Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:04 AM - Re: RPM Chart (Kevin Horton)
2. 04:25 AM - Re: Fuel Injection System (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta))
3. 06:06 AM - Back seat instruments (FATKORAT@aol.com)
4. 06:29 AM - Re: ELT Antenna (Hopperdhh@aol.com)
5. 06:47 AM - Hinged fuse block tray (James H Nelson)
6. 07:10 AM - Re: Re: Pilot's family awarded $10.5M (Jeff Linebaugh)
7. 07:21 AM - Re: ELT Antenna (Ron Lee)
8. 07:35 AM - Re: Hinged fuse block tray (Bret Smith)
9. 07:38 AM - Re: RV 6 Transition Training (Brian Meyette)
10. 07:46 AM - Re: RV 6 Transition Training (Zeidman, Richard B)
11. 07:59 AM - Re: ELT Antenna (carlos)
12. 08:51 AM - Re: battery update, Bill Dube (Konrad L. Werner)
13. 09:00 AM - Re: pilot's family awarded $10.5M (Bob Collins)
14. 09:15 AM - Re: ELT Antenna (Steve Allison)
15. 09:38 AM - Re: ELT Antenna (David Burton)
16. 10:35 AM - Re: ELT Antenna (Ron Lee)
17. 11:01 AM - Re: pilot's family awarded $10.5M (Bob Collins)
18. 12:24 PM - EI back-up Battery (was: battery update, Bill Dube) (Bill Dube)
19. 12:56 PM - Re: battery update, Bill Dube/now HotRod mag (gordon or marge)
20. 01:42 PM - Re: ELT Antenna (Charlie England)
21. 02:01 PM - Re: Re: Pilot's family awarded $10.5M (Jerry Springer)
22. 08:28 PM - Re: Hinged fuse block tray (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
23. 11:45 PM - RV-4 Tail kit (DEAN PSIROPOULOS)
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 |
|
On 9 Feb 2007, at 24:16, Greg Williams wrote:
> My RV-7 has an IO-360, lightspeed ignition and Hartzell constant
> speed prop. I'm looking for a chart with RPM & MP & %power that I
> can use to set up cruise flight efficiently. My Lycoming &
> Hartzell books don't help.
Parallel valve or angle valve IO-360?
Kevin Horton
Ottawa, Canada
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: | Fuel Injection System |
If you plumb into your fuel supply system instead of the tank or vent,
then there is a possibility of contaminating the fuel supply with air
should there ever be a problem with the return lines. IF this happens,
the result is a loss in steady fuel supply to the system and potential
engine failure.
I have personal experience with this failure mode.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Fuel Injection System
My philosophy was...the closer to the tank the better. I don't think it
makes much difference.
)_( Dan
----- Original Message -----
From: "David E. Nelson" <david.nelson@pobox.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 12:55 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Fuel Injection System
<david.nelson@pobox.com>
>
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> I'm curious - in looking at your pics, why didn't you plum the return
in
> between the two backets?
>
> Thanks,
> /\/elson
> RV-7A Fuselage
> Austin, TX
>
> --
> ~~ ** ~~ Research has shown that Mondays account for 1/7th of your
time ~~
> ** ~~
>
>
>
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: | Back seat instruments |
I saw an RV-8 with a neat rear seat panel at Lakeland. It was N127EK.
You could look him up and ask.
Bob Gibbons
RV-8 Finish Kit
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 |
|
Jerry,
If you put the antenna inside the cabin, then it is essentially no longer an
antenna. At least not a very effective one. If you want it to be a good
antenna, on the turtle deck is the right place.
If the antenna is about 1/4 wavelength (about 24 inches) then there is
probably nothing in the base -- it is just an insulator. You can check this with
an
ohmmeter. If it is shorter that 24 inches, then there is probably a loading
coil in the base.
Most RVers sacrifice the ability of the antenna to radiate and put it inside
the cabin or even in the empennage fairing at the base of the vertical stab.
I guarantee no one will here it more than 100 yards away if it is put there
(at the base of the stab)!
In my own case, I have the antenna in the baggage compartment mounted to one
of the side ribs, and leaning toward the center of the free space there. In
other words probably the best location inside the airplane. Once the ELT was
accidentally left on for about 2 hours outdoors, and I never heard from anyone!
Dan Hopper K9WEK
RV-7A
In a message dated 2/8/2007 9:38:58 PM Eastern Standard Time,
jlisler@alltel.net writes:
What is your current opinion of where the ELT antenna should be installed on
an RV-4? My ACK ELT is mounted on the upper shelf of the baggage
compartment. I am leaning toward mounting the antenna on the topside of the
turtle deck right behind the canopy. If you have a snappy location that is
better concealed I would like to know. The airplane is finished and this is
one of the small details I have left to complete.
