Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:54 AM - Re: Axle Extension List is now CLOSED (John Jessen)
2. 01:11 AM - Re: Re: Washer installation tool (David Maib)
3. 03:04 AM - Re: good deal of the day- really? (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
4. 04:47 AM - Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (Tim Olson)
5. 05:14 AM - Nose Gear Wheelpant/Strut Fairing Clearance (zackrv8)
6. 05:19 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (GRANSCOTT@AOL.COM)
7. 05:46 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
8. 06:07 AM - Re: Nose Gear Wheelpant/Strut Fairing Clearance (Rob Kermanj)
9. 06:25 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (Tim Olson)
10. 06:59 AM - Door trim (tadsargent)
11. 07:03 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (tadsargent)
12. 07:09 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (Kelly McMullen)
13. 07:36 AM - Re: Door trim (Rob Kermanj)
14. 07:46 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment ()
15. 07:53 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (Michael Schipper)
16. 08:01 AM - Firewalls and proseal (Vern W. Smith)
17. 08:02 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (James K Hovis)
18. 08:05 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (Kelly McMullen)
19. 08:08 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (Dj Merrill)
20. 08:12 AM - practice project (linn Walters)
21. 08:15 AM - Re: The project is mine! (linn Walters)
22. 08:33 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (James K Hovis)
23. 08:48 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (linn Walters)
24. 09:25 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (Tim Olson)
25. 09:31 AM - Re: Firewalls and proseal (John Jessen)
26. 09:45 AM - Sportair composite construction class worth it? (Jae Chang)
27. 09:58 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (linn Walters)
28. 10:06 AM - Re: Sportair composite construction class worth it? (linn Walters)
29. 10:20 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (James Hein)
30. 10:41 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (Kelly McMullen)
31. 11:12 AM - Re: Firewalls and proseal (Vern W. Smith)
32. 11:14 AM - Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment (Tim Olson)
33. 12:10 PM - Re: Sportair composite construction class worth it? (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
34. 12:18 PM - Fw: [Fw: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations] (Kelly McMullen)
35. 01:17 PM - Re: Sportair composite construction class worth it? (Shawn Moon)
36. 01:43 PM - Re: Sportair composite construction class worth it? (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
37. 02:08 PM - Re: Door trim (tadsargent)
38. 05:53 PM - A safety reminder. (John W. Cox)
39. 06:46 PM - How to Get the RV-10 Out the Workshop Door (Bill Reining)
40. 07:29 PM - Re: How to Get the RV-10 Out the Workshop Door, Door Width, Garage, main wheel distance (Larry Rosen)
41. 07:34 PM - Re: How to Get the RV-10 Out the Workshop Door (Tim Olson)
42. 07:55 PM - RV10 Video from Down Under (zackrv8)
43. 09:25 PM - Re: A safety reminder. (Dave Leikam)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Axle Extension List is now CLOSED |
Just my opinion, but if this guy ever lands at any airport with an RV get
together, he should not be buying his own drinks or dinner.
John J
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 8:49 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Axle Extension List is now CLOSED
Well, what started as a great little fix to a weak part, by Russ Daves, has
blossomed into a huge undertaking and a good improvement to the RV-10
design.
Originally I didn't know for sure if we'd get 20 people who wanted Axle
Extensions. Boy was I wrong.
I'm having machined at least 320 of them, for over 150 people around the
world. The quoted costs to do these parts was originally $125 per pair as
passed to the list by other people, but with a bit of effort on economizing
everything as much as possible except for sacrificing on part design, the
end price will be LESS than $40 per pair to the lucky OVER 150 people who
got on the list.
I doubt I'll ever take on a hair-pulling event like this again, as it is
harder than I thought to get all the addresses and logistics sorted out, but
it sure was a great thing this time. Perhaps in the future a more "for
profit" thing will be available.
Sorry to have to add this, but, the list is now CLOSED.
You can inquire, but no guarantees at this point, as much of the stuff has
been ordered and paid for.
If you still need them, feel free to ask, and for a couple days I'll file
your emails away.
Thanks everyone, for putting up with the bandwidth on the list this week!
NOTE: If you're one of the people receiving the extensions, I'll be
contacting you via email probably later today to give all the final details
on price, timelines, and payment. I think everyone will be pretty happy
with how this all ended up.
Tim
do not archive
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Washer installation tool |
Bob,
Thank you. When it is time to put the control surfaces back on, we
will definitely take you up on your kind offer.
David
On Jan 31, 2007, at 10:48 PM, Bob Collins wrote:
<bcollinsrv7a@comcast.net>
David:
I used almost all of the ideas you've read about and they worked
to varying degrees; they just took a little longer. In a fit of
weakness, I bought those ridiculously priced washer wrenches and
they're really sweet and work well. If you'd like to borrow them, let
me know and I'll run 'em over to you.
Bob
--------
Bob Collins
St. Paul, Minn.
RV Builder's Hotline (free!)
http://rvhotline.expercraft.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=92017#92017
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | good deal of the day- really? |
Interesting read. I guess that's what you get for paying someone else
to build you an experimental aircraft. He may not have understood the
rules but the guy building it for them certainly knew he was violating
them.
Michael
Do not archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Lanier
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 11:27 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: good deal of the day- really?
Hello All, first post on the list... lemme know if I screw it up!
There's a good description of what is said to be the real story behind
this kit in a thread on VAF
(http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=14866)
Mark Lanier
#40519
do not archive
Pascal <rv10builder@verizon.net> wrote:
What am I missing here?
A plane with twice the stock power, fuel capacity, all held
together with clecos, larger blade, 80% completed (maybe cleco'ing) and
all for a "Buy me now" at 100K.
Something just isn't right about all of this. Where does the
extra 60 gallons go and what about W&B and what's with the lack of
riveting and saying 80% completed. And what kills me (no pun intended)
is "I have already spent $187,000 for this airplane that should easliy
fly at 25,000 feet, maintain over 500hp at altitude with turbo, at well
over 300mph, and 1,500 mile range." This has to be some joke.. He'll
take 100K now?? What to kill someone!. The RV-10 has a Vne of 240, that
does NOT mean 240mph at FL18 which Ken clearly explains in the
attachment "why more power is not always a good thing" . (see
attachment)
Is it April 1st? or does this guy think he'll find a fool out
there to buy what simply is "just not right!!" Laugh and ask what if..
Pascal
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: eagerlee <mailto:eagerlee@comcast.net>
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 9:01 AM
Subject: RV10-List: good deal of the day
RV 10 Airplane with 600+Horsepower
Item number: 180081108309
I saw this for sale on E-bay. WOW - why am i wasting
my time with a 200mph machine when i could have 300mph capability?
Paul
#40203
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronic
s
.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
I saw this in today's AOPA newsletter:
FAA MAY TAKE AWAY PANEL-MOUNT OPTION FOR PORTABLE GPS
Think your portable GPS would work great mounted to your old Cessna
172's instrument panel? If the FAA has its way, you won't be able to
mount it.
The parts--panel dock and connective wiring--needed to mount your
portable GPS would either no longer be available or be too expensive to
buy. The FAA's proposal would make it illegal for manufacturers to
produce a replacement or modification part if they know (or should
know) the part would end up installed in a certified aircraft--that is
unless they obtain production approval from the agency. But that costs
tens of thousands of dollars, something many companies can't afford.
While AOPA agrees production approval is necessary for critical parts
like connecting rods and cylinders, it isn't needed for non-critical
parts like a portable GPS panel dock or traffic detector that enhance
pilot safety.
See AOPA Online
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2007/070201parts.html ).
To me, this would seem like pretty much a direct attack on Air gizmos
for the Garmin handheld docking stations. I know the 396/496 get
awfully tempting to substitute in for a certified box. They must
be seeing some 337's (or worse....NOT seeing 337's) coming in on
putting those in certified planes. They're great boxes, but apparently
the FAA has their opinion of what they want to see.
Never thought I'd read that when I woke up today.
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Nose Gear Wheelpant/Strut Fairing Clearance |
Any flying Rv10's out there know if the 1/4" clearance between the nosegear wheelpant
and the nosegear strut fairing is enough? Any rub issues from normal use?
Zack
--------
RV8 #80125
RV10 # 40512
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=92242#92242
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
Tim posted...
I saw this in today's AOPA newsletter:
FAA MAY TAKE AWAY PANEL-MOUNT OPTION FOR PORTABLE GPS
Think your portable GPS would work great mounted to your old Cessna
172's instrument panel?
>From what I see, the LSA folks are creating or mounting portable devices in
their panels. I'm not an expert on FAR regs...now CIR's but isn't there an
item somewhere about permanent mounted devices needing FAA approval...I think
the FAA may have been a little lax in recent years on the LSA crowd since
most of them are approved oversea's and with the conventions they must accept
what other countries have approved unless safety is compromised.
This may be a statement from them (FAA) laying a line in the sand on
production products...probably will not affect experimental's, though.
P
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
I read that too. I wonder if there really are that many of the docks
being put in the certified aircraft. I always assumed they were
targeting the experimental and other markets. It sucks but at least
they aren't saying that you can't use them period.
