Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 09:23 AM - Re: Shimmy comments (Bill DeRouchey)
2. 11:36 AM - Re: Shimmy comments (linn Walters)
3. 11:54 AM - Baffling Question (Michael Wellenzohn)
4. 12:09 PM - Finish kit (Fred Williams, M.D.)
5. 12:34 PM - Re: Re: Op Tech panel at Oshkosh (Mr Luther Strickland)
6. 01:09 PM - Re: Shimmy comments (Tim Olson)
7. 01:11 PM - Re: Baffling Question (Tim Olson)
8. 01:12 PM - Re: Finish kit (Tim Olson)
9. 01:17 PM - Stein's wiring kit (Ben Westfall)
10. 01:43 PM - Re: Shimmy comments (John Dunne)
11. 01:48 PM - Re: Baffling Question (Jesse Saint)
12. 01:52 PM - Re: Finish kit (Jesse Saint)
13. 01:53 PM - Re: Stein's wiring kit (Jesse Saint)
14. 02:14 PM - Re: Re: Op Tech panel at Oshkosh (Deems Davis)
15. 04:23 PM - Re: Finish kit (Chris)
16. 10:28 PM - Re: Finish kit (AirMike)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Shimmy comments |
I have also been very suspicious that the nose wheel is creating the need for rudder
trim. Just yesterday I removed the fairing and tightened the big nut. With
the fairing off took the plane for a test flight and now it needed left trim
instead of right trim. Shook it back and forth with rudder deflection and it
centered the ball with feet on the floor.
Apparently too loose is bad and too tight is bad. Has anyone considered adding
a fin to the nose wheel fairing, much like the Piper Archer, that would de-sensitize
the big nut torque?
I am having difficulty understanding why too loose is a problem. This is what
is holding me up from adding the fin.
Bill DeRouchey
N939SB, flying
DejaVu <wvu@ameritel.net> wrote:
Tim,
I should also mention, which I forgot before, that by tightening the the
large fork to nose gear leg nut it took care of 80% of the need for right
rudder input during cruise. At the end before tightening this nut I had to
give so much right rudder that my foot got tired. Once a gust of wind hit
during cruise I went from right rudder input to left rudder input to center
the ball. After tightening only resting my foot on the pedal was required.
Probably 3-5lbs at most. I decided that rudder trim is not even necessary.
Anh
N591VU - 102 hours
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson"
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 11:49 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Shimmy comments
>
>
>
> I've been wanting to wait a bit and write up a little on tire
> balancing and such, because my tires are not at all balanced
> and I want to see how much better things gets once they are.
> But, I did have a curve to throw into the wheel shimmy thing
> we hear about with the RV-10.
>
> First, its ESSENTIAL that you take your nosewheel and re-torque
> the axle bolt and the large fork to gear leg nut on the nosewheel
> once you hit 40-75 hours. You will find that the required 26lbs of
> breakout force has dropped to almost nothing on that large nut.
> This will cause a lot of extra shake. Remember that Anh tightened
> his 3 full flats to get it back to spec. You will prevent a lot
> of problems by using the new nosewheel spacers, and keeping
> everything tight for the first 100 hours or more.
>
> But, the curveball is, I think a lot of people who are feeling
> shimmy are mis-diagnosing it. I was once told by John that my
> main gear was where he saw the shimmy when I taxied. I believed
> him, but I also know I feel some in the nose as well. Keep in mind
> that none of the tires are balanced yet, and my mains are now
> in the process of wearing the outer tread on the opposite side
> of the tire.
>
> Well, this weekend I had shimmy on landing and I decided to hold
> the nosewheel ALL the way off the ground as I had a perfect CG
> balance to do it with, having baggage and rear passengers.
> What I found was that I felt my normal shimmy on landing at
> 35-40kts, but I only had the mains on the ground. Don't ask
> me why, just yet, but I can tell you without a doubt that some
> of the shimmy people are complaining about is main gear
> shimmy, not nose. It may be a while but I'll report back once
> I've balanced my tires, and I'll also report back next spring
> once I've swapped in new tires and balanced them.
>
> --
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
>
&
gt;
>
>
>
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: Shimmy comments |
Bill DeRouchey wrote:
> I have also been very suspicious that the nose wheel is creating the
> need for rudder trim.
Very well could be.
> Just yesterday I removed the fairing and tightened the big nut. With
> the fairing off took the plane for a test flight and now it needed
> left trim instead of right trim. Shook it back and forth with rudder
> deflection and it centered the ball with feet on the floor.
Seems like it worked .... at least for the tirm problem.
> Apparently too loose is bad and too tight is bad.
Didn't know that too tight was bad except when you're trying to park the
airplane without the help of a towbar. :-P
> Has anyone considered adding a fin to the nose wheel fairing, much
> like the Piper Archer, that would de-sensitize the big nut torque?
It would work to 'straighten' out the nose gear.
> I am having difficulty understanding why too loose is a problem. This
> is what is holding me up from adding the fin.
