Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:06 AM - Great Touch Up Gun ()
2. 05:50 AM - Re: Dynon OAT Probe (LarryRobertHelming)
3. 06:51 AM - Re: Great Touch Up Gun (Jamie Painter)
4. 07:15 AM - Altimeter Adjustmen t- Why not to use GPS altitude in the ATC environment (pcondon)
5. 08:10 AM - wheel bearing specification (SportAV8R@aol.com)
6. 08:47 AM - Autopilot Itch (Donald Mei)
7. 09:37 AM - Sun & Fun Flight Information (Ed Anderson)
8. 09:37 AM - FOR SALE: PS Engineering PM3000 - 4 Place Stereo Intercom (Bill VonDane)
9. 09:51 AM - Re: wheel bearing specification (John D. Heath)
10. 09:58 AM - Re: Autopilot Itch (John D. Heath)
11. 10:34 AM - Photos of Dual LSE ignition installation? (czechsix@juno.com)
12. 10:57 AM - Re: Photos of Dual LSE ignition installation? (Scott Bilinski)
13. 11:09 AM - RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58 (lucky macy)
14. 11:09 AM - wing skin to fuse skin fit (Dave Mader)
15. 11:29 AM - RV get togethers at Sun-N-Fun ?? (Charles Rowbotham)
16. 11:35 AM - Re: RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58 (Scott Bilinski)
17. 11:42 AM - Re: RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58 (lucky macy)
18. 12:23 PM - Re: wing skin to fuse skin fit (Mike Nellis)
19. 01:11 PM - Re: RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58 (Stein Bruch)
20. 01:22 PM - Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole kits? (Frederick Oldenburg)
21. 01:29 PM - Wing dolly help (Bruce Bell)
22. 01:31 PM - Re: Photos of Dual LSE ignition installation? (jamesbaldwin@attglobal.net)
23. 02:17 PM - Re: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole kits? (Steve Waltner)
24. 02:20 PM - Re: Photos of Dual LSE ignition installation? (Scott Bilinski)
25. 02:53 PM - Re: Wing dolly help (LarryRobertHelming)
26. 02:55 PM - Most efficient climb (Scott Bilinski)
27. 03:06 PM - Re: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole kits? (LarryRobertHelming)
28. 03:11 PM - Re: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole (Frederick Oldenburg)
29. 03:13 PM - Re: Autopilot Itch (Ross Mickey)
30. 03:19 PM - Re: Autopilot Itch (Donald Mei)
31. 03:20 PM - Wood Stick Grips for sale (from Vans) (Travis Hamblen)
32. 03:24 PM - Re: Dynon OAT Probe (Kevin Horton)
33. 05:05 PM - Re: [SPAM] Re: Autopilot Itch (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta))
34. 05:25 PM - Re: Re: Autopilot Itch (Harvey Sigmon)
35. 05:28 PM - Re: Re: Autopilot Itch (Jerry Springer)
36. 06:26 PM - Re: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole (Charlie & Tupper England)
37. 07:22 PM - Re: Re: Autopilot Itch (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta))
38. 07:44 PM - Re: Re: Autopilot Itch (Sam Buchanan)
39. 09:27 PM - Re: Most efficient climb (GMC)
40. 09:27 PM - Re: Re: Autopilot Itch (Richard Sipp)
41. 09:52 PM - Re: Most efficient climb (RV6 Flyer)
42. 10:18 PM - Re: Re: Autopilot Itch (Sam Buchanan)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Great Touch Up Gun |
--> RV-List message posted by: <EricHe@FlexSolPackaging.com>
Hi, I'm painting a friends 6a and used this as an excuse to buy an airbrush. I
wanted it to shoot clear on the mask lines before shooting the contrasting color
(to eliminate any bleed under problems). The air brush was just too slow for
something as big as an RV fuselage. So then I found and bought one of these
guns on ebay. I figured for 20 bucks could I go wrong? Turns out, the thing works
great. Shoots like a big air brush but still gives good coverage, and you
can crank open the needle and really lay a beautiful fine coat of paint. The thing
atomizes single stage urethane very well. It paints much faster than an airbrush
too. This guy will sell them outright for $19.95 so you can skip the whole
auction thing. I've bought two now and he's a good guy to deal with. Thought
I'd share.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=43987&item=2472031127
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dynon OAT Probe |
--> RV-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
Mike, does it look like the 10' wire/coax lead in to the OAT can be cut off
easily so it could be extended?
I am considering mounting mine under the HS. (I mounted the remote compass
under the fairing of the fuselage and VS.) But I think the wing would be a
better location if the lead in can be longer. (I will have a GPS, so I am
not real sure that have TAS is all that important.) What is its real value
of having TAS from the Dynon in this case?
Indiana Larry, RV7 TipUp
TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
JeffRose Flightline Interiors
Firewall Forward, Wiring with Nuckoll's Knowledge
((((((((((((()))))))))))))))))
----- Original Message -----
From: <N223RV@aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Dynon OAT Probe
> --> RV-List message posted by: N223RV@aol.com
>
> I mounted mine on the right side about 2-3 inches under the horizontal
stab.
> Seems to work good, but don't have much to reference it to. Sure would
have
> been nice if they put 25' on it so you could put it out under the
wing.....
>
> -Mike Kraus
> N223RV RV-4 Flying
> N213RV RV-10 Empennage
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Great Touch Up Gun |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jamie Painter" <jdpainter@jpainter.org>
This looks like a great deal. I've been using the Campbell Hausfeld
Detail Spray Gun I got from Harbor Freight for $19.99 for priming all my
parts. It's a fantastic cheapo siphon feed gun. It sprays SW-P60G2
great. The other day while at Wal-Mart Aviation Supply picking up an air
hose I noticed that they have these same guns for $9.99 -- a fantastic
deal if you are saving every nickle (like me!) for your project.
do not archive
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=86
> --> RV-List message posted by: <EricHe@FlexSolPackaging.com>
>
>
> Hi, I'm painting a friends 6a and used this as an excuse to buy an
> airbrush. I wanted it to shoot clear on the mask lines before shooting the
> contrasting color (to eliminate any bleed under problems). The air brush
> was just too slow for something as big as an RV fuselage. So then I found
> and bought one of these guns on ebay. I figured for 20 bucks could I go
> wrong? Turns out, the thing works great. Shoots like a big air brush but
> still gives good coverage, and you can crank open the needle and really
> lay a beautiful fine coat of paint. The thing atomizes single stage
> urethane very well. It paints much faster than an airbrush too. This guy
> will sell them outright for $19.95 so you can skip the whole auction
> thing. I've bought two now and he's a good guy to deal with. Thought I'd
> share.
>
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=43987&item=2472031127
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Altimeter Adjustmen t- Why not to use GPS altitude in the ATC |
environment
--> RV-List message posted by: "pcondon" <pcondon@mitre.org>
The NAS (National Airspace System) that the ATC controllers use to control
and separate air traffic also use NAS reporting stations that have
barometric pressure readings at various places within the area of airspace
the monitor (Sectors for EnRoute airspace)
Your Mode-c transponder reply to TCAS AND ground based radar
interrogations and rely on baro. Data (pressure) to yield a "altitude".
Likewise your fellow pilot uses and relies on these same factors. You fly in
a shared airspace environment with certain "agreements" based on altitude
which boils down to safety and separation.
Using your GPS derived absolute height from the ground may be accurate BUT
everyone else is using another (baro.) system to get altitude. Even with its
errors...if everyone uses the "error prone" system then the error is evenly
distributed between all users and hence safety is assured.
If you go buzzing along with GPS altitude, then other pilots, controllers
and TCAS equipped aircraft are all at more "risk" as well as your self.
