Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:56 AM - Re: Relays used on Flap / Trim Motor Control (Steve Sampson)
2. 01:05 AM - Re: Relays used on Flap / Trim Motor Control (Paul Besing)
3. 03:05 AM - Re: VM1000 manifold pressure and CHT sensors - a formula (Kevin Horton)
4. 05:03 AM - Re: VM1000 manifold pressure and CHT sensors (Ralph E. Capen)
5. 05:46 AM - Almost An Emergency (Snow, Daniel A.)
6. 07:38 AM - Re: Almost An Emergency (Reuven Silberman)
7. 08:29 AM - Re: VM1000 manifold pressure and CHT sensors (Vanremog@aol.com)
8. 08:45 AM - Re: VM1000 manifold pressure and CHT sensors (Tim Bryan)
9. 08:49 AM - Re: Almost An Emergency (Rob Prior)
10. 10:24 AM - IO-390 test flight info (Travis Hamblen)
11. 07:31 PM - Re: VM1000 manifold pressure and CHT sensors - a formula (sarg314)
12. 07:57 PM - VM1000 parts (sarg314)
13. 08:21 PM - Re: VM1000 parts (Vanremog@aol.com)
14. 08:24 PM - Re: Almost An Emergency (rtitsworth)
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: Relays used on Flap / Trim Motor Control |
The relays I use are these and can be seen at
http://211.217.75.113/Promotion/PDF%20CATEGORY/Relays%20&%20Solenoids.pdf go
to page 41 and then look for part number 619-760. This is the Farnell
catalogue, not RS.
In the USA I think Farnell is called Newark. You will find the same part in
all the major catalogues, or B&C if you want to pay a lot more for the same
part.
Steve
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Relays used on Flap / Trim Motor Control |
Hopefully the other person in the other seat won't have their hand on the stick
while you are landing :-) I never had to worry about that, but yes, there are
other ways to wire it, but I wanted to keep it simple as I could, and even this
was alot of wiring.
Paul Besing
Doug Gray <dgra1233@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
Nice simple idea but don't hit both the up and down switches together!
You will pop your flap breaker.
Doug Gray
On Sun, 2007-09-09 at 21:38 -0700, Paul Besing wrote:
> Radio Shack sells many. I put a wiring diagram and the p/n is on
> there too. This is only one way to do it, and is for wiring two
> sticks on the flap circuit. There are other ways to skin that cat,
> like wire them so only one works at a time, etc, but this one worked
> out well for me.
>
> http://lacodeworks.com/besing/flap.htm
>
> Paul Besing
>
> Garey Wittich wrote:
>
> Greetings:
>
> Does anybody have a recommendation (Mfg, Part No.)
> for Relays that they have used to control the
> direction of the Flap and Trim (Az & Elev) Motors ???
>
> Thanks, to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
>
>
>
---------------------------------
Luggage? GPS? Comic books?
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.
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: VM1000 manifold pressure and CHT sensors - a formula |
On 9 Sep 2007, at 22:00, sarg314 wrote:
>
> I found an absolute air pressure calculator at the link below.
>
> http://www.csgnetwork.com/barcorrectthcalc.html
>
> When I fill in the numbers it gives me a 2.02 in. hg correction, so
> I have a 0.7 in. error, not a 2.7 in error.
I'm not sure this calculator does what you think it does. It seems
to calculate the sea level referenced barometric pressure, which is a
number that the meteorologists like, as it removes the effect of
elevation on the pressures they are analysing.
Look at the standard atmosphere calculator at:
http://www.digitaldutch.com/atmoscalc/
It will show you the pressure that would be present at 2200 ft
elevation, assuming you had a standard atmosphere.
If you want to correct for non-standard pressures, and you have
access to an altimeter setting from a local airport, look at:
http://wahiduddin.net/calc/calc_da.htm
It is really designed to calculate density altitude, so it won't run
unless you also input temperature and dew point. But, it also
displays absolute pressure, which is what your MP gauge is
reporting. The absolute pressure calculation is not affected by
temperature or dew point, so you can input any values for those
parametres.
Kevin
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: VM1000 manifold pressure and CHT sensors |
I have one of the early ones too. Initially Vision Microsystems was the best on
the market and their service was pretty good too. I had mine upgraded to the
RS232 connectors and the DPU was initially set up for the wrong fuel pressure
sender (but they shipped the correct sender). I got a great deal when I bought
it. It was completely installed - waiting for the rest of the project to
finish.
