Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:27 AM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Richard Bibb)
2. 05:41 AM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (linn walters)
3. 06:34 AM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Russell Daves)
4. 07:40 AM - wing storage racks (Chris Hukill)
5. 08:01 AM - Odyssey and metal jackets (David McNeill)
6. 08:05 AM - akro ... was Re: Getting Trim System to work (linn walters)
7. 08:09 AM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Tim Olson)
8. 08:11 AM - Re: wing storage racks (Tim Olson)
9. 08:20 AM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Scott Schmidt)
10. 08:45 AM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (John W. Cox)
11. 08:46 AM - Re: DVD ()
12. 09:11 AM - Re: akro ... was Re: Getting Trim System to work (Rick)
13. 09:11 AM - Re: Falcon pitot tube (Warren Gretz)
14. 09:27 AM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Tim Olson)
15. 09:31 AM - Re: wing storage racks (Jim Combs)
16. 09:44 AM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Dan Checkoway)
17. 10:12 AM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (John W. Cox)
18. 10:14 AM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
19. 10:32 AM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Dan Checkoway)
20. 10:56 AM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Dan Checkoway)
21. 11:39 AM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
22. 12:16 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Rick)
23. 12:26 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Brandon Yost)
24. 12:27 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Tim Olson)
25. 12:52 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Dan Checkoway)
26. 01:16 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
27. 01:41 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Dan Checkoway)
28. 02:08 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
29. 02:20 PM - Re: wing storage racks (Russell Daves)
30. 02:36 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (John W. Cox)
31. 02:38 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Tim Olson)
32. 02:55 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Tim Dawson-Townsend)
33. 03:03 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Dan Checkoway)
34. 03:09 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Russell Daves)
35. 03:15 PM - Re: Aerobatic Forum?? (Russell Daves)
36. 03:23 PM - Re: Aerobatic Forum?? (Tim Dawson-Townsend)
37. 04:41 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Marcus Cooper)
38. 05:29 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Scott Schmidt)
39. 05:30 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Scott Schmidt)
40. 06:16 PM - Re: wing storage racks (bob.kaufmann)
41. 06:20 PM - Re: akro ... was Re: Getting Trim System to work (bob.kaufmann)
42. 06:29 PM - -10 akro .... was Re: Getting Trim System to work (linn walters)
43. 06:43 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (linn walters)
44. 07:07 PM - Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with aerobatics) (Kent Forsythe)
45. 07:25 PM - Re: Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with aerobatics) (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
46. 07:34 PM - Re: -10 akro .... was Re: Getting Trim System to work (bob.kaufmann)
47. 07:42 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Carl Franz)
48. 07:44 PM - Re: Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with aerobatics) (Tim Olson)
49. 07:46 PM - Re: -10 akro .... was Re: Getting Trim System to work (bob.kaufmann)
50. 07:46 PM - Re: Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with (Rick)
51. 07:48 PM - Re: -10 akro .... was Re: Getting Trim System to work (Rick)
52. 07:56 PM - Re: Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with (Rick)
53. 07:57 PM - Re: -10 akro .... was Re: Getting Trim System to work (Rick)
54. 08:02 PM - Re: Getting Trim System to work (Rick)
55. 08:06 PM - Re: Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with aerobatics) (Indran Chelvanayagam)
56. 09:00 PM - Re: Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with aerobatics) (Deems Davis)
57. 09:23 PM - Re: Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with aerobatics) (Tim Olson)
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: Getting Trim System to work |
I don't know specifically on the RV-10 but I doubt the 2 degree difference will
make any difference as full trim deflection will likely never be needed.
----- Original Message -----
From: Lorenz Malmstr=F6m
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 2:29 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
Hi Guys
I have been trying to get the trim system to work - with limited success. My
best effort is 33=B0 down - instead of the 35=B0 required (right side). The 'up'-travel
is 27=B0 - the required amount is not even mentioned in the plans. I
don't get both sides aligned in the 0=B0 position. I have checked the plans several
times and can't find any 'builder induced' error.
From those of you that have gone through this process I'd like to know if you
had similar experiences and if so what the solution was.
Does anybody know the deflections? For a potentially nose heavy plane I'd rather
know the exact up position than the down position.
Thanks in advance
Lorenz Malmstr=F6m
40280 Wings (& Trim System)
http://www.malmstrom.ch/RV10.htm
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: Getting Trim System to work |
Richard Bibb wrote:
> I don't know specifically on the RV-10 but I doubt the 2 degree
> difference will make any difference as full trim deflection will
> likely never be needed.
Needed? Probably not, but it surely will tighten up the loop. Sorry, I
just couldn't resist. :-)
For those that are humourously challenged, that's a joke. But, I'm sure
somebody will loop it and roll it. :-( Trust me. ;-)
Linn
do not archive
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Lorenz Malmstrm <mailto:lm@viscomvisual.com>
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 2:29 AM
> Subject: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>
> Hi Guys
>
>
>
> I have been trying to get the trim system to work - with limited
> success. My best effort is 33 down - instead of the 35 required
> (right side). The 'up'-travel is 27 - the required amount is not
> even mentioned in the plans. I don't get both sides aligned in the
> 0 position. I have checked the plans several times and can't find
> any 'builder induced' error.
>
>
>
> From those of you that have gone through this process I'd like to
> know if you had similar experiences and if so what the solution was.
>
>
>
> Does anybody know the deflections? For a potentially nose heavy
> plane I'd rather know the exact up position than the down position.
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance
>
>
>
> Lorenz Malmstrm
>
> 40280 Wings (& Trim System)
>
> http://www.malmstrom.ch/RV10.htm
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Getting Trim System to work |
I know of at least one Texas RV-10 builder and one Nevada RV-10 builder who will
loop and roll their RV-10's when finished.
----- Original Message -----
From: linn walters
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 7:44 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
Richard Bibb wrote:
I don't know specifically on the RV-10 but I doubt the 2 degree difference
will make any difference as full trim deflection will likely never be needed.
Needed? Probably not, but it surely will tighten up the loop. Sorry, I just
couldn't resist. :-)
For those that are humourously challenged, that's a joke. But, I'm sure somebody
will loop it and roll it. :-( Trust me. ;-)
Linn
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Lorenz Malmstr=F6m
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 2:29 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
Hi Guys
I have been trying to get the trim system to work - with limited success.
My best effort is 33=B0 down - instead of the 35=B0 required (right side). The
'up'-travel is 27=B0 - the required amount is not even mentioned in the plans.
I don't get both sides aligned in the 0=B0 position. I have checked the plans
several times and can't find any 'builder induced' error.
From those of you that have gone through this process I'd like to know if
you had similar experiences and if so what the solution was.
Does anybody know the deflections? For a potentially nose heavy plane I'd
rather know the exact up position than the down position.
Thanks in advance
Lorenz Malmstr=F6m
40280 Wings (& Trim System)
http://www.malmstrom.ch/RV10.htm
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: | wing storage racks |
I am preparing to accept delivery of my quickbuild wings and fuselage. Does anyone
have plans for a storage rack for the wings? I need them to sit on the leading
edges, on a rolling rack. Pictures and dimensions of the wings would be helpful.
Thanx in advance.
Chris Hukill (working on rudder)
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: | Odyssey and metal jackets |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "David McNeill" <dlm46007@cox.net>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Reservepower" <YISTATIONARY@enersys.com>
Subject: RE: Visitor Comments
Good Morning,
Here are the operating temps:
With jacket: -40 degrees F to 176 degrees F
Without jacket: -40 F to 113 F
Thank you
John Edwards
-----Original Message-----
From: dlm46007@cox.net [mailto:dlm46007@cox.net]
Subject: Visitor Comments
McNeill
Country: USA
Phone:
Fax:
Comments
what are the operating temperatures for the Odyssey 680 with and without
metal jacket?
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: Getting Trim System to work |
Russell Daves wrote:
> I know of at least one Texas RV-10 builder and one Nevada RV-10
> builder who will loop and roll their RV-10's when finished.
I am sorry to hear that. Don't get me wrong, if properly done there
shouldn't be any problem. The big words here are 'properly done'. And
why stop at loops and rolls? Why not go for other akro maneuvers.
After all, the loops and rolls were surviveable. That was sarcasm, for
those that didn't catch it. I do akro in my Pitts. It's why I have
it. I'll do cross countries in my RV-10. That's why I'm going to build
it. Many years ago I did akro in a utility category airplane. Now I'm
a little older and a little wiser. I'm also still here. I also know a
Nevada builder that said the same thing (may be the same guy). His
choice, and we live in a free society. I don't agree with him, but I'm
not going make it an issue. I just hope they do not show up on my NTSB
page.
Linn
do not archive .....
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: linn walters <mailto:lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 7:44 AM
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>
> Richard Bibb wrote:
>
>> I don't know specifically on the RV-10 but I doubt the 2 degree
>> difference will make any difference as full trim deflection will
>> likely never be needed.
>
> Needed? Probably not, but it surely will tighten up the loop.
> Sorry, I just couldn't resist. :-)
> For those that are humourously challenged, that's a joke. But,
> I'm sure somebody will loop it and roll it. :-( Trust me. ;-)
> Linn
> do not archive
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Lorenz Malmstrm <mailto:lm@viscomvisual.com>
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 2:29 AM
>> Subject: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>>
>> Hi Guys
>>
>> I have been trying to get the trim system to work - with
>> limited success. My best effort is 33 down - instead of the
>> 35 required (right side). The 'up'-travel is 27 - the
>> required amount is not even mentioned in the plans. I don't
>> get both sides aligned in the 0 position. I have checked the
>> plans several times and can't find any 'builder induced' error.
>>
>> From those of you that have gone through this process I'd
>> like to know if you had similar experiences and if so what
>> the solution was.
>>
>> Does anybody know the deflections? For a potentially nose
>> heavy plane I'd rather know the exact up position than the
>> down position.
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>>
>> Lorenz Malmstrm
>>
>> 40280 Wings (& Trim System)
>>
>> http://www.malmstrom.ch/RV10.htm
>>
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: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
I plan to, at the end of the fly-off, roll mine, and record some
entry speed data to add to my operating limitations, to at least
make it a documented item. I'm not too interested in looping
it though, just a basic positive G roll. There's no reason
why the -10 should not be able to do this nicely....if you've
never seen Tex Johnsons Boeing 707 roll, you'll understand.
Tim
Russell Daves wrote:
> I know of at least one Texas RV-10 builder and one Nevada RV-10 builder
> who will loop and roll their RV-10's when finished.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* linn walters <mailto:lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 18, 2005 7:44 AM
> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>
> Richard Bibb wrote:
>
>> I don't know specifically on the RV-10 but I doubt the 2 degree
>> difference will make any difference as full trim deflection will
>> likely never be needed.
>
> Needed? Probably not, but it surely will tighten up the loop.
> Sorry, I just couldn't resist. :-)
> For those that are humourously challenged, that's a joke. But, I'm
> sure somebody will loop it and roll it. :-( Trust me. ;-)
> Linn
> do not archive
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Lorenz Malmstrm <mailto:lm@viscomvisual.com>
>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 18, 2005 2:29 AM
>> *Subject:* RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>>
>> Hi Guys
>>
>> I have been trying to get the trim system to work with
>> limited success. My best effort is 33 down instead of the
>> 35 required (right side). The up-travel is 27 - the
>> required amount is not even mentioned in the plans. I dont
>> get both sides aligned in the 0 position. I have checked the
>> plans several times and cant find any builder induced error.
>>
>> From those of you that have gone through this process Id like
>> to know if you had similar experiences and if so what the
>> solution was.
>>
>> Does anybody know the deflections? For a potentially nose
>> heavy plane Id rather know the exact up position than the
>> down position.
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>>
>> Lorenz Malmstrm
>>
>> 40280 Wings (& Trim System)
>>
>> http://www.malmstrom.ch/RV10.htm
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: wing storage racks |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Chris,
Go here: http://www.myrv10.com/tips/wingtips.html
I cobbled up someone elses design, and then if you look towards
the bottom of that page, Larry Rosen #356 even took my info
and improved on it and did a great write-up.
It's cheap and easy.
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
Current project: Doors/Windows
Chris Hukill wrote:
> I am preparing to accept delivery of my quickbuild wings and fuselage.
> Does anyone have plans for a storage rack for the wings? I need them to
> sit on the leading edges, on a rolling rack. Pictures and dimensions of
> the wings would be helpful. Thanx in advance.
> Chris Hukill (working on rudder)
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: | Getting Trim System to work |
Make sure you include one Utah builder too!!!
Even though it is a four seater, it's still an RV.
Scott Schmidt
sschmidt@ussynthetic.com
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Russell Daves
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
I know of at least one Texas RV-10 builder and one Nevada RV-10 builder who will
loop and roll their RV-10's when finished.
----- Original Message -----
From: linn walters <mailto:lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 7:44 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
Richard Bibb wrote:
=09
=09
I don't know specifically on the RV-10 but I doubt the 2 degree difference
will make any difference as full trim deflection will likely never be needed.
Needed? Probably not, but it surely will tighten up the loop. Sorry,
I just couldn't resist. :-)
Linn
do not archive
=09
=09
----- Original Message -----
From: Lorenz Malmstr=F6m <mailto:lm@viscomvisual.com>
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 2:29 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
Hi Guys
I have been trying to get the trim system to work - with limited
success. My best effort is 33=B0 down - instead of the 35=B0 required (right
side). The 'up'-travel is 27=B0 - the required amount is not even mentioned in
the plans. I don't get both sides aligned in the 0=B0 position. I have checked
the plans several times and can't find any 'builder induced' error.