BTW, ATC RADAR suffers from this same problem as altitude here. There is
known error with radar. This error effects all targets equally (at given
distances and altitudes). Position data gained from GPS and used or mixed
with ATC RADAR is equally "at risk" due to the mixing of data inputs from
two source and being displayed on a single PAD or radar screen by the
controller.
(20 year ATC engineering contractor for the FAA)
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | wheel bearing specification |
--> RV-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
Anyone know the callout for the nose wheel bearings in the 6A (and probably same
for the 7A & 8A)?
I've got one making loud whirring noises on rollout, and I know it's needing replacement.
If I can get the part # while at work today, I can have one on hand
when I tear into it tonight; saves a day or 2 of downtime to know what size
I need.
Thanks in advance.
-Bill B
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Donald Mei" <don_mei@hotmail.com>
Has anyone done a real honest-to-god decision analysis of the TruTrak vs.
Trio Avionics autopilot decision.
I've read all the reviews on the list and prettymuch every one with a
TruTrak is happy with their decision, and everyone with a Trio is happy with
their decision. It seems that they are both very good products. But that
doesn't mean that one product isn't superior to another in specific areas.
I know no one's actually done it, but I'd like to see a side by side
comparison of which one actually FLYS better.
Thoughts??
So far in favor of the Navaid I've got:
1) Founded by the inventor of the autopilot (practically)
2) Established company with solid financial underpinnings i.e. Safe to say
they'll be around a while.
3) Proven performance
4) 100% of purchase price applied towards any upgrade
In favor of the Trio
1) Nice, useful display
Unknown as far as comparison is concerned
1) Reliability
2) Performance in turbulence
Any and all comparisons are appreciated, including "I looked at the XXX and
decided to purchase the YYY because of . . ."
Don
"All of us need to be reminded that the federal government did not create
the states; the states created the federal government!"---Ronald Reagan
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Sun & Fun Flight Information |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
Anyone flying to Sun & Fun, there is now a nice pictorial covering the procedures
and approaches. For those that have never flown into Sun & Fun before , it
should be a great help compared to that available the first time I went. There
is also a video of the route from Lake Parker to Lakeland as well - as well
as the official NOTAM.
URL is http://www.faa.gov/fsdo/orl/snfland/arrivalphotos/index.htm
Ed Anderson
RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | FOR SALE: PS Engineering PM3000 - 4 Place Stereo Intercom |
vansairforce <vansairforce@yahoogroups.com>
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill VonDane <bill@vondane.com>
PS Engineering PM 3000 Stereo Intercom
Part number: 11931 - 4 Place
ISO and ALL modes
Stereo Music Input
SoftMute circuitry
Karaoke Mode
Automatic fail-safe interconnect
2-color LED
FAA-TSO Approved
$420 new from Aircraft Spruce, will take $310 shipping included...
Contact: Bill Vondane - Telephone: 719-510-0854
http://www.vondane.com/forsale/index.htm
do not archive
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: wheel bearing specification |
--> RV-List message posted by: "John D. Heath" <altoq@direcway.com>
Timken Bearing P/N: LM-67000L-A
John D
----- Original Message -----
From: <SportAV8R@aol.com>
Subject: RV-List: wheel bearing specification
> --> RV-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
>
> Anyone know the callout for the nose wheel bearings in the 6A (and
probably same for the 7A & 8A)?
>
> I've got one making loud whirring noises on rollout, and I know it's
needing replacement. If I can get the part # while at work today, I can
have one on hand when I tear into it tonight; saves a day or 2 of downtime
to know what size I need.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> -Bill B
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
--> RV-List message posted by: "John D. Heath" <altoq@direcway.com>
Look at this Web site http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal/
John D
----- Original Message -----
From: "Donald Mei" <don_mei@hotmail.com>
Subject: RV-List: Autopilot Itch
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Donald Mei" <don_mei@hotmail.com>
>
> Has anyone done a real honest-to-god decision analysis of the TruTrak vs.
> Trio Avionics autopilot decision.
>
> I've read all the reviews on the list and prettymuch every one with a
> TruTrak is happy with their decision, and everyone with a Trio is happy
with
> their decision. It seems that they are both very good products. But that
> doesn't mean that one product isn't superior to another in specific areas.
>
> I know no one's actually done it, but I'd like to see a side by side
> comparison of which one actually FLYS better.
>
> Thoughts??
>
> So far in favor of the Navaid I've got:
> 1) Founded by the inventor of the autopilot (practically)
> 2) Established company with solid financial underpinnings i.e. Safe to
say
> they'll be around a while.
> 3) Proven performance
> 4) 100% of purchase price applied towards any upgrade
>
> In favor of the Trio
> 1) Nice, useful display
>
> Unknown as far as comparison is concerned
> 1) Reliability
> 2) Performance in turbulence
>
> Any and all comparisons are appreciated, including "I looked at the XXX
and
> decided to purchase the YYY because of . . ."
>
> Don
>
>
> "All of us need to be reminded that the federal government did not create
> the states; the states created the federal government!"---Ronald Reagan
>
> Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee
>
>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Photos of Dual LSE ignition installation? |
--> RV-List message posted by: czechsix@juno.com
Guys,
Does anyone have pics of how they installed coils and ignition leads for a dual
Lightspeed ignition system for the BOTTOM plugs? I've seen lots of pics for
the top plugs installation, but none for the lower ones. I'm thinking of hanging
the coils just ahead of the sump, but that puts them close to the exhaust
and means I have to run the coax from the igntion box around the sump to get to
the coils. Perhaps it would be better to hang the coils behind the acc. case??
Any input/advice on how others have done this would be appreciated...
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D finishing...
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Photos of Dual LSE ignition installation? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
I placed the coil for the lower plugs on engine center line in front of the
sump as high as possible, basically above the pipes. I locally wrapped the
exhaust with high temp heat wrap stuff. I then fabricated a heat shield
that has 1/4 inch thick ceramic material for additional protection. The
shield was long enough and wide enough that any heat rising up from the
pipes after engine shut off would be diverted around the coil location. By
the way I highly recommend using the RG 400 from the start. 97 hours to
date and no problems.......well no problems after I replaced the RG-58 at
about the 30 hr mark.
At 05:31 PM 4/5/04 +0000, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: czechsix@juno.com
>
>
>Guys,
>
>Does anyone have pics of how they installed coils and ignition leads for a
>dual Lightspeed ignition system for the BOTTOM plugs? I've seen lots of
>pics for the top plugs installation, but none for the lower ones. I'm
>thinking of hanging the coils just ahead of the sump, but that puts them
>close to the exhaust and means I have to run the coax from the igntion box
>around the sump to get to the coils. Perhaps it would be better to hang the
>coils behind the acc. case?? Any input/advice on how others have done this
>would be appreciated...
>
>Thanks,
>
>--Mark Navratil
>Cedar Rapids, Iowa
>RV-8A N2D finishing...
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
vansairforce@yahoogroups.com
| Subject: | RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58 |
--> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" <luckymacy@hotmail.com>
Speaking of not using RG-58, here's what a professional EMI engineer told me
at work. We were discussing a RADALT issue we have on a aircraft.
"When in doubt, use RG-393 or better for RADALT applications. Also use a
swept elbow if you have to turn a corner. Do not use mitered elbows as the
pulse will get distorted from a non-linear group delay at the corner.
The advantage of RG-400 over RG-58 is double shielding with better optical
coverage and better quality Teflon dielectric centers.
RG-393 is 0.23 dB/ft at 4300 MHz (rated at about 50 W CW@ 4300). RG-400 is
twice the loss.