You can always go with some of the old external mounting options. I
have a suction cup gooseneck mount that I would use to mount my 196 in
rentals that worked quite well. I also put a little puck mount in both
of my vehicles and I can move it between them quickly.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 6:44 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment
I saw this in today's AOPA newsletter:
FAA MAY TAKE AWAY PANEL-MOUNT OPTION FOR PORTABLE GPS
Think your portable GPS would work great mounted to your old Cessna
172's instrument panel? If the FAA has its way, you won't be able to
mount it.
The parts--panel dock and connective wiring--needed to mount your
portable GPS would either no longer be available or be too expensive to
buy. The FAA's proposal would make it illegal for manufacturers to
produce a replacement or modification part if they know (or should
know) the part would end up installed in a certified aircraft--that is
unless they obtain production approval from the agency. But that costs
tens of thousands of dollars, something many companies can't afford.
While AOPA agrees production approval is necessary for critical parts
like connecting rods and cylinders, it isn't needed for non-critical
parts like a portable GPS panel dock or traffic detector that enhance
pilot safety.
See AOPA Online
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2007/070201parts.html ).
To me, this would seem like pretty much a direct attack on Air gizmos
for the Garmin handheld docking stations. I know the 396/496 get
awfully tempting to substitute in for a certified box. They must
be seeing some 337's (or worse....NOT seeing 337's) coming in on
putting those in certified planes. They're great boxes, but apparently
the FAA has their opinion of what they want to see.
Never thought I'd read that when I woke up today.
--
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Nose Gear Wheelpant/Strut Fairing Clearance |
Good enough. I have just about the same clearance and since there is
no movement between the two, there is no problem. Just be sure that
you have the clearance through the full wheel movement.
do not archive
On Feb 2, 2007, at 8:11 AM, zackrv8 wrote:
>
> Any flying Rv10's out there know if the 1/4" clearance between the
> nosegear wheelpant and the nosegear strut fairing is enough? Any
> rub issues from normal use?
>
> Zack
>
> --------
> RV8 #80125
> RV10 # 40512
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=92242#92242
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
Ahh, you're probably right...it's probably due to the new
LSA's being developed like that as production planes.
I do agree that this isn't likely to affect experimentals
much, but it does show their philosophical direction, so for
a hardcore IFR plane, consideration as to what you put in
should be thought out carefully.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
GRANSCOTT@aol.com wrote:
> Tim posted...
>
> I saw this in today's AOPA newsletter:
>
> FAA MAY TAKE AWAY PANEL-MOUNT OPTION FOR PORTABLE GPS
> Think your portable GPS would work great mounted to your old Cessna
> 172's instrument panel?
>
> From what I see, the LSA folks are creating or mounting portable
> devices in their panels. I'm not an expert on FAR regs...now CIR's but
> isn't there an item somewhere about permanent mounted devices needing
> FAA approval...I think the FAA may have been a little lax in recent
> years on the LSA crowd since most of them are approved oversea's and
> with the conventions they must accept what other countries have approved
> unless safety is compromised.
>
> This may be a statement from them (FAA) laying a line in the sand on
> production products...probably will not affect experimental's, though.
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I have a question regarding Door trimming. On page 45-10 figures 1,2,3
show the doors being trimmed till they fit just inside the openings on
the fuse.
I have sanded the hinge side till it fits that way. My question is.
Did most of you builders do this while the door was on the hinges and
sand away till the fit is correct
or is there a better way. Additionally, which came first the fit or the
bevel or was the sanding done on a bevel to accomplish both at the same
time.
Lastly, is the trim bevel shown on this page completely around the door
opening.
Thanks for your responses or pictures.
Tad Sargent
(working on the dusty parts) RV10
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
I believe experimental means just that. I could put a TRS80 personal
computer in the panel if I wanted to use it for navigation or Comm. I think
we have much latitude in this respect. Mounting a GPS on an experimental
requires no FAA sign off unless you are making major changes to the AC.
Just a thought.
Tad Sargent
7A and helping build a 10A
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 7:43 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment
>
> I saw this in today's AOPA newsletter:
>
> FAA MAY TAKE AWAY PANEL-MOUNT OPTION FOR PORTABLE GPS
> Think your portable GPS would work great mounted to your old Cessna 172's
> instrument panel? If the FAA has its way, you won't be able to mount it.
> The parts--panel dock and connective wiring--needed to mount your portable
> GPS would either no longer be available or be too expensive to buy. The
> FAA's proposal would make it illegal for manufacturers to produce a
> replacement or modification part if they know (or should know) the part
> would end up installed in a certified aircraft--that is unless they obtain
> production approval from the agency. But that costs tens of thousands of
> dollars, something many companies can't afford. While AOPA agrees
> production approval is necessary for critical parts like connecting rods
> and cylinders, it isn't needed for non-critical parts like a portable GPS
> panel dock or traffic detector that enhance pilot safety.
> See AOPA Online
> http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2007/070201parts.html ).
>
> To me, this would seem like pretty much a direct attack on Air gizmos
> for the Garmin handheld docking stations. I know the 396/496 get
> awfully tempting to substitute in for a certified box. They must
> be seeing some 337's (or worse....NOT seeing 337's) coming in on
> putting those in certified planes. They're great boxes, but apparently
> the FAA has their opinion of what they want to see.
>
> Never thought I'd read that when I woke up today.
>
> --
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
Let me take you through the logic of the regs as I understand
them..not that any FAA inspector would agree. ;-) Primary reference is
Appendix A of FAR 43.
The Airgizmo mount could be considered a cover plate for a blank space
in a radio rack...clearly a minor modification. Portable devices
connected by temporary, quick disconnects, such as cigar lighter
socket are clearly NOT installed devices, and are for pilot and
passenger amusement and not legal for use in navigation.(that might be
debatable for a portable navcom with VOR that meets the VOR check
rule.
Connecting wiring to said quick disconnect with proper fusing and
aircraft quality wiring may be considered a minor mod, although some
will argue that it could be major, depending on potential implications
to overall electrical system.
Assemble all that together, and plug in a portable GPS, and you have
1. a minor modification, 2. a controversy.
KM
A&P/IA
PS: I'll be real interested to see how much, if any discussion there
is on this point at my IA renewal sessions next month.
On 2/2/07, GRANSCOTT@aol.com <GRANSCOTT@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Tim posted...
>
> I saw this in today's AOPA newsletter:
>
> FAA MAY TAKE AWAY PANEL-MOUNT OPTION FOR PORTABLE GPS
> Think your portable GPS would work great mounted to your old Cessna
> 172's instrument panel?
>
> From what I see, the LSA folks are creating or mounting portable devices in
> their panels. I'm not an expert on FAR regs...now CIR's but isn't there an
> item somewhere about permanent mounted devices needing FAA approval...I
> think the FAA may have been a little lax in recent years on the LSA crowd
> since most of them are approved oversea's and with the conventions they must
> accept what other countries have approved unless safety is compromised.
>
> This may be a statement from them (FAA) laying a line in the sand on
> production products...probably will not affect experimental's, though.
>
> P
>
>
> - The RV10-List Email Forum -
> to browse
> Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
> much more:
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> - NEW MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> the Web Forums!
> http://forums.matronics.com
>
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Don't have a picture but I used a folded sandpaper and stuck it
between the door and the frame (sandpaper side facing the door edge)
while sanding, to get a good fit. This method also created the bevel
that you need. The door was hinged to the fuselage in it's final
position.
Make sure that you allow for the paint and "bondo" before you stop
sanding. If you sand too much, you can later tape the edge of the
door and fill between the door and the frame.
Good thing about fiberglass, it is forgiving. Although I recommend
that you get the best fit possible before resorting to "I'll fix it
before painting".
The trim bevel is all the way around.
I am sure others will have nifty ideas about the doors.
Do not archive
On Feb 2, 2007, at 9:56 AM, tadsargent wrote:
> I have a question regarding Door trimming. On page 45-10 figures
> 1,2,3 show the doors being trimmed till they fit just inside the
> openings on the fuse.
> I have sanded the hinge side till it fits that way. My question
> is. Did most of you builders do this while the door was on the
> hinges and sand away till the fit is correct
> or is there a better way. Additionally, which came first the fit
> or the bevel or was the sanding done on a bevel to accomplish both
> at the same time.
> Lastly, is the trim bevel shown on this page completely around the
> door opening.
> Thanks for your responses or pictures.
> Tad Sargent
> (working on the dusty parts) RV10
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List_-
> ============================================================ _-
> forums.matronics.com_-
> ===========================================================
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
I hope that would be a TRS-80 model 100.
Bill
>
> I believe experimental means just that. I could put a TRS80 personal
> computer in the panel if I wanted to use it for navigation or Comm. I
> think we have much latitude in this respect. Mounting a GPS on an
> experimental requires no FAA sign off unless you are making major
> changes to the AC. Just a thought.
