Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:51 AM - Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations (kahuna)
2. 04:39 AM - Re: Price Increase Rant (Chuck Jensen)
3. 04:55 AM - Re: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations (Garry)
4. 06:07 AM - Re: Speaking of frivolous lawsuites (N395V)
5. 06:10 AM - Re: Wing bolt torque values (Hopperdhh@aol.com)
6. 06:45 AM - Re: Why starve engine of fuel to shut down (RV6 Flyer)
7. 07:00 AM - Re: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations (Phil Birkelbach)
8. 07:34 AM - Re: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations (linn Walters)
9. 07:45 AM - Re: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations (linn Walters)
10. 08:02 AM - Re: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations (Dan Checkoway)
11. 08:43 AM - Re: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations (RV6 Flyer)
12. 08:47 AM - What DC is reading about FAA today (Sherman Butler)
13. 08:49 AM - Re: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations (Darrell Reiley)
14. 09:22 AM - Re: Price Increase Rant (Terry Watson)
15. 09:33 AM - Re: What DC is reading about FAA today (Bob J.)
16. 10:26 AM - Re: Price Increase Rant (Joseph Larson)
17. 10:26 AM - Re: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations (linn Walters)
18. 10:32 AM - Re: Re: Why starve engine of fuel to shut down (David Leonard)
19. 10:36 AM - Re: Exxon and ACS (David Leonard)
20. 10:39 AM - Re: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations (Charles Reiche)
21. 11:15 AM - Re: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations (Darrell Reiley)
22. 12:25 PM - Tip up (Greg Williams)
23. 12:29 PM - Re: Re: Why starve engine of fuel to shut down (LarryRobertHelming)
24. 01:01 PM - Re: Price Increase Rant (Terry Watson)
25. 03:53 PM - Re: Re: pilot's family awarded $10.5M (Jeffery J. Morgan)
26. 04:34 PM - Re: Tip up (LarryRobertHelming)
27. 04:38 PM - Re: Tip up (Brian Meyette)
28. 05:12 PM - Re: Tip up (Brian Meyette)
29. 06:29 PM - Re: Tip up (Tim Bryan)
30. 08:00 PM - Re: Re: pilot's family awarded $10.5M (Tracy Crook)
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: I've sworn off purge valve installations |
Gary.A.Sobek wrote:
> I know of one RV accident that totaled the airplane where the fuel injected
> engine quit after takeoff. Post crash investigation sure looked like VAPOR
> LOCK to me. If that airplane had a purge valve and was used before
> starting, there may be one additional RV flying today.
>
> I agree that a FI system should not need a purge valve to SHUT OFF the
> engine but one fuel injector manufacturer made his servo require one.
>
> Gary A. Sobek
> "My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
> 1,977 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
>
>
Gary I do not see how this is a possible senerio argue purge to the AFP system.
Here is why.
THere are many opportunities for vapor lock. The AFP purge vaule is mounted right
before the spider. If used per the manual, you purge for a few seconds and
start. Now if a guy has not used the purge valve, starts, taxis, and takes off,
he has already run for minutes and done way more by running than the purge valve
ever did. Running the purge valve, with boost on, will only dribble fuel
since the meter device is not getting air flow. Im not sure what the flow is,
Id guess ~ 1gph. So if you run the purge for 20 seconds you have moved some miniscule
amount of fresh fuel into the lines. Which is fine since you dont need
much movement in the injection lines to purge vapor. If you run your engine at
take off power for even a few seconds you have blasted fresh fuel into the system
at an order of magnatude greater than 1gph. In an IO360 for example. One
second of take off power is worth ~20 seconds of purge, at least in terms of
fuel flow of fresh fuel. And Ill bet the number is several times that. Im only
guessing at the purge fuel flow. The only design senerio Im aware of for the
purge is to help with vapor lock starts, not vapor lock while airborn. You will
have to convince me that operating a purge valve on the ground would have prevented
your accident senerio.
Also Im with the others, whats the point of ICO still delivering fuel? I have over
2k AFP hours in multiple planes, and I dont use the purge for anything.
Talk to me Gary
Mike
PS Smoozer is doing well and mentioned your help
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=92538#92538
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: | Price Increase Rant |
Charlie,
In reading your message, I can say with certainty that I agree with
you...or you agree with me, whichever, but we are in agreement. The
size of the investment and degree of risk is what determines a 'fair
return on investment', not the amount or velocity cash that flows
through one's books.
The idea that Exxon is a $377B company is ludicrous, as is their profit.
Buying a barrel of crude for $55 and selling it 15 seconds later for $56
is just a transaction, not real business. It does not add $56 in
enterprise value and entitle you to a $5.60 profit (10%).
Before everyone got hung up on 'free markets' being sacrosynct, they
used to call it gouging or marketeering, or monopolistic pricing,
collusion and miscellaneous other perjorative terms applied to the
behavior common among oil companies. Even though there are several oil
companies, anyone that doesn't think there isn't collusion going
on---even if they don't meet in a room on Thursday night to plan things,
the fact is they are all equally motivated to cut the legs off of the
public, not each other.
Now, I am not anti-free markets, but I am anti-free for all. Government
should govern with the absolute lightest touch possible, but to be
totally hands off is to allow the worst tendencies of individuals and
companies to prevail. I guess you would call me a quasi, free market
advocate....whatever the heck that is.
Thanks,
Chuck Jensen
Diversified Technologies
2680 Westcott Blvd
Knoxville, TN 37931
Phn: 865-539-9000 x25
Cell: 865-406-9001
Fax: 865-539-9001
cjensen@dts9000.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charlie England
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 9:08 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Price Increase Rant
Chuck Jensen wrote:
>
> --> <retasker@optonline.net>
>
> Uuum, not that I disagree with the gist of what you are saying, but
> what
>
> makes you think that a small business must make more than 10% to stay
> in
>
> business??? Profit is what is left after all expenses - including
> salaries for the owners, etc. As long as a business breaks even
after
> all expenses it can stay in business as long as the owners want it to.
> A not unusual method of operating a small business is to make sure
there
>
> are no profits at all. Distribute any potential profits to the owners
> and employees as salary and/or bonus and the profit disappears. No
> profits and the business pays no taxes!
>
> WARNING: Your delete key is just to the right of your return key.
>
> Dick,
> The reason a 10% profit is an absolute minimum for a business (20%-30%
> is actually needed) is, at that rate of profit, you will never be able
> to pay back the investment, be it to yourself or an outside investor.
> You can get 5.5% on a CD with NO risk. If you put $250,000 into
> starting a business, you deserve 10%-15% return on your money for
> taking on such a high risk investment. Since 7 of 10 startup
> businesses fail in the first three years, where are the 7 people who
> lost $250K each going to recover their investment. The only avenue of
> recovery is the 3 that are successful must make enough profit to pay
> back the money lost by the other 7 (even if it goes to themselves and
> not the other seven losers). Even then, if all the 3 did was make back
> the total investment of the 10, then that's a breakeven
> situation--which is not justification for the investments ever being
> made in the first place. A business must be able to pay back their
> investors (even if its yourself), organically generate excess cash for
> expansion and build a cushion for the inevitable business setback, and
> so forth. 10% ain't even close to doing the job.
>
> Of course, if the owners/managers/employees drain the company of its
> profit by paying themselves inordinately high wages, then all they are
> doing is fooling the owners or themselves. Part of the problem in
> this discussion is the definition of "profit". First of all, there
> are several definitions of profit including those for tax accounting
> and those for GAAP accounting, and even those are subject to a level
> of manipulation beyond belief. There are scads of companies, small
> and large, that were profitable every year of their existence...and
> they went bankrupt. That's why Don Trump said "Cash is King" as he
> was headed toward bankruptcy (and didn't have any). For start up to
> mid sized companies, survival depends on cash flow, not profits. On
> the other hand, there are scads of big companies that are unprofitable
> every year and yet they stay in business (think USAir, Delta, GM,
> Ford, et al).
>
> In closing, I would say that your definition of a business is not
> really a business at all....that's just self-employment. If you have
> a small investment, there is very low risk of failure, you pay
> yourself a going-wage and you 10% leftover, that's great, but what you
> describe is not an ongoing enterprise or business if all you are doing
> is paying yourself.
>
> Anyone that thinks starting a company or running a small to mid sized
> company is a get rich quick scheme--has obviously never done it.
>
> Chuck
>
I say again:
Percentage of revenue is a meaningless measurement. Many high volume
businesses make huge profit percentages with only 1% to 2% margin.
Percentage of *investment* (weighted by risk factor) is the number that
matters.
If there's $300Billion of investment, I've got no problem with their
profit. If there's say, $75Billion in investment (and I'm not talking
about stock price but actual investment in assets), I might have a real
problem with $37Billion in profits on a commodity that really isn't
optional in our society.