Also, what does the large molded rubber base do on the ELT antenna? Is it a
strain relief to keep the antenna from snapping off in the breeze at 200+
MPH? Does it cover something up like a coil or what ever? I want to be able
to trim this rubber off so I can possibly mount the antenna inside the
cabin. However I do not want to destroy the antenna by sawing off something
important.
Jerry Isler
Donalsonville, GA
RV4 N455J
Cessna C140A N9641A
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: | Hinged fuse block tray |
Bret,
I have a hinged fuse block arrangement on the pilots side. It
has the main 10 fuse block and the essential 6 fuse block behind it. It
is on the left side and uses one of Van's cam locks to hold it up. The
rear of the tray is spaced lower to level the tray. The reason I put ir
there is I mounted the map box as low and as far to the left as I could
on my three piece panel from Affordable Panels. I have some pix on my
web site at www.websites.expercraft.com/jimn
There is someone else that put the fuse shelf on the right side
but he did not have anything directly above the fuses to interfear with
it. Any questions on this , give me a jog.
Jim Nelson
RV9-A
N15JN (res)
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: re: Pilot's family awarded $10.5M |
I am thinking that perhaps we should get Matt Dralle to start a new list
Title? re: Pilot's family awarded $10.5M-list
Jeff Linebaugh
jefflinebaugh@earthlink.net
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 |
|
>Most RVers sacrifice the ability of the antenna to radiate and put it inside
>the cabin or even in the empennage fairing at the base of the vertical stab.
>I guarantee no one will here it more than 100 yards away if it is put there
>(at the base of the stab)!
I have mine there (horizontal stab area). If you really want to be found
then look into a GPS-enabled 406 MHz PLB such as the McMurdo
Fastfind. Of course you have to manually activate it but I would rate
it far higher as a method to be rescued.
Ron Lee
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: Hinged fuse block tray |
You dog,
I coulda sworn I saw breakers on your panel... Damn, I gotta look your
plane over more closely..
Thanks
Bret Smith
RV-9A "Wings"
Blue Ridge, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Fiveonepw@aol.com
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 11:56 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Hinged fuse block tray
Hi Bret-
Here's mine:
http://websites.expercraft.com/n51pw/index.php?q=log_entry&log_id=500
2
I've got some more fotos I could dig up if needed...
From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark
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: | RV 6 Transition Training |
It wasn't that long ago there was only ONE.
brian
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ron Lee
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 8:59 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV 6 Transition Training
At 05:21 PM 2/8/2007, you wrote:
>
>We already have it:
>http://www.vansairforce.net/transition_training.htm
>
So there are only six in the entire USA?
Ron Lee
--
3:33 PM
--
9:04 PM
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: RV 6 Transition Training |
I flew with Jan Bussell 2 weeks ago in Okeechobee, Fl in his RV6 and got
a tailwheel endorsment. He also has an RV6A which and both aircraft are
waivered for transition training.
He is a very good instructor with a lot of patience.
http://www.safeair1.com/RVTT/JB_Aframe.htm
Rich Zeidman
RV7 N42PZ
First flight 2/3/07
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 |
|
Ron Lee wrote:
>
>
>> Most RVers sacrifice the ability of the antenna to radiate and put it
>> inside
>> the cabin or even in the empennage fairing at the base of the
>> vertical stab.
>> I guarantee no one will here it more than 100 yards away if it is put
>> there
>> (at the base of the stab)!
>
> I have mine there (horizontal stab area). If you really want to be found
> then look into a GPS-enabled 406 MHz PLB such as the McMurdo
> Fastfind. Of course you have to manually activate it but I would rate
> it far higher as a method to be rescued.
>
> Ron Lee
>
>
Speaking of ELT's, I read yesterday that the older ELT will no longer
exist as of 2009 and the newer 406 will be required. Anyone have a place
I can get more info on this? I'm on the empennage now and will most
likely not be finished until 09 or later.
Carlos in AZ
RV7A
--
Carlos Hernandez <carlosh@sec-engr.com>
Structural Engineers, LLC
2963 W. Elliot Rd. - Suite 3
Chandler, AZ 85224
Phone: 480.968.8600
Fax: 480.968.8608
www.sec-engr.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged.
This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual or
organization named above. If you are not the intended recipient or
an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any review, dissemination or copyingof this email and
its attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is
prohibited. If you havereceived this email in error, please
immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email
from your system.
