---------------------------------------------------------- RV10-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 01/23/07: 57 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 06:48 AM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (RV Builder (Michael Sausen)) 2. 07:07 AM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (BPA) 3. 07:10 AM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (Deems Davis) 4. 07:13 AM - Re: Elevator counterbalance weight (James K Hovis) 5. 07:16 AM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (Rene Felker) 6. 07:46 AM - Re: Elevator counterbalance weight (Kelly McMullen) 7. 07:51 AM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB Ranting (John W. Cox) 8. 08:43 AM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (RV Builder (Michael Sausen)) 9. 09:06 AM - Re: Elevator counterbalance weight (James K Hovis) 10. 09:21 AM - OT: Evolution of aviation (RV Builder (Michael Sausen)) 11. 09:25 AM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (Rene Felker) 12. 09:57 AM - Vans motor mount SB (Fred Williams, M.D.) 13. 09:57 AM - Vans motor mount SB (Fred Williams, M.D.) 14. 10:07 AM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB Ranting (Niko) 15. 10:22 AM - Re: OT: Evolution of aviation (Dave Saylor) 16. 10:27 AM - Re: Vans motor mount SB (RV Builder (Michael Sausen)) 17. 10:28 AM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (John Jessen) 18. 10:47 AM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB Ranting (Jon A. Delamarter) 19. 10:58 AM - Re: Vans motor mount SB (James K Hovis) 20. 11:03 AM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (Pascal) 21. 11:11 AM - Re: Vans motor mount SB (Pascal) 22. 11:22 AM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB Ranting (RV Builder (Michael Sausen)) 23. 11:50 AM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (RV Builder (Michael Sausen)) 24. 01:19 PM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (Tim Olson) 25. 01:28 PM - Re: Rudder cable exits on tailcone (MauleDriver) 26. 01:40 PM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (McGANN, Ron) 27. 01:42 PM - Ring gear mounting bolts (Deems Davis) 28. 01:55 PM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (McGANN, Ron) 29. 02:10 PM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (ddddsp1@juno.com) 30. 02:15 PM - OOPS (Deems Davis) 31. 03:24 PM - Vans Motor mount SB (Fred Williams, M.D.) 32. 03:50 PM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (John Hasbrouck) 33. 03:56 PM - Cold Air Induction (Jon Reining) 34. 03:59 PM - front wheel (Rob Wright) 35. 04:08 PM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (RV Builder (Michael Sausen)) 36. 04:42 PM - Canada first Flight with James Cowl (Tim Olson) 37. 04:45 PM - HID landing light review (Tim Olson) 38. 05:05 PM - Re: Elevator counterbalance weight (orchidman) 39. 05:15 PM - Re: Cold Air Induction (RV Builder (Michael Sausen)) 40. 05:21 PM - Re: Cold Air Induction (Deems Davis) 41. 05:59 PM - Re: Re: Elevator counterbalance weight (John Hasbrouck) 42. 06:03 PM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (Mark Ritter) 43. 06:17 PM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (Mark Ritter) 44. 06:36 PM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (RV Builder (Michael Sausen)) 45. 06:38 PM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (RV Builder (Michael Sausen)) 46. 06:58 PM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (John Hasbrouck) 47. 07:00 PM - Re: Cold Air Induction (cloudvalley@comcast.net) 48. 07:11 PM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (Mark Ritter) 49. 07:12 PM - Re: Cold Air Induction (Deems Davis) 50. 07:14 PM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (Mark Ritter) 51. 07:22 PM - Re: Cold Air Induction (RV Builder (Michael Sausen)) 52. 07:29 PM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (Mark Ritter) 53. 07:38 PM - happy with Van's rant- was Van's Motor Mount SB (Pascal) 54. 07:47 PM - Re: Canada first Flight with James Cowl (Jesse Saint) 55. 07:55 PM - Re: Van's Motor Mount SB (Jesse Saint) 56. 07:58 PM - Re: happy with Van's rant- was Van's Motor Mount SB (Jesse Saint) 57. 08:03 PM - Re: happy with Van's rant- was Van's Motor Mount SB (Tim Olson) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 06:48:34 AM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" Deems, Have the modifications fixed the issue with your mount? I would like to know before I call and discuss the mount for my engine. I take exception with the SB. First of all I paid a crap load of money for a Lycoming and my Barrett engine is NOT a clone. Second of all, Lycoming offers a cold air induction sump also and I'm betting that that "stock" Lycoming part is also going to see interference. If they know what the problem is and know how to fix it without impacting everyone else, they should. I agree that they do not need to accommodate every variation out there but this is a fairly common mod and I'm not doing it to hot rod anything. I have a HP limiting device called a throttle and the additional HP I may see is to get me out of short strips or high density altitude locations, not to get me there 10 minutes sooner. I really wish Van's would get the difference already and move on with the stupid hot rodding crap. Michael Sausen -10 #352 limbo -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:02 PM Subject: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Looks like Van's has issued another service bulletin, this time aimed at us "Hot Rodders" http://vansaircraft.com/pdf/10_motor_mount.pdf Scott was extremely helpful and modified my mount. Looks like they won't be doing any more! Deems Davis # 406 Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) http://deemsrv10.com/ ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 07:07:20 AM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB From: "BPA" Wow Deems. Thanks for passing this along. There are a few points that should be understood by individuals who are either new to the list or are still in the homework phase of engine selection. Primarily, the Barrett Precision Engines IO-540-X is not a "clone" engine. It is made of all new Lycoming components sold from Lycoming to us as part of their kit program. The only exception is the cold air induction sump, plenum and pipes which Monty designed almost 20 years ago for use in the experimental arena. In some cases, the compression ratio is increased at the request of the airplane builder using propriety pistons. Oops, and we use silicone rocker box gaskets made by Superior. Other than that, all OEM certified parts are used on the 540. Of course the IO-540-X is also available with the stock sump. There is a clearance issue with the mount. I do have a local source for the modification needed on the mount and am happy to pass that along to anyone who is interested or intends to use the modified IO-540-X with cold air induction. This individual has modified the RV-10 engine mount with the standard sump. We are meeting with him over the next few days, and we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value added service with your engine at no additional charge. For those of you who have already taken delivery of your engine equipped with Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for assistance in getting your mounts modified. Re: Van's advisement about going with standard hp, this is a debate for you as builders, and each individual has different needs and wants. We have always recommended moderation in increasing the hp. Van's has an interest in selling you a stock Lycoming engine. I doubt very seriously that he is selling them to you at cost! Thank for your continued support. Allen Barrett Barrett Precision Engines, Inc. 2870-B N. Sheridan Rd. Tulsa, OK 74115 (918) 835-1089 phone (918) 835-1754 fax www.barrettprecisionengines.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:02 PM Subject: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Looks like Van's has issued another service bulletin, this time aimed at us "Hot Rodders" http://vansaircraft.com/pdf/10_motor_mount.pdf Scott was extremely helpful and modified my mount. Looks like they won't be doing any more! Deems Davis # 406 Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) http://deemsrv10.com/ ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 07:10:18 AM PST US From: Deems Davis Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB The modification did indeed fix my situation I've posted pictures here : http://deemsrv10.com/album/Sec%20Firewall%20Forward%20FF1/slides/DSC04025.html page forward and you can see several other shots. I think this must be a broader issue than just BPE cold air. They told me they had just modified another mount the day prior to mine. Don't know if that one was an early/unmodified mount or not. Deems Davis # 406 Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) http://deemsrv10.com/ RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote: > >Deems, > > Have the modifications fixed the issue with your mount? I would like >to know before I call and discuss the mount for my engine. I take >exception with the SB. First of all I paid a crap load of money for a >Lycoming and my Barrett engine is NOT a clone. Second of all, Lycoming >offers a cold air induction sump also and I'm betting that that "stock" >Lycoming part is also going to see interference. > > If they know what the problem is and know how to fix it without >impacting everyone else, they should. I agree that they do not need to >accommodate every variation out there but this is a fairly common mod >and I'm not doing it to hot rod anything. I have a HP limiting device >called a throttle and the additional HP I may see is to get me out of >short strips or high density altitude locations, not to get me there 10 >minutes sooner. I really wish Van's would get the difference already >and move on with the stupid hot rodding crap. > >Michael Sausen >-10 #352 limbo > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com >[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis >Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:02 PM >To: rv10-list@matronics.com >Subject: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > >Looks like Van's has issued another service bulletin, this time aimed at > >us "Hot Rodders" > >http://vansaircraft.com/pdf/10_motor_mount.pdf > >Scott was extremely helpful and modified my mount. Looks like they won't > >be doing any more! > > >Deems Davis # 406 >Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) >http://deemsrv10.com/ > > > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 07:13:14 AM PST US From: "James K Hovis" Subject: Re: RV10-List: Elevator counterbalance weight For a quick explanation of control surfaces see this: http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Theories_of_Flight/control/TH28.htm Those tabs forward of the hinge line out on the tips of the elevator aren't there just to provide a convenient place to store the mass balance lead. 172's have leading edge elevator tabs out at the tip. Obviously, Cessna relies on aerodynamic balance rather than mass balance and probably a lower Vne to limit flutter. My old AA1A had a spring balance system on the elevator which centered the elevator to the trim tab setting along with moving tips that provided a certain level of aero balance and hid lead for mass balance resulting in VERY light loads (compared to C150's). On 1/22/07, Kelly McMullen wrote: > > The 172's I've flown(pre 1977) had nothing of the sort. The elevator > would fall to the rear of its own weight. The only tab on the elevator > is the trim tab. But its a little different when Vne is 150 mph. > Mooneys on the other hand, have Vne's of 189mph MIAS and up(most newer > models well over 200kts), and they definitely are balanced with the > elevator tail heavy, with a weight spec specific to the model, while > some models have bungee springs that change the resting point of the > elevator depending on the trim position, because the entire tail > pivots, changing the angle of incidence of the horizontal stab. > > On 1/22/07, James K Hovis wrote: > > > > How many C-172's do you see on a ramp with the elevators drooping? The > > elevators themselves are balanced about the hinge-line, but the > > control linkage weights basically "pull down" the elevator. This is > > also one reason there's an aerodynamic balance tab on a C-172 > > elevator. > > > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 07:16:32 AM PST US From: "Rene Felker" Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB I do not see the words "hot rodding" in the SB nor do I see anything but Vans covering their buts. It looks pretty simple, the motor mount is only guaranteed to work with the stock IO-540 without cold air induction, if you go with any other variation, it is on the builder to fix the motor mount. Also their statement about higher horse power does not limit you on the size of engine you are putting in, just that you must account for it in your operating limits in order to meet the intent of the statement in the SB. There are many airplanes with de-rated turbines. Yes I have a stock IO-540....so this really doesn't affect me. But, I hate to see this mud slinging at Vans on something that they are reasonably handling.....now about the fiberglass parts......... Rene' Felker 40322 N423CF 801-721-6080 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 7:47 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Deems, Have the modifications fixed the issue with your mount? I would like to know before I call and discuss the mount for my engine. I take exception with the SB. First of all I paid a crap load of money for a Lycoming and my Barrett engine is NOT a clone. Second of all, Lycoming offers a cold air induction sump also and I'm betting that that "stock" Lycoming part is also going to see interference. If they know what the problem is and know how to fix it without impacting everyone else, they should. I agree that they do not need to accommodate every variation out there but this is a fairly common mod and I'm not doing it to hot rod anything. I have a HP limiting device called a throttle and the additional HP I may see is to get me out of short strips or high density altitude locations, not to get me there 10 minutes sooner. I really wish Van's would get the difference already and move on with the stupid hot rodding crap. Michael Sausen -10 #352 limbo -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:02 PM Subject: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Looks like Van's has issued another service bulletin, this time aimed at us "Hot Rodders" http://vansaircraft.com/pdf/10_motor_mount.pdf Scott was extremely helpful and modified my mount. Looks like they won't be doing any more! Deems Davis # 406 Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) http://deemsrv10.com/ ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 07:46:30 AM PST US From: "Kelly McMullen" Subject: Re: RV10-List: Elevator counterbalance weight I'd say we are separated by a common language. I don't consider the balance horns on Cessna "tabs" any more than they are on the hundreds of other aircraft that have them. I consider "tabs" as small strips of metal riveted to the rear of a control surface. What you describe is most commonly called a horn or counter balance, not a tab. >From your reference link "Tabs are auxiliary control surfaces placed at the trailing edges of the primary control surfaces." Which is why I wrote what I did. On 1/23/07, James K Hovis wrote: > > For a quick explanation of control surfaces see this: > http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Theories_of_Flight/control/TH28.htm > Those tabs forward of the hinge line out on the tips of the elevator > aren't there just to provide a convenient place to store the mass > balance lead. 172's have leading edge elevator tabs out at the tip. > Obviously, Cessna relies on aerodynamic balance rather than mass > balance and probably a lower Vne to limit flutter. My old AA1A had a > spring balance system on the elevator which centered the elevator to > the trim tab setting along with moving tips that provided a certain > level of aero balance and hid lead for mass balance resulting in VERY > light loads (compared to C150's). > > On 1/22/07, Kelly McMullen wrote: > > > > The 172's I've flown(pre 1977) had nothing of the sort. The elevator > > would fall to the rear of its own weight. The only tab on the elevator > > is the trim tab. But its a little different when Vne is 150 mph. > > Mooneys on the other hand, have Vne's of 189mph MIAS and up(most newer > > models well over 200kts), and they definitely are balanced with the > > elevator tail heavy, with a weight spec specific to the model, while > > some models have bungee springs that change the resting point of the > > elevator depending on the trim position, because the entire tail > > pivots, changing the angle of incidence of the horizontal stab. > > > > On 1/22/07, James K Hovis wrote: > > > > > > How many C-172's do you see on a ramp with the elevators drooping? The > > > elevators themselves are balanced about the hinge-line, but the > > > control linkage weights basically "pull down" the elevator. This is > > > also one reason there's an aerodynamic balance tab on a C-172 > > > elevator. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 07:51:12 AM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Ranting From: "John W. Cox" Allen, thank you for clarifying what should have been obvious to most builders. Your engine is not a "clone". That statement presents the voracity of contempt held at VANS to those renegade builders who have the audacity to improve on a design. Seems that was exactly how VAN started his business with an improvement to someone else's design a few years ago which began this process of model improvement. I have posed to Jon Delamarter that he might respond on the Thunderbolt "Clone" products as well. Next we will hear that unless you buy a new engine direct from VAN, then the mount will not work. That you will fall out of the sky with a Lycoming Thunderbolt. Or, we will again hear how flutter and speed are bringing down the fleet. Another reason to check those lead counter-weights against the written standard - additional weight with those clones engines. Deems - thanks for the prompt response. Scott - thanks for doing the right thing for Deems. Now to get the welder to do them right in the first place. Tim, you must be running a clone as well, since it wasn't and still isn't a Barrett and you seem to have done the unthinkable by modification to the correct mount. John Cox #40600 Do not Archive as the logic of this post defies gravity. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of BPA Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 7:09 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Wow Deems. Thanks for passing this along. There are a few points that should be understood by individuals who are either new to the list or are still in the homework phase of engine selection. Primarily, the Barrett Precision Engines IO-540-X is not a "clone" engine. It is made of all new Lycoming components sold from Lycoming to us as part of their kit program. The only exception is the cold air induction sump, plenum and pipes which Monty designed almost 20 years ago for use in the experimental arena. In some cases, the compression ratio is increased at the request of the airplane builder using propriety pistons. Oops, and we use silicone rocker box gaskets made by Superior. Other than that, all OEM certified parts are used on the 540. Of course the IO-540-X is also available with the stock sump. There is a clearance issue with the mount. I do have a local source for the modification needed on the mount and am happy to pass that along to anyone who is interested or intends to use the modified IO-540-X with cold air induction. This individual has modified the RV-10 engine mount with the standard sump. We are meeting with him over the next few days, and we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value added service with your engine at no additional charge. For those of you who have already taken delivery of your engine equipped with Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for assistance in getting your mounts modified. Re: Van's advisement about going with standard hp, this is a debate for you as builders, and each individual has different needs and wants. We have always recommended moderation in increasing the hp. Van's has an interest in selling you a stock Lycoming engine. I doubt very seriously that he is selling them to you at cost! Thank for your continued support. Allen Barrett Barrett Precision Engines, Inc. 2870-B N. Sheridan Rd. Tulsa, OK 74115 (918) 835-1089 phone (918) 835-1754 fax www.barrettprecisionengines.com ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 08:43:28 AM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" Reasonably handling to me would suggest they make the change to their production run eliminating this problem with 99% of the engines used. Tim had a "stock" setup and still had this problem as did others. I think the final statement in the SB describes their position on the unofficial term of "hot rodding" so let's cut the semantics. I also didn't say anything about them covering their butts. The SB went out of its way to suggest that the Barrett engine is not a stock Lycoming which is absolutely incorrect. Frankly if I was Alan I would be rather irritated and would be having a conversation with Van's about that incorrect fact and suggest they change the wording. The SB also suggests that if you use Lycoming parts this won't be a problem which has already been shown as incorrect. I talked to Scott and Van's position is he is afraid of giving the appearance of authorizing these changes for litigious reasons as he tested the aircraft with the 260HP engine. This is the ONLY reason they don't make the change across the board. As I told Scott, the addition of the cold air sump for me was for a safety margin getting out of grass strips (my home airport) and high density altitude locations. When I purchased my engine I was living in Texas where it routinely is over 100 degrees. I can tell you that the cold air sump probably isn't going to get me back up to 260HP by itself when it's over 100 in the high desert. Same with Deems. While Van is in CYA mode against increased HP, Van is also setting himself up for lawsuits in the other direction by impacting safety. If he had the chance to make a non-impacting change to his design to improve safety and didn't do it, it's no better than encouraging wild modifications. Scott is checking with Van on if he can drop ship the mount directly to Alan for modification but he's afraid that they may also give the same impression. Give me a break. How about if I sign a legal release of responsibility like I had to when I deleted items from the finish kit. Or better yet I can give him Alan's home address as mine. Or they can take the don't ask, don't tell approach. This is just silly. I'm not slinging mud at Van's, I'm simply stating that if they have a solution they should implement it. That's called customer service and improving a product. Unfortunately they have a long history of ignoring customer suggestions and going on their merry way (fiberglass, shipping, etc). They make a great aircraft kit but there is no way to hide from lawsuits nowadays. It makes me sick that people cannot assume responsibility for their own actions anymore to the point that everyone is doing lawsuit mitigation as the first step in anything. I bought an engine from Barrett and at least I know they will take care of any issues that arise and not run and stick their head in the sand. Michael Rant mode off -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rene Felker Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 9:16 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB I do not see the words "hot rodding" in the SB nor do I see anything but Vans covering their buts. It looks pretty simple, the motor mount is only guaranteed to work with the stock IO-540 without cold air induction, if you go with any other variation, it is on the builder to fix the motor mount. Also their statement about higher horse power does not limit you on the size of engine you are putting in, just that you must account for it in your operating limits in order to meet the intent of the statement in the SB. There are many airplanes with de-rated turbines. Yes I have a stock IO-540....so this really doesn't affect me. But, I hate to see this mud slinging at Vans on something that they are reasonably handling.....now about the fiberglass parts......... Rene' Felker 40322 N423CF 801-721-6080 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 7:47 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Deems, Have the modifications fixed the issue with your mount? I would like to know before I call and discuss the mount for my engine. I take exception with the SB. First of all I paid a crap load of money for a Lycoming and my Barrett engine is NOT a clone. Second of all, Lycoming offers a cold air induction sump also and I'm betting that that "stock" Lycoming part is also going to see interference. If they know what the problem is and know how to fix it without impacting everyone else, they should. I agree that they do not need to accommodate every variation out there but this is a fairly common mod and I'm not doing it to hot rod anything. I have a HP limiting device called a throttle and the additional HP I may see is to get me out of short strips or high density altitude locations, not to get me there 10 minutes sooner. I really wish Van's would get the difference already and move on with the stupid hot rodding crap. Michael Sausen -10 #352 limbo -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:02 PM Subject: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Looks like Van's has issued another service bulletin, this time aimed at us "Hot Rodders" http://vansaircraft.com/pdf/10_motor_mount.pdf Scott was extremely helpful and modified my mount. Looks like they won't be doing any more! Deems Davis # 406 Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) http://deemsrv10.com/ ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 09:06:16 AM PST US From: "James K Hovis" Subject: Re: RV10-List: Elevator counterbalance weight True. Common parlance here is "horn tab" not to be confused with "control horn"... On 1/23/07, Kelly McMullen wrote: > > I'd say we are separated by a common language. I don't consider the > balance horns on Cessna "tabs" any more than they are on the hundreds > of other aircraft that have them. I consider "tabs" as small strips of > metal riveted to the rear of a control surface. What you describe is > most commonly called a horn or counter balance, not a tab. > >From your reference link "Tabs are auxiliary control surfaces placed > at the trailing edges of the primary control surfaces." > > Which is why I wrote what I did. > > On 1/23/07, James K Hovis wrote: > > > > For a quick explanation of control surfaces see this: > > > http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Theories_of_Flight/control/TH28.htm > > Those tabs forward of the hinge line out on the tips of the elevator > > aren't there just to provide a convenient place to store the mass > > balance lead. 172's have leading edge elevator tabs out at the tip. > > Obviously, Cessna relies on aerodynamic balance rather than mass > > balance and probably a lower Vne to limit flutter. My old AA1A had a > > spring balance system on the elevator which centered the elevator to > > the trim tab setting along with moving tips that provided a certain > > level of aero balance and hid lead for mass balance resulting in VERY > > light loads (compared to C150's). > > > > On 1/22/07, Kelly McMullen wrote: > > > > > > The 172's I've flown(pre 1977) had nothing of the sort. The elevator > > > would fall to the rear of its own weight. The only tab on the elevator > > > is the trim tab. But its a little different when Vne is 150 mph. > > > Mooneys on the other hand, have Vne's of 189mph MIAS and up(most newer > > > models well over 200kts), and they definitely are balanced with the > > > elevator tail heavy, with a weight spec specific to the model, while > > > some models have bungee springs that change the resting point of the > > > elevator depending on the trim position, because the entire tail > > > pivots, changing the angle of incidence of the horizontal stab. > > > > > > On 1/22/07, James K Hovis wrote: > > > > > > > > > How many C-172's do you see on a ramp with the elevators drooping? The > > > > elevators themselves are balanced about the hinge-line, but the > > > > control linkage weights basically "pull down" the elevator. This is > > > > also one reason there's an aerodynamic balance tab on a C-172 > > > > elevator. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 09:21:23 AM PST US Subject: RV10-List: OT: Evolution of aviation From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" Now for something a little lighter. Funny how the evolution of the aircraft mimics nature...... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6287367.stm do not archive ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 09:25:54 AM PST US From: "Rene Felker" Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Michael wrote "It makes me sick that people cannot assume responsibility for their own actions anymore to the point that everyone is doing lawsuit mitigation as the first step in anything." I totally agree......I have been on the receiving end of a lawsuit and totally understand Vans position based on the world we live in. If Vans makes the change and it can be tied to his attempt to support alternative engines, what will that look like to a jury, seeing the crying widow of the dumb pilot who just killed himself doing something that exceeded the operating limits of the airplane. Defense mode off, back to covering my ass at work...... Rene' Felker 40322 N423CF 801-721-6080 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 9:42 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Reasonably handling to me would suggest they make the change to their production run eliminating this problem with 99% of the engines used. Tim had a "stock" setup and still had this problem as did others. I think the final statement in the SB describes their position on the unofficial term of "hot rodding" so let's cut the semantics. I also didn't say anything about them covering their butts. The SB went out of its way to suggest that the Barrett engine is not a stock Lycoming which is absolutely incorrect. Frankly if I was Alan I would be rather irritated and would be having a conversation with Van's about that incorrect fact and suggest they change the wording. The SB also suggests that if you use Lycoming parts this won't be a problem which has already been shown as incorrect. I talked to Scott and Van's position is he is afraid of giving the appearance of authorizing these changes for litigious reasons as he tested the aircraft with the 260HP engine. This is the ONLY reason they don't make the change across the board. As I told Scott, the addition of the cold air sump for me was for a safety margin getting out of grass strips (my home airport) and high density altitude locations. When I purchased my engine I was living in Texas where it routinely is over 100 degrees. I can tell you that the cold air sump probably isn't going to get me back up to 260HP by itself when it's over 100 in the high desert. Same with Deems. While Van is in CYA mode against increased HP, Van is also setting himself up for lawsuits in the other direction by impacting safety. If he had the chance to make a non-impacting change to his design to improve safety and didn't do it, it's no better than encouraging wild modifications. Scott is checking with Van on if he can drop ship the mount directly to Alan for modification but he's afraid that they may also give the same impression. Give me a break. How about if I sign a legal release of responsibility like I had to when I deleted items from the finish kit. Or better yet I can give him Alan's home address as mine. Or they can take the don't ask, don't tell approach. This is just silly. I'm not slinging mud at Van's, I'm simply stating that if they have a solution they should implement it. That's called customer service and improving a product. Unfortunately they have a long history of ignoring customer suggestions and going on their merry way (fiberglass, shipping, etc). They make a great aircraft kit but there is no way to hide from lawsuits nowadays. It makes me sick that people cannot assume responsibility for their own actions anymore to the point that everyone is doing lawsuit mitigation as the first step in anything. I bought an engine from Barrett and at least I know they will take care of any issues that arise and not run and stick their head in the sand. Michael Rant mode off -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rene Felker Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 9:16 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB I do not see the words "hot rodding" in the SB nor do I see anything but Vans covering their buts. It looks pretty simple, the motor mount is only guaranteed to work with the stock IO-540 without cold air induction, if you go with any other variation, it is on the builder to fix the motor mount. Also their statement about higher horse power does not limit you on the size of engine you are putting in, just that you must account for it in your operating limits in order to meet the intent of the statement in the SB. There are many airplanes with de-rated turbines. Yes I have a stock IO-540....so this really doesn't affect me. But, I hate to see this mud slinging at Vans on something that they are reasonably handling.....now about the fiberglass parts......... Rene' Felker 40322 N423CF 801-721-6080 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 7:47 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Deems, Have the modifications fixed the issue with your mount? I would like to know before I call and discuss the mount for my engine. I take exception with the SB. First of all I paid a crap load of money for a Lycoming and my Barrett engine is NOT a clone. Second of all, Lycoming offers a cold air induction sump also and I'm betting that that "stock" Lycoming part is also going to see interference. If they know what the problem is and know how to fix it without impacting everyone else, they should. I agree that they do not need to accommodate every variation out there but this is a fairly common mod and I'm not doing it to hot rod anything. I have a HP limiting device called a throttle and the additional HP I may see is to get me out of short strips or high density altitude locations, not to get me there 10 minutes sooner. I really wish Van's would get the difference already and move on with the stupid hot rodding crap. Michael Sausen -10 #352 limbo -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:02 PM Subject: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Looks like Van's has issued another service bulletin, this time aimed at us "Hot Rodders" http://vansaircraft.com/pdf/10_motor_mount.pdf Scott was extremely helpful and modified my mount. Looks like they won't be doing any more! Deems Davis # 406 Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) http://deemsrv10.com/ ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 09:57:00 AM PST US From: "Fred Williams, M.D." Subject: RV10-List: Vans motor mount SB Question: Has anybody run into problems getting the RV 10 certified as "airworthy" when they have installed a modified (increased horsepower) Lycoming engine? Does this continue to fall under the experimental regs of building our own aircraft? Fred Williams 40515 ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 09:57:30 AM PST US From: "Fred Williams, M.D." Subject: RV10-List: Vans motor mount SB Question: Has anybody run into problems getting the RV 10 certified as "airworthy" when they have installed a modified (increased horsepower) Lycoming engine? Does this continue to fall under the experimental regs of building our own aircraft? Fred Williams 40515 ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 10:07:31 AM PST US From: Niko Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Ranting I don't want to ruffle anyones feathers here, but here is a different point of view.=0A=0AI had talked to Van's regarding the certified engines about 1 to 1.5 years ago. They did not try to just sell me a certified engine. In fact they told me that the I was better off getting an experimental engi ne from one of the engine builders. So my experience with Van's makes me b elieve that they are not out to just sell an engine; and of course they mak e money selling engines. The RV10's, RV9, RV7s and RV8 are selling well an d I am sure Van is doing very well financially. Now a few crashes of RV10 due to supposedly structural problems could slow his sales down in a hurry so I think his viewpoint is based more on safety then selling engines.=0A =0AAs far as hot rodding, there is definitely an actual amount of power abo ve which one might get in trouble if they don't modify the structure to ha ndle it. Is that 260hp 300hp or 400hp it appears no one knows. Van's clai ms that it can handle 260 hp but they don't want to stick their neck out an y further and I don't blame them for that. The 260hp number is what their design and testing is based on. Is there some margin? Probably, if not th ey cut it too close. =0A=0AIf its okay to go to 280hp is it okay to go to 300hp or 350hp how about 500hp? Where is the cutoff? Should the person go ing to 300hp have to do some homework to ensure that the aircraft will be s afe with that much power? If the plane does come apart and people get kill ed than was he not negligent ? I can see having to defend this in court, " Are you a structural or aeronautical engineer? No. Have you designed any a ircraft or have experience designing aircraft? No. Well then if the design er of the aircraft thought that it was not capable of handling more than 26 0 hp, and repeatedly said so, what made you think that you knew better?" a nd no I am not a lawyer. The bottom line to this is if you are going to mo dify it and fly it outside the envelope that Van's has designed it for than you need to do the analysis and/or testing to verify that its safe in the expanded envelope.=0A=0ALets go back to the fatigue discussions we had seve ral times on this list. If there was a fatigue critical item in the engine compartment (i.e. engine mounts, engine mount support fittings aft of the firewall that are ending up with short edge distance in a lot of aircraft, etc) then going to 286 hp (10% increase) would halve the life of these item s and at 315 hp you would have approximately only 1/4 of the life left. And maybe you allready ate away at half the life because your edge distances w ere to small. Now for someone going to 315 hp are you sure that those item s are not critical?=0A=0ANiko=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: J ohn W. Cox =0ATo: rv10-list@matronics.com=0ASent: T uesday, January 23, 2007 10:50:23 AM=0ASubject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor hnwcox@pacificnw.com>=0A=0AAllen, thank you for clarifying what should have been obvious to most=0Abuilders. Your engine is not a "clone". That state ment presents the=0Avoracity of contempt held at VANS to those renegade bui lders who have=0Athe audacity to improve on a design.=0A=0ASeems that was e xactly how VAN started his business with an improvement=0Ato someone else's design a few years ago which began this process of=0Amodel improvement. I have posed to Jon Delamarter that he might respond=0Aon the Thunderbolt "C lone" products as well. Next we will hear that=0Aunless you buy a new engi ne direct from VAN, then the mount will not=0Awork. That you will fall out of the sky with a Lycoming Thunderbolt.=0A=0AOr, we will again hear how flu tter and speed are bringing down the=0Afleet. Another reason to check those lead counter-weights against the=0Awritten standard - additional weight wi th those clones engines.=0A=0ADeems - thanks for the prompt response. Scot t - thanks for doing the=0Aright thing for Deems. Now to get the welder to do them right in the=0Afirst place. Tim, you must be running a clone as we ll, since it wasn't=0Aand still isn't a Barrett and you seem to have done t he unthinkable by=0Amodification to the correct mount.=0A=0AJohn Cox=0A#406 00=0A=0ADo not Archive as the logic of this post defies gravity.=0A=0A=0A-- ---Original Message-----=0AFrom: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com=0A[ma ilto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of BPA=0ASent: Tuesday , January 23, 2007 7:09 AM=0ATo: rv10-list@matronics.com=0ASubject: RE: RV1 PA@BPAENGINES.COM>=0A=0A=0AWow Deems. Thanks for passing this along. Ther e are a few points that=0Ashould be understood by individuals who are eithe r new to the list or=0Aare still in the homework phase of engine selection. Primarily, the=0ABarrett Precision Engines IO-540-X is not a "clone" engi ne. It is made=0Aof all new Lycoming components sold from Lycoming to us a s part of their=0Akit program. The only exception is the cold air inductio n sump, plenum=0Aand pipes which Monty designed almost 20 years ago for use in the=0Aexperimental arena. In some cases, the compression ratio is incr eased=0Aat the request of the airplane builder using propriety pistons. Oo ps,=0Aand we use silicone rocker box gaskets made by Superior. Other than =0Athat, all OEM certified parts are used on the 540. Of course the=0AIO-5 40-X is also available with the stock sump.=0A=0AThere is a clearance issue with the mount. I do have a local source for=0Athe modification needed on the mount and am happy to pass that along to=0Aanyone who is interested or intends to use the modified IO-540-X with=0Acold air induction. This indi vidual has modified the RV-10 engine mount=0Awith the standard sump. We are meeting with him over the next few days,=0Aand we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value=0Aadded service with your engine at no additional charge.=0A=0AFor those of you who have already taken delivery o f your engine equipped=0Awith Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for a ssistance in getting=0Ayour mounts modified.