Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:39 AM - Re: HID lights (Wayne Edgerton)
2. 05:55 AM - Re: Isham Planetools for RV-10 kits][Isham Planetools for RV-10 kits] (Murray Randall)
3. 06:01 AM - Re: HID lights (Larry Rosen)
4. 06:38 AM - Re: Isham Planetools for RV-10 kits][Isham Planetools for RV-10 kits] (Larry Rosen)
5. 07:44 AM - Re: Isham Planetools for RV-10 kits][Isham Planetools for RV-10 kits] (Les Kearney)
6. 09:47 AM - Re: When to order QB wings & Fuselage (John Jessen)
7. 11:18 AM - Re: When to order QB wings & Fuselage (Marvin Mixon)
8. 11:31 AM - Re: When to order QB wings & Fuselage (Larry Rosen)
9. 01:32 PM - Re: HID lights (Rob Wright)
10. 01:54 PM - Re: Motor Mount (David McNeill)
11. 02:35 PM - Re: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer Service (Luis)
12. 03:42 PM - Re: Re: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer Service (jdalton77)
13. 04:57 PM - Re: Re: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer Service (Pascal)
14. 05:12 PM - Static port airspeed error update (Tim Olson)
15. 05:23 PM - Re: Static port airspeed error update (McGANN, Ron)
16. 06:38 PM - Re: Static port airspeed error update (Tim Olson)
17. 07:26 PM - Re: Re: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer Service (John W. Cox)
18. 09:33 PM - Re: Static port airspeed error update (Dave Leikam)
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 |
|
Rob,
I installed the DW HID's but I'm not flying yet, so can't comment on
coverage. But I went ahead and installed Van's also because I wanted to
have the ability to install a Wig Wag system to allow me to flash my
lights (wig wag) when I'm coming in to land. The fellow at DW told me I
couldn't WigWag the HID's so I will use the Van's lights for that.
Wayne Edgerton #40336
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: Isham Planetools for RV-10 kits][Isham Planetools for RV-10 |
kits]
Does any one have a cheaper source than Brown's $.36 for 3/32" clecos?
used would be quite fine Or anyone have 100-200 3/32" clecos that
they would sell thanks Murray Randall
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 |
|
--> RV10-List message posted by: Larry Rosen <LarryRosen@comcast.net>
I have already installed Vans lights, but after reading on VAF about
light coverage and working on my electrical load analysis, I have
decided to add one DW HID light for landing and use the Vans lights for
taxi.
--
Larry Rosen
RV-10 #356
http://lrosen.nerv10.com
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: Isham Planetools for RV-10 kits][Isham Planetools for |
RV-10 kits]
--> RV10-List message posted by: Larry Rosen <LarryRosen@comcast.net>
You can try CountrySidewalk Trading Post
<http://www.countrysidewalk.com/index.html> in the Tool Shed
<http://www.countrysidewalk.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=C&Category_Code=TSUT>
They have used 3/32 cleco fasteners for $0.25 each.
I purchased many from them and ~98% are good. I also got some counter
sinks and counter sink cages from them.
Watch out for the shipping charge, but if your order is large enough
they will be less expensive.
Larry Rosen
RV-10 #356
http://lrosen.nerv10.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: | Isham Planetools for RV-10 kits][Isham Planetools for |
RV-10 kits]
Murray
The Yard Store (www.yardstore.com <http://www.yardstore.com/> ) has them
for
$0.35 each ($4.20 / doz). I believe they also sell used.
Cheers
Les
RV10 Wannabe
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Murray
Randall
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 6:54 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Isham Planetools for RV-10 kits][Isham
Planetools
for RV-10 kits]
Does any one have a cheaper source than Brown's $.36 for 3/32" clecos?
used would be quite fine Or anyone have 100-200 3/32" clecos that
they
would sell thanks Murray Randall
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: | When to order QB wings & Fuselage |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "John Jessen" <jjessen@rcn.com>
I figured that I'd be done with the empennage by March of this year, so ordered
the wings (SB) before the price hike in December and had them ready to go. It's
now September and I'm not done with the Tailcone. Stuff gets in the way.
Make your best guess, then pick up the phone. Chances are you'll be off a month
or two, but who's counting.
BTW. I'm doing slow build wings and (probably) fast build fuselage. I know that
the fuselage is "more fun" but figured I needed to save $$$ on one part and
time on another. Wings may be boring, but might be "easier."
John Jessen - Tailcone
do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of johngoodman
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 6:51 PM
Subject: RV10-List: When to order QB wings & Fuselage
--> RV10-List message posted by: "johngoodman"
--> <johngoodman@earthlink.net>
It's been sneaking up on me but I'm on page 8-8 and I've got some skins in some
ugly (but functional) cradles with a few clecos in them. I've been pretty religious
about 3 to 4 hours a day and plan to continue through Christmas. I arrived
at page 8-8 with about 120 hours of build time (I'm very stingy with calling
shop time build time, so that's pure fabrication hours). I've read John Jessen's
comments on what build time really is and I agree, but I need a little
friendly guessing from you pros.