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: battery update, Bill Dube |
Dear Bill,
I like Dan's idea of a scaled down version of your big battery to be
used exclusively for E.I. Backup. What would a 4 cell backup battery
like this weigh? Rough cost estimate?
Keep up the good work, as you sure are a true experimenter...
Konrad
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Dube
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: battery update, Bill Dube
Sure, smaller is easy. The increments are 2.3 a-hrs and 120 cranking
amps.
The cells are 26650 size. That is, they are ~ 26 mm in diameter and
~65 mm long. To make a battery that is nominally 12 volts, we put 4
in series. We them parallel up as many as required to get the amp-hrs
and cranking amps we need.
We weld the tabs on with the cells side-by-side. We leave
them in that configuration for the starting battery we are about to
produce. If you want a slightly different shape, we can "unfold" the
tabs to make some, or all, of the series cells stack end-to-end.
Thus, we can make a battery that is as thin as 1 inch and 11 inches
long, or 2 inches thick and 5 1/2 inches long. The width is set by
the amp-hrs (and cranking amps). For each 2.3 amp-hrs, add another
inch in width.
The cost roughly scales with amp-hrs (and cranking amps)
Bill Dube'
At 07:42 AM 2/8/2007, you wrote:
>
>Bill,
>
>Cool stuff. How about an even smaller one capacity-wise? i.e. what
>would a 6 amp-hour or so version look like footprint &
>weight-wise? I ask about this in the context of providing a backup
>for a dual electronic ignition setup.
>
>I keep having this fantasy that in a year or two when I want to
>replace my mag with a 2nd Lightspeed, battery technology will hit a
>point where I can plop a little RC battery pack sized dealie in
>there. Essentially negligible weight & size, full functionality for
>what I need for. Like I said, a fantasy...or is it?
>
>)_( Dan
>do not archive
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "john schmidt"
<jeschmidt@hotmail.com>
>To: <rv-list@matronics.com>
>Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 5:42 AM
>Subject: RV-List: battery update, Bill Dube
>
>
<jeschmidt@hotmail.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>this is a recent post from the Flyrotary forum; I read it on
>>another aviation-related list:
>>
>>>Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
>>>Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary
>>
>>Well, I said I was going to do it and we finally got the prototype
built.
>>
>>We just built a 600 cranking amp, 11.5 A-hr, battery that weighs
just
>>3.7 pounds. I've been testing it in my GMC van for the past week
here
>>in the Denver Winter. It snaps the van right over every morning
>>without a problem. The van cranks faster than it did with the
>>standard lead-acid battery.
>>
>>It is smaller than the Odyssey 680 so it fit in the same battery box
>>with a couple of foam blocks for spacers.
>>The battery has four status LEDs that tell you the cell balancing
>>electronics are working OK. We are using A123 Systems M1 cells with
>>our own custom battery management electronics. The A123 Systems
cells
>>are proven to be the safest Li-Ion cells on the market. No problems
>>with fires (like laptop cells) because the chemistry they use is
>>completely different.
>>
>>The battery can be damaged by running it completely flat (like
>>leaving the master on) and holding the battery below 8 volts for a
>>long time. It can also be damaged by charging it over 15.0 volts. It
>>will likely still function after such abuse, but it won't be nearly
>>as good as it was originally. If you don't abuse it, it should last
>>you for many years.
>>
>>I think we will be in production in about a month, maybe two.
>>
>>Specs:
>>
>>3.7 lbs
>>600 cranking amps
>>11.5 amp-hr
>>Approximate maximum dimensions: 3" wide, 5" long, 7" tall (including
>>terminals)
>>Charging voltage = 13.8 to 15.0 volts (anywhere in this range is
OK)
>>Nominal voltage = 13.2 volts (Just a touch higher than your
typical
>>lead-acid, so it spins the starter a touch faster.)
>>Cell cycle life rated at 2000 cycles (80% DOD, 90% capacity
>>remaining) 10,000 cycles (80% DOD with 50% capacity remaining) @25 C
>>Cell specs:
>><http://www.a123systems.com/html/products/ANR26650M1specs.pdf"http://ww
w.a12>
>>3systems.com/html/products/ANR26650M1specs.pdf>http://www.a123systems.c
om/ht
>>ml/products/ANR26650M1specs.pdf
>>
>>Maintenance free
>>No heavy metals (iron-phosphate type cells)
>>
>>At this time, we estimate the retail price will be $595. (Yeah, I
>>know this is not cheap, but this is the state-of-the-art battery
>>technology so the parts to make it are not cheap.)
