Today's Message Index:
----------------------
0. 04:52 AM - LOC (Matt Dralle)
1. 04:02 AM - Re: 0-540 B2B5? (GRANSCOTT@aol.com)
2. 06:29 AM - Re: Post Component Construction Priming (Mike Lauritsen - Work)
3. 06:31 AM - Re: Rivethead - are they shipping any product? (Rick)
4. 06:45 AM - Re: Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the RV-12 (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
5. 08:00 AM - Re: Rivethead - are they shipping any product? Yes (Maule Driver)
6. 08:24 AM - Re: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables (Scott Schmidt)
7. 08:35 AM - Re: Rivethead - are they shipping any product? Yes (Rick)
8. 09:14 AM - Re: Post Component Construction Priming (Jeff Carpenter)
9. 09:27 AM - Re: Post Component Construction Corrosion Protection (Mike Lauritsen - Work)
10. 10:22 AM - Re: Post Component Construction Corrosion Protection (Jeff Carpenter)
11. 11:40 AM - Re: Post Component Construction Corrosion Protection (John Gonzalez)
12. 12:21 PM - Re: Post Component Construction Corrosion Protection (Mike Lauritsen - Work)
13. 12:29 PM - Re: Rivethead - are they shipping any product? Yes (Maule Driver)
14. 02:06 PM - Re: Rivethead - are they shipping any product? Yes (Kelly McMullen)
15. 02:12 PM - Re: Post Component Construction Priming (Chris Stanley)
16. 02:24 PM - Re: Rivethead - are they shipping any product? Yes (Jesse Saint)
17. 02:28 PM - Re: Kits/Family - A Review (Chris , Susie Darcy)
18. 02:28 PM - Re: Post Component Construction Priming (Dj Merrill)
19. 03:43 PM - Re: Re: 0-540 E vs C (Rob Wright)
20. 03:56 PM - Re: Rivethead - are they shipping any product? Yes (MauleDriver)
21. 04:00 PM - Re: Re: 0-540 E vs C (Jesse Saint)
22. 04:21 PM - Re: Re: 0-540 E vs C (Rob Wright)
23. 05:03 PM - Re: Re: 0-540 E vs C (linn Walters)
24. 05:27 PM - Re: Kits/Family - A Review (Tim Olson)
25. 05:59 PM - Re: Kits/Family - A Review (John Cram)
26. 06:07 PM - Re: Re: 0-540 E vs C (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
27. 06:22 PM - Re: Re: Re: 0-540 E vs C ()
28. 06:33 PM - Rudder pedal bolt direction (L Aune)
29. 06:54 PM - Re: Rudder pedal bolt direction (Tim Olson)
30. 07:28 PM - Re: Pattern for Front Seat Upholstery (Steven DiNieri)
31. 08:30 PM - Re: Pattern for Front Seat Upholstery (Rick)
32. 09:27 PM - Re: Pattern for Front Seat Upholstery (Steven DiNieri)
Message 0
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Each year at the end of the List Fund Raiser, I post a message acknowledging everyone
that so generously made a Contribution to support the Lists. Its sort
of my way of publicly thanking everyone that took a minute to show their
appreciation for the Lists.
Won't you take a moment and assure that your name is on that List of Contributors
(LOC)? As a number of members have pointed out over the years, the List seems
at least - if not a whole lot more - valuable as a
building/flying/recreating/entertainment tool as your typical magazine subscription!
Please take minute and assure that your name is on this year's LOC! Show others
that you appreciate the Lists. Making a Contribution to support the Lists is
fast and easy using your Credit card or Paypal on the Secure Web Site:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
or by popping a personal check in the mail to:
Matt Dralle / Matronics
PO Box 347
Livermore CA 94551-0347
I would like to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution thus
far in this year's List Fund Raiser! Remember that its YOUR support that keeps
these Lists going and improving! Don't forget to include a little comment
about how the Lists have helped you!
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
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 |
|
In a message dated 11/14/2006 8:30:26 PM Eastern Standard Time,
ddddsp1@juno.com writes:
Is it an O-540
O-540
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: Post Component Construction Priming |
We sell Boshield in small qty. for use on tools to keep them from
rusting. We are a dealer and can have gallons or 5's drop shipped
from Boeshield and possibly save some money. Email me if interested.
mike <at> cleavelandtool.com
FYI this has been my corrosion plan all along.
Mike
Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
On 11/14/06, Dave Leikam <DAVELEIKAM@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Here are two options for you. I am planning on one of these products after
> completion and painting.
>
> http://boeshield.com/index.htm
>
> http://www.nocorrosion.com/corrosion-control.htm
>
> Dave Leikam
> 40496
> tailcone - (dimple, dimple, dimple...)
> N89DA
> Muskego, WI
>
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: Rivethead - are they shipping any product? |
Are you close to flying? I suspect the only time to really "need" them would be
final rigging of the elevator trim. I only trial fitted mine when I installed
the HS and elevator which really could have a waited till final assembly...which
is 6 months away and that was a year and a half ago. Silver brazing rods and
a torch makes Van's versions work just fine in the "Really need tham catagory"
;)
Rick S.
40185
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: | Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the RV-12 |
Just in case you have a spare $60k laying around?
Dan
N289DT RV10E
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Wright
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 7:30 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the
RV-12
Vans and Garmin are working on a way to have the G900 installed with no
panel rib mods... more to follow!
Rob Wright
#392
Fuse
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 8:37 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the RV-12
After studying in-depth the VANS website on the RV-12, am I mistaken or
is glass EFIS okay for the RV-12 but not for an RV-10 where the panel
ribs were intentionally placed to interfere with glass EFIS insertion.
Amber Peterson, Rian Johnson and Phil Rivall are to be commended for
bringing VANS into the 21st century (only six years late) with
Solidworks engineering. It was also exciting to see them incorporate a
panel insert for a Garmin 496/396/296 or 196. Now anyone want to take
bets they will never ever redesign the panel ribs on the RV-10 out of
shear stubbornness?
<http://www.vansaircraft.com/images/RV-12/inst_panel.jpg>
Did anyone else note the ergonomically canted panel as well. Directly
perpendicular into the pilot's eyes for ease of scanning.
http://www.vansaircraft.com/images/RV-12/12crew_prepares.jpg
<http://www.vansaircraft.com/images/RV-12/12crew_prepares.jpg>
John Cox
#40600
Do not Archive
www.aeroelectric.com
www.kitlog.com
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
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: | Re: Rivethead - are they shipping any product? Yes |
In my mind's eye, yes!
I suspected that these steps could be delayed indefinitely but wasn't
sure. Figuring out what can be deferred without penalty is tricky
sometimes - For example, I now know that if you drill out a bad rivet in
the HS, you need to replace it before riveting on rear spar :-)
Actually, the folks at the Alexander Tech Center fixed the Van's version
with a weld. Then I proceeded to do a sloppy job drilling holes in it.
So I decided to order the Rivethead version anyway, as if anyone except
me cares whether the four holes are lined up.
Like I said earlier, I got a call and expect delivery by week's end anyway
Bill W.
do not archive
Rick wrote:
>
>Are you close to flying? I suspect the only time to really "need" them would be
final rigging of the elevator trim. I only trial fitted mine when I installed
the HS and elevator which really could have a waited till final assembly...which
is 6 months away and that was a year and a half ago. Silver brazing rods
and a torch makes Van's versions work just fine in the "Really need tham catagory"
;)
>
>Rick S.
>40185
>
>_-
>
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: | Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables |
I'm just catching up on some e-mails on the list but thought I would add
one more comment in relation to the quadrant.
One thing that I recently realized that I like is how quickly you can
look at it and determine settings. The quadrant is very visual. It is
easy to scan during startup and landing to see if it is set up how you
would like it.
With Vernier's you really never know how far out the throttle is. How
many times do you check to see if you are =BC" forward during priming
and startup with a Vernier system? Plus it is really nice having the
throttle a totally different shape so in emergencies or a quick go
around it is easy to see and advance.
And I have no problem dialing in any egt setting I want. I was sold on
Vernier's and really doubted my decision early on but have been very
happy with the quadrant.
