---------------------------------------------------------- RV10-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 11/17/06: 28 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 0. 12:41 AM - List Value... (Matt Dralle) 1. 04:10 AM - Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the RV-12 (Tim Olson) 2. 04:33 AM - Re: glassing rivets into glass (ddddsp1@juno.com) 3. 04:44 AM - Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the RV-12 (Jack Sargeant) 4. 05:22 AM - Lightspeed EI (David Boone) 5. 05:28 AM - Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the RV-12 (John Jessen) 6. 06:01 AM - Re: glassing rivets into glass (David McNeill) 7. 06:32 AM - Strobe Units and Cleaveland Tool Clearance (Mike Lauritsen - Work) 8. 06:32 AM - Re: Some Observations after Two Years of Building (RV Builder (Michael Sausen)) 9. 08:13 AM - =?us-ascii?Q?One_of_the_best_moves_I've_made_yet? (Les Kearney) 10. 08:17 AM - Re: Post Component Construction Priming (Dj Merrill) 11. 09:30 AM - Primer Wars - Redux (Les Kearney) 12. 09:32 AM - Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the RV-12 (John W. Cox) 13. 10:39 AM - Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve (Niko) 14. 11:03 AM - Re: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve () 15. 12:19 PM - Re: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve (Niko) 16. 12:29 PM - Re: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve () 17. 01:53 PM - Re: Some Observations after Two Years of Building (johngoodman) 18. 02:26 PM - Re: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve (AndrewTR30) 19. 02:37 PM - Re: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve (Tim Olson) 20. 02:43 PM - Re: One of the best moves I've made yet (Tim Olson) 21. 02:50 PM - Re: Re: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve (Tim Olson) 22. 04:09 PM - Re: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve (AndrewTR30) 23. 04:57 PM - riveting the lid (David McNeill) 24. 06:18 PM - Screw up my spar (SamMarlow) 25. 07:28 PM - Re: Screw up my spar (David McNeill) 26. 08:20 PM - Re: Screw up my spar (David McNeill) 27. 08:43 PM - Re: Screw up my spar (David McNeill) ________________________________ Message 0 _____________________________________ Time: 12:41:33 AM PST US From: Matt Dralle Subject: RV10-List: List Value... If you look forward to checking your List email everyday (and a lot of you have written to say that you do!), then you're probably getting at least 0 or 0 worth of Entertainment from the Lists each year. You'd pay twice that for a subscription to some lame magazine or even a dinner out. Isn't the List worth at least that much to you? Wouldn't it be great if you could pay that same amount and get a well-managed media source free of advertising, SPAM, and viruses? Come to think of it, you do... Won't you please take a minute to make your Contribution today and support YOUR Lists? Contribution Page: http://www.matronics.com/contribution Again, I want to say THANK YOU to everyone that has made a Contribution thus far during this year's List Fund Raiser!! These Lists are made possible exclusively through YOUR generosity!! Thank you for your support! Matt Dralle Email List Admin. ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 04:10:07 AM PST US From: Tim Olson Subject: Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: RV10-List: Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the RV-12 For a guy who doesn't own a plane and isn't building a kit, you're very in touch. Good job Matt. I've read some pretty good stuff showing that Va actually goes up with more weight. Strange, but true. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive mgeans@provide.net wrote: > > John Cox, > > Your Comment: > The reason for asking is the additional weight on the VAN > designed spar (with extension) cannot perform to the same > standards in maneuvering speed turbulence as the prototype > N410RV used for kit certification. > > Just finding out that you are an A & P you ought to be > familiar with this concept so here goes. > > I remember once reading an article about A/C that have tip > tanks and how the weight on the ends of the spars would > actually dispurses the load at the wing roots. > > IE: 10' 2 x 4 on 2 sawhorses placed 6" from each end. hang > 8 25Lb sand bags from looped rope within the center 2' of > the 9' span between the saw horses and note the load and > stress on the 2x4. NOW take 2 of the sandbags and hang > them on the ends of the 2 x 4 and note the change in the > load. The 2x4 is still holding the 200lbs but can do it > easier with 50lbs spread out to the ends of the "wings" > > This was the article's point about tip tanks which seems > like the subject of the thread. I could see how 2 souls > and extra gas in the tips could gross out the weight of the > -10 but it seems logical that the spar roots would see less > stress dynamically during flight than normal wings with a > full gross load in the cabin. I could see how static > stress on the ramp could be affected but is that really > pushing the design limits past the -G's the A/C is rated > for? > > Not meaning to question your more expertise on this, but am > I on to something or missing something about maneuvering > speed turbulence? > > Matt Geans > Builder Wanna-be > > Do not archive (I have GOT to remember to put that in more > often) > > On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 10:44:36 -0800 > "John W. Cox" wrote: >> John, for the purpose of expanded clarification, do you >> espouse that >> those aircraft which have added additional fuel tanks >> have moved to the >> dark side as well? The reason for asking is the >> additional weight on >> the VAN designed spar (with extension) cannot perform to >> the same >> standards in maneuvering speed turbulence as the >> prototype N410RV used >> for kit certification. >> >> >> >> That was the reason for the phrase I used last week >> "Design for >> Aerobatic, Load to Utility and fly Standard Category... >> 3.8 G". I >> perceive many builders have dismissed it our did not >> understand the >> consequence. It was commonplace for the Lancair plastics >> to just up >> their Gross Weight on paper for certification to cover >> the additional >> mods without regard to the spar and the landing gear >> capability. >> Kabang. >> >> >> >> For those willing to move to the dark side, the process >> is as easy as >> finding a DER (Designated Engineering Rep) willing to go >> with you and >> then provide the plane for the same testing that the FAA >> required of >> VAN. Remember to pack a current chute. >> >> >> >> J Cox >> >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf >> Of JOHN STARN >> Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 9:59 PM >> To: rv10-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: RV10-List: Okay - Okay >> tell me I'm >> just sarcastic on the RV-12 >> >> >> >> NOPE, I'm not, but my minor was in aeronautical >> engineering...BUT if I >> were building a -10 and wanted to change something, >> anything I'd spend a >> little bit and seek the advise of one. I'd do the same >> thing if I wanted >> to go from light shingles to a heavy tile roof on my >> home. BUT there >> seems to be a lot of -10 guys who are looking the same >> answer, sooo pool >> your funds and buy the advise. Do Not Archive. KABONG >> BE HAPPY.. >> >> >> >> On the other hand maybe, just maybe, Van has considered >> all the other >> ways but he also didn't want to be "dickin' with >> anything that may >> affect the airworthiness of the plane" either. >> >> >> > > > > > ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 04:33:45 AM PST US From: "ddddsp1@juno.com" Subject: Re: RV10-List: glassing rivets into glass David, How would you strengthen the hard points and what size CS SS washer ar e you using IF you just go with Vans standard belts? These CS SS washer s available at ACS or other places? Anyone else improved the hardpoints on their top or is this an issue of overkill? Thanks, DEAN 40449 ________________________________________________________________________

David,

  How would you strengthen the hard points and what size CS SS w asher are you using IF you just go with Vans standard belts?  These CS SS washers available at ACS or other places?

