Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:13 AM - Re: Re: Lawsuits against builders (Was AOPA hates homebuilts?) (Alex Peterson)
2. 06:23 AM - Re: Sensenich prop data (Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club)
3. 06:42 AM - Builder's Liability (Mark & Lisa)
4. 07:00 AM - Re: Re: Lawsuits against builders (Was AOPA hates homebuilts?) (JT Helms)
5. 07:04 AM - McCauley Governor Repair (DAVID REEL)
6. 07:58 AM - stuff for sale (Frazier, Vincent A)
7. 08:00 AM - Re: Builder's Liability (Mickey Coggins)
8. 08:11 AM - Wing tip paint prep (Richard Suffoletto)
9. 08:14 AM - Re: Builder's Liability (Tim Bryan)
10. 08:21 AM - Oshkosh (Airventure) camping (Bob Collins)
11. 08:49 AM - Re: Builder's Liability (Bruce Gray)
12. 09:19 AM - Re: Builder's Liability (UFOBUCK@aol.com)
13. 09:41 AM - Re: Builder's Liability (Rob Prior (rv7))
14. 09:41 AM - Re: Builder's Liability (Mickey Coggins)
15. 10:08 AM - Re: Builder's Liability (Bruce Gray)
16. 12:12 PM - Been There done that Tapes (bertrv6@highstream.net)
17. 01:31 PM - Re: Lawsuits against builders (Was AOPA hates homebuilts?) ()
18. 02:18 PM - Nose Wheel Questions (chaztuna@adelphia.net)
19. 02:53 PM - Re: Nose Wheel Questions (Ron Lee)
20. 03:05 PM - Re: McCauley Governor Repair (Larry Bowen)
21. 03:18 PM - Re: MT Props delay (Steve & Denise)
22. 04:11 PM - Re: Nose Wheel Questions (Tim Olson)
23. 04:32 PM - RV-8 Tail Kit For Sale --- Save 25% (Denny M. Dennison)
24. 05:20 PM - (no subject) (RVer273sb@aol.com)
25. 05:20 PM - Re: MT Props delay (N395V)
26. 05:37 PM - RV-6A Tail Tie Down (Paul Richardson)
27. 06:23 PM - Datapoint for Fairings Speed Improvement (czechsix@juno.com)
28. 06:24 PM - Re: Re: MT Props delay (dick martin)
29. 06:48 PM - Vx, Vy, Best Glide for O-360/Hartzell (czechsix@juno.com)
30. 06:59 PM - Re: RV-6A Tail Tie Down (c.ennis)
31. 07:13 PM - Re: Datapoint for Fairings Speed Improvement (Dale Ensing)
32. 07:13 PM - Re: RV-6A Tail Tie Down (Denis Walsh)
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: | Re: Lawsuits against builders (Was AOPA hates homebuilts?) |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@earthlink.net>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Tom Gummo" <T.gummo@verizon.net>
>
> A quote from my Small Business for Dummies book:
>
> Limited Liability Corporations
>
> "LLC is hybrid entity. It combines the benefits of a
> corporation with those of a partnership:
>
> Like a corporation, investors in a LLC, do not face
> personal liability for the debts or obligations of the LLC."
>
> There is nothing about only one person, etc. etc.
>
> Wish I understood, all I know about his subject but I will be
> doing some more research on this matter.
>
> Tom Gummo
> Apple Valley, CA
> Harmon Rocket-II
>
> do not archive
Any corporate "veil", whether S-corp, LLC, etc., will not protect its
individual owners' or principals' personal worth from liability if they are
indeed guilty of some mis-deed. It may protect them if one of their
employees does something dumb while on the job, something that was out of
the control of the company. It doesn't go much further, though.
Alex Peterson
RV6-A N66AP 752 hours, installing Lightspeed dual ignitions
Maple Grove, MN
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: Sensenich prop data |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Phil Sisson, Litchfield Aerobatic Club" <sisson@consolidated.net>
james frierson wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "james frierson" <tn3639@hotmail.com>
>
>I recently put a new 80 pitch Sensenich propeller on my 160HP RV6A. I made
>a cross country trip and here are my initial results. At 8500 at
>approximately 60 degrees F, I was indicating 158 mph, 2530 rpms at WOT and
>1680 lbs. After doing the math that wound up being 185 mph TAS and the
>ground speed according to my GPS was 195 mph which would be about right as
>there should have been a slight 5-8 knot tail wind component according to
>Dans web sites wind calculator. After climbing to 9500 the results were
>still 158 mph indicated, 58deg F, 2500 rpm at WOT which works out to 188 mph
>TAS, 197 mph GPS ground speed. Again with the expected tail winds this was
>right on. This is the first time I have been able to fly at WOT and the CHTs
>and the EGTs were much more uniform.
