Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:33 AM - [PLEASE READ!] "What's my Contribution used for?" (Matt Dralle)
2. 03:41 AM - Re: Rosales RV-6A AOG SFM Sanford, Maine USA (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta))
3. 05:23 AM - Re: LOW OIL TEMP ON RV-4 (linn walters)
4. 06:29 AM - Which RV? (Alex Peterson)
5. 06:43 AM - Re: OIL TEMPS (Scott Bilinski)
6. 06:53 AM - Re: Wing Tips (Scott Bilinski)
7. 07:25 AM - Re: Which RV? (Jeff Dowling)
8. 07:37 AM - Instruments for rural night flying (Ken Simmons)
9. 08:03 AM - Re: EAA Young Eagles paranoid concern.... (Pat Perry)
10. 08:05 AM - LED position lights (was: Cheap Strobes) (Bill Dube)
11. 08:06 AM - Combo Lights (was: using non-sheared wing tips on RV-7) (Bill Dube)
12. 08:06 AM - Re: Which RV? (Bill VonDane)
13. 08:27 AM - Re: Instruments for rural night flying (Larry Pardue)
14. 08:35 AM - Re: Instruments for rural night flying (linn walters)
15. 08:38 AM - Re: Wing Tips (Jim Oke)
16. 08:38 AM - Panel switch/breaker panel holes (Nine Builder)
17. 08:55 AM - Re: Instruments for rural night flying (Bruce Gray)
18. 08:56 AM - Re: Which RV? (WMPALM@aol.com)
19. 09:01 AM - Wing Skin Corrosion Under Plastic - Update! (Kevin Behrent)
20. 09:02 AM - Re: Which RV? (Doug Rozendaal)
21. 09:17 AM - Re: Cheap Strobes (Charlie Kuss)
22. 09:25 AM - Re: Combo Lights (was: using non-sheared wing tips on RV-7) (Bill VonDane)
23. 09:31 AM - Re: Wing Tips (very short) (LeastDrag93066@aol.com)
24. 09:34 AM - Re: Wing Tips (very short) (LeastDrag93066@aol.com)
25. 10:04 AM - Re: Panel switch/breaker panel holes (Jeff Point)
26. 10:12 AM - Re: Which RV? (RV8ter@aol.com)
27. 10:19 AM - Re: Panel switch/breaker panel holes (Glenn S. Gordon)
28. 10:25 AM - Re: Instruments for rural night flying (Larry Bowen)
29. 10:29 AM - Re: Panel switch/breaker panel holes (Bruce Gray)
30. 10:45 AM - Re: Instruments for rural night flying (Jim Jewell)
31. 10:56 AM - Lycoming CD on Engines (LarryRobertHelming)
32. 11:01 AM - Re: Which RV? (Vincent Welch)
33. 11:08 AM - Re: Cheap Strobes (Bill VonDane)
34. 11:27 AM - Re: Wing Skin Corrosion Under Plastic - Update! (Elsa & Henry)
35. 11:28 AM - Re: Panel switch/breaker panel holes (Charlie Kuss)
36. 11:33 AM - Sheared (RV-7) vs Hoerner (RV-6) Wing tips (Laird Owens)
37. 11:42 AM - Re: Which RV? (Phil N)
38. 11:50 AM - Re: Instruments for rural night flying (jdalton77@comcast.net)
39. 11:56 AM - impulse coupling spring (Bob Japundza)
40. 12:41 PM - Re: Which RV? (Alex Peterson)
41. 01:56 PM - Acceptable method for inverfted tank fuel fuel send wire (RV8ter@aol.com)
42. 02:25 PM - Re: Panel switch/breaker panel holes (linn walters)
43. 02:58 PM - Re: Instruments for rural night flying (Ken Simmons)
44. 03:13 PM - Re: Which RV? (Genev E Reed)
45. 03:31 PM - Re: Acceptable method for inverfted tank fuel fuel send wire (Scott Brumbelow)
46. 03:58 PM - Re: RV builders prayer (Jim Bower)
47. 04:06 PM - Re: Panel switch/breaker panel holes (Charlie Kuss)
48. 04:16 PM - Re: Which RV? (Terry Watson)
49. 04:50 PM - Re: Which RV? (C. Rabaut)
50. 04:57 PM - Re: Panel switch/breaker panel holes (Bill Dube)
51. 06:07 PM - pop rivet stems falling out (Paul Eastham)
52. 06:16 PM - Re: Wing Tips (very short) (Ed Holyoke)
53. 06:46 PM - Re: Panel switch/breaker panel holes (linn walters)
54. 07:30 PM - Less Expensive (not cheap) strobes (Donald Mei)
55. 07:51 PM - Re: Panel switch/breaker panel holes (Stein Bruch)
56. 07:52 PM - Re: Wing Skin Corrosion Under Plastic - Update! (Jerry Springer)
57. 08:21 PM - AK 450 ELT (Stein Bruch)
58. 08:38 PM - Re: Wing Skin Corrosion Under Plastic - Update! (Richard Sipp)
59. 08:43 PM - Re: Which RV? (Tom Gummo)
60. 08:54 PM - Re: RV6-List: AK 450 ELT (Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club)
61. 09:03 PM - Re: Which RV? (Karie Daniel)
62. 10:40 PM - Re: Cheap Strobes (Norman Hunger)
63. 11:32 PM - Re: Which RV? (WMPALM@aol.com)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | [PLEASE READ!] "What's my Contribution used for?" |
--> RV-List message posted by: Matt Dralle <dralle@matronics.com>
Dear Listers,
A few Listers have asked me recently, "What's my Contribution used for?",
and that's a valid question. Here are just a few examples of what your
direct List support enables... It provides for the expensive,
business-class, high-speed Internet connection used on the List, insuring
maximum performance and minimal contention when accessing List
services. It pays for the regular system hardware and software upgrades
enabling the highest performance possible for services such as the Archive
Search Engine and List Browser. It pays for 15+ years worth of on line
archive data available for instant random access. And, it offsets the many
hours spent writing, developing, and maintaining the custom applications
that power this List Service such as the List Browse, Search Engine, and
Photoshare.
But most importantly, your List Contribution enables a forum where you and
your peers can communicate freely in an environment that is free from
moderation, censorship, advertising, commercialism, SPAM, and computer
viruses. How many places on the Internet can you make all those statements
about these days? I will venture to say - next to none...
It is YOUR CONTRIBUTION that directly enables these many desirable aspects
of this most valuable List service. Please support it today with your List
Contribution. Its the best investment you can make in your Sport - BAR NONE!
Email List Contribution Web Site:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you for your support!
Matt Dralle
Email List Administrator
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle@matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
do not archive
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: | Rosales RV-6A AOG SFM Sanford, Maine USA |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart@iss.net>
Guys great job getting Rosie taken care of!.
Mike Stewart
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
RGray67968@aol.com
Subject: RV-List: Rosales RV-6A AOG SFM Sanford, Maine USA
--> RV-List message posted by: RGray67968@aol.com
Gary and all,
Got a call from Paul as well. Help is on the way!!!! Was able to contact
one
of our good RV friends in Maine, Nick Knobil. He contacted Carl Beatrice
just
who keeps his RV6A at the Sanford airport. Turns out that Carl knows
Paul and
will be able to handle the mechanical problem. Matter of
fact.........Paul and
Victoria will be spending tomorrow night at Carls house...........RV'ers
are
awesome!!
Thanks to all.
Rick Gray in Ohio at the Buffalo Farm
AOG = Aircraft On Ground that requires part to repair a problem
Just got off the phone with Paul and Victoria Rosales. Sounds like they
had
an oil line, fitting, or oil cooler develop a crack and dump about
quart
of oil all over the firewall and underside of their airplane.
Paul is looking for any builder / flyer in the area that may be able to
help
out with an oil cooler, fittings, or oil line. I gave him several phone
numbers from the White Pages of aircraft in Maine and New Hampshire.
If you can help, email me off list at: rv6_flyer_AT_hotmail.com and I
will
furnish you Pauls Cell phone or call him with your number. Remember to
change the _AT_ in the email address to @.
Thanks,
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,399 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
http://SoCAL_WVAF.rvproject.com
=
==
==
==
==
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: LOW OIL TEMP ON RV-4 |
--> RV-List message posted by: linn walters <lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
Larry Bowen wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
>
>Shouldn't a vernitherm accomplish the same temperature control you are
>looking for? Or do you guys already have one and it's not working,
>
The failure mide is that they do not expand enough to seal the bypass
hole. Checking is cumbersome and the variables in measuring the
expansion are many. So, here's what you do. Remove the Vernitherm.
Take your trusty Sharpie black marker and paint the shiny cone black.
All of it! Re-insert the vernitherm and go fly for food somewhere.
Return and let cool. Remove vernitherm again and look at the cone. If
it's still all black, go buy another Vernitherm. If you see a shiny
ring around the Vernitherm, then it's working correctly. If the ring is
wider on one side than the other, that means that the Vernitherm is not
centered on the bypass hole and may or may not need changing. Even if
the ring is wide on one side, as long as it goes all the way around,
it's sealing good enough.
Linn Walters
> or I
>misunderstand the benefit of the vernithrm, or .....
>
>-
>Larry Bowen
>Larry@BowenAero.com
>http://BowenAero.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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
To those contemplating building an RV:
Obviously, there is no "right" model of RV to choose. Each has their
own pluses and minuses. Fortunately, Van has really diminished the
minuses on all RV models. Mostly, it simply comes down to which one
catches your fancy. However, I wanted to share my experience with the
side by side RV (mine is a 6A) as it relates to model type. I'm not
going to get into the practical differences between trike and
taildragger, they have been flogged to death on this list. I also do
not have RV experience in fore/aft arrangements.
Regarding passengers: I am probably unique in that I rarely fly alone,
maybe 20% of the time. One of the most enjoyable things for me with my
plane is sharing it, whether it be with my family or others. Having
side by side seating is quite nice for this. Would this be diminished
with a fore/aft setup? I think so. Non pilot passengers seem to really
like asking and learning about the various instruments on the panel.
Also, I would generally not take passengers in a fore/aft arrangement
with the rear seat stick in place, whereas I don't mind doing that in
the side by side.
Regarding long cross country trips: Last week I flew from southern
Florida to Minneapolis in one day, three hops, headwinds, a total of 9.4
hours on the hobbs. I was alone for this trip, but it was really nice
to be able to set charts and the cooler on the seat next to me. I took
the passenger control stick out for this trip. Additionally, it was
nice to be able to move my legs around to the right side occasionally.
Flight instruction: I am working (slowly, still!!) on an instrument
rating in my plane. This would really not be possible with a tandem
arrangment.
Formation flying: Here is a bit of a disadvantage for the side by side.
I prefer not to fly formation to the left of someone. One needs to
leave a little more margin (specifically, stay lower relative to the
lead) if flying on the left of lead in a side by side.
Just some thoughts from a side by sider!
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 421 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
With those temps what is the OAT?
At 11:43 AM 11/23/03 -0500, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Scott Brown" <scottbrown@precisionjet.com>
>
>Listers,
>
>Just put a new Sam James cowl on my -4 with the fiberglass plenum chamber,
>what is the optimal oil temps that I should be seeing? I currently am at 200
>in the air and 210 on the ground.
>
>scott
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
I belive it creates a much smaller vortex, which, equals less drag.
At 10:08 AM 11/23/03 -0700, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "John" <n1cxo320@salidaco.com>
>
>The discussion regarding wing tips brings to mind a question I have been
>pondering lately.
>
>A friend has a plane he races in the Reno Air Races (Formula V I believe)
>and he has modified his wing tips so that the aft edges, instead of being
>'straight' now are curved into a 'curl' so that the outer edge is a few
>inches more aft than the inboard edge. Kinda "BatMan-like" - he placed sixth
>in the races so I guess he knows what he's doing - he claims it results in
>measurable speed increase. I don't understand the aerodynamics of this, but
>he says that it controls air flow resulting in less drag. Your opinion?
