Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:29 AM - Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have (Fred Stucklen)
2. 05:30 AM - Re: Altrack override force (Doug Rozendaal)
3. 05:51 AM - Re: Question on Registration paperwork (Hopperdhh@aol.com)
4. 06:03 AM - Re: Canopy Breaker Tool (Hopperdhh@aol.com)
5. 07:28 AM - Re: Canopy Breaker Survival Gear (Jim Oke)
6. 07:49 AM - Re: Quick release "pull" pins (Jack Blomgren)
7. 07:54 AM - Re: Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have (Doug Weiler)
8. 08:01 AM - Re: Quick release "pull" pins (Jeff Dowling)
9. 08:03 AM - Re: Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have (Jeff Dowling)
10. 08:10 AM - IO-320-B1A for RV9A? (Peter Mather)
11. 08:37 AM - Navaid (Wheeler North)
12. 09:29 AM - Re: Navaid (Stein Bruch)
13. 09:54 AM - Tank Prep (Bill Cary)
14. 10:40 AM - Re: Tank Prep (Paul Trotter)
15. 11:46 AM - Re: Tank Prep (Bill Cary)
16. 11:58 AM - Re: Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have (HCRV6@aol.com)
17. 12:43 PM - Re: Question on Registration paperwork (Paul Besing)
18. 01:51 PM - Re: IO-320-B1A for RV9A? (Charlie Kuss)
19. 01:51 PM - Re: Tank Prep (Charlie Kuss)
20. 01:54 PM - Re: Insurance (JT Helms)
21. 01:54 PM - Re: over square ()
22. 02:09 PM - Re: Tank Prep (Jim Jewell)
23. 02:53 PM - Re: Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have (CW Crane)
24. 03:09 PM - Re: Canopy Breaker Tool (James H Nelson)
25. 03:12 PM - Re: Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have (DOUGPFLYRV@aol.com)
26. 05:41 PM - Re: Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have (Alex Peterson)
27. 05:53 PM - Re: Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have (Evan and Megan Johnson)
28. 06:47 PM - Re: IO-320-B1A for RV9A? (RV6 Flyer)
29. 06:59 PM - Australian RV accidents (was Canopy Breaker Survival Gear) (Scott Lewis)
30. 07:23 PM - Re: Navaid (Jeff Dowling)
31. 07:40 PM - Re: Canopy Breaker Survival Gear ()
32. 08:00 PM - Re: wing incidence (lancenewman)
33. 08:00 PM - Re: Navaid (Stein Bruch)
34. 08:20 PM - Re: cockpit noise abatement? (lancenewman)
35. 10:38 PM - Re: Australian RV accidents (was Canopy Breaker Survival Gear) (Paul Olsen)
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: | Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Fred Stucklen" <wstucklen1@cox.net>
Paul,
I used to feel this way too, but, as I get older, I'm finding it a lot
more
enjoyable on long cross country trips to turn on the autopilot and enjoy
the ride. After two short stops, and 8 hours in the air, being "fresh"
enough
to be able to complete a 40 knot 90* crosswind at the destination is
enough reason for an autopilot....
Fred Stucklen
RV-6A N926RV 375+ Hrs
RV-6A N925RV 2008 Hrs
From:
"Valovich, Paul" <pvalovich@dcscorp.com>
--> RV-List message posted by: "Valovich, Paul"
<pvalovich@dcscorp.com>
I'm in the avionics dreaming stage of my RV-8A construction. I'm
debating the advantages of an autopilot - initially, based on my
4500
hours in A-4's without an autopilot and acceptance that stabilized
wing
trim was always an impossible dream, I felt that an autopilot
wasn't
worth the hassle. I plan to do a lot of cross country flying, but
I'm
also one of those guys who doesn't defer to automobile cruise
control.
Anyone have biased opinions about RV autopilots?
Paul Valovich
RV-8A QB
Ridgecrest, CA
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: Altrack override force |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr@petroblend.com>
Nothing is grinding, you are just pushing the stepper motor to a different
step. You will have no problem overpowering it, if the trim is too far off,
the trim will easily overpower the servo.
The real beauty of the Altrak system is there is no tuning. Just install
it, go flying and turn it on! If it doesn't hold alt, turn it off, retrim,
and turn it on again. A wonderful product!
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
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: Question on Registration paperwork |
--> RV-List message posted by: Hopperdhh@aol.com
Richard,
I don't know if this has been mentioned, but be sure to answer "Number of"
as "seats two." This cost me about a month of waiting for my registration.
It may be worth your while to get a copy of AC 20-27E which has samples of
all this paperwork. It has to be perfect or the feds will bounce it back to
you.
Hope all goes well for you.
Dan Hopper
Walton, IN
RV-7A (Was flying, now being painted)
In a message dated 3/24/05 1:44:28 A.M. US Eastern Standard Time,
mrobert569@hotmail.com writes:
Richard,
Leave the bill of sale from Van's as is and list your name as the
manufacturer on the registration application. Don't forget to send the
notarized affidavit of ownership.
Mike Robertson
Das Fed
>From: "Richard Suffoletto" <rsuffoletto@hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: Question on Registration paperwork
>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 09:08:55 -0800
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Richard Suffoletto"
><rsuffoletto@hotmail.com>
>
>
>I have searched the archives and have not found the answer to this.
>
>Who is listed as the manufacturer on form 8050-1 ?
>
>The "kit" bill of sale from Van's does not list a manufacturer just the
>model number.
>
>If I list myself as the manufacuturer on form 8050-1 do I also change the
>kit bill of sale form?
>
>I'm sure this has been asked many times but darn if I could find it in the
>archives...
>
>Thanks
>
>Richard
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Canopy Breaker Tool |
--> RV-List message posted by: Hopperdhh@aol.com
Bruce,
I was thinking of an AK-47. No, that would be too dangerous. How about an
air tank and your die grinder? Or a battery powered saws-all.