>All in all the new prop is doing exactly as advertised. Note: These are not
>super picky test pilot figures, just what was noted during a flight from a
>fly-in with my lovely bride taking notes
>__________________
>Scott Frierson
>N162RV
>RV6A 160HP
>
>
>
>
>
sounds pretty good.......... Phil
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: | Builder's Liability |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Mark & Lisa" <marknlisa@hometel.com>
Guys, guys, guys,
It's not about providing for the orphaned children. Most lawyers could care
less about the orphans; SHOW ME THE MONEY! You may find a lawyer that cares
about the orphans, but they gotta earn a living too. Here's how it works
(usually). A poor, destitute, (hopefully) taken-advantage of individual is
injured or killed while using a defective product foisted on an unsuspecting
public by a big, fat juicy manufacturer -- with mucho dinero and product
liability insurance. The altruistic lawyer comes to the rescue offering to
"help" the poor, destitute plaintiff(s) by taking the case without a
retainer (usually because the plaintiff has no money); they'll only take a
third (sometimes even more) of any court awarded damages or pre-trial
settlement. Our altruistic friend has researched the situation and knows
the evil manufacturer has cash, otherwise why waste the time?
Now let's consider the case of the "manufacturer" of an experimental
aircraft. A lawyer must be willing to bring a product liability suit
against an individual with no real liquid assets (you spent all your money
on your kitplane, right!?!) and (probably) no product liability insurance.
Assuming the plaintiff wins, a big assumption considering the plaintiff was
injured or killed flying an EXPERIMENTAL aircraft built in someone's garage
(do ya think they assumed some risk?), the plaintiff still has to collect a
judgement. If the jury awards my house, plane and cars -- my only real
assets -- the plaintiff has to hassle with selling them. If they're in a
hurry then those items won't sell at market value. And after all that
hassle, they only get a third of the total proceeds -- a few year's work for
maybe 30 or 40 grand (for the lawyer). No matter how much the lawyer cares
about the orphans, they're not gonna take a case like this. A lawyer stupid
enough to take a case like this won't make much of a legal attack.
I'll even suggest that if you carry a tail (liability insurance held beyond
ownership) you are MORE likely to get slapped with a suit since you (or your
insurance company) have MONEY!
On the other hand, if you've got millions in the bank, you might just
consider buying a plane instead of building one. Come to think of, that's
what I'd do!
Regards,
Mark & Lisa Sletten
Legacy FG N828LM
http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com
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: Lawsuits against builders (Was AOPA hates homebuilts?) |
--> RV-List message posted by: "JT Helms" <jhelms@i1.net>
Also, you as the pilot of an accident airplane can be sued. So, if you're
the only person who ever flies the plane, the LLC or Inc might not help. In
some cases, an LLC or Inc can be useful if it is truly a couple of pilots
that own the plane. That way if your partner is flying, crashes, the
corporation and the pilot who was operating the plane are likely to be sued.
You (the pilot/owner who was not operating the plane) could be protected
better than if you all own it as Joe Smith, and John Smedlap.
However, (and this is a big one which I just learned about recently) in some
states (Missouri being one of them) it is my understanding that the officers
of a corporation can be held personally liable for the actions of that
corporation.
JT
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alex Peterson
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 7:07 AM
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: Lawsuits against builders (Was AOPA hates
homebuilts?)
--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@earthlink.net>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Tom Gummo" <T.gummo@verizon.net>
>
> A quote from my Small Business for Dummies book:
>
> Limited Liability Corporations
>
> "LLC is hybrid entity. It combines the benefits of a
> corporation with those of a partnership:
>
> Like a corporation, investors in a LLC, do not face
> personal liability for the debts or obligations of the LLC."
>
> There is nothing about only one person, etc. etc.
>
> Wish I understood, all I know about his subject but I will be
> doing some more research on this matter.
>
> Tom Gummo
> Apple Valley, CA
> Harmon Rocket-II
>
> do not archive
Any corporate "veil", whether S-corp, LLC, etc., will not protect its
individual owners' or principals' personal worth from liability if they are
indeed guilty of some mis-deed. It may protect them if one of their
employees does something dumb while on the job, something that was out of
the control of the company. It doesn't go much further, though.
Alex Peterson
RV6-A N66AP 752 hours, installing Lightspeed dual ignitions
Maple Grove, MN
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: | McCauley Governor Repair |
--> RV-List message posted by: "DAVID REEL" <dreel@cox.net>
I'd like to hear about price or quality experiences from people who have had a
governor repaired. My new McCauley governor is seeping oil out the back so I
guess it needs new seals/gaskets and I need to find a good shop to do this work
as I am advised one can't do it without special tools. Letting it sit for 5
years before using it probably wasn't real good for it.
Dave Reel - RV8A
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Frazier, Vincent A" <VFrazier@usi.edu>
> Guys,
> I apologize for the spam to those who aren't interested in this type
> of thing.
> There was an auction last Saturday in Vincennes, IN and in a moment of
> weakness... I bought a Piper Tomahawk. Complete, no damage... minus
> the engine and prop and a few instruments.
> I plan to part it out. Please let me know if you know anyone who wants
> a wing, tail, small parts, fuselage.... or the whole darn thing.
> Geez..... a Tomahawk..... what will my friends say?
