/23/2003 10:13:54 AM
--> RV-List message posted by: Don.Alexander@AstenJohnson.com
Thanks for all of the opinions on the 170 hp O-360. Very interesting
reading. I also received many excellent thoughts off-list. One thing that
caught my eye in one of the articles was a statement that the electronic
ignition was not approved for use with auto fuel using standard compression
jugs.
Also, thanks to the many engineer wannabees out there who were kind enough
to offer English/ Metric conversions. (145 lbs= 11 KM) I must confess
that I was attempting to interject humor into my message when I used the
obviously erroneous conversion from lbs to KM. I now know that the correct
conversion for 145 lbs is 365 CC : -)
And to close, I am not really going to use helium in my empty bays as a way
to lighten my ship. (Although it would be a blast to call up ATC on your
radio after taking a deep breath of the helium.) Once again, another
attempt to interject humor...
Remember our fallen heroes this weekend
Regards,
Don
do not archive
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: Reversity? NON RV |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner@wans.net>
DO NOT ARCHIVE / Period !!!
ME TOO. But I thought it was called reversititis.
No Sir, "reversititis" is the illness you get in your neck, when you drive your
car backwards for a prolonged time, just so it rolls back the odometer (normally
done just before selling it with a newer, lower reading)
Frankly I prefer to get them that way.
Saves time by having the answers already before the question, doesn't it?
But then I frequently read books from the back first, too. Why wait to find
out how it comes out?
Same here! I figured the last ten pages are normally the best, and I just make
up the rest of the story (that lead to it) all by myself. The outcomes are always
interesting, when compared with someone who actually read the book from A-Z.
Could be the aluminum dust.
IT IS, DENIS, IT IS - I normally mix a little Aluminum Dust with good old 100LL
for a real man's cocktail-hour.
(Kids and/or dumb Jackass'es: DO NOT try this at home, or in school, or anywhere
elsed in this Universe)
And for heavens sake > DO NOT ARCHIVE < this nonsense ever.
Wishing everyone a grand Memorial Day Weekend!
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: | Stick It-Your-Ear Headsets |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Richard V. Reynolds" <rvreynolds@macs.net>
Does anyone have experience with either the
Panther CAT in-the-ear headset
Quiet Technology AuriComm in-the-ear headset
Richard Reynolds
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: Stick It-Your-Ear Headsets |
--> RV-List message posted by: <315@cox.net>
I have the Quiet Technology and it is a very good system. It takes a bit
getting used to having he plugs in your ears but other than that it is very
quiet and comfortable on those long trips. In comparison to my Denali it is
much, much lighter, the mike may be a bit more sensative, perhaps it picks
up a bit more noise. My wife likes it much beter than wearing headset on
long trips. I would recommend it above the Panther system.
Ned
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard V. Reynolds" <rvreynolds@macs.net>
Subject: RV-List: Stick It-Your-Ear Headsets
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Richard V. Reynolds" <rvreynolds@macs.net>
>
> Does anyone have experience with either the
>
> Panther CAT in-the-ear headset
>
> Quiet Technology AuriComm in-the-ear headset
>
> Richard Reynolds
>
>
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: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson@consolidated.net>
Now which is it? This is going to be a real interesting thread to follow.
I have done some research on the web from very reliable sources. They say it
is an anti-knock agent only, They say it is a lubricant for the valves only,
and they say it is both.
Phil
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: | Breakfast in Greeley, CO tommorow morning |
vansairforce <vansairforce@yahoogroups.com>
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill VonDane <bill@vondane.com>
If you so inclined... Come to breakfast in Greeley, CO tomorrow morning...
I know there will be a few people from the Denver area, the Springs, and possible
Pueblo...
-Bill VonDane
RV-8A
www.vondane.com
do not archive
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: Mounting you Garmin ideas needed |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Lervold" <randy@rv-8.com>
James, see the following link for my solution...
http://www.rv-8.com/Pictures/Dscn0346x.jpg
Randy Lervold
RV-8, 310 hrs
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Bond" <rvflyingisfun@yahoo.com>
Subject: RV-List: Mounting you Garmin ideas needed
> --> RV-List message posted by: James Bond <rvflyingisfun@yahoo.com>
>
> Hello all, with all this talk about Garmin GPS handhelds. I would like to
see some ideas on mounting places as my panel is limited on space. So any
pic you may have would be great. So please send some pic's to me needs some
ideas.
>
> Thanks
> James Bond
> RV6-A
> rvflyingisfun@yahoo.com
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
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: | Engine - Prop Considerations (was Engine Question...things that |
make you go "Hmmmm")
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ken Brooks" <kenbrooks@charter.net>
Longwinded -- Delete or skip down now if not interested.
Disclaimer: I'm an education major, so consider the fact that I may be
clueless about this subject.
With the recent thread about low compression pistons for auto gas, etc.,
I thought some on the list might be interested in a conundrum that I
have been pondering concerning the Whirlwind 150 prop and my Aerosport
Power IO-360 with 1-mag, 1-Lightspeed EI, and 9.2:1 pistons. The higher
compression pistons, of course, eliminate any consideration about auto
gas, but our questions revolve around Whirlwind's recommendation that
their 150 prop NOT be used with electronic ignition or high compression
pistons without a counterweighted engine.
I spoke yesterday with Patti Rust at Whirlwind, and although they have a
few aircraft flying non-counterweighted engines, they just don't have
enough data to feel confident about recommending the 150 series prop
with non counterweighted crankshaft engines. Since the WW prop is
all-composite, and therefore doesn't have the "tuning fork" resonance
properties of an aluminum prop, we were surprised that it would have
vibration problems. After talking with Bart at Aerosport Power, we
learned that the vibration is inherent in the engine (power pulses
combined with number of prop blades and angular distance between blades
compared with position of the crank when the power stroke is strongest).
That is why he "likes" counterweighted engines for the 6th and 8th order
harmonic vibrations that are inherent in the engines. Aside from prop
considerations, the counterweights dampen the engine vibrations, so that
the engine runs smoother and lasts longer regardless of prop choice.
The crankshaft counterweighting is not a cheap option however -- $2500
at present and adds about 8 lbs. to the weight of the engine.