From those of you that have gone through this process I'd like
to know if you had similar experiences and if so what the solution was.
Does anybody know the deflections? For a potentially nose heavy
plane I'd rather know the exact up position than the down position.
Thanks in advance
Lorenz Malmstr=F6m
40280 Wings (& Trim System)
http://www.malmstrom.ch/RV10.htm
=09
=09
=09
=09
________________________________
=09
________________________________
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: | Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
Never seeing it doesn't help. It's the "Seeing is believing" that does.
His son (Mr. Johnson that is) mentioned that the maneuver was practiced for days
before SeaFair. Just done off the Straits of Juan DeFuca (out of prying eyes)
so it looked spontaneous. Oh how those marketing guys can manipulate us little
kids.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
I plan to, at the end of the fly-off, roll mine, and record some
entry speed data to add to my operating limitations, to at least
make it a documented item. I'm not too interested in looping
it though, just a basic positive G roll. There's no reason
why the -10 should not be able to do this nicely....if you've
never seen Tex Johnsons Boeing 707 roll, you'll understand.
Tim
Russell Daves wrote:
> I know of at least one Texas RV-10 builder and one Nevada RV-10 builder
> who will loop and roll their RV-10's when finished.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* linn walters <mailto:lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 18, 2005 7:44 AM
> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>
> Richard Bibb wrote:
>
>> I don't know specifically on the RV-10 but I doubt the 2 degree
>> difference will make any difference as full trim deflection will
>> likely never be needed.
>
> Needed? Probably not, but it surely will tighten up the loop.
> Sorry, I just couldn't resist. :-)
> For those that are humourously challenged, that's a joke. But, I'm
> sure somebody will loop it and roll it. :-( Trust me. ;-)
> Linn
> do not archive
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Lorenz Malmstrm <mailto:lm@viscomvisual.com>
>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 18, 2005 2:29 AM
>> *Subject:* RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>>
>> Hi Guys
>>
>> I have been trying to get the trim system to work - with
>> limited success. My best effort is 33 down - instead of the
>> 35 required (right side). The 'up'-travel is 27 - the
>> required amount is not even mentioned in the plans. I don't
>> get both sides aligned in the 0 position. I have checked the
>> plans several times and can't find any 'builder induced' error.
>>
>> From those of you that have gone through this process I'd like
>> to know if you had similar experiences and if so what the
>> solution was.
>>
>> Does anybody know the deflections? For a potentially nose
>> heavy plane I'd rather know the exact up position than the
>> down position.
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>>
>> Lorenz Malmstrm
>>
>> 40280 Wings (& Trim System)
>>
>> http://www.malmstrom.ch/RV10.htm
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Saw this $655 DVD/CD/MP3 that looks pretty nice:
http://www.flightdisplay.com/products_av.html
FAA/PMA approved and plays world-wide DVDs . . .
TDT
40025
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: Getting Trim System to work |
DNA: do not archive
Its-Bogus: do not forward to list - No Plain-Text Section
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
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: Falcon pitot tube |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Warren Gretz <warrengretz@gretzaero.com>
Hello:
This is Warren's wife - I think I can answer this question for you guys (Warren
is on a run to town to get more metal to make mounting brackets). Its because
of the high wages he pays me. Ha! Seriously, the heated pitot tubes are VERY
work intensive and it takes a lot of time to make just one, even with both of
us sharing the work. There are two circuit boards that we have to populate
and there are numerous steps to complete just one pitot, plus some of the components
are fairly pricey. Because Warren wants each pitot to leave the shop working
perfectly, also factor in checking it all out. The unheated pitot is just
that - no extra circuit boards/wires/soldering, etc. and once the pitot is
back from the molding company, we don't have to do hardly anything to it.
Hope this helps explain the cost difference.
Jan Mutchler (populating circuit boards in my retirement)
---- Dj Merrill <deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Dj Merrill <deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu>
>
>
> > The price for heated is $425 and the price for unheated is $125.
>
> Just curious because I don't know about these things.
> What makes the heating part of the pitot so expensive?
>
> -Dj
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Warren Gretz
Gretz Aero
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
I stuck a copy of the video in .wmv format out at:
http://www.myrv10.com/files/videos/707JohnsonRoll.wmv
if people want to see what we're talking about.
Tim
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
DO NOT ARCHIVE
John W. Cox wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
>
> Never seeing it doesn't help. It's the "Seeing is believing" that does.
>
> His son (Mr. Johnson that is) mentioned that the maneuver was practiced for days
before SeaFair. Just done off the Straits of Juan DeFuca (out of prying eyes)
so it looked spontaneous. Oh how those marketing guys can manipulate us
little kids.
>
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 8:09 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>
>
> I plan to, at the end of the fly-off, roll mine, and record some
> entry speed data to add to my operating limitations, to at least
> make it a documented item. I'm not too interested in looping
> it though, just a basic positive G roll. There's no reason
> why the -10 should not be able to do this nicely....if you've
> never seen Tex Johnsons Boeing 707 roll, you'll understand.
> Tim
>
>
>
> Russell Daves wrote:
>
>>I know of at least one Texas RV-10 builder and one Nevada RV-10 builder
>>who will loop and roll their RV-10's when finished.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* linn walters <mailto:lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 18, 2005 7:44 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>>
>> Richard Bibb wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I don't know specifically on the RV-10 but I doubt the 2 degree
>>> difference will make any difference as full trim deflection will
>>> likely never be needed.
>>
>> Needed? Probably not, but it surely will tighten up the loop.
>> Sorry, I just couldn't resist. :-)
>> For those that are humourously challenged, that's a joke. But, I'm
>> sure somebody will loop it and roll it. :-( Trust me. ;-)
>> Linn
>> do not archive
>>
>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> *From:* Lorenz Malmstrm <mailto:lm@viscomvisual.com>
>>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 18, 2005 2:29 AM
>>> *Subject:* RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>>>
>>> Hi Guys
>>>
>>> I have been trying to get the trim system to work - with
>>> limited success. My best effort is 33 down - instead of the
>>> 35 required (right side). The 'up'-travel is 27 - the
>>> required amount is not even mentioned in the plans. I don't
>>> get both sides aligned in the 0 position. I have checked the
>>> plans several times and can't find any 'builder induced' error.
>>>
>>> From those of you that have gone through this process I'd like
>>> to know if you had similar experiences and if so what the
>>> solution was.
>>>
>>> Does anybody know the deflections? For a potentially nose
>>> heavy plane I'd rather know the exact up position than the
>>> down position.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance
>>>
>>> Lorenz Malmstrm
>>>
>>> 40280 Wings (& Trim System)
>>>
>>> http://www.malmstrom.ch/RV10.htm
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: wing storage racks |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Jim Combs" <jimc@mail.infra-read.com>
Chris,
The stands documented on Tim's web site are great. Additionally I added a piece
of plywood on the 2x4 box at the end holding the inboard spar ends to make it
more rigid. A diagonal would work well too if you don't have any spare plywood
around.
Jim Combs
#40192
N312F
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Chris,
Go here: http://www.myrv10.com/tips/wingtips.html
I cobbled up someone elses design, and then if you look towards
the bottom of that page, Larry Rosen #356 even took my info
and improved on it and did a great write-up.
It's cheap and easy.
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
Current project: Doors/Windows
Chris Hukill wrote:
> I am preparing to accept delivery of my quickbuild wings and fuselage.
> Does anyone have plans for a storage rack for the wings? I need them to
> sit on the leading edges, on a rolling rack. Pictures and dimensions of
> the wings would be helpful. Thanx in advance.
> Chris Hukill (working on rudder)
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: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
> I plan to, at the end of the fly-off, roll mine, and record some
> entry speed data to add to my operating limitations, to at least
> make it a documented item. I'm not too interested in looping
> it though, just a basic positive G roll. There's no reason
> why the -10 should not be able to do this nicely....if you've
> never seen Tex Johnsons Boeing 707 roll, you'll understand.
Wow, you're so cool...
Gee, may as well expand the airspeed envelope well past Vne while you're at
it. And spin it a few times. Are you prepared for both possibilities,
either getting too slow and spinning out of the top of the roll, or blasting
past Vne as the nose drops and the roll rate is too slow to get you level
again?
And then there's overstressing it. That nose is gonna drop on you in the
roll, and you'll be wanging the stick over to get the nose up and pulling
the nose back through the last half of the roll to keep it from dropping too
sharply. You'll be twisting the crap out of those long wings.
You are talking about doing things the designer doesn't approve of. Not
saying it can't be done safely, but seriously consider your own experience
as a test pilot when you start rattling off names like Tex Johnson.
And your point about adding it to your operating limitations? What are you
talking about? Your operating limitations are issued by the FAA/DAR...it's
not like you can just "add" something to it on your own. I assume maybe
you're talking about the airframe logbook entry describing the aerobatic
maneuvers that were performed during Phase I -- or did you even know that
there is such a logbook entry required? Or are you talking about your
operating handbook?
Regardless, by adding any "suggestion" of the possibility of aerobatic
maneuvers being "OK" in your airplane, then you open a serious can of worms
if you ever sell that plane. You basically *enable* the buyer to do those
maneuvers. Is that a liability you're willing to extend?
REALITY CHECK!!! You are not building an aerobatic airplane. Give Van's a
call and see what they have to say about your plan.
do not archive
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.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: | Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
Dan, just a question for the group. Are you saying your engine, cowl
and ramair system are stock "Van approved" inclusions?
I was impressed that you went off the reservation just a little before
doing that flight to 20,000MSL back on April 3rd. I wasn't clear on the
thought behind some of your maneuvers in the Lycoming IO-360-A1A. I
thought some of your maneuvers would require an AEIO IO-360 to stay on
the reservation.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
> I plan to, at the end of the fly-off, roll mine, and record some
> entry speed data to add to my operating limitations, to at least
> make it a documented item. I'm not too interested in looping
> it though, just a basic positive G roll. There's no reason
> why the -10 should not be able to do this nicely....if you've
> never seen Tex Johnsons Boeing 707 roll, you'll understand.
Wow, you're so cool...
Gee, may as well expand the airspeed envelope well past Vne while you're
at
it. And spin it a few times. Are you prepared for both possibilities,
either getting too slow and spinning out of the top of the roll, or
blasting
past Vne as the nose drops and the roll rate is too slow to get you
level
again?
And then there's overstressing it. That nose is gonna drop on you in
the
roll, and you'll be wanging the stick over to get the nose up and
pulling
the nose back through the last half of the roll to keep it from dropping
too
sharply. You'll be twisting the crap out of those long wings.
You are talking about doing things the designer doesn't approve of. Not
saying it can't be done safely, but seriously consider your own
experience
as a test pilot when you start rattling off names like Tex Johnson.
And your point about adding it to your operating limitations? What are
you
talking about? Your operating limitations are issued by the
FAA/DAR...it's
not like you can just "add" something to it on your own. I assume maybe
you're talking about the airframe logbook entry describing the aerobatic
maneuvers that were performed during Phase I -- or did you even know
that
there is such a logbook entry required? Or are you talking about your
operating handbook?
Regardless, by adding any "suggestion" of the possibility of aerobatic
maneuvers being "OK" in your airplane, then you open a serious can of
worms
if you ever sell that plane. You basically *enable* the buyer to do
those
maneuvers. Is that a liability you're willing to extend?
REALITY CHECK!!! You are not building an aerobatic airplane. Give
Van's a
call and see what they have to say about your plan.
do not archive
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
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: | Getting Trim System to work |
And while your at it ask Van's what they think about building an IFR platform.
Bit of an over reaction there Dan. Let me guess, you feel strongly about this
subject for some reason. Don't forget, we all do things the designer doesn't
approve of. Like fly RV's in IFR which I believe you are also guilty of.
These are experimental aircraft as I recall. Listing valid reasons for not doing
a roll, as you did, is good, ranting about it doesn't get us anywhere.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 wing ribs
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
> I plan to, at the end of the fly-off, roll mine, and record some entry
> speed data to add to my operating limitations, to at least make it a
> documented item. I'm not too interested in looping it though, just a
> basic positive G roll. There's no reason why the -10 should not be
> able to do this nicely....if you've never seen Tex Johnsons Boeing 707
> roll, you'll understand.
Wow, you're so cool...
Gee, may as well expand the airspeed envelope well past Vne while you're at it.
And spin it a few times. Are you prepared for both possibilities, either getting
too slow and spinning out of the top of the roll, or blasting past Vne as
the nose drops and the roll rate is too slow to get you level again?
And then there's overstressing it. That nose is gonna drop on you in the roll,
and you'll be wanging the stick over to get the nose up and pulling the nose
back through the last half of the roll to keep it from dropping too sharply.
You'll be twisting the crap out of those long wings.
You are talking about doing things the designer doesn't approve of. Not saying
it can't be done safely, but seriously consider your own experience as a test
pilot when you start rattling off names like Tex Johnson.
And your point about adding it to your operating limitations? What are you talking
about? Your operating limitations are issued by the FAA/DAR...it's not like
you can just "add" something to it on your own. I assume maybe you're talking
about the airframe logbook entry describing the aerobatic maneuvers that
were performed during Phase I -- or did you even know that there is such a logbook
entry required? Or are you talking about your operating handbook?
