---------------------------------------------------------- RV-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sun 12/19/04: 34 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 01:49 AM - Re: installing fire sleeve - basic question (Jim Jewell) 2. 01:54 AM - Re: installing fire sleeve - basic question (Jim Jewell) 3. 04:53 AM - Re: E-Mag (RVer273sb@aol.com) 4. 04:53 AM - Alternator mounting problem (Ron Schreck) 5. 05:13 AM - Re: Re: IFR EFIS (George Steube) 6. 06:03 AM - Re: E-Mag (Kelly Patterson) 7. 07:02 AM - Re: Alternator mounting problem (Sam Buchanan) 8. 08:52 AM - Re: Superior XP-360 vs Mattituck TMX-360 (Douglas A. Fischer) 9. 09:40 AM - Insurance Question (Jim Bean) 10. 09:46 AM - Re: installing fire sleeve - basic question (Mark Burns) 11. 09:48 AM - Re: Insurance Question (Cory Emberson) 12. 10:54 AM - Re: Windshield to Canopy joint (HCRV6@aol.com) 13. 01:18 PM - Re: installing fire sleeve - basic question (linn walters) 14. 02:52 PM - Re: Insurance Question (Ross S) 15. 03:51 PM - Re: Insurance Question (DWENSING@aol.com) 16. 04:13 PM - Re: E-Mag () 17. 04:36 PM - Re: Re: E-Mag (Jerry Calvert) 18. 05:05 PM - Mags Crossed (John Furey) 19. 05:24 PM - Re: Mags Crossed (Scott VanArtsdalen) 20. 05:35 PM - Re: Mags Crossed (linn walters) 21. 05:46 PM - Re: Re: E-Mag (Jim Jewell) 22. 06:04 PM - HR II for sale on Ebay Motors (Scott VanArtsdalen) 23. 06:09 PM - RV-8 for sale on Ebay Motors (Scott VanArtsdalen) 24. 06:50 PM - Re: Insurance Question (Dave Bristol) 25. 07:26 PM - Re: Insurance Question (Mike Robertson) 26. 07:36 PM - Re: Insurance Question (Charlie Kuss) 27. 07:39 PM - Re: Insurance Question clamav-milter version 0.80j on zoot.lafn.org (cgalley) 28. 07:41 PM - Apples to oranges (Wheeler North) 29. 07:47 PM - E-Mag (Wheeler North) 30. 07:55 PM - Tailwheel (Wheeler North) 31. 09:13 PM - Rocket Tailwheel Linkage (Mark Taylor) 32. 09:18 PM - O-320 HDAD For Sale (Paul Besing) 33. 09:46 PM - Re: Rocket Tailwheel Linkage (Andre Berthet) 34. 09:56 PM - Subject: Engines-List: Another O-290 for sale (Rob W M Shipley) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 01:49:38 AM PST US From: "Jim Jewell" Subject: Re: RV-List: installing fire sleeve - basic question --> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" Hi Tom, I couple of years ago I attended the EAA show at Arlington Washington. While there I bought a "ClampTite" tool for making clamps out of stainless steel tie wire. I believe I paid a show price of US. $20.00 at the time. Well worth it! Because the camping medium is tie wire the possible uses for this tool are quite plentiful. Their brochure claims that "if you can get a wire around it you can clamp it tight" So far they have proven to be right. Using this tool for clamping firesleeve has worked out very well. It is hard to describe the tool and the manner of its use but the clamps it makes are very low profile and have no sharp edges to grab clothing or draw blood. The fact that with just a small bit if practice the clamps it produces look really nice is a bonus as well. With this tool you control the number of times the wire surrounds the hose and how tight the wire clamp gets set. By making double wrap clamps for the firesleeve there is no chance of having the wire cut into and damage the firesleeve. How the clamp is secured after setting up the clamp is unique, tidy and very secure. Contact: http://198.63.56.18/pages/order.html Google clamptite and it's there also Camptite tools, Ray Silvey MFG. Co. PO box 414 Shady Cove Or.97539 Direst Orders-800-962-2901 Tel.-(503) 826-4466 As for Using the RTV on the ends of the firesleeve, Yes by all means use it. It is used to stop oils ,cleaning solvents and environmental contaminants from creeping into the ends of the firesleeve.and damaging the otherwise protected hose. There is an actual industrial product that has been designed for that purpose. I expect it is a liquid form of silicone?. I cannot offer a name or contact info for supply source etc. Maybe ACS could find it. I had a small container given to me and it soon set up into a hard rubber mass after coming in contact with air. Very short shelf life!. don't by a large volume. In use it does work better than the RTV. The people who make the firesleeve most likely make the stuff. I have a length of Parker Stratoflex firesleeve but found nothing tangible on the web. Carry on Hoser, {[;-) >From: "thomas a. sargent" >Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com >To: rv-list@matronics.com >Subject: RV-List: installing fire sleeve - basic question >Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 22:24:56 -0700 > >--> RV-List message posted by: "thomas a. sargent" > >I have yet to make any oil or fuel hoses and haven't yet seen any >uninstalled firesleeve, so I'm starting from zero knowledge here. > >Can some one please tell me what the order of operations is? Can >firesleeve be installed on a completed hose, that is one that has both >end fittings installed? Or do you have to slip it on after installing >the first fitting and then install the second end fitting? > >Thanks, >-- >Tom Sargent >RV-6A, firewall. ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 01:54:53 AM PST US From: "Jim Jewell" Subject: Re: RV-List: installing fire sleeve - basic question --> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" Hi Tom, I think you will find a page in the ACS catalog that explains quite a bit about hosing.;) I forgot to sign the other email to you, It's 3:00 am., Jim in Kelowna ----- Original Message ----- From: "thomas a. sargent" Subject: RV-List: installing fire sleeve - basic question > --> RV-List message posted by: "thomas a. sargent" > > I have yet to make any oil or fuel hoses and haven't yet seen any > uninstalled firesleeve, so I'm starting from zero knowledge here. > > Can some one please tell me what the order of operations is? Can > firesleeve be installed on a completed hose, that is one that has both > end fittings installed? Or do you have to slip it on after installing > the first fitting and then install the second end fitting? > > Thanks, > -- > Tom Sargent > RV-6A, firewall. > > > ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 04:53:52 AM PST US From: RVer273sb@aol.com Subject: Re: RV-List: E-Mag --> RV-List message posted by: RVer273sb@aol.com You can run the e-mag with fixed timing or have it sense Map and Rpm to vary timing. P=mag is the same except it can produce its own DC power if needed. Stewart do not archive ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 04:53:52 AM PST US From: "Ron Schreck" Subject: RV-List: Alternator mounting problem --> RV-List message posted by: "Ron Schreck" Is this an internally regulated alternator? I have a B & C regulator already installed in my RV-8 and would be interested in putting one of these Autozone clones if it will work with the B & C regulator. Ron Schreck Gold Hill Airpark, NC do not archive --> RV-List message posted by: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" > > > Or......just buy the same 35 amp alternator *with* the fan (it'll fit > just fine) from your local discount auto parts emporium for less than > $50. The alternator is NipponDenso as used on 1976-1979 Honda Civic CVCC > without air conditioning. A common number you can find in Duralast and > other reman alternators is 14184. The Beck/Arnley number is 186-0100. > > Sam Buchanan (RV-6 with Advance Auto Parts alternator) I went to Autozone and bought a Duralast 14184 for about $60 with the fan like Sam mentioned.. It fits perfectly and aligns up with the flywheel pulley perfectly. It has a lifetime warranty. Bad thing is, a lot of Autozones electrical stuff doesn't has long life spans, but they will exchange them indefinitly if you want to keep changing them.. I originally bought Van's alternator kit with the 35 amp alternator. It was Dead on arrival but I didnt find it out for three years since I had ordered it and "shelfed" it. One of the diodes was broken inside. Poor Quality control back at the rebuild shop. It also did not line up real well. Funny thing, both of these were 14184 alternators, but there was a difference. Van's was twice as much money and it was very poorly rebuilt. The Duralast looks very nicely rebuilt for much less money. I am going to buy a spare and "shelf" it again........ just my oppinion Phil, in Illinois ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 05:13:00 AM PST US From: "George Steube" Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: IFR EFIS --> RV-List message posted by: "George Steube" Stein, Have you seen any of the paper work being used to install Dynon's in certificated aircraft? Since the FAA has more or less gotten out of the field approval business it would be interesting to see what some FSDOs are accepting. I don't think mine would go for anything less than an STC. Thanks. George -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Stein Bruch Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: IFR EFIS --> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" I've gotten a peek at these new ADI's coming from Trutrak, and of course I'll be selling them as soon as they start shipping. I can take orders for them fairly soon, but they tell me they won't likely be shipping until Q2 '05. They'll be just like their pictorial pilot, but wil vertical guidance as well, making it a quasi-ADI except solid state and probably more reliable. Their current solid state T&B will run an hour on a simple 9 volt battery!! They aren't the most advanced digital looking things in the world, but if it's coming from Younkin, you will know it's top notch and VERY reliable. He's forgotten more about aircraft flight instruments than most people will ever know. It's just my opinion, but they will be well worth the money when they are shipped. I've been selling a TON of the pictorial T&B's to guys that are flying heavy IFR in a variety of aircraft and they are using them as backups, and good ones at that. FYI, Dynon's are now starting to show up in quite a few certified airplanes. We've been selling quite a number of harnesses to people who've sucessfully been able to install them in certified aircraft, not the least being an FAA FSDO inspector himslef. I personally know of Dynon's installed in 172's, 182's, 210's, Bonanza's, Various Pipers, and a few twins. Also the T-28 crowd along with the YAK/CJ drivers are installing these things at a high rate. Just my 2 cents as usual! Cheers, Stein. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Doug Rozendaal Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: IFR EFIS --> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" Jim Younkin and the folks at Tru-Trak have another neat toy coming out at SNF. It is basically a Solid State Turn Coordinator with a horizon bar that is driven by a solid state gyro and a rate of climb aneriod to yield pitch information. Jim Younkin told me about this device a couple years ago and it looks like they are ready to ship it. This could be either a primary ADI or a backup for a experimental EFIS. My airplane will have one of these as soon as I can get one. Tailwinds, Doug Rozendaal ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 06:03:16 AM PST US From: "Kelly Patterson" Subject: RV-List: RE: E-Mag --> RV-List message posted by: "Kelly Patterson" Doug and list, I have an E-Mag on order and have quizzed them up and down at Copperstate and on the phone. Here's what I know... The E-Mag comes in 4 flavors - and you must specify at time of order what you want. 1. 25 BTDC (same as Slick mag) 2. RPM advance curve 3. MAP advance curve 4. custom curve (factory set - you can't modify it) My fixed pitch will use the RPM advance, any CS prop would use the MAP. Map sensor used to be a $50 option but it is now standard on the current batch of orders. The current batch is also shorter in length, and has a new circuit board, as well as other changes. Here is a snip from Brad at E-Mag... "It turns out, the backordered (circuit board) component is in short supply because it's being replaced by a newer version. The new part is a "near" direct replacement, requiring only a few changes in our command code. However, this requires us to test the new part before we commit the entire run. This work, during the upcoming holidays, will mean a likely delay of about three weeks. We regret the interruption, but everyone agrees it's better to get it right than get it quick." Kindest Regards, Brad Dement I'm happy they are testing the units before shipping them. My motor will have a test cell run with the mag which should uncover any potential problems. Given the hot spark, lack of moving parts, competitive price, advance curve options, ability to use auto plugs, and compact size I simply had to try one on. The left side will be a Slick mag for redundancy and peace of mind. Don't ask how it works cuz I won't be airborne soon...just made the BIG CUT on the canopy. Soon to be glued, not screwed. Kelly Patterson Phoenix, AZ -6A finishing >Time: 10:19:17 AM PST US >From: "Douglas A. Fischer" >Subject: Re: RV-List: E-Mag > >--> RV-List message posted by: "Douglas A. Fischer" > > >After reading the E-Mag web site, it appeared to me that the >E-mag is a straight replacement for a mag in that the timing >is fixed and does not advance or retard like an electronic >ignition does. Am I mistaken? Even if I'm not, the E-mag >sounds better than a standard mag. > >Doug Fischer >RV-9A Wings >Do not archive ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 07:02:00 AM PST US From: Sam Buchanan Subject: Re: RV-List: Alternator mounting problem --> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan Ron Schreck wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: "Ron Schreck" > > > > Is this an internally regulated alternator? I have a B & C regulator > already installed in my RV-8 and would be interested in putting one > of these Autozone clones if it will work with the B & C regulator. > > Ron Schreck Gold Hill Airpark, NC > The 14184 is externally regulated, just like the one Vans sells.......cause it *is* the one Vans sells! :-) A good regulator for it is mid-70's Ford from the same place you buy the alternator, 'bout $10. But the high dollar B&C will work, too. ;-) Sam Buchanan ============================== > > --> RV-List message posted by: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic > Club" > >> >> >> Or......just buy the same 35 amp alternator *with* the fan (it'll >> fit just fine) from your local discount auto parts emporium for >> less than $50. The alternator is NipponDenso as used on 1976-1979 >> Honda Civic CVCC without air conditioning. A common number you can >> find in Duralast and other reman alternators is 14184. The >> Beck/Arnley number is 186-0100. >> >> Sam Buchanan (RV-6 with Advance Auto Parts alternator) > > I went to Autozone and bought a Duralast 14184 for about $60 with the > fan like Sam mentioned.. It fits perfectly and aligns up with the > flywheel pulley perfectly. It has a lifetime warranty. Bad thing is, > a lot of Autozones electrical stuff doesn't has long life spans, but > they will exchange them indefinitly if you want to keep changing > them.. > > I originally bought Van's alternator kit with the 35 amp alternator. > It was Dead on arrival but I didnt find it out for three years since > I had ordered it and "shelfed" it. One of the diodes was broken > inside. Poor Quality control back at the rebuild shop. It also did > not line up real well. > > Funny thing, both of these were 14184 alternators, but there was a > difference. Van's was twice as much money and it was very poorly > rebuilt. The Duralast looks very nicely rebuilt for much less money. > I am going to buy a spare and "shelf" it again........ > > just my oppinion > > Phil, in Illinois > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 08:52:57 AM PST US From: "Douglas A. Fischer" Subject: Re: RV-List: Superior XP-360 vs Mattituck TMX-360 clamav-milter version 0.80j on mail6.iserv.net --> RV-List message posted by: "Douglas A. Fischer" Not to advertise for yet another discussion group, there is a forum on Yahoo that is specifically set up for XP-360 engines that seems to be very informative. You may want to check it out. Doug Fischer RV-9A Wings ----- Original Message ----- From: "davercook" Subject: RV-List: Superior XP-360 vs Mattituck TMX-360 > --> RV-List message posted by: "davercook" > > Listers > Any thoughts on the difference between the Superior XP-360 and the Mattituck TMX-360. The TMX is $1000 less and closer to my home (less shipping cost).I know lots of people like AeroSport but they are a long way away from Florida. Also, Superior will be increasing price as of Jan. 1st. Or is ECI a better or cheaper way to go. I don't know who distributes the ECI engine.There web site only indicates parts available. > Thanks > Dave Cook > Looking for Windmill for RV-6 > > ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 09:40:33 AM PST US From: Jim Bean Subject: RV-List: Insurance Question --> RV-List message posted by: Jim Bean Listers, Having hopefully got close to flight, after 5 years, I requested info from Avemco about converting not-inflight to inflight. They say OK but have two surprising, to me, restrictions. No hull coverage for the first 10 hours and no liability to a test pilot for the first 10 hours. That is if the pilot is not the insured. This seems to be just the time you need insurance. My question is do all of the other companies have similar restrictions or is this just an Avemco thing. If not I might be tempted to shop around. TIA Jim Bean RV-8 - close PS- They also want 10 hours of current tailwheel time, which I think is quite reasonable. ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 09:46:02 AM PST US From: "Mark Burns" Subject: Re: RV-List: installing fire sleeve - basic question --> RV-List message posted by: "Mark Burns" An old mechanic showed me how to install firesleeve with compressed air. I was working at the Cessna service hanger in Wichita back in the late 70's. I was a young A&P at the time and had been struggling with the firesleeve on an oil hose for at least 15 minutes. This guy comes over to me and say's "let me show you a trick". I said "please". He takes a air hose with a blow nozzle, sticks it up in one end of the fire sleeve and tells me to put the other end on the oil hose. He tells me to get it started and then put my hand around it and squeeze to trap the air inside. By controlling the amount of air you let out, the firesleeve expands and the extra air escaping makes the firesleeve slide on like a hockey puck on an air table. I was amazed and remember it like it was yesterday. Hope this helps someone. Mark Burns ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Robertson" Subject: RE: RV-List: installing fire sleeve - basic question > --> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" > > om, > > The firesleeve can fit over the end fitting but when it is sized properly > it > is tight. If you make the lines first, or have them made, just be patient > and work the firesleeve over the fittings. Then dab a bit of high tenmp > silicone sealer on each and and secure them so that oil and dirt can't get > inside. > > Mike Robertson > >>From: "thomas a. sargent" >>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com >>To: rv-list@matronics.com >>Subject: RV-List: installing fire sleeve - basic question >>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 22:24:56 -0700 >> >>--> RV-List message posted by: "thomas a. sargent" >> >>I have yet to make any oil or fuel hoses and haven't yet seen any >>uninstalled firesleeve, so I'm starting from zero knowledge here. >> >>Can some one please tell me what the order of operations is? Can >>firesleeve be installed on a completed hose, that is one that has both >>end fittings installed? Or do you have to slip it on after installing >>the first fitting and then install the second end fitting? >> >>Thanks, >>-- >>Tom Sargent >>RV-6A, firewall. >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 09:48:40 AM PST US From: "Cory Emberson" Subject: RE: RV-List: Insurance Question --> RV-List message posted by: "Cory Emberson" Hi Jim, I believe that's a Avemco underwriting standard. I did an article on insurance for homebuilts for Kitplanes in the Oct 2004 issue, and because Avemco's a direct insurer, which means they deal directly with the customers and develop their own underwriting standards. They're strict. Things may have changed since I did my research, but I'd give JT Helms (VanGuard) a ping on the list, or contact Falcon Insurance to see if their standards are different. best, Cory -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jim Bean Subject: RV-List: Insurance Question --> RV-List message posted by: Jim Bean Listers, Having hopefully got close to flight, after 5 years, I requested info from Avemco about converting not-inflight to inflight. They say OK but have two surprising, to me, restrictions. No hull coverage for the first 10 hours and no liability to a test pilot for the first 10 hours. That is if the pilot is not the insured. This seems to be just the time you need insurance. My question is do all of the other companies have similar restrictions or is this just an Avemco thing. If not I might be tempted to shop around. TIA Jim Bean RV-8 - close PS- They also want 10 hours of current tailwheel time, which I think is quite reasonable. ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 10:54:31 AM PST US From: HCRV6@aol.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Windshield to Canopy joint --> RV-List message posted by: HCRV6@aol.com In a message dated 12/18/04 3:12:07 PM Pacific Standard Time, JTAnon@aol.com writes: << Page 9-12, paragraph 3 (Fitting THe Windscreen) in the manual regarding the meeting point of the windscreen and canopy on a slider states, " ...the height of the canopy frame is adjusted ... so the windscreen portion of the canopy=20is even with, or slightly lower than the sliding portion of the canopy." >> I don't know about the -7 instructions but on my -6 I adjusted the mating line by placing spacers (#6 nylon washers) between the plexi and the bars as required to make them even and this worked well. Harry Crosby Pleasanton, California RV-6, flying, 18+ hours so far. ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 01:18:39 PM PST US From: linn walters Subject: Re: RV-List: installing fire sleeve - basic question --> RV-List message posted by: linn walters Mark, this trick is hands-down the best one I've heard in a long while! Until you've struggled with firesleeve, you owe it to yourself to put at least one firesleeve on he old fashioned way ..... like trying to stuff a noodle! Your appreciation for Marks trick will be boundless!!! Linn do not archive. Mark Burns wrote: >--> RV-List message posted by: "Mark Burns" > >An old mechanic showed me how to install firesleeve with compressed air. >I was working at the Cessna service hanger in Wichita back in the late 70's. > >I was a young A&P at the time and had been struggling with the firesleeve on >an oil hose for at least 15 minutes. >This guy comes over to me and say's "let me show you a trick". I said >"please". > >He takes a air hose with a blow nozzle, sticks it up in one end of the fire >sleeve and tells me to put the other end on the oil hose. >He tells me to get it started and then put my hand around it and squeeze to >trap the air inside. By controlling the amount of air you let out, the >firesleeve expands and the extra air escaping makes the firesleeve slide on >like a hockey puck on an air table. I was amazed and remember it like it was >yesterday. > >Hope this helps someone. > >Mark Burns > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Mike Robertson" >To: >Subject: RE: RV-List: installing fire sleeve - basic question > > > > >>--> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" >> >>om, >> >>The firesleeve can fit over the end fitting but when it is sized properly >>it >>is tight. If you make the lines first, or have them made, just be patient >>and work the firesleeve over the fittings. Then dab a bit of high tenmp >>silicone sealer on each and and secure them so that oil and dirt can't get >>inside. >> >>Mike Robertson >> >> >> >>>From: "thomas a. sargent" >>>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com >>>To: rv-list@matronics.com >>>Subject: RV-List: installing fire sleeve - basic question >>>Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 22:24:56 -0700 >>> >>>--> RV-List message posted by: "thomas a. sargent" >>> >>>I have yet to make any oil or fuel hoses and haven't yet seen any >>>uninstalled firesleeve, so I'm starting from zero knowledge here. >>> >>>Can some one please tell me what the order of operations is? Can >>>firesleeve be installed on a completed hose, that is one that has both >>>end fittings installed? Or do you have to slip it on after installing >>>the first fitting and then install the second end fitting? >>> >>>Thanks, >>>-- >>>Tom Sargent >>>RV-6A, firewall. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 02:52:20 PM PST US From: "Ross S" Subject: RE: RV-List: Insurance Question --> RV-List message posted by: "Ross S" Jim, Nationair converted my builders policy to full liability and hull coverage (1M and 100K) with no such requirement. I did need a signoff in a tailwheel RV though. A little under $3000 for a year with me as a very low time pilot -Ross Ross Schlotthauer N703RV Flying www.experimentalair.com >From: Jim Bean >Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com >To: rv-list@matronics.com >Subject: RV-List: Insurance Question >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 12:40:09 -0500 > >--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Bean > >Listers, > >Having hopefully got close to flight, after 5 years, I requested info >from Avemco about converting not-inflight to inflight. They say OK but >have two surprising, to me, restrictions. No hull coverage for the first >10 hours and no liability to a test pilot for the first 10 hours. That >is if the pilot is not the insured. > >This seems to be just the time you need insurance. >My question is do all of the other companies have similar restrictions >or is this just an Avemco thing. If not I might be tempted to shop around. > >TIA Jim Bean >RV-8 - close > >PS- They also want 10 hours of current tailwheel time, which I think is >quite reasonable. > > ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 03:51:48 PM PST US From: DWENSING@aol.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Insurance Question --> RV-List message posted by: DWENSING@aol.com In a message dated 12/19/04 12:41:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, jim-bean@att.net writes: > No hull coverage for the first > 10 hours and no liability to a test pilot for the first 10 hours. Had similar recent experience with AIG on the test pilot coverage. Had a test pilot lined up who was recently retired from USAirways after 30 years, was a flight instructor with 160 hours in RV's, had an RV6 he used to check out new RV pilots, was an A&P and I am probably forgetting something. But, AIG would not insure him! So, I successfully flew it myself. do not archive Dale Ensing ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 04:13:59 PM PST US From: Subject: RV-List: Re: E-Mag --> RV-List message posted by: Yes the E-Mag does advance timing, using MAP and RPM, as do all the current experimental electronic ignitions. The P-Mag is the self-powered version of the E-Mag, which will continue to run without battery power (but needs a small amount of power to get it going.) Other electronic ignitions require ships power 100% of the time to make the engine turn. This is why builders have had to contemplate extra batteries as backup with dual electronic ignitions up till now. Almost any engine, turbo-charged or non-turbo, can benefit from variable timing advance. At altitude, low power and lean mixture the combustion flame front is slow, therefore it requires advanced timing to burn completely. That is why it is more efficient to advance the timing under these conditions to get a complete burn of the fuel. MAP and RPM are directly related to the POWER the engine is making. Knowing how much power you are making is very important to knowing how much to advance timing. CHT is not used to measure power in engines typically, but is a critical limitation of an air-cooled aircraft engine. Timing is only one thing that affects CHT, cooling airflow and mixture affect CHT. The main indication of power is MAP & RPM. LSE, E-Mag, JeffRose all have an timing advance capability using MAP and RPM. You can buy the E-Mag without the MAP input. Then the timing is fixed at 25 degrees like a regular Magneto. It does NOT advance timing on RPM only, as far as I know. You need both RPM & MAP sensors to accurately control timing advance. CHT is NOT required or needed to control timing well or safely. As far as CHT, I assume the "certified" units use this input to guard against detonation more than optimize timing. It is possible to cause detonation with timing too far advanced under high power. Detonation is characteristically preceded with a sharp rise in CHT. However if the CHT spikes it may be too late anyway. I think the Fed's made LASAR do this for a feel good. To get LASAR certified they even buried a complete set of magnetos under the electronics. Looking at the LASAR, it looks a little messy. I have not heard any WOW about it, except it is very expensive. The E-Mag allows you to turn the timing advance off for the fixed 25 deg timing. However I don't know why you would do this, unless you wanted to compare performance with and without advance. With the engine running, old magnetos are always at 25-degree BTDC, ALL THE TIME. It works well, but it is not real efficient at all power settings. Electronic ignitions also give hotter sparks and sometimes much longer duration sparks as well as advanced timing. A fixed 25 degree is very conservative. Max advance of the electronic ignitions is about 40 deg, but is reached only at low power (Low MAP). CHT is not in the mix. Aircraft engines operate almost always in a narrow power band from 2300 to 2700 RPM, so timing advance is not as critical. You can just set it at a happy average, 25 deg. That is why the good-old magneto has worked OK for this long, but have the disadvantage of poor spark and mechanical parts to wear. The advantage of the magneto is it is self-contained and does not rely on external power supply. Up till the E-Mag a battery was needed. The current crop of electronic ignitions target a conservative increase in efficiency from timing. I don't think any are on the edge or reduce the detonation margins in their standard configuration. I assume this from their good service history. The max advance only happens at low power setting (i.e. WOT cruise at altitude), where detonation is very unlikely. The CHT probe would not help much anyway if you did detonate. It can happen too fast. Also any adjustment made to timing from a CHT input would be small. They have a biased towards efficiency and not higher power, so no CHT is needed. The pilot is responsible for CHT to be in limits. Experimental aircraft should have good EGT/CHT on all cylinders. Lightspeed does have an option for the Racers to tinker with T-advance in the cockpit while flying. I think it is real cool, but you have to be real sure of what you are doing, have a well-instrumented engine and understand the risks. You can get more power with advance at high power but you are reducing your detonation margins, just as you are when you put in high compression pistons. E-Mag will customize you timing curve on request, but it is fixed and must be done at their factory. The self powered version of the E-Mag, the P-Mag does not need backup electric power. This self powered feature lets you run a dual electronic ignition setup without worry or installing an extra back-up power supply. Unlike other electronic ignitions, the E-Mag has a simpler self-contained package (like a Magneto). The other typical electronic ignitions require several components like: ignition