So. . .where do we stand? Originally, I was totally put off by the cost
of the counterweighting, so had decided to "live with the rpm
restrictions" of no continuous operation between 2050 and 2300. Then we
tried to find out where the numbers (rpm) came from. The basic
assumption (yes, I know what happens when you assume things) was that
that was the rpm range other prop manufacturers want you to avoid for
their props, so it follows that the same range would be "bad" for all
props. MT has a similar restriction on their 3-blade composite over
wood core prop. While the Whirlwind props are dynamically balanced, to
my knowledge, that is a whole other issue, not specifically related to
the vibrations subjected to the prop through the engine. So, while it's
definitely a "plus" that WW props are dynamically balanced, we're still
left with the "other" stress placed on the prop from the engine.
Randy Lervold may be able to clarify this issue for us, as his engine is
non-counterweighted, but he also chose to stay with the 200-C two-blade
prop after his testing, so perhaps the vibration problem was a factor in
that decision. The 200-C prop has no such rpm restrictions attached to
it. Any thoughts, Randy?
I basically came away from the various discussions with a couple of
thoughts. First, the best thing for the engine, regardless of prop
used, is to counterweight the crankshaft. In doing so, you also remove
a lot of the bad vibratory harmonics to the prop. Second, I'm not an
engineer, so I can't verify scientifically what I'm told about all this,
and not everything one is told is correct (necessarily). I therefore
have to decide whom to believe, and that's not an exact science either.
But I do trust Bart to know engines, and if I can come up with the extra
dough, I'll probably counterweight my engine and hang the 150-series WW
prop on the front. I liked what Randy's website comments had to say
about the CG considerations and solo trim range with the 150 prop. I
can live with the 3-4 mph slower top end speed compared with the
2-bladers.
Just as a side note, if you are considering the Whirlwind 150-series
prop for your RV, the next open delivery date they have is December, so
plan ahead. It's about 6-weeks for the 200-C 2-blade.
Any other thoughts/corrections about this would be appreciated -- on the
-list or personal e-mail.
Ken Brooks
Roscoe, IL
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: | Clear wingwalk material? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@bowenaero.com>
Do I remember someone giving the clear wing walk a failing grade? Maybe
it showed dirt and couldn't be cleaned easily? Check the archives...
-
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
> Scott Bilinski
> Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 9:40 AM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Clear wingwalk material?
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
> --> <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>
> ACS, 16" x 30", P/N 09-31810, $33.00 (old catalog)
>
>
> At 08:54 AM 5/23/03 -0400, you wrote:
> >--> RV-List message posted by: Ken Balch <kbalch1@attbi.com>
> >
> >With my paint job underway, I've been trying to locate some clear
> >wingwalk material which I remember seeing a year or two back.
> > Unfortunately, either I didn't bookmark the site or it's just
> >disappeared back into the mists of time.
> >
> >Can anyone point me toward this stuff?
> >
> >Regards,
> >Ken Balch
> >RV-8 N118KB
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: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
My question then if it isn't natural, why do they put it in at all. It
isn't lead but a compound of lead, TetraEthyl Lead. It was developed back
in the early 20s for its antiknock properties. They found the more than they
used in low quality gas the higher the octane rating rose. There are
several compounds that do this, but TEL is by far the cheapest and most
effective. When they take TEL out of 100LL the octane rating drops to about
94 octane. It is not a safe compound as it is very toxic. Check
http://www.radford.edu/~wkovarik/papers/kettering.html#troubles One quote
is..."On September 21, Frank W. Durr, a 37-year-old process operator who had
worked for 25 years for du Pont, became the first of eight du Pont employees
to die of lead poisoning. Du Pont took additional precautions and no other
workers died of lead poisoning in Deepwater until the summer of 1924, when
production was stepped up to meet new demands. Altogether, between 1923 and
1925, eight du Pont workers died."
Later...
There were hundreds of incidents involving serious exposure of workers to
TEL, including eight fatalities in a single US incident more than thirty
years after
the introduction of TEL ( " Tetraethyl Lead Poisoning Incident with
Eight Deaths " Am.Ind.Hyg.Assn.J. v.21 p515-517 (1960)). "
Why is TEL still used? because in the amount necessary to raise the octane
is about 1/3 the cost of other alternatives. Alcohol is being used for cars
but it is a weak organic acid which with a little water corrodes most metal.
In cars they are eliminated most of the problem. In airplanes with the
standard carburetor basically with the same materials from its introduction
in the 30s, goes to pot very quickly. Gas sits stagnant in carb bowls for
weeks and months in many airplanes as they aren't flown often. 100LL also
uses toluene as an octane enhancer. It will take the paint right off your
plane if it sits too long. It is one of the reasons that the first plastic
carb floats failed.
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: <glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm"
> --> RV-List message posted by: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
>
>
> Cy sorry but you are partly wrong. Lead does in fact foul plugs and in
> general makes for a dirty combustion liner. However lead does not enhance
> octane. In 100 low lead the process is better but you will still have
> fouled plugs and dirty heads. That is the reason we relocate the plugs
> during the annual inspection. Lead is made purely for the lubrication of
> the valve train. The fuel manufacturers have to put lead in the fuel it is
> not a natural part of the fuel. I would suggest that you look at any fuel
> manufacturers web site and get further information. That way you know I am
> not blowing hot air in your direction.
>
> Regards
> Glenn Williams
> A&P
> Fort Worth, Texas
>
> do not archive
>
>
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: Engine Question > "Hmmmm??" |
--> RV-List message posted by: Chris W <chrisw3@cox.net>
I did read that part of the article you mention. I didn't read the whole thing
but I skimmed most of it and read a lot of it. I'm not
saying that I know if lead lubricates or not. I am just saying from everything
I have read, which at this point isn't much, leads me to
think that lead doesn't help lubricate. The two sources that were provided by
a poster both "state" that lead does help lubricate. But I
am one of those people who don't believe everything they read. Even if it is written
by someone who should know, and sounds like they know,
what they are talking about. I always look for evidence to back up claims and
when no evidence to back up a claim is given I have to
wonder. Especialy if that claim is disputed by others who also seem to know what
they are talking about. In the AVWEB article the author
states that he has found no scientific data that indicates that lead helps with
lubrication. This leads me to believe that he has looked
for such data and can't find it. I also have to wonder about that pdf file on
the EAA sight. It says in part, "Leaded aviation fuels use
tetraethyl lead in small quantities, primarily to improve antiknock qualities,
and is a necessary additive to aviation fuel to produce 100
octane or greater fuel." It makes two claims there as if they were two different
things when they really are just stating the same thing in
two different ways. At least that is the way I have been lead to understand what
higher octane does. That article on EAA's site also
describes several ways that the lead in the fuel is bad for your engine. The other
source that was posted and claimed lead helped with
lubrication also says, "Burning an occasional tank of 100LL should not be necessary
if the valve's, guides and seats were constructed in
accordance with the latest specifications." So even if lead does lubricate this
tells me that with a modern engine I don't need it.
