Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:09 AM - Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (FLYaDIVE@aol.com)
2. 05:24 AM - Re: Tire Wear (glen matejcek)
3. 06:55 AM - Kick Back - More Info (rveighta)
4. 06:55 AM - Re: Engine Kick-Back IO-360 (Steve & Denise)
5. 06:58 AM - Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (Jerry Springer)
6. 08:14 AM - Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (Tim Olson)
7. 08:20 AM - Re: Engine Kick-Back IO-360 (Hopperdhh@aol.com)
8. 08:25 AM - Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (Jim Duckett)
9. 08:35 AM - Re: Kick Back - More Info (Bruce Gray)
10. 09:12 AM - Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (Bob Collins)
11. 09:21 AM - Re: Kick Back - More Info (linn Walters)
12. 09:39 AM - Re: RV7-List: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (Bob Collins)
13. 10:30 AM - Re: Kick Back - More Info (Jeff Point)
14. 11:06 AM - Re: Kick Back - More Info (Garry)
15. 11:18 AM - Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (Frank Stringham)
16. 11:37 AM - Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (Charlie England)
17. 11:55 AM - Cylinders: ECI vs Superior or Others (Darrell Reiley)
18. 02:07 PM - +Re:Rant, question, etc (John Fasching)
19. 02:34 PM - Re: Kick Back - More Info (Bruce Gray)
20. 02:41 PM - Weight & Balance (PGLong@aol.com)
21. 03:07 PM - Re: Weight & Balance (Greg Young)
22. 03:20 PM - Re: Weight & Balance (Ron Lee)
23. 03:40 PM - Re: Weight & Balance (Kevin Horton)
24. 03:55 PM - Re: Weight & Balance (PGLong)
25. 05:14 PM - Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (MLWynn@aol.com)
26. 05:31 PM - Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (gordon or marge)
27. 05:47 PM - Re: Cylinders: ECI vs Superior or Others (RV6 Flyer)
28. 06:18 PM - Re: First flight N176LD (Charles Rowbotham)
29. 06:29 PM - Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (Bob Collins)
30. 06:33 PM - Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (Charlie England)
31. 06:37 PM - Re: Cylinders: ECI vs Superior or Others (Darrell Reiley)
32. 06:45 PM - Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (Paul Trotter)
33. 06:46 PM - Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (Charlie England)
34. 07:49 PM - Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (Darrell Reiley)
35. 08:36 PM - Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings (William Gill)
36. 10:32 PM - tire wear (Wheeler North)
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: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
In a message dated 8/26/2006 10:59:14 PM Eastern Standard Time,
ceengland@bellsouth.net writes:
Is this a worthwhile suggestion?
(Again, koolaid drinkers please don't reply.)
Thanks,
Charlie
========================================
It sure is Charlie!
As one person said: "PSS Van does not do to much wrong when it comes to the
RV's. :-)"
How little is wrong does not matter or count when you spend hours or days
working on something only to find it cannot be built or fit together the way it
was drawn or described. It is still wrong.
I really like RV's and there are less problems with RV's than GA planes.
But, get frustrated because of a 'wrong' and then tell me you want to kiss Van.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
"Show them the first time, correct them the second time, kick them the third
time."
Yamashiada
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: "glen matejcek" <aerobubba@earthlink.net>
Hi Pete-
Re: Over time, do RV main tires wear more on the outside or the inside
treads?
Yes, they do. Crosswind landings made in a slip put wear on the outboard
edges of tires. The same principle applies to all aircraft.
glen matejcek
aerobubba@earthlink.net
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: | Kick Back - More Info |
--> RV-List message posted by: rveighta <rveighta@earthlink.net>
Guys, thanks all of you who answered my query about a kick back problem
with my IO-360. I should have included info about the battery and ignition
system. I don't have an electronic ignition system, just two mags, the left is
equipped with the standard impulse coupler. I have a new Concord 25RG-XC
battery that is fully charged. When starting, I always flip on both mags.
I have recently been experiencing start problems where the engine will fire
on a cylinder or two for a few seconds, then gradually on all four. Sound like
a impulse coupler problem?
Walt Shipley
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: Engine Kick-Back IO-360 |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Steve & Denise" <sjhdcl@kingston.net>
Plasma III Ignitions have been modified to run down to 6.5V during start
from the previous 8.5V.
If you have a plasma Ign go to their website and see which serial number
have the mod. You can
also send your module back and get it changed to accept as low as 6.5V
during start up for $100.
Changing starters is not always possible as I found out. I originally
wanted to use the B&C and do believe
they are better than Skytek. But I also have Precision Airmotive fuel
injection which would interfere with
the mixture control on the FI. In addition my engine is horizontal
induction and the fiberglass ducting from
Van's needs a ton of modifications to clear the B&C. Its built to go around
the Skytek 12LS.
Steve
RV7A
Flying, IO-360, Plasma III, 1 Mag
> Time: 06:42:44 AM PST US
> From: rveighta <rveighta@earthlink.net>
> Subject: RV-List: Engine Kick-Back IO-360
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: rveighta <rveighta@earthlink.net>
>
> All, yesterday as I attempted to start up the IO-360 in my RV-8A, the
> engine "kicked back" and broke something in the starter, which is a
> Sky Tec Flyweight 149-12LS.
>
> When I say "broke something" I mean it actually broke off the cast
> metal nose of the starter, exposing the pinion gear.
>
> Any thoughts on what could cause the kick-backs? This is the second
> time I've had a problem with this starter - sent it back for repairs about
> 200 hours ago - it was almost new then, and the factory covered the
> repair cost.
>
> Walt Shipley
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@verizon.net>
FLYaDIVE@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 8/26/2006 10:59:14 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> ceengland@bellsouth.net writes:
>
> Is this a worthwhile suggestion?
>
> (Again, koolaid drinkers please don't reply.)
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
> ========================================
> It sure is Charlie!
>
> As one person said: "PSS Van does not do to much wrong when it comes
> to the RV's. :-)"
That would be me as I am the only person that had responded. .. In the
20+ years I have been building and
flying RVs it seem like there are always a few people that have constant
problems and complaints. On the
the other hand there are several thousand RVs being built where the
builders do not have problems. I guess I
will stop here before getting into a nasty slug fest. I would have let
it go if it had not been for the koolaid
comment. Have you ever considered the koolaid drinkers are very happy
builders and flyers?
do not archive
> How little is wrong does not matter or count when you spend hours or
> days working on something only to find it cannot be built or fit
> together the way it was drawn or described. It is still wrong.
