Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:29 AM - static lines and radios (Donald Mei)
2. 03:42 AM - SL-40 vs xcom760 (lucky macy)
3. 04:18 AM - WAAS-OT (Dana Overall)
4. 06:34 AM - Re: off subject story (RV_8 Pilot)
5. 07:01 AM - Microair T2000 SFL Sale (aronsond)
6. 07:27 AM - Re: off subject story (Phil Birkelbach)
7. 12:51 PM - of OAT probes and NACA ducts... (SportAV8R@aol.com)
8. 01:06 PM - RV-10 (John Helms)
9. 01:44 PM - Re: of OAT probes and NACA ducts... (Scott Bilinski)
10. 02:46 PM - carb repair vs. Ellison TBI (David.vonLinsowe)
11. 02:54 PM - Re: of OAT probes and NACA ducts... (Kevin Horton)
12. 03:25 PM - Re: of OAT probes and NACA ducts... (Cy Galley)
13. 03:28 PM - Re: of OAT probes and NACA ducts... (Jim Jewell)
14. 04:16 PM - Re: of OAT probes and NACA ducts... (Alex Peterson)
15. 04:54 PM - Re: Strobe lens retainer (LarryRobertHelming)
16. 06:44 PM - Re: gascolators (Garry LeGare)
17. 07:00 PM - Garmin 196 in panel (Don Mack)
18. 07:03 PM - Re: Microair T2000 SFL Sale (Garry LeGare)
19. 08:07 PM - Re: Garmin 196 in panel (Tom Webster)
20. 08:23 PM - Re: Garmin 196 in panel (Tom Webster)
21. 08:30 PM - Aileron Removal (Guy Cotnoir)
22. 08:49 PM - Re: of OAT probes and NACA ducts... (Vanremog@aol.com)
23. 09:42 PM - Re: Aileron Removal (Dan Checkoway)
24. 09:50 PM - Elevator Stiffener ?s ()
25. 10:00 PM - Wing Kit Questions ()
26. 10:20 PM - Re: Microair T2000 SFL Sale (aronsond)
27. 10:21 PM - Re: of OAT probes and NACA ducts... (aronsond)
28. 11:31 PM - Re: carb repair vs. Ellison TBI (George McNutt)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | static lines and radios |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Donald Mei" <don_mei@hotmail.com>
re: Radios - someone just mentined the standby monitoring ability of the
SL-40. I was thinking that when I started writing my last post, but somehow
it didn't get to the keyboard. Great feature, espescially in the crowded
Northeast
That little XCom looks great, but I would have reservations about the
company. It does most of what the UPS does. I think the UPS is 1200 ish
new (I may be off)
If they are similar in cost and abilities, who would you rather buy from:
1) A startup that "will have some at Oshkosh", that is based in Australia,
or
2) A product made by a fortune 100 company that is one of the most admired
companies in America. A company that was built on quality. A company with
hundreds of dealers. A comany that has a track record of supporting home
builders.
I'm not knocking the Xcom, I'm just being pragmatic.
Of course if you need something that will go in a 2" instrument hole, then
my whole point goes out the window.
Re static line size: It makes no difference. They are used to conduct
pressure changes, not to move volumes of air. Since air is a compressable
fluid, then some movement is inevitable. But (theoretically) increased lag
caused by the decreased flow capabilities is negated by the DECREASED lag
because of the decreased volume of the hoses. This is theory, in reality,
it makes no difference. Think about it. People put bulbs in their static
system to catch condensation. These bulbs just about double the volume (a
guess) of the static system, with no adverse affects.
Don Mei
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: | SL-40 vs xcom760 |
--> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" <luckymacy@hotmail.com>
I don't think you went to the web site and compared the two. The SL-40
seems to be INFERIOR after looking at the two closer.
The SL-40 has the following 2 issues I found in the archives:
"Anyone contemplating using the built-in intercom of the UPS Aviation (new
name for II Morrow) SL-40 or the GPS/com units should be advised that while
the built-in intercoms work well there are a couple of gotchas...
1. When using the built-in intercom the standby frequency monitoring
function, which is the sole reason why I'm buying one, is not functional.
2. Both pilot and copilot mics are opened when anyone keys the PTT circuit.
Almost all modern intercoms activate only the mic of the person speaking to
eliminate unwanted noise."
While the 760's ads says "2 place voice activated intercom , with pilot over
ride and passenger isolate (pax can listen to CD music whilst pilot listens
to com). CD music has auto fade, turns off if comm is receiving or reduces
in volume if pilot or pax talk."
and the additional extra features over the SL-40 would be redundant to post
but there is another very interesting web page which does direct comparisons
between the 760 and some of its competitors some may be interested in seeing
at:
http://www.mcp.com.au/xcom760/comparison/comparison.html
>From: "Donald Mei" <don_mei@hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: static lines and radios
>Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 07:27:56 +0000
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Donald Mei" <don_mei@hotmail.com>
>
>re: Radios - someone just mentined the standby monitoring ability of the
>SL-40. I was thinking that when I started writing my last post, but
>somehow
>it didn't get to the keyboard. Great feature, espescially in the crowded
>Northeast
>
>That little XCom looks great, but I would have reservations about the
>company. It does most of what the UPS does. I think the UPS is 1200 ish
>new (I may be off)
>
>If they are similar in cost and abilities, who would you rather buy from:
>
>1) A startup that "will have some at Oshkosh", that is based in Australia,
>or
>
>2) A product made by a fortune 100 company that is one of the most admired
>companies in America. A company that was built on quality. A company with
>hundreds of dealers. A comany that has a track record of supporting home
>builders.
