Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:40 AM - Re: Static ports, was: Gretz GA-1000 Pitot Experience? (Kevin Horton)
2. 04:43 AM - Re: Facet pump failure (Zeidman, Richard B)
3. 04:59 AM - Re: yet another rivet question (Hopperdhh@aol.com)
4. 05:45 AM - Re: May the road rise to meet you... (Larry Mac Donald)
5. 06:51 AM - Heatset woes (Steve Struyk)
6. 07:04 AM - ()
7. 07:18 AM - Re: Static ports, was: Gretz GA-1000 Pitot Experience? (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
8. 07:26 AM - Re: Why fuel cutoff? (Kelly McMullen)
9. 07:31 AM - HEADset woes (Steve Struyk)
10. 07:48 AM - Re: Heatset woes (David Maib)
11. 08:28 AM - Re: Heatset woes (Ron Lee)
12. 08:45 AM - Re: Re: RV-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 10/04/06 (D.Bristol)
13. 09:38 AM - Re: HEADset woes (FLYaDIVE@aol.com)
14. 09:50 AM - Re: Why fuel cutoff? (FLYaDIVE@aol.com)
15. 09:50 AM - Re: Why fuel cutoff? (linn Walters)
16. 10:03 AM - Roll Trim - RV-6A (FLYaDIVE@aol.com)
17. 10:35 AM - custom cables... (Bill VonDane)
18. 10:41 AM - Re: Roll Trim - RV-6A (Sam Buchanan)
19. 10:46 AM - stopping the engine (glen matejcek)
20. 11:00 AM - Re: HEADset woes (scott bilinski)
21. 11:43 AM - Re: custom cables... (Bruce Gray)
22. 12:57 PM - Re: custom cables... (Bob J.)
23. 01:21 PM - Re: Re: RV-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 10/04/06 (Jim Fogarty at Lakes & Leisure Realty)
24. 03:45 PM - Re: HEADset woes (Charles Reiche)
25. 04:06 PM - Re: HEADset woes (Steve Struyk)
26. 04:37 PM - Re: HEADset woes (Bruce Bell)
27. 05:37 PM - Re: yet another rivet question (Doug Gray)
28. 08:41 PM - Re: yet another rivet question (Richard E. Tasker)
29. 10:46 PM - Senator Ground Loops RV-8 (Hans Conser)
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: Static ports, was: Gretz GA-1000 Pitot Experience? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
Thanks for the additional info. It is good to learn that Cleaveland
has updated the design of their static ports, and that the new ones
appear to be much more suited to RVs, or at least RV-10s. I'd love
to get any reports from people who have done comprehensive static
system error testing with the new Cleaveland static ports on other RVs.
I wouldn't try to chase your -1.8 kt error - that is actually pretty
good. A lot of type-certificated aircraft have errors larger than
that. You would probably have to experiment with machining the
static port to change how much it protruded from the fuselage surface.
The ultimate answer is for EFIS manufacturers to add a feature where
the user can define a static pressure correction. The corrected
static pressure would be used for the displayed airspeed and
altitude. There are several classical ways to describe the static
pressure correction.
Fly safe,
Kevin Horton
On 5 Oct 2006, at 21:10, Tim Olson wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>
> I had the original Cleaveland ports that were flat. I didn't get
> any instructions with them, so I just riveted them in, and
> painted around them...they were flush with the painted part of
> the fuselage. As it turned out, they were supposedly to be installed
> on an un-primed inner surface, so they'd not have that super
> thick primer (sarcastic) keeping them from sticking out, and then
> they were supposed to be painted with the fuselage so the end
> result was that they were to stick out .010" or so. Well, with
> mine being flush, I had a -6.5 to -7.5 kt error. I had no idea
> until thanks to your site I used your 4-way spreadsheet and
> did a bunch of test flights. I was consistently off by that
> amount, with st.dev. numbers near zero.
>
> I cut some .040 or .050" penny sized discs and taped them over
> the ports (had a hole in the discs), and then my airspeed error
> was -4 kts or so....a good improvement, but a messy kludge.
>
> I then removed the discs and made some horseshoe bridges to put
> in front of the ports, which brought the error to -4 to -4.5
> kts or so.
>
> Finally I gave up doing the messy fixes and installed the newer
> style Cleaveland ports. They stick out a bit, and are rounded
> in shape on the outside. When I test flew with those ports, my
> error was -1.8 on your spreadsheet. With 1kt resolution on the
> airspeed indicator, I think this is the best I can expect to get.
>
> I did a pitot system leak check when I had the IFR pitot static
> done, and both were tight. I did a simulated test of the pitot
> system by blowing into it to 170kts and plugging the pitot with
> a piece of rubber. I couldn't get a perfect seal, but it only
> leaked down by 1kt every 20+ seconds or so....so it was tight
> enough to be pretty accurate I'd think.
>
> I need to say thank you for your website. I used it during my
> quest for good airspeed numbers. I'd love to get rid of the
> -1.8 kt error, but I think I'd be a little obsessive if I put
> much more time into that small of an error.
>
> Thanks again Kevin,
> Tim
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> Kevin Horton wrote:
>> --> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
>>> --> RV-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>>>
>>> I've got one installed and flying. It seems to work fine.
>>> The thermostatic control works as advertised. Somewhere in
>>> my pitot static system I have something causing an airspeed
>>> error of -1 to -2 kts, but that's pretty minimal. I had
>>> lots more until I got new static ports installed.
>> Tim - tell us more about the static ports. Which static ports
>> gave the errors? How much error, and in which speed range? Which
>> ports do you have now?
>> Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
>> Ottawa, Canada
>> http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Facet pump failure |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Zeidman, Richard B" <richard.b.zeidman@boeing.com>
It was the low pressure Facet pump from Vans catalog. It did give me
some warning that I didn't heed. Along with not sounding quite right,
the day prior to the in flight failure, after flying around for awhile,
I stopped for fuel and could not get any fuel pressure on restart.
Thinking I had a vapor lock in my engine pump, I let the engine cool for
20 minutes and then flew home without any problems. The next day,
(5/11/05) I added a blast tube to the engine pump and flew around to
warm up the engine to see if I could get it to repeat the prior day's
event. During that flight is when I toggled the electric pump, shutting
off the engine.
Pump failure may be rare, but it does happen.
Rich
RV6A N42RZ
RV7 N42PZ
time: 09:04:04 AM PST US
From: Vanremog@aol.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: Facet pump failure
In a message dated 10/4/2006 4:21:59 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
richard.b.zeidman@boeing.com writes:
I don't want to cause a fuel pump panic, but I, unfortunately, was one
who had a facet pump failure at about 800 hours. It hadn't been
sounding
normal for a few hours and should have been replaced. During it's last
flight, I toggled the pump switch and the engine shut off. I tested it
in a lab later and found it to be intermittent below 13.5 volts and
would
start dithering instead of pumping. Why it didn't allow fuel through
it,
I cannot explain.
PS My new RV has a cylindrical pump installed.
================================
It would help us all a little to know which pump you had fail (FI high
pressure or Carb low pressure).
GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A, C/S, Flying 811hrs, Silicon Valley, CA)
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: | Re: yet another rivet question |
Jeff,
I too don't understand why the "3/32" rivets are so small for the holes. If
the rivets were .100 inch instead of .094 they would fit much better.
Now I'll give another plug for pre-squeezing the rivets. Use your squeezer
and squeeze a batch of rivets until they just fit the holes before you even
start to rivet. Once you have the squeezer adjusted this goes pretty fast.
Now when you start banging on the skin, you won't spend the first 4 or 5 hits
bringing the rivet shank up to size. The now shorter rivets are not as
likely to bend over, and the shop heads form almost as soon as you start the gun.
The result is a much better job. You don't have to start with longer rivets
-- that would defeat the purpose. Use the gauge before you pre-squeeze.
I built most of my plane this way and I get lots of unsolicited comments
about how good the riveting looks.
Please don't flame me until after you have given this a try. It really
works.
Dan Hopper
RV-7A
In a message dated 10/5/2006 8:59:22 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
jb.flynavy@gmail.com writes:
These are the 3.5 length rivets as specified on the drawings. I'm match
drilling to #40, then dimpling. This sure seems to give an awfully big hole for
the 3/32 rivets to move around in, although the rudder turned out ok.
As far as I can tell, my surface (back rivet plate) is level and the gun is
perpendicular. The working pressure is about 44 psi (avery 2x gun).
I seem to get slightly better results by driving the rivets very slowly.
Any advice to improve my technique??
Thanks,
Jeff[img][/img]
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: May the road rise to meet you... |
--> RV-List message posted by: Larry Mac Donald <lm4@juno.com>
J.T.
John,
Thanks for all the good advice and good luck in your new challenge.
Larry Mac Donald
lm4@juno.com
Rochester N.Y.
Do not achcive
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 15:28:35 -0500 "John Helms" <jhelms@nationair.com>
writes:
> It has been my pleasure to serve you all as a group and many of you
> as
> individuals over the past several years. I have accepted a position
> as
> Assistant Vice President and Manager of the Light Aircraft Division
> - East
> (long title I know) for American International Group, Inc (AIG for
> short).
> Basically, that is the head of light aircraft underwriting for the
> east
> coast for AIG. The office is in Atlanta, GA.
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 |
|
List,
I finally took the plunge and bought the Thirty 3G Lightspeeds. The day
after they arrived I used them in the corporate jet that I fly. They
worked beautifully and because the jet has Bose headsets, I was able to
do a back to back comparison, which BTW, seemed to be about even on all
points. Anyway, here's the problem. When I use the Lightspeeds in my
RV-8, I get a squeal in the interphone when the volume is turned up past
a point where I can hear the back seater. If the volume is low enough,
it goes away but so does my ability to hear my passenger. I don't think
it's feedback. It sounds more like it's related to the VOX threshold.
Once the threshold is crossed and the volume is too high, it squeals.
Turn the volume down, the VOX clips off and the squeal stops. If I put
the LS's in the rear and my "cheapos" in the front, the LS's work fine.
I tried the Bose in the RV and they work beautifully in the front or
rear. Until now (60 hours) my two cheepos have worked fine.
I've talked to the techs a LS and they have no idea. They seem to think
it's my airplane...but why does brand "B" (and my cheepos) work in my
plane and theirs does not?
I also talked to the guys in the avionics shop at work. They think it
could be a mismatch between the LS's (stereo) and my cheepos. (mono)
My next step is to try two stereo sets and see if that's the problem but
in the meantime any ideas from you guys would be appreciated.
Steve Struyk
St. Charles MO
RV-8 60 Hours
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 |
|
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: | Static ports, was: Gretz GA-1000 Pitot Experience? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
I got to see Tim's updated static ports last weekend (thanks again for
the ride) and the first thing I noticed is they are styled very much
like the Van's pop rivet ports. They are like a little mound sticking
out of the skin a tiny bit.
A while back I made the decision to go with the SafeAir static and pitot
tubing along with their ports. I asked lots of people about the
possible error I could see and had a wide range of answers but most
people didn't seem to have a problem with them. If I had to guess the
RV-10 might be a tad more sensitive to the static port position than the
other RV's and it really wants the port sticking out into the slipstream
a little more.
