Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:07 AM - Re: Alternator Belt-Please Help (Dwpetrus@aol.com)
2. 06:53 AM - Re: Alternator Belt-Please Help (Jeff Dowling)
3. 06:59 AM - Re: [rv8list] (lucky macy)
4. 07:00 AM - Re: More on chutes for RV's (Jeff Peltier)
5. 07:14 AM - Re: Propeller Flange Bushings (PGLong@aol.com)
6. 07:20 AM - Wing countersink spot priming (Coers, John)
7. 07:58 AM - Re: Re: [rv8list] (Tom & Cathy Ervin)
8. 08:18 AM - Re: Wing countersink spot priming (linn walters)
9. 08:20 AM - Re: Re: Propeller Flange Bushings (linn walters)
10. 08:47 AM - Re: Wing countersink spot priming (Gert)
11. 08:48 AM - Re: Exiting an RV in Flight (Bob)
12. 09:18 AM - Re: Ballistic parachutes on RVs HTML_TITLE_EMPTY (Jeff Peltier)
13. 09:18 AM - Re: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs (Claude Heiniger)
14. 09:36 AM - Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator (Ross Mickey)
15. 10:03 AM - Re: Ballistic parachutes on RVs HTML_TITLE_EMPTY (Boss)
16. 10:06 AM - tinted canopies (lucky macy)
17. 10:12 AM - Re: Re: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs (Kyle Boatright)
18. 10:12 AM - Re: More on chutes for RV's (Mickey Coggins)
19. 10:20 AM - Re: Exiting an RV in Flight (Mickey Coggins)
20. 10:39 AM - Re: Exiting an RV in Flight (Jerry Springer)
21. 10:42 AM - Canopy jettison (Randy Compton)
22. 11:01 AM - Re: Re: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs (Tony Howard)
23. 11:01 AM - Re: Gary VanRemortel (HCRV6@aol.com)
24. 11:04 AM - MP vs Altimeter (Larry Bowen)
25. 11:04 AM - Re: Flop tube - time to install (Phil Birkelbach)
26. 11:35 AM - Re: Re: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs (Dan Checkoway)
27. 11:46 AM - Re: Re: Chutes on RV's (Jeff Peltier)
28. 11:55 AM - Re: Chutes for RVs (Jeff Peltier)
29. 12:00 PM - Re: Re:Chutes for RV's (Jeff Peltier)
30. 12:11 PM - Re: MP vs Altimeter (Larry Pardue)
31. 12:12 PM - Re: Canopy jettison (Larry Pardue)
32. 12:22 PM - Altimeter Setting (Larry Pardue)
33. 01:01 PM - Re: Canopy jettison (Randy Compton)
34. 01:03 PM - Re: Re: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs (Stein Bruch)
35. 01:25 PM - Re: Chutes for RVs (Jeff Peltier)
36. 01:52 PM - Re: Wing countersink spot priming ()
37. 02:08 PM - Re: Canopy jettison plus parachutes (Doug Rozendaal)
38. 02:10 PM - Re: MP vs Altimeter (Doug Rozendaal)
39. 02:20 PM - Re: Altimeter Setting (Larry Bowen)
40. 02:45 PM - Re: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator (Charles Rowbotham)
41. 03:09 PM - Help with starting technique for an O320 (dmedema@att.net)
42. 03:14 PM - Re: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator (LarryRobertHelming)
43. 03:36 PM - Re: More on chutes for RV's (Jeff Peltier)
44. 03:50 PM - Re: Exiting an RV in Flight (Jeff Peltier)
45. 04:20 PM - Re: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator (LarryRobertHelming)
46. 04:33 PM - Re: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time (Jim Jewell)
47. 04:54 PM - Re: Canopy jettison plus parachutes (Jeff Peltier)
48. 05:06 PM - Re: Help with starting technique for an O320 (Cy Galley)
49. 05:19 PM - VM1000 Connectors (Russ Werner)
50. 05:30 PM - >Re:Starting technique for an O-320 (Oldsfolks@aol.com)
51. 06:09 PM - Re: Exiting an RV in Flight (Kevin Horton)
52. 06:10 PM - Re: Exiting an RV in Flight (Kevin Horton)
53. 06:35 PM - Re: VM1000 Connectors (Ralph E. Capen)
54. 06:48 PM - Re: Flop tube - time to install (McFarland, Randy)
55. 08:05 PM - Re: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator (Genev E Reed)
56. 08:28 PM - Re: Canopy jettison plus parachutes (Randy Compton)
57. 08:36 PM - Re: Exiting an RV in Flight (Tom Gummo)
58. 08:43 PM - RV-8 Test Plan and Operators Manual (C462c@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: | Re: Alternator Belt-Please Help |
--> RV-List message posted by: Dwpetrus@aol.com
Stop by your local NAPA (National Aircraft Parts Assoc.) & pick up a shorter
one?
WP
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: Alternator Belt-Please Help |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
Or better yet, buy 3 more and return the 2 that dont fit. This comes from
experience:)
Many extra miles on the car
Jeff Dowling
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: Dwpetrus@aol.com <Dwpetrus@aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Alternator Belt-Please Help
>--> RV-List message posted by: Dwpetrus@aol.com
>
>Stop by your local NAPA (National Aircraft Parts Assoc.) & pick up a
shorter
>one?
>
>WP
>
>
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 |
|
vansairforce@yahoogroups.com, Mid-AtlRVwing@yahoogroups.com
--> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" <luckymacy@hotmail.com>
Well, here's a chance for advice giving to an open mind. :-)
I'm building an 8. I am ordering the finishing kit today and want to add
some other stuff too including some electrical components.
I want to use an Odyssey pc680 battery on the firewall. I don't have any
preconceived ideas about some fancy or off-nominal wiring/switch scheme for
my plane. Will the premade wiring kit and also the switch kit be a waste or
will I actually end up using all of it without modifying? For example, does
the wire kit with the terminal already on make too big of an assumption
about where and what type of fuses I'll be using and their location? I've
heard a lot of folks on this list say the FWF kit had a lot of pieces they
didn't or couldn't use. Just wondering of the wiring kit is the same way.
thx,
lucky
>From: "Danny King" <danny.king@charter.net>
>Reply-To: rv8list@yahoogroups.com
>To: "RV-8 One List" <rv8list@yahoogroups.com>
>Subject: [rv8list] Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 07:57:18 -0600
>
>"Thanks for all the replys.
> Guess I'm chicken to toss the gascolator."
>John
>=======================
>"Thanks for the input. I ordered an "A" kit today with an O 360-A1A trim
>kit. I'll be back!"
>Dave Bothe
>==============
>
>Well that was fun.... but it shows the limits of a forum like this. When
>builders need help with understanding the plans, or the "How too" of
>building an RV, this forum is extremely valuable. But, when it comes to
>the big decisions like: to gascolator or not, or taildragger or tricycle,
>Lycoming or auto conversion, etc. this forum is of little value.
>
>Builders really do not want advice on these major decisions, they are
>seeking conformation for the decision they have already made!
>Still, I hope these questions keep coming, because the sparks that fly are
>fun to watch.
>
>Danny King
>Beautiful Doll 80434
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
Get reliable dial-up Internet access now with our limited-time introductory
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: More on chutes for RV's |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier <jeffpeltier@brsparachutes.com>
On 12/28/03 5:05 PM, "Richard Scott" <rscott@cascadeaccess.com> wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Richard Scott <rscott@cascadeaccess.com>
>
> All this discussion raises a few of questions:
>
> What is the max speed at which the chute can be deployed? In Jerry's "178
> seconds...", how fast would the "typical" VFR pilot be going before
> deciding to deploy the system? Would he already be going too fast once he
> decided he couldn't get out of the pickle he had gotten into? In Jerry's
> example the plane exceeds redline--would the system and attaching structure
> hold together at over 200 mph?
>
> Mr. Peltier claims the system has saved the lives of 159 people. In his
> book does a deployment constitute a save or just a deployment? Or has
> someone evaluated each situation and determined that the people would have
> died without the chute? Most aircraft accidents are not fatal. I suspect
> that in many of the deployments, the pilot used it because he had it and
> that in many cases he would have survived anyway.
>
> Dick Scott
>
>
>
>
>
>
Hi Dick,
Good questions. We regard each deployment as a "save". We can only go by
the accounts that each person involved in these incidents give to us. No
doubt, that in retrospect, some of the incidences may have only resulted in
injury and not death, per se, but the decision to use the chute is
completely up to the pilot. Its all dependent on many factors at the time,
and I don't think any of us can judge someone elses action in an emergency
situation unless we've been in the exact same situation ourselves. We do
however interview each pilot involved afterwards, and in all cases they
believed at the time, that they would have suffered death or severe injuries
had they not deployed the system when they did.
Also Dick, this is the minimum number of deployments that we are aware of.
Generally, we only get word of a deployment when the user sends his unit
back for repack. If he decides to quit flying (wife makes him quit) after
the event, then we usually never hear from them. About 30% of our units are
shipped overseas, and we know we don't always hear from them either.
As far as the max speed questions go... Yes, the system would be designed to
stay attached to the aircraft at the maximum deployment speed (185mph) of
the canopy plus material safety factor.
Jeff
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: Propeller Flange Bushings |
--> RV-List message posted by: PGLong@aol.com
Since I'm about ready to order a new wood prop and I hear that the 3/8" bolts
need to be re-torqued too often, I also would like to see about new bushing
for 7/16" bolts in my prop flange. Are they just pressed in and where would you
go to get them?