>
>I'm not knocking the Xcom, I'm just being pragmatic.
>Of course if you need something that will go in a 2" instrument hole, then
>my whole point goes out the window.
>
>Re static line size: It makes no difference. They are used to conduct
>pressure changes, not to move volumes of air. Since air is a compressable
>fluid, then some movement is inevitable. But (theoretically) increased lag
>caused by the decreased flow capabilities is negated by the DECREASED lag
>because of the decreased volume of the hoses. This is theory, in reality,
>it makes no difference. Think about it. People put bulbs in their static
>system to catch condensation. These bulbs just about double the volume (a
>guess) of the static system, with no adverse affects.
>
>Don Mei
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dana Overall" <bo124rs@hotmail.com>
For those of you with anything WAAS capable, the system was turned on about
a week ago. In doing so, the Feds have published several new approachs. As
someone with regular, it will never be routine, IFR flying, my personnal
minumums have never really been lower than the published numbers. That may
cease to exist with what many considered, the cure all with WAAS. This
forward is off the Bonanza list by a gentleman who I would considered the
most knowledgeable person I have ever encountered in grasping the aspects of
approaches and their impact on GA. I know this is totally off topic but if
you were waiting on WAAS, such as the new WAAS UPS 80 (which is about to
ship, so 430s, probably 530s, should really be coming on the market), think
again.
Forward follows:
If anyone is interested in seeing an example of one foolish procedure that
the FAA is using in drawing the new RNAV approaches, there is an excellent
example at KBDE, Baudette International Airport, Baudette, Minnesota.
The RNAV (GPS) Rwy 30 approach is over a very richly endowed obstacle field.
The DA/DH for the LNAV/VNAV and the LNAV MDA are both at 1820 MSL, 736
feet AG.
Since the VNAV portion of the approach is an ILS lookalike, the required
visibility is two and one half miles. That is necessary so that the runway
can be seen when the aircraft is at it's 736 foot high DH/DA. You take your
look and if you can't see the required runway clues, a missed approach is
mandatory. Fortunately, the LNAV portion of the approach has the same
altitude for it's MDA as the VNAV has for its decision height. The
advantage is that you can level off and fly as far as the missed approach
point before having to execute the miss. All that time you can be looking
for the runway. I think your chances of finding it will be lot better
flying along level for those several moments than you will be during the
couple of seconds you have at the DH before a miss is required. If you
manage to pick up the runway before you get too close to land straight
ahead, the approach will be comfortably completed.
However, suppose you don't see the runway until you are one mile out. For
most of our Bonanza class aircraft, it will bit of a dive to get rid of 736
feet of altitude in not much over one mile.
If the circling minimum was one mile, it would be piece of cake to circle
the field for the landing. Unfortunately, even though the minimum
visibility required for the straight in approach is only one mile, the
circling minima for that LNAV approach is two and one half miles.
Why is the minima so high?
No good reason. It is merely government policy!
The policy is that the circling minima can be no lower than the highest
minima published on that individual approach plate. As long as both the
VNAV and the LNAV approach procedures share the same approach plate, the
circling minima will be the one required for that inefficient attempt at an
ILS lookalike approach.
There is another way to handle the situation. As long as you still have a
VOR in your airplane, you can shoot the VOR approach to runway 30. If you
spot the runway from that approach, you are perfectly legal to execute the
circling approach at the same altitude as you would use for the circle from
the GPS approach, but you only need to have one mile visibility.
If they separated the approaches and printed the VNAV and the LNAV on
separate pieces of paper, their policy would allow the LNAV approach to have
a circling minima of one mile, just like the VOR.
It seems to me that the sensible thing to do is change the policy and let
the requirements of the individual obstacle field determine what the
required visibility should be.
Bureaucracy at it's very worst.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
Dana Overall
Richmond, KY
RV-7 slider/fuselage
Finish kit ordered!! Buying Instruments
http://rvflying.tripod.com
do not archive
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: | Re: off subject story |
--> RV-List message posted by: "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot@hotmail.com>
Glad to hear things worked out well with your nephew. Send him to Weiser
(EYQ) off hwy 290. don't know the names of the FBO's, but it's a nice
private field. Rates are mid-range for the Houston area. It's fairly down
to Earth over there, but to fill the bill as you've described it, you'll
have to come down south of town.
Bryan Jones -8, Cub
An Aviators Airport - Wolfe Airpark (S of HOU) - tailwheel CAF planes,
Stearmans, Stinsons, Cubs, experimentals, old fire trucks, clay pigeon
launcher and 3 airport dogs!
>BTW I almost forgot my question, I need to send him home to Houston to
>find a flight school on the NW side of town. A down home kinda place where
>taildraggers are welcome, there is an airport dog, and they hire 16 year
>old kids to wash and fuel airplanes. Any suggestions?