Charlie
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: I've sworn off purge valve installations |
I've been reading this thread with some interest, hoping to learn
something practical when I begin flying my RV 7A. I have an IO360 from
Aerosport and hope to be flying in the next couple of months. What I
don't understand is why can't you shut down the engine simply by turning
off the mag switches? Why the need to shut down by starving the engine
of fuel? We don't do this with our cars, or lawnmowers, or any other
gasoline engine powered device, so why airplanes?
Garry Stout
Tampa Florida
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob J.
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 10:59 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations
On 2/2/07, Dan Checkoway <dan@rvproject.com> wrote:
If you have AFP injection (i.e. an FM-200 servo), then leaning the
mixture
all the way to the "ICO" position doesn't actually stop fuel flow
completely -- by design. Fuel still flows even when the mixture is
back to
ICO stop.
Why doesn't the AFP system allow ICO by pulling the mixture.? I have
always wondered why this is the case. I have an RSA-10 servo, and it
allows ICO.
Regards,
Bob Japundza
RV-6 flying F1 under const.
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: Speaking of frivolous lawsuites |
Ah,
But we do not know all the facts. Maybe the airline had contracted with a "Large"barf
bag company to be on standby thereby generating a liability for itself.
There must be something of merit or no lawyer would file the suit. Right?
But then we can certainly expect the jury to be fair can't we?
--------
Milt
N395V
F1 Rocket
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=92559#92559
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: Wing bolt torque values |
In a message dated 2/2/2007 8:23:39 AM Eastern Standard Time,
lhelming@sigecom.net writes:
I put my bolts in the freezer of my refrigerator and transferred them to the
airport in a cooler to keep them cold. A bit of grease and they slid in very
easily. Minimize hammering in to avoid buggering up the threads. Larry in
Indiana
Larry,
For the record, hammering in didn't bugger up the threads at all. You don't
hammer on the threads. The friction is along the shank of the bolt. The
threads are smaller in diameter than the shank.
I had the holes in alignment by using standard hardware store bolts first,
then replacing them one by one with the close tolerance bolts. Guess I should
have gone into more detail.
Dan Hopper
RV-7A
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: Why starve engine of fuel to shut down |
You can but it is not recommended.
Most airplane engines have mags. Mags provide their own electricity to the
ignition circuit.
If you have an air / fuel charge in the cylinder, move the prop, the engine
can start with just a simple open circuit in the ground wire to the mag
switch.
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,977 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Garry" <garrys@tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations
I've been reading this thread with some interest, hoping to learn something
practical when I begin flying my RV 7A. I have an IO360 from Aerosport and
hope to be flying in the next couple of months. What I don't understand is
why can't you shut down the engine simply by turning off the mag switches?
Why the need to shut down by starving the engine of fuel? We don't do this
with our cars, or lawnmowers, or any other gasoline engine powered device,
so why airplanes?
Garry Stout
Tampa Florida
_________________________________________________________________
Get in the mood for Valentine's Day. View photos, recipes and more on your
Live.com page.
http://www.live.com/?addTemplate=ValentinesDay&ocid=T001MSN30A0701
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: I've sworn off purge valve installations |
Cars, boats, and lawnmowers don't have a big fan sticking out in front
of them that can be used to turn the engine. Using the mag switches to
kill the engine will leave some properly mixed fuel in the cylinders and
then if you (or somebody) moves the prop and the impulse coupler
fires.... Not a good day.
There is also a school of thought that the gasoline in the cylinders of
a horizontally opposed engine will wash oil off the cylinder walls and
increase wear. I don't know if I buy this one but I've seen enough
people turning props on the ramp (for reasons that I don't understand)
to be fearful of having fuel in the cylinders.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB
http://www.myrv7.com
Garry wrote:
> I've been reading this thread with some interest, hoping to learn
> something practical when I begin flying my RV 7A. I have an IO360
> from Aerosport and hope to be flying in the next couple of months.
> What I don't understand is why can't you shut down the engine simply
> by turning off the mag switches? Why the need to shut down by
> starving the engine of fuel? We don't do this with our cars, or
> lawnmowers, or any other gasoline engine powered device, so why airplanes?
>
> Garry Stout
> Tampa Florida
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Bob J. <mailto:rocketbob@gmail.com>
> *To:* rv-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv-list@matronics.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, February 02, 2007 10:59 PM
> *Subject:* Re: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations
>
> On 2/2/07, *Dan Checkoway* <dan@rvproject.com
> <mailto:dan@rvproject.com>> wrote:
>
> <dan@rvproject.com <mailto:dan@rvproject.com>>
>
> If you have AFP injection (i.e. an FM-200 servo), then leaning
> the mixture
> all the way to the "ICO" position doesn't actually stop fuel flow
> completely -- by design. Fuel still flows even when the
> mixture is back to
> ICO stop.
>
>
> Why doesn't the AFP system allow ICO by pulling the mixture.? I
> have always wondered why this is the case. I have an RSA-10
> servo, and it allows ICO.
>
> Regards,
> Bob Japundza
> RV-6 flying F1 under const.
>
> *
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
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: I've sworn off purge valve installations |
And your point is???? I have a problem when, in the absence of any
clear data, a malfunction is attributed to 'vapor lock'. I've put up
with all the rhetoric for a lot of years running auto fuel ..... in FL,
on hot days, with both injected and carb'd engines (yep, run auto fuel
through the injected engine too ..... but not near as much as through a
carb) with nary a hiccup. Not even any more hard starting problems than
using 100LL. I guess the statement 'looked like vapor lock to me' just
rubbed me the wrong way. Sorry. I really would rather have statements
backed up by data or first-person-experience, not (to seal a line from a
song) 'I heard it from a friend, who, heard it from a friend, who .... '.
The point I tried to make (and failed, I guess) is that all that engine
running after startup should have purged any heat-soaked fuel. Once the
heat soaked fuel is gone (from the firewall forward), the possibility of
vapor lock goes way down ......
Linn ...... calmed down without the drugs :-P
do not archive
Darrell Reiley wrote:
>
>Linn,
>
>I believe Gary stated the plane was 'fuel injected".
>
>Darrell
>
>do not archive
>
>
>--- linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>><pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
>>
>>RV6 Flyer wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>><rv6_flyer@hotmail.com>
>>
>>
>>>I know of one RV accident that totaled the
>>>
>>>
>>airplane where the fuel
>>
>>
>>>injected engine quit after takeoff. Post crash
>>>
>>>
>>investigation sure
>>
>>
>>>looked like VAPOR LOCK to me.
>>>
>>>
>>Hmmm. The engine started, ran long enough to taxi
>>to the runway, some
>>full-power takeoff and short flight ..... explain to
>>me how that could
>>be caused by vapor lock??? How did it look like
>>vapor lock????
>>
>>I would be more inclined to believe excessive water
>>in the fuel (did the
>>plane sit outside in a lot of rain before flying,
>>have leaking fuel caps
>>to allow the water in, and the pilot didn't sump the
>>tanks??? Not
>>likely, but stupid pilot tricks do happen.) or carb
>>ice or ..... almost
>>anything but vapor lock.
>>Linn
>>do not archive.
>>
>>
>>
>>> If that airplane had a purge valve and was used
>>>
>>>
>>before starting,
>>
>>
>>>there may be one additional RV flying today.
>>>
>>>I agree that a FI system should not need a purge
>>>
>>>
>>valve to SHUT OFF the
>>
>>
>>>engine but one fuel injector manufacturer made his
>>>
>>>
>>servo require one.
>>
>>
>>>Gary A. Sobek
>>>"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
>>>1,977 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>----Original Message Follows----
>>>From: "kahuna" <mike.stewart@us.ibm.com>
>>>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>>>Subject: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve
>>>
>>>
>>installations
>>
>>
>>>Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 16:32:21 -0800
>>>
>>>
>>>
>><mike.stewart@us.ibm.com>
>>
>>
>>>[quote="gerf(at)gerf.com"]So ... at the risk of
>>>
>>>
>>starting a war ... if
>>
>>
>>>I left the cotter pins out of my flap mounting
>>>
>>>
>>bolts and a flap fell
>>
>>
>>>off, should I conclude that the flaps are too much
>>>
>>>
>>trouble or should I
>>
>>
>>>chastise myself for forgetting to install the
>>>
>>>
>>cotter pins ?
>>
>>
>>>Sorry, but I question your conclusion that purge
>>>
>>>
>>valves have no place
>>
>>
>>>on an RV.