Pat Long
PGLong@aol.com
N924PL (reserved)
RV4 finishing
Bay City, Michigan
Do Not Archive
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: | Wing countersink spot priming |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Coers, John" <John.Coers@fkilogistex.com>
At the risk of opening up a can of worms, I need some advise on this one.
I just started work on my wing spars and the instructions say to spot prime
the countersunk holes in the spar. I really don't want to lug the spars
outside to shoot that small an amount of primer. I was wondering if alodine
(in the little applicator from aircraft spruce) would work? It's $46 for the
small amount from aircraft spruce. Anyone have any other ideas?
John Michael Coers
90780
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: RE: [rv8list] |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Tom & Cathy Ervin" <tcervin@valkyrie.net>
Lucky, I got the pre-made wiring kit for my RV6-A and found it to be a good
starting point but probably wouldn't buy it again:
1) My panel is full boat with 2-axis auto pilot.
2) Van's harness is perfect for a VFR application.
3) The wiring diagram is excellent in that it gave me a lot of
good ideas.
Well back to work on the Air-box to Cowl fitting.......Won' be long
now!
Tom in Ohio
----- Original Message -----
From: "lucky macy" <luckymacy@hotmail.com>
<vansairforce@yahoogroups.com>; <Mid-AtlRVwing@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RV-List: RE: [rv8list]
> --> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" <luckymacy@hotmail.com>
>
> Well, here's a chance for advice giving to an open mind. :-)
>
> I'm building an 8. I am ordering the finishing kit today and want to add
> some other stuff too including some electrical components.
>
> I want to use an Odyssey pc680 battery on the firewall. I don't have any
> preconceived ideas about some fancy or off-nominal wiring/switch scheme
for
> my plane. Will the premade wiring kit and also the switch kit be a waste
or
> will I actually end up using all of it without modifying? For example,
does
> the wire kit with the terminal already on make too big of an assumption
> about where and what type of fuses I'll be using and their location? I've
> heard a lot of folks on this list say the FWF kit had a lot of pieces they
> didn't or couldn't use. Just wondering of the wiring kit is the same way.
>
> thx,
> lucky
>
>
> >From: "Danny King" <danny.king@charter.net>
> >Reply-To: rv8list@yahoogroups.com
> >To: "RV-8 One List" <rv8list@yahoogroups.com>
> >Subject: [rv8list] Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 07:57:18 -0600
> >
> >"Thanks for all the replys.
> > Guess I'm chicken to toss the gascolator."
> >John
> >=======================
> >"Thanks for the input. I ordered an "A" kit today with an O 360-A1A trim
> >kit. I'll be back!"
> >Dave Bothe
> >==============
> >
> >Well that was fun.... but it shows the limits of a forum like this. When
> >builders need help with understanding the plans, or the "How too" of
> >building an RV, this forum is extremely valuable. But, when it comes to
> >the big decisions like: to gascolator or not, or taildragger or tricycle,
> >Lycoming or auto conversion, etc. this forum is of little value.
> >
> >Builders really do not want advice on these major decisions, they are
> >seeking conformation for the decision they have already made!
> >Still, I hope these questions keep coming, because the sparks that fly
are
> >fun to watch.
> >
> >Danny King
> >Beautiful Doll 80434
> >
> >
> >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
>
> Get reliable dial-up Internet access now with our limited-time
introductory
>
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing countersink spot priming |
--> RV-List message posted by: linn walters <lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
Coers, John wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Coers, John" <John.Coers@fkilogistex.com>
>
>At the risk of opening up a can of worms, I need some advise on this one.
>
>I just started work on my wing spars and the instructions say to spot prime
>the countersunk holes in the spar. I really don't want to lug the spars
>outside to shoot that small an amount of primer. I was wondering if alodine
>(in the little applicator from aircraft spruce) would work? It's $46 for the
>small amount from aircraft spruce. Anyone have any other ideas?
>
>John Michael Coers
>90780
>
Alodine is a surface conversion material, and has some acid in it. The
instructions tell you to apply and wash off before it dries. If it
dries, apply again and wash. So, without any data available on what
happens long term if you don't get it all washed off, where do we go
from here? Even applying it with a q-tip, you'll invariably get some
down through the hole. Faced with this dilemma, I'd get a can of
self-etching spray primer in a spray can, or use Zinc Chromate in a
spray can. Just a little spritz shouldn't coat everything in your
workshop!!!
Linn
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: Propeller Flange Bushings |
--> RV-List message posted by: linn walters <lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
PGLong@aol.com wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: PGLong@aol.com
>
>Since I'm about ready to order a new wood prop and I hear that the 3/8" bolts
>need to be re-torqued too often, I also would like to see about new bushing
>for 7/16" bolts in my prop flange. Are they just pressed in
>
Yes. You can use a large c-clamp and sockets to press the old ones out
and the new ones in. Use a GOOD c-clamp. Cheap ines tend to get out of
line.
> and where would you go to get them?
>
Your friendly A&P can order new ones, or you may get used ones from a
prop shop.
Linn
>
>
>Pat Long
>PGLong@aol.com
>N924PL (reserved)
>RV4 finishing
>Bay City, Michigan
>
>Do Not Archive
>
>
>
>
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: Wing countersink spot priming |
--> RV-List message posted by: Gert <gert@execpc.com>
Why not get a can of Marhyde self etching primer, you can use it on many
other small parts, quicker and less messy than alodine which needs to be
washed off after application.
make a small hole the size of your countersunk hole in a piece of
cardboard, hold it over the countersink and give a quick spraythrough
the cardboard hole, lots less messy, quicker too. I did not carry the
spars outside for that minute amount of paint. Marhyde covers even when
it is translucent. you do not need to spray a lot.
Gert
p.s.
do yourself a big favour and DO NOT buy the cheaper Sherwin Williams
equivalent. the nozzels have always clogged for me and I ended up
throwing half full cans away, the marhyde seems, for me, to give a much
nicer even coat till the last drop.
Coers, John wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Coers, John" <John.Coers@fkilogistex.com>
>
> At the risk of opening up a can of worms, I need some advise on this one.
>
> I just started work on my wing spars and the instructions say to spot prime
> the countersunk holes in the spar. I really don't want to lug the spars
> outside to shoot that small an amount of primer. I was wondering if alodine
> (in the little applicator from aircraft spruce) would work? It's $46 for the
> small amount from aircraft spruce. Anyone have any other ideas?
>
> John Michael Coers
> 90780
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500
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: Exiting an RV in Flight |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bob <panamared2@brier.net>
Interesting this BRS debate.
But, for those who are so ardently against the BRS, I still have a few
questions:
1. How do you get the slider canopy open in flight to bail out (for those
who do aerobatics and wear a parachute)?
2. Once the canopy is open, how does one actually get out of the aircraft?
3. What are the chances of leaving the aircraft without hitting the tail
structure?
I am not a proponent of putting a BRS in my RV6. I am interested in how to
bail out if one of my aerobatic maneuvers goes real bad or structural
failure occurs.
I feel there is little productive benefit by discouraging new ideas or
technologies. In the history of design innovations, the actual results
sometimes have very little to do with the original goal or purpose. I
highly encourage BRS to continue working on their RV project, I won't buy a
BRS for my RV, but I would buy a personal ejection system for my parachute
(we used to do this with Hang Gliders, while still attached to the hang
glider, our emergency chutes could be hand deployed, or rocket deployed,
both the parachute and rocket were a part of the hang glider harness that
was worn by the pilot).
Yes there are numerous obstacles and challenges to overcome with the BRS
(or a personal parachute ejection system), but someone can figure it out
and solve the problem. As I recall, some people were initially opposed to
a two seat RV3, then against a side by side RV4, and then horror of
horrors, a nosewheel RV6! When will it end!!!!
I have some ideas on my three questions above, but I would like to hear
from those who have done it, or think they know how to do it.
Bob
RV6 NightFighter
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Ballistic parachutes on RVs HTML_TITLE_EMPTY |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier <jeffpeltier@brsparachutes.com>
On 12/28/03 3:11 PM, "Leesafur@aol.com" <Leesafur@aol.com> wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Leesafur@aol.com
>
> In a message dated 12/28/2003 2:42:38 PM Central Standard Time, rv7@b4.ca
> writes:
> I agree the choice should be there for Helmets as with BRS chutes. Just
> don't make them law. You can't legislate common sense.
> Unfortunately in some states it is law.
>
>
> Lee
> Anoka MN
> RV-3 wing
>
>
>
>
>
>
Lee,
I couldn't agree more! We are pilots to. We would surely not want to see
ballistic parachutes mandatory in the US as they are in Germany, for
example. However, like you I'm sure, we also don't want to see the
government stand in the way of someone wishing to have a system like this if
they want.
Jeff Peltier
BRS INC
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: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Claude Heiniger" <cheiniger@dplanet.ch>
Anyone out there,
I would be interested in knowing, now that the RV 7 kit has been around fro
a while, what you guys are
averaging in terms of construction time. Is 1400 hrs realistic?
I would also like to have an idea of what engines are being installed, and
the proportions in costs between the Airframe, the engine and the
instrument-avioncis ro :
1. Basic VFR machine
2. Basic IFR machine
I realize there are many variables, of course.
There is one RV 7 under construction in Switzerland at this time and I hope
to have a look in the near future.
Thanks for the input.
Claude HEINIGER
heiniger@air-espace.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: | Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey@ix.netcom.com>
I am helping someone on their 7A and was reviewing Vans firewall layout. He
shows the gasolator about 10" up from the bottom of the cowl. How are you
supposed to drain the thing if its that far up? Why does he put it there
other than it is in line with the fuel filter?
