Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:39 AM - Fuel flow sensor (Michael Wellenzohn)
2. 03:26 AM - Re: Fuel flow sensor (John Dunne)
3. 04:36 AM - Re: Flaps (Tim Olson)
4. 05:18 AM - Incentive! (dmaib@mac.com)
5. 05:59 AM - Re: Flaps (Jesse Saint)
6. 06:03 AM - Re: Fuel flow sensor (Jesse Saint)
7. 06:06 AM - GNS-430W? (Jesse Saint)
8. 06:39 AM - Re: Fuel flow sensor (Ralph E. Capen)
9. 07:12 AM - Re: Establishing gross weight (James K Hovis)
10. 07:20 AM - Fuel flow sensor (Fred Williams, M.D.)
11. 07:46 AM - Re: Establishing gross weight (Rene Felker)
12. 08:05 AM - Re: Fuel flow sensor (Rick)
13. 08:50 AM - Re: GNS-430W? (Vern W. Smith)
14. 09:06 AM - Re: GNS-430W? (Darton Steve)
15. 09:08 AM - Baggage door lock arm (Jay Brinkmeyer)
16. 09:08 AM - Re: Fuel flow sensor (Jesse Saint)
17. 09:30 AM - Rosen Visors, finally! (Jesse Saint)
18. 09:48 AM - Re: Rosen Visors, finally! (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
19. 09:53 AM - Re: GNS-430W? (Rob Kermanj)
20. 09:54 AM - Re: Rosen Visors, finally! (Rob Kermanj)
21. 10:11 AM - Re: GNS-430W? (Jesse Saint)
22. 10:15 AM - Re: Flaps (William Curtis)
23. 10:29 AM - Re: GNS-430W? (Rob Kermanj)
24. 10:32 AM - Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy (Jesse Saint)
25. 10:33 AM - Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy (Jesse Saint)
26. 10:35 AM - Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy (Jesse Saint)
27. 10:36 AM - Re: Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy (Jesse Saint)
28. 10:40 AM - Re: Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy (Jesse Saint)
29. 10:40 AM - Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy (LARSON36@aol.com)
30. 10:46 AM - Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy (Condrey, Bob (US SSA))
31. 10:51 AM - Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy (Jesse Saint)
32. 11:08 AM - Upper Fwd Fuse (Robert Wright)
33. 11:09 AM - Visors (Fred Williams, M.D.)
34. 11:25 AM - Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy (Jesse Saint)
35. 11:33 AM - Re: Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
36. 11:35 AM - Re: GNS-430W? (Vern W. Smith)
37. 11:43 AM - Re: Upper Fwd Fuse (Rene Felker)
38. 11:43 AM - Re: Rosen Visors, finally! (Vern W. Smith)
39. 11:50 AM - Re: Upper Fwd Fuse (JSMcGrew@aol.com)
40. 11:56 AM - Re: Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy (Mark Ritter)
41. 12:01 PM - upper fwd fuse (Robert Wright)
42. 12:04 PM - Re: Upper Fwd Fuse (Jesse Saint)
43. 12:14 PM - Re: GNS-430W? (Rob Kermanj)
44. 12:16 PM - Re: Rosen Visors, finally! (Rob Kermanj)
45. 12:44 PM - When to start on the panel (Jon Reining)
46. 12:55 PM - Re: GNS-430W? (Tim Olson)
47. 12:55 PM - Re: Upper Fwd Fuse (Robert Wright)
48. 01:19 PM - Re: When to start on the panel (Tim Olson)
49. 01:44 PM - Re: GNS-430W? (Rob Kermanj)
50. 01:44 PM - Re: When to start on the panel (Jesse Saint)
51. 01:51 PM - Re: GNS-430W? (John Jessen)
52. 02:41 PM - Re: GNS-430W? (gary)
53. 02:46 PM - Re: Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy (Jay Rowe)
54. 02:58 PM - The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Jesse Saint)
55. 03:01 PM - Re: Establishing gross weight (Scott Schmidt)
56. 03:15 PM - Re: GNS-430W? (Rob Kermanj)
57. 03:16 PM - Re: GNS-430W? (Chris Johnston)
58. 03:22 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Rob Kermanj)
59. 03:42 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (John Gonzalez)
60. 03:42 PM - Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy (Ben Westfall)
61. 04:55 PM - Leaking gas tank (Wayne Edgerton)
62. 04:59 PM - Taking the deep questions Offline (John W. Cox)
63. 05:09 PM - Re: GNS-430W? (Darton Steve)
64. 05:11 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Tim Olson)
65. 05:26 PM - Re: Taking the deep questions Offline (Rick)
66. 05:37 PM - Re: Taking the deep questions Offline (MauleDriver)
67. 06:44 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Bill Schlatterer)
68. 06:54 PM - Re: Taking the deep questions Offline (Rick)
69. 07:04 PM - Re: GNS-430W? (linn Walters)
70. 07:12 PM - Re: Taking the deep questions Offline (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
71. 07:56 PM - Re: Flaps (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
72. 08:09 PM - Re: Upper Fwd Fuse (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
73. 08:15 PM - Re: When to start on the panel (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
74. 09:10 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Deems Davis)
75. 09:25 PM - Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy (Deems Davis)
76. 09:28 PM - FW: Upper Fwd Fuse (Albert Gardner)
77. 09:36 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Tim Olson)
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: | Fuel flow sensor |
Hello,
soon I'll start with the fuel system and I know that I need to purchase the fuel
pump and filter. i would like some advice regarding fuel flow sensors. Can anyone
recommand a proven system which would also work with e.g. AF-3500 or other
engine monitoring systems.
Many thanks
Michael
--------
RV-10 builder (wings)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114128#114128
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: Fuel flow sensor |
Michael, you'll find a lot of the EFIS and engine monitoring setups like
Dynon or GRT supply you the FloScan transducer as part of the package.
John 40315
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10@wellenzohn.net>
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 7:38 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Fuel flow sensor
> <rv-10@wellenzohn.net>
>
> Hello,
>
> soon I'll start with the fuel system and I know that I need to purchase
> the fuel pump and filter. i would like some advice regarding fuel flow
> sensors. Can anyone recommand a proven system which would also work with
> e.g. AF-3500 or other engine monitoring systems.
>
> Many thanks
> Michael
>
> --------
> RV-10 builder (wings)
> #511
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114128#114128
>
>
>
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 |
|
Yeah really, 87kts. The approaches are pretty comfortable to fly at
95-100kts with no flaps though, or depending on the bumps and vis
you may even fly them at 120kts. I've never been asked to keep my
speed up on an IFR approach, but have been asked on a totally
VFR day. In general, slowing down isn't what I'd call easy, but
you really need to get familiar with the RV-10 and get a good
feel for it. Once you do that you can do a lot of things. If
you can get it down under 100kts though, an approach would be no
big deal.
My comment about the Johnson bar was, yeah, that's the indicator, but
just by looking at it, you couldn't always see quickly how much flaps
you put out too. There were 3 notches, and it was easy to have 2 out
when you wanted 3, and you had to pull the lever to verify which one
of those positions you were at. So while it was an indicator, it
was a crude one, and it wasn't impossible to get confused as to
exactly where it was set. At least in the RV-10 there are only 2
"real" flap positions to worry about, and for the most part, if you
just set the flaps to the first one you would be fine except
for possibly when you really want that extra drag of full flaps.
Like I said though, the biggest shortcoming is that 87kt Vfe. If
you're trying to fly a pattern using something like 85, 85, 75, you
really have to be careful not to find yourself accelerating to 90+.
I try to get as stabilized as possible and fly my patterns at
80,80,75kts, but allow myself some upwards leeway on the 80's
and call it 80-85. You don't want to get below 70kts, and
75kts is really comfortable, so you're only dealing with 12kts of
margin between your max flap speed and your comfortable short
final speed. That's why on IFR approaches it's just easier to
fly a stable approach with no flaps and just keep the speed
up 10kts...and add them as required when the runway is in sight.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
John Jessen wrote:
>
> The Johnson bar was your indicator.
>
> Really? 87 knots before flaps! Have you been on approach when the
> controller has asked you to keep your speed up? Any issues slowing down?
>
> John Jessen
> 328
>
> do not archive
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 |
|
Thanks to Tim Olson I got a big shot of incentive yesterday. I was privileged to
pick up Rodger Todd at his hotel in St. Paul and take him to KSGS to meet Tim
and Andrea who were flying in to pick Rodger up. Tim took me up for a wonderful
45 minute flight in N104CD. What an airplane! It performs like a champ, the
Cheltons are awesome, (I might be changing my mind, Stein!)comfortable, and
on and on and on. What a treat! Thanks Tim for all you do for this group of enthusiasts.
David (enthusiastically pounding rivets) Maib
--------
David Maib
RV-10 #40559
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114138#114138
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 |
|
"0" is actually "0". If you drop one notch and don't feel a difference,
then you are at "0". If you give it another notch, then you can feel them
going to "15", and then on to "30" as Tim mentioned. We normally takeoff
with 15, then go all the way up and back down to "0" for climb, then all the
way up for cruise, but going all the way up for climb doesn't make that much
difference. You actually probably get better airspeed in the climb with
them all the way up, just don't climb quite as fast, so on a long trip, it
probably will end up the same.
Do not archive
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sam Marlow
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 7:23 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Flaps
Tell me Jesse, are you calling "0" actually "0" or is that the -3 degree
position.
Jesse Saint wrote:
I would think that when in IMC and focusing on getting to the ground, not
having to count seconds would be a great way to lighten the workload on the
pilot and keep his attention to the needles (or monitoring the Auto Pilot).
In most conditions it wouldn't make much difference, but it is nice to not
have to count. When you have flown for a while you can feel the change when
you lower the flaps with the FPS and know where they are (ie. 0, 15, or 30).
Do not archive
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of linn Walters
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 9:52 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Flaps
Interesting thread. I haven't given it serious thought. Since I'm not
flying yet, is there something that prevents you from using your Mark-1
eyeballs on the flap .... like requiring you to have the neck bones of an
owl??? Does the 'counting seconds' method of coming close to what you want
(or are used to) not work?? Just wondering out loud here.
Linn
do not archive
RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote:
Here are your main two options:
http://www.aircraftextras.com/FPS-Plus.htm
http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1179752413-22-378
<http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1179752413-22-378&bro
wse=airframe&product=fps> &browse=airframe&product=fps
I'm going with the Aircraft Extras product however you have to come up with
your own position sensor for theirs. Most people seem to be using a POS-12
from Ray Allen for this purpose.
http://www.rayallencompany.com/products/indsens.html
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Limbo
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sam Marlow
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 7:39 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Flaps
I'm finding little information on the flap positioning system, just
wondering what the majority of the group is doing here. After all, the flaps
are different than any airplane I've ever flown.
Thanks,
Sam Marlow
Still wiring
; - The RV10-List Email Forarch & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
_; --> http://www.matronics.bsp;
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List> - NEW MATRONICS WEB
FO; http://forums.matronics.com
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
<http://forums.matronics.com> http://forums.matronics.com
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: | Fuel flow sensor |
As John said, you really should decide what EMS you are going with before
deciding on the fuel flow sensor. I don't know how different they are or
how compatible, but I would recommend going with the one recommended by your
EMS manufacturer.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Wellenzohn
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 5:39 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Fuel flow sensor
Hello,
soon I'll start with the fuel system and I know that I need to purchase the
fuel pump and filter. i would like some advice regarding fuel flow sensors.
Can anyone recommand a proven system which would also work with e.g. AF-3500
or other engine monitoring systems.
Many thanks
Michael
--------
RV-10 builder (wings)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114128#114128
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 |
|
Has anybody flown the 430W or 530W yet? If so, have you flown it with an
autopilot that has Vertical Steering? If so, please enlighten the group as
to your thoughts on it.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
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: | Fuel flow sensor |
Jesse has a good point....
I have a VM1000 which uses a FloScan 200 (IIRC). The backlighting has been a little
fritzy lately and with the change in ownership of Vision Microsystems to
JPI - I'm not expecting an easy repair cycle...and I haven't even flown yet.
Sorry - off topic...
Meanwhile, the AF3400EM that I have been looking at can use the same fuel flow
sender according to Rob at advanced Flight Systems.
I'll know for sure shortly....
Ralph Capen
-----Original Message-----
>From: Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com>
>Sent: May 22, 2007 9:01 AM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: RV10-List: Fuel flow sensor
>
>
>As John said, you really should decide what EMS you are going with before
>deciding on the fuel flow sensor. I don't know how different they are or
>how compatible, but I would recommend going with the one recommended by your
>EMS manufacturer.
>
>Jesse Saint
>Saint Aviation, Inc.
>jesse@saintaviation.com
>www.saintaviation.com
>Cell: 352-427-0285
>Fax: 815-377-3694
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
>Wellenzohn
>Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 5:39 AM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RV10-List: Fuel flow sensor
>
>
>Hello,
>
>soon I'll start with the fuel system and I know that I need to purchase the
>fuel pump and filter. i would like some advice regarding fuel flow sensors.
>Can anyone recommand a proven system which would also work with e.g. AF-3500
>or other engine monitoring systems.
>
>Many thanks
>Michael
>
>--------
>RV-10 builder (wings)
>#511
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114128#114128
>
>
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: Establishing gross weight |
+3.8G/-1.5G has been, over time, determined to be the "acceptable"
limits for normal operations by the industry and the Feds. This means
in typically ordinary operations, an airplane will not encounter
conditions while flying that'll exceed these limits. However, as
mentioned elsewhere in this thread, exceeding those limits can be
quite easy. Deciding to lower your G limits so you can increase gross
weight is still a disaster waiting to happen to me. You've just
lowered your margins, so that where before you could have probably
tolerated moderate to moderately severe turbulence, you've just
limited yourself to only chop to light turbulence. Even then light
turbulence could overstress the airframe. This reminds me of my early
days in the company. Back then my boss used to share the field
difficulty reports from the Air Force with the troops. A certain
National Guard unit was transitioning from F-4 to F-15 at that time.
One airplane was flown into the base and as the paperwork was
reviewed, it was found with a 1G restriction to flight on it. The
airplane had a waiver attached, but the pilot who flew it had to have
the biggest set of any cock in the coop. Anyway, a 1G restriction
basically renders a fighter jet useless, in fact anything less than
the operational limits pretty much renders a jet useless. The NG kept
questioning why they got this bird and what to do with it. Eventually,
it was stripped of useable spare parts and the hulk placed on a
pedestal in front of the wing main office. I was fortunant to be part
of the airplane/pedestal interface design.
Kevin H.
On 5/19/07, Rene Felker <rene@felker.com> wrote:
> OK, just to stir the pot a little more...what category will your RV-10
> operate in? Utility, standard??? How may positive and how many negative
> g's. It all factors in doesn't it. If you place an operating limit on the
> aircraft of lets say +2/-.5 g's could you not increase the gross weight
> using the same test data that van's used? (just ignore the hard landing
> issue).
>
>
> What is the fuel burn in climb? 19 gallons an hour? .32 gallons a minute,
> or 1.9 pounds a minute. So can you add 20 pounds to the gross weight, and
> just assume a 10 minute climb and a reduced capability during climb?
>
>
> Been at work all day instead of being able to work on the plane, so if this
> does not make sense it is because I am to tired to think....
>
>
> Rene' Felker
>
> N423CF
>
> 40322 Finish or something like it, my panel arives on Wednesday form Stein,
> the pictures look great.
>
> 801-721-6080
>
> _____
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of GRANSCOTT@aol.com
> Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2007 9:55 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Establishing gross weight
>
>
> In a message dated 5/19/2007 10:52:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> LloydDR@wernerco.com writes:
>
> Research the history of the aircraft
> and you will see many gross weight changes without any modification to
> the airframe,
>
> Dan which aircraft were paper whipped into increases in gross weight/useful
> load without any additional work? The Cessna 172's were increased because
> of increased horsepower, tire size and rating changes and new landing gear
> modifications...cherokee were increased because of horsepower increases and
> other modifications.
>
>
> What method are you using to calculate your changes to the 10 that Van's has
> not gotten correct. I'd think that to really test the higher weights you'd
> need to develop a test bed wing and frame. One would probably need both a
> flying and static test bed product. I believe the Mooney factory static
> test bed they loads bags of shot until the wing deforms or retains it's
> original formation and attach points at a calculated load bearing weight.
> The the test pilot fly's the test bed stressing the heck out of the plane in
> every condition...spins, smap rolls etc and notes the results both with
> instruments and feel. Who know's estabilishing a new higher gross could
> include some fun flying...take along a parachaute, tho.
>
>
> It seems that a pilot the other week believed that he could do aerobatics in
> a baron as he believe the plane was capable of the stresses...it seems the
> plane broke up and a few folks when with him as he became a fatal test
> pilot.
>
>
> Patrick
>
>
> _____
>
> See what's free at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> .
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Fuel flow sensor |
Michael;
I am at the same point as you are and am starting to locate the parts
for the fuel system. I emailed AFS this am to see if we can get a
recommendation. I'll post their answer when obtained. If we don't hear
back later today, I'll call tomorrow.
Fred Williams
It's been a good week. Side panels fit to the fuselage and those bends
are done. Brand spanking new Barrett 270 HP Lycoming sitting on the
shop floor. Purchased the one that Roy posted on the site about two
weeks ago. Sweeeeeet.
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: | Establishing gross weight |
I am surprised that I have only gotten two real replies to my posting. As
you can guess, I was taking a look at the gross weight issue from another
perspective. Since I am not doing any design changes, how could I justify
increasing the gross weight within the constraints of current design.
Flying in the intermountain west, Ogden Utah is home base, there is no real
way of avoiding all turbulence....maybe not flying at all would avoid
it...., so assuming a -.5g is a little unrealistic, but the whole concept of
being able to have different gross weights as long as certain operating
limitations were placed on the flight still intrigues me. Maybe I will talk
to the DAR and see what he thinks......
But, just in case you are wondering, the placard on my airplane will read
Gross Weight....2700. I may sell the airplane one day and do not want to
accept any more liability than I have to......
Thanks for the replies, I love the exchange of ideas on this forum
Rene' Felker
N423CF
40322 Finish or something like it.
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of James K Hovis
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 8:10 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Establishing gross weight
+3.8G/-1.5G has been, over time, determined to be the "acceptable"
limits for normal operations by the industry and the Feds. This means
in typically ordinary operations, an airplane will not encounter
conditions while flying that'll exceed these limits. However, as
mentioned elsewhere in this thread, exceeding those limits can be
quite easy. Deciding to lower your G limits so you can increase gross
weight is still a disaster waiting to happen to me. You've just
lowered your margins, so that where before you could have probably
tolerated moderate to moderately severe turbulence, you've just
limited yourself to only chop to light turbulence. Even then light
turbulence could overstress the airframe. This reminds me of my early
days in the company. Back then my boss used to share the field
difficulty reports from the Air Force with the troops. A certain
National Guard unit was transitioning from F-4 to F-15 at that time.
One airplane was flown into the base and as the paperwork was
reviewed, it was found with a 1G restriction to flight on it. The
airplane had a waiver attached, but the pilot who flew it had to have
the biggest set of any cock in the coop. Anyway, a 1G restriction
basically renders a fighter jet useless, in fact anything less than
the operational limits pretty much renders a jet useless. The NG kept
questioning why they got this bird and what to do with it. Eventually,
it was stripped of useable spare parts and the hulk placed on a
pedestal in front of the wing main office. I was fortunant to be part
of the airplane/pedestal interface design.
Kevin H.
On 5/19/07, Rene Felker <rene@felker.com> wrote:
> OK, just to stir the pot a little more...what category will your RV-10
> operate in? Utility, standard??? How may positive and how many negative
> g's. It all factors in doesn't it. If you place an operating limit on
the
> aircraft of lets say +2/-.5 g's could you not increase the gross weight
> using the same test data that van's used? (just ignore the hard landing
> issue).
>
>
> What is the fuel burn in climb? 19 gallons an hour? .32 gallons a
minute,
> or 1.9 pounds a minute. So can you add 20 pounds to the gross weight, and
> just assume a 10 minute climb and a reduced capability during climb?
>
>
> Been at work all day instead of being able to work on the plane, so if
this
> does not make sense it is because I am to tired to think....
>
>
> Rene' Felker
>
> N423CF
>
> 40322 Finish or something like it, my panel arives on Wednesday form
Stein,
> the pictures look great.