> I also bought a boatload of other stuff including (4) Beech 18
> rudders, a Beech 18 elevator, a Champ rudder, Stinson 108 aileron,
> misc. steel tubing rudders (Cub type.. not sure exactly what planes
> they came from), 7 Cessna wings, an Ercoupe wing, Cessna 150 lift
> struts, Stinson 108 leading edge wingtip metal. All of this stuff
> appears in useable condition, not new, and with the usual storage
> scuffs and scrapes. Some stuff is in perfect shape... some not so
> good. You'd have to be the judge.
> I also picked up old Piper cowl sides with the Piper emblems, Cessna
> 150 center console plastic covers and sun visors, a couple doors that
> look like old Piper or T-craft, an elevator from a Rockwell Commander,
> a couple Piper type hor. stab. pieces, a couple props.. unairworthy
> decorative types,10 Simpson voltmeters, several instrument panels with
> instrument cutouts, lots more, etc.... all this stuff is for sale.
> Email me OFFLIST if interested in any of this stuff. It will all go
> to Ebay if nobody is interested.
> Thanks,
> Vince Frazier
> 3965 Caborn Road
> Mount Vernon, IN 47620
> 812-464-1839 work
> 812-985-7309 home
> F-1H Rocket, N540VF
> http://vincesrocket.com/
>
>
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: Builder's Liability |
--> RV-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
> On the other hand, if you've got millions in the bank, you might just
> consider buying a plane instead of building one. Come to think of, that's
> what I'd do!
Or just don't sell the plane. Why risk your family's future for
100k if you're wealthy? If you're not, then as you mentioned,
the lawyers don't have much to go after.
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 finishing
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 |
|
| Subject: | Wing tip paint prep |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Richard Suffoletto" <suffy@starstream.net>
The wing tips on my 7A came with some minor gel coat voids in the area of
the cut out for position lights. Other than that the gel coat is in good
shape. Is there something I should be doing to prep them for paint other
than roughing them up ?
--
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: Builder's Liability |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Tim Bryan" <flyrv6@bryantechnology.com>
I have known of cases where the lawyer took the case because of friendship.
But, the best protection if for you personally NOT to own anything of value.
Your assests could be in a trust of other protected entity. Don't loose
control, just ownership.
You could sue me if you want, but I don't own a darn thing. The cost to
defend a lawsuit could in itself be more than one can afford to loose.
Prevent it!
Tim
-------Original Message-------
From: Mark & Lisa
Subject: RV-List: Builder's Liability
--> RV-List message posted by: "Mark & Lisa" <marknlisa@hometel.com>
Guys, guys, guys,
It's not about providing for the orphaned children. Most lawyers could care
less about the orphans; SHOW ME THE MONEY! You may find a lawyer that cares
about the orphans, but they gotta earn a living too. Here's how it works
(usually). A poor, destitute, (hopefully) taken-advantage of individual is
injured or killed while using a defective product foisted on an unsuspecting
public by a big, fat juicy manufacturer -- with mucho dinero and product
liability insurance. The altruistic lawyer comes to the rescue offering to
"help" the poor, destitute plaintiff(s) by taking the case without a
retainer (usually because the plaintiff has no money); they'll only take a
third (sometimes even more) of any court awarded damages or pre-trial
settlement. Our altruistic friend has researched the situation and knows
the evil manufacturer has cash, otherwise why waste the time?
Now let's consider the case of the "manufacturer" of an experimental
aircraft. A lawyer must be willing to bring a product liability suit
against an individual with no real liquid assets (you spent all your money
on your kitplane, right!?!) and (probably) no product liability insurance
Assuming the plaintiff wins, a big assumption considering the plaintiff was
injured or killed flying an EXPERIMENTAL aircraft built in someone's garage
(do ya think they assumed some risk?), the plaintiff still has to collect a
judgement. If the jury awards my house, plane and cars -- my only real
assets -- the plaintiff has to hassle with selling them. If they're in a
hurry then those items won't sell at market value. And after all that
hassle, they only get a third of the total proceeds -- a few year's work for
maybe 30 or 40 grand (for the lawyer). No matter how much the lawyer cares
about the orphans, they're not gonna take a case like this. A lawyer stupid
enough to take a case like this won't make much of a legal attack.
I'll even suggest that if you carry a tail (liability insurance held beyond
ownership) you are MORE likely to get slapped with a suit since you (or your
insurance company) have MONEY!
On the other hand, if you've got millions in the bank, you might just
consider buying a plane instead of building one. Come to think of, that's
what I'd do!
Regards,
Mark & Lisa Sletten
Legacy FG N828LM
http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com
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: | Oshkosh (Airventure) camping |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a@comcast.net>
Darwin Barrie and I have been working on setting up an area in Camp Scholler for
RVers of all stripes to camp. We're at the point where we need to know how
many people -- if anyone -- would be interested in having us reserve spots starting
on Friday July 21.
If you're interested, more information is available here (http://home.comcast.net/~bcollinsrv7a/eaa/index.htm), but we'll probably need to make a firm decision within the next 3 weeks.
Also, we're still looking for a few volunteers to help out with the RV Family Reunion
BBQ on Wednesday July 26th. Information is available at:
. And in the next month or so, we'll start take a head count to see if there's
enough interest to pull it off.
One more, unrelated thing, in Hotline this week, there was a survey that I'm conducting
to try to get a general picture of the insurance situation for RVers.