Ross Mickey
N9PT
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Ballistic parachutes on RVs HTML_TITLE_EMPTY |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Boss" <bossone@cox.net>
SPAM, SPAM :-)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Peltier" <jeffpeltier@BRSparachutes.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Ballistic parachutes on RVs HTML_TITLE_EMPTY
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier
<jeffpeltier@brsparachutes.com>
>
> On 12/28/03 3:11 PM, "Leesafur@aol.com" <Leesafur@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Leesafur@aol.com
> >
> > In a message dated 12/28/2003 2:42:38 PM Central Standard Time,
rv7@b4.ca
> > writes:
> > I agree the choice should be there for Helmets as with BRS chutes. Just
> > don't make them law. You can't legislate common sense.
> > Unfortunately in some states it is law.
> >
> >
> > Lee
> > Anoka MN
> > RV-3 wing
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> Lee,
> I couldn't agree more! We are pilots to. We would surely not want to see
> ballistic parachutes mandatory in the US as they are in Germany, for
> example. However, like you I'm sure, we also don't want to see the
> government stand in the way of someone wishing to have a system like this
if
> they want.
>
> Jeff Peltier
> BRS INC
>
>
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 |
|
Mid-AtlRVwing@yahoogroups.com
--> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" <luckymacy@hotmail.com>
From the archives it seems there's 2 sources of tinted canopies. Van's and
Todd's. Van sells a light and medium tint and starts off 3/16". Todd sells
a clear and a tinted, 3/16 or 1/4.
OK. Anyone know if Todd's tinted is the same thing as Van's medium? If not
which of the two is less tinted? I want a definate tint to mine but don't
want any nighttime viz issue 'cuz I can't see well either.
Does the thicker canopy mess up the rivets/screws that Van's calls out for
their thinner canopy? I wouldn't think so but...
Anyone got pictures or advise?
Thanks,
lucky
Expand your wine savvy and get some great new recipes at MSN Wine.
http://wine.msn.com
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: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Kyle Boatright" <kyle.boatright@adelphia.net>
Claude,
Van's website has an excellent cost estimator in which you can specify the
aircraft model and the options you would select. I found it to be in line
with what it cost to complete my RV-6.
KB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Claude Heiniger" <cheiniger@dplanet.ch>
Subject: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Claude Heiniger" <cheiniger@dplanet.ch>
>
> Anyone out there,
>
> I would be interested in knowing, now that the RV 7 kit has been around
fro
> a while, what you guys are
> averaging in terms of construction time. Is 1400 hrs realistic?
>
> I would also like to have an idea of what engines are being installed, and
> the proportions in costs between the Airframe, the engine and the
> instrument-avioncis ro :
>
> 1. Basic VFR machine
> 2. Basic IFR machine
>
> I realize there are many variables, of course.
>
> There is one RV 7 under construction in Switzerland at this time and I
hope
> to have a look in the near future.
>
> Thanks for the input.
>
> Claude HEINIGER
> heiniger@air-espace.net
>
>
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: More on chutes for RV's |
--> RV-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>> ...
>> Mr. Peltier claims the system has saved the lives of 159 people. ...
>
>Also Dick, this is the minimum number of deployments that we are aware of.
>Generally, we only get word of a deployment when the user sends his unit
>back for repack. ...
BTW, there are other companies that compete with BRS and have
also had deployments, and saved lives. As was noted before,
primarily on lighter planes. Of course, in some countries,
like Germany, a chute is a requirement on all aircraft below
about 1000 lbs (460 kg). These numbers are from memory, so
they may be a bit off.
The Germans surely have a database like the NTSB's, but I
don't have a link.
The total number of "saves" from chutes around the world is
higher than 159.
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
do not archive
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Exiting an RV in Flight |
--> RV-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
Hi,
Here is a link to an NTSB incident that shows you
can get out of an RV8 in flight.
http://rv8.ch/article.php?story=20030912223623939
This one ended tragically.
Mickey
>1. How do you get the slider canopy open in flight to bail out (for those
>who do aerobatics and wear a parachute)?
>
>2. Once the canopy is open, how does one actually get out of the aircraft?
>
>3. What are the chances of leaving the aircraft without hitting the tail
>structure?
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Exiting an RV in Flight |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
This one certainly would have been a vote for a seat pack chute rather
than the BRS.
Can you imagine using a BRS in an airplane on fire? Still miss Von, I
talked to him just
before he left Arlington that day.
Jerry
do not archive
Mickey Coggins wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>
>Hi,
>
>Here is a link to an NTSB incident that shows you
>can get out of an RV8 in flight.
>
> http://rv8.ch/article.php?story=20030912223623939
>
>This one ended tragically.
>
>Mickey
>
>
>
>
>>1. How do you get the slider canopy open in flight to bail out (for those
>>who do aerobatics and wear a parachute)?
>>
>>2. Once the canopy is open, how does one actually get out of the aircraft?
>>
>>3. What are the chances of leaving the aircraft without hitting the tail
>>structure?
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>Mickey Coggins
>http://www.rv8.ch/
>
>
>
>
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Compton" <thecomptons@bellsouth.net>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ollie Washburn" <ollie-6a@prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Ballistic parachutes on RVs
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Ollie Washburn" <ollie-6a@prodigy.net>
>
> IMOH anyone wearing a parachute in an RV is not going to be able to exit
the
> plane as I don't think you can open the canopy or if you can,how are you
> going to hold it open,stand up and exit the plane.
I have a tip-over canopy on my RV-3, and I've always been under the
impression that if I unlatched the canopy in-flight it would quickly lift
up, rip the pop rivets out, and then depart. I know that it starts lifting
up pretty easily during a run-up before flight if it is not latched. But
then there's no air load on the canopy, either, when sitting still.
My big concern, 'til now, is if the thing will take my head with it as it
leaves, not will it leave. Anyone out there had experience with a tip-over
style canopy separating from the airframe in-flight? Starting to wonder
that the only reason I'm wearing a 'chute is just to satisfy an FAR.
Randy Compton
RV-3
Gulf Breeze, FL
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: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Tony Howard" <ahoward@easyfocus.com>
Hello Claude:
You might try and contact Mickey Coggins at: mick@rv8.ch He's building an
RV8 but is located in Switzerland. The aircraft, though, I believe is under
construction in the USA.
Regards
Tony Howard
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Claude Heiniger
Subject: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs
--> RV-List message posted by: "Claude Heiniger" <cheiniger@dplanet.ch>
Anyone out there,
I would be interested in knowing, now that the RV 7 kit has been around fro
a while, what you guys are
averaging in terms of construction time. Is 1400 hrs realistic?
I would also like to have an idea of what engines are being installed, and
the proportions in costs between the Airframe, the engine and the
instrument-avioncis ro :
1. Basic VFR machine
2. Basic IFR machine
I realize there are many variables, of course.
There is one RV 7 under construction in Switzerland at this time and I hope
to have a look in the near future.
Thanks for the input.
Claude HEINIGER
heiniger@air-espace.net
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: Gary VanRemortel |
--> RV-List message posted by: HCRV6@aol.com
In a message dated 12/28/03 5:15:17 PM Pacific Standard Time,
larywil@comcast.net writes:
<< The Builders White pages don't seem to be working. Does any one have Gary
V's Phone number? Thanks in advance. >>
Gary monitors this list (unless he has given up after the current "Ballistic
parachutes on RVs" thread).
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, firewall forward
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
What is the relationship between atmosheric pressure (altimeter setting)
and manifold pressure with the engine shut off? I want to make sure the
29.4" my MP guage is telling me is accurate. I saw this somewhere, but
can't find it in the archives....
Thanks,
-
Larry Bowen
Larry@BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
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: Flop tube - time to install |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Phil Birkelbach" <phil@petrasoft.net>
If you are going with the capacitive senders I don't think it would add much
more than a couple of hours. The differences are that you have to cover one
hole, put the little door over the other hole and make the two anti-hangup
strips, but you don't have to cut all the little slots or make the
anti-rotation thingy (although some still put the anti-rotation device in
the flop tube tanks).
One other thing to consider is the fuel line plumbing into the fuselage is a
little more difficult with the flop tube since you have to come out of the
tank and go aft about 10 inches to get to the hole that Van calls out. This
would have been trivial if I had put a bulkhead elbow fitting at the fuse
skin but I wanted it to be one piece of tubing from the tank to the selector
valve. It took me two tries but I got it.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Baffles / Cowling
http://www.myrv7.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Antenbring" <mantenbring@pangaeainc.com>
Subject: RV-List: Flop tube - time to install
> --> RV-List message posted by: Mark Antenbring
<mantenbring@pangaeainc.com>
>
> I'm on the fence about installing a flop tube. Considering all the other
> disadvantages, I think the deciding factor (for me) will be how many hours
> to install. Can someone give me an approximate time for install that's
over
> an above the stock fuel pick up? I'll be ordering the capacitive senders
for
> fuel level (if that makes a difference). Here is the
advantage/disadvantage
> list that's know to me -- feel free to add or correct.
>
> Disadvantages
> =============
> - higher cost
> - more unusable fuel
> - more prone to problems (flop tube hanging up etc)
> - slightly higher weight
> - hours to install?
>
> Advantages
> ==========
> - you get to fly upside down!
>
> Mark A
> RV-7 left elevator
> Wings on order
> Do not archive
>
>
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
I do not believe 1400 hours is realistic for a first-time builder going with
a full slow build. But it's not *that* far off.
I'm about to hit 1800 hours on my RV-7 slow build, and I've easily got
another 200 hours to go. That's mostly because I've gone with several
custom options, strayed from stock in multiple places, and I tend to lean
toward perfectionism. I don't mind taking my time since I have lots of
time.