Scott Schmidt
sschmidt@ussynthetic.com
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder
(Michael Sausen)
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 3:36 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables
Sounds like a good use of duct tape here. Hehe. Sorry, I'm getting
punchy. Finally going to get my project up here from Texas next week.
Going through some serious building withdrawal.
Michael
do not archive
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of linn Walters
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables
Well, not entirely true. Formation pilots with vernier throttles use a
clip to hold the button in ..... disabling the vernier function.
Linn
Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
<LloydDR@wernerco.com> <mailto:LloydDR@wernerco.com>
More food for thought on this, if you ever plan on flying formation,
Verniers are not allowed as they do not allow quick enough throttle
changes, you will have to use regular push pulls or the quadrant. This
was stated at the ground schools for the FFI.
I personally plan on formation with the Ohio Valley Rvators, so make the
best choice for the type of flying you plan on doing.
Dan
RV10E (N289DT)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 6:55 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables
<mailto:Tim@MyRV10.com>
Hey Paul, basically what happened to me wasn't that the cables
were in a different location (they probably can be the
same from quadrant to vernier), but that I wanted to use
eyeball passthroughs because the dual snap-bushing thing just
didn't cut it for me. My eyeballs are aluminum, which some
would disagree with (they don't disagree with the aluminum rivets
holding the firewall on though), but it's got to be better than
snap bushings. They allow you to start angling that cable
so it comes out of the firewall at an angle that you wish for
better routing, and aluminum allows you to drill the bore
to your cable size for perfect fit.
The situatio that happened is that I had already drilled the 3
holes out for snap bushings. To use eyeballs, I only wanted
to use the 2 outer holes and then drill another below them
in the middle. (the holes would run together if I drilled
all 3. Well, as I unibit drilled the outer 2 holes, they
ran into the drilled center hole, and that whole area
got chewed up. Had I not pre-drilled the holes, it would
have been simple, but I made the mistake of first attempting
snap bushings.
So to fix it, I cut out the mangled metal, went to a metal
shop where they gave me some stainless scrap, and bought
a "patch" that I could drill properly, and then rivet and
red RTV in place to make it all good again. I got slightly
thicker stainless as well.
For what it's worth, I'm not saying you made a mistake not
going with the quadrant. If you like Verniers, you may like
them here too if they don't work like 220RV. But you can
be reassured that the quadrant offers smoothness and precision...
and yes, even on the mixture side to the .1 gph resolution
Kelly. If you haven't flown one (of this type specifically,
it's worth a try. They're nice.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Paul Grimstad wrote:
Changes?
Wouldn't you know it, I just drilled out the SS oil cooler recess for
cables. Then Scott brings up the quadrant and Tim tells us again how
much he likes them. Feels like I made a mistake. In the spring of 05'
I was planning to build a 9A until Randy Debauw showed up at the
EAA105
fly in. That changed my mind. Life is all about change, isn't it? Tim
how did you cap off those cable holes? I remember you drilled them out
and then later found the quadrant runs in a different location?
Bill DeRouchey, I am going to be in Santa Cruz for Thanksgiving. Will
you be around home? I'd love to see the paint job.
Paul Grimstad
RV10 40450 with holes to fill
Portland, OR 97219
----- Original Message -----
*From:* John W. Cox <mailto:johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
<mailto:johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
*To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
<mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
*Sent:* Sunday, November 12, 2006 12:33 AM
*Subject:* RV10-List: Quadrant vs. Vernier Cables
A comment was made (I believe from Scott) which went unresponded
to. For those few who have not made their decision or are still
open to input on the subject of choice. It has been said that the
Law of Primacy prevails in aviation. That item first learned by
instruction or experience is most often retained. Example, most
pilot who learn on High wing prefer High Wing. Those who learn on
Low wing prefer low wing. Those who fly with Vernier cables, tend
to choose cables for their RV-10. Those who have flown High
Performance aircraft (those over 200 hp) with throttle quadrants
on
turboprop or turbine or multi then tend to chose throttle
quadrants.
The choice of throttle quadrants allows the competent pilot to
control Throttle-Prop-Mixture with multiple digits -
Simultaneously. Much like piano playing it is a learned skill.
Add
Multi-Engine into the mix and the more primitive cables are
automatically replaced with a quadrant and the discussion is over.
Just food for thought which no one commented on after the valuable
observation.
John Cox
#40600
*
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com" <http://www.aeroelectric.com>
>www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com"
<http://www.buildersbooks.com> >www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.kitlog.com" <http://www.kitlog.com>
>www.kitlog.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com"
<http://www.homebuilthelp.com> >www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List"
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List> >http://www.matronics
.com/Navigator?RV10-List
*
*
*
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.kitlog.com">www.kitlog.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rivethead - are they shipping any product? Yes |
Lol.....
I hate loose ends as well. I don't think the holes line up with the Van's 415's
with the Rivethead version which, by the way I need to order along with some
new access panels due to the hole allignment issue. Anyone using the Van's versions
save yourself some grief and wait to final rivet the 415's to the panel
until after your final rigging. It's way easier to turn them when they are not
attched to the panel, just cleco until they are properly adjusted.
Rick S.
40185
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Post Component Construction Priming |
Hi Mike,
Do you have any sense of the coverage you'll get with the Boeshield,
or, more to the point, how much you'll use on the 10?
Jeff Carpenter
40304
On Nov 15, 2006, at 6:28 AM, Mike Lauritsen - Work wrote:
> <mike@cleavelandtool.com>
>
> We sell Boshield in small qty. for use on tools to keep them from
> rusting. We are a dealer and can have gallons or 5's drop shipped
> from Boeshield and possibly save some money. Email me if interested.
> mike <at> cleavelandtool.com
>
> FYI this has been my corrosion plan all along.
>
> Mike
> Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
>
>
> On 11/14/06, Dave Leikam <DAVELEIKAM@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>> Here are two options for you. I am planning on one of these
>> products after
>> completion and painting.
>>
>> http://boeshield.com/index.htm
>>
>> http://www.nocorrosion.com/corrosion-control.htm
>>
>> Dave Leikam
>> 40496
>> tailcone - (dimple, dimple, dimple...)
>> N89DA
>> Muskego, WI
>>
>
>
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: | Re: Post Component Construction Corrosion Protection |
Here is all the goody, short answer is 500 to 1000 sq. ft./gal. and I don'
t
know how much for the -10
1.* Corrosion Inhibition*
Meets BSS7220 and FED-STD-791, Method 4001 (Max. 3 dots 1mm per 10 square
inches after 100 hours salt spray). Meets ASTM G-34
(Exfoliation Test).
2.* Water Displacement*
Meets MIL-C-16173D. Paragraph 46.11. No evidence of pitting, mottling,
or staining.
3. *Penetrability*
Capillary height of rise 1.2" minimum in bore =F8=0.015" at room temperat
ure.
4. *Wet ability*
30 dynes/cm.
5. *Flow*
Viscosity is 6 centistokes at 75=B11=B0F.
6. *Adhesion at Low Temperatures
*Flaking less than 1/32" at -40=B15K (MIL-O-16173D).
7. *Removability*
Aliphatic Naptha, Cleaning Solvent
8. *Solids*
38%
9. *Flash Point*
Approximately 156=B0F. (TCC.)
10. *Coverage*
500 to 1000 sq. ft. per gallon.
On 11/15/06, Jeff Carpenter <jeff@westcottpress.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> Do you have any sense of the coverage you'll get with the Boeshield,
> or, more to the point, how much you'll use on the 10?
>
> Jeff Carpenter
> 40304
>
>
> On Nov 15, 2006, at 6:28 AM, Mike Lauritsen - Work wrote:
>
> > <mike@cleavelandtool.com>
> >
> > We sell Boshield in small qty. for use on tools to keep them from
> > rusting. We are a dealer and can have gallons or 5's drop shipped
> > from Boeshield and possibly save some money. Email me if interested.
> > mike <at> cleavelandtool.com
> >
> > FYI this has been my corrosion plan all along.