Dan
do not archive
In a message dated 3/23/05 8:24:36 P.M. US Eastern Standard Time,
brucebell74@sbcglobal.net writes:
Hi All,
My RV4 is about to go to the airport. I have been reading the posts on the
canopy breaker tool. My question is. How about a pistol to blow a half
dozen holes in the canopy? Other words shoot your way out of it! Would that
break it or just leave six holes in it? Just wondering!
RV$'s for ever!
Bruce Bell
Lubbock, Texas
RV4 # 2888
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Canopy Breaker Survival Gear |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jim Oke <wjoke@shaw.ca>
I recall reading an Australian accident investigation report on a -6 mishap
some years ago. (Perhaps some of our colleagues from Oz could point out a
web-link). Apart from the cause of the accident (I think it was a prop blade
failure) the behaviour of the structure on impact was discussed. On touching
down on a rough surface, the nose dug in and came to an abrupt stop with
inertia driving the tail section further forward. Analysis was that the
fuselage longerons in the cockpit area failed by bowing or buckling outward.
This allowed the tail cone to continue upwards and forward into the cockpit
area fatally injuring the pilot (and sole occupant). Short story is that a
good seat belt installation will not help much if the cockpit space deforms
in a crash, (ie, gets crushed.) Not a happy thought.
Anyway, not mentioned in the report is if the top member of the F-605
bulkhead behind the seats remained intact. If it failed or came detached
because the longerons were being stressed in an outwards direction then the
back of the seats would not be supported and would allow the occupants to
fall backwards into the baggage compartment after things came to a stop.
Perhaps this is what happens in the more severe touchdown, dig-in, flip
forwards mishaps. If so, better shoulder harness design, etc. will not help
much.
Can anyone who has survived or seen such an RV-6 or -7 mishap comment
further?
Jim Oke
RV-6A
Wpg., MB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris W" <1qazxsw23edcvfr45tgbnhy67ujm@cox.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Canopy Breaker Survival Gear
> --> RV-List message posted by: Chris W
> <1qazxsw23edcvfr45tgbnhy67ujm@cox.net>
>
> Frank Eldridge wrote:
>
>>. . . in my
>>accident, although I was wearing a shoulder harness and seat belts, I
>>was thrown into the baggage compartment upside down . . .
>>
> I have read three stories about side by side RV's flipping over after an
> off field landing in which the pilot somehow ended up in the baggage
> area. I would really like to know why this happens and how to stop it
> from happening. Obviously the pilot has to slip between the shoulder
> harness and the cross member behind the seats. Maybe the two shoulder
> harness slip down off both shoulders as the plane flips over. A link to
> tie both shoulder straps together just behind the seat might stop it. I
> know that to prevent a spinal compression injury the shoulder straps
> have to secured behind you at the same level as your shoulder and NOT to
> the floor. In the case of the RV the shoulder straps are tied to a
> point far behind you. Some kind of loop that was slightly above your
> shoulder on the cross member behind the seats to feed each shoulder
> strap through could be added pretty easily. Maybe it is best to just
> let yourself get flinged into the baggage area. I don't think any of
> the three pilots I read about that ended up there, suffered any serious
> injury because of it. Maybe the lesson to learn it to mount what ever
> canopy breaker you decide on in the baggage area. To cover both
> possibilities, mount one in the baggage area and one in cockpit, or
> maybe mount it on the cross member behind the seats.
>
> --
> Chris W
>
> Gift Giving Made Easy
> Get the gifts you want &
> give the gifts they want
> http://thewishzone.com
>
>
>
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: Quick release "pull" pins |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jack Blomgren" <jackanet@hotmail.com>
Are any using (or maybe why not advisable to use) pull pins for
ground-adjustable peddle rails and links. Considering for my -8. Thanks,
Jack
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: Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have |
--> RV-List message posted by: Doug Weiler <dcw@nomadwi.com>
Hi folks:
Last fall I bought a Digiflight II for my RV-4 and consider it the best
investment I could possibility make for my airplane. I have flown over 100
different aircraft types in my flying career and the RVs are by far the best
handling machines on the planet. But that does not make them the most
stable on a long cross country. With the Digiflight the XC workload is
reduced to such a degree the long trips are a no-brainer. I can't say
enough good things about this autopilot. It is flawless, holds altitude
within 10 feet, lateral track within .05 of a NM. I use it all the time.
If you plan to fly your RV IFR, it is mandatory. Save your pennies, keep
the old car for a couple more years and buy an autopilot!!
Doug Weiler
N722DW, RV-4, 170 hrs TT
On 3/24/05 7:28 AM, "Fred Stucklen" <wstucklen1@cox.net> wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Fred Stucklen" <wstucklen1@cox.net>
>
> Paul,
>
> I used to feel this way too, but, as I get older, I'm finding it a lot
> more
> enjoyable on long cross country trips to turn on the autopilot and enjoy
> the ride. After two short stops, and 8 hours in the air, being "fresh"
> enough
> to be able to complete a 40 knot 90* crosswind at the destination is
> enough reason for an autopilot....
>
> Fred Stucklen
> RV-6A N926RV 375+ Hrs
> RV-6A N925RV 2008 Hrs
>
>
>
>
>
> From:
>
> "Valovich, Paul" <pvalovich@dcscorp.com>
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Valovich, Paul"
> <pvalovich@dcscorp.com>
>
> I'm in the avionics dreaming stage of my RV-8A construction. I'm
> debating the advantages of an autopilot - initially, based on my
> 4500
> hours in A-4's without an autopilot and acceptance that stabilized
> wing
> trim was always an impossible dream, I felt that an autopilot
> wasn't
> worth the hassle. I plan to do a lot of cross country flying, but
> I'm
> also one of those guys who doesn't defer to automobile cruise
> control.
> Anyone have biased opinions about RV autopilots?
>
> Paul Valovich
>
> RV-8A QB
>
> Ridgecrest, CA
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Quick release "pull" pins |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling2@earthlink.net>
There's minimal stress unless the copilot is trying to pull the stick out,
in which case I think he would have to be Hercules to shear a stainless
steel pin. Besides, every time you remove the stick you can inspect the
pin.
ps I HATE FINISHING FIBERGLASS!!!