>>>
>>>g
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>--
>>>>
>>>>
>>>The flaps serve a very useful purpose. One that
>>>
>>>
>>can be demonstrated
>>
>>
>>>and quantified. I say the purge vavle can do
>>>
>>>
>>neither of these. As for
>>
>>
>>>the servo not being at idle cut with fuel flow,
>>>
>>>
>>that can be fixed.
>>
>>
>>>Mike
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>_________________________________________________________________
>
>
>>>Turn searches into helpful donations. Make your
>>>
>>>
>>search count.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>browse
>>Subscriptions page,
>>FAQ,
>>
>>Web Forums!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>Finding fabulous fares is fun.
>Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel
bargains.
>http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097
>
>
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations |
As it was explained to me ...... shutting down with the mags allowed
unburned fuel to be passed through the cylinders and would wash some of
the oil off the cylinder walls ....... inviting the opportunity for the
cylinder walls to rust. The difference in the auto analogy is that we
seldom allow our cars to sit idle for months at a time. I realize that
most of us experimental drivers don't let our airplanes sit for very
long ...... but the practice was for the masses ...... who own those
ramp/hangar queens on your airport!!!
Linn ...... weather is better ..... but still sucky.
do not archive
Garry wrote:
> I've been reading this thread with some interest, hoping to learn
> something practical when I begin flying my RV 7A. I have an IO360
> from Aerosport and hope to be flying in the next couple of months.
> What I don't understand is why can't you shut down the engine simply
> by turning off the mag switches? Why the need to shut down by
> starving the engine of fuel? We don't do this with our cars, or
> lawnmowers, or any other gasoline engine powered device, so why airplanes?
>
> Garry Stout
> Tampa Florida
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Bob J. <mailto:rocketbob@gmail.com>
> To: rv-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 10:59 PM
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations
>
> On 2/2/07, Dan Checkoway <dan@rvproject.com
> <mailto:dan@rvproject.com>> wrote:
>
> <dan@rvproject.com <mailto:dan@rvproject.com>>
>
> If you have AFP injection (i.e. an FM-200 servo), then leaning
> the mixture
> all the way to the "ICO" position doesn't actually stop fuel flow
> completely -- by design. Fuel still flows even when the
> mixture is back to
> ICO stop.
>
>
> Why doesn't the AFP system allow ICO by pulling the mixture.? I
> have always wondered why this is the case. I have an RSA-10
> servo, and it allows ICO.
>
> Regards,
> Bob Japundza
> RV-6 flying F1 under const.
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List
>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations |
FWIW:
I see 3.8 gph stable on the meter when purging (it goes up higher than that
at first and then comes down and stabilizes there). AFP recommends a
30-second purge. So for my setup that results in 0.032 gallons having
flowed through. That's 121ml or 0.19 lbs of fuel. Not much...but enough.
My math isn't good enough to figure out how much length of -6 (3/8" ID) fuel
tubing/hose that equates to. I'm sure somebody out there can figure it out.
But I suspect it's right around the same length as the run from the selector
valve up to and past the flow divider. Not much more than that, but that's
all ya need.
I'm really sorry to hear about your and your friend's issues related to the
purge valve. That really sucks, and I can understand why you're upset about
it. I just still think the concept of the purge valve is a great one, and
I'm keepin' mine!
I also would like to understand better why the AFP system has a
"designed-in" ICO leak. There has to be a good reason behind it, and I'm
sure Don Rivera can explain it better than anybody. It doesn't bother me
like it bothers some people, because I like & use the purge valve, and an
ICO leak is irrelevant to me. Still would like to understand it, though.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "kahuna" <mike.stewart@us.ibm.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 3:49 AM
Subject: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations
>
>
> Gary.A.Sobek wrote:
>> I know of one RV accident that totaled the airplane where the fuel
>> injected
>> engine quit after takeoff. Post crash investigation sure looked like
>> VAPOR
>> LOCK to me. If that airplane had a purge valve and was used before
>> starting, there may be one additional RV flying today.
>>
>> I agree that a FI system should not need a purge valve to SHUT OFF the
>> engine but one fuel injector manufacturer made his servo require one.
>>
>> Gary A. Sobek
>> "My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
>> 1,977 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
>>
>>
>
> Gary I do not see how this is a possible senerio argue purge to the AFP
> system. Here is why.
> THere are many opportunities for vapor lock. The AFP purge vaule is
> mounted right before the spider. If used per the manual, you purge for a
> few seconds and start. Now if a guy has not used the purge valve, starts,
> taxis, and takes off, he has already run for minutes and done way more by
> running than the purge valve ever did. Running the purge valve, with boost
> on, will only dribble fuel since the meter device is not getting air flow.
> Im not sure what the flow is, Id guess ~ 1gph. So if you run the purge for
> 20 seconds you have moved some miniscule amount of fresh fuel into the
> lines. Which is fine since you dont need much movement in the injection
> lines to purge vapor. If you run your engine at take off power for even a
> few seconds you have blasted fresh fuel into the system at an order of
> magnatude greater than 1gph. In an IO360 for example. One second of take
> off power is worth ~20 seconds of purge, at least in terms of fuel flow of
> fresh fuel. And Ill bet the number is s!
> everal times that. Im only guessing at the purge fuel flow. The only
> design senerio Im aware of for the purge is to help with vapor lock
> starts, not vapor lock while airborn. You will have to convince me that
> operating a purge valve on the ground would have prevented your accident
> senerio.
>
> Also Im with the others, whats the point of ICO still delivering fuel? I
> have over 2k AFP hours in multiple planes, and I dont use the purge for
> anything.
>
> Talk to me Gary
> Mike
> PS Smoozer is doing well and mentioned your help
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=92538#92538
>
>
>
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: I've sworn off purge valve installations |
I am not an expert on fuel refining so someone who is should speak up. Fuel
Volatility, Fuel Vapor Pressure, Vapor Lock are all concerns I have in a
fuel injected aircraft engine.
Some info can be found at:
http://www.chevron.com/products/prodserv/fuels/bulletin/aviationfuel/8_ag_perf.shtm
Hot fuel vaporizes at a lower pressure. Vapor lock will occur with hot fuel
in the line being sucked from a fuel tank by only the hot engine mechanical
pump. It may run fine at run up power but quickly turn to vapor lock when
asked to provide takeoff power fuel flow.
Sit on a hot ramp in the sun for about an hour after flying to a HOT
location. Start up, taxi, run up, all go fine. On takeoff, vapor lock
occurs.
HOT fuel turns to vapor quicker. We locate our boost pump close to the tank
so that it does not need to SUCK and create more vapor. If the boost pump
fails or is not turned on, the HOT mechanical fuel pump has to ACT as a
vacuum pump to suck the fuel to the engine and makes it easier to vapor
lock. The FI system requires liquid fuel under pressure for the engine to
run.
A purge valve allows the operator to TEST the boost pump, move cooler fuel
into the lines, and lower the likelihood of the mechanical pump sucking so
hard that it creates vapors in the delivery line causing vapor lock and the
resulting engine failure on takeoff.
ECI FI system has continuous flow of fuel to the FI system and back to the
tank. The RSA type FI system used on most Lycomings does not.
30 seconds of fuel flow through the lines may only move a quart of fuel.
Not much to cause a large error in the fuel flow computer but it could be
enough to make sure that no vapor is in the line and could help make the
difference between the mechanical pump being able to SUCK liquid fuel at
takeoff power with an electrical boost pump failure.
Swearing off a purge valve is not a good excuse for not following good
installation practices. My paranoia about vapor lock on takeoff makes me
want to install a purge valve on any EXPERIMENTAL FI Aircraft that I fly.
Is the CHEAP FI HIGH Pressure boost pump part of the problem? Certificated
aircraft with the RSA type fuel injection does not use a purge valve. What
can WE in our EXPERIMENTAL FI aircraft do without using a purge valve to
prevent vapor lock on takeoff when a scenario like I list above occurs? I
agree that in most cases, less is more. Less parts, less cost, less
installation time, less to break, less to fix.
How do I prevent vapor lock on a HOT FI engine with an electric boost pump
failure, after sitting on a HOT RAMP for about one hour? Startup, taxi, run
up all go fine but the fuel flow stops during climb out? Lots of fuel in
the tanks but none in the FI hose and lines.
Is installing a SECOND electric boot pump needed when no purge valve exists
to insure that fuel gets to the working mechanical pump?
I do not see the purge valve as a fix all problem but just one possible
solution that should help LESSEN the possibility of vapor lock with only the
mechanical engine driven pump proving fuel to a FI engine on takeoff. It
only lessens the possibility of vapor lock with an electric boost pump
failure on takeoff as we replace hot fuel in the lines between the tanks and
engine with COOLER fuel from the tanks before startup. The purge valve
allows us to TEST the fuel delivery system on the ground before takeoff.
