Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:11 AM - Oh So Many Great Comments... (Matt Dralle)
2. 12:18 AM - Re: "Project" Insurance (Jeff Point)
3. 05:05 AM - Re: more FGN questions - Removing Blue Plastic (DWENSING@aol.com)
4. 05:51 AM - More help needed to re-open Meigs (Jeff Dowling)
5. 05:52 AM - Re: "Project" Insurance (Charles Rowbotham)
6. 05:54 AM - Re: Fuel selector handle loose (Gary Zilik)
7. 07:46 AM - Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare (Sam Buchanan)
8. 07:52 AM - Re: RV-List COM Antenna (LeastDrag93066@aol.com)
9. 07:59 AM - Re: More help needed to re-open Meigs (Ralph E. Capen)
10. 08:15 AM - Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare (Scott Bilinski)
11. 08:24 AM - Re: More help needed to re-open Meigs (Boss)
12. 08:31 AM - Re: More help needed to re-open Meigs (Richard Tasker)
13. 08:34 AM - Re: Re: RV-List COM Antenna (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta))
14. 08:38 AM - Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare (David Carter)
15. 08:54 AM - Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare (Evan and Megan Johnson)
16. 09:01 AM - Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare (Bill Dube)
17. 09:05 AM - Re: Re: RV-List COM Antenna (James E. Clark)
18. 09:08 AM - Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare (Scott Bilinski)
19. 09:15 AM - Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare (Scott Bilinski)
20. 09:22 AM - Prop work (MnwPeeps@aol.com)
21. 10:09 AM - Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare (Bill Dube)
22. 10:37 AM - Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare (Scott Jackson)
23. 10:44 AM - Re: Fuel selector handle loose (Scott Jackson)
24. 11:00 AM - Hartzell Props (luckymacy@comcast.net (lucky))
25. 12:18 PM - Re: Fuel selector handle loose (Jim Jewell)
26. 12:20 PM - Re: More help needed to re-open Meigs (Chuck Jensen)
27. 12:45 PM - Freight (Peter Laurence)
28. 01:01 PM - Re: More help needed to re-open Meigs (Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club)
29. 01:24 PM - Re: Re: RV-List COM Antenna (Stein Bruch)
30. 01:36 PM - FW: More help needed to re-open Meigs (J. R. Dial)
31. 02:05 PM - Re: Re: RV-List COM Antenna (SportAV8R@aol.com)
32. 02:23 PM - Re: Freight (CBRxxDRV@aol.com)
33. 03:13 PM - Re: More help needed to re-open Meigs (Doug Rozendaal)
34. 03:29 PM - Re: More help needed to re-open Meigs (R. Craig Chipley)
35. 04:31 PM - Re: Freight (Chenoweth)
36. 05:04 PM - Rv-List Power Required (smoothweasel@juno.com)
37. 05:18 PM - Re: Freight (Hopperdhh@aol.com)
38. 05:29 PM - Re: Freight (David Carter)
39. 05:36 PM - Re: Re: RV-List COM Antenna (Hopperdhh@aol.com)
40. 05:49 PM - Re: Rv-List Power Required (Jerry Springer)
41. 05:58 PM - Re: [Bulk] Rv-List Power Required (Kevin Horton)
42. 06:08 PM - Re: Freight (linn walters)
43. 06:09 PM - Re: Fuel selector handle loose (Curt Reimer)
44. 06:10 PM - Re: Freight (Bill Schlatterer)
45. 06:41 PM - Re: Re: RV-List COM Antenna (Bob 1)
46. 07:35 PM - Re: Freight (CBRxxDRV@aol.com)
47. 07:35 PM - Re: Freight (Tim Coldenhoff)
48. 08:03 PM - Antenna location? (John DeCuir)
49. 08:27 PM - Re: Freight (Bobby Hester)
50. 08:42 PM - Re: Antenna location? (Scott VanArtsdalen)
51. 09:06 PM - Re: [Bulk] Rv-List Power Required (Ed Holyoke)
52. 09:25 PM - Re: Freight (Richard E. Tasker)
53. 09:25 PM - Re: [Bulk] Rv-List Power Required (Larry Pardue)
54. 09:31 PM - Brake holding Power (Ross S)
55. 10:00 PM - Molex connectors (H.Ivan Haecker)
56. 10:04 PM - Re: Rv-List Power Required (Tom Gummo)
57. 10:19 PM - Re: Antenna location? (Derrick Aubuchon)
58. 10:33 PM - Re: Brake holding Power (Jim Jewell)
59. 10:59 PM - purpose of fire sleeve (thomas a. sargent)
60. 11:14 PM - Re: [Bulk] Rv-List Power Required (Scott Jackson)
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: | Oh So Many Great Comments... |
--> RV-List message posted by: Matt Dralle <dralle@matronics.com>
Dear Listers,
As I write this its still November 30th so technically the List Fund Raiser
is still underway! :-) I've gotten so many nice comments from Listers in
the last couple of days along with their Contributions that I just had to
share them with the Lists. Guys, I really appreciate the kind words and
great support that has come in the last few days.
If you've been meaning to support your Lists this month but have just been
putting it off until the last absolute minute, now's a perfect time to make
that Contribution!
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
A special thank you to everyone that has already shown their support. I'm
compiling the List of Contributors and will post it in a couple days. In
the meantime, please read over some of the nice things people have been
saying about the List along with their Contribution...
Thank you!!!
Matt Dralle
List Administrator
-------------- A Ton More Nice Comments ----------------
The number of times I've used the list (especially the
archives) to answer a question I have definitely makes my
contribution worth it.
Jordan G.
This list sure paves the way to a smoother building process.
Tim B.
Really enjoy the list and look forward to it every day.
Darren F.
Love the list, great diversion at work...
Rich C.
The [List] community much appreciates your well run list server.
Donald K.
Good list.
Graham H.
...a wonderful service!
Jon C.
I should be building when I'm reading the list but I have
to keep up with what's going on.
Jerry I.
...fills in the gap between building and flying.
Jerry B.
It's how I start my day.
Randy R.
Keep up the this GREAT resource.
Tom H.
Keeps me in the loop while my airplane is down for a while.
Tim G.
wonderful service...
Andrew J.
...an indispensable tool in building my airplane.
Mark K.
...such a great service.
Rex S.
I'm hooked.
Jerry I.
[The List] makes building a lot easier and more fun!
Eugene H.
Great list!
Sam P.
Its nice to be ad free...
Terry S.
Its an excellent list.
Jim G.
What a tremendous resource...
Bob C.
A great help and an excellent service.
Darren F.
Great service...
Patrick F.
I am an information junkie, and the list gives me my fix every day!
Mark S.
Much useful information is exchanged.
Graham H.
An exceptional resource...
Neal G.
This list is a valuable tool for me.
Grant F.
...such a valuable resource.
Kevin B.
Really enjoy the List...
Michael W.
...such a great tool!
John L.
I have been done building my plane for three years now. I still
get valuable information from this List.
Don N.
Better than the soaps at times!
Jerry I.
Thanks for a huge archive of information.
Paul D.
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle@matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
do not archive
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: "Project" Insurance |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Point <jpoint@mindspring.com>
Skysmith did the same thing for me. Good outfit to deal with. Policy
is through AIG.
SKYSMITH INTL (SCOTT SMITH) 800-743-1439 515-289-1439 sales@skysmith.com
<mailto:%20sales@skysmith.com> AIRCRAFT INSURANCE
Jeff Point
>Nation Air. They sell it and you can transfere the balance when you are
>ready to fly.
>Jim
>
>
>
>
>
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: more FGN questions - Removing Blue Plastic |
--> RV-List message posted by: DWENSING@aol.com
In a message dated 11/30/04 10:45:43 AM Eastern Standard Time,
pcondon@mitre.org writes:
> Don't bother or worry about with this plastic.
>
> .........................................................................
> ............
>
> We'd like to leave as much of it on as long as possible to protect the
> alclad.
You may not want to leave the plastic film on the aluminum. Depends on
how long it will be there. The plastic remained on my instrument panel for
about 5 years. When I removed it there was filigree corrosion around the edges
in several places.
Dale Ensing
RV-6A N118DE
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: | More help needed to re-open Meigs |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
Hey guys, the fight isn't over yet. Friends of Meigs is looking for examples of
airports and parks that co-exist. Please read the following if you know of
any.
Officials of the Chicago Park District have been quoted in the paper as saying:
"There are no parks where airstrips are a compatible use."
Baloney!
This is flat out untrue. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of airports in
the U.S. alone where parks and airports co-exist side by side.
In the Chicago area alone, Palwaukee Airport is adjacent to the Cook County Forest
Preserve, and DuPage Airport is adjacent to a golf course. Many small airports
exist right in state and national parks. Many more have parks adjacent
with observation areas to enjoy the excitement of planes taking off and landing.
Thanks to you, we've already received over 80 e-mails citing examples of airports
large and small co-existing with:
a.. Parks
b.. Nature trails
c.. Golf courses
d.. Forest preserves
e.. Camping facilities
f.. Museums
g.. Historical landmarks
Some airports have received multiple "nominations," including First Flight Airport
(FFA) at Kill Devil Hills, College Park, MD (CGS), Mackinac Island (MCD),
Aeroflex-Andover, IN (12N), and Palo Alto, CA (PAO).
Kentucky fares extremely well, with multiple nominations for their series of airstrips
in their state parks, including the number one nominee: Rough River Dam
State Park (2I3). According to Aaron Carr, one of its many nominators:
"Rough River is a State Park with golf, hiking, camping, beach, lodge, restaurant,
and a runway. This is a great example of what you are looking for. This is
state owned and operated with a lot of traffic."
Thank you everyone who has written so far. And to those who have further examples:
Help us prove them wrong!
Send your examples of parks and planes co-existing. If you have electronic pictures
or links to sites highlighting the parks/planes connection, send them too!
Send them to us at:
info@friendsofmeigs.org
Thanks for the help
Shemp
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: | "Project" Insurance |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham@hotmail.com>
Glenn,
We have had excellent service and support from Scott & Jeanne Smith @
SkySmith Ins (800) 743-1439. The cost was very resonalbe and change to
flight coverage at the last minute was effortless.
Chuck Rowbotham
RV-8A
>From: "Glenn Brasch" <gbrasch@earthlink.net>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RV-List: "Project" Insurance
>Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 18:40:56 -0700
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Glenn Brasch" <gbrasch@earthlink.net>
>
>Can anybody recommend a company for "project" insurance please? Thanks in
>advance. Glenn in Arizona -9A fuselage.
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel selector handle loose |
--> RV-List message posted by: Gary Zilik <zilik@excelgeo.com>
I assume you have tried tightening the screw in the top. :) Are you sure
you have the handle pressed all the way down on the shaft? If you still
can't get it tight order another from vans, or maybe on of the listers
that has installed the Andair unit will give you there old valve.
I must second Jerry's comment. I see nothing wrong with the kit supplied
selector valve. I have installed (in other peoples airplanes) two Andair
valves along with an Andair gascolator. While they are nice units they
require more work to install.
Gary
Jerry Springer wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
>
> John Furey wrote:
>
>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: "John Furey" <john@fureychrysler.com>
>>
>>I would install the Andair now and save yourself the trouble later.
>>
>>John Furey
>>2nd RV6A
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> What trouble is that?