Vans needs up to 4 months for QB wings & fus. Apparently you need to order both
at the same time if you want a QB - I guess they are matched? Anyway, I need
to plan some lead time so I'm not sitting in the garage with nothing to do. Also,
I've got a little twist - the "CFO" is taking me on a two month cruise Jan
9 thru Mar 9th. Bad timing for the arrival of a big QB kit. Also, two months
of dead time. Here are my decision points:
Should I order a QB set right now?
If it doesn't come before Jan 7th, can I delay it to a set date such as March?
If I don't actually get it until after Mar 9th, would I be better off (and $10k
richer) getting the slow build wings ASAP?
The "CFO" has plans for me in May & June.
My goal is to be ready for some serious fire wall forward buying at Oshkosh next
summer. If I finish the empennage before Thanksgiving, would I be better off
getting the slow build and ending up in the same place (hopefully)? A lot of
advice would be appreciated.
John
--------
#40572 Empennage HS
N711JG reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=63323#63323
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: | When to order QB wings & Fuselage |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Marvin Mixon" <mmixon@fastspot.net>
What price hike in December? Has Van's announced a price hike?
Marvin Mixon - Waiting on empennage.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Jessen
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 11:46 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: When to order QB wings & Fuselage
--> RV10-List message posted by: "John Jessen" <jjessen@rcn.com>
I figured that I'd be done with the empennage by March of this year, so ordered
the wings (SB) before the price hike in December and had them ready to go. It's
now September and I'm not done with the Tailcone. Stuff gets in the way.
Make your best guess, then pick up the phone. Chances are you'll be off a month
or two, but who's counting.
BTW. I'm doing slow build wings and (probably) fast build fuselage. I know that
the fuselage is "more fun" but figured I needed to save $$$ on one part and
time on another. Wings may be boring, but might be "easier."
John Jessen - Tailcone
do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of johngoodman
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 6:51 PM
Subject: RV10-List: When to order QB wings & Fuselage
--> RV10-List message posted by: "johngoodman"
--> <johngoodman@earthlink.net>
It's been sneaking up on me but I'm on page 8-8 and I've got some skins in some
ugly (but functional) cradles with a few clecos in them. I've been pretty religious
about 3 to 4 hours a day and plan to continue through Christmas. I arrived
at page 8-8 with about 120 hours of build time (I'm very stingy with calling
shop time build time, so that's pure fabrication hours). I've read John Jessen's
comments on what build time really is and I agree, but I need a little
friendly guessing from you pros.
Vans needs up to 4 months for QB wings & fus. Apparently you need to order both
at the same time if you want a QB - I guess they are matched? Anyway, I need
to plan some lead time so I'm not sitting in the garage with nothing to do. Also,
I've got a little twist - the "CFO" is taking me on a two month cruise Jan
9 thru Mar 9th. Bad timing for the arrival of a big QB kit. Also, two months
of dead time. Here are my decision points:
Should I order a QB set right now?
If it doesn't come before Jan 7th, can I delay it to a set date such as March?
If I don't actually get it until after Mar 9th, would I be better off (and $10k
richer) getting the slow build wings ASAP?
The "CFO" has plans for me in May & June.
My goal is to be ready for some serious fire wall forward buying at Oshkosh next
summer. If I finish the empennage before Thanksgiving, would I be better off
getting the slow build and ending up in the same place (hopefully)? A lot of
advice would be appreciated.
John
--------
#40572 Empennage HS
N711JG reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=63323#63323
--
--
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: When to order QB wings & Fuselage |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Larry Rosen <LarryRosen@comcast.net>
Not YET, but traditionally there is a price increase announced in
December and starts January 1. In the past if an order is placed and
the deposit the price at the time of deposit is what you pay. However,
that may not have been the case last year, you had to pay in full to
guarantee the price. You should check with Vans prior to placing your
order.
Larry
Do not archive
Marvin Mixon wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Marvin Mixon" <mmixon@fastspot.net>
>
> What price hike in December? Has Van's announced a price hike?
>
> Marvin Mixon - Waiting on empennage.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Jessen
> Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 11:46 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: When to order QB wings & Fuselage
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "John Jessen" <jjessen@rcn.com>
>
> I figured that I'd be done with the empennage by March of this year, so ordered
the wings (SB) before the price hike in December and had them ready to go.
It's now September and I'm not done with the Tailcone. Stuff gets in the way.
Make your best guess, then pick up the phone. Chances are you'll be off a
month or two, but who's counting.
>
> BTW. I'm doing slow build wings and (probably) fast build fuselage. I know
that the fuselage is "more fun" but figured I needed to save $$$ on one part and
time on another. Wings may be boring, but might be "easier."