Since reading about their purchase by JPI (another can of worms itself) and their
dropping of support for the first and second generation units, I've decided
to remove it and install an AFS3400EM - it's now completely installed and I've
been parting out the VMS1000 parts to keep existing units running.
Ralph Capen
-----Original Message-----
>From: sarg314 <sarg314@comcast.net>
>Sent: Sep 9, 2007 6:33 PM
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: VM1000 manifold pressure and CHT sensors
>
>
>I have a VM1000 that has sat in a box for 6 years. VisionMicro (=JPI)
>tells me they have an inventory of VM1000 spare parts but are not going
>to maintain it any more. When those parts are gone, they're gone forever.
>
>I finally got the VM1000 installed and powered up. It was flaky until I
>reseated the 4 socketted DIP components in the main control box. I
>attribute that to sitting unused for so long (and maybe cheap sockets).
>Seems to come up reliably now, but shows 2 problems. The CHT3 is
>consistently 15 - 20 deg. low and the manifold pressure is about 2.5
>inches low. It reads 27.3 when the barometric pressure is 30.00. The
>M.P. sensor is a bellows type and can get stuck, so the tech at Vision
>Micro recommended I just run the engine a bit. Well, I'm a few months
>away from being able to do that and their inventory of spare parts is
>only getting smaller, so rather than wait, I hooked up a hose to it and
>actually blew into it gently. I was able to make it change +- 1 inch,
>so I don't think I did it any violence. But it still returns to 27.3 in.
>when I leave it be.
>
>There must be lots of people out there with experience with these
>things. Should I spend the $250 to buy a new MP sensor now, or wait
>until the engine is actually running and hope that all the vibration and
>pressure swings will get the thing working, OR that Vision Micro will
>still have sensors on the shelf?
>
>Since the CHT is a thermocouple, it is as likely that the failure is the
>amplifier circuit it is connected to as it is a bad thermocouple. I
>don't know anything about the innards of these things. What is the
>typical failure mode for a VM1000 temp. sensor? Is it the sensor itself
>or the circuitry reading it? All the other thermo probes seem OK.
>
>Thanks,
>--
>Tom Sargent, RV-6A, electrical system
>
>
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: | Almost An Emergency |
I had my first real scare yesterday as I was preparing to enter the 45
for a landing at our untowered field. A loud, irregular banging noise
broke the squelch on my headset mic. A quick glance at the engine
monitor showed everything normal. I couldn't see anything inside or
outside that could be making the noise, so I announced a straight-in and
used the "E" word (I couldn't think of those other two alternative
words). Expecting a landing gear or wheelpant problem, I squeaked a
landing and rolled out long. The noise stopped sometime during the
approach, but that didn't stop the sweating.
Back at the hanger, I began a thorough examination of the 9A's exterior,
really expecting a problem under the cowl. As I was finishing looking
at skins, I noticed some marks on the left wing root and fuselage side.
I had recently cleaned and polished the plane, and knew that I couldn't
have scuffed my shoes against it that much. As I rubbed the scuff
marks, my hand accidentally contacted the rubber wing root seal. The
seal easily rolled away from the fuselage skin, revealing the origin of
the loud noise.
Lesson from this experience? Fly early in the morning so no one hears
you inappropriately use the "E" word.
Daniel Snow
RV-9A, 70 Hours Flying
Do Not Archive
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: Almost An Emergency |
Daniel,
As a 10,000 CFII, ground school instructor and retired Air Traffic Controller you
used the E word in a very appropriate manner. By not using it and obtaining
the priority it gives the situation could turn into something much much worse.
Get the airplane on the ground and then sort it out. 99% percent of the time
the E word only generates paperwork. What I mean by this (and this is what
I teach in ground school) is that at towered airports where you have used the
E word, and the tower gives you priority handling, they usually get whom ever
is on duty from airport operations to get your name and nature of your emergency.
This information goes into the tower and airport operations logs. If emergency
vehicles were called out one of their members may want the same information
for their log. It's just paperwork. If YOU screwed up and shorted yourself
on fuel - your problem - not the airplanes, then there will be more than paperwork.