>
> Jerry(over 1000 hours trouble free Van's fuel selector valve) Springer
>
> do not archive
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare |
--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
Ross S wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Ross S" <rv7maker@hotmail.com>
>
> O.K. Newbies, Listen up. When you start plumbing your pitot and static
> systems be careful with the hardware you choose. I used some of the
> nylo-seal fittings sold through spruce along with the o-ring style fittings
> sold through Vans. Today I had an avionics shop come out to certify my
> panel for Instrument Work and all hell broke loose. What should have been a
> couple hour task turned into a major project. When we tried to test the
> static system, it was tight with no leaks, but for some reason the Dynon
> airspeed was cranking up along with the altitute, even though we applied
> suction to both the pitot tube and the static ports. After about two hours
> of head scratching and tearing apart my panel, we found that one of the
> nylo-seal elbows I got from Spruce was plugged. It had a manufacturing
> defect that left a thin layer of nylon in the middle of the elbow. You
> could't see it but I tried to blow through it and turned blue in the face.
>
> Moral of the Story: Buy good fittings ( I think the O-ring style are
> better) and blow through all of them prior to assembly.
>
> This would have saved me a couple hours of A&P ($65/hour) time as well as
> about 6 hours of my time ($0.85/hour based on the planes market value) and a
> bunch of chipped paint around screw heads on my once perferct panel.
Bummer!!
Just a reminder to current builders that even though the special elbow
and bulkhead fittings look "professional", the easiest, least expensive,
and probably most reliable way of putting together the pitot lines is to
join the nylon tubing with a short length of rubber hose. The lines can
usually be routed through the wings and fuse without having to resort to
elbows. If the line needs to be disconnected, just cut the rubber splice
off and replace it with a new one.
By the way, this same method is used on at least one certificated plane
that I know of for hooking up the fuel vent hoses.
Sam Buchanan
http://thervjournal.com
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-List COM Antenna |
--> RV-List message posted by: LeastDrag93066@aol.com
Hi Bob1 and all,
Please recall that the original email was regarding a fuselage mounted COM
antenna for a fiberglass fuselage that was unsuitable for a wingtip
installation. And that the COM antenna was one of Bob Archer's Sportcraft antenna.
I have NEVER seen any "legitimat/objective comparison specs" regarding
antenna's on this list. Why should I be held to a higher standard? (If you want
that kind of information, I have always suggested a conversation with Bob
Archer. He knows.)
I quit selling Bob Archer's antenna's on the RV list years ago. Check the
archives.
Do you object to my giving out Bob Archer's contact information so people on
the RV list can buy direct, and save money?
I'm one of the original skeptics.
I have one RV flying, and two more in process.
What I learned from the first is being applied to the rest.
The first RV has one external transponder antenna.
The RV-6A will have NO external antenna's with no compromise in performance
using 2 COM, NAV, GPS and transponder.
My HR2 will be the same with 2 COM, 2 GPS, NAV and Transponder.
I've know Bob Archer for over 20 years. Of the antenna experts, Bob is the
only one I know that consistently has reliable information.
I do have a pet peeve. It offends me to see the a multitude of antenna's on
the outside of RV's. I've seen as many as 9 external antenna's on the
outside of an RV-6.
With Regards, but slightly confused about some peoples reaction on the RV
list to my postings,
Jim Ayers
Less Drag Products, Inc.
"Drag is like magic. It's what you don't see that's important."
In a message dated 12/01/2004 12:01:25 AM Pacific Standard Time,
rv-list-digest@matronics.com writes:
Time: 12:24:09 PM PST US
From: "Bob 1" <rv3a.1@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: RV-List Digest: 35 Msgs - 11/29/04
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob 1" <rv3a.1@comcast.net>
>
> The Aircraft Spruce and Specialty catalog has the Model 1A wingtip COM
> antenna. If installed to the instructions, this is almost as good as the
belly
> mounted bent whip antenna.>
>This antenna is available directly from the manufacturer at a lower price
>than AC$. Contact Bob Archer......
> Regards,
> Jim Ayers
> Less Drag Products, Inc.
> _www.lessdrag.com_ (http://www.lessdrag.com)
=========================
"Almost as good" does not compute.
Got legitimat/objective comparison specs?
As to Bob Archer stuff...
If you are associated in a business way, it should be duly noted so the
reader might understand where you are coming from.
Bob
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: More help needed to re-open Meigs |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen@earthlink.net>
There's one on the TX/OK border (OK side IIRC) on lake Texoma. There's a resort
with a golf course right next to it.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Dowling <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
Subject: RV-List: More help needed to re-open Meigs
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
Hey guys, the fight isn't over yet. Friends of Meigs is looking for examples of
airports and parks that co-exist. Please read the following if you know of
any.
Officials of the Chicago Park District have been quoted in the paper as saying:
"There are no parks where airstrips are a compatible use."
Baloney!
This is flat out untrue. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of airports in
the U.S. alone where parks and airports co-exist side by side.
In the Chicago area alone, Palwaukee Airport is adjacent to the Cook County Forest
Preserve, and DuPage Airport is adjacent to a golf course. Many small airports
exist right in state and national parks. Many more have parks adjacent
with observation areas to enjoy the excitement of planes taking off and landing.
Thanks to you, we've already received over 80 e-mails citing examples of airports
large and small co-existing with:
a.. Parks
b.. Nature trails
c.. Golf courses
d.. Forest preserves
e.. Camping facilities
f.. Museums
g.. Historical landmarks
Some airports have received multiple "nominations," including First Flight Airport
(FFA) at Kill Devil Hills, College Park, MD (CGS), Mackinac Island (MCD),
Aeroflex-Andover, IN (12N), and Palo Alto, CA (PAO).
Kentucky fares extremely well, with multiple nominations for their series of airstrips
in their state parks, including the number one nominee: Rough River Dam
State Park (2I3). According to Aaron Carr, one of its many nominators:
"Rough River is a State Park with golf, hiking, camping, beach, lodge, restaurant,
and a runway. This is a great example of what you are looking for. This is
state owned and operated with a lot of traffic."
Thank you everyone who has written so far. And to those who have further examples:
Help us prove them wrong!
Send your examples of parks and planes co-existing. If you have electronic pictures
or links to sites highlighting the parks/planes connection, send them too!
Send them to us at:
info@friendsofmeigs.org
Thanks for the help
Shemp
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: Pitot Static Check Nightmare |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
In my opinion the best fittings are the push pull air fittings used in
pneumatic automation equipment. Much smaller than the fittings mentioned
here and work great. The good news for me is we have them here in stock for
our pneumatic equipment. They are the same fittings (SMC) used by Mountain
High Oxygen systems. If they are trusted in a oxygen system then why not
the panel.
At 09:45 AM 12/1/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
>
>Ross S wrote:
> > --> RV-List message posted by: "Ross S" <rv7maker@hotmail.com>
> >
> > O.K. Newbies, Listen up. When you start plumbing your pitot and static
> > systems be careful with the hardware you choose. I used some of the
> > nylo-seal fittings sold through spruce along with the o-ring style
> fittings
> > sold through Vans. Today I had an avionics shop come out to certify my
> > panel for Instrument Work and all hell broke loose. What should have
> been a
> > couple hour task turned into a major project. When we tried to test the
> > static system, it was tight with no leaks, but for some reason the Dynon
> > airspeed was cranking up along with the altitute, even though we applied
> > suction to both the pitot tube and the static ports. After about two
> hours
> > of head scratching and tearing apart my panel, we found that one of the
> > nylo-seal elbows I got from Spruce was plugged. It had a manufacturing
> > defect that left a thin layer of nylon in the middle of the elbow. You
> > could't see it but I tried to blow through it and turned blue in the face.
> >
> > Moral of the Story: Buy good fittings ( I think the O-ring style are
> > better) and blow through all of them prior to assembly.
> >
> > This would have saved me a couple hours of A&P ($65/hour) time as well as
> > about 6 hours of my time ($0.85/hour based on the planes market value)
> and a
> > bunch of chipped paint around screw heads on my once perferct panel.
>
>
>Bummer!!
>
>Just a reminder to current builders that even though the special elbow
>and bulkhead fittings look "professional", the easiest, least expensive,
>and probably most reliable way of putting together the pitot lines is to
>join the nylon tubing with a short length of rubber hose. The lines can
>usually be routed through the wings and fuse without having to resort to
>elbows. If the line needs to be disconnected, just cut the rubber splice
>off and replace it with a new one.
>
>By the way, this same method is used on at least one certificated plane
>that I know of for hooking up the fuel vent hoses.
>
>Sam Buchanan
>http://thervjournal.com
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: More help needed to re-open Meigs |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Boss" <bossone@cox.net>
Try lake Nasworthy and all of it's parks including the Goodflellow Air Force
Base park ...all adjacent to the municipal airport. Mathis Field at San
Angelo, Texas. Main approach to the main runway is over the lake and parks.
Airplanes come in over people sitting on a beach for that one.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: More help needed to re-open Meigs
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen@earthlink.net>
>
>
> There's one on the TX/OK border (OK side IIRC) on lake Texoma. There's a
resort with a golf course right next to it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Dowling <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: More help needed to re-open Meigs
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
>
> Hey guys, the fight isn't over yet. Friends of Meigs is looking for
examples of airports and parks that co-exist. Please read the following if
you know of any.
>
>
> Officials of the Chicago Park District have been quoted in the paper as
saying:
> "There are no parks where airstrips are a compatible use."
>
> Baloney!
>
> This is flat out untrue. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of
airports in the U.S. alone where parks and airports co-exist side by side.
>
> In the Chicago area alone, Palwaukee Airport is adjacent to the Cook
County Forest Preserve, and DuPage Airport is adjacent to a golf course.
Many small airports exist right in state and national parks. Many more have
parks adjacent with observation areas to enjoy the excitement of planes
taking off and landing.
>
> Thanks to you, we've already received over 80 e-mails citing examples of
airports large and small co-existing with:
>
> a.. Parks
> b.. Nature trails
> c.. Golf courses
> d.. Forest preserves
> e.. Camping facilities
> f.. Museums
> g.. Historical landmarks
> Some airports have received multiple "nominations," including First Flight
Airport (FFA) at Kill Devil Hills, College Park, MD (CGS), Mackinac Island
(MCD), Aeroflex-Andover, IN (12N), and Palo Alto, CA (PAO).
>
> Kentucky fares extremely well, with multiple nominations for their series
of airstrips in their state parks, including the number one nominee: Rough
River Dam State Park (2I3). According to Aaron Carr, one of its many
nominators:
>
> "Rough River is a State Park with golf, hiking, camping, beach, lodge,
restaurant, and a runway. This is a great example of what you are looking
for. This is state owned and operated with a lot of traffic."
>
> Thank you everyone who has written so far. And to those who have further
examples:
>
> Help us prove them wrong!
>
> Send your examples of parks and planes co-existing. If you have
electronic pictures or links to sites highlighting the parks/planes
connection, send them too! Send them to us at:
>
> info@friendsofmeigs.org
>
>
> Thanks for the help
>
> Shemp
>
>
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: More help needed to re-open Meigs |
--> RV-List message posted by: Richard Tasker <retasker@optonline.net>
Just a detail but Aeroflex-Andover (12N) is in NJ not IN.
Dick Tasker (from NJ)
Jeff Dowling wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
>
>Hey guys, the fight isn't over yet. Friends of Meigs is looking for examples
of airports and parks that co-exist. Please read the following if you know of
any.
>
>
>Officials of the Chicago Park District have been quoted in the paper as saying:
>"There are no parks where airstrips are a compatible use."
>
>Baloney!
>
>This is flat out untrue. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of airports in
the U.S. alone where parks and airports co-exist side by side.
>
>In the Chicago area alone, Palwaukee Airport is adjacent to the Cook County Forest
Preserve, and DuPage Airport is adjacent to a golf course. Many small airports
exist right in state and national parks. Many more have parks adjacent
with observation areas to enjoy the excitement of planes taking off and landing.