>
> John Jessen - Tailcone
>
> do not archive
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of johngoodman
> Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 6:51 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: When to order QB wings & Fuselage
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "johngoodman"
> --> <johngoodman@earthlink.net>
>
> It's been sneaking up on me but I'm on page 8-8 and I've got some skins in some
ugly (but functional) cradles with a few clecos in them. I've been pretty
religious about 3 to 4 hours a day and plan to continue through Christmas. I arrived
at page 8-8 with about 120 hours of build time (I'm very stingy with calling
shop time build time, so that's pure fabrication hours). I've read John
Jessen's comments on what build time really is and I agree, but I need a little
friendly guessing from you pros.
> Vans needs up to 4 months for QB wings & fus. Apparently you need to order both
at the same time if you want a QB - I guess they are matched? Anyway, I need
to plan some lead time so I'm not sitting in the garage with nothing to do.
Also, I've got a little twist - the "CFO" is taking me on a two month cruise Jan
9 thru Mar 9th. Bad timing for the arrival of a big QB kit. Also, two months
of dead time. Here are my decision points:
>
> Should I order a QB set right now?
> If it doesn't come before Jan 7th, can I delay it to a set date such as March?
> If I don't actually get it until after Mar 9th, would I be better off (and
$10k richer) getting the slow build wings ASAP?
> The "CFO" has plans for me in May & June.
>
> My goal is to be ready for some serious fire wall forward buying at Oshkosh next
summer. If I finish the empennage before Thanksgiving, would I be better off
getting the slow build and ending up in the same place (hopefully)? A lot of
advice would be appreciated.
> John
>
> --------
> #40572 Empennage HS
> N711JG reserved
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=63323#63323
>
>
>
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: "Rob Wright" <armywrights@adelphia.net>
Yeah, that's my original plan. I thought I could adapt Bill VonDane's LED
Nav lights for installing sideways but they just don't put out the light in
that orientation. So now I working on converting my hardware to the ldg
light/nav light combo and I'll put my strobe heads in by themselves.
In this case I'm measuring about 6 times before I cut (hopefully) once!
Rob Wright
#392
Wingtips
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry Rosen
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 8:01 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: HID lights
--> RV10-List message posted by: Larry Rosen <LarryRosen@comcast.net>
I have already installed Vans lights, but after reading on VAF about
light coverage and working on my electrical load analysis, I have
decided to add one DW HID light for landing and use the Vans lights for
taxi.
--
Larry Rosen
RV-10 #356
http://lrosen.nerv10.com
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 |
|
--> RV10-List message posted by: "David McNeill" <dlm46007@cox.net>
Just drilled up the motor mount this morning; another possible gotcha is the
top two pilot holes on the QB (#8 Mar/2005) fuselage were about .050
different in distances from the outboard edge. When we drilled the right top
pilot hole the left top was almost out of the mount hole. After pinning the
other four holes with rivet sets which fit the 3/16" on one end 3/8" on the
other and 3/16" bolts we were able to flex the mount on the top left hole to
use as a drill bushing for an off center drilling of the pilot hole. Also
its best to test fit the motor mount (section 47) before riveting the front
deck (section 41) as the access for cleaning and deburring the mount holes
inside is much easier.
----- Original Message -----
From: "zackrv8" <zackrv8@verizon.net>
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 3:15 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Motor Mount
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "zackrv8" <zackrv8@verizon.net>
>
> Guys,
>
> Anybody else have this problem?
>
> I pinned the motor mount onto the firewall today. With the top 2 motor
> mount holes up flush against the firewall, the bottom 2 outboard holes are
> about a 3/16 of an inch from the firewall. This is because the 2 bottom
> inboard mounting holes of the motor mount won't allow the 2 outboard
> mounts to sit flush.
>
> What did you guys do about it? Send it back? Make shims? Just pulled it
> tight with the bolts? Reweld it?
>
> I'm inclined to make shims. I don't want undue stress on the mount by
> pulling it tight with the bolts.
>
> Zack
>
> --------
> RV8 #80125
> RV10 # 40512
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=63295#63295
>
>
>
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: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer Service |
Just to add to the others' opinions. When I started on my RV7, I bought
most of my 'toolkit' from from The Yard, with a little from Avery, Brown
Tools, and Cleaveland. It took quite a bit of research to figure out
exactly what to buy, and from who, but in the end I was very pleased with
the amount of 'bang for the buck' I got.
Among other things, this allowed me to include a used pneumatic squeezer
with my 'kit' for the same price of a 'regular' kit at other places (with
only a hand-squeezer).
So here are my 'customer service' experiences with Brown and The Yard:
When I got my adjustable set holder from Brown Tools, it wouldn't fit in my
pneumatic squeezer because of two 'ears' sticking out from the base. I
ground these off to make it fit. Shortly after starting to use it, the set
broke (not because of my mods, though). I emailed them, and received a
reply from Michael Brown asking for a picture and a description of what
happened. He apologize from the inconvenience and sent me a new holder
within a week.