>
>John at Salida, CO
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
Lets face it. The side by side is the more practical way to go. The tandem
looks cooler. I think that says it all.
Jeff Dowling
RV-6A almost
Chicago/Louisville
Inspection today/tomorrow??
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Instruments for rural night flying |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ken Simmons" <ken@truckstop.com>
I've been involved in and observed some recent discussions on the RV-list concerning
IFR flight, "light" IFR flight, backup instruements, heated pitot's, etc.
I'm not trying to re-open those discussions. I've pretty much decided to not
fly my RV-8 IFR.
To that end I was planning on no "gryos" except maybe a turn coordinator. After
our last EAA meeting I'm not so sure. Our flight advisor gave a presentation
on winter flying and in Idaho that could easily involve night flying. Night flying
in most parts of Idaho is essentially IFR flight because of no discernable
horizon.
Should I reconsider the no "gryo" plan? I've already planned on lights so those
seem a waste if I can't/shouldn't fly at night for other reasons.
Thanks.
Ken
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: EAA Young Eagles paranoid concern.... |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Pat Perry" <pperryrv@hotmail.com>
I'm not flaming you Kim, just adding my point of view. Ive sometimes felt
the same way you do and have almost given in to the faults in our system.
Its a tough call but I like to share my fun.
(Climbing up onto soapbox)
You shouldnt be so concerned that your personal wealth is in jeopardy if
you simply take a young person for an airplane ride or take a scout for a
ride in your car. Keep in mind; you would have to be with these passengers
for both of these activities so you must also feel the activity is safe
enough that you will be returning to enjoy your wealth in the future. Don't
let the lawyer win. You aren't living - you are hiding from the outside
chance that something might go wrong and take your wealth.
Take extra care to make sure there is no open opportunity for a lawyer to
claim negligence. Log books, currency, aircraft condition, weather,
medical, and preflight checklists are critical. Play the game the way they
do, ask your lawyer what an ambulance chaser looks for when they are
preparing a suit and he/she will probably say negligence and money. The
trick is to not be guilty of either but if you remove one of them it reduces
the chances of being sued. I doubt you will be giving up the money except
for airplane parts.
Yes, our tort system is a mess. I live in Pennsylvania where medical
doctors are leaving the state in droves. I pass billboards on my way to
work for 6 different law firms advertising for medical and personal injury
"you don't pay until we win" services and one that shows the picture of an
infant with a dollar sign over it that just simply says "this is what a baby
looks like to a lawyer in Pennsylvania".
I currently need a good lawyer to handle some basic local government issues
(no law suit) and have found it difficult find anyone that knows their dupa
from a hole in the ground who is interested in a standard-fee non-jackpot
consultation or representation.
There is absolutely a problem with the tort system in the U.S. but it's not
worth giving up the opportunity to use my good fortune to put a smile on a
Childs face and let them have a taste of what I get to enjoy on a regular
basis.
(Climbing down off the soapbox)
Pat Perry
Dallas, PA
RV-4 N154PK Flies great!
Do Not Archive
>From: Knicholas2@aol.com
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: EAA Young Eagles paranoid concern....
>Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 11:37:13 EST
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: Knicholas2@aol.com
>
>I don't really want to start a flame war here but I want to explaine a
>concern about Young Eagles and ANY other similar program. Liability. I am
>a
>professional with my own business. My lawyer(s) have "strongly"
>recommended that I
>not take kids and other people I don't know well flying due to liability.
>My
>wife is a school teacher and she can't take school kids or scouts in our
>car
>for similar reasons. If there is ANY accident I could lose everything. My
>practice, my retirement, my plane... There is too mcuh to lose with greedy
>lawyers and our current tort system. Signing a waiver is worthless - any
>lawyer
>will tell you that you can't sign away your rights - especially a minor.
>
>You tell me that it can't happen? I can give many examples that it does.
>It
>is a sad situation when someone is afraid to do something nice for fear of
>being sued.
>
>Please no flames. Just wanted to express a concern.
>
>Kim Nicholas
>Seattle
>RV9A - got the HS mounted yesterday....
>
>
>DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
Say goodbye to busy signals and slow downloads with a high-speed Internet
connection! Prices start at less than $1 a day average.
https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.)
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: | LED position lights (was: Cheap Strobes) |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Dube <bdube@al.noaa.gov>
>. Position lights are a different story and I do not have a strong
>opinion. I would like to see a useful experiment done by a group of RV's
>equipped with different lights. Fly them in trail and photograph (still
>and video) them from a mile away. I would love to see the results. Would
>very much like to see how the new LED position lights stack up against the
>conventional Whelen halogen position lights
Goodrich and Whelen make LED position lights for the military.
Care to guess the price?
As you have said, it is very difficult to select and aim LEDs to
get the required light output in every direction. I spent quite a bit of
time doing just that to achieve the FAA requirements, plus a margin, with
an economical array of LEDs. It was not at all easy, as you have discovered
for yourself.
The key is confirming the design with actual measurement of the
output with a calibrated lightmeter at an array of angles. You also must do
similar measurements on the LEDs you plan to use to confirm the
manufacturer's specifications. The spec sheet is often very much in error.
What I found interesting is that once you meet the FAA specs with
LEDs, the light actually appears brighter to the eye than incandescent
position lights. The light meter says they are about the same, however. I
suspect that the "off spectrum" portion of the incandescent lights boosts
the lightmeter readings, but results in less intensity in the red (or
green) light that you are after.
>I wonder if I'll need a flame suit for this one. I certainly am not
>intending to slam new technology, just exercising my right to express my
>own opinion on aircraft anti-collision strobes - NOT POSITION LIGHTS.
I have had several people ask about LED anti-collision strobes.
Once you look into the FAA requirements, it is obvious that the present LED
technology is not an economic solution. You would have to practically cover
the surface of the airplane to get the required candlepower, even in short
pulses.
Stay tuned, however, as I am working on a nifty high-tech, low
budget, lightweight, anti-collision light in my "spare" time. Likely to be
several months before I have a prototype.
>A quick word on the new technology of HID landing lights. They are worth
>the money. If you want better and are willing to spend the money, they rule.
HID lights are amazing. Tough to swallow the $600 entry fee, however.
>PS - new technology in lighting is coming out all the time and I won't
>claim to be up on every last thing out there. I noticed that for the first
>time an auto manufactor is using LEDs for headlights. Check out the new
>610hp Audi Le Mans. It has headlights made up of 17 LEDs per side. I
>wonder who developed the bulbs and where we could get a few to test. They
>must be good as this car is designed to be the fastest production car
>available.
The LEDs are for the "running light" part of the headlight that
goes on whenever you turn the key. The LEDs do not actually provide useful
road illumination like traditional high-beam and low-beam headlights.
Bill Dube
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: | Combo Lights (was: using non-sheared wing tips on RV-7) |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Dube <bdube@al.noaa.gov>
At 06:37 AM 11/23/03, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Van Heuveln" <lemar@hillstel.net>
>
>I used the RV-8 tips on my -7 for the same reasons you listed. They fit
>just fine and Vans exchanged them at no cost.
If you don't use sheared tips, you won't be able to use my nifty
new "Combo" style LED Position Lights with integrated Landing Lights! =*O
I am ready to ship. You can get them from me at:
http://www.killacycle.com/Lights.htm
or from Bill VonDane at:
http://www.creativair.com
Bill Dube <LED@Killacycle.com>
http://www.killacycle.com/Lights.htm
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill VonDane <bill@vondane.com>
If you have a spouse or significant other that will be going with you
regularly, get the SBS...
-Bill VonDane
EAA Tech Counselor
RV-8A ~ N8WV
www.vondane.com
www.creativair.com
www.epanelbuilder.com
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Which RV?
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
Lets face it. The side by side is the more practical way to go. The tandem
looks cooler. I think that says it all.
Jeff Dowling
RV-6A almost
Chicago/Louisville
Inspection today/tomorrow??
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: Instruments for rural night flying |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Larry Pardue" <n5lp@warpdriveonline.com>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Ken Simmons" <ken@truckstop.com>
>
> I've been involved in and observed some recent discussions on the RV-list
concerning IFR flight, "light" IFR flight, backup instruements, heated
pitot's, etc. I'm not trying to re-open those discussions. I've pretty much
decided to not fly my RV-8 IFR.
>
> To that end I was planning on no "gryos" except maybe a turn coordinator.
After our last EAA meeting I'm not so sure. Our flight advisor gave a
presentation on winter flying and in Idaho that could easily involve night
flying. Night flying in most parts of Idaho is essentially IFR flight
because of no discernable horizon.
>
> Should I reconsider the no "gryo" plan? I've already planned on lights so
those seem a waste if I can't/shouldn't fly at night for other reasons.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Ken
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
Where I live there is often absolutely no horizon reference at night. I
would personally not fly here on a dark night without an attitude indicator.
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP Flying
http://n5lp.net
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Instruments for rural night flying |
--> RV-List message posted by: linn walters <lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
Ken Simmons wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Ken Simmons" <ken@truckstop.com>
>
>I've been involved in and observed some recent discussions on the RV-list concerning
IFR flight, "light" IFR flight, backup instruements, heated pitot's, etc.
I'm not trying to re-open those discussions. I've pretty much decided to not
fly my RV-8 IFR.
>
>To that end I was planning on no "gryos" except maybe a turn coordinator. After
our last EAA meeting I'm not so sure. Our flight advisor gave a presentation
on winter flying and in Idaho that could easily involve night flying. Night flying
in most parts of Idaho is essentially IFR flight because of no discernable
horizon.
>
>Should I reconsider the no "gryo" plan? I've already planned on lights so those
seem a waste if I can't/shouldn't fly at night for other reasons.
>
I love to fly at night. I do not have any problem with spatial
disorientation ...... yet. BUT, I believe you've already seen the error
of your logic (you have lights so you'll fly at night) and probably
decided to put the AH (and a turn coordinator) in your bird. I would
advise against leaving them out just to save a few bucks .... and panel
space. I don't have an IFR rating and hate to fly in the soup. Here's
a scenario: Ken is trucking along at altitude, coming back late from a
fly-in. It's dark. REALLY dark. He's got all the lights on, including
the landing light ...... but he didn't see the cloud before it's too
late. Now, those widely scattered lights on the ground are replaced by
this all-encompassing white glow. There's a few bumps when he entered
the cloud. Which way is up? Kes senses a turn .... and corrects it.
OOps, the airspeed is dropping ..... drop the nose a little. Why is the
air noise so high? What's going on???? Oh crap! Wish I had a AH and
TC!!! Airspeed is climbing too high .... gotta get the nose up. Pull,
Damn, there went the wing. Wonder where the pieces will land. Well, I
guess Ken screwed up. I picked on Ken because he made the post. Insert
your name in where Ken's is. You never know what kind of a bind you'll
get yourself in ..... accidentally or on purpose ......... until you're
in it too deep to pull your butt out of the fire without some real
help. An autopilot would have been a good investment for Ken (and
whatever name is there), but you're diminishing your success in
snatching victory from the jaws of defeat if you don't have all the help
you need. Just my 2 pennies
Linn Walters
>
>Thanks.
>
>Ken
>
>DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Oke <wjoke@shaw.ca>
That's pretty much what an acquaintance who taught University level
aerodynamics once told me regarding winglets. Every airplane produces
wingtip vortices to some extent; creating these vortices requires energy
taken from the aircraft; the pilot sees this as more drag (= less speed for
the same power, etc.) Anything that can be done to reduce the strength of
the vortices means less energy is being added to the airflow, less "drag" is
being generated by the airplane, the airplane goes faster for the same
power.
This stuff is described very nicely but at length at
http://www.av8n.com/how/ . See sect 3.12 regarding wingtip vortices.
Jim Oke
Wpg., MB
RV-3, RV-6A
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Bilinski" <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Wing Tips
> --> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>
> I belive it creates a much smaller vortex, which, equals less drag.