>
> 801-721-6080
>
> _____
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
GRANSCOTT@aol.com
> Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2007 9:55 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Establishing gross weight
>
>
> In a message dated 5/19/2007 10:52:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> LloydDR@wernerco.com writes:
>
> Research the history of the aircraft
> and you will see many gross weight changes without any modification to
> the airframe,
>
> Dan which aircraft were paper whipped into increases in gross
weight/useful
> load without any additional work? The Cessna 172's were increased
because
> of increased horsepower, tire size and rating changes and new landing gear
> modifications...cherokee were increased because of horsepower increases
and
> other modifications.
>
>
> What method are you using to calculate your changes to the 10 that Van's
has
> not gotten correct. I'd think that to really test the higher weights
you'd
> need to develop a test bed wing and frame. One would probably need both a
> flying and static test bed product. I believe the Mooney factory static
> test bed they loads bags of shot until the wing deforms or retains it's
> original formation and attach points at a calculated load bearing weight.
> The the test pilot fly's the test bed stressing the heck out of the plane
in
> every condition...spins, smap rolls etc and notes the results both with
> instruments and feel. Who know's estabilishing a new higher gross could
> include some fun flying...take along a parachaute, tho.
>
>
> It seems that a pilot the other week believed that he could do aerobatics
in
> a baron as he believe the plane was capable of the stresses...it seems the
> plane broke up and a few folks when with him as he became a fatal test
> pilot.
>
>
> Patrick
>
>
> _____
>
> See what's free at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503>
.
>
>
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: Fuel flow sensor |
I believe E.I. makes the red cube flow sensor that comes with the 3400/3500. It
has the same electrical specs as the floscan but different mounting holes. If
you have a floscan it should work with the AFS system but check with Rob first.
AFS sold me the sensor only way in advance so I could get it installed. The
only down fall is I had to modify the monting plate from the stock mount Van's
provides. I really like thier system and the service and documentation has
been really nice. I should be able to report the flying part early this fall....
Rick S.
40185
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 |
|
Hi Jesse,
I think Rob Kermanj has a 530W. He had a positing around 5/2/07 with the
subject line of: RV10-List: G530W, Trutrak and GRT. I saved it in my
files so if you can't find it let me know and I will repost the body of
it.
Also, maybe Rob will give us an expanded report on his system.
Vern Smith (#324)
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 6:03 AM
Subject: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
Has anybody flown the 430W or 530W yet? If so, have you flown it with
an autopilot that has Vertical Steering? If so, please enlighten the
group as to your thoughts on it.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
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 |
|
I have been flying a Caravan with a 530W 430W and
KFC225 autopilot for a couple of months now. Both the
lateral and vertical guidance is more stable than the
ILS it overlays. At KSLC the LNAV/VNAV approaches that
I fly overlay the ILS, so I set up the ILS on the
number 2 nav. On these approaches there is no
difference in the course or glideslope and the
autopilot tracks either RNAV or ILS equally well.
Steve 40212
--- Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com> wrote:
> Has anybody flown the 430W or 530W yet? If so, have
> you flown it with an
> autopilot that has Vertical Steering? If so, please
> enlighten the group as
> to your thoughts on it.
>
>
>
> Jesse Saint
>
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
>
> jesse@saintaviation.com
>
> www.saintaviation.com
>
> Cell: 352-427-0285
>
> Fax: 815-377-3694
>
>
>
>
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: | Baggage door lock arm |
Thanks! I'll go dig through my parts bins.
Jay
> The longer arm should have come with the kit.
Do not archive
The fish are biting.
Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing.
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php
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: | Fuel flow sensor |
Hot rodder!!! Did you do a stress analysis to make sure that the RV-10
airframe can handle those extra 10 ponies? I would derate it if I were you.
All in fun. Do not archive
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fred Williams,
M.D.
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:10 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Fuel flow sensor
<drfred@suddenlinkmail.com>
Michael;
I am at the same point as you are and am starting to locate the parts
for the fuel system. I emailed AFS this am to see if we can get a
recommendation. I'll post their answer when obtained. If we don't hear
back later today, I'll call tomorrow.
Fred Williams
It's been a good week. Side panels fit to the fuselage and those bends
are done. Brand spanking new Barrett 270 HP Lycoming sitting on the
shop floor. Purchased the one that Roy posted on the site about two
weeks ago. Sweeeeeet.
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: | Rosen Visors, finally! |
I finally have a price for the visors. Aparently they give pretty deep
discounts at shows like Sun-N-Fun, because I really can't beat those prices
on a group buy. The final price of the visor on this group buy will be
$317.97 for the double set and $168.99 for the single visor (half set).
This will include the mounting hardware as well. For those who have visors
already and may just want the replacement lenses, the cost will be $74.28.
I will be sending an e-mail to everybody I have on my list. This pricing
does not include shipping. I don't know yet whether they will drop ship
them or will ship them to me and I will ship them, but either way it should
work fine.
Do not archive.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
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: | Rosen Visors, finally! |
For anyone going to OSH, it may be worth waiting until then if the discount
is that good. Or if you know someone going they could order them then.
Michael
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 11:26 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Rosen Visors, finally!
I finally have a price for the visors. Aparently they give pretty deep dis
counts at shows like Sun-N-Fun, because I really can't beat those prices on
a group buy. The final price of the visor on this group buy will be $317.
97 for the double set and $168.99 for the single visor (half set). This wi
ll include the mounting hardware as well. For those who have visors alread
y and may just want the replacement lenses, the cost will be $74.28. I wil
l be sending an e-mail to everybody I have on my list. This pricing does n
ot include shipping. I don't know yet whether they will drop ship them or
will ship them to me and I will ship them, but either way it should work fi
ne.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com<mailto:jesse@saintaviation.com>
www.saintaviation.com<http://www.saintaviation.com>
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
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 |
|
Jesse,
I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago. It should be
in the archive. If you need additional information you may contact
me at 772-460-3907. I will be flying the 10 to NM on Friday but will
return you call when I get back.
Vern, The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches are
very stable. The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS
approaches. I also like the simplicity of this approach; no
localizer frequency to set up. It seems like a small thing, but in
real IFR conditions, I think the name of the game is to do as little
work as possible and as little cross checking/verifying as possible.
If I were to do this again, I would have seriously considered
getting the Trutrak Soccer. With my set-up, you have to switch the
autopilot to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed approaches, DME
arcs and Procedure Turns. Again, not a very big deal but it is one
more thing to remember during the critical part of the flight.
Rob.
On May 22, 2007, at 11:46 AM, Vern W. Smith wrote:
> Hi Jesse,
>
>
> I think Rob Kermanj has a 530W. He had a positing around 5/2/07
> with the subject line of: RV10-List: G530W, Trutrak and GRT. I
> saved it in my files so if you can=92t find it let me know and I will
> repost the body of it.
>
>
> Also, maybe Rob will give us an expanded report on his system.
>
>
> Vern Smith (#324)
>
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-
> server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 6:03 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>
>
> Has anybody flown the 430W or 530W yet? If so, have you flown it
> with an autopilot that has Vertical Steering? If so, please
> enlighten the group as to your thoughts on it.
>
>
> Jesse Saint
>
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
>
> jesse@saintaviation.com
>
> www.saintaviation.com
>
> Cell: 352-427-0285
>
> Fax: 815-377-3694
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> http://forums.matronics.com
>
List
> ========================
> ========================
>
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rosen Visors, finally! |
Great Jesse, I think you have me on your list.
Rob K
On May 22, 2007, at 12:26 PM, Jesse Saint wrote:
> I finally have a price for the visors. Aparently they give pretty
> deep discounts at shows like Sun-N-Fun, because I really can=92t beat
> those prices on a group buy. The final price of the visor on this
> group buy will be $317.97 for the double set and $168.99 for the
> single visor (half set). This will include the mounting hardware
> as well. For those who have visors already and may just want the
> replacement lenses, the cost will be $74.28. I will be sending an
> e-mail to everybody I have on my list. This pricing does not
> include shipping. I don=92t know yet whether they will drop ship
> them or will ship them to me and I will ship them, but either way
> it should work fine.
>
>
> Do not archive.
>
>
> Jesse Saint
>
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
>
> jesse@saintaviation.com
>
> www.saintaviation.com
>
> Cell: 352-427-0285
>
> Fax: 815-377-3694
>
>
List
> ========================
> ========================
>
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 |
|
Will it fly the vertical portion on standard (non-precision) GPS approaches?
Does anybody know the percentage of ILS approaches that have a LNAV/VNAV
approach to match?
Thanks.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Darton Steve
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
I have been flying a Caravan with a 530W 430W and
KFC225 autopilot for a couple of months now. Both the
lateral and vertical guidance is more stable than the
ILS it overlays. At KSLC the LNAV/VNAV approaches that
I fly overlay the ILS, so I set up the ILS on the
number 2 nav. On these approaches there is no
difference in the course or glideslope and the
autopilot tracks either RNAV or ILS equally well.
Steve 40212
--- Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com> wrote:
> Has anybody flown the 430W or 530W yet? If so, have
> you flown it with an
> autopilot that has Vertical Steering? If so, please
> enlighten the group as
> to your thoughts on it.
>
>
>
> Jesse Saint
>
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
>
> jesse@saintaviation.com
>
> www.saintaviation.com
>
> Cell: 352-427-0285
>
> Fax: 815-377-3694
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Robert,
>From you email address, it seems like you are accustomed to flying fast jets or
turbines where stabilized approaches are very important and keeping speeds up
are not a concern. In the world of piston singles I fly, when landing at an
airport frequented by fast jets, quite often I hear "keep your speeds up" as
usually there is a fast jet (on a stabilized approach) behind me. Flight schools
that gear their pupils to commercial (turbine) flying ofter emphasize the
"stabilized approach." This may be heresy to some but, while I agree that the
stabilized approach is very important to the slow reacting turbines (not the
turbines themselves, but the build-up of thrust they produce), it's just silly
for piston singles. So often I see piston single pilots doing extremely loooong
flat "stabilized approaches" to an uncontrolled 3000 foot strip, cause that's
what they were taught when a more efficient tighter, steeper approach would
be better and safer.
Coming into a 2-3000 feet field, my typical approach speed is about 70kts (not
the RV-10). Doing that same 70kt at Greensboro International airport will most
surely invoke a "keep your speed up" prompt from the controller. For that airport
with it's 10,000 feet runway, I don't have a problem "keeping my speed
up" and coming in at 90kts.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
> From: Robert <retiredpilot03-serv@yahoo.com>
>
> The controller should not ask you nor are you expected to keep your speed up
beyond a stabilized approach speed when you are inside of the FAF. Keeping the
speed up above stabilized approach speed inside of this is and should be at
your discretion.
>
>
> The Johnson bar was your indicator.
>
> Really? 87 knots before flaps! Have you been on approach when the
> controller has asked you to keep your speed up? Any issues slowing down?
>
> John Jessen
> 328
>
> 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: Monday, May 21, 2007 8:04 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Flaps
>
>
> I typically don't add flaps until the runway is in sight in the RV-10, due
> to the speed limitation. 90kts is a great approach speed. Unfortunately,
> 87kts is max on the flaps.
> So unless you're willing to have a target airspeed of 80 or 85kts, you
> really won't use flaps for most of the approach.
> In fact, if it were a low approach, I would probably only bother with 1
> notch of flaps or perhaps none, because you wouldn't have the time to deal
> with it all in the last couple hundred feet. And, if you have 500'
> ceilings, you would likely have the chance to throw in a notch or even two
> with visual contact.
>
> I totally agree that slow approach speeds are helpful to keep you from being
> overwhelmed with the approach. Unfortunately, an 87kt limit on the flaps
> just isn't ideal for what we're trying to accomplish here. IMHO, that's the
> one single thing I can note about the RV-10 for IMC flying that's kind of a
> downer. With a flap speed of 100kts, this would be a non-issue.
>
> Also, given the instruments I'm flying, even a stressful approach leaves me
> with enough comfort where it wouldn't be a big deal to do one
> over-the-shoulder check of flap position.
>
> So I find no need for a flap position indicator. I am not discouraging
> anyone from having one, but just stating that I really don't see it as a big
> benefit. Even the old Johnson bar plane I used to fly, you really had to
> pull the lever sometimes to feel that you had it clicked into one position
> or the other, so not having an indicator isn't something that is all that
> abnormal.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote:
> > Nothing stopping you from doing that. I was making an assumption that
> > that wasn't sufficient for something like an IFR environment.
> >
> >
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *linn
> > Walters
> > *Sent:* Monday, May 21, 2007 8:52 AM
> > *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
> > *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Flaps
> >
> >
> >
> > Interesting thread. I haven't given it serious thought. Since I'm not
> > flying yet, is there something that prevents you from using your
> > Mark-1 eyeballs on the flap .... like requiring you to have the neck
> > bones of an owl??? Does the 'counting seconds' method of coming close
> > to what you want (or are used to) not work?? Just wondering out loud
> here.
> > Linn
> > do not archive
> >
> > RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote:
> >
> > Here are your main two options:
> >
> >
> >
> > http://www.aircraftextras.com/FPS-Plus.htm
> >
> >
> >
> > http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1179752413-22-37
> > 8&browse=airframe&product=fps
> > > 78&browse=airframe&product=fps>
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm going with the Aircraft Extras product however you have to come up
> > with your own position sensor for theirs. Most people seem to be
> > using a POS-12 from Ray Allen for this purpose.
> >
> >
> >
> > http://www.rayallencompany.com/products/indsens.html
> >
> >
> >
> > Michael Sausen
> >
> > -10 #352 Limbo
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> >
> > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Sam
> > Marlow
> > *Sent:* Monday, May 21, 2007 7:39 AM
> > *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
> > *Subject:* RV10-List: Flaps
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm finding little information on the flap positioning system, just
> > wondering what the majority of the group is doing here. After all, the
> > flaps are different than any airplane I've ever flown.
> > Thanks,
> > Sam Marlow
> > Still wiring
> >
> > * *
> >
> > * *
> >
> > ; - The RV10-List Email Forarch & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat,
> FAQ,
> >
> > *_; --> http://www.matronics.bsp; - NEW MATRONICS WEB FO;
> http://forums.matronics.com*
> >
> > * *
> >
> > * *
> >
> > * *
> >
> > * *
> >
> >
> >
> > * *
> >
> > * *
> >
> > ; - The RV10-List Email Forarch & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat,
> FAQ,
> >
> > *_; --> http://www.matronics.nbsp; - NEW MATRONICS WEB FO;
> http://forums.matronics.com*
> >
> > * *
> >
> > *
> >
> >
> > *
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 |
|
I am not sure it it will do the "step down". I will have to try it
and let you know. It will fly the vertical on the LPV approaches.
You need to have the 29e software from GRT.
I don't know of the percentage.
do not archive.
On May 22, 2007, at 1:10 PM, Jesse Saint wrote:
> <jesse@saintaviation.com>
>
> Will it fly the vertical portion on standard (non-precision) GPS
> approaches?
> Does anybody know the percentage of ILS approaches that have a LNAV/
> VNAV
> approach to match?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jesse Saint
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
> jesse@saintaviation.com
> www.saintaviation.com
> Cell: 352-427-0285
> Fax: 815-377-3694
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Darton
> Steve
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:04 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>
>
> I have been flying a Caravan with a 530W 430W and
> KFC225 autopilot for a couple of months now. Both the
> lateral and vertical guidance is more stable than the
> ILS it overlays. At KSLC the LNAV/VNAV approaches that
> I fly overlay the ILS, so I set up the ILS on the
> number 2 nav. On these approaches there is no
> difference in the course or glideslope and the
> autopilot tracks either RNAV or ILS equally well.
> Steve 40212
> --- Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com> wrote:
>
>> Has anybody flown the 430W or 530W yet? If so, have
>> you flown it with an
>> autopilot that has Vertical Steering? If so, please
>> enlighten the group as
>> to your thoughts on it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jesse Saint
>>
>> Saint Aviation, Inc.
>>
>> jesse@saintaviation.com
>>
>> www.saintaviation.com
>>
>> Cell: 352-427-0285
>>
>> Fax: 815-377-3694
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: | Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy |
I have you on my list for the Rosen Visors. Please reply to this e-mail and
let me know if you want a full set for $317.97 plus shipping or a half set
for $168.99. Please include on your e-mail the desired shipping address and
phone number. I will e-mail an invoice that you can send in with a check
after I figure out the shipping charges. I should be able to do a flat-rate
USPS box or something like that. I do accept paypal, but they charge a fee,
so I would need the fee added to the amount you send.
GOD BLESS!
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bobby J. Hughes
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 6:50 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
Jessie,
At $200 count me in.
Enjoyed our visit at Lockhart.
Bobby Hughes
40116
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 3:08 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
Sorry for the quality, but I have attached some pictures of our Rosen Sun
Visor installation. I am getting a quote on our custom mount from a local
machine shop and am getting a quote from Rosen on a group buy for the
visors. We tried to find a place on the sides to install a visor, but there
just isn't a good place to put it that won't block the pilot's vision when
he isn't using the visor. This is a 3-axis visor, so it can be used to
block sun from the pilot or copilot's front anywhere in the windshield and
can also block the pilot's right or copilot's left. Unfortunately we
couldn't find any way to block the sun from the pilot's left or copilot's
right except a suction cup or static cling piece. The visor base would
mount on the cabin top using two of the 4 screws that hold the front bar to
the cabin top.
Please let me know off the list if you are interested and I will put a list
together and let you know when I know how much it would cost. I am hoping
to keep it under $200 including the visor (big or small lense) and the
custom black-anodized base.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
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: | Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy |
I have you on my list for the Rosen Visors. Please reply to this e-mail and
let me know if you want a full set for $317.97 plus shipping or a half set
for $168.99. Please include on your e-mail the desired shipping address and
phone number. I will e-mail an invoice that you can send in with a check
after I figure out the shipping charges. I should be able to do a flat-rate
USPS box or something like that. I do accept paypal, but they charge a fee,
so I would need the fee added to the amount you send.
GOD BLESS!
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of David Boone
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 5:59 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
Count me in. David Boone 40138
----- Original Message -----
From: Bobby J. Hughes <mailto:bhughes@qnsi.net>
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 6:49 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
Jessie,
At $200 count me in.
Enjoyed our visit at Lockhart.
Bobby Hughes
40116
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 3:08 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
Sorry for the quality, but I have attached some pictures of our Rosen Sun
Visor installation. I am getting a quote on our custom mount from a local
machine shop and am getting a quote from Rosen on a group buy for the
visors. We tried to find a place on the sides to install a visor, but there
just isn't a good place to put it that won't block the pilot's vision when
he isn't using the visor. This is a 3-axis visor, so it can be used to
block sun from the pilot or copilot's front anywhere in the windshield and
can also block the pilot's right or copilot's left. Unfortunately we
couldn't find any way to block the sun from the pilot's left or copilot's
right except a suction cup or static cling piece. The visor base would
mount on the cabin top using two of the 4 screws that hold the front bar to
the cabin top.
Please let me know off the list if you are interested and I will put a list
together and let you know when I know how much it would cost. I am hoping
to keep it under $200 including the visor (big or small lense) and the
custom black-anodized base.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com
/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
Message 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: | Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy |
I have you on my list for the Rosen Visors. Please reply to this e-mail and
let me know if you want a full set for $317.97 plus shipping or a half set
for $168.99. Please include on your e-mail the desired shipping address and
phone number. I will e-mail an invoice that you can send in with a check
after I figure out the shipping charges. I should be able to do a flat-rate
USPS box or something like that. I do accept paypal, but they charge a fee,
so I would need the fee added to the amount you send.
GOD BLESS!
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd, Daniel R.
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 10:37 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
Jesse
I would be interested in the dual solution
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 10:04 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
That would work, but would be more complicated, would not look as good,
and
would obstruct the view of the pilot when not wanted - IMHO.
Do not archive.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bobby J.
Hughes
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 10:09 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
Jesse,
What about a two sided clamp for the center post similar to the Rosen
Universal visor? Should allow for both visors to move independently.
Bobby
40116
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 3:33 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
That could be done without too much trouble, probably. I could talk to
the machinist and design a base. The single visor will cover both
sides, just not both at the same time, so whoever is flying can use it.
How many would be interested in this setup? I have 20 people now who
want the visor, so that gets into a half-decent price for the base.
Doing a double base would probably take the kit with two visors to about
$350 or so.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
kilopapa@antelecom.net
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 7:47 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
Have you looked at a center mount that would allow 2 visors to hang from
it, one for each side?
Kevin
40494
><jesse@saintaviation.com>
>
>If I or anybody else comes out with a way to mount it on the outside
>corners, it would be easy to get another visor and put the first one
>and the new one on the outside corners. The mount would then not be
>useable, but the new mount would replace it anyway. We could have put
>it on the outside corners with screws through the door channel, but the
>problem is that it would be in the way quite a bit with no way to get
>it completely out of the way so it didn't obstruct visibility.