>
>Thanks to you, we've already received over 80 e-mails citing examples of airports
large and small co-existing with:
>
> a.. Parks
> b.. Nature trails
> c.. Golf courses
> d.. Forest preserves
> e.. Camping facilities
> f.. Museums
> g.. Historical landmarks
>Some airports have received multiple "nominations," including First Flight Airport
(FFA) at Kill Devil Hills, College Park, MD (CGS), Mackinac Island (MCD),
Aeroflex-Andover, IN (12N), and Palo Alto, CA (PAO).
>
>Kentucky fares extremely well, with multiple nominations for their series of airstrips
in their state parks, including the number one nominee: Rough River Dam
State Park (2I3). According to Aaron Carr, one of its many nominators:
>
>"Rough River is a State Park with golf, hiking, camping, beach, lodge, restaurant,
and a runway. This is a great example of what you are looking for. This is
state owned and operated with a lot of traffic."
>
>Thank you everyone who has written so far. And to those who have further examples:
>
>Help us prove them wrong!
>
>Send your examples of parks and planes co-existing. If you have electronic pictures
or links to sites highlighting the parks/planes connection, send them too!
Send them to us at:
>
>info@friendsofmeigs.org
>
>
>Thanks for the help
>
>Shemp
>
>
>
>
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-List COM Antenna |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart@iss.net>
Hey I resent that. Im down to 5 outside:)
2 com, txpdr, mkbcn, vor
Mike
Do not archive.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
LeastDrag93066@aol.com
Subject: RV-List: Re: RV-List COM Antenna
--> RV-List message posted by: LeastDrag93066@aol.com
Hi Bob1 and all,
Please recall that the original email was regarding a fuselage mounted
COM
antenna for a fiberglass fuselage that was unsuitable for a wingtip
installation. And that the COM antenna was one of Bob Archer's
Sportcraft antenna.
I have NEVER seen any "legitimat/objective comparison specs" regarding
antenna's on this list. Why should I be held to a higher standard?
(If you want
that kind of information, I have always suggested a conversation with
Bob
Archer. He knows.)
I quit selling Bob Archer's antenna's on the RV list years ago. Check
the
archives.
Do you object to my giving out Bob Archer's contact information so
people on
the RV list can buy direct, and save money?
I'm one of the original skeptics.
I have one RV flying, and two more in process.
What I learned from the first is being applied to the rest.
The first RV has one external transponder antenna.
The RV-6A will have NO external antenna's with no compromise in
performance
using 2 COM, NAV, GPS and transponder.
My HR2 will be the same with 2 COM, 2 GPS, NAV and Transponder.
I've know Bob Archer for over 20 years. Of the antenna experts, Bob is
the
only one I know that consistently has reliable information.
I do have a pet peeve. It offends me to see the a multitude of
antenna's on
the outside of RV's. I've seen as many as 9 external antenna's on the
outside of an RV-6.
With Regards, but slightly confused about some peoples reaction on the
RV
list to my postings,
Jim Ayers
Less Drag Products, Inc.
"Drag is like magic. It's what you don't see that's important."
In a message dated 12/01/2004 12:01:25 AM Pacific Standard Time,
rv-list-digest@matronics.com writes:
Time: 12:24:09 PM PST US
From: "Bob 1" <rv3a.1@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: RV-List Digest: 35 Msgs - 11/29/04
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob 1" <rv3a.1@comcast.net>
>
> The Aircraft Spruce and Specialty catalog has the Model 1A wingtip
COM
> antenna. If installed to the instructions, this is almost as good as
the
belly
> mounted bent whip antenna.>
>This antenna is available directly from the manufacturer at a lower
price
>than AC$. Contact Bob Archer......
> Regards,
> Jim Ayers
> Less Drag Products, Inc.
> _www.lessdrag.com_ (http://www.lessdrag.com)
=========================
"Almost as good" does not compute.
Got legitimat/objective comparison specs?
As to Bob Archer stuff...
If you are associated in a business way, it should be duly noted so the
reader might understand where you are coming from.
Bob
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare |
--> RV-List message posted by: "David Carter" <dcarter@datarecall.net>
Scott Eilinski mentioned SMC products.
I "googled" SMC and found this link to their fittings and hoses:
http://www.smcusa.com/sections/products/fittings_tubings.asp
Scott, I haven't called SMC or searched their website for info - can you
give a brief description of how these fittings work? What is the "one
touch" terminology about?
David Carter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Bilinski" <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Pitot Static Check Nightmare
> --> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>
> In my opinion the best fittings are the push pull air fittings used in
> pneumatic automation equipment. Much smaller than the fittings mentioned
> here and work great. The good news for me is we have them here in stock
for
> our pneumatic equipment. They are the same fittings (SMC) used by Mountain
> High Oxygen systems. If they are trusted in a oxygen system then why not
> the panel.
>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Evan and Megan Johnson" <evmeg@snowcrest.net>
Hey Scott those look neat....I just looked at them on the mountain High OX
site. Where would the rest of us get them?
Thanks....Evan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Bilinski" <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Pitot Static Check Nightmare
> --> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
<bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>
> In my opinion the best fittings are the push pull air fittings used in
> pneumatic automation equipment. Much smaller than the fittings mentioned
> here and work great. The good news for me is we have them here in stock
for
> our pneumatic equipment. They are the same fittings (SMC) used by Mountain
> High Oxygen systems. If they are trusted in a oxygen system then why not
> the panel.
>
>
> At 09:45 AM 12/1/2004 -0600, you wrote:
> >--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
> >
> >Ross S wrote:
> > > --> RV-List message posted by: "Ross S" <rv7maker@hotmail.com>
> > >
> > > O.K. Newbies, Listen up. When you start plumbing your pitot and
static
> > > systems be careful with the hardware you choose. I used some of the
> > > nylo-seal fittings sold through spruce along with the o-ring style
> > fittings
> > > sold through Vans. Today I had an avionics shop come out to certify
my
> > > panel for Instrument Work and all hell broke loose. What should have
> > been a
> > > couple hour task turned into a major project. When we tried to test
the
> > > static system, it was tight with no leaks, but for some reason the
Dynon
> > > airspeed was cranking up along with the altitute, even though we
applied
> > > suction to both the pitot tube and the static ports. After about two
> > hours
> > > of head scratching and tearing apart my panel, we found that one of
the
> > > nylo-seal elbows I got from Spruce was plugged. It had a
manufacturing
> > > defect that left a thin layer of nylon in the middle of the elbow.
You
> > > could't see it but I tried to blow through it and turned blue in the
face.
> > >
> > > Moral of the Story: Buy good fittings ( I think the O-ring style are
> > > better) and blow through all of them prior to assembly.
> > >
> > > This would have saved me a couple hours of A&P ($65/hour) time as well
as
> > > about 6 hours of my time ($0.85/hour based on the planes market value)
> > and a
> > > bunch of chipped paint around screw heads on my once perferct panel.
> >
> >
> >Bummer!!
> >
> >Just a reminder to current builders that even though the special elbow
> >and bulkhead fittings look "professional", the easiest, least expensive,
> >and probably most reliable way of putting together the pitot lines is to
> >join the nylon tubing with a short length of rubber hose. The lines can
> >usually be routed through the wings and fuse without having to resort to
> >elbows. If the line needs to be disconnected, just cut the rubber splice
> >off and replace it with a new one.
> >
> >By the way, this same method is used on at least one certificated plane
> >that I know of for hooking up the fuel vent hoses.
> >
> >Sam Buchanan
> >http://thervjournal.com
> >
> >
>
>
> Scott Bilinski
> Eng dept 305
> Phone (858) 657-2536
> Pager (858) 502-5190
>
>
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Dube <bdube@al.noaa.gov>
Go to: http://www.mcmaster.com/ and click on "Instant Fittings".
The "Glass-Filled Nylon Department of Transportation (D.O.T.) Fittings"
would likely be the prudent choice. They have the greatest temperature
range and have passed some sort of standardized certification process.
Always a comforting attribute, even if it doesn't directly apply.
I have not yet used these style fittings on an airplane pitot static
system. (I plan to use them on my RV-7.) However, I have used them with
excellent results in all sorts of applications for many many years. I have
used them all seasons outdoors, under modest vacuum, for compressed air,
for CO2, for helium, for neon, for water, etc. I have never had one fail or
leak, even after repeated disconnection and reconnection of the tubing.
The swivel feature makes them especially easy to install in tight quarters.
You will fall in love with instant fittings once you have used them. You
will ask yourself, "Why did I bother to use any other type of low-pressure
tubing fitting?"
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-List COM Antenna |
--> RV-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <james@nextupventures.com>
Good info Jim. A couple of quick questions ...
{SNIP
> The RV-6A will have NO external antenna's with no compromise in
> performance
> using 2 COM, NAV, GPS and transponder.
Hmmmm.
1. What antennas are you using? I purchased Bob's Wingtip NAV and MKR BCN
antennas and during my chat with him concluded that the COM would be "not as
good as" the external COM antenna available (per Bob Archer himself)
2. Where are you placing them? I assume wingtip but figured I would ask
I took my antennas destined for the the RV6A I am building and put them in
the RV6 we have already built and are flying. The RV6A has TWO steps and a
nosegear (more drag), so your "NO external antenna's with no compromise in
performance" caught my eyes.
Thanks for any response,
James
{SNIP}
>
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
For .25 dia tubing (use their tubing!!) the fitting is about .5 ~.75 long
depending on type and .375 dia. There is a flange around the opening of the
fitting that appears to float. Push the tubing in place and your done, "one
touch?". Depress the flange and pull out the tubing, sometimes easier said
than done. There are distributors all over the US, find one near you and
get there fitting/tubing catalog. Prices are about 2~5 bucks per fitting
depending.
At 10:38 AM 12/1/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "David Carter" <dcarter@datarecall.net>
>
>Scott Eilinski mentioned SMC products.
>
>I "googled" SMC and found this link to their fittings and hoses:
>http://www.smcusa.com/sections/products/fittings_tubings.asp
>
>Scott, I haven't called SMC or searched their website for info - can you
>give a brief description of how these fittings work? What is the "one
>touch" terminology about?
>
>David Carter
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Scott Bilinski" <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Pitot Static Check Nightmare
>
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
><bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
> >
> > In my opinion the best fittings are the push pull air fittings used in
> > pneumatic automation equipment. Much smaller than the fittings mentioned
> > here and work great. The good news for me is we have them here in stock
>for
> > our pneumatic equipment. They are the same fittings (SMC) used by Mountain
> > High Oxygen systems. If they are trusted in a oxygen system then why not
> > the panel.
> >
>
>
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
Go to the SMC web site and find a local distributor.
http://www.smcusa.com/default.asp
At 09:04 AM 12/1/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Evan and Megan Johnson" <evmeg@snowcrest.net>
>
>Hey Scott those look neat....I just looked at them on the mountain High OX
>site. Where would the rest of us get them?
>Thanks....Evan
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Scott Bilinski" <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Pitot Static Check Nightmare
>
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
><bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
> >
> > In my opinion the best fittings are the push pull air fittings used in
> > pneumatic automation equipment. Much smaller than the fittings mentioned
> > here and work great. The good news for me is we have them here in stock
>for
> > our pneumatic equipment. They are the same fittings (SMC) used by Mountain
> > High Oxygen systems. If they are trusted in a oxygen system then why not
> > the panel.