A few months after starting building, my pneumatic squeezer started to
misbehave. It sounded like something wasn't right in the air valve at the
bottom of the unit. I emailed the guys at the Yard, and they had their
tools guy call me and asked for a description of the problem. He asked me
to send the squeezer back. When he got it, he called me to tell me how he
would be fixing it, and when I should expect it back. Again, it all
happened within about a week. Definitely a refreshing experience after
dealing with big companies' 'customer support' departments! After this
experience with The Yard, I will probably buy any 'expensive' tools I might
need from them, used.
So, I am definitely happy with both.
Luis
RV7-A
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: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer Service |
I didn't buy a kit. I had quite a few wood working tools and at first I
thought they would not be useful, but, except for the table saw, most of
them are fine. I use the same drill press, radial arm saw (cuts angled
aluminum great), sanding station (perfect for deburing). I bought a
Sioux drill and a "Main Squeeze" used off of ebay and bought clecos from
the Yard for .32 apiece. I also bought a lot of "light-use" tools from
Harbor Freight. Not great quality, but if you have to pull 500 rivets,
their $34 pneumatic rivet puller is perfect. I also bought a DRDT-2
brand new.
All in all I don't think I have more than $1000 in new tools.
----- Original Message -----
From: Luis
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 5:35 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer
Service
Just to add to the others' opinions. When I started on my RV7, I
bought most of my 'toolkit' from from The Yard, with a little from
Avery, Brown Tools, and Cleaveland. It took quite a bit of research to
figure out exactly what to buy, and from who, but in the end I was very
pleased with the amount of 'bang for the buck' I got.
Among other things, this allowed me to include a used pneumatic
squeezer with my 'kit' for the same price of a 'regular' kit at other
places (with only a hand-squeezer).
So here are my 'customer service' experiences with Brown and The Yard:
When I got my adjustable set holder from Brown Tools, it wouldn't fit
in my pneumatic squeezer because of two 'ears' sticking out from the
base. I ground these off to make it fit. Shortly after starting to use
it, the set broke (not because of my mods, though). I emailed them, and
received a reply from Michael Brown asking for a picture and a
description of what happened. He apologize from the inconvenience and
sent me a new holder within a week.
A few months after starting building, my pneumatic squeezer started to
misbehave. It sounded like something wasn't right in the air valve at
the bottom of the unit. I emailed the guys at the Yard, and they had
their tools guy call me and asked for a description of the problem. He
asked me to send the squeezer back. When he got it, he called me to
tell me how he would be fixing it, and when I should expect it back.
Again, it all happened within about a week. Definitely a refreshing
experience after dealing with big companies' 'customer support'
departments! After this experience with The Yard, I will probably buy
any 'expensive' tools I might need from them, used.
So, I am definitely happy with both.
Luis
RV7-A
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: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer Service |
I bought some small items (used rulers) from the Yard store worth less
than $20- I do this usually when I am preparing for a large purchase
from a vendor. The Yard store was excellent! they shipped out the items
within 2 days of ordering, sent with no shipping or handling costs and
sent me an e-mail to trace the order.
For a company with inexpensive tools selling such a small amount of
merchadise I was more than pleasantly surprised being treated as if I
purchased $100's worth.
I plan to do the bulk of my tool purchase from Brown, than Cleveland,
ATS, Avery and Yard Store. because they have the tools I want for the
least amount of money. I am finding out that Cleveland offers the best
"custom builder's kit". if the prices were competitive with Brown and
Yard store I would buy almost everything from Mike @ Cleveland.- I may
do so anyway, at least try first, when the time comes as they do price
match and I plan to buy the tools during Sun n fun (mail order not in
person) so they prices may be closer in range.
----- Original Message -----
From: Luis
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 2:35 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer
Service
Just to add to the others' opinions. When I started on my RV7, I
bought most of my 'toolkit' from from The Yard, with a little from
Avery, Brown Tools, and Cleaveland. It took quite a bit of research to
figure out exactly what to buy, and from who, but in the end I was very
pleased with the amount of 'bang for the buck' I got.
Among other things, this allowed me to include a used pneumatic
squeezer with my 'kit' for the same price of a 'regular' kit at other
places (with only a hand-squeezer).
So here are my 'customer service' experiences with Brown and The Yard:
When I got my adjustable set holder from Brown Tools, it wouldn't fit
in my pneumatic squeezer because of two 'ears' sticking out from the
base. I ground these off to make it fit. Shortly after starting to use
it, the set broke (not because of my mods, though). I emailed them, and
received a reply from Michael Brown asking for a picture and a
description of what happened. He apologize from the inconvenience and
sent me a new holder within a week.