I'd also use RG-393 for GPS but RG-400 will still work."
lucky
----Original Message Follows----
From: rickrv6@aol.com
Subject: Re: [rv8list] Re: light speed ignition questions
Mark,
Take a look at this article written by Bob Nuckolls:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
He provides an even different alternative to RG cable.
Rick McBride
In a message dated 4/3/04 3:37:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
redbeardmark@yahoo.com writes:
> Jerry,
> My LSE Plasma II+ replaces the right-side mag and goes to the top
> plugs. Don't know about using it on the bottom plugs. Don't know
> about the impulse vs. non-impulse issue either.
>
> The coax cables which run from the E/I unit to the coils are RG58.
> An astute fellow builder suggested that I replace the RG58 with RG400
> because of heat from the engine (which I am in the process of
> doing). Klaus at LSE said that RG400 would be optimum. Looking
> forward to testing the engine this June.
>
> Mark Andrews N598X
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Persistent heartburn? Check out Digestive Health & Wellness for information
and advice. http://gerd.msn.com/default.asp
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | wing skin to fuse skin fit |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dave Mader" <davemader@bresnan.net>
Though probably not as big an issue on a pre-punch, how has anybody dealt
with the
fuse skin/wing skin joint. My wingskin, when I fitted it up to the
fuselage,was approx. 1/4"
higher than the skin on the bottom of the fuselage. I could have lowered
the wing to have a
better fit, but then wouldn't have had the edge distance that I liked on the
rear spar.
How has anybody else dealt with this mismatch, if they had it? When I push
the fuse skin up
to meet the wing I get slight waviness. Has anyone found a way to deal with
this?
Dave Mader
2nd slow build 6
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RV get togethers at Sun-N-Fun ?? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham@hotmail.com>
Rvers,
Any plans for get togethers - besides Van's Banquet - at S-N-F ??
Weather permitting we'll be on-site (Camping - HBC) by Tuesday.
Chuck & Dave Rowbotham
RV-8A
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58 |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
When using RG-XXX in the engine compartment for your GPS antenna or EI, the
RG-400 has a much higher center conductor insulator melting point than the
RG-58.
RG-58 = WWII technology.
At 02:08 PM 4/5/04 -0400, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" <luckymacy@hotmail.com>
>
>Speaking of not using RG-58, here's what a professional EMI engineer told me
>at work. We were discussing a RADALT issue we have on a aircraft.
>
>"When in doubt, use RG-393 or better for RADALT applications. Also use a
>swept elbow if you have to turn a corner. Do not use mitered elbows as the
>pulse will get distorted from a non-linear group delay at the corner.
>
>The advantage of RG-400 over RG-58 is double shielding with better optical
>coverage and better quality Teflon dielectric centers.
>
>RG-393 is 0.23 dB/ft at 4300 MHz (rated at about 50 W CW@ 4300). RG-400 is
>twice the loss.
>
>I'd also use RG-393 for GPS but RG-400 will still work."
>
>lucky
>
>
>----Original Message Follows----
>From: rickrv6@aol.com
>To: rv8list@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [rv8list] Re: light speed ignition questions
>Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 17:34:10 EST
>
>Mark,
>
>Take a look at this article written by Bob Nuckolls:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
>
>He provides an even different alternative to RG cable.
>
>Rick McBride
>
>In a message dated 4/3/04 3:37:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>redbeardmark@yahoo.com writes:
>
> > Jerry,
> > My LSE Plasma II+ replaces the right-side mag and goes to the top
> > plugs. Don't know about using it on the bottom plugs. Don't know
> > about the impulse vs. non-impulse issue either.
> >
> > The coax cables which run from the E/I unit to the coils are RG58.
> > An astute fellow builder suggested that I replace the RG58 with RG400
> > because of heat from the engine (which I am in the process of
> > doing). Klaus at LSE said that RG400 would be optimum. Looking
> > forward to testing the engine this June.
> >
> > Mark Andrews N598X
> >
> >
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>Persistent heartburn? Check out Digestive Health & Wellness for information
>and advice. http://gerd.msn.com/default.asp
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58 |
--> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" <luckymacy@hotmail.com>
yeah but 393 might be even better than 400 for that reason too
----Original Message Follows----
From: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
When using RG-XXX in the engine compartment for your GPS antenna or EI, the
RG-400 has a much higher center conductor insulator melting point than the
RG-58.
RG-58 = WWII technology.
At 02:08 PM 4/5/04 -0400, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" <luckymacy@hotmail.com>
>
>Speaking of not using RG-58, here's what a professional EMI engineer told
me
>at work. We were discussing a RADALT issue we have on a aircraft.
>
>"When in doubt, use RG-393 or better for RADALT applications. Also use a
>swept elbow if you have to turn a corner. Do not use mitered elbows as
the
>pulse will get distorted from a non-linear group delay at the corner.
>
>The advantage of RG-400 over RG-58 is double shielding with better optical
>coverage and better quality Teflon dielectric centers.
>
>RG-393 is 0.23 dB/ft at 4300 MHz (rated at about 50 W CW@ 4300). RG-400
is
>twice the loss.
>
>I'd also use RG-393 for GPS but RG-400 will still work."
>
>lucky
>
>
>----Original Message Follows----
>From: rickrv6@aol.com
>To: rv8list@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [rv8list] Re: light speed ignition questions
>Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 17:34:10 EST
>
>Mark,
>
>Take a look at this article written by Bob Nuckolls:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
>
>He provides an even different alternative to RG cable.
>
>Rick McBride
>
>In a message dated 4/3/04 3:37:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>redbeardmark@yahoo.com writes:
>
> > Jerry,
> > My LSE Plasma II+ replaces the right-side mag and goes to the top
> > plugs. Don't know about using it on the bottom plugs. Don't know
> > about the impulse vs. non-impulse issue either.
> >
> > The coax cables which run from the E/I unit to the coils are RG58.
> > An astute fellow builder suggested that I replace the RG58 with RG400
> > because of heat from the engine (which I am in the process of
> > doing). Klaus at LSE said that RG400 would be optimum. Looking
> > forward to testing the engine this June.
> >
> > Mark Andrews N598X
> >
> >
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>Persistent heartburn? Check out Digestive Health & Wellness for
information
>and advice. http://gerd.msn.com/default.asp
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Tax headache? MSN Money provides relief with tax tips, tools, IRS forms and
more! http://moneycentral.msn.com/tax/workshop/welcome.asp
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | wing skin to fuse skin fit |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Nellis" <mike@bmnellis.com>
I cut a notch on the bottom overlapped skin and now the skin lays flat in
the corner. You can see some pics here.
http://www.bmnellis.com/WingSkinning4.htm
Mike Nellis
RV-6 Fuselage N699BM
1947 Stinson 108-2 NC9666K
http://bmnellis.com
*** -----Original Message-----
*** From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
*** [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Mader
*** Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 1:10 PM
*** To: rv-list@matronics.com
*** Subject: RV-List: wing skin to fuse skin fit
***
***
*** --> RV-List message posted by: "Dave Mader" <davemader@bresnan.net>
***
*** Though probably not as big an issue on a pre-punch, how
*** has anybody dealt with the fuse skin/wing skin joint. My
*** wingskin, when I fitted it up to the fuselage,was approx.
*** 1/4" higher than the skin on the bottom of the fuselage. I
*** could have lowered the wing to have a better fit, but then
*** wouldn't have had the edge distance that I liked on the
*** rear spar. How has anybody else dealt with this mismatch,
*** if they had it? When I push the fuse skin up to meet the
*** wing I get slight waviness. Has anyone found a way to deal
*** with this?
***
*** Dave Mader
*** 2nd slow build 6
***
***
*** ==============
*** Matronics Forums.
*** ==============
*** ==============
*** ==============
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58 |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
Guys....
