Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:32 AM - Re: Rod end bearing length (Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club)
2. 06:45 AM - Re: Rod end bearing length (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
3. 07:07 AM - Re: PLease ! No more on (bert murillo)
4. 07:11 AM - Re: Rod end bearing length (Sam Buchanan)
5. 07:53 AM - Re: Rod end bearing length (Canyon)
6. 08:15 AM - Re: Rod end bearing length (Greg Young)
7. 08:40 AM - Re: Camloc Fasteners RV6 (Shemp)
8. 08:47 AM - Re: Propellers (van Bladeren, Ron)
9. 08:55 AM - Re: Rod end bearing length (Sam Buchanan)
10. 09:00 AM - Re: Rod end bearing length (Sam Buchanan)
11. 09:35 AM - Re: Rod end bearing length (Canyon)
12. 09:40 AM - MAC trim servo malfunction: field report (SportAV8R@aol.com)
13. 09:51 AM - propeller indexing and engine smoothness (SportAV8R@aol.com)
14. 11:05 AM - Re: Camloc Fasteners RV6 (Stein Bruch)
15. 12:57 PM - Fw: AeroElectric-List: Choices, choices, choices . . . (LarryRobertHelming)
16. 04:31 PM - For Sale RV-9A Tail, Wings, Fuse, Engine, Tools, Extras (Sam Mourning)
17. 05:45 PM - Re: Rod end bearing length (Jim Oke)
18. 10:06 PM - Re: Camloc Fasteners RV6 (Boyd Braem)
19. 10:25 PM - Loud Radio (Wheeler North)
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: | Re: Rod end bearing length |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson@consolidated.net>
Jeff Point wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Point <jpoint@mindspring.com>
>
> Thanks to all who responded about the rod ends. In the end, I remade
> the forward tube by shortening it about 3/4 inch (it was too long, even
> with the bearings screwed in all the way) which solved the problem with
> the rear pushrod. I tested both by rotating them to both extremes and
> the rod ends remain intact.
>
> On a related note, someone mentioned the minimum thread engagement.
> What is the minimum thread engagement for a rod end bearing? For
> example, the elevator and rudder bearings, where the bearing rotating
> out is not an issue. While getting everything ready for final assmebly,
> I removed and inspected the bearings. I was surprised to find that some
> of them were only engaged into the nutplates about 5 threads (as shown
> by the wear marks on the threads.) This is using the proper dimensions
> for the elevator/ HS gap. Is this normal?
>
> There sure is a lot to this "final assembly" stuff...
>
> Jeff Point
> RV-6 final assembly
> Milwaukee, WI
Jeff, a rule of thumb that an aircraft bolt salesman told me a long time ago
was " the grip of the threads should be at least the diameter of the bolt."
He said anything less is not enough thread grip. He said anything more is ok
but the grip becomes less and less with the threads that are farther in. This
is what I have used over the years and it seems to work out OK. I feel that
one Jam nut is sufficient. If I were concerned about the Jam nut coming loose,
I would dab some epoxy on it, after it is TIGHT. Just a small dab where
threads meet the nut.
Phil
Phil
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rod end bearing length |
--> RV-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
In a message dated 12/22/03 12:51:43 AM Central Standard Time,
mick-matronics@rv8.ch writes:
> I'm having a bit of trouble understanding how this would
> work. Perhaps my morning cup of caffeine has not yet gotten
> into the bloodstream. Do you have any pictures of this you
> can point me to?
>
My caffeine may have started to work- for the rod to rotate, both jam nuts
must be loose. One bearing MUST screw INTO the rod. If you have the hose
covering all the threads on both ends, it ain't going far before it hits that
rubber cushion. Same for other forms of spacers- pretty slick, Sam-
On a related note: It there any reason NOT to use lock washers on these jam
nuts, such as an internal-tooth washer?
From The PossumWorks
Mark - rigging controls next couple of daze- how timely!! 8
)
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: PLease ! No more on |
--> RV-List message posted by: " bert murillo" <bert6@mybluelight.com>
fellows:
Is very simple you do not have to read it; just
go to the next..
is so simple, there are a lot of things, you
fellows post, which are of no interest to me. AllI have to do is not open these...the
title will tell you
what is about.
So let any one talk about primners if they want
is a free country no?
let's light up fellows.