Again I don't know for sure one way or the other, but from what little I have read
so far, I am of the opinion that aside from its
contribution to the high octane lead does nothing good for aviation engines. And
I am quick to point that out in hopes that someone will
have some evidence that will *prove* it one way or the other.
Chris W
Konrad Werner wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner@wans.net>
>
> Dear Chris W. / Cy G., etc.,
>
> Did you ever read this EAA Document in regards to the subject (...courtesy of
Larry in Indiana / Thanks Larry)
>
> http://www.eaa.org/education/fuel/autogas_vs_avgas.pdf
>
> See the bottom right corner (next to the pic of the DC-3) for a little insight
on lead's qualities in regards to Octane vs. Lubrication.
> Don't stop there, but rather read the whole 4-Pages to make an educated decission
for yourself.
> KLW
>
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Reversity? NON RV |
--> RV-List message posted by: kempthornes <kempthornes@earthlink.net>
At 09:55 PM 5/22/2003 -0600, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner@wans.net>
>
>Dear Matt,
>Sometimes I receive an answer to someone's question on the List's I
>subscribe to, before I even get the original question??
Konrad,
It is due to something in the seven layer model. Hope that helps.
Seriously, the answer to this could be complex and boring. If it happens a
lot, you might want to try a different ISP.
hal
do not archive
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" |
22, 2002) at 05/23/2003 01:04:23 PM
--> RV-List message posted by: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
I totally agree that it is both a valve lubricant and an anti knock
additive. But it is NOT an octane booster.
Glenn Williams
A&P
Fort Worth, Texas
do not archive
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: Clear wingwalk material? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Weiler" <dougweil@pressenter.com>
Frankly, I don't know if I would recommend a clear wing walk. This was
installed on the RV-4 I purchased a couple years ago. It was 7 years old
when I bought the airplane and it had yellowed and looked pretty bad. I
removed it was a heat gun and installed the nice black one with "RV-4"
outlined on the top which Vans sells.
Doug Weiler
Hudson, WI
> >
> >With my paint job underway, I've been trying to locate some clear
> >wingwalk material which I remember seeing a year or two back.
> > Unfortunately, either I didn't bookmark the site or it's just
> >disappeared back into the mists of time.
> >
> >Can anyone point me toward this stuff?
>
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: Reversity? NON RV |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner@wans.net>
Seven Layer Model? Ain't got a clue what that means. (Probably was invented by
the seven dwarfs?)
BUT, Alright then, sounds like a plausible reason!
Thanks Hal and All & have a Grand Weekend!
Do Not Archive
----- Original Message -----
From: kempthornes
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Reversity? NON RV
--> RV-List message posted by: kempthornes <kempthornes@earthlink.net>
At 09:55 PM 5/22/2003 -0600, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner@wans.net>
>
>Dear Matt,
>Sometimes I receive an answer to someone's question on the List's I
>subscribe to, before I even get the original question??
Konrad,
It is due to something in the seven layer model. Hope that helps.
Seriously, the answer to this could be complex and boring. If it happens a
lot, you might want to try a different ISP.
hal
do not archive
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Aerospace Logic Inc. |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Tom & Cathy Ervin" <tcervin@valkyrie.net>
I have their Amp./Volt Gauge and am also impressed with the quality.
Tom in Ohio
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dean Pichon" <DeanPichon@msn.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Aerospace Logic Inc.
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Dean Pichon" <DeanPichon@msn.com>
>
> I just installed an Aerospace Logic Dual Fuel Level Gage in my -4. The
unit seems to be of very high quality. The directions were clear and
complete. Calibrating the unit was a pain as it required draining both
tanks and refilling one gallon at a time. I had additional problems as the
senders in the tank did not accurately represent full and empty - but this
had nothing to do with Aerospace Logic.
>
> Technical help was excellent. I placed several calls looking for a
work-around for my issues and found the Aerospace Logic people very prompt
and helpful I would say these instruments rival those of Electronics
International, but have an even nicer display.
>
> Dean
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Konrad Werner
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: Aerospace Logic Inc.
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Konrad Werner" <Connywerner@wans.net>
>
> Does anyone have any *actual* experience with Instruments made/sold by
Aerospace Logic, Inc.?
> I am more specifically interested in their individual EGT &
CHT -Gauges/Scanners.
>
> http://www.aerospacelogic.com/
>
> Any input by an actual user would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Konrad
>
>
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" |
--> RV-List message posted by: Chris W <chrisw3@cox.net>
glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com wrote:
> I totally agree that it is both a valve lubricant and an anti knock
> additive. But it is NOT an octane booster.
Can you back this up? Almost everything I have read, while they disagree on
the lubricant issue, agrees that lead is an octane booster. Increasing
octane is how you prevent knocking.
http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182149-1.html
http://www.eaa.org/education/fuel/autogas_vs_avgas.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 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: Stick It-Your-Ear Headsets |
--> RV-List message posted by: Patty gillies<pgillies@gwm.sc.edu>
Richard,
I used the Quiet Technology. I love them. I have brought them at OshKosh last
yesr and have used them in the RV since October. They are Great! I love the
comfort of not dealing with headsets.
Patty Hamilton
RV- 6 Flying
>>> Richard V. Reynolds<rvreynolds@macs.net> 05/23/03 10:30AM >>>
--> RV-List message posted by: "Richard V. Reynolds" <rvreynolds@macs.net>
Does anyone have experience with either the
Panther CAT in-the-ear headset
Quiet Technology AuriComm in-the-ear headset
Richard Reynolds
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine - Prop Considerations (was Engine Question...things |
that make you go "Hmmmm")
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Lervold" <randy@rv-8.com>
> Randy Lervold may be able to clarify this issue for us, as his engine is
> non-counterweighted, but he also chose to stay with the 200-C two-blade
> prop after his testing, so perhaps the vibration problem was a factor in
> that decision. The 200-C prop has no such rpm restrictions attached to
> it. Any thoughts, Randy?
