Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:14 AM - Re: Effect of paint on weight & balance ()
2. 07:15 AM - Re: amp gauge (bertrv6@highstream.net)
3. 07:20 AM - Ammeter, solved (bertrv6@highstream.net)
4. 07:25 AM - Re: wing fillets (dick martin)
5. 12:04 PM - Re: wing fillets (Greg Young)
6. 02:16 PM - Re: wing fillets (Chuck Jensen)
7. 04:34 PM - Re: wing fillets (gordon or marge)
8. 04:47 PM - Re: Request for updates: E-Mags (gordon or marge)
9. 05:34 PM - Engine for sale (J2j3h4@aol.com)
10. 05:49 PM - Re: wing fillets (D.Bristol)
11. 08:54 PM - Re: Re: Request for updates: E-Mags (don wentz)
12. 09:51 PM - Re: Re: Request for updates: E-Mags (rver273sb@aol.com)
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: Effect of paint on weight & balance |
Well I can't certify the W&B measurement, but paint will move the CG aft quite
a bit.
Look at how much surface area is aft of the CG. Most of the paint is aft. The
centroid of the paint if you will will be at or aft the baggage area. The aft
fuselage and tail is a lot of area. Forward of the CG there's not that much paint.
I agree that 2" shift is a lot. G
>From: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Effect of paint on weight & balance
>
>posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
>
>Very strange.
>
>Before paint moment = 1106 * 77.08 = 85,250.48
>After paint moment = 1130 * 79.11 = 89,394.3
>
>A moment change of 4,143.82 for a weight change of 24 lb implies an
>arm of 172.66" for the added paint. There is no way the centre of
>the paint is that far aft (well aft of the rear baggage compartment),
>so one of the weightings must be wrong.
---------------------------------
Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com
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: bertrv6@highstream.net
Quoting Wheeler North <wnorth@sdccd.edu>:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North <wnorth@sdccd.edu>
>
> It sounds like the shunt is wired backwards.
>
> And that won't matter if it's digital or a d'arsonval movement.
>
> Does the unit have an internal shunt or external shunt?
>
> If the big fat wires go to the gauge it has an internal shunt. If so reverse
> them.
>
> If it's external then reverse the small wires going from the shunt to the
> gauge.
>
> A shunt/gauge wired in the battery to buss line is called an Amp Meter and
> reads in plus for battery charging, and in minus for battery discharging.
>
> In this case the entire system load should be no more than 80% of the
> generator's continuous rated capacity. The extra 20% is for battery
> charging.
>
> If the shunt gauge is wired into the line between the generator and the buss
> it is properly called a Load Meter and only reads in the plus for any
> generator output, and you can have the system total load equal to the max
> continuous load rating of the generator. This is because you can see what
> the total output of the generator is using this type of gauge installation
> including that which is charging the battery.
>
> In this discussion "generator" includes alternators, it specifically assumes
> we are talking about max continuous rated output, which many automotive
> alternator ratings do not comply with. (Some of you may argue this, but I've
> tested many automotive alternators on the bench and they often over heat at
> their rated output eventually, their aircraft cousins don't) And it assumes
> you wish to be in compliance with the certified standards, which in this
> case do make a lot of sense even though it is not required.
>
> And if one wants to use an amp gauge(reads + & -) for both one can install
> two shunts and use a DPDT toggle switch to feed either shunt to the one amp
> gauge(in Load Meter mode it just uses the plus side). I usually leave mine
> in Load Meter mode, but it is occasionally nice to see what the battery is
> doing particularly right after start.
>
> W
> Thanks Wheeler:
It was the gauge, it lasted only a year. If the gauge was working
before, it had to be something else I thought..
I have ordered a new one...
Thanks
bert
rv6a
do not archive
>
>
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: bertrv6@highstream.net
Hi:
Thanks to all for your suggestions...mistery solved... it was the gauge..
It was only a year old. New one ordered..
Bert
rv6a
do not archive
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: wing fillets |
--> RV-List message posted by: "dick martin" <martin@gbonline.com>
All listers,
When I was near the completion of my RV8 SN2 in 1999, I considered the
large fillets for my RV8. Fortunately at that time EAA was running a series
of articles in Sport Aviation featuring the series of tests that were being
run by the CAFE group in California ( I think) on the efficiency of wing
fillets vs the square cut juncture as used by Vans on the RV8. It was the
conclusion in this article that the square cut junction was better than the
large fillet. I am sorry that I cannot recall the exact issue of SA for all
of you to research, however perhaps some of you who are computer experts
can find that article in the archives of Sport Aviation.