Only one fuel injection system available to our EXPERIMENTAL airplanes
includes a purge value as part of their fuel inject system. If they did not
include it, they could make more money by leaving it out and increasing
their profits. Other builders add their purge valve to their FI airplanes
for the reasons that I like the purge valve.
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,977 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
----Original Message Follows----
From: "kahuna" <mike.stewart@us.ibm.com>
Subject: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations
Gary.A.Sobek wrote:
> I know of one RV accident that totaled the airplane where the fuel
injected
> engine quit after takeoff. Post crash investigation sure looked like
VAPOR
> LOCK to me. If that airplane had a purge valve and was used before
> starting, there may be one additional RV flying today.
>
> I agree that a FI system should not need a purge valve to SHUT OFF the
> engine but one fuel injector manufacturer made his servo require one.
>
> Gary A. Sobek
> "My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
> 1,977 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
>
>
Gary I do not see how this is a possible senerio argue purge to the AFP
system. Here is why.
THere are many opportunities for vapor lock. The AFP purge vaule is mounted
right before the spider. If used per the manual, you purge for a few seconds
and start. Now if a guy has not used the purge valve, starts, taxis, and
takes off, he has already run for minutes and done way more by running than
the purge valve ever did. Running the purge valve, with boost on, will only
dribble fuel since the meter device is not getting air flow. Im not sure
what the flow is, Id guess ~ 1gph. So if you run the purge for 20 seconds
you have moved some miniscule amount of fresh fuel into the lines. Which is
fine since you dont need much movement in the injection lines to purge
vapor. If you run your engine at take off power for even a few seconds you
have blasted fresh fuel into the system at an order of magnatude greater
than 1gph. In an IO360 for example. One second of take off power is worth
~20 seconds of purge, at least in terms of fuel flow of fresh fuel. And Ill
bet the number is s!
everal times that. Im only guessing at the purge fuel flow. The only
design senerio Im aware of for the purge is to help with vapor lock starts,
not vapor lock while airborn. You will have to convince me that operating a
purge valve on the ground would have prevented your accident senerio.
Also Im with the others, whats the point of ICO still delivering fuel? I
have over 2k AFP hours in multiple planes, and I dont use the purge for
anything.
Talk to me Gary
Mike
PS Smoozer is doing well and mentioned your help
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=92538#92538
_________________________________________________________________
Check out all that glitters with the MSN Entertainment Guide to the Academy
Awards http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline2
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: | What DC is reading about FAA today |
This article appeared in the Washington Post today. AOPA is briefing reporters
preemptive. I am sure EAA is also. We each may want to join in the discussion
with our representatives.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/02/AR2007020201635.html?referrer=email
Sherman Butler
RV-7a Wings
Idaho Falls
---------------------------------
The fish are biting.
Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing.
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: I've sworn off purge valve installations |
In you post back to Gary you refer to carb ice, I
guess its new info to me... carb icing on a fuel
injected engine?
Oh well... ;-)
Darrell
--- linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> And your point is???? I have a problem when, in the
> absence of any
> clear data, a malfunction is attributed to 'vapor
> lock'. I've put up
> with all the rhetoric for a lot of years running
> auto fuel ..... in FL,
> on hot days, with both injected and carb'd engines
> (yep, run auto fuel
> through the injected engine too ..... but not near
> as much as through a
> carb) with nary a hiccup. Not even any more hard
> starting problems than
> using 100LL. I guess the statement 'looked like
> vapor lock to me' just
> rubbed me the wrong way. Sorry. I really would
> rather have statements
> backed up by data or first-person-experience, not
> (to seal a line from a
> song) 'I heard it from a friend, who, heard it from
> a friend, who .... '.
>
> The point I tried to make (and failed, I guess) is
> that all that engine
> running after startup should have purged any
> heat-soaked fuel. Once the
> heat soaked fuel is gone (from the firewall
> forward), the possibility of
> vapor lock goes way down ......
> Linn ...... calmed down without the drugs :-P
> do not archive
>
>
> Darrell Reiley wrote:
>
> <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
> >
> >Linn,
> >
> >I believe Gary stated the plane was 'fuel
> injected".
> >
> >Darrell
> >
> >do not archive
> >
> >
> >--- linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >><pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
> >>
> >>RV6 Flyer wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >><rv6_flyer@hotmail.com>
> >>
> >>
> >>>I know of one RV accident that totaled the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>airplane where the fuel
> >>
> >>
> >>>injected engine quit after takeoff. Post crash
> >>>
> >>>
> >>investigation sure
> >>
> >>
> >>>looked like VAPOR LOCK to me.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Hmmm. The engine started, ran long enough to taxi
> >>to the runway, some
> >>full-power takeoff and short flight ..... explain
> to
> >>me how that could
> >>be caused by vapor lock??? How did it look like
> >>vapor lock????
> >>
> >>I would be more inclined to believe excessive
> water
> >>in the fuel (did the
> >>plane sit outside in a lot of rain before flying,
> >>have leaking fuel caps
> >>to allow the water in, and the pilot didn't sump
> the
> >>tanks??? Not
> >>likely, but stupid pilot tricks do happen.) or
> carb
> >>ice or ..... almost
> >>anything but vapor lock.
> >>Linn
> >>do not archive.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> If that airplane had a purge valve and was used
> >>>
> >>>
> >>before starting,
> >>
> >>
> >>>there may be one additional RV flying today.
> >>>
> >>>I agree that a FI system should not need a purge
> >>>
> >>>
> >>valve to SHUT OFF the
> >>
> >>
> >>>engine but one fuel injector manufacturer made
> his
> >>>
> >>>
> >>servo require one.
> >>
> >>
> >>>Gary A. Sobek
> >>>"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
> >>>1,977 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>----Original Message Follows----
> >>>From: "kahuna" <mike.stewart@us.ibm.com>
> >>>To: rv-list@matronics.com
> >>>Subject: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve
> >>>
> >>>
> >>installations
> >>
> >>
> >>>Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 16:32:21 -0800
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >><mike.stewart@us.ibm.com>
> >>
> >>
> >>>[quote="gerf(at)gerf.com"]So ... at the risk of
> >>>
> >>>
> >>starting a war ... if
> >>
> >>
> >>>I left the cotter pins out of my flap mounting
> >>>
> >>>
> >>bolts and a flap fell
> >>
> >>
> >>>off, should I conclude that the flaps are too
> much
> >>>
> >>>
> >>trouble or should I
> >>
> >>
> >>>chastise myself for forgetting to install the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>cotter pins ?
> >>
> >>
> >>>Sorry, but I question your conclusion that purge
> >>>
> >>>
> >>valves have no place
> >>
> >>
> >>>on an RV.
> >>>
> >>>g
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>--
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>The flaps serve a very useful purpose. One that
> >>>
> >>>
> >>can be demonstrated
> >>
> >>
> >>>and quantified. I say the purge vavle can do
> >>>
> >>>
> >>neither of these. As for
> >>
> >>
> >>>the servo not being at idle cut with fuel flow,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>that can be fixed.
> >>
> >>
> >>>Mike
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
> >
> >
> >>>Turn searches into helpful donations. Make your
> >>>
> >>>
> >>search count.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>browse
> >>Subscriptions page,
> >>FAQ,
> >>
> >>Web Forums!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Finding fabulous fares is fun.
> >Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel
> sites to find flight and hotel bargains.
> >http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Looking for earth-friendly autos?
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
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: | Price Increase Rant |
Chuck,
I certainly would not call you a free market advocate. You would let the
rest of us be free in our dealings with each other, as long as the results
were what you wanted -- the products you want at a price you consider
"fair", whatever that means, and most likely a minimum wage that would
support a family of four at a comfortable level (just guessing there.)
A free market is one that allows individuals, groups and corporations to
make whatever agreements and arrangements they find mutually to their
benefit, without force or fraud. Some industries require huge investments.
Have you priced a double-hulled supertanker, an oil refinery, an off-shore
oil rig, or a pipeline lately?
OPEC is an oil cartel that has been trying to establish a minimum price for
crude oil for decades, and they can't make it stick. Some country is always
undercutting their price.
By definition, when a government attempts to regulate or even influence a
market, it distorts it and forces someone to pay more for a product than a
free market would, and favors someone else. California wants to prohibit
incandescent lights to save energy. That will be a real windfall for
electricians who will be replacing maybe 99% of all the dimmer switches in
the state because they won't work with fluorescent bulbs, the current
favorite technology.
My condolences to all of you who missed the program on PBS last night about
the life and ideas of the late Milton Freidman, a man who may have done more
to improve the lives of people on the planet than anyone else who has ever
had an idea. One crude summary of his work would be "free minds and free
markets."
Sorry guys, but one rant begets another rant.
Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Jensen
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 4:40 AM
Subject: RE: RV-List: Price Increase Rant
Charlie,
In reading your message, I can say with certainty that I agree with
you...or you agree with me, whichever, but we are in agreement. The
size of the investment and degree of risk is what determines a 'fair
return on investment', not the amount or velocity cash that flows
through one's books.
The idea that Exxon is a $377B company is ludicrous, as is their profit.
Buying a barrel of crude for $55 and selling it 15 seconds later for $56
is just a transaction, not real business. It does not add $56 in
enterprise value and entitle you to a $5.60 profit (10%).
Before everyone got hung up on 'free markets' being sacrosynct, they
used to call it gouging or marketeering, or monopolistic pricing,
collusion and miscellaneous other perjorative terms applied to the
behavior common among oil companies. Even though there are several oil
companies, anyone that doesn't think there isn't collusion going
on---even if they don't meet in a room on Thursday night to plan things,
the fact is they are all equally motivated to cut the legs off of the
public, not each other.
Now, I am not anti-free markets, but I am anti-free for all. Government
should govern with the absolute lightest touch possible, but to be
totally hands off is to allow the worst tendencies of individuals and
companies to prevail. I guess you would call me a quasi, free market
advocate....whatever the heck that is.
Thanks,
Chuck Jensen
Diversified Technologies
2680 Westcott Blvd
Knoxville, TN 37931
Phn: 865-539-9000 x25
Cell: 865-406-9001
Fax: 865-539-9001
cjensen@dts9000.com
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: What DC is reading about FAA today |
Please pass this link on to every pilot you know, and tell your congressman
what you think about user fees. Its easy and takes a minute or two to
complete the form which will emailed to your two senators and the
representative of your district.
http://web.nbaa.org/public/govt/action/?ISSUE=nbaa0005
Regards,
Bob Japundza
RV-6 flying F1 under const.
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: Price Increase Rant |
I believe in free markets. I also believe it was criminal for the
Republicans to give Big Oil a tax handout a couple of years ago.
I also believe it's a crime when our energy policies are written by
Big Oil, or when Big Oil takes steps to hold back alternative forms
of energy.
They can have their profit. I don't care. Just don't give them
handouts and don't let them tell us we can't pursue alternative energy.
-J
Do not archive
On Feb 3, 2007, at 11:21 AM, Terry Watson wrote:
>
> Chuck,
>
> I certainly would not call you a free market advocate. You would
> let the
> rest of us be free in our dealings with each other, as long as the
> results
> were what you wanted -- the products you want at a price you consider
> "fair", whatever that means, and most likely a minimum wage that would
> support a family of four at a comfortable level (just guessing there.)
>
> A free market is one that allows individuals, groups and
> corporations to
> make whatever agreements and arrangements they find mutually to their
> benefit, without force or fraud. Some industries require huge
> investments.
> Have you priced a double-hulled supertanker, an oil refinery, an
> off-shore
> oil rig, or a pipeline lately?
>
> OPEC is an oil cartel that has been trying to establish a minimum
> price for
> crude oil for decades, and they can't make it stick. Some country
> is always
> undercutting their price.
>
> By definition, when a government attempts to regulate or even
> influence a
> market, it distorts it and forces someone to pay more for a product
> than a
> free market would, and favors someone else. California wants to
> prohibit
> incandescent lights to save energy. That will be a real windfall for
> electricians who will be replacing maybe 99% of all the dimmer
> switches in
> the state because they won't work with fluorescent bulbs, the current
> favorite technology.
>
> My condolences to all of you who missed the program on PBS last
> night about
> the life and ideas of the late Milton Freidman, a man who may have
> done more
> to improve the lives of people on the planet than anyone else who
> has ever
> had an idea. One crude summary of his work would be "free minds and
> free
> markets."
>
> Sorry guys, but one rant begets another rant.
>
> Terry
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Jensen
> Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 4:40 AM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV-List: Price Increase Rant
>
>
> Charlie,
>
> In reading your message, I can say with certainty that I agree with
> you...or you agree with me, whichever, but we are in agreement. The
> size of the investment and degree of risk is what determines a 'fair
> return on investment', not the amount or velocity cash that flows
> through one's books.
>
> The idea that Exxon is a $377B company is ludicrous, as is their
> profit.
> Buying a barrel of crude for $55 and selling it 15 seconds later
> for $56
> is just a transaction, not real business. It does not add $56 in
> enterprise value and entitle you to a $5.60 profit (10%).
>
> Before everyone got hung up on 'free markets' being sacrosynct, they
> used to call it gouging or marketeering, or monopolistic pricing,
> collusion and miscellaneous other perjorative terms applied to the
> behavior common among oil companies. Even though there are several
> oil
> companies, anyone that doesn't think there isn't collusion going
> on---even if they don't meet in a room on Thursday night to plan
> things,
> the fact is they are all equally motivated to cut the legs off of the
> public, not each other.
>
> Now, I am not anti-free markets, but I am anti-free for all.
> Government
> should govern with the absolute lightest touch possible, but to be
> totally hands off is to allow the worst tendencies of individuals and
> companies to prevail. I guess you would call me a quasi, free market
> advocate....whatever the heck that is.
>
> Thanks,
> Chuck Jensen
> Diversified Technologies
> 2680 Westcott Blvd
> Knoxville, TN 37931
> Phn: 865-539-9000 x25
> Cell: 865-406-9001
> Fax: 865-539-9001
> cjensen@dts9000.com
>
>
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations |
Good catch Darrell .... I was on a roll and let my fingers do the
talking. :-[
My apologies.
You're right about carb icing not being a problem in FI engines. It
isn't in my PS5 carb either.
I trust you guys to keep me in line!!!
Linn
do not archive
Darrell Reiley wrote:
>
>In you post back to Gary you refer to carb ice, I
>guess its new info to me... carb icing on a fuel
>injected engine?
>
>Oh well... ;-)
>
>Darrell
>
>
>--- linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>>And your point is???? I have a problem when, in the
>>absence of any
>>clear data, a malfunction is attributed to 'vapor
>>lock'. I've put up
>>with all the rhetoric for a lot of years running
>>auto fuel ..... in FL,
>>on hot days, with both injected and carb'd engines
>>(yep, run auto fuel
>>through the injected engine too ..... but not near
>>as much as through a
>>carb) with nary a hiccup. Not even any more hard
>>starting problems than
>>using 100LL. I guess the statement 'looked like
>>vapor lock to me' just
>>rubbed me the wrong way. Sorry. I really would
>>rather have statements
>>backed up by data or first-person-experience, not
>>(to seal a line from a
>>song) 'I heard it from a friend, who, heard it from
>>a friend, who .... '.
>>
>>The point I tried to make (and failed, I guess) is
>>that all that engine
>>running after startup should have purged any
>>heat-soaked fuel. Once the
>>heat soaked fuel is gone (from the firewall
>>forward), the possibility of
>>vapor lock goes way down ......
>>Linn ...... calmed down without the drugs :-P
>>do not archive
>>
>>
>>Darrell Reiley wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>><lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
>>
>>
>>>Linn,
>>>
>>>I believe Gary stated the plane was 'fuel
>>>
>>>
>>injected".
>>
>>
>>>Darrell
>>>
>>>do not archive
>>>
>>>
>>>--- linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>><pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
>>>>
>>>>RV6 Flyer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>><rv6_flyer@hotmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I know of one RV accident that totaled the
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>airplane where the fuel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>injected engine quit after takeoff. Post crash
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>investigation sure
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>looked like VAPOR LOCK to me.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Hmmm. The engine started, ran long enough to taxi
>>>>to the runway, some
>>>>full-power takeoff and short flight ..... explain
>>>>
>>>>
>>to
>>
>>
>>>>me how that could
>>>>be caused by vapor lock??? How did it look like
>>>>vapor lock????
>>>>
>>>>I would be more inclined to believe excessive
>>>>
>>>>
>>water
>>
>>
>>>>in the fuel (did the
>>>>plane sit outside in a lot of rain before flying,
>>>>have leaking fuel caps
>>>>to allow the water in, and the pilot didn't sump
>>>>
>>>>
>>the
>>
>>
>>>>tanks??? Not
>>>>likely, but stupid pilot tricks do happen.) or
>>>>
>>>>
>>carb
>>
>>
>>>>ice or ..... almost
>>>>anything but vapor lock.
>>>>Linn
>>>>do not archive.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> If that airplane had a purge valve and was used
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>before starting,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>there may be one additional RV flying today.
