Today's Message Index:
----------------------
0. 01:02 AM - Please Make a Contribution to Support Your Lists... (Matt Dralle)
1. 04:02 AM - Re: Front seats hard to slide (Richard Reynolds)
2. 04:03 AM - Re: insurance (Rob Kermanj)
3. 04:50 AM - Re: Front seats hard to slide (Jesse Saint)
4. 05:32 AM - Re: insurance (Jim & Julie Wade)
5. 05:54 AM - Re: Re: insurance (bob.kaufmann)
6. 06:08 AM - Re: Teetering on the edge (Dave Leikam)
7. 07:22 AM - Re: insurance (Doerr, Ray R [NTK])
8. 08:02 AM - Re: Front seats hard to slide (DejaVu)
9. 09:09 AM - Re: insurance (Chris Johnston)
10. 09:16 AM - Re: Control Stick Engagement into Control Stick Base. (Niko)
11. 10:11 AM - Re: Control Stick Engagement (Dean Van Winkle)
12. 11:26 AM - Is AS3-063 X .500 1.4375 part of the kit? (Michael Wellenzohn)
13. 12:00 PM - Re: Is AS3-063 X .500 1.4375 part of the kit? (James Hein)
14. 12:01 PM - Re: Is AS3-063 X .500 1.4375 part of the kit? (Bobby J. Hughes)
15. 12:21 PM - Re: Is AS3-063 X .500 1.4375 part of the kit? (Rob Hunter)
16. 02:28 PM - CDI with GRT EFIS (McGANN, Ron)
17. 03:46 PM - Re: CDI with GRT EFIS (Rob Kermanj)
18. 04:21 PM - Re: CDI with GRT EFIS (SteinAir, Inc.)
19. 04:30 PM - Re: CDI with GRT EFIS (McGANN, Ron)
20. 08:36 PM - insurance (Wayne Edgerton)
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 |
|
| Subject: | Please Make a Contribution to Support Your Lists... |
Dear Listers,
Just a reminder that November is the Annual List Fund Raiser. Please make a Contribution
today to support the continued operation and upgrade of these great
List services!! Pick up a really nice free gift with your qualifying Contribution
too!
The Contribution Site is fast and easy:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Front seats hard to slide |
Have you checked to see if the lower rails are parallel?
Are the seat rails parallel?
Are they "in plane"? Check by running strings (dental floss) in the
form of an X from the front of one side to the back of the other (two
strings).
Richard Reynolds
On Nov 20, 2006, at 10:25 PM, Jesse Saint wrote:
>
> I just looked at N415EC today and the same seat that was hard to move
> before still is. I thought it was loosening up, but it appears not
> to be.
> Let me know what Van's says (although they probably won't offer
> much in
> the way of an explanation). They might refer you to Oregon Aero.
> If they
> consider the seat defective, then it might be RMA'able. They might
> just
> say, "grease it and deal with it."
>
> Jesse
>
>
>> Jesse, I haven't talked to Van's yet, but intend to do so.
>>
>> I was hoping someone had experienced similar problems and solved them
>> already.
>>
>> Mine slide ok for a while after lubing them up, then they go back
>> to very
>> hard to move again, even with me sitting in them. Pulling forward is
>> obviously
>> the hardest to do.
>>
>> grumpy
>>
>> In a message dated 11/20/2006 8:23:27 AM Central Standard Time,
>> jesse@itecusa.org writes:
>> Grumpy,
>>
>> Of the 6 seats I have installed and worked with, only one of them
>> was hard
>> to
>> slide. I noticed that it was actually easier to slide with a person
>> sitting
>> in it than without, because you can get the leverage needed.
>> Pushing back
>> is
>> easiest, because you can push with your feet. Pulling forward is
>> harder,
>> but
>> you can grab the bar and pull, which makes it easier. Overall, I
>> dont
>> think
>> it is every seat. I dont know if it has to do with the
>> installation of
>> the
>> rails, the plastic slides on the bottom of the seat, or the rails
>> being
>> not-perfectly-straight to start with. Were your rails extremely
>> hard to
>> install? I
>> have noticed that some are and some arent.
>>
>> So, in answer to your question, I dont know what to say except
>> that not
>> all
>> seats are hard to slide, so you apparently just got lucky
>> .twice. It
>> has also
>> been my experience that they get easier to slide with use, not
>> harder.
>> But,
>> we cant let our experience dictate truth, they just illustrate
>> it, so
>> saying
>> the seats are hard to slide or easy to slide as truth isnt
>> accurate.
>> There
>> has to be some explanation why some slide easily and some hard.
>> Have you
>> talked to Vans or Oregon Aero?
>>
>> Do not archive.
>>
>> Jesse Saint
>> I-TEC, Inc.
>> jesse@itecusa.org
>> http://www.itecusa.org/
>> W: 352-465-4545
>> C: 352-427-0285
>>
>>
>
>
> Jesse Saint
> I-TEC, Inc.