>
>Do not archive
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Microair T2000 SFL Sale |
--> RV-List message posted by: "aronsond" <aronsond@pacbell.net>
Lister:
I have a new, never opened Microair T2000 SFL for sale. Chiefs wants
$1415.00 for it. I will sell for 1200. It comes with 1 year warantee from
supplier (from time aircraft is flying). Going to Ebay in a day or so.
Dave Aronson
N504RV RV4
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: off subject story |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Phil Birkelbach" <phil@petrasoft.net>
The two FBO's at Weiser are MVP and Windsock Aviation. Windsock is a nice
little outfit where everybody knows everybody and they have the only
Taildragger that I could find to rent in town, a nice Citabria. I've never
flown with MVP but I've heard that they are a pretty good bunch. Oh and
don't forget that Carl's BBQ is right there on the airport. That's some
pretty good BBQ there.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Canopy
http://www.myrv7.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: off subject story
> --> RV-List message posted by: "RV_8 Pilot" <rv_8pilot@hotmail.com>
>
> Glad to hear things worked out well with your nephew. Send him to Weiser
> (EYQ) off hwy 290. don't know the names of the FBO's, but it's a nice
> private field. Rates are mid-range for the Houston area. It's fairly
down
> to Earth over there, but to fill the bill as you've described it, you'll
> have to come down south of town.
>
> Bryan Jones -8, Cub
> An Aviators Airport - Wolfe Airpark (S of HOU) - tailwheel CAF planes,
> Stearmans, Stinsons, Cubs, experimentals, old fire trucks, clay pigeon
> launcher and 3 airport dogs!
>
> >BTW I almost forgot my question, I need to send him home to Houston to
> >find a flight school on the NW side of town. A down home kinda place
where
> >taildraggers are welcome, there is an airport dog, and they hire 16 year
> >old kids to wash and fuel airplanes. Any suggestions?
> >
> >Do not archive
>
>
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: | of OAT probes and NACA ducts... |
--> RV-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
I recently coorresponded with Ed Z at Sensenich about a prop re-pitch in the
wake of horsepower increase and airframe clean-up efforts, and as part of the
data collection for Ed's advice, I finally realized the magnitude of the temp
error introduced by placing the OAT probe in the NACA duct on the -6A. The
erroneously high readings we get from this location have been mentioned before,
and anyone who was still building when this was first discussed probably saw
trouble coming and placed their probe in a wing root or other shaded location,
out of the way of hot air leaking from the engine compartment. I was finished
building by then, so my probe has stayed where it was. By comparing the
reading I get when the airplane is first powered up with the OAT readings obtained
at low-altitude cruise, I was shocked to see a difference of 6 - 7 degrees C.
Correcting the TAS calculations for this error is not really my main concern
here. What this tells me is that the outside air I am drawing into my
cockpit for ventilation and "free air-conditioning" at altitude is about 13 degrees
F warmer than what should be available for this purpose. No wonder I start to
swelter in the RV cockpit by about 3500 MSL when I let down at the Outer
Banks. It's not just the humidity that's the problem! My cockpit is being fed
warm air when cool is available at other pick-off points.
Wonder if others have noticed this much extra heating and where else we can
cut NACA vents to get away from the unwanted heat. One experiiment I have yet
to do is fly with the fuselage/cowling joints taped to stop the leakage and
recheck the temps I get.
-Bill B
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "John Helms" <jhelms@i1.net>
I've gotten several calls recently about insuring an RV-10 (two in the last hour).
Because Van hasn't even begun to sell those it's a tad premature, but I know how
some of you budget everything out.
I am going to visit the underwriters in Dallas on Thursday and Van on Friday.
The RV-10s are the primary reason for that trip.
I don't anticipate any difference in the hull insurance rates per hundred $'s of
value. The values are likely going to be a tad higher so they'll be a little
more expensive for that reason. And the liability will likely be about $100
more since there are 2 more seats.
The rates are always dependant on the pilots flying, of course. So, I can't really
get any more specific than that. And again, I haven't even had the conversation
yet with the underwriters about it.
JT
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: of OAT probes and NACA ducts... |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
How can so much heated air come out of the side of the cowl and into the
NACA duct??? I can imagine a lot of things but not this.
At 03:50 PM 7/15/03 -0400, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
>
>I recently coorresponded with Ed Z at Sensenich about a prop re-pitch in the
>wake of horsepower increase and airframe clean-up efforts, and as part of the
>data collection for Ed's advice, I finally realized the magnitude of the temp
>error introduced by placing the OAT probe in the NACA duct on the -6A. The
>erroneously high readings we get from this location have been mentioned
>before,
>and anyone who was still building when this was first discussed probably saw
>trouble coming and placed their probe in a wing root or other shaded
location,
>out of the way of hot air leaking from the engine compartment. I was
finished
>building by then, so my probe has stayed where it was. By comparing the
>reading I get when the airplane is first powered up with the OAT readings
>obtained
>at low-altitude cruise, I was shocked to see a difference of 6 - 7 degrees C.
> Correcting the TAS calculations for this error is not really my main concern
>here. What this tells me is that the outside air I am drawing into my
>cockpit for ventilation and "free air-conditioning" at altitude is about 13
>degrees
>F warmer than what should be available for this purpose. No wonder I
start to
>swelter in the RV cockpit by about 3500 MSL when I let down at the Outer
>Banks. It's not just the humidity that's the problem! My cockpit is being
>fed
>warm air when cool is available at other pick-off points.