Anyone else improved the hardpoints on their top or is this an issue of overkill?

Thanks,

DEAN 40449



______________________ __________________________________________________
Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!
________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 04:44:47 AM PST US From: "Jack Sargeant" Subject: RE: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: RV10-List: Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the RV-12 Not so strange when you remember that an increase in weight results in an increase in inertia. So -- the same applied force results in less acceleration. Jack & Cecilia Sargeant 1127 Patricia St. Wichita, KS 67208-2642 316/683-5268 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tim Olson Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 6:09 AM Subject: Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: RV10-List: Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the RV-12 For a guy who doesn't own a plane and isn't building a kit, you're very in touch. Good job Matt. I've read some pretty good stuff showing that Va actually goes up with more weight. Strange, but true. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive mgeans@provide.net wrote: > > John Cox, > > Your Comment: > The reason for asking is the additional weight on the VAN > designed spar (with extension) cannot perform to the same > standards in maneuvering speed turbulence as the prototype > N410RV used for kit certification. > > Just finding out that you are an A & P you ought to be > familiar with this concept so here goes. > > I remember once reading an article about A/C that have tip > tanks and how the weight on the ends of the spars would > actually dispurses the load at the wing roots. > > IE: 10' 2 x 4 on 2 sawhorses placed 6" from each end. hang > 8 25Lb sand bags from looped rope within the center 2' of > the 9' span between the saw horses and note the load and > stress on the 2x4. NOW take 2 of the sandbags and hang > them on the ends of the 2 x 4 and note the change in the > load. The 2x4 is still holding the 200lbs but can do it > easier with 50lbs spread out to the ends of the "wings" > > This was the article's point about tip tanks which seems > like the subject of the thread. I could see how 2 souls > and extra gas in the tips could gross out the weight of the > -10 but it seems logical that the spar roots would see less > stress dynamically during flight than normal wings with a > full gross load in the cabin. I could see how static > stress on the ramp could be affected but is that really > pushing the design limits past the -G's the A/C is rated > for? > > Not meaning to question your more expertise on this, but am > I on to something or missing something about maneuvering > speed turbulence? > > Matt Geans > Builder Wanna-be > > Do not archive (I have GOT to remember to put that in more > often) > > On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 10:44:36 -0800 > "John W. Cox" wrote: >> John, for the purpose of expanded clarification, do you >> espouse that >> those aircraft which have added additional fuel tanks >> have moved to the >> dark side as well? The reason for asking is the >> additional weight on >> the VAN designed spar (with extension) cannot perform to >> the same >> standards in maneuvering speed turbulence as the >> prototype N410RV used >> for kit certification. >> >> >> >> That was the reason for the phrase I used last week >> "Design for >> Aerobatic, Load to Utility and fly Standard Category... >> 3.8 G". I >> perceive many builders have dismissed it our did not >> understand the >> consequence. It was commonplace for the Lancair plastics >> to just up >> their Gross Weight on paper for certification to cover >> the additional >> mods without regard to the spar and the landing gear >> capability. >> Kabang. >> >> >> >> For those willing to move to the dark side, the process >> is as easy as >> finding a DER (Designated Engineering Rep) willing to go >> with you and >> then provide the plane for the same testing that the FAA >> required of >> VAN. Remember to pack a current chute. >> >> >> >> J Cox >> >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf >> Of JOHN STARN >> Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 9:59 PM >> To: rv10-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: RV10-List: Okay - Okay >> tell me I'm >> just sarcastic on the RV-12 >> >> >> >> NOPE, I'm not, but my minor was in aeronautical >> engineering...BUT if I >> were building a -10 and wanted to change something, >> anything I'd spend a >> little bit and seek the advise of one. I'd do the same >> thing if I wanted >> to go from light shingles to a heavy tile roof on my >> home. BUT there >> seems to be a lot of -10 guys who are looking the same >> answer, sooo pool >> your funds and buy the advise. Do Not Archive. KABONG >> BE HAPPY.. >> >> >> >> On the other hand maybe, just maybe, Van has considered >> all the other >> ways but he also didn't want to be "dickin' with >> anything that may >> affect the airworthiness of the plane" either. >> >> >> > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 05:22:54 AM PST US From: "David Boone" Subject: RV10-List: Lightspeed EI Has anyone heard of any failures of the twin Lightspeed Electronic Ignition. Thanks David O Boone ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 05:28:23 AM PST US From: "John Jessen" Subject: RE: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: RV10-List: Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the RV-12 Less acceleration, meaning less deflection for those parts being stressed, I presume. John Jessen #40328 (buildus interruptus) -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jack Sargeant Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 7:41 AM Subject: RE: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: RV10-List: Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the RV-12 Not so strange when you remember that an increase in weight results in an increase in inertia. So -- the same applied force results in less acceleration. Jack & Cecilia Sargeant 1127 Patricia St. Wichita, KS 67208-2642 316/683-5268 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tim Olson Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 6:09 AM Subject: Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: RV10-List: Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the RV-12 For a guy who doesn't own a plane and isn't building a kit, you're very in touch. Good job Matt. I've read some pretty good stuff showing that Va actually goes up with more weight. Strange, but true. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive mgeans@provide.net wrote: > > John Cox, > > Your Comment: > The reason for asking is the additional weight on the VAN designed > spar (with extension) cannot perform to the same standards in > maneuvering speed turbulence as the prototype N410RV used for kit > certification. > > Just finding out that you are an A & P you ought to be familiar with > this concept so here goes. > > I remember once reading an article about A/C that have tip tanks and > how the weight on the ends of the spars would actually dispurses the > load at the wing roots. > > IE: 10' 2 x 4 on 2 sawhorses placed 6" from each end. hang > 8 25Lb sand bags from looped rope within the center 2' of the 9' span > between the saw horses and note the load and stress on the 2x4. NOW > take 2 of the sandbags and hang them on the ends of the 2 x 4 and note > the change in the load. The 2x4 is still holding the 200lbs but can > do it easier with 50lbs spread out to the ends of the "wings" > > This was the article's point about tip tanks which seems like the > subject of the thread. I could see how 2 souls and extra gas in the > tips could gross out the weight of the -10 but it seems logical that > the spar roots would see less stress dynamically during flight than > normal wings with a full gross load in the cabin. I could see how > static stress on the ramp could be affected but is that really pushing > the design limits past the -G's the A/C is rated for? > > Not meaning to question your more expertise on this, but am I on to > something or missing something about maneuvering speed turbulence? > > Matt Geans > Builder Wanna-be > > Do not archive (I have GOT to remember to put that in more > often) > > On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 10:44:36 -0800 > "John W. Cox" wrote: >> John, for the purpose of expanded clarification, do you espouse that >> those aircraft which have added additional fuel tanks have moved to >> the dark side as well? The reason for asking is the additional >> weight on the VAN designed spar (with extension) cannot perform to >> the same standards in maneuvering speed turbulence as the prototype >> N410RV used for kit certification. >> >> >> >> That was the reason for the phrase I used last week "Design for >> Aerobatic, Load to Utility and fly Standard Category... >> 3.8 G". I >> perceive many builders have dismissed it our did not understand the >> consequence. It was commonplace for the Lancair plastics to just up >> their Gross Weight on paper for certification to cover the additional >> mods without regard to the spar and the landing gear capability. >> Kabang. >> >> >> >> For those willing to move to the dark side, the process is as easy as >> finding a DER (Designated Engineering Rep) willing to go with you and >> then provide the plane for the same testing that the FAA required of >> VAN. Remember to pack a current chute. >> >> >> >> J Cox >> >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of JOHN STARN >> Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 9:59 PM >> To: rv10-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: RV10-List: Okay - Okay tell me I'm >> just sarcastic on the RV-12 >> >> >> >> NOPE, I'm not, but my minor was in aeronautical engineering...BUT if >> I were building a -10 and wanted to change something, anything I'd >> spend a little bit and seek the advise of one. I'd do the same thing >> if I wanted to go from light shingles to a heavy tile roof on my >> home. BUT there seems to be a lot of -10 guys who are looking the >> same answer, sooo pool your funds and buy the advise. Do Not Archive. >> KABONG >> BE HAPPY.. >> >> >> >> On the other hand maybe, just maybe, Van has considered all the other >> ways but he also didn't want to be "dickin' with anything that may >> affect the airworthiness of the plane" either. >> >> >> > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 06:01:19 AM PST US From: "David McNeill" Subject: Re: RV10-List: glassing rivets into glass you can see the pictures of our process on www.inertialbelts.com under airframe prep. In short we are spreading the load over a much larger area and we added additional layers of E-glass and tied all hardpoints together with structural glass mat. we are using http://aircraft-spruce.com/catalog/hapages/stainlesswashers.php. I looked at www.mcmaster.com #98466A030 and found one for a #5 screw; however the picture does not look the same as the Spruce stuff. ----- Original Message ----- From: ddddsp1@juno.com To: rv10-list@matronics.com Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 5:31 AM Subject: Re: RV10-List: glassing rivets into glass David, How would you strengthen the hard points and what size CS SS washer are you using IF you just go with Vans standard belts? These CS SS washers available at ACS or other places? Anyone else improved the hardpoints on their top or is this an issue of overkill? Thanks, DEAN 40449 ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 06:32:15 AM PST US From: "Mike Lauritsen - Work" Subject: RV10-List: Strobe Units and Cleaveland Tool Clearance In an effort to clean house and find good homes for discontinued items I have added some strobe kits to ebay. These will be an outstanding buy for those that need strobe kits. I will be adding a few more Aeroflash items throughout the day and will be putting some other scratched or discontinued items up for auction as well over the next several days. As soon as possible I will be offering all of the extra parts from my IO-540-C4B5 overhaul, many are in very good condition but I replaced to get "within new limits". Follow the link to: http://motors.search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZclevtool and check back next week to see what has been added. Please feel free to post this on other lists or boards that you subscribe to. Thanks, Mike -- Mike Lauritsen Cleaveland Aircraft Tool 515-432-6794 www.cleavelandtool.com ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 06:32:21 AM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Some Observations after Two Years of Building From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" HEY! I walked 5 miles, uphill both ways, to school when I was little and it was in 5 feet of snow. But I was only 4 feet tall with no shoes on! Ah yes, this list is always good for a laugh or two. HA! :-D Michael Do not archive archiveer niet no archive no archive non archivii -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 9:46 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Some Observations after Two Years of Building Not to down play all the name calling He-men out there but I had 6 surgeries on my right hand since May of 2003, the last in October 2005 as a result of a crushed finger that ultimately was replaced by a nifty carbon fiber and titanium bone replacement unit (#2 to get one in the country) that will never really replace the original but beats the heck out of amputation or fusion. So nanner nanner Deems, and your Wussy comment ;) Getting back to the building process was a major motivator and in between some 350 odd physical therapy appointments and work I managed to get to the point Deems is at minus a few months.... Never give in, never surrender... Rick S. 40185 FWIW, I think Anh went through a bunch more with the torn achillies tendon... do not archive ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 08:13:15 AM PST US From: Les Kearney Subject: RV10-List: =?us-ascii?Q?One_of_the_best_moves_I've_made_yet? Hi Since starting to build a couple of weeks ago, I have limited my work to things that I felt I could do without too much risk of error. Namely, small fabrication, priming, deburring, drilling, deburring, priming. Did I mention deburring? My plan all along was to advance enough that I could then hire an experienced builder for some detailed one on one instruction. I have just completed two very full days with this chap and now believe that I am well equipped to proceed on my own (at least for now). In October I did a two day "sheet metal course" that gave me the basics on a couple of small scale "projects - a small airfoil section being one". It is a bit different when you are looking at a large, very expensive vertical stab skin that you have just spent hours prepping. The decision to get someone to look over my shoulder and to demonstrate [proper technique and what to look for was the best decision I have made so far. Here's why: On Wednesday, I started with dimpling 101. Although I had previously dimpled the rudder and vertical stab skins these did not meet the standard set by Ralph (my instructor). He demonstrated how to tell if the dimples were correctly formed and more importantly, how to correct those that weren't. After redoing the dimpling, we moved on to backrivetting the rudder stiffeners to the skins. At that point we departed from the plans and cut an electric trim access panel into the rudder skin. Here Ralph demonstrated how to cut access panel holes without deforming the skins and getting nice clean edges. If I had tried this on my own, I would be buying a new rudder skin by now! Before starting we also discussed the location of the trim tab and we decided to move it lower on the rudder. We also gave thought to the rivet pattern for the doubler and access plate, Ralph suggesting that we consider the esthetics of matching the existing rivet pattern when placing the doubler and access panel. Next we tackled the trailing edge of the rudder. Another builder suggested using angle aluminum to hold the trailing edge straight after the edge wedge was glued in. The problem with this was that the edge wedge is a wedge and a cleco will not sit flat on the skin due to the angle through the wedge. To compensate I used (temporarily) the horizontal stab wedge material to provide a completely flat clecoing surface. The cleco went through: * Extra edge wedge (pointing forward) * Rudder edge wedge (point aft of course) * Rudder skin * Angle aluminum Every hole was clecoed overnight while the glue set. The next morning I had a perfectly straight rudder skin and edge wedge. Thursday morning Ralph showed me how to use a carpenter's angle to check that the rib flange angles were correct. This would ensure that the skins wouldn't pucker due to the rib flanges being bent to far in/out. We riveted the trim access panel double and also fabricated a cover plate. Here I was shown how to bend the cover plate edges so that the plate would sit flat on the doubler (and the corners wouldn't turn up). We then discussed how the trim servo would be mounted and decided we could cut the servo cable into the skin as well given that we sorted out where the trim tab would be and how great it's range of movement would be. I cut this hole, finished it and trimmed a rudder cable fairing to fit. We riveted it on and then stood back being quite smug with our work! We completed the rudder back riveting and spliced the two sides together with op rivets. I then started setting the trailing edge rivets with my squeezer. After back riveting the trailing edge, I now have a rudder that is al most complete - a rudder with an arrow straight trailing edge. Late in the day, we still hadn't bucked any vertical stab rivets. This was the last bit of "experience" I wanted. We setup and Ralph gave me a step by step instruction on how to rivet these skins and what to be careful of so as not to dent the skins. He spent time on how to hold the bucking bar, how to ensure you are on the rivet and how to rivet very carefully. He also warned me to not use my mushroom set and to get a swivel set. After doing a few rivets, I understand why. Before we called it a day, we completed about half of one side of the stab skin. Perhaps the hardest part for Ralph was watching me rivet the forward center rivets of the skin, perhaps the riskiest of the lot. But they came out fine! There must have been a hundred different thgings Ralh showed me including how to use my tools correctly and a few oithes to buy. Most importantly, I was able to make a lot of mistakes (not fatal) and was shown how to correct them. Also, I learned a great deal about how to work with aluminium - if nothing else, the rudder trim "extra" was invaluble in this respect. This may be a bit rambling, but it was a fun couple of days. For any one else who has 0, zero, nadda, zilch, zippo experience like I do (did), this is a great way to build confidence and acquire skills. Unforrttunately spending two weeks a buikld center was impossible and in many respects, I believe that this approach was better. I used my tools, in my work area and I have an umbilicus to an individual who knows me and my project. The cost was also a fraction of the cost of build center. Cheers Les Kearney RV10 # 40643 - Vertical Stab / Rudder in various stages of disrepair Do not archive ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 08:17:56 AM PST US Subject: Re: RV10-List: Post Component Construction Priming From: Dj Merrill Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote: > > It is also sold at Napa as 7220, made by a division of Sherwin Williams, > and often easier to get in rural areas, because the automotive paint > stores for them are difficult to find outside of big cities > Dan > N289DT (RV10E) > I just order it at this website, and have them ship it to me. No worries about trying to find a store, or if they have it in stock. -Dj do not archive ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 09:30:49 AM PST US From: Les Kearney Subject: RV10-List: Primer Wars - Redux Hi All At the risk of killing a sacred cow, I thought I might add a bit more to my previous posts regarding primers. I have been using Sherwin Williams DTM Wash Primer which is a fairly non toxic water based acrylic primer. It goes on with a spray gun (no surprise there) and cleans up with water. It does not use any of the interesting toxins found in GBP and the like so there is little change of growing a third eye after prolonged use. Over the past few days, I have found that it is quite scratch resistant even when repeatedly handling parts. Thus far, I can see no reason to switch to another product especially if it is more toxic and/or is more expensive. The other nice thing about this product is that it dries very quickly - well under two hours. The chap who provided building guidance over the past couple of days, and who has been using a two part epoxy primer, is considering a switch. Just a thought for others on the journey.. Les Kearney RV10 # 40643 - Vertical Stab ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 09:32:55 AM PST US Subject: RE: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: RV10-List: Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the RV-12 From: "John W. Cox" Ask VAN (a former Freightliner engineer) or Ken Krueger, (a real aeronautical engineer)if his style of RV-9 wing extensions to make the RV-10 wing will allow for additional tanks outboard of those now designed without compromising the design performance standard. Header tanks are always an interesting topic but the Lancair boys don't like gear up landings on the belly with an "in the cockpit fuel tank". Before you Mod, know what the results will be. Have any of you with dual 60s done any DER evaluations or am I missing something? Anybody done