---------------------------------------------------------- RV-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sat 12/17/05: 23 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 01:05 AM - RV-7 center section question () 2. 02:04 AM - Re: MIL-PRF-83282 Brake (Hydraulic) Fluid (Todd Bartrim) 3. 04:36 AM - Re: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)) 4. 05:10 AM - DOT-5 Brake Fluid (Ron Brown) 5. 05:22 AM - FW: RV-4 for sale (Douglas Kohser) 6. 06:12 AM - Re: RV-7 center section question (Bob Collins) 7. 08:06 AM - Re: MIL-PRF-83282 Brake (Hydraulic) Fluid (linn walters) 8. 08:21 AM - Re: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? (Rob Prior (rv7)) 9. 08:49 AM - Re: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? (Dan Checkoway) 10. 09:21 AM - Re: MIL-PRF-83282 Brake (Hydraulic) Fluid (Randy Lervold) 11. 09:23 AM - Re: MIL-PRF-83282 Brake (Hydraulic) Fluid (Ron Lee) 12. 10:32 AM - Re: MIL-PRF-83282 Brake (Hydraulic) Fluid (Bob J) 13. 11:17 AM - [ George McNutt ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! (Email List Photo Shares) 14. 12:50 PM - Re: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)) 15. 01:16 PM - tail wheel and transition training needed (RV6n) 16. 01:18 PM - Re: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? (Kyle Boatright) 17. 01:58 PM - Re: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? (Kevin Horton) 18. 02:03 PM - Re: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? (Rob Prior (rv7)) 19. 02:54 PM - Source for : MIL-PRF-83282 Brake (Hydraulic) Fluid (Ed Anderson) 20. 04:50 PM - Re: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? (Jerry Springer) 21. 05:09 PM - Re: tail wheel and transition training needed () 22. 05:43 PM - Re: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? (Randy Lervold) 23. 06:41 PM - Re: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 01:05:43 AM PST US From: Subject: RV-List: RV-7 center section question --> RV-List message posted by: I'm working on the F-704 center section bulkhead of my RV. As I was working on the cover plate brackets (F782 and F783), I found that the two bottom holes for the longer of the brackets were obstructed by very large rivets. There were supposed to be holes there for bolts. Has anyone else encountered this? Right now, I'm deciding to just cut off the flange of the bracket to go around the rivet or to drill out the rivet. I don't relish the idea of the drilling. I have to see what all the brackets support, first. Maybe the fuel selector? I'll check that out at my next building session. It seems that's all it was used for in my -6A. Jim Sears in KY ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 02:04:15 AM PST US From: "Todd Bartrim" Subject: RE: RV-List: MIL-PRF-83282 Brake (Hydraulic) Fluid --> RV-List message posted by: "Todd Bartrim" Last year I switched to ATF, based on info from this list, where it seemed to have great reviews. Unfortunately due to a way too busy year I never had time to fly again until early this winter, but first I wanted to put on new tires and needed to purge the brake system. It was -15C on the day I was doing this (outside - no hangar) and there was absolutely no way I could get the ATF to flow in the brake lines. The next day I brought an air compressor and put a shrader fitting in place of the fluid reservoir vent. It took 120psi of air to finally force the ATF out. I then flushed out the system using gas-line anti freeze (I have Viton o-rings) then completely flushed it out with a litre of DOT5. The DOT5 is working great now and I'm sure that ATF may work great in the south, but for anyone up in the colder climates(Jim?), I'd recommend avoiding it. Dot5 seems to be working great though just my $.02 RV9, 13Bturbo Todd ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 04:36:30 AM PST US Subject: RE: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? From: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" --> RV-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" Frankly Im pissed off to find this out after 25 years. How much fun has been left on the table all these years? Im really ticked off. Oh Im sure we will hear from yee ole "it saved a lot of lives' folks. Bottom line is this little tid bit of information is revolutionary for every RV owner. AND it might just be the happiest most annoying piece of information I have ever heard. Its like adding 250# of acro gross weight to every acro rv built. ARGH!!! I left a lot of fun on the ground over the years. I want to give Randy a big kiss for extracting this piece of information. Then I think Ill just slap him for waiting so long to do it:) Great work Randy! Mike Do not archive -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Skylor Piper Subject: Re: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? --> RV-List message posted by: Skylor Piper That's absolutely true! However, one would assume that Van's load calculations are based on both full and empty fuel tank cases to cover the full range of loading possibilities...if that's the case, aerobatic gross + full fuel tanks should not necessarily have too much impact on the mid span spar loads. I seem to recall that some speculation of N58RV's failure centered around the possibility of over G AND roll input. My memory is suspect, though. Skylor --- Kyle Boatright wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: "Kyle Boatright" > > > The interesting thing here is that Van's has > published (Via the RVator) that > the weak point for the RV-4 and RV-6 wing is just > outboard of the fuel tank. > I believe the same thing holds true for the RV-7 and > RV-8 (isn't that where > the factory RV-8's wing failed?). Fuel in the wing > tanks does result in > higher bending moments in the portion of the wing > outboard of the tank, so > I'd have assumed that fuel should be considered when > calculating aerobatic > weight. > > I'm confused. > > KB > > > > browse > Subscriptions page, > FAQ, > > Admin. > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 05:10:27 AM PST US From: "Ron Brown" Subject: RV-List: DOT-5 Brake Fluid --> RV-List message posted by: "Ron Brown" --> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" While on the subject of brake fluid; Does anybody out there have any experience with DOT-5 synthetic brake fluid? Pros and Cons? Jim in Kelowna Jim, Nearly ALL Velocities use DOT5 since they feature Datsun/Nissan master cylinders (which won't work with 5606) and MATCO calipers. Some folks have converted the MATCOs to Clevelands. DOT5 works fine - just a bit expensive at $30 a quart (NAPA). Ronnie Brown N713MR - Velocity RG ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 05:22:22 AM PST US From: "Douglas Kohser" Subject: RV-List: FW: RV-4 for sale 1.43 HTML_TINY_FONT RAW: body contains 1 or 0-point font --> RV-List message posted by: "Douglas Kohser" I'm posting this for a friend of a friend. It is located in the Atlanta, GA area. I'm not sure but there might even be some tools involved. O time on engine since overhaul. I believe the engine is 160 HP, but not positive. Contact Jere as listed below for more information. Douglas Kohser dckoh@mindspring.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Jere Rosser Subject: Charlie,s RV-4 RV-4 airframe 90% completed, overhauled 0-320 with Prince Prop, all VFR instruments, Panel Mount GPS(Garmin), Transponder with Mode C, Com, and Antennae. All support equipment included, tech data and etc. Have to sell due to poor health. $21,000.00. Contact Jere Rosser at 770-592-1943. What do you think Doug? Jere Let fate take it's course directly to your email. ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 06:12:27 AM PST US From: "Bob Collins" Subject: RE: RV-List: RV-7 center section question --> RV-List message posted by: "Bob Collins" Jim: Doublecheck that you have not inadvertently reversed the forward center section with the aft center section. At tht spot on the aft center section, there is a rivet in place. Apologies if you've already done that. Bob St. Paul > brackets were obstructed by very large rivets. There were > supposed to be holes there for bolts. Has anyone else > encountered this? Right now, I'm deciding to just cut off > the flange of > the bracket to go around the rivet or to drill out the rivet. > I don't relish the idea of the drilling. I have to see what > all the brackets support, first. Maybe the fuel selector? > I'll check that out at my next building session. It seems > that's all it was used for in my -6A. > > Jim Sears in KY ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 08:06:56 AM PST US From: linn walters Subject: Re: RV-List: MIL-PRF-83282 Brake (Hydraulic) Fluid --> RV-List message posted by: linn walters For the most part Bruce. However, brake assemblies have reached the temperaqture point of failure of the seal on the brake puck, allowing fluid to leak under pressure (remember that it's constant braking that causes the heat problem in the first place) which then catches fire. I like the idea of having a fluid available that has a higher flash/ignition point ..... it surely is worth investigating. I also like the idea of ATF that someone mentioned, but don't have any data. Linn do not archive Bruce Gray wrote: >--> RV-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" > >Sounds like a brake line issue not a fluid issue. > >Bruce >SS brake lines. >www.glasair.org > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com >[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of linn walters >To: rv-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV-List: MIL-PRF-83282 Brake (Hydraulic) Fluid > > >--> RV-List message posted by: linn walters > >Bruce Gray wrote: > > > >>--> RV-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" >> >>Hey, they're BOTH flamable. One just needs a hotter flame to get started. >>5606 has been around for decades, it's in most GA airplanes we fly. I >>haven't seen a rash of brake fires. Why the concern? >> >>Bruce >>www.glasair.org >> >> >> >Because you haven't been looking!!! Ever since folks started using the >plastic brake lines, there have been fires .... some that totaled the >airplane. I know of a Defiant, Long EZ, glasair, and am sure there are >others. The problem is more prevalent in plastic airplanes (OK, FG) >with glass gear legs. The problem starts with long taxi requirements >and a crosswind .... where you're riding one brake and carrying some >extra power ..... the heat keeps rising and when the plastic rake line >finally gets hot enough to rupture, the brake assembly is hot enough to >cause combustion. Problem is, most pilots aren't aware that they have a >problem because they can't see the brake area from the cockpit. I