I'm probably at least a year from flying but I will be sure to post back
any errors that I see after careful calculations and multiple runs. One
solution I have heard for the people that had flush ports with errors
was to take the Vans pop rivet version, cut the head off, and glue it
over the flush ports.
I also have the Gretz GA-1000 Pitot and it is very nicely styled. It is
sandable and you can also paint it to match whatever color.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Buildus Interuptus
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Horton
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 4:39 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Static ports, was: Gretz GA-1000 Pitot Experience?
--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
Thanks for the additional info. It is good to learn that Cleaveland has
updated the design of their static ports, and that the new ones appear
to be much more suited to RVs, or at least RV-10s. I'd love to get any
reports from people who have done comprehensive static system error
testing with the new Cleaveland static ports on other RVs.
I wouldn't try to chase your -1.8 kt error - that is actually pretty
good. A lot of type-certificated aircraft have errors larger than that.
You would probably have to experiment with machining the static port to
change how much it protruded from the fuselage surface.
The ultimate answer is for EFIS manufacturers to add a feature where the
user can define a static pressure correction. The corrected static
pressure would be used for the displayed airspeed and altitude. There
are several classical ways to describe the static pressure correction.
Fly safe,
Kevin Horton
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: Why fuel cutoff? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com>
I'd infer the reason has a lot to do with the fact that airplane engines
have magnetos and a big old prop out front that doesn't take much effort
to move. When is the last time you moved your auto engine with one hand?
When is the last time you worried about your car starting if you moved
the engine? If you kill the engine with the mag switch you will have
fuel in the cylinders, and if a mag isn't fully grounded, someone moves
the prop, and presto, instant unintended start and whatever is in the
way of the prop gets sliced and diced.
linn Walters wrote:
> Dean, I share your frustration. Thanks to the Feds, we have to put up
> with antiquated engines because it costs too much to certify new ones,
> and the lawyers have inferred that if an improvement is made, then the
> original was flawed. Homebuilts are the only solution. Car engines
> have all the newest technology ... are far more efficient, have better
> power to weight ratios, and far better tolerances. I really have to
> agree .... magneto's belong on lawnmowers!!! However, they're dirt
> simple and if taken care of .... hardly ever fail. I like that.
> Electronic ignition is more efficient ..... but is still prone to
> failures like any other electronic gadget. I don't really like that.
> Working in the electronics industry all my life has made me very
> wary!!! KISS is important to me, and adding dual backut everythings
> just doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling. But I digress.
>
> I believe the biggest difference between car engines and airplane
> engines is the way we operate them. The only way your car sits in the
> garage for weeks on end is when your job takes you out of town!!! I
> run the dog-crap out of my Pitts engine ..... and often .....so I
> don't worry about internal rust and corrosion because I run it often.
> If you flew every day, then you'd probably never have any problems
> related to shutting the engine down with the mag switch. I was given
> that reason for having an idle cutoff on the mixture and accepted it.
> It's plausible to me. So, I ask you ..... do you have a better
> reason?? Lycoming says a lot of things relating to their engines that
> I think come from a severe case of CYA. This could be one of them.
> Until I find good. meaningful data to suggest otherwise, I'll hold on
> to this "urban legend".
> Linn
> do not archive.
> DEAN PSIROPOULOS wrote:
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 |
|
List,
I finally took the plunge and bought the Thirty 3G Lightspeeds. The day
after they arrived I used them in the corporate jet that I fly. They
worked beautifully and because the jet has Bose headsets, I was able to
do a back to back comparison, which BTW, seemed to be about even on all
points. Anyway, here's the problem. When I use the Lightspeeds in my
RV-8, I get a squeal in the interphone when the volume is turned up past
a point where I can hear the back seater. If the volume is low enough,
it goes away but so does my ability to hear my passenger. I don't think
it's feedback. It sounds more like it's related to the VOX threshold.
Once the threshold is crossed and the volume is too high, it squeals.
Turn the volume down, the VOX clips off and the squeal stops. If I put
the LS's in the rear and my "cheapos" in the front, the LS's work fine.
I tried the Bose in the RV and they work beautifully in the front or
rear. Until now (60 hours) my two cheepos have worked fine.
I've talked to the techs a LS and they have no idea. They seem to think
it's my airplane...but why does brand "B" (and my cheepos) work in my
plane and theirs does not?
I also talked to the guys in the avionics shop at work. They think it
could be a mismatch between the LS's (stereo) and my cheepos. (mono)
My next step is to try two stereo sets and see if that's the problem but
in the meantime any ideas from you guys would be appreciated.
Steve Struyk
St. Charles MO
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: Heatset woes |
Hi Steve,
Does the mic on your HD (High Dollar ^-^) headset have a very tiny adjustment screw?
If so, that will set the sensitivity of the mic. Probably would only move
it a quarter turn at a time.
Regards,
David Maib
still on the tailcone!
On Friday, October 06, 2006, at 07:23AM, linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
>
><<Original Attached>>
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: Heatset woes |
--> RV-List message posted by: Ron Lee <ronlee@pcisys.net>
>Verify that your headset jacks are proper for the headset. Are there
three prongs to match the three sections of a stereo headset. Not sure
how this works but worth checking.
Ron Lee
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: RE: RV-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 10/04/06 |
The best reason for shutting down your aircraft engine with the mixture
instead of the switch is safety. You don't have a propeller on your car
so it doesn't matter if there's a cylinder ready to fire, but on an
airplane with a charge in a cylinder, if the prop gets moved and a mag
is hot, the engine can start. So if you shut it down by pulling the
mixture (or using the bypass valve) there is much less of a chance that
it will fire inadvertently and hurt someone.