> I really like RV's and there are less problems with RV's than GA
> planes. But, get frustrated because of a 'wrong' and then tell me you
> want to kiss Van.
>
> Barry
> "Chop'd Liver"
>
> "Show them the first time, correct them the second time, kick them the
> third
> time."
> Yamashiada
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
--> RV-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
I would suggest that the comments regarding laxity in accuracy of the
plans and laxity of notifications of revisions, and items like
those quoted are valid concerns. These suggestions, if taken by
the Van's crew, would greatly simplify the common issues, and
could easily prevent them from having to spend as much time on the
phone in the first place.
That said, I can understand why Jerry would feel the way he does too.
Once you've actually completed and flown an RV, some of those issues
seem minor.
As I see it, the end product satisfaction shouldn't justify ignoring
product and plans improvements by Vans. It would be to EVERYONE's
benefit if the plans had things listed properly, if plans issues
were posted for people to receive, and if when errors were found
they were corrected. Doing this would turn a great Van's kit into
a Phenomenal kit, and as mentioned above, could lead to a time where
they don't have to provide any measurable phone support so they can
focus on doing more profitable things. IMHO, almost all of the
quality support I've received in the build was provided by the
RV and RV-10 matronics list members. The factory support always
seemed to lead to a dead end.
Note: I didn't drink the kool-aid, so I see fairly clearly....but
I'm still very happy with my overall build.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying 116 hrs
do not archive
Jerry Springer wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@verizon.net>
>
> FLYaDIVE@aol.com wrote:
>
>> In a message dated 8/26/2006 10:59:14 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>> ceengland@bellsouth.net writes:
>>
>> Is this a worthwhile suggestion?
>>
>> (Again, koolaid drinkers please don't reply.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>> ========================================
>> It sure is Charlie!
>>
>> As one person said: "PSS Van does not do to much wrong when it comes
>> to the RV's. :-)"
>
>
> That would be me as I am the only person that had responded. .. In the
> 20+ years I have been building and
> flying RVs it seem like there are always a few people that have constant
> problems and complaints. On the
> the other hand there are several thousand RVs being built where the
> builders do not have problems. I guess I
> will stop here before getting into a nasty slug fest. I would have let
> it go if it had not been for the koolaid
> comment. Have you ever considered the koolaid drinkers are very happy
> builders and flyers?
>
> do not archive
>
>> How little is wrong does not matter or count when you spend hours or
>> days working on something only to find it cannot be built or fit
>> together the way it was drawn or described. It is still wrong.
>> I really like RV's and there are less problems with RV's than GA
>> planes. But, get frustrated because of a 'wrong' and then tell me you
>> want to kiss Van.
>> Barry
>> "Chop'd Liver"
>>
>> "Show them the first time, correct them the second time, kick them the
>> third
>> time."
>> Yamashiada
>>
>
>
>
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: Engine Kick-Back IO-360 |
In a message dated 8/26/2006 4:26:39 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
mkejrj@comcast.net writes:
I spoke with Klaus @ OSH regarding the "kickback" potential of my LSE Plasma
III installed on my Superior I0 360. I also have the SkyTek starter.
Klaus issued a service bulletin ( 1/05 ) regarding "kickbacks".It notes that
the PM starters draw very high current which drops the voltage available to
the LSE ignition system. If the voltage drops below 8.5 volts the LSE is
disabled and kickbacks can occur. The system needs at least 8.5 volts during the
starting phase.
LSE can modify your system if you return same to him. I believe the cost is
about $ 100.00. The mod allows the LSE to operate as low as 6.5 volts.
Dick Jordan
N888BZ RV 8A/flying
Interesting! I worked in ignition system design for GM for 15 years. We
always had to meet a 4.5 volt, 30 RPM cranking test. Yes, a low battery on a
GM car can dip to 4.5 volts and the ignition system has to stay in sync and
deliver a spark. It seems to me like a design defect, and LSE should do the
fix for no charge.
Dan Hopper
RV-7A
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: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Duckett" <perfeng@3rivers.net>
Okay, I'll pipe up in defense of where I think Jerry is coming from. As
"homebuilders", "Experimenters", or what ever the proper and accepted
moniker is being used this week, we are first and formost "fabricators"! At
least those of us that started building aircraft years ago from plans
ordered from Mechanics Illistrated or other publication that sparked our
desire to build and fly our own craft.
Yes, as an engineer of sorts, I too sometimes assume that the person who
will be fabricating and or assembling an assembly from plans or drawings
will have some basic intuition as to the proper and accepted manner in which
to perform the task even if the plans do not project it.
If bolt "A" is supposed to go into hole "B" but is drawn as going into hole
"C" and it is functionally required and obvious that it must go in "B" then,
it goes in "B"! Pretty simple actually.
Granted Charlie, I would like Van's to have a better means of providing
updates to builders and have tech personnel that took a more active concern
in some of the errors that have been brought to them in the past but come
on, orientation of the bolts? Some say down and back, some say up and
forward, others say it dioesn't matter...who's right? It's what ever works
and meets the functional requirement of the installation.
Don't get mad if some folks don't share the same frustration on issues such
as this. When they tell you to "read ahead" what might be better said is to
understand how the component or assembly is oriented, what connects to it,
and what function does it serve.
I'm not trying to flame or start another 2 month rant thread, I'm just
saying sometimes it's up to you to decide whats best for your ship.
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Jim Duckett N708JD RV-7A
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Springer" <jsflyrv@verizon.net>
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 7:57 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@verizon.net>
>
> FLYaDIVE@aol.com wrote:
>
>> In a message dated 8/26/2006 10:59:14 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>> ceengland@bellsouth.net writes:
>>
>> Is this a worthwhile suggestion?
>>
>> (Again, koolaid drinkers please don't reply.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>> ========================================
>> It sure is Charlie!
>> As one person said: "PSS Van does not do to much wrong when it comes to
>> the RV's. :-)"
>
>
> That would be me as I am the only person that had responded. .. In the 20+
> years I have been building and
> flying RVs it seem like there are always a few people that have constant
> problems and complaints. On the
> the other hand there are several thousand RVs being built where the
> builders do not have problems. I guess I
> will stop here before getting into a nasty slug fest. I would have let it
> go if it had not been for the koolaid
> comment. Have you ever considered the koolaid drinkers are very happy
> builders and flyers?