Dick Martin
RV8 N233M
the fast one
----- Original Message -----
From: "Evan and Megan Johnson" <evmeg@snowcrest.net>
Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: wing fillets
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Evan and Megan Johnson"
> <evmeg@snowcrest.net>
>
> Just a recollection.....so take it at face value. As I recall it had
> something to do with flutter problems on RV8 in particular. Maybe I
> dreamed
> the whole thing but I don't think so....worth a call to the home base to
> find out before you do such a thing.
> Evan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen@dts9000.com>
> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 11:54 AM
> Subject: RE: RV-List: wing fillets
>
>
>> --> RV-List message posted by: "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen@dts9000.com>
>>
>> I assumed Nic's reference to the wing/fuselage design deficiency was due
> to the 90 degree intersection, which is well understood to be 'draggy' and
> not as efficient as a faired/filleted one. But the fillet negatively
> impacts flight characteristics? Any further info on that or was it just a
> recollection to that effect?
>>
>> Chuck
>> Do Not Archive
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Evan and Megan
>> Johnson
>> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 1:37 PM
>> To: rv-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RV-List: wing fillets
>>
>>
>> --> RV-List message posted by: "Evan and Megan Johnson"
> <evmeg@snowcrest.net>
>>
>> UH OH! Be careful here guys...Talk to the guys at Vans before you put any
>> wing fillets on your airplane. There have in the past been discussions
> about
>> this causing some odd flight characteristics...I believe Van himself
>> wrote
>> an article on the subject a few years back in an RV ator..... Despite
>> popular opinion, those engineers DO know more about these planes than any
>> other group of experts. If you know what you are doing and understand the
>> consequences then by all means knock yourself out with the mods...the
>> rest
>> of us should build it the way it was designed.
>> Cheers..
>> Evan Johnson
>> www.evansaviationproducts.com
>> (530)247-0375
>> (530)351-1776 cell
>>
>> do not archive
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jerry Springer" <jsflyrv@verizon.net>
>> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 9:55 AM
>> Subject: Re: RV-List: SLA's and the SportCruiser
>>
>>
>> > --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@verizon.net>
>> >
>> > Nic wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > >However, the RV8 design has some flaws, and talking to RV8 owners in
>> Sweden
>> > >last weekend at an RV fly-in, some pilots have even gone to the extent
> of
>> > >modifying the wing fuselage interface, as well as basic things like
> pilot
>> > >ergonomics and undercarriage, no design is perfect. In some areas the
> RV8
>> > >excels in others it is poor.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > I think you better describe more about the above statements. I would
>> > like to hear more about the wing to fuselage interface!!!!
>> > And the poor side of trhe design
>> >
>> > Jerry
>> > do not archive
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Greg Young" <gyoung@cs-sol.com>
Actually Chuck, you've got the drag part backwards. It goes against
intuition but in theory, a non-filleted 90 deg intersection is the
lowest drag. The RV is close enough to 90 deg that the fillet will
increase drag. The F4U Corsair used it - bent wing and round fuselage
gave them a perfect 90 deg intersection - no fillets needed. Van and
Chance Vought knew what they were doing. Flight characteristic changes
with fillets are a different thing and could be good or bad.
Greg Young
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen@dts9000.com>
>
> I assumed Nic's reference to the wing/fuselage design
> deficiency was due to the 90 degree intersection, which is
> well understood to be 'draggy' and not as efficient as a
> faired/filleted one. But the fillet negatively impacts
> flight characteristics? Any further info on that or was it
> just a recollection to that effect?
>
> Chuck
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: "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen@dts9000.com>
I'll be....not the first, and certainly not the last thing that I've had
backwards. I have no idea where I came up with the belief that a fillet
would reduce drag over a 90 degree intersection--probably the same place
that a lot of people come up with their 'aeronautical' ideas.
Thanks for setting me straight...I wondered why the cart was out head of
the horse!!!
Chuck Jensen
Do Not Archive
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Greg Young" <gyoung@cs-sol.com>
>
> Actually Chuck, you've got the drag part backwards. It goes
> against intuition but in theory, a non-filleted 90 deg
> intersection is the lowest drag. The RV is close enough to 90
> deg that the fillet will increase drag. The F4U Corsair used
> it - bent wing and round fuselage gave them a perfect 90 deg
> intersection - no fillets needed. Van and Chance Vought knew
> what they were doing. Flight characteristic changes with
> fillets are a different thing and could be good or bad.