Dave -6 So Cal
EAA Technical Counselor
DEAN PSIROPOULOS wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" <dean.psiropoulos@verizon.net>
>
>Linn this comment sounds a lot like some of the other urban legends that I
>keep hearing since being involved in aviation. I honestly cannot understand
>where this one came from. This is another thing that does have a
>counterpart in automotive land. As far back as I can remember (about 1963)
>automobiles have been turned off with the IGNITION switch, NOT a fuel
>cutoff. Now I don't know why airplanes have to use that particular method
>over just turning off the ignition but it in some ways it seems as
>antiquated as the magnetos that are STILL in use on new production airplanes
>today. Why do we continue to perpetuate this stuff when cars have long
>since dispensed with them? We NEVER think about washing oil off the cylinder
>walls of our autos, even when they had big four barrel carburetors? Not a
>personal attack on you Linn, just a frustration with certain things I hear
>in aviation land that are NEVER even thought about in automotive land.
>
>Dean Psiropoulos
>RV-6A N197DM
>Finishing wiring, soon to clear the prop.
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>>Time: 01:28:36 PM PST US
>>From: linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
>>Subject: Re: RV-List: Findings on the AFP purge valve
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>The only downside to this procedure is that there is 'extra' fuel in the
>>cylinders which will wash the oil off the cylinder walls.
>>Linn
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
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: HEADset woes |
In a message dated 10/6/2006 10:33:59 AM Eastern Standard Time,
rv8striker@hotmail.com writes:
I've talked to the techs a LS and they have no idea. They seem to think it's
my airplane...but why does brand "B" (and my cheepos) work in my plane and
theirs does not?
I also talked to the guys in the avionics shop at work. They think it could
be a mismatch between the LS's (stereo) and my cheepos. (mono)
My next step is to try two stereo sets and see if that's the problem but in
the meantime any ideas from you guys would be appreciated.
Steve Struyk
St. Charles MO
==============================
Hi Steve:
I think the avionics shop is on the right track but needs to refine their
thought process just a bit.
It is NOT the stereo, it is the MIC. The Mic is not stereo (not that it needs
to be) and it could very well be the MIC impedance between the two different
headsets that is causing the problem.
Now to confuse you a bit further ... It is not the headsets, it is the
intercom. Yes, there probably is a difference between the headsets impedance but
it
is the intercom, that is not being able to handle the difference that is
causing the problem.
The way to check this out is to use the same type of headset in BOTH the
front and read seats at the same time; both Bose's and then both LS.
ALSO ... It is important to check the following:
1 - Battery condition in ALL headsets.
2 - Position of the headset on the head ... Nice and secure, no air/sound
leaks around the ear pieces.
3 - MIC position ... Close to the mouth, just above the upper lip ... So when
opening the mouth in Awe (as you roll the plane) there is no rushing sound.
4 - Mic Muff - Make sure ALL mic's are muffed with that foam thing.
5 - NEVER leave a headset plugged in when it is not being used during flight.
This is especially true of Noise Canceling headsets. Doing so will cause
all sorts of noise problems.
But, I'd bet it is the intercom with one of these problems:
1 - Impedance mismatch.
2 - Intercom has only ONE Squelch control; better to have a squelch and
volume control for pilot & copilot. Note: 4 seat intercoms do not have a squelch
for the passengers.
Hope this helps.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
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: Why fuel cutoff? |
In a message dated 10/6/2006 10:28:24 AM Eastern Standard Time,
kellym@aviating.com writes:
So, I ask you ..... do you have a better
> reason?? Lycoming says a lot of things relating to their engines that
> I think come from a severe case of CYA. This could be one of them.
> Until I find good. meaningful data to suggest otherwise, I'll hold on
> to this "urban legend".
> Linn
===============================
Hi Linn:
I would think there are three reasons to have a fuel cutoff:
1 - If you have your wits about you ... Just before the crash you shut off
the fuel so as not to fuel the fire.
2 - Since many planes with two tanks manage their fuel with a fuel selector
switch and that switch is located in the cockpit it may just help if there is a
fuel leak in the cockpit or engine fire.
3 - It is probably an FAA requirement.
But, as for the KISS ME principal, why not eliminate all fuel lines in the
cockpit and run the lines directly to the boost pump and engine forward of the
firewall. Do away with the switch completely. I know, I know ... Fuel
management and fuel contamination.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
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: Why fuel cutoff? |
--> RV-List message posted by: linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
Good point Kelly! I know two 'victims' of prop strikes after shutdown
with the mixture. One lost a thumb, and the other spent weeks in the
hospital recovering from a blade across the top of his head. In this
one, he just braced his hand on the prop to look into the intake ....
and the impulse fired ..... on a hot engine. I treat mags like guns
...... they're always loaded and ready to fire!!! I just don't trust
them to always be grounded. Both my buddies were in a hurry and didn't
switch the mags off when they got out of the plane. Another one of my
learning experiences.
Linn
Kelly McMullen wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com>
>
> I'd infer the reason has a lot to do with the fact that airplane
> engines have magnetos and a big old prop out front that doesn't take
> much effort to move. When is the last time you moved your auto engine
> with one hand? When is the last time you worried about your car
> starting if you moved the engine? If you kill the engine with the
> mag switch you will have fuel in the cylinders, and if a mag isn't
> fully grounded, someone moves the prop, and presto, instant unintended
> start and whatever is in the way of the prop gets sliced and diced.