>
>Wonder if others have noticed this much extra heating and where else we can
>cut NACA vents to get away from the unwanted heat. One experiiment I have
yet
>to do is fly with the fuselage/cowling joints taped to stop the leakage and
>recheck the temps I get.
>
>-Bill B
>
>
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: | carb repair vs. Ellison TBI |
--> RV-List message posted by: "David.vonLinsowe" <David.vonLinsowe@delphi.com>
Hi guys,
My carb seems to be acting up and I want to make an informed decision between overhauling
the carb myself, sending it out for overhaul (to who?) and replacing
it with an Ellison TBI.
The engine sometimes falters between 1500 and 2000 rpm and usually hesitates when
adding throttle in this range (even small, slow increases with a vernier control).
Leaning seems to help a little. The mags check ok and I just removed
and cleaned the plugs and they seemed fine with just a little lead, no change
in performance.
The engine is Lyc O-360 A3A narrow deck converted to A1A with a constant speed
prop. The airframe is a RV-6.
I've heard good and bad about the Ellison. Although, on the surface it does look
like a better option than a carb. I've been all through Ellison's web site.
Any opinions, experience and/or info?
Thanks,
Dave
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: of OAT probes and NACA ducts... |
--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorto1537@rogers.com>
>--> RV-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
>
>I recently coorresponded with Ed Z at Sensenich about a prop re-pitch in the
>wake of horsepower increase and airframe clean-up efforts, and as part of the
>data collection for Ed's advice, I finally realized the magnitude of the temp
>error introduced by placing the OAT probe in the NACA duct on the -6A. The
>erroneously high readings we get from this location have been
>mentioned before,
>and anyone who was still building when this was first discussed probably saw
>trouble coming and placed their probe in a wing root or other shaded location,
>out of the way of hot air leaking from the engine compartment. I was finished
>building by then, so my probe has stayed where it was. By comparing the
>reading I get when the airplane is first powered up with the OAT
>readings obtained
>at low-altitude cruise, I was shocked to see a difference of 6 - 7 degrees C.
> Correcting the TAS calculations for this error is not really my main concern
>here. What this tells me is that the outside air I am drawing into my
>cockpit for ventilation and "free air-conditioning" at altitude is
>about 13 degrees
>F warmer than what should be available for this purpose. No wonder I start to
>swelter in the RV cockpit by about 3500 MSL when I let down at the Outer
>Banks. It's not just the humidity that's the problem! My cockpit
>is being fed
>warm air when cool is available at other pick-off points.
>
>Wonder if others have noticed this much extra heating and where else we can
>cut NACA vents to get away from the unwanted heat. One experiiment I have yet
>to do is fly with the fuselage/cowling joints taped to stop the leakage and
>recheck the temps I get.
>
>-Bill B
Just pondering - Bill figures the high OAT indications are telling
him that the air coming into the NACA scoop is warmer than ambient.
Perhaps it is, but I'm not sure why that would be (other than the ram
temperature rise, which I'll discuss later). I wonder if what it
really means is that the temp probe indications are affected by the
temperature on the back side of the probe - i.e. the cockpit. The
air in the cockpit is often quite a bit warmer than ambient due to
the green house effect, so perhaps this is what we are seeing. Or
maybe not.
Note: there is a bit of ram rise at play here too. The maximum
amount of ram rise in deg C is equal to TAS
2/7592, where the TAS is
in kt. So, if we are at 170 kt TAS, the max amount of ram rise would
be 3.8 deg C. Our temperature probes don't recover the full amount
of the ram rise though - the probe recovery factor is probably
somewhere between 0.7 and 1, so the actual amount of ram rise at this
condition is likely between 2.6 and 3.8 deg C.
So, depending on whether Bill has accounted for the ram rise or not,
the amount of error might not be quite as much as he reported.
However, it is still an error, and it makes sense to not put OAT
probes in NACA scoops.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: of OAT probes and NACA ducts... |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
I have been told that temperature probes exposed to high speed air flow read
HIGH due to friction of the air across the probe.
Cy Galley
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley@qcbc.org or experimenter@eaa.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Bilinski" <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: of OAT probes and NACA ducts...
> --> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>
> How can so much heated air come out of the side of the cowl and into the
> NACA duct??? I can imagine a lot of things but not this.
>
>
> At 03:50 PM 7/15/03 -0400, you wrote:
> >--> RV-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
> >
> >I recently coorresponded with Ed Z at Sensenich about a prop re-pitch in
the
> >wake of horsepower increase and airframe clean-up efforts, and as part of
the
> >data collection for Ed's advice, I finally realized the magnitude of the
temp
> >error introduced by placing the OAT probe in the NACA duct on the -6A.
The
> >erroneously high readings we get from this location have been mentioned
> >before,
> >and anyone who was still building when this was first discussed probably
saw
> >trouble coming and placed their probe in a wing root or other shaded
> location,
> >out of the way of hot air leaking from the engine compartment. I was
> finished
> >building by then, so my probe has stayed where it was. By comparing the
> >reading I get when the airplane is first powered up with the OAT readings
> >obtained
> >at low-altitude cruise, I was shocked to see a difference of 6 - 7
degrees C.
