---------------------------------------------------------- RV-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Mon 05/26/03: 40 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 12:55 AM - Re: RV Turboprop (Mills, Trevor R) 2. 03:08 AM - Re: RV Turboprop (Kevin Horton) 3. 04:55 AM - Re: RV Turboprop do not archive (WALTER KERR) 4. 05:42 AM - Re: RV Turboprop do not archive (John Huft) 5. 06:04 AM - Alternator Mount (RV6AOKC@aol.com) 6. 07:06 AM - Re: Fw: F-688 ? for slider. (Doug Gray) 7. 07:19 AM - Re: Alternator Mount (Mark Phillips) 8. 07:54 AM - Re: RV Turboprop (kempthornes) 9. 08:21 AM - EFI was RV Turboprop (Chris W) 10. 08:54 AM - tip-up canopy frame (thomas a. sargent) 11. 08:55 AM - Re: RV Turboprop/proving speed claims (Boyd C. Braem) 12. 08:57 AM - WAS>>> RV Turboprop NOW >>>[How do we define BETTER?] (James E. Clark) 13. 09:03 AM - Re: Alternator Mount (Vanremog@aol.com) 14. 09:15 AM - Re: Alternator Mount (Kyle Boatright) 15. 09:40 AM - Clear wingwalk material? (Emmanuelle Richard) 16. 09:55 AM - Re: EFI was RV Turboprop (kempthornes) 17. 10:01 AM - Re: tip-up canopy frame (Dan Checkoway) 18. 10:47 AM - Re: EFI was RV Turboprop (Charlie & Tupper England) 19. 11:33 AM - Collins Avionics stack on Ebay (Dana Overall) 20. 11:41 AM - RPM Limitations (DPrestonsr@aol.com) 21. 11:44 AM - TEL (Wheeler North) 22. 12:11 PM - Re: Alternator Mount (Mark Phillips) 23. 12:26 PM - Re: EFI was RV Turboprop (Konrad Werner) 24. 12:41 PM - Re: WAS>>> RV Turboprop NOW >>>[How do we define BETTER?] (Tedd McHenry) 25. 12:56 PM - Re: RPM Limitations (Dwpetrus@aol.com) 26. 01:42 PM - Turbo Prop (Norman) 27. 02:31 PM - Re: TEL (Art Glaser) 28. 03:23 PM - Re: LED light source (Flexible Electroluminescent Lighting, 888 457-0117) 29. 03:26 PM - Re: RPM Limitations (Randall Henderson) 30. 03:29 PM - Re: RPM Limitations (Dougpsr@aol.com) 31. 04:28 PM - RV6 Wings Install (J. R. Dial) 32. 06:04 PM - Q. - ElectroAir ignition mounting (Fred Stucklen) 33. 06:06 PM - Non RV message to our veterans. (Pete Elia) 34. 07:52 PM - Fuel Valve Concerns (Eustace Bowhay) 35. 08:01 PM - Re: RPM Limitations (Alex Peterson) 36. 09:20 PM - Re: Non RV message to our veterans. (Tom Gummo) 37. 09:34 PM - Re: Non RV message to our veterans. (Jerry Springer) 38. 09:41 PM - Re: RPM Limitations (James E. Clark) 39. 10:06 PM - Re: WAS>>> RV Turboprop NOW >>>[How do we define BETTER?] (James E. Clark) 40. 10:31 PM - Re: Alternator Mount (Vanremog@aol.com) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 12:55:50 AM PST US From: "Mills, Trevor R" Subject: Re: RV-List: RV Turboprop --> RV-List message posted by: "Mills, Trevor R" can anyone tell me about the new V6 from Rotax, re h/p Trevor Mills ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 03:08:49 AM PST US From: Kevin Horton Subject: Re: RV-List: RV Turboprop --> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton >--> RV-List message posted by: Rob Prior > >Kevin Horton wrote: >> --> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton >> I do agree >> that I would love to have a modern replacement for the Lycosaur. > >And: > >> But, I'd sure want to see some good service history before I bought >> an engine, > >Am I the only one who sees these as being almost mutually exclusive? If you >have an engine that's "modern" compared to a Lycoming, it's unlikely to have >the service history to show it being as reliable. And if it's got the >service history to show it being as reliable, it's unlikely to be very >"modern", if you look closely at it. > >I'm all for an alternative to a Lycoming engine. But I also accept that I >will have to assume that my aircraft will have a different set of teething >pains if I end up with a non-Lycoming powerplant. That's not to say it will >be more or less reliable, but it will have it's own set of problems/benefits >that will be different from a Lycoming installation. > >-- >--------- >Rob Prior It all depends on your definition of modern. I would be happy with liquid cooling, electronic ignition and electronic fuel injection. This technology has been around for decades. I don't expect to see variable valve timing, or oval pistons, etc. The first batches of a new engine design from a small company is pretty much guaranteed to have teething pains. That is the price you pay for trying something new. I'm more worried about questions such as how frequent the engine failures are, how many hours the engines can go before overhaul, and whether the company can provide reasonable support. I'd sure like to see five years of service history on a good number of engines before I head out over the trees in one. If everyone had the same perspective I have, then any new engine design would be doomed to failure. The small companies that come up with these new engine ideas are counting on the optimistic risk-taker types to buy the first engines, to produce the service history that the cautious guys like me want to see. -- Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) Ottawa, Canada http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/ ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 04:55:59 AM PST US From: "WALTER KERR" Subject: Re: RV-List: RV Turboprop do not archive --> RV-List message posted by: "WALTER KERR" I'd sure like to see five years of service > history on a good number of engines before I head out over the trees > in one. > > If everyone had the same perspective I have, then any new engine > design would be doomed to failure. The small companies that come up > with these new engine ideas are counting on the optimistic risk-taker > types to buy the first engines, to produce the service history that > the cautious guys like me want to see. > -- > Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) > Ottawa, Canada > http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/ Hi Kevin, You are the type that should be out there testing new "STUFF" with your background! (GRIN) Seriously we owe what we in the world of homebuilt