Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:05 AM - Re: Static port airspeed error update (Tim Olson)
2. 05:18 AM - Re: Static port airspeed error updateStatic port airspeed error update/tail position-strobe lt (Link McGarity)
3. 07:18 AM - Re: Isham Planetools for RV-10 kits (Mike Lauritsen - Work)
4. 09:57 AM - Re: Re: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer Service (Vern W. Smith)
5. 11:10 AM - elevator control horn drilling (John Gonzalez)
6. 02:44 PM - RV-10 landing characteristics (ivo welch)
7. 03:35 PM - james plenum? (Chris Johnston)
8. 03:44 PM - WIG-WAG HIDS (Neville Boyle)
9. 04:01 PM - Re: RV-10 landing characteristics (Rob Wright)
10. 04:08 PM - Re: WIG-WAG HIDS (John Jessen)
11. 04:46 PM - Re: james plenum? (N777TY)
12. 05:06 PM - James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site? (jdalton77)
13. 05:06 PM - James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site? (jdalton77)
14. 05:18 PM - Re: RV-10 landing characteristics (Rob Kermanj)
15. 06:01 PM - Re: RV-10 landing characteristics (Marcus Cooper)
16. 06:07 PM - Re: James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site? (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
17. 06:36 PM - Re: Re: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer Service (John W. Cox)
18. 06:44 PM - Ray Allen Trim Servo (Marc)
19. 07:07 PM - Re: James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site? (John W. Cox)
20. 07:17 PM - Re: James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site? (Tim Olson)
21. 07:27 PM - Re: Ray Allen Trim Servo (Rob Wright)
22. 07:27 PM - Re: Ray Allen Trim Servo (David McNeill)
23. 07:43 PM - Apologies to Deems (John W. Cox)
24. 11:00 PM - No appology required. (Deems Davis)
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: Static port airspeed error update |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Hi Dave,
I guess that question is a very tough one (the static port question).
In general, these aftermarket static ports are much nicer looking and
provide a better attachment for the static line. The cleaveland ports
allow me to use the very flexible Tygon tubing, and the barb fittings
seal really well. So the aftermarket ports have some benefits besides
looking nicer. One of the big problems though is, on the RV-10,
I've never once heard anyone else post numbers that they've got
from flying a 3 or 4-way box to find their true airspeed. Some people
have bought the SafeAir ports, which I'd assume are good, and
some have stuck with the Van's pop rivet. But, until we get numbers
from people, how would we know how accurate they are? Also, the
people should take the extra step as I did to have the tester run
on their pitot system when they get their IFR pitot static test
done. Once we get a few people running the numbers we can better
evaluate the ports. Until then, people can make claims one way
or the other, but I wouldn't believe any anecdotal "These work
great" claims without data....I thought my old ones worked
great too.
As for the position and strobe lights for the tail, I got the
Whelen combo strobe/tail light from Van's. It seems to work
fine, so I couldn't ask for much more. You don't need that
though until it's time to attach that lower rudder fairing, or
even until final assembly if you wish.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Dave Leikam wrote:
> --> 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>
> To: <rv10-list@matronics.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
>>>
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>>> *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Static port airspeed error updateStatic port airspeed |
error update/tail position-strobe lt
--> RV10-List message posted by: Link McGarity <wv4i@bellsouth.net>
Airspeed, mode C, altitude errors....Gradually these got worse on my
RV6. Finally had pro check out system. Altimeter failed leak test, mode
C was off, and static system had leaks near ports. Would have saved a
lot of time if I had gotten this fellow, with proper equipment, to check
out at the outset. Also, probably some error due slipstream differences
on each side of fuselage, differs by airspeed. Sure RV-10 is similar.
Need check everything hooked to pitot-static for leaks, etc..
Think most important to verify indicated stall speed is reasonably
accurate early on in phase 1 flight test, or any time after pitot static
system work has been done. Need adjust for density altitude/weight of
course.
Tail posn/strobe light. Put a combo Whelen posn/strobe light on tail of
my RV6, and it's never missed a beat. For power supply, I used one from
Strobes N More, ditto never missing a beat, and half the price of a
Whelen power supply.