If you're interested, there's a blue box on the right side of the Hotline. Please
fill out the form. Everything's confidential and all that.
Bob Collins
St. Paul
--------
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=30348#30348
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Builder's Liability |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
Yep, it's called 'judgment proofing' yourself. Ironically, a lot of lawyers
use this to protect themselves from judgments. If you live in a
non-community property state, it can be as simple as putting all your assets
except your airplane in your wife's name. Of course, you REALLY have to
trust your wife.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Bryan
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Builder's Liability
--> RV-List message posted by: "Tim Bryan" <flyrv6@bryantechnology.com>
I have known of cases where the lawyer took the case because of friendship.
But, the best protection if for you personally NOT to own anything of value.
Your assests could be in a trust of other protected entity. Don't loose
control, just ownership.
You could sue me if you want, but I don't own a darn thing. The cost to
defend a lawsuit could in itself be more than one can afford to loose.
Prevent it!
Tim
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Builder's Liability |
--> RV-List message posted by: UFOBUCK@aol.com
In a message dated 04/24/2006 10:54:48 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
Bruce@glasair.org writes:
If you live in a
non-community property state, it can be as simple as putting all your assets
except your airplane in your wife's name.
What happens if your wife gets sued ??
Do not archive
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Builder's Liability |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Rob Prior (rv7)" <rv7@b4.ca>
On 9:14:27 2006-04-24 UFOBUCK@aol.com wrote:
>> In a message dated 04/24/2006 10:54:48 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
>> Bruce@glasair.org writes:
>>
>> If you live in a
>> non-community property state, it can be as simple as putting all
>> your assets except your airplane in your wife's name.
>
> What happens if your wife gets sued ??
Nothing. She doesn't own the plane, she didn't build the plane, and she
wasn't (presumably) flying the plane. She's an unrelated third party.
Hence the "non-community property" statement above. I believe Canada falls
into this category.
-Rob
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Builder's Liability |
--> RV-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
> Yep, it's called 'judgment proofing' yourself. Ironically, a lot of lawyers
> use this to protect themselves from judgments. If you live in a
> non-community property state, it can be as simple as putting all your assets
> except your airplane in your wife's name. Of course, you REALLY have to
> trust your wife.
What happens if she gets sued?
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 finishing
do not archive
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Builder's Liability |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
Um, why would you wife be sued, she's not in the chain of liability?
Contrary to popular belief, lawyers always need a legal basis to sue
someone. If there is none, they (the lawyers) are open to frivolous law suit
claims. If you're worried about your wife being sued for her own negligent
actions, you can always go the trust route or an off-shore corporation
owning all your assets. There is always a way, it just gets more expensive
as you move up in complexity. Big secret, most real wealty people keep the
majority of their asset ownership OUTSIDE of the USA.
While I'm not a lawyer, I've been involved in enough of these things to know
how they work. With all advice, take it for what it's worth.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of UFOBUCK@aol.com
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 12:14 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Builder's Liability
--> RV-List message posted by: UFOBUCK@aol.com
In a message dated 04/24/2006 10:54:48 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
Bruce@glasair.org writes:
If you live in a
non-community property state, it can be as simple as putting all your
assets
except your airplane in your wife's name.
What happens if your wife gets sued ??
Do not archive
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: | Been There done that Tapes |
--> RV-List message posted by: bertrv6@highstream.net
Hi:
I have among other things,the complete Set of four VHS Tapes, by" Rich Hansen"
Oskosh Price Winner for his RV6A.
They were very helpful to me, when getting ready to hang my Engine, on my
RV6A,,,
Quality of tapes are excellent.If any one interested please contact me off
list. Or by phone 407.384.4961
Bert
RV6a
Do Not archive
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Lawsuits against builders (Was AOPA hates homebuilts?) |
--> RV-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
>posted by: pcowper@webtv.net (Pete Cowper)
>
>A builder of a kit plane becomes a manufacturer of
>that aircraft. If the builder is found to be
>negligent in the design or manufacture which causes
>harm to another, they can be held liable for that
>victim's damages.
FIRST KIT PLANE BUILDERS DONT DESIGN THEIR
PLANE.
We all know that as the builder we are the SO CALLED
manufacture, SO what. However its not a product held
out by a company for the general public in mass. No
one is arguing there is liability, but it has to be
related to the building of the aircraft. There is NO
legal precedence of a builder being sued or loosing a
product liability case TO DATE. (deal with facts please.)
>A waiver of liability can be prepared and signed by
>the buyer and spouse, however that is only an
>agreement between those individuals. The agreement
>must not be found unconscionable and signed by both
>parties after an arms-length negotiation with each
>party having an equal bargaining position.
Are you a lawyer or legal expert. As I mentioned on
a previous post hold harmless agreements should work,
but then no one has needed to prove it in a law suits against
a BUILDER, since there has been ZERO to date.
>The new owner's minor children who lose their parent
>cannot legally enter into a contract, nor can a
>parent enter into a contract on their behalf,
>therefore the risk remains. The builder's negligent
>product has taken away the minor children's parental
>love, support and college tuition payments and
>someone gets to take over with their checkbook.