I know of one builder who put about 1100 hours into her bone stock RV-7A QB,
and she's just weeks away from flying.
Just remember that the airframe is nothing...especially with these
match-drilled kits. Now it's all the finishing work that lets your
craftsmanship shine, but also takes the most time regardless of quality.
The best way to shave time off your build is to STAY STOCK. Put in an
O-360-A1A and do not modify anything. Van's FWF kit will bolt on. Build to
the plans. Change anything and you're adding time.
That said, build it the way you want it! That's what I'm doing and I'm very
happy with my choices. Another 200 or 300 hours never killed anybody, and
by the time you hit 1400 hours, another 200 hours is nothing. Just be
patient, and always inflate your estimates much higher than you think is
reasonable, and then pad it even further. Same with money. Throw it out
the window. Don't shoot for a target date, just build a kick-butt plane.
Aim for building the best plane you can, and just keep at it...it'll get
done.
My 2 cents,
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Claude Heiniger" <cheiniger@dplanet.ch>
Subject: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Claude Heiniger" <cheiniger@dplanet.ch>
>
> Anyone out there,
>
> I would be interested in knowing, now that the RV 7 kit has been around
fro
> a while, what you guys are
> averaging in terms of construction time. Is 1400 hrs realistic?
>
> I would also like to have an idea of what engines are being installed, and
> the proportions in costs between the Airframe, the engine and the
> instrument-avioncis ro :
>
> 1. Basic VFR machine
> 2. Basic IFR machine
>
> I realize there are many variables, of course.
>
> There is one RV 7 under construction in Switzerland at this time and I
hope
> to have a look in the near future.
>
> Thanks for the input.
>
> Claude HEINIGER
> heiniger@air-espace.net
>
>
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Chutes on RV's |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier <jeffpeltier@brsparachutes.com>
On 12/28/03 12:23 PM, "John" <n1cxo320@salidaco.com> wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "John" <n1cxo320@salidaco.com>
>
> Once you deploy the BRS you have lost control over the situation. Unless
> there had been a catastrophic structural failure I wouldn't use one, and I
> fly in the Rocky Mountains..
>
> John
>
>
>
>
>
>
Hi John,
Thats exactly the point of the BRS!!! When you've lost control of the
situation. Is structural failure the only thing that kills people? How
about panic? Panic manifests itself at the point your training or options
fail you.
Jeff Peltier
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Chutes for RVs |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier <jeffpeltier@brsparachutes.com>
On 12/28/03 11:49 AM, "Ed Bundy" <ebundy@velocitus.net> wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Bundy" <ebundy@velocitus.net>
>
> I've resisted commenting on this this thread because both sides have
> presented most of the information. However, I feel it necessary to comment
> on a few issues.
>
> First off, I want to commend Jeff for patiently and calmly pointing out his
> side of the story if the face of some overzealous opposing viewpoints. It
> never ceases to amaze me how some people whip out the flamethrower whenever
> they disagree with an Email. There have been many excellent 'listers drive
> away by this. Jeff apparently has thick enough skin to make it here on the
> list. :-)
>
> Secondly, I think BRS makes a great product. I made my living as an
> ultralight instructor for 10 years, and my 2 seat trainer always had a BRS
> unit on it. I had full confidence in the aircraft (Quicksilver Sprint II)
> as a great design, and because I built/maintained it myself. However, being
> responsible for students I always felt better that it was there.
>
> On a "regular" (non-ultralight) aircraft, I don't feel the need as much. As
> a CFI teaching in certified aircraft I feel the additional structure of the
> aircraft eliminates the benefit of having the parachute on board. Factoring
> in the weight and cost just makes it worse IMHO. I *do* however think it
> would be a potential benefit for x/c at night - something I don't normally
> do because of the additional risk.
>
> That said, I can't imagine putting one in my RV. In addition to the loss of
> some useful load, I assume the canister goes in the baggage compartment,
> decreasing the volume and weight available to use for baggage.
>
> I'm all for having the BRS as an option. I know that there are some that
> want it, and some significant others that may well be convinced to start
> flying because of it, both of which are good things.
>
> To each there own; choice is good; caveat emptor; your mileage may vary;
> don't run with scissors,
>
> Ed Bundy - Eagle, ID
> RV6a 600+ hours
>
> ---
>
>
>
>
>
>
Hi Ed,
Thanks, I needed that! You're right, it is definitely more comforting
flying at night with it. I'm a CFI myself. Have you noticed how little time
you spend on emergency landings at night compared to day time? Not much
option then is there?
Jeff Peltier
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE:Chutes for RV's |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier <jeffpeltier@brsparachutes.com>
On 12/28/03 11:28 AM, "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba@earthlink.net> wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba@earthlink.net>
>
>>> - An experienced skydiver would most likely need to be out and clear of
> the
>>> aircraft at least 1,500' agl. This would be quite a stretch for most
> pilots
>>> and passengers, especially seeing that most people tend to stay with the
>>> aircraft far too long.
>>> - 100% useless at traffic pattern alt or less.
>>>
>
> In a previous life I used to fall out of airplanes with a certain amount of
> regularity. As I recall, the TSO for an emergency rig dictated that it
> open and decelerate it's load within 500 feet.
>
> In at least some EU states, static lines are required for emergency rigs.
> Therefore, the opening sequence starts w/in 25 feet of the airframe.
>
> I've a very healthy (and admittedly lucky) friend who ended getting out of
> a crippled Eagle at a couple of hundred feet. No where near patten
> altitude.
>
> Anyone flying YE flights beyond gliding distance from shore.... well...
> leave that one to Darwin.
>
> Pack jobs can add up. However, if one were to fly to the field where a
> rigger operates, get their rigs repacked, strap them on, and take the
> rigger for an acro ride/lesson, you might just get all your rigging
> services for free. You may wonder how I know that....
>
> YMMV
>
> do not archive
>
> gm
>
>
>
>
>
>
Gm,
Good points. Can you ensure your passenger can get out and operate his
parachute properly, also. What of the occasions when your not wearing them?
Jeff
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: MP vs Altimeter |
--> RV-List message posted by: Larry Pardue <n5lp@warpdriveonline.com>
on 12/29/03 12:06 PM, Larry Bowen at Larry@bowenaero.com wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
>
> What is the relationship between atmosheric pressure (altimeter setting)
> and manifold pressure with the engine shut off? I want to make sure the
> 29.4" my MP guage is telling me is accurate. I saw this somewhere, but
> can't find it in the archives....
>
Manifold pressure with the engine shut off IS atmospheric pressure.
Altimeter setting is a whole other thing.
Conversion at http://www.srh.noaa.gov/elp/wxcalc/altimetersetting.shtml
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP Flying
http://n5lp.net
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: | Re: Canopy jettison |
--> RV-List message posted by: Larry Pardue <n5lp@warpdriveonline.com>
on 12/29/03 11:43 AM, Randy Compton at thecomptons@bellsouth.net wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Compton" <thecomptons@bellsouth.net>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ollie Washburn" <ollie-6a@prodigy.net>
> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Ballistic parachutes on RVs
>
>
>> --> RV-List message posted by: "Ollie Washburn" <ollie-6a@prodigy.net>
>>
>> IMOH anyone wearing a parachute in an RV is not going to be able to exit
> the
>> plane as I don't think you can open the canopy or if you can,how are you
>> going to hold it open,stand up and exit the plane.
>
> I have a tip-over canopy on my RV-3, and I've always been under the
> impression that if I unlatched the canopy in-flight it would quickly lift
> up, rip the pop rivets out, and then depart. I know that it starts lifting
> up pretty easily during a run-up before flight if it is not latched. But
> then there's no air load on the canopy, either, when sitting still.
>
> My big concern, 'til now, is if the thing will take my head with it as it
> leaves, not will it leave. Anyone out there had experience with a tip-over
> style canopy separating from the airframe in-flight? Starting to wonder
> that the only reason I'm wearing a 'chute is just to satisfy an FAR.
>
> Randy Compton
Randy,
If the only reason you are wearing a chute is to satisy an FAR, relax.
There is no FAR requiring you to wear a chute for aerobatics in your 3
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP Flying
http://n5lp.net
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Altimeter Setting |
--> RV-List message posted by: Larry Pardue <n5lp@warpdriveonline.com>
Listers:
I think the conversion page I referenced to convert atmospheric pressure to
altimeter setting is not accurate, because it uses station pressure.
Actually just setting an altimeter to zero altitude (if near enough to sea
level to be able to do that) should pretty accurately show atmospheric
pressure in the altimeter setting window. Near enough to check the MP gauge
anyway.
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
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: Canopy jettison |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Compton" <thecomptons@bellsouth.net>
> If the only reason you are wearing a chute is to satisy an FAR, relax.
> There is no FAR requiring you to wear a chute for aerobatics in your 3
>
> Larry Pardue
> Carlsbad, NM
Well, yes, this exactly correct.
I guess what I meant is that, just as with the 3000 hours I spent sitting on
an ejection seat (and never used it, so I guess I could have just left the
thing pinned and saved some preflight time :->), wearing a chute is a way to
trade one situation that is definitely going to have an unfavorable outcome,
for another that I hope will have a better outcome.
But there's no guarantee, although my rigger has assured me no one has ever
jumped with one of his pack jobs and come back to complain that it didn't
work. So I got that going for me....looks like the remaining issue is the
small matter of whether or not I'll be able to exit the machine, or even
survive the exit.