The emergency information does not get
passed to FSDO unless there has been an accident or a violation of FAR's. At
non-towered airports where the airport operator monitors the frequency the above
comments apply. Where the airport operator does not monitor the frequency it
would be hoped that our fellow pilots are monitoring and get out of your way.
Good job on handling your airplane and don't hesitate to use the E word again if
the situation warrants it.
Reuven Silberman
CFII
RV7A N7WT
I had my first real scare yesterday as I was preparing to enter the 45
for a landing at our untowered field. A loud, irregular banging noise
broke the squelch on my headset mic. A quick glance at the engine
monitor showed everything normal. I couldn't see anything inside or
outside that could be making the noise, so I announced a straight-in and
used the "E" word (I couldn't think of those other two alternative
words). Expecting a landing gear or wheelpant problem, I squeaked a
landing and rolled out long. The noise stopped sometime during the
approach, but that didn't stop the sweating.
Back at the hanger, I began a thorough examination of the 9A's exterior,
really expecting a problem under the cowl. As I was finishing looking
at skins, I noticed some marks on the left wing root and fuselage side.
I had recently cleaned and polished the plane, and knew that I couldn't
have scuffed my shoes against it that much. As I rubbed the scuff
marks, my hand accidentally contacted the rubber wing root seal. The
seal easily rolled away from the fuselage skin, revealing the origin of
the loud noise.
Lesson from this experience? Fly early in the morning so no one hears
you inappropriately use the "E" word.
Daniel Snow
RV-9A, 70 Hours Flying
Do Not Archive
"No pressure, no diamonds".
~Thomas Carlyle
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: VM1000 manifold pressure and CHT sensors |
In a message dated 9/9/2007 4:13:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
sarg314@comcast.net writes:
Thanks, I guess I'll have to swap CHT sensors. I don't like handling
those things - I keep expecting that stiff T.C. wire to fatigue and break.
I was looking for a "trouble shooting" section in the manual, but mine
doesn't have one. I didn't get anything else with the unit and their
web page has no downloads. How did you get yours?
==========================================
Tom-
I have a sheet of troubleshooting info for each of the instrument systems in
hard copy. I will happily fax it to you if you like.
N1GV (RV-6A, Flying 865hrs, O-360-A1A, C/S, Silicon Valley)
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: | VM1000 manifold pressure and CHT sensors |
Tom,
You are right it was once the one to have. I understood Mooney was putting
them in there certified planes. These were the reasons why I chose it. Too
bad it had to go down hill from there. Of course I purchased the UPS
slimline stack for my airplane also just before Garmin bought them out and
discontinued some of the product. I noticed the MX20 is now discontinued
also. It really sucked to have my stuff all discontinued even before my
airplane flew. It still works great however and I am enjoying it but would
like to see some updates (never will happen).
Tim
Do Not Archive
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-
> server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of sarg314
> Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 8:42 PM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: VM1000 manifold pressure and CHT sensors
>
>
> Tim:
> Thanks for relating your recent experiences. I'm afraid I'm
> "married" to the thing at this point. It's fully installed. These
> things seemed to be the way to go 5 or 10 years ago, but I guess they
> are quite dated now. The JPI buy out certainly doesn't help.
>
> Advice to other builders who aren't as far along as I am: Don't buy the
> expensive, complicated electronic stuff until you really have to in
> order to proceed. This stuff changes fast and gets smarter and more
> cost effective as time goes on. I bought the VM1000 because I was
> offered a good price just before a price hike was going to happen. Of
> course, I didn't think it was going to take me this long to finish the
> plane at that time, but that's a different problem.
>
> Tim Bryan wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Tom,
> >
> >Is this already all installed in your airplane? I have an original
> VM1000
> >and if it wasn't installed I would drop it like a rock. It would be a
> hard
> >decision because of what I spent for the system, but I would change mine
> out
> >even now if the sensors were compatible with something else.
> >
> >
> --
> Tom Sargent
>
>
>
>
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: Almost An Emergency |
On 7:37 2007-09-10 Reuven Silberman <pilots2@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The emergency
> information does not get passed to FSDO unless there has been an
> accident or a violation of FAR's. At non-towered airports where the
> airport operator monitors the frequency the above comments apply.