Regardless, by adding any "suggestion" of the possibility of aerobatic maneuvers
being "OK" in your airplane, then you open a serious can of worms if you ever
sell that plane. You basically *enable* the buyer to do those maneuvers. Is
that a liability you're willing to extend?
REALITY CHECK!!! You are not building an aerobatic airplane. Give Van's a call
and see what they have to say about your plan.
do not archive
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.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: | Re: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
John,
I do only *positive* G aerobatics. I don't have inverted oil. Not sure
what you're referring to.
Regarding my engine, cowl, and ram air system...I'm using a Lycoming
IO-360-A1B6 engine, which is among the list of powerplants Van's does
approve for the RV-7. In fact it's the same engine in the RV-7 (now RV-7A)
factory demonstrator. I'm using the identical Hartzell prop that they use
on that plane.
My intake air system is exactly what Van's specs out in the plans (identical
to the factory demonstrator), with the exception of the ram air setup. I
don't personally consider that modification to be on the same level of
seriousness as somebody looping or rolling an RV-10!!! Maybe that's just
me.
do not archive
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
>
> Dan, just a question for the group. Are you saying your engine, cowl
> and ramair system are stock "Van approved" inclusions?
>
> I was impressed that you went off the reservation just a little before
> doing that flight to 20,000MSL back on April 3rd. I wasn't clear on the
> thought behind some of your maneuvers in the Lycoming IO-360-A1A. I
> thought some of your maneuvers would require an AEIO IO-360 to stay on
> the reservation.
>
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 9:44 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
>
>> I plan to, at the end of the fly-off, roll mine, and record some
>> entry speed data to add to my operating limitations, to at least
>> make it a documented item. I'm not too interested in looping
>> it though, just a basic positive G roll. There's no reason
>> why the -10 should not be able to do this nicely....if you've
>> never seen Tex Johnsons Boeing 707 roll, you'll understand.
>
> Wow, you're so cool...
>
> Gee, may as well expand the airspeed envelope well past Vne while you're
> at
> it. And spin it a few times. Are you prepared for both possibilities,
> either getting too slow and spinning out of the top of the roll, or
> blasting
> past Vne as the nose drops and the roll rate is too slow to get you
> level
> again?
>
> And then there's overstressing it. That nose is gonna drop on you in
> the
> roll, and you'll be wanging the stick over to get the nose up and
> pulling
> the nose back through the last half of the roll to keep it from dropping
> too
> sharply. You'll be twisting the crap out of those long wings.
>
> You are talking about doing things the designer doesn't approve of. Not
>
> saying it can't be done safely, but seriously consider your own
> experience
> as a test pilot when you start rattling off names like Tex Johnson.
>
> And your point about adding it to your operating limitations? What are
> you
> talking about? Your operating limitations are issued by the
> FAA/DAR...it's
> not like you can just "add" something to it on your own. I assume maybe
>
> you're talking about the airframe logbook entry describing the aerobatic
>
> maneuvers that were performed during Phase I -- or did you even know
> that
> there is such a logbook entry required? Or are you talking about your
> operating handbook?
>
> Regardless, by adding any "suggestion" of the possibility of aerobatic
> maneuvers being "OK" in your airplane, then you open a serious can of
> worms
> if you ever sell that plane. You basically *enable* the buyer to do
> those
> maneuvers. Is that a liability you're willing to extend?
>
> REALITY CHECK!!! You are not building an aerobatic airplane. Give
> Van's a
> call and see what they have to say about your plan.
>
> do not archive
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.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: Getting Trim System to work |
RE: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to workMichael,
Your point is well taken. But when a guy gets jumped on just for preaching safety,
I think something is wrong.
From http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/flyrvs.htm:
"The RV-9/9A and RV-10 were not designed with aerobatic stress limits and are not
intended to be used for aerobatic flight."
That is my only point. Don't break your airframe doing something stupid. Everything
else is flying within the limits and is certainly at your discretion.
do not archive
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 10:13 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
And while your at it ask Van's what they think about building an IFR platform.
Bit of an over reaction there Dan. Let me guess, you feel strongly about
this subject for some reason. Don't forget, we all do things the designer doesn't
approve of. Like fly RV's in IFR which I believe you are also guilty of.
These are experimental aircraft as I recall. Listing valid reasons for not
doing a roll, as you did, is good, ranting about it doesn't get us anywhere.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 wing ribs
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 11:44 AM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
> I plan to, at the end of the fly-off, roll mine, and record some entry
> speed data to add to my operating limitations, to at least make it a
> documented item. I'm not too interested in looping it though, just a
> basic positive G roll. There's no reason why the -10 should not be
> able to do this nicely....if you've never seen Tex Johnsons Boeing 707
> roll, you'll understand.
Wow, you're so cool...
Gee, may as well expand the airspeed envelope well past Vne while you're at it.
And spin it a few times. Are you prepared for both possibilities, either
getting too slow and spinning out of the top of the roll, or blasting past Vne
as the nose drops and the roll rate is too slow to get you level again?
And then there's overstressing it. That nose is gonna drop on you in the roll,
and you'll be wanging the stick over to get the nose up and pulling the nose
back through the last half of the roll to keep it from dropping too sharply.
You'll be twisting the crap out of those long wings.
You are talking about doing things the designer doesn't approve of. Not saying
it can't be done safely, but seriously consider your own experience as a test
pilot when you start rattling off names like Tex Johnson.
And your point about adding it to your operating limitations? What are you talking
about? Your operating limitations are issued by the FAA/DAR...it's not
like you can just "add" something to it on your own. I assume maybe you're talking
about the airframe logbook entry describing the aerobatic maneuvers that
were performed during Phase I -- or did you even know that there is such a logbook
entry required? Or are you talking about your operating handbook?
Regardless, by adding any "suggestion" of the possibility of aerobatic maneuvers
being "OK" in your airplane, then you open a serious can of worms if you ever
sell that plane. You basically *enable* the buyer to do those maneuvers.
Is that a liability you're willing to extend?
REALITY CHECK!!! You are not building an aerobatic airplane. Give Van's a call
and see what they have to say about your plan.
do not archive
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
RV10-List Email Forum -
more:
bsp;
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: | Getting Trim System to work |
Dan,
You got jumped on for how you went about it. We all value your opinion but adding
things like "Wow, you're so cool..." and "REALITY CHECK!!! " make it sound
a hell of a lot like your talking down to the community. I myself have no
aerobatic experience so I didn't add to the post, nor will I say that Tim's proposition
is reasonable because again I have no idea. But we all do take certain
liberties during the build and flight test stage and all I can say is I hope
everyone keeps it in their comfort zone and doesn't cause our insurance rates
to go up. ;-)
Michael
do not archive
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
Michael,
Your point is well taken. But when a guy gets jumped on just for preaching safety,
I think something is wrong.
From http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/flyrvs.htm:
"The RV-9/9A and RV-10 were not designed with aerobatic stress limits and are not
intended to be used for aerobatic flight."
That is my only point. Don't break your airframe doing something stupid. Everything
else is flying within the limits and is certainly at your discretion.
do not archive
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: RV Builder (Michael Sausen) <mailto:rvbuilder@sausen.net>
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 10:13 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
And while your at it ask Van's what they think about building an IFR platform.
Bit of an over reaction there Dan. Let me guess, you feel strongly
about this subject for some reason. Don't forget, we all do things the designer
doesn't approve of. Like fly RV's in IFR which I believe you are also guilty
of. These are experimental aircraft as I recall. Listing valid reasons for
not doing a roll, as you did, is good, ranting about it doesn't get us anywhere.
=09
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 wing ribs
=09
Do not archive
=09
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 11:44 AM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
=09
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
=09
> I plan to, at the end of the fly-off, roll mine, and record some entry
> speed data to add to my operating limitations, to at least make it a
> documented item. I'm not too interested in looping it though, just a
> basic positive G roll. There's no reason why the -10 should not be
> able to do this nicely....if you've never seen Tex Johnsons Boeing 707
> roll, you'll understand.
=09
Wow, you're so cool...
=09
Gee, may as well expand the airspeed envelope well past Vne while you're
at it. And spin it a few times. Are you prepared for both possibilities, either
getting too slow and spinning out of the top of the roll, or blasting past
Vne as the nose drops and the roll rate is too slow to get you level again?
=09
And then there's overstressing it. That nose is gonna drop on you in the
roll, and you'll be wanging the stick over to get the nose up and pulling the
nose back through the last half of the roll to keep it from dropping too sharply.
You'll be twisting the crap out of those long wings.
=09
You are talking about doing things the designer doesn't approve of. Not
saying it can't be done safely, but seriously consider your own experience as
a test pilot when you start rattling off names like Tex Johnson.
=09
And your point about adding it to your operating limitations? What are
you talking about? Your operating limitations are issued by the FAA/DAR...it's
not like you can just "add" something to it on your own. I assume maybe you're
talking about the airframe logbook entry describing the aerobatic maneuvers
that were performed during Phase I -- or did you even know that there is such
a logbook entry required? Or are you talking about your operating handbook?
=09
Regardless, by adding any "suggestion" of the possibility of aerobatic
maneuvers being "OK" in your airplane, then you open a serious can of worms if
you ever sell that plane. You basically *enable* the buyer to do those maneuvers.
Is that a liability you're willing to extend?
=09
REALITY CHECK!!! You are not building an aerobatic airplane. Give Van's
a call and see what they have to say about your plan.
=09
do not archive
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
=09
=09
=09
=09
more:
bsp;
=09
=09
=09
=09
=09
=09
=09
=09
=09
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: | Getting Trim System to work |
DNA: do not archive
Its-Bogus: do not forward to list - No Plain-Text Section
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
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: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Brandon Yost" <bryostdc@hotmail.com>
I have to agree with Dan on this one. Safety is something that is
completely okay to get all hot and bothered about. I guess you can do what
you want in your plane, as long as you are completely okay with the fact
that many bad decisions in a plane cannot be erased - just ask my friend
who's been in critical care for over a week following a plane crash. I
guess if you think the risk of doing aerobatics in the -10 is worth it, go
for it. Personally, I can't think of ANY maneuver in a plane that gives me
enough of a thrill to justify taking that kind of risk. Flying is a risk
all on it's own. Why push it? I'm still holding out hope that the original
post was a joke.
do not archive
Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Hey guys, Don't worry, there's no offense taken, even with the
maybe a little harsh tone. I realize the -10 wasn't built
for aerobatics. And I did myself add the words "positive
G roll". I didn't say snap roll, and even added that I
wasn't interested in looping the -10 (although in the right
plane it would be a blast). A plain vanilla roll, done
*correctly* (acknowledging Dan's statements) should be
even less stressful on the airframe than a steep turn. Done
incorrectly, it could quickly lead to a disasterous amount
of G's during a pull-out, or an un-planned spin recovery.
So his points are very valid and should be well taken by all.
Now that said, if you're spinning out of the top of the
roll, and getting too slow, and everything else, you're
really messing up the roll pretty bad.
Dan, you're correct that I didn't mean operating limitations,
I meant the airframe logbook entry. It was the requirement
for such an entry that would be my motivation for doing it...
at the end of my fly-off period.
As for airframe stresses....I get paranoid when I see the
skin oil-can and the wings flex all over the place is
some heavier turbulence, so I'm certainly not interested
in any of the higher-G maneuvers in my -10. I also offer
no endorsement for doing any maneuver that conforms to the
standard FAA terms of "aerobatic". Heck, I don't offer
any endorsement to any non-aerobatic maneuvers. There are
things that are just unknown. Right now, having not
had hardly anything for -10 time, I can't tell you if
slips with flaps is an issue, or extended slips on final
(fuel un-porting), or anything. These are experimental
planes, and in my mind, every one of us building them is
a test-pilot.....because none of these planes are the
same. What may work for one, may not work for another.
So, Dan's post isn't all that bad...just a little maybe
demeaning in tone as was pointed out. My guess is that it's
an attempt to scare someone out of doing something stupid,
which can be a good thing. Then again, there's always
a good forum to discuss these things in relation to our
RV-10's, and this being the RV-10 forum, I don't think
it's such a bad place.
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
DO NOT ARCHIVE
RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote:
> Dan,
>
> You got jumped on for how you went about it. We all value your
> opinion but adding things like "Wow, you're so cool..." and "REALITY
> CHECK!!! " make it sound a hell of a lot like your talking down to the
> community. I myself have no aerobatic experience so I didn't add to the
> post, nor will I say that Tim's proposition is reasonable because again
> I have no idea. But we all do take certain liberties during the build
> and flight test stage and all I can say is I hope everyone keeps it in
> their comfort zone and doesn't cause our insurance rates to go up. ;-)
>
> Michael
> do not archive
>
> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Dan Checkoway
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 18, 2005 12:56 PM
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>
> Michael,
>
> Your point is well taken. But when a guy gets jumped on just for
> preaching safety, I think something is wrong.
>
> From http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/flyrvs.htm:
> "The RV-9/9A and RV-10 were not designed with aerobatic stress limits
> and are not intended to be used for aerobatic flight."
>
> That is my only point. Don't break your airframe doing something
> stupid. Everything else is flying within the limits and is certainly at
> your discretion.