>>>>>
>>>>>I agree that a FI system should not need a purge
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>valve to SHUT OFF the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>engine but one fuel injector manufacturer made
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>his
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>servo require one.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Gary A. Sobek
>>>>>"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
>>>>>1,977 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>----Original Message Follows----
>>>>>From: "kahuna" <mike.stewart@us.ibm.com>
>>>>>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>>>>>Subject: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>installations
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 16:32:21 -0800
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>><mike.stewart@us.ibm.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>[quote="gerf(at)gerf.com"]So ... at the risk of
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>starting a war ... if
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I left the cotter pins out of my flap mounting
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>bolts and a flap fell
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>off, should I conclude that the flaps are too
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>much
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>trouble or should I
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>chastise myself for forgetting to install the
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>cotter pins ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Sorry, but I question your conclusion that purge
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>valves have no place
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>on an RV.
>>>>>
>>>>>g
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>--
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>The flaps serve a very useful purpose. One that
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>can be demonstrated
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>and quantified. I say the purge vavle can do
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>neither of these. As for
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>the servo not being at idle cut with fuel flow,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>that can be fixed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Turn searches into helpful donations. Make your
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>search count.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>browse
>>>>Subscriptions page,
>>>>FAQ,
>>>>
>>>>Web Forums!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Finding fabulous fares is fun.
>>>Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel
>>>
>>>
>>sites to find flight and hotel bargains.
>>
>>
>>>http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>Looking for earth-friendly autos?
>Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
>http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
>
>
>
>
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: Why starve engine of fuel to shut down |
It is important that there be no fuel left in the cylinders after shut
down. Safety is part of the reason. If someone accidentally left the mags
on, turning the prop could cause it to fire. Also, gas left in the cylinder
can wash away the thin layer of lubricating oil. Given that airplanes often
sit for long periods that could lead to significant rust issues.
We don't do it in cars because the computer does it for us.
--
David Leonard
Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY
My websites at:
http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/rotaryroster/index.html
http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/vp4skydoc/index.html
http://leonardiniraq.blogspot.com
>
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: "Garry" <garrys@tampabay.rr.com>
> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations
> Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 07:54:12 -0500
>
> I've been reading this thread with some interest, hoping to learn
> something
> practical when I begin flying my RV 7A. I have an IO360 from Aerosport
> and
> hope to be flying in the next couple of months. What I don't understand
> is
> why can't you shut down the engine simply by turning off the mag switches?
> Why the need to shut down by starving the engine of fuel? We don't do
> this
> with our cars, or lawnmowers, or any other gasoline engine powered device,
> so why airplanes?
>
> Garry Stout
> Tampa Florida
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Exxon and ACS |
I would be very surprised if the 496 was part of the sale....
Dave Leonard
>
>
> Wanna go up the the sale this year? I need a 496.
>
> Reuven
> N7WT
>
>
> *Wheeler North <wnorth@sdccd.edu>* wrote:
>
>
> Well,
>
> My only complaint with Exxon is that I doubled my money invested in them
> this last two years and I would have preferred to triple it... ;{(
>
> And I don't talk to ACS on the phone much so I have no idea what their
> customer service is like.
>
> However, I order from them online a lot and they seem to get it right
> every
> time.
>
> Of course it's also quite handy to just go there and buy what you need.
> They
> do
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
--
David Leonard
Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY
My websites at:
http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/rotaryroster/index.html
http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/vp4skydoc/index.html
http://leonardiniraq.blogspot.com
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: I've sworn off purge valve installations |
Its called throttle Ice and happens on the back side of the trottle plate,
it happens no mater if you have a carb or throttle body. Its just less
severe for an injected engine, the venturi is the real problem area for
carb ice, not necessarily throttle ice.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Darrell Reiley" <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations
>
> In you post back to Gary you refer to carb ice, I
> guess its new info to me... carb icing on a fuel
> injected engine?
>
> Oh well... ;-)
>
> Darrell
>
>
> --- linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>> And your point is???? I have a problem when, in the
>> absence of any
>> clear data, a malfunction is attributed to 'vapor
>> lock'. I've put up
>> with all the rhetoric for a lot of years running
>> auto fuel ..... in FL,
>> on hot days, with both injected and carb'd engines
>> (yep, run auto fuel
>> through the injected engine too ..... but not near
>> as much as through a
>> carb) with nary a hiccup. Not even any more hard
>> starting problems than
>> using 100LL. I guess the statement 'looked like
>> vapor lock to me' just
>> rubbed me the wrong way. Sorry. I really would
>> rather have statements
>> backed up by data or first-person-experience, not
>> (to seal a line from a
>> song) 'I heard it from a friend, who, heard it from
>> a friend, who .... '.
>>
>> The point I tried to make (and failed, I guess) is
>> that all that engine
>> running after startup should have purged any
>> heat-soaked fuel. Once the
>> heat soaked fuel is gone (from the firewall
>> forward), the possibility of
>> vapor lock goes way down ......
>> Linn ...... calmed down without the drugs :-P
>> do not archive
>>
>>
>> Darrell Reiley wrote:
>>
>> <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
>> >
>> >Linn,
>> >
>> >I believe Gary stated the plane was 'fuel
>> injected".
>> >
>> >Darrell
>> >
>> >do not archive
>> >
>> >
>> >--- linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >><pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
>> >>
>> >>RV6 Flyer wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >><rv6_flyer@hotmail.com>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>I know of one RV accident that totaled the
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>airplane where the fuel
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>injected engine quit after takeoff. Post crash
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>investigation sure
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>looked like VAPOR LOCK to me.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>Hmmm. The engine started, ran long enough to taxi
>> >>to the runway, some
>> >>full-power takeoff and short flight ..... explain
>> to
>> >>me how that could
>> >>be caused by vapor lock??? How did it look like
>> >>vapor lock????
>> >>
>> >>I would be more inclined to believe excessive
>> water
>> >>in the fuel (did the
>> >>plane sit outside in a lot of rain before flying,
>> >>have leaking fuel caps
>> >>to allow the water in, and the pilot didn't sump
>> the
>> >>tanks??? Not
>> >>likely, but stupid pilot tricks do happen.) or
>> carb
>> >>ice or ..... almost
>> >>anything but vapor lock.
>> >>Linn
>> >>do not archive.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> If that airplane had a purge valve and was used
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>before starting,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>there may be one additional RV flying today.
>> >>>
>> >>>I agree that a FI system should not need a purge
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>valve to SHUT OFF the
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>engine but one fuel injector manufacturer made
>> his
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>servo require one.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>Gary A. Sobek
>> >>>"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
>> >>>1,977 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>----Original Message Follows----
>> >>>From: "kahuna" <mike.stewart@us.ibm.com>
>> >>>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>> >>>Subject: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>installations
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 16:32:21 -0800
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >><mike.stewart@us.ibm.com>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>[quote="gerf(at)gerf.com"]So ... at the risk of
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>starting a war ... if
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>I left the cotter pins out of my flap mounting
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>bolts and a flap fell
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>off, should I conclude that the flaps are too
>> much
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>trouble or should I
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>chastise myself for forgetting to install the
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>cotter pins ?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>Sorry, but I question your conclusion that purge
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>valves have no place
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>on an RV.
>> >>>
>> >>>g
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>>--
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>The flaps serve a very useful purpose. One that
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>can be demonstrated
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>and quantified. I say the purge vavle can do
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>neither of these. As for
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>the servo not being at idle cut with fuel flow,
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>that can be fixed.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>Mike
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>> >
>> >
>> >>>Turn searches into helpful donations. Make your
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>search count.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>browse
>> >>Subscriptions page,
>> >>FAQ,
>> >>
>> >>Web Forums!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Finding fabulous fares is fun.
>> >Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel
>> sites to find flight and hotel bargains.
>> >http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
> Looking for earth-friendly autos?
> Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
> http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
>
>
>
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations |
I this common? This is the first I've heard of this?
(on fuel injection)
Darrell
do not archive
--- Charles Reiche <charlieray@optonline.net> wrote:
> <charlieray@optonline.net>
>
> Its called throttle Ice and happens on the back side
> of the trottle plate,
> it happens no mater if you have a carb or throttle
> body. Its just less
> severe for an injected engine, the venturi is the
> real problem area for
> carb ice, not necessarily throttle ice.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Darrell Reiley" <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 11:48 AM
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve
> installations
>
>
> <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
> >
> > In you post back to Gary you refer to carb ice, I
> > guess its new info to me... carb icing on a fuel
> > injected engine?