\bert
rv6a
do not archive
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rod end bearing length |
--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
Mickey Coggins wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>
>
>>... one idea we pursued (even after insuring adequate threads were
>>inside the pushrod) was to put a length of rubber hose on the rod end
>>bearings to prevent a bearing from unscrewing more than a turn or so
>>even if the lock nut was completely loose. ...
>
>
> Hi Sam,
>
> I'm having a bit of trouble understanding how this would
> work. Perhaps my morning cup of caffeine has not yet gotten
> into the bloodstream. Do you have any pictures of this you
> can point me to?
>
> Thanks,
> Mickey
>
Mickey, the caffeine is probably fine; the pushrod setup is a little
confusing it you haven't gotten to that point in your project.
The pushrods under consideration are those that have rod end bearings on
both ends. If the locknuts on both bearings loosened, the rod could
rotate even though the bearings are still trapped by the bellcranks. The
bearings have opposing threads; one is right-hand, the other is
left-hand. So, if the rod rotates, one bearing will be screwed into the
rod as the other is being screwed out of the rod. The discussion has
been about how to stop the rotation of the rod before one of the
bearings is screwed all the way out of the rod. There are three ways to
prevent this from happening:
1) Mechanically secure one of the bearings to the pushrod via a cotter
key, safety wire, peening the threads, welding, etc.
2) Be sure enough threads are engaged in the rod so the bearing being
screwed into the rod bottoms out before the opposing bearing can be
screwed completely out of the rod. If at least half of the threads of
each bearing is in the rod when fitted, this will prevent the bearings
from disconnecting from the rod even though there may be minimal threads
engaged if the rod rotates all the way.
3) As a belt and suspenders method, the spacer can be used to prevent
one of the bearings from screwing into the rod which would also prevent
the opposing bearing from detaching from the rod.
Whew! This whole situation is addressed because each bearing has
opposing threads which is often overlooked by builders who haven't
thought through this process. Obviously, if a pushrod is trapped by a
non-rotating fastener on one end, this whole scenario is not possible.
Hope this doesn't require an additional dose of caffeine! :-)
Sam Buchanan
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rod end bearing length |
--> RV-List message posted by: Canyon <steve.canyon@verizon.net>
Sam Buchanan wrote:
>This whole situation is addressed because each bearing has
>opposing threads which is often overlooked by builders who haven't
>thought through this process.
---
Sam, I just have to ask -- why use opposing thread pitch
anyway? Wouldn't it be better to just use identical rod ends? I must
be missing something else here...
Steve
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Rod end bearing length |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Greg Young" <gyoung@cs-sol.com>
Minor correction - the threads are the same rotation on both ends. When the
rod rotates about the rod ends the length does not change. Turnbuckles
(cables? How quaint!) have right and left hand threads so they can be
shortened or lengthened. The accepted way to protect the turnbuckle from
backing out is with safety wire. Sam doesn't often mis-speak - nice to know
he's human.
Greg
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
>
> Mickey, the caffeine is probably fine; the pushrod setup is a little
> confusing it you haven't gotten to that point in your project.
>
> The pushrods under consideration are those that have rod end
> bearings on
> both ends. If the locknuts on both bearings loosened, the rod could
> rotate even though the bearings are still trapped by the
> bellcranks. The
> bearings have opposing threads; one is right-hand, the other is
> left-hand. So, if the rod rotates, one bearing will be
> screwed into the
> rod as the other is being screwed out of the rod. The discussion has
> been about how to stop the rotation of the rod before one of the
> bearings is screwed all the way out of the rod. There are
> three ways to
> prevent this from happening:
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Camloc Fasteners RV6 |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Shemp" <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
I have both on my 6 and if I had to do it all over again, I would
absolutely, positively, without question....... use the cam locks. Im sure
the pins will get a lot easier after some more use but the camlocks are
great. If you dont mind using both, I would suggest using hinge pins to
hold the top and bottom cowls together and camlocks to secure it to the
fuse. Its easy making the backing plates and attaching them to the fuse and
there's plenty of room. Attaching them to the fiberglass takes more work
and there's little room. Besides, the pins holding the halves together are
pretty easy to remove/install.
Good luck
Jeff Dowling
A whole 1.5
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mickey & Paula" <mimartin@sweetwaterhsa.com>
Subject: RV-List: Camloc Fasteners RV6
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Mickey & Paula"
<mimartin@sweetwaterhsa.com>
>
> Is there any dis-advantage to using the camloc fasteners for the cowling
rather than the hinges used in the plans?