>
> Do not archive.
--
11:52 AM
--
4:22 PM
--
4:22 PM
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: | Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy |
I have you on my list for the Rosen Visors. Please reply to this e-mail and
let me know if you want a full set for $317.97 plus shipping or a half set
for $168.99. Please include on your e-mail the desired shipping address and
phone number. I will e-mail an invoice that you can send in with a check
after I figure out the shipping charges. I should be able to do a flat-rate
USPS box or something like that. I do accept paypal, but they charge a fee,
so I would need the fee added to the amount you send.
GOD BLESS!
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ralph E. Capen
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 4:17 PM
Subject: Re: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
Dual version - I'm interested too
-----Original Message-----
>From: gorejr@bellsouth.net
>Sent: Apr 16, 2007 3:38 PM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>
>
>Count me in. I'd be interested in the dual version. Jim
>>
>> From: "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)" <bob.condrey@baesystems.com>
>> Date: 2007/04/16 Mon AM 09:10:50 EST
>> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>>
<bob.condrey@baesystems.com>
>>
>> Jesse,
>>
>> I'd be interested in the dual version.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
>> Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 4:33 PM
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>>
>>
>> That could be done without too much trouble, probably. I could talk to
>> the
>> machinist and design a base. The single visor will cover both sides,
>> just
>> not both at the same time, so whoever is flying can use it. How many
>> would
>> be interested in this setup? I have 20 people now who want the visor,
>> so
>> that gets into a half-decent price for the base. Doing a double base
>> would
>> probably take the kit with two visors to about $350 or so.
>>
>> Jesse Saint
>> Saint Aviation, Inc.
>> jesse@saintaviation.com
>> www.saintaviation.com
>> Cell: 352-427-0285
>> Fax: 815-377-3694
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>> kilopapa@antelecom.net
>> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 7:47 PM
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>>
>>
>> Have you looked at a center mount that would allow 2 visors
>> to hang from it, one for each side?
>>
>> Kevin
>> 40494
>>
>> ><jesse@saintaviation.com>
>> >
>> >If I or anybody else comes out with a way to mount it on
>> >the outside corners, it would be easy to get another visor
>> >and put the first one and the new one on the outside
>> >corners. The mount would then not be useable, but the new
>> >mount would replace it anyway. We could have put it on the
>> >outside corners with screws through the door channel, but
>> >the problem is that it would be in the way quite a bit with
>> >no way to get it completely out of the way so it didn't
>> >obstruct visibility.
>> >
>> > Do not archive.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 11:52 AM
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy |
I have you on my list for the Rosen Visors. Please reply to this e-mail and
let me know if you want a full set for $317.97 plus shipping or a half set
for $168.99. Please include on your e-mail the desired shipping address and
phone number. I will e-mail an invoice that you can send in with a check
after I figure out the shipping charges. I should be able to do a flat-rate
USPS box or something like that. I do accept paypal, but they charge a fee,
so I would need the fee added to the amount you send.
GOD BLESS!
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of jim berry
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 11:24 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
Jesse,
The holes on my brace are 3/4" ctc in both axes. And please put me down for
a set also.
Jim Berry
40482 Finishing
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=106637#106637
--
11:52 AM
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: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy |
Please include me on the full set list.
Larry Klein _larson36@aol.com_ (mailto:larson36@aol.com)
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
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: | Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy |
Jesse,
I want a full set and will just send you a check when you figure it out
- just let me know.
BTW, any thoughts on Michael's comment about waiting until OSH for a big
discount?
Bob
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:33 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
I have you on my list for the Rosen Visors. Please reply to this e-mail
and let me know if you want a full set for $317.97 plus shipping or a
half set for $168.99. Please include on your e-mail the desired
shipping address and phone number. I will e-mail an invoice that you
can send in with a check after I figure out the shipping charges. I
should be able to do a flat-rate USPS box or something like that. I do
accept paypal, but they charge a fee, so I would need the fee added to
the amount you send.
GOD BLESS!
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bobby J.
Hughes
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 6:50 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
Jessie,
At $200 count me in.
Enjoyed our visit at Lockhart.
Bobby Hughes
40116
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 3:08 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
Sorry for the quality, but I have attached some pictures of our Rosen
Sun Visor installation. I am getting a quote on our custom mount from a
local machine shop and am getting a quote from Rosen on a group buy for
the visors. We tried to find a place on the sides to install a visor,
but there just isn't a good place to put it that won't block the pilot's
vision when he isn't using the visor. This is a 3-axis visor, so it can
be used to block sun from the pilot or copilot's front anywhere in the
windshield and can also block the pilot's right or copilot's left.
Unfortunately we couldn't find any way to block the sun from the pilot's
left or copilot's right except a suction cup or static cling piece. The
visor base would mount on the cabin top using two of the 4 screws that
hold the front bar to the cabin top.
Please let me know off the list if you are interested and I will put a
list together and let you know when I know how much it would cost. I am
hoping to keep it under $200 including the visor (big or small lense)
and the custom black-anodized base.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
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: | Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy |
I have you on my list for the Rosen Visors. Please reply to this e-mail and
let me know if you want a full set for $317.97 plus shipping or a half set
for $168.99. Please include on your e-mail the desired shipping address and
phone number. I will e-mail an invoice that you can send in with a check
after I figure out the shipping charges. I should be able to do a flat-rate
USPS box or something like that. I do accept paypal, but they charge a fee,
so I would need the fee added to the amount you send.
GOD BLESS!
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rene
Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 10:50 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
Jesse, sign me up for the dual.......I can not get away with having anything
on my side of the airplane that my wife does not have on her side.....it is
why I have a dual screen GRT and a BMA Lite....button for her to push.
Rene'
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 3:33 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
That could be done without too much trouble, probably. I could talk to the
machinist and design a base. The single visor will cover both sides, just
not both at the same time, so whoever is flying can use it. How many would
be interested in this setup? I have 20 people now who want the visor, so
that gets into a half-decent price for the base. Doing a double base would
probably take the kit with two visors to about $350 or so.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
kilopapa@antelecom.net
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 7:47 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
Have you looked at a center mount that would allow 2 visors
to hang from it, one for each side?
Kevin
40494
><jesse@saintaviation.com>
>
>If I or anybody else comes out with a way to mount it on
>the outside corners, it would be easy to get another visor
>and put the first one and the new one on the outside
>corners. The mount would then not be useable, but the new
>mount would replace it anyway. We could have put it on the
>outside corners with screws through the door channel, but
>the problem is that it would be in the way quite a bit with
>no way to get it completely out of the way so it didn't
>obstruct visibility.
>
> Do not archive.
--
11:52 AM
--
4:22 PM
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 |
|
Is it feasible to cleco in the upper fwd fuse, then fit and install the canopy,
and then remove the upper fwd fuse so I can play with my panel and sub-panel?
Later on I'd then slide the fwd fuse back into place and rivet it once my sub-panel
mods are complete.
Rob Wright
#392
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection.
Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
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 |
|
Jesse ;
Put "hot rodder" down for left side visor.
Fred Williams
drfred@suddenlinkmail.com
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: | Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy |
Sorry to list for that. I guess the initial message came through the list
and I just filed it and replied to it without thinking.
Do not archive.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
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: | Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy |
Guys, take this off list. Geeze.
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:35 PM
Subject: RE: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
I have you on my list for the Rosen Visors. Please reply to this e-mail and
let me know if you want a full set for $317.97 plus shipping or a half set
for $168.99. Please include on your e-mail the desired shipping address and
phone number. I will e-mail an invoice that you can send in with a check
after I figure out the shipping charges. I should be able to do a flat-rate
USPS box or something like that. I do accept paypal, but they charge a fee,
so I would need the fee added to the amount you send.
GOD BLESS!
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ralph E. Capen
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 4:17 PM
Subject: Re: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
Dual version - I'm interested too
-----Original Message-----
>From: gorejr@bellsouth.net
>Sent: Apr 16, 2007 3:38 PM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>
>
>Count me in. I'd be interested in the dual version. Jim
>>
>> From: "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)" <bob.condrey@baesystems.com>
>> Date: 2007/04/16 Mon AM 09:10:50 EST
>> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>>
<bob.condrey@baesystems.com>
>>
>> Jesse,
>>
>> I'd be interested in the dual version.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
>> Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 4:33 PM
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>>
>>
>> That could be done without too much trouble, probably. I could talk to
>> the
>> machinist and design a base. The single visor will cover both sides,
>> just
>> not both at the same time, so whoever is flying can use it. How many
>> would
>> be interested in this setup? I have 20 people now who want the visor,
>> so
>> that gets into a half-decent price for the base. Doing a double base
>> would
>> probably take the kit with two visors to about $350 or so.
>>
>> Jesse Saint
>> Saint Aviation, Inc.
>> jesse@saintaviation.com
>> www.saintaviation.com
>> Cell: 352-427-0285
>> Fax: 815-377-3694
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>> kilopapa@antelecom.net
>> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 7:47 PM
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>>
>>
>> Have you looked at a center mount that would allow 2 visors
>> to hang from it, one for each side?
>>
>> Kevin
>> 40494
>>
>> ><jesse@saintaviation.com>
>> >
>> >If I or anybody else comes out with a way to mount it on
>> >the outside corners, it would be easy to get another visor
>> >and put the first one and the new one on the outside
>> >corners. The mount would then not be useable, but the new
>> >mount would replace it anyway. We could have put it on the
>> >outside corners with screws through the door channel, but
>> >the problem is that it would be in the way quite a bit with
>> >no way to get it completely out of the way so it didn't
>> >obstruct visibility.
>> >
>> > Do not archive.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 11:52 AM
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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 |
|
Rob,
If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a Trutrak
Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldn't run it through GRT
EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR workload. I'm all for
reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is true, this would allow the use
of any EFIS or even analog gauges and still have the ability to do LPV
approaches. Cool.
This is very helpful as I'm trying to hold off on buying an EFIS- lots
of interesting changes in the market place. But, I'm to the point if I
don't start running wires I'll have to duct tape them to the outside;)
Thanks,
Vern (#324 fuselage)
Do not archive
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Kermanj
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
Jesse,
I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago. It should be in
the archive. If you need additional information you may contact me at
772-460-3907. I will be flying the 10 to NM on Friday but will return
you call when I get back.
Vern, The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches are
very stable. The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS approaches. I
also like the simplicity of this approach; no localizer frequency to set
up. It seems like a small thing, but in real IFR conditions, I think
the name of the game is to do as little work as possible and as little
cross checking/verifying as possible.
If I were to do this again, I would have seriously considered getting
the Trutrak Soccer. With my set-up, you have to switch the autopilot to
the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed approaches, DME arcs and Procedure
Turns. Again, not a very big deal but it is one more thing to remember
during the critical part of the flight.
Rob.
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 |
|
That is the way I am doing it. It is the last airframe item I have left to
put on.
Rene' Felker
N423CF
40322
801-721-6080
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert Wright
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:06 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Upper Fwd Fuse
Is it feasible to cleco in the upper fwd fuse, then fit and install the
canopy, and then remove the upper fwd fuse so I can play with my panel and
sub-panel? Later on I'd then slide the fwd fuse back into place and rivet it
once my sub-panel mods are complete.
Rob Wright
#392
Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car
Finder tool.
http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48518/*http://autos.yahoo.com/carfinder/;_ylc=X3o
DMTE3NWsyMDd2BF9TAzk3MTA3MDc2BHNlYwNtYWlsdGFncwRzbGsDY2FyLWZpbmRlcg-- hot
CTA = Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool
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: | Rosen Visors, finally! |
Waiting may not help. At Sun-N-Fun Rosen offered me the discounted price
of $320 for a set of two visors. Jesse has done a neat thing here. And
as my sister says "He who hesitates gets no cookies."
Vern Smith (#324)
Don not archive
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder
(Michael Sausen)
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:48 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Visors, finally!
For anyone going to OSH, it may be worth waiting until then if the
discount is that good. Or if you know someone going they could order
them then.
Michael
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 11:26 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Rosen Visors, finally!
I finally have a price for the visors. Aparently they give pretty deep
discounts at shows like Sun-N-Fun, because I really can't beat those
prices on a group buy. The final price of the visor on this group buy
will be $317.97 for the double set and $168.99 for the single visor
(half set). This will include the mounting hardware as well. For those
who have visors already and may just want the replacement lenses, the
cost will be $74.28. I will be sending an e-mail to everybody I have on
my list. This pricing does not include shipping. I don't know yet
whether they will drop ship them or will ship them to me and I will ship
them, but either way it should work fine.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
; - The RV10-List Email Forarch & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat,
FAQ,
_; --> http://www.matronics.bsp; - NEW MATRONICS WEB FO;
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
http://forums.matronics.com
</==================>
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: | Re: Upper Fwd Fuse |
Rob,
I think that would be tough, though maybe not impossible. There might be
some rivets that are hard to get to near the point that the canopy rests on the
upper forward fuse. I was looking at these pictures of my canopy installation
to see if there was anything that would prevent from doing things in that
order; I'm not really sure, but maybe they'll help you.
-Jim
40134
In a message dated 5/22/2007 2:12:06 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
flywrights@yahoo.com writes:
Is it feasible to cleco in the upper fwd fuse, then fit and install the
canopy, and then remove the upper fwd fuse so I can play with my panel and
sub-panel? Later on I'd then slide the fwd fuse back into place and rivet it once
my sub-panel mods are complete.
Rob Wright
#392
Jim "Scooter" McGrew
_http://www.mit.edu/~jsmcgrew_ (http://www.mit.edu/~jsmcgrew)
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
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: | Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy |
Jesse,
Put me down for a full set.
Mark Ritter
509 Bulian Lane
Austin, TX 78746
mritter509@msn.com
>From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@saintaviation.com>
>To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RE: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 13:35:15 -0400
>
>
>I have you on my list for the Rosen Visors. Please reply to this e-mail
>and
>let me know if you want a full set for $317.97 plus shipping or a half set
>for $168.99. Please include on your e-mail the desired shipping address
>and
>phone number. I will e-mail an invoice that you can send in with a check
>after I figure out the shipping charges. I should be able to do a
>flat-rate
>USPS box or something like that. I do accept paypal, but they charge a
>fee,
>so I would need the fee added to the amount you send.
>
>GOD BLESS!
>
>Jesse Saint
>Saint Aviation, Inc.
>jesse@saintaviation.com
>www.saintaviation.com
>Cell: 352-427-0285
>Fax: 815-377-3694
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ralph E. Capen
>Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 4:17 PM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>
>
>Dual version - I'm interested too
>
>-----Original Message-----
> >From: gorejr@bellsouth.net
> >Sent: Apr 16, 2007 3:38 PM
> >To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> >Subject: Re: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
> >
> >
> >Count me in. I'd be interested in the dual version. Jim
> >>
> >> From: "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)" <bob.condrey@baesystems.com>
> >> Date: 2007/04/16 Mon AM 09:10:50 EST
> >> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> >> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
> >>
><bob.condrey@baesystems.com>
> >>
> >> Jesse,
> >>
> >> I'd be interested in the dual version.
> >>
> >> Bob
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> >> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
> >> Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 4:33 PM
> >> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> >> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
> >>
><jesse@saintaviation.com>
> >>
> >> That could be done without too much trouble, probably. I could talk to
> >> the
> >> machinist and design a base. The single visor will cover both sides,
> >> just
> >> not both at the same time, so whoever is flying can use it. How many
> >> would
> >> be interested in this setup? I have 20 people now who want the visor,
> >> so
> >> that gets into a half-decent price for the base. Doing a double base
> >> would
> >> probably take the kit with two visors to about $350 or so.
> >>
> >> Jesse Saint
> >> Saint Aviation, Inc.
> >> jesse@saintaviation.com
> >> www.saintaviation.com
> >> Cell: 352-427-0285
> >> Fax: 815-377-3694
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> >> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> >> kilopapa@antelecom.net
> >> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 7:47 PM
> >> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> >> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
> >>
> >>
> >> Have you looked at a center mount that would allow 2 visors
> >> to hang from it, one for each side?
> >>
> >> Kevin
> >> 40494
> >>
> >> ><jesse@saintaviation.com>
> >> >
> >> >If I or anybody else comes out with a way to mount it on
> >> >the outside corners, it would be easy to get another visor
> >> >and put the first one and the new one on the outside
> >> >corners. The mount would then not be useable, but the new
> >> >mount would replace it anyway. We could have put it on the
> >> >outside corners with screws through the door channel, but
> >> >the problem is that it would be in the way quite a bit with
> >> >no way to get it completely out of the way so it didn't
> >> >obstruct visibility.
> >> >
> >> > Do not archive.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> 11:52 AM
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
PC Magazines 2007 editors choice for best Web mailaward-winning Windows
Live Hotmail.
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 |
|
Hopefully I'm not sending this multiple times....
Is it feasible to cleco in the upper fwd fuse, then fit and install the canopy,
and then remove the upper fwd fuse so I can play with my panel and sub-panel?
Later on I'd then slide the fwd fuse back into place and rivet it once my sub-panel
mods are complete.
Rob Wright
to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
http://travel.yahoo.com/
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 |
|
Yes, it can be and has been done. I would recommend, before gluing the top
on, however, that you hold it on with a couple of screws/bolts and make sure
you can take off the upper forward fuse and get it back on. I seem to
remember we needed to do a little extra sanding to make this possible, but
it was a while ago.
Do not archive
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert Wright
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 2:06 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Upper Fwd Fuse
Is it feasible to cleco in the upper fwd fuse, then fit and install the
canopy, and then remove the upper fwd fuse so I can play with my panel and
sub-panel? Later on I'd then slide the fwd fuse back into place and rivet it
once my sub-panel mods are complete.
Rob Wright
#392
Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car
Finder tool.
http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48518/*http://autos.yahoo.com/carfinder/;_ylc=X3o
DMTE3NWsyMDd2BF9TAzk3MTA3MDc2BHNlYwNtYWlsdGFncwRzbGsDY2FyLWZpbmRlcg-- hot
CTA = Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool
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 |
|
You are correct. I would let the auto pilot be auto pilot and have
one source drive the plane. I would also recommend that you talk to
John at Trutrak. As I found out, the WASS is all new and not much is
published. Make sure that you ask him specific question about the
Soccer and see if you need a NAV indicator to take full advantage of
it's capabilities.
do not archive
On May 22, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Vern W. Smith wrote:
> Rob,
>
> If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a
> Trutrak Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldn=92t run it
> through GRT EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR
> workload. I=92m all for reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is
> true, this would allow the use of any EFIS or even analog gauges
> and still have the ability to do LPV approaches. Cool.
>
>
> This is very helpful as I=92m trying to hold off on buying an EFIS-
> lots of interesting changes in the market place. But, I=92m to the
> point if I don=92t start running wires I=92ll have to duct tape them
to
> the outside;)
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Vern (#324 fuselage)
>
> Do not archive
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-
> server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Kermanj
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>
>
> Jesse,
>
>
> I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago. It should
> be in the archive. If you need additional information you may
> contact me at 772-460-3907. I will be flying the 10 to NM on
> Friday but will return you call when I get back.
>
>
> Vern, The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches
> are very stable. The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS
> approaches. I also like the simplicity of this approach; no
> localizer frequency to set up. It seems like a small thing, but in
> real IFR conditions, I think the name of the game is to do as
> little work as possible and as little cross checking/verifying as
> possible.
>
>
> If I were to do this again, I would have seriously considered
> getting the Trutrak Soccer. With my set-up, you have to switch the
> autopilot to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed approaches, DME
> arcs and Procedure Turns. Again, not a very big deal but it is one
> more thing to remember during the critical part of the flight.
>
>
> Rob.
>
>
List
> ========================
> ========================
>
Message 44
| 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: Rosen Visors, finally! |
amen!
On May 22, 2007, at 2:43 PM, Vern W. Smith wrote:
> Waiting may not help. At Sun-N-Fun Rosen offered me the discounted
> price of $320 for a set of two visors. Jesse has done a neat thing
> here. And as my sister says =93He who hesitates gets no cookies.=94
>
>
> Vern Smith (#324)
>
> Don not archive
>
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-
> server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:48 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Visors, finally!
>
>
> For anyone going to OSH, it may be worth waiting until then if the
> discount is that good. Or if you know someone going they could
> order them then.
>
>
> Michael
>
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-
> server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 11:26 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: Rosen Visors, finally!
