Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:58 AM - Re: P-Mags P-Mags (Bob Barrow)
2. 03:03 AM - Re: P-Mags P-Mags (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mich=E8le_Delsol?=)
3. 08:10 AM - P-mags P-mags (James H Nelson)
4. 08:42 AM - Re: P-Mags P-Mags (Konrad L. Werner)
5. 02:27 PM - Is an RV Hard To Fly ? (lyle)
6. 02:59 PM - Is An RV Hard To Fly? (John Fasching)
7. 03:09 PM - Re: Is an RV Hard To Fly ? (Joseph Larson)
8. 08:29 PM - Rudder trim (DAVID REEL)
9. 11:07 PM - Re: Is An RV Hard To Fly? (Mickey Coggins)
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob Barrow" <bobbarrow10@hotmail.com>
On their website EMAG is vague about the RPM required for providing
sufficient power to run the EI. For instance on the PMAG page they say:
"produces its own power at 700 RPM and above". However on the FAQ page they
say: "will operate at 700 to 800 RPM".
Personally I'd be getting worried if it took 900 RPM to keep the EI
operating because that might be getting very close to the edge if you pulled
the throttle fully at slow speed on final. If there was cessation of ship's
power for any reason then the engine could quit...and it would not start
again. At altitude you might be able to push the nose over and get the RPMs
up but at lower levels this would not be an option.
I'm inclined to agree with Michele and Darrell on this one....900 RPM is
over EMAGs specifications and may produce a quite slender safety margin (if
any at all).
>From: Michle Delsol <michele.delsol@microsigma.fr>
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RE: RV-List: P-Mags P-Mags
>Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 07:16:54 +0200
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mich=E8le_Delsol?=
><michele.delsol@microsigma.fr>
>
>PMag minimum RPM has been discussed in the past. The consensus seems to
>have
>been that the whirlwind effect would maintain the propeller spinning above
>700 RPM, which means that the PMags should put out power. Now, if the PMag
>is not generating its own power above 700 RPM then it is not up to specs.
>This is another issue which should definitely be taken up with eMagair and
>is probably a case by case issue.
>
>Michele - RV8 Fuselage - going the dual PMag route.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Horton
>Sent: jeudi 13 avril 2006 00:07
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: P-Mags P-Mags
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
>
>On 12 Apr 2006, at 10:34, Darrell Reiley wrote:
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Darrell Reiley
> > <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
> >
> > I would send the P-Mags back to the manufacture for a 100% full
> > replacement as the 900 rpm range is unacceptable!
> >
>
>Does it really matter if the P-Mag can't handle an electrical power
>loss at idle on the ground?
>
>What is idle rpm in flight at typical airspeeds? What would the
>operational consequences be to having to keep the engine at 1,000 rpm
>minimum in flight, if the electrical system had failed?
>
>
>Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
>Ottawa, Canada
>http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
>
>
Test drive new cars from the comfort of your desk at carpoint.com.au
http://secure-au.imrworldwide.com/cgi-bin/a/ci_450304/et_2/cg_801459/pi_1004813/ai_833884
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mich=E8le_Delsol?= <michele.delsol@microsigma.fr>
One solution I am considering is to have a small back up rechargeable
battery just for the PMags - sort of a redundant electrical system which
would automatically turn on if current feeding the PMag were to fail.
Warning lights would tell me if the redundant system was low voltage wise,
another light would light up if the PMags were not getting their power form
the main electrical system. This should pretty well take care of just about
all risks of not getting power into the PMag.
Michle
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Barrow
Sent: jeudi 13 avril 2006 10:52
Subject: RE: RV-List: P-Mags P-Mags
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob Barrow" <bobbarrow10@hotmail.com>
On their website EMAG is vague about the RPM required for providing
sufficient power to run the EI. For instance on the PMAG page they say:
"produces its own power at 700 RPM and above". However on the FAQ page they
say: "will operate at 700 to 800 RPM".
Personally I'd be getting worried if it took 900 RPM to keep the EI
operating because that might be getting very close to the edge if you pulled
the throttle fully at slow speed on final. If there was cessation of ship's
power for any reason then the engine could quit...and it would not start
again. At altitude you might be able to push the nose over and get the RPMs
up but at lower levels this would not be an option.