Shemp/Jeff Dowling
RV-6A, N915JD
165 hours
Chicago/Louisville
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob C. " <flyboy.bob@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Quick release "pull" pins
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Bob C. " <flyboy.bob@gmail.com>
>
> How can you be sure you are getting equal strength, etc as the
> specified bolt? That would be one part I wouldn't want to fail in
> flight!
>
> Bob
>
>
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:50:12 -0800, JOHN STARN <jhstarn@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>> --> RV-List message posted by: "JOHN STARN" <jhstarn@verizon.net>
>>
>> Check out Reid Tool & Supply 1-800-253-0421 Stainless Steel catalog.
>> www.reidtool.com They have free catalogs
>> They have 3/16", 1/4", 5/16", 3/8" 1/2", 5/8", 3/4" and 1"
>> Quick release pins on page #39. 3/16" X .5" thru 3/8" X 5.0"
>> These are 303 SS. Max size is 1" X 8.0". $1.74 to $21.85
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Andy Gold" <winterland@rkymtnhi.com>
>> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: RV-List: Canopy Breaker Survival Gear
>>
>> > --> RV-List message posted by: "Andy Gold" <winterland@rkymtnhi.com>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling2@earthlink.net>
Get Alt Hold, consider lateral.
Shemp/Jeff Dowling
RV-6A, N915JD
165 hours
Chicago/Louisville
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr@petroblend.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr@petroblend.com>
>
> What follows is IMHO.
>
> If you plan to fly IFR in an RV, my "opinion" is that an autopilot is
> nearly
> mandatory. If you don't fly IFR suit yourself.
>
> Since you are a single seat fighter guy, AND IF you have not lost those
> skills..... You might be one of the few people who might be able to get
> along safely in IMC without one, but you would need to do mission planning
> like you did in the military, not climb in and blast off type IFR. I flew
> single pilot IFR without an A/P for years hauling freight and I thought I
> was pretty good, but the RV in unfamiliar territory without an A/P would
> be
> more than I want to bite off.
>
> I routinely fly long cross-country missions and I will not have another RV
> without one.
>
> I have a Navaid and an Altrak and I am very happy with both. When the
> navaid dies, it will become a Treo or a Trutrak, the jury is out on that
> leaning toward Trutrak pictorial pilot.
>
> Tailwinds,
> Doug Rozendaal
> do not archive
>
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | IO-320-B1A for RV9A? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Peter Mather" <peter@mather.com>
Has anyone used an IO-320-B1A on a 9 or 9A? or any othere Vans. At first
glance both the engine and prop off a Twin Commanche should work well as
speeds are quite similar. Any comments appreciated.
Best Regards
Peter
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North <wnorth@sdccd.edu>
I have about 300 hours on the navaid, and another 300 hours on the trio and
I would never go back to the navaid. This is particularly true if your GPS
has predictive functions and can anticipate a turn. The GNS garmins do this,
and I've heard some of the handhelds do as well now.
Also, to plug pending developments, since I do not work for trio, they are
soon to be beta testing their altitude/vert speed management system.
In fact, from my perspective, the best thing about Trutrak is they provide
competition, which keeps the prices down....
;{)
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
And....surprise, surprise....TruTrak is adding the "VS" functionality to
it's Altrak as well.
Just an FYI for those that didn't already know.
Cheers,
Stein
do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Wheeler North
Subject: RV-List: Navaid
--> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North <wnorth@sdccd.edu>
I have about 300 hours on the navaid, and another 300 hours on the trio and
I would never go back to the navaid. This is particularly true if your GPS
has predictive functions and can anticipate a turn. The GNS garmins do this,
and I've heard some of the handhelds do as well now.
Also, to plug pending developments, since I do not work for trio, they are
soon to be beta testing their altitude/vert speed management system.
In fact, from my perspective, the best thing about Trutrak is they provide
competition, which keeps the prices down....
;{)
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Cary <cary@Fusion.gat.com>
Van's instructions say not to prime anything inside of the tank but I
was wondering about alodine. There are a couple parts that are not
alclad which might benefit from some protection. Is alodine OK
inside tank or should I not worry and leave everything inside tank
alone?
Bill RV-9A wings
Ramona, CA
--
William Cary
Manager: Electrical Systems Engineering
GENERAL ATOMICS
Fusion Group
Tel. (858)455-2486, Fax (858)455-4190
e-mail cary@fusion.gat.com
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Paul Trotter <ptrotter@acm.org>
Bill,
I think alodining fuel tank components is ok. I asked Van's and they said
no problem. In order to meet Mil-spec, tank sealants must be tested on
alodined surfaces, so there should be no sealing problems.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Cary" <cary@Fusion.gat.com>
Subject: RV-List: Tank Prep
> --> RV-List message posted by: Bill Cary <cary@Fusion.gat.com>
>
> Van's instructions say not to prime anything inside of the tank but I
> was wondering about alodine. There are a couple parts that are not
> alclad which might benefit from some protection. Is alodine OK
> inside tank or should I not worry and leave everything inside tank
> alone?
>
> Bill RV-9A wings
> Ramona, CA
> --
>
> William Cary
> Manager: Electrical Systems Engineering
> GENERAL ATOMICS
> Fusion Group
> Tel. (858)455-2486, Fax (858)455-4190
> e-mail cary@fusion.gat.com
>
>
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Cary <cary@Fusion.gat.com>
Do Not Archive
Thanks for the info Paul. Much appreciated.
Bill
Paul Trotter wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: Paul Trotter <ptrotter@acm.org>
>
>Bill,
>
>I think alodining fuel tank components is ok. I asked Van's and they said
>no problem. In order to meet Mil-spec, tank sealants must be tested on
>alodined surfaces, so there should be no sealing problems.
