Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:47 AM - Re: FW: Hole in wing (RAS)
2. 04:52 AM - Re: Re: Hugo rv10-40456 ()
3. 05:36 AM - Re: In a truck (Jesse Saint)
4. 05:52 AM - Re: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking for a copy of RTCA/DO-229C (Eric Ekberg)
5. 06:07 AM - Re: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking for a copy of RTCA/DO-229C (Tim Dawson-Townsend)
6. 08:07 AM - Re: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking for a copy of RTCA/DO-229C (Deems Davis)
7. 08:21 AM - Re: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking for a copy of RTCA/DO-229C (Tim Dawson-Townsend)
8. 08:32 AM - Re: Re: Trailing Edges (Vern W. Smith)
9. 09:15 AM - Breckenridges (John Jessen)
10. 09:51 AM - Re: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking for a copy of RTCA/DO-229C (Bill DeRouchey)
11. 09:55 AM - Re: Trailing Edges (zackrv8)
12. 10:16 AM - RV Fly-In (Mike Lauritsen - Work)
13. 10:20 AM - Re: Re: Trailing Edges (Jesse Saint)
14. 10:51 AM - Re: RV Fly-In (Doerr, Ray R [NTK])
15. 10:59 AM - Re: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking for a copy of RTCA/DO-229C (Tim Dawson-Townsend)
16. 11:32 AM - Windows & Weld-10 (Bill DeRouchey)
17. 11:51 AM - Re: Windows & Weld-10 (Conti, Rick)
18. 01:16 PM - Re: RV Fly-In (Condrey, Bob (US SSA))
19. 01:36 PM - Re: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking for a copy of RTCA/DO-229C (David McNeill)
20. 01:47 PM - Re: Windows & Weld-10 (David McNeill)
21. 01:58 PM - Re: Trailing Edges (zackrv8)
22. 03:29 PM - Re: Re: Trailing Edges (Jesse Saint)
23. 03:30 PM - Re: Re: Trailing Edges (Vern W. Smith)
24. 04:14 PM - Re: Windows & Weld-10 (KiloPapa)
25. 08:03 PM - Suggestion for purchasing a Carb for my 0-320. (jdalton77)
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: FW: Hole in wing |
FW: Hole in winghi,
repair as per Van's suggestions. Cut a hole big enough in the rear
baffle to pass your hand through with a fly cutter. Clean out the tank,
deburr the inside of the damage properly, make a patch and dimple both
skin and patch, plenty of proseal and rivet the patch on. Then cut a
circular patch to cover the hole in the rear baffle.
Using access through the rear baffle is the Van's recommended procedure
to rectify any leaks when testing the tanks for leaks after
construction. This is in the manual.
However, I would the parts from Van's and build a new tank altogether as
the profile of the tank might be a bit off because of the bouncing, it
doesn't look as if it cut straight through on the first go. use the list
on the Van's webstore.
----- Original Message -----
From: Tim Dawson-Townsend
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 2:51 AM
Subject: RV10-List: FW: Hole in wing
Here's a new one.
It's a long story, but we were transporting our RV-10 inside a 26'
Penske rental truck. (it will fit, if you can believe it!)
Unfortunately, the crap that passes for roads in parts of this country
bounced things around enough that one of our wings, held vertically in a
cradle, shifted far enough that it contacted the fuselage step. The
result was a small hole, as illustrated in the attached photos. More
unfortunately, this is the fuel tank.
So what to do? One current thought is to patch as follows:
1. Keeping wing vertical, put some fuel into the tank and alllow it to
flow out the hole, flushing any aluminum dust out of inside of the tank.
2. Create a small patch just large enough to cover the hole.
3. Using "flush" blind rivets and some ProSeal, attach the patch over
the hole.
The hole isn't really that big, so I'm not too concerned,
structure-wise, as long as we can get a patch that is secure and not
likely to leak.
Comments? Ideas?
Tim Dawson-Townsend
40025
--
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: Hugo rv10-40456 |
--> RV10-List message posted by: <gommone7@bellsouth.net>
Thanks for the answers-sugestions, I thinks the cherry max are the logical solutions,few
more dollars but far more safe then try to install a bucking bar by
feeling inside the wing.
Thanks a lot .
Hugo
do not archive
>
> From: "Russell Daves" <dav1111@cox.net>
> Date: 2006/06/11 Sun PM 06:30:09 EDT
> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Hugo rv10-40456
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Russell Daves" <dav1111@cox.net>
>
> On the rivets that were really hard to reach I used Cherry Max Pop Rivets.
>
> Russ Daves
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>
> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 6:52 AM
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Hugo rv10-40456
>
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>
>
> I don?t know about the QB wing but that fairing is supposed to be installed
> before the bottom skin goes on. If I remember right, the bottom skin is
> installed by the builder in the QB wings, right? If your bottom skin is
> truly already on, then you might have to use blind rivets, but I would ask
> Van's first if this is acceptable. You might be able to access some of the
> rivets through inspection plates, but not very many.
>
> Do not archive.
>
> Jesse Saint
> I-TEC, Inc.
> jesse@itecusa.org
> www.itecusa.org
> W: 352-465-4545
> C: 352-427-0285
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> gommone7@bellsouth.net
> Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 7:17 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: Hugo rv10-40456
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: <gommone7@bellsouth.net>
>
> Good morning at all.
> I just found a problem in the wings,I
> hope I miss somethings.
> for the builders just finish the QB wings,how is suppose to rivet the flap
> gap fairing against the back spar ,when the bottom skin is allready in
> place,in the instruction say cleco and rivet,thats it.please tell me I miss
> some instruction.
> Thanks for the help,Hugo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Since we=92re on this subject, here=92s a couple of pictures of our
=93truck=94
packing. Everything was in crates except the fuselage and HS, then very
well secured several ways. The width of the gear was a press-fit into
the
container, but it did fit. We just lifted it up and in, but ramps would
be
nice also if you can keep them from sliding or falling off.