>
> do not archive
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* RV Builder (Michael Sausen) <mailto:rvbuilder@sausen.net>
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 18, 2005 10:13 AM
> *Subject:* RE: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>
> And while your at it ask Van's what they think about building an
> IFR platform. Bit of an over reaction there Dan. Let me guess, you
> feel strongly about this subject for some reason. Don't forget, we
> all do things the designer doesn't approve of. Like fly RV's in IFR
> which I believe you are also guilty of. These are experimental
> aircraft as I recall. Listing valid reasons for not doing a roll,
> as you did, is good, ranting about it doesn't get us anywhere.
>
> Michael Sausen
> -10 #352 wing ribs
>
> Do not archive
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 11:44 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
>
> > I plan to, at the end of the fly-off, roll mine, and record some
> entry
> > speed data to add to my operating limitations, to at least make it a
> > documented item. I'm not too interested in looping it though, just a
> > basic positive G roll. There's no reason why the -10 should not be
> > able to do this nicely....if you've never seen Tex Johnsons
> Boeing 707
> > roll, you'll understand.
>
> Wow, you're so cool...
>
> Gee, may as well expand the airspeed envelope well past Vne while
> you're at it. And spin it a few times. Are you prepared for both
> possibilities, either getting too slow and spinning out of the top
> of the roll, or blasting past Vne as the nose drops and the roll
> rate is too slow to get you level again?
>
> And then there's overstressing it. That nose is gonna drop on you
> in the roll, and you'll be wanging the stick over to get the nose up
> and pulling the nose back through the last half of the roll to keep
> it from dropping too sharply. You'll be twisting the crap out of
> those long wings.
>
> You are talking about doing things the designer doesn't approve of.
> Not saying it can't be done safely, but seriously consider your own
> experience as a test pilot when you start rattling off names like
> Tex Johnson.
>
> And your point about adding it to your operating limitations? What
> are you talking about? Your operating limitations are issued by the
> FAA/DAR...it's not like you can just "add" something to it on your
> own. I assume maybe you're talking about the airframe logbook entry
> describing the aerobatic maneuvers that were performed during Phase
> I -- or did you even know that there is such a logbook entry
> required? Or are you talking about your operating handbook?
>
> Regardless, by adding any "suggestion" of the possibility of
> aerobatic maneuvers being "OK" in your airplane, then you open a
> serious can of worms if you ever sell that plane. You basically
> *enable* the buyer to do those maneuvers. Is that a liability
> you're willing to extend?
>
> REALITY CHECK!!! You are not building an aerobatic airplane. Give
> Van's a call and see what they have to say about your plan.
>
> do not archive
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.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: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
> A plain vanilla roll, done
> *correctly* (acknowledging Dan's statements) should be
> even less stressful on the airframe than a steep turn.
Huh?!?! Now you've got me worried even more.
In a steep turn, you are distributing load EVENLY between the two wings. In
a roll, even at 1G or 0G, the wings are not evenly loaded. They are
twisting. The stresses on the wings in an aileron or barrel roll are not to
be compared with flying coordinated, with unaccelerated bank. Your airframe
is simply not designed to withstand the twisting involved in aerobatic
maneuvers. It is that simple.
I'm picturing your "vanilla" roll, where you're rolling so gently and so
slowly that you couldn't possibly overstress the airframe with these
twisting moments. Rolling so slowly that you probably can't complete the
roll before you're in a nose dive.
I don't get it.
Tim, I'm curious...in what planes have you done aerobatics?
> So, Dan's post isn't all that bad...just a little maybe
> demeaning in tone as was pointed out. My guess is that it's
I'm trying not to be patronizing here, but what I've read so far is a clear
sign of a lack of knowledge.
do not archive
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Lloyd, Daniel R." <LloydDR@wernerco.com>
Not to be a smart A**, but on Vans Website it clearly states that
recreational spins are not recommended, yet you tested for 1.5
revolution turn, just so you could see how it would react, and you did
it with the smaller rudder, even though you know the spin recovery
characteristics, as stated by the kit manufacturer, were less than
favorable. And directly quoting you:
"My goal at this point in flight testing was really just to fly a
handful of aerobatic maneuvers. As you'll see in your operating
limitations (issued by the FAA and/or DAR), if aerobatics are to be
performed during the course of normal flying, you have to have
previously demonstrated that specific maneuvers are safe and
controllable...and you have demonstrated that during Phase I. There's a
specific airframe logbook endorsement required for this. So as I said, I
wanted to run through these maneuvers to satisfy that requirement, and
to see how the thing behaved. I had already done tons of rolls at this
point. When done properly, aileron rolls impose very little stress on
the airframe, and in my opinion barely constitute an aerobatic maneuver.
So according to you a roll is no big deal, but as soon as someone wants
to do something out of the envelop you jump them?
This does not seem like the normal you, what is going on?
Concerned
Dan Lloyd
40269
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan
Checkoway
> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 9:44 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
>
>> I plan to, at the end of the fly-off, roll mine, and record some
>> entry speed data to add to my operating limitations, to at least
>> make it a documented item. I'm not too interested in looping
>> it though, just a basic positive G roll. There's no reason
>> why the -10 should not be able to do this nicely....if you've
>> never seen Tex Johnsons Boeing 707 roll, you'll understand.
>
> Wow, you're so cool...
>
> Gee, may as well expand the airspeed envelope well past Vne while
you're
> at
> it. And spin it a few times. Are you prepared for both
possibilities,
> either getting too slow and spinning out of the top of the roll, or
> blasting
> past Vne as the nose drops and the roll rate is too slow to get you
> level
> again?
>
> And then there's overstressing it. That nose is gonna drop on you in
> the
> roll, and you'll be wanging the stick over to get the nose up and
> pulling
> the nose back through the last half of the roll to keep it from
dropping
> too
> sharply. You'll be twisting the crap out of those long wings.
>
> You are talking about doing things the designer doesn't approve of.
Not
>
> saying it can't be done safely, but seriously consider your own
> experience
> as a test pilot when you start rattling off names like Tex Johnson.
>
> And your point about adding it to your operating limitations? What
are
> you
> talking about? Your operating limitations are issued by the
> FAA/DAR...it's
> not like you can just "add" something to it on your own. I assume
maybe
>
> you're talking about the airframe logbook entry describing the
aerobatic
>
> maneuvers that were performed during Phase I -- or did you even know
> that
> there is such a logbook entry required? Or are you talking about your
> operating handbook?
>
> Regardless, by adding any "suggestion" of the possibility of aerobatic
> maneuvers being "OK" in your airplane, then you open a serious can of
> worms
> if you ever sell that plane. You basically *enable* the buyer to do
> those
> maneuvers. Is that a liability you're willing to extend?
>
> REALITY CHECK!!! You are not building an aerobatic airplane. Give
> Van's a
> call and see what they have to say about your plan.
>
> do not archive
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
>
>
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
> This does not seem like the normal you, what is going on?
To be perfectly honest...
We had a first flight at my local airport this past weekend that scared me a
little. The builder hadn't done everything to ensure that the plane was
ready for first flight. There were some loose ends.
I'm in conservative mode.
do not archive
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Lloyd, Daniel R." <LloydDR@wernerco.com>
Understood, we just had a Cherokee crash local and kill 3 0f 4 on board,
because the guy ran out of gas, after he had already landed, and found
the FBO closed, so he tried for the next closest airport, knowing low
fuel and it would be close. This kind of stuff just does not sit right
with me.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
> This does not seem like the normal you, what is going on?
To be perfectly honest...
We had a first flight at my local airport this past weekend that scared
me a
little. The builder hadn't done everything to ensure that the plane was
ready for first flight. There were some loose ends.
I'm in conservative mode.
do not archive
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: wing storage racks |
You might want to consider two sawhorses instead of a wing storage rack.
I screwed the spar end into the wood sawhorse at one end, stuck a 4' 2x4 into the
wingtip ribs and screwed the 2x4 into the other sawhorse. With the two wings
back to back I could work on the flap gap farings, run the wires for the lights,
etc., install the autopilot servo and get the bottom skin ready to rivet
all at a really good working height with no obstructions.
When I got ready to install the stall warning and pitot tube I put the left wing
down flap on a table top side down.
Best regards,
Russ Daves
N710RV (Reserved) Fuselage on main gear
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Hukill
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 9:45 AM
Subject: RV10-List: wing storage racks
I am preparing to accept delivery of my quickbuild wings and fuselage. Does anyone
have plans for a storage rack for the wings? I need them to sit on the leading
edges, on a rolling rack. Pictures and dimensions of the wings would be
helpful. Thanx in advance.
Chris Hukill (working on rudder)
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: | Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
A close personal friend, Sean Tucker, supplements his well observed
aerobatics with an Unusual Attitude Recovery Training school back home.
If you are of the opinion that all attitudes entered with positive G are
recovered by limitation to use of only positive G then I have clearly
missed something in the training.
The reason for the AEIO system that Christen Industries perfected for my
Eagle was to insure oil flow in all attitudes - either intentional or
unintentional. I have lots of friends that do unusual attitudes till
the combustion stops from interrupted fuel flow or interrupted oil flow.
Last August Shannon Knoeplein lost is life and beautiful plane with not
understanding that to fly the aircraft, oil pressure was a key
component. Doing Tim's rolls under proper training and supervision is
an important step to knowing one's aircraft. It is Tim's choice - van
is just the parts builder. The next best thing would be to do it in
someoneelses cockpit. Fly the aircraft, Fly the aircraft... just stay
away from the abusive gyroscopic prop forces while doing it.
If safety is the premise, than I am all ears on the value of doing
aerobatics without the AEIO and limited to only positive Gs.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Checkoway
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
John,
I do only *positive* G aerobatics. I don't have inverted oil. Not sure
what you're referring to.
Regarding my engine, cowl, and ram air system...I'm using a Lycoming
IO-360-A1B6 engine, which is among the list of powerplants Van's does
approve for the RV-7. In fact it's the same engine in the RV-7 (now
RV-7A)
factory demonstrator. I'm using the identical Hartzell prop that they
use
on that plane.
My intake air system is exactly what Van's specs out in the plans
(identical
to the factory demonstrator), with the exception of the ram air setup.
I
don't personally consider that modification to be on the same level of
seriousness as somebody looping or rolling an RV-10!!! Maybe that's
just
me.
do not archive
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "John W. Cox"
<johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
>
> Dan, just a question for the group. Are you saying your engine, cowl
> and ramair system are stock "Van approved" inclusions?
>
> I was impressed that you went off the reservation just a little before
> doing that flight to 20,000MSL back on April 3rd. I wasn't clear on
the
> thought behind some of your maneuvers in the Lycoming IO-360-A1A. I
> thought some of your maneuvers would require an AEIO IO-360 to stay on
> the reservation.
>
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan
Checkoway
> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 9:44 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
>
>> I plan to, at the end of the fly-off, roll mine, and record some
>> entry speed data to add to my operating limitations, to at least
>> make it a documented item. I'm not too interested in looping
>> it though, just a basic positive G roll. There's no reason
>> why the -10 should not be able to do this nicely....if you've
>> never seen Tex Johnsons Boeing 707 roll, you'll understand.
>
> Wow, you're so cool...
>
> Gee, may as well expand the airspeed envelope well past Vne while
you're
> at
> it. And spin it a few times. Are you prepared for both
possibilities,
> either getting too slow and spinning out of the top of the roll, or
> blasting
> past Vne as the nose drops and the roll rate is too slow to get you
> level
> again?
>
> And then there's overstressing it. That nose is gonna drop on you in
> the
> roll, and you'll be wanging the stick over to get the nose up and
> pulling
> the nose back through the last half of the roll to keep it from
dropping
> too
> sharply. You'll be twisting the crap out of those long wings.
>
> You are talking about doing things the designer doesn't approve of.
Not
>
> saying it can't be done safely, but seriously consider your own
> experience
> as a test pilot when you start rattling off names like Tex Johnson.
>
> And your point about adding it to your operating limitations? What
are
> you
> talking about? Your operating limitations are issued by the
> FAA/DAR...it's
> not like you can just "add" something to it on your own. I assume
maybe
>
> you're talking about the airframe logbook entry describing the
aerobatic
>
> maneuvers that were performed during Phase I -- or did you even know
> that
> there is such a logbook entry required? Or are you talking about your
> operating handbook?
>
> Regardless, by adding any "suggestion" of the possibility of aerobatic
> maneuvers being "OK" in your airplane, then you open a serious can of
> worms
> if you ever sell that plane. You basically *enable* the buyer to do
> those
> maneuvers. Is that a liability you're willing to extend?
>
> REALITY CHECK!!! You are not building an aerobatic airplane. Give
> Van's a
> call and see what they have to say about your plan.
>
> do not archive
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
>
>
Message 31
| 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: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
What you say here doesn't jibe well. You talk about the twisting
of the wings during a roll. Think about it harder...
Obtain proper entry speed (note that this is not high speeds, but
more like maneuvering speeds....perhaps 120 kts off the cuff)
Nose up 20 degrees.
Neutralize everything.
Stick smoothly full Left
3 or 4 seconds later you're upright, slightly nose low
Neutralize everything
Ease back on the stick back to level flight
Yeah, you're going full aileron, (or possibly not, depending on the
roll rate.....that has to come from getting a feel for how touchy
the -10 is) but using your logic below, we should now live in fear of
tearing our wings off when cranking into a steep turn. During the
initial rolling of the plane, there shouldn't be a big difference
between going from a 45 degree right bank directly to a 45 degree
left bank (which nobody would claim would be awful rough on a
plane) or going all the way around.