I'm inclined to agree with Michele and Darrell on this one....900 RPM is
over EMAGs specifications and may produce a quite slender safety margin (if
any at all).
>From: Michle Delsol <michele.delsol@microsigma.fr>
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RE: RV-List: P-Mags P-Mags
>Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 07:16:54 +0200
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mich=E8le_Delsol?=
><michele.delsol@microsigma.fr>
>
>PMag minimum RPM has been discussed in the past. The consensus seems to
>have
>been that the whirlwind effect would maintain the propeller spinning above
>700 RPM, which means that the PMags should put out power. Now, if the PMag
>is not generating its own power above 700 RPM then it is not up to specs.
>This is another issue which should definitely be taken up with eMagair and
>is probably a case by case issue.
>
>Michele - RV8 Fuselage - going the dual PMag route.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Horton
>Sent: jeudi 13 avril 2006 00:07
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: P-Mags P-Mags
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
>
>On 12 Apr 2006, at 10:34, Darrell Reiley wrote:
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Darrell Reiley
> > <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
> >
> > I would send the P-Mags back to the manufacture for a 100% full
> > replacement as the 900 rpm range is unacceptable!
> >
>
>Does it really matter if the P-Mag can't handle an electrical power
>loss at idle on the ground?
>
>What is idle rpm in flight at typical airspeeds? What would the
>operational consequences be to having to keep the engine at 1,000 rpm
>minimum in flight, if the electrical system had failed?
>
>
>Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
>Ottawa, Canada
>http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
>
>
Test drive new cars from the comfort of your desk at carpoint.com.au
http://secure-au.imrworldwide.com/cgi-bin/a/ci_450304/et_2/cg_801459/pi_1004
813/ai_833884
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: James H Nelson <rv9jim@juno.com>
If that becomes a safety issue, I intend to add to my pre-landing check
list: "Ignition" to battery", "boost pump on" ect. You start it that
way and leave it on until I take the active. Another way would be to tie
it to the boost pump switch. That way, any time you are on the ground or
getting ready to land, boost pump on also turns on the battery feed to
the "P" mags. BTW, I have two "P" ignitions units on my engine. I have
not flown yet but later this year. Now that it is noted, I may wire it
so either way I set the switches, I will have battery power to the "P"
ign. unit. That way I won't have to "add" to do something else. Just
trying to follow the KISS principal.
Jim
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: P-Mags P-Mags |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Konrad L. Werner" <klwerner@comcast.net>
One might as well do away with the more expensive P-Mag, and install the E-Mag
if you plan to have a secondary powersource anyway besides the "MAIN" Alternator/-Battery.
What is the point of having a self-powered P-Mag if you then have to come up with
multiple warning systems to monitor and possibly aid it's self-powering function?
How about a magneto with no external source to worry about???
I would personally prefer dual Lightspeeds instead, to be powered by a small Ignition-battery
to power them exclusively (...but the LSE's could also be switched
to the main battery if need be).
This way you always have uninterrupted juice to the Sparklers, and this setup will
also prevent the problems some very popular Starters have due to temporary
voltage drop during the starting sequence.
Do not archive my two cents worth, ...but I wish to each its own, after all it
is experimental!
----- Original Message -----
From: Mich=E8le Delsol
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 3:58 AM
Subject: RE: RV-List: P-Mags P-Mags
--> RV-List message posted by: =3D?iso-8859-1?Q?Mich=3DE8le_Delsol?=3D <michele.delsol@microsigma.fr>
One solution I am considering is to have a small back up rechargeable
battery just for the PMags - sort of a redundant electrical system which
would automatically turn on if current feeding the PMag were to fail.
Warning lights would tell me if the redundant system was low voltage wise,
another light would light up if the PMags were not getting their power form
the main electrical system. This should pretty well take care of just about
all risks of not getting power into the PMag.
Michle
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Barrow
Sent: jeudi 13 avril 2006 10:52
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV-List: P-Mags P-Mags
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob Barrow" <bobbarrow10@hotmail.com>
On their website EMAG is vague about the RPM required for providing
sufficient power to run the EI. For instance on the PMAG page they say:
"produces its own power at 700 RPM and above". However on the FAQ page they
say: "will operate at 700 to 800 RPM".