We will see tomorrow how everything stayed where we put it.
An yes, it will fit in a 20=92, pero con las justas.
Do not archive.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
HYPERLINK "mailto:jesse@itecusa.org"jesse@itecusa.org
HYPERLINK "http://www.itecusa.org"www.itecusa.org
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim
Dawson-Townsend
Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 10:58 PM
Subject: RV10-List: In a truck
Here's a shot of the loaded truck for those interested . . . .
TDT
40025
do not archive
--
--
--
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking for a copy |
of RTCA/DO-229C
I work on WAAS for the FAA and have the MOPS (229c) on pdf. There is lots
of good information in the document useful for building a WAAS receiver, but
I don't think you'll find what you are looking for there. The word
experimental occurs only 1 time and in the context of "findings based on
experimental data".
Eric
RV-10 #583 - empennage
On 6/11/06, Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net> wrote:
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>
>
> I recently read an article posted on Direct2. website
> http://www.direct2avionics.com/pdfs/Using_GPS_for_IFR_flight.pd by a
> Phd CFII that concludes that for EXPERIMENTAL aircraft, it was not
> necessary for the aircraft to be equipped with a CERTIFIED GPS receiver
> to legally file and fly IFR, PROVIDED that you, the pilot/mfg can
> evaluate the GPS functionality, and find it provides all of the
> necessary pilot input (as defined in the TSO) for IFR flight.
>
> This sounded like it was worth looking into. I verified this opinion
> with a competitor of Direct2. So off I go to study TSO-C146 the Standard
> document for WAAS GPS, unfortunately there is nothing in the document
> regarding functional requirements other than a reference to:
> RTCA/DO-229B (which I learned has since been superceeded w/
> RTCA/DO-229C). Another Google search reveals that this document is
> available but with a cost which ranged from $108-370 per copy.
> Does anyone know of a 'library' where this document could be 'rented' or
> checked-out. a couple hundred bucks is a steep price for someone just
> investigating an idea/thought.
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> Fuse
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>
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: | Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking for a copy |
of RTCA/DO-229C
Yeah, in general, TSOs are really equipment specs, not operational
specs, and TSO'ed equipment just helps with the certification of an
aircraft installation by STC or TC. (in fact, certified aircraft can
even get away with non-TSO equipment, if they can convince the FAA to
allow it under their TC.)
For experimental aircraft, in general, TSOs are not really necessary,
since there is no STC or TC. (just look at all of us using GRT or other
"non-TSO'ed" equipment for engine instruments, and the FAA doesn't ask
us to prove they meet some spec.)
However, the FAA may have blurred lines by issuing ACs that blend
operational and equipment requirements. (specific to IFR GPS ops, etc.)
Isn't FAA certification a wonderfully transparent and easy process?
TDT
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Ekberg
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 8:50 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking
for a copy of RTCA/DO-229C
I work on WAAS for the FAA and have the MOPS (229c) on pdf. There is
lots of good information in the document useful for building a WAAS
receiver, but I don't think you'll find what you are looking for there.
The word experimental occurs only 1 time and in the context of "findings
based on experimental data".
Eric
RV-10 #583 - empennage
On 6/11/06, Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net> wrote:
--> RV10-List message posted by: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net >
I recently read an article posted on Direct2. website
http://www.direct2avionics.com/pdfs/Using_GPS_for_IFR_flight.pd by a
Phd CFII that concludes that for EXPERIMENTAL aircraft, it was not
necessary for the aircraft to be equipped with a CERTIFIED GPS receiver
to legally file and fly IFR, PROVIDED that you, the pilot/mfg can
evaluate the GPS functionality, and find it provides all of the
necessary pilot input (as defined in the TSO) for IFR flight.
This sounded like it was worth looking into. I verified this opinion
with a competitor of Direct2. So off I go to study TSO-C146 the Standard
document for WAAS GPS, unfortunately there is nothing in the document
regarding functional requirements other than a reference to:
RTCA/DO-229B (which I learned has since been superceeded w/
RTCA/DO-229C). Another Google search reveals that this document is
available but with a cost which ranged from $108-370 per copy.
Does anyone know of a 'library' where this document could be 'rented' or
checked-out. a couple hundred bucks is a steep price for someone just
investigating an idea/thought.
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse
http://deemsrv10.com/
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: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking for a |
copy of RTCA/DO-229C
--> RV10-List message posted by: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>
I understand the part about Experimental aircraft not requiring TSO'd or
certified equipment, but there has been an understanding that in order
to file and fly IFR/G you needed to have an IFR tso'd GPS on board. The
article I read stated that you did not if you as the pilot/builder could
determine that the GPS you used met the functional requirements of the
TSO. Hence the inquiry re 229C to find out just what hurdles are required.
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse
http://deemsrv10.com/
Tim Dawson-Townsend wrote:
> Yeah, in general, TSOs are really equipment specs, not operational
> specs, and TSOed equipment just helps with the certification of an
> aircraft installation by STC or TC. (in fact, certified aircraft can
> even get away with non-TSO equipment, if they can convince the FAA to
> allow it under their TC.)
>
> For experimental aircraft, in general, TSOs are not really necessary,
> since there is no STC or TC. (just look at all of us using GRT or
> other non-TSOed equipment for engine instruments, and the FAA
> doesnt ask us to prove they meet some spec.)
>
> However, the FAA may have blurred lines by issuing ACs that blend
> operational and equipment requirements. (specific to IFR GPS ops, etc.)
>
> Isnt FAA certification a wonderfully transparent and easy process?
>
> TDT
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Eric Ekberg
> *Sent:* Monday, June 12, 2006 8:50 AM
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or
> looking for a copy of RTCA/DO-229C
>
> I work on WAAS for the FAA and have the MOPS (229c) on pdf. There is
> lots of good information in the document useful for building a WAAS
> receiver, but I don't think you'll find what you are looking for
> there. The word experimental occurs only 1 time and in the context of
> "findings based on experimental data".