>
> At 10:08 AM 11/23/03 -0700, you wrote:
> >--> RV-List message posted by: "John" <n1cxo320@salidaco.com>
> >
> >The discussion regarding wing tips brings to mind a question I have been
> >pondering lately.
> >
> >A friend has a plane he races in the Reno Air Races (Formula V I believe)
> >and he has modified his wing tips so that the aft edges, instead of being
> >'straight' now are curved into a 'curl' so that the outer edge is a few
> >inches more aft than the inboard edge. Kinda "BatMan-like" - he placed
sixth
> >in the races so I guess he knows what he's doing - he claims it results
in
> >measurable speed increase. I don't understand the aerodynamics of this,
but
> >he says that it controls air flow resulting in less drag. Your opinion?
> >
> >John at Salida, CO
> >
> >
>
>
> Scott Bilinski
> Eng dept 305
> Phone (858) 657-2536
> Pager (858) 502-5190
>
>
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Panel switch/breaker panel holes |
--> RV-List message posted by: Nine Builder <federigo@pacbell.net>
Is there a tool or technique for making correctly sized and shaped holes for the
W58 Series Switch/Breakers? The threads that go through the panel have a nominal
diameter of 0.46" with a flat spot on one side. I presume the flat spot is
to keep the breaker from rotating in its panel hole. Any help would be much
appreciated.
Leland in Pleasanton
RV9A
New Lycoming from Van's arriving next week
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: | Instruments for rural night flying |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
Which is why, in some countries, it's illegal to fly at night WITHOUT an
IFR rating.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of linn walters
Subject: Re: RV-List: Instruments for rural night flying
--> RV-List message posted by: linn walters <lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
Ken Simmons wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Ken Simmons" <ken@truckstop.com>
>
>I've been involved in and observed some recent discussions on the
RV-list concerning IFR flight, "light" IFR flight, backup instruements,
heated pitot's, etc. I'm not trying to re-open those discussions. I've
pretty much decided to not fly my RV-8 IFR.
>
>To that end I was planning on no "gryos" except maybe a turn
coordinator. After our last EAA meeting I'm not so sure. Our flight
advisor gave a presentation on winter flying and in Idaho that could
easily involve night flying. Night flying in most parts of Idaho is
essentially IFR flight because of no discernable horizon.
>
>Should I reconsider the no "gryo" plan? I've already planned on lights
so those seem a waste if I can't/shouldn't fly at night for other
reasons.
>
I love to fly at night. I do not have any problem with spatial
disorientation ...... yet. BUT, I believe you've already seen the error
of your logic (you have lights so you'll fly at night) and probably
decided to put the AH (and a turn coordinator) in your bird. I would
advise against leaving them out just to save a few bucks .... and panel
space. I don't have an IFR rating and hate to fly in the soup. Here's
a scenario: Ken is trucking along at altitude, coming back late from a
fly-in. It's dark. REALLY dark. He's got all the lights on, including
the landing light ...... but he didn't see the cloud before it's too
late. Now, those widely scattered lights on the ground are replaced by
this all-encompassing white glow. There's a few bumps when he entered
the cloud. Which way is up? Kes senses a turn .... and corrects it.
OOps, the airspeed is dropping ..... drop the nose a little. Why is the
air noise so high? What's going on???? Oh crap! Wish I had a AH and
TC!!! Airspeed is climbing too high .... gotta get the nose up. Pull,
Damn, there went the wing. Wonder where the pieces will land. Well, I
guess Ken screwed up. I picked on Ken because he made the post. Insert
your name in where Ken's is. You never know what kind of a bind you'll
get yourself in ..... accidentally or on purpose ......... until you're
in it too deep to pull your butt out of the fire without some real
help. An autopilot would have been a good investment for Ken (and
whatever name is there), but you're diminishing your success in
snatching victory from the jaws of defeat if you don't have all the help
you need. Just my 2 pennies
Linn Walters
>
>Thanks.
>
>Ken
>
>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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: WMPALM@aol.com
Recommendation:
If you have a spouse or significant other, check with them. They should also
fly, or at least sit in, all the models: side-by-side, tandem, and
taildragger. You might be surprised at the result.
My wife and I flew our Tobago to Van's with the intent to purchase an RV-7A
kit. After flying the 6A (no 7A demo available at that time), sitting in the
RV-7, and flying the 8A, my wife liked the RV-8A, so that's what we got. Her
reasons: More room (shoulders tend to rub together in side-by-side), better
visibility with a tandem rear seat than a side seat (she thought), and, probably
most importantly, the centerline "feel" while flying. My reasons: The same.
As far as tri-gear vs. tail dragger, our conclusions for the tri-gear were:
That's what we were used to flying (Tobago, Cherokee 140), easier landing, and
lower insurance.
Note: All of Van's aircraft are fine aircraft. In my opinion, your choice
will be mainly a matter of personal requirements, experience, and taste. Since
all RVers are proud of their aircraft, they may tend to advocate their
particular choice, but, bottom line, it's what you want, and your spouse/significant
other, that's important!
Good Luck,
Bill
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: | Wing Skin Corrosion Under Plastic - Update! |
--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Behrent <kbehrent@cascadiasoftware.com>
As I mentioned last week in my original post, I took my wings skins to
Van's last Friday. Scott Riser and Ken Kruger examined the skins and I
believe they said it was the worst case they've seen, but Ken felt that
they were salvagable. The bottoms skins were the worst, followed by the
outer D sections. The fuel tanks had a little corrosion, but I didn't
feel comfortable striping away the alclad to remove the corrosion and
than not being able to prime inside the tanks. The top skins seem okay
and should only need cleaning with alumiprep to remove any surface
corrosion.
So, I left Van's a few dollars lighter, but with new bottom skins, D
sections, and fuel tanks and a strong message from Van's to REMOVE the
plastic as soon as possible.
I would like to publicly thank Scott Riser (I know you're monitoring)
for helping with this issue and would like to say that it was the best
"customer service" experience that I've had with Van's Aircraft. Scott
handled this issue, which I take responsibility for, better than the
other times I've called due to Van's screwups. So, if you haven't gotten
the customer service that you expected, call Scott (sorry Scott). If he
can't help you, you're screwed!
--
Kevin
rv-9a - wings
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr@petroblend.com>
Alex,
Is this a ploy? Were you baiting me? Has the list been too quiet for too
long so you felt the need to throw some avgas on the fire?
Everything you said about the side by side is true, and you forgot the fact
that the rear seater freezes in the wintertime, but I would not trade tandem
seating for any of it.
I flew a -6A from MCW to MAF to ABQ to IWA last weekend. almost 10 hours.
It was more comfortable and more user freindly than my -4, but I had no
desire to go buzzing down the canyons. In my -4 I would have been having
fun the whole trip, but in the -6, I drove it like a bus.
Acro in a side by side is less fun, still fun, just less fun. I guess the
side by sides just don't as effectively capture the "fighter feel." I can't
answer why, but they don't, and that is a big deal. People spend millions
on Mustangs to get that "fighter feel" that we get in a "Tandem" RV for 5%
of the cost.
There, see what you started! ;-)
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cheap Strobes |
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss@bellsouth.net>
Hi Norman,
Thanks for your detailed post. I'd like you to tell me if my research on this
subject is in error. I had followed much of the various threads relating to the
various strobe systems available. What I found was as follows.
The Aeroflash systems available are rated to the older, lower candlepower standards
set back before the 1980s. The newer systems have about 4 times the power
( 100 vs 400 candlepower I believe) that this older system has. The Nova power
supplies available from STROBES N' MORE come in a variety of styles and powers.
I chose their most powerful (X-Pak 904 model 90 watt) single unit power supply.
See
http://www.strobe.com/pdfs/xpak904-install.pdf
I intend to use this unit to power 3 strobes on my 8A. I purchased the complete
package below. This comes with 32 watt strobe heads. See
http://strobeguy.safeshopper.com/18/1829.htm?959
The switch was not included when I purchased my unit. It was on sale then for $250.00
Strobes N' More lists a similar Whelen unit. Unfortunately, they do not supply
as much info for this unit. It also appears that this Whelen unit is not an aviation
specific power supply. Whelen's site recommends their model HDACF for use
with a 2 strobe system on our aircraft. They recommend the use of 2 model A490ATSC
power supplies for use on 3 strobe systems. I suspect that the number
of model A490ATSC power supplies to be used with a 3 lamp system is a typographical
error. I say this because Page 10 of their catalog states that these units
are designed to power one strobe head. (I could be wrong on this) Page 10
of their catalog states that the model HDACF with power 1, 2 or 3 strobe heads.
So comparing the Nova X-Pak 904 to the Whelen HDACF would be more of an "apples
to apples" comparison.
See
http://www.whelen.com/nondynmc/Aviation/homebuilt.htm
and
http://www.whelen.com/pb/11015.htm
From this I discern that the Nova unit will supply 80 joules of power. (See first
link listed above) This compares to the Whelen's 84 joules. (See the third
link listed above Page 10) The Whelen has a slight edge here, but not a large
one. I suspect that most of us could not tell the difference with the naked eye.
The Whelen unit is also somewhat more efficient in it's use of power. The
Nova unit is rated at 8.5 amps at 12.8 volts (8.5 X 12.8 = 108.8 watts). The Whelen
HDACF is rated at 7 amps at 14 volts (7 X 14 = 98 watts)
Is the Whelen unit waterproof? I seem to remember reading somewhere that it was,
but I can not locate the reference now. The Nova unit is not waterproof, so
this must be taken into account when mounting it. The Whelen unit may have an
advantage here.
One point I will make in support of Norman's statements below, is that the Strobes
N' More strobe heads are supplied bare. Whelen supplies their units with
a special lens to focus the light output from their heads. This is an important
feature and should not be ignored. Luckily, users of the non Whelen units can
purchase the proper lens from Vans accessory catalog. They are part number
LN W1284-C . They cost $12.50 each and can be found on Vans site at:
http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1069691959-52-651&browse=lighting&product=strobe_parts
A stamped steel lens retainer will also be needed to retain the lens to the strobe
heads. Vans catalog does not list these items.
Am I missing anything here Norman? Please advise as to any technical details I
have missed. Good information is the key to good purchasing decisions. I agree
with Norman regarding the new HID head lamps. I'll be prowling the local wrecking
yards soon for the PAR 35 style (4.5" round) HID head lamps. The current
new prices for these is to rich for my blood. I expect that the cost of these
units will decline as they become more plentiful and popular.
Charlie Kuss
RV-8A punching holes for instruments in my panel
Boca Raton, Fl.
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Norman Hunger" <nhunger@sprint.ca>
>
>Not reading the list real time these days but scanning it about two months behind.
I have how ever been reading it for quite a few years though and I've seen
the cheap strobe subject come up many times. I thought I'd speak up on this
one to put forth my opinion that the cheap strobes designed for emergency ground
vehicles are next to USELESS in aircraft. They are not bright enough. I've
had the good fortune in my career to test many different types of strobes and
I've used this experience to form this strong opinion.
>
>Ground vehicle strobes are purposely not as bright as aviation strobes because
if they were they would blind motorists on dark and rainy nights. They are designed
to be in your scope of vision, aviation strobes are designed to be noticed
from your peripheral vision from much further away. That is a big difference.
Vehicle strobes are typically giving warning to other vehicles that are within
1/4 mile from the source. That's not good enough for aircraft. We need them
to be seen from several miles away. Some one is now sure to pipe up that they
have seen police strobes two miles down the highway so I'll point out that
you were probably looking directly down that straight, level highway. How noticeable
do you feel they would be at four miles off your two o'clock? If you are
on a converging flightpath, you would want them to be noticeable from at least
four miles.
>
>An interesting turn of my career this year involved spending over $40k building
some modern LED police light bars. I tested LED's from several manufactures
after spending considerable effort researching who had the brightest LED's. I
tested quite a few and found that they are very directional. They can be made
with a wide beam or a narrow beam. Going with a wide beam sacrifices brightness
at distance. I ended up purchasing 6000 of what I considered to be the brightest.
