Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:41 AM - Re: Dynon Fuel Tank Calibration (Jesse Saint)
2. 04:48 AM - Re: Dynon Fuel Tank Calibration (Wayne Edgerton)
3. 06:40 AM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
4. 06:50 AM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
5. 06:58 AM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (Tim Olson)
6. 07:09 AM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
7. 08:07 AM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (Albert Gardner)
8. 08:19 AM - Re: Fuel Tanks - To Alodine or Not to Alodine - That is the Question? (Vernon Smith)
9. 09:06 AM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
10. 09:06 AM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
11. 09:16 AM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
12. 09:50 AM - Re: Fuel Tanks - To Alodine or Not to Alodine - That is the Question? (Tim Olson)
13. 09:57 AM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (Tim Olson)
14. 10:26 AM - RVator (John Hasbrouck)
15. 10:35 AM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (Jon Reining)
16. 10:35 AM - Re: RVator (Rick Sked)
17. 10:45 AM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (Rick Sked)
18. 11:22 AM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
19. 11:55 AM - Re: Central or South America? (Carlos Jorge)
20. 01:04 PM - Re: Fiberglass and antenna placement (KiloPapa)
21. 05:00 PM - Re: RVator (nick@nleonard.com)
22. 07:56 PM - Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co (Ben Westfall)
23. 08:10 PM - Re: Fuel Tanks - To Alodine or Not to Alodine - That is the Question? (Kelly McMullen)
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: | Dynon Fuel Tank Calibration |
In my experience, the Dynon reads between 24 and 26 gallons as full, so it
will just show "26+" when the tank is full. Because of the dihedral in the
wing, there is no way for a float to be able to read full and empty
accurately, and you are right, when it is full you don't need an extremely
accurate reading as much as you do when it is almost empty. If you
calibrate it correctly, it will be very accurate as you burn past the max
level on the float, especially in smooth and coordinated flight. On our
C172 the gauges are about as valuable as a hole in the head. They give you
an idea of where the tank might be, but nothing as accurate as you can get
these days with the modern electronics. Comparing the float to the
totalizer is a great way to manage fuel. The totalizer can be wrong by a
little bit, especially when it is "freaked out" by flying with the boost
pump on, so getting used to monitoring both the totalizer and the floats is
wise.
Can you tell the rest of us what it is like always being right? :-)
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: Albert Gardner [mailto:ibspud@roadrunner.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 1:14 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Dynon Fuel Tank Calibration
On the subject of Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co., originally I thought only Bob
and Rick were wrong but now I see that many more could possibly being
joining that group. I mean, since I'm - by definition 'right' - anyone who
disagrees with me must be 'wrong'. :)
On another subject:
I was doing the calibration of my fuel tanks for the Dynon 180 and found an
interesting situation. The float isn't right at the root of the tank and
hits the top before the tank is full so it can't register levels across the
entire 30 gal. capacity of the tanks. It looks like the float hits the top
at about the 22 gal. mark so the Dynon says a full tank is 22 gal. and will
hold that reading until the float begins to drop. I guess that will have to
be OK and the backup is to enter the proper fuel amount into the fuel
computer and use its calculations of fuel used and remaining. Oh well, the
gages only have to be accurate at empty to be legal. A call to Dynon
confirms the situation and provided some additional information but it
appears that this is the way things work.
This isn't a new situation since the cap. gages I had on the RV-9A couldn't
read empty and full tanks either but the software in the EI fuel gage
handled it differently than the Dynon does.
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
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: Dynon Fuel Tank Calibration |
Albert,
I have the same problem with my fuel gauge and when I talked to EI about
it, they told me that this is a quite common situation. I guess it
really doesn't matter, since I want to know when I'm getting close to
empty, but the indicator goes from full to 1/2 full quickly :>} I
usually never rely on the fuel gauge anyway I usually go by how long
I've flown. But if you were to get a leak you need to know the empty
spot.
On the insurance issue I think that this could possible be of benefit to
all RV10 flyers if it can work, so I have to respectfully disagree with
you that this isn't the correct forum for it.
Wayne Edgerton N602WT
Hopefully I will get me plane back from paint tomorrow
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
I would disagree, this has relevance to any RV builder as it is
insurance for us RV types, we are a large market and should be treated
as a separate entity and not have to pay for the mistakes of the Lancair
buyer/ builders.