>
> Eric
>
> RV-10 #583 - empennage
>
>
> On 6/11/06, *Deems Davis* <deemsdavis@cox.net
> <mailto:deemsdavis@cox.net>> wrote:
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net
> <mailto:deemsdavis@cox.net>>
>
> I recently read an article posted on Direct2. website
> http://www.direct2avionics.com/pdfs/Using_GPS_for_IFR_flight.pd by a
> Phd CFII that concludes that for EXPERIMENTAL aircraft, it was not
> necessary for the aircraft to be equipped with a CERTIFIED GPS receiver
> to legally file and fly IFR, PROVIDED that you, the pilot/mfg can
> evaluate the GPS functionality, and find it provides all of the
> necessary pilot input (as defined in the TSO) for IFR flight.
>
> This sounded like it was worth looking into. I verified this opinion
> with a competitor of Direct2. So off I go to study TSO-C146 the Standard
> document for WAAS GPS, unfortunately there is nothing in the document
> regarding functional requirements other than a reference to:
> RTCA/DO-229B (which I learned has since been superceeded w/
> RTCA/DO-229C). Another Google search reveals that this document is
> available but with a cost which ranged from $108-370 per copy.
> Does anyone know of a 'library' where this document could be 'rented' or
> checked-out. a couple hundred bucks is a steep price for someone just
> investigating an idea/thought.
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> Fuse
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>
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: | Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking for a |
copy of RTCA/DO-229C
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Tim Dawson-Townsend" <Tdawson@Avidyne.com>
Well, as someone else pointed out, integrity monitoring is a key feature
of IFR GPS units, so if a unit lacks that, it's a non-starter if you are
trying to match the "functional requirements" of the TSO.
Conceptually, you should be able to test the "functional requirements"
of a GPS unit without knowing the inside of it, but you will probably
need an anechoic chamber and a GPS signal simulator. You can't fly
around and compare your results to a map . . .
TDT
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 11:02 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking
for a copy of RTCA/DO-229C
--> RV10-List message posted by: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>
I understand the part about Experimental aircraft not requiring TSO'd or
certified equipment, but there has been an understanding that in order
to file and fly IFR/G you needed to have an IFR tso'd GPS on board. The
article I read stated that you did not if you as the pilot/builder could
determine that the GPS you used met the functional requirements of the
TSO. Hence the inquiry re 229C to find out just what hurdles are
required.
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse
http://deemsrv10.com/
Tim Dawson-Townsend wrote:
> Yeah, in general, TSOs are really equipment specs, not operational
> specs, and TSO'ed equipment just helps with the certification of an
> aircraft installation by STC or TC. (in fact, certified aircraft can
> even get away with non-TSO equipment, if they can convince the FAA to
> allow it under their TC.)
>
> For experimental aircraft, in general, TSOs are not really necessary,
> since there is no STC or TC. (just look at all of us using GRT or
> other "non-TSO'ed" equipment for engine instruments, and the FAA
> doesn't ask us to prove they meet some spec.)
>
> However, the FAA may have blurred lines by issuing ACs that blend
> operational and equipment requirements. (specific to IFR GPS ops,
etc.)
>
> Isn't FAA certification a wonderfully transparent and easy process?
>
> TDT
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Eric
Ekberg
> *Sent:* Monday, June 12, 2006 8:50 AM
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or
> looking for a copy of RTCA/DO-229C
>
> I work on WAAS for the FAA and have the MOPS (229c) on pdf. There is
> lots of good information in the document useful for building a WAAS
> receiver, but I don't think you'll find what you are looking for
> there. The word experimental occurs only 1 time and in the context of
> "findings based on experimental data".
>
> Eric
>
> RV-10 #583 - empennage
>
>
> On 6/11/06, *Deems Davis* <deemsdavis@cox.net
> <mailto:deemsdavis@cox.net>> wrote:
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net
> <mailto:deemsdavis@cox.net>>
>
> I recently read an article posted on Direct2. website
> http://www.direct2avionics.com/pdfs/Using_GPS_for_IFR_flight.pd by a
> Phd CFII that concludes that for EXPERIMENTAL aircraft, it was not
> necessary for the aircraft to be equipped with a CERTIFIED GPS
receiver
> to legally file and fly IFR, PROVIDED that you, the pilot/mfg can
> evaluate the GPS functionality, and find it provides all of the
> necessary pilot input (as defined in the TSO) for IFR flight.
>
> This sounded like it was worth looking into. I verified this opinion
> with a competitor of Direct2. So off I go to study TSO-C146 the
Standard
> document for WAAS GPS, unfortunately there is nothing in the document
> regarding functional requirements other than a reference to:
> RTCA/DO-229B (which I learned has since been superceeded w/
> RTCA/DO-229C). Another Google search reveals that this document is
> available but with a cost which ranged from $108-370 per copy.
> Does anyone know of a 'library' where this document could be 'rented'
or
> checked-out. a couple hundred bucks is a steep price for someone just
> investigating an idea/thought.
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> Fuse
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Trailing Edges |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Vern W. Smith" <Vern@teclabsinc.com>
Hi Zack,
I talked to Scott at Van's about control surface twist. He said for the
ailerons 3/16" was the QC limit for the QB ailerons that come into the
factory. This is measured by laying the aileron on a flat surface,
finding the corner that is not sitting flat on the table and measuring
the distant between that spot on the skin and the table top.
I also asked if the 3/16" rule applied to the flaps and was told if one
can get 3/16" or less great. But it is a very long surface and not as
critical as the aileron (though still important) because the flap is
fixed in position where the aileron "floats" in the air stream. So
twists in an aileron tend to change the air flow over them and push them
out of alignment in flight. Hope this is of help.