To cover 90 degrees of vision, they have to be splayed or fanned out so
that even if you have a panel of 40 LEDs, you will only see a minority of them
when a long distance away from them. When left in a flat panel, they were useless
for the task of a police light bar. When seen from outside their beam they
appear to turn off.
>
>The best thing about LEDs is their low power draw. The second best thing is their
cool operating temperature. The third is that they last for a very long time.
Sadly, I feel that to do a good job in an aircraft, one would need to use
a huge panel (100+) of the best available LEDs. By the way, the good ones are
not cheap and you still need to build a board to get them to fire. I am not convinced
that LEDs are bright enough to substitute for strobes. Position lights
are a different story and I do not have a strong opinion. I would like to see
a useful experiment done by a group of RV's equipped with different lights. Fly
them in trail and photograph (still and video) them from a mile away. I would
love to see the results. Would very much like to see how the new LED position
lights stack up against the conventional Whelen halogen position lights
>
>This is only my opinion but I feel that I have played with more lighting than
most amateur aircraft builders. I feel that the best anti collision lighting we
can put on our homebuilds are the highest wattage strobes available. Again,
sadly, they aren't cheap. If you are researching strobes with the intention to
be as noticeable as possible, seek the highest wattage output on your power supply.
The cheap ones are no good on airplanes.
>
>I wonder if I'll need a flame suit for this one. I certainly am not intending
to slam new technology, just exercising my right to express my own opinion on
aircraft anti-collision strobes - NOT POSITION LIGHTS.
>
>A quick word on the new technology of HID landing lights. They are worth the money.
If you want better and are willing to spend the money, they rule.
>
>PS - new technology in lighting is coming out all the time and I won't claim to
be up on every last thing out there. I noticed that for the first time an auto
manufactor is using LEDs for headlights. Check out the new 610hp Audi Le Mans.
It has headlights made up of 17 LEDs per side. I wonder who developed the
bulbs and where we could get a few to test. They must be good as this car is designed
to be the fastest production car available.
>
>Norman Hunger
>RV6A Delta BC
>
>
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: Combo Lights (was: using non-sheared wing tips on RV-7) |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill VonDane <bill@vondane.com>
Actually, if you install the airtech lens kit that van sells into the older
horner style tips, you can still install out lighting systems...
-Bill VonDane
www.creativair.com
www.vondane.com
www.epanelbuilder.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Dube" <bdube@al.noaa.gov>
Subject: RV-List: Combo Lights (was: using non-sheared wing tips on RV-7)
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Dube <bdube@al.noaa.gov>
At 06:37 AM 11/23/03, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Van Heuveln" <lemar@hillstel.net>
>
>I used the RV-8 tips on my -7 for the same reasons you listed. They fit
>just fine and Vans exchanged them at no cost.
If you don't use sheared tips, you won't be able to use my nifty
new "Combo" style LED Position Lights with integrated Landing Lights! =*O
I am ready to ship. You can get them from me at:
http://www.killacycle.com/Lights.htm
or from Bill VonDane at:
http://www.creativair.com
Bill Dube <LED@Killacycle.com>
http://www.killacycle.com/Lights.htm
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: Wing Tips (very short) |
--> RV-List message posted by: LeastDrag93066@aol.com
In a message dated 11/23/2003 9:35:40 PM Pacific Standard Time,
dan@rvproject.com writes:
Jim,
Thanks for the great info. I'm curious if you happen to have any sort of
side-by-side photos or diagrams that might highlight the difference that
you're talking about between Van's sheared tips (with the joggle you
mentioned) and the ideal tips (with the straight line vortex cutter).
If not, no sweat, but I'd like to gather as much info on this as possible
before I decide one way or the other.
Thanks!
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
Normally, the parting line edge on Van's sheared wingtip is sanded into a
nice smooth rounded edge.
Maybe someone on this list with composite expertise can suggest an easy way
to create the sharp edge on Van's wingtip along the parting line.
Jim Ayers
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing Tips (very short) |
--> RV-List message posted by: LeastDrag93066@aol.com
In a message dated 11/23/2003 9:35:40 PM Pacific Standard Time,
dan@rvproject.com writes:
Jim,
Thanks for the great info. I'm curious if you happen to have any sort of
side-by-side photos or diagrams that might highlight the difference that
you're talking about between Van's sheared tips (with the joggle you
mentioned) and the ideal tips (with the straight line vortex cutter).
If not, no sweat, but I'd like to gather as much info on this as possible
before I decide one way or the other.
Thanks!
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
Normally, the parting line edge on Van's sheared wingtip is sanded into a
nice smooth rounded edge.
Maybe someone on this list with composite expertise can suggest an easy way
to create the sharp edge on Van's wingtip along the parting line.
Jim Ayers
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Panel switch/breaker panel holes |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Point <jpoint@mindspring.com>
Does the switch have a washer with a little tab on it? If so, this is
used for anti-rotation, and a round hole is called for. You must drill
another, smaller hole above the primary hole for the tab to fit into.
The small hole is drilled from behind, and does not need to penetrate
the front of the panel.
I wish I had a picture to explain this better.
Jeff Point
RV-6 finishing
Milwaukee WI
Nine Builder wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Nine Builder <federigo@pacbell.net>
>
>Is there a tool or technique for making correctly sized and shaped holes for the
W58 Series Switch/Breakers? The threads that go through the panel have a nominal
diameter of 0.46" with a flat spot on one side. I presume the flat spot
is to keep the breaker from rotating in its panel hole. Any help would be much
appreciated.
>Leland in Pleasanton
>RV9A
>New Lycoming from Van's arriving next week
>
>
>
>
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: RV8ter@aol.com
Nope, get the tandem. :-)
My wife likes being able to see the ground equally well from either side - me
too - and likes her own space to put her junk where ever she wants to
without worrying about whether or not I care. She's not a pilot and she could
care
or less about the panel view. She'd rather have her own elbow room and put a
"blankie and pillow" on either side of her head on long trips.
she loves everything about the 8 (except the cost ...)
do not archive
In a message dated 11/24/2003 11:16:29 AM Eastern Standard Time,
bill@vondane.com writes:
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill VonDane <bill@vondane.com>
If you have a spouse or significant other that will be going with you
regularly, get the SBS...
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: | Panel switch/breaker panel holes |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Glenn S. Gordon" <ggordon@psiatms.com>
Leland,
You would need a metal punch to get the proper "hole with flats" shape.
On my panel I placed the breakers close to each other so that each breaker
is prevented from rotating by the adjacent breaker.
-Glenn
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: | Instruments for rural night flying |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
Yes, reconsider. Error on the side of safety and better resale value.
-
Larry Bowen
Larry@BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Simmons [mailto:ken@truckstop.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 10:46 AM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: Instruments for rural night flying
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Ken Simmons" <ken@truckstop.com>
>
> I've been involved in and observed some recent discussions on
> the RV-list concerning IFR flight, "light" IFR flight, backup
> instruements, heated pitot's, etc. I'm not trying to re-open
> those discussions. I've pretty much decided to not fly my RV-8 IFR.
>
> To that end I was planning on no "gryos" except maybe a turn
> coordinator. After our last EAA meeting I'm not so sure. Our
> flight advisor gave a presentation on winter flying and in
> Idaho that could easily involve night flying. Night flying in
> most parts of Idaho is essentially IFR flight because of no
> discernable horizon.
>
> Should I reconsider the no "gryo" plan? I've already planned
> on lights so those seem a waste if I can't/shouldn't fly at
> night for other reasons.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Ken
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Panel switch/breaker panel holes |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
In addition to that, most rows of breakers have a brass/copper buss bar
that connects all the top or bottom terminals together.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Glenn S. Gordon
Subject: RE: RV-List: Panel switch/breaker panel holes
--> RV-List message posted by: "Glenn S. Gordon" <ggordon@psiatms.com>
Leland,
You would need a metal punch to get the proper "hole with flats" shape.
On my panel I placed the breakers close to each other so that each
breaker
is prevented from rotating by the adjacent breaker.
-Glenn
=
==
==
==
==
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Instruments for rural night flying |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Simmons" ken@truckstop.com
Subject: RV-List: Instruments for rural night flying
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Ken Simmons" <ken@truckstop.com>
>
> I've been involved in and observed some recent discussions on the RV-list
concerning IFR flight, "light" IFR flight, backup instruements, heated
pitot's, etc. I'm not trying to re-open those discussions. I've pretty much
decided to not fly my RV-8 IFR.
>
> To that end I was planning on no "gryos" except maybe a turn coordinator.
After our last EAA meeting I'm not so sure. Our flight advisor gave a
presentation on winter flying and in Idaho that could easily involve night
flying. Night flying in most parts of Idaho is essentially IFR flight
because of no discernable horizon.
>
> Should I reconsider the no "gryo" plan? I've already planned on lights so
those seem a waste if I can't/shouldn't fly at night for other reasons.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Ken
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
Hi Ken,
It sounds to me that you might benifit by looking at
http://www.Dynondevelopment.com before finalizing the instrument decision
process.
Jim in Kelowna
I am not affiliated with Dynon in any way, just a customer.
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Lycoming CD on Engines |
--> RV-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
I notice that Lycoming through its distributors sells a CD for $199 that
includes many needed facts published on their engines. The price is a bit
high but it includes the operators, overhaul, and parts plus other info in a
small concise CD. It has a search capability.
If anyone has used this, I'd be interested in knowing how they like it and
if they think it is a good value/purchase.
reference:
http://www.lycoming.textron.com/main.jsp?bodyPage=support/publications/technicalPublications/1.html
Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip-up TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
On Finish Kit
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Vincent Welch" <welchvincent@hotmail.com>
Consider also that you have more hip, shoulder, and elbow room in a RV-8/8A
than in the side-by-side RV's.
Vince Welch
>From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RV-List: Which RV?
>Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 08:28:36 -0600
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
>
>To those contemplating building an RV:
>
>Obviously, there is no "right" model of RV to choose. Each has their
>own pluses and minuses. Fortunately, Van has really diminished the
>minuses on all RV models. Mostly, it simply comes down to which one
>catches your fancy. However, I wanted to share my experience with the
>side by side RV (mine is a 6A) as it relates to model type. I'm not
>going to get into the practical differences between trike and
>taildragger, they have been flogged to death on this list. I also do
>not have RV experience in fore/aft arrangements.
>
>Regarding passengers: I am probably unique in that I rarely fly alone,
>maybe 20% of the time. One of the most enjoyable things for me with my
>plane is sharing it, whether it be with my family or others. Having
>side by side seating is quite nice for this. Would this be diminished
>with a fore/aft setup? I think so. Non pilot passengers seem to really
>like asking and learning about the various instruments on the panel.
>Also, I would generally not take passengers in a fore/aft arrangement
>with the rear seat stick in place, whereas I don't mind doing that in
>the side by side.
>
>Regarding long cross country trips: Last week I flew from southern
>Florida to Minneapolis in one day, three hops, headwinds, a total of 9.4
>hours on the hobbs. I was alone for this trip, but it was really nice
>to be able to set charts and the cooler on the seat next to me. I took
>the passenger control stick out for this trip. Additionally, it was
>nice to be able to move my legs around to the right side occasionally.
>
>Flight instruction: I am working (slowly, still!!) on an instrument
>rating in my plane. This would really not be possible with a tandem
>arrangment.
>
>Formation flying: Here is a bit of a disadvantage for the side by side.
>I prefer not to fly formation to the left of someone. One needs to
>leave a little more margin (specifically, stay lower relative to the
>lead) if flying on the left of lead in a side by side.
>
>Just some thoughts from a side by sider!
>
>Alex Peterson
>Maple Grove, MN
>RV6-A N66AP 421 hours
>www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
>
>
Say goodbye to busy signals and slow downloads with a high-speed Internet
connection! Prices start at less than $1 a day average.
https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.)