>
> do not archive
>
>> How little is wrong does not matter or count when you spend hours or days
>> working on something only to find it cannot be built or fit together the
>> way it was drawn or described. It is still wrong.
>> I really like RV's and there are less problems with RV's than GA planes.
>> But, get frustrated because of a 'wrong' and then tell me you want to
>> kiss Van. Barry
>> "Chop'd Liver"
>>
>> "Show them the first time, correct them the second time, kick them the
>> third
>> time."
>> Yamashiada
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: | Kick Back - More Info |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
Walt,
Unless both your mags have impulse couplings then you should start your
engine with the impulse mag on and the non impulse mag OFF. Once the engine
is running, turn on the other mag.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of rveighta
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 9:54 AM
Subject: RV-List: Kick Back - More Info
--> RV-List message posted by: rveighta <rveighta@earthlink.net>
Guys, thanks all of you who answered my query about a kick back problem
with my IO-360. I should have included info about the battery and ignition
system. I don't have an electronic ignition system, just two mags, the left
is
equipped with the standard impulse coupler. I have a new Concord 25RG-XC
battery that is fully charged. When starting, I always flip on both mags.
I have recently been experiencing start problems where the engine will fire
on a cylinder or two for a few seconds, then gradually on all four. Sound
like
a impulse coupler problem?
Walt Shipley
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: | Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a@comcast.net>
FYI, I started a database of "errors" (or at least, shall we say,
"clarifications" as people reported them over the years. Oddly, though, I
really don't have that many. If folks have specifics, please e-mail them to
me at bcollinsrv7a(at)comcast.net (or if you're subscribed, just add it
yourself at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7A/database) and perhaps we can
make it easier on those who are to follow.
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn
RV Builder's Hotline free weekly newsletter
http://home.comcast.net/~rvnewsletter/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 10:11 AM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in
> plans/drawings
>
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>
> I would suggest that the comments regarding laxity in
> accuracy of the plans and laxity of notifications of
> revisions, and items like those quoted are valid concerns.
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: Kick Back - More Info |
--> RV-List message posted by: linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
Walt, the impulse will disengage at a couple of hundred RPM if I recall.
When it fires the first time or second time may be enough to get past
that. At that speed though, you could turn on the right mag (because
you're starting on the left only now aren't you???) and see if it helps.
A good plug cleaning and leaning on the ground may help also. What you
might have is not enough primer so I would experiment there. While the
engine is cranking, give the primer a push and see if that doesn't speed
things up a bit.
Linn
rveighta wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: rveighta <rveighta@earthlink.net>
>
>Guys, thanks all of you who answered my query about a kick back problem
>with my IO-360. I should have included info about the battery and ignition
>system. I don't have an electronic ignition system, just two mags, the left is
>equipped with the standard impulse coupler. I have a new Concord 25RG-XC
>battery that is fully charged. When starting, I always flip on both mags.
>
>I have recently been experiencing start problems where the engine will fire
>on a cylinder or two for a few seconds, then gradually on all four. Sound like
>a impulse coupler problem?
>
>Walt Shipley
>
>
>
>
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: RV7-List: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob Collins" <bcollinsrv7a@comcast.net>
>I checked dwg 11
> exploded
> view for the F633 bolts; it's inconsistent with the section
> view on dwg
> 22 also. Errors/inconsistencies #742 & 743 (guesstimate :-) )
> noted in
> the plans and/or instructions.
It's been awhile -- two years -- but I vaguely remember this part. However,
I didn't bother too much with the plans because there was -- as I recall --
another issue which solved the question for me -- access to the bolt head
(or maybe it was a nut) in the future. Anyway, as I recall -- without the
specifics -- there was no way for me to EASILY check on those nuts (to see
if they were working loose except if I oriented them one way (I have
removable floors). There have been certain phases of the build, I've
noticed, where it's helpful for me to slow down a bit and say "OK, this
might be the easiest way to BUILD it, but what's the easiest and best way to
accommodate an inspection once I'm built. YMMV.
I think the suggestion is a good one. I think the thread could prove helpful
ONLY if we can separate the suggestion from characterizing other people one
way or the other.
I'm loathe to have another week of deleting messages that really have no
value to the build process, especially when the essence of the thread is
about building.
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: Kick Back - More Info |
--> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Point <jpoint@mindspring.com>
rveighta wrote:
>Sound like a impulse coupler problem?
>
>
No, it sounds like the non-impulse coupled mag is firing before TDC
(like it should) during starting. The purpose of the IC is to slow the
mag down so it fires right at TDC during the starting process. When the
engine is running, there is enough speed and inertia that firing at 28
BTDC is desireable. Duirng starting, when the engine is running so
slowly, if the non-IC mag fires at 28 BDTC, it is likely to cause a
kickback.
Try leaving the non-IC mag off during starting. If you have a
keyswitch, make sure it's wired properly to ground (turn off) the non-IC
mag at the START position.
Jeff Point
>
>
>
>
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: Kick Back - More Info |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Garry" <garrys@tampabay.rr.com>
I'm very close to wiring my plane and would like to know how to wire the
ignition key switch. I have an AeroSport IO360 with one "mag", and one
Lightspeed Electronic Ignition. It seems that the forum is suggesting that
I wire the key switch so that in the "start" position only the Mag is
firing, but upon releasing the key switch from start to both, that then both
the mag and the Lightspeed are firing. Is this correct?
Garry Stout
RV7A Odessa Fl
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Point" <jpoint@mindspring.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Kick Back - More Info
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Point <jpoint@mindspring.com>
>
> rveighta wrote:
>
>>Sound like a impulse coupler problem?
>>
> No, it sounds like the non-impulse coupled mag is firing before TDC (like
> it should) during starting. The purpose of the IC is to slow the mag down
> so it fires right at TDC during the starting process. When the engine is
> running, there is enough speed and inertia that firing at 28 BTDC is
> desireable. Duirng starting, when the engine is running so slowly, if the
> non-IC mag fires at 28 BDTC, it is likely to cause a kickback.