> jesse@itecusa.org
> www.itecusa.org
>
>
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 |
|
2000+ hrs, private/instrument rated. It looks like they are charging
2% of the hull value.
Do not archive
Rob Kermanj
On Nov 21, 2006, at 7:38 PM, Chris Johnston wrote:
> <CJohnston@popsound.com>
>
> All replying about insurance costs -
>
> Would it be indiscreet to include your total hours and ratings along
> with your premium? I think it would help gauge things a bit...
>
> cj
> #40410
> fuse
> www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
>
>
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: | Front seats hard to slide |
I have not, but I can't imagine a way to change them if they are not parallel because
of the way they attach. I can imagine that even being 2mm out of square
from the front to the back of the rails could make a big difference in how they
slide, but with 750 nutplates (roughly) holding them in, I can't see a way
to possibly change those 2mm.
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 Richard Reynolds
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 7:02 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Front seats hard to slide
Have you checked to see if the lower rails are parallel?
Are the seat rails parallel?
Are they "in plane"? Check by running strings (dental floss) in the
form of an X from the front of one side to the back of the other (two
strings).
Richard Reynolds
On Nov 20, 2006, at 10:25 PM, Jesse Saint wrote:
>
> I just looked at N415EC today and the same seat that was hard to move
> before still is. I thought it was loosening up, but it appears not
> to be.
> Let me know what Van's says (although they probably won't offer
> much in
> the way of an explanation). They might refer you to Oregon Aero.
> If they
> consider the seat defective, then it might be RMA'able. They might
> just
> say, "grease it and deal with it."
>
> Jesse
>
>
>> Jesse, I haven't talked to Van's yet, but intend to do so.
>>
>> I was hoping someone had experienced similar problems and solved them
>> already.
>>
>> Mine slide ok for a while after lubing them up, then they go back
>> to very
>> hard to move again, even with me sitting in them. Pulling forward is
>> obviously
>> the hardest to do.
>>
>> grumpy
>>
>> In a message dated 11/20/2006 8:23:27 AM Central Standard Time,
>> jesse@itecusa.org writes:
>> Grumpy,
>>
>> Of the 6 seats I have installed and worked with, only one of them
>> was hard
>> to
>> slide. I noticed that it was actually easier to slide with a person
>> sitting
>> in it than without, because you can get the leverage needed.
>> Pushing back
>> is
>> easiest, because you can push with your feet. Pulling forward is
>> harder,
>> but
>> you can grab the bar and pull, which makes it easier. Overall, I
>> dont
>> think
>> it is every seat. I dont know if it has to do with the
>> installation of
>> the
>> rails, the plastic slides on the bottom of the seat, or the rails
>> being
>> not-perfectly-straight to start with. Were your rails extremely
>> hard to
>> install? I
>> have noticed that some are and some arent.
>>
>> So, in answer to your question, I dont know what to say except
>> that not
>> all
>> seats are hard to slide, so you apparently just got lucky
>> .twice. It
>> has also
>> been my experience that they get easier to slide with use, not
>> harder.
>> But,
>> we cant let our experience dictate truth, they just illustrate
>> it, so
>> saying
>> the seats are hard to slide or easy to slide as truth isnt
>> accurate.
>> There
>> has to be some explanation why some slide easily and some hard.
>> Have you
>> talked to Vans or Oregon Aero?
>>
>> Do not archive.
>>
>> Jesse Saint
>> I-TEC, Inc.
>> jesse@itecusa.org
>> http://www.itecusa.org/
>> W: 352-465-4545
>> C: 352-427-0285
>>
>>
>
>
> Jesse Saint
> I-TEC, Inc.
> jesse@itecusa.org
> www.itecusa.org
>
>
--
--
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 |
|
I was quoted 3000 also for 150000. I have 14000 hrs, com. instrument CFI. Doesn't
seem to make any difference how many hours you have past a certain point. I
think the price is way high. My Cessna 210 wasn't that high.
Jim
40383
55 hrs and loving it.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=76357#76357
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 |
|
And you wonder why Rick and I desired to start Aircraft Mutual?
Bob K 90/90
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim & Julie
Wade
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 5:31 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: insurance
<jwade@msdeltawireless.com>
I was quoted 3000 also for 150000. I have 14000 hrs, com. instrument CFI.
Doesn't seem to make any difference how many hours you have past a certain
point. I think the price is way high. My Cessna 210 wasn't that high.
Jim
40383
55 hrs and loving it.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=76357#76357
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: | Re: Teetering on the edge |
I wanted to build an 8. Then my wife surprised me with a 10 kit for my
birthday and said if you are going to build a plane, the whole family
has to be able to fly. How could I argue? I agree with "Build for the
best mission."
Dave Leikam
40496
tailcone - (dimple, dimple, dimple...)