You are getting into the minutia of legalities and
WHAT IFS. My dog can sue you but he is not going to
win. Your FICTITIOUS scenarios prove nothing but you
have an imagination. Fiction does not make law, legal
precedence does. THE adult parent in your scenario
assumes all responsibility flying a homebuilt amateur
built plane the DOES NOT MEET Federal regulations. If
anyone is going to get sued it is the CHILD and
his parents estate for being an idiot and killing
himself and who ever else they killed or damaged. I have
a question, ARE YOU A Liberal? Do you think gun and
ammo makers should be sued when someone gets shot?
You are the kind of person I would NOT want to sell my
plane to, someone who looks to blame and not take
responsibility for their actions and choices.
>Likewise, if the negligently designed or manufactured
>airplane harms someone or property on the ground the
>waiver between the buyer and seller will not apply to
>their claims against the negligent builder.
Again SO WHAT. You are a chicken little sky falling
kind of guy and worry way to much. I mean that is cool
and works for you, however life has risks and
liabilities. I am surprised you fly at all. Flying
little planes is VERY risky. You can crash into an
elementary school. You are going to get an ulcer. If a
guy flies into a house with an amateur built plane you
or I built and sold because of HIS stupidity, than OUR
liability is nil, small. If sued the defense should be
straight forward. AGAIN THERE IS NO Legal Precedence.
THAT COUNTS A LOT. If you are going to give case
history or examples give real ones not made up
scenarios that have no REAL meaning.
>The victims will all come after the negligent builder
>who must then file a lawsuit against the buyer for
>indemnity and hope the buyer has enough money to pay
>any judgments rendered against the builder. Lots of
>up front legal expenses even with an attorney's fee
>provision.
LOOK you keep saying the victims WILL all come after
the negligent builder. WHY IS THE BUILDER NEGLIGENT?
YOU MAKE ASSUMPTIONS, Like WILL come after. Chance is
they will NOT sue at all. Why not sue the kit
manufacture of the plane parts? How about Lycoming?
Hartzell? I mean the list is long and your point is
full of conjecture, assumptions and over wrought
paranoia. Again your statements are sensational and
emotional from your overactive paranoid mind. Go on
FACTS and REAL risk, not what you can dream up can
happen. S#@t happens. All you can do is protect
yourself with documentation and agreements.
TO be clear however, if you build and sell a plane and
don't put the bolts in the rear spar you should get sued,
bankrupted and thrown in jail.
>A few years ago AVEMCO announced that they were
>offering continuing products liability for up to three
>years after sale for insured builders who had been
>covered by an AVEMCO policy the previous three years.
>Each year of insurance extended the after sale
>coverage for one year up to a maximum of three years
>coverage after sale. This was a wonderful
>Program for we homebuilders who decided to sell our
>aircraft. Regardless of the builder's ultimate
>liability or lack thereof, AVEMCO is paying for an
>attorney to defend the builder.
WOW good old AVEMCO wants to take your money. Gee
what great guys. Look they OFFER IT because they know
the liability is low and they can defend against it
easily. They dont offer it out of the goodness of
their heart. THEY ARE MAKING MONEY, Bottom line.
AVEMCO is all about MAKING MONEY. That is why
AVEMCO, for all intensive purposes has priced homebuilts
out of the (their) insurance market. They have dropped first
flight and under construction insurance for most
people. There premium of course is the highest and
they will viciously sue YOU, their customer to NOT pay
if they smell any breach in the conditions of the
insurance. WOW gee what great guys.
>AVEMCO's policy was the only economical products
>liability coverage available . . . without getting
>in line with Detroit automakers, passenger jet
>aircraft manufactures, cigarette manufacturers,
>makers of Vioxx, etc. to try to purchase a major
>manufacturer's product liability policy for your one
>single manufactured product. Hopefully after three
>years the new owner would learn to fly it safely or
>as a true EAA member make enough changes that none
>of your original work remains untampered with.
First of all jet manufactures like Boeing dont have
product liability insurance. They defend themselves
vigorously in court (and usually win) and are self
covered if you will. Now you are just stretching and
rambling about Vioxx. KEEP IT SIMPLE. Homebuilt plane,
well built, per planes, with a PLACARD THIS IS A
Amateur built plane and may not MEET federal
standards. If you sell your plane, KEEP DETAILED
records, pictures, logs and so on. AGAIN there is SOME
liability but its not likely the worst case scenarios you
dream up will happen. Also despite the cost of defending
yourself, it is a long shot they will win. Look if you
want to scrap your RV-8 when you loose your medical
(soon with your blood pressure) that's your business.
>John Denver's estate went after the manufacturer of
>the FUEL VALVE that failed leaving about 45 minutes
>of fuel in the tank the valve had been switched to
>when the plane was pulled from the water. In expert
>testimony it became apparent that the manufacturer
>knew of the corrosion problem and failed to issue
>proper lubricants specifications for periodic
>maintenance. Hundreds of the valves had failed from
>the same problem that caused John Denver's to
>corrode. The maker of the fuel valve was forced to
>finally issue proper lubrication maintenance
>guidelines to prevent the continuing problem as part
>of the settlement.