Do you think the aftermarket door latches should be on here? Do you
think the aftermarket door guides should be on here? These particular
items were found to be lacking and an enterprising builder took up the
slack and made parts. Same can be said for the insurance side, the rates
were found lacking, so a fellow RV builder has taken up the slack and is
trying to provide a service for us. No difference, just the end product
is a service instead of produced part.
In my not so humble opinion I think this has direct relevance to us and
our overall operating costs because frankly I am getting tired of paying
close to $400 a month just in case and I know there has to be an
alternative and applaud Rick and Bob for doing the due diligence to get
us a better product.
Dan Lloyd
N289DT RV10E Flying and "paying way too much for insurance"
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert
Gardner
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 8:15 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
<ibspud@roadrunner.com>
I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the
RV-10
List.
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
-----Original Message-----
Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit
Co.
bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
Speaking of profits and insurance companies...think Geico, if they were
so much cheaper, how are they able to afford a Nascar Team, an Indy car
team, and an Offshore racing boat team. Each of these cost north of $20
million a year to run and that money is all coming directly from the
policy holders.
Insurance is a scam, right up until you have a legitimate claim that
they will try to deny for every reason possible until you threaten to
sue them for breach of contract.
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
deemsdavis@cox.net
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 11:41 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
I think this is a good idea, from my experience in the insurance
industry, These are commonly referred to as 'groups' Where there is a
large enough group of similarly motivated people that essentially self
insure all but the most catastrophic losses from a shared pool of
resources. Think of it as a cooperative for buying/purchasing insurance.
Why send excess profits to the insurance carriers or agents?
The key to success of this and other groups is the behavior of the
participants. So long as everyone acts with a similar/shared interest it
works. When someone tried to 'take advantage' of the 'pool' it falls
apart. Insurance rates are often higher than they could be because of
claims that are frequently brought which are nuisance or borderline
fradulant.
---- John Ackerman <johnag5b@cableone.net> wrote:
>
> Al, I respectfully disagree. I have not made up my mind on this, but
> I believe the RV-10 list is the right venue for Bob and Rick to reach
> us all.
> John Ackerman
> 40458 finishing kit
>
> On Sep 26, 2007, at 5:14 PM, Albert Gardner wrote:
>
> > <ibspud@roadrunner.com>
> >
> > I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the
> > RV-10
> > List.
> > Albert Gardner
> > Yuma, AZ
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
> > posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
> > Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
> > Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit
Co.
> > bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
Dan.... "close to $400 a month" ??? I thought you said the Subie
gave no price premium. I'm a bit UNDER $300/mo.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
>
> I would disagree, this has relevance to any RV builder as it is
> insurance for us RV types, we are a large market and should be treated
> as a separate entity and not have to pay for the mistakes of the Lancair
> buyer/ builders.
> Do you think the aftermarket door latches should be on here? Do you
> think the aftermarket door guides should be on here? These particular
> items were found to be lacking and an enterprising builder took up the
> slack and made parts. Same can be said for the insurance side, the rates
> were found lacking, so a fellow RV builder has taken up the slack and is
> trying to provide a service for us. No difference, just the end product
> is a service instead of produced part.
>
> In my not so humble opinion I think this has direct relevance to us and
> our overall operating costs because frankly I am getting tired of paying
> close to $400 a month just in case and I know there has to be an
> alternative and applaud Rick and Bob for doing the due diligence to get
> us a better product.
> Dan Lloyd
> N289DT RV10E Flying and "paying way too much for insurance"
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert
> Gardner
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 8:15 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
>
> <ibspud@roadrunner.com>
>
> I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the
> RV-10
> List.
> Albert Gardner
> Yuma, AZ
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
> posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
> Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
> Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit
> Co.
> bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.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: | Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
Funny thing, Geico was probably the most painless claim I ever have had. I had
the claim filed before the cop even showed up at the scene and they never once
argued the repair costs nor did they raise my insurance (guess I was "due"
for an accident).
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd, Daniel R.
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 8:50 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
Speaking of profits and insurance companies...think Geico, if they were
so much cheaper, how are they able to afford a Nascar Team, an Indy car
team, and an Offshore racing boat team. Each of these cost north of $20
million a year to run and that money is all coming directly from the
policy holders.
Insurance is a scam, right up until you have a legitimate claim that
they will try to deny for every reason possible until you threaten to
sue them for breach of contract.