RG-393 is NOT the way to go for a number of reasons. Here's a couple:
#1) RG-393 is a variante of RG-225, which used to be RG-87.
#2) RG-393 is OVER DOUBLE the size of RG-400/RG58 variants, nearly 1/2"
thick!!!!
#3) Regular BNC connectors will NOT work on this cable, you have to buy
special ones. You think the BNC connectors for RG400 are expensive ar
$2-4.00, while try tripling or quadrupling that price!!
#4) That fat wire is not easy to route around corner. Instead of a 4" bend
radius, you're now talking 8-12" for a bend.
#5) It's REALLY expensive compared to even RG-400.
#6) Temperature ranges for the cables are IDENTICAL. They are both "Type
IX" - Mil-C-17 cables, with a temperature range of -55oC to +200oC.
#7) It's over 3 times as heavy. RG-400 weights 5lbs per 1K', RG-393 weighs
over 16Lbs per 1K'.
Anyway, given the properties are nearly identical, there is no good reason
to use something as foreign as RG-393. If you ever need to work on it,
no-one will have connectors, crimpers, extra wire, etc.. for you, you'll
have to get it from a ham outfit, etc..
On the surface, there may appear to be lots of superior RG coax cables.
After all, there are hundreds of them. That being said, there is lot's of
people a whole lot smarter than me to have done the research and concluded
that RG-400 is the best to use. While it may be tempting to re-invent the
wheel, logic dictates there is no reason to do so.
This is not a personal attack on anyone, just my usual statement of facts.
Hope this helps,
Stein Bruch
RV6's, Minneapolis
http://www.steinair.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of lucky macy
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58
--> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" <luckymacy@hotmail.com>
yeah but 393 might be even better than 400 for that reason too
----Original Message Follows----
From: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-393 vs RG-400 vs RG-58
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
When using RG-XXX in the engine compartment for your GPS antenna or EI, the
RG-400 has a much higher center conductor insulator melting point than the
RG-58.
RG-58 = WWII technology.
At 02:08 PM 4/5/04 -0400, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "lucky macy" <luckymacy@hotmail.com>
>
>Speaking of not using RG-58, here's what a professional EMI engineer told
me
>at work. We were discussing a RADALT issue we have on a aircraft.
>
>"When in doubt, use RG-393 or better for RADALT applications. Also use a
>swept elbow if you have to turn a corner. Do not use mitered elbows as
the
>pulse will get distorted from a non-linear group delay at the corner.
>
>The advantage of RG-400 over RG-58 is double shielding with better optical
>coverage and better quality Teflon dielectric centers.
>
>RG-393 is 0.23 dB/ft at 4300 MHz (rated at about 50 W CW@ 4300). RG-400
is
>twice the loss.
>
>I'd also use RG-393 for GPS but RG-400 will still work."
>
>lucky
>
>
>----Original Message Follows----
>From: rickrv6@aol.com
>To: rv8list@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [rv8list] Re: light speed ignition questions
>Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 17:34:10 EST
>
>Mark,
>
>Take a look at this article written by Bob Nuckolls:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
>
>He provides an even different alternative to RG cable.
>
>Rick McBride
>
>In a message dated 4/3/04 3:37:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>redbeardmark@yahoo.com writes:
>
> > Jerry,
> > My LSE Plasma II+ replaces the right-side mag and goes to the top
> > plugs. Don't know about using it on the bottom plugs. Don't know
> > about the impulse vs. non-impulse issue either.
> >
> > The coax cables which run from the E/I unit to the coils are RG58.
> > An astute fellow builder suggested that I replace the RG58 with RG400
> > because of heat from the engine (which I am in the process of
> > doing). Klaus at LSE said that RG400 would be optimum. Looking
> > forward to testing the engine this June.
> >
> > Mark Andrews N598X
> >
> >
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>Persistent heartburn? Check out Digestive Health & Wellness for
information
>and advice. http://gerd.msn.com/default.asp
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Tax headache? MSN Money provides relief with tax tips, tools, IRS forms and
more! http://moneycentral.msn.com/tax/workshop/welcome.asp
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole kits? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Frederick Oldenburg <foldenburg@earthlink.net>
I'm building an RV-7A with the newer, all CNC matched hole kits. So far on my empennage,
I've been fluting the ribs on the horizontal and vertical stabilizers.
It won't be long before I'm on to the wings (hopefully!) One of the things
I've been wondering about is whether fluting is really necessary with the CNC
matched hole kits.
I understand the purpose of fluting on the older, non-matched hole kits, but it
seems like the rib is "pulled into line" with the gentle flexing that occurs
when you are clecoing parts together before riveting. On the newer kits, no jigging
is required, because the accuracy of the CNC match holes automagically make
everything line up. So why flute ribs that already have matching holes?
Just want to get some opinions on this.....
Thanks,
Fred
Fred Oldenburg
RV-7A - Empennage
http://www.rv.oldsack.com
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bruce Bell" <rv4bell@door.net>
Has anyone painted their RV wings on a dolly that you can roll out to the
driveway to paint and roll back into the garage. Something with the leading
edge up. Would like to make it out of wood bought from the local Lowe's. If
you have would you contact me at rv4bell@door.net.
Thank you!
Bruce Bell
Lubbock, Texas
RV4 # 2888
DO NOT ARCHIVE!
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Photos of Dual LSE ignition installation? |
--> RV-List message posted by: jamesbaldwin@attglobal.net
Dual electronic ignition sounds like the way to go to me but I'd like to ask what
the electrical system looks like for failure of the alt or a battery. Thanks.
JBB
Scott Bilinski wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>
> I placed the coil for the lower plugs on engine center line in front of the
> sump as high as possible, basically above the pipes. I locally wrapped the
> exhaust with high temp heat wrap stuff. I then fabricated a heat shield
> that has 1/4 inch thick ceramic material for additional protection. The
> shield was long enough and wide enough that any heat rising up from the
> pipes after engine shut off would be diverted around the coil location. By
> the way I highly recommend using the RG 400 from the start. 97 hours to
> date and no problems.......well no problems after I replaced the RG-58 at
> about the 30 hr mark.
>
> At 05:31 PM 4/5/04 +0000, you wrote:
> >--> RV-List message posted by: czechsix@juno.com
> >
> >
> >Guys,
> >
> >Does anyone have pics of how they installed coils and ignition leads for a
> >dual Lightspeed ignition system for the BOTTOM plugs? I've seen lots of
> >pics for the top plugs installation, but none for the lower ones. I'm
> >thinking of hanging the coils just ahead of the sump, but that puts them
> >close to the exhaust and means I have to run the coax from the igntion box
> >around the sump to get to the coils. Perhaps it would be better to hang the
> >coils behind the acc. case?? Any input/advice on how others have done this
> >would be appreciated...
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >--Mark Navratil
> >Cedar Rapids, Iowa
> >RV-8A N2D finishing...
> >
> >
>
> Scott Bilinski
> Eng dept 305
> Phone (858) 657-2536
> Pager (858) 502-5190
>
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole kits? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Steve Waltner <swaltner@mac.com>
You still need to flute the parts. I think you're a little confused on what is
actually happening when you flute a rib. The rib is formed from a flat piece of
metal that has the lightening holes cut, and all holes stamped. It then has
the flanges bent onto it. You'll notice that the flanges for the airfoil surface
are bent along a curved surface. As you get further away from the center of
the bend (ie: towards the edge of the flange), there is more material there.
You basically have two concentric circles (well, curved objects), and the outside
one (the line along the outside of the flange bend) is longer. This extra
has to go somewhere, so when the rib is originally shaped it deforms the part
so that it bows away from the side with the flange.