SO? They sued the valve maker NOT the builder. They
not only sued the valve maker Gould Electronics Inc.,
they sued Aircraft Spruce & Specialty Co. who sold it.
I stand by my previous statement NO **BUILDER** HAS
BEEN SUED TO DATE THAT I OR MY LAWYER KNOW OF.
>The fuel valve had been mounted on the bulkhead over
>the pilot's shoulder by the builder as a safety
>modification to eliminate having fuel lines running
>in the front near the pilot's feet and crotch in the
>plastic rear-engined aircraft.
SO WHAT, What is your POINT?
>John Denver was observed switching the tank valve by
>a line person at the Monterey airport when he started
>his plane to takeoff to do some touch and go
>practices. With the larger engine on his particular
>aircraft he intentionally did not want full tanks for
>practice flights remaining within the local pattern.
Again SO WHAT? What is your point? AGAIN THE BUILDER
DID NOT GET SUED! (Even though he did a weird thing.)
You state the KNOWN facts of the accident as if you are
going some where with it. SO WHAT! HE KILLED HIMSELF.
>Please get the facts before throwing the term
>"frivolous litigation" around.
YOU HAVE NO FACTS. Everything I stated is correct.
There has NEVER been any lawsuits TO DATE against a
builder. Get YOUR facts straight. Also please have a
beer or calm down before writing. You are scaring
people for no reason. I hope you dont act like this
in the cockpit if you have an emergency. I think you
are going to have a massive heart attack and sue me.
You make ZERO points, made up a few fictitious
examples you dreamed up and prove nothing. AGAIN
LEAGAL precedence against BUILDERS is (zero) so that
your REAL liability risk is SMALL. Lawyers and judges
go by previous case history and precedence. That does
not mean your exposure is ZERO. I does NOT mean you
cant be sued, but it does mean that the chance is
small, and there are things to limit your exposure and
help defend yourself if the worse happens, as I
suggested. HOWEVER I am not going to give legal
advice, because I dont want to be sued for giving out
advice. My advice is get a lawyer when you sell your
plane.
When I sell my plane I will have independant inspections,
agreements written up. I will put a placard across the panel
saying USE AT YOUR OWN RISK (documented in the
agreement, log book and photos). Of course they will take
it off but that is not my problem since its documented in the
agreement it will not be removed (like pillow tags). I will make
log book entries, have excellent documentation. Could I still
get sued, sure, but for what? Bad design? I did not design it.
The case will be thrown out with my evidence.
>Pete Cowper
>RV8 #81139
Pete I suggest you never sell your plane I dont think
your heart will take it. :-) lol. Take care and fly
safe. We agree to disagree. Please stop making
stuff up like it has happened. It than gets spread
around that it did, than there is an issue where
none exist. All the liability issue is trumped up but
AOPA or Cessna because they want people the buy
a $200,000 C172 that has the performance of a
C-172. They would love to spread this urban legend.
HOMEBUILTS RULE!
George RV-7
---------------------------------
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: | Nose Wheel Questions |
--> RV-List message posted by: chaztuna@adelphia.net
Listers,
I recently aquired a spare set of Cleveland 5:00 X 5" main wheels. I recently
spoke to the owner of Matco Engineering, the current supplier of Vans Nose wheel.
I asked him what differed between the product listed for our nose wheel and
his standard 5:00 X 5" wheel offering.
He stated that the only difference was the location of the hole in the wheel for
the inner tube. It seems that the Lamb tire and tube supplied by Vans locates
the exit of the valve stem in a different location, as compared to the main
tires.
I have three questions
#1 When did Vans switch from Cleveland to Matco for the nose wheel?
#2 Is there any weight difference between the Magnesium Cleveland wheel and the
aluminum Matco wheel?
#2a Has anyone used a 5:00 X 5" tire on their nose wheel?
#2b Did this require modification of the fork or wheel pant?
Charlie Kuss
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Nose Wheel Questions |
--> RV-List message posted by: Ron Lee <ronlee@pcisys.net>
>#2a Has anyone used a 5:00 X 5" tire on their nose wheel?
>#2b Did this require modification of the fork or wheel pant?
I would be surprised if you could use a 5" wheel/tire...at least on a
6A. The difference in size between a 5" and 4" tire is not trivial.
Ron Lee
Do not archive
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 |
|
| Subject: | McCauley Governor Repair |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
Try John at SouthWest Aero (Seattle, WA, 206-575-8732). He was helpful a
couple years ago when I got a Woodward governor from him.
-
Larry Bowen
Larry@BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DAVID REEL [mailto:dreel@cox.net]
> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 10:05 AM
> To: rvlist
> Subject: RV-List: McCauley Governor Repair
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "DAVID REEL" <dreel@cox.net>
>
> I'd like to hear about price or quality experiences from
> people who have had a governor repaired. My new McCauley
> governor is seeping oil out the back so I guess it needs new
> seals/gaskets and I need to find a good shop to do this work
> as I am advised one can't do it without special tools.
> Letting it sit for 5 years before using it probably wasn't
> real good for it.
>
> Dave Reel - RV8A
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: MT Props delay |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Steve & Denise" <sjhdcl@kingston.net>
Aerocomposites quotes a 20 week delivery.