Randy Compton
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: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
Dan,
Good Post. I think you put everything into context regarding build time. I
haven't had the joy of building a -7 (yet), but just finished my 2nd slow
build RV6. I can't add much except to say, re-read Dan's post a couple of
times. His points are dead on about stock verses customizations, time,
cost, etc..
Cheers,
Stein Bruch
RV6's, Minneapolis
Do Not Archive.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
Subject: Re: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
I do not believe 1400 hours is realistic for a first-time builder going with
a full slow build. But it's not *that* far off.
I'm about to hit 1800 hours on my RV-7 slow build, and I've easily got
another 200 hours to go. That's mostly because I've gone with several
custom options, strayed from stock in multiple places, and I tend to lean
toward perfectionism. I don't mind taking my time since I have lots of
time.
I know of one builder who put about 1100 hours into her bone stock RV-7A QB,
and she's just weeks away from flying.
Just remember that the airframe is nothing...especially with these
match-drilled kits. Now it's all the finishing work that lets your
craftsmanship shine, but also takes the most time regardless of quality.
The best way to shave time off your build is to STAY STOCK. Put in an
O-360-A1A and do not modify anything. Van's FWF kit will bolt on. Build to
the plans. Change anything and you're adding time.
That said, build it the way you want it! That's what I'm doing and I'm very
happy with my choices. Another 200 or 300 hours never killed anybody, and
by the time you hit 1400 hours, another 200 hours is nothing. Just be
patient, and always inflate your estimates much higher than you think is
reasonable, and then pad it even further. Same with money. Throw it out
the window. Don't shoot for a target date, just build a kick-butt plane.
Aim for building the best plane you can, and just keep at it...it'll get
done.
My 2 cents,
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Claude Heiniger" <cheiniger@dplanet.ch>
Subject: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Claude Heiniger" <cheiniger@dplanet.ch>
>
> Anyone out there,
>
> I would be interested in knowing, now that the RV 7 kit has been around
fro
> a while, what you guys are
> averaging in terms of construction time. Is 1400 hrs realistic?
>
> I would also like to have an idea of what engines are being installed, and
> the proportions in costs between the Airframe, the engine and the
> instrument-avioncis ro :
>
> 1. Basic VFR machine
> 2. Basic IFR machine
>
> I realize there are many variables, of course.
>
> There is one RV 7 under construction in Switzerland at this time and I
hope
> to have a look in the near future.
>
> Thanks for the input.
>
> Claude HEINIGER
> heiniger@air-espace.net
>
>
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: Chutes for RVs |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier <jeffpeltier@brsparachutes.com>
On 12/28/03 4:54 AM, "Bob U." <rv3@comcast.net> wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Bob U." <rv3@comcast.net>
>
> Jeff Peltier wrote:
>
>>>> 1. I read that the Cirrus that is back flying was a FREAK SAVE. The
>>>> report I read stated that tree branches or some such broke the fall of
>>>> the aircraft sufficiently before it hit the ground - if it even hit the
>>>> ground, allowing the airframe to be reused at practical costs.
>>>>
>>
>> The Cirrus save you mention is not considered a "freak" save by any means.
>> When airplanes are drop tested to determine spinal loads on the occupants,
>> its done on very hard concrete-virtually anything else is gravy to us. The
>> trees in that incident also served to pitch the aircraft forward just prior
>> to touchdown, forcing the nose assembly to absorb virtually all the impact,
>> not the mains as designed.
>>
>
> Jeff,
> Perhaps you did not understand my definition of FREAK SAVE. I was
> referring to the aircraft being saved and back in the air... flying
> again. Nothing to do with the occupants surviving.
>
> Are you stating that aircraft equipped with a BRS parachute system can
> be expected to be placed back in service after deployment... just like
> the Cirrus example you gave the list?
>
> Quoting you....
>
> "A deployment on a
> Cirrus aircraft in late 2002 was our first save on a CERTIFIED aircraft.
> That aircraft is now flying again, by the way."
>
>
> Bob
>
>
>
>
>
>
Hi Bob,
Oh, thanks for clarifying- I read a different meaning in it. If what you
mean by a "freak save" is one that also saves the aircraft- yes, that would
probably not occur every time, or even very often with an aircraft of that
size. Much depends on the condition of the landing site and ensuing
aircraft recovery effort as to how much damage is caused to the airplane.
Always keep in mind the purpose of the BRS. Its only to be utilized when
the probability of significant damage (and injury) is going to occur
anyways, due to reasons BEYOND YOUR CONTROL.
An older airplane with damage from a parachute landing may be totaled and
parted out, where maybe a new airplane may justify the repair due to
differences in value. When we design systems for any airplane, we purposely
take into account collapsing portions of the structure. These portions
(landing gear, motor mounts, seats, etc.) which collapse and buckle use up
the energy that would otherwise be transferred into the structure and then
into the occupants. In the event that you should need to use the parachute,
the final condition of the airplane will in no doubt, be better than the
alternative.
Jeff Peltier
BRS INC
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Wing countersink spot priming |
--> RV-List message posted by: "" <tx_jayhawk@excite.com>
John,
I used the Sherwin Williams 988 self-etching primer for spot situations (in a rattle
can). I believe it can be had for around $8 a can at any SW automotive
store. I just masked off an area with blue painters tape and shot away (with
it on the bench). Didn't worry too much about overspray...no-one's gonna see
the spar anyway.
Scott Haskins
7A Wings
--- On Mon 12/29, Coers, John < John.Coers@fkilogistex.com > wrote:
From: Coers, John [mailto: John.Coers@fkilogistex.com]
Subject: RV-List: Wing countersink spot priming
--> RV-List message posted by: "Coers, John" <John.Coers@fkilogistex.com>
At the risk of opening up a can of worms, I need some advise on this one.
I just started work on my wing spars and the instructions say to spot prime
the countersunk holes in the spar. I really don't want to lug the spars
outside to shoot that small an amount of primer. I was wondering if alodine
(in the little applicator from aircraft spruce) would work? It's $46 for the
small amount from aircraft spruce. Anyone have any other ideas?
John Michael Coers
90780
W !!
================================
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
Message 37
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Canopy jettison plus parachutes |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr@petroblend.com>
Unfortunately I can speak to Canopy jettison in flight.....
I was flying a full-scale replica of a P-51 with a Turbine engine on it.
The first comment I made when I looked at the airplane before I flew it was
the canopy latch was inadequate. I was assured that at the low speeds we
would be flying, below 180 kts, it was OK. This Airplane had an RV-4
tipover type canopy. It was my second flight and the airplane's third. It
left the airplane. Just like I believe an RV-4 would do, it swung open, hit
the side of the fuselage and tore the hinges off the airplane. It appeared
from the scratches on the side of the airplane to tuck under the tail and
blow clear. At 180 kias, You Can't believe the Pressure!
I am expect that opening the canopy on a tip-over RV would instantly yield
you a convertable!
One more comment on this subject, Emergeny chutes with the pilot chute
spring have been successfully deployed at ridiculously low altitudes!
I am not a big BRS fan. Not because I have a problem with the parachute, but
I see people who are flying those airplanes in situations that they would
not fly a Cessna or Bonanza because they believe the technology in the panel
and the parachute will save them. Bad idea. Cirrus, Columbia, and all the
airplanes with hi-tech cockpits are going to cause some crashes because
people are seeking safety with $$$ instead of training, currency, and
experience.
In Ultralites, BRS seem to be a lifesaver, I will withold my comments on
whether they have a place in RVs. Having said that, most airplanes crash
because of air in the fuel tanks. Given choice between 50# of parachute and
50# of gas, I would chose the gas everytime! My guess is 50# of extra gas
would save more lives than the chute.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
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: MP vs Altimeter |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr@petroblend.com>
Set your altimeter to Zero. Then the barometric pressure in the window and
the MP gauge (with the engine off) should read the same. Don't get carried
away here, with in 1/2" is plenty accurate enough for manifold pressure.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
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: | Altimeter Setting |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
Easy enough. I'll try it. Thanks.
-
Larry Bowen
Larry@BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry Pardue [mailto:n5lp@warpdriveonline.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 3:22 PM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: Altimeter Setting
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Larry Pardue <n5lp@warpdriveonline.com>
>
> Listers:
>
> I think the conversion page I referenced to convert
> atmospheric pressure to altimeter setting is not accurate,
> because it uses station pressure. Actually just setting an
> altimeter to zero altitude (if near enough to sea level to be
> able to do that) should pretty accurately show atmospheric
> pressure in the altimeter setting window. Near enough to
> check the MP gauge anyway.
>
> Larry Pardue
> Carlsbad, NM
Message 40
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham@hotmail.com>
Ross,
Not sure why put it there - but he's usually right on .
Re: how to drain the gascolator we extended the drain witha peoce of tubing
that ended about 2" below the cowling.
Chuck Rowbotham
RV-8A
>From: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey@ix.netcom.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RV-List: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator
>Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:36:17 -0800
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey@ix.netcom.com>
>
>I am helping someone on their 7A and was reviewing Vans firewall layout.
>He
>shows the gasolator about 10" up from the bottom of the cowl. How are you
>supposed to drain the thing if its that far up? Why does he put it there
>other than it is in line with the fuel filter?
>
>Ross Mickey
>N9PT
>
>
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: | Help with starting technique for an O320 |
--> RV-List message posted by: dmedema@att.net
Listers,
I'm having a heck of a time getting my engine to start.
The particulars:
O320-E2D rebuilt with 160hp pistons.
New Slick mag on left with impulse coupler.
Lightspeed electronic ignition on right side.
Old style Lycoming starter.
No priming system.
Odyssey battery.