By fluting a part, you are putting a fold in the outside curve on the original
part. The flutes make the distance along the outside edge of the flute longer
and this "absorb" the excess material in the outer edge of the flange, which will
straighten out the part. Put your un-fluted part on the table (flanges up)
and you will notice a gap underneath the center of the part (because the part
is bowing away from the flange). When the part is properly fluted, the holes
along the flanges will be in a nice straight line, and the part will lay flat
on the table. The important thing is that the flanges are at 90 degrees to the
web of the part (they won't be when you first receive the kit) and that the holes
are in a nice straight line (to match the holes in the skin which are in
a nice straight line). If you tried to cleco an un-fluted part onto your skins,
the stamped holes would not line up since the holes on the rib would be on a
curved line and the skin's holes are in a straight !
line.
Steve
On Monday, April 05, 2004, at 03:21PM, Frederick Oldenburg <foldenburg@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Frederick Oldenburg <foldenburg@earthlink.net>
>
>I'm building an RV-7A with the newer, all CNC matched hole kits. So far on my
empennage, I've been fluting the ribs on the horizontal and vertical stabilizers.
It won't be long before I'm on to the wings (hopefully!) One of the things
I've been wondering about is whether fluting is really necessary with the CNC
matched hole kits.
>
>I understand the purpose of fluting on the older, non-matched hole kits, but it
seems like the rib is "pulled into line" with the gentle flexing that occurs
when you are clecoing parts together before riveting. On the newer kits, no jigging
is required, because the accuracy of the CNC match holes automagically
make everything line up. So why flute ribs that already have matching holes?
>
>Just want to get some opinions on this.....
>
>Thanks,
>
>Fred
>
>
>Fred Oldenburg
>RV-7A - Empennage
>http://www.rv.oldsack.com
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Photos of Dual LSE ignition installation? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
I have a standard system with no back up alt or battery. I know I am good
for at
least 1 hr if not 2 (depending) before I need to land. Thats 180 miles +.
Should
be somewhere to land and call my boss to let him kow I wont be in the next day.
Almost looking forward to that. I love small towns and hangin with the locals.
Although I just might spring for the alt that plugs into the vac pump pad. It
puts out 8 amps. Thats enough to eaisly keep me going.
At 01:26 PM 4/5/04 -0700, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: jamesbaldwin@attglobal.net
>
>Dual electronic ignition sounds like the way to go to me but I'd like to ask
>what
>the electrical system looks like for failure of the alt or a battery. Thanks.
>JBB
>
>Scott Bilinski wrote:
>
>> --> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>>
>> I placed the coil for the lower plugs on engine center line in front of the
>> sump as high as possible, basically above the pipes. I locally wrapped the
>> exhaust with high temp heat wrap stuff. I then fabricated a heat shield
>> that has 1/4 inch thick ceramic material for additional protection. The
>> shield was long enough and wide enough that any heat rising up from the
>> pipes after engine shut off would be diverted around the coil location. By
>> the way I highly recommend using the RG 400 from the start. 97 hours to
>> date and no problems.......well no problems after I replaced the RG-58 at
>> about the 30 hr mark.
>>
>> At 05:31 PM 4/5/04 +0000, you wrote:
>> >--> RV-List message posted by: czechsix@juno.com
>> >
>> >
>> >Guys,
>> >
>> >Does anyone have pics of how they installed coils and ignition leads for a
>> >dual Lightspeed ignition system for the BOTTOM plugs? I've seen lots of
>> >pics for the top plugs installation, but none for the lower ones. I'm
>> >thinking of hanging the coils just ahead of the sump, but that puts them
>> >close to the exhaust and means I have to run the coax from the igntion box
>> >around the sump to get to the coils. Perhaps it would be better to hang
the
>> >coils behind the acc. case?? Any input/advice on how others have done this
>> >would be appreciated...
>> >
>> >Thanks,
>> >
>> >--Mark Navratil
>> >Cedar Rapids, Iowa
>> >RV-8A N2D finishing...
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Scott Bilinski
>> Eng dept 305
>> Phone (858) 657-2536
>> Pager (858) 502-5190
>>
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing dolly help |
--> RV-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
You might consider using a couple of engine stands. I did this using one
stand and a support on the root end which required a helper to move it into
painting location but I could rotate it by myself when painting. (two
stands would be better) All that is needed is to add some height to it
(mine was an el cheapo from harbor freight) and you can rotate your wings a
full 180 or even 360 degrees and paint each side on the horizontal.
Painting on the horizontal beats painting on the vertical because it allows
the paint to flow out and you don't get runs very easily.
Indiana Larry, RV7 TipUp
TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
JeffRose Flightline Interiors
Firewall Forward, Wiring w/Nuckoll's Knowledge
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Bell" <rv4bell@door.net>
Subject: RV-List: Wing dolly help
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Bruce Bell" <rv4bell@door.net>
>
> Has anyone painted their RV wings on a dolly that you can roll out to the
> driveway to paint and roll back into the garage. Something with the
leading
> edge up. Would like to make it out of wood bought from the local Lowe's.
If
> you have would you contact me at rv4bell@door.net.
> Thank you!
> Bruce Bell
> Lubbock, Texas
> RV4 # 2888
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE!
>
>
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Most efficient climb |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
So your going on a long X-country What is the most efficient climb? Blast
right on up to altitude and go, or, do a long cruise climb, somewhere in
between, what speed? Has anyone really crunched the numbers and figured
this out. I figured one of you test pilot types know this stuff. Oh, the
whole point is to get from point A to point B (this case 700 miles) the
fastest at 8k feet, depending on the wind of course while using the least
amount of fuel.
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole kits? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frederick Oldenburg" <foldenburg@earthlink.net>
Subject: RV-List: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole kits?
> --> RV-List message posted by: Frederick Oldenburg
<foldenburg@earthlink.net>
>
> I'm building an RV-7A with the newer, all CNC matched hole kits. So far on
my empennage, I've been fluting the ribs on the horizontal and vertical
stabilizers. It won't be long before I'm on to the wings (hopefully!) One of
the things I've been wondering about is whether fluting is really necessary
with the CNC matched hole kits?
YES, it is still necessary to do this. You want the plane of the
ribs to be flat and straight. If you don't flute, the ribs will be
bent/curved, straining all the rest of their lives with the wing skins.
That stress could lead to other bad things, like cracks.
>
> I understand the purpose of fluting on the older, non-matched hole kits,
but it seems like the rib is "pulled into line" with the gentle flexing that
occurs when you are clecoing parts together before riveting. On the newer
kits, no jigging is required, because the accuracy of the CNC match holes
automagically make everything line up. So why flute ribs that already have
matching holes?
THE cnc process does many great things. But it does not releve
stretched metal that has been bent around corners like the ribs have been.
That is the issue here.
>
> Just want to get some opinions on this.....
>
> Thanks,
>
> Fred
>
>
> Fred Oldenburg
> RV-7A - Empennage
((((((((())))))))))
Indiana Larry, RV7 TipUp
TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
JeffRose Flightline Interiors
Firewall Forward, Wiring with Nuckolls Nowledge
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole |
kits?
--> RV-List message posted by: Frederick Oldenburg <foldenburg@earthlink.net>
I think I undertand what you are saying, and you're right, they don't line up exactly
out of the box. With some gentle flexing they do. The holes in the rib(s)
line up exactly with the ones in the skin. For example, if you start putting
clecos in a line of matched holes, starting at one end, the rib will pull itself
into line as you continue on down the line.