Perhaps your perspective comes from your own ride...the -7.
When I went for my first and only -6 ride, my instructions
were "YOU CAN RIP THE WINGS OFF THIS PLAN WITH THE STICK".
Pretty scary. In fact, once in cruise in the -6, that
stick was ABSOLUTELY way oversensitive and yes, you could
probably rip the wings off that plane unless you were at
lower airspeeds or only used smaller stick deflections.
The -10 is sporty, but it's not nearly as awful sensitive
as the -7, so maybe that's why you think this would cause
a huge wing twisting motion.
My current roll experience is limited to the Beech Sundowner,
which in both Aerobatic and non-aerobatic models uses the
same airframe (the aerobat has some spin recovery enhancements,
but no additional strength). This airplane is very very close
in performance, roll rate, feel, and size to the RV-10, with
very similar empt weights, and very similar G rated design.
If you can twist the wings off the -10 doing a roll, it's
not a plane I'd want to own, and probably one that shouldn't
be allowed to fly.
Look at the Boeings that fly. They're fully capable of
being rolled, although I don't know that anyone's been
as crazy as Tex and done one since. The design loads
on those wings are something more like +1.25/ -.5 or
some tiny number like that. Now, think about what those
"long" wings look like when you're on that long flight in
turbulence.
You can worry all you want, but I don't think you should
use the argument of twisting the wings off the -10 as the
basis of that argument. If the -10 can't handle a roll,
then it shouldn't be rolled into and out of steep turns
at anything but grand-lady speeds, and probably shouldn't
be allowed to fly without some structural enhancements.
Now, if you want to argue your point based on pilot
skill, and wether or not the pilot can complete the
maneuver without messing up and getting into an
attitude that CAN break the airframe, then fine...that's
a great argument to make and there's no disputing
that it's valid. Yes...if you mess up an aerobatic
maneuver in the -10, you probably can cause some
irreversible damage that just may end your life.
I'll reverse your question on you....
Dan, in what planes have you done aerobatics...or more
specifically, aerobatics in the 0-2G range...since
that's what my points in the discussion are relevant to?
Tim
Dan Checkoway wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
>
>> A plain vanilla roll, done
>> *correctly* (acknowledging Dan's statements) should be
>> even less stressful on the airframe than a steep turn.
>
>
> Huh?!?! Now you've got me worried even more.
>
> In a steep turn, you are distributing load EVENLY between the two
> wings. In a roll, even at 1G or 0G, the wings are not evenly loaded.
> They are twisting. The stresses on the wings in an aileron or barrel
> roll are not to be compared with flying coordinated, with unaccelerated
> bank. Your airframe is simply not designed to withstand the twisting
> involved in aerobatic maneuvers. It is that simple.
>
> I'm picturing your "vanilla" roll, where you're rolling so gently and so
> slowly that you couldn't possibly overstress the airframe with these
> twisting moments. Rolling so slowly that you probably can't complete
> the roll before you're in a nose dive.
>
> I don't get it.
>
> Tim, I'm curious...in what planes have you done aerobatics?
>
>> So, Dan's post isn't all that bad...just a little maybe
>> demeaning in tone as was pointed out. My guess is that it's
>
>
>
> I'm trying not to be patronizing here, but what I've read so far is a
> clear sign of a lack of knowledge.
>
> do not archive
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 32
| 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: | Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Tim Dawson-Townsend" <Tdawson@Avidyne.com>
Can we get back to RV-10s and leave the aerobatics to another forum? I'm sure
Dan Reeves would love to have everyone start another thread on his forums . .
.
TDT
DO NOT ARCHIVE
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
What you say here doesn't jibe well. You talk about the twisting
of the wings during a roll. Think about it harder...
Obtain proper entry speed (note that this is not high speeds, but
more like maneuvering speeds....perhaps 120 kts off the cuff)
Nose up 20 degrees.
Neutralize everything.
Stick smoothly full Left
3 or 4 seconds later you're upright, slightly nose low
Neutralize everything
Ease back on the stick back to level flight
Yeah, you're going full aileron, (or possibly not, depending on the
roll rate.....that has to come from getting a feel for how touchy
the -10 is) but using your logic below, we should now live in fear of
tearing our wings off when cranking into a steep turn. During the
initial rolling of the plane, there shouldn't be a big difference
between going from a 45 degree right bank directly to a 45 degree
left bank (which nobody would claim would be awful rough on a
plane) or going all the way around.
Perhaps your perspective comes from your own ride...the -7.
When I went for my first and only -6 ride, my instructions
were "YOU CAN RIP THE WINGS OFF THIS PLAN WITH THE STICK".
Pretty scary. In fact, once in cruise in the -6, that
stick was ABSOLUTELY way oversensitive and yes, you could
probably rip the wings off that plane unless you were at
lower airspeeds or only used smaller stick deflections.
The -10 is sporty, but it's not nearly as awful sensitive
as the -7, so maybe that's why you think this would cause
a huge wing twisting motion.
My current roll experience is limited to the Beech Sundowner,
which in both Aerobatic and non-aerobatic models uses the
same airframe (the aerobat has some spin recovery enhancements,
but no additional strength). This airplane is very very close
in performance, roll rate, feel, and size to the RV-10, with
very similar empt weights, and very similar G rated design.
If you can twist the wings off the -10 doing a roll, it's
not a plane I'd want to own, and probably one that shouldn't
be allowed to fly.
Look at the Boeings that fly. They're fully capable of
being rolled, although I don't know that anyone's been
as crazy as Tex and done one since. The design loads
on those wings are something more like +1.25/ -.5 or
some tiny number like that. Now, think about what those
"long" wings look like when you're on that long flight in
turbulence.
You can worry all you want, but I don't think you should
use the argument of twisting the wings off the -10 as the
basis of that argument. If the -10 can't handle a roll,
then it shouldn't be rolled into and out of steep turns
at anything but grand-lady speeds, and probably shouldn't
be allowed to fly without some structural enhancements.
Now, if you want to argue your point based on pilot
skill, and wether or not the pilot can complete the
maneuver without messing up and getting into an
attitude that CAN break the airframe, then fine...that's
a great argument to make and there's no disputing
that it's valid. Yes...if you mess up an aerobatic
maneuver in the -10, you probably can cause some
irreversible damage that just may end your life.
I'll reverse your question on you....
Dan, in what planes have you done aerobatics...or more
specifically, aerobatics in the 0-2G range...since
that's what my points in the discussion are relevant to?
Tim
Dan Checkoway wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
>
>> A plain vanilla roll, done
>> *correctly* (acknowledging Dan's statements) should be
>> even less stressful on the airframe than a steep turn.
>
>
> Huh?!?! Now you've got me worried even more.
>
> In a steep turn, you are distributing load EVENLY between the two
> wings. In a roll, even at 1G or 0G, the wings are not evenly loaded.
> They are twisting. The stresses on the wings in an aileron or barrel
> roll are not to be compared with flying coordinated, with unaccelerated
> bank. Your airframe is simply not designed to withstand the twisting
> involved in aerobatic maneuvers. It is that simple.
>
> I'm picturing your "vanilla" roll, where you're rolling so gently and so
> slowly that you couldn't possibly overstress the airframe with these
> twisting moments. Rolling so slowly that you probably can't complete
> the roll before you're in a nose dive.
>
> I don't get it.
>
> Tim, I'm curious...in what planes have you done aerobatics?
>
>> So, Dan's post isn't all that bad...just a little maybe
>> demeaning in tone as was pointed out. My guess is that it's
>
>
>
> I'm trying not to be patronizing here, but what I've read so far is a
> clear sign of a lack of knowledge.
>
> do not archive
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 33
| 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: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
> Dan, in what planes have you done aerobatics...or more
> specifically, aerobatics in the 0-2G range...since
> that's what my points in the discussion are relevant to?
Only Decathlons and RVs.
Hey, I said my peace, and the forum can take it or leave it. Don't like my
tone? Oh, well. Roll the heck out of your RV-10. Have fun.
do not archive
Message 34
| 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: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Russell Daves" <dav1111@cox.net>
My rolls in an RV-6A were done just as Tim describes but with only about 5
degrees nose high, fast full aileron and about a 1/4 second 360 roll to full
recovery. I say 1/4 second because it was so fast you couldn't hardly blink
before coming back right side up. Most times in the -6A I came back up
level and not nose low.
As far as G loads I had a recording G meter in my RV-6A and the G meter on
my rolls moved less than a 1/4 G even when I was first starting to do the
rolls. At the end before I sold my -6A you couldn't even see that the G
meter recording needle moved.
I will admit that in first learning to do loops in the -6A I did pull almost
2 G's.
Anyone can horse around an airplane, regardless of whether or not it is
aerobatic. There are lots of aerobatic rated airplanes that have had their
wings pulled off.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>
> What you say here doesn't jibe well. You talk about the twisting
> of the wings during a roll. Think about it harder...
>
> Obtain proper entry speed (note that this is not high speeds, but
> more like maneuvering speeds....perhaps 120 kts off the cuff)
> Nose up 20 degrees.
> Neutralize everything.
> Stick smoothly full Left
> 3 or 4 seconds later you're upright, slightly nose low
> Neutralize everything
> Ease back on the stick back to level flight
>
> Yeah, you're going full aileron, (or possibly not, depending on the
> roll rate.....that has to come from getting a feel for how touchy
> the -10 is) but using your logic below, we should now live in fear of
> tearing our wings off when cranking into a steep turn. During the
> initial rolling of the plane, there shouldn't be a big difference
> between going from a 45 degree right bank directly to a 45 degree
> left bank (which nobody would claim would be awful rough on a
> plane) or going all the way around.
>
> Perhaps your perspective comes from your own ride...the -7.
> When I went for my first and only -6 ride, my instructions
> were "YOU CAN RIP THE WINGS OFF THIS PLAN WITH THE STICK".
> Pretty scary. In fact, once in cruise in the -6, that
> stick was ABSOLUTELY way oversensitive and yes, you could
> probably rip the wings off that plane unless you were at
> lower airspeeds or only used smaller stick deflections.
>
> The -10 is sporty, but it's not nearly as awful sensitive
> as the -7, so maybe that's why you think this would cause
> a huge wing twisting motion.
>
> My current roll experience is limited to the Beech Sundowner,
> which in both Aerobatic and non-aerobatic models uses the
> same airframe (the aerobat has some spin recovery enhancements,
> but no additional strength). This airplane is very very close
> in performance, roll rate, feel, and size to the RV-10, with
> very similar empt weights, and very similar G rated design.
> If you can twist the wings off the -10 doing a roll, it's
> not a plane I'd want to own, and probably one that shouldn't
> be allowed to fly.
>
> Look at the Boeings that fly. They're fully capable of
> being rolled, although I don't know that anyone's been
> as crazy as Tex and done one since. The design loads
> on those wings are something more like +1.25/ -.5 or
> some tiny number like that. Now, think about what those
> "long" wings look like when you're on that long flight in
> turbulence.
>
> You can worry all you want, but I don't think you should
> use the argument of twisting the wings off the -10 as the
> basis of that argument. If the -10 can't handle a roll,
> then it shouldn't be rolled into and out of steep turns
> at anything but grand-lady speeds, and probably shouldn't
> be allowed to fly without some structural enhancements.
>
> Now, if you want to argue your point based on pilot
> skill, and wether or not the pilot can complete the
> maneuver without messing up and getting into an
> attitude that CAN break the airframe, then fine...that's
> a great argument to make and there's no disputing
> that it's valid. Yes...if you mess up an aerobatic
> maneuver in the -10, you probably can cause some
> irreversible damage that just may end your life.
>
> I'll reverse your question on you....
> Dan, in what planes have you done aerobatics...or more
> specifically, aerobatics in the 0-2G range...since
> that's what my points in the discussion are relevant to?
>
> Tim
>
>
> Dan Checkoway wrote:
>> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
>>
>>> A plain vanilla roll, done
>>> *correctly* (acknowledging Dan's statements) should be
>>> even less stressful on the airframe than a steep turn.
>>
>>
>> Huh?!?! Now you've got me worried even more.
>>
>> In a steep turn, you are distributing load EVENLY between the two wings.
>> In a roll, even at 1G or 0G, the wings are not evenly loaded. They are
>> twisting. The stresses on the wings in an aileron or barrel roll are not
>> to be compared with flying coordinated, with unaccelerated bank. Your
>> airframe is simply not designed to withstand the twisting involved in
>> aerobatic maneuvers. It is that simple.
>>
>> I'm picturing your "vanilla" roll, where you're rolling so gently and so
>> slowly that you couldn't possibly overstress the airframe with these
>> twisting moments. Rolling so slowly that you probably can't complete the
>> roll before you're in a nose dive.
>>
>> I don't get it.
>>
>> Tim, I'm curious...in what planes have you done aerobatics?
>>
>>> So, Dan's post isn't all that bad...just a little maybe
>>> demeaning in tone as was pointed out. My guess is that it's
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm trying not to be patronizing here, but what I've read so far is a
>> clear sign of a lack of knowledge.