N89DA
Muskego, WI
----- Original Message -----
From: Rene Felker
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 5:43 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Teetering on the edge
I say go for the -10. I am a first time builder, damaged a lot of
perfectly good al and have had a blast. I have a guy building a -9 a
couple of hangers away and I do not see much time difference.
Far as lemmings are concerned, I don't think they jump, they are
pushed..I don't want to push anyone out of this groups, but I agree that
it all depends on your mission...I don't think I would have gone the -10
route if I did not need the two additional seats.
Rene' Felker
40322
Finish....or something like it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 3:19 PM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Teetering on the edge
Don't jump, cause RV-10 builders are like lemmings. Patience is a
virtue and to my knowledge not even Dan has completed an RV-10 yet.
Having helped on 7s and 9s the scale is "Upscale" and worth the climb.
I have the utmost respect for those who have completed 10's cause they
are an exclusive group. I do miss James McClow though.
John - #600
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Pierre Levy
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 1:56 PM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: RV10-List: Teetering on the edge
I attended the RV assembly workshop taught by Dan Checkoway this
week-end in Watsonville. Very informative and helpful, and I took away
two essential points. First, I damaged a lot of perfectly good
aluminum, and my technique is going to need a lot of refinement.
Second, it's going to take a long, long time to build a 10. Is the
build time for a two-seater significantly less? Should I start with
that? Thinking maybe the RV-9A? Many thanks for your comments.
Pierre Levy
EAA 767961 (Teetering on the edge of the precipice, and wondering
whether to jump off)
www.buildersbooks.comwww.kitlog.comwww.homebuilthelp.comhttp://www.matron
ics.com/contributionhttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
www.aeroelectric.comwww.kitlog.comhttp://www.matronics.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 |
|
RV-10 with $150,000 hull for $4,500, ASEL Private Pilot with 120 hours when first
insured. I had to get 15 hours dual first.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of linn Walters
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 3:36 PM
Subject: RV10-List: insurance
Those of you with flying airplanes: How much are you paying for
insurance??? I need to know how much/year and how much hull coverage.
I'm comparing the RV-10 to the Grumman AA-5 series, which really
doesn't compare because of their wimpy engines, but inquiring minds want
to know!!!
linn
do not archive
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: Front seats hard to slide |
Perhaps some of those 750 screws are tighter than others causing a slight
warp in the rails, otherwise I think the only way is to shave some of the
white stuff off somehow ....
Anh
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 7:49 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Front seats hard to slide
>
>
>
> I have not, but I can't imagine a way to change them if they are not
> parallel because of the way they attach. I can imagine that even being
> 2mm out of square from the front to the back of the rails could make a big
> difference in how they slide, but with 750 nutplates (roughly) holding
> them in, I can't see a way to possibly change those 2mm.
>
> 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 Richard
> Reynolds
> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 7:02 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Front seats hard to slide
>
>
> Have you checked to see if the lower rails are parallel?
>
> Are the seat rails parallel?
>
> Are they "in plane"? Check by running strings (dental floss) in the
> form of an X from the front of one side to the back of the other (two
> strings).
>
> Richard Reynolds
>
> On Nov 20, 2006, at 10:25 PM, Jesse Saint wrote:
>
>>
>> I just looked at N415EC today and the same seat that was hard to move
>> before still is. I thought it was loosening up, but it appears not
>> to be.
>> Let me know what Van's says (although they probably won't offer
>> much in
>> the way of an explanation). They might refer you to Oregon Aero.
>> If they
>> consider the seat defective, then it might be RMA'able. They might
>> just
>> say, "grease it and deal with it."
>>
>> Jesse
>>
>>
>>> Jesse, I haven't talked to Van's yet, but intend to do so.
>>>
>>> I was hoping someone had experienced similar problems and solved them
>>> already.
>>>
>>> Mine slide ok for a while after lubing them up, then they go back
>>> to very
>>> hard to move again, even with me sitting in them. Pulling forward is
>>> obviously
>>> the hardest to do.
>>>
>>> grumpy
>>>
>>> In a message dated 11/20/2006 8:23:27 AM Central Standard Time,
>>> jesse@itecusa.org writes:
>>> Grumpy,
>>>
>>> Of the 6 seats I have installed and worked with, only one of them
>>> was hard
>>> to
>>> slide. I noticed that it was actually easier to slide with a person
>>> sitting
>>> in it than without, because you can get the leverage needed.
>>> Pushing back
>>> is
>>> easiest, because you can push with your feet. Pulling forward is
>>> harder,
>>> but
>>> you can grab the bar and pull, which makes it easier. Overall, I
>>> dont
>>> think
>>> it is every seat. I dont know if it has to do with the
>>> installation of
>>> the
>>> rails, the plastic slides on the bottom of the seat, or the rails
>>> being
>>> not-perfectly-straight to start with. Were your rails extremely
>>> hard to
>>> install? I
>>> have noticed that some are and some arent.