=0A=0ARe: Van's advisement abou t going with standard hp, this is a debate for=0Ayou as builders, and each individual has different needs and wants. We=0Ahave always recommended mod eration in increasing the hp. Van's has an=0Ainterest in selling you a sto ck Lycoming engine. I doubt very seriously=0Athat he is selling them to yo u at cost!=0A=0AThank for your continued support.=0A=0AAllen Barrett=0ABarr ett Precision Engines, Inc.=0A2870-B N. Sheridan Rd.=0ATulsa, OK 74115=0A( 918) 835-1089 phone=0A(918) 835-1754 fax=0Awww.barrettprecisionengines.com == ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 10:22:43 AM PST US From: "Dave Saylor" Subject: RE: RV10-List: OT: Evolution of aviation Hmm...evolution seems to support successful deviation from the original design...what would the SB say? Do Not Archive _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 9:20 AM Subject: RV10-List: OT: Evolution of aviation Now for something a little lighter. Funny how the evolution of the aircraft mimics nature.. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6287367.stm do not archive ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 10:27:10 AM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vans motor mount SB From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" Experimental, is experimental, is experimental. No such limitation. Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fred Williams, M.D. Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 11:51 AM Subject: RV10-List: Vans motor mount SB Question: Has anybody run into problems getting the RV 10 certified as "airworthy" when they have installed a modified (increased horsepower) Lycoming engine? Does this continue to fall under the experimental regs of building our own aircraft? Fred Williams 40515 ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 10:28:46 AM PST US From: "John Jessen" Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB I probably shouldn't weigh in on this, simply because I usually don't have a clue. However, after reading the notice and knowing a bit about business, it appears Vans is simply narrowing their scope of liability. It'll not hurt their business one whit to do so and might hurt to go the other way. They will continue to sell and support the narrow band of known product, and they will make a good living doing that. They will let Marty and others deal with the issues that lay outside that band. And, that's okay. There is good innovation happening all around Vans and they are fine with that. I daresay they are happy with that. The cottage industry that has grown up around their product is quite large and strong and will continue to grow and improve. Should they make improvements to, say, the fiberglassed parts, sure and yes and I agree. If they have a stock part that is not of high quality in fabrication, damn right they should improve that. Should they modify the engine mount to make sure it works for a "standard" engine, of course. They are all about keeping well within a safety and knowledge zone. Let the market improve the product. They will still make their money. Now, having said that, I do agree that the language found in the SB was not well thought out. Clearly Barrett's engines are not aggressively modified clones, and clearly they didn't even have the mount correct for Tim's engine, so to put their stake at this point in the sand doesn't make sense on the face of it. And certainly building demonstrators as minimal VFR machines was a silly thing to do. Clearly the RV-10 is a cruising IFR machine, and should be treated as such. It has always been an attempt by the company to narrow the liability and cost options. But, the stake has been put in the sand and we will continue to build the planes, modify them as the market allows, and continue to enjoy the hell out of them. My conclusion? We all have our quirks. We meaning both individuals and companies. But the cool thing in this society is that we have a market that can fill the voids and make things even better. I have a feeling Van's will be seeing many a gear, many a cabin, many a cowl being returned, and many an engine not sold, as people find better alternatives. Hopefully this will make an impression on them, but if not, hey, we'll find a way to move forward with their basic product, which ain't bad. John Jessen #328 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rene Felker Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 9:26 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Michael wrote "It makes me sick that people cannot assume responsibility for their own actions anymore to the point that everyone is doing lawsuit mitigation as the first step in anything." I totally agree......I have been on the receiving end of a lawsuit and totally understand Vans position based on the world we live in. If Vans makes the change and it can be tied to his attempt to support alternative engines, what will that look like to a jury, seeing the crying widow of the dumb pilot who just killed himself doing something that exceeded the operating limits of the airplane. Defense mode off, back to covering my ass at work...... Rene' Felker 40322 N423CF 801-721-6080 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 9:42 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Reasonably handling to me would suggest they make the change to their production run eliminating this problem with 99% of the engines used. Tim had a "stock" setup and still had this problem as did others. I think the final statement in the SB describes their position on the unofficial term of "hot rodding" so let's cut the semantics. I also didn't say anything about them covering their butts. The SB went out of its way to suggest that the Barrett engine is not a stock Lycoming which is absolutely incorrect. Frankly if I was Alan I would be rather irritated and would be having a conversation with Van's about that incorrect fact and suggest they change the wording. The SB also suggests that if you use Lycoming parts this won't be a problem which has already been shown as incorrect. I talked to Scott and Van's position is he is afraid of giving the appearance of authorizing these changes for litigious reasons as he tested the aircraft with the 260HP engine. This is the ONLY reason they don't make the change across the board. As I told Scott, the addition of the cold air sump for me was for a safety margin getting out of grass strips (my home airport) and high density altitude locations. When I purchased my engine I was living in Texas where it routinely is over 100 degrees. I can tell you that the cold air sump probably isn't going to get me back up to 260HP by itself when it's over 100 in the high desert. Same with Deems. While Van is in CYA mode against increased HP, Van is also setting himself up for lawsuits in the other direction by impacting safety. If he had the chance to make a non-impacting change to his design to improve safety and didn't do it, it's no better than encouraging wild modifications. Scott is checking with Van on if he can drop ship the mount directly to Alan for modification but he's afraid that they may also give the same impression. Give me a break. How about if I sign a legal release of responsibility like I had to when I deleted items from the finish kit. Or better yet I can give him Alan's home address as mine. Or they can take the don't ask, don't tell approach. This is just silly. I'm not slinging mud at Van's, I'm simply stating that if they have a solution they should implement it. That's called customer service and improving a product. Unfortunately they have a long history of ignoring customer suggestions and going on their merry way (fiberglass, shipping, etc). They make a great aircraft kit but there is no way to hide from lawsuits nowadays. It makes me sick that people cannot assume responsibility for their own actions anymore to the point that everyone is doing lawsuit mitigation as the first step in anything. I bought an engine from Barrett and at least I know they will take care of any issues that arise and not run and stick their head in the sand. Michael Rant mode off -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rene Felker Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 9:16 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB I do not see the words "hot rodding" in the SB nor do I see anything but Vans covering their buts. It looks pretty simple, the motor mount is only guaranteed to work with the stock IO-540 without cold air induction, if you go with any other variation, it is on the builder to fix the motor mount. Also their statement about higher horse power does not limit you on the size of engine you are putting in, just that you must account for it in your operating limits in order to meet the intent of the statement in the SB. There are many airplanes with de-rated turbines. Yes I have a stock IO-540....so this really doesn't affect me. But, I hate to see this mud slinging at Vans on something that they are reasonably handling.....now about the fiberglass parts......... Rene' Felker 40322 N423CF 801-721-6080 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen) Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 7:47 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Deems, Have the modifications fixed the issue with your mount? I would like to know before I call and discuss the mount for my engine. I take exception with the SB. First of all I paid a crap load of money for a Lycoming and my Barrett engine is NOT a clone. Second of all, Lycoming offers a cold air induction sump also and I'm betting that that "stock" Lycoming part is also going to see interference. If they know what the problem is and know how to fix it without impacting everyone else, they should. I agree that they do not need to accommodate every variation out there but this is a fairly common mod and I'm not doing it to hot rod anything. I have a HP limiting device called a throttle and the additional HP I may see is to get me out of short strips or high density altitude locations, not to get me there 10 minutes sooner. I really wish Van's would get the difference already and move on with the stupid hot rodding crap. Michael Sausen -10 #352 limbo -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:02 PM Subject: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Looks like Van's has issued another service bulletin, this time aimed at us "Hot Rodders" http://vansaircraft.com/pdf/10_motor_mount.pdf Scott was extremely helpful and modified my mount. Looks like they won't be doing any more! Deems Davis # 406 Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) http://deemsrv10.com/ ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 10:47:20 AM PST US Subject: RV10-List: Re: Van's Motor Mount SB Ranting From: "Jon A. Delamarter" AV8ORJWC wrote: > Allen, thank you for clarifying what should have been obvious to most > builders. Your engine is not a "clone". > > I have posed to Jon Delamarter that he might respond > on the Thunderbolt "Clone" products as well. Next we will hear that > unless you buy a new engine direct from VAN, then the mount will not > work. That you will fall out of the sky with a Lycoming Thunderbolt. > > John Cox > #40600 > > -- If I am not mistaken, I believe that the core issue at the heart of this discussion really extends beyond liability concerns. But first, let me back up Allen's statement regarding a "clone" Lycoming from BPA. A clone, in my opinion, would refer to a Superior or ECI engine. The folks at Barrett assemble their engines from a box of Lycoming parts that they buy from us, Lycoming. In other words, the majority of their parts come from the same parts bin as a certified or Thunderbolt Lycoming. As with all of our kit shops, they have the discretion to modify the parts or add parts that in their judgment are safe and suitable. Michael and a lot of other folks have bought engines from BPA based on a well deserved industry reputation. Having said all that, I think it is just possible that the Van's SB specifically mentioned Monty's custom sump/intake system due to the fact that, to date, this is really the only commonly used aftermarket system of it's type (Tip of the hat to my good friend Kevin Murray at SkyDynamics; Kevin's system uses a stock Lycoming sump and is not exactly an equivalent.) Monty led the way in the experimental aftermarket with his system long before the RV-10 was on Van's drawing boards. And yes, to Michael's point, the cold-air system we are developing in Thunderbolt is similiar enough that I expect that the same interference would occur. (I must take a technical exception to one of your points, though Michael; a Barrett engine is not a stock Lycoming engine by definition. Neither is any engine that we build here in Thunderbolt. That's not a bad thing! It just means that those of us in the custom experimental engine market have an opportunity to do things a little differently.) To Van's point, I understand their reticence to implicitly or tacitly endorse modifications of their design. Once that is allowed to begin, where does it end? The line simply must be drawn somewhere. We cannot in good conscience ask an engineer to design in a safety margin and then endorse our intention to disregard that margin. Again, to Michael's point, throttle/manifold pressure management is a legitimate method for limiting horsepower. Now to the core issue I mentioned at the beginning. Those of us who participate in the experimental aircraft market do so knowing full well that the law supports the individual builder's right to modify the end product at will. Participation at any level is therefore risk inherent. Therefore, as a member of this group, I would ask that you would be patient with our attempts to balance innovation and performance with safety and reasonable risk. -------- Jon A. Delamarter Thunderbolt Manager Lycoming Engines Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=89801#89801 ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 10:58:30 AM PST US From: "James K Hovis" Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vans motor mount SB Fred, I think ultimately you can get a "hotrodded" RV approved. It would depend on how comfortable and familiar the FAA DAR or Inspector is with the modification, the original design, and the level the modification deviates from the original. As an experimental aircraft, if you can figure how to install one or two turbine powerplants to an RV-10, you are free to do so (an extreme example I know). The key will be how many hoops your FAA rep will make you go through to "prove" your ship is airworthy. One of the good things about buying a kit from Van's you get the design and engineering work they put into the original airframe as a basis for your ship and if yours is within the design limits studied by Van's, then I think you have an easier time with your paperwork. The further away from a "standard" RV-10 you go, don't be surprized that the FAA reps will want to see some engineering analysis to support the re-design and don't look to Van's to support you either partly due to the "cover my ass" syndrome. There's a couple points that should be considered why Van's has a "CMA" attitude towards "major" modifications: 1) They spent a lot of time and money developing an airframe that conforms to a certain set of criteria. Van's could incur considerable expense studying each deviation request coming in from the builder community. The results could drastically affect one or more aspect of the original design, which in Van's opinion could be detrimental to the overall utility of the airframe. 2) As kit airplanes become an increasing percentage of the overall GA fleet, especially those aircraft 18 years and newer, it's increasingly likely that some ambulance chaser is salivating at the chance to go after a kit manufacturer. A modification that greatly degraded some part of the performance criteria of the airframe originally set by Van's and was supported by analysis by Van's could be blood in the water to the legal sharks should that aircraft crash. For now, the 51% rule shields Van's, and that theuy probably don't have the corporate deep pockets like Cessna or Beechcraft, but other support services may not see such protection. Does anyone know if Van's faced a threat of lawsuit from the Arlington crash mentioned in a previous post? If it wasn't then, I feel sooner or later a kit maker will see a liability suit as a result of a crash. I think liability concerns may affect all kit makers and could kill the industry as it helped depress the production industry way back when. Hopefully this won't happen until after I begin work on my own airplane. Bottom-line is I see valid reasons for Van's position to modifications beyond the original design criteria of its airframes. And on the otherhand, I support those experimenters who want improvements for their own personal birds, it is EXPERIMENTING afterall. But, don't go whining when the Feds want you to support your modifications with rational analysis and Van's tells you you're on your own. JKH. On 1/23/07, Fred Williams, M.D. wrote: > > > Question: > > Has anybody run into problems getting the RV 10 certified as "airworthy" > when they have installed a modified (increased horsepower) Lycoming > engine? Does this continue to fall under the experimental regs of > building our own aircraft? > > Fred Williams > 40515 > > ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 11:03:56 AM PST US From: "Pascal" Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB "we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value added service with your engine at no additional charge. > For those of you who have already taken delivery of your engine equipped > with Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for assistance in getting > your mounts modified." That is what I call customer service. Barrett just earn a point for my decision on the engine. It's the small things that help me make the big decisions. Maybe we all need to send something to Van's and have them publish a concrete reason for releasing something that surely has nothing to do with Safety. I may be wrong on this but when I see a Service Bulletin I take it to mean- improvement found that will make the part, or other safer. A more powerful engine may get me to go slightly faster but just how much faster than the 201MPH advertised.. no power means I get over the mountains sooner, it means I have it if I want it. Vic, as an example has more power and he has said more than once he rarely uses more than 75% on his plane.. but he has it if he needs it. I see adding 20-30hp as a good thing and Van's using a SB so people like Deems don't have their welder do extra work by re welding to fit anything different than a stock engine, versus Van's just working with Mattituck, Thunderbolt, Barrett and any other engine company out there driving their kits to work out a motor mount that fits them all- ie make the mount fit the largest sump out there without safety issues. It's been done for Tim, Deems and probably many more out there. It's experimental and it HAS been tested so just weld a different motor mount and skip the SB. I am still clueless to the motor mount but the point is I have seen two perspectives here. 1) we'll take care of the motor mounts as part of the engine price and 2) We won't modify nor support you if you don't use a stock engine. if it wasn't for #2 making the kit I would consider taking my business elsewhere, but I think back to why did Van's publish a SB? I really would like an explanantion for the logic with proof to back it up. More is not worse unless we were talking out of C/G weights or a turbine engine.. than I would understand.. John C (since you're so close), take a walk down to Van's and get us an explanation, if anyone can do it it's you! Pascal Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 7:08 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > > Wow Deems. Thanks for passing this along. There are a few points that > should be understood by individuals who are either new to the list or > are still in the homework phase of engine selection. Primarily, the > Barrett Precision Engines IO-540-X is not a "clone" engine. It is made > of all new Lycoming components sold from Lycoming to us as part of their > kit program. The only exception is the cold air induction sump, plenum > and pipes which Monty designed almost 20 years ago for use in the > experimental arena. In some cases, the compression ratio is increased > at the request of the airplane builder using propriety pistons. Oops, > and we use silicone rocker box gaskets made by Superior. Other than > that, all OEM certified parts are used on the 540. Of course the > IO-540-X is also available with the stock sump. > > There is a clearance issue with the mount. I do have a local source for > the modification needed on the mount and am happy to pass that along to > anyone who is interested or intends to use the modified IO-540-X with > cold air induction. This individual has modified the RV-10 engine mount > with the standard sump. We are meeting with him over the next few days, > and we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value > added service with your engine at no additional charge. > > For those of you who have already taken delivery of your engine equipped > with Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for assistance in getting > your mounts modified. > > Re: Van's advisement about going with standard hp, this is a debate for > you as builders, and each individual has different needs and wants. We > have always recommended moderation in increasing the hp. Van's has an > interest in selling you a stock Lycoming engine. I doubt very seriously > that he is selling them to you at cost! > > Thank for your continued support. > > Allen Barrett > Barrett Precision Engines, Inc. > 2870-B N. Sheridan Rd. > Tulsa, OK 74115 > (918) 835-1089 phone > (918) 835-1754 fax > www.barrettprecisionengines.