Yes, the vibration issue was/is a factor in staying with the 200C, but only
one of several factors. When you see the 200C hub (McCauley) compared to the
150 (proprietary WW design) you get the impression that the 200C is a
significantly more robust unit in every respect. It is also heavier however.
Rember also that the 200C was designed for unlimited class aerobatics where
those crazy guys crank and bank and put unbelieveable forces on their props,
and they typically have engines that are "built". There has never been a
failure of a 200C of any sort in this kind of use that I am aware of. Of
course we don't do that in RVs but it is confidence inspiring to know that
the prop can handle it.
Knowing what I know now I would have opted for the $2,500 counterweighted
crank, but I ordered my engine in 1998 when not as much was known about the
effect electronic ignitions and higher compressions were having on
engine/prop combos. Frankly I'm jealous of all these guys around me with
these Superior XP-360 based engines... it's just a better product in every
regard. I've flown two local builders up to Bart's shop for meetings with
him to discuss and order their engines. During one of those trips Bart had
an SP-360 case on his bench and he took me through all the improvements...
made me want to sell my engine and order a new one!
> I basically came away from the various discussions with a couple of
> thoughts. First, the best thing for the engine, regardless of prop
> used, is to counterweight the crankshaft. In doing so, you also remove
> a lot of the bad vibratory harmonics to the prop. Second, I'm not an
> engineer, so I can't verify scientifically what I'm told about all this,
> and not everything one is told is correct (necessarily). I therefore
> have to decide whom to believe, and that's not an exact science either.
> But I do trust Bart to know engines, and if I can come up with the extra
> dough, I'll probably counterweight my engine and hang the 150-series WW
> prop on the front. I liked what Randy's website comments had to say
> about the CG considerations and solo trim range with the 150 prop. I
> can live with the 3-4 mph slower top end speed compared with the
> 2-bladers.
I concur completely with your thinking, and I don't believe 99% of the RV
builders out there will notice much less care about the very small speed
difference.
Randy Lervold
RV-8, 309 hrs, down for 2nd annual condition inspection right now
www.rv-8.com
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: | Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" |
--> RV-List message posted by: Larry Hawkins <lhawkins@giant.com>
Glen
Your comment is a contradiction in it's self. Both "Research and Motor"
octane numbers are an index number of a fuels ability to resist knock, hence
"anti knock". Research and Motor are two separate tests but are very similar
in the way they are done. The knock motor is run with a reference fuel
"iso-octane" and a "knock" reading is taken, then the test fuel is run on
the same motor, the compression on the motor is slowly raised or lowered to
get the same "knock", that tells you the octane value by adding or
subtracting the amount of difference of the compression ratio to get the
same knock, yes there is a knock meter on the motor. I assure you "lead" has
a profound affect on octane value.
Hope this helps!
Larry
-----Original Message-----
From: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
[mailto:glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com]
Subject: Re: RV-List: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm"
--> RV-List message posted by: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
I totally agree that it is both a valve lubricant and an anti knock
additive. But it is NOT an octane booster.
Glenn Williams
A&P
Fort Worth, Texas
do not archive
DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail message may be
privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the
intended recipient, any further disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution
or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you
think you have received this e-mail message in error, please e-mail the
sender at the above address and permanently delete the e-mail. Although this
e-mail and any attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other
defect that might affect any computer system into which they are received
and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that they
are virus free and no responsibility is accepted by Giant Industries, Inc.
or its affiliates for any loss or damage arising in any way from their use.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<META NAME"Generator" CONTENT"MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2656.60">
RE: RV-List: Engine Question...things that make you go Hmmmm
Glen
Your comment is a contradiction in it's self. Both Research and Motor octane numbers
are an index number of a fuels ability to resist knock, hence anti knock.
Research and Motor are two separate tests but are very similar in the way they
are done. The knock motor is run with a reference fuel iso-octane and a knock
reading is taken, then the test fuel is run on the same motor, the compression
on the motor is slowly raised or lowered to get the same knock, that tells
you the octane value by adding or subtracting the amount of difference of the
compression ratio to get the same knock, yes there is a knock meter on the motor.
I assure you lead has a profound affect on octane value.
Hope this helps!
Larry
-----Original Message-----
From: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
[<A HREF"mailto:glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com">mailto:glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com]
Subject: Re: RV-List: Engine Question...things that make you go Hmmmm
-- RV-List message posted by: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
I totally agree that it is both a valve lubricant and an anti knock
additive. But it is NOT an octane booster.
Glenn Williams
AP
Fort Worth, Texas
do not archive
DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient,
any further disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this
message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you think you have received
this e-mail message in error, please e-mail the sender at the above address
and permanently delete the e-mail. Although this e-mail and any attachments
are believed to be free of any virus or other defect that might affect any
computer system into which they are received and opened, it is the responsibility
of the recipient to ensure that they are virus free and no responsibility
is accepted by Giant Industries, Inc. or its affiliates for any loss or damage
arising in any way from their use.
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: | Landoll balancer for sale |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Compton" <rdcompton@earthlink.net>
Listers:
I've got a Mark Landoll harmonic balancer for sale. It is 5 1/2 months old
and has less than 30 operating hours on it.
I paid $375 for it back in December. Asking $325, or make offer.
Randy Compton
RV-3 N84VF
Gulf Breeze, FL
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: | more Octane stuff. hit delete if you're sick of it. |
--> RV-List message posted by: Larry Hawkins <lhawkins@giant.com>
The sign you see at a fuel pump R+M/2 is the average of Research and Motor
octane tests. The two tests are very similar. Research octane test is
intended to simulate an engine under no load at low speed, like a car going
down hill. Motor octane test is a test intended to simulate an engine under
heavy loads like a Lincoln with 8 big people going up a steep hill.
Larry Hawkins, RV-4 Farmington, NM, N-345SL, flying.
DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail message may be
privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the
intended recipient, any further disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution
or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you
think you have received this e-mail message in error, please e-mail the
sender at the above address and permanently delete the e-mail. Although this
e-mail and any attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other
defect that might affect any computer system into which they are received
and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that they
are virus free and no responsibility is accepted by Giant Industries, Inc.
or its affiliates for any loss or damage arising in any way from their use.
