---------------------------------------------------------- RV-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sun 09/14/08: 5 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 03:45 AM - Re: RV-8 Nylon Flap Bolt Interference... (Charles Kuss) 2. 04:58 AM - Re: Nosewheel Breakout Force (Carl Froehlich) 3. 02:52 PM - FAA Proposed Rule Changes (Jack Sparling) 4. 03:06 PM - Re: Fly above 8000 ft ? (K Klewin) 5. 04:57 PM - Re: FAA Proposed Rule Changes (Ralph Finch) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 03:45:05 AM PST US From: Charles Kuss Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-8 Nylon Flap Bolt Interference... Matt, My nylon blocks were so poorly made, that I decided to make a proper set of replacement pieces myself. I noted the same problem you did. I counter-bored the tops of my parts to allow the use of SHCS (socket head cap screws aka Allen head bolts) to retain the flap weldment. This eliminated the interference issue you have noted. Using the SHCSs also eases future maintenance of this assembly. Charlie Kuss PS Sorry, but I never took any photos of this mod. If needed, I suppose I could take a few. --- On Sat, 9/13/08, Matt Dralle wrote: > From: Matt Dralle > Subject: RV-List: RV-8 Nylon Flap Bolt Interference... > To: rv-list@matronics.com > Date: Saturday, September 13, 2008, 7:39 PM > Dear Listers, > > Have a look at the attached photo. The rear predrilled > holes for > mounting the flap weldment nylon blocks seems to interfere > with the > seatbelt attachment. Am I missing something here? The > blocks are > drilled according to the plans and the rear holes are > already drilled > and have the platenut installed. Do I just added some > washers above > and below and call it good? Seems hokey. Notching the > belt attach > also seems like a poor idea. > > Thanks, > > Matt Dralle > RV-8 #82880 N844RV ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 04:58:02 AM PST US From: "Carl Froehlich" Subject: RE: RV-List: Nosewheel Breakout Force Keep in mind you will need to tighten the nut again after the first few landings and takeoffs. Make sure you get grease throughout the nose fork. Carl Froehlich RV-8A (450 hrs) RV-10 (wings) -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian Meyette Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2008 7:12 PM Subject: RE: RV-List: Nosewheel Breakout Force IIRC, mine squished down quite a bit, but not completely flattened. Once you get the breakout force set, you drill the leg for a cotter pin Brian -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard E. Tasker Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2008 6:12 PM Subject: RV-List: Nosewheel Breakout Force --> I am installing my nosewheel (RV9A) and attempting to set the breakout force as specified in the construction manual. It seems that to get to the 14 ft-lbs (22 lbs side force) I have to crank the nut down so the two belleville washers are totally compressed! Is this correct? Second, the instructions say to temporarily safety the nut and move the fork back and forth to the stops. How are you supposed to safety the nut?? Is the fork leg supposed to be already drilled for a cotter pin? I have a reworked leg and it isn't. Thanks for your advice! Dick Tasker -- Please Note: No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however, that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced. -- Checked by AVG. 2:18 PM Checked by AVG. 2:18 PM ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 02:52:52 PM PST US From: "Jack Sparling" Subject: RV-List: FAA Proposed Rule Changes Just my thoughts, hope it helps others who might be in the process of writing. _____ 4002 Oakridge Drive Crestwood, KY 40014 September 14, 2008 Miguel L. Vasconcelos Production and Airworthiness Division AIR-200, Room 815 800 Independence Ave., SW Washington, D.C. 20591 Reference: Proposed Policy changes regarding Certification of Amateur Built Aircraft. Dear Mr. Vasconcelos; I am a recreational aviation pilot who has built a Van's Aircraft RV-10 metal airplane, which was an educational experience for my whole family. Building this aircraft took 13 months and 9 days with the help of my wife and teenage daughters building with me full time. It was certificated in 2006 and we have flown it together all over the U.S. I will be purchasing another kit and building an airplane in the near future and am very concerned about the changes to the future 51% construction rules. I do not see a need to change the rules as they stand. This proposal is the typical response that takes place when a small percentage of individuals blatantly disregard the rules. Those types of individuals will always exist and the new rules will not prohibit their disregard. In any society, there will always be those who cross the line and the new rules will not be an exception. Those individuals who tempt fate will ultimately sponsor new and more stringent rules. The result of which, typifies treatment of the symptom and not the disease. Enforcement is the real solution, as without it, those who suffer are the ones adhering to the rules. My primary concern is that the complexities of this new policy will place significant new burdens on amateur aircraft builders and make them reluctant to participate in a market that has become an industry phenomenon. Those of us who have followed the regulations as they stand today are concerned that the daunting task of producing an airworthy craft will become secondary to a bureaucratic nightmare. This would not be in the best interest of the overall experimental market. In my