triggers, brain box and coils. All this is connected together with a wiring harness. Not a problem, just a little more installation and more potential problem areas. The E-Mags "timing curve" schedules how the timing will advanced. I think max advance is around 40 Deg BTDC. It also has a start mode where the timing is back around TDC. As you know starting at 25 deg will get you a nasty kick back. Magnetos use a mechanical retard and "impulse couple" for extra spark to start, and usually this is on just one magneto. The E-Mag does this electronically. If you have a failure in the electronics, MAP or RPM sensor it will revert to standard 25 degree timing as a fall back mode. The standard "Timing Curve" is fixed, but the factory will make a custom curve for those who want special performance for high compression pistons or a special cam. The typical setup would be one E-Mag and one self powered P-Mag, or you could use two P-Mag's. However the "P" costs a few hundred more than the "E." I asked if the P-Mag and another brand of electronic ignition could be paired. It was suggested that it is better to stick with a dual electronic ignition of the same type (brand). The interaction between different brads of ignition should not be a problem but may not be as efficient. If you can run a Magneto with any electronic ignition, I don't think it should be a problem running two different electronic ignitions. (Thoughts?) I gather the performance of the E-Mag will be good, but that the Lightspeed may be just a little better from a pure performance stand point, but that is a guess. The LSE uses "CDI" capacitive discharge" and the JeffRose and E-Mag use "inductive". They both work well. Going from a regular magneto to any electronic ignition with variable timing is a huge leap forward. How much differential in performance between electronic ignitions is there? The Lightspeed has other features that separate it from others, like in-flight cockpit controlled timing, MAP and RPM display options and works on lower voltage. If you don't care about these features, I think the E-Mag/P-Mag combo is a great option to builders. Plus the ease of installation and no worry of electrical power is a big plus. The magneto is still an option, but passing on the electronic ignition based on fear of advanced timing or no CHT input is not a reason. Remember old car distributors with the mechanical advance and a vacuum advance on the side. Advance is good but don't expect a huge gain in efficiency (LSE claims 5-7% efficiency increase). Cafe foundation did a 3 part on electronic ignition and did find performance and efficiency gains, mostly at altitude and 70% power cruise. If youre on a budget and have the magnetos already, use them. You can always add on electronic ignition in the future. If you are starting from scratch get dual electronic ignition. You may not make your money back in fuel savings, but it will be smoother and you have the option to use auto spark plugs at a fraction the price. If you drop a $3 auto plug, you may not cry like you would with a $20 A/C plug. With the P-Mag the redundancy of power is addressed with little fuss. I am looking forward to hearing how it works in the air. Happy Holidays G >Time: 10:19:17 AM PST US >From: "Douglas A. Fischer" >Subject: Re: RV-List: E-Mag >clamav-milter version 0.80j >on mail3.iserv.net >RV-List message posted by: "Douglas A. Fischer" > > >After reading the E-Mag web site, it appeared to me that the E-mag is a >straight replacement for a mag in that the timing is fixed and does not >advance or retard like an electronic ignition does. Am I mistaken? >Even if I'm not, the E-mag sounds better than a standard mag. > >Doug Fischer >RV-9A Wings >Do not archive > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Wheeler North" >Subject: RV-List: E-Mag > RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North >Well, >as I have stated before, I'm concerned that they (E-Mag, as well as >the other two systems) are not providing a CHT input to the varible >timing equation. This is far more important than is MAP since MAP is not >really a critical factor in a non-supercharged engine and can be roughly >estimated, and in fact is by their non-MAP system. On the other hand CHT (the >most critical limiting factor in a tightly cowled aircooled engine), is most easily >and effectively controlled by timing, and in fact the onl certified FADEC units, >TCM Aerosance and Unison LASAR, in fact do use CHT for just that >purpose.> --------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 04:36:05 PM PST US From: "Jerry Calvert" Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: E-Mag --> RV-List message posted by: "Jerry Calvert" ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: RV-List: Re: E-Mag > --> RV-List message posted by: > > >SNIP. > > The E-Mag allows you to turn the timing advance off for the fixed 25 deg timing. However I don't know why you would do this, unless you wanted to compare performance with and without advance. With the engine running, old magnetos are always at 25-degree BTDC, ALL THE TIME. > > >SNIP I would guess that the 25 degree can be turned off when the E-Mag is used during starting of engine so it will fire at TDC. Jerry Calvert RV6 N296JC ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 05:05:46 PM PST US From: "John Furey" Subject: RV-List: Mags Crossed --> RV-List message posted by: "John Furey" I'm embarrassed to admit that I switched the P leads on my mag (toggle) switches which means that I was starting on the right mag only and the left one with the impulse couplings only came on line after the engine was running. It worked that way for 7 starts and then refused to start again and that's when I discovered my mistake. I was under the impression that it would not start without the impulse coupling (which is what did happen) but why did it work for a while. Any thoughts from you A&P's out there? Also, just installed my constant speed prop, sure performs great but makes a lot of noise (and some vibration) below 2350 rpm Anyone else experience this? John RV6A O-320 ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 05:24:48 PM PST US From: Scott VanArtsdalen Subject: Re: RV-List: Mags Crossed --> RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen Heh, heh... been there done that. Get this, mine ran a year with my mags reversed! Just kept getting harder and harder to start until finally, nothing. Would just run the battery down. Man! A whole year! Yes sir, that's an Aero Sport Power engine! Bart can sure build 'em! John Furey wrote: >--> RV-List message posted by: "John Furey" > >I'm embarrassed to admit that I switched the P leads on my mag (toggle) >switches which means that I was starting on the right mag only and the left >one with the impulse couplings only came on line after the engine was >running. It worked that way for 7 starts and then refused to start again and >that's when I discovered my mistake. I was under the impression that it >would not start without the impulse coupling (which is what did happen) but >why did it work for a while. Any thoughts from you A&P's out there? Also, >just installed my constant speed prop, sure performs great but makes a lot >of noise (and some vibration) below 2350 rpm Anyone else experience this? > >John >RV6A O-320 > > > > -- Scott VanArtsdalen Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 05:35:45 PM PST US From: linn walters Subject: Re: RV-List: Mags Crossed --> RV-List message posted by: linn walters John Furey wrote: >--> RV-List message posted by: "John Furey" > >I'm embarrassed to admit that I switched the P leads on my mag (toggle) >switches which means that I was starting on the right mag only and the left >one with the impulse couplings only came on line after the engine was >running. It worked that way for 7 starts and then refused to start again and >that's when I discovered my mistake. I was under the impression that it >would not start without the impulse coupling (which is what did happen) but >why did it work for a while. Any