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: Clear wingwalk material? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Laird Owens <owens@aerovironment.com>
Go to your local skate board shop. Grip tape is a buck a foot.
That's what I used...works fine.
Laird
>--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>
>ACS, 16" x 30", P/N 09-31810, $33.00 (old catalog)
>
>
>At 08:54 AM 5/23/03 -0400, you wrote:
>>--> RV-List message posted by: Ken Balch <kbalch1@attbi.com>
>>
>>With my paint job underway, I've been trying to locate some clear
>>wingwalk material which I remember seeing a year or two back.
>> Unfortunately, either I didn't bookmark the site or it's just
>>disappeared back into the mists of time.
>>
>>Can anyone point me toward this stuff?
>>
>>Regards,
>>Ken Balch
>>RV-8 N118KB
>>
>>
>
>
>Scott Bilinski
>Eng dept 305
>Phone (858) 657-2536
>Pager (858) 502-5190
>
>
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: | RemovingBadlyDrivenRivets |
--> RV-List message posted by: "DAVID REEL" <dreel@cox.net>
I'm excited because I have discovered a new way to remove badly driven rivets quickly
by myself without bending the aluminum or enlarging the hole. First I
drill off the head with a hole sized drill. Nothing new here & inaccurate drilling
can still damage the hole. Now put a thick machine screw nut over the driven
head. Size the nut to fit the head closely. Now place the long leg of
a pin with a T shaped cross section against the drilled out side and squeeze with
the rivet squeezer. The driven head pops into the empty space within the
nut. The long leg of the T should be a tad smaller than the hole and the hat
of the T big enough around to direct the squeezing force squarely through the
long leg. Those with a pneumatic squeezer will have to take care that the length
of the long leg does not allow the squeezer to force the driven head beyond
the surface of the thick nut. Now how can I get rich off this idea?
Dave Reel - RV8A
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: | Kit + for sale(RV-6) |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob Binzer" <robinzer@seidata.com>
Due to aging and constant battle for medical I have decided to sell the prepunched
Wings and Empennage kit Purchased from Van's on 3/30/98, that consists of
the following:
RV-6 Empennage, complete, (except for tips)
Left wing: on Phlogiston spar nearly complete, Aileron mounted, next step is mount
the flap, top skin must be installed. Wiring for strobe/light installed, tubing
and ports for AOA installed. Landing light installed. Air speed tubing installed.
Gas tank installed and tested with avgas. Tie down completed. Wing tip
is not installed.
Right wing: gas tank complete and tested with avgas,(unmounted)
aileron and flap constructed, (unmounted) aileron control bracket complete. Spar,
is complete as received from Phlogiston.
Ribs have been straightened and ready to be installed on spar.
All skins and material to complete the wings are included in the sale. Rear spar
complete and ready to mount.
Strobes are tested monthly,(Not installed), AOA by Proprietary Software Systems.
If interested please contact by E-mail (robinzer@seidata.com)
I expect to be out of town some, so no phone calls please, I am in Madison, Indiana.
(KIMS)
To answer some questions that have been raised I have broken down the package ($11,000.)
as follows.
Empennage 2660.00
Wings 5637.00
Welen Strobes 660.00
Angle of Attack inst. 856.00
Prop Ext.,Bolt Kit,
Crush Plate 247.00
Van's True Air Speed 150.00
Turn Bank 200.00
Attitude 200.00
D/G 200.00
Vert. Speed 50.00
Altimeter 130.00
Suction GA. 10.00
Please advise if there are any other questions. Thanks for the interest.
Bob Binzer
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: | Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" |
22, 2002) at 05/23/2003 03:51:13 PM
--> RV-List message posted by: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
I would agree that octane has an affect on anti knocking. If anything it
would retard the octane of the fuel to keep it from detonating before the
piston reaches TDC. The greater the octane the more potential you have for
detonation. Lead aside. I still stand by my debate that the lead in
aviaiton grade fuels was and is made for valve train lubrication and not an
octane booster.
Regards
Glenn Williams
A&P
Fort Worth, Texas
do not archive
Message 38
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Clear wingwalk material? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Laird Owens <owens@aerovironment.com>
Clearrrr tape, oh..... Whoops....That's what happens when you take
the red eye back from Hawaii and then try to read email in the
morning....
Laird
do not archive
>--> RV-List message posted by: Laird Owens <owens@aerovironment.com>
>
>Go to your local skate board shop. Grip tape is a buck a foot.
>That's what I used...works fine.
>Laird
>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>>
>>ACS, 16" x 30", P/N 09-31810, $33.00 (old catalog)
>>
>>
>>At 08:54 AM 5/23/03 -0400, you wrote:
>>>--> RV-List message posted by: Ken Balch <kbalch1@attbi.com>
>>>
>>>With my paint job underway, I've been trying to locate some clear
>>>wingwalk material which I remember seeing a year or two back.
>>> Unfortunately, either I didn't bookmark the site or it's just
>>>disappeared back into the mists of time.
>>>
>>>Can anyone point me toward this stuff?
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Ken Balch
>>>RV-8 N118KB
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>Scott Bilinski
>>Eng dept 305
>>Phone (858) 657-2536
>>Pager (858) 502-5190
>>
>>
>
>
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: | Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" |
--> RV-List message posted by: kempthornes <kempthornes@earthlink.net>
We live and learn, Glenn, hopefully.
See at bottom of page 138 Skyranch Engineering Manual ( a commonly accepted
authority) where it says,
"Lead does not lubricate valve stems."
or were you thinking of the rocker arms? :-)
hal kempthorne
At 02:48 PM 5/23/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
>
>........... I still stand by my debate that the lead in
>aviaiton grade fuels was and is made for valve train lubrication and not an
>octane booster.
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: | Laird's most excellent adventure (OT) |
--> RV-List message posted by: "David Burton" <dburton@nwlink.com>
Welcome home! Time to slide Pop out of the RV and see if you still remember
how to fly...
How did the Helios flights go? I have not heard anything about it. Is
Hawaii smoking this time of year? One of my techs is getting married and
honeymooning there in a few days. Guess the weather outside won't matter
much to him :-)
Message 41
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RemovingBadlyDrivenRivets |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Elsa & Henry" <elsa-henry@darlor-watch.com>
Don't know at what stage you are in your 8A build, but I found that 99.9% of
my badly driven rivets were in areas where a rivet squeezer couldn't be
used. I have used on occasion the shank of an old (straight) rivet set with
the business end ground-down to form a pin 3/32" diameter and have a
bucking-bar with various holes in it to take the shop head similar to you
"nut" idea and then tap the headless rivet with the rivet gun. Works great
too. Free!!