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:02 PM > To: rv10-list@matronics.com > Subject: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > > Looks like Van's has issued another service bulletin, this time aimed at > > us "Hot Rodders" > > http://vansaircraft.com/pdf/10_motor_mount.pdf > > Scott was extremely helpful and modified my mount. Looks like they won't > > be doing any more! > > > Deems Davis # 406 > Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) > http://deemsrv10.com/ > > > ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 11:11:27 AM PST US From: "Pascal" Subject: Re: RV10-List: Vans motor mount SB The only issue is maybe the FAA/DAR telling you 40hrs versus 25 hour test fly-off. Otherwise that's it. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred Williams, M.D." Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 9:50 AM Subject: RV10-List: Vans motor mount SB > > > Question: > > Has anybody run into problems getting the RV 10 certified as "airworthy" > when they have installed a modified (increased horsepower) Lycoming > engine? Does this continue to fall under the experimental regs of > building our own aircraft? > Fred Williams > 40515 > > > ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 11:22:31 AM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Ranting From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" In reality the 260HP number means next to nothing. The real limiting factors are in the size and weight of the engine, any changes that it causes to the CG, possible torque increases on the mount, and most importantly VNE. Van's is stating that they believe that there is no chance to exceed their design limitations in normal flight with an engine rated at 260HP. I say rated because it is impossible to say if a engine is putting out more or less HP unless someone builds reference data for that engine using a known measurement like a dyno. So that being said, if someone limits an engine of any size to the same characteristics they are not exceeding the design specifications. In the case of a larger engine, anyone can mitigate weight issues by doing a weight and balance. In my case the sump is lighter than the stock component. Torque, well that can be a bit of a guess as I'm betting Van never did any destructive testing on their mounts so they have no idea if there is a flaw in even the current version that could rear its ugly head down the road. But then again there is a fair amount of data at this point on the "stock" 540 in an RV-10 for us to take a good guess that there isn't a problem. Most of us that are making improvements to the engine are doing it to the exact same 260HP Lycoming IO-540 that is considered acceptable so let's just assume the mount is perfectly fine for this application. That leaves us with the VNE issue. There are plenty of ways to exceed VNE with a stock 260HP engine. If you cross the manufactures set VNE limit you have moved into the test pilot realm and you are on your own. Hopefully you know what you are doing. If the modifications to my engine put me over 300HP (they didn't) it makes absolutely no difference to the aircraft as long as the other parameters are kept in check. Easiest way to do that is by connecting your eyes watching your airspeed with the hand controlling the throttle. So my point is I don't feel it's an actual amount of power expressed in HP that is the issue as that really has no direct bearing on if you will fall out of the sky. So if that number is really irrelevant as long as you keep things inside the design boundaries, who cares what the actual HP number is? Operating limits are valid numbers and also something Van should absolutely stand behind but I would rather see those than just saying arbitrarily that anything over 260HP is going to be a problem. It's Van's choice on whether or not to accommodate the builders out there and Barrett's cold air induction is a popular option. As I told Scott, I understand their decision even if I don't agree with it. Allen immediately had a solution to the problem so I'm not concerned. You can also bet that Thunderbolt is going to be pushing their cold air induction from Lycoming and they will see the same problem. Will Van's have the same stance on the subject even though it is a direct Lycoming option? Maybe Van's will silently change the mount design under the guise of optimization once this subject dies out a bit so they can say they didn't do it for the hot rodders out there. Time will tell. In the mean time Scott has agreed to drop ship my mount directly to Barrett for his local man to modify. I'm glad to see they are willing to work to a compromise with some of us on this. If anyone else is ordering an engine with cold air, make sure you add this request to the finish kit order. Once I have it back I'll be happy to post pictures. Interesting thing is that I've been told the first several kits didn't even have the troublesome cross member in the engine mount and haven't been replaced. Michael From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Niko Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 12:07 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Ranting I don't want to ruffle anyones feathers here, but here is a different point of view. I had talked to Van's regarding the certified engines about 1 to 1.5 years ago. They did not try to just sell me a certified engine. In fact they told me that the I was better off getting an experimental engine from one of the engine builders. So my experience with Van's makes me believe that they are not out to just sell an engine; and of course they make money selling engines. The RV10's, RV9, RV7s and RV8 are selling well and I am sure Van is doing very well financially. Now a few crashes of RV10 due to supposedly structural problems could slow his sales down in a hurry so I think his viewpoint is based more on safety then selling engines. As far as hot rodding, there is definitely an actual amount of power above which one might get in trouble if they don't modify the structure to handle it. Is that 260hp 300hp or 400hp it appears no one knows. Van's claims that it can handle 260 hp but they don't want to stick their neck out any further and I don't blame them for that. The 260hp number is what their design and testing is based on. Is there some margin? Probably, if not they cut it too close. If its okay to go to 280hp is it okay to go to 300hp or 350hp how about 500hp? Where is the cutoff? Should the person going to 300hp have to do some homework to ensure that the aircraft will be safe with that much power? If the plane does come apart and people get killed than was he not negligent ? I can see having to defend this in court, "Are you a structural or aeronautical engineer? No. Have you designed any aircraft or have experience designing aircraft? No. Well then if the designer of the aircraft thought that it was not capable of handling more than 260 hp, and repeatedly said so, what made you think that you knew better?" and no I am not a lawyer. The bottom line to this is if you are going to modify it and fly it outside the envelope that Van's has designed it for than you need to do the analysis and/or testing to verify that its safe in the expanded envelope. Lets go back to the fatigue discussions we had several times on this list. If there was a fatigue critical item in the engine compartment (i.e. engine mounts, engine mount support fittings aft of the firewall that are ending up with short edge distance in a lot of aircraft, etc) then going to 286 hp (10% increase) would halve the life of these items and at 315 hp you would have approximately only 1/4 of the life left. And maybe you allready ate away at half the life because your edge distances were to small. Now for someone going to 315 hp are you sure that those items are not critical? Niko ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 11:50:52 AM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" The short version is Van's was hit with a lawsuit around similar items in the past. They made modifications to the RV-10 mount in the past because their mockup was wrong. When they realized that Deems issue was because of the cold air sump, and others were in the pipeline, they kept their word to Deems and then issued the SB stopping any future modifications. Good thing Tim didn't let them know he had a Lightspeed ignition on his when he sent it back for modification, might be producing more than 260HP. Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Pascal Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 1:03 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB "we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value added service with your engine at no additional charge. > For those of you who have already taken delivery of your engine equipped > with Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for assistance in getting > your mounts modified." That is what I call customer service. Barrett just earn a point for my decision on the engine. It's the small things that help me make the big decisions. Maybe we all need to send something to Van's and have them publish a concrete reason for releasing something that surely has nothing to do with Safety. I may be wrong on this but when I see a Service Bulletin I take it to mean- improvement found that will make the part, or other safer. A more powerful engine may get me to go slightly faster but just how much faster than the 201MPH advertised.. no power means I get over the mountains sooner, it means I have it if I want it. Vic, as an example has more power and he has said more than once he rarely uses more than 75% on his plane.. but he has it if he needs it. I see adding 20-30hp as a good thing and Van's using a SB so people like Deems don't have their welder do extra work by re welding to fit anything different than a stock engine, versus Van's just working with Mattituck, Thunderbolt, Barrett and any other engine company out there driving their kits to work out a motor mount that fits them all- ie make the mount fit the largest sump out there without safety issues. It's been done for Tim, Deems and probably many more out there. It's experimental and it HAS been tested so just weld a different motor mount and skip the SB. I am still clueless to the motor mount but the point is I have seen two perspectives here. 1) we'll take care of the motor mounts as part of the engine price and 2) We won't modify nor support you if you don't use a stock engine. if it wasn't for #2 making the kit I would consider taking my business elsewhere, but I think back to why did Van's publish a SB? I really would like an explanantion for the logic with proof to back it up. More is not worse unless we were talking out of C/G weights or a turbine engine.. than I would understand.. John C (since you're so close), take a walk down to Van's and get us an explanation, if anyone can do it it's you! Pascal Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 7:08 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > > Wow Deems. Thanks for passing this along. There are a few points that > should be understood by individuals who are either new to the list or > are still in the homework phase of engine selection. Primarily, the > Barrett Precision Engines IO-540-X is not a "clone" engine. It is made > of all new Lycoming components sold from Lycoming to us as part of their > kit program. The only exception is the cold air induction sump, plenum > and pipes which Monty designed almost 20 years ago for use in the > experimental arena. In some cases, the compression ratio is increased > at the request of the airplane builder using propriety pistons. Oops, > and we use silicone rocker box gaskets made by Superior. Other than > that, all OEM certified parts are used on the 540. Of course the > IO-540-X is also available with the stock sump. > > There is a clearance issue with the mount. I do have a local source for > the modification needed on the mount and am happy to pass that along to > anyone who is interested or intends to use the modified IO-540-X with > cold air induction. This individual has modified the RV-10 engine mount > with the standard sump. We are meeting with him over the next few days, > and we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value > added service with your engine at no additional charge. > > For those of you who have already taken delivery of your engine equipped > with Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for assistance in getting > your mounts modified. > > Re: Van's advisement about going with standard hp, this is a debate for > you as builders, and each individual has different needs and wants. We > have always recommended moderation in increasing the hp. Van's has an > interest in selling you a stock Lycoming engine. I doubt very seriously > that he is selling them to you at cost! > > Thank for your continued support. > > Allen Barrett > Barrett Precision Engines, Inc. > 2870-B N. Sheridan Rd. > Tulsa, OK 74115 > (918) 835-1089 phone > (918) 835-1754 fax > www.barrettprecisionengines.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:02 PM > To: rv10-list@matronics.com > Subject: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > > Looks like Van's has issued another service bulletin, this time aimed at > > us "Hot Rodders" > > http://vansaircraft.com/pdf/10_motor_mount.pdf > > Scott was extremely helpful and modified my mount. Looks like they won't > > be doing any more! > > > Deems Davis # 406 > Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) > http://deemsrv10.com/ > > > ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 01:19:19 PM PST US From: Tim Olson Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Should I keep the nitrous system secret still, or can I tell people about it now. ;) It's too bad we had to see this whole clearance thread even come BACK with the prior history we had. One fix done well could have prevented a reoccurance. I still get a laugh out of one person saying that my engine wasn't a Lycoming engine, so maybe mine was different....it wasn't a Lycoming, it was an Aerosport. That always gives me the giggles. That's like saying, I don't drive any GM products....mine's made by Chevrolet. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote: > > The short version is Van's was hit with a lawsuit around similar items > in the past. They made modifications to the RV-10 mount in the past > because their mockup was wrong. When they realized that Deems issue was > because of the cold air sump, and others were in the pipeline, they kept > their word to Deems and then issued the SB stopping any future > modifications. Good thing Tim didn't let them know he had a Lightspeed > ignition on his when he sent it back for modification, might be > producing more than 260HP. > > Michael > ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 01:28:29 PM PST US From: MauleDriver Subject: Re: RV10-List: Rudder cable exits on tailcone Thanks Deems and everyone else who responded (I've been offline for a few days). I will be getting some of those Aircraft Spruce cable exits. Deems Davis wrote: > > I used parts from Aircraft Spruce, > http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/topages/ruddercable.php you can > get them from Cleveland, Wicks and others no doubt. > "DDD" is my shorthand for doing the "*D*rill, *D*ebur, and *D*imple" > Dance, as your have learned by now, you get LOTS of practice at this! > > Deems Davis # 406 > Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) > http://deemsrv10.com/ > > MauleDriver wrote: > >> >> Who used what here? I remember a recent post regarding 3rd party >> parts for this. I see something called 'DDD' in Mr Deems tailcone. >> Looking for advice here before I start riveting on the top skin. >> >> Thanks! >> > > ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 01:40:51 PM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB From: "McGANN, Ron" Pascal wrote:- ["we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value added service with your engine at no additional charge. > For those of you who have already taken delivery of your engine equipped > with Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for assistance in getting > your mounts modified." That is what I call customer service. Barrett just earn a point for my decision on the engine. It's the small things that help me make the big decisions.] I'm with Pascal. Unfortunately I am not inclined to send my mount from South Australia for modification. Does Allen provide a stock IO540 (ie w/o cold air induction) that does not require the mount mod, and at what cost? If you're out their Allen, please reply off list if you wish. cheers, Ron Selecting an engine ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 01:42:44 PM PST US From: Deems Davis Subject: RV10-List: Ring gear mounting bolts Allen, sorry about all the hoopla re engine mounts. They say any publicity is good publicity, hope this works that way for you. Looks like your response drew some favorable remarks. I have a question about what size/type of bolts to use for mounting the ring gear to the crank/prop flange. can you send me the size? Are there any special characteristics for these bolts? Any thread sealant or anything other than put em in and torque them? THANKS Deems > > ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 01:55:04 PM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB From: "McGANN, Ron" On the subject of engines, my reqts are pretty basic - standard IO540 D4A5 with one Mag replaced with a lightspeed plasma III. Ignoring the Lightspeed, what is the difference between buying a Vans Experimental 540 at $39,900 vs say an Aerosportpower at $40,300? $400 is not a lot, but what added value do the engine (re-)builders give beyond the standard engine provided by Vans? cheers, Ron -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron Sent: Wednesday, 24 January 2007 8:10 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Pascal wrote:- ["we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value added service with your engine at no additional charge. > For those of you who have already taken delivery of your engine equipped > with Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for assistance in getting > your mounts modified." That is what I call customer service. Barrett just earn a point for my decision on the engine. It's the small things that help me make the big decisions.] I'm with Pascal. Unfortunately I am not inclined to send my mount from South Australia for modification. Does Allen provide a stock IO540 (ie w/o cold air induction) that does not require the mount mod, and at what cost? If you're out their Allen, please reply off list if you wish. cheers, Ron Selecting an engine ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 02:10:32 PM PST US From: "ddddsp1@juno.com" Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Speaking of TIM...............where is his reply to CALM the storm here? For all the upset builders with built up frustration I would recommend grapping a sanding block, extra sandpaper and take it all out on some f iberglass in the SHOP. Who knows, by the time you relieve all the frust ration your wheel pants and cabin top may be completely smooth and ready for paint! I love this list........Educational and ENTERTAINING! We all started building these wonderful birds with very little knowledge an d lots of money.................and as we get close to the end of the pr ocess we boldly share on here our LOADS of expertise(loosely used term) and realize we have little money. Can life get any better? Oh yea, it could if I had a job. OK, rant mode off? DEAN 40449 ________________________________________________________________________ Interested in getting caught up on today's news? Click here to checkout USA TODAY Headlines. http://track.juno.com/s/lc?s=198954&u=http://www.usatoday.com/news/f ront.htm?csp=24

Speaking of TIM...............where is his reply to CALM the st orm here?  For all the upset builders with built up frustration I w ould recommend grapping a sanding block, extra sandpaper and t ake it all out on some fiberglass in the SHOP.  Who knows, by the t ime you relieve all the frustration your wheel pants and cabin top may b e completely smooth and ready for paint!   I love this list... .....Educational and ENTERTAINING!  We all started building these w onderful birds with very little knowledge and lots of money............. ....and as we get close to the end of the process we boldly share&n bsp;on here our LOADS of expertise(loosely used term) and realize w e have little money.  Can life get any better?  Oh yea, it cou ld if I had a job.