>>
>>Here is a picture of the prototype. We have it in a clear Lexan case
>>so we can keep an eye on it. The production battery will have a
>>smaller opaque case with a clear top lid (terminal end.)
>>http://www.killacycle.com/photos/aircraft-battery/Prototype1InVan.JPG
>>
>>
>>We have been racing these cells in the KillaCycle for about a year,
>>so we know _all_ about them.
>><http://www.KillaCycle.com"http://www.KillaCycle.com>http://www.KillaCy
cle.c
>>om (Be sure to
>>watch the movie clip.)
>>
>>
>>
>>We figured that most folks would want a battery that had the
cranking
>>amps to easily spin the starter and would not care much about the
a-hrs.
>>
>>The cost is directly proportional to the amp-hrs. If we were to go
to
>>16 amp-hrs (it's easy to do) the cost would go up to about $850. The
>>cranking amps would also go up in proportion too. Figure about $1
per
>>cranking amp, and about $50 per amp-hr and you won't be far off. The
>>steps are 2.3 a-hr and 120 cranking amp increments. You pick.
>>
>>This battery REALLY spins the starter in my GMC van. When I turn on
>>the key in the morning, the battery voltage is typically 13.4 volts
>>(instead of 12.8 volts.)
>>
>>Anyone in the Denver area that flies daily interested in flight
>>testing one of these? You would get to keep the battery and write
>>anything you want about it (good or bad) as long as it was truthful.
>>You would have to inspect it before and after each flight including
>>noting the voltage and the BMS indicator light status. You must sign
>>the usual liability waiver we are all now accustomed to of course.
:-)
>>
>>You need to isolate it from over and under voltage as much as you
>>would your present sealed lead-acid battery. I would suggest a
buzzer
>>connected to a door switch to warn you that you have left the master
>>on. You should also have a warning light on the panel for over and
>>under voltage. You should have these already.
>>
>>Keep in mind that this battery will withstand over and under
>>voltage. It just "wounds" it much like such mistreatment "wounds"
>>your present sealed lead-acid battery. This battery will take the
>>abuse without creating an additional hazard. Other, less safe, types
>>of Li-Ion batteries will do very bad things (like burst into flames)
>>if you subject them to abuse.
>>
>>You wouldn't want to use anything other than a warning
>>system for over and under voltage. This would cause a hazard greater
>>than letting the battery "take the abuse". There is no danger in
>>abusing the battery other than reducing its capacity for later use.
>>
>>To give you an idea of how tough these batteries are, we
>>routinely heat these up to 100 C (212 F) in the bike. We routinely
>>draw 50% more than their rated current. We routinely go below the
>>minimum voltage (briefly.) We have accidentally over charged some of
>>these cells. Yet, despite this abuse, we have never had to replace a
>>single one of the 880 cells in the bike.
>>
>>These are not the delicate Li-Ion cells that they put in
>>your laptop or cellphone.
>>
>>Bill Dube'
>>bike@KillaCycle.com
>>
>>
>>
>>posted by
>>John Schmidt
>>RV 6 slow build
>>St. Paul, MN
>>651 776 1717
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
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: pilot's family awarded $10.5M |
I just want to say again that since the list now has a browsable Web-based interface
(more like VAF), that lots of people whose messages go to the entire list,
are actually posting by way of the Web interface. This "problem" of people
getting messageson subjects they don't want, is only going to get worse as a result
of the invitation by Matt to begin "experiencing" the RV List via this interface.
Like it or not -- and Im not saying -- this results in two entirely
separate means of communicating for the "Web-based" folks vs the "e-mai-based"
folks.
I don't have an answer for this and it's not my job anyway. Just an alert that
perhaps folks should discuss this directly with Matt as we're only doing what
we were invited to do.
Thanks for your consideration.
Do not archive
(and this function has no purpose on the Web-interace)
BTW, if you want to see another example of the "disconnect" between the two interfaces.
Go to forums.matronics.com and take a look at your message.
Warm regards,
Bob
--------
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
RV Builder's Hotline (free!)
http://rvhotline.expercraft.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=93952#93952
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 |
|
Airtex has a link on their website.
http://www.artex.net/
Scroll down the page to the "121.5 MHz Phaseout, Future ELT Requirements
Announcement".
More info from AOPA. The March 2005 article is a bit dated on price and
availability of the 403MHz ELTs, but the background info is correct.
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/regulatory/elt.html
Steve
RV-6A
carlos wrote:
> Speaking of ELT's, I read yesterday that the older ELT will no longer
> exist as of 2009 and the newer 406 will be required. Anyone have a
> place I can get more info on this? I'm on the empennage now and will
> most likely not be finished until 09 or later.