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cheap Strobes |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill VonDane <bill@vondane.com>
FYI...
I will soon have a power supply for sale for experimental aircraft for about
half the cost of the Whelen unit... I contracted Nova to produce the PS for
me which will be equal to or better than the whelen in performance...
I should have more info on this and other products on my site soon...
-Bill VonDane
www.creativair.com
www.vondane.com
www.epanelbuilder.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charlie Kuss" <chaskuss@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Cheap Strobes
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss@bellsouth.net>
Hi Norman,
Thanks for your detailed post. I'd like you to tell me if my research on
this subject is in error. I had followed much of the various threads
relating to the various strobe systems available. What I found was as
follows.
The Aeroflash systems available are rated to the older, lower candlepower
standards set back before the 1980s. The newer systems have about 4 times
the power ( 100 vs 400 candlepower I believe) that this older system has.
The Nova power supplies available from STROBES N' MORE come in a variety of
styles and powers. I chose their most powerful (X-Pak 904 model 90 watt)
single unit power supply. See
http://www.strobe.com/pdfs/xpak904-install.pdf
I intend to use this unit to power 3 strobes on my 8A. I purchased the
complete package below. This comes with 32 watt strobe heads. See
http://strobeguy.safeshopper.com/18/1829.htm?959
The switch was not included when I purchased my unit. It was on sale then
for $250.00
Strobes N' More lists a similar Whelen unit. Unfortunately, they do not
supply as much info for this unit. It also appears that this Whelen unit is
not an aviation specific power supply. Whelen's site recommends their model
HDACF for use with a 2 strobe system on our aircraft. They recommend the use
of 2 model A490ATSC power supplies for use on 3 strobe systems. I suspect
that the number of model A490ATSC power supplies to be used with a 3 lamp
system is a typographical error. I say this because Page 10 of their catalog
states that these units are designed to power one strobe head. (I could be
wrong on this) Page 10 of their catalog states that the model HDACF with
power 1, 2 or 3 strobe heads. So comparing the Nova X-Pak 904 to the Whelen
HDACF would be more of an "apples to apples" comparison.
See
http://www.whelen.com/nondynmc/Aviation/homebuilt.htm
and
http://www.whelen.com/pb/11015.htm
From this I discern that the Nova unit will supply 80 joules of power. (See
first link listed above) This compares to the Whelen's 84 joules. (See the
third link listed above Page 10) The Whelen has a slight edge here, but not
a large one. I suspect that most of us could not tell the difference with
the naked eye. The Whelen unit is also somewhat more efficient in it's use
of power. The Nova unit is rated at 8.5 amps at 12.8 volts (8.5 X 12.8 108.8 watts).
The Whelen HDACF is rated at 7 amps at 14 volts (7 X 14 = 98
watts)
Is the Whelen unit waterproof? I seem to remember reading somewhere that it
was, but I can not locate the reference now. The Nova unit is not
waterproof, so this must be taken into account when mounting it. The Whelen
unit may have an advantage here.
One point I will make in support of Norman's statements below, is that the
Strobes N' More strobe heads are supplied bare. Whelen supplies their units
with a special lens to focus the light output from their heads. This is an
important feature and should not be ignored. Luckily, users of the non
Whelen units can purchase the proper lens from Vans accessory catalog. They
are part number LN W1284-C . They cost $12.50 each and can be found on Vans
site at:
http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1069691959-52-651&browse=lighting&product=strobe_parts
A stamped steel lens retainer will also be needed to retain the lens to the
strobe heads. Vans catalog does not list these items.
Am I missing anything here Norman? Please advise as to any technical details
I have missed. Good information is the key to good purchasing decisions. I
agree with Norman regarding the new HID head lamps. I'll be prowling the
local wrecking yards soon for the PAR 35 style (4.5" round) HID head lamps.
The current new prices for these is to rich for my blood. I expect that the
cost of these units will decline as they become more plentiful and popular.
Charlie Kuss
RV-8A punching holes for instruments in my panel
Boca Raton, Fl.
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Norman Hunger" <nhunger@sprint.ca>
>
>Not reading the list real time these days but scanning it about two months
behind. I have how ever been reading it for quite a few years though and
I've seen the cheap strobe subject come up many times. I thought I'd speak
up on this one to put forth my opinion that the cheap strobes designed for
emergency ground vehicles are next to USELESS in aircraft. They are not
bright enough. I've had the good fortune in my career to test many different
types of strobes and I've used this experience to form this strong opinion.
>
>Ground vehicle strobes are purposely not as bright as aviation strobes
because if they were they would blind motorists on dark and rainy nights.
They are designed to be in your scope of vision, aviation strobes are
designed to be noticed from your peripheral vision from much further away.
That is a big difference. Vehicle strobes are typically giving warning to
other vehicles that are within 1/4 mile from the source. That's not good
enough for aircraft. We need them to be seen from several miles away. Some
one is now sure to pipe up that they have seen police strobes two miles down
the highway so I'll point out that you were probably looking directly down
that straight, level highway. How noticeable do you feel they would be at
four miles off your two o'clock? If you are on a converging flightpath, you
would want them to be noticeable from at least four miles.
>
>An interesting turn of my career this year involved spending over $40k
building some modern LED police light bars. I tested LED's from several
manufactures after spending considerable effort researching who had the
brightest LED's. I tested quite a few and found that they are very
directional. They can be made with a wide beam or a narrow beam. Going with
a wide beam sacrifices brightness at distance. I ended up purchasing 6000 of
what I considered to be the brightest. To cover 90 degrees of vision, they
have to be splayed or fanned out so that even if you have a panel of 40
LEDs, you will only see a minority of them when a long distance away from
them. When left in a flat panel, they were useless for the task of a police
light bar. When seen from outside their beam they appear to turn off.
>
>The best thing about LEDs is their low power draw. The second best thing is
their cool operating temperature. The third is that they last for a very
long time. Sadly, I feel that to do a good job in an aircraft, one would
need to use a huge panel (100+) of the best available LEDs. By the way, the
good ones are not cheap and you still need to build a board to get them to
fire. I am not convinced that LEDs are bright enough to substitute for
strobes. Position lights are a different story and I do not have a strong
opinion. I would like to see a useful experiment done by a group of RV's
equipped with different lights. Fly them in trail and photograph (still and
video) them from a mile away. I would love to see the results. Would very
much like to see how the new LED position lights stack up against the
conventional Whelen halogen position lights
>
>This is only my opinion but I feel that I have played with more lighting
than most amateur aircraft builders. I feel that the best anti collision
lighting we can put on our homebuilds are the highest wattage strobes
available. Again, sadly, they aren't cheap. If you are researching strobes
with the intention to be as noticeable as possible, seek the highest wattage
output on your power supply. The cheap ones are no good on airplanes.
>
>I wonder if I'll need a flame suit for this one. I certainly am not
intending to slam new technology, just exercising my right to express my own
opinion on aircraft anti-collision strobes - NOT POSITION LIGHTS.
>
>A quick word on the new technology of HID landing lights. They are worth
the money. If you want better and are willing to spend the money, they rule.
>
>PS - new technology in lighting is coming out all the time and I won't
claim to be up on every last thing out there. I noticed that for the first
time an auto manufactor is using LEDs for headlights. Check out the new
610hp Audi Le Mans. It has headlights made up of 17 LEDs per side. I wonder
who developed the bulbs and where we could get a few to test. They must be
good as this car is designed to be the fastest production car available.
>
>Norman Hunger
>RV6A Delta BC
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing Skin Corrosion Under Plastic - Update! |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Elsa & Henry" <elsa-henry@darlor-watch.com>
Which makes me think there must be some corroding element in the adhesive of
the blue plastic.Las week , I peeled off the white plastic from some of the
scrap that was sent in my kits in 1995 which has been sitting in my basement
since then,------ still pristine!
Cheers!!----Henry Hore
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Panel switch/breaker panel holes |
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss@bellsouth.net>
Leland
I believe you are looking for a Greenlee model 731 radio chassis punch. I have
one of these tools. It produces a round hole with a fall side. (Sort of a D)
This punch was used to put the old glass BUSS type fuse holders in certified ships.
I'll check the diameter of the punch when I go to my shop later.
Charlie Kuss
>--> RV-List message posted by: Nine Builder <federigo@pacbell.net>
>
>Is there a tool or technique for making correctly sized and shaped holes for the
W58 Series Switch/Breakers? The threads that go through the panel have a nominal
diameter of 0.46" with a flat spot on one side. I presume the flat spot
is to keep the breaker from rotating in its panel hole. Any help would be much
appreciated.
>Leland in Pleasanton
>RV9A
>New Lycoming from Van's arriving next week
>
>
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
rv-list <rv-list@matronics.com>
| Subject: | Sheared (RV-7) vs Hoerner (RV-6) Wing tips |
--> RV-List message posted by: Laird Owens <owens@aerovironment.com>
I have my RV-6 with the old style (Hoerner) tips. I have pretty good
data on the top end speed of my RV and a pretty good system for
getting repeatable data.
If anybody wants to loan me a set of the new RV tips, I can do the
tip mod that Jim is talking about (which is minor) and do the testing
and report back with a comparison test. Might be interesting.
I figure I'd need them for a least a few weeks to get them mounted,
modified, and leave enough time for finding good days to test on.
Of course, somebody local would be preferable.
Anybody interested?
Laird
SoCal
Message 37
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Phil N" <pnewlon@toosan.com>
Unless you have a spouse like mine that hates to hold the enroute charts
and approach plates :-) Mine insisted that I take up too much room and
she wants her own space.
> If you have a spouse or significant other that will be going
> with you regularly, get the SBS...
> Lets face it. The side by side is the more practical way to
> go. The tandem looks cooler. I think that says it all.
Message 38
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Instruments for rural night flying |
--> RV-List message posted by: jdalton77@comcast.net
Just my .02 but I would never fly without Gyros. You just never know when you
may need them. They're very helpful at night, where you can easily fly into a
cloud in the dark, or during the winter when a squall line can easily surprise
you.
I can remember at least one time when I was flying with my young children and found
myself in IFR weather all of a sudden on all sides .... yes it happens here
in the midwest in the winter. If I hadn't had and AI and Turn Coordinator
I would probably be dead today - along with them.
Spring for the gyro - two would be better. Just to be safe.
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Ken Simmons" <ken@truckstop.com>
>
> I've been involved in and observed some recent discussions on the RV-list
> concerning IFR flight, "light" IFR flight, backup instruements, heated pitot's,
> etc. I'm not trying to re-open those discussions. I've pretty much decided to
> not fly my RV-8 IFR.
>
> To that end I was planning on no "gryos" except maybe a turn coordinator. After
> our last EAA meeting I'm not so sure. Our flight advisor gave a presentation
on
> winter flying and in Idaho that could easily involve night flying. Night flying
> in most parts of Idaho is essentially IFR flight because of no discernable
> horizon.
>
> Should I reconsider the no "gryo" plan? I've already planned on lights so those
> seem a waste if I can't/shouldn't fly at night for other reasons.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Ken
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 39
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | impulse coupling spring |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bob Japundza <bjapundza@yahoo.com>
Hello All,
I am wondering if any of you could tell me how to wind a bendix impulse coupling
by hand. This weekend I pulled my bendix mag out to do the 500 hour check,
and to check the points/e-gap, cam condition, etc. I wanted to verify that the
impulse flyweights were not held on by the old-style rivets, and as I was pulling
the impulse assembly off with a gear puller (with the puller pulling on
the flyweight body per the book), boing! the impulse coupling broke loose and
the body/spring came off. The only manual I have seems to be rather outdated
and it doesn't describe impulse coupling assembly. After breaking one spring
trying to rewind it, and not wanting to repeat this exercise, is there a sure-fire
way to do it?
Regards,
Bob Japundza
RV-6 flying 550 hours
F1 QB under const.