OK, rant mode off?

DEAN 40449



______________________ __________________________________________________
Interested in getting caught up on today's news?
Click here to checkout USA TODAY Headlines.
________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 02:15:28 PM PST US From: Deems Davis Subject: RV10-List: OOPS Looks like I did it AGAIN, This was intended to go to Allen directly, ....... measure twice drill once.......... Sorry, Deems > ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 03:24:13 PM PST US From: "Fred Williams, M.D." Subject: RV10-List: Vans Motor mount SB James : Thanks for your thoughtful reply. All of those issues were running through my thoughts. I understand Van's point of view and legal responsibilties. I am a gynecologist and well aware of the legal ramifications of something done "outside of the standard of care." After having talked with Mr Barrett at Oshgosh last year I am leaning toward having him build me an engine. I see a lot of benefits in his designs. The changes make sense. But again, not being an engineer and being truely able to back up with documentation any significant powerplant changes, I do not want to invest 150K on this airplane and have a paperwork fight to get it certified. I have followed the posts and know that if I put a "stock" Lycoming in my 10 I will have a great airplane that will last me for 20 years. I appreciate all of the input from the previous builders. It's discussion of these issues that move things forward and make it safer for all of us. We better know the questions to ask. I just read the last couple of posts before I sent this reply. All this is because of Deems pushing the wrong button? :) He sure knows how to stir the pot. Fred Williams Money rapidly leaving the checkbook Hey, the fuselage is here, fiberglass and all. ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 03:50:29 PM PST US From: "John Hasbrouck" Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB I,m so glad Van's issued that SB. I was getting tired of the counterweight discussion.... hehehe John Hasbrouck #40264 currently installing JATO bottles ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 03:56:35 PM PST US Subject: RV10-List: Cold Air Induction From: "Jon Reining" Bless me father for I have forgotten, it's been six months since I've been to Oshkosh... With all this discussion on engine mounts, cold air incudtion and cowls (and since it has been awhile since I learned why at Oshkosh) - what does cold air induction do for you? More horsepower? Less weight? Basically, how does it work and why is it good? If you get a Barrett Engine with Cold Air Induction, will it fit in a Holy Cowl? If you do one or the other, or both, what is the net impact on horsepower and speed? Jon Reining 40514 - tailcone Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=89901#89901 ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 03:59:06 PM PST US From: "Rob Wright" Subject: RV10-List: front wheel Anybody seen torque values for the front wheel halves? It's an AN4 bolt, so 50-70 plus drag should be correct. Just wondering if there are other guidelines. Rob Wright #392 Fuse & gear, waiting for interior paint to arrive. ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 04:08:35 PM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" Ya, still not as fun as the lawsuit discussion over on the RV proper list. That thing just won't die. It's all Bob's fault. :-) Michael Do not archive -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Hasbrouck Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 5:50 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB I,m so glad Van's issued that SB. I was getting tired of the counterweight discussion.... hehehe John Hasbrouck #40264 currently installing JATO bottles ________________________________ Message 36 ____________________________________ Time: 04:42:26 PM PST US From: Tim Olson Subject: RV10-List: Canada first Flight with James Cowl This is a post of an offline note I got from Barry Martin regarding David Corrigan's airplane and first flight in Canada. The photos were sent inline, but I'll attach them below. Not in order, in case the forum strips more than a certain number. Tim ------- The first Vans RV-10 to fly in Canada took to the air on January 18, 2007 from the Charlottetown Airport on PEI. After approximately 16 months of building and, much to the delight of owner and co-builder David Corrigan and co-builder Deryck Hickox, the RV-10 lifted off around noon in clear skies and light winds, although the temperature was a little cool, being around minus 5 degrees C. With the IO-540 purring like a kitten, the RV-10 was through circuit height before reaching the end of the runway. Test pilot Glen McLarty took the RV to 4000 feet over the airport to do the initial tests then headed north of the airport to finish the first round of tests. In communication with the ground crew, Glen relayed that the plane flew straight and level even with his hands off the stick. The RV-10 is equipped with a Lycoming IO-540 that was rebuilt by Aerotec in Halifax and has a MT 3 blade propeller up front. The aluminum portion of the kit was of top quality. Since this was a quick build kit the cockpit area and most of the wings were riveted together in the Philippines while everything aft of the cockpit was riveted in Charlottetown by Deryck, with bucking help from Dave, Terry Cooper and me. When both pieces were fitted, not a hole was out of place. The instrument panel was prefabricated by Gulf Coast Avionics in Florida and I did the wiring and hooked up the panel. The panel had a few bugs in it but most were found before the panel was installed. The panel is well equipped with an AF-2500 engine monitor, Garmin 430, Garmin SL-30, PS Engineering Audio Panel, Garmin GTX 327 Transponder, ATD-300 Traffic Watch and a TruTrak Autopilot. As all the instruments are electrically run, there is also a back-up battery. This is the first homebuilt project for Dave, locally known as The Flying Real Estate Agent, but Deryck has over 30 years experience building and restoring aircraft, much of it with the Canadian Warplane Heritage in Hamilton. Deryck, originally from PEI, moved back after retiring from Air Canada where he worked as an AME. Since starting the project, Deryck has formed D. Hickox Aviation Services specializing in aircraft restoration, fabric covering and home built aircraft. He can be contacted at xxx-xxx-xxxx (trimmed for privacy) if you have a project you would like him to build. Dave is hoping to have the 25 hours flown off before Sun n Fun this April. If you make it to Sun n Fun and see this beautiful RV-10 sitting there with the registration of C-FYYG, you will know that he was successful. do not archive ________________________________ Message 37 ____________________________________ Time: 04:45:12 PM PST US From: Tim Olson Subject: RV10-List: HID landing light review Found this on the "generic" RV matronics list today: For a review of HID landing lights, see http://www.preciseflight.com/ufiles/06March_Aviation_Consumer_HID_Article_Main.pdf -- Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive ________________________________ Message 38 ____________________________________ Time: 05:05:35 PM PST US Subject: RV10-List: Re: Elevator counterbalance weight From: "orchidman" jhasbrouck(at)woh.rr.com wrote: > Gary, > Actually the equipment needed for checking the counterbalances is quite > simple. For the elevators you need a rod attached to the elevators > extending forward to a point 37.5 inches from the hinge centerline with a 1 > lb weight attached at that point. ( 37.5 in/lb ). This is with both > elevators attached, the trim in place and the tips on. > ... Adjust counterweights so the elevators rest trailing > edge low. > John Hasbrouck > #40264 John, Thanks. I have added Vic Syracuses rudder trim so I am going to need to balance the rudder. So I guess what I need to do is after it is finished, I need to lay the VS and attached Rudder on their side. Then add a 30.8" rod to the top with a 1 lb weight. Should the rudder/VS lay flat or should the trailing edge of the rudder droop? The 30.8" would be measured at a 90 deg angle from the pivit point line. Is this correct? Gary -------- Gary Blankenbiller RV10 - # 40674 (N410GB reserved) do not archive Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=89918#89918 ________________________________ Message 39 ____________________________________ Time: 05:15:56 PM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cold Air Induction From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" Yes, yes, and yes. :-) The cold air induction basically removes the intake tubes from the oil sump (stock configuration) which heat soaks the incoming air. Hot air is less dense which means less HP. Barrett's sump is also magnesium which is lighter than the stock sump. As for the holy cowl, you need to go with the James cowl anyway which is made for the cold air unless you want to do a bunch of work on the stock cowl ala Gary Specketer. Figure on the credit for the stock cowl being around $800 by the time you subtract the various parts. Net impact, unknown at this time. The first couple of this combination are still coming out of the gate. I believe the cowl on something like an RV-4 gains you about 10 mph and the cold air induction is good for around 10 ponies. Michael -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jon Reining Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 5:56 PM Subject: RV10-List: Cold Air Induction Bless me father for I have forgotten, it's been six months since I've been to Oshkosh... With all this discussion on engine mounts, cold air incudtion and cowls (and since it has been awhile since I learned why at Oshkosh) - what does cold air induction do for you? More horsepower? Less weight? Basically, how does it work and why is it good? If you get a Barrett Engine with Cold Air Induction, will it fit in a Holy Cowl? If you do one or the other, or both, what is the net impact on horsepower and speed? Jon Reining 40514 - tailcone Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=89901#89901 ________________________________ Message 40 ____________________________________ Time: 05:21:42 PM PST US From: Deems Davis Subject: Re: RV10-List: Cold Air Induction Standard Lycoming induction has the induction air routed through the oil sump, the result is that the air intake to the cylinders is heated by the surrounding oil in the sump. Cold Air Induction takes ram air and routes it directly to each cylinders intake bypassing the oil sump. this requires a custom oil sump and hence the recent discussion. If you remember your pilot training, Cold air is more dense and produces a stronger air charge going into the cylinder, which results in more manifold pressure and more power (OOPS there I go again hot rodding!). Its kind of like putting a booster on your engine without adding any moving parts. Free power (well almost free) !. The answer as to does it add horsepower depends on who's asking, but I'm VERY happy with the results of my Dyno run ! :-) Less weight : marginally but not enough to be concerned with. Holy Cowl fit : Will James has made an RV-10 lower cowl that fits the BPE Cold air induction. He also has the Holy cowl for standard induction. Net effect: Horsepower increases, Allen can tell you how much if you contact him. All things being equal speed should increase, but it takes a lot more ponies to equal 1 additional knot. (I'm not sure what the ratio is but it's definitely NOT 1:1. Since there are no RV-10's flying with cold air yet there are no performance numbers to report only 'hopes'. Perhaps later this year. Deems Davis # 406 Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) http://deemsrv10.com/ Jon Reining wrote: > >Bless me father for I have forgotten, it's been six months since I've been to Oshkosh... > >With all this discussion on engine mounts, cold air incudtion and cowls (and since it has been awhile since I learned why at Oshkosh) - what does cold air induction do for you? More horsepower? Less weight? Basically, how does it work and why is it good? > >If you get a Barrett Engine with Cold Air Induction, will it fit in a Holy Cowl? > >If you do one or the other, or both, what is the net impact on horsepower and speed? > >Jon Reining >40514 - tailcone > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=89901#89901 > > > > ________________________________ Message 41 ____________________________________ Time: 05:59:39 PM PST US From: "John Hasbrouck" Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Elevator counterbalance weight Gary, I'm not sure if the rudder trim affects the balance requirements or not. I'd check with Van's tech support, any answer I'd give would be a guess.... John Hasbrouck ________________________________ Message 42 ____________________________________ Time: 06:03:09 PM PST US From: "Mark Ritter" Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Is there anything these guys like about Vans? Seems like there are 66+ of us out there flying RV-10's that are very pleased with the kit and the support we have received from Vans. Mark (N410MR Flying) >From: "John Hasbrouck" >To: >Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 18:49:57 -0500 > > >I,m so glad Van's issued that SB. I was getting tired of the counterweight >discussion.... hehehe > >John Hasbrouck >#40264 >currently installing JATO bottles > > _________________________________________________________________ FREE online classifieds from Windows Live Expo buy and sell with people you know ________________________________ Message 43 ____________________________________ Time: 06:17:46 PM PST US From: "Mark Ritter" Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Michael, Got anything positive to say about a great kit? A few more tacky comments like this and we can consider the source. Mark (N410MR Flying) >From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" >To: >Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 13:49:38 -0600 > > > > The short version is Van's was hit with a lawsuit around similar items >in the past. They made modifications to the RV-10 mount in the past >because their mockup was wrong. When they realized that Deems issue was >because of the cold air sump, and others were in the pipeline, they kept >their word to Deems and then issued the SB stopping any future >modifications. Good thing Tim didn't let them know he had a Lightspeed >ignition on his when he sent it back for modification, might be >producing more than 260HP. > >Michael > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com >[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Pascal >Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 1:03 PM >To: rv10-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > >"we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value >added service with your engine at no additional charge. > > For those of you who have already taken delivery of your engine >equipped > > with Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for assistance in getting > > your mounts modified." > >That is what I call customer service. Barrett just earn a point for my >decision on the engine. It's the small things that help me make the big >decisions. > >Maybe we all need to send something to Van's and have them publish a >concrete reason for releasing something that surely has nothing to do >with >Safety. I may be wrong on this but when I see a Service Bulletin I take >it >to mean- improvement found that will make the part, or other safer. A >more >powerful engine may get me to go slightly faster but just how much >faster >than the 201MPH advertised.. no power means I get over the mountains >sooner, >it means I have it if I want it. Vic, as an example has more power and >he >has said more than once he rarely uses more than 75% on his plane.. but >he >has it if he needs it. I see adding 20-30hp as a good thing and Van's >using >a SB so people like Deems don't have their welder do extra work by re >welding to fit anything different than a stock engine, versus Van's just > >working with Mattituck, Thunderbolt, Barrett and any other engine >company >out there driving their kits to work out a motor mount that fits them >all- >ie make the mount fit the largest sump out there without safety issues. >It's >been done for Tim, Deems and probably many more out there. It's >experimental >and it HAS been tested so just weld a different motor mount and skip the >SB. > >I am still clueless to the motor mount but the point is I have seen two > >perspectives here. 1) we'll take care of the motor mounts