For what it's worth, up here in Canada *every* event, every Emergency, Pan,
Mayday, even a comment like "the engine sounds a little rough so i'm coming
back", all gets logged into a system called CADORS. That stands for Civil
Aviation Daily Occurrence Reporting System. The system is owned/maintained
by Transport Canada (Canada's FAA), and is drawn upon mostly for
statistical purposes. It's my understanding that every event is reviewed
by TC, but (similar to the US) only events where there was a safety concern
(or CAR violation) would be followed up on.
The system is public in that anyone can search it for events by a number of
fields. Aircraft registration isn't one of them, but the "notes" field is,
and frequently the controllers enter the registration there as part of
their narrative of events.
If anyone wants to look around:
<http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/SystemSafety/CADORS/menu.htm>
-Rob
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: | IO-390 test flight info |
I have received a bunch of requests for performance of my IO-390 from
Barrett Precision Engines. I'm not a professional test pilot, and the data
that follows was not meant to be a comparative analysis between ROP and LOP.
The data below is just to samples I took during a recent flight test. As
far as Barrett Precision Engines go, I would not buy an engine anywhere
else. I can call them at anytime and get on the spot advice and answers
from the top! Although I haven't needed any work or modifications, I know
that with a phone call they will 100% stand behind the engine and do
whatever needs to be done to make sure I am 100% satisfied. So I hope that
answers your questions about doing business with the Barrett family.
I started off with the Van's provided Niagara 20002A cooler, which is great
for a 160hp engine, not so great on 215 HP!! At 6.4 hours I upgraded to a
much beefier cooler, still mounted on the back of the baffles and everything
is just perfect! With the new oil cooler (Stewart Warner 10599R) I have NO
oil temp problems, everything is just perfect. I experimented with leaning
to best power setting and also LOP operation. LOP obviously results in MUCH
better operating conditions; I can dial the engine in to almost perfect
operating conditions! I have Airflow Performance fuel injection & Dynon
EFIS & EMS with CHT and EGT probes on all cylinders. I have always run
carbureted engines, so this ability to extremely fine-tune all the settings
to almost down to a degree of change is just amazing!
If you are looking at the performance numbers, keep in mind that with the
fairings installed I would get about 20 knots better performance on the
RV-7A. Below are the results:
*Test #1 (ROP):*
47 degrees F OAT @ altitude
8600 MSL
9590 Density Alt
155 knots corrected TAS (NO FAIRINGS AT ALL)
2410 RPM
21.2" MP
1485 was approx peak EGT
Peak EGT at this setting results in 8.8 GPH
I leaned to 50 degrees ROP which results in 10.3 GPH
CHTs were 391, 393, 408, 353
EGTs I didn't record EGTs for some reason
Oil temp 198F
Oil pressure 72
*Test #2 (LOP):*
52 degrees F OAT @ altitude
6280 MSL
7100 Density Alt.
144 corrected knots TAS (NO FAIRINGS AT ALL)
2300 RPM
23" MP
I leaned to 50 degrees F LOP which results in 8.7 GPH
CHTs were 366, 367, 369, 334
EGTs were 1435, 1410, 1412, 1423
Oil temp 185F
Oil pressure 72
Obviously I could run much higher power settings such as increasing the RPMs
up to 2600 or so at altitude, but I didn't have time to get into
experimenting with these settings very much. I did check, and at 6500 MSL
with 23" MP and 2700 RPM (very briefly) I saw 165 corrected KTAS (with no
fairings). The speeds all seem right, with fairings it looks like I will
see a top speed of 215MPH. But the beauty of the 390 is the climb!! I
climb out at 100 kts and usually see at least 2400 fpm. At best rate of
climb I would guess that I will see 3000 fpm, but I haven't got to that part
of the flight testing yet. Oil consumption seems okay, but I don't have
definitive results on that yet. After replacing the oil cooler at
6.4hours, I went ahead and changed the oil, so that I would have
pristine oil
that has never been ran at high oil temps. So far it looks like I have
burned/lost about 1/2 a quart after 3.5 hours of tach time. So probably
about 1/2 a quart in 4.2 hobbs hours or so, I'm thinking this is normal for
the break in period of the engine.