>
>Paul
>
--
Bill RV-9A wings
Ramona, CA
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: Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have |
--> RV-List message posted by: HCRV6@aol.com
In a message dated 3/23/05 5:24:45 PM Pacific Standard Time,
cwcrane@gbronline.com writes:
> <<The Navaid will track a GPS course easily, you just need the Smart
> Coupler (minewas built into the head) and a GPS that will output data.
> >>
> I have the same Navaid with built in coupler and a panel mounted hand held
> Garmin 195 that has a data output line. As far as I can tell it is wired
> correctly to the Navaid. I would certainly appreciate any suggestions.
Harry Crosby
RV-6, 50 hours
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: | Question on Registration paperwork |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Paul Besing" <paul@kitlog.com>
If you own a copy of KitLog Pro, all of this documentation, including the
AC20-27E and sample forms are included. You can edit them in PDF format for
a clean presentation.
If not, these same forms are all available on the FAA website. Again,
review 20-27E and that should answer all your questions. If you list
yourself as the manufacturer, and don't call it an RV, you *could* save
money on your taxes. That is whole other topic though, and there are pros
(tax savings) and cons (resale, insurance) to calling it an RV.
Paul Besing
RV-6A Sold
RV-10 Soon
Kitlog Builder's Software
www.kitlog.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Hopperdhh@aol.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: Question on Registration paperwork
--> RV-List message posted by: Hopperdhh@aol.com
Richard,
I don't know if this has been mentioned, but be sure to answer "Number of"
as "seats two." This cost me about a month of waiting for my registration.
It may be worth your while to get a copy of AC 20-27E which has samples of
all this paperwork. It has to be perfect or the feds will bounce it back
to
you.
Hope all goes well for you.
Dan Hopper
Walton, IN
RV-7A (Was flying, now being painted)
In a message dated 3/24/05 1:44:28 A.M. US Eastern Standard Time,
mrobert569@hotmail.com writes:
Richard,
Leave the bill of sale from Van's as is and list your name as the
manufacturer on the registration application. Don't forget to send the
notarized affidavit of ownership.
Mike Robertson
Das Fed
>From: "Richard Suffoletto" <rsuffoletto@hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: rv-list@matronics.com
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: Question on Registration paperwork
>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 09:08:55 -0800
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Richard Suffoletto"
><rsuffoletto@hotmail.com>
>
>
>I have searched the archives and have not found the answer to this.
>
>Who is listed as the manufacturer on form 8050-1 ?
>
>The "kit" bill of sale from Van's does not list a manufacturer just the
>model number.
>
>If I list myself as the manufacuturer on form 8050-1 do I also change the
>kit bill of sale form?
>
>I'm sure this has been asked many times but darn if I could find it in
the
>archives...
>
>Thanks
>
>Richard
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: IO-320-B1A for RV9A? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie Kuss <chaztuna@adelphia.net>
Peter,
Haven't done it myself. However, my buddy, Eric Hensen has one on his
RV6. The B1A uses a Dynafocal 2 mount (18 degrees rather than 30 degrees)
as opposed to the more common Dynafocal 1 mount. The Dynafocal 2 mounts are
designed for engines on pylons (a twin). The engine sits much further
forward. The Dynafocal 1 mount is the preferred (less transmitted
vibration) mount for any RV.
The B1A also requires special (expen$ive) spacers between the crankcase
and the mounts. Make sure you get these with your engine. If you plan on
rebuilding the engine, you can have Divco convert your crankcases from
Dynafocal 2 to Dynafocal 1 for a reasonable fee. My friend didn't get the
spacers with his engine. It was a PITA to find them. He didn't learn of the
mounting difference until AFTER he got his crankcases back from Divco! :-(
Is this engine a narrow deck (1960s) or wide deck (1970s & later) model?
It is an IO-320-B1A and not a LIO-320-B1A, I hope.
Charlie Kuss
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Peter Mather" <peter@mather.com>
>
>Has anyone used an IO-320-B1A on a 9 or 9A? or any othere Vans. At first
>glance both the engine and prop off a Twin Commanche should work well as
>speeds are quite similar. Any comments appreciated.
>
>Best Regards
>
>Peter
>
>
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie Kuss <chaztuna@adelphia.net>
Bill
The Mil-Specs state that ProSeal (and clones) will adhere better to an
Alodined surface, as opposed to bare aluminum.
Charlie Kuss
>--> RV-List message posted by: Bill Cary <cary@Fusion.gat.com>
>
>Van's instructions say not to prime anything inside of the tank but I
>was wondering about alodine. There are a couple parts that are not
>alclad which might benefit from some protection. Is alodine OK
>inside tank or should I not worry and leave everything inside tank
>alone?
>
>Bill RV-9A wings
>Ramona, CA
>--
>
>William Cary
>Manager: Electrical Systems Engineering
>GENERAL ATOMICS
>Fusion Group
>Tel. (858)455-2486, Fax (858)455-4190
>e-mail cary@fusion.gat.com
>
>
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: "JT Helms" <jhelms@nationair.com>
That discount is available thru any agent that uses AIG.
Most agents that exist today work with all the companies that'll do
aviation.
JT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob 1" <rv3a.1@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Insurance
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Bob 1" <rv3a.1@comcast.net>
>
>
> AOPA gives a 5% discount....
> If you're a member.
> They use AIG.
>
>
> > Give Nationair a call. They use Phoenix and EAA.
> >
> > Shemp/Jeff Dowling
> > RV-6A, N915JD
> > 165 hours
> > Chicago/Louisville
>
>
> > > Hello All,
> > > What is the preferred insurance provider to use for a group of five
> people
> > > in an
> > > RV-6A?
> > > Thanks,
> > > Paul Richardson
> > >
> > > Do not archive
>
>
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
Ivan:
An article of "oversquare" operations from Lycoming is noted below. This has to
do more with constant speed props but is related to your question. To answer
you question, you are OK oversquare and your numbers indicate you are making about
87%-89% power. Your MAP number of 25-25.5" inches at 5000 feet is pretty
good. Sounds like you are getting may be 1" more MAP than expected for static
conditions. You did not state the pressure altitude which may be lower than 5000
feet. (An excerpt form the Lycoming article)
"Is it a fact, or is it fiction, that engines with constant speed props should
not use power settings where inches of mercury exceed RPM in hundreds? I am referring
of course to non-turbocharged engines in general ."