Link Mcgarity
#40622
FD38, Wellington, FL
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Isham Planetools for RV-10 kits |
We have Wedge-Loc brand on sale now at $.32 each brand new. This is our
cost and we have them on sale to lower our stock level. Only in bags of
100. You will not find cheaper Wedge-Loc clekos anywhere.
https://www.cleavelandtoolstore
<https://www.cleavelandtoolstore.com/specials.asp> .com/specials.asp
--
Mike Lauritsen
Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
515-432-6794
www.cleavelandtool.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronic
<mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com> s.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronic
<mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com> s.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 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: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer Service |
Hi John,
I'll bite! I have three I like. First one is a standard universal footed
bucking bar (Ceaveland #BB30 but others carry it.) Didn't like it at
first but have grown to appreciate it. Second is (Yardstore #71007).
It's long and thin, works great for the rivets in between the closely
spaced ribs in the wing root. My other favorite is one I picked up from
Boeing Surplus, but never have seen it anywhere else. It is
approximately 1" by 2 ". by 4" Has a 45=B0 angle on one end and =BD"
notch machined in the other to create a foot for working around flanges.
Doesn't work everywhere but where it does it works like a charm.
Vern (#40324)
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 7:26 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: 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
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: | elevator control horn drilling |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "John Gonzalez" <indigoonlatigo@msn.com>
I finished the drilling of the elevator horns yesterday and followed the
direction to the tee. I indexed one of the horns(the most aft horn with the
size hole which was specified, then made the block of wood for betwen the
two horns to keep the drill bit going pependicular to the horn faces. All
went well, however once complete, I noticed in addition to there being a
front/aft discrepancy, there also was a up/down descrepancy. This means
that although the length of each horn is the same, one is higher than the
other. This must be due to the jigging and welding up of the horns.
In anycase, the hole on the second horn ovbiously has a different spacing
than the first hole which was used as an index. The edge dimension on the
first horn are called out as 1/2" from the L.E. of the horn and 3/8" from
the bottom edge of the horn. The hole on the secong horn was okay on the
front/aft spacing which is probably the most critical, but the spacing from
the bottom edge of the horn was only 6/32". 6/32 vs 3/8, roughly 50% less
material.
As stated above the main forces on the horn will be in the pull-front edge
or push-rear edge of the horn. The bottom edge distance should not be so
critical, but I obviously would hate to have a crack form down the line in
this right horn. I imagine everything is sinched tight with washers and a
bolt, but has anyone else noticed something like this?
>From my analysis, nothing I did would have caused this. This is simply the
variation in the fabrication of these control horns and the V which is
riveted to the elevator spar and the inboard elevator rib.
There are a lot of welds making up these parts.
John G. #409
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: | RV-10 landing characteristics |
--> RV10-List message posted by: ivo welch <ivowel@gmail.com>
Although I am still trying to sell my Vans RV-10 (lack of time---I have
a toddler), I have decided that I will keep it if I don't get any nice
offers. (in case anyone is interested,
http://welch.econ.brown.edu/n325hp/; also, if you know someone else
who wants a flawless RV-10, please forward this).
Now, I am still flying once a month with it to familiarize myself with
it. Flight characteristics are wonderfully simple---as easy as a piper
cherokee, and this at 50% faster and with fuel consumption that is
fairly similar at comparable speeds. Vans make amazing airplanes.
Alas, I find that the ground handling, like any other nose-steerable
plain with wheels close together and castoring front-wheel (eg SR-22),
is less pleasant. I am a low-time 300 hour pilot (half in an RV-9), and
not flying often does not help.
So, I would love to ask some other RV-10 pilots what practices they
like best about landing. At 75 knots, the airplane seems in slow-flight
mode---behind the power curve. still very easily controllable, but not
as crisp as it is at 110 knots. When I land with *full* flaps, I also
think it is not as easily controllable (tends to be a little fidgety; it
wants
to jump up again; not a big deal) as when I land with 2/3 flaps. I presume
this means that I should land at slower speeds. What have others found
to be best (speed + flap setting; as function of weight, sidewind, etc)?