>
> Try leaving the non-IC mag off during starting. If you have a keyswitch,
> make sure it's wired properly to ground (turn off) the non-IC mag at the
> START position.
>
> Jeff Point
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: | Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Frank Stringham" <fstringham@hotmail.com>
Charlie and all you great RV builders
I have really enjoyed this thread as I to have had these same experiences.
But I have learned alot more from my mistakes ( some very $$$$$$$$$$) than
from my success.
Now to the plans and instructions and those that read and use them. As an
old high school chemistry teacher I was confornted many time by a few
student that said my lab, test, and or assignment instructions were just
plain terriable. And others, less vocally, would say they were great or
would do them as described. In other words one man's poison is anothers
cake. In fact on one occassion a student walked in to my class room and just
unloaded on me, how he tought I was a terrible teacher, incapable of giving
proper directions, and concept understanding. The very next student in the
door praised my teaching ability and said "I just love the way you explain
things and make the lab stuff understood................................"
Same instruction, instructor, and process!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I do know this, that at the begining of my RV 7A project I would just follow
the plans step at a time to find that down the road was an instruction that
said, make sure you do....what ever.....before you do the things you have
just done........DAH............
So I started reading a head, choreographing my days fabrication, measue
thrice /cut once, e-mail group for clairification before I moved ahead, and
would call Van's when all else failed.
Does this mean that Van's should just rest on there laurals....No....I would
hope that they are in continual reflection, introspection, and change. With
that said I must play the cards that are passed my way (instructions, parts,
other info) and do the best I can. This has been the best fun of my life and
I wouldn't change a thing ( will maybe IF I build again there will be a
bunch of things I would do different and or change) as it has been a great
growing journey.
For me success comes knowing that life is a series of problems in which
successsful people solve their problems successfully.
I am coming up on my second anniversary of building (September 4, 2004) and
can see a little light at the end of the tunnel. New Challenges, new
mistakes to correct, and more interaction and learning from all you great
airplane builders. Thanks for all your past help and info.................
Now back to my control stick grip fabrication. Now how can I add throttle,
mixture, carb heat, and props controller to my grip that will have flaps,
trims, seat heat, flip flop com, VOR adjustment, altimeter pressure gage
adjustment, tire pressure adjusting switch, canopy latch actuator,
............... have I left any other essential switches out, oh
ya.....engine start button, wig wag switches, weapons bay actuation, weapons
release, and last but not least emergency radio 121.5 switch. I know I have
left someting important out so please e-mail me of what I need to add.
Alright pass the koolaid...............bill o'rielly fans.....
Frank at SGU and SLC RV 7A ...wiring, you gotta love that fiberglass work,
looking for instrument and engine $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
>From: "Jim Duckett" <perfeng@3rivers.net>
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings
>Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 09:23:32 -0600
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Duckett" <perfeng@3rivers.net>
>
>Okay, I'll pipe up in defense of where I think Jerry is coming from. As
>"homebuilders", "Experimenters", or what ever the proper and accepted
>moniker is being used this week, we are first and formost "fabricators"!
>At least those of us that started building aircraft years ago from plans
>ordered from Mechanics Illistrated or other publication that sparked our
>desire to build and fly our own craft.
>Yes, as an engineer of sorts, I too sometimes assume that the person who
>will be fabricating and or assembling an assembly from plans or drawings
>will have some basic intuition as to the proper and accepted manner in
>which to perform the task even if the plans do not project it.
>If bolt "A" is supposed to go into hole "B" but is drawn as going into hole
>"C" and it is functionally required and obvious that it must go in "B"
>then, it goes in "B"! Pretty simple actually.
>Granted Charlie, I would like Van's to have a better means of providing
>updates to builders and have tech personnel that took a more active concern
>in some of the errors that have been brought to them in the past but come
>on, orientation of the bolts? Some say down and back, some say up and
>forward, others say it dioesn't matter...who's right? It's what ever works
>and meets the functional requirement of the installation.
>Don't get mad if some folks don't share the same frustration on issues such
>as this. When they tell you to "read ahead" what might be better said is
>to understand how the component or assembly is oriented, what connects to
>it, and what function does it serve.
>I'm not trying to flame or start another 2 month rant thread, I'm just
>saying sometimes it's up to you to decide whats best for your ship.
>
>
>DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>Jim Duckett N708JD RV-7A
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry Springer" <jsflyrv@verizon.net>
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 7:57 AM
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings
>
>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@verizon.net>
>>
>>FLYaDIVE@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>>In a message dated 8/26/2006 10:59:14 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>>>ceengland@bellsouth.net writes:
>>>
>>> Is this a worthwhile suggestion?
>>>
>>> (Again, koolaid drinkers please don't reply.)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Charlie
>>>
>>>========================================
>>>It sure is Charlie!
>>> As one person said: "PSS Van does not do to much wrong when it comes to
>>>the RV's. :-)"
>>
>>
>>That would be me as I am the only person that had responded. .. In the 20+
>>years I have been building and
>>flying RVs it seem like there are always a few people that have constant
>>problems and complaints. On the
>>the other hand there are several thousand RVs being built where the
>>builders do not have problems. I guess I
>>will stop here before getting into a nasty slug fest. I would have let it
>>go if it had not been for the koolaid
>>comment. Have you ever considered the koolaid drinkers are very happy
>>builders and flyers?
>>
>>do not archive
>>
>>>How little is wrong does not matter or count when you spend hours or days
>>>working on something only to find it cannot be built or fit together the
>>>way it was drawn or described. It is still wrong.
>>>I really like RV's and there are less problems with RV's than GA planes.
>>>But, get frustrated because of a 'wrong' and then tell me you want to
>>>kiss Van. Barry
>>>"Chop'd Liver"
>>>
>>>"Show them the first time, correct them the second time, kick them the
>>>third
>>>time."
>>>Yamashiada
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie England <ceengland@bellsouth.net>
1st, I want to be clear that I'm flying a -4 & building a -7 because I
think that Van's planes are the best overall value on the market. Having
said that, the best can still be a lot better with not a lot of effort.
There's a story about one of our famous WW2/test pilots flying an early
jet after a maintenance session. The controls jammed & as the story
goes, only his superior skills kept him alive as he worked around the
problem. He managed to get the plane on the ground in one piece &
subsequent inspection revealed that during maintenance, an old salt who
knew the rules about the bolt head going forward noticed a bolt that was
in backward & corrected it. What he missed was the documentation that
that particular bolt had to be reversed to prevent potential jamming of
the controls.