> >
> > Mike
> > Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11/14/06, Dave Leikam <DAVELEIKAM@wi.rr.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Here are two options for you. I am planning on one of these
> >> products after
> >> completion and painting.
> >>
> >> http://boeshield.com/index.htm
> >>
> >> http://www.nocorrosion.com/corrosion-control.htm
> >>
> >> Dave Leikam
> >> 40496
> >> tailcone - (dimple, dimple, dimple...)
> >> N89DA
> >> Muskego, WI
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
===========
===========
===========
>
>
--
Mike Lauritsen
Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
515-432-6794
www.cleavelandtool.com
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Post Component Construction Corrosion Protection |
Have you thought through the timing of the application... before/
after exterior paint... and if there's an increased danger of fire
after it's been applied?
It seems to me that pre-paint application could contaminate the
exterior and post paint application would be a lot more difficult...
assuming the plane is in a more "assembled" state.
I'm guessing the flash point decreases after the solvents have
evaporated, but I picture a somewhat oily quality in its final
state... giving me some pause about the fire issue.
Jeff Carpenter
40304
On Nov 15, 2006, at 9:27 AM, Mike Lauritsen - Work wrote:
> Here is all the goody, short answer is 500 to 1000 sq. ft./gal.
> and I don't know how much for the -10
>
>
> 1. Corrosion Inhibition
> Meets BSS7220 and FED-STD-791, Method 4001 (Max. 3 dots 1mm per 10
> square inches after 100 hours salt spray). Meets ASTM G-34
> (Exfoliation Test).
>
> 2. Water Displacement
> Meets MIL-C-16173D. Paragraph 46.11. No evidence of pitting,
> mottling,
> or staining.
>
> 3. Penetrability
> Capillary height of rise 1.2" minimum in bore =F8= 0.015" at room
> temperature.
>
> 4. Wet ability
> 30 dynes/cm.
>
> 5. Flow
> Viscosity is 6 centistokes at 75=B11=B0F.
>
> 6. Adhesion at Low Temperatures
> Flaking less than 1/32" at -40=B15K (MIL-O-16173D).
>
> 7. Removability
> Aliphatic Naptha, Cleaning Solvent
>
> 8. Solids
> 38%
>
> 9. Flash Point
> Approximately 156=B0F. (TCC.)
>
> 10. Coverage
> 500 to 1000 sq. ft. per gallon.
>
>
> On 11/15/06, Jeff Carpenter <jeff@westcottpress.com> wrote:
> <jeff@westcottpress.com >
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> Do you have any sense of the coverage you'll get with the Boeshield,
> or, more to the point, how much you'll use on the 10?
>
> Jeff Carpenter
> 40304
>
>
> On Nov 15, 2006, at 6:28 AM, Mike Lauritsen - Work wrote:
>
> > <mike@cleavelandtool.com>
> >
> > We sell Boshield in small qty. for use on tools to keep them from
> > rusting. We are a dealer and can have gallons or 5's drop shipped
> > from Boeshield and possibly save some money. Email me if
> interested.
> > mike <at> cleavelandtool.com
> >
> > FYI this has been my corrosion plan all along.
> >
> > Mike
> > Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11/14/06, Dave Leikam < DAVELEIKAM@wi.rr.com> wrote:
> <DAVELEIKAM@WI.RR.COM>
> >>
> >> Here are two options for you. I am planning on one of these
> >> products after
> >> completion and painting.
> >>
> >> http://boeshield.com/index.htm
> >>
> >> http://www.nocorrosion.com/corrosion-control.htm
> >>
> >> Dave Leikam
> >> 40496
> >> tailcone - (dimple, dimple, dimple...)
> >> N89DA
> >> Muskego, WI
> >>
> >
> ========================
tric bsp; * The Builder's Bookstore >
> sp; -Ma==============
========= ef="http://
> www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://
> www.matronics.co===================
=
>
>
> --
> Mike Lauritsen
> Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
> 515-432-6794
> www.cleavelandtool.com
>
>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Post Component Construction Corrosion Protection |
These are all very valid points.
Perhaps add one more to the list...smell!
Some of this stuff may leave a smell which depending on where it is applied
could migrate into the cockpit...when one get sea sick it usually is not
just the rolling ocean, but the diesel exhaust also.
Wouldn't that suck after putting in 1600 hours of building.
Something to think about.
John G.
>From: Jeff Carpenter <jeff@westcottpress.com>
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV10-List: Post Component Construction Corrosion Protection
>Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 10:21:07 -0800
>
>Have you thought through the timing of the application... before/ after
>exterior paint... and if there's an increased danger of fire after it's
>been applied?
>
>It seems to me that pre-paint application could contaminate the exterior
>and post paint application would be a lot more difficult... assuming the
>plane is in a more "assembled" state.
>
>I'm guessing the flash point decreases after the solvents have evaporated,
>but I picture a somewhat oily quality in its final state... giving me some
>pause about the fire issue.
>
>Jeff Carpenter
>40304
>
>
>On Nov 15, 2006, at 9:27 AM, Mike Lauritsen - Work wrote:
>
>>Here is all the goody, short answer is 500 to 1000 sq. ft./gal. and I
>>don't know how much for the -10
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1. Corrosion Inhibition
>>Meets BSS7220 and FED-STD-791, Method 4001 (Max. 3 dots 1mm per 10 square
>>inches after 100 hours salt spray). Meets ASTM G-34
>>(Exfoliation Test).
>>
>>2. Water Displacement
>>Meets MIL-C-16173D. Paragraph 46.11. No evidence of pitting, mottling,
>>or staining.
>>
>>3. Penetrability
>>Capillary height of rise 1.2" minimum in bore = 0.015" at room
>>temperature.
>>
>>4. Wet ability
>>30 dynes/cm.
>>
>>5. Flow
>>Viscosity is 6 centistokes at 751F.
>>
>>6. Adhesion at Low Temperatures
>>Flaking less than 1/32" at -405K (MIL-O-16173D).
>>
>>7. Removability
>>Aliphatic Naptha, Cleaning Solvent
>>
>>8. Solids
>>38%
>>
>>9. Flash Point
>>Approximately 156F. (TCC.)
>>
>>10. Coverage
>>500 to 1000 sq. ft. per gallon.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On 11/15/06, Jeff Carpenter <jeff@westcottpress.com> wrote:
>>
>>Hi Mike,
>>
>>Do you have any sense of the coverage you'll get with the Boeshield,
>>or, more to the point, how much you'll use on the 10?
>>
>>Jeff Carpenter
>>40304
>>
>>
>>On Nov 15, 2006, at 6:28 AM, Mike Lauritsen - Work wrote:
>>
>> > <mike@cleavelandtool.com>
>> >
>> > We sell Boshield in small qty. for use on tools to keep them from
>> > rusting. We are a dealer and can have gallons or 5's drop shipped
>> > from Boeshield and possibly save some money. Email me if interested.
>> > mike <at> cleavelandtool.com
>> >
>> > FYI this has been my corrosion plan all along.
>> >
>> > Mike
>> > Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 11/14/06, Dave Leikam < DAVELEIKAM@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Here are two options for you. I am planning on one of these
>> >> products after
>> >> completion and painting.
>> >>
>> >> http://boeshield.com/index.htm
>> >>
>> >> http://www.nocorrosion.com/corrosion-control.htm
>> >>
>> >> Dave Leikam
>> >> 40496
>> >> tailcone - (dimple, dimple, dimple...)
>> >> N89DA
>> >> Muskego, WI
>> >>
>> >
>>======================== tric bsp; * The Builder's Bookstore > sp;
>> -Ma======================= ef="http://
>>www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://
>>www.matronics.co====================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Mike Lauritsen
>>Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
>>515-432-6794
>>www.cleavelandtool.com
>>
>>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Post Component Construction Corrosion Protection |
I thought I had mentioned that, but perhaps that was not on the list.