Aside, I find that an RV-10 lands nicer with a passenger than without one.
In fact, it is very easy to grease the landing *with* passenger and then
control it on the ground, but seems more difficult alone. Am I imagining
these characteristics, or do other RV-10 pilots have the same experience?
I was thinking about landing another 10 knots slower for easier ground
handling, but even though this is still about 20 knots above stall
speed, the fact that it is in slow flight makes me hesitate. Any other
pilot experiences would be appreciated.
FWIW, I would sacrifice 5 knots in flying speed for wheels further
apart, bigger, and perhaps front wheel steerable. If nothing else, it
would make soft-field landings safer. I wish Vans and Cirrus and
everyone else offered some options to improve ground handling---
wheels farther apart, a nose wheel that wants to stay straight even
in cross-wind landings, perhaps bigger tires or shock absorber. Has
anyone come up with something better than Vans?
Regards,
/iaw
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 |
|
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Chris Johnston" <CJohnston@popsound.com>
Hey all -
Anyone using the James Aircraft plenum? I'm looking into it, and just
kind of wondering how well it works. It basically takes the place of
baffles right? Doesn't the glass get hot being right on the engine? If
it works so well, why doesn't everyone use it? is it a pain in the
butt? I'd love to get some real-world info about this...
Thanks!
cj
#40401
fuse
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
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 |
|
If you are prepared to potentially sacrifice some bulb light it is
possible to WIG-WAG the HID Xenon globes.You need to be aware that the
globes have a warm up time while the gas is ionising and they need to
warm fully to burn the deposit left while warming up off the glass (this
means the flash rate needs to be longer than 3 seconds per side) The
second problem is that most of the commercial flash units rely on a low
impedance through the filament of the traditional globe that does not
exist with the xenon alternative.On my plane I increased the capacitor
size to slow the flash rate and provided a additional earth in stead of
the traditional path through the globe filament
Neville Boyle
VH-NVL 33 hours
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RV-10 landing characteristics |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Rob Wright" <armywrights@adelphia.net>
In short, slow down!
Well, initially you want to go back to basics. Many critical V speeds are
calculated at 1.2, 1.3 or so X Vso, so you really don't need to go 20-30
knots faster to approach to land. No wonder you're ballooning up. It must
take a lot of power to land that fast at full flaps as well. Then when you
round out the wing+flaps combo has so much camber that you've got one
awesome angle of attack going. The extra weight of a passenger is giving
you the slight advantage of helping the aircraft settle onto the runway, but
you're still developing too much lift.
Most folks you talk to use a rule of thumb of stall + 5 knots in calm winds,
stall + 10 knots in crosswinds or gusty winds. Do a little research in the
light to medium twins and you find yourself looking at VRef speeds. The one
I fly is Ref + 20 at partial flaps, then Ref +10 at full flaps, then Ref
across the threshold; Ref being the standard Stall + X as necessary for the
conditions.
I can't help you on the ground handling thing. No castering nosewheel
experience yet.
Rob Wright
#392
Starting QB Fuse...
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ivo welch
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 4:44 PM
Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 landing characteristics
--> RV10-List message posted by: ivo welch <ivowel@gmail.com>
Although I am still trying to sell my Vans RV-10 (lack of time---I have
a toddler), I have decided that I will keep it if I don't get any nice
offers. (in case anyone is interested,
http://welch.econ.brown.edu/n325hp/; also, if you know someone else
who wants a flawless RV-10, please forward this).
Now, I am still flying once a month with it to familiarize myself with
it. Flight characteristics are wonderfully simple---as easy as a piper
cherokee, and this at 50% faster and with fuel consumption that is
fairly similar at comparable speeds. Vans make amazing airplanes.
Alas, I find that the ground handling, like any other nose-steerable
plain with wheels close together and castoring front-wheel (eg SR-22),
is less pleasant. I am a low-time 300 hour pilot (half in an RV-9), and
not flying often does not help.