>
>
> I finally have a price for the visors. Aparently they give pretty
> deep discounts at shows like Sun-N-Fun, because I really can=92t beat
> those prices on a group buy. The final price of the visor on this
> group buy will be $317.97 for the double set and $168.99 for the
> single visor (half set). This will include the mounting hardware
> as well. For those who have visors already and may just want the
> replacement lenses, the cost will be $74.28. I will be sending an
> e-mail to everybody I have on my list. This pricing does not
> include shipping. I don=92t know yet whether they will drop ship
> them or will ship them to me and I will ship them, but either way
> it should work fine.
>
>
> Jesse Saint
>
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
>
> jesse@saintaviation.com
>
> www.saintaviation.com
>
> Cell: 352-427-0285
>
> Fax: 815-377-3694
>
>
> ; - The RV10-List Email Forarch & Download, 7-Day Browse,
> Chat, FAQ,
> _; --> http://www.matronics.bsp; - NEW MATRONICS WEB FO;
> http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> http://forums.matronics.com
>
List
> ========================
> ========================
>
Message 45
| 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: | When to start on the panel |
My dad and I are making good progress on the quickbuild wings (I know, they came
almost done, but it still feels good) and we're starting to seriously think
about the panel. Our thoughts are centering around a 3 panel Chelton system with
all the appropriate gizmos to help them perform at peak proficiency.
When would you start ordering equipment? How much of a delay is there from the
point of ordering to receiving? If we go with a panel builder, what are the
delays on that end - how much time is it taking the pros to build panels once
all the parts come in?
With all the new technology coming out on such a regular basis, we're reluctant
to order anything before its time. But, recognizing that the panel will probably
take a lot of time to get all together, we don't want to be waiting forever
either.
Thanks for the thoughts
Jon and Bill Reining
40514 - wings
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114241#114241
Message 46
| 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 |
|
One additional thing about the 530W. It's a fantastic radio, but
Rob would also probably tell you that it was his way into a good
IFR machine...and when you combine a sorcerer and a 530W, you're
putting in over $20,000 into those 2 items to get the functionality
that you'd want. If you were to take some of that money and spend it
on one of the higher end EFIS systems (OP, G900, Chelton) you would
be enhancing your overall system by actually not just having a
radio and a Nav/Com that work well together, but an EFIS that has
that integration level. Thrown in a GMX-200 and you really start
having to wonder if you wouldn't just be better off moving up to
a higher end system as your cornerstone of your panel. Rob started
off with a GRT, which led him to later add the 530W. I think he's
now got something he's happy with, but the question is, what would
he do if he were doing it over again? Since he's got a flying RV-10,
with a working system and did it two ways, he's got some good input
I'm sure.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Rob Kermanj wrote:
> You are correct. I would let the auto pilot be auto pilot and have one
> source drive the plane. I would also recommend that you talk to John at
> Trutrak. As I found out, the WASS is all new and not much is
> published. Make sure that you ask him specific question about the
> Soccer and see if you need a NAV indicator to take full advantage of
> it's capabilities.
>
> do not archive
>
> On May 22, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Vern W. Smith wrote:
>
>> Rob,
>>
>> If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a
>> Trutrak Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldnt run it
>> through GRT EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR workload.
>> Im all for reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is true, this would
>> allow the use of any EFIS or even analog gauges and still have the
>> ability to do LPV approaches. Cool.
>>
>>
>>
>> This is very helpful as Im trying to hold off on buying an EFIS- lots
>> of interesting changes in the market place. But, Im to the point if I
>> dont start running wires Ill have to duct tape them to the outside;)
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> Vern (#324 fuselage)
>>
>> Do not archive
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rob Kermanj
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AM
>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>>
>>
>>
>> Jesse,
>>
>>
>>
>> I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago. It should be
>> in the archive. If you need additional information you may contact me
>> at 772-460-3907. I will be flying the 10 to NM on Friday but will
>> return you call when I get back.
>>
>>
>>
>> Vern, The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches are
>> very stable. The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS approaches.
>> I also like the simplicity of this approach; no localizer frequency to
>> set up. It seems like a small thing, but in real IFR conditions, I
>> think the name of the game is to do as little work as possible and as
>> little cross checking/verifying as possible.
>>
>>
>>
>> If I were to do this again, I would have seriously considered getting
>> the Trutrak Soccer. With my set-up, you have to switch the autopilot
>> to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed approaches, DME arcs and
>> Procedure Turns. Again, not a very big deal but it is one more thing
>> to remember during the critical part of the flight.
>>
>>
>>
>> Rob.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> * - 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 47
| 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: Upper Fwd Fuse |
Thanks Jesse and James. And yes, I guess I sent it multiple times....
Rob Wright
#392
----- Original Message ----
From: Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 2:04:21 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Upper Fwd Fuse
Yes, it can be and has been done. I would recommend, before gluing the top on,
however, that you hold it on with a couple of screws/bolts and make sure you
can take off the upper forward fuse and get it back on. I seem to remember we
needed to do a little extra sanding to make this possible, but it was a while
ago.
Do not archive
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert Wright
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 2:06 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Upper Fwd Fuse
Is it feasible to cleco in the upper fwd fuse, then fit and install the canopy,
and then remove the upper fwd fuse so I can play with my panel and sub-panel?
Later on I'd then slide the fwd fuse back into place and rivet it once my sub-panel
mods are complete.
Rob Wright
#392
Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool. http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48518/*http://autos.yahoo.com/carfinder/;_ylc=X3oDMTE3NWsyMDd2BF9TAzk3MTA3MDc2BHNlYwNtYWlsdGFncwRzbGsDY2FyLWZpbmRlcg-- hot CTA = Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC
Message 48
| 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: When to start on the panel |
Jon,
Your question is a very tough one, and a very good one. The problem
is, there's no one answer that will work for every builder.
The reason is, some components are available immediately. Some, like
my mini-ADI from TruTrak, will take over 2 YEARS to get to you.
There are EFIS systems that you can buy and have delivered within
a week. Then there are some that will easily approach a year (or
maybe even more) before you'll be at the top of the queue, and
waiting for the latest features to actually ship will REALLY
place you into a long wait. The there's the panel builders. Ask
people like Anh Vu how long a panel's lead time is by a panel
builder.... You'd be surprised. For some panel builders, you will
wait nearly a year (or more) from your actual paid deposit before
you'll get a finished product, and most panel builders have at least
a few weeks or months lead time. Even with interiors, Abby is currently
booking October/November slots. It just varies so much from item to
item. Also, figure that no matter what the date you are given when
you contact them is, there will inevitably be delays beyond that for
many people.
The only safe thing to do is to look at what you actually
want to buy, and the possibilities for the future, and then go
with a choice that you know you'll be happy with. For example,
if you buy a GRT system, they will allow you to upgrade later for
a fee. Then you just have to ensure you have your panel made for the
current system yet able to fit the future one...but waiting for
the features to show up may just mean you will have a plane with
no panel by the time you need it. Stein has said in the past
that when you shop for avionics, you need to buy what's available
today, because the vendors promises of delivery on things in
the future don't come with reliable timeframes.
As far as your current thoughts for hardware, from what I hear
these days, there is almost zero lead time on the EFIS and
probably a month or two at most on the entire system, so you're
OK there for the time being. *Most* of the Garmin standard
radio stack hardware is pretty quick to ship, as are the
backup gauges and things like that. So theoretically you
could buy today and have a panel builder finish it maybe
in the 3rd or 4th quarter of '07, or if you DIY, you could
buy it in August and still be wiring it in the same timeframe.
Oh, and if you get a QB fuselage, you won't have an incredibly
long time before you'll want to at least have those items
identified so you can prepare for some wiring and placements.
I'd actually pick a panel builder you trust and call them
for a time estimate. It's no secret that I'm a Stein fan, but
the nice thing is, he'll give you a straight idea on the
timeframe. All bets are off when OSH comes though, as that's
a time when the schedules quickly book for months to come,
so it pays to either jump before OSH or right in the first
couple of days of the show.
Personally, I ordered my panel items in May 2005. I got most
of it by the end of July, and started wiring. Some items
came a little later. The item that has taken the longest is
the mini-ADI, which I'm still waiting for today.
When you start talking panel though, you're hitting some of
the most fun but stressful times of the build. ;)
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Jon Reining wrote:
> <jonathan.w.reining@wellsfargo.com>
>
> My dad and I are making good progress on the quickbuild wings (I
> know, they came almost done, but it still feels good) and we're
> starting to seriously think about the panel. Our thoughts are
> centering around a 3 panel Chelton system with all the appropriate
> gizmos to help them perform at peak proficiency.
>
> When would you start ordering equipment? How much of a delay is
> there from the point of ordering to receiving? If we go with a panel
> builder, what are the delays on that end - how much time is it taking
> the pros to build panels once all the parts come in?
>
> With all the new technology coming out on such a regular basis, we're
> reluctant to order anything before its time. But, recognizing that
> the panel will probably take a lot of time to get all together, we
> don't want to be waiting forever either.
>
> Thanks for the thoughts
>
> Jon and Bill Reining 40514 - wings
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114241#114241
>
Message 49
| 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 |
|
You are right Tim. I kinda got myself cornered into the setup I
have. I have not commented on any other set up since I do not have a
first hand knowledge about anything else.
From what I have read and heard, I would have bought the Chelton and
a compatible autopilot instead. Especially, when the prices were
more affordable. GRT is a great bang for the buck but it has it's
limitations. I must admit that GRT qualifies the fact that it is not
an IFR EFIS. On the other hand, GRT functions so well with SL30 that
I wondered if they were just trying to limit their liability (with
such declaration) and went ahead and bought them.
I also admit that I am not 100% happy with my setup for the reasons I
have mentioned previously. But the alternative is so much more
expensive now that it is no longer an option for me.
do not archive
On May 22, 2007, at 3:54 PM, Tim Olson wrote:
>
> One additional thing about the 530W. It's a fantastic radio, but
> Rob would also probably tell you that it was his way into a good
> IFR machine...and when you combine a sorcerer and a 530W, you're
> putting in over $20,000 into those 2 items to get the functionality
> that you'd want. If you were to take some of that money and spend it
> on one of the higher end EFIS systems (OP, G900, Chelton) you would
> be enhancing your overall system by actually not just having a
> radio and a Nav/Com that work well together, but an EFIS that has
> that integration level. Thrown in a GMX-200 and you really start
> having to wonder if you wouldn't just be better off moving up to
> a higher end system as your cornerstone of your panel. Rob started
> off with a GRT, which led him to later add the 530W. I think he's
> now got something he's happy with, but the question is, what would
> he do if he were doing it over again? Since he's got a flying RV-10,
> with a working system and did it two ways, he's got some good input
> I'm sure.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> Rob Kermanj wrote:
>> You are correct. I would let the auto pilot be auto pilot and
>> have one source drive the plane. I would also recommend that you
>> talk to John at Trutrak. As I found out, the WASS is all new and
>> not much is published. Make sure that you ask him specific
>> question about the Soccer and see if you need a NAV indicator to
>> take full advantage of it's capabilities.
>> do not archive
>> On May 22, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Vern W. Smith wrote:
>>> Rob,
>>>
>>> If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a
>>> Trutrak Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldnt run it
>>> through GRT EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR
>>> workload. Im all for reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is
>>> true, this would allow the use of any EFIS or even analog gauges
>>> and still have the ability to do LPV approaches. Cool.
>>>
>>>
>>> This is very helpful as Im trying to hold off on buying an EFIS-
>>> lots of interesting changes in the market place. But, Im to the
>>> point if I dont start running wires Ill have to duct tape them
>>> to the outside;)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>> Vern (#324 fuselage)
>>>
>>> Do not archive
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ----
>>>
>>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-
>>> list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rob Kermanj
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AM
>>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>>>
>>>
>>> Jesse,
>>>
>>>
>>> I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago. It
>>> should be in the archive. If you need additional information you
>>> may contact me at 772-460-3907. I will be flying the 10 to NM on
>>> Friday but will return you call when I get back.
>>>
>>>
>>> Vern, The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches
>>> are very stable. The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS
>>> approaches. I also like the simplicity of this approach; no
>>> localizer frequency to set up. It seems like a small thing, but
>>> in real IFR conditions, I think the name of the game is to do as
>>> little work as possible and as little cross checking/verifying as
>>> possible.
>>>
>>>
>>> If I were to do this again, I would have seriously considered
>>> getting the Trutrak Soccer. With my set-up, you have to switch
>>> the autopilot to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed
>>> approaches, DME arcs and Procedure Turns. Again, not a very big
>>> deal but it is one more thing to remember during the critical
>>> part of the flight.
>>>
>>>
>>> Rob.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> * - 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 50
| 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: | When to start on the panel |
I would say it depends on the fuse. If you are just working on the wings
and don't even have the fuse sitting there ready to work on, then you can
wait quite a while. It also depends on how fast you plan to work. I would
say that it is safe, if you are going to build the panel yourself, to start
ordering 3-4 months before you expect to want your panel up and running. If
you are going to have someone like Stein put it together for you, then you
will want to talk with him about lead times. It is a good practice, IMHO,
to not run wires while you are building the airplane. I have shared my
viewpoint on this in the past, but if you run conduit and stuff like that,
then pull/push your wires after things are closed up, then you know that you
can access anywhere you need to access, so when (not if) you want to modify
or rewire things in the future, you know that you can do it. The same goes
for installing your panel. If you build the panel into the upper forward
fuse on the bench, then install it and build the plane around it, there is a
much better chance of having something back in there that is inaccessible in
the future. If you wire everything after it is mounted, then you KNOW that
you can get at everything, because you put it in there in the same state as
you will be getting back at it.
This is just my opinion, having done this several times, but I have only
done it this way, so I only have experience from this viewpoint.
So, in short, it depends on how you want to approach things and how fast you
expect to be building. You can wait until you have your airframe completely
done, your engine hung, and your interior in (besides seats and close-out
panels, of course, if you want to. It has been done and is being done.
Bracing for the attacks!
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jon Reining
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 3:44 PM
Subject: RV10-List: When to start on the panel
<jonathan.w.reining@wellsfargo.com>
My dad and I are making good progress on the quickbuild wings (I know, they
came almost done, but it still feels good) and we're starting to seriously
think about the panel. Our thoughts are centering around a 3 panel Chelton
system with all the appropriate gizmos to help them perform at peak
proficiency.
When would you start ordering equipment? How much of a delay is there from
the point of ordering to receiving? If we go with a panel builder, what are
the delays on that end - how much time is it taking the pros to build panels
once all the parts come in?
With all the new technology coming out on such a regular basis, we're
reluctant to order anything before its time. But, recognizing that the
panel will probably take a lot of time to get all together, we don't want to
be waiting forever either.
Thanks for the thoughts
Jon and Bill Reining
40514 - wings
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114241#114241
--
2:01 PM
Message 51
| 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 |
|
But, that's the basic question, is it not.
What's frustrating to a non-IFR pilot is anticipating what you want, knowing
that you'll be flying IFR one of these days. Many of us do not have enough
knowledge to determine what combination of things gets you the best
functionality at the best price. Most of these combinations are just as
good or better than the best IFR panel 5-10 years ago. Some integrated
systems, perhaps Op and Chelton, are much better. Why they are much better
is the issue. I don't even know the very difficult approach issues that
would require high workloads with some systems versus almost no workload
with another. I'm not sure if having a Sorcerer is necessary compared to
one model down, when coupled with whatever EFIS and whatever nav/com/gps
box. There's a lot of money at stake here, with tons of useless capacity
sitting in the panel as a potential consequence of uniformed decision
making.
Enough ranting. I don't expect anyone to create a grid of all possible
combinations so we can pick and choose, and this is obviously where the
"self education" comes in. It's just a little frustrating not knowing what
you need to know in order to know. And, besides, this stuff is changing too
fast to really know what you need to know when you finally need to know it.
So, I'll shut up. As Randy says, stop wasting time and just go build.
John (finally back and going to the hanger tonight) Jessen
#40328
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: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:54 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
One additional thing about the 530W. It's a fantastic radio, but Rob would
also probably tell you that it was his way into a good IFR machine...and
when you combine a sorcerer and a 530W, you're putting in over $20,000 into
those 2 items to get the functionality that you'd want. If you were to take
some of that money and spend it on one of the higher end EFIS systems (OP,
G900, Chelton) you would be enhancing your overall system by actually not
just having a radio and a Nav/Com that work well together, but an EFIS that
has that integration level. Thrown in a GMX-200 and you really start having
to wonder if you wouldn't just be better off moving up to a higher end
system as your cornerstone of your panel. Rob started off with a GRT, which
led him to later add the 530W. I think he's now got something he's happy
with, but the question is, what would he do if he were doing it over again?
Since he's got a flying RV-10, with a working system and did it two ways,
he's got some good input I'm sure.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Rob Kermanj wrote:
> You are correct. I would let the auto pilot be auto pilot and have
> one source drive the plane. I would also recommend that you talk to
> John at Trutrak. As I found out, the WASS is all new and not much is
> published. Make sure that you ask him specific question about the
> Soccer and see if you need a NAV indicator to take full advantage of
> it's capabilities.
>
> do not archive
>
> On May 22, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Vern W. Smith wrote:
>
>> Rob,
>>
>> If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a
>> Trutrak Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldn't run it
>> through GRT EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR workload.
>> I'm all for reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is true, this
>> would allow the use of any EFIS or even analog gauges and still have
>> the ability to do LPV approaches. Cool.
>>
>>
>>
>> This is very helpful as I'm trying to hold off on buying an EFIS-
>> lots of interesting changes in the market place. But, I'm to the
>> point if I don't start running wires I'll have to duct tape them to
>> the outside;)
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> Vern (#324 fuselage)
>>
>> Do not archive
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---
>>
>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rob
>> Kermanj
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AM
>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>>
>>
>>
>> Jesse,
>>
>>
>>
>> I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago. It should be
>> in the archive. If you need additional information you may contact
>> me at 772-460-3907. I will be flying the 10 to NM on Friday but will
>> return you call when I get back.
>>
>>
>>
>> Vern, The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches are
>> very stable. The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS approaches.
>> I also like the simplicity of this approach; no localizer frequency
>> to set up. It seems like a small thing, but in real IFR conditions,
>> I think the name of the game is to do as little work as possible and
>> as little cross checking/verifying as possible.
>>
>>
>>
>> If I were to do this again, I would have seriously considered
>> getting the Trutrak Soccer. With my set-up, you have to switch the
>> autopilot to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed approaches, DME
>> arcs and Procedure Turns. Again, not a very big deal but it is one
>> more thing to remember during the critical part of the flight.
>>
>>
>>
>> Rob.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> * - 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 52
| 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 |
|
With the price of Dynon and others at under $3000, make that your only VFR
instrument and finish the aircraft. When and if you want to go IFR you can
then build the panel you need and not have anything to scrap as you can use
the Dynon as the backup system.
Gary
40274
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Jessen
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 3:49 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
But, that's the basic question, is it not.
What's frustrating to a non-IFR pilot is anticipating what you want, knowing
that you'll be flying IFR one of these days. Many of us do not have enough
knowledge to determine what combination of things gets you the best
functionality at the best price. Most of these combinations are just as
good or better than the best IFR panel 5-10 years ago. Some integrated
systems, perhaps Op and Chelton, are much better. Why they are much better
is the issue. I don't even know the very difficult approach issues that
would require high workloads with some systems versus almost no workload
with another. I'm not sure if having a Sorcerer is necessary compared to
one model down, when coupled with whatever EFIS and whatever nav/com/gps
box. There's a lot of money at stake here, with tons of useless capacity
sitting in the panel as a potential consequence of uniformed decision
making.
Enough ranting. I don't expect anyone to create a grid of all possible
combinations so we can pick and choose, and this is obviously where the
"self education" comes in. It's just a little frustrating not knowing what
you need to know in order to know. And, besides, this stuff is changing too
fast to really know what you need to know when you finally need to know it.
So, I'll shut up. As Randy says, stop wasting time and just go build.
John (finally back and going to the hanger tonight) Jessen
#40328
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: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:54 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
One additional thing about the 530W. It's a fantastic radio, but Rob would
also probably tell you that it was his way into a good IFR machine...and
when you combine a sorcerer and a 530W, you're putting in over $20,000 into
those 2 items to get the functionality that you'd want. If you were to take
some of that money and spend it on one of the higher end EFIS systems (OP,
G900, Chelton) you would be enhancing your overall system by actually not
just having a radio and a Nav/Com that work well together, but an EFIS that
has that integration level. Thrown in a GMX-200 and you really start having
to wonder if you wouldn't just be better off moving up to a higher end
system as your cornerstone of your panel. Rob started off with a GRT, which
led him to later add the 530W. I think he's now got something he's happy
with, but the question is, what would he do if he were doing it over again?