lifetime, I have never witnessed a government agency's intervention actually promote the advancement of the free enterprise system. In fact, there is a basic premise that I have observed in terms of absolutes and that is; regulation is not the friend of free enterprise. Has the FAA considered the negative economic impact that these regulations could induce? It wouldn't be the first time that regulation killed or crippled an entire industry. It should be self evident that the overregulated commercial side of this industry has experienced this crippling effect. This is the primary reason the experimental market has had so much success. I fear that your proposed rule changes could have a far reaching and devastating effect on this market segment, i.e. the vendors, suppliers, and their employees and families. Please give this point of view the consideration it deserves and don't fix it if it's not broken. The rules worked well when the industry was in its infancy, they should work just as well now that it has matured. You will no doubt receive hundreds if not thousands of letters voicing concerns about this issue. Many will attempt to espouse the virtues of their changes to your proposed rules as they have already conceded that these changes are coming whether we speak out or not. I am of the belief that you are of an open mind, otherwise you would not have solicited our input. I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to submit my comments on this proposed policy change. Very Truly Yours, Jack H Sparling, Jr. ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 03:06:25 PM PST US From: K Klewin Subject: Re: RV-List: Fly above 8000 ft ? I would guess there are some cheaper models out there.- I would also surm ise that larger distributerships probably get a better price than I current ly receive.- If you can find them cheaper (with case) I say buy it...I'm an RV'r.....I know how we all shop around for the best deal.....avgas is ex pensive...I sure don't blame anyone at all.-- - Thanks to those who have visited our site.- We have had a great year with our RV Flight Bags and will have a few more new bags online in the next fe w months.- Thanks for passing the word. - Happy Building/Flying... - Cheers, - Kurt www.bisonmountainbags.com bisonmountain@gmail.com --- On Sat, 9/13/08, Henry wrote: From: Henry Subject: Re: RV-List: Fly above 8000 ft ? On another aviation list they have been discussing cheap pulse oximeters. Here's a link to two of them. One is $58 and one is $69. I haven't tried either of them so I can't say they're better than the deal you can get from Kurt. But you can't beat the price. http://www.portablenebs.com/ascent.htm http://sedationresource.com/pilot.pdf Henry H. RV-7 N79994 (borrowed from time to time) K Klewin wrote: > If you do and are interested in flying at higher altitudes safely I > have been offered a great discount from our supplier on Checkmate > Pulse Oximeters. If enough folks (5-10) are interested we can get > these for $119.95. Sportys sells these for $169 so its a great price. > > I had my 6A up to 19,000 ft a few weeks ago and these Pulse Oximeters > are a great safety tool. > > Email me at: bisonmountain@gmail.com > to get on the list. Link to our > pulse oximeter webpage: > http://www.bisonmountainbags.com/checkmate.html We have lots of > other cool RV stuff if you have time to visit. Thanks. > > Kurt > www.bisonmountainbags.com > bisonmountain@gmail.com > > > > * > > * =0A=0A=0A ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 04:57:23 PM PST US From: "Ralph Finch" Subject: RE: RV-List: FAA Proposed Rule Changes >From VAF. I read the postings by Van and the EAA about the NPRM. Vans shows why he's the man and most of us just gawkers: "As always, name-calling and vague gripes serve no purpose other than to help convince the FAA that we are a bunch of idiots." * The proposed rule has nothing to do with accommodating pro-built planes, even though some of us, maybe including me, think that should be allowed. Probably the FAA would need a directive from Congress to address that. So no point in mentioning such potential accommodation in a response. * Van again: "Unless the FAA sees a serious safety reason, they will not re-evaluate existing kits that have previously been found to meet the major portion rule." So most of us are good now. Of course we can still comment for the sake of future kit designs, but I see no problem for future builders of today's kits. * Aside from some relatively minor changes for clarity, the only change I'd like to see is a further definition of "fabrication" and percentage: by time? by task? Unlike the EAA and others, I think the further refinement of what constitutes an amateur built aircraft is welcome, or at the very least, simply not a big deal. I find it very unlikely that a legitimate amateur builder now will not be legit with these new rules. It might be a little more onerous documenting one's work, but I think better logging of work is to the good. * My guess is that in addition to wanting to halt the blatant pro-building, the FAA wants to head off a potential future problem: well-meaning amateur builders getting more and more pre-fabbed parts until only assembly, not fabrication, is done. I think such concern is fair and even forward-thinking, contrary to some stereotyped responses here. Reply With Quote ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message rv-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/rv-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/rv-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.