---------------------------------------------------------- RV-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Mon 12/29/03: 58 ---------------------------------------------------------- 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 _____________________________________ Time: 06:07:40 AM PST US From: 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 2 _____________________________________ Time: 06:53:18 AM PST US From: "Jeff Dowling" Subject: Re: RV-List: Alternator Belt-Please Help --> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" 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 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 _____________________________________ Time: 06:59:29 AM PST US From: "lucky macy" vansairforce@yahoogroups.com, Mid-AtlRVwing@yahoogroups.com Subject: RV-List: RE: [rv8list] --> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" 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" >Reply-To: rv8list@yahoogroups.com >To: "RV-8 One List" >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 _____________________________________ Time: 07:00:44 AM PST US Subject: Re: RV-List: More on chutes for RV's From: Jeff Peltier --> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier On 12/28/03 5:05 PM, "Richard Scott" wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: Richard Scott > > 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 _____________________________________ Time: 07:14:00 AM PST US From: PGLong@aol.com Subject: RV-List: 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 _____________________________________ Time: 07:20:28 AM PST US From: "Coers, John" Subject: RV-List: Wing countersink spot priming --> RV-List message posted by: "Coers, John" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 07:58:34 AM PST US From: "Tom & Cathy Ervin" Subject: Re: RV-List: RE: [rv8list] --> RV-List message posted by: "Tom & Cathy Ervin" 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" ; Subject: RV-List: RE: [rv8list] > --> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" > > 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" > >Reply-To: rv8list@yahoogroups.com > >To: "RV-8 One List" > >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 _____________________________________ Time: 08:18:14 AM PST US From: linn walters Subject: Re: RV-List: Wing countersink spot priming --> RV-List message posted by: linn walters Coers, John wrote: >--> RV-List message posted by: "Coers, John" > >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 _____________________________________ Time: 08:20:54 AM PST US From: linn walters Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Propeller Flange Bushings --> RV-List message posted by: linn walters 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:47:44 AM PST US From: Gert Subject: Re: RV-List: Wing countersink spot priming --> RV-List message posted by: Gert 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" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:48:38 AM PST US From: Bob Subject: Re: RV-List: Exiting an RV in Flight --> RV-List message posted by: Bob 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 ____________________________________ Time: 09:18:24 AM PST US Subject: Re: RV-List: Ballistic parachutes on RVs HTML_TITLE_EMPTY From: Jeff Peltier --> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier On 12/28/03 3:11 PM, "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 ____________________________________ Time: 09:18:24 AM PST US From: "Claude Heiniger" Subject: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs --> RV-List message posted by: "Claude Heiniger" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 09:36:34 AM PST US From: "Ross Mickey" Subject: RV-List: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator --> RV-List message posted by: "Ross Mickey" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:03:59 AM PST US From: "Boss" Subject: Re: RV-List: Ballistic parachutes on RVs HTML_TITLE_EMPTY --> RV-List message posted by: "Boss" SPAM, SPAM :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Peltier" Subject: Re: RV-List: Ballistic parachutes on RVs HTML_TITLE_EMPTY > --> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier > > On 12/28/03 3:11 PM, "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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:06:18 AM PST US From: "lucky macy" Mid-AtlRVwing@yahoogroups.com Subject: RV-List: tinted canopies --> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:12:02 AM PST US From: "Kyle Boatright" Subject: Re: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs --> RV-List message posted by: "Kyle Boatright" 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" Subject: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs > --> RV-List message posted by: "Claude Heiniger" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:12:13 AM PST US From: Mickey Coggins Subject: Re: RV-List: More on chutes for RV's --> RV-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins >> ... >> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:20:04 AM PST US From: Mickey Coggins Subject: Re: RV-List: Exiting an RV in Flight --> RV-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:39:43 AM PST US From: Jerry Springer Subject: Re: RV-List: Exiting an RV in Flight --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer 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 > >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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:42:57 AM PST US From: "Randy Compton" Subject: RV-List: Canopy jettison --> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Compton" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ollie Washburn" Subject: Re: RV-List: Ballistic parachutes on RVs > --> RV-List message posted by: "Ollie Washburn" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:01:22 AM PST US From: "Tony Howard" Subject: RE: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs --> RV-List message posted by: "Tony Howard" 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" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:01:22 AM PST US From: HCRV6@aol.com Subject: Re: RV-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:04:22 AM PST US From: "Larry Bowen" Subject: RV-List: MP vs Altimeter --> RV-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:04:22 AM PST US From: "Phil Birkelbach" Subject: Re: RV-List: Flop tube - time to install --> RV-List message posted by: "Phil Birkelbach" 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" Subject: RV-List: Flop tube - time to install > --> RV-List message posted by: Mark Antenbring > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:35:32 AM PST US From: "Dan Checkoway" Subject: Re: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs --> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" 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" Subject: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs > --> RV-List message posted by: "Claude Heiniger" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:46:20 AM PST US Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Chutes on RV's From: Jeff Peltier --> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier On 12/28/03 12:23 PM, "John" wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: "John" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:55:31 AM PST US Subject: Re: RV-List: Chutes for RVs From: Jeff Peltier --> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier On 12/28/03 11:49 AM, "Ed Bundy" wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Bundy" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:00:11 PM PST US Subject: Re: RV-List: RE:Chutes for RV's From: Jeff Peltier --> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier On 12/28/03 11:28 AM, "Glen Matejcek" wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: "Glen Matejcek" > >>> - 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:11:29 PM PST US Subject: Re: RV-List: MP vs Altimeter From: Larry Pardue --> RV-List message posted by: Larry Pardue on 12/29/03 12:06 PM, Larry Bowen at