Personally I'd be getting worried if it took 900 RPM to keep the EI
operating because that might be getting very close to the edge if you pulled
the throttle fully at slow speed on final. If there was cessation of ship's
power for any reason then the engine could quit...and it would not start
again. At altitude you might be able to push the nose over and get the RPMs
up but at lower levels this would not be an option.
I'm inclined to agree with Michele and Darrell on this one....900 RPM is
over EMAGs specifications and may produce a quite slender safety margin (if
any at all).
>From: Michle Delsol <michele.delsol@microsigma.fr>
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RE: RV-List: P-Mags P-Mags
>Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 07:16:54 +0200
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: =3D?iso-8859-1?Q?Mich=3DE8le_Delsol?=3D
><michele.delsol@microsigma.fr>
>
>PMag minimum RPM has been discussed in the past. The consensus seems to
>have
>been that the whirlwind effect would maintain the propeller spinning above
>700 RPM, which means that the PMags should put out power. Now, if the PMag
>is not generating its own power above 700 RPM then it is not up to specs.
>This is another issue which should definitely be taken up with eMagair and
>is probably a case by case issue.
>
>Michele - RV8 Fuselage - going the dual PMag route.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Horton
>Sent: jeudi 13 avril 2006 00:07
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: P-Mags P-Mags
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
>
>On 12 Apr 2006, at 10:34, Darrell Reiley wrote:
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Darrell Reiley
> > <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
> >
> > I would send the P-Mags back to the manufacture for a 100% full
> > replacement as the 900 rpm range is unacceptable!
> >
>
>Does it really matter if the P-Mag can't handle an electrical power
>loss at idle on the ground?
>
>What is idle rpm in flight at typical airspeeds? What would the
>operational consequences be to having to keep the engine at 1,000 rpm
>minimum in flight, if the electrical system had failed?
>
>
>Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
>Ottawa, Canada
>http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Test drive new cars from the comfort of your desk at carpoint.com.au
http://secure-au.imrworldwide.com/cgi-bin/a/ci_450304/et_2/cg_801459/pi_1004
813/ai_833884
--
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: | Is an RV Hard To Fly ? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "lyle" <lyleedda@telus.net>
Well, just the opposite, I have found.
When I was abuilding my RV, I used to sponge up any magazine stories and pictures
about RVs ever since RV6
Ol' Blue came on line. Even pilot reports in ( egad ) ! English mags.
After only a half hour checkout, I was getting along just fine with
my RV albeit with a couple of less than text book landings.
The other day though, I had to get checked out in a 172 and this really underlined
what a sweet bird the RV really is.
I had never before, ever, been on final with only 300 feet altitude left
and holding 2200 rpm in a STRONG wind to get down.
See, the instructor wanted those big barn door flaps hanging out full
travel each and every time we went around so it felt like somebody had thrown
the anchor out and we were two miles out with little ground speed and with me
not wanting to sink below the 65 mph he liked to see on final, it was a lot
of work, going round and round, smokin' ( for a 172 ) downwind, crabbing on base,
and in low gear on final, wings going this way and that, and naturally, if
the attitude was not just so, UP we would float and plop now and then as only
about two landings were greasers without any noises......to go around again,
she wanted to run for the right edge of the runway and lift off was good in that
wind, although we did get some good closeup looks at cars and drivers on the
way.
Old habits die hard and climbing at 100 which is good for an RV only
gets me a couple of hundred of climb in the 172 until instructor fellow suggests
pulling nose higher.
I did lots of things wrong....turning too soon , bank too much, fly over
houses, try to slow down too soon, damn flaps...
An Rv does all the good things you expect it to do WHEN you want to do
them.....adjusting to a 172 on a very turbulent day was not a good start.
I don't think I was a good ambassador for grey haired guys. He did not think
today was a good day for me to do a few solo circuits.....maybe next time..
Funny thing I notice about the rental guys is that they don't ask anything
about RVs. Don't even walk over on the ramp to gee whiz when an RV is parked....I
think the office types warn them off us free spirit homebuilt people...no
use in hanging with the wrong crowd....