So, I would love to ask some other RV-10 pilots what practices they
like best about landing. At 75 knots, the airplane seems in slow-flight
mode---behind the power curve. still very easily controllable, but not
as crisp as it is at 110 knots. When I land with *full* flaps, I also
think it is not as easily controllable (tends to be a little fidgety; it
wants
to jump up again; not a big deal) as when I land with 2/3 flaps. I presume
this means that I should land at slower speeds. What have others found
to be best (speed + flap setting; as function of weight, sidewind, etc)?
Aside, I find that an RV-10 lands nicer with a passenger than without one.
In fact, it is very easy to grease the landing *with* passenger and then
control it on the ground, but seems more difficult alone. Am I imagining
these characteristics, or do other RV-10 pilots have the same experience?
I was thinking about landing another 10 knots slower for easier ground
handling, but even though this is still about 20 knots above stall
speed, the fact that it is in slow flight makes me hesitate. Any other
pilot experiences would be appreciated.
FWIW, I would sacrifice 5 knots in flying speed for wheels further
apart, bigger, and perhaps front wheel steerable. If nothing else, it
would make soft-field landings safer. I wish Vans and Cirrus and
everyone else offered some options to improve ground handling---
wheels farther apart, a nose wheel that wants to stay straight even
in cross-wind landings, perhaps bigger tires or shock absorber. Has
anyone come up with something better than Vans?
Regards,
/iaw
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 |
|
I plan on 1 or 2 HIDS for landing. Probably 1. Van's standard for taxi
(wig-wag) and position. Strobes of course. Should be simple enough. Maybe
do LED for position if there is some combination that will fit.
John Jessen
40328 tailcone
do not archive
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Neville Boyle
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 4:17 PM
Subject: RV10-List: WIG-WAG HIDS
If you are prepared to potentially sacrifice some bulb light it is possible
to WIG-WAG the HID Xenon globes.You need to be aware that the globes have a
warm up time while the gas is ionising and they need to warm fully to burn
the deposit left while warming up off the glass (this means the flash rate
needs to be longer than 3 seconds per side) The second problem is that most
of the commercial flash units rely on a low impedance through the filament
of the traditional globe that does not exist with the xenon alternative.On
my plane I increased the capacitor size to slow the flash rate and provided
a additional earth in stead of the traditional path through the globe
filament
Neville Boyle
VH-NVL 33 hours
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: james plenum? |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "N777TY" <microsmurfer@yahoo.com>
It doesn't replace baffling.. you still need side baffling walls... this is more
of a lid on top of baffling. From what I'm told by people who have it, it works
pretty good. I'll be putting it in my -7A.
--------
RV-7A
N777TY (res)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=63830#63830
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: | James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site? |
I've read a lot about the James cowl and plenum on the list. Not having
stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night - what is it and why would I
want/need it?
I have not been able to find any web information on this. Does "James"
have a website?
Jeff
455
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: | James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site? |
I've read a lot about the James cowl and plenum on the list. Not having
stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night - what is it and why would I
want/need it?
I have not been able to find any web information on this. Does "James"
have a website?
Jeff
455
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-10 landing characteristics |
Agree with Rob totally. I would add that I have found the approach
angle with full flaps and 75 kts a bit steep with forward CG
("without Passenger"). In this instance, I use "1/2 Flaps" and touch
down with up elevator and a flatter attitude. I believe that this
behavior is normal in 4 seater planes.
I have also found that the castering nose wheel to be much easier to
control that a steerable one. You don't have to stand on it to make
tight turns and you almost do not have to use the breaks to stear. I
have tried it on paved taxiways....using the rudder to steer.... and
it works!
Do not archive
Rob Kermanj
On Sep 25, 2006, at 7:00 PM, Rob Wright wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Rob Wright"
> <armywrights@adelphia.net>
>
> In short, slow down!
>
> Well, initially you want to go back to basics. Many critical V
> speeds are
> calculated at 1.2, 1.3 or so X Vso, so you really don't need to go
> 20-30
> knots faster to approach to land. No wonder you're ballooning up.
> It must
> take a lot of power to land that fast at full flaps as well. Then
> when you
> round out the wing+flaps combo has so much camber that you've got one
> awesome angle of attack going. The extra weight of a passenger is
> giving
> you the slight advantage of helping the aircraft settle onto the
> runway, but
> you're still developing too much lift.