guess >after the brake failure, they keep trying to get wherever they're headed >as the fire gets bigger. Just a guess. >Linn >do not archive > > > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 08:21:49 AM PST US From: "Rob Prior (rv7)" Subject: RE: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? --> RV-List message posted by: "Rob Prior (rv7)" On 4:35:32 2005-12-17 "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" wrote: > Oh Im sure we will hear from yee ole "it saved a lot of lives' folks. > Bottom line is this little tid bit of information is revolutionary for > every RV owner. AND it might just be the happiest most annoying piece > of information I have ever heard. Its like adding 250# of acro gross > weight to every acro rv built. This is probably why Van never published this "tidbit" of information. Because many of the armchair aeronautical engineers on this list, who can build amazingly beautiful airplanes but don't know a load distribution from a hole in their backside will immediately assume this means they can carry an additional 200-250 lb anywhere in the plane when they fly acro. (not saying this applies to you, Michael, but your wording comes dangerously close to suggesting that). With full tanks on an RV, the weight in the tanks will (in a positive-G manoeuver) lessen the load on the wing attach points, because you've increased the weight of the wing. However, it will *increase* the load on the spar just outboard of the fuel tank. I don't know what control deflection Van assumed when he designed the wing for G-loading. But if you happen to combine a large aileron deflection with a full tank, you'll be concentrating the control loads at the inboard end of the aileron, and the extra weight from your fuel tank at the outboard end of the tank. I don't have the plans in front of me, but I seem to recall that the points are pretty close together along the span of the spar, maybe 1 bay apart? The stress concentration could easily fold your wing. If you move some of that 250# into the cabin (so you have some room to take your light friend with you), you will be increasing the load on the wing attach points, and decreasing the load on the spar outboard of the tank. Which again is a good recipe for folding a wing if you screw up a manouever. Just my $0.02. I will be following Vans' published recommendations for aerobatic weights. -Rob Prior (trained as an Aeronautical Engineer, but not working in that field) ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 08:49:51 AM PST US From: "Dan Checkoway" Subject: Re: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? --> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" > Just my $0.02. I will be following Vans' published recommendations for > aerobatic weights. Ditto. I don't necessarily think it's a positive thing that this "new information" has come to light. It's not a license to abuse your aircraft. do not archive )_( Dan RV-7 N714D (725 hours) http://www.rvproject.com ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 09:21:03 AM PST US From: "Randy Lervold" Subject: Re: RV-List: MIL-PRF-83282 Brake (Hydraulic) Fluid --> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Lervold" > As has already been said, the MIL-PRF-83282 fluid is available, higher > temp > and fully compatible with systems/seals designed for MIL-H-5606 fluid. > Read > the MIL-Spec and the history of the development of the newer fluid with > the > Military. This is a no-brainer folks. Neither Spruce or Van's carry it, anyone know a source? Randy Lervold www.rv-3.com ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 09:23:59 AM PST US From: Ron Lee Subject: Re: RV-List: MIL-PRF-83282 Brake (Hydraulic) Fluid --> RV-List message posted by: Ron Lee Reference the Mobile 1 Synthetic ATF fluid, here is a link to it: http://tinyurl.com/8wj8q Data sheet at bottom. I am concerned about the post about a problem at -15 Deg C. Of course not flying it for several seasons is not ideal for the plane. Ron Lee ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 10:32:15 AM PST US From: Bob J Subject: Re: RV-List: MIL-PRF-83282 Brake (Hydraulic) Fluid --> RV-List message posted by: Bob J If you got the lines to flow at 120psi with compressed air, then still not a problem with using ATF. Perhaps you had some junk in the system? A friend of mine was curious to what the brake line pressures were, so he hooked a tee on the caliper to a pressure gauge. 300psi with someone in the cockpit pushing as reasonably hard as they could on the brakes. The reason for the exercise was to check the suitability of nylaflow brake lines, which BTW also work fine. I really don't understand why folks want to make it more complicated than it is. If the synthetic ATF didn't work in cold climates, I wouldn't think that there would be many vehicles being driven around in the winter. Your torque converter wouldn't work, the transmission wouldn't shift, etc. Regards, Bob Japundza RV-6 flying F1 under const. > > ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 11:17:22 AM PST US Subject: RV-List: [ George McNutt ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! From: Email List Photo Shares --> RV-List message posted by: Email List Photo Shares A new Email List Photo Share is available: Poster: George McNutt Lists: RV-List,RV7-List Subject: Roll Bar Shims