This is not just a value issue; it's a safety issue. Most of us are
working through our 1st build on our model of choice. As others have
pointed out, we can't read Van's mind & know how they did it. Many, many
hours are wasted & many, many parts are replaced at the builders'
expense due to ambiguous or outright incorrect instructions. Again, as
others have pointed out, it would be to Van's advantage to make these
updates & corrections readily available to all. Should that bolt follow
convention with the head forward, or did Van intend for it to be
reversed for future access? It's drawn both ways. Why should I be forced
to guess his intent when I paid good money for a kit & instructions
instead of a truckload of ore?
Why, in two phone conversations while searching for a part in the
inventory, did one tech guy insist that all hardware be kept in the
original bags & another recommend that it be sorted by type into
containers? (Mine was still in the original bags containing the
seemingly random mix of parts.) No matter which I did, I'd be wrong 1/2
the time.
I've had quite a few conversations with Van's various tech guys offering
what I consider constructive suggestions that could improve the kits at
minimal expense & radically reduce phone time for them. All have met
with indifference or resistance. For example, how many hours did you
spend inventorying your kit? Would a pick list printed in numeric order
have saved about 80% of those hours? When asked for a 'soft copy' so I
could sort it myself, I was offered various excuses. When I tried to
explain how much time is wasted with the current setup & how easily &
cheaply it could be corrected (with free, open source application
software & volunteer work to provide the data conversion routines), they
were uninterested. How many hours have you spent trying to decide which
of multiple pieces of bar or angle stock with varying lengths to cut
when fabricating a part? Someone at Van's made up a cutting schedule so
they know lengths to send in the kit. Why do we have to guess, often
incorrectly, which piece we should use & then be forced to buy more
stock when the cutting schedule could easily be provided with the parts
list? If I really wanted a scavenger hunt, I'd have gone to a church
social, for free. :-)
Again, I think that Van's kits (& planes) are the best available. I just
think we can have it a lot better for minimal effort. These posts are
made with the hope that something productive & useful will result. Bob
Collins mentioned that he had started a list of problem areas. I'll try
to do my part & send all the stuff I've found so far to him. Hopefully,
all this stuff will eventually migrate to one totally open location
where all can go to post or research issues.
Charlie
Jim Duckett wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Jim Duckett" <perfeng@3rivers.net>
>
> Okay, I'll pipe up in defense of where I think Jerry is coming from.
> As "homebuilders", "Experimenters", or what ever the proper and
> accepted moniker is being used this week, we are first and formost
> "fabricators"! At least those of us that started building aircraft
> years ago from plans ordered from Mechanics Illistrated or other
> publication that sparked our desire to build and fly our own craft.
> Yes, as an engineer of sorts, I too sometimes assume that the person
> who will be fabricating and or assembling an assembly from plans or
> drawings will have some basic intuition as to the proper and accepted
> manner in which to perform the task even if the plans do not project it.
> If bolt "A" is supposed to go into hole "B" but is drawn as going into
> hole "C" and it is functionally required and obvious that it must go
> in "B" then, it goes in "B"! Pretty simple actually.
> Granted Charlie, I would like Van's to have a better means of
> providing updates to builders and have tech personnel that took a more
> active concern in some of the errors that have been brought to them in
> the past but come on, orientation of the bolts? Some say down and
> back, some say up and forward, others say it dioesn't matter...who's
> right? It's what ever works and meets the functional requirement of
> the installation.
> Don't get mad if some folks don't share the same frustration on issues
> such as this. When they tell you to "read ahead" what might be better
> said is to understand how the component or assembly is oriented, what
> connects to it, and what function does it serve.
> I'm not trying to flame or start another 2 month rant thread, I'm just
> saying sometimes it's up to you to decide whats best for your ship.
>
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
> Jim Duckett N708JD RV-7A
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry Springer" <jsflyrv@verizon.net>
> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 7:57 AM
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in
> plans/drawings
>
>
>> --> RV-List message posted by: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv@verizon.net>
>>
>> FLYaDIVE@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>> In a message dated 8/26/2006 10:59:14 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>>> ceengland@bellsouth.net writes:
>>>
>>> Is this a worthwhile suggestion?
>>>
>>> (Again, koolaid drinkers please don't reply.)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Charlie
>>>
>>> ========================================
>>> It sure is Charlie!
>>> As one person said: "PSS Van does not do to much wrong when it
>>> comes to the RV's. :-)"
>>
>>
>>
>> That would be me as I am the only person that had responded. .. In
>> the 20+ years I have been building and
>> flying RVs it seem like there are always a few people that have
>> constant problems and complaints. On the
>> the other hand there are several thousand RVs being built where the
>> builders do not have problems. I guess I
>> will stop here before getting into a nasty slug fest. I would have
>> let it go if it had not been for the koolaid
>> comment. Have you ever considered the koolaid drinkers are very happy
>> builders and flyers?
>>
>> do not archive
>>
>>> How little is wrong does not matter or count when you spend hours or
>>> days working on something only to find it cannot be built or fit
>>> together the way it was drawn or described. It is still wrong.
>>> I really like RV's and there are less problems with RV's than GA
>>> planes. But, get frustrated because of a 'wrong' and then tell me
>>> you want to kiss Van. Barry
>>> "Chop'd Liver"
>>
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: | Cylinders: ECI vs Superior or Others |
--> RV-List message posted by: Darrell Reiley <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
I'm looking for decision support To all the Engine
Gurus and Roll your own engine builders out there,
which is the cylinder kit to by in todays market. So
many things are changing. It seems like everyday
products are being improved and or modified in some
way. I will not be going with standard compression
pistons and have not settled on the type of pistons or
the ratio yet. I would like to discuss overall
quality, casting, manufacturing methods etc... Which
will require a port clean up? Who's cleaned up their
fins from casing issues? Is anyone using a cryogenic
process on wear parts? Etc... Any information or
advice is appreciated.
Thanks in advance!