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 |
|
Speaking of ELT's, I read yesterday that the older ELT will no longer
exist as of 2009 and the newer 406 will be required. Anyone have a place
I can get more info on this? I'm on the empennage now and will most
likely not be finished until 09 or later.
Carlos in AZ
RV7A
Satellite monitoring of 121.5 is scheduled to cease January 2009. All other
monitoring of the frequency will continue. As of now there is no FAA
requirement to replace old ELTs. Your chance of being found quickly without
satellite monitoring is poor though. The new ELTs are much more capable and
should significantly reduce the number of false alerts. Hopefully the
response to activation will be significantly more successful. It's up to us
to decide whether or not to upgrade our ELTs.
Dave
Flying 172/182
Building RV6
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 |
|
>Satellite monitoring of 121.5 is scheduled to cease January 2009. All other
>monitoring of the frequency will continue. As of now there is no FAA
>requirement to replace old ELTs. Your chance of being found quickly without
>satellite monitoring is poor though. The new ELTs are much more capable and
>should significantly reduce the number of false alerts. Hopefully the
>response to activation will be significantly more successful. It's up to us
>to decide whether or not to upgrade our ELTs.
>
>Dave
Correct. As of now, I know of no mandate to switch over to 406 MHz ELTs.
I do fly over desolate areas so I bought a McMurdo Fastfind Plus PLB which
in theory could be transmitting my actual location to S&R before I contact
terra firma. And they will know that it is me and then decide whether I am
worth
trying to rescue (just kidding).
Bottom line is that I do not count on the ELT.
If any term is unknown do a google search for the term.
Ron Lee
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: pilot's family awarded $10.5M |
ronlee(at)pcisys.net wrote:
> At 02:29 PM 2/8/2007, you wrote:
>
> If this judgment stands then giving that money to YE or Mother Teresa will mean
> nothing. The chilling effect on fly-ins may cause many to cease to exist.
>
> Ron Lee
Possibly. But this suit is five years old, I believe, so there should have been
some "chilling effect" just by the fact the parties have been fighting it for
5 years. I'd be interested what changes folks have noticed in the NW Fly-in since
it was filed. If there haven't been any as a result of the obvious threat
even prior to the ruling, I'm not sure it will have lasting implications.
I'll tell you one thing, though, having read the account of the gentleman who was
first on the scene, I'll make sure my preflights take twice as long as they
do now.
--------
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
RV Builder's Hotline (free!)
http://rvhotline.expercraft.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=93985#93985
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: | EI back-up Battery (was: battery update, Bill Dube) |
It should not be difficult for me to do. Such a battery would have
2.3 A-hrs, and would weigh less than a pound. What would the max
current draw be?
Bill D.
At 09:48 AM 2/9/2007, you wrote:
>Dear Bill,
>
>I like Dan's idea of a scaled down version of your big battery to be
>used exclusively for E.I. Backup. What would a 4 cell backup battery
>like this weigh? Rough cost estimate?
>
>Keep up the good work, as you sure are a true experimenter...
>
>Konrad
>Do not archive
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:billdube@killacycle.com>Bill Dube
>To: <mailto:rv-list@matronics.com>rv-list@matronics.com
>Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 4:29 PM
>Subject: Re: RV-List: battery update, Bill Dube
>
><<mailto:billdube@killacycle.com>billdube@killacycle.com>
>
>Sure, smaller is easy. The increments are 2.3 a-hrs and 120 cranking amps.
>
>The cells are 26650 size. That is, they are ~ 26 mm in diameter and
>~65 mm long. To make a battery that is nominally 12 volts, we put 4
>in series. We them parallel up as many as required to get the amp-hrs
>and cranking amps we need.
>
> We weld the tabs on with the cells side-by-side. We leave
>them in that configuration for the starting battery we are about to
>produce. If you want a slightly different shape, we can "unfold" the
>tabs to make some, or all, of the series cells stack end-to-end.
>Thus, we can make a battery that is as thin as 1 inch and 11 inches
>long, or 2 inches thick and 5 1/2 inches long. The width is set by
>the amp-hrs (and cranking amps). For each 2.3 amp-hrs, add another
>inch in width.
>
> The cost roughly scales with amp-hrs (and cranking amps)
>
>Bill Dube'
>
>
>At 07:42 AM 2/8/2007, you wrote:
> <<mailto:dan@rvproject.com>dan@rvproject.com>
> >
> >Bill,
> >
> >Cool stuff. How about an even smaller one capacity-wise? i.e. what
> >would a 6 amp-hour or so version look like footprint &
> >weight-wise? I ask about this in the context of providing a backup
> >for a dual electronic ignition setup.
