---------------------------------------------------------- RV10-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Mon 09/25/06: 24 ---------------------------------------------------------- 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 _____________________________________ Time: 04:05:16 AM PST US From: Tim Olson Subject: Re: RV10-List: Static port airspeed error update --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson 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" > > 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" > To: > Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 8:37 PM > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Static port airspeed error update > > >> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson >> >> 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 >>> >>> 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 _____________________________________ Time: 05:18:13 AM PST US From: Link McGarity Subject: Re: RV10-List: Static port airspeed error updateStatic port airspeed error update/tail position-strobe lt --> RV10-List message posted by: Link McGarity 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 _____________________________________ Time: 07:18:06 AM PST US From: "Mike Lauritsen - Work" Subject: Re: RV10-List: 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 .com/specials.asp -- Mike Lauritsen Cleaveland Aircraft Tool 515-432-6794 www.cleavelandtool.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronic s.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronic 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 _____________________________________ Time: 09:57:19 AM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer Service From: "Vern W. Smith" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 11:10:31 AM PST US From: "John Gonzalez" Subject: RV10-List: elevator control horn drilling --> RV10-List message posted by: "John Gonzalez" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 02:44:45 PM PST US From: ivo welch Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 landing characteristics --> RV10-List message posted by: ivo welch 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 _____________________________________ Time: 03:35:53 PM PST US Subject: RV10-List: james plenum? From: "Chris Johnston" --> RV10-List message posted by: "Chris Johnston" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 03:44:47 PM PST US Subject: RV10-List: WIG-WAG HIDS From: "Neville Boyle" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 04:01:25 PM PST US From: "Rob Wright" Subject: RE: RV10-List: RV-10 landing characteristics --> RV10-List message posted by: "Rob Wright" 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 04:08:37 PM PST US From: "John Jessen" Subject: RE: RV10-List: WIG-WAG HIDS 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 ____________________________________ Time: 04:46:38 PM PST US Subject: RV10-List: Re: james plenum? From: "N777TY" --> RV10-List message posted by: "N777TY" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 05:06:19 PM PST US From: "jdalton77" 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 13 ____________________________________ Time: 05:06:56 PM PST US From: "jdalton77" 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 14 ____________________________________ Time: 05:18:52 PM PST US From: Rob Kermanj Subject: Re: RV10-List: 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" > > > 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 > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:01:30 PM PST US From: "Marcus Cooper" Subject: RE: RV10-List: RV-10 landing characteristics --> RV10-List message posted by: "Marcus Cooper" 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:07:48 PM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site? From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:36:07 PM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: The Yard Store & Brown tools -- Customer Service From: "John W. Cox" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:44:51 PM PST US From: "Marc" 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 19 ____________________________________ Time: 07:07:51 PM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site? From: "John W. Cox" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:17:50 PM PST US From: Tim Olson Subject: Re: RV10-List: James Cowl and Plenum - Web Site? --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson 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 > . > > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:27:48 PM PST US From: "Rob Wright" Subject: RE: RV10-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:27:49 PM PST US From: "David McNeill" Subject: Re: RV10-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:43:28 PM PST US Subject: RV10-List: Apologies to Deems From: "John W. Cox" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:00:28 PM PST US From: Deems Davis Subject: RV10-List: No appology required. --> RV10-List message posted by: Deems Davis 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 > >* > > >* >