__________________
Darrell Reiley
RV7A "Reiley Rocket"
N622DR Reserved
CenTex_RV_Aircraft-owner@yahoogroups.com
__________________________________________________
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: | Rant, question, etc |
I read with interest the comments in this thread. I built my RV6A
starting in 1991 so your quick builders, pre-punched, matched-hole
RV'ers don't have a clue as to problems with plans. Yet, it got built
and I am happy, but I had a lot of bad days struggling with
"instructions" and drawings.
Keep punching away, you don't know how easy you have it!
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: | Kick Back - More Info |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
No, you want to start the engine with the EI ON and the mag OFF.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Garry
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Kick Back - More Info
--> RV-List message posted by: "Garry" <garrys@tampabay.rr.com>
I'm very close to wiring my plane and would like to know how to wire the
ignition key switch. I have an AeroSport IO360 with one "mag", and one
Lightspeed Electronic Ignition. It seems that the forum is suggesting that
I wire the key switch so that in the "start" position only the Mag is
firing, but upon releasing the key switch from start to both, that then both
the mag and the Lightspeed are firing. Is this correct?
Garry Stout
RV7A Odessa Fl
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Point" <jpoint@mindspring.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Kick Back - More Info
> --> RV-List message posted by: Jeff Point <jpoint@mindspring.com>
>
> rveighta wrote:
>
>>Sound like a impulse coupler problem?
>>
> No, it sounds like the non-impulse coupled mag is firing before TDC (like
> it should) during starting. The purpose of the IC is to slow the mag down
> so it fires right at TDC during the starting process. When the engine is
> running, there is enough speed and inertia that firing at 28 BTDC is
> desireable. Duirng starting, when the engine is running so slowly, if the
> non-IC mag fires at 28 BDTC, it is likely to cause a kickback.
>
> Try leaving the non-IC mag off during starting. If you have a keyswitch,
> make sure it's wired properly to ground (turn off) the non-IC mag at the
> START position.
>
> Jeff Point
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: | Weight & Balance |
After removing the vacuum system, pump and instruments, and adding an
autopilot, I want to re-weigh and do a weight & balance on my RV-4. Is it feasable
to top off the fuel tanks, assume a 32 gallon load and then reverse the fuel
arm and weight to arrive at the gross aircraft weight? Part of my brain says
that won't work correctly. Any thoughts?
Pat Long
PGLong@aol.com
N120PL
RV4
Bay City, Michigan
3CM
Do Not Archive
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Weight & Balance |
Sure, it will work. The fuel weight should be obvious but be careful the
fuel moment is backed out the correct way. Do a sanity check afterwards
to see if adding fuel back in on a pre-flight W&B using your new empty
weight and CG gets you back to what showed on the scales.
Greg Young
After removing the vacuum system, pump and instruments, and
adding an autopilot, I want to re-weigh and do a weight & balance on my
RV-4. Is it feasable to top off the fuel tanks, assume a 32 gallon load
and then reverse the fuel arm and weight to arrive at the gross aircraft
weight? Part of my brain says that won't work correctly. Any thoughts?
Pat Long
PGLong@aol.com
N120PL
RV4
Bay City, Michigan
3CM
Do Not Archive
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: Weight & Balance |
At 03:41 PM 8/27/2006, you wrote:
>After removing the vacuum system, pump and instruments, and adding an
>autopilot, I want to re-weigh and do a weight & balance on my RV-4. Is it
>feasable to top off the fuel tanks, assume a 32 gallon load and then
>reverse the fuel arm and weight to arrive at the gross aircraft weight?
>Part of my brain says that won't work correctly. Any thoughts?
If you can weigh it empty then add the weight of 32 gallons at its arm, why
not?
Ron Lee
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Weight & Balance |
On 27 Aug 2006, at 17:41, PGLong@aol.com wrote:
> After removing the vacuum system, pump and instruments, and adding
> an autopilot, I want to re-weigh and do a weight & balance on my
> RV-4. Is it feasable to top off the fuel tanks, assume a 32 gallon
> load and then reverse the fuel arm and weight to arrive at the
> gross aircraft weight? Part of my brain says that won't work
> correctly. Any thoughts?
>
> Pat Long
> PGLong@aol.com
> N120PL
> RV4
> Bay City, Michigan
> 3CM
>
This will work, if you have already confirmed that you have 32 USG
usable fuel load. The number from Van's is only the nominal value.
Every aircraft is slightly different.
But, if you subtract the fuel, you'll get an empty weight, not the
gross weight, right?
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Weight & Balance |
--> RV-List message posted by: "PGLong" <PGLong@aol.com>
Right, empty weight. There is just enough grey area, guess I'll wait till I'm light
enough on fuel to have storage for the balance. Didn't want to do that, but
it is the correct and safer way.
Pat
--------
Pat Long
RV-4, N120PL
Bay City, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=57841#57841
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: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
I was struck, when starting my -8 with the empennage, just how simple and
straightforward the plans and instructions were. Nice little check boxes for
each step. Then I got the wing kit. The wing is much more complex and the
instructions are much less exacting. Like where it discusses how to rivet the
bottom skins. Then, the next page talks about what to do before you put on
the bottom skins and then the next page goes back to how to put on the bottom
skins.
I suppose the truth is that I learned enough from the empennage to sort out
how to do most of the wing--with a lot of help from the online community and a
few questions to Van's. My guess is that the online community would
probably be happy to re-write the assembly manual given the opportunity.
Anyway, most the kit and plans are pretty straightforward. I would be
happier if I had a bunch more pages of little check boxes. I am clearly an
assembler and not an engineer. I think the second RV would be a lot easier.
I
suppose Van's has other stuff to do, but I think they would sell even more kits
if all the instructions were as well documented as the empennage
instructions.
Regards,
Michael Wynn (Ginger ale drinker)
RV-8, Wings
San Ramon, California
Do Not Archive
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: | Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
--> 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 Charlie England
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 1:37 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings
Why should I be forced
to guess his intent when I paid good money for a kit & instructions
instead of a truckload of ore?
I've had quite a few conversations with Van's various tech guys offering
what I consider constructive suggestions that could improve the kits at
minimal expense & radically reduce phone time for them.
Charlie et al:
It might be helpful to think of the builders manual as an outline to direct
your own thought processes. A manual sufficiently detailed to satisfy
everyone would be impractical. One needs to think through the tasks and the
builders manual will help you do that but it will not do it for you. Time
spent trying to improve Van's perceived performance could be spent solving
problems using any and all resources that can be found. The literature has
many volumes describing standard practices, techniques methods and goals
that have been a part of aircraft manufacture for decades. These projects
are part of a learning process we can strive for. The ensueing self
reliance can be gratifying.