Vern Smith (#40324 flaps done going back to the fuel tanks!)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of zackrv8
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 12:43 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: Trailing Edges
--> RV10-List message posted by: "zackrv8" <zackrv8@verizon.net>
Rick and Jay,
Thanks for the replies. I just found out that I indeed have a
"twisted" flap. You have to take great care when builing those long
pieces. Inducing a twist or warp is very, very easy.
My flaps are so bad (in my opinion) that I need to redo them. I will
try drilling out the trailing edge rivets and use a heat gun to break
the 2216 epoxy. If I booger it up, Vans will get more of my money!
For the rest of you building the flaps, take great care to follow the
instructions and make sure you have a flat table and weigh the flap down
like the plans call for.
Zack
--------
RV8 #80125
RV10 # 40512
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 |
|
--> RV10-List message posted by: "John Jessen" <jjessen@rcn.com>
Just thought us brothers and sisters in RV-10 land should know (and be
forewarned of):
Fellow RV-10 builder, Bruce Breckenridge, on Saturday, June 10, 2006,
followed in the footsteps of his beautiful wife, and is now a pilot with all
the privileges and responsibilities thereof, therein, thereto and therefore!
Bruce and Becky! Congratulations! Just remember, the PIC in the right seat
must at all times be polite to the PIC in the left seat, no matter how wrong
and ignorant he (or she) appears to be! Enjoy!
All our best,
John Jessen
~328 Tailcone
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: | Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking for a copy |
of RTCA/DO-229C
I have two questions regarding blending experimental equipment with certified equipment.
In July 2003 I ordered an RV-10 kit and began designing out all vacuum-based
components ending up with a complete IFR glass panel. The PFD/EFIS was implemented
from scratch.
The panel is highly integrated and the main pieces are:
1) Garmin 430 and 330.
2) Own display computer driving a 10.4" sunlight rated industrial LCD.
3) Own calibrated air data computer with high sensitivity.
4) Commercial 360 degree, accurate solid state gyro pack.
5) Own black box to convert all the discretes and analog outputs from the Garmin
430 to packets.
6) Good IFR Tru-Trak 2-axis autopilot.
All the above has been tested, prototyped and installed in our RV-10. First flight
will occur in July.
My two questions are:
Since I have pulled the Garmin Glideslope/Localizer CDI and annunicators into
my
experimental display does this negate my legal ability to fly IFR?
Since my experimental air data computer is supplying pressure altitude to
the
Garmin 330 transponder does this satisfy all VFR & IFR requirements? I will
have a licensed avionics shop perform a standard pitot/static & transponder
certification.
Bill DeRouchey
N939SB, RV-10 kit #40029
billderou@yahoo.com
the requiRe: the blending operational and equipment requirements as mentioned
by Tim Dawson-Townsend
Tim Dawson-Townsend <Tdawson@avidyne.com> wrote:
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) } Yeah, in general, TSOs
are really equipment specs, not operational specs, and TSOed equipment just
helps with the certification of an aircraft installation by STC or TC. (in fact,
certified aircraft can even get away with non-TSO equipment, if they can convince
the FAA to allow it under their TC.)
For experimental aircraft, in general, TSOs are not really necessary, since there
is no STC or TC. (just look at all of us using GRT or other non-TSOed equipment
for engine instruments, and the FAA doesnt ask us to prove they meet some
spec.)
However, the FAA may have blurred lines by issuing ACs that blend operational
and equipment requirements. (specific to IFR GPS ops, etc.)
Isnt FAA certification a wonderfully transparent and easy process?
TDT
---------------------------------
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Ekberg
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 8:50 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking for a copy
of RTCA/DO-229C
I work on WAAS for the FAA and have the MOPS (229c) on pdf. There is lots
of good information in the document useful for building a WAAS receiver, but I
don't think you'll find what you are looking for there. The word experimental
occurs only 1 time and in the context of "findings based on experimental data".
Eric
RV-10 #583 - empennage
On 6/11/06, Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net> wrote:
--> RV10-List message posted by: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net >
I recently read an article posted on Direct2. website
http://www.direct2avionics.com/pdfs/Using_GPS_for_IFR_flight.pd by a
Phd CFII that concludes that for EXPERIMENTAL aircraft, it was not
necessary for the aircraft to be equipped with a CERTIFIED GPS receiver
to legally file and fly IFR, PROVIDED that you, the pilot/mfg can
evaluate the GPS functionality, and find it provides all of the
necessary pilot input (as defined in the TSO) for IFR flight.
This sounded like it was worth looking into. I verified this opinion
with a competitor of Direct2. So off I go to study TSO-C146 the Standard
document for WAAS GPS, unfortunately there is nothing in the document
regarding functional requirements other than a reference to:
RTCA/DO-229B (which I learned has since been superceeded w/
RTCA/DO-229C). Another Google search reveals that this document is
available but with a cost which ranged from $108-370 per copy.
Does anyone know of a 'library' where this document could be 'rented' or
checked-out. a couple hundred bucks is a steep price for someone just
investigating an idea/thought.
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse
http://deemsrv10.com/
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Trailing Edges |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "zackrv8" <zackrv8@verizon.net>
Vern,
Roger everything you said. I agree. I mounted the right flap on the wing the
other day and it was much, much straighter than the left flap. Definetly had
a twist in the right flap. Mine was more pronounced than 3/16 inch.
Couple things bother me though...My right flap had the bad twist in it and it
nested in between the top and bottom wing skin very nicely (this is the flap
with the bad twist in it). However, the left flap which is almost straight, rubs
pretty good between the top and bottom wing skins in the "flap up" position.
Why?
Also, I noticed near the "wing root" area of the flap (both flaps actually),
that the flap protrudes down below the bottom wing skin yet is flush with the
bottom wing skin near the "outboard" area of the flap Again...why?