Since he's got a flying RV-10, with a working system and did it two ways,
he's got some good input I'm sure.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Rob Kermanj wrote:
> You are correct. I would let the auto pilot be auto pilot and have
> one source drive the plane. I would also recommend that you talk to
> John at Trutrak. As I found out, the WASS is all new and not much is
> published. Make sure that you ask him specific question about the
> Soccer and see if you need a NAV indicator to take full advantage of
> it's capabilities.
>
> do not archive
>
> On May 22, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Vern W. Smith wrote:
>
>> Rob,
>>
>> If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a
>> Trutrak Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldn't run it
>> through GRT EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR workload.
>> I'm all for reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is true, this
>> would allow the use of any EFIS or even analog gauges and still have
>> the ability to do LPV approaches. Cool.
>>
>>
>>
>> This is very helpful as I'm trying to hold off on buying an EFIS-
>> lots of interesting changes in the market place. But, I'm to the
>> point if I don't start running wires I'll have to duct tape them to
>> the outside;)
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> Vern (#324 fuselage)
>>
>> Do not archive
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---
>>
>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rob
>> Kermanj
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AM
>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>>
>>
>>
>> Jesse,
>>
>>
>>
>> I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago. It should be
>> in the archive. If you need additional information you may contact
>> me at 772-460-3907. I will be flying the 10 to NM on Friday but will
>> return you call when I get back.
>>
>>
>>
>> Vern, The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches are
>> very stable. The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS approaches.
>> I also like the simplicity of this approach; no localizer frequency
>> to set up. It seems like a small thing, but in real IFR conditions,
>> I think the name of the game is to do as little work as possible and
>> as little cross checking/verifying as possible.
>>
>>
>>
>> If I were to do this again, I would have seriously considered
>> getting the Trutrak Soccer. With my set-up, you have to switch the
>> autopilot to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed approaches, DME
>> arcs and Procedure Turns. Again, not a very big deal but it is one
>> more thing to remember during the critical part of the flight.
>>
>>
>>
>> Rob.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> * - 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 53
| 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: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy |
Jesse: Nice work. Full set for me. Ship, and bill, to: Jay Rowe, 151 N.
Shore Ln, Winthrop, ME 04364, 207 322-6167. JFR
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@saintaviation.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 1:35 PM
Subject: RE: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>
> I have you on my list for the Rosen Visors. Please reply to this e-mail
> and
> let me know if you want a full set for $317.97 plus shipping or a half set
> for $168.99. Please include on your e-mail the desired shipping address
> and
> phone number. I will e-mail an invoice that you can send in with a check
> after I figure out the shipping charges. I should be able to do a
> flat-rate
> USPS box or something like that. I do accept paypal, but they charge a
> fee,
> so I would need the fee added to the amount you send.
>
> GOD BLESS!
>
> Jesse Saint
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
> jesse@saintaviation.com
> www.saintaviation.com
> Cell: 352-427-0285
> Fax: 815-377-3694
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ralph E. Capen
> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 4:17 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>
>
> Dual version - I'm interested too
>
> -----Original Message-----
>>From: gorejr@bellsouth.net
>>Sent: Apr 16, 2007 3:38 PM
>>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>>
>>
>>Count me in. I'd be interested in the dual version. Jim
>>>
>>> From: "Condrey, Bob (US SSA)" <bob.condrey@baesystems.com>
>>> Date: 2007/04/16 Mon AM 09:10:50 EST
>>> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>>>
> <bob.condrey@baesystems.com>
>>>
>>> Jesse,
>>>
>>> I'd be interested in the dual version.
>>>
>>> Bob
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
>>> Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 4:33 PM
>>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>>>
>>>
>>> That could be done without too much trouble, probably. I could talk to
>>> the
>>> machinist and design a base. The single visor will cover both sides,
>>> just
>>> not both at the same time, so whoever is flying can use it. How many
>>> would
>>> be interested in this setup? I have 20 people now who want the visor,
>>> so
>>> that gets into a half-decent price for the base. Doing a double base
>>> would
>>> probably take the kit with two visors to about $350 or so.
>>>
>>> Jesse Saint
>>> Saint Aviation, Inc.
>>> jesse@saintaviation.com
>>> www.saintaviation.com
>>> Cell: 352-427-0285
>>> Fax: 815-377-3694
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>>> kilopapa@antelecom.net
>>> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 7:47 PM
>>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>>>
>>>
>>> Have you looked at a center mount that would allow 2 visors
>>> to hang from it, one for each side?
>>>
>>> Kevin
>>> 40494
>>>
>>> ><jesse@saintaviation.com>
>>> >
>>> >If I or anybody else comes out with a way to mount it on
>>> >the outside corners, it would be easy to get another visor
>>> >and put the first one and the new one on the outside
>>> >corners. The mount would then not be useable, but the new
>>> >mount would replace it anyway. We could have put it on the
>>> >outside corners with screws through the door channel, but
>>> >the problem is that it would be in the way quite a bit with
>>> >no way to get it completely out of the way so it didn't
>>> >obstruct visibility.
>>> >
>>> > Do not archive.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 11:52 AM
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 2:01 PM
>
>
Message 54
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
It sounds like it wouldn't be a bad idea to put together a chart with a
rating system for different options out there. For example, if you want to
buy a printer, there is no perfect printer out there, but each one has a
rating for cost, a rating for ease of use, a rating for quality, a rating
for ease of setup, a rating for cost of consumables, etc. If someone like
me wants a budget printer, I won't worry about ease of setup because I know
computer and can work my way through that, but initial cost and cost of
consumables is very important. For my dad, ease of setup and use is a huge
factor that he has to consider before even looking at the other options.
For some, quality comes before everything else. Is there an easy way to
setup a web page with a rating system and people can also put in their
personal reviews of the different products. Would having that information
quantified in a single location help? There are exactly 17,569,293
different instrument panel combinations for the RV-10, so having this
information might be helpful. Also having a compatibility rating system
would help. Man, this sounds like a project. Anybody know of an easy way
to do this, like maybe even a shopping cart page that has a rating system
built in, so people can pick and choose and it will calculate a total panel
cost (minus general stuff like wiring, switches and breakers, antennas,
labor, etc.)?
There is TONS of information that has gone through the list over the past
2.5 years, but wading through that has got to be enormously painful.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Kermanj
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
You are right Tim. I kinda got myself cornered into the setup I
have. I have not commented on any other set up since I do not have a
first hand knowledge about anything else.
From what I have read and heard, I would have bought the Chelton and
a compatible autopilot instead. Especially, when the prices were
more affordable. GRT is a great bang for the buck but it has it's
limitations. I must admit that GRT qualifies the fact that it is not
an IFR EFIS. On the other hand, GRT functions so well with SL30 that
I wondered if they were just trying to limit their liability (with
such declaration) and went ahead and bought them.
I also admit that I am not 100% happy with my setup for the reasons I
have mentioned previously. But the alternative is so much more
expensive now that it is no longer an option for me.
do not archive
On May 22, 2007, at 3:54 PM, Tim Olson wrote:
>
> One additional thing about the 530W. It's a fantastic radio, but
> Rob would also probably tell you that it was his way into a good
> IFR machine...and when you combine a sorcerer and a 530W, you're
> putting in over $20,000 into those 2 items to get the functionality
> that you'd want. If you were to take some of that money and spend it
> on one of the higher end EFIS systems (OP, G900, Chelton) you would
> be enhancing your overall system by actually not just having a
> radio and a Nav/Com that work well together, but an EFIS that has
> that integration level. Thrown in a GMX-200 and you really start
> having to wonder if you wouldn't just be better off moving up to
> a higher end system as your cornerstone of your panel. Rob started
> off with a GRT, which led him to later add the 530W. I think he's
> now got something he's happy with, but the question is, what would
> he do if he were doing it over again? Since he's got a flying RV-10,
> with a working system and did it two ways, he's got some good input
> I'm sure.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> Rob Kermanj wrote:
>> You are correct. I would let the auto pilot be auto pilot and
>> have one source drive the plane. I would also recommend that you
>> talk to John at Trutrak. As I found out, the WASS is all new and
>> not much is published. Make sure that you ask him specific
>> question about the Soccer and see if you need a NAV indicator to
>> take full advantage of it's capabilities.
>> do not archive
>> On May 22, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Vern W. Smith wrote:
>>> Rob,
>>>
>>> If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a
>>> Trutrak Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldn't run it
>>> through GRT EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR
>>> workload. I'm all for reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is
>>> true, this would allow the use of any EFIS or even analog gauges
>>> and still have the ability to do LPV approaches. Cool.
>>>
>>>
>>> This is very helpful as I'm trying to hold off on buying an EFIS-
>>> lots of interesting changes in the market place. But, I'm to the
>>> point if I don't start running wires I'll have to duct tape them
>>> to the outside;)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>> Vern (#324 fuselage)
>>>
>>> Do not archive
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ----
>>>
>>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-
>>> list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rob Kermanj
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AM
>>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>>>
>>>
>>> Jesse,
>>>
>>>
>>> I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago. It
>>> should be in the archive. If you need additional information you
>>> may contact me at 772-460-3907. I will be flying the 10 to NM on
>>> Friday but will return you call when I get back.
>>>
>>>
>>> Vern, The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches
>>> are very stable. The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS
>>> approaches. I also like the simplicity of this approach; no
>>> localizer frequency to set up. It seems like a small thing, but
>>> in real IFR conditions, I think the name of the game is to do as
>>> little work as possible and as little cross checking/verifying as
>>> possible.
>>>
>>>
>>> If I were to do this again, I would have seriously considered
>>> getting the Trutrak Soccer. With my set-up, you have to switch
>>> the autopilot to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed
>>> approaches, DME arcs and Procedure Turns. Again, not a very big
>>> deal but it is one more thing to remember during the critical
>>> part of the flight.
>>>
>>>
>>> Rob.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> * - 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*
>>> *
>>> *
>> *
>> *
>> **
>> **
>
>
--
2:01 PM
Message 55
| 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: Establishing gross weight |
Rene' I have talked with Van about this at Oshkosh last year. Of course he feels
that the plane should never be flown above gross. There is more to the calculations
than just reducing the positive and negative g's for the wings when
flying over gross. I know many people have put higher gross weight numbers on
their aircraft in order to eliminate any problems with a ramp check. The fact
is, most planes are flown over gross from time to time. If you ever see 3 or
4 people get into a Cirrus you can almost be guaranteed it is flying over gross.
I have 2700 lbs on my plate as well.
Scott Schmidt
scottmschmidt@yahoo.com
----- Original Message ----
From: Rene Felker <rene@felker.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 7:45:03 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Establishing gross weight
I am surprised that I have only gotten two real replies to my posting. As
you can guess, I was taking a look at the gross weight issue from another
perspective. Since I am not doing any design changes, how could I justify
increasing the gross weight within the constraints of current design.
Flying in the intermountain west, Ogden Utah is home base, there is no real
way of avoiding all turbulence....maybe not flying at all would avoid
it...., so assuming a -.5g is a little unrealistic, but the whole concept of
being able to have different gross weights as long as certain operating
limitations were placed on the flight still intrigues me. Maybe I will talk
to the DAR and see what he thinks......
But, just in case you are wondering, the placard on my airplane will read
Gross Weight....2700. I may sell the airplane one day and do not want to
accept any more liability than I have to......
Thanks for the replies, I love the exchange of ideas on this forum
Rene' Felker
N423CF
40322 Finish or something like it.
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of James K Hovis
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 8:10 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Establishing gross weight
+3.8G/-1.5G has been, over time, determined to be the "acceptable"
limits for normal operations by the industry and the Feds. This means
in typically ordinary operations, an airplane will not encounter
conditions while flying that'll exceed these limits. However, as
mentioned elsewhere in this thread, exceeding those limits can be
quite easy. Deciding to lower your G limits so you can increase gross
weight is still a disaster waiting to happen to me. You've just
lowered your margins, so that where before you could have probably
tolerated moderate to moderately severe turbulence, you've just
limited yourself to only chop to light turbulence. Even then light
turbulence could overstress the airframe. This reminds me of my early
days in the company. Back then my boss used to share the field
difficulty reports from the Air Force with the troops. A certain
National Guard unit was transitioning from F-4 to F-15 at that time.
One airplane was flown into the base and as the paperwork was
reviewed, it was found with a 1G restriction to flight on it. The
airplane had a waiver attached, but the pilot who flew it had to have
the biggest set of any cock in the coop. Anyway, a 1G restriction
basically renders a fighter jet useless, in fact anything less than
the operational limits pretty much renders a jet useless. The NG kept
questioning why they got this bird and what to do with it. Eventually,
it was stripped of useable spare parts and the hulk placed on a
pedestal in front of the wing main office. I was fortunant to be part
of the airplane/pedestal interface design.
Kevin H.
On 5/19/07, Rene Felker <rene@felker.com> wrote:
> OK, just to stir the pot a little more...what category will your RV-10
> operate in? Utility, standard??? How may positive and how many negative
> g's. It all factors in doesn't it. If you place an operating limit on
the
> aircraft of lets say +2/-.5 g's could you not increase the gross weight
> using the same test data that van's used? (just ignore the hard landing
> issue).
>
>
> What is the fuel burn in climb? 19 gallons an hour? .32 gallons a
minute,
> or 1.9 pounds a minute. So can you add 20 pounds to the gross weight, and
> just assume a 10 minute climb and a reduced capability during climb?
>
>
> Been at work all day instead of being able to work on the plane, so if
this
> does not make sense it is because I am to tired to think....
>
>
> Rene' Felker
>
> N423CF
>
> 40322 Finish or something like it, my panel arives on Wednesday form
Stein,
> the pictures look great.
>
> 801-721-6080
>
> _____
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
GRANSCOTT@aol.com
> Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2007 9:55 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Establishing gross weight
>
>
> In a message dated 5/19/2007 10:52:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> LloydDR@wernerco.com writes:
>
> Research the history of the aircraft
> and you will see many gross weight changes without any modification to
> the airframe,
>
> Dan which aircraft were paper whipped into increases in gross
weight/useful
> load without any additional work? The Cessna 172's were increased
because
> of increased horsepower, tire size and rating changes and new landing gear
> modifications...cherokee were increased because of horsepower increases
and
> other modifications.
>
>
> What method are you using to calculate your changes to the 10 that Van's
has
> not gotten correct. I'd think that to really test the higher weights
you'd
> need to develop a test bed wing and frame. One would probably need both a
> flying and static test bed product. I believe the Mooney factory static
> test bed they loads bags of shot until the wing deforms or retains it's
> original formation and attach points at a calculated load bearing weight.
> The the test pilot fly's the test bed stressing the heck out of the plane
in
> every condition...spins, smap rolls etc and notes the results both with
> instruments and feel. Who know's estabilishing a new higher gross could
> include some fun flying...take along a parachaute, tho.
>
>
> It seems that a pilot the other week believed that he could do aerobatics
in
> a baron as he believe the plane was capable of the stresses...it seems the
> plane broke up and a few folks when with him as he became a fatal test
> pilot.
>
>
> Patrick
>
>
> _____
>
> See what's free at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503>
.
>
>
Message 56
| 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 |
|
John, you are absolutely right and I agree with everything you said.
I must say that we all have different threashold for pain and what
might be an unnecessary work load to someone could be an improvement
for others. I think that you are also right by saying "self
education". In my opinion all education will cost you something and
in this case, it is the cost of the panel. You will learn from your
purchase and most likely, you will not be 100% happy with it once you
discover it's limitations.
I have one suggestion though. Talk to someone with experience and
explain what you are trying to do with your plane. In my opinion,
most avionics shops are not qualified to advise you on your needs
especially today, with so many new things. I also believe that the
reason we have so many "new" options is partly due to the
introduction of immature products to the market and subsequent
improvements/additions to the product. I would hesitate to buy
anything that has just come out.
You should find someone that flies GA planes regularly. Consider the
advice you get very seriously and expect again, that you ultimate
panel may be different than what you end up with.
Also, once you commit, be happy and no longer look for the latest.
Enough of being on the Soap Box!
Do not archive
On May 22, 2007, at 4:48 PM, John Jessen wrote:
>
> But, that's the basic question, is it not.
>
> What's frustrating to a non-IFR pilot is anticipating what you
> want, knowing
> that you'll be flying IFR one of these days. Many of us do not
> have enough
> knowledge to determine what combination of things gets you the best
> functionality at the best price. Most of these combinations are
> just as
> good or better than the best IFR panel 5-10 years ago. Some
> integrated
> systems, perhaps Op and Chelton, are much better. Why they are
> much better
> is the issue. I don't even know the very difficult approach issues
> that
> would require high workloads with some systems versus almost no
> workload
> with another. I'm not sure if having a Sorcerer is necessary
> compared to
> one model down, when coupled with whatever EFIS and whatever nav/
> com/gps
> box. There's a lot of money at stake here, with tons of useless
> capacity
> sitting in the panel as a potential consequence of uniformed decision
> making.
>
> Enough ranting. I don't expect anyone to create a grid of all
> possible
> combinations so we can pick and choose, and this is obviously where
> the
> "self education" comes in. It's just a little frustrating not
> knowing what
> you need to know in order to know. And, besides, this stuff is
> changing too
> fast to really know what you need to know when you finally need to
> know it.
> So, I'll shut up. As Randy says, stop wasting time and just go build.
>
> John (finally back and going to the hanger tonight) Jessen
> #40328
>
> 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: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:54 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>
>
> One additional thing about the 530W. It's a fantastic radio, but
> Rob would
> also probably tell you that it was his way into a good IFR
> machine...and
> when you combine a sorcerer and a 530W, you're putting in over
> $20,000 into
> those 2 items to get the functionality that you'd want. If you
> were to take
> some of that money and spend it on one of the higher end EFIS
> systems (OP,
> G900, Chelton) you would be enhancing your overall system by
> actually not
> just having a radio and a Nav/Com that work well together, but an
> EFIS that
> has that integration level. Thrown in a GMX-200 and you really
> start having
> to wonder if you wouldn't just be better off moving up to a higher end
> system as your cornerstone of your panel. Rob started off with a
> GRT, which
> led him to later add the 530W. I think he's now got something he's
> happy
> with, but the question is, what would he do if he were doing it
> over again?
> Since he's got a flying RV-10, with a working system and did it two
> ways,
> he's got some good input I'm sure.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> Rob Kermanj wrote:
>> You are correct. I would let the auto pilot be auto pilot and have
>> one source drive the plane. I would also recommend that you talk to
>> John at Trutrak. As I found out, the WASS is all new and not much is
>> published. Make sure that you ask him specific question about the
>> Soccer and see if you need a NAV indicator to take full advantage of
>> it's capabilities.
>>
>> do not archive
>>
>> On May 22, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Vern W. Smith wrote:
>>
>>> Rob,
>>>
>>> If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a
>>> Trutrak Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldn't run it
>>> through GRT EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR
>>> workload.
>>> I'm all for reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is true, this
>>> would allow the use of any EFIS or even analog gauges and still have
>>> the ability to do LPV approaches. Cool.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This is very helpful as I'm trying to hold off on buying an EFIS-
>>> lots of interesting changes in the market place. But, I'm to the
>>> point if I don't start running wires I'll have to duct tape them to
>>> the outside;)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Vern (#324 fuselage)
>>>
>>> Do not archive
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> -
>>> ---
>>>
>>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rob
>>> Kermanj
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AM
>>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jesse,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago. It
>>> should be
>>> in the archive. If you need additional information you may contact
>>> me at 772-460-3907. I will be flying the 10 to NM on Friday but
>>> will
>>> return you call when I get back.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Vern, The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches
>>> are
>>> very stable. The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS
>>> approaches.