aircraft to folks that were willing to step out on a limb and do new things and you have all the qualifications to do it in a sane manner. Bernie Kerr, 6A flying, 9A rotary building ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 05:42:06 AM PST US From: "John Huft" Subject: RE: RV-List: RV Turboprop do not archive --> RV-List message posted by: "John Huft" One thing I have noticed in my years of flying (34 in Sept.), is that the more experienced a pilot is, the more conservative he is in all aspects of his flying. When we are young and invincible, we are risk takers, but after we have had a few good scares, we back off a little (or a lot). So maybe it is up to the young among us to try the new stuff. One observation I have made is that with the low stall speed and wide envelope of the RVs, you couldn't ask for a better test platform. The opening for new engine manufacturers is to follow in Tracy Crook's footsteps. Get out there and fly it. Put some hours on it. Enter events like the Sun 100 and prove that the engine is producing rated power. One thing that is cracking me up lately is the number of people who CLAIM to have O-so-fast airplanes, but never seem to enter a race. The Sun 100 is a great BS filter. I can even think of a couple of listers who live in Florida.... John Huft RV8 Pagosa Springs, CO -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of WALTER KERR Subject: Re: RV-List: RV Turboprop do not archive --> RV-List message posted by: "WALTER KERR" I'd sure like to see five years of service > history on a good number of engines before I head out over the trees > in one. > > If everyone had the same perspective I have, then any new engine > design would be doomed to failure. The small companies that come up > with these new engine ideas are counting on the optimistic risk-taker > types to buy the first engines, to produce the service history that > the cautious guys like me want to see. > -- > Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) > Ottawa, Canada > http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/ Hi Kevin, You are the type that should be out there testing new "STUFF" with your background! (GRIN) Seriously we owe what we in the world of homebuilt aircraft to folks that were willing to step out on a limb and do new things and you have all the qualifications to do it in a sane manner. Bernie Kerr, 6A flying, 9A rotary building ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 06:04:40 AM PST US From: RV6AOKC@aol.com Subject: RV-List: Alternator Mount --> RV-List message posted by: RV6AOKC@aol.com A few quick questions for the wise that the archives couldn't help me with. Im mounting a B and C L40 on an Aerosport 0-360. I have removed the flywheel and mounted and safety wired the main mount and associated bolts. Have a few other questions... 1. The directions indicate that the two bolts that attach the alt tension arm are to be safety wired. Makes sense...but not sure what they should be safety wired to...nothing close by...do I just run the safety around the tension arm? Drill a hole?? 2. What is the correct way to adjust the tension on the belt? 3. When running the field wire and main wire where is the best place to run it? Can it be run just under the intake manifold supported by some C-clamps (from the back to the front) or do I need to run all the way under the engine? Thanks for the help..... Kurt in OKC... Engine Stuff... Do Not Archive ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 07:06:07 AM PST US From: Doug Gray Subject: Re: RV-List: Fwd: F-688 ? for slider. --> RV-List message posted by: Doug Gray Bill, SC-4 does have the F-688 part illustrated, but not identified. Only shown edgewise, so corresponds to an extra line on the elevation in the TRH corner. Look closely on the full size plan. Doug Gray ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 07:19:24 AM PST US From: Mark Phillips Subject: Re: RV-List: Alternator Mount --> RV-List message posted by: Mark Phillips Hi Kurt- Just installed mine but not safetied yet as I don't see a way to wire the tension adjustment bolt, or if this is necessary- somebody chime in on this one- It looks like the two mounting bolts just wire to each other, I believe (mine is the "U" shaped bracket). I ran the wires to an adel clamp on the front right corner of the sump, then down between the intake tubes to another pair of adel clamps on the lower engine mount tube that connects the lower right engine vibration damper to the FW. The wires clear the intake tubes nicely. I've noticed some builders have added firesleeve around these wires & may do the same. From the PossumWorks Mark RV6AOKC@aol.com wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: RV6AOKC@aol.com > > A few quick questions for the wise that the archives couldn't help me with. > Im mounting a B and C L40 on an Aerosport 0-360. I have removed the flywheel > and mounted and safety wired the main mount and associated bolts. Have a few > other questions... > > 1. The directions indicate that the two bolts that attach the alt tension > arm are to be safety wired. Makes sense...but not sure what they should be > safety wired to...nothing close by...do I just run the safety around the > tension > arm? Drill a hole?? > > 2. What is the correct way to adjust the tension on the belt? > > 3. When running the field wire and main wire where is the best place to run > it? Can it be run just under the intake manifold supported by some C-clamps > (from the back to the front) or do I need to run all the way under the > engine? > > Thanks for the help..... > > Kurt in OKC... > Engine Stuff... > > Do Not Archive > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 07:54:08 AM PST US From: kempthornes Subject: Re: RV-List: RV Turboprop --> RV-List message posted by: kempthornes At 06:02 AM 5/26/2003 -0400, you wrote: >--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton It all depends on your definition of modern. I would be happy