>>>
>>> So, in answer to your question, I dont know what to say except
>>> that not
>>> all
>>> seats are hard to slide, so you apparently just got lucky
>>> .twice. It
>>> has also
>>> been my experience that they get easier to slide with use, not
>>> harder.
>>> But,
>>> we cant let our experience dictate truth, they just illustrate
>>> it, so
>>> saying
>>> the seats are hard to slide or easy to slide as truth isnt
>>> accurate.
>>> There
>>> has to be some explanation why some slide easily and some hard.
>>> Have you
>>> talked to Vans or Oregon Aero?
>>>
>>> Do not archive.
>>>
>>> Jesse Saint
>>> I-TEC, Inc.
>>> jesse@itecusa.org
>>> http://www.itecusa.org/
>>> W: 352-465-4545
>>> C: 352-427-0285
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Jesse Saint
>> I-TEC, Inc.
>> jesse@itecusa.org
>> www.itecusa.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
> --
>
>
>
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 |
|
Yay! That's the one I was waiting for! I've been nervous about the
insurance part, because I've got a private and about 104 hours. I also
got my instrument rating in April cause I thought it might make a huge
difference in insuring - like I'd be able to GET insurance! Also, I
figured it might make me a better pilot :) Now you're thinking "gee,
104 hours and an instrument rating... and I share the sky with this
guy?" Don't worry, I know I don't know everything, and I try to act
accordingly.
cj
#40410
fuse
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doerr, Ray R
[NTK]
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 6:23 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: insurance
<Ray.R.Doerr@sprint.com>
RV-10 with $150,000 hull for $4,500, ASEL Private Pilot with 120 hours
when first insured. I had to get 15 hours dual first.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of linn Walters
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 3:36 PM
Subject: RV10-List: insurance
<pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
Those of you with flying airplanes: How much are you paying for
insurance??? I need to know how much/year and how much hull coverage.
I'm comparing the RV-10 to the Grumman AA-5 series, which really
doesn't compare because of their wimpy engines, but inquiring minds want
to know!!!
linn
do not archive
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: Control Stick Engagement into Control Stick Base. |
Thanks for all the replies on this. I sent the question to Vans and got a
reply from Ken Scott.=0A=0AHe said=0A=0A "The stick should bottom out in th
e base...which would be about the weld line."=0A=0ANiko=0A40188=0A=0A=0A=0A
----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>=0ATo: rv10-l
ist@matronics.com=0ASent: Monday, November 20, 2006 2:41:18 PM=0ASubject: R
e: RV10-List: Control Stick Engagement into Control Stick Base.=0A=0A=0A-->
RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>=0A=0AReply inline.
e Saint" <jesse@itecusa.org>=0A> =0A> By reading the page you sent (and acc
ording to our installation), it seems=0A> to me that the bushing is suppose
d to be tightened with the bolt (so it is=0A> fixed with the bolt), then th
e WD-1011 is pivoting on the bushing, not the=0A> bushing pivoting on the b
olt. Am I way off here. I would think the allow=0A> the bolt to be loose
would be less safe than greasing the mate that you=0A> glued so the pivot i
s there. I think that's why it says, "Debur the ends of=0A> the control st
ick base bushing so that they slide easily inside the=0A> WD-1011..." Eith
er way there are parts rubbing, but that would certainly=0A> explain why th
e bushing needs to be longer than the WD-1011.=0A> =0A=0AIn most mechanical
systems, the bushing is meant to move around on=0Athe removable hardware..
.the bolt. As you noticed, that's why you want=0Ato ensure the bushing is
longer than the other part, so the=0Asteel-to-steel is eliminated at the en
ds. Also, with slop if that=0Abushing wasn't secured, that outer part coul
d slide back and forth=0Aand still rub on the other steel part....not good.