I am planning on using it during the annual after the paint is applied. I
don't want it to contaminate the paint and it likely will. It is difficult
to remove after application (think candle wax). I want to make certain the
paint is good and cured before application. Our RV-4 still is shiny inside
after 18 years so I am not too worried about it one way or another. Once
the mineral spirits flashes off I don't think there would be any risk of
fire, but then again, think candle wax... I will check into this. It is no
t
an oily residue more of just a buildup.
Mike
On 11/15/06, Jeff Carpenter <jeff@westcottpress.com> wrote:
>
> Have you thought through the timing of the application... before/after
> exterior paint... and if there's an increased danger of fire after it's b
een
> applied?
>
> It seems to me that pre-paint application could contaminate the exterior
> and post paint application would be a lot more difficult... assuming the
> plane is in a more "assembled" state.
>
>
> I'm guessing the flash point decreases after the solvents have evaporated
,
> but I picture a somewhat oily quality in its final state... giving me som
e
> pause about the fire issue.
>
>
> Jeff Carpenter
> 40304
>
>
> On Nov 15, 2006, at 9:27 AM, Mike Lauritsen - Work wrote:
>
> Here is all the goody, short answer is 500 to 1000 sq. ft./gal. and I
> don't know how much for the -10
>
>
> 1.* Corrosion Inhibition*
> Meets BSS7220 and FED-STD-791, Method 4001 (Max. 3 dots 1mm per 10 square
> inches after 100 hours salt spray). Meets ASTM G-34
> (Exfoliation Test).
>
> 2.* Water Displacement*
> Meets MIL-C-16173D. Paragraph 46.11. No evidence of pitting, mottling,
> or staining.
>
> 3. *Penetrability*
> Capillary height of rise 1.2" minimum in bore =F8= 0.015" at room
> temperature.
>
> 4. *Wet ability*
> 30 dynes/cm.
>
> 5. *Flow*
> Viscosity is 6 centistokes at 75=B11=B0F.
>
> 6. *Adhesion at Low Temperatures
> *Flaking less than 1/32" at -40=B15K (MIL-O-16173D).
>
> 7. *Removability*
> Aliphatic Naptha, Cleaning Solvent
>
> 8. *Solids*
> 38%
>
> 9. *Flash Point*
> Approximately 156=B0F. (TCC.)
>
> 10. *Coverage*
> 500 to 1000 sq. ft. per gallon.
>
>
> On 11/15/06, Jeff Carpenter <jeff@westcottpress.com> wrote:
>
> > >
> >
> > Hi Mike,
> >
> > Do you have any sense of the coverage you'll get with the Boeshield,
> > or, more to the point, how much you'll use on the 10?
> >
> > Jeff Carpenter
> > 40304
> >
> >
> > On Nov 15, 2006, at 6:28 AM, Mike Lauritsen - Work wrote:
> >
> > > <mike@cleavelandtool.com>
> > >
> > > We sell Boshield in small qty. for use on tools to keep them from
> > > rusting. We are a dealer and can have gallons or 5's drop shipped
> > > from Boeshield and possibly save some money. Email me if interested.
> > > mike <at> cleavelandtool.com
> > >
> > > FYI this has been my corrosion plan all along.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > > Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 11/14/06, Dave Leikam < DAVELEIKAM@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > >>
> > >> Here are two options for you. I am planning on one of these
> > >> products after
> > >> completion and painting.
> > >>
> > >> http://boeshield.com/index.htm
> > >>
> > >> http://www.nocorrosion.com/corrosion-control.htm
> > >>
> > >> Dave Leikam
> > >> 40496
> > >> tailcone - (dimple, dimple, dimple...)
> > >> N89DA
> > >> Muskego, WI
> > >>
> > >
> > =======================
= tric bsp; * The Builder's Bookstore > sp; -Ma
======================
> > ef="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronic
s.co====================
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>
> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>
>
> --
> Mike Lauritsen
> Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
> 515-432-6794
> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>www.cleavelandtool.com
>
> *
> href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
> href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
> href="http://www.kitlog.com">www.kitlog.com
> href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ontribution
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> *
>
>
> *
>
===========
===========
===========
> *
>
>
--
Mike Lauritsen
Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
515-432-6794
www.cleavelandtool.com
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rivethead - are they shipping any product? Yes |
Sounds like good advice for the Rivethead parts too.. That is, just
leave the 415 off until mounting the feathers on the tailcone.. Leave
the access panel undrilled and cleco'd in place until then too.
BTW, UPS just delivered the Rivethead parts. They look good. Should
save some time.
Bill - plunging ahead with the tailcone and prepping to prime the
elevators and trim tab parts.
do not archive
>
>I hate loose ends as well. I don't think the holes line up with the Van's 415's
with the Rivethead version which, by the way I need to order along with some
new access panels due to the hole allignment issue. Anyone using the Van's versions
save yourself some grief and wait to final rivet the 415's to the panel
until after your final rigging. It's way easier to turn them when they are not
attched to the panel, just cleco until they are properly adjusted.
>
>Rick S.
>40185
>
>
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: Rivethead - are they shipping any product? Yes |
I'm just kinda wondering. If you don't reside in coastal state, and
perhaps only have 20-30 years left that getting a medical is probable,
and none of the top 4 GA plane brands/models did any priming, and very
few have suffered significant corrosion over 30-50 year lives, is it
going to really be cost/time effective to bother with priming at all?
On 11/15/06, Maule Driver <MauleDriver@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Sounds like good advice for the Rivethead parts too.. That is, just
> leave the 415 off until mounting the feathers on the tailcone.. Leave
> the access panel undrilled and cleco'd in place until then too.
>
> BTW, UPS just delivered the Rivethead parts. They look good. Should
> save some time.
>
> Bill - plunging ahead with the tailcone and prepping to prime the
> elevators and trim tab parts.
> do not archive
>
> >
> >I hate loose ends as well. I don't think the holes line up with the Van's 415's
with the Rivethead version which, by the way I need to order along with some
new access panels due to the hole allignment issue. Anyone using the Van's
versions save yourself some grief and wait to final rivet the 415's to the panel
until after your final rigging. It's way easier to turn them when they are
not attched to the panel, just cleco until they are properly adjusted.
> >
> >Rick S.
> >40185
> >
> >
>
>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Post Component Construction Priming |
I am using a Sherwin Williams rattle can one step. I can't remember the
numbers, but it's something like Primer no. 348. If you're really
interested, I'll go back and get specifics for you.
Christopher Stanley
80% on empenage
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: | Rivethead - are they shipping any product? Yes |
Oh no, not that can of worms again! I am sure that is fairly well covered
in the archives. I think the ultimate catch-all answer to that is "to each
his own."
Do not archive.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 5:06 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Rivethead - are they shipping any product? Yes
I'm just kinda wondering. If you don't reside in coastal state, and
perhaps only have 20-30 years left that getting a medical is probable,
and none of the top 4 GA plane brands/models did any priming, and very
few have suffered significant corrosion over 30-50 year lives, is it
going to really be cost/time effective to bother with priming at all?
On 11/15/06, Maule Driver <MauleDriver@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Sounds like good advice for the Rivethead parts too.. That is, just
> leave the 415 off until mounting the feathers on the tailcone.. Leave
> the access panel undrilled and cleco'd in place until then too.
>
> BTW, UPS just delivered the Rivethead parts. They look good. Should
> save some time.
>
> Bill - plunging ahead with the tailcone and prepping to prime the
> elevators and trim tab parts.
> do not archive
>
> >
> >I hate loose ends as well. I don't think the holes line up with the Van's
415's with the Rivethead version which, by the way I need to order along
with some new access panels due to the hole allignment issue. Anyone using
the Van's versions save yourself some grief and wait to final rivet the
415's to the panel until after your final rigging. It's way easier to turn
them when they are not attched to the panel, just cleco until they are
properly adjusted.
> >
> >Rick S.
> >40185
> >
> >
>
>
--
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
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: Kits/Family - A Review |
Just build!!! Less talk !!! Just build!!! You can do it!!!
Please take no offence but you could have built half the tail while ...well
im not sure realy what you were actualy on about!!.
Please take no offece and as I say to my builders Just build ....no time and
space....I built my whole tail and cone on the dining room table and
bedtroom while also building a house for us to move into.