Once the engine starts, it runs fine. I've tried
pumping the throttle before cranking and then
immediately cranking. I've tried pumping while
cranking. I finally thought I had it figured out,
just keep pumping till it started. It usually took
7 or 8 pumps and many blades to start. However,
this didn't work Saturday when it was about 35
degrees. I ended up having fuel dripping out
of the airbox and onto the ground. Not a real
comfortable feeling. Several times, it would
seem to fire on a cylinder or two, but not continue.
So for those who don't have a priming system,
what is your technique?
Do you pump the throttle at all before you start
cranking?
Do you push the throttle in quickly, say over a
second, or slowly, say over 5 seconds?
How many throttle pump cycles do you do? How
long do you leave the throttle out before the
next push in?
Does it matter how fast you pull it out?
Do you pump n times and then just crank until it
starts or do you keep pumping till it starts?
Will one of the new lightweight starters that
crank the engine much faster solve all of my
problems?
The Lightspeed ignition was timed on installation
and the spark plugs gapped. Can the timing be off
enough to screw up starting and still run great
once it starts?
I was hoping (based on a bunch of conversations)
that the electronic ignition would give me quick
starts even without a primer. I need some
suggestions on how to start this engine without
totally discharging my battery.
Thanks,
Doug Medema
RV-6A N276DM flying off my 25 hours.
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: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator |
--> RV-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey@ix.netcom.com>
I am helping someone on their 7A and was reviewing Vans firewall layout. He
shows the gasolator about 10" up from the bottom of the cowl. How are you
supposed to drain the thing if its that far up? Why does he put it there
other than it is in line with the fuel filter?
Ross Mickey
N9PT<<<
))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Dear Ross: I'll take a stab at these although I admit to not being anywhere
close to an aeroengineer.
I believe you are supposed to drain the gascolator when you remove the
cowling, like at oil change time. Water should be caught in the low spot of
the wing tank when you check that before each flight.
Why do they put it there? It is there, where it is designed to be I guess,
because that is where the premade gascolator reinforce installation bracket
fits and is riveted nicely to a couple of firmly attached angled alum parts
for strength. In addition that location makes the piece of firesleeved fuel
line be just the right length as supplied in the FWF kit for hooking up the
gascolator with the engine fuel pump. It all ties together nicely. They
could have put it in a lot of places but the gascolator spot to fuel pump is
just about level to each other too with level and straight flight.
Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip-up TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
On Finish Kit and FWF
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: RV-List: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey@ix.netcom.com>
>
> I am helping someone on their 7A and was reviewing Vans firewall layout.
He
> shows the gasolator about 10" up from the bottom of the cowl. How are you
> supposed to drain the thing if its that far up? Why does he put it there
> other than it is in line with the fuel filter?
>
> Ross Mickey
> N9PT
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: More on chutes for RV's |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier <jeffpeltier@brsparachutes.com>
On 12/29/03 12:12 PM, "Mickey Coggins" <mick-matronics@rv8.ch> wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>
>
>>> ...
>>> Mr. Peltier claims the system has saved the lives of 159 people. ...
>>
>> Also Dick, this is the minimum number of deployments that we are aware of.
>> Generally, we only get word of a deployment when the user sends his unit
>> back for repack. ...
>
> BTW, there are other companies that compete with BRS and have
> also had deployments, and saved lives. As was noted before,
> primarily on lighter planes. Of course, in some countries,
> like Germany, a chute is a requirement on all aircraft below
> about 1000 lbs (460 kg). These numbers are from memory, so
> they may be a bit off.
>
> The Germans surely have a database like the NTSB's, but I
> don't have a link.
>
> The total number of "saves" from chutes around the world is
> higher than 159.
>
>
> --
> Mickey Coggins
> http://www.rv8.ch/
> do not archive
>
>
>
>
>
>
Mickey,
You're correct. The figure I gave only considered BRS. I didn't think it
would be right to take credit for others. Between 2nd Chantz , ABS (both now
defunct) and others around the world there could possibly be as many as 150
others, we have no way of knowing for sure.
Jeff
Message 44
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Exiting an RV in Flight |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier <jeffpeltier@brsparachutes.com>
On 12/29/03 12:37 PM, "Jerry Springer" <jsflyrv@earthlink.net> wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
>
> This one certainly would have been a vote for a seat pack chute rather
> than the BRS.
> Can you imagine using a BRS in an airplane on fire? Still miss Von, I
> talked to him just
> before he left Arlington that day.
>
> Jerry
> do not archive
>
> Mickey Coggins wrote:
>
>> --> RV-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Here is a link to an NTSB incident that shows you
>> can get out of an RV8 in flight.
>>
>> http://rv8.ch/article.php?story=20030912223623939
>>
>> This one ended tragically.
>>
>> Mickey
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> 1. How do you get the slider canopy open in flight to bail out (for those
>>> who do aerobatics and wear a parachute)?
>>>
>>> 2. Once the canopy is open, how does one actually get out of the aircraft?
>>>
>>> 3. What are the chances of leaving the aircraft without hitting the tail
>>> structure?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mickey Coggins
>> http://www.rv8.ch/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Jerry,
I'll agree with you there- no one wants to be with a burning aircraft too
long! Fortunately, its a statistically rare event.
Jeff Peltier
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: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator |
--> RV-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
Chuck: Would that extending tubing be aluminum or some sort of plastic?
Would you try and describe how it attaches and is held in place? Do you
just push the tube up to remove a small amount from the gascolator? >OR< Do
you test with one of the standard or modified standard fuel tester?
Thanks,
Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip-up TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
On Finish Kit and FWF
>>>Ross,
Not sure why put it there - but he's usually right on .
Re: how to drain the gascolator we extended the drain witha peoce of tubing
that ended about 2" below the cowling.
Chuck Rowbotham
RV-8A<<
Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip-up TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
On Finish Kit
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-List RV-7 Construction Time |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>
I am interested to know what criteria people use to determine build time
hours.
Some examples:
!/ Mark down the clock times upon shop entry and exit. Times include head
scratching, the numerous cleco fitting and re-fitting sessions, correcting
mistreaks, shop cleaning, shop re-arranging required as the aircraft takes
shape, trips to get parts and supplies, etc. This would include every days
effort up to and including every aspect of building to the time spent on
that final day of the first flight.
2/ Mark down only the time for riveting assemblies, equipment installs,
wiring, upholstery and painting.
3/ Mark down only time for riveting structures to the point of airframe
readiness for final installs and assembly.
4/ Mark down times on the basis of estimated times for the above but after
the fact.
I am seeing a wide range of estimated times for completion. I don't see
evidence of any accepted standard for keeping track.
I am not a fast builder at all, my bald spot should give people a good clue
as to the scatching time spent there. I have deviated from the blueprints
and instructions but only on terchiary(sp) options.
Yes! the custom extras do add considerably to the build time!
I used the first example up to the point where I started into the Bob
Nuckolls 'wiring learn and then do' stage. My book shows something near 3000
very enjoyed hours to that point. Upholstery, paint and some final
outfitting remain to be done.
Happy new year folks,
Jim (I never make mistreaks) Jewell in Kelowna
AH!,, at last, Christmas is over, it's time to take the bear trap back out
of the fireplace and store it angain till next year!! do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
>
> Dan,
>
> Good Post. I think you put everything into context regarding build time.
I
> haven't had the joy of building a -7 (yet), but just finished my 2nd slow
> build RV6. I can't add much except to say, re-read Dan's post a couple of
> times. His points are dead on about stock verses customizations, time,
> cost, etc..
>
> Cheers,
> Stein Bruch
> RV6's, Minneapolis
>
> Do Not Archive.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
>
> I do not believe 1400 hours is realistic for a first-time builder going
with
> a full slow build. But it's not *that* far off.
>
> I'm about to hit 1800 hours on my RV-7 slow build, and I've easily got
> another 200 hours to go. That's mostly because I've gone with several
> custom options, strayed from stock in multiple places, and I tend to lean
> toward perfectionism. I don't mind taking my time since I have lots of
> time.
>
> I know of one builder who put about 1100 hours into her bone stock RV-7A
QB,
> and she's just weeks away from flying.
>
> Just remember that the airframe is nothing...especially with these
> match-drilled kits. Now it's all the finishing work that lets your
> craftsmanship shine, but also takes the most time regardless of quality.
>
> The best way to shave time off your build is to STAY STOCK. Put in an
> O-360-A1A and do not modify anything. Van's FWF kit will bolt on. Build
to
> the plans. Change anything and you're adding time.
>
> That said, build it the way you want it! That's what I'm doing and I'm
very
> happy with my choices. Another 200 or 300 hours never killed anybody, and
> by the time you hit 1400 hours, another 200 hours is nothing. Just be
> patient, and always inflate your estimates much higher than you think is
> reasonable, and then pad it even further. Same with money. Throw it out
> the window. Don't shoot for a target date, just build a kick-butt plane.
> Aim for building the best plane you can, and just keep at it...it'll get
> done.
>
> My 2 cents,
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Claude Heiniger" <cheiniger@dplanet.ch>
> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs
>
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: "Claude Heiniger" <cheiniger@dplanet.ch>
> >
> > Anyone out there,
> >
> > I would be interested in knowing, now that the RV 7 kit has been around
> fro
> > a while, what you guys are
> > averaging in terms of construction time. Is 1400 hrs realistic?
> >
> > I would also like to have an idea of what engines are being installed,
and
> > the proportions in costs between the Airframe, the engine and the
> > instrument-avioncis ro :
> >
> > 1. Basic VFR machine
> > 2. Basic IFR machine
> >
> > I realize there are many variables, of course.