> >
> >
> > At 09:45 AM 12/1/2004 -0600, you wrote:
> > >--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
> > >
> > >Ross S wrote:
> > > > --> RV-List message posted by: "Ross S" <rv7maker@hotmail.com>
> > > >
> > > > O.K. Newbies, Listen up. When you start plumbing your pitot and
>static
> > > > systems be careful with the hardware you choose. I used some of the
> > > > nylo-seal fittings sold through spruce along with the o-ring style
> > > fittings
> > > > sold through Vans. Today I had an avionics shop come out to certify
>my
> > > > panel for Instrument Work and all hell broke loose. What should have
> > > been a
> > > > couple hour task turned into a major project. When we tried to test
>the
> > > > static system, it was tight with no leaks, but for some reason the
>Dynon
> > > > airspeed was cranking up along with the altitute, even though we
>applied
> > > > suction to both the pitot tube and the static ports. After about two
> > > hours
> > > > of head scratching and tearing apart my panel, we found that one of
>the
> > > > nylo-seal elbows I got from Spruce was plugged. It had a
>manufacturing
> > > > defect that left a thin layer of nylon in the middle of the elbow.
>You
> > > > could't see it but I tried to blow through it and turned blue in the
>face.
> > > >
> > > > Moral of the Story: Buy good fittings ( I think the O-ring style are
> > > > better) and blow through all of them prior to assembly.
> > > >
> > > > This would have saved me a couple hours of A&P ($65/hour) time as well
>as
> > > > about 6 hours of my time ($0.85/hour based on the planes market value)
> > > and a
> > > > bunch of chipped paint around screw heads on my once perferct panel.
> > >
> > >
> > >Bummer!!
> > >
> > >Just a reminder to current builders that even though the special elbow
> > >and bulkhead fittings look "professional", the easiest, least expensive,
> > >and probably most reliable way of putting together the pitot lines is to
> > >join the nylon tubing with a short length of rubber hose. The lines can
> > >usually be routed through the wings and fuse without having to resort to
> > >elbows. If the line needs to be disconnected, just cut the rubber splice
> > >off and replace it with a new one.
> > >
> > >By the way, this same method is used on at least one certificated plane
> > >that I know of for hooking up the fuel vent hoses.
> > >
> > >Sam Buchanan
> > >http://thervjournal.com
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > 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 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: MnwPeeps@aol.com
Looking for recommendations for a good prop repair shop in the New England
area - fairly close to the Boston area would be a plus, but not important.
Thanks.
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Pitot Static Check Nightmare |
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Dube <bdube@al.noaa.gov>
At 09:08 AM 12/1/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>
>For .25 dia tubing (use their tubing!!) the fitting is about .5 ~.75 long
>depending on type and .375 dia. There is a flange around the opening of the
>fitting that appears to float. Push the tubing in place and your done, "one
>touch?". Depress the flange and pull out the tubing, sometimes easier said
>than done. There are distributors all over the US, find one near you and
>get there fitting/tubing catalog. Prices are about 2~5 bucks per fitting
>depending.
These are "instant fittings".
Here is a link to the exact page in the McMaster Catalog:
http://www.mcmaster.com/nav/enter.asp?pagenum=139
They have a HUGE selection of instant fittings and tubing to go
with them. The nylon tubing comes in all different colors. This is a big
help when you are plumbing multiple systems (like in an airplane.)
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: Pitot Static Check Nightmare |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Scott Jackson" <jayeandscott@telus.net>
I used these fittings to repair pinhole leaks in my plastic brake lines, and
they worked great. Just cut the line, slip each end into the union all the
way, crack the coupling nut on the left side master cylinder until the
bubble is gone, and we're serviceable again.
And they're so cheap, I bought extras for the fly-away kit.
Scott in Vancouver
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Dube" <bdube@al.noaa.gov>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Pitot Static Check Nightmare
> --> RV-List message posted by: Bill Dube <bdube@al.noaa.gov>
>
> At 09:08 AM 12/1/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>>--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
>><bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>>
>>For .25 dia tubing (use their tubing!!) the fitting is about .5 ~.75 long
>>depending on type and .375 dia. There is a flange around the opening of
>>the
>>fitting that appears to float. Push the tubing in place and your done,
>>"one
>>touch?". Depress the flange and pull out the tubing, sometimes easier said
>>than done. There are distributors all over the US, find one near you and
>>get there fitting/tubing catalog. Prices are about 2~5 bucks per fitting
>>depending.
>
> These are "instant fittings".
>
> Here is a link to the exact page in the McMaster Catalog:
>
> http://www.mcmaster.com/nav/enter.asp?pagenum=139
>
> They have a HUGE selection of instant fittings and tubing to go
> with them. The nylon tubing comes in all different colors. This is a big
> help when you are plumbing multiple systems (like in an airplane.)
>
>
>
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: Fuel selector handle loose |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Scott Jackson" <jayeandscott@telus.net>
Is the handle on properly?
The part of the handle that mates with the selector shaft is not completely
square.
Just like the ring gear being forced onto the crankshaft the wrong way,
tightening the handle onto the selector shaft the wrong way will create
enough of a grip to get it to turn.
Scott in VAncouver
----- Original Message -----
From: <Vanremog@aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Fuel selector handle loose
> --> RV-List message posted by: Vanremog@aol.com
>
>
> In a message dated 11/30/2004 3:21:25 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
> ghinman@allstream.net writes:
>
> I have the Van's standard fuel selector.
> It is new but the handle is not tight.
> It moves a small amount when switching
> tanks.I feel it might become more loose and
> eventually I will be unable to switch tanks.
> Probably at the worst time!!
> Have others had this problem?
>
>
> =======================================
>
> George-
>
> What part is loose? As long as the handle tightly fits the shaft, a
> small
> amount of slop in the mechanism is not a problem IMO. Mine has remained
> absolutely unchanged in the 730 hrs, and I suspect that yours will be no
> different.
>
>
> GV (RV-6A N1GV, Flying 725hrs)
>
>
>
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 |
|
0.50 MIME_BOUND_NEXTPART Spam tool pattern in MIME boundary
0.01 RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE Received: by and from look like IP addresses
--> RV-List message posted by: luckymacy@comcast.net (lucky)
To balance out my Whirl Wind info I got earlier, I called Hartzell today and talked
to a tech rep (John) who said that someone from his group was out flying
this week testing a new prop for the 200hp angle valve engine and told me their
goal was to have something available for Van's to market for Sun n Fun. They
were specifically testing with both a counterweighted and non-counterweighted
version of the engine. They said to call back at the end of January and they
should be able to give some specific results.
Lucky
-------------- Original message --------------
>
>
> Lucky -
>
> Actually, as of yesterday, they have upped the TBO time on the 200RV
> to 500h and expect that it will go to 1000h. I have about 40h on mine
> and am extremely happy with it.
>
> Jon Weiswasser
> N898JW
>
> --- In Mid-AtlRVwing@yahoogroups.com, luckymacy@c... wrote:
> > Howdy,
> > In case anyone was curious about the care and feeding of the Whirl
> Wind prop "designed" for RVs, I received the following info from them
> on that very subject.
> >
> > I am shocked. Full teardown every 250 hours?
> >
> > hmmm....Checkoway would have his in the shop and be without a plane
> at least twice a year! And $350 to boot? I didn't even ask if there
> were East Coast overhaul shops.
> >
> > Are folks flying this prop really going through this? I'd like to
> hear.
> >
> > Wow, makes the heavy, noisy but cheaper Hartzell seem like a steal
> at the moment. What's the Hartzell designed blade life on a Magneto
> fired Lycoming? 40,000 hours? 20,000? TBO 1000 hours?
> >
> > Lucky
> >
> > -------------- Original message --------------
> >
> > > Hello Lucky,
> > >
> > > Thank you for your email. For your RV-8, the 200RV would be an
> ideal propeller
> > > choice. You can read about the performance on www.rv-8.com
> > >
> > > The current maintenance requirement is a full teardown and blade
> inspection
> > > every 250 hours. The cost of this teardown is $350 for the 200RV.
> > >
> > > If you would like to place an order, all that is required is a
> deposit of $1,000
> > > with the balance due prior to shipment of the propeller. I
> currently have an
> > > opening for delivery in May 2005.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > -Patti
> > > Whirl Wind Propellers
> > > 619-562-3725
>
>
>
>
>
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/SyTolB/TM
>
>
>
> <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mid-AtlRVwing/
>
> <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Mid-AtlRVwing-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
To balance out my Whirl Wind info I got earlier, I called Hartzell todayand talked
to a tech rep (John) who said that someone from his group was out flying this
week testing a new prop for the 200hp angle valve engine and told me their
goal was to have something available for Van's to market for Sun n Fun. They
were specifically testing with both a counterweighted and non-counterweighted
version of the engine. They said to call back at the end of January and they should
be able to give some specific results.
Lucky
-------------- Original message --------------
Lucky -
Actually, as of yesterday, they have upped the TBO time on the 200RV
to 500h and expect that it will go to 1000h. I have about 40h on mine
and am extremely happy with it.
Jon Weiswasser
N898JW
--- In Mid-AtlRVwing@yahoogroups.com, luckymacy@c... wrote:
Howdy,
In case anyone was curious about the care and feeding of the Whirl
Wind prop "designed" for RVs, I received the following info from them
on that very subject.
I am shocked. Full teardown every 250 hours?
hmmm....Checkoway would have his in the shop and be without a plane
at least twice a year! And $350 to boot? I didn't even ask if there
were East Coast
overhaul shops.
Are folks flying this prop really going through this? I'd like to
hear.
Wow, makes the heavy, noisy but cheaper Hartzell seem like a steal
at the moment. What's the Hartzell designed blade life on a Magneto
fired Lycoming? 40,000 hours? 20,000? TBO 1000 hours?
Lucky
-------------- Original message --------------
Hello Lucky,
Thank you for your email. For your RV-8, the 200RV would be an
ideal propeller
choice. You can read about the performance on www.rv-8.com
The current maintenance requirement is a full teardown and blade
inspection
every 250 hours. The cost of this teardown is $350 for the 200RV.
If you would like to pl
ace an order, all that is required is a
deposit of $1,000
with the balance due prior to shipment of the propeller. I
currently have an
opening for delivery in May 2005.
Sincerely,
-Patti
Whirl Wind Propellers
619-562-3725
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/SyTolB/TM
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mid-AtlRVwing/
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Mid-AtlRVwing-unsubscr
ibe@yahoogroups.com
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
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: Fuel selector handle loose |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>
An early parts problem solved:
Though I have not held one in my hand, I have no doubt that the Andair fuel
selector valve referred to is of good quality with good features. Of course
the quality and features comes with a commemorate added cost and some added
instalation effort.
Back in my early days on this list I heard that there was a problem with the
fuel valves that Van's was supplying. These units where all metal and in use
would slowly tighten up and eventually even jam. If these units taken apart
early enough and lubed with fuel lube or some other fuel proof lubricant
they could be reused. I assume that this step was then added to the annual
inspection list.
Van's superseded the all metal valve with one that outwardly looked the same
but utilized an internal plastic ball valve that so far as I know has not
had any problems associated to it.
My kit supplied early 1997 came with the plastic ball type fuel selector
valve.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Zilik" <zilik@excelgeo.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Fuel selector handle loose
> --> RV-List message posted by: Gary Zilik <zilik@excelgeo.com>
>
> I assume you have tried tightening the screw in the top. :) Are you sure
> you have the handle pressed all the way down on the shaft? If you still
> can't get it tight order another from vans, or maybe on of the listers
> that has installed the Andair unit will give you there old valve.