Nowadays the rental outfits check you out very thoroughly...licence, medical, currency
slip, RADIO LICENCE, can you believe it ?...photocopy of logbook, drivers
licence, passport, certificate of circumcision...on and on...questions about
what types you have flown..when...but when RV comes up, it is almost like it
doesn't count...ain't professional i guess.
Not one has ever asked about the speeds, landings, crosswind behaviour, climbout......FUN
FACTOR .....or asked to sit in one.....
If I was in my twenties and hanging around the ramp when something different
came in, I would be there like a shot, but then by this time, I was probably
affected by all those times I purposely stood in the slipstream of all those
radial engines when they burped to life and cleared their throats of oil
smoke and gas and a bit of ramp dust.
Mind you, I do like a 172 or almost anything that flies and won't scare you
( like a Seawind ), or that old Pietenpol that used to be here locally, the
one with grass up to her legs, and the big honkin Kinner that looked like she
would like to play lawn dart. That one I would never even want to sit in especially
when the pal I knew told me he only flies " the old whore " once in a
while for the owner who had very little liking to do so himself.
I ain't real picky..flyin' is flyin' and if it takes longer to get there, then
I can most likely take time to map read since I never did have a wing leveler
in the RV, and map reading had to be done quickly...ain't it all a hoot ?.....sure
beats bingo !
Old Grey,
do not archive
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: | Is An RV Hard To Fly? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "John Fasching" <n1cxo320@salidaco.com>
DO NOT ARCHINE
I have always been able to get my bi-annual rides in my own RV6A, so instead of
pushing a clunky 172 around, I was always able to "instruct" the instructor
in how an airplane should work. They were always impressed (by the airplane,
not necessarily my flying skills.)
If an instructor won't use my plane, I won't "use" him for the bi-annual.
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: Is an RV Hard To Fly ? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Joseph Larson <jpl@showpage.org>
Lyle's message underscores why we have to go through check rides even
for something as easy to fly as a 172.
As for his comments regarding other folks' reaction to his
airplane... I can say that I would never ask to sit in the airplane
of someone I didn't know fairly well. I would most certainly want to
and would really love a ride, but if I don't know you, I'm not going
to ask. I wouldn't want to put you on the spot, forcing you to
acquiesce to my request even when you don't really want to.
I probably wouldn't even bother you on the ramp with questions I may
be dying to ask. Again, I don't want to be a pest. Yes, I
understand you may be quite happy to talk about your pride and joy.
But the times I'm likely to see your airplane are when it's stopping
for fuel, and you're going to look busy. I don't want to bug you
when you're busy.
The sort of folks you most want to give a ride are the folks who are
least likely to ask, I would think. Which means you need to do
something to be approachable, such as offer rides when someone
expresses the least interest.
"Nice airplane."
"Thanks. Built it myself. What do you fly?"
"I rent Cessnas."
"Well, want to ride in a REAL airplane?"
:-)
-Joe
do not archive
On Apr 13, 2006, at 4:23 PM, lyle wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "lyle" <lyleedda@telus.net>
>
> The other day though, I had to get checked out in a 172 and
> this really underlined what a sweet bird the RV really is.
[ lots trimmed to keep things short ]
> Funny thing I notice about the rental guys is that they
> don't ask anything about RVs.
>
[ and lots more trimmed ]
> Old Grey,
> do not archive
>
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "DAVID REEL" <dreel@cox.net>
I've had a left yaw in the amount of one ball width but have now corrected it.
For those of you that might also encounter this problem and want to know how
much of a trim tab it takes to correct this much yaw, the answer is a wedge 12
inches long, 1/4 inch high at the trailing edge, and 1 1/2 inches to it's 0 height
knife edged leading edge. I placed it half way up the rudder. For now
this has just been duct taped in place.
Dave Reel - RV8A
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: Is An RV Hard To Fly? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
> I have always been able to get my bi-annual rides in my own RV6A, so
> instead of pushing a clunky 172 around, I was always able to
> "instruct" the instructor in how an airplane should work.
I always try to get my biannual in an airplane I've never
flown. Kills two birds with one stone - I get my biannual,
and I get checked out in a new aircraft.
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 finishing
do not archive
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! --
|