Larry@bowenaero.com wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:12:58 PM PST US Subject: Re: RV-List: Canopy jettison From: Larry Pardue --> RV-List message posted by: Larry Pardue on 12/29/03 11:43 AM, Randy Compton at thecomptons@bellsouth.net wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Compton" > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ollie Washburn" > To: > Subject: Re: RV-List: Ballistic parachutes on RVs > > >> --> RV-List message posted by: "Ollie Washburn" >> >> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:22:50 PM PST US Subject: RV-List: Altimeter Setting From: Larry Pardue --> RV-List message posted by: Larry Pardue 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:01:48 PM PST US From: "Randy Compton" Subject: Re: RV-List: Canopy jettison --> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Compton" > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:03:14 PM PST US From: "Stein Bruch" Subject: RE: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs --> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" 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" 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" Subject: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs > --> RV-List message posted by: "Claude Heiniger" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:25:24 PM PST US Subject: Re: RV-List: Chutes for RVs From: Jeff Peltier --> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier On 12/28/03 4:54 AM, "Bob U." wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: "Bob U." > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:52:32 PM PST US Subject: RE: RV-List: Wing countersink spot priming From: "" --> RV-List message posted by: "" 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" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 02:08:34 PM PST US From: "Doug Rozendaal" Subject: Re: RV-List: Canopy jettison plus parachutes --> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 02:10:59 PM PST US From: "Doug Rozendaal" Subject: Re: RV-List: MP vs Altimeter --> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 02:20:15 PM PST US From: "Larry Bowen" Subject: RE: RV-List: Altimeter Setting --> RV-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" 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 > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 02:45:14 PM PST US From: "Charles Rowbotham" Subject: RE: RV-List: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator --> RV-List message posted by: "Charles Rowbotham" 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" >Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com >To: >Subject: RV-List: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator >Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:36:17 -0800 > >--> RV-List message posted by: "Ross Mickey" > >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 ____________________________________ Time: 03:09:09 PM PST US 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 42 ____________________________________ Time: 03:14:54 PM PST US From: "LarryRobertHelming" Subject: Re: RV-List: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator --> RV-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" >>--> RV-List message posted by: "Ross Mickey" 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" Subject: RV-List: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator > --> RV-List message posted by: "Ross Mickey" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 03:36:34 PM PST US Subject: Re: RV-List: More on chutes for RV's From: Jeff Peltier --> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier On 12/29/03 12:12 PM, "Mickey Coggins" wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins > > >>> ... >>> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 03:50:32 PM PST US Subject: Re: RV-List: Exiting an RV in Flight From: Jeff Peltier --> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier On 12/29/03 12:37 PM, "Jerry Springer" wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer > > 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 >> >> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 04:20:04 PM PST US From: "LarryRobertHelming" Subject: Re: RV-List: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator --> RV-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 04:33:24 PM PST US From: "Jim Jewell" Subject: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time --> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" 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" Subject: RE: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs > --> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" > > 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" > > 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" > To: > Subject: RV-List: RE: RV-List RV-7 Construction Time and Costs > > > > --> RV-List message posted by: "Claude Heiniger" > > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 04:54:26 PM PST US Subject: Re: RV-List: Canopy jettison plus parachutes From: Jeff Peltier --> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Peltier On 12/29/03 4:07 PM, "Doug Rozendaal" wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 05:06:27 PM PST US From: "Cy Galley" Subject: Re: RV-List: Help with starting technique for an O320 --> RV-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" 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: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 05:19:50 PM PST US From: "Russ Werner" Subject: RV-List: VM1000 Connectors --> RV-List message posted by: "Russ Werner" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 05:30:33 PM PST US From: Oldsfolks@aol.com Subject: RV-List: >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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:09:06 PM PST US From: Kevin Horton Subject: Re: RV-List: Exiting an RV in Flight --> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton > --> RV-List message posted by: Bob > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:10:29 PM PST US From: Kevin Horton Subject: Re: RV-List: Exiting an RV in Flight --> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton 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 > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:35:35 PM PST US From: "Ralph E. Capen" Subject: Re: RV-List: VM1000 Connectors --> RV-List message posted by: "Ralph E. Capen" one's a 37 the other's a 25 did some of mine yesterday...... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Russ Werner" Subject: RV-List: VM1000 Connectors > --> RV-List message posted by: "Russ Werner" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:48:51 PM PST US From: "McFarland, Randy" Subject: RE: RV-List: Flop tube - time to install --> RV-List message posted by: "McFarland, Randy" 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" 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" Subject: RV-List: Flop tube - time to install > --> RV-List message posted by: Mark Antenbring > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:05:49 PM PST US Subject: Re: RV-List: Vans Firewall Forward...gasolator From: Genev E Reed --> RV-List message posted by: Genev E Reed On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:36:17 -0800 "Ross Mickey" writes: > --> RV-List message posted by: "Ross Mickey" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:28:53 PM PST US From: "Randy Compton" Subject: Re: RV-List: Canopy jettison plus parachutes --> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Compton" > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:36:20 PM PST US From: "Tom Gummo" Subject: Re: RV-List: Exiting an RV in Flight --> RV-List message posted by: "Tom Gummo" 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" Subject: Re: RV-List: Exiting an RV in Flight > --> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton > > 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 > > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:43:31 PM PST US From: C462c@aol.com Subject: RV-List: 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!