The answer to this question is easily found in cruise power charts of the airframe
Pilots Operating Handbook. Whatever the combinations of RPM and MP listed
in the charts they have been flight tested and approved by the airframe and powerplant
engineers. Therefore, if there are power settings such as 2100 RPM and
24" MP in the power chart, they are approved for use.
The confusion over so-called "squared" power settings (i. e. 2400 x 24" MP), appears
to have been a carry-over from some models of the old radial engines which
were vulnerable to excessive bearing wear where a MP higher than "squared"
was used. More pressure on the bearings with the higher than "squared" MP was
the cause of their problem. However, changes in design, metals, and lubricants
permit changes in operation in the more modern flat opposed powerplants.
There are limits to how oversquare you go, but Skylor is correct it is an old wives
tale and likely rooted in some limits of early aircraft engines. However,
the actual amount of "oversquare" does have practical limits and recommendations
by Lycoming. Recommend you get the operation manual for the engine you have.
Of course with a fixed pitch prop you do not directly control RPM as you do
with a C/S prop. The 28-29" at 2200-2300 rpm (5-6" difference), Skylor states
is only on the first part of the initial take off run at SL on an engine with
a fixed pitch prop. For cruise or climb you will not see these numbers and MAP
and RPM will be closer. George
Lycoming operation tip from the "FLYER" newsletter
http://www.lycoming.textron.com/main.jsp?bodyPage=support/publications/keyReprints/operation/powerSettings.html
Other key reprints of operation articles from Lycoming
http://www.lycoming.textron.com/main.jsp?bodyPage=/support/publications/keyReprints/operation.html
> RV-List message posted by: Skylor Piper <skylor4@yahoo.com>
>
>"Oversquare" is somewhat of an old wives tale, and is
>totally arbitrary. You will not hurt the engine
>running it at 2450/25.5. Many sea level operators
>will see 29-30" at 2200-2300 static.
>
>http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/186778-1.html
>Skylor
>RV-8 QB
>
> > Ivan McLaws <toejam@cybertrails.com> wrote:
> > RV-List message posted by: "Ivan McLaws"
> >
> > I have an IO-360 on an RV-6A with a Sterba Prop. It
> > can be converted to C/S.
> >
> > I have a manifold pressure gauge which is
> > operational. At my home airport 5,000 ft I get a
> > static RPM of 2450 with the manifold pressure rising
> > to 25-25.5.
> > My question is am I doing major damage with the
> > current situation or are most of the people out
> > there with fixed props doing the same thing to their
> > engines and not knowing it because they don't have a
> > manifold pressure gauge?
---------------------------------
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>
Hi Bill,
The information that I was given at the local FBO re. Alodine in the tanks
was: "Yes it will improve the surface grip or bite for the sealant if used
after scowering the contact areas".
I used Alumaprep and Scotch-Brite for all interior surfaces then used a
small stainless steel welders wire brush for the contact areas (Do not use
standard steel brushes on Aluminium) Alodined. then I riveted the tanks I
used two thirds of a quart of pro-seal (one third for each tank) and
actually I still could have used less and they tested without leaks.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Cary" <cary@Fusion.gat.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Tank Prep
> --> RV-List message posted by: Bill Cary <cary@Fusion.gat.com>
>
> Do Not Archive
>
> Thanks for the info Paul. Much appreciated.
>
> Bill
>
>
> Paul Trotter wrote:
>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: Paul Trotter <ptrotter@acm.org>
>>
>>Bill,
>>
>>I think alodining fuel tank components is ok. I asked Van's and they said
>>no problem. In order to meet Mil-spec, tank sealants must be tested on
>>alodined surfaces, so there should be no sealing problems.
>>
>>Paul
>>
>
> --
> Bill RV-9A wings
> Ramona, CA
>
>
>
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: Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have |
--> RV-List message posted by: CW Crane <cwcrane@gbronline.com>
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 14:56:24 EST, you wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: HCRV6@aol.com
>
>In a message dated 3/23/05 5:24:45 PM Pacific Standard Time,
>cwcrane@gbronline.com writes:
>
>> <<The Navaid will track a GPS course easily, you just need the Smart
>> Coupler (mine was built into the head) and a GPS that will output data.
>> >>
>
>> I have the same Navaid with built in coupler and a panel mounted hand held
>> Garmin 195 that has a data output line. As far as I can tell it is wired
>> correctly to the Navaid. I would certainly appreciate any suggestions.
>
>Harry Crosby
>RV-6, 50 hours
>
Harry,
It has been a few years since I wired it up and I do not have the plane or
documentation anymore. The data line went in on pin 9? to be converted to
analog by the coupler. The plus and minus from the coupler was output on two
other pins (can't recall which ones, the Navaid/Smart Coupler documentation
should tell you). These wires were then looped back into the Loran input pins
on the Navaid. I had a sub panel switch that would let you choose track or
course that plugged into the head with a telephone plug. I think I remember it
being somewhat counter-intuitive as to which one to use with the GPS, maybe
someone that is current with the Navaid can help us with the specifics.
You will need some kind of signal ground to make the GPS and the Navaid
communicate. I used on board power for my GPS so the ground lead from the GPS
and the ground/negative wire on the Navaid were connected. If you are using
batteries you may need a separate signal ground to the negative of the Navaid.
I could not get mine to work initially but it was just my misunderstanding that
my GPS did not output the data signal by default and I had to turn it on using
one of the setup items. IIRC there were two or three different data stream
standards that the GPS would output so it took a couple of tries there also.
Sorry to be so vague about the pin numbers and the data standard but maybe
someone can chime in with the specifics or you can get them from James Ham, the
builder of the Smart Coupler. The telephone I have for him is (650) 326-2669 or
online at www.porcine.com.