Gordon Comfort
N363GC
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: | Cylinders: ECI vs Superior or Others |
--> RV-List message posted by: "RV6 Flyer" <rv6_flyer@hotmail.com>
Darrell:
I am particial to the Superior Investment Cast Millineum cylinders. I have
S/N: 8, 9, 10, and 11 installed on my airplane. They are match flowed and
have 10:1 NFS pistons. Check the hours. Plan to take the cylinders off
when oil consumption gets high or compression gets low. Could be within the
next 1 months. I will have the cylinders inspected. If they have no
CRACKS, they may be rebuilt will all new parts and reinstalled or bored
0.010 over and rebuilt. I have budget for NEW cylinders and may go that way
if the rebuild approaches 70% of the new cost.
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,936 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
DO NOT ARCHIVE
----Original Message Follows----
From: Darrell Reiley <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
Subject: RV-List: Cylinders: ECI vs Superior or Others
--> RV-List message posted by: Darrell Reiley <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
I'm looking for decision support To all the Engine
Gurus and Roll your own engine builders out there,
which is the cylinder kit to by in todays market. So
many things are changing. It seems like everyday
products are being improved and or modified in some
way. I will not be going with standard compression
pistons and have not settled on the type of pistons or
the ratio yet. I would like to discuss overall
quality, casting, manufacturing methods etc... Which
will require a port clean up? Who's cleaned up their
fins from casing issues? Is anyone using a cryogenic
process on wear parts? Etc... Any information or
advice is appreciated.
Thanks in advance!
__________________
Darrell Reiley
RV7A "Reiley Rocket"
N622DR Reserved
CenTex_RV_Aircraft-owner@yahoogroups.com
__________________________________________________
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: | First flight N176LD |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Charles Rowbotham" <crowbotham@hotmail.com>
LeRoy and David,
CONGRATULATIONS and WELL DONE !!!
Chuck & Dave Rowbotham
RV-8A
>From: JhnstnIII@aol.com
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: First flight N176LD
>Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 22:26:44 EDT
>
>
>Listers--My airplane partner David White and I have been on this list
>since
>Fall 1999 when we started our RV-6 project. Today she flew for the first
>time.
>LeRoy Johnston and David White in Ohio.
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: | Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
I presume at some point the instructions for the 7/8/9 will mirror those
of
the 10. That is, no instruction manual at all.
Bob
Do Not Archive
// Anyway, most the kit and plans are pretty straightforward. I would
be
happier if I had a bunch more pages of little check boxes. I am clearly
an
assembler and not an engineer. I think the second RV would be a lot
easier.
I suppose Van's has other stuff to do, but I think they would sell even
more
kits if all the instructions were as well documented as the empennage
instructions.
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: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie England <ceengland@bellsouth.net>
gordon or marge wrote:
>--> 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 Charlie England
>Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 1:37 PM
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings
>
> Why should I be forced
>to guess his intent when I paid good money for a kit & instructions
>instead of a truckload of ore?
>
>I've had quite a few conversations with Van's various tech guys offering
>what I consider constructive suggestions that could improve the kits at
>minimal expense & radically reduce phone time for them.
>
>
>Charlie et al:
>
>It might be helpful to think of the builders manual as an outline to direct
>your own thought processes. A manual sufficiently detailed to satisfy
>everyone would be impractical. One needs to think through the tasks and the
>builders manual will help you do that but it will not do it for you. Time
>spent trying to improve Van's perceived performance could be spent solving
>problems using any and all resources that can be found. The literature has
>many volumes describing standard practices, techniques methods and goals
>that have been a part of aircraft manufacture for decades. These projects
>are part of a learning process we can strive for. The ensueing self
>reliance can be gratifying.
>
>Gordon Comfort
>N363GC
>
You're not fooling me, Gordon; I can smell the koolaid on your breath. :-)
I think that you're missing the point. If I wanted the raw 'mine the
ore' experience, I could buy a set of plans for a -6 (or a crashed plane
to build around the serial #), a Mustang II or a Thorp T-18 & start
pounding metal. (Yes, there are scratch built -4's & -6's out there.)
Please explain what value, other than long suffering & patience, I can
take from spending 20 hours inventorying parts when the job could be
done in 2 hours with a pick list sorted by part #.
I paid a premium for a prepunched kit, the instructions to assemble it,
and the support of the kit seller. Van's A/C understands their market
well enough to continue adding features (along with price) like
prepunch, FWF kits, etc. In the past they have incorporated many
features in the kits that were dreamed up by builders & flyers. It's
unfortunate that they cannot or will not recognize that the kits could
be significantly improved and the need for factory support minimized
with a little attention to their documents.
I really don't want to just rant; I'd like to try for a solution. That's
why I'm proposing that we do this ourselves.
Charlie
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: | Cylinders: ECI vs Superior or Others |
--> RV-List message posted by: Darrell Reiley <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
Gary,
Thanks for the info. How many years to accumulate the
hours? What's your oil consumption now?
-D-
--- RV6 Flyer <rv6_flyer@hotmail.com> wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "RV6 Flyer"
> <rv6_flyer@hotmail.com>
>
> Darrell:
>
> I am particial to the Superior Investment Cast
> Millineum cylinders. I have
> S/N: 8, 9, 10, and 11 installed on my airplane.
> They are match flowed and
> have 10:1 NFS pistons. Check the hours. Plan to
> take the cylinders off
> when oil consumption gets high or compression gets
> low. Could be within the
> next 1 months. I will have the cylinders inspected.
> If they have no
> CRACKS, they may be rebuilt will all new parts and
> reinstalled or bored
> 0.010 over and rebuilt. I have budget for NEW
> cylinders and may go that way
> if the rebuild approaches 70% of the new cost.
>
> Gary A. Sobek
> "My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
> 1,936 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: Darrell Reiley <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
> To: RV-List <rv-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RV-List: Cylinders: ECI vs Superior or
> Others
> Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 11:54:55 -0700 (PDT)
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: Darrell Reiley
> <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
>
> I'm looking for decision support To all the Engine
> Gurus and Roll your own engine builders out there,
> which is the cylinder kit to by in todays market.