> >
> >I keep having this fantasy that in a year or two when I want to
> >replace my mag with a 2nd Lightspeed, battery technology will hit a
> >point where I can plop a little RC battery pack sized dealie in
> >there. Essentially negligible weight & size, full functionality for
> >what I need for. Like I said, a fantasy...or is it?
> >
> >)_( Dan
> >do not archive
> >
> >----- Original Message ----- From: "john schmidt"
> <<mailto:jeschmidt@hotmail.com>jeschmidt@hotmail.com>
> >To: <<mailto:rv-list@matronics.com>rv-list@matronics.com>
> >Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 5:42 AM
> >Subject: RV-List: battery update, Bill Dube
> >
> >
> <<mailto:jeschmidt@hotmail.com>jeschmidt@hotmail.com>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>this is a recent post from the Flyrotary forum; I read it on
> >>another aviation-related list:
> >>
> >>>Homepage: <http://www.flyrotary.com/>http://www.flyrotary.com/
> >>>Archive and
> UnSub:
> <http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary>http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary
> >>
> >>Well, I said I was going to do it and we finally got the prototype built.
> >>
> >>We just built a 600 cranking amp, 11.5 A-hr, battery that weighs just
> >>3.7 pounds. I've been testing it in my GMC van for the past week here
> >>in the Denver Winter. It snaps the van right over every morning
> >>without a problem. The van cranks faster than it did with the
> >>standard lead-acid battery.
> >>
> >>It is smaller than the Odyssey 680 so it fit in the same battery box
> >>with a couple of foam blocks for spacers.
> >>The battery has four status LEDs that tell you the cell balancing
> >>electronics are working OK. We are using A123 Systems M1 cells with
> >>our own custom battery management electronics. The A123 Systems cells
> >>are proven to be the safest Li-Ion cells on the market. No problems
> >>with fires (like laptop cells) because the chemistry they use is
> >>completely different.
> >>
> >>The battery can be damaged by running it completely flat (like
> >>leaving the master on) and holding the battery below 8 volts for a
> >>long time. It can also be damaged by charging it over 15.0 volts. It
> >>will likely still function after such abuse, but it won't be nearly
> >>as good as it was originally. If you don't abuse it, it should last
> >>you for many years.
> >>
> >>I think we will be in production in about a month, maybe two.
> >>
> >>Specs:
> >>
> >>3.7 lbs
> >>600 cranking amps
> >>11.5 amp-hr
> >>Approximate maximum dimensions: 3" wide, 5" long, 7" tall (including
> >>terminals)
> >>Charging voltage = 13.8 to 15.0 volts (anywhere in this range is OK)
> >>Nominal voltage = 13.2 volts (Just a touch higher than your typical
> >>lead-acid, so it spins the starter a touch faster.)
> >>Cell cycle life rated at 2000 cycles (80% DOD, 90% capacity
> >>remaining) 10,000 cycles (80% DOD with 50% capacity remaining) @25 C
> >>Cell specs:
> >><<http://www.a123systems.com/html/products/ANR26650M1specs.pdf"htt
> p://www.a12>http://www.a123systems.com/html/products/ANR26650M1specs.pdf"http://www.a12>
>
> >>3systems.com/html/products/ANR26650M1specs.pdf>http://www.a123syst
> ems.com/ht
> >>ml/products/ANR26650M1specs.pdf
> >>
> >>Maintenance free
> >>No heavy metals (iron-phosphate type cells)
> >>
> >>At this time, we estimate the retail price will be $595. (Yeah, I
> >>know this is not cheap, but this is the state-of-the-art battery
> >>technology so the parts to make it are not cheap.)
> >>
> >>Here is a picture of the prototype. We have it in a clear Lexan case
> >>so we can keep an eye on it. The production battery will have a
> >>smaller opaque case with a clear top lid (terminal end.)
> >>http://www.killacycle.com/photos/aircraft-battery/Prototype1InVan.JPG
> >>
> >>
> >>We have been racing these cells in the KillaCycle for about a year,
> >>so we know _all_ about them.
> >><<http://www.KillaCycle.com"http://www.KillaCycle.com>http://www.K
> illaCycle.c>http://www.KillaCycle.com"http://www.KillaCycle.com>http://www.KillaCycle.c
> >>om (Be sure to
> >>watch the movie clip.)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>We figured that most folks would want a battery that had the cranking
> >>amps to easily spin the starter and would not care much about the a-hrs.