>
> I must second Jerry's comment. I see nothing wrong with the kit supplied
> selector valve. I have installed (in other peoples airplanes) two Andair
> valves along with an Andair gascolator. While they are nice units they
> require more work to install.
>
> Gary
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: | More help needed to re-open Meigs |
--> RV-List message posted by: Chuck Jensen <cjensen@dts9000.com>
Not only are parks and airports not incompatible, but are viable companions.
With allowance for non-secured areas for picnicking, boating, Frisbee
throwing and dog walking, the airport serves as additional entertainment.
How many airports have parking/viewing areas at the end of runways? Many.
Why--because many people like to watch planes. Those that don't have the
option of going to a different park. Those that do, have no option of going
to any other park because Chicago is deficit in parks that are associated
with aviation! Lets give all the citizens an option, not just those that
don't want to be near aviation. We need Meigs back for the recreation and
entertainment value in the Chicago parks system!
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Richard Tasker
Subject: Re: RV-List: More help needed to re-open Meigs
--> RV-List message posted by: Richard Tasker <retasker@optonline.net>
Just a detail but Aeroflex-Andover (12N) is in NJ not IN.
Dick Tasker (from NJ)
Jeff Dowling wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
>
>Hey guys, the fight isn't over yet. Friends of Meigs is looking for
examples of airports and parks that co-exist. Please read the following if
you know of any.
>
>
>Officials of the Chicago Park District have been quoted in the paper as
saying:
>"There are no parks where airstrips are a compatible use."
>
>Baloney!
>
>This is flat out untrue. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of airports
in the U.S. alone where parks and airports co-exist side by side.
>
>In the Chicago area alone, Palwaukee Airport is adjacent to the Cook County
Forest Preserve, and DuPage Airport is adjacent to a golf course. Many
small airports exist right in state and national parks. Many more have
parks adjacent with observation areas to enjoy the excitement of planes
taking off and landing.
>
>Thanks to you, we've already received over 80 e-mails citing examples of
airports large and small co-existing with:
>
> a.. Parks
> b.. Nature trails
> c.. Golf courses
> d.. Forest preserves
> e.. Camping facilities
> f.. Museums
> g.. Historical landmarks
>Some airports have received multiple "nominations," including First Flight
Airport (FFA) at Kill Devil Hills, College Park, MD (CGS), Mackinac Island
(MCD), Aeroflex-Andover, IN (12N), and Palo Alto, CA (PAO).
>
>Kentucky fares extremely well, with multiple nominations for their series
of airstrips in their state parks, including the number one nominee: Rough
River Dam State Park (2I3). According to Aaron Carr, one of its many
nominators:
>
>"Rough River is a State Park with golf, hiking, camping, beach, lodge,
restaurant, and a runway. This is a great example of what you are looking
for. This is state owned and operated with a lot of traffic."
>
>Thank you everyone who has written so far. And to those who have further
examples:
>
>Help us prove them wrong!
>
>Send your examples of parks and planes co-existing. If you have electronic
pictures or links to sites highlighting the parks/planes connection, send
them too! Send them to us at:
>
>info@friendsofmeigs.org
>
>
>Thanks for the help
>
>Shemp
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Peter Laurence <dr.laurence@mbdi.org>
Received my wing from Van's via Roadway Trucking and got a bill for
$467.90!
Has anyone in the south Florida area recently taken delivery of an RV9 or 7
wing? If so, does the amount I just paid commensurate with yours?
OUCH!
Peter
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: More help needed to re-open Meigs |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson@consolidated.net>
Chuck Jensen wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Chuck Jensen <cjensen@dts9000.com>
>
>Not only are parks and airports not incompatible, but are viable companions.
>With allowance for non-secured areas for picnicking, boating, Frisbee
>throwing and dog walking, the airport serves as additional entertainment.
>How many airports have parking/viewing areas at the end of runways? Many.
>Why--because many people like to watch planes. Those that don't have the
>option of going to a different park. Those that do, have no option of going
>to any other park because Chicago is deficit in parks that are associated
>with aviation! Lets give all the citizens an option, not just those that
>don't want to be near aviation. We need Meigs back for the recreation and
>entertainment value in the Chicago parks system!
>
>Chuck
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Richard Tasker
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: More help needed to re-open Meigs
>
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: Richard Tasker <retasker@optonline.net>
>
>Just a detail but Aeroflex-Andover (12N) is in NJ not IN.
>
>Dick Tasker (from NJ)
>
>Jeff Dowling wrote:
>
>
>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
>>
>>Hey guys, the fight isn't over yet. Friends of Meigs is looking for
>>
>>
>examples of airports and parks that co-exist. Please read the following if
>you know of any.
>
>
>>Officials of the Chicago Park District have been quoted in the paper as
>>
>>
>saying:
>
>
>>"There are no parks where airstrips are a compatible use."
>>
>>Baloney!
>>
>>This is flat out untrue. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of airports
>>
>>
>in the U.S. alone where parks and airports co-exist side by side.
>
>
>>In the Chicago area alone, Palwaukee Airport is adjacent to the Cook County
>>
>>
>Forest Preserve, and DuPage Airport is adjacent to a golf course. Many
>small airports exist right in state and national parks. Many more have
>parks adjacent with observation areas to enjoy the excitement of planes
>taking off and landing.
>
>
>>Thanks to you, we've already received over 80 e-mails citing examples of
>>
>>
>airports large and small co-existing with:
>
>
>> a.. Parks
>> b.. Nature trails
>> c.. Golf courses
>> d.. Forest preserves
>> e.. Camping facilities
>> f.. Museums
>> g.. Historical landmarks
>>Some airports have received multiple "nominations," including First Flight
>>
>>
>Airport (FFA) at Kill Devil Hills, College Park, MD (CGS), Mackinac Island
>(MCD), Aeroflex-Andover, IN (12N), and Palo Alto, CA (PAO).
>
>
>>Kentucky fares extremely well, with multiple nominations for their series
>>
>>
>of airstrips in their state parks, including the number one nominee: Rough
>River Dam State Park (2I3). According to Aaron Carr, one of its many
>nominators:
>
>
>>"Rough River is a State Park with golf, hiking, camping, beach, lodge,
>>
>>
>restaurant, and a runway. This is a great example of what you are looking
>for. This is state owned and operated with a lot of traffic."
>
>
>>Thank you everyone who has written so far. And to those who have further
>>
>>
>examples:
>
>
>>Help us prove them wrong!
>>
>>Send your examples of parks and planes co-existing. If you have electronic
>>
>>
>pictures or links to sites highlighting the parks/planes connection, send
>them too! Send them to us at:
>
>
>>info@friendsofmeigs.org
>>
>>
>>Thanks for the help
>>
>>Shemp
>>
>>
It ain't a Park... "Danglin Dick" Daley wants to put a gambling Casino
boat up there and that old airport is sitting in the parking
lot................
Phil
Do not archive
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-List COM Antenna |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
I can't resisst piping in here....
Jim has been around a LOOONG time regarding these RV's and making them go fast.
His word is worth quite a bit more than some people's.
That being said, my personal experience is that of mixed results. I have both
the wingtip mounted antennas, Com/Nav. I like the Nav and quit using the Comm.
My personal experience is that I like the belly mounted whip better, and I'm
willing to accept the 1 mph deduction for the extremely long range, crystal
clear comm. That being said, the wingpit comm worked fine, just not as well as
the belly mounted whip that I'm using.
Alos, the Wingtip Nav is great. I get accurate VOR/GS/ILS from a long way out.
Just my 2 cents. I also like to hide as many antennas as possible. No reason
to have an external GPS antenna, and many people are successfully mounting the
txpdr under the cowl in between the stack with good results also. My planes
(present & future) will have the belly mounted whip, but everything else will
be hidden.
Cheers,
Stein Bruch
RV6's, Minneapolis
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: LeastDrag93066@aol.com
>--> RV-List message posted by: LeastDrag93066@aol.com
>
>
>Hi Bob1 and all,
>
>Please recall that the original email was regarding a fuselage mounted COM
>antenna for a fiberglass fuselage that was unsuitable for a wingtip
>installation. And that the COM antenna was one of Bob Archer's Sportcraft antenna.
>
>I have NEVER seen any "legitimat/objective comparison specs" regarding
>antenna's on this list. Why should I be held to a higher standard? (If you
want
>that kind of information, I have always suggested a conversation with Bob
>Archer. He knows.)
>
>I quit selling Bob Archer's antenna's on the RV list years ago. Check the
>archives.
>
>Do you object to my giving out Bob Archer's contact information so people on
>the RV list can buy direct, and save money?
>
>I'm one of the original skeptics.
>I have one RV flying, and two more in process.
>What I learned from the first is being applied to the rest.
>The first RV has one external transponder antenna.
>The RV-6A will have NO external antenna's with no compromise in performance
>using 2 COM, NAV, GPS and transponder.
>My HR2 will be the same with 2 COM, 2 GPS, NAV and Transponder.
>
>I've know Bob Archer for over 20 years. Of the antenna experts, Bob is the
>only one I know that consistently has reliable information.
>
>I do have a pet peeve. It offends me to see the a multitude of antenna's on
>the outside of RV's. I've seen as many as 9 external antenna's on the
>outside of an RV-6.
>
>With Regards, but slightly confused about some peoples reaction on the RV
>list to my postings,
>Jim Ayers
>Less Drag Products, Inc.
>"Drag is like magic. It's what you don't see that's important."
>
>In a message dated 12/01/2004 12:01:25 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>rv-list-digest@matronics.com writes:
>
>Time: 12:24:09 PM PST US
>From: "Bob 1" <rv3a.1@comcast.net>
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: RV-List Digest: 35 Msgs - 11/29/04
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob 1" <rv3a.1@comcast.net>
>
>
>>
>> The Aircraft Spruce and Specialty catalog has the Model 1A wingtip COM
>> antenna. If installed to the instructions, this is almost as good as the
>belly
>> mounted bent whip antenna.>
>
>>This antenna is available directly from the manufacturer at a lower price
>>than AC$. Contact Bob Archer......
>
>> Regards,
>> Jim Ayers
>> Less Drag Products, Inc.
>> _www.lessdrag.com_ (http://www.lessdrag.com)
>=========================
>
>"Almost as good" does not compute.
>Got legitimat/objective comparison specs?
>
>As to Bob Archer stuff...
>If you are associated in a business way, it should be duly noted so the
>reader might understand where you are coming from.
>
>
>Bob
>
>
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: | More help needed to re-open Meigs |
--> RV-List message posted by: "J. R. Dial" <jrdial@hal-pc.org>
Lake Whitney State Park, TX (F50)
This is in the P-49 prohibited area when President Bush is at
his ranch but it is a nice place to go most of the time.
I have landed at Meigs on the way to Oshkosh in years past and
would love to see it reopened.
Dick Dial
N89DD RV6
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Dowling
Subject: RV-List: More help needed to re-open Meigs
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling"
<shempdowling@earthlink.net>
Hey guys, the fight isn't over yet. Friends of Meigs is looking for
examples of airports and parks that co-exist. Please read the following
if you know of any.
Officials of the Chicago Park District have been quoted in the paper as
saying:
"There are no parks where airstrips are a compatible use."
Baloney!
This is flat out untrue. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of
airports in the U.S. alone where parks and airports co-exist side by
side.
In the Chicago area alone, Palwaukee Airport is adjacent to the Cook
County Forest Preserve, and DuPage Airport is adjacent to a golf course.
Many small airports exist right in state and national parks. Many more
have parks adjacent with observation areas to enjoy the excitement of
planes taking off and landing.