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
deemsdavis@cox.net
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 11:41 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
I think this is a good idea, from my experience in the insurance
industry, These are commonly referred to as 'groups' Where there is a
large enough group of similarly motivated people that essentially self
insure all but the most catastrophic losses from a shared pool of
resources. Think of it as a cooperative for buying/purchasing insurance.
Why send excess profits to the insurance carriers or agents?
The key to success of this and other groups is the behavior of the
participants. So long as everyone acts with a similar/shared interest it
works. When someone tried to 'take advantage' of the 'pool' it falls
apart. Insurance rates are often higher than they could be because of
claims that are frequently brought which are nuisance or borderline
fradulant.
---- John Ackerman <johnag5b@cableone.net> wrote:
>
> Al, I respectfully disagree. I have not made up my mind on this, but
> I believe the RV-10 list is the right venue for Bob and Rick to reach
> us all.
> John Ackerman
> 40458 finishing kit
>
> On Sep 26, 2007, at 5:14 PM, Albert Gardner wrote:
>
> > <ibspud@roadrunner.com>
> >
> > I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the
> > RV-10
> > List.
> > Albert Gardner
> > Yuma, AZ
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
> > posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
> > Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
> > Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit
Co.
> > bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
It appears that some folks thought I was negative on the subject of posting
info about Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Nothing could be further from the
truth. It appears I was misquoted, that I misspoke, was taken out of
context, misunderstood, and besides, I know that you think that you
understood what I said but you fail to realize that what I said was not what
I meant.
Albert (about face) Gardner
Yuma, AZ
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 6:57 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
Dan.... "close to $400 a month" ??? I thought you said the Subie
gave no price premium. I'm a bit UNDER $300/mo.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
>
> I would disagree, this has relevance to any RV builder as it is
> insurance for us RV types, we are a large market and should be treated
> as a separate entity and not have to pay for the mistakes of the Lancair
> buyer/ builders.
> Do you think the aftermarket door latches should be on here? Do you
> think the aftermarket door guides should be on here? These particular
> items were found to be lacking and an enterprising builder took up the
> slack and made parts. Same can be said for the insurance side, the rates
> were found lacking, so a fellow RV builder has taken up the slack and is
> trying to provide a service for us. No difference, just the end product
> is a service instead of produced part.
>
> In my not so humble opinion I think this has direct relevance to us and
> our overall operating costs because frankly I am getting tired of paying
> close to $400 a month just in case and I know there has to be an
> alternative and applaud Rick and Bob for doing the due diligence to get
> us a better product.
> Dan Lloyd
> N289DT RV10E Flying and "paying way too much for insurance"
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert
> Gardner
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 8:15 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
>
> <ibspud@roadrunner.com>
>
> I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the
> RV-10
> List.
> Albert Gardner
> Yuma, AZ
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
> posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
> Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
> Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit
> Co.
> bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 Tanks - To Alodine or Not to Alodine - That is the |
Question?
Stephen,
I agree with your reasoning about corrosion in the fuel tanks. This is why
the inside of my fuel tanks are not alodined. As far as the link in my emai
l to the previous discussion, I firmly believe no decision should be made i
n a vacuum. That is want is so neat about this group, having access to enou
gh info to make an informed decision.
As far as future fuels I think there will be more problems with the fuel ta
nk sealant than the metal, alodined or not.
And as for age I'm 44 going on 29:)
Vern Smith (#324 just about ready for the cabin top)
do not archive
@matronics.comSubject: Re: RV10-List: Fuel Tanks - To Alodine or Not to Alo
dine - That is the Question?
Vernon,
I see it this way.... fuel is hydrophobic (does not like water), so hard
to corrode the metal when it has hydrocarbons next to it most of the time.
Also, if the tank is kept mostly full, there is little O2 for oxidation
. The risk of any alodine reacting with some future gas product or coming o
ff from a poor metal prep seems to be a greater risk vs any benefit it may
provide. My 1952 C-170b has just Alclad aluminum in the tail cone and is
still fine after 55 years (based in Florida, 1.5 miles from the ocean). H
ow old are you???? I am 49, and figure on flying 20-30 more years... if l
ucky. The plane should out last me with no extra metal protection. -- Step
hen G. Blank, DDS # 40499 Building the tail cone finally!! 184 N
W Central Park PlazaPort St. Lucie, FL 34986772-475-5556 >>> Cell
_________________________________________________________________
Discover the new Windows Vista
E
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: | Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
$3800 per year is average for what all of the 10 builders are seeing
with under 200 hours total and no IFR rating. Remember you have some
more hours and a rating I do not have.