> >>
> >>The cost is directly proportional to the amp-hrs. If we were to go to
> >>16 amp-hrs (it's easy to do) the cost would go up to about $850. The
> >>cranking amps would also go up in proportion too. Figure about $1 per
> >>cranking amp, and about $50 per amp-hr and you won't be far off. The
> >>steps are 2.3 a-hr and 120 cranking amp increments. You pick.
> >>
> >>This battery REALLY spins the starter in my GMC van. When I turn on
> >>the key in the morning, the battery voltage is typically 13.4 volts
> >>(instead of 12.8 volts.)
> >>
> >>Anyone in the Denver area that flies daily interested in flight
> >>testing one of these? You would get to keep the battery and write
> >>anything you want about it (good or bad) as long as it was truthful.
> >>You would have to inspect it before and after each flight including
> >>noting the voltage and the BMS indicator light status. You must sign
> >>the usual liability waiver we are all now accustomed to of course. :-)
> >>
> >>You need to isolate it from over and under voltage as much as you
> >>would your present sealed lead-acid battery. I would suggest a buzzer
> >>connected to a door switch to warn you that you have left the master
> >>on. You should also have a warning light on the panel for over and
> >>under voltage. You should have these already.
> >>
> >>Keep in mind that this battery will withstand over and under
> >>voltage. It just "wounds" it much like such mistreatment "wounds"
> >>your present sealed lead-acid battery. This battery will take the
> >>abuse without creating an additional hazard. Other, less safe, types
> >>of Li-Ion batteries will do very bad things (like burst into flames)
> >>if you subject them to abuse.
> >>
> >>You wouldn't want to use anything other than a warning
> >>system for over and under voltage. This would cause a hazard greater
> >>than letting the battery "take the abuse". There is no danger in
> >>abusing the battery other than reducing its capacity for later use.
> >>
> >>To give you an idea of how tough these batteries are, we
> >>routinely heat these up to 100 C (212 F) in the bike. We routinely
> >>draw 50% more than their rated current. We routinely go below the
> >>minimum voltage (briefly.) We have accidentally over charged some of
> >>these cells. Yet, despite this abuse, we have never had to replace a
> >>single one of the 880 cells in the bike.
> >>
> >>These are not the delicate Li-Ion cells that they put in
> >>your laptop or cellphone.
> >>
> >>Bill Dube'
> >>bike@KillaCycle.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>posted by
> >>John Schmidt
> >>RV 6 slow build
> >>St. Paul, MN
> >>651 776 1717
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> ><======================
>Navigator
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List">http://www.matronics.nbsp;
>available via href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
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: | battery update, Bill Dube/now HotRod mag |
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Dube
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 6:29 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: battery update, Bill Dube/HotRod mag
Bill: My copy of HotRod magazine came today and page 33 has your story.
Nice picture, news and quotations. Congratulations. Well done.
Gordon Comfort
N363GC
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 |
|
If this is the wire whip antenna on a cone shaped rubber base, it might
be vulnerable to fatigue if mounted behind the canopy on a -4. I had one
break off at the top of the cone. It's pretty turbulent behind the canopy.
As to effectiveness, that's been debated before, but old style elt's are
statistically & demonstrably ineffective, anyway. The odds of it
actually activating when you need it, being heard, and anyone being able
to locate it before the battery runs down if it is heard are so bad that
any concern with mounting location seems pointless. My attitude is, put
it where it won't cause any drag & forget about it. Then get a personal
locater beacon with gps to actually be rescued. Get creative & put a
G-switch on it yourself if you want auto activation.
Charlie
Hopperdhh@aol.com wrote:
>
>
> Jerry,
>
> If you put the antenna inside the cabin, then it is essentially no longer an
> antenna. At least not a very effective one. If you want it to be a good
> antenna, on the turtle deck is the right place.
>
> If the antenna is about 1/4 wavelength (about 24 inches) then there is
> probably nothing in the base -- it is just an insulator. You can check this
with an
> ohmmeter. If it is shorter that 24 inches, then there is probably a loading
> coil in the base.
>
> Most RVers sacrifice the ability of the antenna to radiate and put it inside
> the cabin or even in the empennage fairing at the base of the vertical stab.
> I guarantee no one will here it more than 100 yards away if it is put there
> (at the base of the stab)!
>
> In my own case, I have the antenna in the baggage compartment mounted to one
> of the side ribs, and leaning toward the center of the free space there. In
> other words probably the best location inside the airplane. Once the ELT was
> accidentally left on for about 2 hours outdoors, and I never heard from anyone!