Cheers!!--Henry
Hore
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: Mounting you Garmin ideas needed |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham@hotmail.com>
Jim,
Take a look at the the first photo in our Oct 12th Chuck & Dave Rowbotham,
in the Matronics enclosures Photo share. We mounted out 205 in the glare
shield - It's like having a HUD and does not impact your visibilty. Best of
all you keep your head out of the cockpit.
Chuck & Dave Rowbotham
RV-8A
>From: James Bond <rvflyingisfun@yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: rv-list-digest@matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: Mounting you Garmin ideas needed
>Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 06:12:07 -0700 (PDT)
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: James Bond <rvflyingisfun@yahoo.com>
>
>Hello all, with all this talk about Garmin GPS handhelds. I would like to
>see some ideas on mounting places as my panel is limited on space. So any
>pic you may have would be great. So please send some pic's to me needs some
>ideas.
>
>Thanks
>James Bond
>RV6-A
>rvflyingisfun@yahoo.com
>
>
>---------------------------------
>
>
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: Engine Question > "Hmmmm??" |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
Chris W wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Chris W <chrisw3@cox.net>
>
> I did read that part of the article you mention. I didn't read the whole thing
but I skimmed most of it and read a lot of it. I'm not
> saying that I know if lead lubricates or not. I am just saying from everything
I have read, which at this point isn't much, leads me to
> think that lead doesn't help lubricate. The two sources that were provided by
a poster both "state" that lead does help lubricate. But I
> am one of those people who don't believe everything they read. Even if it is
written by someone who should know, and sounds like they know,
> what they are talking about. I always look for evidence to back up claims and
when no evidence to back up a claim is given I have to
> wonder. Especialy if that claim is disputed by others who also seem to know
what they are talking about. In the AVWEB article the author
> states that he has found no scientific data that indicates that lead helps with
lubrication. This leads me to believe that he has looked
> for such data and can't find it. I also have to wonder about that pdf file on
the EAA sight. It says in part, "Leaded aviation fuels use
> tetraethyl lead in small quantities, primarily to improve antiknock qualities,
and is a necessary additive to aviation fuel to produce 100
> octane or greater fuel." It makes two claims there as if they were two different
things when they really are just stating the same thing in
> two different ways. At least that is the way I have been lead to understand
what higher octane does. That article on EAA's site also
> describes several ways that the lead in the fuel is bad for your engine. The
other source that was posted and claimed lead helped with
> lubrication also says, "Burning an occasional tank of 100LL should not be necessary
if the valve's, guides and seats were constructed in
> accordance with the latest specifications." So even if lead does lubricate this
tells me that with a modern engine I don't need it.
>
> Again I don't know for sure one way or the other, but from what little I have
read so far, I am of the opinion that aside from its
> contribution to the high octane lead does nothing good for aviation engines.
And I am quick to point that out in hopes that someone will
> have some evidence that will *prove* it one way or the other.
>
> Chris W
>
HOW HARD can it be to call Lycoming and ask? IF YOU really want to know
the answer. Would have taken less time then it did to write the book
above and post it to the archive.
do not archive
Jerry
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: Landoll balancer for sale |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
Randy Compton wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Compton" <rdcompton@earthlink.net>
>
> Listers:
>
> I've got a Mark Landoll harmonic balancer for sale. It is 5 1/2 months old
> and has less than 30 operating hours on it.
>
> I paid $375 for it back in December. Asking $325, or make offer.
>
> Randy Compton
> RV-3 N84VF
> Gulf Breeze, FL
>
>
Don't like it?
do not archive
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North <wnorth@sdccd.cc.ca.us>
Doesn't propane liquify at 60 psig, at 70ish degrees?
That makes 60 psid at sea level or roughly 67 psid at altitude. I would hope
the canisters aren't that critical.
Most of them use a mix of Butane and Propane which may reduce this pressure
some, but I don't have that chart in front me right now.
I would be suprised if they don't have a 10 to 1 WAG factor as well.
My little snow peak works fine going from place to place, as long as I don't
turn it on in the plane...
;{) (Some coffee addicts will do anything for a cup-o-jo)
Message 46
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North <wnorth@sdccd.cc.ca.us>
Good fuel articles, all,
My two cents worth is that when they converted to unleaded I was rebuilding
engines, including VWs, (but never one with 200k on it) and there were many
signs of increased errosion of valve seats and valve faces when the unleaded
was introduced.
But, the hard science of it didn't exist. IE was it due to the elmination of
the lead or the addition of new octane enhancers that are used in unleaded
fuels. I do know that this problem went away in a few years so somebody
figured it out. Since then the unleaded fuels have had a problem with intake
component fouling and subsequent poor drivability problems.
The bottom line, every vehicle or powerplant is a set of compromises,
trundling down the road, or across the sky.
June gloom is back in So Cal. I actually got 8.3 seconds of really soft IFR
on the Dynon today. It didn't seem to notice the fog outside one bit.
do not archive
Message 47
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
You need to find out how octane ratings are determined via the point of
Knock in a special one cylinder engine. Raising the knock point raises the
octane rating. That is what the antiknock does. There are other compounds
that do the same thing as TEL. Alcohol, toluene, benzene are just a few.
See... http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/autos/octane.htm
OR
http://www.howstuffworks.com/question90.htm
Cy Galley
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley@qcbc.org or experimenter@eaa.org
----- Original Message -----
From: <glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm"
> --> RV-List message posted by: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
>
>
> I totally agree that it is both a valve lubricant and an anti knock
> additive. But it is NOT an octane booster.
>
> Glenn Williams
> A&P
> Fort Worth, Texas
>
> do not archive
>
>
Message 48
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | MK-319-BS Rivets |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Glenn Brasch" <gbrasch@earthlink.net>
Would anyone out there have any left over MK-319-BS rivets that they can spare
to mail out? Another builder and I are looking for some but are trying to avoid
the high cost of shipping from a supplier. We would be glad to cover any of
your costs and expenses. Ideally, we could use about 20 of them if possible.
Thanks in advance. Glenn in AZ -9A emp.