At least this is my experience with the empennage ribs (for the verrtical & horizontal
stabs). I undertand that on the wing ribs, there is more bowing than on
the emp ribs. Some of my empennage ribs layed perfectly flat on the bench right
out of the box....and some did not....but they all were able to be clecoed
together and then clecoed to the skin with no fluting. I did flute them, after
I test fit them and then disassembled (mostly because the instructions said
to do so).
I'm wondering if, in your example where a rib is bowed, if you could not start
clecoing in the center of the rib (where there is the least amount of variation)
and work your way outward. It seels like the rib will pull into line this way
with some gentle flexing.
- Fred
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Waltner <swaltner@mac.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole kits?
--> RV-List message posted by: Steve Waltner <swaltner@mac.com>
You still need to flute the parts. I think you're a little confused on what is
actually happening when you flute a rib. The rib is formed from a flat piece of
metal that has the lightening holes cut, and all holes stamped. It then has
the flanges bent onto it. You'll notice that the flanges for the airfoil surface
are bent along a curved surface. As you get further away from the center of
the bend (ie: towards the edge of the flange), there is more material there.
You basically have two concentric circles (well, curved objects), and the outside
one (the line along the outside of the flange bend) is longer. This extra
has to go somewhere, so when the rib is originally shaped it deforms the part
so that it bows away from the side with the flange.
By fluting a part, you are putting a fold in the outside curve on the original
part. The flutes make the distance along the outside edge of the flute longer
and this "absorb" the excess material in the outer edge of the flange, which will
straighten out the part. Put your un-fluted part on the table (flanges up)
and you will notice a gap underneath the center of the part (because the part
is bowing away from the flange). When the part is properly fluted, the holes
along the flanges will be in a nice straight line, and the part will lay flat
on the table. The important thing is that the flanges are at 90 degrees to the
web of the part (they won't be when you first receive the kit) and that the holes
are in a nice straight line (to match the holes in the skin which are in
a nice straight line). If you tried to cleco an un-fluted part onto your skins,
the stamped holes would not line up since the holes on the rib would be on a
curved line and the skin's holes are in a straight !
line.
Steve
On Monday, April 05, 2004, at 03:21PM, Frederick Oldenburg <foldenburg@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Frederick Oldenburg <foldenburg@earthlink.net>
>
>I'm building an RV-7A with the newer, all CNC matched hole kits. So far on my
empennage, I've been fluting the ribs on the horizontal and vertical stabilizers.
It won't be long before I'm on to the wings (hopefully!) One of the things
I've been wondering about is whether fluting is really necessary with the CNC
matched hole kits.
>
>I understand the purpose of fluting on the older, non-matched hole kits, but it
seems like the rib is "pulled into line" with the gentle flexing that occurs
when you are clecoing parts together before riveting. On the newer kits, no jigging
is required, because the accuracy of the CNC match holes automagically
make everything line up. So why flute ribs that already have matching holes?
>
>Just want to get some opinions on this.....
>
>Thanks,
>
>Fred
>
>
>Fred Oldenburg
>RV-7A - Empennage
>http://www.rv.oldsack.com
Fred Oldenburg
RV-7A - Empennage
http://www.rv.oldsack.com
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey@ix.netcom.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> Subject: RV-List: Autopilot Itch
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Donald Mei" <don_mei@hotmail.com>
> Has anyone done a real honest-to-god decision analysis of the
> TruTrak vs. Trio Avionics autopilot decision
Part of the answer to your question depends on the mission you are
asking of the unit. For the IFR pilot, if budget is an issue, I would
opt for a stand alone altitude hold. As far as I know, TruTrak is the
only one offering this option. If you are only interested in tracking
GPS, then I would think any of the three, TruTrak, Trio or Navaid would
be fine.
Since I built an IFR bird, I decided early on that I wanted altitude
hold and tracking of GPS and Nav (VOR) capability. TruTrak was the only
one offering this when I bought the unit three years ago. I was
comfortable with the purchase because it was developed by Jim Younkin.
I have the DFC250 and must say am very, very impressed with the unit.
"Control Wheel Steering" will hold the current flight condition.
Steering can be accomplished by turning the dial to the desired heading.
Vertical speeds can be adjusted and desired altitude can be selected,
intercepted and held. In GPS Steering mode, it intersects and tracks
whatever flight plan is in the GPS. In ILS mode, it intercepts glide
paths, locks on and tracks right down the center of the glide path. It
also does backcourses.
I have found the control interface to be easy and intuitive. I am
currently getting my IFR rating currency with an instructor. He didn't
allow me to use the autopilot the first 6 hours under the hood. When he
let me use it, I found that it did not add any workload associated with
entering and changing modes, altitudes or headings. (I wish I could say
the same for the GX-60 GPS. I am still learning the fastest way to
change approaches etc while under the hood in high workload situations.)
The switch on my Infinity grip allows swift engagement and
disengagement.
As with all decisions on your homebuilt, the primary question that needs
to be answered is, "What is your mission?" The second is, "How much
money do you want to spend?"
I am thrilled with my TruTrak DFC250. It does everything as advertised
and was easy to install.
Ross Mickey
RV-6A
N9PT
50 hours and counting
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Donald Mei" <don_mei@hotmail.com>
Re: Look at this Web site http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal/ - John D
Sam discusses the benefits of the Trio over the Navaid, but does not discuss
a direct comparison with the Trutrak.
As far as I am concerned, no one in their right mind would buy a Navaid if
they are starting a project now. So thats not the real question.
Trutrak has proven to be far superior to Navaid. Trio seems to be far
superior to the Navaid and I trust time will prove this out.
So, maybe Sam can give us some description of his decision making process in
choosing the trio?? I suspect it may be that at the time, only the Trio was
capable of using Navaid servos. Well Trutrak has adapted and now they offer
a way to use the navaid servos also. So we're back to square 1.
Help!!
Don
"All of us need to be reminded that the federal government did not create
the states; the states created the federal government!"---Ronald Reagan
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Wood Stick Grips for sale (from Vans) |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Travis Hamblen" <TravisHamblen@cox.net>
I have two wood stick grips with the push to talk switches in the top and
wires coming out the bottom. They are from Vans and are in EXCELLENT SHAPE!!
They are $50.00 each from Vans plus shipping. I will sell them to you for
$30.00 each which INCLUDES SHIPPING! I want to sell both, but may consider
selling 1 at a time. This is a 40% savings over Vans! E-mail me to purchase,
I can accept credit cards, otherwise we can work out the payment
arrangements.
Travis
TravisHamblen@cox.net
--
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus (http://www.grisoft.com).
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dynon OAT Probe |
--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
If Dynon says that you should not extend this lead, there may be a
very good reason for it. If this is a thermocouple lead, then you
need to know what you are doing, or you may greatly affect its
accuracy.
Kevin Horton
At 7:52 -0400 5/4/04, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
>
>Mike, does it look like the 10' wire/coax lead in to the OAT can be cut off
>easily so it could be extended?
>
>I am considering mounting mine under the HS. (I mounted the remote compass
>under the fairing of the fuselage and VS.) But I think the wing would be a
>better location if the lead in can be longer. (I will have a GPS, so I am
>not real sure that have TAS is all that important.) What is its real value
>of having TAS from the Dynon in this case?
>
>Indiana Larry, RV7 TipUp
>TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
>JeffRose Flightline Interiors
>Firewall Forward, Wiring with Nuckoll's Knowledge
>((((((((((((()))))))))))))))))
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <N223RV@aol.com>
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Dynon OAT Probe
>
>
>> --> RV-List message posted by: N223RV@aol.com
>>
>> I mounted mine on the right side about 2-3 inches under the horizontal
>stab.
>> Seems to work good, but don't have much to reference it to. Sure would
>have
>> been nice if they put 25' on it so you could put it out under the
>wing.....