I have only seen 1 performance comparison between MT, Aerocomposites, and
Hartzel. All props were
within 6 mph top speed of each other. I have ordered the MT anyways
despite the 16 week wait.
Steve
RV7A
> Steve,
> Suggest you consider a Aero Composites carbon fiber prop. It we be on
> average 10 knots faster, same weight, has lightning protection, is
> considerably stronger etc. ad infinitum. Also more expensive, but worth
it.
> Delivery is usually 70 to 90 days.
> Dick Martin
> RV8 N233M
> the fast one
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Nose Wheel Questions |
--> RV-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Ron, the 5" is standard on the -10. 6" on the mains.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Ron Lee wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Ron Lee <ronlee@pcisys.net>
>
>
>> #2a Has anyone used a 5:00 X 5" tire on their nose wheel?
>> #2b Did this require modification of the fork or wheel pant?
>
> I would be surprised if you could use a 5" wheel/tire...at least on a
> 6A. The difference in size between a 5" and 4" tire is not trivial.
>
> Ron Lee
>
> Do not archive
>
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: | RV-8 Tail Kit For Sale --- Save 25% |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Denny M. Dennison" <Denny@DennisonSoftware.com>
Complete, unassembled RV-8/8A empennage kit with plans and assembly manual from Van's Aircraft. Electric Elevator Trim. Van's price is $1775.00 for the same items. My price $1331. Located near Yosemite, California. Call (209) 878-0810. Pictures at http://www.dennisonmountain.com/pages/2/index.htm
Regards,
Denny
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: RVer273sb@aol.com
Listers, I have a never been touched RV-8 tail kit for sale.
Complete with electric elevator trim kit.
Will sell for $1300 plus freight costs. Located in
Denver Colorado.
Stewart Bergner
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: MT Props delay |
--> RV-List message posted by: "N395V" <n395v@hughes.net>
Is there a delay or is it just a quoted long lead time. From the above post it
looks like the MT will arrive 1 month sooner than the aerocomposite.
--------
Milt
N395V
F1 Rocket
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=30434#30434
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: | RV-6A Tail Tie Down |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Paul Richardson" <prichar@mail.win.org>
One of my fellow aviators was taking off from a grass strip in our RV-6A when the
tail tie down contacted a clump of grass and was bent backward, cracking the
bottom rudder fairing. Anyone experience that, and do you have any good or bad
news as far as expected damage? Specifically, I'm wonder about how much is
really bent back where you can't see anything. He said there were no flight problems.
He didn't know it happened until postflight cleaning.
--------
Paul Richardson
RV-6A 106RV
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=30440#30440
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: | Datapoint for Fairings Speed Improvement |
--> RV-List message posted by: "czechsix@juno.com" <czechsix@juno.com>
Guys,
I know others have commented on how much speed an RV picks up when fairings are
installed. Just for kicks though I took some data in my RV-8A without any fairings
and then again with wheel pants, gear leg and intersection fairings installed.
My data was taken with four-way GPS runs using one of the calculators
on Kevin Horton's website (the advantage of the four-way run vs. three-way is
that the spreadsheet gives you a sanity check to show how good/bad your data
is).
Anyway, at 4000' density altitude, power set to 24 squared and mixture 50 ROP,
I saw an 18 kt gain in TAS when when fairings were put on. I would imagine that
the speed increase would be less in a taildragger since there are only two
big gear legs/wheels to clean up. I wish now I'd taken some numbers at full power
and lower altitude...I bet the speed increase would have been at least 20
kts. Even so I've told several of my spam-can buddies and they can't believe
that fairings would make that much difference.
Cool!
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D with O-360-A1A and blended Hartzell
Flying 29.2 hours now....
Guys,
I know others have commented on how much speed an RV picks up when fairings are
installed. Just for kicks though I took some data in my RV-8A without any fairings
and then again with wheel pants, gear leg and intersection fairings installed.
My data was taken with four-way GPS runs using one of the calculators on
Kevin Horton's website (the advantage of the four-way run vs. three-way is that
the spreadsheet gives you a sanity check to show how good/bad your data is).
Anyway, at 4000' density altitude, power set to 24 squared and mixture 50 ROP,
I saw an 18 kt gain in TAS when when fairings were put on. I would imagine that
the speed increase would be less in a taildragger since there are only two big
gear legs/wheels to clean up. I wish now I'd taken some numbers at full power
and lower altitude...I bet the speed increase would have been at least 20 kts.
Even so I've told several of my spam-can buddies and they can't believe that
fairings would make that much difference.
Cool!
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D with O-360-A1A and blended Hartzell
Flying 29.2 hours now....
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: MT Props delay |
--> RV-List message posted by: "dick martin" <martin@gbonline.com>
Milt,
Aero Composites will usually quote a longer lead time because most customers
are happier when the prop is available sooner than expected, rather than
later.