as part of the > >engine price and 2) We won't modify nor support you if you don't use a >stock >engine. > >if it wasn't for #2 making the kit I would consider taking my business >elsewhere, but I think back to why did Van's publish a SB? I really >would >like an explanantion for the logic with proof to back it up. More is not > >worse unless we were talking out of C/G weights or a turbine engine.. >than I >would understand.. > >John C (since you're so close), take a walk down to Van's and get us an >explanation, if anyone can do it it's you! > >Pascal > > >To: >Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 7:08 AM >Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > > > > > > > Wow Deems. Thanks for passing this along. There are a few points >that > > should be understood by individuals who are either new to the list or > > are still in the homework phase of engine selection. Primarily, the > > Barrett Precision Engines IO-540-X is not a "clone" engine. It is >made > > of all new Lycoming components sold from Lycoming to us as part of >their > > kit program. The only exception is the cold air induction sump, >plenum > > and pipes which Monty designed almost 20 years ago for use in the > > experimental arena. In some cases, the compression ratio is increased > > at the request of the airplane builder using propriety pistons. Oops, > > and we use silicone rocker box gaskets made by Superior. Other than > > that, all OEM certified parts are used on the 540. Of course the > > IO-540-X is also available with the stock sump. > > > > There is a clearance issue with the mount. I do have a local source >for > > the modification needed on the mount and am happy to pass that along >to > > anyone who is interested or intends to use the modified IO-540-X with > > cold air induction. This individual has modified the RV-10 engine >mount > > with the standard sump. We are meeting with him over the next few >days, > > and we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value > > added service with your engine at no additional charge. > > > > For those of you who have already taken delivery of your engine >equipped > > with Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for assistance in getting > > your mounts modified. > > > > Re: Van's advisement about going with standard hp, this is a debate >for > > you as builders, and each individual has different needs and wants. >We > > have always recommended moderation in increasing the hp. Van's has an > > interest in selling you a stock Lycoming engine. I doubt very >seriously > > that he is selling them to you at cost! > > > > Thank for your continued support. > > > > Allen Barrett > > Barrett Precision Engines, Inc. > > 2870-B N. Sheridan Rd. > > Tulsa, OK 74115 > > (918) 835-1089 phone > > (918) 835-1754 fax > > www.barrettprecisionengines.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com > > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:02 PM > > To: rv10-list@matronics.com > > Subject: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > > > > > Looks like Van's has issued another service bulletin, this time aimed >at > > > > us "Hot Rodders" > > > > http://vansaircraft.com/pdf/10_motor_mount.pdf > > > > Scott was extremely helpful and modified my mount. Looks like they >won't > > > > be doing any more! > > > > > > Deems Davis # 406 > > Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) > > http://deemsrv10.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Laugh, share and connect with Windows Live Messenger ________________________________ Message 44 ____________________________________ Time: 06:36:09 PM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" That's quite a leap from some complaints about a couple specific things. I guess we should just bow to Van's ability to tell us how things should be and be happy with that? Some people want improvements and some people are content to follow the plans and recommendations to the T. Nothing wrong with either method. Michael Fitting the supercharger Do not archive -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Ritter Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 8:03 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Is there anything these guys like about Vans? Seems like there are 66+ of us out there flying RV-10's that are very pleased with the kit and the support we have received from Vans. Mark (N410MR Flying) >From: "John Hasbrouck" >To: >Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 18:49:57 -0500 > > >I,m so glad Van's issued that SB. I was getting tired of the counterweight >discussion.... hehehe > >John Hasbrouck >#40264 >currently installing JATO bottles > > _________________________________________________________________ FREE online classifieds from Windows Live Expo - buy and sell with people you know ________________________________ Message 45 ____________________________________ Time: 06:38:57 PM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" I'm sorry, what exactly was tacky about this. It's basically what Scott Risen told me on the phone this morning. Do not archive -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Ritter Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 8:17 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Michael, Got anything positive to say about a great kit? A few more tacky comments like this and we can consider the source. Mark (N410MR Flying) >From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" >To: >Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 13:49:38 -0600 > > > > The short version is Van's was hit with a lawsuit around similar items >in the past. They made modifications to the RV-10 mount in the past >because their mockup was wrong. When they realized that Deems issue was >because of the cold air sump, and others were in the pipeline, they kept >their word to Deems and then issued the SB stopping any future >modifications. Good thing Tim didn't let them know he had a Lightspeed >ignition on his when he sent it back for modification, might be >producing more than 260HP. > >Michael > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com >[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Pascal >Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 1:03 PM >To: rv10-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > >"we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value >added service with your engine at no additional charge. > > For those of you who have already taken delivery of your engine >equipped > > with Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for assistance in getting > > your mounts modified." > >That is what I call customer service. Barrett just earn a point for my >decision on the engine. It's the small things that help me make the big >decisions. > >Maybe we all need to send something to Van's and have them publish a >concrete reason for releasing something that surely has nothing to do >with >Safety. I may be wrong on this but when I see a Service Bulletin I take >it >to mean- improvement found that will make the part, or other safer. A >more >powerful engine may get me to go slightly faster but just how much >faster >than the 201MPH advertised.. no power means I get over the mountains >sooner, >it means I have it if I want it. Vic, as an example has more power and >he >has said more than once he rarely uses more than 75% on his plane.. but >he >has it if he needs it. I see adding 20-30hp as a good thing and Van's >using >a SB so people like Deems don't have their welder do extra work by re >welding to fit anything different than a stock engine, versus Van's just > >working with Mattituck, Thunderbolt, Barrett and any other engine >company >out there driving their kits to work out a motor mount that fits them >all- >ie make the mount fit the largest sump out there without safety issues. >It's >been done for Tim, Deems and probably many more out there. It's >experimental >and it HAS been tested so just weld a different motor mount and skip the >SB. > >I am still clueless to the motor mount but the point is I have seen two > >perspectives here. 1) we'll take care of the motor mounts as part of the > >engine price and 2) We won't modify nor support you if you don't use a >stock >engine. > >if it wasn't for #2 making the kit I would consider taking my business >elsewhere, but I think back to why did Van's publish a SB? I really >would >like an explanantion for the logic with proof to back it up. More is not > >worse unless we were talking out of C/G weights or a turbine engine.. >than I >would understand.. > >John C (since you're so close), take a walk down to Van's and get us an >explanation, if anyone can do it it's you! > >Pascal > > >To: >Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 7:08 AM >Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > > > > > > > Wow Deems. Thanks for passing this along. There are a few points >that > > should be understood by individuals who are either new to the list or > > are still in the homework phase of engine selection. Primarily, the > > Barrett Precision Engines IO-540-X is not a "clone" engine. It is >made > > of all new Lycoming components sold from Lycoming to us as part of >their > > kit program. The only exception is the cold air induction sump, >plenum > > and pipes which Monty designed almost 20 years ago for use in the > > experimental arena. In some cases, the compression ratio is increased > > at the request of the airplane builder using propriety pistons. Oops, > > and we use silicone rocker box gaskets made by Superior. Other than > > that, all OEM certified parts are used on the 540. Of course the > > IO-540-X is also available with the stock sump. > > > > There is a clearance issue with the mount. I do have a local source >for > > the modification needed on the mount and am happy to pass that along >to > > anyone who is interested or intends to use the modified IO-540-X with > > cold air induction. This individual has modified the RV-10 engine >mount > > with the standard sump. We are meeting with him over the next few >days, > > and we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value > > added service with your engine at no additional charge. > > > > For those of you who have already taken delivery of your engine >equipped > > with Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for assistance in getting > > your mounts modified. > > > > Re: Van's advisement about going with standard hp, this is a debate >for > > you as builders, and each individual has different needs and wants. >We > > have always recommended moderation in increasing the hp. Van's has an > > interest in selling you a stock Lycoming engine. I doubt very >seriously > > that he is selling them to you at cost! > > > > Thank for your continued support. > > > > Allen Barrett > > Barrett Precision Engines, Inc. > > 2870-B N. Sheridan Rd. > > Tulsa, OK 74115 > > (918) 835-1089 phone > > (918) 835-1754 fax > > www.barrettprecisionengines.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com > > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:02 PM > > To: rv10-list@matronics.com > > Subject: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > > > > > Looks like Van's has issued another service bulletin, this time aimed >at > > > > us "Hot Rodders" > > > > http://vansaircraft.com/pdf/10_motor_mount.pdf > > > > Scott was extremely helpful and modified my mount. Looks like they >won't > > > > be doing any more! > > > > > > Deems Davis # 406 > > Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) > > http://deemsrv10.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Laugh, share and connect with Windows Live Messenger ________________________________ Message 46 ____________________________________ Time: 06:58:30 PM PST US From: "John Hasbrouck" Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Mark Seems to me that Van's is simply saying that they will provide one motor mount that works with the engines they have available ( and many other Lycomings as well ) but don't expect them to modify it if it doesn't work for a particular engine. That's the builders responsibility. Never in the Service LETTER ( not bulletin ) is the word prohibited used. Van's doesn't recommend 260+ HP but you can do whatever you want. It's experimental, you're the builder, have at it. Hang a PT6 on the nose if you want but Van's isn't going to offer any help. As it should be IMHO. The DAR is not responsible for your choices of modifications either only that they are installed according to generally accepted practice and conform to W & B specs. He'll sign off on the PT6, give you a 40 hour flyoff, a look of concern and if you haven't killed yourself in that time you can continue to phase 2. That's the great thing about the experimental category. Indeed this is a great kit and the fact that 60+ are flying so soon after initial introduction proves it... John Hasbrouck #40264 ________________________________ Message 47 ____________________________________ Time: 07:00:23 PM PST US From: cloudvalley@comcast.net Subject: Re: RV10-List: Cold Air Induction Hello, We are nor anywhere near the engine stage yet, but my wife and I would like to know if Vans will give you credit on their cowl, if one decides to get a Holy Cowl. Also, how do you get in touch with Will James. Thank you. Brian and Ruth Preston #40666 -------------- Original message -------------- From: Deems Davis > > Standard Lycoming induction has the induction air routed through the oil > sump, the result is that the air intake to the cylinders is heated by > the surrounding oil in the sump. Cold Air Induction takes ram air and > routes it directly to each cylinders intake bypassing the oil sump. this > requires a custom oil sump and hence the recent discussion. If you > remember your pilot training, Cold air is more dense and produces a > stronger air charge going into the cylinder, which results in more > manifold pressure and more power (OOPS there I go again hot rodding!). > Its kind of like putting a booster on your engine without adding any > moving parts. Free power (well almost free) !. The answer as to does it > add horsepower depends on who's asking, but I'm VERY happy with the > results of my Dyno run ! :-) > Less weight : marginally but not enough to be concerned with. > Holy Cowl fit : Will James has made an RV-10 lower cowl that fits the > BPE Cold air induction. He also has the Holy cowl for standard induction. > Net effect: Horsepower increases, Allen can tell you how much if you > contact him. All things being equal speed should increase, but it takes > a lot more ponies to equal 1 additional knot. (I'm not sure what the > ratio is but it's definitely NOT 1:1. Since there are no RV-10's flying > with cold air yet there are no performance numbers to report only > 'hopes'. Perhaps later this year. > > Deems Davis # 406 > Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) > http://deemsrv10.com/ > > Jon Reining wrote: > > > > > >Bless me father for I have forgotten, it's been six months since I've been to > Oshkosh... > > > >With all this discussion on engine mounts, cold air incudtion and cowls (and > since it has been awhile since I learned why at Oshkosh) - what does cold air > induction do for you? More horsepower? Less weight? Basically, how does it > work and why is it good? > > > >If you get a Barrett Engine with Cold Air Induction, will it fit in a Holy > Cowl? > > > >If you do one or the other, or both, what is the net impact on horsepower and > speed? > > > >Jon Reining > >40514 - tailcone > > > > > > > > > >Read this topic online here: > > > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=89901#89901 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Hello, We are nor anywhere near the engine stage yet, but my wife and I would like to know if Vans will give you credit on their cowl, if one decides to get a Holy Cowl. Also, how do you get in touch with Will James. Thank you.
Brian and Ruth Preston
#40666
 
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>

> --> RV10-List message posted by: Deems Davis
>
> Standard Lycoming induction has the induction air routed through the oil
> sump, the result is that the air intake to the cylinders is heated by
> the surrounding oil in the sump. Cold Air Induction takes ram air and
> routes it directly to each cylinders intake bypassing the oil sump. this
> requires a custom oil sump and hence the recent discussion. If you
> remember your pilot training, Cold air is more dense and produces a
> stronger air charge going into the cylinder, which results in more
> manifold pressure and more power (OOPS there I go again hot rodding!).