Since you have all the pieces, you should be able to make it work. It is so
nice to set a "go to" or "activate route" on the GPS then engage the autopilot,
just look out for those TFR's.
CW Crane
RV-6A sold
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Canopy Breaker Tool |
--> RV-List message posted by: James H Nelson <rv9jim@juno.com>
Nope! a small 22 will do the trick and also provide a rabbit if you get
hungry. CCP, got one (carried one for 12 years) and a choice of noise
makers. Plus, many states have a reprocity agreement on CCP. Of course,
some gestapo states like Ill and NJ, NY and the very liberal NE hate
noise makers of that varity. Yes save one for number one as being a
crispy critter is a bad way to go. (32 yrs military helicopter pilot)
You have to try very hard to ignite gas with a firearm. It can be done.
Kabong has merits.
Jim Nelson
do not archive
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: Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have |
--> RV-List message posted by: DOUGPFLYRV@aol.com
Paul, I highly recommend an A/P for any RV to be flown IFR. I have flown
corporate since 1965 and have 23,000 hours in many different types from RV's to
P-51, and various SE & ME pistons, turboprops and jets. I WILL NOT FLY AN RV
IFR WITHOUT AN A/P. They are very quick & sensitive. You can't start to look
at charts and such without it going somewhere you don't want it to go. I
have a Trutrak with altitude hold in the RV7 and love it. There are others you
might look at and make your choice. Good luck and enjoy your RV.
Doug Preston
RV7 N731RV
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: | Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@earthlink.net>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Valovich, Paul"
> <pvalovich@dcscorp.com>
>
> I'm in the avionics dreaming stage of my RV-8A construction.
> I'm debating the advantages of an autopilot - initially,
> based on my 4500 hours in A-4's without an autopilot and
> acceptance that stabilized wing trim was always an impossible
> dream, I felt that an autopilot wasn't worth the hassle. I
> plan to do a lot of cross country flying, but I'm also one of
> those guys who doesn't defer to automobile cruise control.
> Anyone have biased opinions about RV autopilots?
>
> Paul Valovich
Paul, I just logged 9.3 hours on the Hobbs today, and 9 last Saturday. I
can't imagine doing cross country without a two axis autopilot. RV's will
not stay put long if you look away.
Alex Peterson
RV6-A 602 hours
Maple Grove, MN
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Evan and Megan Johnson" <evmeg@snowcrest.net>
Wow!......9.3 hours in an RV 6 will get some miles under your butt.Are you
just having fun or is it business?
Evan Johnson
www.evansaviationproducts.com
(530)247-0375
(530)351-1776 cell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Autopilot - To Have or Not to Have
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson"
<alexpeterson@earthlink.net>
>
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: "Valovich, Paul"
> > <pvalovich@dcscorp.com>
> >
> > I'm in the avionics dreaming stage of my RV-8A construction.
> > I'm debating the advantages of an autopilot - initially,
> > based on my 4500 hours in A-4's without an autopilot and
> > acceptance that stabilized wing trim was always an impossible
> > dream, I felt that an autopilot wasn't worth the hassle. I
> > plan to do a lot of cross country flying, but I'm also one of
> > those guys who doesn't defer to automobile cruise control.
> > Anyone have biased opinions about RV autopilots?
> >
> > Paul Valovich
>
> Paul, I just logged 9.3 hours on the Hobbs today, and 9 last Saturday. I
> can't imagine doing cross country without a two axis autopilot. RV's will
> not stay put long if you look away.
>
> Alex Peterson
> RV6-A 602 hours
> Maple Grove, MN
>
> http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/
>
>
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: IO-320-B1A for RV9A? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "RV6 Flyer" <rv6_flyer@hotmail.com>
Becareful with the Twin Commanche prop. If I remember correctly, it is a
longer hub and throws the blades too far out in front of the RV cowling. A
friend that tried to use the prop had to have the hub changed as the Twin
Commanche hub that the OLD Fixed Pitch cowl that Van use to have was too
short. Also watch out for the counter-weighted props that have ADs out
against them.
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,644 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
http://SoCAL_WVAF.rvproject.com
----Original Message Follows----
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Peter Mather" <peter@mather.com>
>
>Has anyone used an IO-320-B1A on a 9 or 9A? or any othere Vans. At first
>glance both the engine and prop off a Twin Commanche should work well as
>speeds are quite similar. Any comments appreciated.
>
>Best Regards
>
>Peter
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: | Australian RV accidents (was Canopy Breaker Survival Gear) |
--> RV-List message posted by: Scott Lewis <rv10@tpg.com.au>
Jim Oke wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jim Oke <wjoke@shaw.ca>
>
> I recall reading an Australian accident investigation report on a -6 mishap
> some years ago. (Perhaps some of our colleagues from Oz could point out a
> web-link). Apart from the cause of the accident (I think it was a prop blade
> failure) the behaviour of the structure on impact was discussed. On touching
> down on a rough surface, the nose dug in and came to an abrupt stop with
> inertia driving the tail section further forward. Analysis was that the
> fuselage longerons in the cockpit area failed by bowing or buckling outward.
> This allowed the tail cone to continue upwards and forward into the cockpit
> area fatally injuring the pilot (and sole occupant). Short story is that a
> good seat belt installation will not help much if the cockpit space deforms
> in a crash, (ie, gets crushed.) Not a happy thought.
G'day all,
Here is the link to this report:
http://www.atsb.gov.au/aviation/occurs/occurs_detail.cfm?ID=402
And a similar involving an RV-3:
http://www.atsb.gov.au/aviation/occurs/occurs_detail.cfm?ID=96
Jim made a slight error in his write-up. The fatal injuries to the
pilots in these cases were not due to the tailcone entering the cockpit.
Rather they were due to the tailcone, and hence seat belt attach
points, moving forward relative to the pilot, loosening the shoulder
straps. This didn't occur due to the nose wheel digging in; they both
hit the ground at a rate of knots, and the RV-6 was banked 90 degrees at
the time.