>
> Most folks you talk to use a rule of thumb of stall + 5 knots in
> calm winds,
> stall + 10 knots in crosswinds or gusty winds. Do a little
> research in the
> light to medium twins and you find yourself looking at VRef
> speeds. The one
> I fly is Ref + 20 at partial flaps, then Ref +10 at full flaps,
> then Ref
> across the threshold; Ref being the standard Stall + X as necessary
> for the
> conditions.
>
> I can't help you on the ground handling thing. No castering nosewheel
> experience yet.
>
> Rob Wright
> #392
> Starting QB Fuse...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ivo welch
> Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 4:44 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 landing characteristics
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: ivo welch <ivowel@gmail.com>
>
>
> Although I am still trying to sell my Vans RV-10 (lack of time---I
> have
> a toddler), I have decided that I will keep it if I don't get any nice
> offers. (in case anyone is interested,
> http://welch.econ.brown.edu/n325hp/; also, if you know someone else
> who wants a flawless RV-10, please forward this).
>
>
> Now, I am still flying once a month with it to familiarize myself with
> it. Flight characteristics are wonderfully simple---as easy as a
> piper
> cherokee, and this at 50% faster and with fuel consumption that is
> fairly similar at comparable speeds. Vans make amazing airplanes.
> Alas, I find that the ground handling, like any other nose-steerable
> plain with wheels close together and castoring front-wheel (eg SR-22),
> is less pleasant. I am a low-time 300 hour pilot (half in an
> RV-9), and
> not flying often does not help.
>
> So, I would love to ask some other RV-10 pilots what practices they
> like best about landing. At 75 knots, the airplane seems in slow-
> flight
> mode---behind the power curve. still very easily controllable, but
> not
> as crisp as it is at 110 knots. When I land with *full* flaps, I also
> think it is not as easily controllable (tends to be a little
> fidgety; it
> wants
> to jump up again; not a big deal) as when I land with 2/3 flaps. I
> presume
> this means that I should land at slower speeds. What have others
> found
> to be best (speed + flap setting; as function of weight, sidewind,
> etc)?
> Aside, I find that an RV-10 lands nicer with a passenger than
> without one.
> In fact, it is very easy to grease the landing *with* passenger and
> then
> control it on the ground, but seems more difficult alone. Am I
> imagining
> these characteristics, or do other RV-10 pilots have the same
> experience?
>
> I was thinking about landing another 10 knots slower for easier ground
> handling, but even though this is still about 20 knots above stall
> speed, the fact that it is in slow flight makes me hesitate. Any
> other
> pilot experiences would be appreciated.
>
> FWIW, I would sacrifice 5 knots in flying speed for wheels further
> apart, bigger, and perhaps front wheel steerable. If nothing else, it
> would make soft-field landings safer. I wish Vans and Cirrus and
> everyone else offered some options to improve ground handling---
> wheels farther apart, a nose wheel that wants to stay straight even
> in cross-wind landings, perhaps bigger tires or shock absorber. Has
> anyone come up with something better than Vans?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> /iaw
>
>
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: | RV-10 landing characteristics |
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Marcus Cooper" <coop85@bellsouth.net>
I can't say I've got a wealth of experience in my -10 yet, but after 45
hours here's what I have to offer. I approach around 80 kts, it's a little
faster than required (62 knot stall flaps up) but feels more comfortable at
first, crossing the threshold I'm down to around 70 knots. If I don't do
that than I have to accept a pretty long landing. I tried a full flap,
fairly slow landing and didn't like it as there was no energy left in the
airplane for a good flare. I fly with ballast in the baggage compartment
which I'm sure helps when solo. As you mentioned, it seems like full flaps
makes a good roundout difficult so I use 50% and it works great and as long
as I don't have too much speed on the airplane approaching the flare then
the landings are still very short.
As for the nosewheel steering, I haven't had any issued at all. Landing a
little slower probably won't help the ground control as the rudder is still
pretty effective, just be as attentive as possible and don't delay any
apparent need for a correction.