> > Correcting the TAS calculations for this error is not really my main
concern
> >here. What this tells me is that the outside air I am drawing into my
> >cockpit for ventilation and "free air-conditioning" at altitude is about
13
> >degrees
> >F warmer than what should be available for this purpose. No wonder I
> start to
> >swelter in the RV cockpit by about 3500 MSL when I let down at the Outer
> >Banks. It's not just the humidity that's the problem! My cockpit is
being
> >fed
> >warm air when cool is available at other pick-off points.
> >
> >Wonder if others have noticed this much extra heating and where else we
can
> >cut NACA vents to get away from the unwanted heat. One experiiment I
have
> yet
> >to do is fly with the fuselage/cowling joints taped to stop the leakage
and
> >recheck the temps I get.
> >
> >-Bill B
> >
> >
>
>
> Scott Bilinski
> Eng dept 305
> Phone (858) 657-2536
> Pager (858) 502-5190
>
>
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: of OAT probes and NACA ducts... |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>
Hi Scott,
I suppose if the cowlings are a fairly loose fit, especially the sides of
the top cowl. They then could allow engine heated air to leak out. It would
not take a large gap to leak quite a bit of volume. That heated air would
have a chance to tuck into the NACA duct.
I wonder if Bill B Has tried using some (handy mans secret weapon) "duct
tape" to temporarily seal this area to see if the unwanted temperatures
reduce somewhat. If so adding a couple of Screws and plate nuts in that area
might be worth doing.
As you say, that does sound like a lot of heated air!
However this email might sound like a lot of heated air to some! {;-]!
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Bilinski" <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: of OAT probes and NACA ducts...
> --> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>
> How can so much heated air come out of the side of the cowl and into the
> NACA duct??? I can imagine a lot of things but not this.
>
>
> At 03:50 PM 7/15/03 -0400, you wrote:
> >--> RV-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
> >
> >I recently coorresponded with Ed Z at Sensenich about a prop re-pitch in
the
> >wake of horsepower increase and airframe clean-up efforts, and as part of
the
> >data collection for Ed's advice, I finally realized the magnitude of the
temp
> >error introduced by placing the OAT probe in the NACA duct on the -6A.
The
> >erroneously high readings we get from this location have been mentioned
> >before,
> >and anyone who was still building when this was first discussed probably
saw
> >trouble coming and placed their probe in a wing root or other shaded
> location,
> >out of the way of hot air leaking from the engine compartment. I was
> finished
> >building by then, so my probe has stayed where it was. By comparing the
> >reading I get when the airplane is first powered up with the OAT readings
> >obtained
> >at low-altitude cruise, I was shocked to see a difference of 6 - 7
degrees C.
> > Correcting the TAS calculations for this error is not really my main
concern
> >here. What this tells me is that the outside air I am drawing into my
> >cockpit for ventilation and "free air-conditioning" at altitude is about
13
> >degrees
> >F warmer than what should be available for this purpose. No wonder I
> start to
> >swelter in the RV cockpit by about 3500 MSL when I let down at the Outer
> >Banks. It's not just the humidity that's the problem! My cockpit is
being
> >fed
> >warm air when cool is available at other pick-off points.
> >
> >Wonder if others have noticed this much extra heating and where else we
can
> >cut NACA vents to get away from the unwanted heat. One experiiment I
have
> yet
> >to do is fly with the fuselage/cowling joints taped to stop the leakage
and
> >recheck the temps I get.
> >
> >-Bill B
> >
> >
>
>
> Scott Bilinski
> Eng dept 305
> Phone (858) 657-2536
> Pager (858) 502-5190
>
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | of OAT probes and NACA ducts... |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
I have my temperature probe in the NACA duct on my 6A, and see zero
error. Really. Some do see a lot of error.
Kevin, regarding your post, I believe he is perhaps seeing the
temperature rise from air leaking out of the cowl sides, and streaming
back onto the probe. I measured about 4 inches water pressure in the
lower cowl area, so air is clearly leaking out all around the
firewall/cowl attach points. The tape over the cowl seams is the sure
way to nail that one.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 323 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
> How can so much heated air come out of the side of the cowl
> and into the NACA duct??? I can imagine a lot of things but not this.
>
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: Strobe lens retainer |
--> RV-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
The outside diameter measurement of the Whelan combined strobe and tail
light glass cover is 1" plus 482 thousands. ( Just shy of 1.5" )
Larry in Indiana, RV7 Tip-up TMX-O-360
Working on Finish Kit
Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous. But ..... is terribly
unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect.
..Author unknown
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Phillips" <ripsteel@edge.net>
Subject: RV-List: Strobe lens retainer
> --> RV-List message posted by: Mark Phillips <ripsteel@edge.net>
>
> I purchased the Aeroflash taillight/strobe combination for the rudder
> bottom of my -6A. Problem is, the fixture and retaining ring is
> completely round instead of narrowed in the center like the comparable
> Whelen A500A unit. I have trimmed the fixture to match the rudder
> bottom, but will need to purchase the Whelen retainer ($18!!!!!)