http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/gmcnutt@shaw.ca.12.17.2005/index.html o Main Photo Share Index http://www.matronics.com/photoshare o Submitting a Photo Share If you wish to submit a Photo Share of your own, please include the following information along with your email message and files: 1) Email List or Lists that they are related to: 2) Your Full Name: 3) Your Email Address: 4) One line Subject description: 5) Multi-line, multi-paragraph description of topic: 6) One-line Description of each photo or file: Email the information above and your files and photos to: pictures@matronics.com ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 12:50:17 PM PST US Subject: RE: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? From: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" --> RV-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" License to abuse the plane? How about a license to add 250lbs to all weights we have been calculating? Seems that is now the case. Im no design engineer, but the manufacturer just gave me license to add another major chunk of weight in my fuse. I would say that's a pretty big deal. Oh, and lets not forget that this for the gross weight also. Mike -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway Subject: Re: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? --> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" > Just my $0.02. I will be following Vans' published recommendations for > aerobatic weights. Ditto. I don't necessarily think it's a positive thing that this "new information" has come to light. It's not a license to abuse your aircraft. do not archive )_( Dan RV-7 N714D (725 hours) http://www.rvproject.com ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 01:16:10 PM PST US From: RV6n Subject: RV-List: tail wheel and transition training needed --> RV-List message posted by: RV6n Thanks to all the wonderful people on this list and all the great information given, and after six years of building, my RV6 has finally been signed off by the local DAR. Now I am trying to locate a tail wheel instructor and if possible the all important transition training. The insurance company requires 10 hours, some of which must be in a tail wheel RV. I am located at Francis Gabreski Airport (FOK) on Eastern Long Island, NY. Does anyone have any recommendations for an instructor, preferably on the East coast NY to Fla., that has access to an RV. I have not found any on Long Island that are willing to help. I have zero time in a T/W and only 20 min. 6 years ago in an RV, but just under 500 hours tt. Thanks in advance. Bob Bales Do not archive ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 01:18:48 PM PST US From: "Kyle Boatright" Subject: Re: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? --> RV-List message posted by: "Kyle Boatright" Adding weight to any airplane, particularly one used for aerobatics is a serious issue and the subject needs to be addressed very carefully so people understand that the new information from Van's does not constitute a "Get out of Jail Free" card. The original post on this subject didn't say anything about gross weight, which I believe Van's has stated is driven by the landing gear design. On the subject of not including fuel in the aerobatic weight. Regardless of Van's latest disclosure, if you do aerobatics with more fuel aboard than you used to (or with a passenger if you never carried one during aerobatics), the structural safety margin will be lower due to the increased bending and shear loads just outboard of the fuel tank. That point coencides with the most likely failure point in the wing. It is very possible that people have gotten away with things in the past (i.e. rolling maneuvers while pulling serious G's) which they might not get away with if there was an extra 150 lbs of fuel aboard. Maybe the misunderstanding about including fuel in aerobatic weight is why there has only been one wing spar failure (IIRC) in the -4, 6, 7, and 8. Everyone was operating with a safety margin that covered for a multitude of sins - whether construction mistakes or ham handed pilots. KB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" Subject: RE: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? > --> RV-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" > > > License to abuse the plane? How about a license to add 250lbs to all > weights we have been calculating? Seems that is now the case. > Im no design engineer, but the manufacturer just gave me license to add > another major chunk of weight in my fuse. I would say that's a pretty > big deal. Oh, and lets not forget that this for the gross weight also. > > Mike > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway > To: rv-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? > > --> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" > >> Just my $0.02. I will be following Vans' published recommendations > for >> aerobatic weights. > > Ditto. I don't necessarily think it's a positive thing that this "new > information" has come to light. It's not a license to abuse your > aircraft. > > do not archive > > )_( Dan > RV-7 N714D (725 hours) > http://www.rvproject.com > > > ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 01:58:27 PM PST US From: Kevin Horton Subject: Re: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? --> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton Van had to make a bunch of assumptions when he determined spar bending loads vs gross weight. He only recommends engines up to the weight of an Lycoming IO-360, so you can be sure that he assumed the wing would be supporting no more than that engine, plus a Hartzell, plus normally expected avionics and instruments. Adding weight in the fuselage has a much more significant effect on spar bending loads than adding fuel. I strongly recommend that anyone who has an engine/prop combination that is heavier than a counterweighted IO-360 plus Hartzell should not do aerobatics at greater than 1550 lb gross weight unless they clear it with Van's. Kevin Horton On 17 Dec 2005, at 15:46, Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" > > > License to abuse the plane? How about a license to add 250lbs to all > weights we have been calculating? Seems that is now the case. > Im no design engineer, but the manufacturer just gave me license to > add > another major chunk of weight in my fuse. I would say that's a pretty > big deal. Oh, and lets not forget that this for the gross weight also. > > Mike > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway > To: rv-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? > > --> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" > >> Just my $0.02. I will be following Vans' published recommendations > for >> aerobatic weights. > > Ditto. I don't necessarily think it's a positive thing that this "new > information" has come to light. It's not a license to abuse your > aircraft. ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 02:03:38 PM PST US From: "Rob Prior (rv7)" Subject: RE: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? --> RV-List message posted by: "Rob Prior (rv7)" On 12:46:18 2005-12-17 "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" wrote: > License to abuse the plane? How about a license to add 250lbs to all > weights we have been calculating? Seems that is now the case. > Im no design engineer, but the manufacturer just gave me license to > add another major chunk of weight in my fuse. I would say that's a > pretty big deal. Oh, and lets not forget that this for the gross > weight also. This is exactly why armchair engineers should resign themselves to sitting in their armchairs. Van's wording, as reported in the original email, says nothing about being able to add weight to your fuselage, and nothing about increasing overall gross weight. It definitely does not say that you can add 250lb to all of the weights you've been calculating. Van has given you nothing. All you have is the word of someone on the RV-List who claims to have talked to Van (*), and claims that we can magically carry full fuel into an aerobatic flight when previously that was believed to be unwise. Until you have *in writing from Van*, a statement that you can add 250lb to your fuselage, or to your wings while doing acro, I suggest that you accept the numbers you were given when you bought your kit. There is no free lunch and these airplanes are as safe as they are because people aren't pushing them to their limits on every flight. If you want to magically believe that your airplane just got 10% stronger overnight, that's your decision. -Rob * - Not to say that the original poster didn't talk to Van, or that this wasn't what Van said. Just a word to the wise that you should take everything you read on the 'net with a grain of salt unless it's backed up with some proof. ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 02:54:24 PM PST US From: "Ed Anderson" Subject: RV-List: Source for : MIL-PRF-83282 Brake (Hydraulic) Fluid --> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Anderson" Randy, Here is the web site where I ordered mine. I could only find it in gallon quantities $18.00, you may have better luck . http://commerce.lubes.com/ click Hydraulic Fluids on the menu to the left and you should see Royco 782-1GL Anderol MIL-PRF-83282 Hydraulic Fluid, 1 Gallon $18.00 That's the stuff you want - trade name in this case is Royco 782-1G. Oh, yes, it comes in one of those cans you have to punch a hole in so you probably want to have a suitable container to put the remainder in after opening it. Ed Ed Anderson RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered Matthews, NC eanderson@carolina.rr.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Randy Lervold" Subject: Re: RV-List: MIL-PRF-83282 Brake (Hydraulic) Fluid > --> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Lervold" > >> As has already been said, the MIL-PRF-83282 fluid is available, higher >> temp >> and fully compatible with systems/seals designed for MIL-H-5606 fluid. >> Read >> the MIL-Spec and the history of the development of the newer fluid with >> the >> Military. This is a no-brainer folks. > > Neither Spruce or Van's carry it, anyone know a source? > > Randy Lervold > www.rv-3.com > > > ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 04:50:30 PM PST US From: Jerry Springer Subject: Re: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer Rob Prior (rv7) wrote: >--> RV-List message posted by: "Rob Prior (rv7)" > >On 12:46:18 2005-12-17 "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" >wrote: > > >>License to abuse the plane? How about a license to add 250lbs to all >>weights we have