There is NO premium based on engine, the insurance companies are not
even asking that question anymore. So I should have done better math and
dived it out by 12 instead of 10, so it is $316 per month my bad.
Dyslexic in math
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 9:57 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
Dan.... "close to $400 a month" ??? I thought you said the Subie
gave no price premium. I'm a bit UNDER $300/mo.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
<LloydDR@wernerco.com>
>
> I would disagree, this has relevance to any RV builder as it is
> insurance for us RV types, we are a large market and should be treated
> as a separate entity and not have to pay for the mistakes of the
Lancair
> buyer/ builders.
> Do you think the aftermarket door latches should be on here? Do you
> think the aftermarket door guides should be on here? These particular
> items were found to be lacking and an enterprising builder took up the
> slack and made parts. Same can be said for the insurance side, the
rates
> were found lacking, so a fellow RV builder has taken up the slack and
is
> trying to provide a service for us. No difference, just the end
product
> is a service instead of produced part.
>
> In my not so humble opinion I think this has direct relevance to us
and
> our overall operating costs because frankly I am getting tired of
paying
> close to $400 a month just in case and I know there has to be an
> alternative and applaud Rick and Bob for doing the due diligence to
get
> us a better product.
> Dan Lloyd
> N289DT RV10E Flying and "paying way too much for insurance"
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert
> Gardner
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 8:15 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
>
> <ibspud@roadrunner.com>
>
> I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the
> RV-10
> List.
> Albert Gardner
> Yuma, AZ
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
> posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
> Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
> Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit
> Co.
> bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
That is how they keep costs lower, by pre-paying it with an adjustor on
site, but what often happens is that the adjustor is low and it is very
difficult to get additional monies based on the claim because they
already have settled it in their mind.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of RV Builder
(Michael Sausen)
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 10:09 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
<rvbuilder@sausen.net>
Funny thing, Geico was probably the most painless claim I ever have
had. I had the claim filed before the cop even showed up at the scene
and they never once argued the repair costs nor did they raise my
insurance (guess I was "due" for an accident).
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Lloyd, Daniel
R.
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 8:50 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
<LloydDR@wernerco.com>
Speaking of profits and insurance companies...think Geico, if they were
so much cheaper, how are they able to afford a Nascar Team, an Indy car
team, and an Offshore racing boat team. Each of these cost north of $20
million a year to run and that money is all coming directly from the
policy holders.
Insurance is a scam, right up until you have a legitimate claim that
they will try to deny for every reason possible until you threaten to
sue them for breach of contract.
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
deemsdavis@cox.net
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 11:41 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
I think this is a good idea, from my experience in the insurance
industry, These are commonly referred to as 'groups' Where there is a
large enough group of similarly motivated people that essentially self
insure all but the most catastrophic losses from a shared pool of
resources. Think of it as a cooperative for buying/purchasing insurance.
Why send excess profits to the insurance carriers or agents?
The key to success of this and other groups is the behavior of the
participants. So long as everyone acts with a similar/shared interest it
works. When someone tried to 'take advantage' of the 'pool' it falls
apart. Insurance rates are often higher than they could be because of
claims that are frequently brought which are nuisance or borderline
fradulant.
---- John Ackerman <johnag5b@cableone.net> wrote:
>
> Al, I respectfully disagree. I have not made up my mind on this, but
> I believe the RV-10 list is the right venue for Bob and Rick to reach
> us all.
> John Ackerman
> 40458 finishing kit
>
> On Sep 26, 2007, at 5:14 PM, Albert Gardner wrote:
>
> > <ibspud@roadrunner.com>
> >
> > I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the
> > RV-10
> > List.
> > Albert Gardner
> > Yuma, AZ
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
> > posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
> > Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
> > Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit
Co.
> > bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
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: | Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
Leave it to you to point out how math challenged I am....the over $400
figure includes hanger rent and that is what stuck out in my mind. It is
$316 for Insurance and $125 for hanger fee's so around $450 total for
the plane to sit.
Sorry for the confusion!
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 9:57 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
Dan.... "close to $400 a month" ??? I thought you said the Subie
gave no price premium. I'm a bit UNDER $300/mo.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
<LloydDR@wernerco.com>
>
> I would disagree, this has relevance to any RV builder as it is
> insurance for us RV types, we are a large market and should be treated
> as a separate entity and not have to pay for the mistakes of the
Lancair
> buyer/ builders.