Zack
--------
RV8 #80125
RV10 # 40512
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=40150#40150
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 |
|
Just a reminder to those in the area (or with a completed RV). The Boone RV
fly in is this Saturday. Follow this link for more details.
http://wcaircraft.com/boonervday.html
Thanks,
Mike
Mike Lauritsen
Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
2225 First St.
Boone, Iowa 50036
515-432-6794
mike@cleavelandtool.com
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: Trailing Edges |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>
I'm not sure what exactly you are saying in the last paragraph, but as far
as the flap hitting the fuse when it is in the up position, that is normal
from my experience. I guess it is good to have that as close as possible,
so they make it tight tolerance in design which requires some trimming to
get it to fit just right. We has to do some substantial trimming (filing
mainly) on all 4 flaps that I have fit to get them to fit nicely without
scraping/rubbing the fuse. As far as the twist, I have not noticed
anything, but we pretty much followed the pattern of weighing it down on the
table to hold it flat while riveting the trailing edge...I think.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of zackrv8
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 12:55 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: Trailing Edges
--> RV10-List message posted by: "zackrv8" <zackrv8@verizon.net>
Vern,
Roger everything you said. I agree. I mounted the right flap on the wing
the other day and it was much, much straighter than the left flap.
Definetly had a twist in the right flap. Mine was more pronounced than 3/16
inch.
Couple things bother me though...My right flap had the bad twist in it and
it nested in between the top and bottom wing skin very nicely (this is the
flap with the bad twist in it). However, the left flap which is almost
straight, rubs pretty good between the top and bottom wing skins in the
"flap up" position. Why?
Also, I noticed near the "wing root" area of the flap (both flaps
actually), that the flap protrudes down below the bottom wing skin yet is
flush with the bottom wing skin near the "outboard" area of the flap
Again...why?
Zack
--------
RV8 #80125
RV10 # 40512
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=40150#40150
--
--
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 |
|
I was planning on being there with my RV-10 (40250) N519RV.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mike
Lauritsen - Work
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 12:15 PM
Subject: RV10-List: RV Fly-In
Just a reminder to those in the area (or with a completed RV). The
Boone RV fly in is this Saturday. Follow this link for more details...
http://wcaircraft.com/boonervday.html
Thanks,
Mike
Mike Lauritsen
Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
2225 First St.
Boone, Iowa 50036
515-432-6794
mike@cleavelandtool.com
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking for a copy |
of RTCA/DO-229C
Sounds like you're good to go to me. It's not TSO'ed equipment, but it
does the necessary functions. To impress the inspector, you could even
borrow a Nav radio test set and drive the Garmin with some simulated
VOR/LOC and GS signals to verify your deviation indicator.
TDT
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
DeRouchey
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 12:50 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking
for a copy of RTCA/DO-229C
I have two questions regarding blending experimental equipment with
certified equipment.
In July 2003 I ordered an RV-10 kit and began designing out all
vacuum-based components ending up with a complete IFR glass panel. The
PFD/EFIS was implemented from scratch.
The panel is highly integrated and the main pieces are:
1) Garmin 430 and 330.
2) Own display computer driving a 10.4" sunlight rated industrial LCD.
3) Own calibrated air data computer with high sensitivity.
4) Commercial 360 degree, accurate solid state gyro pack.
5) Own black box to convert all the discretes and analog outputs from
the Garmin 430 to packets.
6) Good IFR Tru-Trak 2-axis autopilot.
All the above has been tested, prototyped and installed in our RV-10.
First flight will occur in July.
My two questions are:
Since I have pulled the Garmin Glideslope/Localizer CDI and
annunicators into my
experimental display does this negate my legal ability to fly IFR?
Since my experimental air data computer is supplying pressure
altitude to the
Garmin 330 transponder does this satisfy all VFR & IFR requirements?
I will
have a licensed avionics shop perform a standard pitot/static &
transponder
certification.
Bill DeRouchey
N939SB, RV-10 kit #40029
billderou@yahoo.com
the requiRe: the blending operational and equipment requirements as
mentioned by Tim Dawson-Townsend
Tim Dawson-Townsend <Tdawson@avidyne.com> wrote:
Yeah, in general, TSOs are really equipment specs, not
operational specs, and TSO'ed equipment just helps with the
certification of an aircraft installation by STC or TC. (in fact,
certified aircraft can even get away with non-TSO equipment, if they can
convince the FAA to allow it under their TC.)
For experimental aircraft, in general, TSOs are not really
necessary, since there is no STC or TC. (just look at all of us using
GRT or other "non-TSO'ed" equipment for engine instruments, and the FAA
doesn't ask us to prove they meet some spec.)
However, the FAA may have blurred lines by issuing ACs that
blend operational and equipment requirements. (specific to IFR GPS ops,
etc.)
Isn't FAA certification a wonderfully transparent and easy
process?
TDT
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Ekberg
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 8:50 AM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or
looking for a copy of RTCA/DO-229C
I work on WAAS for the FAA and have the MOPS (229c) on pdf.
There is lots of good information in the document useful for building a
WAAS receiver, but I don't think you'll find what you are looking for
there. The word experimental occurs only 1 time and in the context of
"findings based on experimental data".
Eric
RV-10 #583 - empennage
On 6/11/06, Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net> wrote:
--> RV10-List message posted by: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net
>
I recently read an article posted on Direct2. website
http://www.direct2avionics.com/pdfs/Using_GPS_for_IFR_flight.pd
by a
Phd CFII that concludes that for EXPERIMENTAL aircraft, it was
not
necessary for the aircraft to be equipped with a CERTIFIED GPS
receiver
to legally file and fly IFR, PROVIDED that you, the pilot/mfg
can
evaluate the GPS functionality, and find it provides all of the
necessary pilot input (as defined in the TSO) for IFR flight.
This sounded like it was worth looking into. I verified this
opinion
with a competitor of Direct2. So off I go to study TSO-C146 the
Standard
document for WAAS GPS, unfortunately there is nothing in the
document
regarding functional requirements other than a reference to:
RTCA/DO-229B (which I learned has since been superceeded w/
RTCA/DO-229C). Another Google search reveals that this document
is
available but with a cost which ranged from $108-370 per copy.