with liquid cooling, electronic ignition and electronic fuel injection. I don't feel a need for modern so much as I do a need for : 1 - lower price 2 - less vibration 3 - more reliability Something like the 350 V8 in my 1972 Chevy pickup would be wonderful. EI and EFI are available for the Chevy and the Lycoming, of course. K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne RV6-a N7HK flying! PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA) ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 08:21:28 AM PST US From: Chris W Subject: EFI was RV-List: RV Turboprop --> RV-List message posted by: Chris W kempthornes wrote: > EI and EFI are available for the Chevy and the Lycoming, of course. I knew you could get EI from a few different vendors for a Lycoming but I didn't know about the EFI for Lycoming. Do you have any web links for this? do not archive -- 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 10 ____________________________________ Time: 08:54:15 AM PST US From: "thomas a. sargent" Subject: RV-List: tip-up canopy frame --> RV-List message posted by: "thomas a. sargent" I am starting on the tip-up canopy rame for my 6A. The 2 halves of the forward channel of the frame are spliced together and the width matches the fuselage well. The WD-625 side rails are bent so that they match the curvature of the fuselage and are 1/8" above the main longeron. The problem is where the side rails and the forward frame (WD-616) meet and are supposed to be spliced together. There is a mismatch in 2 dimensions. With the forward frame clamped in place against the sub panel (F-668), the bottom flanges of the side rail and the side support of the frame are off by about 1/4" (the side support being higher one). Secondly, the side rail sticks straight up, but the side support of the frame is curving inboard. Dwg # 51 C-C' shows these 2 pieces laying against each other, but I have a 1/2" gap between them. What has to give here? Thanks for any ideas/experience. -- Tom Sargent RV-6A ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 08:55:45 AM PST US From: "Boyd C. Braem" Subject: Re: RV-List: RV Turboprop/proving speed claims --> RV-List message posted by: "Boyd C. Braem" John-- I am very lucky to still be alive, because when I was young I was concerned about trying to "impress" people with myself or my airplane. For what? If I enter a race and beat somebody that I know is slower than I am or lose to someone I know is faster than I am, what does that prove?--assuming pilot skills are relatively equal--and, going from there, in 'planes with close performance, if I beat a less experiened pilot or get beat by a more experienced pilot, what does that prove? The only person I care about impressing is ME. If I do something better or faster than I did yesterday, I am a happy man and I sleep very well that night. I really don't give a flying rat's ass what you or anyone else think--it just really doesn't matter. I still takes risks, esp. when I fly low and fast, but I consider them controlled risks, these days--because I practice for them--for example, I practice saying "Oh, shit!!!" a lot. Boyd. Venice, FL do not archive John Huft wrote: >--> RV-List message posted by: "John Huft" > >One thing I have noticed in my years of flying (34 in Sept.), is that the >more experienced a pilot is, the more conservative he is in all aspects of >his flying. When we are young and invincible, we are risk takers, > >One thing that is cracking me up lately is the number of people who CLAIM to >have O-so-fast airplanes, but never seem to enter a race. The Sun 100 is a >great BS filter. I can even think of a couple of listers who live in >Florida.... > >John Huft RV8 >Pagosa Springs, CO > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 08:57:57 AM PST US From: "James E. Clark" Subject: RV-List: WAS>>> RV Turboprop NOW >>>[How do we define BETTER?] --> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" First, I am no engine expert in the least bit. I am just a "consumer"> I concur with Kevin but his comments about electronic ignition and fuel injection got me to thinking about the decison process I just went through ... and wonder what is the decision criteria people are using when they wax and wane about the new "turbo-fireblaster Model 0.5" (due out next month) engines. [I, like anyone else would love to have a "plug replacement engine" that delivered 10x the reliability, 2x the performance for 1/10 the the cost of a Lyc/clone. So please take this with the notion of "thinking out loud"] What characteristics do you want your engine to have from a functional, you cannot touch it or see it standpoint. What is it that you want it to do that the Lycoming and its "clones" don't do our cannot be made to do? + More evenly measured fuel as in Fuel Injection?? See Airflow Performance and other options + Better spark for a little more gitty-up and better "mileage"?? See ElectroAir and Lightspeed. Burn autogas?? They do already. Burn Jet-A?? Can't help on that one. :-) Be cheaper?? Don't we all wish. (But Lycoming could reduce their price anytime. Don't know if their financials could handle it but if theirs cannot, why should we think someone else could?) How does one seriously define "better" as opposed to "different" and supposedly "modern and better"? I suspect if we REALLY listed in the REAL priority the things that are important and took an unbiased look at the Lyc's and clones, we would probably be impressed. I think it would be an interesting exercise. James ... ramblings > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Kevin Horton > Sent: Monday, May 26, 2003 6:02 AM > To: rv-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: RV Turboprop > > > --> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton > > >--> RV-List message posted by: Rob Prior > > > >Kevin Horton wrote: > >> --> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton > >> I do agree > >> that I would love to have a modern replacement