A few months after starting building, my pneumatic squeezer started to
misbehave. It sounded like something wasn't right in the air valve at
the bottom of the unit. I emailed the guys at the Yard, and they had
their tools guy call me and asked for a description of the problem. He
asked me to send the squeezer back. When he got it, he called me to
tell me how he would be fixing it, and when I should expect it back.
Again, it all happened within about a week. Definitely a refreshing
experience after dealing with big companies' 'customer support'
departments! After this experience with The Yard, I will probably buy
any 'expensive' tools I might need from them, used.
So, I am definitely happy with both.
Luis
RV7-A
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: | Static port airspeed error update |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
As I've mentioned before, my previous speeds listed when
I gave performance stats were inaccurate. For over 100
hours I hadn't ever officially flown the plane against
the 4-way spreadsheet to see how accurate the IAS and
TAS speeds were. Lately, I've been fighting with the airspeed
error doing many test flights with various things.
My original Cleaveland static ports were flush. The older
ones were made that way, and they needed to be mounted on
bare, unprimed skins, and they needed to be painted with
the airframe, to ensure they had a .010" "stickout" from the
fuselage. The error on those ports was -6.5 to -7.5kts, but
I had never been informed that I should have painted them,
so this will have an effect too. I wanted the airspeed to
be as accurate as possible because on the Chelton system
with it's wind computer and everything else, I wanted it
to accurately depict the winds that I was seeing at altitude.
My first test was to put a penny-sized disc of .050"
over them with a hole in it, and the error went down to -4kts.
Next, I put a bridge (like what John sent to the list in the
photo) in front of them and the error was -4 to -4.5 kts.
I wanted to do anything I could to prevent installing different
ports, but after getting a set of the new style rounded head
ports from Mike (Cleaveland Aircraft Tools), I decided this
weekend I was desperate and drilled out my old ones and put
in the new rounded static ports. If there is any installation
flaw left, it's that there is still primer on the skin inside
the airplane (and the port isn't painted either...but I'm
not sure if the new ones are supposed to be) Talk about
an un-fun experience, my lovely wife was the lucky one who
went into the tailcone to disconnect the old ports and
buck the rivets on the new ones....and with the AHRS and
Magnetometer shelves in there it wasn't any fun for her.
On my test flight tonight, the airspeed was held very steady,
which gave me statistics on the computer spreadsheet that
rendered 0.0 standard deviation, so it was very accurate and
I knew I got good data. As it turns out, I'm now only -1.5
to -1.8 kts lower than the displayed TAS on the Chelton, and
considering I was taking the measurements with only 1kt
resolution, I think this is now the best that I can get...and
it's finally within the 3kts that I felt would be "good enough"
for me.
Oh, I also had previously checked for static and pitot system
leaks, by the way. The static system was perfectly tight,
but the pitot system had a leak rate of about 1kt every
20 seconds while at 170kts. That kind of rate I would
consider to be not capable of affecting a really dynamic
airspeed indication, but who knows, maybe it makes up
a .1 or .2kt error.
The nice thing is, today my wind calculations are now
also very good looking compared to actual winds on the
speed runs. They were accurate to within a knot or
two of speed, and the direction was within 5-10 degrees
too...and usually on the <5 degrees.
So, I guess with the new ports from Cleaveland, I think
I have this thing licked. Thanks Mike! I'm having
a pretty hard time finding things to be unhappy about
these days. ;)
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
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: | Static port airspeed error update |
Hi Tim,
Any idea what the altitude error may have been with the original ports?
cheers,
Ron (back in Oz)
187 finishing
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Monday, 25 September 2006 9:42 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Static port airspeed error update
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
As I've mentioned before, my previous speeds listed when
I gave performance stats were inaccurate. For over 100
hours I hadn't ever officially flown the plane against
the 4-way spreadsheet to see how accurate the IAS and
TAS speeds were. Lately, I've been fighting with the airspeed
error doing many test flights with various things.
My original Cleaveland static ports were flush. The older
ones were made that way, and they needed to be mounted on
bare, unprimed skins, and they needed to be painted with
the airframe, to ensure they had a .010" "stickout" from the
fuselage. The error on those ports was -6.5 to -7.5kts, but
I had never been informed that I should have painted them,
so this will have an effect too. I wanted the airspeed to
be as accurate as possible because on the Chelton system
with it's wind computer and everything else, I wanted it
to accurately depict the winds that I was seeing at altitude.
My first test was to put a penny-sized disc of .050"
over them with a hole in it, and the error went down to -4kts.
Next, I put a bridge (like what John sent to the list in the
photo) in front of them and the error was -4 to -4.5 kts.