> Tad Sargent
> 7A and helping build a 10A
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 7:43 AM
> Subject: RV10-List: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment
>
>
>>
>> I saw this in today's AOPA newsletter:
>>
>> FAA MAY TAKE AWAY PANEL-MOUNT OPTION FOR PORTABLE GPS
>> Think your portable GPS would work great mounted to your old Cessna
>> 172's instrument panel? If the FAA has its way, you won't be able to
>> mount it. The parts--panel dock and connective wiring--needed to mount
>> your portable GPS would either no longer be available or be too
>> expensive to buy. The FAA's proposal would make it illegal for
>> manufacturers to produce a replacement or modification part if they
>> know (or should know) the part would end up installed in a certified
>> aircraft--that is unless they obtain production approval from the
>> agency. But that costs tens of thousands of dollars, something many
>> companies can't afford. While AOPA agrees production approval is
>> necessary for critical parts like connecting rods and cylinders, it
>> isn't needed for non-critical parts like a portable GPS panel dock or
>> traffic detector that enhance pilot safety.
>> See AOPA Online
>> http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2007/070201parts.html ).
>>
>> To me, this would seem like pretty much a direct attack on Air gizmos
>> for the Garmin handheld docking stations. I know the 396/496 get
>> awfully tempting to substitute in for a certified box. They must be
>> seeing some 337's (or worse....NOT seeing 337's) coming in on putting
>> those in certified planes. They're great boxes, but apparently the
>> FAA has their opinion of what they want to see.
>>
>> Never thought I'd read that when I woke up today.
>>
>> --
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>> do not archive
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
I don't normally make posts regarding AirGizmos, but in this case I
feel compelled to tell a bit of the story, just so you guys can know.
AirGizmos is a very small company. I designed the Panel Dock for the
Garmin 196 when I was building my RV-9A. It was simply a solution to
a problem that I had when designing my panel. I am fortunate to have
a friend who is in the plastics industry. We worked together to make
something that we could be proud of. It was always intended for
experimental use. The business just grew because other builders had
the same problem as I did. I have been amazed at the number of
positive emails I have received from fellow builders.
Well, over time it seems that certified owners have noticed the
AirGizmos products because they are looking for solutions to the same
issues. They want something safer than the yoke-mount contraption
they've been using. So, we've worked to have burn tests and load
analyses done on the Panel Dock to make it easier for people to get
337s approved. Again, this isn't the market we were targeting, but
there is definitely a lot of demand.
What is really interesting is that this comes down to politics.
Apparently the people in the avionics industry are not happy. We've
been approached by the leader of one professional organization saying
we need to join their association "or else." It felt like extortion
to me, so we declined. Well, now we see this story. We have good
working relationships with several avionics shops and local FSDOs,
and we've provided everything short of a PMA for our products.
The sad part is that in my opinion the AirGizmos Panel Dock is a
good, safe solution. Much safer than the yoke mount for obvious reasons.
Regards,
Mike Schipper
RV-9A - N63MS - www.my9a.com
RV-10 - #40576 - www.rvten.com
www.airgizmos.com
Do not archive
On Feb 2, 2007, at 6:43 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
>
> I saw this in today's AOPA newsletter:
>
> FAA MAY TAKE AWAY PANEL-MOUNT OPTION FOR PORTABLE GPS
> Think your portable GPS would work great mounted to your old Cessna
> 172's instrument panel? If the FAA has its way, you won't be able
> to mount it.
> The parts--panel dock and connective wiring--needed to mount your
> portable GPS would either no longer be available or be too
> expensive to buy. The FAA's proposal would make it illegal for
> manufacturers to produce a replacement or modification part if
> they know (or should know) the part would end up installed in a
> certified aircraft--that is unless they obtain production approval
> from the agency. But that costs tens of thousands of dollars,
> something many companies can't afford. While AOPA agrees production
> approval is necessary for critical parts like connecting rods and
> cylinders, it isn't needed for non-critical parts like a portable
> GPS panel dock or traffic detector that enhance pilot safety.
> See AOPA Online http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/
> 2007/070201parts.html ).
>
> To me, this would seem like pretty much a direct attack on Air gizmos
> for the Garmin handheld docking stations. I know the 396/496 get
> awfully tempting to substitute in for a certified box. They must
> be seeing some 337's (or worse....NOT seeing 337's) coming in on
> putting those in certified planes. They're great boxes, but
> apparently
> the FAA has their opinion of what they want to see.
>
> Never thought I'd read that when I woke up today.
>
> --
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Firewalls and proseal |
Just an FYI: Chapters 27 and 28 mentions using "proseal" to seal the
firewall seams. The plans offer no further explanation than this.
Proseal is proseal right? No. My Tech. counselor pointed out this is
high temperature sealant not the stuff used on the fuel tanks.
So just for fun I put a propane torch on a small sample of cured
proseal left over from the fuel tanks. This stuff burns almost as well
as marshmallows! The fact the can says Flamemaster (Company name)
doesn't help clarify things either. I know it's probably 'in the
archives.' But unless it was pointed out I would have not known there
was a difference. Hope this save someone some grief. Good news it was
caught before I used the wrong sealant:-)
Vern Smith (#324)
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
When it comes to radio gear, remember you have to deal with another
Fed agency, the FCC. Depending on the radio service and spectrum used,
the FCC requires equipment used, whether a signal reciever like a GPS
unit or a transmitter to be certified to conform to the FCC rules by
the manufacturer, similar to FAA TSO process. If you're a Ham, you can
build your own gear for use in the spectrum allocated to Amatuer Radio
service, but I'm not sure about the Aviation service, whether
build-your-own is allowed. So unless Radio Shack made a transmitter
registered with the FCC for your Trash-80, I doubt you could legally
(FCC-wise, not necessarily FAA) use it.
JKH
On 2/2/07, tadsargent <tadsargent@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> I believe experimental means just that. I could put a TRS80 personal
> computer in the panel if I wanted to use it for navigation or Comm. I think
> we have much latitude in this respect. Mounting a GPS on an experimental
> requires no FAA sign off unless you are making major changes to the AC.
> Just a thought.
> Tad Sargent
> 7A and helping build a 10A
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 7:43 AM
> Subject: RV10-List: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment
>
>
> >
> > I saw this in today's AOPA newsletter:
> >
> > FAA MAY TAKE AWAY PANEL-MOUNT OPTION FOR PORTABLE GPS
> > Think your portable GPS would work great mounted to your old Cessna 172's
> > instrument panel? If the FAA has its way, you won't be able to mount it.
> > The parts--panel dock and connective wiring--needed to mount your portable
> > GPS would either no longer be available or be too expensive to buy. The
> > FAA's proposal would make it illegal for manufacturers to produce a
> > replacement or modification part if they know (or should know) the part
> > would end up installed in a certified aircraft--that is unless they obtain
> > production approval from the agency. But that costs tens of thousands of
> > dollars, something many companies can't afford. While AOPA agrees
> > production approval is necessary for critical parts like connecting rods
> > and cylinders, it isn't needed for non-critical parts like a portable GPS
> > panel dock or traffic detector that enhance pilot safety.
> > See AOPA Online
> > http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2007/070201parts.html ).
> >
> > To me, this would seem like pretty much a direct attack on Air gizmos
> > for the Garmin handheld docking stations. I know the 396/496 get
> > awfully tempting to substitute in for a certified box. They must
> > be seeing some 337's (or worse....NOT seeing 337's) coming in on
> > putting those in certified planes. They're great boxes, but apparently
> > the FAA has their opinion of what they want to see.
> >
> > Never thought I'd read that when I woke up today.
> >
> > --
> > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> > do not archive
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
The point of the article was TC aircraft, NOT experimental. The mounts
are pretty popular in TC aircraft as well.
On 2/2/07, tadsargent <tadsargent@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> I believe experimental means just that. I could put a TRS80 personal
> computer in the panel if I wanted to use it for navigation or Comm. I think
> we have much latitude in this respect. Mounting a GPS on an experimental
> requires no FAA sign off unless you are making major changes to the AC.
> Just a thought.
> Tad Sargent
> 7A and helping build a 10A
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 7:43 AM
> Subject: RV10-List: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment
>
>
> >
> > I saw this in today's AOPA newsletter:
> >
> > FAA MAY TAKE AWAY PANEL-MOUNT OPTION FOR PORTABLE GPS
> > Think your portable GPS would work great mounted to your old Cessna 172's
> > instrument panel? If the FAA has its way, you won't be able to mount it.
> > The parts--panel dock and connective wiring--needed to mount your portable
> > GPS would either no longer be available or be too expensive to buy. The
> > FAA's proposal would make it illegal for manufacturers to produce a
> > replacement or modification part if they know (or should know) the part
> > would end up installed in a certified aircraft--that is unless they obtain
> > production approval from the agency. But that costs tens of thousands of
> > dollars, something many companies can't afford. While AOPA agrees
> > production approval is necessary for critical parts like connecting rods
> > and cylinders, it isn't needed for non-critical parts like a portable GPS
> > panel dock or traffic detector that enhance pilot safety.
> > See AOPA Online
> > http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2007/070201parts.html ).
> >
> > To me, this would seem like pretty much a direct attack on Air gizmos
> > for the Garmin handheld docking stations. I know the 396/496 get
> > awfully tempting to substitute in for a certified box. They must
> > be seeing some 337's (or worse....NOT seeing 337's) coming in on
> > putting those in certified planes. They're great boxes, but apparently
> > the FAA has their opinion of what they want to see.