thoughts from you A&P's out there? Also, >just installed my constant speed prop, sure performs great but makes a lot >of noise (and some vibration) below 2350 rpm Anyone else experience this? > >John >RV6A O-320 > I'm no A&P but here's some thoughts. I'm surprised that it started at all! I'm guessing that you have a new lightweight starter that spins that engine really fast. Fast enough for the new mag to generate enough energy to fire and not kick back. Why did it quit firing? Maybe a low battery ..... or the phase of the moon or ....... the things preventing the continued firing are endless. I'm glad you found the problem ...... must have been good sleuthing on your part!!!! As for the CS prop ..... they usually make more noise the faster they go. The vibration (and some of the noise) may be a mis-wired plug(s) ...... check the firing order. Oops .... out of thoughts on this one. Linn > > > > ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 05:46:08 PM PST US From: "Jim Jewell" Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: E-Mag --> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" Hi G, Am I wrong in thinking that Ping sensing would seem to be a missing component in the current electronic ignition system designs? I would like to think that including ping sensing as is done in automotive electronic ignition systems might some day be incorporated into the various ignition systems that have come on stream lately. Do you or any other listers have ideas in this regard. Best of the season to everyone, Jim in Kelowna ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: RV-List: Re: E-Mag > --> RV-List message posted by: > > > Yes the E-Mag does advance timing, using MAP and RPM, as do all the > current experimental electronic ignitions. The P-Mag is the self-powered > version of the E-Mag, which will continue to run without battery power > (but needs a small amount of power to get it going.) Other electronic > ignitions require ships power 100% of the time to make the engine turn. > This is why builders have had to contemplate extra batteries as backup > with dual electronic ignitions up till now. > > > Almost any engine, turbo-charged or non-turbo, can benefit from variable > timing advance. At altitude, low power and lean mixture the combustion > flame front is slow, therefore it requires advanced timing to burn > completely. That is why it is more efficient to advance the timing under > these conditions to get a complete burn of the fuel. MAP and RPM are > directly related to the POWER the engine is making. Knowing how much power > you are making is very important to knowing how much to advance timing. > CHT is not used to measure power in engines typically, but is a critical > limitation of an air-cooled aircraft engine. Timing is only one thing that > affects CHT, cooling airflow and mixture affect CHT. The main indication > of power is MAP & RPM. > > > LSE, E-Mag, JeffRose all have an timing advance capability using MAP and > RPM. You can buy the E-Mag without the MAP input. Then the timing is fixed > at 25 degrees like a regular Magneto. It does NOT advance timing on RPM > only, as far as I know. You need both RPM & MAP sensors to accurately > control timing advance. CHT is NOT required or needed to control timing > well or safely. As far as CHT, I assume the "certified" units use this > input to guard against detonation more than optimize timing. It is > possible to cause detonation with timing too far advanced under high > power. Detonation is characteristically preceded with a sharp rise in CHT. > However if the CHT spikes it may be too late anyway. I think the Fed's > made LASAR do this for a feel good. To get LASAR certified they even > buried a complete set of magnetos under the electronics. Looking at the > LASAR, it looks a little messy. I have not heard any WOW about it, except > it is very expensive. > > > The E-Mag allows you to turn the timing advance off for the fixed 25 deg > timing. However I don't know why you would do this, unless you wanted to > compare performance with and without advance. With the engine running, old > magnetos are always at 25-degree BTDC, ALL THE TIME. It works well, but > it is not real efficient at all power settings. Electronic ignitions also > give hotter sparks and sometimes much longer duration sparks as well as > advanced timing. A fixed 25 degree is very conservative. Max advance of > the electronic ignitions is about 40 deg, but is reached only at low power > (Low MAP). CHT is not in the mix. > > > Aircraft engines operate almost always in a narrow power band from 2300 to > 2700 RPM, so timing advance is not as critical. You can just set it at a > happy average, 25 deg. That is why the good-old magneto has worked OK for > this long, but have the disadvantage of poor spark and mechanical parts to > wear. The advantage of the magneto is it is self-contained and does not > rely on external power supply. Up till the E-Mag a battery was needed. > > > The current crop of electronic ignitions target a conservative increase in > efficiency from timing. I don't think any are on the edge or reduce the > detonation margins in their standard configuration. I assume this from > their good service history. The max advance only happens at low power > setting (i.e. WOT cruise at altitude), where detonation is very unlikely. > The CHT probe would not help much anyway if you did detonate. It can > happen too fast. Also any adjustment made to timing from a CHT input would > be small. They have a biased towards efficiency and not higher power, so > no CHT is needed. The pilot is responsible for CHT to be in limits. > Experimental aircraft should have good EGT/CHT on all cylinders. > > > Lightspeed does have an option for the Racers to tinker with T-advance in > the cockpit while flying. I think it is real cool, but you have to be real > sure of what you are doing, have a well-instrumented engine and understand > the risks. You can get more power with advance at high power but you are > reducing your detonation margins, just as you are when you put in high > compression pistons. E-Mag will customize you timing curve on request, but > it is fixed and must be done at their factory. > > > The self powered version of the E-Mag, the P-Mag does not need backup > electric power. This self powered feature lets you run a dual electronic > ignition setup without worry or installing an extra back-up power supply. > Unlike other electronic ignitions, the E-Mag has a simpler self-contained > package (like a Magneto). The other typical electronic ignitions require > several components like: ignition triggers, brain box and coils. All this > is connected together with a wiring harness. Not a problem, just a little > more installation and more potential problem areas. > > > The E-Mags "timing curve" schedules how the timing will advanced. I think > max advance is around 40 Deg BTDC. It also has a start mode where the > timing is back around TDC. As you know starting at 25 deg will get you a > nasty kick back. Magnetos use a mechanical retard and "impulse couple" for > extra spark to start, and usually this is on just one magneto. The E-Mag > does this electronically. If you have a failure in the electronics, MAP or > RPM sensor it will revert to standard 25 degree timing as a fall back > mode. The standard "Timing Curve" is fixed, but the factory will make a > custom curve for those who want special performance for high compression > pistons or a special cam. > > > The typical setup would be one E-Mag and one self powered P-Mag, or you > could use two P-Mag's. However the "P" costs a few hundred more than the > "E." I asked if the P-Mag and another brand of electronic ignition could > be paired. It was suggested that it is better to stick with a dual > electronic ignition of the same type (brand). The interaction between > different brads of ignition should not be a problem but may not be as > efficient. If you can run a Magneto with any electronic ignition, I don't > think it should be a problem running two