> linn Walters wrote:
>
>> Dean, I share your frustration. Thanks to the Feds, we have to put
>> up with antiquated engines because it costs too much to certify new
>> ones, and the lawyers have inferred that if an improvement is made,
>> then the original was flawed. Homebuilts are the only solution. Car
>> engines have all the newest technology ... are far more efficient,
>> have better power to weight ratios, and far better tolerances. I
>> really have to agree .... magneto's belong on lawnmowers!!! However,
>> they're dirt simple and if taken care of .... hardly ever fail. I
>> like that. Electronic ignition is more efficient ..... but is still
>> prone to failures like any other electronic gadget. I don't really
>> like that. Working in the electronics industry all my life has made
>> me very wary!!! KISS is important to me, and adding dual backut
>> everythings just doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling. But I digress.
>>
>> I believe the biggest difference between car engines and airplane
>> engines is the way we operate them. The only way your car sits in
>> the garage for weeks on end is when your job takes you out of
>> town!!! I run the dog-crap out of my Pitts engine ..... and often
>> .....so I don't worry about internal rust and corrosion because I run
>> it often. If you flew every day, then you'd probably never have any
>> problems related to shutting the engine down with the mag switch. I
>> was given that reason for having an idle cutoff on the mixture and
>> accepted it. It's plausible to me. So, I ask you ..... do you have
>> a better reason?? Lycoming says a lot of things relating to their
>> engines that I think come from a severe case of CYA. This could be
>> one of them. Until I find good. meaningful data to suggest
>> otherwise, I'll hold on to this "urban legend".
>> Linn
>> do not archive.
>> DEAN PSIROPOULOS wrote:
>
>
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: | Roll Trim - RV-6A |
Hey Group:
I have been fighting with trimming out the unwanted roll to the right of an
RV-6A. Things I have done:
1 - Installed the center mounted manual trim. That worked for a while but
seems the springs or hook up wire has stretched and the plane is back to doing
rolls.
2 - I found the flaps to be out of trim when in the FULL UP position. By
giving them the slightest blip of down the roll rate decreases about 75%. I also
do not notice any change in IAS.
I found the flap problem when taking measurements while the plane was bubble
level on the ground. One flap pulls UP just a bit more than the other.
So, I am now thinking about trim tabs on the ailerons. I heard about using a
seam tool to squeeze the trailing edge. But, other than hearing about it I
have not read about it. Also, this seems like a permanent action, no means to
correct if over done.
I would appreciate to hear about your experience and cures.
Thank you,
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: | custom cables... |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bill VonDane" <bill@vondane.com>
Anyone have a line on where to get custom control cables made? (like RV
rudder cables)
I need tree cables of different lengths with balls and shanked balls swaged
on them...
Someplace in the Denver/Colorado Springs area would be great!
Thanks!
-Bill
bill@vondane.com
do not archive
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: | Re: Roll Trim - RV-6A |
--> RV-List message posted by: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@hiwaay.net>
FLYaDIVE@aol.com wrote:
<snip>
> So, I am now thinking about trim tabs on the ailerons. I heard about using a
> seam tool to squeeze the trailing edge. But, other than hearing about it I
> have not read about it. Also, this seems like a permanent action, no means to
> correct if over done.
> I would appreciate to hear about your experience and cures.
A search on "squeezing & aileron" (leave off the quotes) on the
Matronics search engine yielded 103 hits on this very frequently and
extensively discussed topic:
http://www.matronics.com/searching/search.html
Sam Buchanan
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: | stopping the engine |
--> RV-List message posted by: "glen matejcek" <aerobubba@earthlink.net>
Howdy Dean and Linn (and anyone else)-
I agree absolutely about the OWT. It never ceases to amaze me how
pervasive they are.
WRT using the mixture to kill the engine, I was taught and believe it's
real value is as a test of the system. The IGN gets tested during runup.
Idle C/O gets tested at shut down. Just that simple.
WRT auto IGN sys, I've got almost 300K miles on my Saturn, with only the
occasional plug and wire swaps. Otherwise, it's been bullet proof. We
ought to be able to adapt / adopt that kind of thing technology.
Nomex undies in place, HALON in one hand and keyboard in the other...
glen matejcek
aerobubba@earthlink.net
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: | Re: HEADset woes |
Try to duplicate the problem on the ground with out the engine running.....
.....I am not sure what exactly this will indicate, but somebody here with
more knowelegeable than me might be able to make a connection to the proble
m. I would think if the issue is not duplicated, there might be a mic probl
em as others mentioned.=0A=0A=0A =0AScott Bilinski=0ARV-8a=0A=0A=0A----- Or
iginal Message ----=0AFrom: "FLYaDIVE@aol.com" <FLYaDIVE@aol.com>=0ATo: rv-
list@matronics.com=0ASent: Friday, October 6, 2006 9:36:13 AM=0ASubject: Re
: RV-List: HEADset woes=0A=0A=0AIn a message dated 10/6/2006 10:33:59 AM Ea
stern Standard Time, rv8striker@hotmail.com writes:=0AI've talked to the te
chs a LS and they have no idea. They seem to think it's my airplane...but w
hy does brand "B" (and my cheepos) work in my plane and theirs does not?=0A
=0AI also talked to the guys in the avionics shop at work. They think it c
ould be a mismatch between the LS's (stereo) and my cheepos. (mono)=0A =0AM
y next step is to try two stereo sets and see if that's the problem but in
the meantime any ideas from you guys would be appreciated.=0A =0ASteve Stru
yk=0ASt. Charles MO=0A=================
===============0AHi Steve:=0A =0AI think the av
ionics shop is on the right track but needs to refine their thought process
just a bit.=0A =0AIt is NOT the stereo, it is the MIC. The Mic is not ster
eo (not that it needs to be) and it could very well be the MIC impedance be
tween the two different headsets that is causing the problem.=0ANow to conf
use you a bit further ... It is not the headsets, it is the intercom. Yes,
there probably is a difference between the headsets impedance but it is th
e intercom, that is not being able to handle the difference that is causing
the problem.=0AThe way to check this out is to use the same type of headse
t in BOTH the front and read seats at the same time; both Bose's and then b
oth LS.=0AALSO ... It is important to check the following:=0A1 - Battery co
ndition in ALL headsets.=0A2 - Position of the headset on the head ... Nice
and secure, no air/sound leaks around the ear pieces.=0A3 - MIC position .