>>> I also like the simplicity of this approach; no localizer frequency
>>> to set up. It seems like a small thing, but in real IFR conditions,
>>> I think the name of the game is to do as little work as possible and
>>> as little cross checking/verifying as possible.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If I were to do this again, I would have seriously considered
>>> getting the Trutrak Soccer. With my set-up, you have to switch the
>>> autopilot to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed approaches, DME
>>> arcs and Procedure Turns. Again, not a very big deal but it is one
>>> more thing to remember during the critical part of the flight.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Rob.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> * - 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 57
| 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 |
|
Just to chime in here -
When I started my build I was a non-IFR pilot, and during the build, it
became apparent to me that there were decisions that needed to be made
that required a working knowledge of what IFR ops are all about. I
decided to bite the bullet and add another 13-14 thousand on to my
airplane budget and get my IFR ticket so I could see what the hub-bub
was about, and maybe make some better decisions about equipment, layout,
and other stuff. It definitely helped. I'm building a much different
plane than I started out building, and much of that is due to the better
understanding of aviation in general, and IFR ops in the specific. Some
places, I'm spending WAAAY too much money for a seemingly small issue
(I'll come clean on that someday), and some places I've discovered I can
cut the extras out, gain some simplicity, and save some money. Getting
the IFR ticket doesn't really give you all the answers to your panel
questions, but it does help teach you how you need to be thinking when
it comes to IFR flight, and that helps with the decision making process.
I'm sure that Tim O. could tell you that I'm still full of questions,
and I agonize over everything.
Getting the instrument rating did drive home this one major point to
me...
SINGLE PILOT IFR IS VERY CHALLENGEING. I have a VERY healthy respect
for IFR ops now, and I will go a very long way to lighten my workload in
IFR situations, even just a little bit. EVERY LITTLE BIT COUNTS.
Especially when you're a super green, low-time pilot such as myself.
Now I'm sort of spoiled in a weird way, because I have this super sweet
Chelton unit on the bench, and I have really no desire to go out and fly
IFR in some beat up Cessna with super old, super crappy gear in it.
Funny, I'm not even flying yet and I'm spoiled :)
As always, these are just things that I think. I don't know anything.
cj
#40410
fuse/finishing
www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Jessen
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 1:49 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
But, that's the basic question, is it not.
What's frustrating to a non-IFR pilot is anticipating what you want,
knowing
that you'll be flying IFR one of these days. Many of us do not have
enough
knowledge to determine what combination of things gets you the best
functionality at the best price. Most of these combinations are just as
good or better than the best IFR panel 5-10 years ago. Some integrated
systems, perhaps Op and Chelton, are much better. Why they are much
better
is the issue. I don't even know the very difficult approach issues that
would require high workloads with some systems versus almost no workload
with another. I'm not sure if having a Sorcerer is necessary compared
to
one model down, when coupled with whatever EFIS and whatever nav/com/gps
box. There's a lot of money at stake here, with tons of useless
capacity
sitting in the panel as a potential consequence of uniformed decision
making.
Enough ranting. I don't expect anyone to create a grid of all possible
combinations so we can pick and choose, and this is obviously where the
"self education" comes in. It's just a little frustrating not knowing
what
you need to know in order to know. And, besides, this stuff is changing
too
fast to really know what you need to know when you finally need to know
it.
So, I'll shut up. As Randy says, stop wasting time and just go build.
John (finally back and going to the hanger tonight) Jessen
#40328
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: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:54 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
One additional thing about the 530W. It's a fantastic radio, but Rob
would
also probably tell you that it was his way into a good IFR machine...and
when you combine a sorcerer and a 530W, you're putting in over $20,000
into
those 2 items to get the functionality that you'd want. If you were to
take
some of that money and spend it on one of the higher end EFIS systems
(OP,
G900, Chelton) you would be enhancing your overall system by actually
not
just having a radio and a Nav/Com that work well together, but an EFIS
that
has that integration level. Thrown in a GMX-200 and you really start
having
to wonder if you wouldn't just be better off moving up to a higher end
system as your cornerstone of your panel. Rob started off with a GRT,
which
led him to later add the 530W. I think he's now got something he's
happy
with, but the question is, what would he do if he were doing it over
again?
Since he's got a flying RV-10, with a working system and did it two
ways,
he's got some good input I'm sure.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Rob Kermanj wrote:
> You are correct. I would let the auto pilot be auto pilot and have
> one source drive the plane. I would also recommend that you talk to
> John at Trutrak. As I found out, the WASS is all new and not much is
> published. Make sure that you ask him specific question about the
> Soccer and see if you need a NAV indicator to take full advantage of
> it's capabilities.
>
> do not archive
>
> On May 22, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Vern W. Smith wrote:
>
>> Rob,
>>
>> If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a
>> Trutrak Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldn't run it
>> through GRT EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR
workload.
>> I'm all for reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is true, this
>> would allow the use of any EFIS or even analog gauges and still have
>> the ability to do LPV approaches. Cool.
>>
>>
>>
>> This is very helpful as I'm trying to hold off on buying an EFIS-
>> lots of interesting changes in the market place. But, I'm to the
>> point if I don't start running wires I'll have to duct tape them to
>> the outside;)
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> Vern (#324 fuselage)
>>
>> Do not archive
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---
>>
>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rob
>> Kermanj
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AM
>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>>
>>
>>
>> Jesse,
>>
>>
>>
>> I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago. It should be
>> in the archive. If you need additional information you may contact
>> me at 772-460-3907. I will be flying the 10 to NM on Friday but will
>> return you call when I get back.
>>
>>
>>
>> Vern, The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches are
>> very stable. The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS approaches.
>> I also like the simplicity of this approach; no localizer frequency
>> to set up. It seems like a small thing, but in real IFR conditions,
>> I think the name of the game is to do as little work as possible and
>> as little cross checking/verifying as possible.
>>
>>
>>
>> If I were to do this again, I would have seriously considered
>> getting the Trutrak Soccer. With my set-up, you have to switch the
>> autopilot to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed approaches, DME
>> arcs and Procedure Turns. Again, not a very big deal but it is one
>> more thing to remember during the critical part of the flight.
>>
>>
>>
>> Rob.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> * - 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 58
| 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 Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Sounds like a Tim Olson job!
do not archive.
On May 22, 2007, at 5:58 PM, Jesse Saint wrote:
> <jesse@saintaviation.com>
>
> It sounds like it wouldn't be a bad idea to put together a chart
> with a
> rating system for different options out there. For example, if you
> want to
> buy a printer, there is no perfect printer out there, but each one
> has a
> rating for cost, a rating for ease of use, a rating for quality, a
> rating
> for ease of setup, a rating for cost of consumables, etc. If
> someone like
> me wants a budget printer, I won't worry about ease of setup
> because I know
> computer and can work my way through that, but initial cost and
> cost of
> consumables is very important. For my dad, ease of setup and use
> is a huge
> factor that he has to consider before even looking at the other
> options.
> For some, quality comes before everything else. Is there an easy
> way to
> setup a web page with a rating system and people can also put in their
> personal reviews of the different products. Would having that
> information
> quantified in a single location help? There are exactly 17,569,293
> different instrument panel combinations for the RV-10, so having this
> information might be helpful. Also having a compatibility rating
> system
> would help. Man, this sounds like a project. Anybody know of an
> easy way
> to do this, like maybe even a shopping cart page that has a rating
> system
> built in, so people can pick and choose and it will calculate a
> total panel
> cost (minus general stuff like wiring, switches and breakers,
> antennas,
> labor, etc.)?
>
> There is TONS of information that has gone through the list over
> the past
> 2.5 years, but wading through that has got to be enormously painful.
>
> Jesse Saint
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
> jesse@saintaviation.com
> www.saintaviation.com
> Cell: 352-427-0285
> Fax: 815-377-3694
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Kermanj
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 4:41 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>
>
> You are right Tim. I kinda got myself cornered into the setup I
> have. I have not commented on any other set up since I do not have a
> first hand knowledge about anything else.
>
> From what I have read and heard, I would have bought the Chelton and
> a compatible autopilot instead. Especially, when the prices were
> more affordable. GRT is a great bang for the buck but it has it's
> limitations. I must admit that GRT qualifies the fact that it is not
> an IFR EFIS. On the other hand, GRT functions so well with SL30 that
> I wondered if they were just trying to limit their liability (with
> such declaration) and went ahead and bought them.
>
> I also admit that I am not 100% happy with my setup for the reasons I
> have mentioned previously. But the alternative is so much more
> expensive now that it is no longer an option for me.
>
> do not archive
>
>
> On May 22, 2007, at 3:54 PM, Tim Olson wrote:
>
>>
>> One additional thing about the 530W. It's a fantastic radio, but
>> Rob would also probably tell you that it was his way into a good
>> IFR machine...and when you combine a sorcerer and a 530W, you're
>> putting in over $20,000 into those 2 items to get the functionality
>> that you'd want. If you were to take some of that money and spend it
>> on one of the higher end EFIS systems (OP, G900, Chelton) you would
>> be enhancing your overall system by actually not just having a
>> radio and a Nav/Com that work well together, but an EFIS that has
>> that integration level. Thrown in a GMX-200 and you really start
>> having to wonder if you wouldn't just be better off moving up to
>> a higher end system as your cornerstone of your panel. Rob started
>> off with a GRT, which led him to later add the 530W. I think he's
>> now got something he's happy with, but the question is, what would
>> he do if he were doing it over again? Since he's got a flying RV-10,
>> with a working system and did it two ways, he's got some good input
>> I'm sure.
>>
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>> do not archive
>>
>>
>> Rob Kermanj wrote:
>>> You are correct. I would let the auto pilot be auto pilot and
>>> have one source drive the plane. I would also recommend that you
>>> talk to John at Trutrak. As I found out, the WASS is all new and
>>> not much is published. Make sure that you ask him specific
>>> question about the Soccer and see if you need a NAV indicator to
>>> take full advantage of it's capabilities.
>>> do not archive
>>> On May 22, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Vern W. Smith wrote:
>>>> Rob,
>>>>
>>>> If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a
>>>> Trutrak Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldn't run it
>>>> through GRT EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR
>>>> workload. I'm all for reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is
>>>> true, this would allow the use of any EFIS or even analog gauges
>>>> and still have the ability to do LPV approaches. Cool.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is very helpful as I'm trying to hold off on buying an EFIS-
>>>> lots of interesting changes in the market place. But, I'm to the
>>>> point if I don't start running wires I'll have to duct tape them
>>>> to the outside;)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Vern (#324 fuselage)
>>>>
>>>> Do not archive
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -
>>>> ----
>>>>
>>>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-
>>>> list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rob Kermanj
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AM
>>>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jesse,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago. It
>>>> should be in the archive. If you need additional information you
>>>> may contact me at 772-460-3907. I will be flying the 10 to NM on
>>>> Friday but will return you call when I get back.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Vern, The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches
>>>> are very stable. The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS
>>>> approaches. I also like the simplicity of this approach; no
>>>> localizer frequency to set up. It seems like a small thing, but
>>>> in real IFR conditions, I think the name of the game is to do as
>>>> little work as possible and as little cross checking/verifying as
>>>> possible.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If I were to do this again, I would have seriously considered
>>>> getting the Trutrak Soccer. With my set-up, you have to switch
>>>> the autopilot to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed
>>>> approaches, DME arcs and Procedure Turns. Again, not a very big
>>>> deal but it is one more thing to remember during the critical
>>>> part of the flight.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rob.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> * - 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*
>>>> *
>>>> *
>>> *
>>> *
>>> **
>>> **
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 2:01 PM
>
>
Message 59
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Where are you guys finding the time to be doing stuff like this. Does
anybody on this list eat, drink, exercise, sleep, play with the wife or
poop?
Give us working class folk a break...do it for us!
exactly 17,569,293 options..how did you figure this out. Man I'm getting
stressed out...I'm building with a bunch of geniuses.
Do not archive
John G. Drilling teeth, not aluminum
>From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@saintaviation.com>
>To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
>Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 17:58:20 -0400
>
>
>It sounds like it wouldn't be a bad idea to put together a chart with a
>rating system for different options out there. For example, if you want to
>buy a printer, there is no perfect printer out there, but each one has a
>rating for cost, a rating for ease of use, a rating for quality, a rating
>for ease of setup, a rating for cost of consumables, etc. If someone like
>me wants a budget printer, I won't worry about ease of setup because I know
>computer and can work my way through that, but initial cost and cost of
>consumables is very important. For my dad, ease of setup and use is a huge
>factor that he has to consider before even looking at the other options.
>For some, quality comes before everything else. Is there an easy way to
>setup a web page with a rating system and people can also put in their
>personal reviews of the different products. Would having that information
>quantified in a single location help? There are exactly 17,569,293
>different instrument panel combinations for the RV-10, so having this
>information might be helpful. Also having a compatibility rating system
>would help. Man, this sounds like a project. Anybody know of an easy way
>to do this, like maybe even a shopping cart page that has a rating system
>built in, so people can pick and choose and it will calculate a total panel
>cost (minus general stuff like wiring, switches and breakers, antennas,
>labor, etc.)?
>
>There is TONS of information that has gone through the list over the past
>2.5 years, but wading through that has got to be enormously painful.
>
>Jesse Saint
>Saint Aviation, Inc.
>jesse@saintaviation.com
>www.saintaviation.com
>Cell: 352-427-0285
>Fax: 815-377-3694
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Kermanj
>Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 4:41 PM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>
>
>You are right Tim. I kinda got myself cornered into the setup I
>have. I have not commented on any other set up since I do not have a
>first hand knowledge about anything else.
>
> From what I have read and heard, I would have bought the Chelton and
>a compatible autopilot instead. Especially, when the prices were
>more affordable. GRT is a great bang for the buck but it has it's
>limitations. I must admit that GRT qualifies the fact that it is not
>an IFR EFIS. On the other hand, GRT functions so well with SL30 that
>I wondered if they were just trying to limit their liability (with
>such declaration) and went ahead and bought them.
>
>I also admit that I am not 100% happy with my setup for the reasons I
>have mentioned previously. But the alternative is so much more
>expensive now that it is no longer an option for me.
>
>do not archive
>
>
>On May 22, 2007, at 3:54 PM, Tim Olson wrote:
>
> >
> > One additional thing about the 530W. It's a fantastic radio, but
> > Rob would also probably tell you that it was his way into a good
> > IFR machine...and when you combine a sorcerer and a 530W, you're
> > putting in over $20,000 into those 2 items to get the functionality
> > that you'd want. If you were to take some of that money and spend it
> > on one of the higher end EFIS systems (OP, G900, Chelton) you would
> > be enhancing your overall system by actually not just having a
> > radio and a Nav/Com that work well together, but an EFIS that has
> > that integration level. Thrown in a GMX-200 and you really start
> > having to wonder if you wouldn't just be better off moving up to
> > a higher end system as your cornerstone of your panel. Rob started
> > off with a GRT, which led him to later add the 530W. I think he's
> > now got something he's happy with, but the question is, what would
> > he do if he were doing it over again? Since he's got a flying RV-10,
> > with a working system and did it two ways, he's got some good input
> > I'm sure.
> >
> > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> > do not archive
> >
> >
> > Rob Kermanj wrote:
> >> You are correct. I would let the auto pilot be auto pilot and
> >> have one source drive the plane. I would also recommend that you
> >> talk to John at Trutrak. As I found out, the WASS is all new and
> >> not much is published. Make sure that you ask him specific
> >> question about the Soccer and see if you need a NAV indicator to
> >> take full advantage of it's capabilities.
> >> do not archive
> >> On May 22, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Vern W. Smith wrote:
> >>> Rob,
> >>>
> >>> If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a
> >>> Trutrak Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldn't run it
> >>> through GRT EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR
> >>> workload. I'm all for reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is
> >>> true, this would allow the use of any EFIS or even analog gauges
> >>> and still have the ability to do LPV approaches. Cool.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> This is very helpful as I'm trying to hold off on buying an EFIS-
> >>> lots of interesting changes in the market place. But, I'm to the
> >>> point if I don't start running wires I'll have to duct tape them
> >>> to the outside;)
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Vern (#324 fuselage)
> >>>
> >>> Do not archive
> >>>
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> ----
> >>>
> >>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-
> >>> list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rob Kermanj
> >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AM
> >>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
> >>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Jesse,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago. It
> >>> should be in the archive. If you need additional information you
> >>> may contact me at 772-460-3907. I will be flying the 10 to NM on
> >>> Friday but will return you call when I get back.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Vern, The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches
> >>> are very stable. The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS
> >>> approaches. I also like the simplicity of this approach; no
> >>> localizer frequency to set up. It seems like a small thing, but
> >>> in real IFR conditions, I think the name of the game is to do as
> >>> little work as possible and as little cross checking/verifying as
> >>> possible.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> If I were to do this again, I would have seriously considered
> >>> getting the Trutrak Soccer. With my set-up, you have to switch
> >>> the autopilot to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed
> >>> approaches, DME arcs and Procedure Turns. Again, not a very big
> >>> deal but it is one more thing to remember during the critical
> >>> part of the flight.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Rob.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> * - 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*
> >>> *
> >>> *
> >> *
> >> *
> >> **
> >> **
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>--
>2:01 PM
>
>
Message 60
| 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: | Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy |
Jesse,
I am 6'3" tall and am wondering if when folded up (not in use) will the
visor become an obstruction? Do you think taller pilots/passengers heads
might bump into the visors when folded back along the roofline?
-Ben
Message 61
| 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: | Leaking gas tank |
Just as a follow up to my earlier post on having a leak in my right gas
tank at a rivet. After much discussion I decided to drill out the rivet
that was leaking and I then drilled it out to a #27. If anyone does
this, make sure to vacuum out of the tank for any drilling debris and
also the back side of the rivet. Mine was stuck somewhat in the old pro
seal so I had to wedge it loose. It wasn't easy to get at but I bent a
piece of fuel line to get at it. I used that same piece of fuel line,
hooked to my vacuum, to get out the debris.
Anyway, once it was ready to put back together I inserted a glob of pro
seal up into the rivet hole and then put pro seal on the end of a cherry
max rivet and riveted it in.
I've refilled the tank and ran the engine since then and it seems to
have solved the problem.
Hopefully this might help anyone that runs into the same issue.
Wayne Edgerton #40336
DAR coming out on Monday :>}
Message 62
| 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: | Taking the deep questions Offline |
To the many who have begun communicating far more frequently offline and
remain committed to the sharing of builder information... I say thank
you for your continued sharing.
To those who will eventually notice the slow change in intensity,
brevity of answers and the pursuit of capitalistic profits on this list,
I say " the silence can seem deafening at times". The frequency of
posts and depth of thoughtful answers should reflect the approaching
arrival of OSH and the completion of kits after years with this list.
How about that cold beer at Camp Condrey and those Red Sox... I will
have Fries with my Burger please?
John Cox
#600
Do not Archive
Message 63
| 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 |
|
Jesse,
I can,t remember the exact numbers. At a WAAS seminar
I attended 2 months ago they said there are currently
6-800 GPS approaches with vertical guidance and 1400
ILS's. In the next two years they expect 26-2800 GPS
approaches with vertical guidance.
Steve 40212
--- Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com> wrote:
> <jesse@saintaviation.com>
>
> Will it fly the vertical portion on standard
> (non-precision) GPS approaches?
> Does anybody know the percentage of ILS approaches
> that have a LNAV/VNAV
> approach to match?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jesse Saint
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
> jesse@saintaviation.com
> www.saintaviation.com
> Cell: 352-427-0285
> Fax: 815-377-3694
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On
> Behalf Of Darton Steve
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:04 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>
> <sfdarton@yahoo.com>
>
> I have been flying a Caravan with a 530W 430W and
> KFC225 autopilot for a couple of months now. Both
> the
> lateral and vertical guidance is more stable than
> the
> ILS it overlays. At KSLC the LNAV/VNAV approaches
> that
> I fly overlay the ILS, so I set up the ILS on the
> number 2 nav. On these approaches there is no
> difference in the course or glideslope and the
> autopilot tracks either RNAV or ILS equally well.
> Steve 40212
> --- Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com> wrote:
>
> > Has anybody flown the 430W or 530W yet? If so,
> have
> > you flown it with an
> > autopilot that has Vertical Steering? If so,
> please
> > enlighten the group as
> > to your thoughts on it.
> >
> >
> >
> > Jesse Saint
> >
> > Saint Aviation, Inc.
> >
> > jesse@saintaviation.com
> >
> > www.saintaviation.com
> >
> > Cell: 352-427-0285
> >
> > Fax: 815-377-3694
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>
> Web Forums!
>
>
>
>
>
Finding fabulous fares is fun.
Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel
bargains.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097
Message 64
| 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 Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
This list cracks me up sometimes. ;)
I have to say, to me, a real geek, and a pilot who looks at that grey
thick wet layer of clouds as a perfect day to go for a pleasure flight
and build some experience, the panel is my favorite part of the plane.