No Money get a part time job ( cant build a 10 on fireman wages)!
Its easy just do it.............Build.......... An hour a day and you will
finish.
Again take no offence
Kind regards Chris 388
----- Original Message -----
From: <mgeans@provide.net>
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 6:01 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Kits/Family - A Review
> All,
>
> For those that may be interested and some who may be
> lurking, attached is some observations/converastions that
> my wife and I had based on all of the replies we recieved
> from the Kits and Family thread.
>
> It is a bit long, ~3 pages in Word, but an interesting read
> for those wanting to add thier 2 cents (we describe our
> buidling status scenerio in more detail and invite
> suggestions) and those considering building to have some
> helpful insight.
>
> On another note:
> I fished for a reply with a one liner on the original post
> with no specific replies and will try once more. It may
> have gotten scanned over.
> I have an opportunity to switch careers in which my
> employer will be overseas. If anyone has any expirience or
> knows someone who does, in such matters and what to be wary
> of or be sure you include in your "package" as an employee
> I would like to share more info about the scenerio for your
> feedback. It is a life altering opportunity and I am
> checking all sorts of leads where I could make myself
> knowledgeable before my visit with them.
>
> For those who are considering a build, or know of someone
> who is, I will be downloading all the replies that we
> recieved from this original post into a Word document to
> consolidate all the advice for our and anyone's future use.
> Contact me directly if you would be interested in getting
> this document.
>
> Thanks to all for your help.
>
> Matt Geans
> Builder Wanna-be
>
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Post Component Construction Priming |
Chris Stanley wrote:
>
> I am using a Sherwin Williams rattle can one step. I cant remember
> the numbers, but its something like Primer no. 348. If youre really
> interested, Ill go back and get specifics for you.
>
Sherwin Williams 988:
<http://www.sherwin-automotive.com/products/show_product.cfm?product=7565>
-Dj
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 0-540 E vs C |
Bob, Thanks. It always helps to have a confirmation.
I bought a -F4B5 from an R44 and had it overhauled to a D4A5. The research
I had done led me to believe that the two engines were identical, just
certificated at different rating depending on the airplane installation.
The overhauler told me the same thing, and then even wrote ... reconfigured
to -C4B5 in the engine logbook. It's when I asked him about the C4B5
write-up that he told me about the same engine/different rating issue.
So yes, even though my logbook says that it was reconfigured to a -C4B5, I
plan on operating it as high as 2700 RPM for the 260 HP.
So here's a follow up question for the A&P types: even though I know that I
"can" operate it however I want to since it's an experimental installation,
since I'd like to keep decent records on the engine should I make a write-up
of my intentions to operate the engine as a D4A5?
Rob Wright
#392
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of bcondrey
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 10:35 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: 0-540 E vs C
Turns out the power section identifier was for the first version of the
engine in that series. Pick a couple engines from the info on Tim's web
page and look at the lineage - you'll find that they essentially start with
the same thing and are simply configuration differences. Funny thing is
that occasionally you wind up with something like the IO-540-C4B5 and
IO-540-D4A5 (different power section code) but are absolutely identical
engines physically but rated differently. The C4B5 is rated 250@2575 and
the D4A5 is 260@2700. You'll also see that the IO-540-D4A5 is the same as
the O-540-E4A5 but with fuel injection instead of a carb.
Bob
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=74667#74667
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: Rivethead - are they shipping any product? Yes |
I guess everyone has to figure out what they want to do.
First you read the 'Primer War' chronicles in the various archives.
Then you do a critical self examination - just what kind of person am I?
Then you waffle around for awhile and hope to make a decision.
Here's where I am:
My HS and VS were built and primed in Griffin GA with 2 part epoxy in
zinc chromate green. Very nice, very compelling
Vans uses Sherwin Williams Industrial Wash Primer - P60-? Easy to use,
light weight, less than 'mil-spec'
Then there are those 30 year airplanes, hmmmm
I've located some Sherwin Williams P60 and that's what I intend to
continue with
until I'm convinced otherwise.
Bill Watson - a good person with too few years left in my Class A
Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
> I'm just kinda wondering. If you don't reside in coastal state, and
> perhaps only have 20-30 years left that getting a medical is probable,
> and none of the top 4 GA plane brands/models did any priming, and very
> few have suffered significant corrosion over 30-50 year lives, is it
> going to really be cost/time effective to bother with priming at all?
>
> On 11/15/06, Maule Driver <MauleDriver@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>> Bill - plunging ahead with the tailcone and prepping to prime the
>> elevators and trim tab parts.
>> do not archive
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 0-540 E vs C |
Do you really think the added 10HP at sea level will do anything except
increase your fuel burn? I know a guy who, in essence, derated the D4A5 to
a C4B5 so he didn't have to worry about backing off on the prop when
climbing. He set his governor for a max of about 1550rpm and doesn't feel
any need for more power, no matter how heavy he is loaded.
Do not archive.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Wright
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 6:43 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: 0-540 E vs C
Bob, Thanks. It always helps to have a confirmation.
I bought a -F4B5 from an R44 and had it overhauled to a D4A5. The research
I had done led me to believe that the two engines were identical, just
certificated at different rating depending on the airplane installation.
The overhauler told me the same thing, and then even wrote ... reconfigured
to -C4B5 in the engine logbook. It's when I asked him about the C4B5
write-up that he told me about the same engine/different rating issue.
So yes, even though my logbook says that it was reconfigured to a -C4B5, I
plan on operating it as high as 2700 RPM for the 260 HP.
So here's a follow up question for the A&P types: even though I know that I
"can" operate it however I want to since it's an experimental installation,
since I'd like to keep decent records on the engine should I make a write-up
of my intentions to operate the engine as a D4A5?
Rob Wright
#392
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of bcondrey
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 10:35 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: 0-540 E vs C
Turns out the power section identifier was for the first version of the
engine in that series. Pick a couple engines from the info on Tim's web
page and look at the lineage - you'll find that they essentially start with
the same thing and are simply configuration differences. Funny thing is
that occasionally you wind up with something like the IO-540-C4B5 and
IO-540-D4A5 (different power section code) but are absolutely identical
engines physically but rated differently. The C4B5 is rated 250@2575 and
the D4A5 is 260@2700. You'll also see that the IO-540-D4A5 is the same as
the O-540-E4A5 but with fuel injection instead of a carb.
Bob
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=74667#74667
--
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
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: 0-540 E vs C |
Boy the list could have a field day with this guy's personal choices, even
if they may be yours!
I'm not worried about fuel burn since the time at 260HP would be so short.
However, an airfield that strains a 250HP's short field capabilities _may_
allow a safe margin in a 260 HP. Too many other factors could change this
simple analogy, so it still boils down to personal choices.
Rob Wright
#392
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 5:59 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: 0-540 E vs C
Do you really think the added 10HP at sea level will do anything except
increase your fuel burn? I know a guy who, in essence, derated the D4A5 to
a C4B5 so he didn't have to worry about backing off on the prop when
climbing. He set his governor for a max of about 1550rpm and doesn't feel
any need for more power, no matter how heavy he is loaded.
Do not archive.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Wright
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 6:43 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: 0-540 E vs C
Bob, Thanks. It always helps to have a confirmation.
I bought a -F4B5 from an R44 and had it overhauled to a D4A5. The research
I had done led me to believe that the two engines were identical, just
certificated at different rating depending on the airplane installation.
The overhauler told me the same thing, and then even wrote ... reconfigured
to -C4B5 in the engine logbook. It's when I asked him about the C4B5
write-up that he told me about the same engine/different rating issue.
So yes, even though my logbook says that it was reconfigured to a -C4B5, I
plan on operating it as high as 2700 RPM for the 260 HP.
So here's a follow up question for the A&P types: even though I know that I
"can" operate it however I want to since it's an experimental installation,
since I'd like to keep decent records on the engine should I make a write-up
of my intentions to operate the engine as a D4A5?