> It looks like the hinge pins would be a nuisance.
>
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "van Bladeren, Ron" <rwv@nwnatural.com>
I have the 74" blended airfoil prop on my 8A and have 11.5" tip to ground
clearance. I have to taxi on an unimproved dirt/sod taxiway to get to my
runway and have not had any problems so far. Even found grass fragments
stuck in the castering nut but the prop tip was clean. Not sure if the 7A
has a shorter nose strut or not but one thing is sure, the prop tip on both
models will take some hits as time goes on and while the 74" can be cleaned
up and cut back to a 72", the 72" may end up being scrap.
Ron.
-----Original Message-----
From: Randy Lervold [mailto:randy@rv-8.com]
Subject: Re: RV-List: Propellers
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Lervold" <randy@rv-8.com>
Dave,
If maximum performance is what you're after various bits of data I've seen
would indicate the 74" is the choice. It will have a higher tip speed at a
given rpm however and will therefore be a little bit noisier. Of course the
1" greater radius puts you that much closer to gravel etc. also. Because you
have a nosewheel, and because any performance improvement will be very
small, I'd use the 72" with any -A model.
FWIW,
Randy Lervold
www.rv-8.com
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Dave Sundberg" <dfsund@aol.com>
>
> There has been some great prop. comparison testing done recently, but
> unfortunately it did not include the new "Blended Airfoil" c.s.
> Hartzell. Van's is now offering this prop. in both 72" and 74" models
> for the 7A. Any thoughts as to what the performance difference would be
> between the two on an O-360? TIA for the info and I hope you all have a
> great and safe holiday.
>
> Dave
> 7A Wiring
>
>
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: Rod end bearing length |
--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
Greg Young wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Greg Young" <gyoung@cs-sol.com>
>
> Minor correction - the threads are the same rotation on both ends. When the
> rod rotates about the rod ends the length does not change. Turnbuckles
> (cables? How quaint!) have right and left hand threads so they can be
> shortened or lengthened. The accepted way to protect the turnbuckle from
> backing out is with safety wire. Sam doesn't often mis-speak - nice to know
> he's human.
>
> Greg
Thank you Greg! I guess I needed the caffeine shot!!
You are indeed correct; however, my mistake doesn't change the fact that
the rod CAN come apart if it rotates enough to unscrew one of the
bearings. I got the thread thing confused with turnbuckles.
Thanks for the catch. :-)
Sam Buchanan
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rod end bearing length |
--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
Canyon wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Canyon <steve.canyon@verizon.net>
>
> Sam Buchanan wrote:
>
>>This whole situation is addressed because each bearing has
>>opposing threads which is often overlooked by builders who haven't
>>thought through this process.
>
> ---
> Sam, I just have to ask -- why use opposing thread pitch
> anyway? Wouldn't it be better to just use identical rod ends? I must
> be missing something else here...
>
> Steve
Steve, you are correct; I screwed up by stating the bearings have
opposing threads. What I was trying to say was that as one bearing is
being turned into the rod, the other one will be turning out of the rod.
The control rod can come apart if it rotates far enough to unscrew one
of the bearings from the rod. The rubber hose spacer prevents this from
happening.
Wow...........I need a big cup of coffee........
Sam Buchanan
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rod end bearing length |
--> RV-List message posted by: Canyon <steve.canyon@verizon.net>
Sam Buchanan wrote:
>Steve, you are correct; I screwed up by stating the bearings have
>opposing threads. What I was trying to say was that as one bearing is
>being turned into the rod, the other one will be turning out of the rod.
---
Sam,
Hey, no problem -- I'm getting some more coffee myself. Too early
Monday for me to be thrashing my way through details anyway. :-)
Regards,
Steve
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | MAC trim servo malfunction: field report |
--> RV-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
Last week I had a failure of my elevator trim servo afer landing at a friend's
airstrip. The servo would not return to takeoff trim from the landing trim position.
Wiggling the wires and closely inspecting the mechanism didn't help,
and it looked like I was facing a brief flight home while holding a lot of forward
stick pressure in cruise. Finally, at the last minute, the buttons seemed
to come alive again and I was able to dial in the correct trim for takeoff.
The trim responded normally for in-cruise adjustments, but seemed to quit working
again as I was setting up final approach trim.