> Do you think the aftermarket door latches should be on here? Do you
> think the aftermarket door guides should be on here? These particular
> items were found to be lacking and an enterprising builder took up the
> slack and made parts. Same can be said for the insurance side, the
rates
> were found lacking, so a fellow RV builder has taken up the slack and
is
> trying to provide a service for us. No difference, just the end
product
> is a service instead of produced part.
>
> In my not so humble opinion I think this has direct relevance to us
and
> our overall operating costs because frankly I am getting tired of
paying
> close to $400 a month just in case and I know there has to be an
> alternative and applaud Rick and Bob for doing the due diligence to
get
> us a better product.
> Dan Lloyd
> N289DT RV10E Flying and "paying way too much for insurance"
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert
> Gardner
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 8:15 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
>
> <ibspud@roadrunner.com>
>
> I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the
> RV-10
> List.
> Albert Gardner
> Yuma, AZ
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
> posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
> Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
> Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit
> Co.
> bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 Tanks - To Alodine or Not to Alodine - That is the |
Question?
I'd agree that corrosion inside the tank probably isn't a very
big concern. That said, my Beech's tanks were alodined inside,
so I found no reason not to take the time to do the step on
my RV-10. Even though the vapor should keep the O2 down,
tanks tend to collect moisture when heat/cold cycled, so
rather than leave it, I did them. No biggie if someone doesn't
want to. But, I think those who are concerned that there would
be some issue with residue in the future if you alodine
are probably a little over-reacting. Even if the stuff did
come off because someone didn't rinse it well, it's going to
mix with 30 gallons of fuel, and it'll be so small an amount
that it would have no effect on anything even if it flowed
through the system. It won't flake in large flakes that would
plug a fuel filter, and there's no realistic way that if you
do a normal final rinse that you should have to worry about
a negative effect. You can always spray and wipe with a
rag a few times too when it's fully dried if you really want
to try to get all of it off.
Alodining can be an unnecessary process for some, and it's surely
not something that should be proposed as a "Gotta do" except in
some specific situations. but when done properly, in *most* cases
there is only good that can come from it.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Vernon Smith wrote:
> Stephen,
>
> I agree with your reasoning about corrosion in the fuel tanks. This is
> why the inside of my fuel tanks are not alodined. As far as the link in
> my email to the previous discussion, I firmly believe no decision should
> be made in a vacuum. That is want is so neat about this group, having
> access to enough info to make an informed decision.
>
> As far as future fuels I think there will be more problems with the fuel
> tank sealant than the metal, alodined or not.
> And as for age I'm 44 going on 29:)
>
> Vern Smith (#324 just about ready for the cabin top)
> do not archive
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 23:26:33 -0400
> From: sblankdds@gmail.com
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fuel Tanks - To Alodine or Not to Alodine -
> That is the Question?
>
> Vernon,
>
> I see it this way.... fuel is hydrophobic (does not like water),
> so hard to corrode the metal when it has hydrocarbons next to it
> most of the time. Also, if the tank is kept mostly full, there is
> little O2 for oxidation. The risk of any alodine reacting with some
> future gas product or coming off from a poor metal prep seems to be
> a greater risk vs any benefit it may provide. My 1952 C-170b has
> just Alclad aluminum in the tail cone and is still fine after 55
> years (based in Florida, 1.5 miles from the ocean). How old are
> you???? I am 49, and figure on flying 20-30 more years... if
> lucky. The plane should out last me with no extra metal protection.
>
> --
> Stephen G. Blank, DDS # 40499 Building the tail cone
> finally!!
> 184 NW Central Park Plaza
> Port St. Lucie, FL 34986
>
> 772-475-5556 >>> Cell
>
> *
>
> get=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> p://forums.matronics.com
>
> *
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Discover the new Windows Vista Learn more!
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
Ah, that explains it. Yeah, that's more like "A little over $300/mo",
than "close to $400/mo". I can see how it's easy to bundle the
costs though.
FYI, my estimation of the average hourly operational cost for
my personal RV-10 is $120/hr, based on about 100 hours a year
of flying. Fly less and the price goes up, fly more and the
price goes down. Part of this is due to my hangar fees totaling
$425/YEAR, so for many builders this will be on the low side.
So $12,000 year as a baseline at 100 hours...that's just one of
those numbers some people don't want the wife to know. Luckily
mine is just happy to have the plane. I think I she dumped me,
she'd try for the kids, the house, AND the plane....so I'm
gonna stay nice to that woman.