spin recovery in a Aux Tank equipped 10? This is just another form of Hot Rodding (IMHO). John -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of mgeans@provide.net Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 9:27 PM Subject: Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: RV10-List: Okay - Okay tell me I'm just sarcastic on the RV-12 John Cox, Your Comment: The reason for asking is the additional weight on the VAN designed spar (with extension) cannot perform to the same standards in maneuvering speed turbulence as the prototype N410RV used for kit certification. Just finding out that you are an A & P you ought to be familiar with this concept so here goes. I remember once reading an article about A/C that have tip tanks and how the weight on the ends of the spars would actually dispurses the load at the wing roots. IE: 10' 2 x 4 on 2 sawhorses placed 6" from each end. hang 8 25Lb sand bags from looped rope within the center 2' of the 9' span between the saw horses and note the load and stress on the 2x4. NOW take 2 of the sandbags and hang them on the ends of the 2 x 4 and note the change in the load. The 2x4 is still holding the 200lbs but can do it easier with 50lbs spread out to the ends of the "wings" This was the article's point about tip tanks which seems like the subject of the thread. I could see how 2 souls and extra gas in the tips could gross out the weight of the -10 but it seems logical that the spar roots would see less stress dynamically during flight than normal wings with a full gross load in the cabin. I could see how static stress on the ramp could be affected but is that really pushing the design limits past the -G's the A/C is rated for? Not meaning to question your more expertise on this, but am I on to something or missing something about maneuvering speed turbulence? Matt Geans Builder Wanna-be Do not archive (I have GOT to remember to put that in more often) On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 10:44:36 -0800 "John W. Cox" wrote: > John, for the purpose of expanded clarification, do you > espouse that > those aircraft which have added additional fuel tanks > have moved to the > dark side as well? The reason for asking is the > additional weight on > the VAN designed spar (with extension) cannot perform to > the same > standards in maneuvering speed turbulence as the > prototype N410RV used > for kit certification. > > > > That was the reason for the phrase I used last week > "Design for > Aerobatic, Load to Utility and fly Standard Category... > 3.8 G". I > perceive many builders have dismissed it our did not > understand the > consequence. It was commonplace for the Lancair plastics > to just up > their Gross Weight on paper for certification to cover > the additional > mods without regard to the spar and the landing gear > capability. > Kabang. > > > > For those willing to move to the dark side, the process > is as easy as > finding a DER (Designated Engineering Rep) willing to go > with you and > then provide the plane for the same testing that the FAA > required of > VAN. Remember to pack a current chute. > > > > J Cox > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf > Of JOHN STARN > Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 9:59 PM > To: rv10-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: RV10-List: Okay - Okay > tell me I'm > just sarcastic on the RV-12 > > > > NOPE, I'm not, but my minor was in aeronautical > engineering...BUT if I > were building a -10 and wanted to change something, > anything I'd spend a > little bit and seek the advise of one. I'd do the same > thing if I wanted > to go from light shingles to a heavy tile roof on my > home. BUT there > seems to be a lot of -10 guys who are looking the same > answer, sooo pool > your funds and buy the advise. Do Not Archive. KABONG > BE HAPPY.. > > > > On the other hand maybe, just maybe, Van has considered > all the other > ways but he also didn't want to be "dickin' with > anything that may > affect the airworthiness of the plane" either. > > > ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 10:39:25 AM PST US From: Niko Subject: RV10-List: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve I am installing the Andair valve instead of the standard one Vans provides. I moved the mounting bracket about 1 or 2 inches down and got a straight extension for the Andair valve and the 90 fittings that Andair sells. So f ar it looks like it will work well . I would like to replace the aluminum tube fuel line with the Aeroquip stuff. It appears that Vans and Aircaft S pruce sell the Aeroquip 701 hose. I am wondering if this is the proper hos e to use. I know Tim used the performance racing hoses also with a steel b raid and it appears to be about half the price of the 701 stuff. The racin g angled fittings appear to be a lot less expensive also. Any thoughts on this?=0A=0Athanks=0A=0ANiko ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 11:03:49 AM PST US From: Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve If you look at the specifications, the Aeroquip braided hose that Summit Racing sells, is exactly the same as the hose Van's sells, except about half the price. (www.summitracing.com) I bought my hose fittings from Aircraft Spruce, because they are about the same price, and selected for aircraft. Aircarft Spruce's price is about the same as Van's for the hose. I am going to use the racing hose for the brake lines also...probably overkill; however, I don't want any future problems with the plastic hose. I am also using an Adnair fuel valve, and the fuel hose is the braided Aeroquip racing hose, and I am using one continuous piece from the 90 deg fitting on the fuel valve to the fuel tank. I tried to use 90 deg aeroquip fittings off the fuel valve, and discovered that they are too wide. Steve Mills RV-10 40486 Slow-build Naperville, Illinois finishing fuselage Do Not Archive -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Niko Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 12:39 PM To: Matronics Subject: RV10-List: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve I am installing the Andair valve instead of the standard one Vans provides. I moved the mounting bracket about 1 or 2 inches down and got a straight extension for the Andair valve and the 90 fittings that Andair sells. So far it looks like it will work well . I would like to replace the aluminum tube fuel line with the Aeroquip stuff. It appears that Vans and Aircaft Spruce sell the Aeroquip 701 hose. I am wondering if this is the proper hose to use. I know Tim used the performance racing hoses also with a steel braid and it appears to be about half the price of the 701 stuff. The racing angled fittings appear to be a lot less expensive also. Any thoughts on this? thanks Niko ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 12:19:00 PM PST US From: Niko Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve Thanks for the info Steve.=0AAre you using the straight fittings at both en ds of the hose? Do you have the Andair 90 deg fitting on the valve?