>
> But I need to make sure it will fit- anyone done this? Or can someone
> using the Whelen unit measure the diameter of their lens so I can check
> it against the Aeroflash lens for fit before I send Spruce some MORE
> $$$$$! If this is totally cunfuzing, you can see these things here-
>
> Whelen:
> http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/elpages/whelentaillights.php
>
> Aeroflash: http://aeroflash.com/plane.html#tailposition (almost at the
> bottom of the page)
>
> Thanks for any assistance!
>
> Mark
>
>
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Garry LeGare <versadek@earthlink.net>
Chris,
This post is in no way meant as a insult to you or anyone else on the
list, but you will find that most of us whom have been around sport
aviation for a few years, OK a lot of years, have learned that they just
aren't doing what we were told they would.
With most gascolator installations the way it's supposed to work is the
water settles out as the velocity of the liquid is slowed upon entering
the gascolater. That is the theory but unfortunately when you flow over
15 gallons per hour thru the most commonly used gascolator, exposed to
the vibration level of a blender, there is just not a whole bunch of
settling going on. Don't believe me try it yourself.
Casper,
Old Geezer, enjoying flying more each day.
Chris W wrote:
>I don't want to start a big primer type controversy but, it is my understanding
that the gascolator does NOT need to be at the low point in the fuel system
to do it's job.
>
>--
>Chris Woodhouse
>3147 SW 127th St.
>Oklahoma City, OK 73170
>405-691-5206
>chrisw@programmer.net
>N35 20.492'
>W97 34.342'
>
>
>
>
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: | Garmin 196 in panel |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Don Mack" <don@dmack.net>
Has anyone mounted a Garmin 196 IN the panel? I plan on doing so and would
appreciate any info.
Thanks
Don Mack - RV6A - paneling
www.dmack.net
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: Microair T2000 SFL Sale |
--> RV-List message posted by: Garry LeGare <versadek@earthlink.net>
Dave, I'll take it if it's still available.
aronsond wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "aronsond" <aronsond@pacbell.net>
>
>Lister:
>I have a new, never opened Microair T2000 SFL for sale. Chiefs wants
>$1415.00 for it. I will sell for 1200. It comes with 1 year warantee from
>supplier (from time aircraft is flying). Going to Ebay in a day or so.
>Dave Aronson
>N504RV RV4
>
>
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Garmin 196 in panel |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Tom Webster" <twebste@hotmail.com>
Don,
I have not installed a 196 yet, but am planning on putting one in my RV-7
panel.
The RAM mounting system should work. Some venders don't have the 196 listed
yet.
Hart Aviation does shows some systems for mounting a Garmin 196.
http://hartaviation.com/cgi-local/webc.cgi/web_3/searchstandardb.webc
The first example should mount to the sub-panel behind the instrument panel.
The 196 is slightly smaller in width than a standard 6.25 radio and should
fit flush with the panel. I am planning on tilting it to the left about 30
degrees.
I am letting this go to the archives.
I hope this is of some help,
Tom Webster
RV-7AQB N462TW (reserved)
>From: "Don Mack" <don@dmack.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RV-List: Garmin 196 in panel
>Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 21:01:16 -0500
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Don Mack" <don@dmack.net>
>
>Has anyone mounted a Garmin 196 IN the panel? I plan on doing so and would
>appreciate any info.
>
>Thanks
>
>Don Mack - RV6A - paneling
>www.dmack.net
>
>do not archive
>
>
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: | Re: Garmin 196 in panel |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Tom Webster" <twebste@hotmail.com>
Don,
The address doesn't work. I hate hotmail.
Go to: http://www.hartaviation.com
Select-MOUNTING SYSTEMS, then under BROWSE BY DEVICE TYPE, select Garmin-196
The first mount shown is the one I am planning on using. (surface-existing,
$29.95)
Tom
>From: "Tom Webster" <twebste@hotmail.com>
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Garmin 196 in panel
>Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 23:06:37 -0400
>
>Don,
>I have not installed a 196 yet, but am planning on putting one in my RV-7
>panel.
>The RAM mounting system should work. Some venders don't have the 196
>listed yet.
>Hart Aviation does shows some systems for mounting a Garmin 196.
>
> http://hartaviation.com/cgi-local/webc.cgi/web_3/searchstandardb.webc
>
>The first example should mount to the sub-panel behind the instrument
>panel.
>The 196 is slightly smaller in width than a standard 6.25 radio and should
>fit flush with the panel. I am planning on tilting it to the left about 30
>degrees.
>I am letting this go to the archives.
>
>I hope this is of some help,
>
>Tom Webster
>RV-7AQB N462TW (reserved)
>
>
>>From: "Don Mack" <don@dmack.net>
>>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>>Subject: RV-List: Garmin 196 in panel
>>Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 21:01:16 -0500
>>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: "Don Mack" <don@dmack.net>
>>
>>Has anyone mounted a Garmin 196 IN the panel? I plan on doing so and would
>>appreciate any info.