My thoughts; no matter what you are flying, you hit the ground as
described in these reports - you will be very lucky to survive. As
others have said, an opinion that is worth exactly what you paid for it!
Seeya,
Scott Lewis
RV-10 40172 VH-DRS
Adelaide, South Australia
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling2@earthlink.net>
I dont work for Navaid and I think it works fine. I dont see a need for
additional functionality. Predictive functions, anticipating a turn... so
what. The Navaid turns to the next course just fine, and you can get them a
lot cheaper. IMHO, spend the money on something you'll actually use.
Shemp/Jeff Dowling
RV-6A, N915JD
165 hours
Chicago/Louisville
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Navaid
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
>
> And....surprise, surprise....TruTrak is adding the "VS" functionality to
> it's Altrak as well.
>
> Just an FYI for those that didn't already know.
>
> Cheers,
> Stein
>
> do not archive
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Wheeler North
> To: 'rv-list@matronics.com'
> Subject: RV-List: Navaid
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North <wnorth@sdccd.edu>
>
>
> I have about 300 hours on the navaid, and another 300 hours on the trio
> and
> I would never go back to the navaid. This is particularly true if your GPS
> has predictive functions and can anticipate a turn. The GNS garmins do
> this,
> and I've heard some of the handhelds do as well now.
>
> Also, to plug pending developments, since I do not work for trio, they are
> soon to be beta testing their altitude/vert speed management system.
>
> In fact, from my perspective, the best thing about Trutrak is they provide
> competition, which keeps the prices down....
>
> ;{)
>
>
>
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Canopy Breaker Survival Gear |
--> RV-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
Sam:
My post asked for comments and suggestions to several links of possible canopy
egress tools, survival knives, hatchets and a control stick bubble buster, after
researching the achieves. Your response on the subject stated:
> Posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
>
>"As has been mentioned MANY TIMES on this forum, the side-by-side RVs
>are ALREADY carrying a good canopy bustin' tool. Make sure you provide for
>removal of the passenger control stick;
No, Sam, you have mentioned it several times on this forum. I saw your posts, so
what if you made this comment (many times). I am not looking for your reiterated
idea, but new input. No offense. I guess I need not look further than your
post. Your not so subtle hint is this topic is played out and the last word
has been spoken is patronizing.
I think many new ideas have come out from this thread. If you have your mind made
up or posted all there is to know on the topic several times, why post it
again. In the future suggest you omit the as has been mentioned many times or
just dont reply.
For the record you clip the Pax Contl stick to the floor 95% of the time and when
you use it, you dont secure it. Got it. I trust my passengers and don't need
to have the only control stick to know I'm the PIC.
> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
>George, I appreciate your apologies, but for the life of me I can't
>figure out why you are apologizing!
> In no part of my post did I state that I thought the control stick was
"the definitive
> device to extricate ones self from an inverted RV".
Whaaaaa? Come on give me a break. You know what you wrote and really meant. This
second reply, for the life of me is smugness thinly veiled as confusion. You
are right I dont owe you any apologies.
Your replies only mentioned using a control stick as an egress tool, so what is
the word according to Sam. If you got something new, lets hear it. As a result
of this thread I got some great tips, not relying on one egress tool, having
access to it, flying with a control stick not secured into its base is a bad
idea (ouch) and you can secure the stick and still have quick removal.
>Please, please carefully read posts before you attach a conclusion or
>implication to someone's opinion that can't be drawn from the actual post.
What are you talking about? Sam, Please, please read what you write before you
post it, your tone is patronizing. I can and will make any conclusions I want
whenever I want, Thanks for the warning.
I read all your posts and made no conclusion or implication. Please, please dont
reply to any more of my dumb post, at least if you are going to be contentious
>If you wish to amend your apologies for implying that I said something
>that I didn't, I will accept that. :-)
Nope
>I have a Leatherman tool attached to my shoulder harness. That is
>another of my options for breaching the canopy.
Great you thought of everything. First time you said anything about it. I just
got the idea for a back-up tool, like a folding knife in the pocket or attached
to the shoulder strap for easy access from Franks post three days ago. This
is great idea and appreciate his input..
I have about 800 hours in RVs and working on my 2rd RV, so I am still learning.
I learned several great tips from this thread. Thanks for those replies.
Have a Nice Day
Regards George, RV-4, RV-7, CE500, B737/757/767, CFI, CFII, MEI, ATP, BSME
---------------------------------
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: wing incidence |
--> RV-List message posted by: "lancenewman" <lancenewman@comcast.net>
You might already know this, but you don't set the wing incidence angle at
the wing. Any adjustment is done at the horizontal stabilizer relative to
the wing. Don't set the horizontal stab incidence angle until the wing is
set. The wing should show 1 degree positive incidence angle relative to the
horizontal stab being neutral in level flight attitude. Level cruise flight
is when the fuselage is leveled front to back at the main longeron line. If
you don't have the procedure for measuring this with the 3 and 1/16th spacer
plate on the level, go over it with tech support at Vans.
Critical Adjustments
Be sure the aft mounting point single 5/16" bolt is as near center as
possible with I believe a minimum edge distance of 7/8", look in the plans
for the exact dimension. This is the weak point in the wing attachment and
proper procedure is critical here. This should bring the wing down to where
it is flush with the bottom fuselage skin which is a good place to be. Work
very hard to ensure incidence angle of both wings is exactly the same. This
will greatly effect the rigging of the airplane and make it fly true. If you
don't have the procedure for measuring this with the 3 and 1/16th spacer
plate on the level, go over it with tech support at Vans. Use 4 plumb bobs
to set the rake of the wing from the leading edge. A small laser level makes
this very easy to do. Shine it across all 4 plumb bobs. One mounted at the
root and outboard leading edge of each wing. You will need 3 to 3 guys to do
this right. Take your time and clamp and triple check the distances before
drilling.