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Message 49
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Laird's most excellent adventure (OT) |
--> RV-List message posted by: Laird Owens <owens@aerovironment.com>
Hi David,
I'm just back for the Holiday weekend to work on some stuff I can't
do out there, and to see if I can get Pop out of the left seat for a
day or 2. I'm back on the 767 on Tuesday.
We've completed some good tests and are preparing for first flight
with the H2 fuel cell. We expect to fly in about 2 weeks. The first
flight will be a test hop to 50K feet, landing later in the evening
on battery power. If everything goes as planned, the next flight
should be a multiday mission using the fuel cell for power thru the
night. Probable see something in Avweek when we fly.
2 types of days on Kauai.....beautiful or gorgeous. It's a rough life :-)
Talk with you later,
Laird
I'll keep you in the loop of the people I'm goin
>--> RV-List message posted by: "David Burton" <dburton@nwlink.com>
>
>Welcome home! Time to slide Pop out of the RV and see if you still remember
>how to fly...
>
>How did the Helios flights go? I have not heard anything about it. Is
>Hawaii smoking this time of year? One of my techs is getting married and
>honeymooning there in a few days. Guess the weather outside won't matter
>much to him :-) do not archive
Message 50
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Engine Question > "Hmmmm??" |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Greg Young" <gyoung@cs-sol.com>
Agreed Jerry. I heard it directly from ECI who is an engine manufacturer
competing directly with Lycoming and Superior. We were standing 30 ft from
the test cell where they were running certification tests on their Lycosaur
clone. He didn't talk about octane, vapor pressure or valve stems - it was
specifically valve seats/sealing. So you could add Continental, Superior and
ECI to your call list. Common sense (and marketing) says if it were simple
they would have fixed it. And if it were just octane or vapor pressure,
which can be fixed for a price, the tree huggers would have forced it down
our throats.
Greg
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
>
>
> Chris W wrote:
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Chris W <chrisw3@cox.net>
> >
> > I did read that part of the article you mention. I didn't read the
> > whole thing but I skimmed most of it and read a lot of it. I'm not
> > saying that I know if lead lubricates or not. I am just
<snip>
> > engines. And I am quick to point that out in hopes that
> someone will
> > have some evidence that will *prove* it one way or the other.
> >
> > Chris W
> >
>
>
> HOW HARD can it be to call Lycoming and ask? IF YOU really
> want to know the answer. Would have taken less time then it
> did to write the book
> above and post it to the archive.
> do not archive
>
> Jerry
>
Message 51
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Adnair fuel valve concern |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jerry2DT@aol.com
Fellow Listers....
I'm installing an Andair 3-port valve in my RV6a, that is left, right, and
engine. I see it's possible to feed from both tanks however, if valve is placed
between. I believe this is a no-no on RV's, am I right? Not that it is likely
to happen, as the valve has positive detents for left/right positioning. Thing
is though, it can happen, and having intimate knowledge of Mr. Murphy's law,
just wondering if anyone else has noodled about this or has an answer or
opinion. I'd like to eliminate as many "it probably won't happen"'s from my
airplane as possible.
Yes, I did email Andair about it a week ago. No answer... Also checked
archives to no avail. BTW, the valve itself is of jewel-like construction, a lot
prettier than the old brass valve, which did not have this prolem...
My old C-172 had a "both" position, and I hate to expose my ignorance in
front of everyone, but why is it our RV's are not supposed to use that position,
anyone know?
Jerry Cochran
Wilsonville, OR
-6a 70/80
Message 52
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm" |
--> RV-List message posted by: "William Davis" <rvpilot@695online.com>
Sorry Glenn but I just have to jump in here. T.E.L."s primary reason for
being is to raise the octane number of the gasoline that it is added to. It
may have some ability to lubricate the valve seats (not the stems) of some
engines depending on which materials those seats are made of. T.E.L.'s
effectiveness diminishes the more that is added. The first ml added raises
the octane a good bit but the more that is added, the less good it does.
after about 3 ml/gal., not much octane increase is realized. I retired from
the DuPont Co. and spent a good deal of my time manufacturing the stuff,
also spent a couple of years in their Petroleum Lab running octane
comparison studies. Incidentally, the stuff is very toxic. It is readily
absorbed through the skin and the lead thus acquired stays in your body for
a very long time--read-don't wash your hands in 100LL
do not archive
Bill N48WD Tiger-Kat
----- Original Message -----
From: <glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Engine Question...things that make you go "Hmmmm"
> --> RV-List message posted by: glenn.williams@businessacft.bombardier.com
>
>
> Cy sorry but you are partly wrong. Lead does in fact foul plugs and in
> general makes for a dirty combustion liner. However lead does not enhance
> octane. In 100 low lead the process is better but you will still have
> fouled plugs and dirty heads. That is the reason we relocate the plugs
> during the annual inspection. Lead is made purely for the lubrication of
> the valve train. The fuel manufacturers have to put lead in the fuel it is
> not a natural part of the fuel. I would suggest that you look at any fuel
> manufacturers web site and get further information. That way you know I am
> not blowing hot air in your direction.
>
> Regards
> Glenn Williams
> A&P
> Fort Worth, Texas
>
> do not archive
>
>
Message 53
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Landoll balancer for sale |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Compton" <rdcompton@earthlink.net>
I like it OK, but my -3 is already on the nose-heavy side. Adding 12 lbs
just about as far in front as possible didn't help, and I don't feel like
adding dead weight aft to balance it out.
Randy Compton
RV-3 N84VF
Gulf Breeze, FL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Springer" <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Landoll balancer for sale
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
> Don't like it?
> do not archive
Do Not Archive
Message 54
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Adnair fuel valve concern |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
When gravity feeds then you can have a both. When you suck fuel like on any
low winged airplane, suction always sucks the easier fluid which in this
case will be AIR from the tank that empties first. So what? you say! Well
the other tank could have many gallons of fuel left, but your sucker of a
pump always sucks the easier fluid AIR from the empty tank. You will have
to agree that some gas is necessary to make the engine run. Since the fuel
system now has AIR and not gas, it stops. This you don't want to happen.
Moral of story... Don't have a both position on your fuel valve if you are
sucking gas.
P.S. Unless the tank vent system is correctly design for a gravity system
you can have problems with both. The Luscombe comes to mind.
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: <Jerry2DT@aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: Adnair fuel valve concern
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry2DT@aol.com
>
> Fellow Listers....