I wanted to do anything I could to prevent installing different
ports, but after getting a set of the new style rounded head
ports from Mike (Cleaveland Aircraft Tools), I decided this
weekend I was desperate and drilled out my old ones and put
in the new rounded static ports. If there is any installation
flaw left, it's that there is still primer on the skin inside
the airplane (and the port isn't painted either...but I'm
not sure if the new ones are supposed to be) Talk about
an un-fun experience, my lovely wife was the lucky one who
went into the tailcone to disconnect the old ports and
buck the rivets on the new ones....and with the AHRS and
Magnetometer shelves in there it wasn't any fun for her.
On my test flight tonight, the airspeed was held very steady,
which gave me statistics on the computer spreadsheet that
rendered 0.0 standard deviation, so it was very accurate and
I knew I got good data. As it turns out, I'm now only -1.5
to -1.8 kts lower than the displayed TAS on the Chelton, and
considering I was taking the measurements with only 1kt
resolution, I think this is now the best that I can get...and
it's finally within the 3kts that I felt would be "good enough"
for me.
Oh, I also had previously checked for static and pitot system
leaks, by the way. The static system was perfectly tight,
but the pitot system had a leak rate of about 1kt every
20 seconds while at 170kts. That kind of rate I would
consider to be not capable of affecting a really dynamic
airspeed indication, but who knows, maybe it makes up
a .1 or .2kt error.
The nice thing is, today my wind calculations are now
also very good looking compared to actual winds on the
speed runs. They were accurate to within a knot or
two of speed, and the direction was within 5-10 degrees
too...and usually on the <5 degrees.
So, I guess with the new ports from Cleaveland, I think
I have this thing licked. Thanks Mike! I'm having
a pretty hard time finding things to be unhappy about
these days. ;)
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
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: Static port airspeed error update |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Oooooh, you gave me a tough question. ;) There's a lot of variables
in that, with temperatures and such, so getting an exact number
is very hard. So, don't trust this figure, but I think I have it
roughly figured out.
First I had to look at 170kts and 160kts and find how much
pressure in inH20 difference there was in 10kts, then just
estimated how many inH20 per Kt there was at that those
speeds, and figure out how many inH2O variation I had.
Then since I couldn't find a good chart on altitude vs. inH20
I had to get a chart that showed altitudes of 6562' and 8202'
and the associated inHg, and then I just linear-ly came up
with approximately how many feet per in/Hg that was.
Then I took that in/H2O in speed and converted it to inHg
and then multiplied it out with the altitude factor.
I came up with a difference of 131.26'. Now I know
that these pressures aren't exactly linear and there are
more factors involved, but this should give a really
rough idea of what 7kts variation would be. 131' of
altitude could be significant, but remember that both
the airspeed and altitude errors would be completely
different during an approach into and airport at 1000'msl
flying 100kts, so it may not be as bad in that situation.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
McGANN, Ron wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
> Any idea what the altitude error may have been with the original ports?
>
> cheers,
> Ron (back in Oz)
> 187 finishing
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Monday, 25 September 2006 9:42 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: Static port airspeed error update
>
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>
> As I've mentioned before, my previous speeds listed when
> I gave performance stats were inaccurate. For over 100
> hours I hadn't ever officially flown the plane against
> the 4-way spreadsheet to see how accurate the IAS and
> TAS speeds were. Lately, I've been fighting with the airspeed
> error doing many test flights with various things.
> My original Cleaveland static ports were flush. The older
> ones were made that way, and they needed to be mounted on
> bare, unprimed skins, and they needed to be painted with
> the airframe, to ensure they had a .010" "stickout" from the
> fuselage. The error on those ports was -6.5 to -7.5kts, but
> I had never been informed that I should have painted them,
> so this will have an effect too. I wanted the airspeed to
> be as accurate as possible because on the Chelton system
> with it's wind computer and everything else, I wanted it
> to accurately depict the winds that I was seeing at altitude.
>
> My first test was to put a penny-sized disc of .050"
> over them with a hole in it, and the error went down to -4kts.
>
> Next, I put a bridge (like what John sent to the list in the
> photo) in front of them and the error was -4 to -4.5 kts.
>
> I wanted to do anything I could to prevent installing different
> ports, but after getting a set of the new style rounded head
> ports from Mike (Cleaveland Aircraft Tools), I decided this
> weekend I was desperate and drilled out my old ones and put
> in the new rounded static ports. If there is any installation
> flaw left, it's that there is still primer on the skin inside
> the airplane (and the port isn't painted either...but I'm
> not sure if the new ones are supposed to be) Talk about
> an un-fun experience, my lovely wife was the lucky one who
> went into the tailcone to disconnect the old ports and
> buck the rivets on the new ones....and with the AHRS and
> Magnetometer shelves in there it wasn't any fun for her.
>
> On my test flight tonight, the airspeed was held very steady,
> which gave me statistics on the computer spreadsheet that
> rendered 0.0 standard deviation, so it was very accurate and
> I knew I got good data. As it turns out, I'm now only -1.5
> to -1.8 kts lower than the displayed TAS on the Chelton, and
> considering I was taking the measurements with only 1kt
> resolution, I think this is now the best that I can get...and
> it's finally within the 3kts that I felt would be "good enough"
> for me.