With the bushing=0Acaptive in the WD-1011, you're now limited to brass-on
-steel movement,=0Awith the endcaps from the other steel part only rubbing
brass.=0AYou'll still need to deburr the ends, because you want to be able
to=0Aeasily slide the brass tube inside the steel....but deburring isn't=0A
going to have any effect, even if you put it together the other=0Away, on a
ny wear inside. Now, if you do capture that bushing inside=0Athe WD-1011,
you will certainly not want to crank way down on the=0Apinching bolt, or yo
u'll induce a lot more friction into the system.=0A=0AI should note that id
eally, you should not have to use loctite or=0Aanything on the WD-1011. Id
eally it would be a high-friction=0Aalmost press-fit. But, there was so mu
ch slop in there that I=0Ahad no choice but to use a gap filler. I had con
sidered=0Ahaving a larger OD bushing made up that was a tight fit, but=0Ath
at just wastes time and money and effort. You really don't=0Awant the thin
g revolving around inside the WD-1011 anyway.=0ABut, if you didn't have muc
h slop, it really wouldn't be a huge=0Aproblem, either. At least it isn't
steel-on-steel...except if=0Athe steel ends of the WD-1011 start to contact
the other steel=0Acontrol linkage.=0A=0AThe fact that it's a castle nut sp
ec'd there also indicates=0Athat it isn't necessarily a high-torque applica
tion. Just like=0Adoing wheel bearings, snug, then back off so they spin f
reely,=0Aand use a cotter pin. Nobody questions the safety of a wheel=0Ath
at spins freely and the nut is held by a cotter pin, right?=0A=0A=0A=0A> Am
I way off? I am sure it will work either way, but to fix wobble in ours
=0A> I turned down the end of the bushing so there is no play on the WD-101
1.=0A> =0A> Well, anyway, wobble is bad if you can help it. At least it is
=0A> disconcerting when you are flying autopilot and you touch the stick an
d it=0A> feels loose. Going with the dremel sanding drum either on a dreme
l or a die=0A> grinder will do the trick. It should also help with the cle
arance with the=0A> instrument panel, I would think, making sure the engage
ment is sufficient.=0A> =0A=0AI agree with that. I remember not really thi
nking of it, then=0Aabout 100 hours ago I noticed it one smooth flight, and
got=0Aparanoid about the wobble. I inspected the linkages and didn't=0Ase
e any issues, so decided to put it on the list to dig=0Ainto at a convenien
t time. When Vic flew it and noticed the=0Aslop was worse than his, it got
moved higher on the list,=0Aso now it's done. It now is completely slop f
ree, and the=0Acontrols are still smooth and light. Everything's very good
,=0Aand I know the steel parts are rubbing down there. It's=0Athe little
things that bring a smile sometimes. ;)=0A=0A=0A> Jesse Saint=0A> I-TEC, In
c.=0A> jesse@itecusa.org=0A> www.itecusa.org=0A> W: 352-465-4545=0A> C: 352
-427-0285=0A> =0A> -----Original Message-----=0A> From: owner-rv10-list-ser
ver@matronics.com=0A> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Beha
lf Of Tim Olson=0A> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 12:24 PM=0A> To: rv10-l
ist@matronics.com=0A> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Control Stick Engagement into
Control Stick Base.=0A> =0A> Good point Jesse. 2 additional comments...
=0A> =0A> 1) I used a dremel tool sanding drum. Worked well to=0A> deal wi
th the inside of the bore.=0A> =0A> 2) Regarding stick wobble/slop: I jus
t dealt with this=0A> myself. I noticed I had a bit of looseness in the st
ick.=0A> At OSH I compared it to Vic's and he had some too. Over=0A> the
last couple weeks I actually got rid of mine completely.=0A> Here's more...
=0A> =0A> The source of the slop in my case was actually the OD of the=0A>
BUSHING 065 x .375 x 2.313 shown on page 39-8. (see attached=0A> .jpg)=0A>
Or more accurately, the sloppy hole in my WD-1011-L & R.=0A> The way bushi
ngs normally work, you want them to have one=0A> movable surface, the ID th
at rides on the removable bolt.=0A> You want the OD of the bushing to be fi
xed to the WD-1011=0A> somewhat. The AN4-27 bolt that holds the assembly t
ogether=0A> doesn't get cranked really tight, hence the castle nut. You=0A
> want to trim the bushing so it's longer than the WD-10ll,=0A> but still f
its in the mating part. If necessary, you trim=0A> the WD-1011 shorter. T
he slop in my case though was the OD=0A> of that bushing, as I mentioned.
I could stick the bushing=0A> in, then stick the bolt through, and rock the
bolt up and=0A> down slightly, feeling the slop. The reamed ID of the=0A>
bushing was very snug on the bolt, but the OD was slopping=0A> around in t
he WD-1011.=0A> =0A> I fixed it by using a loctite product "Loctite quick m
etal=0A> 660" that I had sitting around from a previous bushing=0A> repair
a couple years ago.=0A> http://www.chemicalcontacts.co.za/teroson/retainers
.htm=0A> You could probably use many of the ones on this page.=0A> Basicall
y, it just fills the gap and solidifies the=0A> bushing to the WD-1011, so
it now pivots on the nicely=0A> fit bolt. When tightening the AN4-27, you
just bring it=0A> up tight, then loosen it to the next castle, so it's=0A>
not sloppy, but non-restrictive. Wala, no more stick slop.=0A> =0A> The on
ly downside is in the ultra-ultra-long term when=0A> you want to replace th
e bushing. It'll be tight in the=0A> WD-1011, and will probably require yo
u to drill out the=0A> bushing to the OD size so you can install a new one.