=0A=0At hanks=0ANiko=0A40188=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: "millstees @ameritech.net" =0ATo: rv10-list@matronics.com=0AS ent: Friday, November 17, 2006 2:04:43 PM=0ASubject: RE: RV10-List: Aeroqui p Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve=0A=0A=0AIf you look at the specifications, the Aeroquip braided hose that Summit Racing sells, is exactly the same as the hose Van's sells, except about half the price. (www.summitracing.com) I bo ught my hose fittings from Aircraft Spruce, because they are about the same price, and selected for aircraft. Aircarft Spruce's price is about the sa me as Van's for the hose. I am going to use the racing hose for the brake lines also...probably overkill; however, I don't want any future problems w ith the plastic hose.=0A =0AI am also using an Adnair fuel valve, and the f uel hose is the braided Aeroquip racing hose, and I am using one continuous piece from the 90 deg fitting on the fuel valve to the fuel tank. I tried to use 90 deg aeroquip fittings off the fuel valve, and discovered that th ey are too wide.=0A =0ASteve Mills=0ARV-10 40486 Slow-build=0ANaperville, I llinois =0Afinishing fuselage=0ADo Not Archive=0A =0A-----Original Message- ----=0AFrom: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-s erver@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Niko=0ASent: Friday, November 17, 2006 12: 39 PM=0ATo: Matronics=0ASubject: RV10-List: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Va lve=0A=0A=0AI am installing the Andair valve instead of the standard one Va ns provides. I moved the mounting bracket about 1 or 2 inches down and got a straight extension for the Andair valve and the 90 fittings that Andair sells. So far it looks like it will work well . I would like to replace t he aluminum tube fuel line with the Aeroquip stuff. It appears that Vans a nd Aircaft Spruce sell the Aeroquip 701 hose. I am wondering if this is th e proper hose to use. I know Tim used the performance racing hoses also wi th a steel braid and it appears to be about half the price of the 701 stuff . The racing angled fittings appear to be a lot less expensive also. Any thoughts on this?=0A =0Athanks=0A =0ANiko=0A=0A=0Ahref="http://www.aeroel ectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com=0Ahref="http://www.buildersbooks.com">ww w.buildersbooks.com=0Ahref="http://www.kitlog.com">www.kitlog.com=0Ahref ="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com=0Ahref="http://ww w.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="http://www. matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10- ====== ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 12:29:08 PM PST US From: Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve Niko: I am using the banjo fitting from Andair, with 816-6D fittings from Aircraft Spruce. Steve Mills RV-10 40486 Slow-build Naperville, Illinois finishing fuselage Do Not Archive -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Niko Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 2:18 PM To: rv10-list@matronics.com Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve Thanks for the info Steve. Are you using the straight fittings at both ends of the hose? Do you have the Andair 90 deg fitting on the valve? thanks Niko 40188 ----- Original Message ---- From: "millstees@ameritech.net" To: rv10-list@matronics.com Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 2:04:43 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve If you look at the specifications, the Aeroquip braided hose that Summit Racing sells, is exactly the same as the hose Van's sells, except about half the price. (www.summitracing.com) I bought my hose fittings from Aircraft Spruce, because they are about the same price, and selected for aircraft. Aircarft Spruce's price is about the same as Van's for the hose. I am going to use the racing hose for the brake lines also...probably overkill; however, I don't want any future problems with the plastic hose. I am also using an Adnair fuel valve, and the fuel hose is the braided Aeroquip racing hose, and I am using one continuous piece from the 90 deg fitting on the fuel valve to the fuel tank. I tried to use 90 deg aeroquip fittings off the fuel valve, and discovered that they are too wide. Steve Mills RV-10 40486 Slow-build Naperville, Illinois finishing fuselage Do Not Archive -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Niko Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 12:39 PM To: Matronics Subject: RV10-List: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve I am installing the Andair valve instead of the standard one Vans provides. I moved the mounting bracket about 1 or 2 inches down and got a straight extension for the Andair valve and the 90 fittings that Andair sells. So far it looks like it will work well . I would like to replace the aluminum tube fuel line with the Aeroquip stuff. It appears that Vans and Aircaft Spruce sell the Aeroquip 701 hose. I am wondering if this is the proper hose to use. I know Tim used the performance racing hoses also with a steel braid and it appears to be about half the price of the 701 stuff. The racing angled fittings appear to be a lot less expensive also. Any thoughts on this? thanks Niko 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/chref "http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navi gator?RV10-List www.buildersbooksltHELP http://www.matronics.com/contribution> ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 01:53:31 PM PST US Subject: RV10-List: Re: Some Observations after Two Years of Building From: "johngoodman" Rick S. wrote: > Never give in, never surrender... > > Galaxy Quest!!! I don't believe the elbow problems come from riveting. I have developed it in both elbows. I figured out that it was the cleco pliers. I sprang for a pneumatic cleco gun and it has already helped a lot. Here's a test: put a cleco in the pliers, squeeze it, and hold. You'll feel it. [Idea] -------- #40572 Empennage - starting Elevators! N711JG reserved Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=75324#75324 ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 02:26:40 PM PST US Subject: RV10-List: Re: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve From: "AndrewTR30" Niko, I had teflon lined hoses made for me with Earls Racing components. I put some red heat shrink tubing put over them for a little extra protection. If I remember correctly they are 37 1/2" I decided not to use them and ended up using the aluminum tubing. If you are interested in them, I can send you some pictures. They might suit your application really well. Feel free to contact me off the list. Andrewtr30 (at) yahoo (dot) com -------- Andrew Rayhill RV-10 40078 Phoenix Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=75331#75331 ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 02:37:34 PM PST US From: Tim Olson Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve You can buy Aeroquip (and other brands) of fittings from race supply too. I would (and apparently have) bet my life on the quality of some of them, like Aeroquip. In fact, other than the part number, I would bet the Aeroquip fittings used on Van's hoses are the same exact part you buy at race supply places. (I did use some other brands of fittings and they're very nice too) The best part is that the race supply shops have a better selection, even if the price isn't always tons lower. Yeah, we may be fanatical about safety of our hoses, which is great....but remember that these high performance racing buffs are just as fanatic about their hoses, and their rides. I'd definitely look at the fittings as you get them and if you have any doubts about their quality then do the right thing and exchange them for another brand, but if you stick with Aeroquip, you can't go too wrong. I think I have some XRP or something like that too. Side by side, they look identical, even down to the welding/brazing qualities. Your best bet if you can do it is to visit a local racing supply shop where you can look at them firsthand. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive millstees@ameritech.net wrote: > If you look at the specifications, the Aeroquip braided hose that Summit > Racing sells, is exactly the same as the hose Van's sells, except about > half the price. (www.summitracing.com ) I > bought my hose fittings from Aircraft Spruce, because they are about the > same price, and selected for aircraft. Aircarft Spruce's price is about > the same as Van's for the hose. I am going to use the racing hose for > the brake lines also...probably overkill; however, I don't want any > future problems with the plastic hose. > > I am also using an Adnair fuel valve, and the fuel hose is the braided > Aeroquip racing hose, and I am using one continuous piece from the 90 > deg fitting on the fuel valve to the fuel tank. I tried to use 90 deg > aeroquip fittings off the fuel valve, and discovered that they are too wide. > > Steve Mills > RV-10 40486 Slow-build > Naperville, Illinois > finishing fuselage > Do Not Archive > ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 02:43:02 PM PST US From: Tim Olson Subject: Re: RV10-List: One of the best moves I've made yet Les, that sounds like a fantastic way to start off. I had an RV-4 building buddy get me started for 2 or 3 hours, and I helped on his project for a couple hours too. It's very comforting to work with someone with good skills and have time to learn. It sounds as if you had a very skillful guy in Ralph. Now you can use those skills to have a really good quality outcome on the rest of your project. Besides that, those hours probably were more fun as well. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive Les Kearney wrote: > Hi > > > > Since starting to build a couple of weeks ago, I have limited my work to > things that I felt I could do without too much risk of error. Namely, > small fabrication, priming, deburring, drilling, deburring, priming. Did > I mention deburring? > > > > My plan all along was to advance enough that I could then hire an > experienced builder for some detailed one on one instruction. I have > just completed two very full days with this chap and now believe that I > am well equipped to proceed on my own (at least for now). In October I > did a two day sheet metal course that gave me the basics on a couple > of small scale projects a small airfoil section being one. It is a > bit different when you are looking at a large, very expensive vertical > stab skin that you have just spent hours prepping. The decision to get > someone to look over my shoulder and to demonstrate [proper technique > and what to look for was the best decision I have made so far. Heres why: > > > > On Wednesday, I started with dimpling 101. Although I had previously > dimpled the rudder and vertical stab skins these did not meet the > standard set by Ralph (my instructor). He demonstrated how to tell if > the dimples were correctly formed and more importantly, how to correct > those that werent. After redoing the dimpling, we moved on to > backrivetting the rudder stiffeners to the skins. At that point we > departed from the plans and cut an electric trim access panel into the > rudder skin. Here Ralph demonstrated how to cut access panel holes > without deforming the skins and getting nice clean edges. If I had tried > this on my own, I would be buying a new rudder skin by now! Before > starting we also discussed the location of the trim tab and we decided > to move it lower on the rudder. We also gave thought to the rivet > pattern for the doubler and access plate, Ralph suggesting that we > consider the esthetics of matching the existing rivet pattern when > placing the doubler and access panel. > > > > Next we tackled the trailing edge of the rudder. Another builder > suggested using angle aluminum to hold the trailing edge straight after > the edge wedge was glued in. The problem with this was that the edge > wedge is a wedge and a cleco will not sit flat on the skin due to the > angle through the wedge. To compensate I used (temporarily) the > horizontal stab wedge material to provide a completely flat clecoing > surface. The cleco went through: > > > > * Extra edge wedge (pointing forward) > * Rudder edge wedge (point aft of course) > * Rudder skin > * Angle aluminum > > > > Every hole was clecoed overnight while the glue set. The next morning I > had a perfectly straight rudder skin and edge wedge. > > > > Thursday morning Ralph showed me how to use a carpenters angle to check > that the rib flange angles were correct. This would ensure that the > skins wouldnt pucker due to the rib flanges being bent to far in/out. > We riveted the trim access panel double and also fabricated a cover > plate. Here I was shown how to bend the cover plate edges so that the > plate would sit flat on the doubler (and the corners wouldnt turn up). > > > > We then discussed how the trim servo would be mounted and decided we > could cut the servo cable into the skin as well given that we sorted out > where the trim tab would be and how great its range of movement would > be. I cut this hole, finished it and trimmed a rudder cable fairing to > fit. We riveted it on and then stood back being quite smug with our work! > > > > We completed the rudder back riveting and spliced the two sides together > with op rivets. I then started setting the trailing edge rivets with my > squeezer. After back riveting the trailing edge, I now have a rudder > that is al most complete a rudder with an arrow straight trailing edge. > > > > Late in the day, we still hadnt bucked any vertical stab rivets. This > was the last bit of experience I wanted. We setup and Ralph gave me a > step by step instruction on how to rivet these skins and what to be > careful of so as not to dent the skins. He spent time on how to hold the > bucking bar, how to ensure you are on the rivet and how to rivet very > carefully. He also warned me to not use my mushroom set and to get a > swivel set. After doing a few rivets, I understand why. Before we called > it a day, we completed about half of one side of the stab skin. Perhaps > the hardest part for Ralph was watching me rivet the forward center > rivets of the skin, perhaps the riskiest of the lot. But they came out fine! > > > > There must have been a hundred different thgings Ralh showed me > including how to use my tools correctly and a few oithes to buy. Most > importantly, I was able to make a lot of mistakes (not fatal) and was > shown how to correct them. Also, I learned a great deal about how to > work with aluminium if nothing else, the rudder trim extra was > invaluble in this respect. > > > > This may be a bit rambling, but it was a fun couple of days. For any one > else who has 0, zero, nadda, zilch, zippo experience like I do (did), > this is a great way to build confidence