>>
>> do not archive
>> )_( Dan
>> RV-7 N714D
>> http://www.rvproject.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 35
| 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: Aerobatic Forum?? |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Russell Daves" <dav1111@cox.net>
I didn't know that Dan Reeves had a web site. Doug Reeves on the other hand
is a really great guy and his web site VAFWWW is a great web site to boot.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Dawson-Townsend" <Tdawson@avidyne.com>
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Tim Dawson-Townsend"
> <Tdawson@Avidyne.com>
>
>
> Can we get back to RV-10s and leave the aerobatics to another forum? I'm
> sure Dan Reeves would love to have everyone start another thread on his
> forums . . .
>
> TDT
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 5:38 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>
> What you say here doesn't jibe well. You talk about the twisting
> of the wings during a roll. Think about it harder...
>
> Obtain proper entry speed (note that this is not high speeds, but
> more like maneuvering speeds....perhaps 120 kts off the cuff)
> Nose up 20 degrees.
> Neutralize everything.
> Stick smoothly full Left
> 3 or 4 seconds later you're upright, slightly nose low
> Neutralize everything
> Ease back on the stick back to level flight
>
> Yeah, you're going full aileron, (or possibly not, depending on the
> roll rate.....that has to come from getting a feel for how touchy
> the -10 is) but using your logic below, we should now live in fear of
> tearing our wings off when cranking into a steep turn. During the
> initial rolling of the plane, there shouldn't be a big difference
> between going from a 45 degree right bank directly to a 45 degree
> left bank (which nobody would claim would be awful rough on a
> plane) or going all the way around.
>
> Perhaps your perspective comes from your own ride...the -7.
> When I went for my first and only -6 ride, my instructions
> were "YOU CAN RIP THE WINGS OFF THIS PLAN WITH THE STICK".
> Pretty scary. In fact, once in cruise in the -6, that
> stick was ABSOLUTELY way oversensitive and yes, you could
> probably rip the wings off that plane unless you were at
> lower airspeeds or only used smaller stick deflections.
>
> The -10 is sporty, but it's not nearly as awful sensitive
> as the -7, so maybe that's why you think this would cause
> a huge wing twisting motion.
>
> My current roll experience is limited to the Beech Sundowner,
> which in both Aerobatic and non-aerobatic models uses the
> same airframe (the aerobat has some spin recovery enhancements,
> but no additional strength). This airplane is very very close
> in performance, roll rate, feel, and size to the RV-10, with
> very similar empt weights, and very similar G rated design.
> If you can twist the wings off the -10 doing a roll, it's
> not a plane I'd want to own, and probably one that shouldn't
> be allowed to fly.
>
> Look at the Boeings that fly. They're fully capable of
> being rolled, although I don't know that anyone's been
> as crazy as Tex and done one since. The design loads
> on those wings are something more like +1.25/ -.5 or
> some tiny number like that. Now, think about what those
> "long" wings look like when you're on that long flight in
> turbulence.
>
> You can worry all you want, but I don't think you should
> use the argument of twisting the wings off the -10 as the
> basis of that argument. If the -10 can't handle a roll,
> then it shouldn't be rolled into and out of steep turns
> at anything but grand-lady speeds, and probably shouldn't
> be allowed to fly without some structural enhancements.
>
> Now, if you want to argue your point based on pilot
> skill, and wether or not the pilot can complete the
> maneuver without messing up and getting into an
> attitude that CAN break the airframe, then fine...that's
> a great argument to make and there's no disputing
> that it's valid. Yes...if you mess up an aerobatic
> maneuver in the -10, you probably can cause some
> irreversible damage that just may end your life.
>
> I'll reverse your question on you....
> Dan, in what planes have you done aerobatics...or more
> specifically, aerobatics in the 0-2G range...since
> that's what my points in the discussion are relevant to?
>
> Tim
>
>
> Dan Checkoway wrote:
>> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
>>
>>> A plain vanilla roll, done
>>> *correctly* (acknowledging Dan's statements) should be
>>> even less stressful on the airframe than a steep turn.
>>
>>
>> Huh?!?! Now you've got me worried even more.
>>
>> In a steep turn, you are distributing load EVENLY between the two
>> wings. In a roll, even at 1G or 0G, the wings are not evenly loaded.
>> They are twisting. The stresses on the wings in an aileron or barrel
>> roll are not to be compared with flying coordinated, with unaccelerated
>> bank. Your airframe is simply not designed to withstand the twisting
>> involved in aerobatic maneuvers. It is that simple.
>>
>> I'm picturing your "vanilla" roll, where you're rolling so gently and so
>> slowly that you couldn't possibly overstress the airframe with these
>> twisting moments. Rolling so slowly that you probably can't complete
>> the roll before you're in a nose dive.
>>
>> I don't get it.
>>
>> Tim, I'm curious...in what planes have you done aerobatics?
>>
>>> So, Dan's post isn't all that bad...just a little maybe
>>> demeaning in tone as was pointed out. My guess is that it's
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm trying not to be patronizing here, but what I've read so far is a
>> clear sign of a lack of knowledge.
>>
>> do not archive
>> )_( Dan
>> RV-7 N714D
>> http://www.rvproject.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 36
| 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: | Aerobatic Forum?? |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Tim Dawson-Townsend" <Tdawson@Avidyne.com>
It's his evil twin . . .
do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Russell Daves
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aerobatic Forum??
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Russell Daves" <dav1111@cox.net>
I didn't know that Dan Reeves had a web site. Doug Reeves on the other hand
is a really great guy and his web site VAFWWW is a great web site to boot.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Dawson-Townsend" <Tdawson@avidyne.com>
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Tim Dawson-Townsend"
> <Tdawson@Avidyne.com>
>
>
> Can we get back to RV-10s and leave the aerobatics to another forum? I'm
> sure Dan Reeves would love to have everyone start another thread on his
> forums . . .
>
> TDT
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 5:38 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
>
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>
> What you say here doesn't jibe well. You talk about the twisting
> of the wings during a roll. Think about it harder...
>
> Obtain proper entry speed (note that this is not high speeds, but
> more like maneuvering speeds....perhaps 120 kts off the cuff)
> Nose up 20 degrees.
> Neutralize everything.
> Stick smoothly full Left
> 3 or 4 seconds later you're upright, slightly nose low
> Neutralize everything
> Ease back on the stick back to level flight
>
> Yeah, you're going full aileron, (or possibly not, depending on the
> roll rate.....that has to come from getting a feel for how touchy
> the -10 is) but using your logic below, we should now live in fear of
> tearing our wings off when cranking into a steep turn. During the
> initial rolling of the plane, there shouldn't be a big difference
> between going from a 45 degree right bank directly to a 45 degree
> left bank (which nobody would claim would be awful rough on a
> plane) or going all the way around.
>
> Perhaps your perspective comes from your own ride...the -7.
> When I went for my first and only -6 ride, my instructions
> were "YOU CAN RIP THE WINGS OFF THIS PLAN WITH THE STICK".
> Pretty scary. In fact, once in cruise in the -6, that
> stick was ABSOLUTELY way oversensitive and yes, you could
> probably rip the wings off that plane unless you were at
> lower airspeeds or only used smaller stick deflections.
>
> The -10 is sporty, but it's not nearly as awful sensitive
> as the -7, so maybe that's why you think this would cause
> a huge wing twisting motion.
>
> My current roll experience is limited to the Beech Sundowner,
> which in both Aerobatic and non-aerobatic models uses the
> same airframe (the aerobat has some spin recovery enhancements,
> but no additional strength). This airplane is very very close
> in performance, roll rate, feel, and size to the RV-10, with
> very similar empt weights, and very similar G rated design.
> If you can twist the wings off the -10 doing a roll, it's
> not a plane I'd want to own, and probably one that shouldn't
> be allowed to fly.
>
> Look at the Boeings that fly. They're fully capable of
> being rolled, although I don't know that anyone's been
> as crazy as Tex and done one since. The design loads
> on those wings are something more like +1.25/ -.5 or
> some tiny number like that. Now, think about what those
> "long" wings look like when you're on that long flight in
> turbulence.
>
> You can worry all you want, but I don't think you should
> use the argument of twisting the wings off the -10 as the
> basis of that argument. If the -10 can't handle a roll,
> then it shouldn't be rolled into and out of steep turns
> at anything but grand-lady speeds, and probably shouldn't
> be allowed to fly without some structural enhancements.
>
> Now, if you want to argue your point based on pilot
> skill, and wether or not the pilot can complete the
> maneuver without messing up and getting into an
> attitude that CAN break the airframe, then fine...that's
> a great argument to make and there's no disputing
> that it's valid. Yes...if you mess up an aerobatic
> maneuver in the -10, you probably can cause some
> irreversible damage that just may end your life.
>
> I'll reverse your question on you....
> Dan, in what planes have you done aerobatics...or more
> specifically, aerobatics in the 0-2G range...since
> that's what my points in the discussion are relevant to?
>
> Tim
>
>
> Dan Checkoway wrote:
>> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
>>
>>> A plain vanilla roll, done
>>> *correctly* (acknowledging Dan's statements) should be
>>> even less stressful on the airframe than a steep turn.
>>
>>
>> Huh?!?! Now you've got me worried even more.
>>
>> In a steep turn, you are distributing load EVENLY between the two
>> wings. In a roll, even at 1G or 0G, the wings are not evenly loaded.
>> They are twisting. The stresses on the wings in an aileron or barrel
>> roll are not to be compared with flying coordinated, with unaccelerated
>> bank. Your airframe is simply not designed to withstand the twisting
>> involved in aerobatic maneuvers. It is that simple.
>>
>> I'm picturing your "vanilla" roll, where you're rolling so gently and so
>> slowly that you couldn't possibly overstress the airframe with these
>> twisting moments. Rolling so slowly that you probably can't complete
>> the roll before you're in a nose dive.
>>
>> I don't get it.
>>
>> Tim, I'm curious...in what planes have you done aerobatics?
>>
>>> So, Dan's post isn't all that bad...just a little maybe
>>> demeaning in tone as was pointed out. My guess is that it's
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm trying not to be patronizing here, but what I've read so far is a
>> clear sign of a lack of knowledge.
>>
>> do not archive
>> )_( Dan
>> RV-7 N714D
>> http://www.rvproject.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 37
| 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: | Getting Trim System to work |
Hmmm, 1 response out of 25 actually had something to do with this guy=92s
question. Anybody else have a pertinent answer, I=92m also about to deal with
the trim system?
Thanks,
Marcus
P.S. The wings won=92t twist any more in an aileron roll than they would
rolling into a steep turn using the same roll rate. (Couldn=92t help it,
sorry)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lorenz Malmstr=F6m
Subject: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
Hi Guys
I have been trying to get the trim system to work =96 with limited success. My
best effort is 33=B0 down =96 instead of the 35=B0 required (right side). The
=91up=92-travel is 27=B0 - the required amount is not even mentioned in the plans.
I don=92t get both sides aligned in the 0=B0 position. I have checked the plans
several times and can=92t find any =91builder induced=92 error.
From those of you that have gone through this process I=92d like to know if
you had similar experiences and if so what the solution was.
Does anybody know the deflections? For a potentially nose heavy plane I=92d
rather know the exact up position than the down position.
Thanks in advance
Lorenz Malmstr=F6m
40280 Wings (& Trim System)
http://www.malmstrom.ch/RV10.htm
Message 38
| 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: | Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Scott Schmidt" <sschmidt@ussynthetic.com>
Do not archive.
Well, I have to agree with Tim on this one. My training is Mechanical
Engineering with an emphasis in aerodynamics, I have taken a 20 hour
spin course in a Decathlon, I have quite a few hours in a Pitts, and I
have flown 2 competitions in an S2-B. Rolling an airplane on a scale
from 1-10 (let's say a 10 is +4 g's) is a 0 compared to straight and
level flight (a 1). Now entering the roll should be a 10-20 degree
pitch up which will be a 4 on my scale (you can probably do it under 2
g's). The exit should also be 1-4 if done correctly. Even with a
little bit of nose down (10 degrees) recover should occur with less than
2.5 g's. As for the twisting I would agree that excess twisting would
be bad but the worst condition would be straight and level flight on
your left wing with a hard left turn, or of course a steep turn with a
hard left turn. (and the opposite would be true on the right wing).
Anytime the aileron loads the wing more than it currently is holding
adds to it's stress. Now when I took my demo flight in the RV-10 Gus
took the RV-10 from 60 deg. Left to 60 deg. right with full aileron
deflection. I was very impressed with the roll rate for a 4 seater.
That will be a much worse case than rolling the airplane at zero g's.
The center of pressure during a roll with full deflection does shift but
that has been taken into consideration already by the engineering staff
at Van's. So, in summary, rolling the plane won't hurt, but pulling
excess g's will and then there's the ground that really hurts.
Now looping is still something that safely could be done below 4 g's. I
have looped an L-39, Pitt's, Extra 300's, T-34's, Decatholon, RV-8,
RV-6, RV-6A and it can be done below 4 g's but your airspeed has to be
just right at the top. As for me, I will never loop the RV-10 but who
knows, maybe someone will put on a great airshow someday with an RV-10.
I know Bobby Younkin could have done a great show in the RV-10 without
over stressing the skins or spars at all.
Now will Van's endorse it? No way. It just wasn't designed for it.
But can it do it? Sure, but he would never say it. He could never
prove that the airframe wasn't overstressed.