Back in the hangar, I confirmed that the trim module seemed electrically dead and
the tab itself was able to move freely when disconnected from the servo. A
9v battery and clip leads applied directly to the MAC servo did not move the
motor, so the problem had to be in there and not in the ship's wiring or switches.
I pulled the servo from the elevator and immediately saw evidence of mud dauber
wasp activity in the area. There were several mud nests between the servo housing
and the mounting bracket. I opened the servo housing and found just a few
specks of dirt inside, but it was enough to cause the malfunction. As soon
as I cleaned that out, the servo worked normally on the 9v battery. I deduced
that the grit that had entered the housing was interfering with the limit switch
follower that is designed to be activated by the servo rod only at the extremes
of travel. Any friction between these two mating parts will cause premature
activation of the micro-switches and shut down the servo just as if the
travel limit has been reached. Dirt particles cause the slide to be carried along
by the servo rod and can produce erratic behavior in the limit switch mechanism.
The final nagging question was how the wasp's dirt could have gotten inside such
a well-designed and sealed unit. It turns out there is an Achilles heel: the
square-section, gear-driven plastic rod that attaches to the clevis has a groove
in the outer part of its length, and the wasp had filled that with mud, too.
When the rod is half in and half out of the servo housing, the channel or
longitudinal groove in the rod allows access to the inside of the housing. When
the rod is fully extended or retracted, the rod fully fills the square hole
in the housing and the unit remains impenetrable.
These little wasp critters are quite resourceful! I hope the silicone sealant
I have placed in this groove will prevent a return of the problem, as there is
no way to escape the onslaught of these insects in the summer months, and they
work very quickly. Listers might want to check your MAC trim servo installations
for existing damage and then fill this groove with some kind of sealant.
Just be sure whatever you use won't mechaniclaly bind the servo if it should
come loose.
-Bill Boyd
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: | propeller indexing and engine smoothness |
--> RV-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
Over the weekend I had to pull the cowl and prop to make repairs on a broken aluminum
alternator tension arm, and thought while I had the prop off anyway I would
try a suggestion I had read about in the Sky Ranch Engineering Manual. It
says that a flat four engine will run more smoothly if the prop is indexed to
be in the same plane as the crank pins, meaning it is horizontal when the pistons
are at top or bottom dead center. This orientation is 60 degrees away from
the indexing that is traditional for Lycomings, which is a concession to ease
of hand-propping.
Well, I tried it and it works. The difference in smoothness was noticable from
very first startup, and the engine is (subjectively) smoother at all rpm ranges.
The prop now stops at about 1 o'clock position viewed from the front, as
opposed to the traditional 10 o'clock position. The compression stroke is felt
much lower down in the swing, making it indeed very awkward and dangerous to
hand prop as you have to bend way over to pull it through. But since I never
hand prop my plane, I consider it worth the trade off. I'm going to take a wild
guess and say the vibration level is about half what it was before. I find
myself now wondering if the dynamic balance I was considering before would even
be worth the cost and effort. Now, if only we could solve the exhaust pulse
floor vibration as easily ;-)
-Bill Boyd
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: | Camloc Fasteners RV6 |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
The only downside is the cost, but I think it's well worth it. I have one
of each, my first RV6 has the pins, the 2nd has the Skybolt fasteners.
Several huge advantages to me.
#1) They were quicker and easier to install.
#2) You can get the cowling off in a matter of seconds with no cussing,
scraped or burnt hands, etc..
#3) I think they look good. I was nervous about how they would look
compared to my pin installation, but it looks quite nice.
Anyway, if you can afford it, I would at least use them for the top and
bottoms of the cowl. Sides are optional, but I like having them all the way
around.
Just my 2 cents!
Cheers,
Stein Bruch
RV6's, Minneapolis.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Mickey & Paula
Subject: RV-List: Camloc Fasteners RV6
--> RV-List message posted by: "Mickey & Paula" <mimartin@sweetwaterhsa.com>
Is there any dis-advantage to using the camloc fasteners for the cowling
rather than the hinges used in the plans?
It looks like the hinge pins would be a nuisance.
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Fw: AeroElectric-List: Choices, choices, choices . . . |
--> RV-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
Forwarding from Aero-electric list due to reference to finely built RV.
Happy holidays to everyone. Do not Archive.
Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip-up TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
On Finish Kit
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Choices, choices, choices . . .