Rob Wright
#392
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of bcondrey
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 10:35 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: 0-540 E vs C
Turns out the power section identifier was for the first version of the
engine in that series. Pick a couple engines from the info on Tim's web
page and look at the lineage - you'll find that they essentially start with
the same thing and are simply configuration differences. Funny thing is
that occasionally you wind up with something like the IO-540-C4B5 and
IO-540-D4A5 (different power section code) but are absolutely identical
engines physically but rated differently. The C4B5 is rated 250@2575 and
the D4A5 is 260@2700. You'll also see that the IO-540-D4A5 is the same as
the O-540-E4A5 but with fuel injection instead of a carb.
Bob
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=74667#74667
--
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 0-540 E vs C |
Rob Wright wrote:
>
>Bob, Thanks. It always helps to have a confirmation.
>
>I bought a -F4B5 from an R44 and had it overhauled to a D4A5. The research
>I had done led me to believe that the two engines were identical, just
>certificated at different rating depending on the airplane installation.
>The overhauler told me the same thing, and then even wrote ... reconfigured
>to -C4B5 in the engine logbook. It's when I asked him about the C4B5
>write-up that he told me about the same engine/different rating issue.
>
>So yes, even though my logbook says that it was reconfigured to a -C4B5, I
>plan on operating it as high as 2700 RPM for the 260 HP.
>
>So here's a follow up question for the A&P types: even though I know that I
>"can" operate it however I want to since it's an experimental installation,
>since I'd like to keep decent records on the engine should I make a write-up
>of my intentions to operate the engine as a D4A5?
>
>Rob Wright
>#392
>
Rob, I'm no A&P, so you might take this with a grain of salt (whatever
THAT means :-D )!
It really doesn't matter how you run your engine ..... it won't change
anything. Putting that info in your logs would just confuse a buyer
down the road, since he probably wouldn't know what the differences are.
Having said that, I'll point out that the 'redline' an engine is saddled
with is a number chosen to get the engine through it's rather rigorous
certification stage. The same is true of the leaning scenario. And
too, for the mogas issue! I've said here before .... I run the dickens
out of my O-360 on 92 octane mogas and it's nothing to see 3300 to 3400
on the tach when I'm wringing out the Pitts. No bad things have
happened so far in the 25 years I've been abusing it ..... because of
the high RPMs. So, just go out and fly the way you want to. The
operating limitations on your engine are rather conservative .... and
are that way so the manufacturer can get it certified.
Just MHO, and your mileage may differ.
Linn
do not archive
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kits/Family - A Review |
Matt, (and any other interested)
Ok, ya'll are gonna have to hold back from being too romantic
about this post....it was actually written by my wife in regards
to her thoughts about the Family experience of building an RV-10.
After reading it, I thought I better just make it a web page, because
it may be appreciated by other people down the road. Here's the
link to it:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/why/wifesperspective.html
---------
Also, Matt, I read your word doc, and it looks like you're going about
things the very right way....really thinking it through and including
your wife in the thought process. I commend you for that!
My couple of quick comments on the write up you did:
* I totally understand your concern on 5000 hour airframes...but that
said, a good inspection on some of the common models of planes can
turn up most problems. Certified planes aren't falling out of the sky
at an alarming rate, so I wouldn't worry too much about it if you get
a good pre-buy inspection of a certified bird. I'd actually be more
fearful buying a pre-built kit, because you're buying someone elses
possibly poor building decisions.
Regarding wife's help....I would be willing to bet that in your
case, with very young kids, you'll be lucky to get even a couple
or few dozen good hours of help. That's not saying ANYTHING bad
about your wife, but she's gonna be a busy lady for a long time.
Just be happy she'll take a majority of the misc. work. My wife's
write-up (above) reminded me that she really took care of most of
the meals, the household duties, the lawn mowing, and lots more,
while I built. We also didn't go places, and I didn't fix cars
as quickly and generally let the house, vehicles, and yard
deteriorate a bit in order to get to completion...trying to shorten
the pain, even though it might be more intense. So don't bother
trying to talk her into help. Just hope you can talk her into
letting you NOT help around the house much.
You asked how my kids stayed involved. Here's my dirty secret.
I'm a sociable guy. For me, building was a very lonely experience.
A couple thousand hours of being alone working on a plane could be
a dream for some, and misery for others. For me it was a
miserably fun time. ;) I loved the progress, got depressed by
the lack of it at times, and generally just wished the family
would please come out and see me once in a while. The kids?
They loved to come out for a minute or two and play with things,
which usually resulted in me getting upset. "Put down that primer,
and get some gloves on!", and "QUIT HAMMERING ON THAT WING, I want
it to stay nice!"...that kind of thing. It was great to have them
there, but the BEST was when they were just THERE, and watched
TV while I worked. Other times, it just slowed me down.
Now, don't anyone ever tell that I said that. My kids were just
coming up on 5 and 7 at the time of completion. So they were
just almost 3 and 5 when I started. I could not have started
it even a few months earlier and had such success, because I
really had to wait until they grew big enough to deal with better.
Regarding the LSA step, I really think that's taking the hard and
long road. Buying a certified plane is nice in that you buy it,
put your time in, and then sell it for a similar cost of your
entry cost. My Sundowner cost $45K, and we sold it for $48K or
so. I got a few hundred hours out of it, and sold it for enough
that we pocketed the engine reserve! You may not make out as
well buying some brands of kits, and then you have to suffer
through the build process. While you have tiny kids, just get
a good flying plane and have some experiences to break them in...skip
the building until it fits your family's life well. We started
flying both our kids at 5 weeks old. They've never been afraid
of flying.
About the BRS....if you're seriously interested in that, and
the stuff you said about old planes, you actually may find a
better temporary fit buy partnering with someone in a new
or new/used Cirrus. You could get a 1/2 share for less than
an RV-10 of similar equipment pretty easily I'd think. Heck,
people forget about one important thing.....in many cases, in
fact most cases, if you're not flying at least 100 hours per year
you're actually better off renting. Blasphemy, I know, but if you
have a rental Cirrus in your area, that could be a great way to
spend the next 3 years while you buy yourself some time adjusting
your family's life.
Reading the end of your word .doc, I see you realize the most important
fact....flying, that's the important thing. You don't have to give
up flying. You don't have to give up building either. But, I was
35 when I started my kit. I'm 37 now (almost 38). We're both
plenty young, and have time left if we're lucky. My kids were
just turning 5 and 7 when we finished, to repeat myself. They had
some trips to Florida in the Sundowner that WE will remember forever,
but THEY will probably only have the fuzziest recollection of. But
at 5 and 7, they're a lot more able to appreciate things. I would
not be in a hurry to build for at least 2 or 3 more years. Get the
whole gang out of diapers, and position everyone for the task. Also,
the oft-overlooked thing is that if you start stuffing away cash
right NOW, you'll pile up some good interest on it. I don't have
much in the bank these days....it took everything I had. But,
I remember the day my bank account, (yes, in low-interest but
very liquid state), passed through $100,000. That was a great day,
and the interest at even the low rate was piling up well. It
was comforting. I actually HOPED I wouldn't finish the plane
too soon, because the goal was to pay cash for everything, and
end up broke but flying. If I hit too early, I'd have to take
out a loan.....something I'm not one to agree with when buying
toys. It worked out so close that I probably only had a few
hundred bucks to my name on the day I flew. A pretty
precarious position to be in for a family....for sure, but now
we're on our slow way to recovery. (It gets even harder to
save AFTER you're flying)
None of this is meant to turn you off. I really think you've
got admirable motivation. It is definitely nice to see you
worrying about it a little. As long as it is a dream of both
you and your supportive wife, it will happen, eventually. It'll
be pretty cool if in the end the RV-10 fits your mission and
family, and you have the cash in hand so you don't have to flinch
the day you drop over $45K on your kit, and another $35K on your
engine....and then get on the phone to the avionics store. ;)
Good luck, and if you ever want a phone call, just track me
down and we can talk by phone. Would be cool to get the
families together if you're ever in the area.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
mgeans@provide.net wrote:
> All,
>
> For those that may be interested and some who may be
> lurking, attached is some observations/converastions that
> my wife and I had based on all of the replies we recieved
> from the Kits and Family thread.