different electronic ignitions. > (Thoughts?) > > > I gather the performance of the E-Mag will be good, but that the > Lightspeed may be just a little better from a pure performance stand > point, but that is a guess. The LSE uses "CDI" capacitive discharge" and > the JeffRose and E-Mag use "inductive". They both work well. Going from a > regular magneto to any electronic ignition with variable timing is a huge > leap forward. How much differential in performance between electronic > ignitions is there? The Lightspeed has other features that separate it > from others, like in-flight cockpit controlled timing, MAP and RPM display > options and works on lower voltage. If you don't care about these > features, I think the E-Mag/P-Mag combo is a great option to builders. > Plus the ease of installation and no worry of electrical power is a big > plus. > > > The magneto is still an option, but passing on the electronic ignition > based on fear of advanced timing or no CHT input is not a reason. Remember > old car distributors with the mechanical advance and a vacuum advance on > the side. Advance is good but don't expect a huge gain in efficiency (LSE > claims 5-7% efficiency increase). Cafe foundation did a 3 part on > electronic ignition and did find performance and efficiency gains, mostly > at altitude and 70% power cruise. If youre on a budget and have the > magnetos already, use them. You can always add on electronic ignition in > the future. If you are starting from scratch get dual electronic ignition. > You may not make your money back in fuel savings, but it will be smoother > and you have the option to use auto spark plugs at a fraction the price. > If you drop a $3 auto plug, you may not cry like you would with a $20 A/C > plug. With the P-Mag the redundancy of power is addressed with little > fuss. > > > I am looking forward to hearing how it works in the air. Happy Holidays G > > >>Time: 10:19:17 AM PST US > >>From: "Douglas A. Fischer" > >>Subject: Re: RV-List: E-Mag > >>clamav-milter version 0.80j > >>on mail3.iserv.net > > >>RV-List message posted by: "Douglas A. Fischer" > >> > >> > >>After reading the E-Mag web site, it appeared to me that the E-mag is a > >>straight replacement for a mag in that the timing is fixed and does not > >>advance or retard like an electronic ignition does. Am I mistaken? > >>Even if I'm not, the E-mag sounds better than a standard mag. > >> > >>Doug Fischer > >>RV-9A Wings > >>Do not archive > >> > >>----- Original Message ----- > >>From: "Wheeler North" > >>Subject: RV-List: E-Mag > >> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North > > >>Well, > > >>as I have stated before, I'm concerned that they (E-Mag, as well as > >>the other two systems) are not providing a CHT input to the varible > >>timing equation. This is far more important than is MAP since MAP is not > >>really a critical factor in a non-supercharged engine and can be roughly > >>estimated, and in fact is by their non-MAP system. On the other hand CHT >>(the > >>most critical limiting factor in a tightly cowled aircooled engine), is >>most easily > >>and effectively controlled by timing, and in fact the onl certified FADEC >>units, > >>TCM Aerosance and Unison LASAR, in fact do use CHT for just that >> >purpose.> > > > --------------------------------- > > > ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 06:04:06 PM PST US From: Scott VanArtsdalen vansairforce@yahoogroups.com Subject: RV-List: HR II for sale on Ebay Motors --> RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen In case anyone's interested. Here's the shortened URL: *http://tinyurl.com/6ar2h * -- Scott VanArtsdalen Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 06:09:00 PM PST US From: Scott VanArtsdalen vansairforce@yahoogroups.com Subject: RV-List: RV-8 for sale on Ebay Motors --> RV-List message posted by: Scott VanArtsdalen Seems to be RV day on eBay: *http://tinyurl.com/6la3m * -- Scott VanArtsdalen Van Arts Consulting Services 3848 McHenry Ave Suite #155-184 Modesto, CA 95356 209-986-4647 Ps 34:4,6 ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 06:50:44 PM PST US From: Dave Bristol Subject: Re: RV-List: Insurance Question clamav-milter version 0.80j on zoot.lafn.org --> RV-List message posted by: Dave Bristol Jim, I think this is pretty common. Back when AVEMCO was the official EAA insurance company, you were insured from the first flight if you took part in the EAA Flight Advisor and Technical Counselor programs, because it was proven that there were far fewer accidents during early flight testing when builders took advantage of those programs. I don't know if this is true now with the new insurer but, in my opinion, it should be. Dave -6 So Cal EAA Flight Advisor and Technical Counselor Jim Bean wrote: >--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Bean > >Listers, > >...I requested info from Avemco about converting not-inflight to inflight. They say OK but >have two surprising, to me, restrictions. No hull coverage for the first >10 hours and no liability to a test pilot for the first 10 hours... > > > ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 07:26:50 PM PST US From: "Mike Robertson" Subject: RE: RV-List: Insurance Question --> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Robertson" Through Nationair I am listed on several polices as a pilot. And as long as the pilot meets the experience requirements they will cover him/her and the aircraft during the first ten hours. You should check them out. Mike Robertson >From: Jim Bean >Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com >To: rv-list@matronics.com >Subject: RV-List: Insurance Question >Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 12:40:09 -0500 > >--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Bean > >Listers, > >Having hopefully got close to flight, after 5 years, I requested info >from Avemco about converting not-inflight to inflight. They say OK but >have two surprising, to me, restrictions. No hull coverage for the first >10 hours and no liability to a test pilot for the first 10 hours. That >is if the pilot is not the insured. > >This seems to be just the time you need insurance. >My question is do all of the other companies have similar restrictions >or is this just an Avemco thing. If not I might be tempted to shop around. > >TIA Jim Bean >RV-8 - close > >PS- They also want 10 hours of current tailwheel time, which I think is >quite reasonable. > > ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 07:36:12 PM PST US From: Charlie Kuss Subject: Re: RV-List: Insurance Question --> RV-List message posted by: Charlie Kuss Jim This is an advantage of joining your local EAA Chapter. EAA has a tech councilor program. This program mandates a minimum of 3 tech councilor visits to inspect your workmanship and offer tips and advice. First inspection must be prior to closing up the wings. Avemco will waive the "no insurance for the first 10 hours" if you complete this program. Better yet is the advantage to you, of having an experienced builder look over your work. Charlie Kuss >--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Bean > >Listers, > >Having hopefully got close to flight, after 5 years, I requested info >from Avemco about converting not-inflight to inflight. They say OK but >have two surprising, to me, restrictions. No hull coverage for the first >10 hours and no liability to a test pilot for the first 10 hours. That >is if the pilot is not the insured. > >This seems to be just the time you need insurance. >My question is do all of the other companies have similar restrictions >or is this just an Avemco thing. If not I might be tempted to shop around. > >TIA Jim Bean >RV-8 - close > >PS- They also want 10 hours of current tailwheel time, which I think is >quite reasonable. > > ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 07:39:30 PM PST US From: "cgalley" Subject: Re: RV-List: Insurance Question clamav-milter version 0.80j on zoot.lafn.org --> RV-List message posted by: "cgalley" I believe the "new" insurance