=0A> =0A> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying=0A> do not archive=0A> =0A> =0A
> Jesse Saint wrote:=0A>> Ideally, you want the stick to fit in as far as p
ossible, which means =0A>> using a round/half-round file to take down the i
nside of the weld so it =0A>> fits. You could also use a sanding drum that
=92s a little smaller than =0A>> the stick to take it down. Usually it is
just a couple of burrs in =0A>> there keeping it from going further. On ou
r sticks I think we got about =0A>> =BE or a little more of the unpainted p
ortion inside. The more you have =0A>> sticking down inside the more stren
gth you will have, and the less =0A>> likely you will have a wobble in your
stick, which is something I have =0A>> noticed in a number of -10=92s out
there, both flying and in progress.=0A>>=0A>> =0A>>=0A>> Jesse Saint=0A>>
=0A>> I-TEC, Inc.=0A>>=0A>> jesse@itecusa.org <mailto:jesse@itecusa.org>=0A
>>=0A>> www.itecusa.org <http://www.itecusa.org>=0A>>=0A>> W: 352-465-4545
=0A>>=0A>> C: 352-427-0285=0A>>=0A>> --------------------------------------
----------------------------------=0A>>=0A>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server
@matronics.com =0A>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Beha
lf Of *Niko=0A>> *Sent:* Monday, November 20, 2006 10:25 AM=0A>> *To:* Matr
onics=0A>> *Subject:* RV10-List: Control Stick Engagement into Control Stic
k Base.=0A>>=0A>> =0A>>=0A>> I have been trying to insert the Control Stic
k into the Control Base =0A>> this morning. I am not sure how much engagem
ent is needed between the =0A>> two. Right now the control stick only goes
about as far as the weld =0A>> between the two tubes in the Base. A little
less than half of the =0A>> unpainted portion of the control stick is not
engaged. Does this sound =0A>> correct?=0A>>=0A>> =0A>>=0A>> By the way i
t took about 2 hrs of working on the inside of the Control =0A>> Base tubes
to get the Control Stick to fit inside it.=0A>>=0A>> =0A>>=0A>> thanks=0A
>>=0A>> =0A>>=0A>> Niko=0A>>=0A>> 40188=0A>>=0A>> *=0A>>=0A>> href="http
://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com>=0A>> href="http://www.buil
dersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com>=0A>> href="http://www.kitlog.com">w
ww.kitlog.com>=0A>> href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp
.com>=0A>>=0A> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.ma
tronics.com/chref==0A> "http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">htt
p://www.matronics.com/Navi=0A> gator?RV10-List=0A>> *=0A>>=0A>> -- Release
-========================
=======
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: Control Stick Engagement |
Tim and Jesse
I am with Scott on the bronze bushing part of the installation. The bushing
should normally be captured by design, either as a press fit, or as in this
case captured by the torqued up through bolt with a castellated nut and
cotter pin. The bushing is the sacrificial wear part and readily replaceable
here. The wear rate on the bushing is reduced by utilizing the larger
surface area / lower unit pressures on the outside of the bushing. Normal
design practice in aircraft control systems is to use castellated nuts on
any joint where there could be rotation on the joint. While the castellated
nut might appear to be overkill in this instance, it does guarantee that the
torque is retained on the bolt while a used lock nut might not. I also think
that it is highly likely that the bushing OD or the tube ID on the WD-1011
is out of tolerance. I did not have this situation on my RV-9A.
Dean Van Winkle Retired Aero Engineer
RV-9A Fuselage/Finish
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Gesele" <sgesele@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Control Stick Engagement
>
>> Time: 09:24:05 AM PST US
>> From: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Control Stick Engagement
>> into Control Stick Base.
>>
>> Good point Jesse. 2 additional comments...
>>
>> 1) I used a dremel tool sanding drum. Worked well
>> to
>> deal with the inside of the bore.
>>
>> 2) Regarding stick wobble/slop: I just dealt with
>> this
>> myself. I noticed I had a bit of looseness in the
>> stick.
>> At OSH I compared it to Vic's and he had some too.
>> Over
>> the last couple weeks I actually got rid of mine
>> completely.
>> Here's more...
>>
>> The source of the slop in my case was actually the
>> OD of the
>> BUSHING 065 x .375 x 2.313 shown on page 39-8. (see
>> attached
>> .jpg)
>> Or more accurately, the sloppy hole in my WD-1011-L
>> & R.
>> The way bushings normally work, you want them to
>> have one
>> movable surface, the ID that rides on the removable
>> bolt.
>> You want the OD of the bushing to be fixed to the
>> WD-1011
>> somewhat. The AN4-27 bolt that holds the assembly
>> together
>> doesn't get cranked really tight, hence the castle
>> nut. You
>> want to trim the bushing so it's longer than the
>> WD-10ll,
>> but still fits in the mating part. If necessary,
>> you trim
>> the WD-1011 shorter. The slop in my case though was
>> the OD
>> of that bushing, as I mentioned. I could stick the
>> bushing
>> in, then stick the bolt through, and rock the bolt
>> up and
>> down slightly, feeling the slop. The reamed ID of
>> the
>> bushing was very snug on the bolt, but the OD was
>> slopping
>> around in the WD-1011.