Too loose generally causes shimmy of the nosewheel on landing. I've
been a Grumman (AA-1B) owner for 35 years, and they have the same
problems with the castering nosewheel and shimmy. This shimmy is the
side/side motion as opposed to a balance problem which is an up/down
motion. The Grumman nose gear has a stack of belleville washers
(they're cupped, not flat) that causes more drag as the big nut is
tightened. The Grumman maintenance book says to apply 25 Lbs of force
sideways at the wheel axle and if it doesn't move, it's tight enough.
That 25 Lvs appears to be a minimum, and 28 to 30 is better.
Since I haven't seen my nosegear yet, I haven't got a clue as to it's
assembly ..... but you can bet I'll use my Grumman experience to get it
right.
I also think some of the ground 'vibrations' are caused by the mains
'walking' fore/aft while taxiing. I've given much thought to replacing
the std. main gear with a spring aluminum gear, but will probably end up
with the std -10 gear. However, by the time I get there, there will be
a whole lot of operational info out there that might cause me to revisit
the idea.
Linn
>
> Bill DeRouchey
> N939SB, flying
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: | Baffling Question |
Hi,
does the baffling need to be on top of the rubber gasket or in front of it?
See attached picture.
Michael
--------
RV-10 builder (fuselage)
#511
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140458#140458
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/fairings_013_125.jpg
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 |
|
Did anybody have trouble picking up their finish kit in a standard truck
bed? It lists at 8 ft x 4 ft x 27 inches. I'd rather not take the
trailer if I can avoid it.
Fred Williams
40515
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: Op Tech panel at Oshkosh |
I've also opted for OP technologies. I've been
working with Accuracy Avionics for about 8 months now.
The panel should be ready for me to pick up in the
next few weeks. If anyone is interested in a copy of
the drawings for the panel shoot me a note off line to
LJS2@pge.com.
Jearl Strickland #214
--- Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net> wrote:
> <deemsdavis@cox.net>
>
> Patrick O'Neil has also ordered his OP Tech systems.
>
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
> http://deemsrv10.com/
> gary wrote:
> <speckter@comcast.net>
> >
> > I too have an OP tech panel (integrated system) My
> math says that there are
> > 3 of us, but I hear rumors of more folks that have
> chosen OP. If any of you
> > are lurking, speak up and we can compare notes.
> >
> > Gary
> > 40274
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On
> Behalf Of John W. Cox
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 6:28 PM
> > To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> > Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Op Tech panel at
> Oshkosh
> >
> <johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
> >
> > Dwayne, great to have you surface like this. Your
> selections with the
> > help of the gang at Accuracy adds another rung at
> climbing the ladder of
> > RV-10s setting a new kit building standard.
> >
> > I too, think Deems has done his homework and look
> forward to his Phase
> > I, fly off.
> >
> > Your panel is one of the top 10 in my book.
> >
> > John
> > 40600
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On
> Behalf Of dherring10
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 10:07 AM
> > To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> > Subject: RV10-List: Re: Op Tech panel at Oshkosh
> >
> > <dherring10@suddenlink.net>
> >
> > George,
> > I just saw your post about my panel Tony had in
> his booth at Oshkosh.
> > John is correct that I am a lurker. Maybe when I
> actually have a flying
> > airplane I will feel that I can give advice about
> building to others.
> > Besides there have always been such good answers
> posted by the time I
> > read the questions that in most instances I could
> not add anything. Tim
> > Olsen has told me to respond anyway so maybe I'll
> start now. Here are a
> > couple more pictures of my panel. Some of the
> items and switches Tony
> > and Eric had installed on the panel are not the
> ones that will actually
> > be used. They were just trying to fill the holes
> for the show. Let me
> > know if you have any specific questions that I can
> answer and feel free
> > to contact me offline if you want. I was looking
> at both the Chelton and
> > OP Tech systems and had decided on the Chelton
> until the D2 problems.
> > After Tony and I talked about and I did my own
> research I decided to use
> > the OP Tech. Hoping for good things with the
> buy-out of OP Te!
> > ch by Aerosonics. Besides if Deems was using
> them I knew he had done
> > the homework.
> >
> > I will tell you that Tony, Eric and all the gang
> at Accuracy Avionics
> > have been great to work with. I think they will
> ship the panel to me
> > sometime this month. I wish I was really ready for
> it.
> >
> > dwayne@mid-westglass.com
> >
> > Dwayne Herring
> > 40506
> > QB Fuse
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> >
>
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=137631#137631
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Attachments:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com//files/panel_2_183.jpg
> > http://forums.matronics.com//files/panel_1_183.jpg
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>
> Web Forums!
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Shimmy comments |
Linn,
You're Grumman is almost identical in setup to the RV-10 on the
nose gear. Same washer type, same torque ranges...everything.