I just love aerobatics but I don't like it when people put fear in other
people about aerobatics. It is absolutely safe with proper training and
understanding of aerodynamic loading, airspeed considerations, and spin
recovery training. Flying aerobatics is like being in a bunch of fluid
that you can fly in any direction with the only difference between
pointing straight and straight down is about 1600 lbs of thrust (for an
RV-10). But that gives some awesome acceleration! (You gotta love
gravity)
Happy Flying. I really did enjoy these posts, they made me laugh after
a long day. I just wish I could have been involved sooner.
-Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
What you say here doesn't jibe well. You talk about the twisting
of the wings during a roll. Think about it harder...
Obtain proper entry speed (note that this is not high speeds, but
more like maneuvering speeds....perhaps 120 kts off the cuff)
Nose up 20 degrees.
Neutralize everything.
Stick smoothly full Left
3 or 4 seconds later you're upright, slightly nose low
Neutralize everything
Ease back on the stick back to level flight
Yeah, you're going full aileron, (or possibly not, depending on the
roll rate.....that has to come from getting a feel for how touchy
the -10 is) but using your logic below, we should now live in fear of
tearing our wings off when cranking into a steep turn. During the
initial rolling of the plane, there shouldn't be a big difference
between going from a 45 degree right bank directly to a 45 degree
left bank (which nobody would claim would be awful rough on a
plane) or going all the way around.
Perhaps your perspective comes from your own ride...the -7.
When I went for my first and only -6 ride, my instructions
were "YOU CAN RIP THE WINGS OFF THIS PLAN WITH THE STICK".
Pretty scary. In fact, once in cruise in the -6, that
stick was ABSOLUTELY way oversensitive and yes, you could
probably rip the wings off that plane unless you were at
lower airspeeds or only used smaller stick deflections.
The -10 is sporty, but it's not nearly as awful sensitive
as the -7, so maybe that's why you think this would cause
a huge wing twisting motion.
My current roll experience is limited to the Beech Sundowner,
which in both Aerobatic and non-aerobatic models uses the
same airframe (the aerobat has some spin recovery enhancements,
but no additional strength). This airplane is very very close
in performance, roll rate, feel, and size to the RV-10, with
very similar empt weights, and very similar G rated design.
If you can twist the wings off the -10 doing a roll, it's
not a plane I'd want to own, and probably one that shouldn't
be allowed to fly.
Look at the Boeings that fly. They're fully capable of
being rolled, although I don't know that anyone's been
as crazy as Tex and done one since. The design loads
on those wings are something more like +1.25/ -.5 or
some tiny number like that. Now, think about what those
"long" wings look like when you're on that long flight in
turbulence.
You can worry all you want, but I don't think you should
use the argument of twisting the wings off the -10 as the
basis of that argument. If the -10 can't handle a roll,
then it shouldn't be rolled into and out of steep turns
at anything but grand-lady speeds, and probably shouldn't
be allowed to fly without some structural enhancements.
Now, if you want to argue your point based on pilot
skill, and wether or not the pilot can complete the
maneuver without messing up and getting into an
attitude that CAN break the airframe, then fine...that's
a great argument to make and there's no disputing
that it's valid. Yes...if you mess up an aerobatic
maneuver in the -10, you probably can cause some
irreversible damage that just may end your life.
I'll reverse your question on you....
Dan, in what planes have you done aerobatics...or more
specifically, aerobatics in the 0-2G range...since
that's what my points in the discussion are relevant to?
Tim
Dan Checkoway wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
>
>> A plain vanilla roll, done
>> *correctly* (acknowledging Dan's statements) should be
>> even less stressful on the airframe than a steep turn.
>
>
> Huh?!?! Now you've got me worried even more.
>
> In a steep turn, you are distributing load EVENLY between the two
> wings. In a roll, even at 1G or 0G, the wings are not evenly loaded.
> They are twisting. The stresses on the wings in an aileron or barrel
> roll are not to be compared with flying coordinated, with
unaccelerated
> bank. Your airframe is simply not designed to withstand the twisting
> involved in aerobatic maneuvers. It is that simple.
>
> I'm picturing your "vanilla" roll, where you're rolling so gently and
so
> slowly that you couldn't possibly overstress the airframe with these
> twisting moments. Rolling so slowly that you probably can't complete
> the roll before you're in a nose dive.
>
> I don't get it.
>
> Tim, I'm curious...in what planes have you done aerobatics?
>
>> So, Dan's post isn't all that bad...just a little maybe
>> demeaning in tone as was pointed out. My guess is that it's
>
>
>
> I'm trying not to be patronizing here, but what I've read so far is a
> clear sign of a lack of knowledge.
>
> do not archive
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 39
| 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: | Getting Trim System to work |
What was the trim question again?
Scott
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Marcus Cooper
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
Hmmm, 1 response out of 25 actually had something to do with this guy's question.
Anybody else have a pertinent answer, I'm also about to deal with the trim
system?
Thanks,
Marcus
P.S. The wings won't twist any more in an aileron roll than they would rolling
into a steep turn using the same roll rate. (Couldn't help it, sorry)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lorenz Malmstr=F6m
Subject: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
Hi Guys
I have been trying to get the trim system to work - with limited success. My best
effort is 33=B0 down - instead of the 35=B0 required (right side). The 'up'-travel
is 27=B0 - the required amount is not even mentioned in the plans. I don't
get both sides aligned in the 0=B0 position. I have checked the plans several
times and can't find any 'builder induced' error.
From those of you that have gone through this process I'd like to know if you had
similar experiences and if so what the solution was.
Does anybody know the deflections? For a potentially nose heavy plane I'd rather
know the exact up position than the down position.
Thanks in advance
Lorenz Malmstr=F6m
40280 Wings (& Trim System)
http://www.malmstrom.ch/RV10.htm
Message 40
| 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: | wing storage racks |
Got my wings in them, come take a look. Bob K
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Hukill
Subject: RV10-List: wing storage racks
I am preparing to accept delivery of my quickbuild wings and fuselage. Does
anyone have plans for a storage rack for the wings? I need them to sit on
the leading edges, on a rolling rack. Pictures and dimensions of the wings
would be helpful. Thanx in advance.
Chris Hukill (working on rudder)
Message 41
| 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: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Rick
I also agree that shiny side up is the way to fly, and that a 1 G
environment is preferred. I believe that 1 G could be sustained in a
variety of ways. Possible for a cross country to get 2 to 4 G's in a little
turbulence. Don't think I would call that acro, but know I've put more than
that on in rolling G's on a cross country in a V-Tail. Bob K
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick
Subject: Re: akro ... was Re: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
It's not that Nevada builder and the one who loves to tell everyone he's
going to loop and roll gets my "over the glasses eyeball" everytime he
mentions it. IMHO if ya want to do loops and rolls do them in an aircraft
that has performance as part of it's fort'e. I'm sure the -10 is quite
capable looking at the "g" ratings. I would hate to have something tragic
happen to anyone but especially my friends, in an event that may have been
preventable, had they only partaken in a X-country cruise, shiney side up.
Only my 2 cents worth.
Rick S.
40185
Wings
Message 42
| 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: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: linn walters <lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
Tim, let me try. BTW, nobody knows (yet) just how much akro experience
you have. I have a fair amount. Read on.
Tim Olson wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>
> What you say here doesn't jibe well. You talk about the twisting
> of the wings during a roll. Think about it harder...
>
> Obtain proper entry speed (note that this is not high speeds, but
> more like maneuvering speeds....perhaps 120 kts off the cuff)
And how did you come up with that figure?
> Nose up 20 degrees.
Already I think you're in trouble. I don't think it's high enough ....
but I don't have any experience in a -10 and it's airfoil.
> Neutralize everything.
> Stick smoothly full Left
> 3 or 4 seconds later you're upright, slightly nose low
Not knowing the roll rate with full aileron .... I think in 3 or 4
seconds you're inverted, and the nose is starting to fall through. All
your lift vector is added to the gravity vector, giving you roughly
twice the lift. This baby is headed home.
> Neutralize everything
Not yet. You're nose low, going from inverted to knife edge, and the
airspeed is climbing rapidly. This is a clean airframe and that
airspeed indicator is going to wrap up really quickly. Time to get off
the throttle. Wish this thing rolled a little quicker.
> Ease back on the stick back to level flight
Well, our 'lightly loaded roll' has taken us up near Vne (direction
unknown from initial entry) ..... just how high did we start this
thing??? .... with the nose pointed down. Not the time to get agressive
..... maybe we should have pulled the prop back along with the throttle.
...... I've been there, done that (and survived without damaging the
airplane ...... I think), and don't want anyone else to tread the nether
regions of the flight envelope. I was young and stupid .... and where
an awful lot of y'all are now. Yeah, sure .... ya never did anything
stupid. Crock! I want everyone to live to fight another day!
> Yeah, you're going full aileron, (or possibly not, depending on the
> roll rate.....that has to come from getting a feel for how touchy
> the -10 is) but using your logic below, we should now live in fear of
> tearing our wings off when cranking into a steep turn. During the
> initial rolling of the plane, there shouldn't be a big difference
> between going from a 45 degree right bank directly to a 45 degree
> left bank (which nobody would claim would be awful rough on a
> plane) or going all the way around.
I haven't seen any stress testing done with asymetrical ailerons. This
airfoil just is poor for aerobatic maneuvers.
> Perhaps your perspective comes from your own ride...the -7.
> When I went for my first and only -6 ride, my instructions
> were "YOU CAN RIP THE WINGS OFF THIS PLAN WITH THE STICK".
Absolutely true. Many ham-fisted (and you may not be one of them)
pilots have ripped the wings off of certified A/C built by experts. Our
-10's don't fit either category.
> Pretty scary. In fact, once in cruise in the -6, that
> stick was ABSOLUTELY way oversensitive and yes, you could
> probably rip the wings off that plane unless you were at
> lower airspeeds or only used smaller stick deflections.
>
> The -10 is sporty, but it's not nearly as awful sensitive
> as the -7, so maybe that's why you think this would cause
> a huge wing twisting motion.
I'm out of my experience league with the -7, and there's NO credible
data on the -10, but it's apples and oranges. The -10 wing is longer
with more chord. Uncomparable.
> My current roll experience is limited to the Beech Sundowner,
> which in both Aerobatic and non-aerobatic models uses the
> same airframe (the aerobat has some spin recovery enhancements,
> but no additional strength). This airplane is very very close
> in performance, roll rate, feel, and size to the RV-10, with
> very similar empt weights, and very similar G rated design.
> If you can twist the wings off the -10 doing a roll, it's
> not a plane I'd want to own, and probably one that shouldn't
> be allowed to fly.
>
> Look at the Boeings that fly. They're fully capable of
> being rolled, although I don't know that anyone's been
> as crazy as Tex and done one since. The design loads
> on those wings are something more like +1.25/ -.5 or
> some tiny number like that. Now, think about what those
> "long" wings look like when you're on that long flight in
> turbulence.
Again, you're comparing apples and oranges .... in both airframes and
pilot capability. I'll be frank here, your attitude scares me. No, you
probably don't care, but some of the others reading your post may be
tempted to try some akro too, and be in way over their head. I've lost
a lot of friends to aviation accidents, and yes, I feel like these
faceless names are my friends too. I don't want to lose any more
friends, especially to preventable accidents.
> You can worry all you want, but I don't think you should
> use the argument of twisting the wings off the -10 as the
> basis of that argument. If the -10 can't handle a roll,
> then it shouldn't be rolled into and out of steep turns
> at anything but grand-lady speeds, and probably shouldn't
> be allowed to fly without some structural enhancements.
I doubt that the wings will come off in a coordinated, 1G roll. But
then, I'm not a trained test pilot nor aeronautical engineer, so what do
I know???
> Now, if you want to argue your point based on pilot
> skill, and wether or not the pilot can complete the
> maneuver without messing up and getting into an
> attitude that CAN break the airframe, then fine...that's
> a great argument to make and there's no disputing
> that it's valid. Yes...if you mess up an aerobatic
> maneuver in the -10, you probably can cause some
> irreversible damage that just may end your life.
Well, that's MY point. If you're the gambling type ..... and you've
indicated that you are by your posts .... then let the dice roll. By
yourself. Please don't take anyone with you.
> I'll reverse your question on you....
> Dan, in what planes have you done aerobatics...or more
> specifically, aerobatics in the 0-2G range...since
> that's what my points in the discussion are relevant to?
>
> Tim
Too bad you're too defensive to listen. I happen to agree with Dan, and
his post. Whatever the reasons folks have NOT to do akro in the -10
...... some valid, and some not ...... so what ...... it's only because
they care. Be safe out there.
I now relinquish the soapbox.
Linn
do not archive
>
>
> Dan Checkoway wrote:
>
>> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@rvproject.com>
>>
>>> A plain vanilla roll, done
>>> *correctly* (acknowledging Dan's statements) should be
>>> even less stressful on the airframe than a steep turn.
>>
>>
>>
>> Huh?!?! Now you've got me worried even more.
>>
>> In a steep turn, you are distributing load EVENLY between the two
>> wings. In a roll, even at 1G or 0G, the wings are not evenly
>> loaded. They are twisting. The stresses on the wings in an aileron
>> or barrel roll are not to be compared with flying coordinated, with
>> unaccelerated bank. Your airframe is simply not designed to
>> withstand the twisting involved in aerobatic maneuvers. It is that
>> simple.