thru EAA does but I'll will check and get back to you. Cy Galley EAA Safety Programs Editor Always looking for ideas and articles for EAA Sport Pilot ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Bristol" Subject: Re: RV-List: Insurance Question clamav-milter version 0.80j on zoot.lafn.org > --> RV-List message posted by: Dave Bristol > > Jim, > > I think this is pretty common. Back when AVEMCO was the official EAA > insurance company, you were insured from the first flight if you took > part in the EAA Flight Advisor and Technical Counselor programs, because > it was proven that there were far fewer accidents during early flight > testing when builders took advantage of those programs. I don't know if > this is true now with the new insurer but, in my opinion, it should be. > > Dave -6 So Cal > EAA Flight Advisor and Technical Counselor > > > Jim Bean wrote: > > >--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Bean > > > >Listers, > > > >...I requested info from Avemco about converting not-inflight to inflight. They say OK but > >have two surprising, to me, restrictions. No hull coverage for the first > >10 hours and no liability to a test pilot for the first 10 hours... > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 07:41:54 PM PST US From: Wheeler North "'owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com '"@matronics.com Subject: RV-List: Apples to oranges --> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North BTW, my Cheetah had a 35 amp unit that was still running strong after a thousand hours of use. That was one reason I picked Van's 35 amp unit. My RV is set up pretty much like what I had in the Cheetah. My -7A will be, also. Well, I guess I may have some newer toys in the panel. :-) Folks, you can't compare the rating of an aircraft alternator with an automobile unit. The auto units are not rated at continous duty as are the aircraft units. The other factor is that the units are rated at a specific temperature. Is the temperature in your cowl equal to that? Having it be of a load capacity that is larger just allows for it to run cooler at an equal load, or at least to be better suited to handling equal temperatures. In my limited experience with Van's units (about ten of them) they are not great units and in several cases they were flat out trash. I would never fly one without first overhauling it myself. But, that said, I would do the same with an autozone unit as well. W ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 07:47:52 PM PST US From: Wheeler North "'owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com '"@matronics.com Subject: RV-List: E-Mag --> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North After reading the E-Mag web site, it appeared to me that the E-mag is a straight replacement for a mag in that the timing is fixed and does not advance or retard like an electronic ignition does. Am I mistaken? Even if I'm not, the E-mag sounds better than a standard mag. Doug, The E-Mag has the option, via a switch on the side of the unit somewhere to set it to fixed or varible. They then offer an option to have a MAP input which most likely allows them to follow a slightly more agressive timing curve. In any event, it most probably delivers a slightly hotter, longer, and more consistant spark than does the typical mag, even in fixed mode. The problem is how do I justify spending all that money when I already have two perfectly well running mags flying right now. Particularly when every bit if research I've done, including my own empirical testing, shows that CHT is the most critical thing to be monitoring when using an agressive timing curve on an aircooled engine. But, since I don't want to do the work at designing this, my goal here is to stir up the pot enough to get the market pressure to motivate them to make what I want... ;{) W ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 07:55:44 PM PST US From: Wheeler North "'owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com '"@matronics.com Subject: RV-List: Tailwheel --> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North My tailwheel measures 5.187" diameter after 1100 hrs. and since yours is 4.812", I still can't tell you when they should be considered worn out. But at least I now know that mine isn't worn out yet! Thanks. Ivan, so does this mean I'm the poor fool who has to create the standard here. Last I heard most aviation standards come from crash sites... ;{) Judging by those numbers I guess I'm dragging my tailwheel around too much. I guess I'll have to start doing more wheel landings so somebody else can catch up and become the poor fool. Hey Mikey, ya wanta borrow my tail wheel for awhile? do not archive ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 09:13:19 PM PST US From: "Mark Taylor" Subject: RV-List: Rocket Tailwheel Linkage --> RV-List message posted by: "Mark Taylor" I've left e-mail and phone messages with Terry Jantzi for one of these for my RV-7, but am getting no response at all. Does anybody know if these are still available? Mark Taylor RV-7 QB www.4sierratango.com ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 09:18:20 PM PST US From: "Paul Besing" Subject: RV-List: O-320 HDAD For Sale --> RV-List message posted by: "Paul Besing" Do not archive 2000 hours SMOH All Accessories High compressions 100 hour inspections $4,900 $5,400 with Sensenich Prop Please respond to azpilot@extremezone.com Paul Besing RV-6A Sold RV-10 Soon http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software http://www.kitlog.com ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 09:46:19 PM PST US From: "Andre Berthet" Subject: RE: RV-List: Rocket Tailwheel Linkage --> RV-List message posted by: "Andre Berthet" Mark, I have also been trying to contact Terry for more than a month. I left several messages on his voice-mail; sent him multiple e-mails without any replies. If anyone in this list has any information about his whereabouts I would appreciate it. Thanks, Andre Berthet Do not archive. > Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 9:10 PM > Subject: RV-List: Rocket Tailwheel Linkage > > --> RV-List message posted by: "Mark Taylor" > > I've left e-mail and phone messages with Terry Jantzi for one of these for > my RV-7, but am getting no response at all. Does anybody know if these are > still available? > > Mark Taylor ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 09:56:42 PM PST US From: "Rob W M Shipley" Subject: RV-List: Subject: Engines-List: Another O-290 for sale --> RV-List message posted by: "Rob W M Shipley" I posted this on the engines list and then figured why not spread it around. Call me if you need any more info. --> Engines-List message posted by: "Rob W M Shipley" Ron wrote: "If our friend still has it, there is a steal on a 0-290 that has been rebuilt by a professional aircraft engine builder. Dyno tested @ 140 HP. It is a certified engine and the last asking price was $10,000. If interested, email Ron at rgdplg@radiowire.net" I too have an O-290 which I decided to sell. Please note this is not a certified engine. I bought this from a fellow Chapter 14 club member. It was used until fairly recently in his Tailwind and reportedly has about 65 hours on it since a full rebuild. It was removed when he decided to change to a Jabiru in the hopes (vain) of getting more performance. It comes complete with several spares and engine manuals. There is also a prop and spinner which I am willing to sell with it. It has been filled with 30 weight oil and the bores wiped with STP whilst I have had it. I live in the San Diego area but would be willing to deliver up to a couple of hundred miles. I am asking for $6,000 with the prop and spinner and $5,600 for just the engine. Buyer to pay s & h if required. For any more information please feel free to call me directly at 619 916 8059 or email robshipley@gmail.com . Rob Rob W M Shipley N919RV (res) Fuselage .....still! Now planning on a Mazda Renesis engine! No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.