> >
> > Oh well... ;-)
> >
> > Darrell
> >
> >
> > --- linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >> And your point is???? I have a problem when, in
> the
> >> absence of any
> >> clear data, a malfunction is attributed to 'vapor
> >> lock'. I've put up
> >> with all the rhetoric for a lot of years running
> >> auto fuel ..... in FL,
> >> on hot days, with both injected and carb'd
> engines
> >> (yep, run auto fuel
> >> through the injected engine too ..... but not
> near
> >> as much as through a
> >> carb) with nary a hiccup. Not even any more hard
> >> starting problems than
> >> using 100LL. I guess the statement 'looked like
> >> vapor lock to me' just
> >> rubbed me the wrong way. Sorry. I really would
> >> rather have statements
> >> backed up by data or first-person-experience, not
> >> (to seal a line from a
> >> song) 'I heard it from a friend, who, heard it
> from
> >> a friend, who .... '.
> >>
> >> The point I tried to make (and failed, I guess)
> is
> >> that all that engine
> >> running after startup should have purged any
> >> heat-soaked fuel. Once the
> >> heat soaked fuel is gone (from the firewall
> >> forward), the possibility of
> >> vapor lock goes way down ......
> >> Linn ...... calmed down without the drugs :-P
> >> do not archive
> >>
> >>
> >> Darrell Reiley wrote:
> >>
> >> <lifeofreiley2003@yahoo.com>
> >> >
> >> >Linn,
> >> >
> >> >I believe Gary stated the plane was 'fuel
> >> injected".
> >> >
> >> >Darrell
> >> >
> >> >do not archive
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >--- linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >><pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
> >> >>
> >> >>RV6 Flyer wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >><rv6_flyer@hotmail.com>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>I know of one RV accident that totaled the
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>airplane where the fuel
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>injected engine quit after takeoff. Post
> crash
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>investigation sure
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>looked like VAPOR LOCK to me.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>Hmmm. The engine started, ran long enough to
> taxi
> >> >>to the runway, some
> >> >>full-power takeoff and short flight .....
> explain
> >> to
> >> >>me how that could
> >> >>be caused by vapor lock??? How did it look
> like
> >> >>vapor lock????
> >> >>
> >> >>I would be more inclined to believe excessive
> >> water
> >> >>in the fuel (did the
> >> >>plane sit outside in a lot of rain before
> flying,
> >> >>have leaking fuel caps
> >> >>to allow the water in, and the pilot didn't
> sump
> >> the
> >> >>tanks??? Not
> >> >>likely, but stupid pilot tricks do happen.) or
> >> carb
> >> >>ice or ..... almost
> >> >>anything but vapor lock.
> >> >>Linn
> >> >>do not archive.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>> If that airplane had a purge valve and was
> used
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>before starting,
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>there may be one additional RV flying today.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>I agree that a FI system should not need a
> purge
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>valve to SHUT OFF the
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>engine but one fuel injector manufacturer made
> >> his
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>servo require one.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>Gary A. Sobek
> >> >>>"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
> >> >>>1,977 + Flying Hours So. CA, USA
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>----Original Message Follows----
> >> >>>From: "kahuna" <mike.stewart@us.ibm.com>
> >> >>>To: rv-list@matronics.com
> >> >>>Subject: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge
> valve
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>installations
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 16:32:21 -0800
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >><mike.stewart@us.ibm.com>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>[quote="gerf(at)gerf.com"]So ... at the risk
> of
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>starting a war ... if
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>I left the cotter pins out of my flap mounting
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>bolts and a flap fell
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>off, should I conclude that the flaps are too
> >> much
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>trouble or should I
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>chastise myself for forgetting to install the
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>cotter pins ?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>Sorry, but I question your conclusion that
> purge
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>valves have no place
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>on an RV.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>g
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>>--
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>The flaps serve a very useful purpose. One
> that
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>can be demonstrated
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>and quantified. I say the purge vavle can do
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>neither of these. As for
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>the servo not being at idle cut with fuel
> flow,
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>that can be fixed.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>Mike
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >>
>
>>_________________________________________________________________
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>>Turn searches into helpful donations. Make
> your
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>search count.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>browse
> >> >>Subscriptions page,
> >> >>FAQ,
> >> >>
> >> >>Web Forums!
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Finding fabulous fares is fun.
> >> >Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel
> >> sites to find flight and hotel bargains.
> >>
> >http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Looking for earth-friendly autos?
> > Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos'
> Green Center.
> > http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
>
> Web Forums!
>
>
>
>
>
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection.
Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
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 |
|
Are there any great methods to rainproof radios in a tip-up RV? Besides
moving to Arizona or building a slider?
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: Why starve engine of fuel to shut down |
And because the car does not have a prop that can smack you. do not
archive.
----- Original Message -----
From: David Leonard
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 12:29 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Why starve engine of fuel to shut down
It is important that there be no fuel left in the cylinders after shut
down. Safety is part of the reason. If someone accidentally left the
mags on, turning the prop could cause it to fire. Also, gas left in the
cylinder can wash away the thin layer of lubricating oil. Given that
airplanes often sit for long periods that could lead to significant rust
issues.
We don't do it in cars because the computer does it for us.
--
David Leonard
Turbo Rotary RV-6 N4VY
My websites at:
http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/rotaryroster/index.html
http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/vp4skydoc/index.html
http://leonardiniraq.blogspot.com
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Garry" < garrys@tampabay.rr.com>
To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 07:54:12 -0500
I've been reading this thread with some interest, hoping to learn
something
practical when I begin flying my RV 7A. I have an IO360 from
Aerosport and
hope to be flying in the next couple of months. What I don't
understand is
why can't you shut down the engine simply by turning off the mag
switches?
Why the need to shut down by starving the engine of fuel? We don't
do this
with our cars, or lawnmowers, or any other gasoline engine powered
device,
so why airplanes?
Garry Stout
Tampa Florida
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: | Price Increase Rant |
I'm not sure if "criminal" is the right word, but I would certainly agree
that subsidies distort a free market in ways that are virtually always bad
for us in the long run and usually in the short run. You dilute the strength
of your argument significantly by blaming it on the republicans. The way I
see the problem is that we have allowed government to become powerful enough
to take from the many to give to the few when it meets the personal needs of
an individual or group who has at least for the moment the power to reward
friends and punish political enemies. From my perspective the republicans
used to have a better record than the democrats of keeping their hands off
my life, but after they had their moment in the sun it's a lot harder to
distinguish between the two. We have such a tangle of oil subsidies, farm
subsidies, ethanol subsidies, nuclear subsidies, sugar price supports,
school lunch programs, school breakfast programs, and import restrictions to
name a few, plus the various other groups clamoring and muscling their way
into our pockets that it's absolutely amazing that market forces still find
a way to keep us fed, housed, and relatively free and happy. When we look to
the government for everything that we are not able or willing to pay for, we
end up competing in our skill at begging rather than our skill at producing.
We pay AOPA and maybe the EAA to defend us against others' wants and then to
plead, threaten or beg for ours. Charlie talks about advocating for cancer
research which certainly seems to me a worthy cause, but is it a better
cause than any or all the other causes that compete for the same dollars?
Would more lives be saved if it were spent some other way? Look at the
millions of lives lost to malaria because of the pressure of the
environmental community to ban DDT.
As for alternative energy, I am unaware of any way "Big Oil" is or even
could hold it back. Alternative resources or technologies are the limit on
monopoly power. There is a price at which any commodity becomes less
attractive than an alternative, even if that alternative is doing without as
in the case of purely luxury goods.
When a market is free, WE individually choose where our money goes. To the
extent that it is not free, we have less to say about what we get for our
efforts.
Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Joseph Larson
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 10:23 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Price Increase Rant
I believe in free markets. I also believe it was criminal for the
Republicans to give Big Oil a tax handout a couple of years ago.
I also believe it's a crime when our energy policies are written by
Big Oil, or when Big Oil takes steps to hold back alternative forms
of energy.
They can have their profit. I don't care. Just don't give them
handouts and don't let them tell us we can't pursue alternative energy.
-J
Do not archive
On Feb 3, 2007, at 11:21 AM, Terry Watson wrote:
>
> Chuck,
>
> I certainly would not call you a free market advocate. You would
> let the
> rest of us be free in our dealings with each other, as long as the
> results
> were what you wanted -- the products you want at a price you consider
> "fair", whatever that means, and most likely a minimum wage that would
> support a family of four at a comfortable level (just guessing there.)
>
> A free market is one that allows individuals, groups and
> corporations to
> make whatever agreements and arrangements they find mutually to their
> benefit, without force or fraud. Some industries require huge
> investments.
> Have you priced a double-hulled supertanker, an oil refinery, an
> off-shore
> oil rig, or a pipeline lately?
>
> OPEC is an oil cartel that has been trying to establish a minimum
> price for
> crude oil for decades, and they can't make it stick. Some country
> is always
> undercutting their price.
>
> By definition, when a government attempts to regulate or even
> influence a
> market, it distorts it and forces someone to pay more for a product
> than a
> free market would, and favors someone else. California wants to
> prohibit
> incandescent lights to save energy. That will be a real windfall for
> electricians who will be replacing maybe 99% of all the dimmer
> switches in
> the state because they won't work with fluorescent bulbs, the current
> favorite technology.