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> From time to time, a builder writes to ask, "I got a really
> good deal on this kind of wire, can I use it to wire up
> my whizzy-giget?" Or, "Why should I go out an buy this
> $high$ connector that takes a special tool when this
> $low$ connector does the same job and installs with
> a soldering iron?" I've been pondering this situation for
> the past several days. Indulge me please while
> I share some past experiences:
>
> When I was in the 4th or 5th grade, I shared an interest
> in model aircraft construction with a cousin about 5 years
> my senior. He worked in a hobby shop and I think took much
> of his compensation in store stock. His models were
> all beautifully crafted and flew well. I recall a
> conversation about glue. His personal choice was a product
> called Ambroid while my personal preference was for
> a less expensive, faster drying Testor's model cement.
> As I recall, Ambroid sold for perhaps three or four
> times the price of Testors. It also took 12-18 hours
> to reach full strength.
>
> When you considered the cost of a kit, cost of engine,
> and hours to assemble, and a quest of lowest cost of
> ownership (lots of maintenance-free flying), the
> difference in $total$ for assembling with Ambroid vs.
> Testors was insignificant. He also covered in silk while
> I used tissue. I suspect there were additional differences
> in our choice materials and techniques wherein I went the
> $low$ route . . . but in the final analysis made little
> difference in the total cost of our respective
> projects.
>
> Perhaps it was a mute point in my case, cousin Calvin's
> models usually lived to fly many a mission while my
> own were not so fortunate. Had any of his models
> survived to the present time, it's a certainty that
> they would be the finest examples of model construction
> of that era.
>
> Would we build a model that way today? Epoxy wasn't
> around then. Nor were any form of composite materials.
> You had to shrink coverings to contour with multiple
> coats of finish, not with a hot iron. Radio
> control was bang-bang, rudder only at wide open throttle,
> today it's fully three-axis with trims accessory
> control channels + throttle.
>
> I open my seminars with a statement to the effect, "You
> folks are building the finest airplanes to have ever
> flown." This always raises a few eyebrows, "Wha-da-ya-
> mean? I don't know all that much about it."
>
> I can confidently reply, "Yes, and that's why. You
> participate on list servers to tap the collective
> gray-matter of the OBAM aircraft community. You are
> attending this seminar to achieve a higher level of
> understanding.
>
> If you break something, it gets replaced. If
> a part doesn't work quite right, you rebuild it as
> needed until it does. Unlike those new graduates bucking
> rivets on an assembly line while dreaming about what they're
> going to do after work that evening, YOU are paying attention
> to achieving the very best the community knows how to do.
>
> I'll suggest there is more VALUE in a nicely built RV
> than ANY spam can irrespective of how nice the paint looks
> or what electro-whizzies are bolted to the panel. Finally,
> no two OBAM aircraft are built exactly the same way. Certified
> airplanes are literally carved into regulatory stone of
> conformance, your airplane can freely evolve. OBAM aircraft
> are by definition at the leading edge of performance
> and value in aviation."
>
> Remember the Jimmy Stewart movie "Flight of the Phoenix"?
> The folks trying to assemble a man-rated, flying aircraft
> from a pile of salvage were not pleased to discover that
> their "designer's" previous experience was limited to building
> flying models. It took some time for folks to understand that
> basic principals of structures and flight were interchangeable
> between the worlds of miniature and full-scale.
>
> I suggest that after you've purchased kit, engine, propeller,
> brakes, and a panel full of whippy radios and instruments, impact
> on total cost for the-best-we-know-how-to-do versus materials
> or tools you discovered at a garage sale or hardware store is
> trivial.
>
> My experience at workbench of cousin Calvin stands out my
> memory as a benchmark of Calvin's superior sense craftsmanship.
> He chose to build in a manner that represented the very
> best the model building community knew how to do.
>
> To be sure, few OBAM aircraft builders are going to be using
> today's techniques and technologies 20 years from now . . . May I
> suggest we should be wary of tools, techniques and materials
> popularly used 20 years ago? May I further suggest that it's
> not so much a question of "will it work" as opposed to will
> it be something you'll look back on 20 years from now as the
> best we knew how to do today?
>
> Dee and I offer our best wishes for you and yours for the
> upcoming holidays. We're looking forward to meeting many of
> you in what promises to be a busy seminar schedule for
> next year. It's always enjoyable and gratifying to work with
> folks building the finest airplanes to have ever flown.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> P.S. I'd appreciate it if folks would take the time to relay
> this note to other list servers . . .