Tim
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
>
> Leave it to you to point out how math challenged I am....the over $400
> figure includes hanger rent and that is what stuck out in my mind. It is
> $316 for Insurance and $125 for hanger fee's so around $450 total for
> the plane to sit.
> Sorry for the confusion!
> Dan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 9:57 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
>
>
> Dan.... "close to $400 a month" ??? I thought you said the Subie
> gave no price premium. I'm a bit UNDER $300/mo.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
> <LloydDR@wernerco.com>
>> I would disagree, this has relevance to any RV builder as it is
>> insurance for us RV types, we are a large market and should be treated
>> as a separate entity and not have to pay for the mistakes of the
> Lancair
>> buyer/ builders.
>> Do you think the aftermarket door latches should be on here? Do you
>> think the aftermarket door guides should be on here? These particular
>> items were found to be lacking and an enterprising builder took up the
>> slack and made parts. Same can be said for the insurance side, the
> rates
>> were found lacking, so a fellow RV builder has taken up the slack and
> is
>> trying to provide a service for us. No difference, just the end
> product
>> is a service instead of produced part.
>>
>> In my not so humble opinion I think this has direct relevance to us
> and
>> our overall operating costs because frankly I am getting tired of
> paying
>> close to $400 a month just in case and I know there has to be an
>> alternative and applaud Rick and Bob for doing the due diligence to
> get
>> us a better product.
>> Dan Lloyd
>> N289DT RV10E Flying and "paying way too much for insurance"
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert
>> Gardner
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 8:15 PM
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
>>
>> <ibspud@roadrunner.com>
>>
>> I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the
>> RV-10
>> List.
>> Albert Gardner
>> Yuma, AZ
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
>> posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
>> Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
>> Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit
>> Co.
>> bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
> rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
On page 13 of the latest RVator there is a picture of Van's own -10 on
final. The AOA indicator on the glareshield gives one reading while the AOA
indicator that is part of the EFIS shows another. These are both AFS
products so why the difference? Seperate sources possible but doesn't make
sense. Just a difference in set-up?
J Hasbrouck #40264
Decided not to sell, still pounding away.
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
I work with a number of captive insurance companies and have talked to Rick on
this and he's done a great job of thinking it through. Looking at Vans Hobbs
meter, there are now 102 flying RV10s and a total of 5,360 flying RVs. Im not
real sure what premiums are for the other models, but if theyre even half of
an RV10, thats at least $10 million in annual premium (5,360 RVs x $2,000 pure
guesstimate of premium). If Rick and Bob can organize some fraction of this,
thats a good amount of purchasing power.
In full disclosure, I work at an asset management firm with a specialization in
managing assets for captive insurance companies. If Aircraft Mutual is successful,
we would welcome the opportunity to work with them. Im sure we all have
our days jobs (except for those lucky guys who have retired), I just never thought
work and building an RV10 might intersect.
Jon (working) and Bill (retired) Reining
40514 wings
do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136821#136821
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 |
|
John,
I noticed the same thing, My guess is that the LED sport version is actually hooked
up, maybe Van didn't tee off into the EFIS itself for the AOA function. Just
speculation on my part
Rick S.
40185
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hasbrouck" <jhasbrouck@woh.rr.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 10:25:40 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RV10-List: RVator
On page 13 of the latest RVator there is a picture of Van's own -10 on
final. The AOA indicator on the glareshield gives one reading while the AOA
indicator that is part of the EFIS shows another. These are both AFS
products so why the difference? Seperate sources possible but doesn't make
sense. Just a difference in set-up?
J Hasbrouck #40264
Decided not to sell, still pounding away.
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
No problem Al,
Emails always seem to be taken in different ways depending on the readers mood.
We just want to get the word out as far as possible. I had to pull back the regins
on Bob after your post for the same reasons, I asked him to wait to respond
and see what the RV-10 group response would be. For once I can say I was right
on. Thanks for the support of this program, if you not interested that's
cool, if you are and want to take a small risk to find out then lets make this
work. FWIW we are not cashing any checks until we have enough of them to pay
forward with the study. If we don't get enough, then we will mail them back to
everyone who came onboard, lick our wounds and join the masses paying for higher
than our share for insurance premiums.
Lastly this is NOT the sale of insurance, it is strictly a deposit on a membership
fee to join the group. WE ARE NOT YET IN THE INSURANCE BIZ. Disclaimer for
all the attorneys that may be licking their chops to go after an insurance company.