Just my $.02, don't know if it will help, I'm just glad to be flying!
Marcus
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ivo welch
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 5:44 PM
Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 landing characteristics
--> RV10-List message posted by: ivo welch <ivowel@gmail.com>
Although I am still trying to sell my Vans RV-10 (lack of time---I have
a toddler), I have decided that I will keep it if I don't get any nice
offers. (in case anyone is interested,
http://welch.econ.brown.edu/n325hp/; also, if you know someone else
who wants a flawless RV-10, please forward this).
Now, I am still flying once a month with it to familiarize myself with
it. Flight characteristics are wonderfully simple---as easy as a piper
cherokee, and this at 50% faster and with fuel consumption that is
fairly similar at comparable speeds. Vans make amazing airplanes.
Alas, I find that the ground handling, like any other nose-steerable
plain with wheels close together and castoring front-wheel (eg SR-22),
is less pleasant. I am a low-time 300 hour pilot (half in an RV-9), and
not flying often does not help.
So, I would love to ask some other RV-10 pilots what practices they
like best about landing. At 75 knots, the airplane seems in slow-flight
mode---behind the power curve. still very easily controllable, but not
as crisp as it is at 110 knots. When I land with *full* flaps, I also
think it is not as easily controllable (tends to be a little fidgety; it
wants
to jump up again; not a big deal) as when I land with 2/3 flaps. I presume
this means that I should land at slower speeds. What have others found
to be best (speed + flap setting; as function of weight, sidewind, etc)?
Aside, I find that an RV-10 lands nicer with a passenger than without one.
In fact, it is very easy to grease the landing *with* passenger and then
control it on the ground, but seems more difficult alone. Am I imagining
these characteristics, or do other RV-10 pilots have the same experience?
I was thinking about landing another 10 knots slower for easier ground
handling, but even though this is still about 20 knots above stall
speed, the fact that it is in slow flight makes me hesitate. Any other
pilot experiences would be appreciated.
FWIW, I would sacrifice 5 knots in flying speed for wheels further
apart, bigger, and perhaps front wheel steerable. If nothing else, it
would make soft-field landings safer. I wish Vans and Cirrus and
everyone else offered some options to improve ground handling---
wheels farther apart, a nose wheel that wants to stay straight even
in cross-wind landings, perhaps bigger tires or shock absorber. Has
anyone come up with something better than Vans?
Regards,
/iaw
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: | James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site? |
Start by searching the archives, it's been discussed a couple times.
Website can be found at www.jamesaircraft.com.
I will be using both the plenum and the cowl, not flying yet though.
The plenum is very efficient at cooling the engine by reducing the
volume and directing the flow of air through the cowl.
The cowl does a few things. First is it is aerodynamically cleaner
than the stock Van's cowl. Also it is much better at matching the inlet
and exhaust pressure of the air. You ideally want 1:1 for those
pressures which results in no drag. Anything higher and the airstream
is transferring its energy to the airframe somewhere in the engine
compartment. It, combined with the plenum, also does a good job at
slowing the volume of air down to extract the maximum amount of heat
from the engine and then speeding it back up to the airstream speed as
it exists. Again that 1:1 thing.
Many people swear by the combination, or even each individually.
There are plenty of examples of documented top speed increases from
using the cowl. Hope that helps.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Buildus Interuptus
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of jdalton77
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 7:06 PM
Subject: RV10-List: James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site?
I've read a lot about the James cowl and plenum on the list. Not having
stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night - what is it and why would I
want/need it?
I have not been able to find any web information on this. Does "James"
have a website?
Jeff
455
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 |
The BB30 is also known as the AT670 which was part of the standard 3X
and 4X US Tool kit. One of my recent "Want it" was the #71007 which had
been modified by bending the chisel end UP about 20 degrees. We were
replacing a gasket track on a pressurized avionics door which had about
0.125" between the final shop head and the pressure locking mechanism.
The veteran shoved it into the limited space and pried as he hit the
rivet head. It worked exceptionally for really, really tight spaces. I
was amazed.