>
> My condolences to all of you who missed the program on PBS last
> night about
> the life and ideas of the late Milton Freidman, a man who may have
> done more
> to improve the lives of people on the planet than anyone else who
> has ever
> had an idea. One crude summary of his work would be "free minds and
> free
> markets."
>
> Sorry guys, but one rant begets another rant.
>
> Terry
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Jensen
> Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 4:40 AM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV-List: Price Increase Rant
>
>
> Charlie,
>
> In reading your message, I can say with certainty that I agree with
> you...or you agree with me, whichever, but we are in agreement. The
> size of the investment and degree of risk is what determines a 'fair
> return on investment', not the amount or velocity cash that flows
> through one's books.
>
> The idea that Exxon is a $377B company is ludicrous, as is their
> profit.
> Buying a barrel of crude for $55 and selling it 15 seconds later
> for $56
> is just a transaction, not real business. It does not add $56 in
> enterprise value and entitle you to a $5.60 profit (10%).
>
> Before everyone got hung up on 'free markets' being sacrosynct, they
> used to call it gouging or marketeering, or monopolistic pricing,
> collusion and miscellaneous other perjorative terms applied to the
> behavior common among oil companies. Even though there are several
> oil
> companies, anyone that doesn't think there isn't collusion going
> on---even if they don't meet in a room on Thursday night to plan
> things,
> the fact is they are all equally motivated to cut the legs off of the
> public, not each other.
>
> Now, I am not anti-free markets, but I am anti-free for all.
> Government
> should govern with the absolute lightest touch possible, but to be
> totally hands off is to allow the worst tendencies of individuals and
> companies to prevail. I guess you would call me a quasi, free market
> advocate....whatever the heck that is.
>
> Thanks,
> Chuck Jensen
> Diversified Technologies
> 2680 Westcott Blvd
> Knoxville, TN 37931
> Phn: 865-539-9000 x25
> Cell: 865-406-9001
> Fax: 865-539-9001
> cjensen@dts9000.com
>
>
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: pilot's family awarded $10.5M |
As much as we all would agree, unfortunately when one is dead, it is up
to the survivors to determine when to sue. If you want to make it
better, educate your family and friends about the risks and reason to
sue or not sue. It is human nature to want to find a cause for
accidents. It is unfortunate that in today's world, responsibility is
not something that we want to take on, rather blame someone else or
something.
What if's are never ending and usually something that someone can always
come up with another. It seems to not stop with the first problem, but
rather all the other things that could have happened afterwards. In
this case (I haven't seen the details, but play along), if the pilot
didn't check the control surfaces and that is what caused the accident,
it should stop there rather than say that if the fire department was
quick enough or if the airplane was strong enough, or if ...
if....if.... To the survivors, it is easier to want to blame the city
or EAA or the fire department than except the facts that it just
shouldn't have happened in the first place and was preventable.
In my mind, it should stop there. It never should have made it to the
court room, but our system allows for that. If in fact there was a
problem that was not pilot error, it would be important for a way to
challenge the problem. In order to have that, you need to allow the
cases without too much merit to present themselves just as much as the
cases that seem open and shut. That is what makes our system great. The
downside of our system is that juries don't have the knowledge to make
the judgments that we can. They might have never seen the inside of a
small plane. They can only go on the facts presented in the case. If
the sides don't present the materials in a way that they can make a good
decision, how can they do it? We can't sit and criticize what they
decided without knowing what they heard and saw. Using only what they
heard and saw in court (and not your insider knowledge) as if you would
make the same decision.
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Lee
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 1:09 PM
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: pilot's family awarded $10.5M
My gust locks are all internal to the cockpit. PILOT's
seat belt for elevators/ailerons and a plastic gizmo on the
pilots side for rudder. I doubt that I could ever take-off
with either installed.
I also verify control surface movement during the ground
inspection and during the runup checklist...making sure that
each surface moves the way it should for the intended rudder
or stick movement.
Now if I ever do something suicidal like flying into icing
weather, a mountain or take off with control locks installed,
I do not want anyone sued for my stupidity.
Ron Lee
N54RL
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 |
|
I used some plastic sheet and glued this to the subpanel and angled it
so any water would run to the side of the plane rather than downward
onto the avionics. I also installed and reinstall a P-Strip (ACS p/n
05-01200) under the front of the canopy frame where it meets up with the
forward top skin at each year's annual. It seems to get distorted
somehow each year and need to be replaced. In essence, I created a
gutter above the electrical stuff that catches and channels any water
that gets in over and to the side of the radios.
Indiana Larry - RV7, tip up 180 hours.
----- Original Message -----
From: Greg Williams
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 2:23 PM
Subject: RV-List: Tip up
Are there any great methods to rainproof radios in a tip-up RV?
Besides moving to Arizona or building a slider?
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 |
|
Fred Stucklen (who I believe is on this list) made Velcro-on covers to go
between the subpanel and firewall. Basically, its just a waterproof
material that is velcroed to the top of the firewall and subpanel and covers
everything below it. I have numerous pictures of Freds installation, that
Ive gotten at fly-ins, but none are currently on my web page. I could
post them, if my description isnt clear. I plan to copy what Fred did.
brian
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Greg Williams
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 3:24 PM
Subject: RV-List: Tip up
Are there any great methods to rainproof radios in a tip-up RV? Besides
moving to Arizona or building a slider?
--
3:31 PM
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 |
|
Ive also ordered my hangar door with a remote control. If its raining
when I land, I can just taxi right into the hangar, which will help some.
brian
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Meyette [mailto:brianpublic2@starband.net]
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 7:36 PM
Subject: RE: RV-List: Tip up
Fred Stucklen (who I believe is on this list) made Velcro-on covers to go
between the subpanel and firewall. Basically, its just a waterproof
material that is velcroed to the top of the firewall and subpanel and covers
everything below it. I have numerous pictures of Freds installation, that
Ive gotten at fly-ins, but none are currently on my web page. I could
post them, if my description isnt clear. I plan to copy what Fred did.
brian
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Greg Williams
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 3:24 PM
Subject: RV-List: Tip up
Are there any great methods to rainproof radios in a tip-up RV? Besides
moving to Arizona or building a slider?
--
3:31 PM
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 |
|
Must be a hydroswing. I just got mine two weeks ago.
Do Not Archive
Tim
_____
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian Meyette
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 7:11 PM
Subject: RE: RV-List: Tip up
I've also ordered my hangar door with a remote control. If it's raining
when I land, I can just taxi right into the hangar, which will help some.
brian
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Meyette [mailto:brianpublic2@starband.net]
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 7:36 PM
Subject: RE: RV-List: Tip up
Fred Stucklen (who I believe is on this list) made Velcro-on covers to go
between the subpanel and firewall. Basically, it's just a waterproof
material that is velcroed to the top of the firewall and subpanel and covers
everything below it. I have numerous pictures of Fred's installation, that
I've gotten at fly-ins, but none are currently on my web page. I could
post them, if my description isn't clear. I plan to copy what Fred did.
brian
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Greg Williams
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 3:24 PM
Subject: RV-List: Tip up
Are there any great methods to rainproof radios in a tip-up RV? Besides
moving to Arizona or building a slider?
- NEW MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
--> http://forums.matronics.com
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: pilot's family awarded $10.5M |
The other part of the problem is that jurors buy into the fiction that
they are not permitted to use their own judgment. They are virtually
always instructed that they *must* apply the law as written and
interpreted to them by the judge and lawyers, regardless of how absurd
it may seem to them. If this was the intent of the gentlemen who
established this country's legal system, the jury of your peers would be
counterproductive and superfluous. Why not have a panel of legal
experts render the verdict?
The jury is there to act as a check on defective and illogical laws.
When you agree to "check your brain at the door" as most jurors do, you
preserve these defective laws. The same goes for those who vote for and
support clearly unconstitutional laws. My guess is that this includes
many here who complain loudly about this particular case in which their
own person ox was gored.
If anyone is truly interested in the subject of jury powers, Google
"fully informed jurors".
Tracy Crook (stepping down from soap box)
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeffery J. Morgan<mailto:jmorgan@compnetconcepts.com>
To: rv-list@matronics.com<mailto:rv-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 6:52 PM
Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: pilot's family awarded $10.5M
>SNIP< The downside of our system is that juries don't have the
knowledge to make the judgments that we can. They might have never seen
the inside of a small plane. They can only go on the facts presented in
the case. If the sides don't present the materials in a way that they
can make a good decision, how can they do it? We can't sit and
criticize what they decided without knowing what they heard and saw.
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! --
|