.. Close to the mouth, just above the upper lip ... So when opening the mou
th in Awe (as you roll the plane) there is no rushing sound.=0A4 - Mic Muff
- Make sure ALL mic's are muffed with that foam thing.=0A5 - NEVER leave a
headset plugged in when it is not being used during flight. This is espec
ially true of Noise Canceling headsets. Doing so will cause all sorts of n
oise problems.=0A =0ABut, I'd bet it is the intercom with one of these prob
lems:=0A1 - Impedance mismatch. =0A2 - Intercom has only ONE Squelch contr
ol; better to have a squelch and volume control for pilot & copilot. Note:
4 seat intercoms do not have a squelch for the passengers.=0A =0AHope this
=========================0A
========0A=0A
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: | custom cables... |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
Check your local sail boat supply house.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill VonDane
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 1:31 PM
Subject: RV-List: custom cables...
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bill VonDane" <bill@vondane.com>
Anyone have a line on where to get custom control cables made? (like RV
rudder cables)
I need tree cables of different lengths with balls and shanked balls swaged
on them...
Someplace in the Denver/Colorado Springs area would be great!
Thanks!
-Bill
bill@vondane.com
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: custom cables... |
If you can find someone with a Kearney swager, its easy to make control
cables. Its a necessity for warbird restoration, so if you know of any
local warbird guys they might clue you in to someone that would swage the
fittings onto your cables. I have a buddy that has one, its a piece of cake
to use but the swager itself is very expensive so don't expect it to be
loaned out!
Regards,
Bob Japundza
RV-6 flying F1 under const.
On 10/6/06, Bill VonDane <bill@vondane.com> wrote:
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Bill VonDane" <bill@vondane.com>
>
> Anyone have a line on where to get custom control cables made? (like RV
> rudder cables)
>
> I need tree cables of different lengths with balls and shanked balls
> swaged
> on them...
>
> Someplace in the Denver/Colorado Springs area would be great!
>
> Thanks!
> -Bill
> bill@vondane.com
>
> do not archive
>
>
Message 23
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: RE: RV-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 10/04/06 |
Dave, That is excellent advise. I'm sure we have all read this
somewhere or heard this from our CFI, but thanks for telling all of us
again.
Jim
RV9a
----- Original Message -----
From: D.Bristol
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 10:44 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: RE: RV-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 10/04/06
The best reason for shutting down your aircraft engine with the
mixture instead of the switch is safety. You don't have a propeller on
your car so it doesn't matter if there's a cylinder ready to fire, but
on an airplane with a charge in a cylinder, if the prop gets moved and a
mag is hot, the engine can start. So if you shut it down by pulling the
mixture (or using the bypass valve) there is much less of a chance that
it will fire inadvertently and hurt someone.
Dave -6 So Cal
EAA Technical Counselor
DEAN PSIROPOULOS wrote:
--> RV-List message posted by: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS"
<dean.psiropoulos@verizon.net>
Linn this comment sounds a lot like some of the other urban legends that
I
keep hearing since being involved in aviation. I honestly cannot
understand
where this one came from. This is another thing that does have a
counterpart in automotive land. As far back as I can remember (about
1963)
automobiles have been turned off with the IGNITION switch, NOT a fuel
cutoff. Now I don't know why airplanes have to use that particular
method
over just turning off the ignition but it in some ways it seems as
antiquated as the magnetos that are STILL in use on new production
airplanes
today. Why do we continue to perpetuate this stuff when cars have long
since dispensed with them? We NEVER think about washing oil off the
cylinder
walls of our autos, even when they had big four barrel carburetors? Not
a
personal attack on you Linn, just a frustration with certain things I
hear
in aviation land that are NEVER even thought about in automotive land.
Dean Psiropoulos
RV-6A N197DM
Finishing wiring, soon to clear the prop.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Time: 01:28:36 PM PST US
From: linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Findings on the AFP purge valve
The only downside to this procedure is that there is 'extra' fuel in
the
cylinders which will wash the oil off the cylinder walls.
Linn
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
10/6/2006
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: HEADset woes |
What kind of Intercom?
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Struyk
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 10:30 AM
Subject: RV-List: HEADset woes
List,
I finally took the plunge and bought the Thirty 3G Lightspeeds. The day after
they arrived I used them in the corporate jet that I fly. They worked beautifully
and because the jet has Bose headsets, I was able to do a back to back comparison,
which BTW, seemed to be about even on all points. Anyway, here's the
problem. When I use the Lightspeeds in my RV-8, I get a squeal in the interphone
when the volume is turned up past a point where I can hear the back seater.
If the volume is low enough, it goes away but so does my ability to hear my
passenger. I don't think it's feedback. It sounds more like it's related to the
VOX threshold. Once the threshold is crossed and the volume is too high, it
squeals. Turn the volume down, the VOX clips off and the squeal stops. If I put
the LS's in the rear and my "cheapos" in the front, the LS's work fine. I tried
the Bose in the RV and they work beautifully in the front or rear. Until now
(60 hours) my two cheepos have worked fine.