>>
>> I'm picturing your "vanilla" roll, where you're rolling so gently and
>> so slowly that you couldn't possibly overstress the airframe with
>> these twisting moments. Rolling so slowly that you probably can't
>> complete the roll before you're in a nose dive.
>>
>> I don't get it.
>>
>> Tim, I'm curious...in what planes have you done aerobatics?
>>
>>> So, Dan's post isn't all that bad...just a little maybe
>>> demeaning in tone as was pointed out. My guess is that it's
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm trying not to be patronizing here, but what I've read so far is a
>> clear sign of a lack of knowledge.
>>
>> do not archive
>> )_( Dan
>> RV-7 N714D
>> http://www.rvproject.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Message 43
| 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: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: linn walters <lwalters2@cfl.rr.com>
Scott, this part I totally agree with. However you forgot to include
"in an aircraft designed for it." Well, IMHO anyway!
I too love akro ..... which is why I've kept my Pitts all these years!
Linn
Scott Schmidt wrote:
>--> RV10-List message posted by: "Scott Schmidt" <sschmidt@ussynthetic.com>
>
>Do not archive.
>
>I just love aerobatics but I don't like it when people put fear in other
>people about aerobatics. It is absolutely safe with proper training and
>understanding of aerodynamic loading, airspeed considerations, and spin
>recovery training.
>
>-Scott
>
>
--
Message 44
| 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: | Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with aerobatics) |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Kent Forsythe <matronix.rv10@4sythe.com>
I just started the final assembly of my tailcone (ie. all parts drilled, dimpled
and primed) and I have clecoed the assembly back together. When I look at where
the side skins overlap the bottom skin, their seems to be a slight gap.
I realized that I did not run my edge seamer down the side skins to put a slight
bend on them. The problem is that with the skin already dimpled, the seamer
will not run down the edge without running over the dimples (and probably flattening
them out). One side looks ok but the other side has maybe a 1/64th gap
that I am not sure will come down when I rivet.
One thought I had was to un-cleco each side (one at a time) to release the pressure
on that curve, and then rivet the line of rivets that joins the two skins.
I think that will bring it down tight. After that, re-cleco and continue as
normal. Am I asking for trouble rivetting those skins together without the
sizes being fully clecoed?
Anyone have any ideas. I am open to suggestions.
Thanks in advance
Kent Forsythe
www.4sythe.com
40338
Tailcone
Message 45
| 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: | Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with aerobatics) |
The Avery tool will still work after you have dimpled.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Wing ribs
Feelin loopy and rolling with laughter. HA!
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kent Forsythe
Subject: RV10-List: Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with aerobatics)
--> RV10-List message posted by: Kent Forsythe
--> <matronix.rv10@4sythe.com>
I just started the final assembly of my tailcone (ie. all parts drilled, dimpled
and primed) and I have clecoed the assembly back together. When I look at where
the side skins overlap the bottom skin, their seems to be a slight gap.
I realized that I did not run my edge seamer down the side skins to put a slight
bend on them. The problem is that with the skin already dimpled, the seamer
will not run down the edge without running over the dimples (and probably flattening
them out). One side looks ok but the other side has maybe a 1/64th gap
that I am not sure will come down when I rivet.
One thought I had was to un-cleco each side (one at a time) to release the pressure
on that curve, and then rivet the line of rivets that joins the two skins.
I think that will bring it down tight. After that, re-cleco and continue as
normal. Am I asking for trouble rivetting those skins together without the
sizes being fully clecoed?
Anyone have any ideas. I am open to suggestions.
Thanks in advance
Kent Forsythe
www.4sythe.com
40338
Tailcone
Message 46
| 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: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
ROFL. Meaning "roll on floor laughing". "That's why good made parachutes."
Russ, I plan on flying close formation also. You lead or me. Just be
smooth over the top.
Bob K
Message 47
| 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: | Getting Trim System to work |
Lorenz,
The trim tab in the down position will cause the elevator to 'fly' up,
helping to hold the nose up, and since both trim tabs are used for this
action, it should provide some 'muscle' to get that task done. You're
right when you say that not much is required for nose down trim, so only
one trim tab is used for that function.
Carl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lorenz
Malmstr=F6m
Subject: RV10-List: Getting Trim System to work
Hi Guys
I have been trying to get the trim system to work =96 with limited
success. My best effort is 33=B0 down =96 instead of the 35=B0 required (right
side). The =91up=92-travel is 27=B0 - the required amount is not even
mentioned in the plans. I don=92t get both sides aligned in the 0=B0
position. I have checked the plans several times and can=92t find any
=91builder induced=92 error.
From those of you that have gone through this process I=92d like to know
if you had similar experiences and if so what the solution was.
Does anybody know the deflections? For a potentially nose heavy plane
I=92d rather know the exact up position than the down position.
Thanks in advance
Lorenz Malmstr=F6m
40280 Wings (& Trim System)
http://www.malmstrom.ch/RV10.htm
Message 48
| 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: Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with aerobatics) |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Hi Kent,
Like Mike said, the edge roller will work after dimpling. It may not
be quite as pretty, but it's the bottom anyway. I'd pull the skins off
and roll them just a tiny bit. It won't take much. Then rivet as
normal. If you just leave it, it might not matter...but may as well
do it unless you have a good reason not to.
As for the rolling...sorry....just remember, Russ Daves started it. ;)
(Gotcha Russ)
Tim
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
Current project: Doors/Windows
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Kent Forsythe wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Kent Forsythe <matronix.rv10@4sythe.com>
>
> I just started the final assembly of my tailcone (ie. all parts drilled, dimpled
and primed) and I have clecoed the assembly back together. When I look at
where the side skins overlap the bottom skin, their seems to be a slight gap.
I realized that I did not run my edge seamer down the side skins to put a slight
bend on them. The problem is that with the skin already dimpled, the seamer
will not run down the edge without running over the dimples (and probably
flattening them out). One side looks ok but the other side has maybe a 1/64th
gap that I am not sure will come down when I rivet.
>
> One thought I had was to un-cleco each side (one at a time) to release the pressure
on that curve, and then rivet the line of rivets that joins the two skins.
I think that will bring it down tight. After that, re-cleco and continue
as normal. Am I asking for trouble rivetting those skins together without the
sizes being fully clecoed?
>
> Anyone have any ideas. I am open to suggestions.
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Kent Forsythe
> www.4sythe.com
> 40338
> Tailcone
>
>
Message 49
| 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: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
FWIW. I have done loops and rolls in every aircraft I've flown except the
172, and the Funk. That includes Helios, Aero Commanders, Pipers, Etc, to
even include 2 different types of hang gliders. It's not a bad deal to go
upside down, but I have a lot of hours in academics and training in acro.
Sure if you are on the first flight you can kill your self. If you have
proper instruction in acro and a competent instructor, and time in the
maneuvers, you can do it. I would recommend that inverted spins not be
done, They really are not that much fun.
Bob K
Message 50
| 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 |
|
aerobatics)
| Subject: | Re: Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with |
aerobatics)
--> RV10-List message posted by: Rick <ricksked@earthlink.net>
Kent,
If you have a hand seamer you can use it to put a slight bend into the sheet. I've
done this in several areas and it works fine. Try it out on a piece of scrap
to get the feel but you only need a little bend to make it happen.
And please in the future when your refer to gap distances, use decimal instead
of frational measurements. .015625 of an inch sounds so small compared to 1/64".
Call Vans, and ask for Ken Scott...then tell him your concerns...lol...let
us know what he says.
Rick S.
40185
Wings level
Message 51
| 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: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Rick <ricksked@earthlink.net>
Bob,
Let Sid and I know your wishes in the "executor" area. Anyone have a business partner
bent on flying upside down?....jeeeezzzz why do I worry!!!!!!
Rick S.
40185
do not archive
Message 52
| 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 |
|
aerobatics)
| Subject: | Re: Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with |
aerobatics)
--> RV10-List message posted by: Rick <ricksked@earthlink.net>
Co'mon guys..."roll" with the flow, it's all "rolls" like water off a ducks back.
If you can't handle to fight "roll" with the punches.....sorry....I guess I'm
getting loopy...opps...sorry I mean I must be getting tired....pitch is out,
can't control attitude, she breaking up, she breaking up.....Steve Austin, a
man barely alive.........PS-he only glided to earth and botched the stabilized
approach concept...never rolled or looped it until impact.
Rick S.
do not archive
Message 53
| 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: Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Rick <ricksked@earthlink.net>
"Good" or "God" made parachutes???
Message 54
| 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: | Getting Trim System to work |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Rick <ricksked@earthlink.net>
Where were you all afternoon!!!.
That was a great post....thanks Scott. I've looped an F-4 and an F-16...but they
don't really care which way is up....Well that's not true but I will leave it
at that.
Rick S.
40185
Wings
do not archive
Message 55
| 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: | Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with aerobatics) |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Indran Chelvanayagam" <ichelva@netspace.net.au>
Kent - I made this mistake on the trailing edges of the elevators - ie
dimpled before running the edge seamer along the edge.
The way I got around it was to bend the skins (only slightly!) with 2 long
blocks of wood. For the bottom piece, I rounded the corner slightly, and cut
notches for the dimples. Then clamped the skin between this piece and
another straight piece. Once immobilised, I could use fingers/small block of
wood to create the slight bend. Turned out well, but much more work than
using the edge seamer in the first place.
Hope this helps
Indran Chelvanayagam
Bunbury, Western Australia
RV-10 Construction Hangar visible on Google Earth :
33d22'27.00"S, 115d40'56.59"E
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kent Forsythe
Subject: RV10-List: Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with
aerobatics)
--> RV10-List message posted by: Kent Forsythe
--> <matronix.rv10@4sythe.com>
I just started the final assembly of my tailcone (ie. all parts drilled,
dimpled and primed) and I have clecoed the assembly back together. When I
look at where the side skins overlap the bottom skin, their seems to be a
slight gap. I realized that I did not run my edge seamer down the side
skins to put a slight bend on them. The problem is that with the skin
already dimpled, the seamer will not run down the edge without running over
the dimples (and probably flattening them out). One side looks ok but the
other side has maybe a 1/64th gap that I am not sure will come down when I
rivet.
One thought I had was to un-cleco each side (one at a time) to release the
pressure on that curve, and then rivet the line of rivets that joins the two
skins. I think that will bring it down tight. After that, re-cleco and
continue as normal. Am I asking for trouble rivetting those skins together
without the sizes being fully clecoed?
Anyone have any ideas. I am open to suggestions.
Thanks in advance
Kent Forsythe
www.4sythe.com
40338
Tailcone
Message 56
| 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: Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with aerobatics) |
Boy, keeping up with this site is Timely, I'm at exactly the same point
as Kent and after reading his post, I went and checked to see how my
skins matched, I actually drove a couple (3) rivets along the seam
between the side skins and the bottom to see if it would snug down
'naturally' no joy on this end. I read Michael's post about being able
to use the Avery tool w/ the dimples. I don't have the Avery tool, but
the Cleveland ( don't know if there's a difference). My 1st reaction was
' you must be nuts there's no way to run the tool over the rivets' and
then after thinking a bit, I tried running the tool between the dimples
about 1 1\2" @ a time, it takes a little longer than the one pass prior
to dimpling, but it seemed to work out fine, I'll let you know tomorrow
when I drive some rivets.
PS. I'm taking a tip from Mike How and Sean Steven's and back riveting
as much as possible, I did the bottom skin and it worked just fine. I
stopped by the Iron salvage/supply and found a piece of 1/4" plate about
12" x 16". They charged me $15 for it. took the belt sander to it to
clean it up a bit, and I've now got a Jumbo back rivet plate!!
Deems Davis
#406 tailcone
http://www.deemsrv10.com
>
>
Message 57
| 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: Tailcone question (sorry...nothing to do with aerobatics) |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Hi again Kent,
I just peeked at my tailcone. If you're referring to the seams that
are on the bottom of the plane, where the skins wrap down and attach
to the belly pan, I can't see that I even rolled mine. Maybe I did,
and just didn't roll them much, but I don't remember doing it (it's
been a long time though), and I can't see any bend. The seam is
very nice and tight on mine though.
That may ease your mind a bit if you've already started riveting.
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170
Current project: Doors/Windows
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Kent Forsythe wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Kent Forsythe
> <matronix.rv10@4sythe.com>
>
> I just started the final assembly of my tailcone (ie. all parts
> drilled, dimpled and primed) and I have clecoed the assembly back
> together. When I look at where the side skins overlap the bottom
> skin, their seems to be a slight gap. I realized that I did not run
> my edge seamer down the side skins to put a slight bend on them. The
> problem is that with the skin already dimpled, the seamer will not
> run down the edge without running over the dimples (and probably
> flattening them out). One side looks ok but the other side has maybe
> a 1/64th gap that I am not sure will come down when I rivet.
>
> One thought I had was to un-cleco each side (one at a time) to
> release the pressure on that curve, and then rivet the line of rivets
> that joins the two skins. I think that will bring it down tight.
> After that, re-cleco and continue as normal. Am I asking for trouble
> rivetting those skins together without the sizes being fully clecoed?
>
>
> Anyone have any ideas. I am open to suggestions.
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Kent Forsythe www.4sythe.com 40338 Tailcone
>
>
>
>
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! --
|