and acquire skills. > Unforrttunately spending two weeks a buikld center was impossible and > in many respects, I believe that this approach was better. I used my > tools, in my work area and I have an umbilicus to an individual who > knows me and my project. The cost was also a fraction of the cost of > build center. > > > > Cheers > > > > Les Kearney > > RV10 # 40643 - Vertical Stab / Rudder in various stages of disrepair > > > > Do not archive > > > > * > > > * ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 02:50:04 PM PST US From: Tim Olson Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve Question Andrew.....did you use the conductive teflon hose? I'm under the understanding that for fuel you would want the conductive versions of the hose for obvious reasons. I just wanted to see if you found this stuff easy to obtain. Had I been able to get conductive teflon hoses locally, made to length, I would have done that. As it was, the easiest way to do it yourself without knowing the total overall length exactly, was to buy rubber and cut and fit the ends. I seem to remember the hoses being either 39 or 41" long myself, but it's getting fuzzy. Also, for those thinking of hoses, I don't know if people saw my braided hoses on my tire and break write-up, but I got braided teflon so I don't have to worry about fatigue cracks on the hose around the axle. Ed Hayden took it one step further and went with braided all the way from fuselage to brake, which is what I really wanted to do. I didn't know the measurement at the time. Some day though, I'll swap mine out when I'm doing some major maintenance. I think his are 44" end to end from fuselage bulkhead fitting to the brake. Slick setup, and his will probably last forever, being teflon. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive AndrewTR30 wrote: > > Niko, I had teflon lined hoses made for me with Earls Racing > components. I put some red heat shrink tubing put over them for a > little extra protection. If I remember correctly they are 37 1/2" I > decided not to use them and ended up using the aluminum tubing. If > you are interested in them, I can send you some pictures. They might > suit your application really well. Feel free to contact me off the > list. > > Andrewtr30 (at) yahoo (dot) com > > -------- Andrew Rayhill RV-10 40078 Phoenix > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=75331#75331 > > ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 04:09:41 PM PST US Subject: RV10-List: Re: Aeroquip Fuel Hoses / Andair Valve From: "AndrewTR30" Tim, Yes my hoses are carbon lined for static dissipation. they are -6 size. Here's a link: http://www.holley.com/620002ERL.asp The fittings are Earls Swivel-seal. http://www.holley.com/types/Swivel-Seal.asp I could not find a good source locally, So I ordered them from: http://www.anplumbing.com/shop/ My Andair valve is mounted high in the tunnel, actually above the standard Vans location and didn't like the bend coming throught the tunnel, so that's why I switched back to the aluminum. -------- Andrew Rayhill RV-10 40078 Phoenix Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=75349#75349 ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 04:57:04 PM PST US From: "David McNeill" Subject: RV10-List: riveting the lid Sometime back there was a suggestion to replace the blinds in the lid with the A rivets and hit lightly with the rivet gun. I checked with the head of one of the aerospace engineering companies for advice. He suggested that this would not be satisfactory for the following reasons. (1) the A rivet is not a structural rivet and (2) the pounding the fiberglass (even if lightly) with the gun and the expansion of the solid rivet in the hole will create fractures of the glass at the micro level and weaken the structure. ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 06:18:33 PM PST US From: SamMarlow Subject: RV10-List: Screw up my spar I think I screwed up my spar. When I was drilling the rear angle of incidence hole, the 3/8 AN6 bolt hole, I let my hand wander a bit off center. Guess what, now the hole is to big for an AN6 bolt. I talked to Ken K at van's, and he said I could use one step oversize, or one sixty fourth of an inch larger bolt. The problem is, I 'm having trouble locating a NAS6660-4x bolt. Can someone point me in the right direction! ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 07:28:36 PM PST US From: "David McNeill" Subject: Re: RV10-List: Screw up my spar The general rule is that, provided there is sufficient edge distance, any bolt can be upsized one size. Since the plan is a #6 you should be able to use a #7 there. 7/16" should not be hard to find. I would get a 7/16" ream (preferably tapered) and some help and some good clamps before drilling again. That said if you can find an oversize #6 use it but by all means buy or borrow the ream to make the hole whole. Final size should always be reamed. An AN7-11 is about a buck at Spruce. ----- Original Message ----- From: SamMarlow To: rv10-list@matronics.com Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 7:17 PM Subject: RV10-List: Screw up my spar I think I screwed up my spar. When I was drilling the rear angle of incidence hole, the 3/8 AN6 bolt hole, I let my hand wander a bit off center. Guess what, now the hole is to big for an AN6 bolt. I talked to Ken K at van's, and he said I could use one step oversize, or one sixty fourth of an inch larger bolt. The problem is, I 'm having trouble locating a NAS6660-4x bolt. Can someone point me in the right direction! ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 08:20:24 PM PST US From: "David McNeill" Subject: Re: RV10-List: Screw up my spar One other possibility is a metric 10 which should be about .394 but of course you will need the appropriate ream ----- Original Message ----- From: SamMarlow To: rv10-list@matronics.com Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 7:17 PM Subject: RV10-List: Screw up my spar I think I screwed up my spar. When I was drilling the rear angle of incidence hole, the 3/8 AN6 bolt hole, I let my hand wander a bit off center. Guess what, now the hole is to big for an AN6 bolt. I talked to Ken K at van's, and he said I could use one step oversize, or one sixty fourth of an inch larger bolt. The problem is, I 'm having trouble locating a NAS6660-4x bolt. Can someone point me in the right direction! ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 08:43:15 PM PST US From: "David McNeill" Subject: Re: RV10-List: Screw up my spar www.mcmaster.com (part 95430A387) has a M10 (class10.9) bolt that is 150000 psi tensile strength compared to the AN spec for the 125000 psi tensile strength. check http://www.allmetalcorp.com/htm/pg902_04.htm ----- Original Message ----- From: SamMarlow To: rv10-list@matronics.com Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 7:17 PM Subject: RV10-List: Screw up my spar I think I screwed up my spar. When I was drilling the rear angle of incidence hole, the 3/8 AN6 bolt hole, I let my hand wander a bit off center. Guess what, now the hole is to big for an AN6 bolt. I talked to Ken K at van's, and he said I could use one step oversize, or one sixty fourth of an inch larger bolt. The problem is, I 'm having trouble locating a NAS6660-4x bolt. Can someone point me in the right direction!