>
> It is a bit long, ~3 pages in Word, but an interesting read
> for those wanting to add thier 2 cents (we describe our
> buidling status scenerio in more detail and invite
> suggestions) and those considering building to have some
> helpful insight.
>
> On another note:
> I fished for a reply with a one liner on the original post
> with no specific replies and will try once more. It may
> have gotten scanned over.
> I have an opportunity to switch careers in which my
> employer will be overseas. If anyone has any expirience or
> knows someone who does, in such matters and what to be wary
> of or be sure you include in your "package" as an employee
> I would like to share more info about the scenerio for your
> feedback. It is a life altering opportunity and I am
> checking all sorts of leads where I could make myself
> knowledgeable before my visit with them.
>
> For those who are considering a build, or know of someone
> who is, I will be downloading all the replies that we
> recieved from this original post into a Word document to
> consolidate all the advice for our and anyone's future use.
> Contact me directly if you would be interested in getting
> this document.
>
> Thanks to all for your help.
>
> Matt Geans
> Builder Wanna-be
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Kits/Family - A Review |
Great write up by both of you, as always. (I think I would have teared
up also Tim)
John Cram
40569 Emp
----- Original Message -----
From: Tim Olson<mailto:Tim@MyRV10.com>
To: rv10-list@matronics.com<mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Kits/Family - A Review
<Tim@MyRV10.com<mailto:Tim@MyRV10.com>>
Matt, (and any other interested)
Ok, ya'll are gonna have to hold back from being too romantic
about this post....it was actually written by my wife in regards
to her thoughts about the Family experience of building an RV-10.
After reading it, I thought I better just make it a web page, because
it may be appreciated by other people down the road. Here's the
link to it:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/why/wifesperspective.html<http://www.myrv10.
com/N104CD/why/wifesperspective.html>
---------
Also, Matt, I read your word doc, and it looks like you're going about
things the very right way....really thinking it through and including
your wife in the thought process. I commend you for that!
My couple of quick comments on the write up you did:
* I totally understand your concern on 5000 hour airframes...but that
said, a good inspection on some of the common models of planes can
turn up most problems. Certified planes aren't falling out of the sky
at an alarming rate, so I wouldn't worry too much about it if you get
a good pre-buy inspection of a certified bird. I'd actually be more
fearful buying a pre-built kit, because you're buying someone elses
possibly poor building decisions.
Regarding wife's help....I would be willing to bet that in your
case, with very young kids, you'll be lucky to get even a couple
or few dozen good hours of help. That's not saying ANYTHING bad
about your wife, but she's gonna be a busy lady for a long time.
Just be happy she'll take a majority of the misc. work. My wife's
write-up (above) reminded me that she really took care of most of
the meals, the household duties, the lawn mowing, and lots more,
while I built. We also didn't go places, and I didn't fix cars
as quickly and generally let the house, vehicles, and yard
deteriorate a bit in order to get to completion...trying to shorten
the pain, even though it might be more intense. So don't bother
trying to talk her into help. Just hope you can talk her into
letting you NOT help around the house much.
You asked how my kids stayed involved. Here's my dirty secret.
I'm a sociable guy. For me, building was a very lonely experience.
A couple thousand hours of being alone working on a plane could be
a dream for some, and misery for others. For me it was a
miserably fun time. ;) I loved the progress, got depressed by
the lack of it at times, and generally just wished the family
would please come out and see me once in a while. The kids?
They loved to come out for a minute or two and play with things,
which usually resulted in me getting upset. "Put down that primer,
and get some gloves on!", and "QUIT HAMMERING ON THAT WING, I want
it to stay nice!"...that kind of thing. It was great to have them
there, but the BEST was when they were just THERE, and watched
TV while I worked. Other times, it just slowed me down.
Now, don't anyone ever tell that I said that. My kids were just
coming up on 5 and 7 at the time of completion. So they were
just almost 3 and 5 when I started. I could not have started
it even a few months earlier and had such success, because I
really had to wait until they grew big enough to deal with better.
Regarding the LSA step, I really think that's taking the hard and
long road. Buying a certified plane is nice in that you buy it,
put your time in, and then sell it for a similar cost of your
entry cost. My Sundowner cost $45K, and we sold it for $48K or
so. I got a few hundred hours out of it, and sold it for enough
that we pocketed the engine reserve! You may not make out as
well buying some brands of kits, and then you have to suffer
through the build process. While you have tiny kids, just get
a good flying plane and have some experiences to break them in...skip
the building until it fits your family's life well. We started
flying both our kids at 5 weeks old. They've never been afraid
of flying.
About the BRS....if you're seriously interested in that, and
the stuff you said about old planes, you actually may find a
better temporary fit buy partnering with someone in a new
or new/used Cirrus. You could get a 1/2 share for less than
an RV-10 of similar equipment pretty easily I'd think. Heck,
people forget about one important thing.....in many cases, in
fact most cases, if you're not flying at least 100 hours per year
you're actually better off renting. Blasphemy, I know, but if you
have a rental Cirrus in your area, that could be a great way to
spend the next 3 years while you buy yourself some time adjusting
your family's life.
Reading the end of your word .doc, I see you realize the most
important
fact....flying, that's the important thing. You don't have to give
up flying. You don't have to give up building either. But, I was
35 when I started my kit. I'm 37 now (almost 38). We're both
plenty young, and have time left if we're lucky. My kids were
just turning 5 and 7 when we finished, to repeat myself. They had
some trips to Florida in the Sundowner that WE will remember forever,
but THEY will probably only have the fuzziest recollection of. But
at 5 and 7, they're a lot more able to appreciate things. I would
not be in a hurry to build for at least 2 or 3 more years. Get the
whole gang out of diapers, and position everyone for the task. Also,
the oft-overlooked thing is that if you start stuffing away cash
right NOW, you'll pile up some good interest on it. I don't have
much in the bank these days....it took everything I had. But,
I remember the day my bank account, (yes, in low-interest but
very liquid state), passed through $100,000. That was a great day,
and the interest at even the low rate was piling up well. It
was comforting. I actually HOPED I wouldn't finish the plane
too soon, because the goal was to pay cash for everything, and
end up broke but flying. If I hit too early, I'd have to take
out a loan.....something I'm not one to agree with when buying
toys. It worked out so close that I probably only had a few
hundred bucks to my name on the day I flew. A pretty
precarious position to be in for a family....for sure, but now
we're on our slow way to recovery. (It gets even harder to
save AFTER you're flying)
None of this is meant to turn you off. I really think you've
got admirable motivation. It is definitely nice to see you
worrying about it a little. As long as it is a dream of both
you and your supportive wife, it will happen, eventually. It'll
be pretty cool if in the end the RV-10 fits your mission and
family, and you have the cash in hand so you don't have to flinch
the day you drop over $45K on your kit, and another $35K on your
engine....and then get on the phone to the avionics store. ;)
Good luck, and if you ever want a phone call, just track me
down and we can talk by phone. Would be cool to get the
families together if you're ever in the area.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
mgeans@provide.net<mailto:mgeans@provide.net> wrote:
> All,
>
> For those that may be interested and some who may be
> lurking, attached is some observations/converastions that
> my wife and I had based on all of the replies we recieved
> from the Kits and Family thread.
>
> It is a bit long, ~3 pages in Word, but an interesting read
> for those wanting to add thier 2 cents (we describe our
> buidling status scenerio in more detail and invite
> suggestions) and those considering building to have some
> helpful insight.
>
> On another note:
> I fished for a reply with a one liner on the original post
> with no specific replies and will try once more. It may
> have gotten scanned over.
> I have an opportunity to switch careers in which my
> employer will be overseas. If anyone has any expirience or
> knows someone who does, in such matters and what to be wary
> of or be sure you include in your "package" as an employee
> I would like to share more info about the scenerio for your
> feedback. It is a life altering opportunity and I am
> checking all sorts of leads where I could make myself
> knowledgeable before my visit with them.
>
> For those who are considering a build, or know of someone
> who is, I will be downloading all the replies that we
> recieved from this original post into a Word document to
> consolidate all the advice for our and anyone's future use.