---------------------------------
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
Message 40
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr@petroblend.com>
>
> Alex,
>
> Is this a ploy? Were you baiting me? Has the list been too
> quiet for too long so you felt the need to throw some avgas
> on the fire?
>
Doug, I am disappointed that I didn't think of you when I threw that
post to the list this morning. I would have made it much more
inflammatory.
OK, I give, the tandem seating is "cooler" for the pilot (and really
cool for the Minnesota winter passenger). But, I don't think the
canyons can really tell when we buzz by at a couple hundred mph.
Good comment by someone else that hip room is more in the -8's.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
RV6-A N66AP 421 hours
www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
Message 41
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Acceptable method for inverfted tank fuel fuel send wire |
--> RV-List message posted by: RV8ter@aol.com
How do folks secure, route and protect the wire from the inverted fuel tank
sender location on the back of the baffle? I know what Red Green would use.
Any pictures?
thanks,
lucky
do not archive
Message 42
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Panel switch/breaker panel holes |
--> RV-List message posted by: linn walters <lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
Nine Builder wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Nine Builder <federigo@pacbell.net>
>
>Is there a tool or technique for making correctly sized and shaped holes for the
W58 Series Switch/Breakers? The threads that go through the panel have a nominal
diameter of 0.46" with a flat spot on one side. I presume the flat spot
is to keep the breaker from rotating in its panel hole. Any help would be much
appreciated.
>Leland in Pleasanton
>RV9A
>New Lycoming from Van's arriving next week
>
>
Yes. It's called a punch press, and it weighs far more than your
airplane. :-D . Barring that, there is a useful tool called a file.
Well, you asked. You can do yourself a favor and forget the flat. If
you drill the holes for a row of breakers the correct spacing so the
breakers fit next to each other, they can't rotate. This way you can
drill a 1/2" hole and be done with it. A Unibit would be a good, nifty
tool.
Linn Walters
Do not archive
Message 43
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Instruments for rural night flying |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ken Simmons" <ken@truckstop.com>
I wanted to thank everyone for their input both on and off the list.
It looks like I'll add the Dynon back to my instrument list. I think the battery
backup for the Dynon will be sufficient for my purposes instead of having a
full blown E-buss.
Ken
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Message 44
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Genev E Reed <genevreed@juno.com>
This is a first for me. A Woman that doesn't mind being bagage
Doyle Reed 7A 140 hrs
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 11:55:58 EST WMPALM@aol.com writes:
> --> RV-List message posted by: WMPALM@aol.com
>
> Recommendation:
>
> If you have a spouse or significant other, check with them. They
> should also
> fly, or at least sit in, all the models: side-by-side, tandem, and
> taildragger. You might be surprised at the result.
>
> My wife and I flew our Tobago to Van's with the intent to purchase
> an RV-7A
> kit. After flying the 6A (no 7A demo available at that time),
> sitting in the
> RV-7, and flying the 8A, my wife liked the RV-8A, so that's what we
> got. Her
> reasons: More room (shoulders tend to rub together in side-by-side),
> better
> visibility with a tandem rear seat than a side seat (she thought),
> and, probably
> most importantly, the centerline "feel" while flying. My reasons:
> The same.
>
> As far as tri-gear vs. tail dragger, our conclusions for the
> tri-gear were:
> That's what we were used to flying (Tobago, Cherokee 140), easier
> landing, and
> lower insurance.
>
> Note: All of Van's aircraft are fine aircraft. In my opinion, your
> choice
> will be mainly a matter of personal requirements, experience, and
> taste. Since
> all RVers are proud of their aircraft, they may tend to advocate
> their
> particular choice, but, bottom line, it's what you want, and your
> spouse/significant
> other, that's important!
>
> Good Luck,
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> _->
=
>
=
>
=
>
=
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 45
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable method for inverfted tank fuel fuel send wire |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Brumbelow <csbrumbelow@fedex.com>
In my RV-8A, I drilled small holes in the fuel tank mounting brackets,
installed snap bushings, the routed the wire from the sender through this to
the fus.
Scott in MEM
RV-8A
12 hours
RV8ter@aol.com wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: RV8ter@aol.com
>
> How do folks secure, route and protect the wire from the inverted fuel tank
> sender location on the back of the baffle? I know what Red Green would use.
> Any pictures?
>
> thanks,
> lucky
> do not archive
>
Message 46
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV builders prayer |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Bower" <rvbuilder@hotmail.com>
That's a good one! It will work in a variety of situations.
>From: "Jeff Orear" <jorear@new.rr.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: RV-List: RV builders prayer
>Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 17:17:43 -0600
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Orear" <jorear@new.rr.com>
>
>Here's one better, inspired by Alan Shepard....
>
>Please God, don't let me screw up!
>
>
>Do No Archive
>
>Regards,
>
>Jeff Orear
>RV6A
>canopy
>Peshtigo, WI
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson@consolidated.net>
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RV-List: RV builders prayer
>
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club"
><sisson@consolidated.net>
> >
> > Dear Lord,
> >
> > Please make this computer stop working for a long enough duration that I
>can finish my RV-6...
> >
> > Phil
> >
> > do not archive
> >
> >
>
>
From the hottest toys to tips on keeping fit this winter, youll find a
range of helpful holiday info here.
http://special.msn.com/network/happyholidays.armx
Message 47
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Panel switch/breaker panel holes |
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss@bellsouth.net>
>--> RV-List message posted by: linn walters <lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
>
>Nine Builder wrote:
>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: Nine Builder <federigo@pacbell.net>
>>
>>Is there a tool or technique for making correctly sized and shaped holes for
the W58 Series Switch/Breakers? The threads that go through the panel have a nominal
diameter of 0.46" with a flat spot on one side. I presume the flat spot
is to keep the breaker from rotating in its panel hole. Any help would be much
appreciated.
>>Leland in Pleasanton
>>RV9A
>>New Lycoming from Van's arriving next week
>>
>>
>Yes. It's called a punch press, and it weighs far more than your
>airplane. :-D . Barring that, there is a useful tool called a file.
>Well, you asked. You can do yourself a favor and forget the flat. If
>you drill the holes for a row of breakers the correct spacing so the
>breakers fit next to each other, they can't rotate. This way you can
>drill a 1/2" hole and be done with it. A Unibit would be a good, nifty
>tool.
>
>Linn Walters
Linn
You are WAY off base here. The Greenlee model 731 radio chassis punch I mentioned
earlier is about 1 " wide and 1.5" long. It must weigh all of 1/2 an ounce.
Do a search on EBay to find one, or go to your local Avionics shop. They will
have one. You might also be able to order one through your local electrician's
supply house, as most of these folks are distributors for Greenlee products.
Charlie Kuss
Message 48
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Terry Watson" <terry@tcwatson.com>
The back seat of a tandem is baggage? I took my instrument training and
check ride in the back seat of a tandem - T-38, about 38 years ago.
Terry
RV-8A finishing
Seattle
Do not archive
--> RV-List message posted by: Genev E Reed <genevreed@juno.com>
This is a first for me. A Woman that doesn't mind being bagage
Doyle Reed 7A 140 hrs
Message 49
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "C. Rabaut" <crabaut@coalinga.com>
Doug,
I have to second your thoughts about our RV-4's. I just get a woody
every time one of those F-18's (from our local NAS Lemoore) tosses by over
head. My wife hates "the noise they make" , but for some unknown reason
she still likes living near by. She says "oh, I don't know... it just
makes me feel better when they're around.". :-}
Chuck
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Doug Rozendaal <dougr@petroblend.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Which RV?
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr@petroblend.com>
>
> Alex,
>
> Is this a ploy? Were you baiting me? Has the list been too quiet for too
> long so you felt the need to throw some avgas on the fire?
>
> Everything you said about the side by side is true, and you forgot the
fact
> that the rear seater freezes in the wintertime, but I would not trade
tandem
> seating for any of it.
>
> I flew a -6A from MCW to MAF to ABQ to IWA last weekend. almost 10 hours.
> It was more comfortable and more user freindly than my -4, but I had no
> desire to go buzzing down the canyons. In my -4 I would have been having
> fun the whole trip, but in the -6, I drove it like a bus.
>
> Acro in a side by side is less fun, still fun, just less fun. I guess the
> side by sides just don't as effectively capture the "fighter feel." I
can't
> answer why, but they don't, and that is a big deal. People spend millions
> on Mustangs to get that "fighter feel" that we get in a "Tandem" RV for 5%
> of the cost.
>
> There, see what you started! ;-)
>
> Tailwinds,
> Doug Rozendaal
>
>
Message 50
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Panel switch/breaker panel holes |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Dube <bdube@al.noaa.gov>
>
>Nine Builder wrote:
>
> >--> RV-List message posted by: Nine Builder <federigo@pacbell.net>
> >
> >Is there a tool or technique for making correctly sized and shaped holes
> for the W58 Series Switch/Breakers? The threads that go through the panel
> have a nominal diameter of 0.46" with a flat spot on one side.
Greenlee part number 60077.
It is called a "D" chassis punch.
Page 34 of the Greenlee catalog.
http://198.247.193.8/wwwroot/greenlee/holemaking.pdf
Message 51
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | pop rivet stems falling out |
--> RV-List message posted by: Paul Eastham <eastham@netapp.com>
Hi list,
I am closing out my RV-9 HS and the plans call for some LP4-4 pop rivets
to attach the ribs to the rear spar in places where you can't buck.
No problem, right? Well...as I pulled a couple of them, I heard the stem
break, and then a rattling noise of the bottom half of the stem falling
through the shop head and into the HS. Now I can see daylight through
those rivets.
I understand the stem can fall out later in life, but does this weaken
the rivet? Anything I can do to avoid it as I am pulling?
2 out of the first 5 I pulled had this problem.
Thanks!
Paul
http://hmb.dyndns.org/~eastham/rv
Message 52
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Wing Tips (very short) |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
I bought the Van's sheared tips and added the sharp edge with west
systems epoxy and microballoons mixed to a very stiff consistency and
sanded to shape when dry. Took a few applications to get it right, but
it wasn't very hard to do. By the way, that was my very first composite
project, so I'm not kidding when I say it wasn't hard to do. Not flying
yet so I don't have data. I did em that way because Tracy Saylor said it
works. I've flown with him and his airplane is fast, very fast.
Ed Holyoke
6QB canopy
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
LeastDrag93066@aol.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: Wing Tips (very short)
--> RV-List message posted by: LeastDrag93066@aol.com
In a message dated 11/23/2003 9:35:40 PM Pacific Standard Time,
dan@rvproject.com writes:
Jim,
Thanks for the great info. I'm curious if you happen to have any sort
of
side-by-side photos or diagrams that might highlight the difference that
you're talking about between Van's sheared tips (with the joggle you
mentioned) and the ideal tips (with the straight line vortex cutter).
If not, no sweat, but I'd like to gather as much info on this as
possible
before I decide one way or the other.
Thanks!
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
Normally, the parting line edge on Van's sheared wingtip is sanded into
a
nice smooth rounded edge.
Maybe someone on this list with composite expertise can suggest an easy
way
to create the sharp edge on Van's wingtip along the parting line.
Jim Ayers
=
==
==
==
==
Message 53
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Panel switch/breaker panel holes |
--> RV-List message posted by: linn walters <lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
Charlie Kuss wrote:
>
>Linn
> You are WAY off base here. The Greenlee model 731 radio chassis punch I mentioned
earlier is about 1 " wide and 1.5" long. It must weigh all of 1/2 an ounce.
Do a search on EBay to find one, or go to your local Avionics shop. They will
have one. You might also be able to order one through your local electrician's
supply house, as most of these folks are distributors for Greenlee products.
>Charlie Kuss
>
>
Charlie, I'm familiar with greenlee punches, and even the type of punch
you mentioned (but not 731 specifically). I found it hard to line up
the punch accurately ..... maybe it's just me. That's why the comment
about the punch press. You can't get everything lined up and spaced
well with the Greenlee punch. That's just my opinion. One hole in a
panel ...... yep, it works fine. But not a row full,spaced tightly.