>
> Dan Hopper K9WEK
> RV-7A
>
>
> In a message dated 2/8/2007 9:38:58 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> jlisler@alltel.net writes:
>
> What is your current opinion of where the ELT antenna should be installed on
> an RV-4? My ACK ELT is mounted on the upper shelf of the baggage
> compartment. I am leaning toward mounting the antenna on the topside of the
> turtle deck right behind the canopy. If you have a snappy location that is
> better concealed I would like to know. The airplane is finished and this is
> one of the small details I have left to complete.
>
> Also, what does the large molded rubber base do on the ELT antenna? Is it a
> strain relief to keep the antenna from snapping off in the breeze at 200+
> MPH? Does it cover something up like a coil or what ever? I want to be able
> to trim this rubber off so I can possibly mount the antenna inside the
> cabin. However I do not want to destroy the antenna by sawing off something
> important.
>
> Jerry Isler
> Donalsonville, GA
> RV4 N455J
> Cessna C140A N9641A
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: re: Pilot's family awarded $10.5M |
Jeff Linebaugh wrote:
> I am thinking that perhaps we should get Matt Dralle to start a new
> list
>
> Title? re: Pilot's family awarded $10.5M-list
>
> Jeff Linebaugh
>
> jefflinebaugh@earthlink.net
>
I certainly agree, as I contribute yet more to this thread.
and do not archive does belong
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: Hinged fuse block tray |
In a message dated 02/09/2007 9:37:19 AM Central Standard Time,
smithhb@tds.net writes:
You dog,
I coulda sworn I saw breakers on your panel...
>>>>
One breaker only on alternator feed for OV crowbar per Aeroelectric Z-11.
Gimme a call for more info...
Woof!
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 |
|
One thing I have NOT seen mentioned yet Tom is the parts of the tail kit
that ARE pre-punched. When I bought my RV-6 tail kit late in 1996, one of
the things that made me nervous was the thought of having to line up the
hinges on the spars and get them drilled without having any of them move
around and cause problems mounting the rudder and elevators later. Much to
my surprise, Van's had started pre-punching some of the tail parts including
the rear spars and hinge brackets (and all the skins but not the ribs).
Made life a lot easier and...the rudder and elevators fit first time. The
point I'm getting to here is that the RV-4 and RV-6 tail kits were identical
back then so, if you bought an RV-4 tail kit made after they started
pre-punching then your life will be easier and things will fit perfectly
when you install the elevators and rudder.
I know, 100s of people have built RV-4/6 tail kits before the pre-punching
but, for me, I've had enough frustration with other things on the airplane.
I would hate to assemble a stabilizer only to find out the elevator hinges
bind. If this doesn't bother you then full speed ahead with the old kit.
Make sure there is no corrosion under the edges of plastic coating or on
parts still wrapped in paper and...that you can still remove the plastic
covering, I've heard of people leaving this on for years only to have real
problems getting it off. If you don't want the hassle of having to align
and drill the hinge brackets you should still be able to order the punched
spar and hinge brackets from Van's for $100 or so.
Jigging, aligning and drilling all those holes and making the Rocket mods is
going to be enough of a job (but you already knew that, you built a -6 after
all), just trying to make this part a little easier for you. Rockets are
awesome but, now that the RV-8 is ALL pre-punched I think that would be my
choice (RV-4 drawings are even cruder than the RV-6 ones and assembling an
RV-8 would be a whole lot less hassle than trying to decipher the hand drawn
blue prints and trying to use your imagination to fill in finishing details
that are now commonplace on the new CAD drawings that come with the
-7/8/9/10, but...it wouldn't have a 540 Lycoming under the cowl either). And
speaking of RV-8s, I'm pretty sure that when that kit first came out the
tail was basically an RV-4/6 tail with the exception of a small
counter-weight on the rudder which the -4/6 don't have. This may have
changed now with Van's quest to standardize tail kits on the RV-7/9 but
you'll have to ask them to make sure, otherwise you may also be able to use
the prepunched spars from an -8 if needed. If you're going to make a Rocket
you may want/need a counter-weighted rudder for flutter suppression anyway.
Dean Psiropoulos
RV-6A N197DM
Finishing wiring, electrical checkout
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tom & Cathy Ervin
> Subject: RV-List: RV-4 Tail Kit Advise
>
>I have located a 1989 Tail Kit with very little done
>at an excellent price. Question for RV-4 Builders: Are the 1989 kits
>less advanced than the newer ones? RV-4 kits appear to have made fewer
>advances.......pre drilled skins....QB, etc? Any reason other than
>corrosion to stay away from the 1989 tail kit?
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! --
|