Thanks to you, we've already received over 80 e-mails citing examples of
airports large and small co-existing with:
a.. Parks
b.. Nature trails
c.. Golf courses
d.. Forest preserves
e.. Camping facilities
f.. Museums
g.. Historical landmarks
Some airports have received multiple "nominations," including First
Flight Airport (FFA) at Kill Devil Hills, College Park, MD (CGS),
Mackinac Island (MCD), Aeroflex-Andover, IN (12N), and Palo Alto, CA
(PAO).
Kentucky fares extremely well, with multiple nominations for their
series of airstrips in their state parks, including the number one
nominee: Rough River Dam State Park (2I3). According to Aaron Carr, one
of its many nominators:
"Rough River is a State Park with golf, hiking, camping, beach, lodge,
restaurant, and a runway. This is a great example of what you are
looking for. This is state owned and operated with a lot of traffic."
Thank you everyone who has written so far. And to those who have
further examples:
Help us prove them wrong!
Send your examples of parks and planes co-existing. If you have
electronic pictures or links to sites highlighting the parks/planes
connection, send them too! Send them to us at:
info@friendsofmeigs.org
Thanks for the help
Shemp
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-List COM Antenna |
--> RV-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
I built an electrical "clone" of the Archer wingtip comm antenna into my RV wingtip
and removed the belly bent-whip comm antenna. The new antenna has beautiful
VSWR characteristics, is lightweight and zero-drag, but is highly directional,
even for stations on the outboard side of the wingtip (not shielded by the
fuselage and wing). This is leading me to install a second wingtip antenna
on the other side, which will have its "opening" facing the other way, allowing
me to overcome the shielding effects of the plane itself and the directional
effects of the antenna planform (front-to-back directionality). I am unsure
at this point if I will parallel the two feedlines together and use both antennas
at once (it's doable with inline coax impedance transformers and a tee-fitting,
but would give rise to an interesting stellate radiation pattern) or just
use a BNC switch or relay to operate one antenna at a time, whichever one is
hearing the other guy the best. Still scanning eBay for appropriate switching
devices...
My word to the wise at this point: expect a compromise in radio performance if
you opt for this antenna design, unless you are willing to install a pair of them,
and even then your troubles may not be over.
-Bill Boyd RV-6A
>>>Hmmmm.
1. What antennas are you using? I purchased Bob's Wingtip NAV and MKR BCN
antennas and during my chat with him concluded that the COM would be "not as
good as" the external COM antenna available (per Bob Archer himself)
2. Where are you placing them? I assume wingtip but figured I would ask<<<
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: CBRxxDRV@aol.com
In a message dated 12/1/04 3:47:10 PM Eastern Standard Time,
dr.laurence@mbdi.org writes:
> Received my wing from Van's via Roadway Trucking and got a bill for
> $467.90!
>
> Has anyone in the south Florida area recently taken delivery of an RV9 or 7
> wing? If so, does the amount I just paid commensurate with yours?
>
>
> OUCH!
>
There is a fuel "ser charge" (read ...we get to charge more)
I just got my quick build.......$2122.04 How's that for an OUCH!
Should have ordered it 2 years ago when the freight was $1500 :)
But it was in perfect condition. I had a friend that saved money
on the freight and paid in grief from another freight company.
Gotta pay to play........It sure is a long drive to Vans :
)
do not archive.
RV-4
RV-8 QB
Sal Capra
Lakeland, FL.
My Home Page
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: More help needed to re-open Meigs |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr@petroblend.com>
Grand Canyon Airport is in a National park isn't it?
Doug Rozendaal
----- Original Message -----
From: "J. R. Dial" <jrdial@hal-pc.org>
Subject: FW: RV-List: More help needed to re-open Meigs
> --> RV-List message posted by: "J. R. Dial" <jrdial@hal-pc.org>
>
>
> Lake Whitney State Park, TX (F50)
> This is in the P-49 prohibited area when President Bush is at
> his ranch but it is a nice place to go most of the time.
> I have landed at Meigs on the way to Oshkosh in years past and
> would love to see it reopened.
> Dick Dial
> N89DD RV6
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Dowling
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: More help needed to re-open Meigs
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling"
> <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
>
> Hey guys, the fight isn't over yet. Friends of Meigs is looking for
> examples of airports and parks that co-exist. Please read the following
> if you know of any.
>
>
> Officials of the Chicago Park District have been quoted in the paper as
> saying:
> "There are no parks where airstrips are a compatible use."
>
> Baloney!
>
> This is flat out untrue. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of
> airports in the U.S. alone where parks and airports co-exist side by
> side.
>
> In the Chicago area alone, Palwaukee Airport is adjacent to the Cook
> County Forest Preserve, and DuPage Airport is adjacent to a golf course.
> Many small airports exist right in state and national parks. Many more
> have parks adjacent with observation areas to enjoy the excitement of
> planes taking off and landing.
>
> Thanks to you, we've already received over 80 e-mails citing examples of
> airports large and small co-existing with:
>
> a.. Parks
> b.. Nature trails
> c.. Golf courses
> d.. Forest preserves
> e.. Camping facilities
> f.. Museums
> g.. Historical landmarks
> Some airports have received multiple "nominations," including First
> Flight Airport (FFA) at Kill Devil Hills, College Park, MD (CGS),
> Mackinac Island (MCD), Aeroflex-Andover, IN (12N), and Palo Alto, CA
> (PAO).
>
> Kentucky fares extremely well, with multiple nominations for their
> series of airstrips in their state parks, including the number one
> nominee: Rough River Dam State Park (2I3). According to Aaron Carr, one
> of its many nominators:
>
> "Rough River is a State Park with golf, hiking, camping, beach, lodge,
> restaurant, and a runway. This is a great example of what you are
> looking for. This is state owned and operated with a lot of traffic."
>
> Thank you everyone who has written so far. And to those who have
> further examples:
>
> Help us prove them wrong!
>
> Send your examples of parks and planes co-existing. If you have
> electronic pictures or links to sites highlighting the parks/planes
> connection, send them too! Send them to us at:
>
> info@friendsofmeigs.org
>
>
> Thanks for the help
>
> Shemp
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
b=eHAVAQKCmJrPLTfDzgh83odDhS0MGIE7uBlwFfm78bL97GQxaskOIeas//ApSlCG8hUV68vGwx42LO7njjoRNal5yYPh2zGSkiINY9Sx82rEv8H9ZhZ5WlvXA4ewlX6sGL7f9FQWNRXtQrdmz1QDKaeByCyFrcmvbIqgUH2X3hc=
;
| Subject: | More help needed to re-open Meigs |
--> RV-List message posted by: "R. Craig Chipley" <mechtech81@yahoo.com>
Do not forget a big park with a big airport, OSH. Only
a few hundred thousand people but that probably won't
count in their feeble minds.
--- Chuck Jensen <cjensen@dts9000.com> wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Chuck Jensen
> <cjensen@dts9000.com>
>
> Not only are parks and airports not incompatible,
> but are viable companions.
> With allowance for non-secured areas for picnicking,
> boating, Frisbee
> throwing and dog walking, the airport serves as
> additional entertainment.
> How many airports have parking/viewing areas at the
> end of runways? Many.
> Why--because many people like to watch planes.
> Those that don't have the
> option of going to a different park. Those that do,
> have no option of going
> to any other park because Chicago is deficit in
> parks that are associated
> with aviation! Lets give all the citizens an
> option, not just those that
> don't want to be near aviation. We need Meigs back
> for the recreation and
> entertainment value in the Chicago parks system!
>
> Chuck
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf
> Of Richard Tasker
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: More help needed to re-open
> Meigs
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Richard Tasker
> <retasker@optonline.net>
>
> Just a detail but Aeroflex-Andover (12N) is in NJ
> not IN.
>
> Dick Tasker (from NJ)
>
> Jeff Dowling wrote:
>
> >--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling"
> <shempdowling@earthlink.net>
> >
> >Hey guys, the fight isn't over yet. Friends of
> Meigs is looking for
> examples of airports and parks that co-exist.
> Please read the following if
> you know of any.
> >
> >
> >Officials of the Chicago Park District have been
> quoted in the paper as
> saying:
> >"There are no parks where airstrips are a
> compatible use."
> >
> >Baloney!
> >
> >This is flat out untrue. There are hundreds, if
> not thousands, of airports
> in the U.S. alone where parks and airports co-exist
> side by side.
> >
> >In the Chicago area alone, Palwaukee Airport is
> adjacent to the Cook County
> Forest Preserve, and DuPage Airport is adjacent to a
> golf course. Many
> small airports exist right in state and national
> parks. Many more have
> parks adjacent with observation areas to enjoy the
> excitement of planes
> taking off and landing.
> >
> >Thanks to you, we've already received over 80
> e-mails citing examples of
> airports large and small co-existing with:
> >
> > a.. Parks
> > b.. Nature trails
> > c.. Golf courses
> > d.. Forest preserves
> > e.. Camping facilities
> > f.. Museums
> > g.. Historical landmarks
> >Some airports have received multiple "nominations,"
> including First Flight
> Airport (FFA) at Kill Devil Hills, College Park, MD
> (CGS), Mackinac Island
> (MCD), Aeroflex-Andover, IN (12N), and Palo Alto, CA
> (PAO).
> >
> >Kentucky fares extremely well, with multiple
> nominations for their series
> of airstrips in their state parks, including the
> number one nominee: Rough
> River Dam State Park (2I3). According to Aaron
> Carr, one of its many
> nominators:
> >
> >"Rough River is a State Park with golf, hiking,
> camping, beach, lodge,
> restaurant, and a runway. This is a great example of
> what you are looking
> for. This is state owned and operated with a lot of
> traffic."
> >
> >Thank you everyone who has written so far. And to
> those who have further
> examples:
> >
> >Help us prove them wrong!
> >
> >Send your examples of parks and planes co-existing.
> If you have electronic
> pictures or links to sites highlighting the
> parks/planes connection, send
> them too! Send them to us at:
> >
> >info@friendsofmeigs.org
> >
> >
> >Thanks for the help
> >
> >Shemp
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Click on the
> this
> by the
> Admin.
> _->
> Contributions
> any other
> Forums.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Chenoweth" <chenoweth@gwi.net>
I can't help you since I'm a brand new customer but I do think their
shipping technique is a bit odd. Other outfits I've dealt with have made
"deals" with a specific shipper and just add the cost of shipping to one's
bill. Works well - the recipient gets a better rate and doesn't have to
come up with money to satisfy a trucker. I have no idea why Van does it the
way he does and my question to them didn't get much of an answer. "That's
the way we do it."
Bill
Albion, Maine
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Laurence" <dr.laurence@mbdi.org>
Subject: RV-List: Freight
> --> RV-List message posted by: Peter Laurence <dr.laurence@mbdi.org>
>
> Received my wing from Van's via Roadway Trucking and got a bill for
> $467.90!
>
> Has anyone in the south Florida area recently taken delivery of an RV9 or
7
> wing? If so, does the amount I just paid commensurate with yours?
>
>
> OUCH!
>
>
> Peter
>
>
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: | Rv-List Power Required |
--> RV-List message posted by: smoothweasel@juno.com
Hey is there anyone on here that can give me an estimated HP that would
be required to make a Harmon Rocket go 220knots TAS at say 22000ft. I
have been doing some expensive dreaming. I wanna go faster and higher
but I don't want the complications of a Turbo system. I have some ideas
bur I don't know how much power I will need at this ALT.
Weasel RV-4
Brooksville Ms
Juno Gift Certificates
Give the gift of Internet access this holiday season.
http://www.juno.com/give
Message 37
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Hopperdhh@aol.com
Peter,
The finish kit, marked "glass -- fragile" is gonna kill ya. As I remember,
it was twice what the wing cost me.