I am licensed to sell insurance in the state of Nevada so at least I am
legally able to discuss the program, just not sell it....YET!!!
Rick Sked
40185
Father of Aircraft Mutual
----- Original Message -----
From: "Albert Gardner" <ibspud@roadrunner.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 8:02:27 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
It appears that some folks thought I was negative on the subject of posting
info about Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Nothing could be further from the
truth. It appears I was misquoted, that I misspoke, was taken out of
context, misunderstood, and besides, I know that you think that you
understood what I said but you fail to realize that what I said was not what
I meant.
Albert (about face) Gardner
Yuma, AZ
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 6:57 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
Dan.... "close to $400 a month" ??? I thought you said the Subie
gave no price premium. I'm a bit UNDER $300/mo.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
>
> I would disagree, this has relevance to any RV builder as it is
> insurance for us RV types, we are a large market and should be treated
> as a separate entity and not have to pay for the mistakes of the Lancair
> buyer/ builders.
> Do you think the aftermarket door latches should be on here? Do you
> think the aftermarket door guides should be on here? These particular
> items were found to be lacking and an enterprising builder took up the
> slack and made parts. Same can be said for the insurance side, the rates
> were found lacking, so a fellow RV builder has taken up the slack and is
> trying to provide a service for us. No difference, just the end product
> is a service instead of produced part.
>
> In my not so humble opinion I think this has direct relevance to us and
> our overall operating costs because frankly I am getting tired of paying
> close to $400 a month just in case and I know there has to be an
> alternative and applaud Rick and Bob for doing the due diligence to get
> us a better product.
> Dan Lloyd
> N289DT RV10E Flying and "paying way too much for insurance"
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert
> Gardner
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 8:15 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
>
> <ibspud@roadrunner.com>
>
> I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the
> RV-10
> List.
> Albert Gardner
> Yuma, AZ
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
> posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
> Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
> Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit
> Co.
> bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
Yeah, Trish would definitely take the plane and trying to find another
wife that is willing to lay on a cold concrete floor and shoot rivets in
December would be difficult. We did the cost run based on if the plane
sat, and then every hour we run it is a bonus because it gets better gas
mileage than our Expedition! I know twisted thinking but it is how we
justify our toys!
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 12:56 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
Ah, that explains it. Yeah, that's more like "A little over $300/mo",
than "close to $400/mo". I can see how it's easy to bundle the
costs though.
FYI, my estimation of the average hourly operational cost for
my personal RV-10 is $120/hr, based on about 100 hours a year
of flying. Fly less and the price goes up, fly more and the
price goes down. Part of this is due to my hangar fees totaling
$425/YEAR, so for many builders this will be on the low side.
So $12,000 year as a baseline at 100 hours...that's just one of
those numbers some people don't want the wife to know. Luckily
mine is just happy to have the plane. I think I she dumped me,
she'd try for the kids, the house, AND the plane....so I'm
gonna stay nice to that woman.
Tim
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
<LloydDR@wernerco.com>
>
> Leave it to you to point out how math challenged I am....the over $400
> figure includes hanger rent and that is what stuck out in my mind. It
is
> $316 for Insurance and $125 for hanger fee's so around $450 total for
> the plane to sit.
> Sorry for the confusion!
> Dan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 9:57 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
>
>
> Dan.... "close to $400 a month" ??? I thought you said the Subie
> gave no price premium. I'm a bit UNDER $300/mo.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
> <LloydDR@wernerco.com>
>> I would disagree, this has relevance to any RV builder as it is
>> insurance for us RV types, we are a large market and should be
treated
>> as a separate entity and not have to pay for the mistakes of the
> Lancair
>> buyer/ builders.
>> Do you think the aftermarket door latches should be on here? Do you
>> think the aftermarket door guides should be on here? These particular
>> items were found to be lacking and an enterprising builder took up
the
>> slack and made parts. Same can be said for the insurance side, the
> rates
>> were found lacking, so a fellow RV builder has taken up the slack and
> is
>> trying to provide a service for us. No difference, just the end
> product
>> is a service instead of produced part.
>>
>> In my not so humble opinion I think this has direct relevance to us
> and
>> our overall operating costs because frankly I am getting tired of
> paying
>> close to $400 a month just in case and I know there has to be an
>> alternative and applaud Rick and Bob for doing the due diligence to
> get
>> us a better product.