for the Lycosaur. > > > >And: > > > >> But, I'd sure want to see some good service history before I bought > >> an engine, > > > >Am I the only one who sees these as being almost mutually > exclusive? If you > >have an engine that's "modern" compared to a Lycoming, it's > unlikely to have > >the service history to show it being as reliable. And if it's got the > >service history to show it being as reliable, it's unlikely to be very > >"modern", if you look closely at it. > > > >I'm all for an alternative to a Lycoming engine. But I also > accept that I > >will have to assume that my aircraft will have a different set > of teething > >pains if I end up with a non-Lycoming powerplant. That's not to > say it will > >be more or less reliable, but it will have it's own set of > problems/benefits > >that will be different from a Lycoming installation. > > > >-- > >--------- > >Rob Prior > > It all depends on your definition of modern. I would be happy with > liquid cooling, electronic ignition and electronic fuel injection. > This technology has been around for decades. I don't expect to see > variable valve timing, or oval pistons, etc. > > The first batches of a new engine design from a small company is > pretty much guaranteed to have teething pains. That is the price you > pay for trying something new. I'm more worried about questions such > as how frequent the engine failures are, how many hours the engines > can go before overhaul, and whether the company can provide > reasonable support. I'd sure like to see five years of service > history on a good number of engines before I head out over the trees > in one. > > If everyone had the same perspective I have, then any new engine > design would be doomed to failure. The small companies that come up > with these new engine ideas are counting on the optimistic risk-taker > types to buy the first engines, to produce the service history that > the cautious guys like me want to see. > -- > Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) > Ottawa, Canada > http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/ > > ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 09:03:58 AM PST US From: Vanremog@aol.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Alternator Mount --> RV-List message posted by: Vanremog@aol.com In a message dated 5/26/2003 6:05:39 AM Pacific Daylight Time, RV6AOKC@aol.com writes: > 1. The directions indicate that the two bolts that attach the alt tension > arm are to be safety wired. Makes sense...but not sure what they should be > safety wired to...nothing close by...do I just run the safety around the > tension > arm? Drill a hole?? To one another. > > 2. What is the correct way to adjust the tension on the belt? So there is about 1/4" deflection midspan with normal finger pressure. > > 3. When running the field wire and main wire where is the best place to run > > it? Can it be run just under the intake manifold supported by some C-clamps > > C-clamps are not the right thing. Adel clamps are. -GV (RV-6A N1GV 605hrs) "Two hands working together can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer." - - anonymous ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 09:15:35 AM PST US From: "Kyle Boatright" Subject: Re: RV-List: Alternator Mount --> RV-List message posted by: "Kyle Boatright" ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: RV-List: Alternator Mount > --> RV-List message posted by: RV6AOKC@aol.com > > A few quick questions for the wise that the archives couldn't help me with. > Im mounting a B and C L40 on an Aerosport 0-360. I have removed the flywheel > and mounted and safety wired the main mount and associated bolts. Have a few > other questions... > > 1. The directions indicate that the two bolts that attach the alt tension > arm are to be safety wired. Makes sense...but not sure what they should be > safety wired to...nothing close by...do I just run the safety around the > tension > arm? Drill a hole?? > > 2. What is the correct way to adjust the tension on the belt? > > 3. When running the field wire and main wire where is the best place to run > it? Can it be run just under the intake manifold supported by some C-clamps > (from the back to the front) or do I need to run all the way under the > engine? > > Thanks for the help..... > > Kurt in OKC... > Engine Stuff... > Kurt, I found a location on the engine to safety the "top" bolt and drilled a hole in the mounting bracket for the "bottom" bolt. 200 hours now with no problems. As you suggested, I ran the wires under the intake manifold. From the archives on belt tension: >>>begin quote<<<< Glenn, Service Instruction 1129A gives the methods: 1. Torque method for 3/8 " belt; 11 to 13 ft. lbs. torque at the nut that holds the pulley on the alternator for a new belt and 7-9 ft. lbs for a used belt. 2. Deflection method; attach a small spring scale to the belt 1/2 way between the ring gear and alternator pulley and pull 14 lbs for a new belt and 10 lbs for a used belt. The deflection should be 5/16". If less your belt it too tight." Hope you can find a copy, if not, reply and I'll get you a copy John Holmgreen Clinton, SC -6A flying >>endquote<<< KB ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 09:40:24 AM PST US From: Emmanuelle Richard Subject: RV-List: Clear wingwalk material? --> RV-List message posted by: Emmanuelle Richard I used some clear bathtub antiskid strips from Home Depot (also comes in white). My plane is hangared and the tape hasn't yellowed after 6 months. It looks good on a polished plane and doesn't stand out as much as the black tape. It's true that if you step on the tape with any dirt under your feet, it will show and it's hard to clean it. __________________________________ http://search.yahoo.com ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 09:55:49 AM PST US From: kempthornes Subject: Re: EFI was RV-List: RV Turboprop --> RV-List message posted by: kempthornes Oops, so it is just FI hal At 