>>
>> -Mike Kraus
>> N223RV RV-4 Flying
>> N213RV RV-10 Empennage
> >
>>
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart@iss.net>
I think you will find several of these exact discussions about the
decision process of the Trio in the archives.
Quite a few of us took a direct and active role in the development of
trio's features and functions.
And I believe Don has accurately assessed the points on Navaid. And no
one to my knowledge has done the Truetrak vs Trio and there has not been
an apples to apples comparison.
No doubt over the next year or 2, more features from all parties will be
coming out. If it were my dollar today, and I had to build for an
autopilot package, based on feature function/price point. I'd build Trio
into the wing, and True Trak's alt. hold into pitch.
Michael Stewart
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Donald Mei
Subject: [SPAM] RV-List: Re: Autopilot Itch
--> RV-List message posted by: "Donald Mei" <don_mei@hotmail.com>
Re: Look at this Web site http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal/ -
John D
Sam discusses the benefits of the Trio over the Navaid, but does not
discuss
a direct comparison with the Trutrak.
As far as I am concerned, no one in their right mind would buy a Navaid
if
they are starting a project now. So thats not the real question.
Trutrak has proven to be far superior to Navaid. Trio seems to be far
superior to the Navaid and I trust time will prove this out.
So, maybe Sam can give us some description of his decision making
process in
choosing the trio?? I suspect it may be that at the time, only the Trio
was
capable of using Navaid servos. Well Trutrak has adapted and now they
offer
a way to use the navaid servos also. So we're back to square 1.
Help!!
Don
"All of us need to be reminded that the federal government did not
create
the states; the states created the federal government!"---Ronald Reagan
==
==
==
==
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Harvey Sigmon" <rv6hes@comcast.net>
What is everybody using as a backup for turn and bank when you remove the
control head of the Navaid, on my install I used the Navaid and Altrac.
Works fine especially since I use the Garmin 196, my last trip is was off
about 14 feet. Not bad for a piece of junk, as you say.
Harvey Sigmon N602RV
----- Original Message -----
From: "Donald Mei" <don_mei@hotmail.com>
Subject: RV-List: Re: Autopilot Itch
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Donald Mei" <don_mei@hotmail.com>
>
> Re: Look at this Web site http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal/ - John
D
>
> Sam discusses the benefits of the Trio over the Navaid, but does not
discuss
> a direct comparison with the Trutrak.
>
> As far as I am concerned, no one in their right mind would buy a Navaid if
> they are starting a project now. So thats not the real question.
>
> Trutrak has proven to be far superior to Navaid. Trio seems to be far
> superior to the Navaid and I trust time will prove this out.
>
> So, maybe Sam can give us some description of his decision making process
in
> choosing the trio?? I suspect it may be that at the time, only the Trio
was
> capable of using Navaid servos. Well Trutrak has adapted and now they
offer
> a way to use the navaid servos also. So we're back to square 1.
>
> Help!!
>
> Don
>
> "All of us need to be reminded that the federal government did not create
> the states; the states created the federal government!"---Ronald Reagan
>
>
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
Donald Mei wrote:
>
>As far as I am concerned, no one in their right mind would buy a Navaid if
>they are starting a project now. So thats not the real question.
>
>
>Don
>
>
I happen to like my Navaid very much thank you. I wonder why anyone in
their right mind
would buy a RV with a wheel hanging off the nose? :-)
Jerry
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole |
kits?
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie & Tupper England <cengland@netdoor.com>
If you haven't gotten your wing kit yet, the problem might not be
obvious. The ribs in the tail don't have much curvature at the nose, at
least where you must put rivets. The tightest 'radius' of the curve on
the tail parts is (wild guess) probably something close to 4 feet. The
sharpest part of the curve on the top of a wing's nose rib has a radius
in the area that you will have to rivet that's probably less than 1
foot. This makes the distortion much worse than what you see in the
tail. If you finish the bend of the flange to 90 degrees without
fluting, then sit a straightedge on the side of the rib running from the
nose to the spar flange, you could probably slide a 3/8" (or larger)
drill bit between the rib & the straightedge. That's a bit much to try
to pull into position without fluting.
Does that help?
Charlie
Frederick Oldenburg wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Frederick Oldenburg <foldenburg@earthlink.net>
>
>I think I undertand what you are saying, and you're right, they don't line up
exactly out of the box. With some gentle flexing they do. The holes in the rib(s)
line up exactly with the ones in the skin. For example, if you start putting
clecos in a line of matched holes, starting at one end, the rib will pull itself
into line as you continue on down the line.
>
>At least this is my experience with the empennage ribs (for the verrtical & horizontal
stabs). I undertand that on the wing ribs, there is more bowing than
on the emp ribs. Some of my empennage ribs layed perfectly flat on the bench right
out of the box....and some did not....but they all were able to be clecoed
together and then clecoed to the skin with no fluting. I did flute them, after
I test fit them and then disassembled (mostly because the instructions said
to do so).
>
>I'm wondering if, in your example where a rib is bowed, if you could not start
clecoing in the center of the rib (where there is the least amount of variation)
and work your way outward. It seels like the rib will pull into line this
way with some gentle flexing.
>
>- Fred
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Steve Waltner <swaltner@mac.com>
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Is rib fluting really necessary on CNC matched hole kits?
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: Steve Waltner <swaltner@mac.com>
>
>You still need to flute the parts. I think you're a little confused on what is
actually happening when you flute a rib. The rib is formed from a flat piece
of metal that has the lightening holes cut, and all holes stamped. It then has
the flanges bent onto it. You'll notice that the flanges for the airfoil surface
are bent along a curved surface. As you get further away from the center of
the bend (ie: towards the edge of the flange), there is more material there.
You basically have two concentric circles (well, curved objects), and the outside
one (the line along the outside of the flange bend) is longer. This extra
has to go somewhere, so when the rib is originally shaped it deforms the part
so that it bows away from the side with the flange.
>
>By fluting a part, you are putting a fold in the outside curve on the original
part. The flutes make the distance along the outside edge of the flute longer
and this "absorb" the excess material in the outer edge of the flange, which
will straighten out the part. Put your un-fluted part on the table (flanges up)
and you will notice a gap underneath the center of the part (because the part
is bowing away from the flange). When the part is properly fluted, the holes
along the flanges will be in a nice straight line, and the part will lay flat
on the table. The important thing is that the flanges are at 90 degrees to the
web of the part (they won't be when you first receive the kit) and that the
holes are in a nice straight line (to match the holes in the skin which are in
a nice straight line). If you tried to cleco an un-fluted part onto your skins,
the stamped holes would not line up since the holes on the rib would be on
a curved line and the skin's holes are in a straight !
> line.
>
>Steve
>
>On Monday, April 05, 2004, at 03:21PM, Frederick Oldenburg <foldenburg@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>
>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: Frederick Oldenburg <foldenburg@earthlink.net>
>>
>>I'm building an RV-7A with the newer, all CNC matched hole kits. So far on my
empennage, I've been fluting the ribs on the horizontal and vertical stabilizers.
It won't be long before I'm on to the wings (hopefully!) One of the things
I've been wondering about is whether fluting is really necessary with the CNC
matched hole kits.
>>
>>I understand the purpose of fluting on the older, non-matched hole kits, but
it seems like the rib is "pulled into line" with the gentle flexing that occurs
when you are clecoing parts together before riveting. On the newer kits, no
jigging is required, because the accuracy of the CNC match holes automagically
make everything line up. So why flute ribs that already have matching holes?
>>
>>Just want to get some opinions on this.....