> So
> many things are changing. It seems like everyday
> products are being improved and or modified in some
> way. I will not be going with standard compression
> pistons and have not settled on the type of pistons
> or
> the ratio yet. I would like to discuss overall
> quality, casting, manufacturing methods etc... Which
> will require a port clean up? Who's cleaned up their
> fins from casing issues? Is anyone using a cryogenic
> process on wear parts? Etc... Any information or
> advice is appreciated.
>
> Thanks in advance!
> __________________
>
>
> Darrell Reiley
> RV7A "Reiley Rocket"
> N622DR Reserved
>
> CenTex_RV_Aircraft-owner@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
>
> Web Forums!
>
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
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: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
--> RV-List message posted by: Paul Trotter <ptrotter@acm.org>
In general, I think that Van's has designed excellent aircraft and their
kits are great. But in some respects the instructions could be a little
better. Yes, we should be able to extrapolate from the drawings and
instructions to figure out what we should be doing, but when there are
specific instructions or drawings for an operation, we should be able to
rely on them. It is not that the instructions need to be expanded, it is
that those that are there should be correct. Any incorrect or contradictory
instructions should be fixed. This is not hard, as I'm sure that Van's has
been apprised of the errors by many people. Also, we should not have to
worry about following the instructions and doing something only to find out
later that something else should have been done first. Reading ahead in the
instructions is a good idea, but they should be in the proper order anyway.
I'm having a great time building my 8, but sometimes it is frustrating
trying to figure out what to do when the instructions and drawing are
unclear or contradict each other.
The instructions that are provided, at whatever level of detail that Van's
feels are necessary, should be accurate. It would take very little effort
to create a section on their website with corrections to the instructions
and drawings. For anything beyond that, I feel that these forums and email
lists are a great resource.
Paul Trotter
RV-8 82080 Fuselage Kit
>
> Charlie et al:
>
> It might be helpful to think of the builders manual as an outline to
> direct
> your own thought processes. A manual sufficiently detailed to satisfy
> everyone would be impractical. One needs to think through the tasks and
> the
> builders manual will help you do that but it will not do it for you. Time
> spent trying to improve Van's perceived performance could be spent solving
> problems using any and all resources that can be found. The literature
> has
> many volumes describing standard practices, techniques methods and goals
> that have been a part of aircraft manufacture for decades. These projects
> are part of a learning process we can strive for. The ensueing self
> reliance can be gratifying.
>
> Gordon Comfort
> N363GC
>
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie England <ceengland@bellsouth.net>
Now you're talking! I've heard great things about the -10's
plans/instructions. Isn't it interesting that Van gets high praise for
reducing build time on the -8 by prepunching the fuselage but we get
criticized for asking that we not be required to waste time needlessly
searching for parts or trying to sort out two instructions in direct
conflict.
Charlie
Bob Collins wrote:
> I presume at some point the instructions for the 7/8/9 will mirror
> those of the 10. That is, no instruction manual at all.
>
> Bob
>
> Do Not Archive
>
> // Anyway, most the kit and plans are pretty straightforward. I would
> be happier if I had a bunch more pages of little check boxes. I am
> clearly an assembler and not an engineer. I think the second RV would
> be a lot easier. I suppose Van's has other stuff to do, but I think
> they would sell even more kits if all the instructions were as well
> documented as the empennage instructions.
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
--> RV-List message posted by: Darrell Reiley <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
<snip>
It's
unfortunate that they cannot or will not recognize
that the kits could
be significantly improved and the need for factory
support minimized
with a little attention to their documents.
<snip>
Charlie,
I understand where you're coming from. It has been a
few years since Van himself decided to make the
company employee owned. Maybe now it's a Job/Owner
Security issue. ;-)
Darrell Reiley
RV7A "Reiley Rocket"
N622DR Reserved
CenTex_RV_Aircraft-owner@yahoogroups.com
__________________________________________________
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Rant, question, suggestion: errors in plans/drawings |
--> RV-List message posted by: "William Gill" <wgill10@comcast.net>
That's called "Job Security"
Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Darrell Reiley
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 9:48 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Rant, question, suggestion: errors in
plans/drawings
--> RV-List message posted by: Darrell Reiley
<lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
<snip>
It's
unfortunate that they cannot or will not recognize
that the kits could
be significantly improved and the need for factory
support minimized
with a little attention to their documents.
<snip>
Charlie,
I understand where you're coming from. It has been a
few years since Van himself decided to make the
company employee owned. Maybe now it's a Job/Owner
Security issue. ;-)
Darrell Reiley
RV7A "Reiley Rocket"
N622DR Reserved
CenTex_RV_Aircraft-owner@yahoogroups.com
__________________________________________________
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: Wheeler North <wnorth@sdccd.edu>
Well,
the last time I made a suggestion on this topic it took about two weeks for
the flaming to stop.
But they wear primarily for three reasons.
Camber, the tire isn't vertically straight
Toe, the tire isn't pointed straight ahead and aft, parallel to the AC
centerline.
Big foot, the brakes are on during take offs, landings and taxi operations
Sans a big foot, toe will wear the tires rapidly if more than one deg.
Test is to rub across the grooves with a finger, if feathered and sharp on
one side of groove and rounded on the other side of groove then side
scrubbing is happening. Direction of scrubbing is from feather edge towards
rounded edge.
Fix is to rotate gear in socket for tapered rod type, the others can be
shimmed at stub axel. Because of aft rake of tapered rod gear rotating in
socket will change both camber and toe. But fixing toe is most important as
it scrubs tire on one side usually, rather than wearing it at a camber
angle.
Since most wear comes from ground ops set toe with AC in that attitude and
common weight. As well most landing are close to three point landings
anyways.
Project line of sight off wheel rim 100 inches out and measure to centerline
close to wheel and at 100 inches. Both should be same.
At 100 inches out one degree = 1.75 inches roughly so get fore and aft tire
parallelism with centerline inside of that value.
Camber - not much you can do about it on an RV as weight changes too much,
too often. Get 'em both the same if you have the stub axel design (-8)
I generally get about 350-400 hours out of a set of tires if I don't pop 'em
on those damm goat head thorns and rotate 'em once.
W
And PS, leak stop tubes rock.
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! --
|