It's not a status thing, or an ego thing, but a genuine interest in
actually taking a creation I made, and have it do flights with ease that
were painful to me only 2,3, or 5 years ago. There is no comparison
to the old equipment when you look at the relative ease and safety that
you can navigate yourself through the sky. And, increasingly it becomes
not a matter of whether you have the "nerve" to psychologically manage
yourself for the approach, but whether you spent the time understanding
your systems that you can manage them through the approach. I now
find instrument flying a lot more relaxing than before, yet stressful
enough to keep you from allowing yourself to be complacent.
My advice for John J is the same as I've said many times over....and
that's to actually take the time to go fly a system before you put the
money down. Actually watch how it does an approach, and how many
button pushes, screen flips, and knob turns it takes to not only load
it, but fly it. Even if you aren't a current instrument pilot, some of
the features will stand out to you when you see them in action. So
go get some real-life in-cockpit flying time behind any system and
you'll be doing yourself a favor. I love my system, and I love the
way it came out and am proud of how I made it work. That's why I
invite people interested in that sort of thing to fly with me. There
are lots of people who don't have the wants or the needs for such a
system, and I've been known to tell those people not to go this
route just because it doesn't fit them. But for a person who wants
to do some real IFR flying with their families, it's recommended to put
in the requisite time to learning the benefits of the various systems
and integrations of all components.
As far as the 17,569,293 panel combinations goes, I actually was hoping
to put together an EFIS FAB page (Features, advantages, benefits), with
perhaps a disadvantages side too. The problem is, it really takes
first-hand and pretty in depth knowledge of a system to really be able
to point out it's strengths and weaknesses. Rest assured, the strengths
will be put out by the manufacturers marketing. The tough part is
the weaknesses are tough to come by. People who fly a system don't
want to talk about the bad side of what they have, and the manufacturers
who make them don't either. And then there are always those who
haven't flown with the higher-end stuff so they spend time justifying
the low end stuff...and make it appear "adequate". In truth, much of
it indeed is adequate. As one reply said, most of this stuff is much
easier to fly behind than the good gear of only a few years ago...even
the lower-budget stuff. But, if you don't take the time to fly a
system, it's very hard to understand why some of the features would
have value or stand out. For me, the HITS was one of those. I never
thought of it as anything other than a cheesy gimick, and in fact when
I bought the system my intention was to turn it off so I didn't have it.
After using it, I found it truly amazing. What makes having a website
of panel combos and EFIS so tough is many-fold...
How do you get the knowledge for all the systems?
How do you keep it updated with all the changes going on?
How HUGE of a list of features do you want to list?
Can you get reviewers to objectively list the good and the bad?
If *I* wrote the list, would anyone even trust if I were objective?
Who in their right mind has the time for such a project?
and many more...
As the various companies build features into systems, like synthetic
vision, IFR databases for approaches, and all the goodies, one thing you
can count on is that the old radio stack with a GPS/Nav/Com will become
sort of like steam gauges are today. (but not nearly that extreme)
An EFIS that functions as a MFD and has all the trimmings definitely has
the capability to improve safety. And, with all the players improving
feature sets, even the cheap gear will eventually have a full feature
set. I love reading the "aftermath" type articles in magazines, but I'm
always left with the thought that there are a lot of those accidents
that could have been prevented if the technologies we are able to put in
our planes were affordable to the certified masses. We *really* have a
huge benefit over a certified plane owner, and truly, even the most
expensive RV-10 panels of the flying -10's today don't even come
anywhere near the price that the same equipment capabilities would cost
you in a certified plane. Those many accidents were had in planes
that were as capable or more capable than ours, but what failed them
is their information presentation, and ability to be flown easily.
So yeah, this is a tough subject for many people to wade through. I
can appreciate the many viewpoints. Some people think it's silly to
even want these things. That's fine too, but there are quite a few
who do want them. For those people, I say, ask lots of questions.
Learn what the limitations are, and then make your choice.
I'll never forget being at the BMA booth 2 or 3 years ago, asking
if the EFIS one could fly a GPS approach and command the Autopilot
down vertically for the approach. The person said, and I quote,
"Why would you want to do that?". And on further questioning, it was
apparent that at that time, it could not, and that they were not at
all interested in considering their system an IFR system for real,
true, IFR use, with an IFR database. That opened my eyes, and told me
that even the stuff I thought of as waaaaay cool, fantastic looking
stuff, had it's shortcomings....and if I didn't find them, I'd be
unhappy later. Luckily for me I waded the sharkpool and ended up
completely satisfied.
EFIS questions, along with GNS430/480 questions, tend to start list
wars. No big deal there, it's kind of fun some days. But, I'd
encourage people to get real flying time behind a system of
choice, and if they can't, then contact someone by phone and
ask questions in depth. I'm game for that too.
Gotta go...I'm being pulled away forcibly from my keyboard...I'm
sure many appreciate that. ;)
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Rob Kermanj wrote:
>
> Sounds like a Tim Olson job!
>
> do not archive.
>
Message 65
| 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: Taking the deep questions Offline |
Lol...Redsox....Do you forget anything John???
Rick S.
40185
do not archive
Message 66
| 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: Taking the deep questions Offline |
Pretty cryptic, but I think I unfortunately agree.... Everyone is soooo
helpful here and so giving of their time and knowledge, and yet, by
deciding not to use the public forum, some may be depriving others of
their expertise.
I would also hypothesize that many of us feel like relative newbies
because we lack the depth of knowledge and skill possessed by the more
experienced. Therefore, feeling like a newbie, one may hesitate from
sharing their growing knowledge in the face of so many with so much more
knowledge.
There's a feedback loop in here somewhere that probably results in so
many seemingly dead forums, i.e. RVxx
So, you folks working on your finishing kits - please keep posting here!
and you folks working on your tail and unwrapping those QB kits - please
start posting here!
I'm going to try to double my posting rate, hopefully it will help.
Bill "still rearranging the goodies in my QB wings while slowly
buttoning it up" Watson
John W. Cox wrote:
>
> To the many who have begun communicating far more frequently offline
> and remain committed to the sharing of builder information I say
> thank you for your continued sharing.
>
> To those who will eventually notice the slow change in intensity,
> brevity of answers and the pursuit of capitalistic profits on this
> list, I say the silence can seem deafening at times. The frequency
> of posts and depth of thoughtful answers should reflect the
> approaching arrival of OSH and the completion of kits after years with
> this list.
>
> How about that cold beer at Camp Condrey and those Red Sox I will
> have Fries with my Burger please?
>
> John Cox
>
> #600
>
> Do not Archive
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 67
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Just another view but picking the right panel becomes a lot easier if you
define the mission first. Chelton are great, Fully coupled autopilots are
wonderful, WAAS GPS supreme and you can get it all for only a gazillion
dollars. The question in my mind is how much do we really need,... Granted
if it's a "want" then all the discussion about price and package is moot. (
BTW, Tim defined his mission as "a real geek, and a pilot who looks at that
grey thick wet layer of clouds as a perfect day" so if that is not you, it
will make a difference")
For example, I fly a lot in the south, Ark, LA, Texas, Ok and normally
approaches flown to mins plus 500 are good enough. I would guess that to be
80% of the time when you actually need an approach which is an even smaller
amount of your total flight time. This is from memory but I have flown
about 40 cross country trips in the last two years (200-400) miles. All
have been filed IFR, of them only 5 or 6 actually required an approach at
the end and then only one was to mins plus about 300. Everything else was
basically just to let down through a layer to about 1,000 agl. BTW, My
whole attitude/experience would be different if I flew in the North East or
in California Coastal fog!
All of the really nice IFR stuff is only needed at the mins so you are
buying a lot of equipment for the rare approach to mins. In most cases, you
are put on vectors, intercept the approach NAV course from vectors, and then
descend from the FAF at a fixed rate of 400-800 fpm to mins plus 400- 500 or
more. Given that, any equipment that will let you fly with a heading bug
while holding altitude, while monitoring the approach VOR or GPS but
preferentially by GPS for spatial awareness will comfortably work for any
but the most die hard IFR pilots. At the FAF, dial in your descent rate and
leave the NAV coupled and you really don't need a coupled glide slope to get
comfortably to mins plus 500 or so.
Now, all of this is up for grabs if you really want to fly to 200' mins on
the rare occasion but reasonable risk management on the ground prior to
take-off makes even the most basic equipment more than adequate "most" of
the time.
Bottom line is that you can have a nice economical IFR panel that will work
well with nominal flight management or a really high dollar system that will
take you to mins with your hands off. Knowing which you will be comfortable
with should be the first part of the planning process. In some cases, we
just can't afford the stuff we would like to have and fly with less but
manage the risk better. Your call, but knowing what you really want to do
"most" of the time is important. The other question you have to ask is "if
I buy this fancy system, will I (the pilot) be ready to take it to mins when
the time comes."
If you plan on serious IFR and need that kind of panel for really hard IFR,
then don't forget that heated pitot and static ports and fuel vents are
things to consider just like wing and prop de-ice. All nice but more
complexity and more dollars. HOWEVER if you fly IFR at all, you just gotta
have a Garmin 396/496 with weather! It's the real minimum IFR equipment in
my mind.
Pick the mission, then pick the panel.
Just my .02
Bill S
7a Ark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 7:11 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
This list cracks me up sometimes. ;)
I have to say, to me, a real geek, and a pilot who looks at that grey thick
wet layer of clouds as a perfect day to go for a pleasure flight and build
some experience, the panel is my favorite part of the plane.
It's not a status thing, or an ego thing, but a genuine interest in actually
taking a creation I made, and have it do flights with ease that were painful
to me only 2,3, or 5 years ago. There is no comparison to the old equipment
when you l
Message 68
| 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: Taking the deep questions Offline |
Don't sweat it Watson!!
I don't think there will ever be a time when SOMEONE doesn't have the answer to
the questions put forth.
3 years into the build and this forum, previously us old timers were really hashing
out the questions on the Yahoo list. If you ever saw a question which might
deserve the "dumb" label you should have seen the questions posted 2 years
ago on the Yahoo board!!! James McClow's spelling skill shoes have been filled
by Deems Davis, who's site has helped out a whole bunch. Lots of good times then
and more to come. There's finally light at the end of my tunnel and I have
only had to post a few questions the last year or so mainly because they had
already been addressed.
So my favorite, not forgotten, brawl breaking post of "How bout them Redsox" lives
on!!!
Ain't building airpains fun!!
Rick S.
40185
do not archive
Message 69
| 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 |
|
My partner in the -10 flies a Gulfstream 2000 for Net Jets. I started
'panel wishing' early on for a super-functional glass panel with 3 axis
autopilot. Then I had a conversation with another builder who asked
what my 'mission' was. I don't reaally know that answer. I've never
had a fast 4-place airplane before. I seldom venture outside my state
now, and then only in fair weather since I'm not IFR rated. His advice
was to build a simple panel with minimal electronics for VFR flight and
go fly. My panel will be easily removeable/modular so upgrading it will
not be a frustrating undertaking. That means a standard 6 pack, a
nav/com and a GPS ..... and the autopilot. Everything but the 6 pack
can go into a state-of-the-art panel along with some redundant radios
etc. if I get serious later on. I liked the advice. With all the new
'toys' coming on the experimental market, all I'm going to do is make
sure that the equipment I choose now will be compatible with the new
stuff. And I'm keeping an eye on what's coming up.
Linn
do not archive
Chris Johnston wrote:
>
>Just to chime in here -
>
>When I started my build I was a non-IFR pilot, and during the build, it
>became apparent to me that there were decisions that needed to be made
>that required a working knowledge of what IFR ops are all about. I
>decided to bite the bullet and add another 13-14 thousand on to my
>airplane budget and get my IFR ticket so I could see what the hub-bub
>was about, and maybe make some better decisions about equipment, layout,
>and other stuff. It definitely helped. I'm building a much different
>plane than I started out building, and much of that is due to the better
>understanding of aviation in general, and IFR ops in the specific. Some
>places, I'm spending WAAAY too much money for a seemingly small issue
>(I'll come clean on that someday), and some places I've discovered I can
>cut the extras out, gain some simplicity, and save some money. Getting
>the IFR ticket doesn't really give you all the answers to your panel
>questions, but it does help teach you how you need to be thinking when
>it comes to IFR flight, and that helps with the decision making process.
>I'm sure that Tim O. could tell you that I'm still full of questions,
>and I agonize over everything.
>
>Getting the instrument rating did drive home this one major point to
>me...
>SINGLE PILOT IFR IS VERY CHALLENGEING. I have a VERY healthy respect
>for IFR ops now, and I will go a very long way to lighten my workload in
>IFR situations, even just a little bit. EVERY LITTLE BIT COUNTS.
>Especially when you're a super green, low-time pilot such as myself.
>
>Now I'm sort of spoiled in a weird way, because I have this super sweet
>Chelton unit on the bench, and I have really no desire to go out and fly
>IFR in some beat up Cessna with super old, super crappy gear in it.
>Funny, I'm not even flying yet and I'm spoiled :)
>
>As always, these are just things that I think. I don't know anything.
>
>cj
>#40410
>fuse/finishing
>www.perfectlygoodairplane.net
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Jessen
>Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 1:49 PM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>
>
>But, that's the basic question, is it not.
>
>What's frustrating to a non-IFR pilot is anticipating what you want,
>knowing
>that you'll be flying IFR one of these days. Many of us do not have
>enough
>knowledge to determine what combination of things gets you the best
>functionality at the best price. Most of these combinations are just as
>good or better than the best IFR panel 5-10 years ago. Some integrated
>systems, perhaps Op and Chelton, are much better. Why they are much
>better
>is the issue. I don't even know the very difficult approach issues that
>would require high workloads with some systems versus almost no workload
>with another. I'm not sure if having a Sorcerer is necessary compared
>to
>one model down, when coupled with whatever EFIS and whatever nav/com/gps
>box. There's a lot of money at stake here, with tons of useless
>capacity
>sitting in the panel as a potential consequence of uniformed decision
>making.
>
>Enough ranting. I don't expect anyone to create a grid of all possible
>combinations so we can pick and choose, and this is obviously where the
>"self education" comes in. It's just a little frustrating not knowing
>what
>you need to know in order to know. And, besides, this stuff is changing
>too
>fast to really know what you need to know when you finally need to know
>it.
>So, I'll shut up. As Randy says, stop wasting time and just go build.
>
>John (finally back and going to the hanger tonight) Jessen
> #40328
>
>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: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:54 PM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>
>
>One additional thing about the 530W. It's a fantastic radio, but Rob
>would
>also probably tell you that it was his way into a good IFR machine...and
>when you combine a sorcerer and a 530W, you're putting in over $20,000
>into
>those 2 items to get the functionality that you'd want. If you were to
>take
>some of that money and spend it on one of the higher end EFIS systems
>(OP,
>G900, Chelton) you would be enhancing your overall system by actually
>not
>just having a radio and a Nav/Com that work well together, but an EFIS
>that
>has that integration level. Thrown in a GMX-200 and you really start
>having
>to wonder if you wouldn't just be better off moving up to a higher end
>system as your cornerstone of your panel. Rob started off with a GRT,
>which
>led him to later add the 530W. I think he's now got something he's
>happy
>with, but the question is, what would he do if he were doing it over
>again?
>Since he's got a flying RV-10, with a working system and did it two
>ways,
>he's got some good input I'm sure.
>
>Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>do not archive
>
>
>Rob Kermanj wrote:
>
>
>>You are correct. I would let the auto pilot be auto pilot and have
>>one source drive the plane. I would also recommend that you talk to
>>John at Trutrak. As I found out, the WASS is all new and not much is
>>published. Make sure that you ask him specific question about the
>>Soccer and see if you need a NAV indicator to take full advantage of
>>it's capabilities.
>>
>>do not archive
>>
>>On May 22, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Vern W. Smith wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Rob,
>>>
>>>If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a
>>>Trutrak Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldn't run it
>>>through GRT EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR
>>>
>>>
>workload.
>
>
>>>I'm all for reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is true, this
>>>would allow the use of any EFIS or even analog gauges and still have
>>>the ability to do LPV approaches. Cool.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>This is very helpful as I'm trying to hold off on buying an EFIS-
>>>lots of interesting changes in the market place. But, I'm to the
>>>point if I don't start running wires I'll have to duct tape them to
>>>the outside;)
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Vern (#324 fuselage)
>>>
>>>Do not archive
>>>
>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>---
>>>
>>>*From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>>>[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rob
>>>Kermanj
>>>*Sent:* Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AM
>>>*To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>>>*Subject:* Re: RV10-List: GNS-430W?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Jesse,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago. It should be
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>>in the archive. If you need additional information you may contact
>>>me at 772-460-3907. I will be flying the 10 to NM on Friday but will
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>>return you call when I get back.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Vern, The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches are
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>>very stable. The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS approaches.
>>>I also like the simplicity of this approach; no localizer frequency
>>>to set up. It seems like a small thing, but in real IFR conditions,
>>>I think the name of the game is to do as little work as possible and
>>>as little cross checking/verifying as possible.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>If I were to do this again, I would have seriously considered
>>>getting the Trutrak Soccer. With my set-up, you have to switch the
>>>autopilot to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed approaches, DME
>>>arcs and Procedure Turns. Again, not a very big deal but it is one
>>>more thing to remember during the critical part of the flight.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Rob.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>* - 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 70
| 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: | Taking the deep questions Offline |
Bill,
Don't ever be afraid to ask questions to the list or share your experiences.
Many things have changed since a group of us decide to mutiny from a Yahoo list
that practiced censorship back in early 2005. Some people have gone and new
people have replaced them. The concern shown by some of us is over the tone
of messages in the last year or so. When experience and knowledge is eschewed
for the loud and inexperienced, the joy of participating and sharing is replaced
with why bother. So conversations are taken underground, so to speak, between
trusted few.
Me, I am a first time builder and should never be taken as someone knowledgeable.
I look to guys like John Cox, Dave Saylor, Kelly McMullen, Barrett, & Stein
who have years of experience on multiple aircraft. Of course there are always
builders extraordinaire like Tim who go way above and beyond documenting
their experience for the community in addition to guys like Deems who are willing
to be the first to do something different.
So make sure you always give weight to responses based on real world experience
of the poster. Take time to do research yourself and listen to all sides.
Don't just have blind faith in something because you might like a guy or because
he belongs to the same club as you. It doesn't mean they are any more experienced
than some guy like me. ;-)
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Limbo
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of MauleDriver
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 7:36 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Taking the deep questions Offline
Pretty cryptic, but I think I unfortunately agree.... Everyone is soooo
helpful here and so giving of their time and knowledge, and yet, by
deciding not to use the public forum, some may be depriving others of
their expertise.
I would also hypothesize that many of us feel like relative newbies
because we lack the depth of knowledge and skill possessed by the more
experienced. Therefore, feeling like a newbie, one may hesitate from
sharing their growing knowledge in the face of so many with so much more
knowledge.
There's a feedback loop in here somewhere that probably results in so
many seemingly dead forums, i.e. RVxx
So, you folks working on your finishing kits - please keep posting here!
and you folks working on your tail and unwrapping those QB kits - please
start posting here!
I'm going to try to double my posting rate, hopefully it will help.
Bill "still rearranging the goodies in my QB wings while slowly
buttoning it up" Watson
John W. Cox wrote:
>
> To the many who have begun communicating far more frequently offline
> and remain committed to the sharing of builder information... I say
> thank you for your continued sharing.
>
> To those who will eventually notice the slow change in intensity,
> brevity of answers and the pursuit of capitalistic profits on this
> list, I say " the silence can seem deafening at times". The frequency
> of posts and depth of thoughtful answers should reflect the
> approaching arrival of OSH and the completion of kits after years with
> this list.
>
> How about that cold beer at Camp Condrey and those Red Sox... I will
> have Fries with my Burger please?
>
> John Cox
>
> #600
>
> Do not Archive
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 71
| 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 |
|
The fit and finish on the James cowl is excellent in comparison to the
standard cowl. In addition I just received the intersection fairings
from Bob, and it is night and day comparison. I would highly recommend
leaving the Vans fairings out and purchasing the after market ones, the
come basically ready to install with very little fitting required.
Dan
N289DT
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Gonzalez
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:54 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Flaps
<indigoonlatigo@msn.com>
How is the quality of that James Cowl in comparison to other Van's
supplied
fiberglass.
John G.
>From: "Lloyd, Daniel R." <LloydDR@wernerco.com>
>To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RE: RV10-List: Flaps
>Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 22:17:20 -0400
>
<LloydDR@wernerco.com>
>
>During transition training we took off with zero flaps, and had no
>issues climbing in excess of 2k a minute at 120mph
>Dan
>N289DT Finishing the cowl for the RV10E install
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sam Marlow
>Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 7:13 PM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV10-List: Flaps
>
>
>The way I understand is, half flaps for takeoff, (15'), "0" for climb,
>and -3 for cruise. If the flaps are up all the way, it could degrade
the
>
>climb performance.