>
> I'm installing an Andair 3-port valve in my RV6a, that is left, right, and
> engine. I see it's possible to feed from both tanks however, if valve is
placed
> between. I believe this is a no-no on RV's, am I right? Not that it is
likely
> to happen, as the valve has positive detents for left/right positioning.
Thing
> is though, it can happen, and having intimate knowledge of Mr. Murphy's
law,
> just wondering if anyone else has noodled about this or has an answer or
> opinion. I'd like to eliminate as many "it probably won't happen"'s from
my
> airplane as possible.
>
> Yes, I did email Andair about it a week ago. No answer... Also checked
> archives to no avail. BTW, the valve itself is of jewel-like construction,
a lot
> prettier than the old brass valve, which did not have this prolem...
>
> My old C-172 had a "both" position, and I hate to expose my ignorance in
> front of everyone, but why is it our RV's are not supposed to use that
position,
> anyone know?
>
> Jerry Cochran
> Wilsonville, OR
> -6a 70/80
>
>
Message 55
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | How mush room.... |
--> RV-List message posted by: emrath <emrath@comcast.net>
Time: 05:06:49 AM PST US
From: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
What about putting the fuselage in from side to side and have one wing
sticking out the door? Might work and you could cover with plastic during
the night. Just an option. Maybe.
Marty in Brentwood TN
Subject: Re: RV-List: How Much Room Do I Need to Build an RV 7?
--> RV-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
I'm building in a 15 1/2 X 21 1/2 (inside dimensions of 16 X 22 garage). I
have mounted one wing at a time to get it final drilled, but just barely
enough room. I think I will be able to get the engine and tail mounted on
the fuselage by angling the plane across the area but I can always wait on
the tail because I have had it fitted and have removed it for ease of
working on other parts/areas. My backup plan to move into my double garage
and move my wife's car outside (but that will have to be her idea and not
mine if you understand what I mean).
Do Not Archive the stuff about the backup plan.
Larry in Indiana, RV7 Tip-up O-360 3XG reserved.
Working on Canopy of Finish Kit
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Brooks" <tbrooks@nexelon.com>
Subject: RV-List: How Much Room Do I Need to Build an RV 7?
Message 56
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RV transition training in Michigan |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dave Ford" <dford@michweb.net>
There are still 6 slots open for training in an RV6 with Mike Seager on July 25,
26. 27 just before Oshkosh in Cadillac, MI (CAD). Anyone interested please
e-mail me off list for requested dates and times.
Dave Ford
dford@michweb.net
Message 57
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Adnair fuel valve concern |
--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorto1537@rogers.com>
>--> RV-List message posted by: Jerry2DT@aol.com
>
>Fellow Listers....
>
>I'm installing an Andair 3-port valve in my RV6a, that is left, right, and
>engine. I see it's possible to feed from both tanks however, if
>valve is placed
>between. I believe this is a no-no on RV's, am I right? Not that it is likely
>to happen, as the valve has positive detents for left/right positioning. Thing
>is though, it can happen, and having intimate knowledge of Mr. Murphy's law,
>just wondering if anyone else has noodled about this or has an answer or
>opinion. I'd like to eliminate as many "it probably won't happen"'s from my
>airplane as possible.
>
>Yes, I did email Andair about it a week ago. No answer... Also checked
>archives to no avail. BTW, the valve itself is of jewel-like
>construction, a lot
>prettier than the old brass valve, which did not have this prolem...
>
>My old C-172 had a "both" position, and I hate to expose my ignorance in
>front of everyone, but why is it our RV's are not supposed to use
>that position,
>anyone know?
>
>Jerry Cochran
I believe that having the valve inadventently in the "both" position
could only be a problem if your fuel state was low enough that one
tank ran dry. So, in the vast majority of your flight hours this
should not be a problem, as long as you didn't leave it in "both" too
long. I suspect that one tank would probably feed faster than the
other, as you probably wouldn't have the selector perfectly centred
between tanks. So one tank would eventually run dry, and the engine
would stop.
Of course it probably makes sense to run a flight test on the both
position with the fuel at a normal level just to confirm that there
are no issues that we aren't yet aware of. It might make sense to
run this test overhead a suitable airfield, just in case.
Note: I am not suggesting that you should ever deliberately run in
the "both" position, except while doing the flight test. I only
suggest the flight test on the basis that if there is a problem, it
is better to find it out when you are prepared to deal with it.
Cy already explained why a Both position is a very bad idea for RVs,
so I won't cover that ground again.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
Message 58
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: How mush room.... |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>
Hi Tim,
Would this work?;
Aside from household security, local area building codes and neighborhood
appearance issues. You could consider the wing out the door suggestion by
adding a movable temporary extension type of structure. It could be strong
enough to satisfy security needs. The wife might not take a strong exception
to it if some effort to make it match the exterior of the home was applied.
Jim in Kelowna
This was an idea that I was tempted to do myself at one point. I got by with
just enough room to fit both wings inside with doors closed I found myself
crawling under and around for quite a while there.
If anyone asked me to build a 10 I would have to do it.
Jim in Kelowna
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "emrath" <emrath@comcast.net>
Subject: RV-List: How mush room....
> --> RV-List message posted by: emrath <emrath@comcast.net>
>
>
> Time: 05:06:49 AM PST US
> From: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
> What about putting the fuselage in from side to side and have one wing
> sticking out the door? Might work and you could cover with plastic
during
> the night. Just an option. Maybe.
> Marty in Brentwood TN
>
>
> Subject: Re: RV-List: How Much Room Do I Need to Build an RV 7?
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
>
> I'm building in a 15 1/2 X 21 1/2 (inside dimensions of 16 X 22 garage).
I
> have mounted one wing at a time to get it final drilled, but just barely
> enough room. I think I will be able to get the engine and tail mounted on
> the fuselage by angling the plane across the area but I can always wait on
> the tail because I have had it fitted and have removed it for ease of
> working on other parts/areas. My backup plan to move into my double
garage
> and move my wife's car outside (but that will have to be her idea and not
> mine if you understand what I mean).
> Do Not Archive the stuff about the backup plan.
>
> Larry in Indiana, RV7 Tip-up O-360 3XG reserved.
> Working on Canopy of Finish Kit
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tim Brooks" <tbrooks@nexelon.com>
> Subject: RV-List: How Much Room Do I Need to Build an RV 7?
>
>
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! --
|