In the near future I will start doing some comparative testing and be a
little more scientific in the way I perform the test and record the data. I'll
report back with the more scientific data in the next couple weeks. In past
testing I was just happy to finally be flying, but now I want to answer a
bunch of my own questions about performance and do some apple to apple
comparisons of LOP/ROP for range and such. I hope this helps you guys on
the fence about the IO-390, if not keep your eyes open for my next data
sampling; it may cause you to take the IO-390 plunge!
Travis
RV-7A w/ 10.2 hours on the Hobbs!
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: VM1000 manifold pressure and CHT sensors - a formula |
Kevin:
The DigitalDutch link seems to give results for a standard
atmosphere though - it takes no baro input. It's computing for 29.92
inches Hg. The second link (wahiduddin, where'd they get THAT name?) is
just what I need. Thanks very much.
Kevin Horton wrote:
>
> I'm not sure this calculator does what you think it does. It seems
> to calculate the sea level referenced barometric pressure, which is a
> number that the meteorologists like, as it removes the effect of
> elevation on the pressures they are analysing.
>
> Look at the standard atmosphere calculator at:
>
> http://www.digitaldutch.com/atmoscalc/
>
> It will show you the pressure that would be present at 2200 ft
> elevation, assuming you had a standard atmosphere.
>
> If you want to correct for non-standard pressures, and you have
> access to an altimeter setting from a local airport, look at:
>
> http://wahiduddin.net/calc/calc_da.htm
>
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 |
|
I talked to the VM1000 parts guy gain today and he makes the situation
sound a bit better than I indicated in my previous email. He says they
intend to maintain a parts inventory for the old VM1000, unless some of
the parts become very diffcult to get or they are fored to order in
large quantities. Then they will drop a part.
Still it is hard to have much confidence that they will keep up this
minimal level of support. They could just change their minds at some
time in the future since the product line is a step-child at this point.
On the plus side he indicated that if I have a bad CHT probe, he would
swap it out for me even though my unit is 6 years old.
--
Tom Sargent, RV-6A.
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: VM1000 parts |
In a message dated 9/10/2007 7:58:49 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
sarg314@comcast.net writes:
Still it is hard to have much confidence that they will keep up this
minimal level of support. They could just change their minds at some
time in the future since the product line is a step-child at this point.
=========================================
It would be nice for the original VM1000 user community if JPI would at
least publish a listing of the manufacturer and part number of all "off the
shelf" (OTS) parts that they buy and resell as part of their system. Then we
could at least buy these non-proprietary items elsewhere if they stop carrying
them.
Anyone want to try and convince them to do this for the benefit of the
RV-List archives? If they don't want to do this, then maybe we can cobble a list
together from our users that have the parts in their possession, but not yet
installed. Just a thought for those of you that still have the parts
accessible.
For my part I am having their sender troubleshooting pages scanned from hard
copies I have and will post them to the archives as .pdfs.
N1GV (RV-6A, Flying 865hrs, O-360-A1A, C/S, Silicon Valley)
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: | Almost An Emergency |
I would't ever call loud banging an inappropriate use of the E word,
regardless of the root cause.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Snow, Daniel A.
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 8:44 AM
Subject: RV-List: Almost An Emergency
I had my first real scare yesterday as I was preparing to enter the 45
for a landing at our untowered field. A loud, irregular banging noise
broke the squelch on my headset mic. A quick glance at the engine
monitor showed everything normal. I couldn't see anything inside or
outside that could be making the noise, so I announced a straight-in and
used the "E" word (I couldn't think of those other two alternative
words). Expecting a landing gear or wheelpant problem, I squeaked a
landing and rolled out long. The noise stopped sometime during the
approach, but that didn't stop the sweating.
Back at the hanger, I began a thorough examination of the 9A's exterior,
really expecting a problem under the cowl. As I was finishing looking
at skins, I noticed some marks on the left wing root and fuselage side.
I had recently cleaned and polished the plane, and knew that I couldn't
have scuffed my shoes against it that much. As I rubbed the scuff
marks, my hand accidentally contacted the rubber wing root seal. The
seal easily rolled away from the fuselage skin, revealing the origin of
the loud noise.
Lesson from this experience? Fly early in the morning so no one hears
you inappropriately use the "E" word.
Daniel Snow
RV-9A, 70 Hours Flying
Do Not Archive
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! --
|