John
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Vern W. Smith
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 9:57 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer
Service
Hi John,
I'll bite! I have three I like. First one is a standard universal footed
bucking bar (Ceaveland #BB30 but others carry it.) Didn't like it at
first but have grown to appreciate it. Second is (Yardstore #71007).
It's long and thin, works great for the rivets in between the closely
spaced ribs in the wing root. My other favorite is one I picked up from
Boeing Surplus, but never have seen it anywhere else. It is
approximately 1" by 2 ". by 4" Has a 45=B0 angle on one end and =BD"
notch machined in the other to create a foot for working around flanges.
Doesn't work everywhere but where it does it works like a charm.
Vern (#40324)
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 7:26 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: 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
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: | Ray Allen Trim Servo |
Was wondering if anyone else had this problem or not?
Before I mount the elevator trim servo bracket with the Ray Allen trim
servo, I wanted to
think about the wiring. The wires make a real sharp bend due to the
closeness of the mounting bracket.
See attached picture. Did anyone cut out a half circle in the bracket or
just bend the wires and
cover with protective material?
Also, what wire did you guys use to hook up the servo?
I was thinking of ordering the WC2 5 wire Teflon Installation Cable from Ray
Allen
at $1.10 per foot.
Thanks for the input
Marc Hudson
#560
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: | James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site? |
Michael, thank you again for posting the second generation of Wholly
Cowl, your shots show a marked improvement over the first Generation one
for John Goodlad's RV-10 from the below website. Hopefully it's yours
or Deems and we will be hearing more soon.
John
600
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder
(Michael Sausen)
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 6:06 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site?
Start by searching the archives, it's been discussed a couple times.
Website can be found at www.jamesaircraft.com.
I will be using both the plenum and the cowl, not flying yet though.
The plenum is very efficient at cooling the engine by reducing the
volume and directing the flow of air through the cowl.
The cowl does a few things. First is it is aerodynamically cleaner
than the stock Van's cowl. Also it is much better at matching the inlet
and exhaust pressure of the air. You ideally want 1:1 for those
pressures which results in no drag. Anything higher and the airstream
is transferring its energy to the airframe somewhere in the engine
compartment. It, combined with the plenum, also does a good job at
slowing the volume of air down to extract the maximum amount of heat
from the engine and then speeding it back up to the airstream speed as
it exists. Again that 1:1 thing.
Many people swear by the combination, or even each individually.
There are plenty of examples of documented top speed increases from
using the cowl. Hope that helps.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Buildus Interuptus
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of jdalton77
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 7:06 PM
Subject: RV10-List: James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site?
I've read a lot about the James cowl and plenum on the list. Not having
stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night - what is it and why would I
want/need it?
I have not been able to find any web information on this. Does "James"
have a website?
Jeff
455
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: James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site? |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
I'm watching the James cowl and plenum results closely
as it may be a great thing to have some day if it gives the
results quoted by people. That said, from what I understand
there are currently zero RV-10's flying with this cowl and plenum
arrangement, so everything related is speculation....the same
as it was with the RV-10 in general when many of us bought the
kit before there were even 2 of them flying. No, I'm not
at all putting the cowl down....but honestly, there aren't
any numbers available for the RV-10 yet. If it turns out
as good as the other models though, it may very well be
a great thing to go with.....and I may even re-do mine in the
future if it can prove all the benefits are there. That's the
one good thing you builders with numbers like 400+ have going
for you....the ability to see some of these things before
you finish your kit. Things are evolving every day.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote:
> Start by searching the archives, its been discussed a couple times.
> Website can be found at www.jamesaircraft.com
> <http://www.jamesaircraft.com>.
>
>
>
> I will be using both the plenum and the cowl, not flying yet though.
> The plenum is very efficient at cooling the engine by reducing the
> volume and directing the flow of air through the cowl.
>
>
>
> The cowl does a few things. First is it is aerodynamically cleaner
> than the stock Vans cowl. Also it is much better at matching the inlet
> and exhaust pressure of the air. You ideally want 1:1 for those
> pressures which results in no drag. Anything higher and the airstream
> is transferring its energy to the airframe somewhere in the engine
> compartment. It, combined with the plenum, also does a good job at
> slowing the volume of air down to extract the maximum amount of heat
> from the engine and then speeding it back up to the airstream speed as
> it exists. Again that 1:1 thing.