>>
>> I fixed it by using a loctite product "Loctite quick
>> metal
>> 660" that I had sitting around from a previous
>> bushing
>> repair a couple years ago.
>>
> http://www.chemicalcontacts.co.za/teroson/retainers.htm
>> You could probably use many of the ones on this
>> page.
>> Basically, it just fills the gap and solidifies the
>> bushing to the WD-1011, so it now pivots on the
>> nicely
>> fit bolt. When tightening the AN4-27, you just
>> bring it
>> up tight, then loosen it to the next castle, so it's
>> not sloppy, but non-restrictive. Wala, no more
>> stick slop.
>>
>> The only downside is in the ultra-ultra-long term
>> when
>> you want to replace the bushing. It'll be tight in
>> the
>> WD-1011, and will probably require you to drill out
>> the
>> bushing to the OD size so you can install a new one.
>>
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
> Tim,
>
> Let me get this straight, you basically glued the
> brass bushing into the control stick and installed
> this assembly with a reduced torque on the bolt? What
> did Van's say about your modifications to the primary
> flight controls on the aircraft? The control stick is
> designed to rotate on the brass bushing and the
> bushing must be captured firmly in the main weldment.
> Right now, all of your wear will be at the end of the
> brass bushing (remember your nose gear spacers). When
> this does wear down, you will have steel on steel. In
> the original design, the bushing is longer than
> WD-1011L or R. It is this difference that results in
> some minor slop, but it also produced a space that
> eliminated any steel on steel wear. As time goes on,
> you will lose this size differential. If your bearing
> did not fit properly in the stick weldment, then
> something was not right. I have installed these
> components on both an RV-6A and RV-10. In both
> aircraft, there was not any play between the bearing
> and weldment. It sound like one of your parts may not
> be within tolerance.
>
> It's your airplane and you are the manufacturer, so
> install it however you want. I strongly encourage
> anyone who is thinking about modifying any critical
> system to run the modification by the designer of the
> aircraft. Instrument panels, interiors, paint, etc
> are open for personal creativeness, primary flight
> controls are not.
>
> Scott Gesele
> N506RV - Flying RV-6A
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Try SPAMfighter for free now!
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: | Is AS3-063 X .500 1.4375 part of the kit? |
Hello,
can someone please tell me if the AS3-063 X .500 1.4375 on page 10-17 step 1
is included in the kit? I cant find it anywhere.
Thank you in advance
Michael
http://www.wellenzohn.net[/url]
--------
RV-10 builder
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=76427#76427
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: Is AS3-063 X .500 1.4375 part of the kit? |
Its in the kit; Check the hardware bags.
-Jim 40384
Michael Wellenzohn wrote:
>
>Hello,
>
>can someone please tell me if the AS3-063 X .500 1.4375 on page 10-17 step 1
is included in the kit? I cant find it anywhere.
>Thank you in advance
>Michael
>
>http://www.wellenzohn.net[/url]
>
>--------
>RV-10 builder
>#511
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=76427#76427
>
>
>
>
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: | Is AS3-063 X .500 1.4375 part of the kit? |
Try bag 1149
Bobby
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael Wellenzohn
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 1:26 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Is AS3-063 X .500 1.4375 part of the kit?
--> <michael@wellenzohn.net>
Hello,
can someone please tell me if the AS3-063 X .500 1.4375 on page 10-17 step 1
is included in the kit? I cant find it anywhere.
Thank you in advance
Michael
http://www.wellenzohn.net[/url]
--------
RV-10 builder
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=76427#76427
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: | Is AS3-063 X .500 1.4375 part of the kit? |
Michael,
Is it in the bundle of aluminum that they gave you. I guessing you have
to cut it to the dimensions indicated in the illustration. I am just a
page behind you, so I am not quite there. That would be my guess. I
am sure you didn't want a guess though.
Rob Hunter
40432
Tailcone
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Wellenzohn
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 1:26 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Is AS3-063 X .500 1.4375 part of the kit?
--> <michael@wellenzohn.net>
Hello,
can someone please tell me if the AS3-063 X .500 1.4375 on page 10-17
step 1 is included in the kit? I cant find it anywhere. Thank you in
advance
Michael
http://www.wellenzohn.net[/url]
--------
RV-10 builder
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=76427#76427
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: | CDI with GRT EFIS |
G'day all,
Have had to review my Panel design so I don't need to modify the forward
fuse ribs or locate the EIS on a subpanel. Config includes 3 screen GRT
EFIS, GNS430 and SL30. I have opted for the arinc 429 interface on the
GRT. Panel design works ok if I do not need a 3.5" hole for a GI-106A.
With the enhanced EFIS capabilities using the 429 i/f, do I really need
a separate nav head?? Is the EFIS alone acceptable for IFR?
cheers,
Ron
187 finishing
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: CDI with GRT EFIS |
I have two GRT units that I stacked on top of each other without
having to modify the ribs. I used the upper left mounting hole to
mount the GRT on the single attach hole on the rib.