> >
> > Never thought I'd read that when I woke up today.
> >
> > --
> > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> > do not archive
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
greenley@starband.net wrote:
>
> I hope that would be a TRS-80 model 100.
> Bill
>
I kinda liked the "White Whale" Model III myself... *grin
-Dj
do not archive
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | practice project |
I've had some emails bounced back recently and this was one of them!!!
You're right, Pascal ...... but there's also the tool box. I searched
and found it here:
http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1170368472-102-528&browse=gifts&product=toolbox
Linn
do not archive
Pascal wrote:
Airfoil project. although the toolbox is also an option, the airfoil is
what is used at the Sportair classes.
http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1170346570-304-225&browse=misc&product=training-project
<http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1170346570-304-225&browse=misc&product=training-project>
Pascal
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The project is mine! |
And this one was bounced too!
Michael Schipper wrote:
> Congrats Linn, sounds like you got yourself another project.
>
> Although it sounds like most of the metalwork is finished, you may
> want to think about ordering the practice kit from Van's.
I am.
> When I did mine it was a little control surface piece, but I think now
> it's a toolbox.
I understand they do have a tool box kit. Might as well get something I
can use.
> Anyways, it would give you something to beat up while figuring out
> those metalwork skills.
I've had some practice with the gun and bucking bar when I was visiting
Las Vegas. We did some work on Bob's wing .... Rick wouldn't let me
touch his!!!
Linn
do not archive
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
What it shows is a total lack of practical common sense within the
FAA. Other than a possible increase in electrical load (very MINOR at
that), what else would this affect? Is the structure altered? Doesn't
appear so. Is weight increased? Not really. Is safe aircraft operation
enhanced? I think so. Can the aircraft be brought back to "original
condition" if the installation was removed? Looks like to to me. The
only thing needed for this should be a logbook entry or at the most a
form 337 filing even for TC aircraft.
JKH
On 2/2/07, Kelly McMullen <apilot2@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The point of the article was TC aircraft, NOT experimental. The mounts
> are pretty popular in TC aircraft as well.
>
> On 2/2/07, tadsargent <tadsargent@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >
> > I believe experimental means just that. I could put a TRS80 personal
> > computer in the panel if I wanted to use it for navigation or Comm. I
> think
> > we have much latitude in this respect. Mounting a GPS on an experimental
> > requires no FAA sign off unless you are making major changes to the AC.
> > Just a thought.
> > Tad Sargent
> > 7A and helping build a 10A
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
> > To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 7:43 AM
> > Subject: RV10-List: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I saw this in today's AOPA newsletter:
> > >
> > > FAA MAY TAKE AWAY PANEL-MOUNT OPTION FOR PORTABLE GPS
> > > Think your portable GPS would work great mounted to your old Cessna
> 172's
> > > instrument panel? If the FAA has its way, you won't be able to mount it.
> > > The parts--panel dock and connective wiring--needed to mount your
> portable
> > > GPS would either no longer be available or be too expensive to buy. The
> > > FAA's proposal would make it illegal for manufacturers to produce a
> > > replacement or modification part if they know (or should know) the part
> > > would end up installed in a certified aircraft--that is unless they
> obtain
> > > production approval from the agency. But that costs tens of thousands of
> > > dollars, something many companies can't afford. While AOPA agrees
> > > production approval is necessary for critical parts like connecting rods
> > > and cylinders, it isn't needed for non-critical parts like a portable
> GPS
> > > panel dock or traffic detector that enhance pilot safety.
> > > See AOPA Online
> > > http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2007/070201parts.html ).
> > >
> > > To me, this would seem like pretty much a direct attack on Air gizmos
> > > for the Garmin handheld docking stations. I know the 396/496 get
> > > awfully tempting to substitute in for a certified box. They must
> > > be seeing some 337's (or worse....NOT seeing 337's) coming in on
> > > putting those in certified planes. They're great boxes, but apparently
> > > the FAA has their opinion of what they want to see.
> > >
> > > Never thought I'd read that when I woke up today.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> > > do not archive
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
The problem is in the definition. The FAA has allowed PORTABLE devices
to be used in certified aircraft. PORTABLE devices do not have to meet
the FAAs testing and installation guidelines. When you physically mount
a PORTABLE device to the airframe, it's no longer PORTABLE, and the FAA
is re-visiting the wording in this area, since some owners are mounting
the docking stations etc. to the airframe. The FAA doesn't see
hardmounting a docking station and having the GPS (or whatever)
removeable as meeting the spirit of the interpretation. At leat that's
what I hear.
Linn
do not archive
James K Hovis wrote:
> <james.k.hovis@gmail.com>
>
> What it shows is a total lack of practical common sense within the
> FAA. Other than a possible increase in electrical load (very MINOR at
> that), what else would this affect? Is the structure altered? Doesn't
> appear so. Is weight increased? Not really. Is safe aircraft operation
> enhanced? I think so. Can the aircraft be brought back to "original
> condition" if the installation was removed? Looks like to to me. The
> only thing needed for this should be a logbook entry or at the most a
> form 337 filing even for TC aircraft.
>
> JKH
>
>
> On 2/2/07, Kelly McMullen <apilot2@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> The point of the article was TC aircraft, NOT experimental. The mounts
>> are pretty popular in TC aircraft as well.
>>
>> On 2/2/07, tadsargent <tadsargent@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> <tadsargent@bellsouth.net>
>> >
>> > I believe experimental means just that. I could put a TRS80 personal
>> > computer in the panel if I wanted to use it for navigation or Comm. I
>> think
>> > we have much latitude in this respect. Mounting a GPS on an
>> experimental
>> > requires no FAA sign off unless you are making major changes to the
>> AC.
>> > Just a thought.
>> > Tad Sargent
>> > 7A and helping build a 10A
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>> > To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 7:43 AM
>> > Subject: RV10-List: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment
>> >
>> >
>> > >
>> > > I saw this in today's AOPA newsletter:
>> > >
>> > > FAA MAY TAKE AWAY PANEL-MOUNT OPTION FOR PORTABLE GPS
>> > > Think your portable GPS would work great mounted to your old Cessna
>> 172's
>> > > instrument panel? If the FAA has its way, you won't be able to
>> mount it.
>> > > The parts--panel dock and connective wiring--needed to mount your
>> portable
>> > > GPS would either no longer be available or be too expensive to
>> buy. The
>> > > FAA's proposal would make it illegal for manufacturers to produce a
>> > > replacement or modification part if they know (or should know)
>> the part
>> > > would end up installed in a certified aircraft--that is unless they
>> obtain
>> > > production approval from the agency. But that costs tens of
>> thousands of
>> > > dollars, something many companies can't afford. While AOPA agrees
>> > > production approval is necessary for critical parts like
>> connecting rods
>> > > and cylinders, it isn't needed for non-critical parts like a
>> portable
>> GPS
>> > > panel dock or traffic detector that enhance pilot safety.
>> > > See AOPA Online
>> > > http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2007/070201parts.html ).
>> > >
>> > > To me, this would seem like pretty much a direct attack on Air
>> gizmos
>> > > for the Garmin handheld docking stations. I know the 396/496 get
>> > > awfully tempting to substitute in for a certified box. They must
>> > > be seeing some 337's (or worse....NOT seeing 337's) coming in on
>> > > putting those in certified planes. They're great boxes, but
>> apparently
>> > > the FAA has their opinion of what they want to see.
>> > >
>> > > Never thought I'd read that when I woke up today.
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>> > > do not archive
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
When I first saw these things, I was amazed. It was like magically
reading the minds of the people on how to best put a nice handheld
into a panel. I didn't even consider putting one in my Sundowner,
because I didn't think I could get it approved. But, even though
I think for a harcore IFR panel you're best putting the info on
an integrated MFD, I think it's a fantastic option for the homebuilders.
The 496 is an extremely impressive device. I've even recommended
to my own father that if he builds a plane, he should buy one
of the AirGizmos and do just that...mount a handheld in the plane.
I didn't realize that people would even try to put them in a
certified plane though, although from the comments returned
on this thread already today, I guess I agree...I can't
see why you shouldn't be able to. I've always just equated
handheld with non-approved and extended non-approved to mean
"can't do in a certified plane". That's a poor assumption
I guess.
You know, what burns me the most is that if you look at
the GOAL of the FAA, it's generally safety. And what
could make today's VFR AND IFR planes safer than affordable
ways to get weather data into the panel. Again, I think if
you're doing a really hardcore IFR panel, you're probably
best off doing an MX-20/MX-200/EX-500/Chelton/OPTech type
thing, because you'll have much better integration than
doing it on a separate box. But, I would think that even
for people who HAVE some of that stuff, these panel mount
handhelds would be a fantastic solution. Weather data
in the cockpit IMHO is a minimum requirement type thing.
I wish you luck in your education of the FAA on the issue,
because you've got a great product, that serves a very
useful market niche, and has the potential for adding
a lot of safety to todays aircraft. The fact that you even did
burn and load testing is a sure sign that you're doing your
share to do it right. You should shoot an email once in
a while about your product to the list, as you get
significant happenings. I don't think anyone here would be
offended, but on the contrary, they'd probably love to hear.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Michael Schipper wrote:
>
> I don't normally make posts regarding AirGizmos, but in this case I feel
> compelled to tell a bit of the story, just so you guys can know.