Dan Hopper
RV-7A
N766DH (Flying since July)
In a message dated 12/1/04 3:47:10 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
dr.laurence@mbdi.org writes:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Peter Laurence <dr.laurence@mbdi.org>
>
> Received my wing from Van's via Roadway Trucking and got a bill for
> $467.90!
>
> Has anyone in the south Florida area recently taken delivery of an RV9 or 7
> wing? If so, does the amount I just paid commensurate with yours?
>
>
> OUCH!
>
>
> Peter
>
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "David Carter" <dcarter@datarecall.net>
I've worked with Barbara at Van's twice to arrange my own shipping company
and rate. There is no problem doing that - you just need to find a shipping
company that is satisfactory to you and gives you a better rate than the one
Van's has selected - Barbara has no hesitation using your chosen company.
I've used two different companies and everything worked out fine.
David Carter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chenoweth" <chenoweth@gwi.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Freight
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Chenoweth" <chenoweth@gwi.net>
>
> I can't help you since I'm a brand new customer but I do think their
> shipping technique is a bit odd. Other outfits I've dealt with have made
> "deals" with a specific shipper and just add the cost of shipping to one's
> bill. Works well - the recipient gets a better rate and doesn't have to
> come up with money to satisfy a trucker. I have no idea why Van does it
the
> way he does and my question to them didn't get much of an answer. "That's
> the way we do it."
> Bill
> Albion, Maine
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter Laurence" <dr.laurence@mbdi.org>
> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RV-List: Freight
>
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Peter Laurence <dr.laurence@mbdi.org>
> >
> > Received my wing from Van's via Roadway Trucking and got a bill for
> > $467.90!
> >
> > Has anyone in the south Florida area recently taken delivery of an RV9
or
> 7
> > wing? If so, does the amount I just paid commensurate with yours?
> >
> >
> > OUCH!
> >
> >
> > Peter
> >
> >
>
>
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: | Re: RV-List COM Antenna |
--> RV-List message posted by: Hopperdhh@aol.com
In a message dated 12/1/04 5:06:21 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
SportAV8R@aol.com writes:
> I am unsure at this point if I will parallel the two feedlines together and
> use both antennas at once (it's doable with inline coax impedance
> transformers and a tee-fitting, but would give rise to an interesting stellate
> radiation pattern) or just use a BNC switch or relay to operate one antenna at
a
> time, whichever one is hearing the other guy the best. Still scanning eBa!
> y for appropriate switching devices...
Bill,
I think you would do just fine if you use a small toggle switch to switch the
antennas. Just keep the leads as short as possible -- like maybe 1/4 to 1/2
inch. Build it into a small mini-box with 3 BNC connectors. It'll work just
fine.
Dan Hopper K9WEK (Ham radio operator since 1960 at age 16 -- you do the
math!)
RV-7A
N766DH (Flying great since July)
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: Rv-List Power Required |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@earthlink.net>
smoothweasel@juno.com wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: smoothweasel@juno.com
>
>
>Hey is there anyone on here that can give me an estimated HP that would
>be required to make a Harmon Rocket go 220knots TAS at say 22000ft. I
>have been doing some expensive dreaming. I wanna go faster and higher
>but I don't want the complications of a Turbo system. I have some ideas
>bur I don't know how much power I will need at this ALT.
>
>Weasel RV-4
>Brooksville Ms
>
>
>
Check the Rocket list for John Harmons email address and ask him, I am
sure he could answer your questions.
Jerry
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: | Re: Rv-List Power Required |
--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
>--> RV-List message posted by: smoothweasel@juno.com
>
>
>Hey is there anyone on here that can give me an estimated HP that would
>be required to make a Harmon Rocket go 220knots TAS at say 22000ft. I
>have been doing some expensive dreaming. I wanna go faster and higher
>but I don't want the complications of a Turbo system. I have some ideas
>bur I don't know how much power I will need at this ALT.
>
>Weasel RV-4
>Brooksville Ms
>
The CAS would be about 157 kt at this condition. The drag at a given
CAS is relatively independent of altitude, as long as the Mach number
is low enough so that Mach effects aren't coming into play. The
power required is proportional to the drag times the TAS. So, the
power required to go 220 kt TAS at 22,000 ft would be about 220/157 =
1.4 times as much as the power required to go 157 kt TAS at sea level.
Assuming a Rocket has similar drag to the RV-8, I estimate it would
take about 110 hp to go 157 kt TAS at sea level (based on Van's perf
specs for top speed, with speed varying as the cube root of power),
and about 154 hp to go 220 kt TAS at 22,000 ft. That doesn't sound
like a lot of power, until you realize that the air density is only
50% of what it is at sea level. This calculation also assumes that
the prop efficiency at 22,000 ft is the same as a Hartzell at sea
level.
Good luck.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: linn walters <lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
David Carter wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "David Carter" <dcarter@datarecall.net>
>
>I've worked with Barbara at Van's twice to arrange my own shipping company
>and rate. There is no problem doing that - you just need to find a shipping
>company that is satisfactory to you and gives you a better rate than the one
>Van's has selected - Barbara has no hesitation using your chosen company.
>I've used two different companies and everything worked out fine.
>
>David Carter
>
So, who did you use, and how did you choose them?
Linn
do not archive
Message 43
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel selector handle loose |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Curt Reimer" <cgreimer@mts.net>
> I have the Van's standard fuel selector.
> It is new but the handle is not tight.
> It moves a small amount when switching
> tanks.I feel it might become more loose and
> eventually I will be unable to switch tanks.
> Probably at the worst time!!
> Have others had this problem?
Yes, mine has always been slightly loose, especially after I laid against it
inadvertantly while working under the panel. Just make sure the screw is
snug once in a while, but don't overdo it. I think it's just a quirk of the
design. If you want a backup plan, keep a pair of pliers in the cockpit.
Curt
RV-6 240 hours
Message 44
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bill Schlatterer" <billschlatterer@sbcglobal.net>
Not good but not too bad. My wing and fuse QB boxes were $1,100 shipped to
Little Rock and my Finish and FWF kit (one box) was $451 received just last
week.
Bill Schlatterer
7a QB fuse/panel
Arkansas
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Peter Laurence
Subject: RV-List: Freight
--> RV-List message posted by: Peter Laurence <dr.laurence@mbdi.org>
Received my wing from Van's via Roadway Trucking and got a bill for
$467.90!
Has anyone in the south Florida area recently taken delivery of an RV9 or 7
wing? If so, does the amount I just paid commensurate with yours?
OUCH!
Peter
Message 45
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-List COM Antenna |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob 1" <rv3a.1@comcast.net>
>> I do have a pet peeve. It offends me to see the a multitude of
antenna's on
> the outside of RV's. I've seen as many as 9 external antenna's on the
> outside of an RV-6.
> Jim Ayers
> Less Drag Products, Inc.
=======================
I'm not so easily offended or overwhelmed, Mr. Ayers.
My pet is not a peeve.
It's a .... Siberian Husky.
Play "hide the salami" to your hearts content.
Life is too short for total uncompromising rational behavior. <g>
Bob - bent whip com antenna advocate
Do not archive
Message 46
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: CBRxxDRV@aol.com
In a message dated 12/1/04 9:11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time,
billschlatterer@sbcglobal.net writes:
> My wing and fuse QB boxes were $1,100 shipped to
> Little Rock
What Freight co.?
Do not archive
Sal Capra
Lakeland, FL
My Home Page
http://hometown.aol.com/cbrxxdrv/index.html
Message 47
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Tim Coldenhoff <rv9a_000@deru.com>
Peter Laurence wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Peter Laurence
>
> Received my wing from Van's via Roadway Trucking and got a bill for
> $467.90!
>
> Has anyone in the south Florida area recently taken delivery of an RV9 or 7
> wing? If so, does the amount I just paid commensurate with yours?
Call Barbara at Van's and confirm that you got billed
correctly by the freight company. When I got my finishing
kit, the bill was over $500. Not knowing any better (and
wanting my kit!), I paid it, but sent an inquiry to Van's
afterwards.
Turns out the freight company did not take out the discount
that Van's had negotiated. It took about a month to work out
getting the refund of about $250.
--
Tim Coldenhoff
#90338 - Final Assembly!!
http://rv9a.deru.com
Message 48
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Antenna location? |
--> RV-List message posted by: John DeCuir <jadecuir@comcast.net>
I need some help here, guys. I've bought a used GX50 GPS to replace the
flybuddy loran in my RV4. The loran antenna was mounted on the belly,
just aft the firewall. The com antenna is mounted on top the fuse,
midway between the aft edge of the canopy and the vert stab. The
cleanest install I can think of is to put the GPS ant where the com is
now, and move the com to the underbelly loran spot. I know the GPS
would be fine, but how well would my com work with the antenna that
close to the firewall (groundplane reduced) and between the gearlegs?
If I leave the com antenna where it is, I can cap the loran hole.
Has anyone mounted the GPS ant. on the aft fuse underneath the canopy,
just behind the pax seat? I feel that I need as much distance from the
com ant. as I can get. What about on the fuse top, between the firewall
and the panel?
John D
RV-4, N204CP
Salinas, CA
EAA204
Message 49
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Bobby Hester <bhester@hopkinsville.net>
Peter Laurence wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Peter Laurence <dr.laurence@mbdi.org>
>
>Received my wing from Van's via Roadway Trucking and got a bill for
>$467.90!
>
>Has anyone in the south Florida area recently taken delivery of an RV9 or 7
>wing? If so, does the amount I just paid commensurate with yours?
>
>
>OUCH!
>
>
>Peter
>
>
All shipping aranged by Van's - cost after discounts, they were listed
on shipper.
Empennage kit $75.39 UPS
Wing kit $214.36 Freight Company - ABF - 53% discount 10/01
QB Fuselage kit $1,042.28 Freight Company - ABF - 60% discount 1/03
Finish kit $387.79 Freight Company - Roadway - 60% discount 7/03
Firewall Forward Kit $59.45 UPS
--
Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
RV7A Slowbuild wings-QB Fuse :-)
Message 50
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Antenna location? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen <svanarts@yahoo.com>
I've seen a lot of GPS antennas mounted on the top fuselage just aft of
the rear passenger. They seem to work just fine there. I have my com
antenna mounted just ahead of my spar on the belly of the plane. No
comm. problems at all.
John DeCuir wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: John DeCuir <jadecuir@comcast.net>
>
>I need some help here, guys. I've bought a used GX50 GPS to replace the
>flybuddy loran in my RV4. The loran antenna was mounted on the belly,
>just aft the firewall. The com antenna is mounted on top the fuse,
>midway between the aft edge of the canopy and the vert stab. The
>cleanest install I can think of is to put the GPS ant where the com is
>now, and move the com to the underbelly loran spot. I know the GPS
>would be fine, but how well would my com work with the antenna that
>close to the firewall (groundplane reduced) and between the gearlegs?
> If I leave the com antenna where it is, I can cap the loran hole.
>Has anyone mounted the GPS ant. on the aft fuse underneath the canopy,
>just behind the pax seat? I feel that I need as much distance from the
>com ant. as I can get. What about on the fuse top, between the firewall
>and the panel?
>John D
>RV-4, N204CP
>Salinas, CA
>EAA204
>
>
>
>
--
Scott VanArtsdalen
Van Arts Consulting Services
3848 McHenry Ave
Suite #155-184
Modesto, CA 95356
209-986-4647
Ps 34:4,6
Message 51
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Rv-List Power Required |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
Kevin,
I expect that you know a lot more about it than I do, but I just don't
understand. Can you explain for a dunce why it takes more power to go
the same speed at higher altitude?