> >
> > There is one RV 7 under construction in Switzerland at this time and I
> hope
> > to have a look in the near future.
> >
> > Thanks for the input.
> >
> > Claude HEINIGER
> > heiniger@air-espace.net
> >
> >
>
>
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: Canopy jettison plus parachutes |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier <jeffpeltier@brsparachutes.com>
On 12/29/03 4:07 PM, "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr@petroblend.com> wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr@petroblend.com>
>
> Unfortunately I can speak to Canopy jettison in flight.....
>
> I was flying a full-scale replica of a P-51 with a Turbine engine on it.
> The first comment I made when I looked at the airplane before I flew it was
> the canopy latch was inadequate. I was assured that at the low speeds we
> would be flying, below 180 kts, it was OK. This Airplane had an RV-4
> tipover type canopy. It was my second flight and the airplane's third. It
> left the airplane. Just like I believe an RV-4 would do, it swung open, hit
> the side of the fuselage and tore the hinges off the airplane. It appeared
> from the scratches on the side of the airplane to tuck under the tail and
> blow clear. At 180 kias, You Can't believe the Pressure!
>
> I am expect that opening the canopy on a tip-over RV would instantly yield
> you a convertable!
>
> One more comment on this subject, Emergeny chutes with the pilot chute
> spring have been successfully deployed at ridiculously low altitudes!
>
> I am not a big BRS fan. Not because I have a problem with the parachute, but
> I see people who are flying those airplanes in situations that they would
> not fly a Cessna or Bonanza because they believe the technology in the panel
> and the parachute will save them. Bad idea. Cirrus, Columbia, and all the
> airplanes with hi-tech cockpits are going to cause some crashes because
> people are seeking safety with $$$ instead of training, currency, and
> experience.
>
> In Ultralites, BRS seem to be a lifesaver, I will withold my comments on
> whether they have a place in RVs. Having said that, most airplanes crash
> because of air in the fuel tanks. Given choice between 50# of parachute and
> 50# of gas, I would chose the gas everytime! My guess is 50# of extra gas
> would save more lives than the chute.
>
> Tailwinds,
> Doug Rozendaal
>
>
>
>
>
>
Hi Doug,
Interesting story with the self-jettisoning canopy. I definitely agree with
you that seems people are getting themselves into more trouble now with the
latest technology panels. I don't believe that its a factor of these pilots
assuming that the systems are going to "save" them if they get into trouble-
more over, its an assumption that this technology will keep them out of
trouble in the first place. Some soon find out that this isn't the case.
I also don't believe that the presence of a BRS system on board would
normally CAUSE anyone to take chances they normally would not. Do you drive
more wreck-less when your wearing seatbelts than when your not? Doubt it.
Pilots that would use that as justification for continued flight into a bad
situation, are probably imprudent enough to justify virtually anything for
bad decision making.
According to the 2002 Nall Report- a comprehensive listing of accident
trends and factors- "air in the tanks" is not the major reason for airplane
accidents. (I wonder where everyone gets that from?). In fact, problems
with the fuel system, fuel starvation or exhaustion are much lower than
engine/ propeller problems or even controls/airframe problems. Probability
of fatalities due to fuel problems or mismanagement are extremely low in
comparison to most other accidents.
Running out of fuel has absolutely "zero" to do with how much fuel you carry
on board at any given time. Its all based on proper planning and
monitoring. Running out of fuel, engine failure, etc. are NOT IN THEMSELVES
justifications for using the parachute (as stated plainly in the manual)-
only when you believe you're in a situation where you or your aircrafts
ability to complete the flight safely cannot be assured. The decision is up
to the pilot in command.
Jeff Peltier
Message 48
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Help with starting technique for an O320 |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
Do you have a bendix type mag switch? Are you trying to start on the mag
only? Is the jumper on the switch installed.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley@qcbc.org or experimenter@eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: <dmedema@att.net>
Subject: RV-List: Help with starting technique for an O320
> --> RV-List message posted by: dmedema@att.net
>
> Listers,
>
> I'm having a heck of a time getting my engine to start.
> The particulars:
> O320-E2D rebuilt with 160hp pistons.
> New Slick mag on left with impulse coupler.
> Lightspeed electronic ignition on right side.
> Old style Lycoming starter.
> No priming system.
> Odyssey battery.
>
> Once the engine starts, it runs fine. I've tried
> pumping the throttle before cranking and then
> immediately cranking. I've tried pumping while
> cranking. I finally thought I had it figured out,
> just keep pumping till it started. It usually took
> 7 or 8 pumps and many blades to start. However,
> this didn't work Saturday when it was about 35
> degrees. I ended up having fuel dripping out
> of the airbox and onto the ground. Not a real
> comfortable feeling. Several times, it would
> seem to fire on a cylinder or two, but not continue.
>
> So for those who don't have a priming system,
> what is your technique?
> Do you pump the throttle at all before you start
> cranking?
> Do you push the throttle in quickly, say over a
> second, or slowly, say over 5 seconds?
> How many throttle pump cycles do you do? How
> long do you leave the throttle out before the
> next push in?
> Does it matter how fast you pull it out?
> Do you pump n times and then just crank until it
> starts or do you keep pumping till it starts?
> Will one of the new lightweight starters that
> crank the engine much faster solve all of my
> problems?
>
> The Lightspeed ignition was timed on installation
> and the spark plugs gapped. Can the timing be off
> enough to screw up starting and still run great
> once it starts?
>
> I was hoping (based on a bunch of conversations)
> that the electronic ignition would give me quick
> starts even without a primer. I need some
> suggestions on how to start this engine without
> totally discharging my battery.
>
> Thanks,
> Doug Medema
> RV-6A N276DM flying off my 25 hours.
>
>
Message 49
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | VM1000 Connectors |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Russ Werner" <russ@wernerworld.com>
I'm not at the hangar and can't remember what size (# of pins)the 2 d-sub
connectors are on the VM1000 computer. Anyone know off hand? I'll be
headed to the hangar tomorrow, but wanted to order a couple of angled hoods
for them tonight.
Russ Werner
HRII
Park City, UT
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: >Re:Starting technique for an O-320 |
--> RV-List message posted by: Oldsfolks@aol.com
Your starter/mag switch may be wired to cut off the right mag during start.
This is normally the case - with a jumper wire between two terminals on the
back of the mag/start switch.
A/C Spruce catalog has a picture of the wiring on the back of the switch.
All that gas in the air-box is an invitation for a FIRE !!!!
Good luck,
Bob Olds A&P , EAA Tech. Counselor
RV-4 , N1191X , Flying Now
Charleston, Arkansas
"Real Aviators Fly Taildraggers"
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: | Re: Exiting an RV in Flight |
--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Bob <panamared2@brier.net>
>
> Interesting this BRS debate.
>
> But, for those who are so ardently against the BRS, I still have a few
> questions:
>
> 1. How do you get the slider canopy open in flight to bail out (for
> those
> who do aerobatics and wear a parachute)?
I'm planning on having "pip pins" instead of bolts where my canopy
frame attaches to the rollers. Pull the pins, unlatch the canopy, pull
aft a bit then push up. It should depart the aircraft.
>
> 2. Once the canopy is open, how does one actually get out of the
> aircraft?
>
I'm certainly no expert here, and it would be interesting to talk to
people that have bailed out of low-wing monoplanes. But I would plan
to pull the intercom cords from the jacks, unbuckle the belt, stand up
and dive over the side. I'm considering adding in-line jacks in the
intercom cord from my helmet so they would unplug from the tension when
the cord goes tight.
> 3. What are the chances of leaving the aircraft without hitting the
> tail
> structure?
>
You may very well hit the tail, but you don't jump unless you are sure
to die if you stayed. I would want to be wearing a helmet if I wore a
chute, to provide some protection against a tail strike. And I plan to
have a 25 ft static line connected from the chute to the harness, so
that the chute opens even if I hit my head on the tail.
Kevin Horton RV-8 Finishing Kit
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8
Message 52
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Exiting an RV in Flight |
--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
I had a misfire on my e-mail system, and an incomplete version of my
last message escaped from my computer. I added some more on the end of
this version:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Bob <panamared2@brier.net>
>
> Interesting this BRS debate.
>
> But, for those who are so ardently against the BRS, I still have a few
> questions:
>
> 1. How do you get the slider canopy open in flight to bail out (for
> those
> who do aerobatics and wear a parachute)?
I'm planning on having "pip pins" instead of bolts where my canopy
frame attaches to the rollers. Pull the pins, unlatch the canopy, pull
aft a bit then push up. It should depart the aircraft.
>
> 2. Once the canopy is open, how does one actually get out of the
> aircraft?
>
I'm certainly no expert here, and it would be interesting to talk to
people that have bailed out of low-wing monoplanes. But I would plan
to pull the intercom cords from the jacks, unbuckle the belt, stand up
and dive over the side. I'm considering adding in-line jacks in the
intercom cord from my helmet so they would unplug from the tension when
the cord goes tight.
> 3. What are the chances of leaving the aircraft without hitting the
> tail
> structure?
>
You may very well hit the tail, but you don't jump unless you are sure
to die if you stayed. I would want to be wearing a helmet if I wore a
chute, to provide some protection against a tail strike. And I am
consider using a 25 ft static line connected from the chute to the
harness, so that the chute opens even if I hit my head on the tail. Is
a static line the right answer in all situations? No, there are too
many possible different scenarios for one answer (static line or no
static line) to be the right answer in every case. It is possible in
some cases that you would really rather be farther from the aircraft
when the chute opens.