10:19 AM 5/26/2003 -0500, you wrote: >--> RV-List message posted by: Chris W > >kempthornes wrote: > > > EI and EFI are available for the Chevy and the Lycoming, of course. > >I knew you could get EI from a few different vendors for a Lycoming but I >didn't know about the EFI for Lycoming. Do you have any web links for this? > >do not archive > > >-- >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 17 ____________________________________ Time: 10:01:34 AM PST US From: "Dan Checkoway" Subject: Re: RV-List: tip-up canopy frame --> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" Same sort of deal on the RV-7 tip-up canopy frame: http://images.rvproject.com/images/2003/20030309_skin_flap.jpg In that picture (right side of the plane looking aft) you can see the mismatch of shape of the side rail and the fwd frame. And here are some photos of what I did to "blend" that top inboard curve...starting from flat and straight up and down to a gentle inboard rolling curve: http://www.rvproject.com/20030324.html On the RV-7, the instructions mentioned that you can take a hand rivet squeezer with flat rivet sets and kind of work that area until you get the curve you need. That's what I did, and in combination with some sanding down, it's nice and smooth now. Hope this helps, )_( Dan RV-7 N714D http://www.rvproject.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "thomas a. sargent" Subject: RV-List: tip-up canopy frame > --> RV-List message posted by: "thomas a. sargent" > > I am starting on the tip-up canopy rame for my 6A. The 2 halves of the forward channel of the frame are spliced together and the width matches the fuselage well. The WD-625 side rails are bent so that they match the curvature of the fuselage and are 1/8" above the main longeron. The problem is where the side rails and the forward frame (WD-616) meet and are supposed to be spliced together. > > There is a mismatch in 2 dimensions. With the forward frame clamped in place against the sub panel (F-668), the bottom flanges of the side rail and the side support of the frame are off by about 1/4" (the side support being higher one). Secondly, the side rail sticks straight up, but the side support of the frame is curving inboard. Dwg # 51 C-C' shows these 2 pieces laying against each other, but I have a 1/2" gap between them. What has to give here? > > Thanks for any ideas/experience. > -- > Tom Sargent > RV-6A > > ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 10:47:52 AM PST US From: Charlie & Tupper England Subject: Re: EFI was RV-List: RV Turboprop --> RV-List message posted by: Charlie & Tupper England Talk to Tracy Crook. He can adapt his EFI/EI to work on a Lyc. kempthornes wrote: >--> RV-List message posted by: kempthornes > >Oops, so it is just FI > >hal >At 10:19 AM 5/26/2003 -0500, you wrote: > > >>--> RV-List message posted by: Chris W >> >>kempthornes wrote: >> >> >> >>>EI and EFI are available for the Chevy and the Lycoming, of course. >>> >>> >>I knew you could get EI from a few different vendors for a Lycoming but I >>didn't know about the EFI for Lycoming. Do you have any web links for this? >> >>do not archive >> >> >>-- >>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 19 ____________________________________ Time: 11:33:05 AM PST US From: "Dana Overall" Subject: RV-List: Collins Avionics stack on Ebay --> RV-List message posted by: "Dana Overall" The price is a little over $1200.00 right now. Dual nav/com, glideslope box, DME plus transponer. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2416462083 Dana Overall Richmond, KY RV-7 slider/fuselage http://rvflying.tripod.com do not archive ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 11:41:18 AM PST US From: DPrestonsr@aol.com Subject: RV-List: RPM Limitations --> RV-List message posted by: DPrestonsr@aol.com HELP !! We have purchased an RV8 with O-360A1A, AFP fuel injection, dual Lasar ignition and Hartzell CS. It is placarded against continuous operation between 2000 & 2350 RPM. Can someone please tell me where I might find documentation to support these limits. I have tried Hartzell but nothing definitive. Thanks. Doug Preston RV8 BHM DNA ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 11:44:50 AM PST US From: Wheeler North Subject: RV-List: TEL --> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North Although this has been beat to death... The evidence is fairly straight forward. "Octane" is a rating system. Rating systems means you are comparing to a standard. Examples are tire ply ratings, and specific gravity. They compare to a standard, such as cotton plys or the density of pure H2O. Octane rating compares the detonation qualities of 100% pure iso-octane fuel (I think its C8H18) to the blend being used. The original blends used to be heptanes mixed with iso-octanes. They then found out they could cheat this by using additives since the iso-octane was pricy and limited. Has has been said, TEL was the best for the buck, but not drinkable. Hence the need for a rating system that compared the anti-detonation characteristics of the fuel with additives to that of the fuel made with only iso-octanes and heptanes. But, the only way one could get get more then 100% iso-octane (ie 130/140, etc.) was to add these additives. Like asbestos is the best for brake linings, nothing works like TEL to eliminate detonation, but fall out from both is kinda ichy. In Diesel fuel they use a Cetane rating and this is almost the inverse of the Octane rating (its the desire of the fuel to auto-boom) since Diesels are self ignited. And finally, knocking is detonation, it just isn't audible over the rest of the aircraft noise, like it is in a car. The knock sensors used in cars are listening for the high frequency shock wave that occurs during pre-detonation and detonation. They then back off the timing a little until it goes away. do not archive ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 12:11:09 PM PST US From: Mark Phillips Subject: Re: RV-List: Alternator Mount --> RV-List message posted by: Mark Phillips So does the bolt on the adjustment arm (at the alternator) get safetied somehow? Mark Vanremog@aol.com wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: Vanremog@aol.com > > In a message dated 5/26/2003 6:05:39 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > RV6AOKC@aol.com writes: > > > 1. The directions indicate that the two bolts that attach the alt tension > > arm are to be safety wired. Makes sense...but not sure what they should be > > safety wired to...nothing close by...do I just run the safety around the > > tension > > arm? Drill a hole?? > > To one another. > > > > > 2. What is the correct way to adjust the tension on the belt? > > So there is about 1/4" deflection midspan with normal finger pressure. > > > > > 3. When running the field wire and main wire where is the best place to run > > > it? Can it be run just under the intake manifold supported by some C-clamps > > > > > > C-clamps are not the right thing. Adel clamps are. > > -GV (RV-6A N1GV 605hrs) > > "Two hands working together can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer." - > - anonymous > ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 12:26:56 PM PST US From: "Konrad Werner" Subject: Re: EFI was RV-List: RV Turboprop --> RV-List message posted by: "Konrad Werner" See the Aerosance FADEC System that Vans offers for EFI! Or go to: www.fadec.com and look under "Technical Description" There it says: . . . "Our advanced design includes SEQUENTIAL PORT FUEL INJECTION at each engine cylinder. Each fuel injector is solenoid operated under precise computer control, to insure correct mixture for each firing event under all operating conditions. The amount of metered fuel matches the cylinder air charge whether operating at best power or best economy conditions. The guesswork in setting fuel/air mixture is a thing of the past." . . . So, there is FI & EFI already available, if money is of no concern! And a very sincere Thank You to all you Veterans and Soliders today. Do not archive From: kempthornes To: rv-list@matronics.com Sent: Monday, May 26, 2003 11:00 AM Subject: Re: EFI was RV-List: RV Turboprop --> RV-List message posted by: kempthornes Oops, so it is just FI hal At 10:19 AM 5/26/2003 -0500, you wrote: >--> RV-List message posted by: Chris W > >kempthornes wrote: > > > EI and EFI are available for the Chevy and the Lycoming, of course. > >I knew you could get EI from a few different vendors for a Lycoming but I >didn't know about the EFI for Lycoming. Do you have any web links for this? > >do not archive > > >-- >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 24 ____________________________________ Time: 12:41:25 PM PST US From: Tedd McHenry Subject: Re: RV-List: WAS>>> RV Turboprop NOW >>>[How do we define BETTER?] --> RV-List message posted by: Tedd McHenry On Mon, 26 May 2003, James E. Clark wrote: --snip-- > I suspect if we REALLY listed in the REAL priority the things that are > important and took an unbiased look at the Lyc's and clones, we would > probably be impressed. I think it would be an interesting exercise. I think you should do it and post the results you get, instead of just posting the rhetorical questions. Tedd McHenry Surrey, BC -6 wings ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 12:56:38 PM PST US From: Dwpetrus@aol.com Subject: Re: RV-List: RPM Limitations --> RV-List message posted by: Dwpetrus@aol.com Call Hartzell at 800-942-7767. I think that the appropriate limits for your prop engine combo should say " avoid continuous operation between 2000 - 2250 rpm and above 2600 rpm." Thanks, Wayne Petrus RV8A flying ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 01:42:11 PM PST US From: "Norman" Subject: RV-List: Turbo Prop --> RV-List message posted by: "Norman" What is the smallest turboprop on the market? Norman Hunger Do not archive questions ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 02:31:08 PM PST US From: Art Glaser Subject: Re: RV-List: TEL --> RV-List message posted by: Art Glaser The formula is correct, however the proper IUPAC name is 2,2,4 trimethyl pentane. It is a 5 carbon chain with two methyl groups on the number two carbon and one methyl group on the number four carbon. Wheeler North wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North > > Although this has been beat to death... > > The evidence is fairly straight forward. "Octane" is a rating system. Rating > systems means you are comparing to a standard. Examples are tire ply > ratings, and specific gravity. They compare to a standard, such as cotton > plys or the density of pure H2O. > > Octane rating compares the detonation qualities of 100% pure iso-octane fuel > (I think its C8H18) to the blend being used. The original blends used to be > heptanes mixed with iso-octanes. They then found out they could cheat this > by using additives since the iso-octane was pricy and limited. Has has been > said, TEL was the best for the buck, but not drinkable. Hence the need for a > rating system that compared the anti-detonation characteristics of the fuel > with additives to that of the fuel made with only iso-octanes and heptanes. > > But, the only way one could get get more then 100% iso-octane (ie 130/140, > etc.) was to add these additives. > > Like asbestos is the best for brake linings, nothing works like TEL to > eliminate detonation, but fall out from both is kinda ichy. > > In Diesel fuel they use a Cetane rating and this is almost the inverse of > the Octane rating (its the desire of the fuel to auto-boom) since Diesels > are self ignited. > > And finally, knocking is detonation, it just isn't audible over the rest of > the aircraft noise, like it is in a car. The knock sensors used in cars are > listening for the high frequency shock wave that occurs during > pre-detonation and detonation. They then back off the timing a little until > it goes away. > > do not archive > ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 03:23:51 PM PST US From: "Flexible Electroluminescent Lighting, 888 457-0117" Subject: Re: RV-List: LED light source --> RV-List message posted by: "Flexible Electroluminescent Lighting, 888 457-0117" Hello, What are you using the LED s for? Thanks Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robin Wessel" Subject: RV-List: LED light source > --> RV-List message posted by: "Robin Wessel" > > Listers- > > FYI I found a nice source of prepackaged LED light sources. I have not > tried them yet but for $10 looks like it is worth a shot. > > http://www.8000mcd.com/sides.html > > robin wessel > RV-6A > Tigard, OR > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 03:26:10 PM PST US From: "Randall Henderson" Subject: Re: RV-List: RPM Limitations --> RV-List message posted by: "Randall Henderson" Go to: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/REGULATORY_AND_GUIDANCE_LIBRARY/RGMAKEMODEL.NSF/MA INFRAMENETSCAPE4X?OpenFrameSet (you may have to "un-break" the above line if the stupid MS email program breaks it into 2 lines) Put "P-920" into the search window -- that's the number for particular TCDS (Type Certificate Data Sheet) you're looking for. Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (~450 hrs) Portland, OR www.vanshomewing.org ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 03:29:20 PM PST US From: Dougpsr@aol.com Subject: Re: RV-List: RPM Limitations --> RV-List message posted by: Dougpsr@aol.com Thanks, Wayne. That is what I think also but unable to verify. I will call . Doug ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 04:28:22 PM PST US From: "J. R. Dial" Subject: RV-List: RV6 Wings Install --> RV-List message posted by: "J. R. Dial" I installed wings this weekend but have not torqued the bolts. What are the torque settings for the wing bolts? Thanks DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 06:04:26 PM PST US From: "Fred Stucklen" Subject: RV-List: Q. - ElectroAir ignition mounting --> RV-List message posted by: "Fred Stucklen" Gil, On the new plane, I mounted both of mine on either side of the firewall indentation. I did add stiffeners behind the firewall. I mounted a single unit (right side) in the same place on the RV i sold. held up for 200+ Hrs and is still flying.... Fred Stucklen RV-6A N926RV Painting & Hope to be flying in a couple of months.... Time: 08:43:45 AM PST US From: Gil Alexander Subject: Q. - ElectroAir ignition mounting --> RV-List message posted by: Gil Alexander RV-6 Question (probably -7 and -9 too...) Guys... can anyone out there with an ElectroAir ignition system tell me the best place to mount it? It's pretty heavy, so needs some real stiffening on the firewall. I was thinking of mounting it on the top center firewall, with 2 horizontal stiffening angles riveted between the two F-646 parts. The ElectroAir main unit could then bolt to these stiffeners. For those of you with flying RV-6s, is this a good location, or would you suggest another mounting spot? ...thanks for any help ... gil Alexander in hot Tucson RV-6A, #20701 77 Tiger N28478 at 57AZ ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 06:06:30 PM PST US From: "Pete Elia" Subject: RV-List: Non RV message to our veterans. --> RV-List message posted by: "Pete Elia" Sorry this is non-RV, but I know there are a lot of veterans out there on the list..... THANK YOU TO ALL OUR VETERANS AS WE REMEMBER YOU ON THIS HOLIDAY!! OUR FAMILY FEELS PRIDE AND GRATITUDE FOR YOU ALL! Pete, Sharon, and Grace Elia do not archive ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 07:52:57 PM PST US From: "Eustace Bowhay" Subject: RV-List: Fuel Valve Concerns --> RV-List message posted by: "Eustace Bowhay" My original valve that was supplied with my kit (RV6)dated back to 1990, the old style, tank tank off. It served me well for twelve years but was getting a bit stiff to turn. When I received my finishing kit for the 6A it had the newer valve, left off right or vise versa as well as good crisp dedents. Installed one in the 6 and changed the placard, really like it and the price is right. Have tested it by changing tanks with and without the boost pump (fuel injected 0360). Standard procedure on all low wing a/c is boost pump on when changing tanks.The momentary fuel interruption is a none issue. With the valve mounted as it is and using visual reference as well as the dedents for verification of the position time to change is at the most 3 seconds. When I have a choice I prefer a valve without the both position. Had a cover come off on a C185 on floats equipped with long range tanks, both sides reading 3/4 on take-off with the fuel selector on both and the engine quit 25 minutes later, both tanks competely dry. Was an interesting ride, was at 6000 on top and the surface elevation around 1100 ft with 300 and 1/2 for ceiling and vis. Eustace Bowhay- Blind Bay, B.C. ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 08:01:56 PM PST US From: "Alex Peterson" Subject: RE: RV-List: RPM Limitations --> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" There is no 2600 limit on the C/S. Alex Peterson Maple Grove, MN RV6-A N66AP 308 hours www.rvforum.org www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson > Call Hartzell at 800-942-7767. I think that the appropriate > limits for your > prop engine combo should say " avoid continuous operation > between 2000 - 2250 > rpm and above 2600 rpm." ________________________________ Message 36 ____________________________________ Time: 09:20:31 PM PST US From: "Tom Gummo" Subject: Re: RV-List: Non RV message to our veterans. --> RV-List message posted by: "Tom Gummo" You are welcome, Tom Thomas L. Gummo Major USAF Retired do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pete Elia" Subject: RV-List: Non RV message to our veterans. > --> RV-List message posted by: "Pete Elia" > > Sorry this is non-RV, but I know there are a lot of veterans out there on the list..... > > THANK YOU TO