I've talked to the techs a LS and they have no idea. They seem to think it's
my airplane...but why does brand "B" (and my cheepos) work in my plane and theirs
does not?
I also talked to the guys in the avionics shop at work. They think it could be
a mismatch between the LS's (stereo) and my cheepos. (mono)
My next step is to try two stereo sets and see if that's the problem but in the
meantime any ideas from you guys would be appreciated.
Steve Struyk
St. Charles MO
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: HEADset woes |
I've had several people ask about my intercom. It's a Garmin 340 audio
panel.
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: Charles Reiche
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: HEADset woes
What kind of Intercom?
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Struyk
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 10:30 AM
Subject: RV-List: HEADset woes
List,
I finally took the plunge and bought the Thirty 3G Lightspeeds. The
day after they arrived I used them in the corporate jet that I fly. They
worked beautifully and because the jet has Bose headsets, I was able to
do a back to back comparison, which BTW, seemed to be about even on all
points. Anyway, here's the problem. When I use the Lightspeeds in my
RV-8, I get a squeal in the interphone when the volume is turned up past
a point where I can hear the back seater. If the volume is low enough,
it goes away but so does my ability to hear my passenger. I don't think
it's feedback. It sounds more like it's related to the VOX threshold.
Once the threshold is crossed and the volume is too high, it squeals.
Turn the volume down, the VOX clips off and the squeal stops. If I put
the LS's in the rear and my "cheapos" in the front, the LS's work fine.
I tried the Bose in the RV and they work beautifully in the front or
rear. Until now (60 hours) my two cheepos have worked fine.
I've talked to the techs a LS and they have no idea. They seem to
think it's my airplane...but why does brand "B" (and my cheepos) work in
my plane and theirs does not?
I also talked to the guys in the avionics shop at work. They think
it could be a mismatch between the LS's (stereo) and my cheepos. (mono)
My next step is to try two stereo sets and see if that's the problem
but in the meantime any ideas from you guys would be appreciated.
Steve Struyk
St. Charles MO
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: | Re: HEADset woes |
I have found in my RV-4 if the ear pieces are not seated or tight to the
ear I can get some weird nose. My sun glasses can cause a leak.
Bruce Bell
Lubbock, Texas
RV-4 N23BB
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Struyk
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 6:05 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: HEADset woes
I've had several people ask about my intercom. It's a Garmin 340 audio
panel.
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: Charles Reiche
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: HEADset woes
What kind of Intercom?
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Struyk
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 10:30 AM
Subject: RV-List: HEADset woes
List,
I finally took the plunge and bought the Thirty 3G Lightspeeds.
The day after they arrived I used them in the corporate jet that I fly.
They worked beautifully and because the jet has Bose headsets, I was
able to do a back to back comparison, which BTW, seemed to be about even
on all points. Anyway, here's the problem. When I use the Lightspeeds in
my RV-8, I get a squeal in the interphone when the volume is turned up
past a point where I can hear the back seater. If the volume is low
enough, it goes away but so does my ability to hear my passenger. I
don't think it's feedback. It sounds more like it's related to the VOX
threshold. Once the threshold is crossed and the volume is too high, it
squeals. Turn the volume down, the VOX clips off and the squeal stops.
If I put the LS's in the rear and my "cheapos" in the front, the LS's
work fine. I tried the Bose in the RV and they work beautifully in the
front or rear. Until now (60 hours) my two cheepos have worked fine.
I've talked to the techs a LS and they have no idea. They seem to
think it's my airplane...but why does brand "B" (and my cheepos) work in
my plane and theirs does not?
I also talked to the guys in the avionics shop at work. They think
it could be a mismatch between the LS's (stereo) and my cheepos. (mono)
My next step is to try two stereo sets and see if that's the
problem but in the meantime any ideas from you guys would be
appreciated.
Steve Struyk
St. Charles MO
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: | Re: yet another rivet question |
--> RV-List message posted by: Doug Gray <dgra1233@bigpond.net.au>
I use half that pressure and only about 4-5 hits with a 3x gun when back
riveting onto a steel plate.
Doug Gray
On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 17:55 -0700, Jeff Bearden wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Bearden" <jb.flynavy@gmail.com>
>
> I know you experienced folks get tired of the "is this crappy rivet ok?" bit,
but I gotta post another one. I'm back riveting the stiffeners into the rudder
and elevator skins of an -8. The rudder stiffener rivets turned out fine,
but upon inspection of the bottom side of the port elevator, I found about 1/3
of the rivets look like the pictures. Essentially, the shop head is flattening
half of the dimple.
>
> These are the 3.5 length rivets as specified on the drawings. I'm match drilling
to #40, then dimpling. This sure seems to give an awfully big hole for the
3/32 rivets to move around in, although the rudder turned out ok.
>
> As far as I can tell, my surface (back rivet plate) is level and the gun is perpendicular.
The working pressure is about 44 psi (avery 2x gun).
>
> I seem to get slightly better results by driving the rivets very slowly.
>
> Any advice to improve my technique??
> Thanks,
> Jeff[img][/img]
>
> --------
> -Clam
> ------------------
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=66083#66083
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/rivetok1_medium_164.jpg
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/rivetok2_medium_128.jpg
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/rivetok3_medium_166.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 28
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: yet another rivet question |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker@optonline.net>
Jeff Bearden wrote:
>As far as I can tell, my surface (back rivet plate) is level and the gun is perpendicular.