Does anyone know of a 'library' where this document could be
'rented' or
checked-out. a couple hundred bucks is a steep price for someone
just
investigating an idea/thought.
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse
http://deemsrv10.com/
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: | Windows & Weld-10 |
I just finished an excellent job of installing the windscreen in my RV-10 and would
like to share the mistakes of installing the previous 4 windows.
In hindsight, three problems needed to be solved:
1) The Weld-10 mix was skinning over too fast and curing within 10 to 15
minutes. Learned that storing package at room temperature will keep the catalyst
from precipitating solids and by mixing only 75% of what is in the small
bottle will slow the cure appreciably. However, the mix will still skin over quickly
making it difficult to work a fillet around the inside edge. Applying plastic
tape to the inside of the window perimeter 3/16 from the edge helps the
cleanup significantly but this tape must be removed quickly or it will be captured
by the mix.
2) Vanss instructions describe the mix should be applied in a thin layer.
This and the ability to not apply good pressure normal to the window edge caused
may voids between the surface of the window and its fiberglass frame. Suggest
applying mix 3/16 thick and covering both the horizontal and vertical edges
of the window indentation in the fiberglass. Do not apply any mix to the window.
It is easier to clean up the excess than fix the voids.
3) A good method to apply suitable holding force took several trials. The
duct tape method is fair but will not pull the plexiglass down tight. It can
physically hold the window against the mix but will not spread the mix. An expert
suggested notching the plexiglass edge, drilling holes through the frame
and using clecos to hold it tight. After the mix set I noticed small cracks deep
underneath the clecos on the rear windows. I can only hope the mix will stop
the cracks from progressing or I must drill some large holes. For the windscreen,
I notched the plexiglass edge, drilled #30 holes through the fiberglass
frame and devised a controllable clamping force using .041 safety wire. Cut up
extra #4 Tefzel wire into 1.5 pieces (Youll find something suitable looking
about). Cut 16 of safety wire and fold it over the center of the Tefzel wire and
twist it a small amount. Now you have a handle with two long tails. Mark on
the window where the notches are so you can
find the holes when they are covered with the Weld-10. Apply the mix to the frame
and gently press the window exactly in place. Quickly cleco the clips to the
metal surface to keep the windscreen from sliding down. With the Tefzel handle
on the outside, stuff the wire through the holes into the inner cabin. Inside
the cabin insert another piece of Tefzel between the wires and pull down twisting
with safety pliers. A helper outside can watch the window seat and stop
the person on the safety pliers from exerting too much pressure. The Tefzel
outer cover will not mark the window nor stick to the mix. The #30 holes can be
easily filled and painted.
Bill DeRouchey
RV-10 N939SB, builder 40029
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: | Windows & Weld-10 |
Thanks Bill!!
Thank You
Rick Conti
office: 703 - 414 - 6141
blackberry: 571 - 215 - 6134
________________________________
From: Bill DeRouchey [mailto:billderou@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 2:32 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Windows & Weld-10
I just finished an excellent job of installing the windscreen in my
RV-10 and would like to share the mistakes of installing the previous 4
windows.
In hindsight, three problems needed to be solved:
1) The Weld-10 mix was skinning over too fast and curing within 10
to 15 minutes. Learned that storing package at room temperature will
keep the catalyst from precipitating solids and by mixing only 75% of
what is in the small bottle will slow the cure appreciably. However, the
mix will still skin over quickly making it difficult to work a fillet
around the inside edge. Applying plastic tape to the inside of the
window perimeter 3/16" from the edge helps the cleanup significantly but
this tape must be removed quickly or it will be captured by the mix.
2) Vans's instructions describe the mix should be applied in a thin
layer. This and the ability to not apply good pressure normal to the
window edge caused may voids between the surface of the window and its
fiberglass frame. Suggest applying mix 3/16" thick and covering both the
horizontal and vertical edges of the window indentation in the
fiberglass. Do not apply any mix to the window. It is easier to clean up
the excess than fix the voids.
3) A good method to apply suitable holding force took several
trials. The duct tape method is fair but will not pull the plexiglass
down tight. It can physically hold the window against the mix but will
not spread the mix. An "expert" suggested notching the plexiglass edge,
drilling holes through the frame and using clecos to hold it tight.
After the mix set I noticed small cracks deep underneath the clecos on
the rear windows. I can only hope the mix will stop the cracks from
progressing or I must drill some large holes. For the windscreen, I
notched the plexiglass edge, drilled #30 holes through the fiberglass
frame and devised a controllable clamping force using .041 safety wire.
Cut up extra #4 Tefzel wire into 1.5" pieces (You'll find something
suitable looking about). Cut 16" of safety wire and fold it over the
center of the Tefzel wire and twist it a small amount. Now you have a
handle with two long tails. Mark on the window where the notches are so
you can find the holes when they are covered with the Weld-10. Apply the
mix to the frame and gently press the window exactly in place. Quickly
cleco the clips to the metal surface to keep the windscreen from sliding
down. With the Tefzel "handle" on the outside, stuff the wire through
the holes into the inner cabin. Inside the cabin insert another piece of
Tefzel between the wires and pull down twisting with safety pliers. A
helper outside can watch the window seat and stop the person on the
safety pliers from exerting too much pressure. The Tefzel outer cover
will not mark the window nor stick to the mix. The #30 holes can be
easily filled and painted.
Bill DeRouchey
RV-10 N939SB, builder 40029
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 |
|
I'll be there, thanks!
Bob
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mike
Lauritsen - Work
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 12:15 PM
Subject: RV10-List: RV Fly-In
Just a reminder to those in the area (or with a completed RV). The
Boone RV fly in is this Saturday. Follow this link for more details...
http://wcaircraft.com/boonervday.html
Thanks,
Mike
Mike Lauritsen
Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
2225 First St.
Boone, Iowa 50036
515-432-6794
mike@cleavelandtool.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: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or looking for a copy |
of RTCA/DO-229C
Perhaps I don't understand but has anybody been questioned by the FAA or
ATC about whether they have TSOed Class A1 equipment on board and
operational?