>>
>>Thanks
>>
>>Don Mack - RV6A - paneling
>>www.dmack.net
>>
>>do not archive
>>
>>
>
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Guy Cotnoir" <guy_cotnoir@msn.com>
Hi all!=0D
I am building a Sonex so I hope I don't commit some sort of federal offence
by posting here. :
)=0D
I would like to know if the RV balances it's ailerons for flutter. And if so
what is the approximate mass of the counterweight? Has anyone have had to
remove their ailerons from the wings once the plane is flying.? I am making
some changes to my counterweights and I need to compare notes with other
designs. Thank you. =0D
guy_cotnoir@msn.com=0D
=0D
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: of OAT probes and NACA ducts... |
--> RV-List message posted by: Vanremog@aol.com
In a message dated 7/15/2003 12:53:26 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
SportAV8R@aol.com writes:
> I finally realized the magnitude of the temp
> error introduced by placing the OAT probe in the NACA duct on the -6A. The
> erroneously high readings we get from this location have been mentioned
> before,
> and anyone who was still building when this was first discussed probably saw
>
> trouble coming and placed their probe in a wing root or other shaded
> location,
> out of the way of hot air leaking from the engine compartment. I was
> finished
> building by then, so my probe has stayed where it was. By comparing the
> reading I get when the airplane is first powered up with the OAT readings
> obtained
> at low-altitude cruise, I was shocked to see a difference of 6 - 7 degrees
> C.
> Correcting the TAS calculations for this error is not really my main concern
>
> here. What this tells me is that the outside air I am drawing into my
> cockpit for ventilation and "free air-conditioning" at altitude is about 13
> degrees
> F warmer than what should be available for this purpose.
This is true in my experience as well. I was hypothesizing that this is the
result of heat transferring thru the thickness of the old style
(non-honeycomb) cowling to the surface and the heated boundary air then entering
the NACA
vents. The delta T between actual ambient and this heated stream is much less
in very cold air (winter or higher altitudes) than it is in already warmer air
(summer at low altitudes). I have not tried putting foam insulation along the
cowling side panels to see if this helps.
For those of you flying the new epoxy cowl, is this your experience as well
and is there a significant difference in heat transfer in the honeycomb
cowling?
-GV (RV-6A N1GV 609hrs)
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: Aileron Removal |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
> I am building a Sonex so I hope I don't commit some sort of federal
offence
> by posting here. :
Well, it's not a plastic plane, so sure. 8-)
> I would like to know if the RV balances it's ailerons for flutter. And if
so
> what is the approximate mass of the counterweight? Has anyone have had to
> remove their ailerons from the wings once the plane is flying.? I am
making
> some changes to my counterweights and I need to compare notes with other
> designs. Thank you. =0D
I can speak for the RV-6 and RV-7, which have a galvanized pipe in the
leading edge as ballast. On all RVs, I believe, all of the control surfaces
(other than flaps) are balanced...at least they are on the RV-7. The rudder
has a lead weight sitting in an arm that juts forward over the VS, the
elevators have lead weights in counterweight arms (which get fine-tuned to
balance the weight of paint), etc.
I forget the exact weight of the aileron counterweight pipe, but I'd
estimate it to be about 3 or 4 pounds. Maybe a kit builder out there can
provide an exact weight. I'd estimate the arm (distance from the pivot
axis) to be about 2.75" or so.
The design is such that the pipe gets riveted to the leading edge (inside
the leading edge skin...see http://www.rvproject.com/20020818.html and
http://www.rvproject.com/20020819.html), which ends up out in front of the
pivot axis.
Hope this helps...
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
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: | Elevator Stiffener ?s |
--> RV-List message posted by: "" <tx_jayhawk@excite.com>
A couple of easy stiffener questions on the 7A:
1) When people have been cutting the taper on the rudder and/or elevator stiffeners,
how have they been doing it? Do they gut the bulk off with WISS snips (and
finish with sander/scotchbrite), or do they use the file/sander/scotchbrite
entirely? I cut the first one with the snips to a rough approximation, but
it seems like it warped the stiffener a little bit.
2) When making the elevator -J, K, and L stiffeners, it appears that you trim just
a tiny bit off of the tapered end of D, E, and F (almost negiligible). Is
that correct? Is the trimming required due to the taper in the elevator (the
raised portion is flipped on oppostie sides)? Assuming the elevators are identical,
I was questioning why one set would be trimmed.
Thanks,
Scott
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
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: | Wing Kit Questions |
--> RV-List message posted by: "" <tx_jayhawk@excite.com>
I just got the great news that my wing kit shipped today, and I am need to make
some "wing" decisions. I would appreciate any feedback on the following:
1) Wing-leveler (Navaid vs. Trutrak) - Based on bang for the buck (one of my most
dominant considerations), everything I have read in the archives sounds like
the Navaid is a better choice. I do plan to fly IFR, so I will definitely get
one or the other. I would appreciate hearing from anyone that strongly supports
the Trutrak as a better option.
2) Guages (fuel monitoring) - Based on the reputation of some of the Vans-labeled
guages (and installation benefits), I think I will be going with the Grand
Rapids EIS-4000 for engine monitoring. I would appreciate hearing any "dislikes"
people might have with the Grand Rapids (haven't heard many). Also what type
of fuel senders they require (Van's resistive, Van's capacitance, other).
FYI...the fancy ones (Vision, ACS, etc.) are out of my price range.
Thanks,
Scott
7A
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
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: Microair T2000 SFL Sale |
--> RV-List message posted by: "aronsond" <aronsond@pacbell.net>
Gary:
you are second on the list. I will let you know by tomorrow (Wednesday).