When it is all said and done, you should require minimal elevator trim
adjustment to trim from climbout to level flight. About 1/2 to 3/4 a turn on
the manual trim wheel. Also your elevator counterweight should be flush with
the horizontal stabilizer at the intersection point when you are in level
flight. There should be no visual offset.
Good
Luck
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Orear" <jorear@new.rr.com>
Subject: RV-List: wing incidence
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Orear" <jorear@new.rr.com>
>
> List:
>
> Just trying to plan ahead here.....What is the maximum that you can
> actually adjust/set the incidence on a 6/6A wing? A full degree?? Half a
> degree?? It seems that with the fit of the spars to the fuselage bulkhead
> that there would be very little room for making any significant change in
> the incidence of the wing.
>
> If you need to change the incidence to any degree, you will have to put
> quite a bit of force on the aft edge of the wing to get any movement back
> there, thus really putting a heavy shear load on that one poor bolt in the
> rear spar.
>
> I don't have my wings installed yet, so I am just speculating here. Am I
> concerned over nothing??
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Jeff Orear
> RV6A N782P (reserved)
> Finishing up firewall forward
> Peshtigo, WI
>
>
>
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stein Bruch" <stein@steinair.com>
It's not like the Navaid is half price or anything....The Navaid is not a
"Lot" cheaper than either Trio or TruTrak. You're looking at $1300.00 vs.
$1500.00 +/- for the others.
Regardless of "additional functionality", the world is moving away from Gyro
driven autopilots to the newer generation digital ap's. Servos are getting
better, functions are getting better, and price is staying reasonable.
Technology is moving forward....
Just my 2 cents as usual...not worth too much!
Cheers,
Stein.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jeff Dowling
Subject: Re: RV-List: Navaid
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling2@earthlink.net>
I dont work for Navaid and I think it works fine. I dont see a need for
additional functionality. Predictive functions, anticipating a turn... so
what. The Navaid turns to the next course just fine, and you can get them a
lot cheaper. IMHO, spend the money on something you'll actually use.
Shemp/Jeff Dowling
RV-6A, N915JD
165 hours
Chicago/Louisville
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: cockpit noise abatement? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "lancenewman" <lancenewman@comcast.net>
Look up high tech foams on the internet. They sell 2 types of foam. a 1/8"
firewall foam with a metal dampening shield and a 1/2 inch general purpose
sound dampening foam. Put both on the floor pan ahead of the spar and the
firewall as well as the cockpit sides ahead of the firewall. The extra metal
shield reduces impact vibration from the exhaust pulses induced through
firewall and floorpan. The 1/2 inch foam is good for reducing wind noise and
fuselage vibration. Cut out squares and put them aft of the rear baggage
door on each panel as well as on the baggage door. This will greatly reduces
resonant vibration associated with the thin fuselage skins of an RV. The
bent skins are stiff and do not require the foam. You will love the results.
LN
----- Original Message -----
From: <Hopperdhh@aol.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: cockpit noise abatement?
> --> RV-List message posted by: Hopperdhh@aol.com
>
>
> Lucky,
>
> Not noise related, but does relate to some of your post:
>
> Abby at Flightline Interiors sells the pushrod boots for the fuselage at
> the
> wing roots. It would be easier to install them with the wings off.
>
> Dan Hopper
> RV-7A
>
>
> In a message dated 3/20/05 9:24:18 P.M. US Eastern Standard Time,
> luckymacy@comcast.net writes:
>
> This is probably a stretch but has anyone actually done a before and
> after
> type test on adding one of the *popular* heat/noise abatement materials
> onto
> the firewall? I've ridden in a few different RVs of various makes and
> they
> were all loud and were hot or cold depending on what the outside was
> doing.
> Can't recall my feet in a side by side being influenced by firewall temp.
> Some
> were all decked out in leather and filled in panels everywhere and some
> were
> plain. I didn't seem to notice the difference. My hunch is closing off
> the
> big fuse holes like ailerons and such will probably help the most but now
> is
> the time for me to finish off the firewall barrier if I do it at all.
>
> thx,
> lucky
>
>
>
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Australian RV accidents (was Canopy Breaker Survival Gear) |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Paul Olsen" <oll@tpg.com.au>
From my reading.
As a result of these accidents (RV6, RV3) a report surfaced questioning
the low speed aerodynamic characteristics, whilst making a case for the need
to
strengthen the canopy deck rails of the RV's. Modifications were also
engineered.
http://www.saoginc.com/%5Cnewsletters%5C112002.htm
This was taken up with Vans who subsequently carried out testing on
the fuselage of a stock built RV-6.
Results:-
Fuselage structure withstood a static load of 26 Gs with no obvious
deformation. (a dynamic load of 26 Gs is said to cause irreparable damage
to body organs.)
Article including a letter from Vans explaining the above was published
in the June/July 2004 edition of the Sports Aircraft Association of
Australia Inc
'Airsport Magazine'
Paul Olsen
SAAA 04689
RV7 QB(emp)
Queensland Australia
> G'day all,
>
> Here is the link to this report:
> http://www.atsb.gov.au/aviation/occurs/occurs_detail.cfm?ID=402
>
> And a similar involving an RV-3:
> http://www.atsb.gov.au/aviation/occurs/occurs_detail.cfm?ID=96
>
> Jim made a slight error in his write-up. The fatal injuries to the
> pilots in these cases were not due to the tailcone entering the cockpit.
> Rather they were due to the tailcone, and hence seat belt attach
> points, moving forward relative to the pilot, loosening the shoulder
> straps. This didn't occur due to the nose wheel digging in; they both
> hit the ground at a rate of knots, and the RV-6 was banked 90 degrees at
> the time.
>
> My thoughts; no matter what you are flying, you hit the ground as
> described in these reports - you will be very lucky to survive. As
> others have said, an opinion that is worth exactly what you paid for it!
>
> Seeya,
> Scott Lewis
> RV-10 40172 VH-DRS
> Adelaide, South Australia
>
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! --
|