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Fred
>>
>>
>>Fred Oldenburg
>>RV-7A - Empennage
>>http://www.rv.oldsack.com
>>
>>
>
>
>Fred Oldenburg
>RV-7A - Empennage
>http://www.rv.oldsack.com
>
>
>
>
Message 37
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart@iss.net>
The ezpilot has a turn coordinator display similar to the Navaid head.
See http://www.trioavionics.com/display.htm
Michael Stewart
Quality Assurance
Do not archive.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Harvey Sigmon
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Autopilot Itch
--> RV-List message posted by: "Harvey Sigmon" <rv6hes@comcast.net>
What is everybody using as a backup for turn and bank when you remove
the
control head of the Navaid, on my install I used the Navaid and Altrac.
Works fine especially since I use the Garmin 196, my last trip is was
off
about 14 feet. Not bad for a piece of junk, as you say.
Harvey Sigmon N602RV
----- Original Message -----
From: "Donald Mei" <don_mei@hotmail.com>
Subject: RV-List: Re: Autopilot Itch
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Donald Mei" <don_mei@hotmail.com>
>
> Re: Look at this Web site http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal/ -
John
D
>
> Sam discusses the benefits of the Trio over the Navaid, but does not
discuss
> a direct comparison with the Trutrak.
>
> As far as I am concerned, no one in their right mind would buy a
Navaid if
> they are starting a project now. So thats not the real question.
>
> Trutrak has proven to be far superior to Navaid. Trio seems to be
far
> superior to the Navaid and I trust time will prove this out.
>
> So, maybe Sam can give us some description of his decision making
process
in
> choosing the trio?? I suspect it may be that at the time, only the
Trio
was
> capable of using Navaid servos. Well Trutrak has adapted and now they
offer
> a way to use the navaid servos also. So we're back to square 1.
>
> Help!!
>
> Don
>
> "All of us need to be reminded that the federal government did not
create
> the states; the states created the federal government!"---Ronald
Reagan
>
>
==
==
==
==
Message 38
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
Jerry Springer wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
>
> Donald Mei wrote:
>
>
>>As far as I am concerned, no one in their right mind would buy a Navaid if
>>they are starting a project now. So thats not the real question.
>>
>>
>>Don
>>
>>
>
> I happen to like my Navaid very much thank you. I wonder why anyone in
> their right mind
> would buy a RV with a wheel hanging off the nose? :-)
>
> Jerry
Jerry, like you I have flown many satisfactory miles with a Navaid.
However, I think if you flew with an EZ-Pilot you would be *very*
impressed, probably enough to seriously consider retiring your trusty
Navaid. :-)
There really is no comparison between the Navaid, the EZ-Pilot and the
DigiTrak when it comes to preciseness, feature set and performance in
turbulence. I have never flown the DigiTrak, but I have no reason to
think it is not a fine performing unit. The solid-state sensors and
digital platform of the EZ-Pilot and DigiTrak is greatly superior to the
mechanical analog system of the Navaid as regards performance,
programming, and features.
The lightweight Navaid servo, however, even though it is a "mature"
product, performs very nicely with the EZ-Pilot, and I suspect it would
also be very satisfactory with the Navaid compatible model of the DigiTrak.
To answer the inquiry as to why I selected the EZ-Pilot as the
replacement for my Navaid, yes, the ability to use the already installed
Navaid servo was a major factor. At the time I installed the EZ-Pilot,
TruTrak had not yet "seen the light" and released their Navaid version
of the DigiTrak. It seems the appearance of the EZ-Pilot got their full
attention. ;-)
If I was to start from square one, I would stay with the EZ-Pilot, not
because the DigiTrak is not a fine product, but primarily because the
EZ-Pilot offers such an advanced display and a huge feature set. Also,
the Trio Avionics guys are *very* aggressively pursuing enhancements to
their already impressive system.
We are fortunate to have not only the "old" Navaid as a workable wing
leveler, but new advanced systems such as the EZ-Pilot and DigiTrak.
There is no telling what these manufacturers and others will unveil in
the next few years!
Sam Buchanan
Message 39
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Most efficient climb |
--> RV-List message posted by: "GMC" <gmcnutt@uniserve.com>
Hi Scott
There are so many variables that one could only consider a zero wind flight
plan.
My 6A is carbureted with fixed pitch and I normally climb at 120 Kts IAS, my
guess is that a constant speed prop might be more efficient at best rate of
climb speed while fixed pitch better at higher speed where engine can wind
up and develop more power.
There is really not much difference on a long 700 NM stage length. My old
DOS flight planning software says 43.9 gal with 90 knot climb and 43.2 gal
with 125 knot climb, however rates of climb and fuel flows are manually
input by myself and are best (conservative) guesses. The software may or may
not do some averaging to first top of climb fix so it would be interesting
to see what others come up with. The snowbird leg I used was CYNJ direct
CYQR.
do not archive
George in Langley
============================================================
Subject: RV-List: Most efficient climb
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
So your going on a long X-country What is the most efficient climb? Blast
right on up to altitude and go, or, do a long cruise climb, somewhere in
between, what speed? Has anyone really crunched the numbers and figured
this out. I figured one of you test pilot types know this stuff. Oh, the
whole point is to get from point A to point B (this case 700 miles) the
fastest at 8k feet, depending on the wind of course while using the least
amount of fuel.
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Message 40
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Richard Sipp" <rsipp@earthlink.net>
While I could certainly be mistaken, I think one of the major differences in
the TruTrak and Trio products is that the TruTrak does not depend on an
external GPS for it attitude information. Loose your GPS signal and the
TruTrak can still control the airplane. From reviewing the Trio web sight
it appears that an external GPS is required to provide or at least augment
the attitude reference.
Dick Sipp
RV4
RV10
Message 41
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Most efficient climb |
--> RV-List message posted by: "RV6 Flyer" <rv6_flyer@hotmail.com>
After reaching a safe altitude, (1,000 AGL) I go for max speed and about a
300 FPM rate of climb. (Prop is pulled back to 2,600 at 1,000 AGL if there
are no MOUNTAINS to clear.) Burns more fuel I think but have no hard
numbers. The speed keeps everything cool and you cover the most forward
distance in the shortest time.
Just my humble opinion.
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,451 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
http://SoCAL_WVAF.rvproject.com
Subject: RV-List: Most efficient climb
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
So your going on a long X-country What is the most efficient climb? Blast
right on up to altitude and go, or, do a long cruise climb, somewhere in
between, what speed? Has anyone really crunched the numbers and figured
this out. I figured one of you test pilot types know this stuff. Oh, the
whole point is to get from point A to point B (this case 700 miles) the
fastest at 8k feet, depending on the wind of course while using the least
amount of fuel.
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Message 42
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot Itch |
--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
Richard Sipp wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Richard Sipp" <rsipp@earthlink.net>
>
>
> While I could certainly be mistaken, I think one of the major differences in
> the TruTrak and Trio products is that the TruTrak does not depend on an
> external GPS for it attitude information. Loose your GPS signal and the
> TruTrak can still control the airplane. From reviewing the Trio web sight
> it appears that an external GPS is required to provide or at least augment
> the attitude reference.
>
> Dick Sipp
> RV4
> RV10
Dick, both the TruTrak and EZ-Pilot use GPS in the attitude solution.
And, both systems are capable of remarkable wing-leveler performance
without GPS input. However, without GPS, both system's performance will
degrade over time and headings will require manual input after a
significant time without GPS data. As far as I can tell, there is no
appreciable difference in the way both systems integrate GPS.
I can tell you from first-hand knowledge that Trio has recently enhanced
the no-GPS performance of the EZ-Pilot in a substantial manner. I really
don't understand how the little box can maintain its balance so well
without any outside assistance, but it can! :-)
Sam
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|