>
> AirGizmos is a very small company. I designed the Panel Dock for the
> Garmin 196 when I was building my RV-9A. It was simply a solution to a
> problem that I had when designing my panel. I am fortunate to have a
> friend who is in the plastics industry. We worked together to make
> something that we could be proud of. It was always intended for
> experimental use. The business just grew because other builders had the
> same problem as I did. I have been amazed at the number of positive
> emails I have received from fellow builders.
>
> Well, over time it seems that certified owners have noticed the
> AirGizmos products because they are looking for solutions to the same
> issues. They want something safer than the yoke-mount contraption
> they've been using. So, we've worked to have burn tests and load
> analyses done on the Panel Dock to make it easier for people to get 337s
> approved. Again, this isn't the market we were targeting, but there is
> definitely a lot of demand.
>
> What is really interesting is that this comes down to politics.
> Apparently the people in the avionics industry are not happy. We've been
> approached by the leader of one professional organization saying we need
> to join their association "or else." It felt like extortion to me, so we
> declined. Well, now we see this story. We have good working
> relationships with several avionics shops and local FSDOs, and we've
> provided everything short of a PMA for our products.
>
> The sad part is that in my opinion the AirGizmos Panel Dock is a good,
> safe solution. Much safer than the yoke mount for obvious reasons.
>
> Regards,
> Mike Schipper
> RV-9A - N63MS - www.my9a.com
> RV-10 - #40576 - www.rvten.com
> www.airgizmos.com
>
> Do not archive
>
> On Feb 2, 2007, at 6:43 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
>
>>
>> I saw this in today's AOPA newsletter:
>>
>> FAA MAY TAKE AWAY PANEL-MOUNT OPTION FOR PORTABLE GPS
>> Think your portable GPS would work great mounted to your old Cessna
>> 172's instrument panel? If the FAA has its way, you won't be able to
>> mount it.
>> The parts--panel dock and connective wiring--needed to mount your
>> portable GPS would either no longer be available or be too expensive
>> to buy. The FAA's proposal would make it illegal for manufacturers to
>> produce a replacement or modification part if they know (or should
>> know) the part would end up installed in a certified aircraft--that is
>> unless they obtain production approval from the agency. But that costs
>> tens of thousands of dollars, something many companies can't afford.
>> While AOPA agrees production approval is necessary for critical parts
>> like connecting rods and cylinders, it isn't needed for non-critical
>> parts like a portable GPS panel dock or traffic detector that enhance
>> pilot safety.
>> See AOPA Online
>> http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2007/070201parts.html ).
>>
>> To me, this would seem like pretty much a direct attack on Air gizmos
>> for the Garmin handheld docking stations. I know the 396/496 get
>> awfully tempting to substitute in for a certified box. They must
>> be seeing some 337's (or worse....NOT seeing 337's) coming in on
>> putting those in certified planes. They're great boxes, but apparently
>> the FAA has their opinion of what they want to see.
>>
>> Never thought I'd read that when I woke up today.
>>
>> --Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>> do not archive
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Firewalls and proseal |
I just want to make sure I know what product you set the torch to. Was it
Proseal, or was it the Flamemaster stuff that Van's sells for prosealing
things like trailing edges.
John Jessen
#328
do not archive
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Vern W. Smith
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 8:00 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Firewalls and proseal
Just an FYI: Chapters 27 and 28 mentions using "proseal" to seal the
firewall seams. The plans offer no further explanation than this. Proseal is
proseal right? No. My Tech. counselor pointed out this is high temperature
sealant not the stuff used on the fuel tanks.
So just for fun I put a propane torch on a small sample of cured proseal
left over from the fuel tanks. This stuff burns almost as well as
marshmallows! The fact the can says Flamemaster (Company name) doesn't help
clarify things either. I know it's probably 'in the archives.' But unless it
was pointed out I would have not known there was a difference. Hope this
save someone some grief. Good news it was caught before I used the wrong
sealant:-)
Vern Smith (#324)
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Sportair composite construction class worth it? |
After a lot of the recent dialog about the joys of working with the composite
parts of the plane, do you think the Sportair Composite Construction class would
be worth while? I noticed there will be a class relatively in the neighborhood.
I have not seen any other of the sportair workshops yet. My only experience with
composites is with the occasional ding repair on surfboards.
Thanks,
Jae
do not archive
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
One of the requirements of a panel mounted GPS (I think) is that it have
a separate attachment that warns of signal loss (raim?) that is in the
pilot's view when he scans the instruments. You do not find that in a
hand-held GPS. In fact, your handheld GPS may go TU and you won't
notice for quite a while ...... when you notice that the GPS airplane is
parked somewhere far behind you. Bad news in an IFR environment. Ranks
up there with a gyro compass that dies on ya because the vacuum pump failed.
Tim is right .... with the FAA, it's all about safety ...... trying to
protect us from ourselves and our penchant for taking the
less-espensive-route (notice I didn't say cheap) and relying on
something that may just not be fully functional when you need it.
Lets take a handheld radio. You can buy one for a whole lot less than a
panel mount, and it'll be as good or better in it's operation. Even has
a VOR display!!! But it's PORTABLE and it runs on batteries. Batteries
run down and then it's useless. Kinda like my AnywhereMap on a trip!
So you plug it into ships power ...... and the jack fails, or the cable
fails ..... pick any scenario ..... and now you're stuck. What do you
do when your headste mike takes a dump???? Do you have another mic
plugged in that you can use? Have you tried your hand mic lately???
Most die and are never replaced .... and yeah, I'm guilty here too. I
feel naked when I can't communicate ..... or navigate .....
And back to your GPS ...... do you regularly tune in your VOR receiver
to make sure it's still working??? I'll be a lot of you don't. When
your GPS croaks, it's a bad time to find out your VOR won't tune or died
somehow.
Just a few things to think about, and I'm not pointing fingers here
..... if I get a few folks to really think aboout the complacency thingy
..... I'm happy.
Linn
do not archive
Tim Olson wrote:
>
> When I first saw these things, I was amazed. It was like magically
> reading the minds of the people on how to best put a nice handheld
> into a panel. I didn't even consider putting one in my Sundowner,
> because I didn't think I could get it approved. But, even though
> I think for a harcore IFR panel you're best putting the info on
> an integrated MFD, I think it's a fantastic option for the homebuilders.
> The 496 is an extremely impressive device. I've even recommended
> to my own father that if he builds a plane, he should buy one
> of the AirGizmos and do just that...mount a handheld in the plane.
>
> I didn't realize that people would even try to put them in a
> certified plane though, although from the comments returned
> on this thread already today, I guess I agree...I can't
> see why you shouldn't be able to. I've always just equated
> handheld with non-approved and extended non-approved to mean
> "can't do in a certified plane". That's a poor assumption
> I guess.
>
> You know, what burns me the most is that if you look at
> the GOAL of the FAA, it's generally safety. And what
> could make today's VFR AND IFR planes safer than affordable
> ways to get weather data into the panel. Again, I think if
> you're doing a really hardcore IFR panel, you're probably
> best off doing an MX-20/MX-200/EX-500/Chelton/OPTech type
> thing, because you'll have much better integration than
> doing it on a separate box. But, I would think that even
> for people who HAVE some of that stuff, these panel mount
> handhelds would be a fantastic solution. Weather data
> in the cockpit IMHO is a minimum requirement type thing.
>
> I wish you luck in your education of the FAA on the issue,
> because you've got a great product, that serves a very
> useful market niche, and has the potential for adding
> a lot of safety to todays aircraft. The fact that you even did
> burn and load testing is a sure sign that you're doing your
> share to do it right. You should shoot an email once in
> a while about your product to the list, as you get
> significant happenings. I don't think anyone here would be
> offended, but on the contrary, they'd probably love to hear.
>
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Sportair composite construction class worth it? |
Not having to repair my surfboard in many years ;-) , the only
difference I see is that our aviation composites have gone to epoxy
resins (or vinylester) while my surfboards used the polyester stuff.
You already have the skills (and tools) necessary to do the work.
Whether it's worth it or not will depend on what you take away from the
workshop ..... but by then it's going to be too late to know if it's
really worth it or not!!!
Linn
Jae Chang wrote:
> After a lot of the recent dialog about the joys of working with the
> composite parts of the plane, do you think the Sportair Composite
> Construction class would be worth while? I noticed there will be a
> class relatively in the neighborhood. I have not seen any other of the
> sportair workshops yet. My only experience with composites is with the
> occasional ding repair on surfboards.
>
> Thanks,
> Jae
> do not archive
>
>
>
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
>You do not find that in a hand-held GPS.
I don't know about the others, but my GPSMAP 296 has a white ALARM wire
that you can hookup to a relay to drive a buzzer, light, or whatever you
want. The signal activates whenever a message pops up on the display,
such as "GPS SIGNAL LOST" along with about a hundred other messages.
The signal does work, but curiously there's no mention of that wire in
my 296 manual.