The 'D' punch (.500 X .469) in the Grainger catalog is Greenlee #60077
and is $159.25! Kinda steep for my blood. A round hole does quite
nicely for me, thank you very much! Once the nut is tightened and the
bus is attached (as another post said), you can't possibly turn it
anyway! Even if it had a knob to grab! Another post mentioned the
tabbed washer. Tough to get the hole for the tab in the right place
too. But not if you have that punch press :-D !!! I've used the
washer, but turned it backwards and used it as a bearing surface only.
Best of luck guys!
Linn Walters
do not archive
Message 54
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Less Expensive (not cheap) strobes |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Donald Mei" <don_mei@hotmail.com>
God I hate to disagree with Norman. I've been reading the list for about 4
yrs now and I'd bet that he's forgoten more about aircraft than I will ever
learn. However, with that said, I think several things he mentioned about
"cheap" strobes are incorrect.
I live 5 miles from the headquarters of Whelen Engineering. Chester
airport,3B9, is owned by Whelen and is right next door to the headquarters.
Many of my friends either work for Whelen or have in the past. When I
first started flying I asked the obvious question: Why are the aviation
power supplies so much more money?? The answer was simple. They take a
commercial power supply, figure in the amount of money necessary to get it
certified. That means high temp tests, low temp tests, EMI tests, corrosion
tests, the whole gamut. (Interesting side note, many of Whelen's products
are used on aircraft that operate off of salt water so corrosion is a big
issue. I was told that the harshest environment is the helicopters used to
service off shore oil drilling rigs)
They take all that expense, figure an anticipated market, figure a return on
investment/payback period and set a price. Don't forget that a Whelen
aviation strobe has to be certified. It costs more to be certified. Just
like you'll never see a $2000 certified efis, ever. But we've already got
one that's not certified. So where was I?
Oh yeah, a strobe power supply has a power rating, I think its Joules.
Aviation Joules are the same as public safety Joules, a Joule is a Joule.
I ended up purchasing a power supply for my RV that while not dirt cheap was
in many ways superior to an aviation supply at a lower price. I purchased a
supply that is considered a "rough duty" power supply. It is entirely
encased in epoxy and is totally vibration and water proof. It is made by a
company named Nova. They are based about 10 miles from Whelen and was
founded by Ex-whelen people. Whelen makes similar devices for the rough
duty market. I chose a Nova because a very good friend of mine (who is a
pilot and hates the fact that I can use superior non aviation products where
prudent) knows a lot about this stuff. His company does turn key public
safety vehicle installations. Radios, lights, sirens. He swares by the
Whelen stuff, he also likes the Nova stuff. He happened to have a Nova that
fit my application on hand so I used it. If he'd had a Whelen on hand, I'd
have used that. (a Joule is a Joule is a Joule)
He also told me that most of the strobe heads for a given input are the same
in brightness. If you feed an aviation head X Joules it won't be brighter
than a public safety head.
In the area of LEDs, just you wait. Norman may be right about the current
state of the art, but things are changing fast. Surefire, a high end flash
light manufacturer now has an LED flashlight with a SINGLE 5 watt GE LED.
It puts out 55 lumens. That's twice the light of a 4 D cell Maglight. This
LED is still far too expensive to use clustered, but that will change with
time.
Whelen is rolling out LED position lights this fall. They've got an all LED
replacement for the standard bulky beacon seen on the top of many plane's
VS. It is VERY bright, and it draws something like 1 amp. They've also got
wing tip LED position lights. Retail on the Wing tip lights is around $400.
But unfortunately they are only currently available in 28 volt versions.
I'm told 12 volt products are on the way.
Re HID lights I totally concur. Amazing. They're much better than standard
quartz halogen bulbs, but in comparison to standard landing lights they flat
blow them away. This same friend and I did an experiment with my car, a
standard landing light, and a HID driving light. If the HID was a 10, the
car lights were a 6 and the landing light was a 3.
Only downside to HIDs is that you can't Wig Wag them.
Best regards,
Don Mei
"All of us need to be reminded that the federal government did not create
the states; the states created the federal government!"---Ronald Reagan
Share holiday photos without swamping your Inbox. Get MSN Extra Storage
Message 55
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Panel switch/breaker panel holes |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
Guys, guys, guys........Toggle switches will stay put just fine without the
flat spot and/or the keyway cut into the panel. Use the star washer under
the nut when installing them, and they'll stay put. A Unibit works just
great! Check out all the 30+ yr old production airplanes' toggle
switches....Put all that time and effort into something else.
Cheers,
Stein Bruch
RV6's, Minneapolis (Lot's of Toggles, NO flat spots or keyways in the
holes).
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Charlie Kuss
Subject: Re: RV-List: Panel switch/breaker panel holes
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss@bellsouth.net>
>--> RV-List message posted by: linn walters <lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
>
>Nine Builder wrote:
>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: Nine Builder <federigo@pacbell.net>
>>
>>Is there a tool or technique for making correctly sized and shaped holes
for the W58 Series Switch/Breakers? The threads that go through the panel
have a nominal diameter of 0.46" with a flat spot on one side. I presume the
flat spot is to keep the breaker from rotating in its panel hole. Any help
would be much appreciated.
>>Leland in Pleasanton
>>RV9A
>>New Lycoming from Van's arriving next week
>>
>>
>Yes. It's called a punch press, and it weighs far more than your
>airplane. :-D . Barring that, there is a useful tool called a file.
>Well, you asked. You can do yourself a favor and forget the flat. If
>you drill the holes for a row of breakers the correct spacing so the
>breakers fit next to each other, they can't rotate. This way you can
>drill a 1/2" hole and be done with it. A Unibit would be a good, nifty
>tool.
>
>Linn Walters
Linn
You are WAY off base here. The Greenlee model 731 radio chassis punch I
mentioned earlier is about 1 " wide and 1.5" long. It must weigh all of 1/2
an ounce. Do a search on EBay to find one, or go to your local Avionics
shop. They will have one. You might also be able to order one through your
local electrician's supply house, as most of these folks are distributors
for Greenlee products.
Charlie Kuss
Message 56
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing Skin Corrosion Under Plastic - Update! |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
Kevin Behrent wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Behrent <kbehrent@cascadiasoftware.com>
>
>As I mentioned last week in my original post, I took my wings skins to
>Van's last Friday. Scott Riser and Ken Kruger examined the skins and I
>believe they said it was the worst case they've seen, but Ken felt that
>they were salvagable. The bottoms skins were the worst, followed by the
>outer D sections. The fuel tanks had a little corrosion, but I didn't
>feel comfortable striping away the alclad to remove the corrosion and
>than not being able to prime inside the tanks. The top skins seem okay
>and should only need cleaning with alumiprep to remove any surface
>corrosion.
>
>So, I left Van's a few dollars lighter, but with new bottom skins, D
>sections, and fuel tanks and a strong message from Van's to REMOVE the
>plastic as soon as possible.
>
>I would like to publicly thank Scott Riser (I know you're monitoring)
>for helping with this issue and would like to say that it was the best
>"customer service" experience that I've had with Van's Aircraft. Scott
>handled this issue, which I take responsibility for, better than the
>other times I've called due to Van's screwups. So, if you haven't gotten
>the customer service that you expected, call Scott (sorry Scott). If he
>can't help you, you're screwed!
>
>--
>Kevin
>rv-9a - wings
>
>
>
Thats your opinion, I find what you say to not be true. IMO!!!!
Jerry
do not archive
Message 57
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
"Rv8-List" <rv8-list@matronics.com>, "Rv7-List" <rv7-list@matronics.com>,
"Rv6-List" <rv6-list@matronics.com>
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
Hi Guys,
If any of you are at all contemplating purchasing an ELT for your project in
the near future, I just got a flyer form one of my distributors that has
these ELT's at a significant discount. Here's the catch, I have to buy them
3 at a time....
If you're interested, the price will be $165.00+shipping. Everywhere else
I've checked these run $180-190.00+shipping (ACS, Van's, Chief, etc..).
If I can get enough people interested, I'll order some. Just thought I'd
pass along the savings. This is a great ELT, I own two of them now!
Contact me off list if you're interested.
Cheers,
Stein Bruch
RV6's, Minneapolis
http://www.steinair.com
Do Not Archive
Message 58
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing Skin Corrosion Under Plastic - Update! |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Richard Sipp" <rsipp@earthlink.net>
Kevin, I am going to have to agree with Jerry, every person I have ever
dealt with at Van's and their have been many, since the early 80s has been
fine to deal with and most have been great.
A business as successful as Van's is not built on "screw ups."
Dick Sipp
Do not achieve
> Kevin Behrent wrote:
>
> >--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Behrent
<kbehrent@cascadiasoftware.com>
> >
> >As I mentioned last week in my original post, I took my wings skins to
> >Van's last Friday. Scott Riser and Ken Kruger examined the skins and I
> >believe they said it was the worst case they've seen, but Ken felt that
> >they were salvagable. The bottoms skins were the worst, followed by the
> >outer D sections. The fuel tanks had a little corrosion, but I didn't
> >feel comfortable striping away the alclad to remove the corrosion and
> >than not being able to prime inside the tanks. The top skins seem okay
> >and should only need cleaning with alumiprep to remove any surface
> >corrosion.
> >
> >So, I left Van's a few dollars lighter, but with new bottom skins, D
> >sections, and fuel tanks and a strong message from Van's to REMOVE the
> >plastic as soon as possible.
> >
> >I would like to publicly thank Scott Riser (I know you're monitoring)
> >for helping with this issue and would like to say that it was the best
> >"customer service" experience that I've had with Van's Aircraft. Scott
> >handled this issue, which I take responsibility for, better than the
> >other times I've called due to Van's screwups. So, if you haven't gotten
> >the customer service that you expected, call Scott (sorry Scott). If he
> >can't help you, you're screwed!
> >
> >--
> >Kevin
> >rv-9a - wings
> >
> >
> >
> Thats your opinion, I find what you say to not be true. IMO!!!!
> Jerry
>
> do not archive
Message 59
| 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: "Tom Gummo" <T.gummo@verizon.net>
Doyle,
You need to increase your circle of friends; my wife picked tandem model
too. :-)
But then the Rocket has more room than the other tandem models from Vans.
However, ANY woman who allows her man to build ANY model RV is all right in
my book.
Tom Gummo
Apple Valley, CA
Harmon Rocket-II
do not archive
http://mysite.verizon.net/t.gummo/index.html
----- Original Message -----
From: "Genev E Reed" <genevreed@juno.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Which RV?
> --> RV-List message posted by: Genev E Reed <genevreed@juno.com>
>
>
> This is a first for me. A Woman that doesn't mind being bagage
> Doyle Reed 7A 140 hrs
>
>
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 11:55:58 EST WMPALM@aol.com writes:
> > --> RV-List message posted by: WMPALM@aol.com
> >
> > Recommendation:
> >
> > If you have a spouse or significant other, check with them. They
> > should also
> > fly, or at least sit in, all the models: side-by-side, tandem, and
> > taildragger. You might be surprised at the result.
> >
> > My wife and I flew our Tobago to Van's with the intent to purchase
> > an RV-7A
> > kit. After flying the 6A (no 7A demo available at that time),
> > sitting in the
> > RV-7, and flying the 8A, my wife liked the RV-8A, so that's what we
> > got. Her
> > reasons: More room (shoulders tend to rub together in side-by-side),
> > better
> > visibility with a tandem rear seat than a side seat (she thought),
> > and, probably
> > most importantly, the centerline "feel" while flying. My reasons:
> > The same.
> >
> > As far as tri-gear vs. tail dragger, our conclusions for the
> > tri-gear were:
> > That's what we were used to flying (Tobago, Cherokee 140), easier
> > landing, and
> > lower insurance.