>> Dan Lloyd
>> N289DT RV10E Flying and "paying way too much for insurance"
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert
>> Gardner
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 8:15 PM
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
>>
>> <ibspud@roadrunner.com>
>>
>> I think this letter is a prime example of what should NOT be on the
>> RV-10
>> List.
>> Albert Gardner
>> Yuma, AZ
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> Subject: RV10-List: Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co
>> posted by: "bob.kaufmann" <bob.kaufmann@cox.net>
>> Bob Kaufmann Rick Sked
>> Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co. Aircraft Mutual Benefit
>> Co.
>> bob@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
> rick@AIRCRAFTMUTUAL.COM
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Central or South America? |
I'm in Santo domingo, Dominican Republic.
Carlos Jorge
CJA Arquitectos
809-540-9560
http://www.cjorge.com
carlos_jorge@mac.com
On Sep 25, 2007, at 1:58 PM, Jesse Saint wrote:
Is anybody on the list in Central or South America or possibly in the
Caribbean?
Do not archive
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List_-
============================================================ _-
forums.matronics.com_-
===========================================================
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: Fiberglass and antenna placement |
> OK, I just redesigned my antenna installation : atop a 5 foot tall
> pylon, made of spaceage transpardium mounted in the exact center/top
> point of the cabin cover, equipped with a gyro stabilized gimble that
> ensures stability of the antenna in all unusual attitudes.
Now that's funny!
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 |
|
They are two different systems that can't be run off of the same AOA processor.
If you want them both, you have to buy the two different units (at a discount,
I'm told).
--------
Nick Leonard
RV-10 (40015) Finish
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=136897#136897
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Aircraft Mutual Benefit Co |
Rick or Bob,
Can you provide the text on your website in a downloadable format such as a
PDF file? I cannot figure out how to copy the flash text for easy printing.
Also a few questions...
1) Does one have to have a completed airplane to buy in or obtain coverage
through Aircraft Mutual?
2) How much is required right now up front and how much of that is
refundable if things don't fly (pun intended)?
3) Is this limited to RV's?
3) What are the expected operating expenses of the company and how many
people will be on the payroll?
4) Is it only possible to obtain coverage if you have your GPS antenna
mounted in a RV-10 matronics list approved location (which from my best
recollection is at home atop your standard 6 story ham radio antenna pole
under 1/8 inch thick fiberglass housing)?
Forgive me if these were covered already as I usually have to read
everything at least 3 times before things sink in and that's open for
debate. We won't talk about this in reference to the RV-10 plans either as
3 times is just getting started!
Ben Westfall
#40579 - (I'm lying to myself to take comfort by saying I'm half way)
PDX
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tanks - To Alodine or Not to Alodine - That is the |
Question?
Two points. Virtually all water contains some dissolved oxygen. Any water in
the fuel will settle to the bottom and interact with the bare metal on the
bottom. Stephen, if your 170 had the original magnesium oil sump on the
C-145 or O-300, you would have seen this effect, because virtually all 170s
with the Continental engine have corrosion pitting at the forward drain
point, because of the angle the engine sits on the ground, and moisture in
the oil settles there.
So, IMHO I'd either alodine, or use the cherry juice top coat for PRC across
the entire inside of the tank surfaces, or both.
KM
ex-170 owner
On 9/27/07, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>
>
> I'd agree that corrosion inside the tank probably isn't a very
> big concern. That said, my Beech's tanks were alodined inside,
> so I found no reason not to take the time to do the step on
> my RV-10. Even though the vapor should keep the O2 down,
> tanks tend to collect moisture when heat/cold cycled, so
> rather than leave it, I did them. No biggie if someone doesn't
> want to. But, I think those who are concerned that there would
> be some issue with residue in the future if you alodine
> are probably a little over-reacting. Even if the stuff did
> come off because someone didn't rinse it well, it's going to
> mix with 30 gallons of fuel, and it'll be so small an amount
> that it would have no effect on anything even if it flowed
> through the system. It won't flake in large flakes that would
> plug a fuel filter, and there's no realistic way that if you
> do a normal final rinse that you should have to worry about
> a negative effect. You can always spray and wipe with a
> rag a few times too when it's fully dried if you really want
> to try to get all of it off.
>
> Alodining can be an unnecessary process for some, and it's surely
> not something that should be proposed as a "Gotta do" except in
> some specific situations. but when done properly, in *most* cases
> there is only good that can come from it.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
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! --
|