-Jim 40384
linn Walters wrote:
>
> One of the requirements of a panel mounted GPS (I think) is that it
> have a separate attachment that warns of signal loss (raim?) that is
> in the pilot's view when he scans the instruments. You do not find
> that in a hand-held GPS. In fact, your handheld GPS may go TU and you
> won't notice for quite a while ...... when you notice that the GPS
> airplane is parked somewhere far behind you. Bad news in an IFR
> environment. Ranks up there with a gyro compass that dies on ya
> because the vacuum pump failed.
> Tim is right .... with the FAA, it's all about safety ...... trying to
> protect us from ourselves and our penchant for taking the
> less-espensive-route (notice I didn't say cheap) and relying on
> something that may just not be fully functional when you need it.
>
> Lets take a handheld radio. You can buy one for a whole lot less than
> a panel mount, and it'll be as good or better in it's operation. Even
> has a VOR display!!! But it's PORTABLE and it runs on batteries.
> Batteries run down and then it's useless. Kinda like my AnywhereMap
> on a trip! So you plug it into ships power ...... and the jack fails,
> or the cable fails ..... pick any scenario ..... and now you're
> stuck. What do you do when your headste mike takes a dump???? Do you
> have another mic plugged in that you can use? Have you tried your
> hand mic lately??? Most die and are never replaced .... and yeah, I'm
> guilty here too. I feel naked when I can't communicate ..... or
> navigate .....
>
> And back to your GPS ...... do you regularly tune in your VOR receiver
> to make sure it's still working??? I'll be a lot of you don't. When
> your GPS croaks, it's a bad time to find out your VOR won't tune or
> died somehow.
>
> Just a few things to think about, and I'm not pointing fingers here
> ..... if I get a few folks to really think aboout the complacency
> thingy ..... I'm happy.
> Linn
>
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
Sure, we can make the cockpit safer...ban all portable electronic
devices, especially game boys, dvd players and Ipods from aircraft
cockpit. Ban cigar lighter receptacles. Put the TC aircraft pilots
back to VOR, ADF and Loran until they can afford a certified panel
mount GPS. That will really enhance safety.
I see it now, kids in back seat, with "are we there yet" syndrome,
with nothing but crayons and coloring books, "helping" the pilot's
concentration.
While we are at it, might as well ban all the panel mount VFR GPS's
that have the same shortcomings as the portables. Yup, Uncle is here
to protect us from ourselves.
On 2/2/07, linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> One of the requirements of a panel mounted GPS (I think) is that it have
> a separate attachment that warns of signal loss (raim?) that is in the
> pilot's view when he scans the instruments. You do not find that in a
> hand-held GPS. In fact, your handheld GPS may go TU and you won't
> notice for quite a while ...... when you notice that the GPS airplane is
> parked somewhere far behind you. Bad news in an IFR environment. Ranks
> up there with a gyro compass that dies on ya because the vacuum pump failed.
> Tim is right .... with the FAA, it's all about safety ...... trying to
> protect us from ourselves and our penchant for taking the
> less-espensive-route (notice I didn't say cheap) and relying on
> something that may just not be fully functional when you need it.
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Firewalls and proseal |
Good catch. Van's sells two products and both are made by Firemaster.
The one I put the torch to is the Fuel Tank Sealant (part# MC-236-B2
quart size.) The other product CS1900 Firewall Sealant is the high temp
product.
Vern Smith (#324 fuselage)
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Jessen
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 9:30 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Firewalls and proseal
I just want to make sure I know what product you set the torch to. Was
it Proseal, or was it the Flamemaster stuff that Van's sells for
prosealing things like trailing edges.
John Jessen
#328
do not archive
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Vern W. Smith
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 8:00 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Firewalls and proseal
Just an FYI: Chapters 27 and 28 mentions using "proseal" to seal the
firewall seams. The plans offer no further explanation than this.
Proseal is proseal right? No. My Tech. counselor pointed out this is
high temperature sealant not the stuff used on the fuel tanks.
So just for fun I put a propane torch on a small sample of cured
proseal left over from the fuel tanks. This stuff burns almost as well
as marshmallows! The fact the can says Flamemaster (Company name)
doesn't help clarify things either. I know it's probably 'in the
archives.' But unless it was pointed out I would have not known there
was a difference. Hope this save someone some grief. Good news it was
caught before I used the wrong sealant:-)
Vern Smith (#324)
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronic
s
.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting panel-mount handheld GPS comment |
I know it might not have been intended to invoke a laugh
Kelly, but your post reminded me of something...
I consider to be one of the TOP safety devices in my
airplane to be the "ISO" button on my intercom. You
don't know how many times I've saved myself from a wailing
kid. My wife and I wish they had those for our cars.
and better yet... I always carry ear plugs. No, the kids
don't need them anymore, but one time on final
from a trip, my daughter said "I gotta poop", and since
she was potty training my wife got out the portable kid
toilet and sat her down. Them ear plug things work well
in the nostrils too, and it can prevent some serious
flight safety issues. ;)
I'm also not ashamed to admit I always carry one of
those "bottles" with me. If I'm on an x/c trip to an
unfamiliar airport, after a 4 hours flight, I think
it's a great flight safety enhancer to NOT be thinking
about how bad you want to be on the ground for some
relief.
Yup, it's the little things that count...and having
good quality gear available to the masses can only help...
but ONLY if they use them for their intended purpose.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
> Sure, we can make the cockpit safer...ban all portable electronic
> devices, especially game boys, dvd players and Ipods from aircraft
> cockpit. Ban cigar lighter receptacles. Put the TC aircraft pilots
> back to VOR, ADF and Loran until they can afford a certified panel
> mount GPS. That will really enhance safety.
> I see it now, kids in back seat, with "are we there yet" syndrome,
> with nothing but crayons and coloring books, "helping" the pilot's
> concentration.
> While we are at it, might as well ban all the panel mount VFR GPS's
> that have the same shortcomings as the portables. Yup, Uncle is here
> to protect us from ourselves.
>
> On 2/2/07, linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>> One of the requirements of a panel mounted GPS (I think) is that it have
>> a separate attachment that warns of signal loss (raim?) that is in the
>> pilot's view when he scans the instruments. You do not find that in a
>> hand-held GPS. In fact, your handheld GPS may go TU and you won't
>> notice for quite a while ...... when you notice that the GPS airplane is
>> parked somewhere far behind you. Bad news in an IFR environment. Ranks
>> up there with a gyro compass that dies on ya because the vacuum pump
>> failed.
>> Tim is right .... with the FAA, it's all about safety ...... trying to
>> protect us from ourselves and our penchant for taking the
>> less-espensive-route (notice I didn't say cheap) and relying on
>> something that may just not be fully functional when you need it.
>
>
>
>
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Sportair composite construction class worth it? |
Having just taken that specific class a week ago, I feel I'm slightly
better off than staying at a Holiday Inn Express. Seriously though, I
feel I'm above average in composite knowledge and I still felt it was a
worthwhile class. This is the 4th Sportair workshop I have taken and I
haven't been disappointed yet. If nothing else it is nice to have a
little hands on experience on something other than my parts.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Limbo
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jae Chang
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 11:45 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Sportair composite construction class worth it?
After a lot of the recent dialog about the joys of working with the
composite parts of the plane, do you think the Sportair Composite
Construction class would be worth while? I noticed there will be a class
relatively in the neighborhood. I have not seen any other of the
sportair workshops yet. My only experience with composites is with the
occasional ding repair on surfboards.
Thanks,
Jae
do not archive
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: [Fwd: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations] |
Given past discussions here on purge valves, I'm forwarding from the
RV list this important safety information.
---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: RV-List: Re: I've sworn off purge valve installations
From: "kahuna" <mike.stewart@us.ibm.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--> RV-List message posted by: "kahuna" <mike.stewart@us.ibm.com>
Well here I am again with this topic because I have some new data for you.
Last month an RV-4 N360WS, based at my airport, had an engine failure
while enroute and landed in a field. Pilot had his 10 yr old son with him.
Both are ok. Plane is totaled. FAA has just completed its findings. PURGE
VALVE FAILURE. Yep thats right. The pilot/builder did the same thing I
did. Mounted and plumbed it without knowing that the little screws had to
be safety wired. I was fortunate. HE was not. While he survived his off
field, his show quality RV-4 is now in the heap pile.
He also did not use his valve except for shut down. So I ask you... What
are the chances that this is some isolated problem. 2 guys, from the same
field, within a month of each other, with a failure of the purge valve?
You still think its edge case?
I say to you again, I have sworn them off my planes. Not needed on an RV,
adds both complexity and failure modes.
And if you have not checked your purge valve for the screws being safety
wired, I suggest you get right on it. Sorry to bring this up again, but I
feel at least compelled to bring you the data.
See ya,
Mike
[quote="mstewart(at)iss.net"]After my second failure in a couple thousand
hours of running fuel injection with pruge valves, I have concluded they
are unnecessary and can have multiple failure modes that can bring you
down.
As many of you know Airflow Performance of Spartanburg SC sells a terrific
fuel injection system for all kinds of engines. from boats, to dragsters,
to planes. I have had their system on 2 RV's and have had 2 failures in
the purge system. The purpose in the purge valve is simple. On a hot
start, pull the valve, turn your pump on, and allow the hot vapors out for
a few seconds. Close the valve and start your normal hot start procedures.