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "gordon or marge" <gcomfo@tc3net.com>
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Jensen
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 4:12 PM
Subject: RE: RV-List: wing fillets
--> RV-List message posted by: "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen@dts9000.com>
I'll be....not the first, and certainly not the last thing that I've had
backwards. I have no idea where I came up with the belief that a fillet
would reduce drag over a 90 degree intersection--probably the same place
that a lot of people come up with their 'aeronautical' ideas.
Chuck Jensen
> Actually Chuck, you've got the drag part backwards. It goes
> against intuition but in theory, a non-filleted 90 deg
> intersection is the lowest drag. The RV is close enough to 90
> deg that the fillet will increase drag. The F4U Corsair used
> it - bent wing and round fuselage gave them a perfect 90 deg
> intersection - no fillets needed. Van and Chance Vought knew
> what they were doing. Flight characteristic changes with
> fillets are a different thing and could be good or bad.
Chuck: If drag at max speed is all you are concerned about, the fillet is
not needed. A good seal is important however. Where the fillet may be
expected to help is at higher angles of attack, i.e. near and at the stall.
Lower stall speeds should result. I think that the earlier discussion about
buffeting relates to the RV-8's reported tail shake a few knots above the
stall, thought to be a result of disturbed flow from the wing root/landing
gear shank area. Several builders addressed this with fillets, local flow
control devices, etc. and reportedly made a difference but perhaps at the
expense of stall warning. At least one -8 builder told me he didn't
recommend others do what he did because of the above. I guess he thought
most people were not as skilled as he.
Gordon Comfort
N363GC
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Request for updates: E-Mags |
--> RV-List message posted by: "gordon or marge" <gcomfo@tc3net.com>
If anyone on the list has recent experience with E-Mags/P-Mags and is
willing to share their observations, good and bad, I would appreciate
hearing from you. If you would be willing to talk to my engine builder that
would be great also. I am currently trying to decide whether to use them
with a regular fuel injection system or to wait for the development of the
Precision Eagle system. In either case G & N will set the system up in
their test cell but currently they have little info on the E-Mag and really
would like me to use the Eagle. The installed weight of the Eagle will be
higher by about the weight of the backup battery chosen and the cost will be
greater by a grand or a little more. The Eagle has a lot of boxes.
Thanks a lot.
Gordon Comfort
N363GC
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 |
|
Since I have been informed that I cannot pass my medical, I am forced to
abandon my RV 7 project and have an engine for sale. It is a Lycoming 0-320 (no
suffix - this is apparently one of the earliest) complete with mags, carb,
alternator, & starter (no flywheel/starter ring). It has a hollow crankshaft
to allow the use of a constant-speed prop. I have the logs for the engine. In
the log book, the designation TC #274 follows the model number. The serial
no. is 3876-27. It is the 150 HP version and can run on auto gas. The first
log entry was 5/14/56. The engine was removed from a Piper-20-150 on 6/1/93
for replacement by a larger engine and has been in storage ever since. At the
time of its removal it had 1995 hours SMOH and 4399 total hours. It is
located at Ellington Airport (LUG) near Lewisburg, TN.
Based on similar engines I have seen advertised, I am asking $6500 and will
provide free shipping at this price, but will consider reasonable offers.
Jim Hasper
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: | Re: wing fillets |
I believe the problem associated with the fairings on the 8 was that
when they were left off completely, the turbulence had a very negative
effect on the tail. I don't recall anything about the shape affecting
the handling on the 8.
Dave
Evan and Megan Johnson wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Evan and Megan Johnson" <evmeg@snowcrest.net>
>
>Just a recollection.....so take it at face value. As I recall it had
>something to do with flutter problems on RV8 in particular. Maybe I dreamed
>the whole thing but I don't think so....worth a call to the home base to
>find out before you do such a thing.
>Evan
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen@dts9000.com>
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 11:54 AM
>Subject: RE: RV-List: wing fillets
>
>
>
>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen@dts9000.com>
>>
>>I assumed Nic's reference to the wing/fuselage design deficiency was due
>>
>>
>to the 90 degree intersection, which is well understood to be 'draggy' and
>not as efficient as a faired/filleted one. But the fillet negatively
>impacts flight characteristics? Any further info on that or was it just a
>recollection to that effect?