> Its kind of like putting a booster on your engine without adding any
> ; movi ng parts. Free power (well almost free) !. The answer as to does it
> add horsepower depends on who's asking, but I'm VERY happy with the
> results of my Dyno run ! :-)
> Less weight : marginally but not enough to be concerned with.
> Holy Cowl fit : Will James has made an RV-10 lower cowl that fits the
> BPE Cold air induction. He also has the Holy cowl for standard induction.
> Net effect: Horsepower increases, Allen can tell you how much if you
> contact him. All things being equal speed should increase, but it takes
> a lot more ponies to equal 1 additional knot. (I'm not sure what the
> ratio is but it's definitely NOT 1:1. Since there are no RV-10's flying
> with cold air yet there are no performance numbers to report only
> 'hopes'. Perhaps later this year.
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! )
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>
> Jon Reining wro te: >
> >--> RV10-List message posted by: "Jon Reining"
>
> >
> >Bless me father for I have forgotten, it's been six months since I've been to
> Oshkosh...
> >
> >With all this discussion on engine mounts, cold air incudtion and cowls (and
> since it has been awhile since I learned why at Oshkosh) - what does cold air
> induction do for you? More horsepower? Less weight? Basically, how does it
> work and why is it good?
> >
> >If you get a Barrett Engine with Cold Air Induction, will it fit in a Holy
> Cowl?
> >
> >If you do one or the other, or both, what is the net impact on horsepower and
> speed?
> >
> >Jon Reining
> >40514 - tailcone
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Read this topic online here:
> >
> >http://for ums.ma >>
>
>
________________________________ Message 48 ____________________________________ Time: 07:11:22 PM PST US From: "Mark Ritter" Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Michael, "Good thing Tim didn't let them know he has a Lightspeed ignition on his when he sent it back for modification, might be producing more than 260 HP" seems a bit over the edge and close to being tacky. I'm just happy I don't have as many as folks telling me how to run my business as Van seems to have regarding this last motor mount war. I built my Rv-10 with the motto "if it dosesn't fit make it fit" after all you are the builder. Mark >From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" >To: >Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 20:37:51 -0600 > > > >I'm sorry, what exactly was tacky about this. It's basically what Scott >Risen told me on the phone this morning. > >Do not archive > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com >[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Ritter >Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 8:17 PM >To: rv10-list@matronics.com >Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > >Michael, > >Got anything positive to say about a great kit? A few more tacky >comments >like this and we can consider the source. > >Mark (N410MR Flying) > > > >From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" > >To: > >Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 13:49:38 -0600 > > > > > > > > The short version is Van's was hit with a lawsuit around similar >items > >in the past. They made modifications to the RV-10 mount in the past > >because their mockup was wrong. When they realized that Deems issue >was > >because of the cold air sump, and others were in the pipeline, they >kept > >their word to Deems and then issued the SB stopping any future > >modifications. Good thing Tim didn't let them know he had a Lightspeed > >ignition on his when he sent it back for modification, might be > >producing more than 260HP. > > > >Michael > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com > >[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Pascal > >Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 1:03 PM > >To: rv10-list@matronics.com > >Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > > > > >"we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value > >added service with your engine at no additional charge. > > > For those of you who have already taken delivery of your engine > >equipped > > > with Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for assistance in >getting > > > your mounts modified." > > > >That is what I call customer service. Barrett just earn a point for my > >decision on the engine. It's the small things that help me make the big > >decisions. > > > >Maybe we all need to send something to Van's and have them publish a > >concrete reason for releasing something that surely has nothing to do > >with > >Safety. I may be wrong on this but when I see a Service Bulletin I take > >it > >to mean- improvement found that will make the part, or other safer. A > >more > >powerful engine may get me to go slightly faster but just how much > >faster > >than the 201MPH advertised.. no power means I get over the mountains > >sooner, > >it means I have it if I want it. Vic, as an example has more power and > >he > >has said more than once he rarely uses more than 75% on his plane.. but > >he > >has it if he needs it. I see adding 20-30hp as a good thing and Van's > >using > >a SB so people like Deems don't have their welder do extra work by re > >welding to fit anything different than a stock engine, versus Van's >just > > > >working with Mattituck, Thunderbolt, Barrett and any other engine > >company > >out there driving their kits to work out a motor mount that fits them > >all- > >ie make the mount fit the largest sump out there without safety issues. > >It's > >been done for Tim, Deems and probably many more out there. It's > >experimental > >and it HAS been tested so just weld a different motor mount and skip >the > >SB. > > > >I am still clueless to the motor mount but the point is I have seen >two > > > >perspectives here. 1) we'll take care of the motor mounts as part of >the > > > >engine price and 2) We won't modify nor support you if you don't use a > >stock > >engine. > > > >if it wasn't for #2 making the kit I would consider taking my business > >elsewhere, but I think back to why did Van's publish a SB? I really > >would > >like an explanantion for the logic with proof to back it up. More is >not > > > >worse unless we were talking out of C/G weights or a turbine engine.. > >than I > >would understand.. > > > >John C (since you're so close), take a walk down to Van's and get us an > >explanation, if anyone can do it it's you! > > > >Pascal > > > > > >To: > >Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 7:08 AM > >Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wow Deems. Thanks for passing this along. There are a few points > >that > > > should be understood by individuals who are either new to the list >or > > > are still in the homework phase of engine selection. Primarily, the > > > Barrett Precision Engines IO-540-X is not a "clone" engine. It is > >made > > > of all new Lycoming components sold from Lycoming to us as part of > >their > > > kit program. The only exception is the cold air induction sump, > >plenum > > > and pipes which Monty designed almost 20 years ago for use in the > > > experimental arena. In some cases, the compression ratio is >increased > > > at the request of the airplane builder using propriety pistons. >Oops, > > > and we use silicone rocker box gaskets made by Superior. Other than > > > that, all OEM certified parts are used on the 540. Of course the > > > IO-540-X is also available with the stock sump. > > > > > > There is a clearance issue with the mount. I do have a local source > >for > > > the modification needed on the mount and am happy to pass that along > >to > > > anyone who is interested or intends to use the modified IO-540-X >with > > > cold air induction. This individual has modified the RV-10 engine > >mount > > > with the standard sump. We are meeting with him over the next few > >days, > > > and we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value > > > added service with your engine at no additional charge. > > > > > > For those of you who have already taken delivery of your engine > >equipped > > > with Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for assistance in >getting > > > your mounts modified. > > > > > > Re: Van's advisement about going with standard hp, this is a debate > >for > > > you as builders, and each individual has different needs and wants. > >We > > > have always recommended moderation in increasing the hp. Van's has >an > > > interest in selling you a stock Lycoming engine. I doubt very > >seriously > > > that he is selling them to you at cost! > > > > > > Thank for your continued support. > > > > > > Allen Barrett > > > Barrett Precision Engines, Inc. > > > 2870-B N. Sheridan Rd. > > > Tulsa, OK 74115 > > > (918) 835-1089 phone > > > (918) 835-1754 fax > > > www.barrettprecisionengines.com > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com > > > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems >Davis > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 10:02 PM > > > To: rv10-list@matronics.com > > > Subject: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > > > > > > > > Looks like Van's has issued another service bulletin, this time >aimed > >at > > > > > > us "Hot Rodders" > > > > > > http://vansaircraft.com/pdf/10_motor_mount.pdf > > > > > > Scott was extremely helpful and modified my mount. Looks like they > >won't > > > > > > be doing any more! > > > > > > > > > Deems Davis # 406 > > > Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) > > > http://deemsrv10.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________ >Laugh, share and connect with Windows Live Messenger > > _________________________________________________________________ Search for grocery stores. Find gratitude. Turn a simple search into something more. http://click4thecause.live.com/search/charity/default.aspx?source=hmemtagline_gratitude&FORM=WLMTAG ________________________________ Message 49 ____________________________________ Time: 07:12:49 PM PST US From: Deems Davis Subject: Re: RV10-List: Cold Air Induction Yes, Van's will give you a credit. Try this: http://www.jamesaircraft.com/ Deems Davis # 406 Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) http://deemsrv10.com/ cloudvalley@comcast.net wrote: > Hello, We are nor anywhere near the engine stage yet, but my wife and > I would like to know if Vans will give you credit on their cowl, if > one decides to get a Holy Cowl. Also, how do you get in touch with > Will James. Thank you. > Brian and Ruth Preston > #40666 > > > - > >** >** > ________________________________ Message 50 ____________________________________ Time: 07:14:34 PM PST US From: "Mark Ritter" Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB John, Well put. Mark >From: "John Hasbrouck" >To: >Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 21:57:52 -0500 > > >Mark > Seems to me that Van's is simply saying that they will provide one >motor mount that works with the engines they have available ( and many >other Lycomings as well ) but don't expect them to modify it if it doesn't >work for a particular engine. That's the builders responsibility. Never >in the Service LETTER ( not bulletin ) is the word prohibited used. Van's >doesn't recommend 260+ HP but you can do whatever you want. It's >experimental, you're the builder, have at it. Hang a PT6 on the nose if >you want but Van's isn't going to offer any help. As it should be IMHO. >The DAR is not responsible for your choices of modifications either only >that they are installed according to generally accepted practice and >conform to W & B specs. He'll sign off on the PT6, give you a 40 hour >flyoff, a look of concern and if you haven't killed yourself in that time >you can continue to phase 2. That's the great thing about the experimental >category. Indeed this is a great kit and the fact that 60+ are flying so >soon after initial introduction proves it... > >John Hasbrouck >#40264 > > _________________________________________________________________ The MSN Entertainment Guide to Golden Globes is here. Get all the scoop. http://tv.msn.com/tv/globes2007/?icid=nctagline2 ________________________________ Message 51 ____________________________________ Time: 07:22:15 PM PST US Subject: RE: RV10-List: Cold Air Induction From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" Yes, they will credit you for anything you want to delete from the kits including the cowl. They do tell you if you order the cowl after the fact expect the price to be a great deal higher. Makes sense as it keeps them from having to deal with people that change their minds after it shipped. As I said earlier, it's about an $800 difference. You can get in touch with Will at www.jamesaircraft.com. Michael From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of cloudvalley@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 9:00 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Cold Air Induction Hello, We are nor anywhere near the engine stage yet, but my wife and I would like to know if Vans will give you credit on their cowl, if one decides to get a Holy Cowl. Also, how do you get in touch with Will James. Thank you. Brian and Ruth Preston #40666 -------------- Original message -------------- From: Deems Davis > > Standard Lycoming induction has the induction air routed through the oil > sump, the result is that the air intake to the cylinders is heated by > the surrounding oil in the sump. Cold Air Induction takes ram air and > routes it directly to each cylinders intake bypassing the oil sump. this > requires a custom oil sump and hence the recent discussion. If you > remember your pilot training, Cold air is more dense and produces a > stronger air charge going into the cylinder, which results in more > manifold pressure and more power (OOPS there I go again hot rodding!). > Its kind of like putting a booster on your engine without adding any > ; movi ng parts. Free power (well almost free) !. The answer as to does it > add horsepower depends on who's asking, but I'm VERY happy with the > results of my Dyno run ! :-) > Less weight : marginally but not enough to be concerned with. > Holy Cowl fit : Will James has made an RV-10 lower cowl that fits the > BPE Cold air induction. He also has the Holy cowl for standard induction. > Net effect: Horsepower increases, Allen can tell you how much if you > contact him. All things being equal speed should increase, but it takes > a lot more ponies to equal 1 additional knot. (I'm not sure what the > ratio is but it's definitely NOT 1:1. Since there are no RV-10's flying > with cold air yet there are no performance numbers to report only > 'hopes'. Perhaps later this year. > > Deems Davis # 406 > Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! ) > http://deemsrv10.com/ > > Jon Reining wro te: > > > > > >Bless me father for I have forgotten, it's been six months since I've been to > Oshkosh... > > > >With all this discussion on engine mounts, cold air incudtion and cowls (and > since it has been awhile since I learned why at Oshkosh) - what does cold air > induction do for you? More horsepower? Less weight? Basically, how does it > work and why is it good? > > > >If you get a Barrett Engine with Cold Air Induction, will it fit in a Holy > Cowl? > > > >If you do one or the other, or both, what is the net impact on horsepower and > speed? > > > >Jon Reining > >40514 - tailcone > > > > > > > > > >Read this topic online here: > > > >http://for ums.ma >> > > ________________________________ Message 52 ____________________________________ Time: 07:29:23 PM PST US From: "Mark Ritter" Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB It seems to me that its the sellers choice as to whether or not they implement "suggested improvements" to their product. The market place will eventually decide the issue. We do have the ability to make what we consider to be improvements during the building process. Most of us have made numerous changes (improvements) and keep on trucking without berating Van for not doing it first. The basic kit is a great starting point to built whatever comes to mind. Mark >From: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" >To: >Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 20:35:48 -0600 > > > >That's quite a leap from some complaints about a couple specific things. >I guess we should just bow to Van's ability to tell us how things should >be and be happy with that? Some people want improvements and some >people are content to follow the plans and recommendations to the T. >Nothing wrong with either method. > >Michael >Fitting the supercharger >Do not archive > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com >[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Ritter >Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 8:03 PM >To: rv10-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > >Is there anything these guys like about Vans? Seems like there are 66+ >of >us out there flying RV-10's that are very pleased with the kit and the >support we have received from Vans. > >Mark (N410MR Flying) > > > >From: "John Hasbrouck" > >To: > >Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > >Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 18:49:57 -0500 > > > > > > >I,m so glad Van's issued that SB. I was getting tired of the >counterweight > >discussion.... hehehe > > > >John Hasbrouck > >#40264 > >currently installing JATO bottles > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________ >FREE online classifieds from Windows Live Expo - buy and sell with >people >you know > > _________________________________________________________________ Invite your Hotmail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces ________________________________ Message 53 ____________________________________ Time: 07:38:13 PM PST US From: "Pascal" Subject: happy with Van's rant- was RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB I think there is nothing like a lively debate on Primers and in this case the engine mount SB, but I know there are a whole lot of us that are set on Van's. I followed a high level composite company for a few years. I was set on a 4 seater and in a way it is no different than what I am doing now. I am getting a sense of is this the right kit for me. I am still around and pretty sure I'll be starting this kit in the next couple of months, this is only after extensive research and following this forum for less than 1 year. I had 3 years at the other forum and finally gave up on it.. Largely because most of the builders complained about one thing or another and somehow the price of the kit doubled with carbon and quickerbuild and other nice upgrades thrown in. I think that last time I looked the kit was now 82K, it was 38K when I started looking into it in 1998. So Van's doesn't want to cater to each of us and our individual engine choice (not including their stock). Fine! Barret has his solution- so BPA is solved, Thunderbolt is competitive in this market enough that they might do something too, and so on but the good news is the rest of us who want a stock engine from Vans don't need to worry that the cost will go up more than 3% next year as a result of the few. Why am I going to build a RV-10? many reasons. Mark Chamberlain for one. He invited me, never knowing who I was, to see and fly and yes, fly in his plane. I never had anyone, and I saw over 12 of the composites from the other company, offer to fly me in the plane. Than there's Jeff Carpenter, who took a morning to go over the kit with me when he had pressing engagements to get to, theres Tim, and Deems, and John and most of you. Basically this group of builders is solid and we feel comfortable enough to speak our minds, in jest and seriously. Let's remember we are all in this for the same reason. A solid company with 30 years experience building the largest fleet of experimentals out there. I am NOT building this plane to be unique or impress my neighbors, I'm building this plane, a Van's, because I know they do care about the builders, and they have the record to prove it. Nothing wrong with venting on delayed shipments and expensive shipping for 2c items from Van's or SB's that we are not in support of- we should be here to support each other as I know, I too will be frustrated and want someone who understands my frustration to be there for me. We are! Lastly, Vendor support- I see what Barrett did by offering to resolve this issue as excellent. Jon's response, from Thunderbolt, was professional and shows he too is in this to make it work for all of us and Lycoming and I also took that he understood Van's SB. Stein last month getting on to comfort those stuck in the D2AV debacle and Mike from Cleveland chiming in at times as well. They all may be in for the business, but they care about the builders too! All in all we are a great group of builders with great vendors who are right there with us building and supporting us. I think Van's has the right to publish as many SB's as they wish, as long as they don't try to keep everyone happy and have an affordable kit be out of reach for the rest of those who just want to build it! And with this, I end my rant! Pascal ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Ritter" Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 6:02 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > Is there anything these guys like about Vans? Seems like there are 66+ of > us out there flying RV-10's that are very pleased with the kit and the > support we have received from Vans. > > Mark (N410MR Flying) > > >>From: "John Hasbrouck" >>To: >>Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB >>Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 18:49:57 -0500 >> >> >>I,m so glad Van's issued that SB. I was getting tired of the >>counterweight discussion.... hehehe >> >>John Hasbrouck >>#40264 >>currently installing JATO bottles >> >> >> >> >> >> > > _________________________________________________________________ > FREE online classifieds from Windows Live Expo - buy and sell with people > you know > > > ________________________________ Message 54 ____________________________________ Time: 07:47:53 PM PST US From: "Jesse Saint" Subject: RE: RV10-List: Canada first Flight with James Cowl Is this the first flying Holy Cowl? I am waiting for some performance numbers. Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse@saintaviation.com www.saintaviation.com Cell: 352-427-0285 Fax: 815-377-3694 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 7:38 PM Subject: RV10-List: Canada first Flight with James Cowl This is a post of an offline note I got from Barry Martin regarding David Corrigan's airplane and first flight in Canada. The photos were sent inline, but I'll attach them below. Not in order, in case the forum strips more than a certain number. Tim ------- The first Vans RV-10 to fly in Canada took to the air on January 18, 2007 from the Charlottetown Airport on PEI. After approximately 16 months of building and, much to the delight of owner and co-builder David Corrigan and co-builder Deryck Hickox, the RV-10 lifted off around noon in clear skies and light winds, although the temperature was a little cool, being around minus 5 degrees C. With the IO-540 purring like a kitten, the RV-10 was through circuit height before reaching the end of the runway. Test pilot Glen McLarty took the RV to 4000 feet over the airport to do the initial tests then headed north of the airport to finish the first round of tests. In communication with the ground crew, Glen relayed that the plane flew straight and level even with his hands off the stick. The RV-10 is equipped with a Lycoming IO-540 that was rebuilt by Aerotec in Halifax and has a MT 3 blade propeller up front. The aluminum portion of the kit was of top quality. Since this was a quick build kit the cockpit area and most of the wings were riveted together in the Philippines while everything aft of the cockpit was riveted in Charlottetown by Deryck, with bucking help from Dave, Terry Cooper and me. When both pieces were fitted, not a hole was out of place. The instrument panel was prefabricated by Gulf Coast Avionics in Florida and I did the wiring and hooked up the panel. The panel had a few bugs in it but most were found before the panel was installed. The panel is well equipped with an AF-2500 engine monitor, Garmin 430, Garmin SL-30, PS Engineering Audio Panel, Garmin GTX 327 Transponder, ATD-300 Traffic Watch and a TruTrak Autopilot. As all the instruments are electrically run, there is also a back-up battery. This is the first homebuilt project for Dave, locally known as "The Flying Real Estate Agent", but Deryck has over 30 years experience building and restoring aircraft, much of it with the Canadian Warplane Heritage in Hamilton. Deryck, originally from PEI, moved back after retiring from Air Canada where he worked as an AME. Since starting the project, Deryck has formed D. Hickox Aviation Services specializing in aircraft restoration, fabric covering and home built aircraft. He can be contacted at xxx-xxx-xxxx (trimmed for privacy) if you have a project you would like him to build. Dave is hoping to have the 25 hours flown off before Sun n Fun this April. If you make it to Sun n Fun and see this beautiful RV-10 sitting there with the registration of C-FYYG, you will know that he was successful. do not archive ________________________________ Message 55 ____________________________________ Time: 07:55:06 PM PST US From: "Jesse Saint" Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB On the engine mount issue, I agree with those who said that Van's has made their engine mount for the engine they provide. Barrett's engine is not a clone, but with the Cold Air Induction it is not "stock" IO-540, so the engine mount is not necessarily going to fit. I don't have a problem with this. Yes, it would be nice if Van's would start making their mount so it would fit this sump as well, but I certainly wouldn't expect them to. I would be quite surprised if they did. Are they creating a safety hazard because they don't condone the Cold Air Induction? NO! Are they saying you can't do it? NO! They just aren't going to go out of their way to make it easier for you, at their expense. Deems, did they charge you for the mod? Tim, did they charge you for the mod? I think the answer to both of these is "NO". So, Van's accidentally helped Deems do something that they don't condone to his benefit, but the SB is just to say that they won't do it any more. If you want to make a mod, you have to make it. I don't have a problem with that. I think the door handles are ugly, so I got some made that I like. I didn't call Van's and ask them to make some that I liked and send them to me, much less at no charge. I wanted an access panel in the baggage floor, so I bought some parts and made one. These planes are not made by Van's Aircraft. Deems' plane will have a manufacturer something like "Deems Davis", so as long as he built it to his specifications, the FAA really has no choice but to sign it off as airworthy (IMHO). They are certifying that it is a safe plane, that it will fly, that nobody will get killed in it, or that it is exactly like Van's designed it. They are just saying something like, "It looks like an airplane" and that it is legal to fly and that Deems has the right to fix it because he built it. Some countries, as I understand, require that you build it exactly as the plans call for to be legal to fly. The US does not (and apparently Canada does not, with the Holy Cowl on the plane up there that just flew). If you want to change something, change it and take your chances. If you want to build it stock, build it stock and take your chances. In short, Deems got lucky and Barrett is being very generous by bailing the rest of the Cold Air Induction users out of the engine mount clearance issue. Way to go Barrett and good for you Deems. Do not archive. Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse@saintaviation.com www.saintaviation.com Cell: 352-427-0285 Fax: 815-377-3694 _____ From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 4:55 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB On the subject of engines, my reqts are pretty basic - standard IO540 D4A5 with one Mag replaced with a lightspeed plasma III. Ignoring the Lightspeed, what is the difference between buying a Vans Experimental 540 at $39,900 vs say an Aerosportpower at $40,300? $400 is not a lot, but what added value do the engine (re-)builders give beyond the standard engine provided by Vans? cheers, Ron -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of McGANN, Ron Sent: Wednesday, 24 January 2007 8:10 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Pascal wrote:- ["we will provide the engine mount modification to you as a value added service with your engine at no additional charge. > For those of you who have already taken delivery of your engine equipped > with Barrett Cold Air, please contact Rhonda for assistance in getting > your mounts modified." That is what I call customer service. Barrett just earn a point for my decision on the engine. It's the small things that help me make the big decisions.] I'm with Pascal. Unfortunately I am not inclined to send my mount from South Australia for modification. Does Allen provide a stock IO540 (ie w/o cold air induction) that does not require the mount mod, and at what cost? If you're out their Allen, please reply off list if you wish. cheers, Ron Selecting an engine href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com /Navigator?RV10-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com ________________________________ Message 56 ____________________________________ Time: 07:58:43 PM PST US From: "Jesse Saint" Subject: RE: happy with Van's rant- was RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB Very nicely put. Do not archive. Jesse Saint Saint Aviation, Inc. jesse@saintaviation.com www.saintaviation.com Cell: 352-427-0285 Fax: 815-377-3694 -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Pascal Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 10:38 PM Subject: happy with Van's rant- was RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB I think there is nothing like a lively debate on Primers and in this case the engine mount SB, but I know there are a whole lot of us that are set on Van's. I followed a high level composite company for a few years. I was set on a 4 seater and in a way it is no different than what I am doing now. I am getting a sense of is this the right kit for me. I am still around and pretty sure I'll be starting this kit in the next couple of months, this is only after extensive research and following this forum for less than 1 year. I had 3 years at the other forum and finally gave up on it.. Largely because most of the builders complained about one thing or another and somehow the price of the kit doubled with carbon and quickerbuild and other nice upgrades thrown in. I think that last time I looked the kit was now 82K, it was 38K when I started looking into it in 1998. So Van's doesn't want to cater to each of us and our individual engine choice (not including their stock). Fine! Barret has his solution- so BPA is solved, Thunderbolt is competitive in this market enough that they might do something too, and so on but the good news is the rest of us who want a stock engine from Vans don't need to worry that the cost will go up more than 3% next year as a result of the few. Why am I going to build a RV-10? many reasons. Mark Chamberlain for one. He invited me, never knowing who I was, to see and fly and yes, fly in his plane. I never had anyone, and I saw over 12 of the composites from the other company, offer to fly me in the plane. Than there's Jeff Carpenter, who took a morning to go over the kit with me when he had pressing engagements to get to, theres Tim, and Deems, and John and most of you. Basically this group of builders is solid and we feel comfortable enough to speak our minds, in jest and seriously. Let's remember we are all in this for the same reason. A solid company with 30 years experience building the largest fleet of experimentals out there. I am NOT building this plane to be unique or impress my neighbors, I'm building this plane, a Van's, because I know they do care about the builders, and they have the record to prove it. Nothing wrong with venting on delayed shipments and expensive shipping for 2c items from Van's or SB's that we are not in support of- we should be here to support each other as I know, I too will be frustrated and want someone who understands my frustration to be there for me. We are! Lastly, Vendor support- I see what Barrett did by offering to resolve this issue as excellent. Jon's response, from Thunderbolt, was professional and shows he too is in this to make it work for all of us and Lycoming and I also took that he understood Van's SB. Stein last month getting on to comfort those stuck in the D2AV debacle and Mike from Cleveland chiming in at times as well. They all may be in for the business, but they care about the builders too! All in all we are a great group of builders with great vendors who are right there with us building and supporting us. I think Van's has the right to publish as many SB's as they wish, as long as they don't try to keep everyone happy and have an affordable kit be out of reach for the rest of those who just want to build it! And with this, I end my rant! Pascal ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Ritter" Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 6:02 PM Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > Is there anything these guys like about Vans? Seems like there are 66+ of > us out there flying RV-10's that are very pleased with the kit and the > support we have received from Vans. > > Mark (N410MR Flying) > > >>From: "John Hasbrouck" >>To: >>Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB >>Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 18:49:57 -0500 >> >> >>I,m so glad Van's issued that SB. I was getting tired of the >>counterweight discussion.... hehehe >> >>John Hasbrouck >>#40264 >>currently installing JATO bottles >> >> >> >> >> >> > > _________________________________________________________________ > FREE online classifieds from Windows Live Expo - buy and sell with people > you know > > > -- 8:40 PM ________________________________ Message 57 ____________________________________ Time: 08:03:25 PM PST US From: Tim Olson Subject: Re: happy with Van's rant- was RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB I don't usually chime in with the simple one-liners, but.....Amen! This sure is a great group of people we have, and the more who join in the more fun it gets. Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive Pascal wrote: > > I think there is nothing like a lively debate on Primers and in this > case the engine mount SB, but I know there are a whole lot of us that > are set on Van's. I followed a high level composite company for a few > years. I was set on a 4 seater and in a way it is no different than what > I am doing now. I am getting a sense of is this the right kit for me. > I am still around and pretty sure I'll be starting this kit in the next > couple of months, this is only after extensive research and following > this forum for less than 1 year. I had 3 years at the other forum and > finally gave up on it.. Largely because most of the builders complained > about one thing or another and somehow the price of the kit doubled with > carbon and quickerbuild and other nice upgrades thrown in. I think that > last time I looked the kit was now 82K, it was 38K when I started > looking into it in 1998. > So Van's doesn't want to cater to each of us and our individual engine > choice (not including their stock). Fine! Barret has his solution- so > BPA is solved, Thunderbolt is competitive in this market enough that > they might do something too, and so on but the good news is the rest of > us who want a stock engine from Vans don't need to worry that the cost > will go up more than 3% next year as a result of the few. Why am I going > to build a RV-10? many reasons. Mark Chamberlain for one. He invited me, > never knowing who I was, to see and fly and yes, fly in his plane. I > never had anyone, and I saw over 12 of the composites from the other > company, offer to fly me in the plane. Than there's Jeff Carpenter, who > took a morning to go over the kit with me when he had pressing > engagements to get to, theres Tim, and Deems, and John and most of you. > Basically this group of builders is solid and we feel comfortable enough > to speak our minds, in jest and seriously. Let's remember we are all in > this for the same reason. A solid company with 30 years experience > building the largest fleet of experimentals out there. I am NOT building > this plane to be unique or impress my neighbors, I'm building this > plane, a Van's, because I know they do care about the builders, and they > have the record to prove it. > Nothing wrong with venting on delayed shipments and expensive shipping > for 2c items from Van's or SB's that we are not in support of- we should > be here to support each other as I know, I too will be frustrated and > want someone who understands my frustration to be there for me. We are! > Lastly, Vendor support- I see what Barrett did by offering to resolve > this issue as excellent. Jon's response, from Thunderbolt, was > professional and shows he too is in this to make it work for all of us > and Lycoming and I also took that he understood Van's SB. Stein last > month getting on to comfort those stuck in the D2AV debacle and Mike > from Cleveland chiming in at times as well. They all may be in for the > business, but they care about the builders too! > All in all we are a great group of builders with great vendors who are > right there with us building and supporting us. I think Van's has the > right to publish as many SB's as they wish, as long as they don't try to > keep everyone happy and have an affordable kit be out of reach for the > rest of those who just want to build it! > > And with this, I end my rant! > > Pascal > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Ritter" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 6:02 PM > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB > > >> >> Is there anything these guys like about Vans? Seems like there are >> 66+ of us out there flying RV-10's that are very pleased with the kit >> and the support we have received from Vans. >> >> Mark (N410MR Flying) >> >> >> >> >>> From: "John Hasbrouck" >>> To: >>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Van's Motor Mount SB >>> Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 18:49:57 -0500 >>> >>> >>> >>> I,m so glad Van's issued that SB. I was getting tired of the >>> counterweight discussion.... hehehe >>> >>> John Hasbrouck >>> #40264 >>> currently installing JATO bottles >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> _________________________________________________________________ >> FREE online classifieds from Windows Live Expo - buy and sell with >> people you know >> >> >> >> > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message rv10-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV10-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/rv10-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/rv10-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.