>
>linn Walters wrote:
> > Interesting thread. I haven't given it serious thought. Since I'm
not
> > flying yet, is there something that prevents you from using your
> > Mark-1 eyeballs on the flap .... like requiring you to have the neck
> > bones of an owl??? Does the 'counting seconds' method of coming
close
> > to what you want (or are used to) not work?? Just wondering out loud
>here.
> > Linn
> > do not archive
> >
> > RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote:
> >>
> >> Here are your main two options:
> >>
> >> http://www.aircraftextras.com/FPS-Plus.htm
> >>
> >>
>http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1179752413-22-378
&
>browse=airframe&product=fps
> >>
><http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1179752413-22-37
8
>&browse=airframe&product=fps>
> >>
> >> I'm going with the Aircraft Extras product however you have to come
> >> up with your own position sensor for theirs. Most people seem to be
> >> using a POS-12 from Ray Allen for this purpose.
> >>
> >> http://www.rayallencompany.com/products/indsens.html
> >>
> >> Michael Sausen
> >>
> >> -10 #352 Limbo
> >>
> >> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> >> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Sam
>Marlow
> >> *Sent:* Monday, May 21, 2007 7:39 AM
> >> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
> >> *Subject:* RV10-List: Flaps
> >>
> >> I'm finding little information on the flap positioning system, just
> >> wondering what the majority of the group is doing here. After all,
> >> the flaps are different than any airplane I've ever flown.
> >> Thanks,
> >> Sam Marlow
> >> Still wiring
> >>
> >> * *
> >> * *
> >> ; - The RV10-List Email Forarch & Download, 7-Day Browse,
>Chat, FAQ,
> >> *_; --> http://www.matronics.bsp; - NEW MATRONICS WEB FO;
><http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>http://forums.matronics.c
o
>m*
> >> * *
> >> *
> >>
> >>
> >> *
> >
> > *
> >
> >
> > *
>
>
Message 72
| 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 did it this way and there is no issues that I can think of. The rivets
get bucked from the inside channel and there is plenty of room.
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
JSMcGrew@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 2:50 PM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Upper Fwd Fuse
Rob,
I think that would be tough, though maybe not impossible. There
might be some rivets that are hard to get to near the point that the
canopy rests on the upper forward fuse. I was looking at these pictures
of my canopy installation to see if there was anything that would
prevent from doing things in that order; I'm not really sure, but maybe
they'll help you.
-Jim
40134
In a message dated 5/22/2007 2:12:06 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
flywrights@yahoo.com writes:
Is it feasible to cleco in the upper fwd fuse, then fit
and install the canopy, and then remove the upper fwd fuse so I can play
with my panel and sub-panel? Later on I'd then slide the fwd fuse back
into place and rivet it once my sub-panel mods are complete.
Rob Wright
#392
Jim "Scooter" McGrew
http://www.mit.edu/~jsmcgrew
_____
See what's free at AOL.com
<http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> .
Message 73
| 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: | When to start on the panel |
I agree with everything stated here, but I would like to stress that the
best panel builders always fill up their schedules fast, especially in
the 2 or 3 months following a show, even if you have not finalized all
of your decisions get on a wait list for the panel builder with a
deposit and work with them to design it to meet your needs. I worked
with Stein and he was great, even during the problems with Direct2 etc.
He was invaluable in making certain decisions based on hi previous
experiences in helping other builders.
I agree with Tim that the panel is the most stressful choices you will
make.
Dan
N289DT RV10E (finishing he cowl)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 4:17 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: When to start on the panel
Jon,
Your question is a very tough one, and a very good one. The problem
is, there's no one answer that will work for every builder.
The reason is, some components are available immediately. Some, like
my mini-ADI from TruTrak, will take over 2 YEARS to get to you.
There are EFIS systems that you can buy and have delivered within
a week. Then there are some that will easily approach a year (or
maybe even more) before you'll be at the top of the queue, and
waiting for the latest features to actually ship will REALLY
place you into a long wait. The there's the panel builders. Ask
people like Anh Vu how long a panel's lead time is by a panel
builder.... You'd be surprised. For some panel builders, you will
wait nearly a year (or more) from your actual paid deposit before
you'll get a finished product, and most panel builders have at least
a few weeks or months lead time. Even with interiors, Abby is currently
booking October/November slots. It just varies so much from item to
item. Also, figure that no matter what the date you are given when
you contact them is, there will inevitably be delays beyond that for
many people.
The only safe thing to do is to look at what you actually
want to buy, and the possibilities for the future, and then go
with a choice that you know you'll be happy with. For example,
if you buy a GRT system, they will allow you to upgrade later for
a fee. Then you just have to ensure you have your panel made for the
current system yet able to fit the future one...but waiting for
the features to show up may just mean you will have a plane with
no panel by the time you need it. Stein has said in the past
that when you shop for avionics, you need to buy what's available
today, because the vendors promises of delivery on things in
the future don't come with reliable timeframes.
As far as your current thoughts for hardware, from what I hear
these days, there is almost zero lead time on the EFIS and
probably a month or two at most on the entire system, so you're
OK there for the time being. *Most* of the Garmin standard
radio stack hardware is pretty quick to ship, as are the
backup gauges and things like that. So theoretically you
could buy today and have a panel builder finish it maybe
in the 3rd or 4th quarter of '07, or if you DIY, you could
buy it in August and still be wiring it in the same timeframe.
Oh, and if you get a QB fuselage, you won't have an incredibly
long time before you'll want to at least have those items
identified so you can prepare for some wiring and placements.
I'd actually pick a panel builder you trust and call them
for a time estimate. It's no secret that I'm a Stein fan, but
the nice thing is, he'll give you a straight idea on the
timeframe. All bets are off when OSH comes though, as that's
a time when the schedules quickly book for months to come,
so it pays to either jump before OSH or right in the first
couple of days of the show.
Personally, I ordered my panel items in May 2005. I got most
of it by the end of July, and started wiring. Some items
came a little later. The item that has taken the longest is
the mini-ADI, which I'm still waiting for today.
When you start talking panel though, you're hitting some of
the most fun but stressful times of the build. ;)
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Jon Reining wrote:
> <jonathan.w.reining@wellsfargo.com>
>
> My dad and I are making good progress on the quickbuild wings (I
> know, they came almost done, but it still feels good) and we're
> starting to seriously think about the panel. Our thoughts are
> centering around a 3 panel Chelton system with all the appropriate
> gizmos to help them perform at peak proficiency.
>
> When would you start ordering equipment? How much of a delay is
> there from the point of ordering to receiving? If we go with a panel
> builder, what are the delays on that end - how much time is it taking
> the pros to build panels once all the parts come in?
>
> With all the new technology coming out on such a regular basis, we're
> reluctant to order anything before its time. But, recognizing that
> the panel will probably take a lot of time to get all together, we
> don't want to be waiting forever either.
>
> Thanks for the thoughts
>
> Jon and Bill Reining 40514 - wings
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114241#114241
>
Message 74
| 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 Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
I recall vividly going through all of the 'FOG' when deciding on my
panel components. there has already been a lot of good advice in
response to this. So I'll limit it to this:
1. DON'T just follow someone else's decision/logic. YOUR panel is
probably the most intimate set of decisions you will make regarding YOUR
plane. MAKE SURE that you have a really SOLID understanding of WHAT
YOUR, requirements/wants/needs/preferences are. something that someone
else says / does may sound good/logical at the moment, but if it
doesn't' match your spec's, it's interesting but not relevant. This
goes for panel builders / vendors as well. e.g one of my factors in
EFIS choice was the amount of information displayable on a single
screen, I like a LOT, I know of one other builder that made their EFIS
choice because they specifically did NOT want a lot of info
simultaneously displayed.
2. IT IS CONFUSING - at least at first, but I recommend that everyone
take the time to wade through the options on their own. My 1st challenge
was just to understand all of the acronyms and what they meant (ADC,
AHRS, EFIS, MFD, PFD , EIS, WAAS, ....... on and on). The process is
EXTREMELY educational and informative, it will tell you a LOT about what
IS or IS NOT important to you. The education that you get will be
invaluable to you in operating and troubleshooting your plane/panel.
Don't short cut your learning opportunity.
3. The printed information from the vendors is unfortunately, not always
that revealing, particularly when it come to system limitations. TAKE
every advantage to talk 1st hand to the vendors, OSH and other shows are
great opportunities, but don't be afraid to pick up the phone and call
direct. The response will tell you something about the company you are
considering dealing with.
4. If you ask another builder/pilot if they 'LIKE' their particular
system and they say YES, don't necessarily put too much weight into that
single comment. I've read/seen lots of posts and I've yet to see one
from someone that says 'I made a terrible mistake, this thing is a pile
of !#@$#" We all tend to be very proud of our decisions and tend to
defend them strongly. Very few if any of us have significant flight
experience with ALL of even MOST of the systems available. We tend to
like what we know and are most familiar with.
My 2 cents
Deems Davis # 406
Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! )
http://deemsrv10.com/
>
Message 75
| 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: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy |
Jesse, I'll take a set also, and bill them to Jay......... :-D
(but send them to me..... O:-)
Deems
Jay Rowe wrote:
>
> Jesse: Nice work. Full set for me. Ship, and bill, to: Jay Rowe, 151
> N. Shore Ln, Winthrop, ME 04364, 207 322-6167. JFR
> --
Do Not Archive
Message 76
| 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 |
|
Rather than putting this little gusset on the outside as the plans indicate,
several builders are riveting it on the inside where it is less obvious.
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
Message 77
| 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 Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Bill Schlatterer wrote:
>
> Just another view but picking the right panel becomes a lot easier if you
> define the mission first. Chelton are great, Fully coupled autopilots are
> wonderful, WAAS GPS supreme and you can get it all for only a gazillion
> dollars. The question in my mind is how much do we really need,... Granted
> if it's a "want" then all the discussion about price and package is moot. (
> BTW, Tim defined his mission as "a real geek, and a pilot who looks at that
> grey thick wet layer of clouds as a perfect day" so if that is not you, it
> will make a difference")
>
Actually, that statement I made was less of my "mission", but much
more my "style". My "mission" might better be summed up like this
slightly edited reply to an offline comment I got.
"When people say I don't "need" all that stuff in the panel, I
think....as far as I'm concerned, I'm not willing to trust my "superior"
(laughing) skills are good enough to put my families life on the line
with, risking their lives unnecessarily. For me, what I "need" is
"the best I can do". It may cost a few dollars, but I want every
bit of ease, safety, and help that I can get, so that I can be
more assured that I'll have another day to fly another flight."
For me, it's about totally enjoying IFR flight, but putting
all the technology to good use in actually keeping my family and
passengers alive. IFR flight isn't something you dabble in. VFR and
IFR are absolute black and white, when you play by the rules. For a
VFR only pilot, I wouldn't get any of the high-end systems, and my
main GPS would just be a 496 even as a gadget guy. For an IFR pilot,
there is a lot more at stake. The accident records clearly state the
highly increased risk in GA IFR flight, especially single-pilot. Having
a very good system at your hands is like having a 2nd pilot. In fact,
when I first began my actual IFR experience post-training, I immediately
purchased an autopilot for my old plane, because I was not willing to
even consider flying my family IFR without an autopilot. This is just
an extension of that caution, brought about by a little more
experience, and, because it's possible to GREATLY increase the survival
chances in an IFR aircraft with the technology today. There are so
absolutely many accidents that need never happen. I remember reading
an article recently where a plane flew a few hundred feet below the
glideslope due to some misc. errors in reading when to descend on
final. With todays synthetic vision approaches, that kind of thing
just doesn't need to happen. It's a world where the slightest
mis-interpretation of a piece of paper can mean sudden death. Even
WITH the equipment, there is plenty of risk, but for those who fly
their families (IFR), what do you want to do to minimize it? I'm
selfish enough in that I love IFR flight so much that I'll actually
be willing to FLY IFR with them on board, whereas I could just adamantly
become a VFR pilot, and ignore that risk. But, I'm also not willing
to make it harder than I have to, to ensure their long-term health.
Many have seen my kids photos.....what do YOU think I should consider
Danielle's value as.....$5,000, $20,000, or $50,000? And is Colleen
worth more, or less? Quite literally, the money I spent has the
potential to save just one, very minor, mistake while in IMC, at
some point in our lives, that will make even $100,000 for that extra
"software feature" worth every penny.
So my mission is the ability to fly in IMC with as little risk
of life and limb as possible.
Also, I know that this kind of discussion bores the ba-jeeses out
of some people, but keep in mind that in that survey done by Van's
way back as to what kind of plane (IFR or VFR) the builders were
building, the vast majority were building IFR aircraft. So, I
usually prefer to consider meaningful panel discussions as IFR panel
discussions. If it's a VFR panel, there's very little that is critical
about planning a panel.
Wouldn't it be cool if 5 years from now, the accident record for IFR
flight were to actually equal what it is for VFR flight...and then
some!?! (If we could just get people to fill up with fuel when needed,
that would even help the VFR's safety record)
> For example, I fly a lot in the south, Ark, LA, Texas, Ok and normally
> approaches flown to mins plus 500 are good enough. I would guess that to be
> 80% of the time when you actually need an approach which is an even smaller
> amount of your total flight time. This is from memory but I have flown
> about 40 cross country trips in the last two years (200-400) miles. All
> have been filed IFR, of them only 5 or 6 actually required an approach at
> the end and then only one was to mins plus about 300. Everything else was
> basically just to let down through a layer to about 1,000 agl. BTW, My
> whole attitude/experience would be different if I flew in the North East or
> in California Coastal fog!
Very true...but now you're arguing that a person who's only going to
be doing minimal low approaches should maybe think about lesser
equipment, right? IMHO, it's probably the opposite, and your point
would be perfectly valid. Here's my thought....
It's hard enough for a private pilot to stay IFR current, with plenty of
IMC experience. If you're going to fly approaches in IMC, the pilot
with less currency could probably benefit more from some of the more
substantial equipment than the guy who does it every week, which your
40 flights is quite a portion of a year. You may indeed have the
"superior" skills that I laughingly mentioned about myself above.
Then, it's just a matter of the same economics of what is the value
to you in life and limb dollars? (Keep in mind I really believe that
some of today's technology has the breakthrough possibility of
changing the accident rate....and SOMEBODY is going to die doing it,
so why not err on the safe side?)
>
> All of the really nice IFR stuff is only needed at the mins so you are
> buying a lot of equipment for the rare approach to mins. In most cases, you
> are put on vectors, intercept the approach NAV course from vectors, and then
> descend from the FAF at a fixed rate of 400-800 fpm to mins plus 400- 500 or
> more. Given that, any equipment that will let you fly with a heading bug
> while holding altitude, while monitoring the approach VOR or GPS but
> preferentially by GPS for spatial awareness will comfortably work for any
> but the most die hard IFR pilots. At the FAF, dial in your descent rate and
> leave the NAV coupled and you really don't need a coupled glide slope to get
> comfortably to mins plus 500 or so.
>
I don't disagree with your thoughts for the most part. That's how I
feel about my backup gauges....I mean, how much do you absolutely
need when the crap hits the fan? With ATC help, and radar contact,
you can probably pull off a whole lot if you stay calm. As far as I'm
concerned, you have it exactly right for how I feel if I have a major
EFIS failure. Other than that though, for a few bucks I have the
opportunity to keep that safety level up. For what it's worth, some of
my more fearful moments were not on the low portion of an approach.
In fact, on the last few seconds before breaking out, it hasn't been
bad at all. For me the climb phase, and some enroute and vectoring
phase time has been pretty tough. Spatial disorientation is something
I became acutely aware of, along with vertigo. Interestingly, while
I commonly at least felt the "leans" in turbulent IMC before, I haven't
had that experience with synthetic vision. I can only surmise that
this is partly due to the added "visibility" I'm now seeing. There are
times, that I can honestly say that I had my hands full just keeping
myself hand-flying the plane to keep it upright while feeling
the leans in a big way. Having that experience was pretty humbling.
I do understand that it's something that can be overcome, but, does
the *average* IFR pilot fly enough approaches to realistically keep
their proficiency to what is *really* required for safety? (Not the
standard legal definition of currency)
Also, it wouldn't be responsible of me to tell someone that there's
such a thing as "light" IFR where you just go busting through
thin layers and then continue on top. You truly can get yourself
into some situations that way.
I catch your comment about if you were in the North East or California's
coastal fog, but in almost all areas of the country you can find some
tough IFR flying, and the question is are you planning to take your
plane all over the country and just fly VFR when you get some soggy
clouds in your way?
> Now, all of this is up for grabs if you really want to fly to 200' mins on
> the rare occasion but reasonable risk management on the ground prior to
> take-off makes even the most basic equipment more than adequate "most" of
> the time.
>
> Bottom line is that you can have a nice economical IFR panel that will work
> well with nominal flight management or a really high dollar system that will
> take you to mins with your hands off. Knowing which you will be comfortable
> with should be the first part of the planning process. In some cases, we
> just can't afford the stuff we would like to have and fly with less but
> manage the risk better. Your call, but knowing what you really want to do
> "most" of the time is important. The other question you have to ask is "if
> I buy this fancy system, will I (the pilot) be ready to take it to mins when
> the time comes."
>
All good points. I do agree that financial things do play a part in
the decision process. For me, I would probably be more of an IFR
avoider with the family on board without the gear, yet I feel that
experience is experience, and the only way to actually GET the
experience is to DO the flight, if Convection, hail, ice, and lightning,
and turbulence aren't involved. Personally, knowing that not
everyone can afford exactly what they want, I would encourage
people to do whatever they can from a proficiency and personal-minimums
standpoint to minimize their risk. Proficiency is expensive though
too, as it costs $50/hr just for the fuel to keep proficient.
Also, I agree with your sentiments about will the pilot be ready, if
they are used to flying the fancy system. Having that fancy system
also requires you to stay proficient at it's operation...the same as
any GPS/NAV/COM of course. I worried about how it would be if
not only the EFIS failed, but what if I had to hand-fly
with or without the EFIS. So far I haven't felt like I will have
a problem keeping hand-flying proficient, although it's tough to
fly as good as the computer these days. It pays to try to stay
current in all regards. There again, the pilots best friend in
an emergency is his autopilot...if it's still working.
> If you plan on serious IFR and need that kind of panel for really hard IFR,
> then don't forget that heated pitot and static ports and fuel vents are
> things to consider just like wing and prop de-ice. All nice but more
> complexity and more dollars. HOWEVER if you fly IFR at all, you just gotta
> have a Garmin 396/496 with weather! It's the real minimum IFR equipment in
> my mind.
Also great points. You're absolutely right about the Wx. It's
one of those things that I don't know what I'd do without. Attached
is a WSI screenshot from Saturday. It was very helpful knowing exactly
which direction held the large cells, and how thick the line was.
It was a VFR flight, which is much more comfortable when you have
any red spots in your area. The visual picture said go, but only
when diverting from the direct route.
FWIW, I actually had the offer of wing de-ice, but decided to pass on
that one in favor of avoiding ice altogether. But since I passed, a
good buddy o'pal of mine will now get the honors of having the first
de-ice'd RV-10 out there. Yep, it's coming available down the road.
Add my .02 to everyone's .02, and pretty soon we'll be millionaires!
Just read Deems's post. Totally wonderful information there as well.
I especially agree with #4. While I know some of the limitations of
some of the other systems, I don't know all of the exact positive
features, so I speak mainly to my own knowledge base of the Chelton.
Many of the others got scratched off the list as I went along when
I found something that was a deal-breaker to me...but that doesn't
mean that it's not something that fits your goals. I love talking
about the capabilities of what I have. Unlike when you talk about
the RV-10 and have to admit that the doors suck, when I talk EFIS
I really have very little to complain about, and that's after
getting married to it and having the honeymoon pass.
Tim
>
> Pick the mission, then pick the panel.
>
> Just my .02
>
> Bill S
> 7a Ark
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 7:11 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
>
>
> This list cracks me up sometimes. ;)
>
> I have to say, to me, a real geek, and a pilot who looks at that grey thick
> wet layer of clouds as a perfect day to go for a pleasure flight and build
> some experience, the panel is my favorite part of the plane.
> It's not a status thing, or an ego thing, but a genuine interest in actually
> taking a creation I made, and have it do flights with ease that were painful
> to me only 2,3, or 5 years ago. There is no comparison to the old equipment
> when you l
>
>
>
>
>
>
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! --
|