On my RV-6 I had the purge vale return line running into the cockpit and
into a tee on the fuel inlet near the tank selector switch. AFP recommends
this returning back to the tank, but I felt this to be too complex an
installation. One day, while scudding back from SnF, close to home base,
with Michelle in the right seat, the engine coughed and would barely run.
I managed to limp home. After weeks of troubleshooting, it turned out that
I had a crack in a tube FWF on the purge return line. This crack was
allowing air into the return line, and hence air into the fuel flow to the
engine. After this incident I decided on my next plane, I would NOT put
the purge return line into the fuel supply system. This failure could have
put me and my wife in the trees.
On my 8, I ran the purge return into the left tank vent. Thought being,
let the vapors and a little fuel run to the ground. Don't let a line
leak here spoil my fuel. So on a trip last week with several RV's and
wifes to NYC for a play and a movie, plane died on landing rollout in NJ.
ARGH! We finished our weekend getaway with the wife's, but on Sunday I
put wife on a Delta flight home and began troubleshooting. What I found
was the plane was way lean in running and would barely idle below 1500. I
removed the fuel inlet to the servo and there was plenty of fuel going in,
but the engine was not getting it. I checked screens and a few other
things and no joy. I decided it was the servo not metering the fuel
properly. I finally decided I try taking off and climbing to altitude and
see if mother nature would richen it with altitude. Sure enough, around
7k' I would get egt's at peak, and at 10k' I could run a little ROP.
BUT the fuel flow was +4gph more than normal. H!
ow could that be? I dunno, but it was running smooth and I flew her home
to Atlanta.
Safe in my own hanger, I removed the servo and flow divider and sent it
to AFP. Don returned it with no problem found. ARGH! Spent the weekend
troubleshooting and found the problem. The Purge valve was leaking
internally and some fuel was by passing and going to the return side.
Actually a lot of fuel was going to the return. This was causing lean
operation and high fuel flow. I have now sent this to AFP for repair. I
also suspect that this valve has been sending fuel to the return all along
in the past 300 hours. I have gotten from day 1, and unexplained +1.5gph
with my boost pump on.
In a couple thousand hours of RV injected operation in multiple aircraft,
I have not found I needed this purge valve function for hot starts. In
fact all I really use it for is to shut down the engine. Hot starts are
easily handled with proper technique. I have now sworn off this purge
valve madness as it provides no value in an RV and multiple failure modes.
Thought some of you might find this information useful.
Best,
Mike Stewart
> [b]
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=92355#92355
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Sportair composite construction class worth it? |
What were your thoughts on the wiring class? I was eying that one as it wi
ll be in town in March.=0A=0A--Shawn=0A40366=0A=0A----- Original Message --
--=0AFrom: RV Builder (Michael Sausen) <rvbuilder@sausen.net>=0ATo: rv10-li
st@matronics.com=0ASent: Friday, February 2, 2007 2:10:10 PM=0ASubject: RE:
RV10-List: Sportair composite construction class worth it?=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A
=0A =0A=0A<!--=0A _filtered {font-family:"Cambria Math";=0Apanose-1:2 4 5 3
5 4 6 3 2 4;}=0A _filtered {font-family:Calibri;=0Apanose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4
3 2 4;}=0A _filtered {font-family:Tahoma;=0Apanose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;
}=0A _filtered {font-family:Consolas;=0Apanose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}=0A/
* Style Definitions */=0A p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal=0A{ma
rgin:0in;=0Amargin-bottom:.0001pt;=0Afont-size:12.0pt;=0Afont-family:"Times
New Roman","serif";}=0Aa:link, span.MsoHyperlink=0A{=0Acolor:blue;=0Ate
xt-decoration:underline;}=0Aa:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed=0A{=0Ac
olor:purple;=0Atext-decoration:underline;}=0Apre=0A{=0A=0Amargin:0in;=0A
margin-bottom:.0001pt;=0Afont-size:10.0pt;=0Afont-family:"Courier New";}=0A
span.HTMLPreformattedChar=0A{=0A=0A=0Afont-family:Consolas;}=0Aspan.Emai
lStyle19=0A{=0Afont-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";=0Acolor:#1F497D;}=0A.
MsoChpDefault=0A{=0Afont-size:10.0pt;}=0A _filtered {=0Amargin:1.0in 1.0
in 1.0in 1.0in;}=0Adiv.Section1=0A{}=0A-->=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AHaving ju
st taken that specific class a week ago, I feel I=92m=0Aslightly better off
than staying at a Holiday Inn Express. Seriously=0Athough, I feel I=92m a
bove average in composite knowledge and I still felt=0Ait was a worthwhile
class. This is the 4th Sportair workshop I=0Ahave taken and I haven=92t be
en disappointed yet. If nothing else it=0Ais nice to have a little hands o
n experience on something other than my parts.=0A =0A=0A =0A =0A=0AMichael
Sausen=0A =0A=0A-10 #352 Limbo=0A =0A=0A =0A =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AFrom:=0Aow
ner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com=0A[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matroni
cs.com] On Behalf Of Jae Chang=0A=0ASent: Friday, February 02, 2007 11:45 A
M=0A=0ATo: rv10-list@matronics.com=0A=0ASubject: RV10-List: Sportair compos
ite construction class worth it?=0A =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A =0A =0A=0A=0A
=0AAfter a lot of the recent dialog about the joys of working with the=0Aco
mposite parts of the plane, do you think the Sportair Composite Constructio
n=0Aclass would be worth while? I noticed there will be a class relatively
in the=0Aneighborhood. I have not seen any other of the sportair workshops
yet. My only=0Aexperience with composites is with the occasional ding repai
r on surfboards.=0A =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A =0A =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AThanks,
=0A =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AJae=0A =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0Ado not archive=0A =0A
=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A =0A =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A http://www.matronics.com/Navigato
=======================0A=0A=0A
=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A =0A________________________________________________________
____________________________=0AFood fight? Enjoy some healthy debate =0Ain
the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.=0Ahttp://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link
=list&sid=396545367
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Sportair composite construction class worth it? |
I took that one last year and liked it. Again, I felt very comfortable
with wiring prior to it and still had a good take away. I think Bob
Collins had a write-up about that specific class in this week's RV
Builders Hotline as he was in it last week.
Michael
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Shawn Moon
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 3:17 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Sportair composite construction class worth it?
What were your thoughts on the wiring class? I was eying that one as it
will be in town in March.
--Shawn
40366
----- Original Message ----
From: RV Builder (Michael Sausen) <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
Sent: Friday, February 2, 2007 2:10:10 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Sportair composite construction class worth it?
Having just taken that specific class a week ago, I feel I'm slightly
better off than staying at a Holiday Inn Express. Seriously though, I
feel I'm above average in composite knowledge and I still felt it was a
worthwhile class. This is the 4th Sportair workshop I have taken and I
haven't been disappointed yet. If nothing else it is nice to have a
little hands on experience on something other than my parts.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Limbo
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jae Chang
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 11:45 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Sportair composite construction class worth it?
After a lot of the recent dialog about the joys of working with the
composite parts of the plane, do you think the Sportair Composite
Construction class would be worth while? I noticed there will be a class
relatively in the neighborhood. I have not seen any other of the
sportair workshops yet. My only experience with composites is with the
occasional ding repair on surfboards.
Thanks,
Jae
do not archive
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-L========
________________________________
Want to start your own business? Learn how on
to
and
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=41244/*http:/smallbusiness.yahoo.com/r-in%3
c
pre%3e%3cb%3e%3cfont%20size=2%20color=000000>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
the
===========
Message 37
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Thank you for the info.
Tad
----- Original Message -----
From: Rob Kermanj
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Door trim
Don't have a picture but I used a folded sandpaper and stuck it
between the door and the frame (sandpaper side facing the door edge)
while sanding, to get a good fit. This method also created the bevel
that you need. The door was hinged to the fuselage in it's final
position.
Make sure that you allow for the paint and "bondo" before you stop
sanding. If you sand too much, you can later tape the edge of the door
and fill between the door and the frame.
Good thing about fiberglass, it is forgiving. Although I recommend
that you get the best fit possible before resorting to "I'll fix it
before painting".
The trim bevel is all the way around.
I am sure others will have nifty ideas about the doors.
Do not archive
On Feb 2, 2007, at 9:56 AM, tadsargent wrote:
I have a question regarding Door trimming. On page 45-10 figures
1,2,3 show the doors being trimmed till they fit just inside the
openings on the fuse.
I have sanded the hinge side till it fits that way. My question is.
Did most of you builders do this while the door was on the hinges and
sand away till the fit is correct
or is there a better way. Additionally, which came first the fit or
the bevel or was the sanding done on a bevel to accomplish both at the
same time.
Lastly, is the trim bevel shown on this page completely around the
door opening.
Thanks for your responses or pictures.
Tad Sargent
(working on the dusty parts) RV10
- The RV10-List Email Forum - class="Apple-converted-space">
--> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List - NEW
MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - class="Apple-converted-space"> -->
http://forums.matronics.com
Message 38
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | A safety reminder. |
Safety reminder for this Spring and beyond from another list.