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill DeRouchey
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 9:50 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or
looking for a copy of RTCA/DO-229C
I have two questions regarding blending experimental equipment with
certified equipment.
In July 2003 I ordered an RV-10 kit and began designing out all
vacuum-based components ending up with a complete IFR glass panel. The
PFD/EFIS was implemented from scratch.
The panel is highly integrated and the main pieces are:
1) Garmin 430 and 330.
2) Own display computer driving a 10.4" sunlight rated industrial LCD.
3) Own calibrated air data computer with high sensitivity.
4) Commercial 360 degree, accurate solid state gyro pack.
5) Own black box to convert all the discretes and analog outputs from
the Garmin 430 to packets.
6) Good IFR Tru-Trak 2-axis autopilot.
All the above has been tested, prototyped and installed in our RV-10.
First flight will occur in July.
My two questions are:
Since I have pulled the Garmin Glideslope/Localizer CDI and
annunicators into my
experimental display does this negate my legal ability to fly IFR?
Since my experimental air data computer is supplying pressure
altitude to the
Garmin 330 transponder does this satisfy all VFR & IFR
requirements? I will
have a licensed avionics shop perform a standard pitot/static &
transponder
certification.
Bill DeRouchey
N939SB, RV-10 kit #40029
billderou@yahoo.com
the requiRe: the blending operational and equipment requirements as
mentioned by Tim Dawson-Townsend
Tim Dawson-Townsend <Tdawson@avidyne.com> wrote:
Yeah, in general, TSOs are really equipment specs, not operational
specs, and TSO'ed equipment just helps with the certification of an
aircraft installation by STC or TC. (in fact, certified aircraft can
even get away with non-TSO equipment, if they can convince the FAA to
allow it under their TC.)
For experimental aircraft, in general, TSOs are not really
necessary, since there is no STC or TC. (just look at all of us using
GRT or other "non-TSO'ed" equipment for engine instruments, and the FAA
doesn't ask us to prove they meet some spec.)
However, the FAA may have blurred lines by issuing ACs that blend
operational and equipment requirements. (specific to IFR GPS ops, etc.)
Isn't FAA certification a wonderfully transparent and easy process?
TDT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Ekberg
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 8:50 AM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Experimental IFR w/o a certified GPS or
looking for a copy of RTCA/DO-229C
I work on WAAS for the FAA and have the MOPS (229c) on pdf. There
is lots of good information in the document useful for building a WAAS
receiver, but I don't think you'll find what you are looking for there.
The word experimental occurs only 1 time and in the context of "findings
based on experimental data".
Eric
RV-10 #583 - empennage
On 6/11/06, Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net> wrote:
--> RV10-List message posted by: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net >
I recently read an article posted on Direct2. website
http://www.direct2avionics.com/pdfs/Using_GPS_for_IFR_flight.pd by
a
Phd CFII that concludes that for EXPERIMENTAL aircraft, it was not
necessary for the aircraft to be equipped with a CERTIFIED GPS
receiver
to legally file and fly IFR, PROVIDED that you, the pilot/mfg can
evaluate the GPS functionality, and find it provides all of the
necessary pilot input (as defined in the TSO) for IFR flight.
This sounded like it was worth looking into. I verified this opinion
with a competitor of Direct2. So off I go to study TSO-C146 the
Standard
document for WAAS GPS, unfortunately there is nothing in the
document
regarding functional requirements other than a reference to:
RTCA/DO-229B (which I learned has since been superceeded w/
RTCA/DO-229C). Another Google search reveals that this document is
available but with a cost which ranged from $108-370 per copy.
Does anyone know of a 'library' where this document could be
'rented' or
checked-out. a couple hundred bucks is a steep price for someone
just
investigating an idea/thought.
Deems Davis # 406
Fuse
http://deemsrv10.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: Windows & Weld-10 |
The way to hold the windows/windscreen in place while curing is the
"bent aluminum fingers method". create 30-40 aluminum fingers about 1" x
3" out of .062 or .080 material . Bend each finger slightly at the
center. drill a #30 hole at one end and tape generously the other end.
These finger can be clecoed around the window so that the padded end
holds the window to the frame flange and the other end is clecoed into
the lid. Be sure and number them when fitting them and reinstall at the
same location during the final window install. leave in place until
cured. Fill lid holes with an epoxy/glass fiber cabosil mixture.
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill DeRouchey
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 11:31 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Windows & Weld-10
I just finished an excellent job of installing the windscreen in my
RV-10 and would like to share the mistakes of installing the previous 4
windows.
In hindsight, three problems needed to be solved:
1) The Weld-10 mix was skinning over too fast and curing within
10 to 15 minutes. Learned that storing package at room temperature will
keep the catalyst from precipitating solids and by mixing only 75% of
what is in the small bottle will slow the cure appreciably. However, the
mix will still skin over quickly making it difficult to work a fillet
around the inside edge. Applying plastic tape to the inside of the
window perimeter 3/16" from the edge helps the cleanup significantly but
this tape must be removed quickly or it will be captured by the mix.
2) Vans's instructions describe the mix should be applied in a
thin layer. This and the ability to not apply good pressure normal to
the window edge caused may voids between the surface of the window and
its fiberglass frame. Suggest applying mix 3/16" thick and covering both
the horizontal and vertical edges of the window indentation in the
fiberglass. Do not apply any mix to the window. It is easier to clean up
the excess than fix the voids.
3) A good method to apply suitable holding force took several
trials. The duct tape method is fair but will not pull the plexiglass
down tight. It can physically hold the window against the mix but will
not spread the mix. An "expert" suggested notching the plexiglass edge,
drilling holes through the frame and using clecos to hold it tight.