>
>
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: | For Sale RV-9A Tail, Wings, Fuse, Engine, Tools, Extras |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Sam Mourning" <sammourning@earthlink.net>
For Sale: RV-9A Tail (finished), Wings (finished) Fuse (nearing quickbuild
stage), Tool set (including pneumatic squeezer and 3 yokes), Engine
O-320-H2AD (first run), and extras. $21,000. Would prefer not to separate.
Details at http://www.vondane.com/forsale/rv9a/
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: | Re: Rod end bearing length |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Oke <wjoke@shaw.ca>
I suggest there are two issues of concern here:
1) that the pushrod should not be allowed to rotate sufficiently that one
end actually comes loose (yes, that's a no-brainer !);
2) that enough threads stay engaged at both rodend bearings to withstand the
max push/pull force that is expected, (a bit more complicated to analyse).
IOW, a couple of threads only may not be enough to carry the loads and cause
a failure which would have the same effect as one end coming completely
unscrewed.
The rubber tubing idea would help both situations if the starting config was
OK and the length of the tube was selected properly keeping in mind that
this is a belt and suspenders add-on to the jam nuts with/or without
locktite.
Jim Oke
RV-3, RV-6A
Winnipeg, MB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Buchanan" <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Rod end bearing length
> --> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
>
> Canyon wrote:
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Canyon <steve.canyon@verizon.net>
> >
> > Sam Buchanan wrote:
> >
> >>This whole situation is addressed because each bearing has
> >>opposing threads which is often overlooked by builders who haven't
> >>thought through this process.
> >
> > ---
> > Sam, I just have to ask -- why use opposing thread pitch
> > anyway? Wouldn't it be better to just use identical rod ends? I must
> > be missing something else here...
> >
> > Steve
>
>
> Steve, you are correct; I screwed up by stating the bearings have
> opposing threads. What I was trying to say was that as one bearing is
> being turned into the rod, the other one will be turning out of the rod.
>
> The control rod can come apart if it rotates far enough to unscrew one
> of the bearings from the rod. The rubber hose spacer prevents this from
> happening.
>
> Wow...........I need a big cup of coffee........
>
> Sam Buchanan
>
>
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Camloc Fasteners RV6 |
--> RV-List message posted by: Boyd Braem <bcbraem@comcast.net>
I have to agree with Stein (jeez, I hate that--joke). I have SS screws
on my cowling and they are a real pain in the butt. I'm seriously
contemplating retrofitting camlocks/SkyBolt fittings. I'm a bit
obsessive/compulsive about things that may be a link-in-the-chain of
things-trying-to-kill-me (it's easier now that my ex-wife has moved
away and that they won't let her into the airport). Anything that will
ease your/my effort in taking off the cowl, so you can inspect things
is worth a few extra bucks and may/will save your butt.
Boyd.
do not archive
On Monday, December 22, 2003, at 02:05 PM, Stein Bruch wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
>
> The only downside is the cost, but I think it's well worth it. I have
> one
> of each, my first RV6 has the pins, the 2nd has the Skybolt fasteners.
> Several huge advantages to me.
>
> #1) They were quicker and easier to install.
> #2) You can get the cowling off in a matter of seconds with no cussing,
> scraped or burnt hands, etc.
> #3) I think they look good. I was nervous about how they would look
> compared to my pin installation, but it looks quite nice.
>
> Anyway, if you can afford it, I would at least use them for the top and
> bottoms of the cowl. Sides are optional, but I like having them all
> the way
> around.
>
> Just my 2 cents!
>
> Cheers,
> Stein Bruch
> RV6's, Minneapolis.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Mickey & Paula
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: Camloc Fasteners RV6
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Mickey & Paula"
> <mimartin@sweetwaterhsa.com>
>
> Is there any disadvantage to using the camloc fasteners for the cowling
> rather than the hinges used in the plans?
> It looks like the hinge pins would be a nuisance.
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North <wnorth@sdccd.cc.ca.us>
<<<<<<<FBO radio man a while back said
he always knows it's me because the radio broadcast is so loud. Gotta
love it. >>>>>>
OK so I'm lagging three days behind, the flying WX is good so eat your heart
out.
Hey Mikey, me thinks its not the radio that's so loud. You're the only guy
at OSH that needs no radio.
;{)
do not archive
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! --
|