>
>
>
> Many people swear by the combination, or even each individually.
> There are plenty of examples of documented top speed increases from
> using the cowl. Hope that helps.
>
>
>
> Michael Sausen
>
> -10 #352 Buildus Interuptus
>
>
>
> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *jdalton77
> *Sent:* Monday, September 25, 2006 7:06 PM
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* RV10-List: James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site?
>
>
>
>
>
> I've read a lot about the James cowl and plenum on the list. Not having
> stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night - what is it and why would I
> want/need it?
>
>
>
> I have not been able to find any web information on this. Does "James"
> have a website?
>
>
>
> Jeff
>
> 455
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> * *
>
> *
>
>
> *
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: | Ray Allen Trim Servo |
I left the sharp bend in mine, but the half circle is a good idea. There's
definitely enough structure to support cutting such a small relief for the
wires.
Rob Wright
#392
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Marc
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 8:44 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Ray Allen Trim Servo
Was wondering if anyone else had this problem or not?
Before I mount the elevator trim servo bracket with the Ray Allen trim
servo, I wanted to
think about the wiring. The wires make a real sharp bend due to the
closeness of the mounting bracket.
See attached picture. Did anyone cut out a half circle in the bracket or
just bend the wires and
cover with protective material?
Also, what wire did you guys use to hook up the servo?
I was thinking of ordering the WC2 5 wire Teflon Installation Cable from Ray
Allen
at $1.10 per foot.
Thanks for the input
Marc Hudson
#560
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: Ray Allen Trim Servo |
I can't recall cutting the bracket but for wiring you might consider a
shielded quad and a shielded pair of 22G wire. probably less expensive
that the trim cable and shield can be grounded on one end if there are
stray electrons running around in your airplane. Come to think of it I
bought the cable and decided not to use it.
----- Original Message -----
From: Marc
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 6:44 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Ray Allen Trim Servo
Was wondering if anyone else had this problem or not?
Before I mount the elevator trim servo bracket with the Ray Allen trim
servo, I wanted to
think about the wiring. The wires make a real sharp bend due to the
closeness of the mounting bracket.
See attached picture. Did anyone cut out a half circle in the bracket
or just bend the wires and
cover with protective material?
Also, what wire did you guys use to hook up the servo?
I was thinking of ordering the WC2 5 wire Teflon Installation Cable
from Ray Allen
at $1.10 per foot.
Thanks for the input
Marc Hudson
#560
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: | Apologies to Deems |
It was not Michael's site but Deems in his Will James folder (under
photos) with the second generation mold product for the RV-10. First
generation being John Goodlad. Now pipe in here Ed, aren't you #1
behind the auto engine, with Michael and Deems waiting in the Que too?
John
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: | No appology required. |
--> RV10-List message posted by: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>
I'm somewhere @ the top of the queue, My BPA engine is due to get built
Oct 3-4, I believe that Gary Foster is getting the 1st James Cowl w/ the
Cold Air accommodation, I think that Will , Alan and Gary are trying to
finalize just how the filtered air will be accommodated. When that's
sorted out I expect Will to begin working off the backlog. In the
meantime, I'm trying to finish up this panel so I can get back out into
the shop and get the engine mount on and the gear legs on. Trying to get
ready for the engine when it arrives. I know that I'm not the fastest
wiring dude, but I never in my life expected that wiring the panel could
take this long. I have a whole new appreciation for what Stein and
others like him do!!!!
Deems Davis # 406
Panel/Finishing
http://deemsrv10.com/
John W. Cox wrote:
> It was not Michaels site but Deems in his Will James folder (under
> photos) with the second generation mold product for the RV-10. First
> generation being John Goodlad. Now pipe in here Ed, arent you #1
> behind the auto engine, with Michael and Deems waiting in the Que too?
>
> John
>
>*
>
>
>*
>
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! --
|