I always thought (perhaps erroneously) that the thinner air meant less
drag and that the reason our normally aspirated birds were slower up
high was because the power available decreased more rapidly than the
drag. I was also under the impression that we go fast down low because
the extra power available overcomes the extra drag of the thicker air.
This idea has been re-enforced over the years by watching field goals
being kicked at extremely long distances in Denver which I (and the TV
announcers) attributed to thinner air at high altitude.
I always thought that was the reason people turbocharge piston airplanes
and fly at high altitudes. It can't be for lessened fuel burn since you
gotta keep the mixture pretty rich in a turbocharged airplane to keep
the cht's and tit's down, don't you?
Confused,
Ed Holyoke
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Horton
Subject: Re: [Bulk] RV-List: Rv-List Power Required
--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
>--> RV-List message posted by: smoothweasel@juno.com
>
>
>Hey is there anyone on here that can give me an estimated HP that would
>be required to make a Harmon Rocket go 220knots TAS at say 22000ft. I
>have been doing some expensive dreaming. I wanna go faster and higher
>but I don't want the complications of a Turbo system. I have some
ideas
>bur I don't know how much power I will need at this ALT.
>
>Weasel RV-4
>Brooksville Ms
>
The CAS would be about 157 kt at this condition. The drag at a given
CAS is relatively independent of altitude, as long as the Mach number
is low enough so that Mach effects aren't coming into play. The
power required is proportional to the drag times the TAS. So, the
power required to go 220 kt TAS at 22,000 ft would be about 220/157 =
1.4 times as much as the power required to go 157 kt TAS at sea level.
Assuming a Rocket has similar drag to the RV-8, I estimate it would
take about 110 hp to go 157 kt TAS at sea level (based on Van's perf
specs for top speed, with speed varying as the cube root of power),
and about 154 hp to go 220 kt TAS at 22,000 ft. That doesn't sound
like a lot of power, until you realize that the air density is only
50% of what it is at sea level. This calculation also assumes that
the prop efficiency at 22,000 ft is the same as a Hartzell at sea
level.
Good luck.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
Message 52
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker@optonline.net>
Well, I don't live in South Florida, I live in NJ which is only a little
closer to Oregon, and I received my wing kit two years ago, but my
shipping bill was only $200 and that included a 3.5% fuel surcharge..
As others have said, you may not have received the 60% discount Van's
gets. If you have the wing kit delivered to a residence they tack on an
additional $50 or so which is not charged if it is delivered to a
business (which mine was).
You say "wing". Was it the wing kit or the QB wing? The QB would be
more since the box is substantially bigger.
Dick Tasker
Peter Laurence wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Peter Laurence <dr.laurence@mbdi.org>
>
>Received my wing from Van's via Roadway Trucking and got a bill for
>$467.90!
>
>Has anyone in the south Florida area recently taken delivery of an RV9 or 7
>wing? If so, does the amount I just paid commensurate with yours?
>
>
>OUCH!
>
>
>Peter
>
>
>
>
Message 53
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rv-List Power Required |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Larry Pardue" <n5lp@warpdriveonline.com>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
Subject: RE: [Bulk] RV-List: Rv-List Power Required
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
>
> Kevin,
>
> I expect that you know a lot more about it than I do, but I just don't
> understand. Can you explain for a dunce why it takes more power to go
> the same speed at higher altitude?
>
Read it again. Kevin was comparing to a lower speed because that is what he
had data on.
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP Flying
http://n5lp.net
Message 54
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Brake holding Power |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ross S" <rv7maker@hotmail.com>
Esteemed listers,
How does air in brake lines affect the holding power of the brakes. I made
a couple initial taxi tests with my plane the other day and it took quite a
bit of pedal pressure to run the engine at run up power and they just plain
wouldn't hold at anything above that. I ran it around for about four orfive
minutes for a so called brake "brake in" but it had no effect. I later
noticed some air bubbles in one of the lines. I haven't run it again yet
and don't want to before I fly it, but I wonder if they will have more
holding power with the air bled. I would think that a small amount of air
in the lines would make them spongy, but not lower the hydraulic pressure or
the resulting squeeze on the disk, unless the master cylinders ran out of
stroke (which they didn't).
Your thoughts please.
Thanks,
Ross
Ross Schlotthauer
RV-7 Wrap-up
www.experimentalair.com
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
Message 55
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Molex connectors |
--> RV-List message posted by: "H.Ivan Haecker" <baremetl@gvtc.com>
Listers,
Can someone in the know tell me if .062" molex terminals are capable of handling
the current flow required for a taillight/strobe unit in the rudder or are
the larger diameter (.093) terminals necessary?
Thanks,
Ivan Haecker
Message 56
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rv-List Power Required |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Tom Gummo" <T.gummo@verizon.net>
55% Power Chart - 11.5 GPH
RPM
Altitude 2100 2200 2300 2400
0 21.6 20.8 20.2 19.6
1000 21.4 20.6 20.0 19.3
2000 21.1 20.4 19.7 19.1
3000 20.9 20.1 19.5 18.9
4000 20.6 19.9 19.3 18.7
5000 20.4 19.7 19.1 18.5
6000 20.1 19.5 18.9 18.3
7000 19.9 19.2 18.6 18.0
8000 19.6 19.0 18.4 17.8
9000 19.4 18.8 18.2 17.6
10,000 19.1 18.6 18.0 17.4
11,000 18.9 18.3 17.8 17.2
12,000 18.6 18.1 17.5 17.0
13,000 17.9 17.3 16.8
14,000 17.1 16.5
15,000
16.3
This info is from a 250 HP Piper Comanche POH.
I have no idea what power you would be able to get at 22,000.
Tom Gummo
Apple Valley, CA
Harmon Rocket-II
do not archive
http://mysite.verizon.net/t.gummo/index.html
----- Original Message -----
From: <smoothweasel@juno.com>
Subject: RV-List: Rv-List Power Required
> --> RV-List message posted by: smoothweasel@juno.com
>
>
> Hey is there anyone on here that can give me an estimated HP that would
> be required to make a Harmon Rocket go 220knots TAS at say 22000ft. I
> have been doing some expensive dreaming. I wanna go faster and higher
> but I don't want the complications of a Turbo system. I have some ideas
> bur I don't know how much power I will need at this ALT.
>
> Weasel RV-4
> Brooksville Ms
>
> Juno Gift Certificates
> Give the gift of Internet access this holiday season.
> http://www.juno.com/give
>
>
>
Message 57
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Antenna location? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Derrick Aubuchon <n184da@volcano.net>
Hey John,,
That's exactly where my GPS antenna is located,, under the canopy,
behind the rear passenger.
Works as advertised!
Derrick L. Aubuchon
n184da@volcano.net
On Dec 1, 2004, at 8:03 PM, John DeCuir wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: John DeCuir <jadecuir@comcast.net>
>
> I need some help here, guys. I've bought a used GX50 GPS to replace the
> flybuddy loran in my RV4. The loran antenna was mounted on the belly,
> just aft the firewall. The com antenna is mounted on top the fuse,
> midway between the aft edge of the canopy and the vert stab. The
> cleanest install I can think of is to put the GPS ant where the com is
> now, and move the com to the underbelly loran spot. I know the GPS
> would be fine, but how well would my com work with the antenna that
> close to the firewall (groundplane reduced) and between the gearlegs?
> If I leave the com antenna where it is, I can cap the loran hole.
> Has anyone mounted the GPS ant. on the aft fuse underneath the canopy,
> just behind the pax seat? I feel that I need as much distance from the
> com ant. as I can get. What about on the fuse top, between the firewall
> and the panel?
> John D
> RV-4, N204CP
> Salinas, CA
> EAA204
>
>
Message 58
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Brake holding Power |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>
Hi Ross,
Air is compressible. Brake fluid is not. A small amount of air in your lines
will definitely make the brakes less effective as far as the pressure on the
pedal for holding and stopping power is concerned. The pedal will have a
soft spongy, springy or cushioned feel.
Bleed the air out and inspect for a source of the air that you are
describing. As this is first testing of new system, It is most likely that
you have found air bubbles that were introduced during the initial filling
of the system. It is also possible that air has entered past a loose fitting
or one or more of the O ring seals (best to replace all O rings in that
cylinder) . Most commonly the master cylinders do this. If this is the case
replacement of the offending seals is the fix.
Happy landings,
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ross S" <rv7maker@hotmail.com>
Subject: RV-List: Brake holding Power
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Ross S" <rv7maker@hotmail.com>
>
> Esteemed listers,
>
> How does air in brake lines affect the holding power of the brakes.
> >spip<
Message 59
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | purpose of fire sleeve |
--> RV-List message posted by: "thomas a. sargent" <sarg314@comcast.net>
I was advised today by one of the guys at Van's to not bother putting
fire sleeve on oil lines. Just use it on the fuel lines.
Is the purpose of fire sleeve just to insulate the fuel lines from heat
of the engine, or is it to retard the progress of an engine fire, by
protecting the combustible oil and fuel from flames? If it's just to
keep the gas cool, then I guess he's right. If it's supposed to retard a
fire, then I think oil lines should be firesleeved too, yes?
--
Tom Sargent
RV-6A
Message 60
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rv-List Power Required |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Scott Jackson" <jayeandscott@telus.net>
> I always thought that was the reason people turbocharge piston airplanes
> and fly at high altitudes. It can't be for lessened fuel burn since you
> gotta keep the mixture pretty rich in a turbocharged airplane to keep
> the cht's and tit's down, don't you?
when I first bought our Cessna TurboCenturion and took it up high, ( well,
FL220 seemed high, although it's ceiling was FL310, IIRC)I was surprized
that the same power setting yielded the same fuel flow and the exact same
IAS.
I shouldn't have been surprized, just never thought about it, having only
flown normally-aspirated engines up until that time.
The only thing that kept increasing with altitude was the TAS, I don't think
the CHT and TIT changed noticeably.
Scott in VAncouver
>-----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Horton
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: [Bulk] RV-List: Rv-List Power Required
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: smoothweasel@juno.com
>>
>>
>>Hey is there anyone on here that can give me an estimated HP that would
>>be required to make a Harmon Rocket go 220knots TAS at say 22000ft. I
>>have been doing some expensive dreaming. I wanna go faster and higher
>>but I don't want the complications of a Turbo system. I have some
> ideas
>>bur I don't know how much power I will need at this ALT.
>>
>>Weasel RV-4
>>Brooksville Ms
>>
>
> The CAS would be about 157 kt at this condition. The drag at a given
> CAS is relatively independent of altitude, as long as the Mach number
> is low enough so that Mach effects aren't coming into play. The
> power required is proportional to the drag times the TAS. So, the
> power required to go 220 kt TAS at 22,000 ft would be about 220/157 > 1.4 times
as much as the power required to go 157 kt TAS at sea level.
>
> Assuming a Rocket has similar drag to the RV-8, I estimate it would
> take about 110 hp to go 157 kt TAS at sea level (based on Van's perf
> specs for top speed, with speed varying as the cube root of power),
> and about 154 hp to go 220 kt TAS at 22,000 ft. That doesn't sound
> like a lot of power, until you realize that the air density is only
> 50% of what it is at sea level. This calculation also assumes that
> the prop efficiency at 22,000 ft is the same as a Hartzell at sea
> level.
>
> Good luck.
> --
> Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
> Ottawa, Canada
> http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
>
>
>
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! --
|