been calculating? Seems that is now the case. >>Im no design engineer, but the manufacturer just gave me license to >>add another major chunk of weight in my fuse. I would say that's a >>pretty big deal. Oh, and lets not forget that this for the gross >>weight also. >> >> > >This is exactly why armchair engineers should resign themselves to sitting >in their armchairs. > >Van's wording, as reported in the original email, says nothing about being >able to add weight to your fuselage, and nothing about increasing overall >gross weight. It definitely does not say that you can add 250lb to all of >the weights you've been calculating. > >Van has given you nothing. All you have is the word of someone on the >RV-List who claims to have talked to Van (*), and claims that we can >magically carry full fuel into an aerobatic flight when previously that was >believed to be unwise. > >Until you have *in writing from Van*, a statement that you can add 250lb to >your fuselage, or to your wings while doing acro, I suggest that you accept >the numbers you were given when you bought your kit. There is no free >lunch and these airplanes are as safe as they are because people aren't >pushing them to their limits on every flight. > >If you want to magically believe that your airplane just got 10% stronger >overnight, that's your decision. > >-Rob > >* - Not to say that the original poster didn't talk to Van, or that this >wasn't what Van said. Just a word to the wise that you should take >everything you read on the 'net with a grain of salt unless it's backed up >with some proof. > > Had breakfast with Van this morning and he comfirmed he talked to Randy about it. His only comment was that he hoped Randy posted it correctly and knowing Randy I believe he did. Jerry do not archive ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 05:09:05 PM PST US From: Subject: Re: RV-List: tail wheel and transition training needed --> RV-List message posted by: Look on Safeairs web site for Jan Bussels, he now has a Trike and a tailwheel 6. Kirk > > From: RV6n > Date: 2005/12/17 Sat PM 04:10:12 EST > To: rv-list@matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: tail wheel and transition training needed > > --> RV-List message posted by: RV6n > > Thanks to all the wonderful people on this list and all the great information given, and after six years of building, my RV6 has finally been signed off by the local DAR. Now I am trying to locate a tail wheel instructor and if possible the all important transition training. The insurance company requires 10 hours, some of which must be in a tail wheel RV. I am located at Francis Gabreski Airport (FOK) on Eastern Long Island, NY. Does anyone have any recommendations for an instructor, preferably on the East coast NY to Fla., that has access to an RV. I have not found any on Long Island that are willing to help. I have zero time in a T/W and only 20 min. 6 years ago in an RV, but just under 500 hours tt. > > Thanks in advance. > Bob Bales > > Do not archive > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 05:43:10 PM PST US From: "Randy Lervold" Subject: Re: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? --> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Lervold" > Had breakfast with Van this morning and he comfirmed he talked to Randy > about it. > His only comment was that he hoped Randy posted it correctly and knowing > Randy > I believe he did. > > Jerry Thanks Jerry. If anyone's curious here's exactly what I said... http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=4595 While I didn't run the exact language by Van I feel confident I have captured exactly what they meant. Note that there is no mention of any change to any Normal/Utility gross weight figure for any RV, it ONLY impacts the Aerobatic gross weight calculation method. Also please note the comments on the "deleterious effects of weight on aerobatic handling" and "encourages pilots to use good judgement when loading their aircraft for aerobatics" statements. Randy Lervold ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 06:41:11 PM PST US Subject: RE: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? From: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" --> RV-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" Thanks for clearing up the Gross weight issue. I misread your statement. Mike Do not archive. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Randy Lervold Subject: Re: RV-List: Aerobatic weight calculation. No Fuel? --> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Lervold" > Had breakfast with Van this morning and he comfirmed he talked to Randy > about it. > His only comment was that he hoped Randy posted it correctly and knowing > Randy > I believe he did. > > Jerry Thanks Jerry. If anyone's curious here's exactly what I said... http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=4595 While I didn't run the exact language by Van I feel confident I have captured exactly what they meant. Note that there is no mention of any change to any Normal/Utility gross weight figure for any RV, it ONLY impacts the Aerobatic gross weight calculation method. Also please note the comments on the "deleterious effects of weight on aerobatic handling" and "encourages pilots to use good judgement when loading their aircraft for aerobatics" statements. Randy Lervold