After the mix set I noticed small cracks deep underneath the clecos on
the rear windows. I can only hope the mix will stop the cracks from
progressing or I must drill some large holes. For the windscreen, I
notched the plexiglass edge, drilled #30 holes through the fiberglass
frame and devised a controllable clamping force using .041 safety wire.
Cut up extra #4 Tefzel wire into 1.5" pieces (You'll find something
suitable looking about). Cut 16" of safety wire and fold it over the
center of the Tefzel wire and twist it a small amount. Now you have a
handle with two long tails. Mark on the window where the notches are so
you can find the holes when they are covered with the Weld-10. Apply the
mix to the frame and gently press the window exactly in place. Quickly
cleco the clips to the metal surface to keep the windscreen from sliding
down. With the Tefzel "handle" on the outside, stuff the wire through
the holes into the inner cabin. Inside the cabin insert another piece of
Tefzel between the wires and pull down twisting with safety pliers. A
helper outside can watch the window seat and stop the person on the
safety pliers from exerting too much pressure. The Tefzel outer cover
will not mark the window nor stick to the mix. The #30 holes can be
easily filled and painted.
Bill DeRouchey
RV-10 N939SB, builder 40029
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Trailing Edges |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "zackrv8" <zackrv8@verizon.net>
Jesse,
OK. Pictures are worth a thousand words. Below are several pics I took of the
flap wing gap.
The first pic was taken between the two inboard flap hinges. Notice how the
flap sticks out below the bottom skin.
The second picture is a closer look. Pretty ugly.
The third pic was taken right next to the middle flap hinge bracket. Perfect!
I write this in hopes that someone else will not go through the same thing I
did.
I am not a first time builder. I have built a slow build RV8 and have a working
knowledge of how Vans kits go together. However, this is stumping me at the
moment.
So, because of these irregularities, I get to build new flaps. What I would
like to know is if anyone else out there seeing the same thing I am?
Btw, this is a slow build RV10 kit.
Zack
--------
RV8 #80125
RV10 # 40512
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=40214#40214
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc04921_168.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc04922_221.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc04923_621.jpg
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Trailing Edges |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>
Thanks for the explanation. I haven't seen this on any of ours, or at least
haven't noticed it (and that shouldn't be hard to notice). It almost seems
as if the leading edge skin didnt get pulled up tightly against the ribs.
I can't imagine how that could happen unless you got some bad hinge brackets
or the leading edge skin is bad. Even having a warped flap shouldn't do
that, singe the bracket is forward of the spar. Could it possibly be
something with the wing or wing brackets (I shudder to even mention this)?
Do not archive.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of zackrv8
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 4:58 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: Trailing Edges
--> RV10-List message posted by: "zackrv8" <zackrv8@verizon.net>
Jesse,
OK. Pictures are worth a thousand words. Below are several pics I took
of the flap wing gap.
The first pic was taken between the two inboard flap hinges. Notice how
the flap sticks out below the bottom skin.
The second picture is a closer look. Pretty ugly.
The third pic was taken right next to the middle flap hinge bracket.
Perfect!
I write this in hopes that someone else will not go through the same thing
I did.
I am not a first time builder. I have built a slow build RV8 and have a
working knowledge of how Vans kits go together. However, this is stumping
me at the moment.
So, because of these irregularities, I get to build new flaps. What I
would like to know is if anyone else out there seeing the same thing I am?
Btw, this is a slow build RV10 kit.
Zack
--------
RV8 #80125
RV10 # 40512
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=40214#40214
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc04921_168.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc04922_221.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc04923_621.jpg
--
--
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: Trailing Edges |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Vern W. Smith" <Vern@teclabsinc.com>
Hi Zack,
Don't know if I can be of much help. I jumped over the fuel tanks and
skinning the bottom of the wings so I'm not able to hang my flaps at
this time.
After looking at your pictures here are some things to think about. Is
the distance between the hinge pivot and the bottom skin the same for
each hinge (check both the wing half of each hinge and the flap half)?
Is the nose skin of the flap more reflexed (sagging) at the inboard end
of the flap? If you have access to a digital protractor clamp the flap
in place so it won't move and take angle readings off of the main skin
(from front to back) along the length of the flap and wing.
Here is the thinking behind it. If either half of the hinge points
progressively run down hill in reference to the skin the whole flap
would droop at one end. Don't know how this could happen with the
pre-punched kits.
If the protractor reading progressively gets worse down the length of
the flap then the problem may be the twist in the flap is centered
around the spar flap (this would cause the leading edge to droop and the
trailing edge to rise or via versa. Well that's my $.02.
Vern (#40324)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of zackrv8
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 9:55 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: Trailing Edges
--> RV10-List message posted by: "zackrv8" <zackrv8@verizon.net>
Vern,
Roger everything you said. I agree. I mounted the right flap on the
wing the other day and it was much, much straighter than the left flap.
Definetly had a twist in the right flap. Mine was more pronounced than
3/16 inch.
Couple things bother me though...My right flap had the bad twist in it
and it nested in between the top and bottom wing skin very nicely (this
is the flap with the bad twist in it). However, the left flap which is
almost straight, rubs pretty good between the top and bottom wing skins
in the "flap up" position. Why?
Also, I noticed near the "wing root" area of the flap (both flaps
actually), that the flap protrudes down below the bottom wing skin yet
is flush with the bottom wing skin near the "outboard" area of the flap
Again...why?
Zack
--------
RV8 #80125
RV10 # 40512
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=40150#40150
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: Windows & Weld-10 |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "KiloPapa" <kilopapa@antelecom.net>
Thanks for the information. I appreciate you sharing your experience. That step
is still in my future.
Kevin
#40494
do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=40238#40238
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: | Suggestion for purchasing a Carb for my 0-320. |
The carb on my PA28 needs to be replaced. I'm still flying the Cherokee
while I'm building my -10. Can anyone suggest the best source for
purchasing a new one?
Jeff
Tail kit almost done
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! --
|