Dick Martin
RV8 N233M
the fast one
Ps: I now have over 300 hours on my RV8, IO390 and Aero Composite 74"
Propeller. It is lighter and faster than my Hartzell
----- Original Message -----
From: "N395V" <n395v@hughes.net>
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 7:16 PM
Subject: RV-List: Re: MT Props delay
> --> RV-List message posted by: "N395V" <n395v@hughes.net>
>
> Is there a delay or is it just a quoted long lead time. From the above
> post it looks like the MT will arrive 1 month sooner than the
> aerocomposite.
>
> --------
> Milt
> N395V
> F1 Rocket
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=30434#30434
>
>
>
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: | Vx, Vy, Best Glide for O-360/Hartzell |
--> RV-List message posted by: "czechsix@juno.com" <czechsix@juno.com>
Guys,
I'm getting ready to do performance testing for Vx, Vy, and best glide speeds in
my RV-8A with O-360/Hartzell setup. I know there are some POH's floating around
out there with these numbers in them but I'm curious how many people have
measured this data carefully themselves? In particular to get good glide data
one would have to pull the mixture and ideally test with the prop stopped, prop
rotating with oil pressure & lever aft, and prop rotating without oil pressure
(fine pitch). This could take quite a few engine-off glide tests and the
numbers should be pretty close from one RV to the next...
Which brings me to my point: if there's any "consensus" on these speeds amongst
those of you who've taken good data it would be nice to have those numbers as
a starting point for my testing. For example if Vy is typically 80-90 kts I
would narrow the range of my test from 75 to 95 instead of a much broader span
of numbers.
It would be cool if someone made a spreadsheet collecting this kind of data from
different airplanes. Checkoway are you listening?
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D flying 29.2 hours now...
Guys,
I'm getting ready to do performance testing for Vx, Vy, and best glide speeds in
my RV-8A with O-360/Hartzell setup. I know there are some POH's floating around
out there with these numbers in them but I'm curious how many people have
measured this data carefully themselves? In particular to get good glide data
one would have to pull the mixture and ideally test with the prop stopped, prop
rotating with oil pressure lever aft, and prop rotating without oil pressure
(fine pitch). This could take quite a few engine-off glide tests and the numbers
should be pretty close from one RV to the next...
Which brings me to my point: if there's any "consensus" on these speeds amongst
those of you who've taken good data it would be nice to have those numbers as
a starting point for my testing. For example if Vy is typically 80-90 kts I would
narrow the range of my test from 75 to 95 instead of a much broader span
of numbers.
It would be cool if someone made a spreadsheet collecting this kind of data from
different airplanes. Checkoway are you listening?
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D flying 29.2 hours now...
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A Tail Tie Down |
--> RV-List message posted by: "c.ennis" <c.ennis@insightbb.com>
Paul,
Shortly after my first few flights, while I was still trying to land my 6A
like a Cessna, I bent the tie down ring in the same way...grass strip, drop
on from 2 feet trying to flare. Anyway, I took the tiedown ring off and
straightened it, checked the rear bulkhead for damage,(found none) and built
a 2" diameter cupped recess into the rudder fairing for clearance for when
it happened again. When it happened again, I was pondering the newly bent
ring and fresh cracks in the fairing when an IA who I have trusted with my
life on more than one occasion, commented that it was entirely possible that
the next time it could cause rudder travel problems when I needed it the
most. I worked at fabricating some sort of skid/guard to protect the tiedown
ring but finally removed it altogether.
I have since learned to land without abusing my gear and have not missed
the tie down ring.
The stainless weldment which was on my 6A bent above the ring stem...saving
the bulkhead. Foolishly, I reinforced it before it was reinstalled. The
second time it bent in the same place in spite of the reinforcement, still
no bulkhead damage. Van designs them hell bent for stout. I am sure one
could come up with a ring and mount which would tear the tail off before it
bent...but I would rather spare the tail and lose the ring, and I don't have
to worry about the ring jambing the rudder if I slam it during takeoff.
Charlie Ennis
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: Datapoint for Fairings Speed Improvement |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dale Ensing" <densing@carolina.rr.com>
Mark,
Your numbers before and after all fairings were installed are very similar
to what I experienced on my 6A.
Dale Ensing
do not archive
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: RV-6A Tail Tie Down |
--> RV-List message posted by: Denis Walsh <denis.walsh@comcast.net>
Can't speak for the later models and or the removable ones; however
the old original tail tie down was welded to mild steel and would
usually bend without causing any damage to the bulkhead on such
strikes. Simply remove three bolts, pound it straight, and re install.
If it were jamming the rudder, it could be realigned by lying behind
plane and using foot to shove it forward. This to get it home to do
above precision fix.
Voice of experience.
Denis Walsh
On Apr 24, 2006, at 6:35 PM, Paul Richardson wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Paul Richardson"
> <prichar@mail.win.org>
>
> One of my fellow aviators was taking off from a grass strip in our
> RV-6A when the tail tie down contacted a clump of grass and was
> bent backward, cracking the bottom rudder fairing. Anyone
> experience that, and do you have any good or bad news as far as
> expected damage? Specifically, I'm wonder about how much is really
> bent back where you can't see anything. He said there were no
> flight problems. He didn't know it happened until postflight cleaning.
>
> --------
> Paul Richardson
> RV-6A 106RV
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=30440#30440
>
>
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! --
|