Jeff Edwards Wrote and again is right on target:
"Here is how you can reduce your chance of ending up in a pile of
aluminum or carbon at the end of the runway
1. train with a qualified instructor every 6 months-- practice makes
perfect
2. practice emergency procedures often-- know your procedures cold
3. don't fly into thunderstorms
4. stay instrument proficient (that means real damn good)
5. don't fly the airplane when it is broke
6. don't do anything stupid"
Jeff Edwards was a Navy Crash Investigator, now is a private contract
investigator on fatal OBAM statistics. He speaks regularly at High
Performance Proficiency Training. We just had a remarkable pilot buy
another local guys Harmon RV with IO-540 and within moments of flying
home (after purchase) to Ohio ran into a fuel starvation issue. He is
fine, his new purchase is not. Many probably saw it on the national
news.
Stay smart... Fly often. Build Wisely
John Cox
#40600
Message 39
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | How to Get the RV-10 Out the Workshop Door |
I need the outside distance from main gear to main gear, assuming the
engine, fuselage and tailcone are all attached. This is the likely
configuration that will be pushed out the door. I have checked Tim Olsen's
excellent site, and have almost all the dimensions, except for this one.
That is to say, the engine to tailcone measures 22.5 feet, and the cabin top
to the floor measures 80 inches. The greatest width seems to be from wing
stub to wing stub, at 57 inches. But then, oops, I forgot about the gear!
Hopefully all this will fit through a standard 8 foot wide by 8 foot tall
roll-up garage door. Why am I asking? I have to build the workshop, and
want to make sure I get it right (did I mention the door has to be on the
side of the building, since I live on a hill?) Another question - is it
feasible to wait and put the fuselage on the gear once it is out the door?
Your data and suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Tim Olsen, if we
get a good number, please add it to your "Work Area Tips and Workspace
Requirements" site.
Bill (and Jon) Reining
40514 tailcone
Message 40
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: How to Get the RV-10 Out the Workshop Door, Door Width, |
Garage, main wheel distance
Here are a bunch of posts I have saved on garage door requirements.
I hope it reads ok, I removed all the author names and removed those
words that keep this info out of the @ R C H I V E S
Some of you may read your words and if you would like credit just let us
know
7'9" on gear with no wheels or tires on. It may spread a little with the
weight of the engine.
NEXT
I think you're right around 8'. I used a 108" wide trailer to haul
it to the airport and I had 4 or 6 inches on the outsides of each
tire. If you plan for 9' wide, you should definitely have plenty of
room. That's not exact, but it should be close. I think when we
were measuring the tire-center widths for where to put the
ramps to the trailer, it was about 93 or 94" apart.
Check the three view drawing (available on Tim's site), it's 7' 4" to
the center of the tires.. I have the same issue.
Ahhh, you may be right on. In the email I just posted I said we measured
93 or 94" when setting up the ramps. I think that wasn't tire centers,
but was the outside edges of the ramps, which would be about right
if the tire centers were 88".
ANOTHER POST
I got this straight from Vans when I started:
"The tires are about 90" center to center - it "will fit on a standard 8'
wide flatbed
The height of the fuse at the cabin is approx 79" - maybe a little
more without the weight of the wings."
AND ANOTHER
We built ours in my oversized single stall garage.
Rough dimensions were 13X26 ft with a 10X10 ft work
area in the front. The door is 8ft by 6'6" high. We
kept the fuselage on temporary gear for as long as we
could and had to slide it out the door with the main
wheels off. Many pieces were fitted and then removed
to be reinstalled later. For example we used a nice
summer day to push the tail out the door to mount the
VS and HS. Final assembly is taking place in a hangar
at the airport. We have pictures if you have a
specific question I could answer.
NEXT
I remember a thread last year about distance between the mains and comments that
an 8' door width should be ok. I checked my plans and the A0 orthographic drawing
identified as DWG 1 shows a distance of 7'4" (88") between bottom main
centres. I measured my door openings and they came in at 94" - no problemo (me
thinks). The bad news came tonight.
Because of the camber, the maximum distance between the outside edges of the mains
is 94.5" (with no weight on the gear).
It will fit through if I remove the wheels. I have also read a suggestion to squeeze
the legs together using a strap. Can anyone vouch for that method? Some
rough geometry suggests the fuse will fit if it is manouvered sideways through
the door (rather than straight through) - has anyone had any success?
AND A RESPONSE
I can vouch both for the straps and for cocking it off to the side a little.
The fuse will fit in a standard shipping container (without the rods for the
wheel pants), but needs a strap and needs to be turned a little to fit in.
Getting out of the garage door should not be too hard if you turn it to the
side a little, get one wheel out and then slide it over a little to get the
other out. Either or both of these methods should help you get the plane
out without taking it off the gear. You will save a max of maybe an inch or
two without the wheels on, I think, but it looks like you only need another
half an inch. I think one of the above methods should take care of you for
just half and inch.
AND ANOTHER RESPONSE
Sounds like you could get by by removing one main
wheel and devising a teporary caster wheel or slide to
get it out the door and remount the main. We had to
get ours lower and narrower to get it out the door and
divised a temporary axle inside the hollow portion of
the main gear and put a small wheel on it. Lots of
ways to do it. Good luck.
HERE IS ONE ON DOOR HEIGHT
I could roll the plane in and out of the garage with the wheels and canopy on.
My door is also 7' tall. You have 2 to 3 inches of clearance.
Message 41
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: How to Get the RV-10 Out the Workshop Door |
I think 8' is going to be a little tight. There have been people
who have used straps to pull the gear legs closer, or you could
try to get one gear leg out first and then the other. But, now
don't quote me on this, but I think that when I loaded mine on the
trailer the gear tire center-to-center as 93-94". So then you
add on 1 full tire width plus little axle stub to that and
you'll get more than 96" wide. I'm pretty sure that without
doing one of the "tricks" you won't just roll it out the door.
My trailer was a 10'L x 108" wide trailer. It fit comfortably
inside that trailer for the haul to the airport. But I would
think you'll end up needing about 102" or so door width if you
just want to roll it out. Of course, bringing them together
with a strap will make the plane taller, but at 8' high you
probably don't have to worry about that one. I did...mine
made it through my garage door with about 1" clearance if I
had the door all the way up.
If someone does get me an exact measurement, I'll be happy
to update that page....it's been a question asked more than
once in the past few weeks, so I should really list that width
there.
As far as putting the gear on later, I see no reason why you
couldn't pin the gear in place using slightly undersized
bolts and then pull the gear for the trip out the door and
put it back on. It'll be a little lifting and work, but
it should be OK. You may want to take some caution tape and
put it on the fake bolts so you don't forget to swap the
real ones in once you're outside the garage. I kept a small
whiteboard with any critical things to remember as well.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Bill Reining wrote:
> I need the outside distance from main gear to main gear, assuming the
> engine, fuselage and tailcone are all attached. This is the likely
> configuration that will be pushed out the door. I have checked Tim
> Olsens excellent site, and have almost all the dimensions, except for
> this one. That is to say, the engine to tailcone measures 22.5 feet,
> and the cabin top to the floor measures 80 inches. The greatest width
> seems to be from wing stub to wing stub, at 57 inches. But then, oops,
> I forgot about the gear! Hopefully all this will fit through a standard
> 8 foot wide by 8 foot tall roll-up garage door. Why am I asking? I
> have to build the workshop, and want to make sure I get it right (did I
> mention the door has to be on the side of the building, since I live on
> a hill?) Another question is it feasible to wait and put the fuselage
> on the gear once it is out the door? Your data and suggestions would be
> greatly appreciated. Tim Olsen, if we get a good number, please add it
> to your Work Area Tips and Workspace Requirements site.
>
>
>
> Bill (and Jon) Reining
>
> 40514 tailcone
>
> *
Message 42
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RV10 Video from Down Under |
Found this on You Tube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BM9cqINzolc&mode=related&search
Zack
--------
RV8 #80125
RV10 # 40512
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=92507#92507
Message 43
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: A safety reminder. |
A safety reminder.Sounds like John Denver.
Dave
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: John W. Cox
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 7:52 PM
Subject: RV10-List: A safety reminder.
Safety reminder for this Spring and beyond from another list.
Jeff Edwards Wrote and again is right on target:
"Here is how you can reduce your chance of ending up in a pile of
aluminum or carbon at the end of the runway
1. train with a qualified instructor every 6 months-- practice makes
perfect
2. practice emergency procedures often-- know your procedures cold
3. don't fly into thunderstorms
4. stay instrument proficient (that means real damn good)
5. don't fly the airplane when it is broke
6. don't do anything stupid"
Jeff Edwards was a Navy Crash Investigator, now is a private contract
investigator on fatal OBAM statistics. He speaks regularly at High
Performance Proficiency Training. We just had a remarkable pilot buy
another local guys Harmon RV with IO-540 and within moments of flying
home (after purchase) to Ohio ran into a fuel starvation issue. He is
fine, his new purchase is not. Many probably saw it on the national
news.
Stay smart. Fly often. Build Wisely
John Cox
#40600
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|