ALL OUR VETERANS AS WE REMEMBER YOU ON THIS HOLIDAY!! OUR FAMILY FEELS PRIDE AND GRATITUDE FOR YOU ALL! > > Pete, Sharon, and Grace Elia > > do not archive > > ________________________________ Message 37 ____________________________________ Time: 09:34:40 PM PST US From: Jerry Springer Subject: Re: RV-List: Non RV message to our veterans. --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer Thank you Pete and family Jerry Vietnam 67-68 Pete Elia wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: "Pete Elia" > > Sorry this is non-RV, but I know there are a lot of veterans out there on the list..... > > THANK YOU TO ALL OUR VETERANS AS WE REMEMBER YOU ON THIS HOLIDAY!! OUR FAMILY FEELS PRIDE AND GRATITUDE FOR YOU ALL! > > Pete, Sharon, and Grace Elia > do not archive > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 38 ____________________________________ Time: 09:41:40 PM PST US From: "James E. Clark" Subject: RE: RV-List: RPM Limitations --> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" See Van's website ... http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1054010075-18-87&brows e=props&product=csprop-hartzell The following is an extract from that website. I am sure this info is from Hartzell. So if you want to return with the same number of blades, it is probably a good idea to give it consideration. I suspect you have and was just wondering who said so. Right?? :-) It has also been discussed here on this list I think. I even seem to recall someone explaining some 4th (or 8th??) order harmonic that could rip that big metal tuning fork in the front of our planes to pieces. James ============================================================================ ========== *With the following restrictions: 1: When installed on a Lycoming O-360-A1A (180hp) avoid continuous operation between 2000 and 2250 rpm. Note: When installed on an engine with an aftermarket electronic ignition, LASAR system, or FADEC system then the following additional restrictions apply: 2: Operation above 2600 rpm is limited to takeoff. As soon as practical after takeoff the rpm should be reduced to 2600 rpm or less. 3: The propeller blade life will be limited to 8,700 hours of operation. **With the following restrictions: Note: When installed on an engine with an aftermarket electronic ignition, LASAR system, or FADEC system then the following restrictions apply: 1: Do not operate above 22" manifold pressure below 2350 rpm. 2: Operation above 2600 rpm is limited to takeoff. As soon as practical after takeoff the rpm should be reduced to 2600 rpm or less. 3: FADEC equipped aircraft maximum engine RPM must > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of > DPrestonsr@aol.com > Sent: Monday, May 26, 2003 2:40 PM > To: rv-list-digest@matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: RPM Limitations > > > --> RV-List message posted by: DPrestonsr@aol.com > > HELP !! > We have purchased an RV8 with O-360A1A, AFP fuel injection, dual Lasar > ignition and Hartzell CS. It is placarded against continuous > operation between > 2000 & 2350 RPM. Can someone please tell me where I might find > documentation to > support these limits. I have tried Hartzell but nothing definitive. > Thanks. > Doug Preston > RV8 > BHM > > DNA > > ________________________________ Message 39 ____________________________________ Time: 10:06:58 PM PST US From: "James E. Clark" Subject: RE: RV-List: WAS>>> RV Turboprop NOW >>>[How do we define BETTER?] --> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" OK, I will give this a try. This is off the top of my head as I did NOT document same. Still though, mine was somewhat simple ... 1. Known reliability 2. Relative ease of installation (a lot of other people having done it) 3. Known "repairability". I want to be able to call upon many others if things happen that I don't understand. 4. The best documented (reliable) performance I can get for the money 5. Minimal experimentation (adding electronic ignition instead of one mag is about the limit Results: 1. RV6 (with a partner) flying with an O-320 + ElectroAir Electronic Ignition 2. RV6A being built with new O-360 + Lightspeed ignition In these cases, I feel I have the most common/reliable, best bang for the buck engines I was comfortable with. Looks like the "Subie" effort is going to prove itself particularly for item #2 above. The other areas will take a bit more time for me on that engine. Don't know of any others that would make the cut-off for consideration for me. They may be great but I am simply not there yet. James > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tedd McHenry > Sent: Monday, May 26, 2003 3:43 PM > To: rv-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: WAS>>> RV Turboprop NOW >>>[How do we define > BETTER?] > > > --> RV-List message posted by: Tedd McHenry > > On Mon, 26 May 2003, James E. Clark wrote: > > --snip-- > > I suspect if we REALLY listed in the REAL priority the things that are > > important and took an unbiased look at the Lyc's and clones, we would > > probably be impressed. I think it would be an interesting exercise. > > I think you should do it and post the results you get, instead of > just posting > the rhetorical questions. > > Tedd McHenry > Surrey, BC > -6 wings > > ________________________________ Message 40 ____________________________________ Time: 10:31:09 PM PST US From: Vanremog@aol.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Alternator Mount --> RV-List message posted by: Vanremog@aol.com In a message dated 5/26/2003 12:13:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time, ripsteel@edge.net writes: > So does the bolt on the adjustment arm (at the alternator) get safetied > somehow? Sorry- I thought the person was asking about the bracket bolts and not the adjustment bolts. For safetying the adjustment bolt just drill a 1/16" diameter hole in the adjustment bracket near where the bolt ends up when properly adjusted. -GV (RV-6A N1GV 605hrs)