> >
> > Note: All of Van's aircraft are fine aircraft. In my opinion, your
> > choice
> > will be mainly a matter of personal requirements, experience, and
> > taste. Since
> > all RVers are proud of their aircraft, they may tend to advocate
> > their
> > particular choice, but, bottom line, it's what you want, and your
> > spouse/significant
> > other, that's important!
> >
> > Good Luck,
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
> >
> > _->
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 60
| 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 |
|
Rv8-List" <rv8-list@matronics.com>,
Rv7-List <rv7-list@matronics.com>
| Subject: | Re: RV6-List: AK 450 ELT |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson@consolidated.net>
Hey Stein, I got the order from you today,
Great service and great prices. I have the Coax installed and the Xpndr checed
out OK..
Hoping to have the uhmw tape on in a couple of weeks.........
Phil
Message 61
| 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: "Karie Daniel" <karie4@comcast.net>
I had never flown the 8 when I purchased the my 7A and when I went to pick
up my kit last year I got a ride in the 8 and almost canceled the deal on my
7 to get an 8. I couldn't help think about why I bought the 7 though. I have
two little girls, one of which is in love with flying in the right seat next
to me.
Buying an 8 would have taken away from our grins and interaction and I
couldn't stand it if she lost interest in flying. One day I'll give her the
7 and I'll build an 8 though. :-)
Karie Daniel
Sammamish, WA.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vincent Welch" <welchvincent@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Which RV?
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Vincent Welch" <welchvincent@hotmail.com>
>
> Consider also that you have more hip, shoulder, and elbow room in a
RV-8/8A
> than in the side-by-side RV's.
>
> Vince Welch
>
>
> >From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
> >Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
> >To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
> >Subject: RV-List: Which RV?
> >Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 08:28:36 -0600
> >
> >--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
> >
> >To those contemplating building an RV:
> >
> >Obviously, there is no "right" model of RV to choose. Each has their
> >own pluses and minuses. Fortunately, Van has really diminished the
> >minuses on all RV models. Mostly, it simply comes down to which one
> >catches your fancy. However, I wanted to share my experience with the
> >side by side RV (mine is a 6A) as it relates to model type. I'm not
> >going to get into the practical differences between trike and
> >taildragger, they have been flogged to death on this list. I also do
> >not have RV experience in fore/aft arrangements.
> >
> >Regarding passengers: I am probably unique in that I rarely fly alone,
> >maybe 20% of the time. One of the most enjoyable things for me with my
> >plane is sharing it, whether it be with my family or others. Having
> >side by side seating is quite nice for this. Would this be diminished
> >with a fore/aft setup? I think so. Non pilot passengers seem to really
> >like asking and learning about the various instruments on the panel.
> >Also, I would generally not take passengers in a fore/aft arrangement
> >with the rear seat stick in place, whereas I don't mind doing that in
> >the side by side.
> >
> >Regarding long cross country trips: Last week I flew from southern
> >Florida to Minneapolis in one day, three hops, headwinds, a total of 9.4
> >hours on the hobbs. I was alone for this trip, but it was really nice
> >to be able to set charts and the cooler on the seat next to me. I took
> >the passenger control stick out for this trip. Additionally, it was
> >nice to be able to move my legs around to the right side occasionally.
> >
> >Flight instruction: I am working (slowly, still!!) on an instrument
> >rating in my plane. This would really not be possible with a tandem
> >arrangment.
> >
> >Formation flying: Here is a bit of a disadvantage for the side by side.
> >I prefer not to fly formation to the left of someone. One needs to
> >leave a little more margin (specifically, stay lower relative to the
> >lead) if flying on the left of lead in a side by side.
> >
> >Just some thoughts from a side by sider!
> >
> >Alex Peterson
> >Maple Grove, MN
> >RV6-A N66AP 421 hours
> >www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
> >
> >
>
> Say goodbye to busy signals and slow downloads with a high-speed Internet
> connection! Prices start at less than $1 a day average.
> https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.)
>
>
Message 62
| 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: Cheap Strobes |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Norman Hunger" <nhunger@sprint.ca>
Charlie's post is truly excellent and sums up what it takes to get bright,
noticeable strobes. Good to hear from Bill that he is working on a similar
power supply for a much better price. Pay attention to Charlie's points of a
water proof supply so builders can mount it anywhere. He also points out
that Whelen uses a lens with retainer to apparently get more bang for the
same amount of light. I'll bet all the guys out there using emergency
vehicle strobes are not even close to this brightness level of flash.
Norman Hunger
CASCAR #96
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charlie Kuss" <chaskuss@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Cheap Strobes
> --> RV-List message posted by: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss@bellsouth.net>
>
> Hi Norman,
> Thanks for your detailed post. I'd like you to tell me if my research on
this subject is in error. I had followed much of the various threads
relating to the various strobe systems available. What I found was as
follows.
> The Aeroflash systems available are rated to the older, lower candlepower
standards set back before the 1980s. The newer systems have about 4 times
the power ( 100 vs 400 candlepower I believe) that this older system has.
The Nova power supplies available from STROBES N' MORE come in a variety of
styles and powers. I chose their most powerful (X-Pak 904 model 90 watt)
single unit power supply. See
> http://www.strobe.com/pdfs/xpak904-install.pdf
> I intend to use this unit to power 3 strobes on my 8A. I purchased the
complete package below. This comes with 32 watt strobe heads. See
> http://strobeguy.safeshopper.com/18/1829.htm?959
> The switch was not included when I purchased my unit. It was on sale then
for $250.00
>
> Strobes N' More lists a similar Whelen unit. Unfortunately, they do not
supply as much info for this unit. It also appears that this Whelen unit is
not an aviation specific power supply. Whelen's site recommends their model
HDACF for use with a 2 strobe system on our aircraft. They recommend the use
of 2 model A490ATSC power supplies for use on 3 strobe systems. I suspect
that the number of model A490ATSC power supplies to be used with a 3 lamp
system is a typographical error. I say this because Page 10 of their catalog
states that these units are designed to power one strobe head. (I could be
wrong on this) Page 10 of their catalog states that the model HDACF with
power 1, 2 or 3 strobe heads. So comparing the Nova X-Pak 904 to the Whelen
HDACF would be more of an "apples to apples" comparison.
> See
> http://www.whelen.com/nondynmc/Aviation/homebuilt.htm
> and
> http://www.whelen.com/pb/11015.htm
>
> From this I discern that the Nova unit will supply 80 joules of power.
(See first link listed above) This compares to the Whelen's 84 joules. (See
the third link listed above Page 10) The Whelen has a slight edge here, but
not a large one. I suspect that most of us could not tell the difference
with the naked eye. The Whelen unit is also somewhat more efficient in it's
use of power. The Nova unit is rated at 8.5 amps at 12.8 volts (8.5 X 12.8 108.8
watts). The Whelen HDACF is rated at 7 amps at 14 volts (7 X 14 = 98
watts)
> Is the Whelen unit waterproof? I seem to remember reading somewhere that
it was, but I can not locate the reference now. The Nova unit is not
waterproof, so this must be taken into account when mounting it. The Whelen
unit may have an advantage here.
> One point I will make in support of Norman's statements below, is that
the Strobes N' More strobe heads are supplied bare. Whelen supplies their
units with a special lens to focus the light output from their heads. This
is an important feature and should not be ignored. Luckily, users of the non
Whelen units can purchase the proper lens from Vans accessory catalog. They
are part number LN W1284-C . They cost $12.50 each and can be found on Vans
site at:
>
http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1069691959-52-651&browse=lighting&product=strobe_parts
>
> A stamped steel lens retainer will also be needed to retain the lens to
the strobe heads. Vans catalog does not list these items.
>
> Am I missing anything here Norman? Please advise as to any technical
details I have missed. Good information is the key to good purchasing
decisions. I agree with Norman regarding the new HID head lamps. I'll be
prowling the local wrecking yards soon for the PAR 35 style (4.5" round) HID
head lamps. The current new prices for these is to rich for my blood. I
expect that the cost of these units will decline as they become more
plentiful and popular.
> Charlie Kuss
> RV-8A punching holes for instruments in my panel
> Boca Raton, Fl.
>
>
> >--> RV-List message posted by: "Norman Hunger" <nhunger@sprint.ca>
> >
> >Not reading the list real time these days but scanning it about two
months behind. I have how ever been reading it for quite a few years though
and I've seen the cheap strobe subject come up many times. I thought I'd
speak up on this one to put forth my opinion that the cheap strobes designed
for emergency ground vehicles are next to USELESS in aircraft. They are not
bright enough. I've had the good fortune in my career to test many different
types of strobes and I've used this experience to form this strong opinion.
> >
> >Ground vehicle strobes are purposely not as bright as aviation strobes
because if they were they would blind motorists on dark and rainy nights.
They are designed to be in your scope of vision, aviation strobes are
designed to be noticed from your peripheral vision from much further away.
That is a big difference. Vehicle strobes are typically giving warning to
other vehicles that are within 1/4 mile from the source. That's not good
enough for aircraft. We need them to be seen from several miles away. Some
one is now sure to pipe up that they have seen police strobes two miles down
the highway so I'll point out that you were probably looking directly down
that straight, level highway. How noticeable do you feel they would be at
four miles off your two o'clock? If you are on a converging flightpath, you
would want them to be noticeable from at least four miles.
> >
> >An interesting turn of my career this year involved spending over $40k
building some modern LED police light bars. I tested LED's from several
manufactures after spending considerable effort researching who had the
brightest LED's. I tested quite a few and found that they are very
directional. They can be made with a wide beam or a narrow beam. Going with
a wide beam sacrifices brightness at distance. I ended up purchasing 6000 of
what I considered to be the brightest. To cover 90 degrees of vision, they
have to be splayed or fanned out so that even if you have a panel of 40
LEDs, you will only see a minority of them when a long distance away from
them. When left in a flat panel, they were useless for the task of a police
light bar. When seen from outside their beam they appear to turn off.
> >
> >The best thing about LEDs is their low power draw. The second best thing
is their cool operating temperature. The third is that they last for a very
long time. Sadly, I feel that to do a good job in an aircraft, one would
need to use a huge panel (100+) of the best available LEDs. By the way, the
good ones are not cheap and you still need to build a board to get them to
fire. I am not convinced that LEDs are bright enough to substitute for
strobes. Position lights are a different story and I do not have a strong
opinion. I would like to see a useful experiment done by a group of RV's
equipped with different lights. Fly them in trail and photograph (still and
video) them from a mile away. I would love to see the results. Would very
much like to see how the new LED position lights stack up against the
conventional Whelen halogen position lights
> >
> >This is only my opinion but I feel that I have played with more lighting
than most amateur aircraft builders. I feel that the best anti collision
lighting we can put on our homebuilds are the highest wattage strobes
available. Again, sadly, they aren't cheap. If you are researching strobes
with the intention to be as noticeable as possible, seek the highest wattage
output on your power supply. The cheap ones are no good on airplanes.
> >
> >I wonder if I'll need a flame suit for this one. I certainly am not
intending to slam new technology, just exercising my right to express my own
opinion on aircraft anti-collision strobes - NOT POSITION LIGHTS.
> >
> >A quick word on the new technology of HID landing lights. They are worth
the money. If you want better and are willing to spend the money, they rule.
> >
> >PS - new technology in lighting is coming out all the time and I won't
claim to be up on every last thing out there. I noticed that for the first
time an auto manufactor is using LEDs for headlights. Check out the new
610hp Audi Le Mans. It has headlights made up of 17 LEDs per side. I wonder
who developed the bulbs and where we could get a few to test. They must be
good as this car is designed to be the fastest production car available.
> >
> >Norman Hunger
> >RV6A Delta BC
> >
> >
>
>
Message 63
| 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: WMPALM@aol.com
Doyle,
My wife is looking for you, and she's not happy! She would like to inform
you that there are flight controls in the back seat of an 8A, and she intends to
use them! In fact, she insisted that I get the rear rudder pedal option.
You're in trouble, man!
Good Luck,
Bill
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! --
|