>
> Oh, I also had previously checked for static and pitot system
> leaks, by the way. The static system was perfectly tight,
> but the pitot system had a leak rate of about 1kt every
> 20 seconds while at 170kts. That kind of rate I would
> consider to be not capable of affecting a really dynamic
> airspeed indication, but who knows, maybe it makes up
> a .1 or .2kt error.
>
> The nice thing is, today my wind calculations are now
> also very good looking compared to actual winds on the
> speed runs. They were accurate to within a knot or
> two of speed, and the direction was within 5-10 degrees
> too...and usually on the <5 degrees.
>
> So, I guess with the new ports from Cleaveland, I think
> I have this thing licked. Thanks Mike! I'm having
> a pretty hard time finding things to be unhappy about
> these days. ;)
>
> --
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> browse Subscriptions page, Chat, FAQ, s.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>
> Web Forums! T>
>
> Wiki!
>
> support!
> ontribution
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer Service |
For those just beginning the journey, five years of OSH price
comparisons showed daily sales prices the lowest in the entire year.
Avionics is not much different. You can't beat planning and persistent
price evaluation. Sun 'N Fun has offered the second lowest (both
mail-order and on the field) and then the closeout and specials monthly
at each vendor. Some want it quick and just hit me with one big
shipment on the whole package right now. Others will piece out the
desired final package over six months and save a bundle. There have
been few complaints with any vendor accept Avery blaming the purchaser
on misuse when things break.
Still looking for all the lurkers to answer up on their favorite bucking
bars and kits. Knowing the use of those bars will help the newbies as
well.
John - 40600
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Pascal
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:56 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer
Service
I bought some small items (used rulers) from the Yard store worth less
than $20- I do this usually when I am preparing for a large purchase
from a vendor. The Yard store was excellent! they shipped out the items
within 2 days of ordering, sent with no shipping or handling costs and
sent me an e-mail to trace the order.
For a company with inexpensive tools selling such a small amount of
merchadise I was more than pleasantly surprised being treated as if I
purchased $100's worth.
I plan to do the bulk of my tool purchase from Brown, than Cleveland,
ATS, Avery and Yard Store. because they have the tools I want for the
least amount of money. I am finding out that Cleveland offers the best
"custom builder's kit". if the prices were competitive with Brown and
Yard store I would buy almost everything from Mike @ Cleveland.- I may
do so anyway, at least try first, when the time comes as they do price
match and I plan to buy the tools during Sun n fun (mail order not in
person) so they prices may be closer in range.
----- Original Message -----
From: Luis <mailto:luis.orozco@gmail.com>
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 2:35 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer
Service
Just to add to the others' opinions. When I started on my RV7,
I bought most of my 'toolkit' from from The Yard, with a little from
Avery, Brown Tools, and Cleaveland. It took quite a bit of research to
figure out exactly what to buy, and from who, but in the end I was very
pleased with the amount of 'bang for the buck' I got.
Among other things, this allowed me to include a used pneumatic
squeezer with my 'kit' for the same price of a 'regular' kit at other
places (with only a hand-squeezer).
So here are my 'customer service' experiences with Brown and The
Yard:
When I got my adjustable set holder from Brown Tools, it
wouldn't fit in my pneumatic squeezer because of two 'ears' sticking out
from the base. I ground these off to make it fit. Shortly after
starting to use it, the set broke (not because of my mods, though). I
emailed them, and received a reply from Michael Brown asking for a
picture and a description of what happened. He apologize from the
inconvenience and sent me a new holder within a week.
A few months after starting building, my pneumatic squeezer
started to misbehave. It sounded like something wasn't right in the air
valve at the bottom of the unit. I emailed the guys at the Yard, and
they had their tools guy call me and asked for a description of the
problem. He asked me to send the squeezer back. When he got it, he
called me to tell me how he would be fixing it, and when I should expect
it back. Again, it all happened within about a week. Definitely a
refreshing experience after dealing with big companies' 'customer
support' departments! After this experience with The Yard, I will
probably buy any 'expensive' tools I might need from them, used.
So, I am definitely happy with both.
Luis
RV7-A
s.com/Navigator?RV10-List
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: | Re: Static port airspeed error update |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Dave Leikam" <DAVELEIKAM@WI.RR.COM>
While you are on the subject of static ports, should I be looking to
purchase a static port system and install it in the tail cone during the
build? And if so, you talked of a system from Cleveland. Better than
Van's? Others?
And another emp. question while I have your attention. Any suggestions on
the position/strobe light for the tail?
Thanks!