The working pressure is about 44 psi (avery 2x gun).
>
Your pressure seems very high. I also have an avery 2X gun and only use
25 psi for these rivets. I only go up to the pressure you mention if I
am setting the longer lengths of 1/8" rivets.
Dick Tasker
--
Please Note:
No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however,
that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced.
--
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: | Senator Ground Loops RV-8 |
From Tulsaworld.com:
Inhofe, his aide safe after plane crash-lands
By JIM MYERS World Washington Bureau
10/6/2006
View in Print (PDF) Format
U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe and an aide escaped injury Thursday when the
small plane the Oklahoma Republican was flying spun out of control
after landing at Tulsa's Jones Riverside Airport.
"No scrapes or bruises. No nicks or cuts. No injuries at all," said
Danny Finnerty, Inhofe's long-time aide, who was sitting behind the
senator in the two-seat aircraft.
"We walked away from the plane."
Finnerty, reached by telephone, said they landed about 8 p.m. and that
the plane had slowed down to about taxi speed.
"Everything was fine until the tail wheel hit the runway," he said.
"Jim felt like his rudder control was not what it should have been, so
it was mechanical, certainly. As soon as we hit, we fish-tailed and
spun around a couple of times. "
According to the Federal Aviation Administration, the RV-8
single-engine aircraft "ground-looped," or went out of control, upon
landing.
Finnerty said the plane, which he described as an experimental model
rated for aerobatics, suffered significant damage.
"The plane looks a lot worse than it was," he said.
Finnerty said the plane, which he described as a "tail dragger," was
built for the senator by a professional a few years ago.
The RV-8 aircraft is known as a "kit-plane." Such planes'
manufacturers provide a kit from which to build the aircraft from the
ground up, according to the manufacturer, Van's Aircraft.
Inhofe, 71, is a veteran pilot who owns several planes.
Finnerty said the senator was returning from Duncan after a day of
campaigning for candidates running for state legislative seats. Earlier
in the day, he said, Inhofe had flown to Guthrie and then made several
stops by car before flying on to Duncan.
Finnerty said no problems appeared during the flight.
"It was an absolutely perfect flight from Duncan," he said. "The
landing was perfectly normal, and then that happened."
Finnerty was unsure whether the National Transportation Safety Board
would have to investigate.
"I am certain the FAA will come out and take a look at the plane," he
said, adding that the plane was left on the runway until permission was
given to move it.
Inhofe did not comment on the incident.
The senator was forced to make an emergency landing in 1999 at the
Claremore Municipal Airport after the propeller fell off the Grumman
American AA-5B he was flying.
The NTSB investigated that incident, and its report blamed an error on
the prop installation.
Inhofe, who was flying alone that day, also escaped that incident
without injury.
His plane was cruising at 2,500 feet when it lost the entire propeller
assembly.
After the plane began to porpoise, Inhofe made a forced landing on a
grassy section between a runway and a taxiway.
World staff writer Clifton Adcock contributed to this story.
nhofe, his aide safe after plane crash-lands
By JIM MYERS World Washington Bureau
10/6/2006
View in Print (PDF) Format
U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe and an aide escaped injury Thursday when the
small plane the Oklahoma Republican was flying spun out of control
after landing at Tulsa's Jones Riverside Airport.
"No scrapes or bruises. No nicks or cuts. No injuries at all," said
Danny Finnerty, Inhofe's long-time aide, who was sitting behind the
senator in the two-seat aircraft.
"We walked away from the plane."
Finnerty, reached by telephone, said they landed about 8 p.m. and that
the plane had slowed down to about taxi speed.
"Everything was fine until the tail wheel hit the runway," he said.
"Jim felt like his rudder control was not what it should have been, so
it was mechanical, certainly. As soon as we hit, we fish-tailed and
spun around a couple of times. "
According to the Federal Aviation Administration, the RV-8
single-engine aircraft "ground-looped," or went out of control, upon
landing.
Finnerty said the plane, which he described as an experimental model
rated for aerobatics, suffered significant damage.
"The plane looks a lot worse than it was," he said.
Finnerty said the plane, which he described as a "tail dragger," was
built for the senator by a professional a few years ago.
The RV-8 aircraft is known as a "kit-plane." Such planes'
manufacturers provide a kit from which to build the aircraft from the
ground up, according to the manufacturer, Van's Aircraft.
Inhofe, 71, is a veteran pilot who owns several planes.
Finnerty said the senator was returning from Duncan after a day of
campaigning for candidates running for state legislative seats. Earlier
in the day, he said, Inhofe had flown to Guthrie and then made several
stops by car before flying on to Duncan.
Finnerty said no problems appeared during the flight.
"It was an absolutely perfect flight from Duncan," he said. "The
landing was perfectly normal, and then that happened."
Finnerty was unsure whether the National Transportation Safety Board
would have to investigate.
"I am certain the FAA will come out and take a look at the plane," he
said, adding that the plane was left on the runway until permission was
given to move it.
Inhofe did not comment on the incident.
The senator was forced to make an emergency landing in 1999 at the
Claremore Municipal Airport after the propeller fell off the Grumman
American AA-5B he was flying.
The NTSB investigated that incident, and its report blamed an error on
the prop installation.
Inhofe, who was flying alone that day, also escaped that incident
without injury.
His plane was cruising at 2,500 feet when it lost the entire propeller
assembly.
After the plane began to porpoise, Inhofe made a forced landing on a
grassy section between a runway and a taxiway.
World staff writer Clifton Adcock contributed to this story.
Jim Myers (202) 484-1424
jim.myers@tulsaworld.com
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! --
|