As to the GI Nav indicator...., I really wished that I had included
it in my panel design. I have found that the GRT display will get
very busy with all the map information and the HSI on top of them.
The Heading box covers the compass rose number and makes it hard to
read small adjustments that you need to see on your IFR final
approach leg. In addition, it is not easy to get a reciprocal course
number and takes too long to set a course in IFR conditions. Also,
the terrain information does not display in HSI mode (it shouldn't -
it would make that much more info piled on top of everything else).
I would like to have the terrain info if I am shooting an approach in
a canyon.
I suspect that if you practice long enough, you might be able to get
used to reading the needles superimposed on the PFD unit and make
your course corrections with the aid of digital heading . I have not
been able to manage that as well as I would like.
In short, I would prefer to use one of the panels for map info, one
for engine and one for flight display and have a dedicated nav head.
I recommend that you find someone with GRT and shoot an approach
before you make your decision.
Do not archive
Rob Kermanj
On Nov 22, 2006, at 5:27 PM, McGANN, Ron wrote:
> G'day all,
>
> Have had to review my Panel design so I don't need to modify the
> forward fuse ribs or locate the EIS on a subpanel. Config includes
> 3 screen GRT EFIS, GNS430 and SL30. I have opted for the arinc 429
> interface on the GRT. Panel design works ok if I do not need a
> 3.5" hole for a GI-106A. With the enhanced EFIS capabilities using
> the 429 i/f, do I really need a separate nav head?? Is the EFIS
> alone acceptable for IFR?
>
> cheers,
> Ron
> 187 finishing
>
>
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: | CDI with GRT EFIS |
CDI with GRT EFISHi Ron, You'll probably be fine, but since you have 2 NAV
radios and you want to have 2 nav heads, why not hook the SL-30 to the GRT
and the 430 to one of the new nifty little 2.25" CDI Indicators by Mid
Continent...same nice CDI, but in a tiny package! The ARINC interface on
the GRT won't help much with your problem, as the main function of that box
is to allow the TIS traffic to communicate with the Box, and to send out the
steering commands for the TruTrak Autopilot. Contact me offline if you have
any more specific questions about the GRT's....we've installed an awful lot
of them!
Cheers,
Stein.
do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 4:27 PM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: RV10-List: CDI with GRT EFIS
G'day all,
Have had to review my Panel design so I don't need to modify the forward
fuse ribs or locate the EIS on a subpanel. Config includes 3 screen GRT
EFIS, GNS430 and SL30. I have opted for the arinc 429 interface on the GRT.
Panel design works ok if I do not need a 3.5" hole for a GI-106A. With the
enhanced EFIS capabilities using the 429 i/f, do I really need a separate
nav head?? Is the EFIS alone acceptable for IFR?
cheers,
Ron
187 finishing
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: | CDI with GRT EFIS |
Outstanding - thanks Stein! I did not realise there was a 2.25" CDI
available. Do you supply them?
cheers,
Ron
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of SteinAir, Inc.
Sent: Thursday, 23 November 2006 10:51 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: CDI with GRT EFIS
Hi Ron, You'll probably be fine, but since you have 2 NAV radios and you
want to have 2 nav heads, why not hook the SL-30 to the GRT and the 430
to one of the new nifty little 2.25" CDI Indicators by Mid
Continent...same nice CDI, but in a tiny package! The ARINC interface
on the GRT won't help much with your problem, as the main function of
that box is to allow the TIS traffic to communicate with the Box, and to
send out the steering commands for the TruTrak Autopilot. Contact me
offline if you have any more specific questions about the GRT's....we've
installed an awful lot of them!
Cheers,
Stein.
do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 4:27 PM
Subject: RV10-List: CDI with GRT EFIS
G'day all,
Have had to review my Panel design so I don't need to modify the forward
fuse ribs or locate the EIS on a subpanel. Config includes 3 screen GRT
EFIS, GNS430 and SL30. I have opted for the arinc 429 interface on the
GRT. Panel design works ok if I do not need a 3.5" hole for a GI-106A.
With the enhanced EFIS capabilities using the 429 i/f, do I really need
a separate nav head?? Is the EFIS alone acceptable for IFR?
cheers,
Ron
187 finishing
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
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?RV10-List
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 |
|
I had a quote some time back for $200,000 hull value $1,000,000 flat and
it was around $3,600. I'm pushing 2000 hrs Multi Engine, instrument and
glider rating. I'm at level 10 of the FAA Wings program. Don't know if
any of that helps or not.
I also just received a quote from Avemco, who has my plane insured
whilst I'm building, and I get the feeling they're not wanting to play
in the RV flying crowds play ground. Same type of coverage as above for
$6,100. Don't think I'll be a taken that one Gertrude.
Wayne Edgerton #40336
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! --
|