>
>
>>Chuck
>>Do Not Archive
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
>>[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Evan and Megan
>>Johnson
>>Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 1:37 PM
>>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: RV-List: wing fillets
>>
>>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: "Evan and Megan Johnson"
>>
>>
><evmeg@snowcrest.net>
>
>
>>UH OH! Be careful here guys...Talk to the guys at Vans before you put any
>>wing fillets on your airplane. There have in the past been discussions
>>
>>
>about
>
>
>>this causing some odd flight characteristics...I believe Van himself wrote
>>an article on the subject a few years back in an RV ator..... Despite
>>popular opinion, those engineers DO know more about these planes than any
>>other group of experts. If you know what you are doing and understand the
>>consequences then by all means knock yourself out with the mods...the rest
>>of us should build it the way it was designed.
>>Cheers..
>>Evan Johnson
>>www.evansaviationproducts.com
>>(530)247-0375
>>(530)351-1776 cell
>>
>>do not archive
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Jerry Springer" <jsflyrv@verizon.net>
>>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>>Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 9:55 AM
>>Subject: Re: RV-List: SLA's and the SportCruiser
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>--> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@verizon.net>
>>>
>>>Nic wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>However, the RV8 design has some flaws, and talking to RV8 owners in
>>>>
>>>>
>>Sweden
>>
>>
>>>>last weekend at an RV fly-in, some pilots have even gone to the extent
>>>>
>>>>
>of
>
>
>>>>modifying the wing fuselage interface, as well as basic things like
>>>>
>>>>
>pilot
>
>
>>>>ergonomics and undercarriage, no design is perfect. In some areas the
>>>>
>>>>
>RV8
>
>
>>>>excels in others it is poor.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I think you better describe more about the above statements. I would
>>>like to hear more about the wing to fuselage interface!!!!
>>>And the poor side of trhe design
>>>
>>>Jerry
>>>do not archive
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Re: Request for updates: E-Mags |
--> RV-List message posted by: "don wentz" <dasduck@comcast.net>
Gordon,
I had a very early emag and it had the 'occasional miss' issue.
After a year I sent it in to get 'updated' to fix that issue.
They said the unit was 'too old' to update, and sent me a brand new unit,
free of charge!
It was easier to install, has a better connector setup, and doesn't miss.
I'm very happy with my emag so far.
Dw
RV-6 930hrs
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of gordon or marge
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 4:47 PM
Subject: RV-List: Re: Request for updates: E-Mags
--> RV-List message posted by: "gordon or marge" <gcomfo@tc3net.com>
If anyone on the list has recent experience with E-Mags/P-Mags and is
willing to share their observations, good and bad, I would appreciate
hearing from you. If you would be willing to talk to my engine builder that
would be great also. I am currently trying to decide whether to use them
with a regular fuel injection system or to wait for the development of the
Precision Eagle system. In either case G & N will set the system up in
their test cell but currently they have little info on the E-Mag and really
would like me to use the Eagle. The installed weight of the Eagle will be
higher by about the weight of the backup battery chosen and the cost will be
greater by a grand or a little more. The Eagle has a lot of boxes.
Thanks a lot.
Gordon Comfort
N363GC
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
--
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: Request for updates: E-Mags |
Gorden, I am currently running the latest generation e-mag and p-mag. Although
I had trouble with the earlier ones, these have proven to be excellent. I am running
the AFP system and have been for years. It has performed flawlesly. The
combination has proven to be excellent! Can run lean of peak too.
Stewart, RV4 colorado (do not archive )
-----Original Message-----
From: gcomfo@tc3net.com
Sent: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 5:46 PM
Subject: RV-List: Re: Request for updates: E-Mags
--> RV-List message posted by: "gordon or marge" <gcomfo@tc3net.com>
If anyone on the list has recent experience with E-Mags/P-Mags and is
willing to share their observations, good and bad, I would appreciate
hearing from you. If you would be willing to talk to my engine builder that
would be great also. I am currently trying to decide whether to use them
with a regular fuel injection system or to wait for the development of the
Precision Eagle system. In either case G & N will set the system up in
their test cell but currently they have little info on the E-Mag and really
would like me to use the Eagle. The installed weight of the Eagle will be
higher by about the weight of the backup battery chosen and the cost will be
greater by a grand or a little more. The Eagle has a lot of boxes.
Thanks a lot.
Gordon Comfort
N363GC
________________________________________________________________________
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! --
|