Thanks
Dave
Ps: let me know your address and I will quote you UPS
fee.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Garry LeGare" <versadek@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Microair T2000 SFL Sale
> --> RV-List message posted by: Garry LeGare <versadek@earthlink.net>
>
> Dave, I'll take it if it's still available.
>
> aronsond wrote:
>
> >--> RV-List message posted by: "aronsond" <aronsond@pacbell.net>
> >
> >Lister:
> >I have a new, never opened Microair T2000 SFL for sale. Chiefs wants
> >$1415.00 for it. I will sell for 1200. It comes with 1 year warantee
from
> >supplier (from time aircraft is flying). Going to Ebay in a day or so.
> >Dave Aronson
> >N504RV RV4
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
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: of OAT probes and NACA ducts... |
--> RV-List message posted by: "aronsond" <aronsond@pacbell.net>
What is a good source for OAT sensors (12v).
Dave aronson
RV4
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: RV-List: of OAT probes and NACA ducts...
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
>
> I have been told that temperature probes exposed to high speed air flow
read
> HIGH due to friction of the air across the probe.
>
> Cy Galley
> Editor, EAA Safety Programs
> cgalley@qcbc.org or experimenter@eaa.org
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott Bilinski" <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: RV-List: of OAT probes and NACA ducts...
>
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
> <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
> >
> > How can so much heated air come out of the side of the cowl and into the
> > NACA duct??? I can imagine a lot of things but not this.
> >
> >
> > At 03:50 PM 7/15/03 -0400, you wrote:
> > >--> RV-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
> > >
> > >I recently coorresponded with Ed Z at Sensenich about a prop re-pitch
in
> the
> > >wake of horsepower increase and airframe clean-up efforts, and as part
of
> the
> > >data collection for Ed's advice, I finally realized the magnitude of
the
> temp
> > >error introduced by placing the OAT probe in the NACA duct on the -6A.
> The
> > >erroneously high readings we get from this location have been mentioned
> > >before,
> > >and anyone who was still building when this was first discussed
probably
> saw
> > >trouble coming and placed their probe in a wing root or other shaded
> > location,
> > >out of the way of hot air leaking from the engine compartment. I was
> > finished
> > >building by then, so my probe has stayed where it was. By comparing
the
> > >reading I get when the airplane is first powered up with the OAT
readings
> > >obtained
> > >at low-altitude cruise, I was shocked to see a difference of 6 - 7
> degrees C.
> > > Correcting the TAS calculations for this error is not really my main
> concern
> > >here. What this tells me is that the outside air I am drawing into my
> > >cockpit for ventilation and "free air-conditioning" at altitude is
about
> 13
> > >degrees
> > >F warmer than what should be available for this purpose. No wonder I
> > start to
> > >swelter in the RV cockpit by about 3500 MSL when I let down at the
Outer
> > >Banks. It's not just the humidity that's the problem! My cockpit is
> being
> > >fed
> > >warm air when cool is available at other pick-off points.
> > >
> > >Wonder if others have noticed this much extra heating and where else we
> can
> > >cut NACA vents to get away from the unwanted heat. One experiiment I
> have
> > yet
> > >to do is fly with the fuselage/cowling joints taped to stop the leakage
> and
> > >recheck the temps I get.
> > >
> > >-Bill B
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Scott Bilinski
> > Eng dept 305
> > Phone (858) 657-2536
> > Pager (858) 502-5190
> >
> >
>
>
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: | carb repair vs. Ellison TBI |
--> RV-List message posted by: "George McNutt" <gmcnutt@intergate.ca>
--> RV-List message posted by: "David.vonLinsowe"
<David.vonLinsowe@delphi.com>
Hi guys,
My carb seems to be acting up and I want to make an informed decision
between overhauling the carb myself, sending it out for overhaul (to who?)
and replacing it with an Ellison TBI.
The engine sometimes falters between 1500 and 2000 rpm and usually hesitates
when adding throttle in this range (even small, slow increases with a
vernier control). Leaning seems to help a little. The mags check ok and I
just removed and cleaned the plugs and they seemed fine with just a little
lead, no change in performance.
The engine is Lyc O-360 A3A narrow deck converted to A1A with a constant
speed prop. The airframe is a RV-6.
I've heard good and bad about the Ellison. Although, on the surface it does
look like a better option than a carb. I've been all through Ellison's web
site.
Any opinions, experience and/or info?
Thanks,
-------------------------------------------------
Hi David
I am not an expert on this topic but have not seen any other replies so will
take a stab at it.
My aircraft is 0-320 with carburetor and also has a little stumble when
power is slowly applied and about the 1500 - 1700 RPM range. Only happens
occasionally, generally when leveling off from a descent. It is over before
you have time to do anything but skip a single heartbeat.
I have been told that this occurs at the carburetor change-over point
between idle and main jet and is not uncommon. I talked to Lycoming rep. at
Arlington and he suggested two things (1) experiment with linkage on
accelerator pump if it has different holes on the linkage (2) check idle
mixture for 30 RPM rise at idle cut-off.
Good Luck
George McNutt
Langley, B.C. 6-A
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! --
|