> Contact me directly if you would be interested in getting
> this document.
>
> Thanks to all for your help.
>
> Matt Geans
> Builder Wanna-be
www.aeroelectric.com<http://www.aeroelectric.com/>
www.buildersbooks.com<http://www.buildersbooks.com/>
www.kitlog.com<http://www.kitlog.com/>
www.homebuilthelp.com<http://www.homebuilthelp.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List<http://www.matronics.com/Nav
igator?RV10-List>
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 0-540 E vs C |
I find it funny that people would go to all this trouble for nothing
more than a psychological barrier. If you can do the same thing by
reducing or adding power then do it. Resetting governors to derate an
engine seems really stupid. I sure want to know I have ALL available
power in an emergency. If it shakes the engine apart so be it as long
as I have the option if needed. The rest of the time I will manage the
engine just like any other part of a flight to keep it in normal
parameters.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 5:59 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: 0-540 E vs C
Do you really think the added 10HP at sea level will do anything except
increase your fuel burn? I know a guy who, in essence, derated the D4A5
to
a C4B5 so he didn't have to worry about backing off on the prop when
climbing. He set his governor for a max of about 1550rpm and doesn't
feel
any need for more power, no matter how heavy he is loaded.
Do not archive.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Wright
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 6:43 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: 0-540 E vs C
Bob, Thanks. It always helps to have a confirmation.
I bought a -F4B5 from an R44 and had it overhauled to a D4A5. The
research
I had done led me to believe that the two engines were identical, just
certificated at different rating depending on the airplane installation.
The overhauler told me the same thing, and then even wrote ...
reconfigured
to -C4B5 in the engine logbook. It's when I asked him about the C4B5
write-up that he told me about the same engine/different rating issue.
So yes, even though my logbook says that it was reconfigured to a -C4B5,
I
plan on operating it as high as 2700 RPM for the 260 HP.
So here's a follow up question for the A&P types: even though I know
that I
"can" operate it however I want to since it's an experimental
installation,
since I'd like to keep decent records on the engine should I make a
write-up
of my intentions to operate the engine as a D4A5?
Rob Wright
#392
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of bcondrey
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 10:35 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: 0-540 E vs C
Turns out the power section identifier was for the first version of the
engine in that series. Pick a couple engines from the info on Tim's web
page and look at the lineage - you'll find that they essentially start
with
the same thing and are simply configuration differences. Funny thing is
that occasionally you wind up with something like the IO-540-C4B5 and
IO-540-D4A5 (different power section code) but are absolutely identical
engines physically but rated differently. The C4B5 is rated 250@2575
and
the D4A5 is 260@2700. You'll also see that the IO-540-D4A5 is the
same as
the O-540-E4A5 but with fuel injection instead of a carb.
Bob
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=74667#74667
--
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 0-540 E vs C |
I can't resist!
Why not make a throttle quadrant with a military power setting and a latch that
you lift to get to "Military Power".
Set the engine up for 2400 (Normal T/O power) and have the other setting for full
military power (2700 or so).
Then you can look over at the right seat and ask "Would you like to see a military
power takeoff?" Shove it into "Afterburner" so to speak. Watch the fuel
get poured into the tailpipe just like the real thing!
You have the power if you need it! but if you want to pinch pennies then use the
"Normal T/O" power
Just a thought!
Jim Combs
N312F
#40192 - Finishing kit
===========================================================
From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: 0-540 E vs C
I find it funny that people would go to all this trouble for nothing
more than a psychological barrier. If you can do the same thing by
reducing or adding power then do it. Resetting governors to derate an
engine seems really stupid. I sure want to know I have ALL available
power in an emergency. If it shakes the engine apart so be it as long
as I have the option if needed. The rest of the time I will manage the
engine just like any other part of a flight to keep it in normal
parameters.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 5:59 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: 0-540 E vs C
Do you really think the added 10HP at sea level will do anything except
increase your fuel burn? I know a guy who, in essence, derated the D4A5
to
a C4B5 so he didn't have to worry about backing off on the prop when
climbing. He set his governor for a max of about 1550rpm and doesn't
feel
any need for more power, no matter how heavy he is loaded.
Do not archive.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
W: 352-465-4545
C: 352-427-0285
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Wright
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 6:43 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: 0-540 E vs C
Bob, Thanks. It always helps to have a confirmation.
I bought a -F4B5 from an R44 and had it overhauled to a D4A5. The
research
I had done led me to believe that the two engines were identical, just
certificated at different rating depending on the airplane installation.
The overhauler told me the same thing, and then even wrote ...
reconfigured
to -C4B5 in the engine logbook. It's when I asked him about the C4B5
write-up that he told me about the same engine/different rating issue.
So yes, even though my logbook says that it was reconfigured to a -C4B5,
I
plan on operating it as high as 2700 RPM for the 260 HP.
So here's a follow up question for the A&P types: even though I know
that I
"can" operate it however I want to since it's an experimental
installation,
since I'd like to keep decent records on the engine should I make a
write-up
of my intentions to operate the engine as a D4A5?
Rob Wright
#392
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of bcondrey
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 10:35 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: 0-540 E vs C
Turns out the power section identifier was for the first version of the
engine in that series. Pick a couple engines from the info on Tim's web
page and look at the lineage - you'll find that they essentially start
with
the same thing and are simply configuration differences. Funny thing is
that occasionally you wind up with something like the IO-540-C4B5 and
IO-540-D4A5 (different power section code) but are absolutely identical
engines physically but rated differently. The C4B5 is rated 250@2575
and
the D4A5 is 260@2700. You'll also see that the IO-540-D4A5 is the
same as
the O-540-E4A5 but with fuel injection instead of a carb.
Bob
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=74667#74667
--
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
===========================================================
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Rudder pedal bolt direction |
When reversing the bolt on the rudder pedals I used an old helicopter
trick of tucking the loose ends of the cotter pins back into one of
the castellations to finish them off. This should keep your feet
from snagging on them.
Len
40381
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rudder pedal bolt direction |
Great idea Len, that would definitely help.
I actually skipped the cotter pins and used safety
wire and did the regular safety wire twist and curl
and tucked it in. So long as the nut doesn't turn,
and nothing snags, anything could be done. If it
weren't so "non-standard" in aviation, I personally
would just use a nyloc nut with only 1 thread
prodtruding, and then medium strength loctite on
the threads. Realistically there's no reason that
wouldn't work too.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
L Aune wrote:
>
> When reversing the bolt on the rudder pedals I used an old helicopter
> trick of tucking the loose ends of the cotter pins back into one of the
> castellations to finish them off. This should keep your feet from
> snagging on them.
>
> Len
>
> 40381
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Pattern for Front Seat Upholstery |
I wonder if a few of us that are able to sew up our own upholstery could
pitch in and pay some professional upholsterer to come up with a good
set of
patterns for the rv10 seat? I=92ve sewn quite a few interiors but I=92ve
always
worked from the old material used as a pattern=85.
Steve
40205
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Niko
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 5:37 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Pattern for Front Seat Upholstery
Has anyone either developed or gotten a pattern for uphostering the
front
seats?
Niko
40188
"http://www.aeroelectric.com"www.aeroelectric.com
"http://www.buildersbooks.com"www.buildersbooks.com
"http://www.kitlog.com"www.kitlog.com
"http://www.homebuilthelp.com"www.homebuilthelp.com
"http://www.matronics.com/contribution"http://www.matronics.com/contribut
ion
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List"http://www.matronics.com/Na
vig
ator?RV10-List
--
11/13/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
11/14/2006
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Pattern for Front Seat Upholstery |
Sorry, no pattern...but happy with my seats!
Rick S.
40185
do not archive
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Pattern for Front Seat Upholstery |
Very nice, now send me one so I can examine it a little closer. Seriously,
the colors are very similar to what I've chosen to use also. Did you make
them yourself??
Steve
40205
>
> Sorry, no pattern...but happy with my seats!
>
> Rick S.
> 40185
>
> do not archive
>
> --
>
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
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! --
|