I'm also going to look into the devices from CYPRES automatic
activation devices that are quite popular in the sky-diving world.
http://www.cypres-usa.com/
They are installed on the chutes that we wear when doing hazardous
flight testing with Bombardier. The full functionality is a bit
complicated to explain, but you basically set the altitude at which you
want the chute to open, and it will open if you descend through that
altitude at a high rate of descent (i.e. in a free fall). The chute
doesn't open if your rate of descent is lower than some threshold. So,
you wouldn't be able to do low altitude loops without the chute opening
in the cockpit, but I'm not a big fan of low level acro anyway. And it
wouldn't be a good thing if you tried to bail out at too low an
altitude, but I believe acro should be done at a reasonably high
altitude to allow some options when things go awry. I haven't yet
looked at the full specs of all the various models they sell to see if
they are really suited for out mission, nor do I know how much they
cost. I fear the price might be prohibitive for most of us.
Kevin Horton RV-8 Finishing Kit
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8
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: VM1000 Connectors |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen@earthlink.net>
one's a 37 the other's a 25
did some of mine yesterday......
----- Original Message -----
From: "Russ Werner" <russ@wernerworld.com>
Subject: RV-List: VM1000 Connectors
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Russ Werner" <russ@wernerworld.com>
>
> I'm not at the hangar and can't remember what size (# of pins)the 2 d-sub
> connectors are on the VM1000 computer. Anyone know off hand? I'll be
> headed to the hangar tomorrow, but wanted to order a couple of angled
hoods
> for them tonight.
>
> Russ Werner
> HRII
> Park City, UT
>
>
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: | Flop tube - time to install |
--> RV-List message posted by: "McFarland, Randy" <Randy.McFarland@novellus.com>
And PLEASE don't forget to install the wire for the fuel sender thru a
couple of the Z brackets to the root BEFORE you put the tank on the wing!!
Nowhere does it tell you to do this. It's a big duh, unless you forget,
then it add a day to your build time for a 2' piece of wire.
Randy
-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Birkelbach [mailto:phil@petrasoft.net]
Subject: Re: RV-List: Flop tube - time to install
--> RV-List message posted by: "Phil Birkelbach" <phil@petrasoft.net>
If you are going with the capacitive senders I don't think it would add much
more than a couple of hours. The differences are that you have to cover one
hole, put the little door over the other hole and make the two anti-hangup
strips, but you don't have to cut all the little slots or make the
anti-rotation thingy (although some still put the anti-rotation device in
the flop tube tanks).
One other thing to consider is the fuel line plumbing into the fuselage is a
little more difficult with the flop tube since you have to come out of the
tank and go aft about 10 inches to get to the hole that Van calls out. This
would have been trivial if I had put a bulkhead elbow fitting at the fuse
skin but I wanted it to be one piece of tubing from the tank to the selector
valve. It took me two tries but I got it.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Baffles / Cowling
http://www.myrv7.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Antenbring" <mantenbring@pangaeainc.com>
Subject: RV-List: Flop tube - time to install
> --> RV-List message posted by: Mark Antenbring
<mantenbring@pangaeainc.com>
>
> I'm on the fence about installing a flop tube. Considering all the other
> disadvantages, I think the deciding factor (for me) will be how many hours
> to install. Can someone give me an approximate time for install that's
over
> an above the stock fuel pick up? I'll be ordering the capacitive senders
for
> fuel level (if that makes a difference). Here is the
advantage/disadvantage
> list that's know to me -- feel free to add or correct.
>
> Disadvantages
> =============
> - higher cost
> - more unusable fuel
> - more prone to problems (flop tube hanging up etc)
> - slightly higher weight
> - hours to install?
>
> Advantages
> ==========
> - you get to fly upside down!
>
> Mark A
> RV-7 left elevator
> Wings on order
> Do not archive
>
>
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: | Re: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator |
--> RV-List message posted by: Genev E Reed <genevreed@juno.com>
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:36:17 -0800 "Ross Mickey" <rmickey@ix.netcom.com>
writes:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey@ix.netcom.com>
>
> I am helping someone on their 7A and was reviewing Vans firewall
> layout. He
> shows the gasolator about 10" up from the bottom of the cowl. How
> are you
> supposed to drain the thing if its that far up? Why does he put it
> there
> other than it is in line with the fuel filter?
>
> Ross Mickey
> N9PT
>
> Ross: put it anywhere you want it. Its a useless peice of junk anyway.
Doyle Reed 7A I've built two and didn't put a gascolater on either.
>
=
>
=
>
=
>
=
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Canopy jettison plus parachutes |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Compton" <thecomptons@bellsouth.net>
> would be flying, below 180 kts, it was OK. This Airplane had an RV-4
> tipover type canopy. It was my second flight and the airplane's third. It
> left the airplane. Just like I believe an RV-4 would do, it swung open,
hit
> the side of the fuselage and tore the hinges off the airplane. It
appeared
> from the scratches on the side of the airplane to tuck under the tail and
> blow clear. At 180 kias, You Can't believe the Pressure!
Yeah, that's another concern I have about a tip-over...if/when the thing
opens in-flight, given the scenario you could be taking category 5 hurricane
force winds in the face right now.
RC
Message 57
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Exiting an RV in Flight |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Tom Gummo" <T.gummo@verizon.net>
Kevin,
The idea comes from the ejection system on the T-37 and T-38, but below
10,000 feet, we had a snap ring and short cable hooked to the parachute
D-Ring that manually pulled it once you cleared the seat. Below 10,000
feet MSL, we had it hooked up. Once we climbed above 10,000 and the air was
cold and not a lot of oxygen for breathing, we unhooked it and allowed the
system to let us free fall and open automatically.
As most RV flights are at low altitude, below 10,000, and low speed, 250
KIAS, why not design a simple system that would pull your D-Ring once you
cleared the tail of the aircraft.
My idea would be a spring-loaded pulley or reel with about 15 feet of cable
or long enough to allow you to clear the tail surfaces and a device to hook
to the D-Ring of the chute. The spring would keep the cable reeled up but
would allow movement. We would not want to have 15 feet of cable lying
around the cockpit.
A short cable without a reel might work but I thought you might want to
clear the tail before the chute starts to deploy. I would think that you
would want to reduce the chance that the chute might hang up on the tail
during deployment.
The cable would not have to be overly strong but just strong enough to pull
your D-Ring out.
Sounds like a lot cheaper and simpler system.
Tom Gummo
Apple Valley, CA
Harmon Rocket-II
http://mysite.verizon.net/t.gummo/index.html
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Horton" <khorton01@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Exiting an RV in Flight
> --> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
>
> I had a misfire on my e-mail system, and an incomplete version of my
> last message escaped from my computer. I added some more on the end of
> this version:
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Bob <panamared2@brier.net>
> >
> > Interesting this BRS debate.
> >
> > But, for those who are so ardently against the BRS, I still have a few
> > questions:
> >
> > 1. How do you get the slider canopy open in flight to bail out (for
> > those
> > who do aerobatics and wear a parachute)?
> I'm planning on having "pip pins" instead of bolts where my canopy
> frame attaches to the rollers. Pull the pins, unlatch the canopy, pull
> aft a bit then push up. It should depart the aircraft.
> >
> > 2. Once the canopy is open, how does one actually get out of the
> > aircraft?
> >
> I'm certainly no expert here, and it would be interesting to talk to
> people that have bailed out of low-wing monoplanes. But I would plan
> to pull the intercom cords from the jacks, unbuckle the belt, stand up
> and dive over the side. I'm considering adding in-line jacks in the
> intercom cord from my helmet so they would unplug from the tension when
> the cord goes tight.
>
> > 3. What are the chances of leaving the aircraft without hitting the
> > tail
> > structure?
> >
>
>
> You may very well hit the tail, but you don't jump unless you are sure
> to die if you stayed. I would want to be wearing a helmet if I wore a
> chute, to provide some protection against a tail strike. And I am
> consider using a 25 ft static line connected from the chute to the
> harness, so that the chute opens even if I hit my head on the tail. Is
> a static line the right answer in all situations? No, there are too
> many possible different scenarios for one answer (static line or no
> static line) to be the right answer in every case. It is possible in
> some cases that you would really rather be farther from the aircraft
> when the chute opens.
>
> I'm also going to look into the devices from CYPRES automatic
> activation devices that are quite popular in the sky-diving world.
>
> http://www.cypres-usa.com/
>
> They are installed on the chutes that we wear when doing hazardous
> flight testing with Bombardier. The full functionality is a bit
> complicated to explain, but you basically set the altitude at which you
> want the chute to open, and it will open if you descend through that
> altitude at a high rate of descent (i.e. in a free fall). The chute
> doesn't open if your rate of descent is lower than some threshold. So,
> you wouldn't be able to do low altitude loops without the chute opening
> in the cockpit, but I'm not a big fan of low level acro anyway. And it
> wouldn't be a good thing if you tried to bail out at too low an
> altitude, but I believe acro should be done at a reasonably high
> altitude to allow some options when things go awry. I haven't yet
> looked at the full specs of all the various models they sell to see if
> they are really suited for out mission, nor do I know how much they
> cost. I fear the price might be prohibitive for most of us.
>
> Kevin Horton RV-8 Finishing Kit
> Ottawa, Canada
> http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8
>
>
Message 58
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RV-8 Test Plan and Operators Manual |
--> RV-List message posted by: C462c@aol.com
We are a few months away from flight testing our RV-8 (180 HP Lycoming
O-360-A4M), with fixed pitch prop. Was wondering if anyone has a flight test plan
that they would like to share and/or Pilots Operating Handbook?
Thanks!
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! --
|