Dave Leikam
Muskego, WI
#40496
N89DA
About to start tailcone
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 8:37 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Static port airspeed error update
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>
> Oooooh, you gave me a tough question. ;) There's a lot of variables
> in that, with temperatures and such, so getting an exact number
> is very hard. So, don't trust this figure, but I think I have it
> roughly figured out.
>
> First I had to look at 170kts and 160kts and find how much
> pressure in inH20 difference there was in 10kts, then just
> estimated how many inH20 per Kt there was at that those
> speeds, and figure out how many inH2O variation I had.
> Then since I couldn't find a good chart on altitude vs. inH20
> I had to get a chart that showed altitudes of 6562' and 8202'
> and the associated inHg, and then I just linear-ly came up
> with approximately how many feet per in/Hg that was.
>
> Then I took that in/H2O in speed and converted it to inHg
> and then multiplied it out with the altitude factor.
> I came up with a difference of 131.26'. Now I know
> that these pressures aren't exactly linear and there are
> more factors involved, but this should give a really
> rough idea of what 7kts variation would be. 131' of
> altitude could be significant, but remember that both
> the airspeed and altitude errors would be completely
> different during an approach into and airport at 1000'msl
> flying 100kts, so it may not be as bad in that situation.
>
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> McGANN, Ron wrote:
>> Hi Tim,
>>
>> Any idea what the altitude error may have been with the original ports?
>>
>> cheers,
>> Ron (back in Oz)
>> 187 finishing
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tim Olson
>> Sent: Monday, 25 September 2006 9:42 AM
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RV10-List: Static port airspeed error update
>>
>>
>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>>
>> As I've mentioned before, my previous speeds listed when
>> I gave performance stats were inaccurate. For over 100
>> hours I hadn't ever officially flown the plane against
>> the 4-way spreadsheet to see how accurate the IAS and
>> TAS speeds were. Lately, I've been fighting with the airspeed
>> error doing many test flights with various things.
>> My original Cleaveland static ports were flush. The older
>> ones were made that way, and they needed to be mounted on
>> bare, unprimed skins, and they needed to be painted with
>> the airframe, to ensure they had a .010" "stickout" from the
>> fuselage. The error on those ports was -6.5 to -7.5kts, but
>> I had never been informed that I should have painted them,
>> so this will have an effect too. I wanted the airspeed to
>> be as accurate as possible because on the Chelton system
>> with it's wind computer and everything else, I wanted it
>> to accurately depict the winds that I was seeing at altitude.
>>
>> My first test was to put a penny-sized disc of .050"
>> over them with a hole in it, and the error went down to -4kts.
>>
>> Next, I put a bridge (like what John sent to the list in the
>> photo) in front of them and the error was -4 to -4.5 kts.
>>
>> I wanted to do anything I could to prevent installing different
>> ports, but after getting a set of the new style rounded head
>> ports from Mike (Cleaveland Aircraft Tools), I decided this
>> weekend I was desperate and drilled out my old ones and put
>> in the new rounded static ports. If there is any installation
>> flaw left, it's that there is still primer on the skin inside
>> the airplane (and the port isn't painted either...but I'm
>> not sure if the new ones are supposed to be) Talk about
>> an un-fun experience, my lovely wife was the lucky one who
>> went into the tailcone to disconnect the old ports and
>> buck the rivets on the new ones....and with the AHRS and
>> Magnetometer shelves in there it wasn't any fun for her.
>>
>> On my test flight tonight, the airspeed was held very steady,
>> which gave me statistics on the computer spreadsheet that
>> rendered 0.0 standard deviation, so it was very accurate and
>> I knew I got good data. As it turns out, I'm now only -1.5
>> to -1.8 kts lower than the displayed TAS on the Chelton, and
>> considering I was taking the measurements with only 1kt
>> resolution, I think this is now the best that I can get...and
>> it's finally within the 3kts that I felt would be "good enough"
>> for me.
>>
>> Oh, I also had previously checked for static and pitot system
>> leaks, by the way. The static system was perfectly tight,
>> but the pitot system had a leak rate of about 1kt every
>> 20 seconds while at 170kts. That kind of rate I would
>> consider to be not capable of affecting a really dynamic
>> airspeed indication, but who knows, maybe it makes up
>> a .1 or .2kt error.
>>
>> The nice thing is, today my wind calculations are now
>> also very good looking compared to actual winds on the
>> speed runs. They were accurate to within a knot or
>> two of speed, and the direction was within 5-10 degrees
>> too...and usually on the <5 degrees.
>>
>> So, I guess with the new ports from Cleaveland, I think
>> I have this thing licked. Thanks Mike! I'm having
>> a pretty hard time finding things to be unhappy about
>> these days. ;)
>>
>> --
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>> do not archive
>>
>>
>> browse Subscriptions page, Chat, FAQ, s.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>
>> Web Forums! T>
>>
>> Wiki!
>>
>> support!
>> ontribution
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>
>
>
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! --
|