As for the mains, you're accurate there too...it's a fore
and aft walking vibration. I don't think that particular
vibration is as common as the shimmy though, but it is
one of those things people will experience. What remains
to be seen is if that walking can be eased by proper inflation
and good balance, or not, because it's related to the
wheel angle or toe. Either way, I don't think the mains
have any problem large enough to be worth spending a lot of
worry on. I know I need to check my pressure again now that
it's cooling off, but that'll be about it for the mains.
(other than balance)
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
linn Walters wrote:
>
> Bill DeRouchey wrote:
>
>> I have also been very suspicious that the nose wheel is creating the
>> need for rudder trim.
>
> Very well could be.
>
>> Just yesterday I removed the fairing and tightened the big nut. With
>> the fairing off took the plane for a test flight and now it needed
>> left trim instead of right trim. Shook it back and forth with rudder
>> deflection and it centered the ball with feet on the floor.
>
> Seems like it worked .... at least for the tirm problem.
>> Apparently too loose is bad and too tight is bad.
>
> Didn't know that too tight was bad except when you're trying to park the
> airplane without the help of a towbar. :-P
>
>> Has anyone considered adding a fin to the nose wheel fairing, much
>> like the Piper Archer, that would de-sensitize the big nut torque?
>
> It would work to 'straighten' out the nose gear.
>> I am having difficulty understanding why too loose is a problem. This
>> is what is holding me up from adding the fin.
>
> Too loose generally causes shimmy of the nosewheel on landing. I've
> been a Grumman (AA-1B) owner for 35 years, and they have the same
> problems with the castering nosewheel and shimmy. This shimmy is the
> side/side motion as opposed to a balance problem which is an up/down
> motion. The Grumman nose gear has a stack of belleville washers
> (they're cupped, not flat) that causes more drag as the big nut is
> tightened. The Grumman maintenance book says to apply 25 Lbs of force
> sideways at the wheel axle and if it doesn't move, it's tight enough.
> That 25 Lvs appears to be a minimum, and 28 to 30 is better.
>
> Since I haven't seen my nosegear yet, I haven't got a clue as to it's
> assembly ..... but you can bet I'll use my Grumman experience to get it
> right.
>
> I also think some of the ground 'vibrations' are caused by the mains
> 'walking' fore/aft while taxiing. I've given much thought to replacing
> the std. main gear with a spring aluminum gear, but will probably end up
> with the std -10 gear. However, by the time I get there, there will be
> a whole lot of operational info out there that might cause me to revisit
> the idea.
> Linn
>
>>
>> Bill DeRouchey
>> N939SB, flying
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Re: Baffling Question |
Michael, I think that metal baffle should be flat against the cylinder,
so you may want to sand or file slightly to make it go around the
gasket. Not sure if it really matters a huge amount, but you'll
want it to seal well either way. It seems your gaskets may be just
a little larger than some. If it likes sitting there though with
no stress on the metal, you could RTV it too if you wanted. Just
make sure it seals well.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Michael Wellenzohn wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> does the baffling need to be on top of the rubber gasket or in front of it?
> See attached picture.
>
> Michael
>
> --------
> RV-10 builder (fuselage)
> #511
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140458#140458
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/fairings_013_125.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
I think the finishing kit also includes the canopy top which is
in a huge crate on it's own. You can probably get the thin box
that you describe in a pickup (I didn't use a pickup though so
it's a guess), but I'm not sure if you'd get the big canopy
box to fit.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Fred Williams, M.D. wrote:
> <drfred@suddenlinkmail.com>
>
> Did anybody have trouble picking up their finish kit in a standard truck
> bed? It lists at 8 ft x 4 ft x 27 inches. I'd rather not take the
> trailer if I can avoid it.
> Fred Williams
> 40515
>
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: | Stein's wiring kit |
Has anyone purchased Stein's "Master kit"?
http://www.steinair.com/masterkit.htm I am considering purchasing it but
wanted to hear any feedback from others that have or have passed on it.
Obviously the #2 wire is a little short for 10's but what other changes or
additions have people gone with? I have not yet talked to Stein about it
which I am sure he has something to say. Just curious to hear others
feedback.
-Ben
40579
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Shimmy comments |
Has anyone experienced the wheel shimmy without the wheel spat installed
and a fairly loose torque on the wheel nut?
In other words is the wheel spat centre of balance correctly over the
wheel. Maybe there's too much surface area on the spat occuring behind
the wheel and swinging in the breeze. It wouldn't take much to set up a
wobble on the wheel with a bit of leverage set too far behind it.(The
old supermarket trolley problem) Mind you there's the solution to the
rudder trim....:-)
John 40315
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill DeRouchey
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 2:22 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Shimmy comments
I have also been very suspicious that the nose wheel is creating the
need for rudder trim. Just yesterday I removed the fairing and tightened
the big nut. With the fairing off took the plane for a test flight and
now it needed left trim instead of right trim. Shook it back and forth
with rudder deflection and it centered the ball with feet on the floor.
Apparently too loose is bad and too tight is bad. Has anyone
considered adding a fin to the nose wheel fairing, much like the Piper
Archer, that would de-sensitize the big nut torque?
I am having difficulty understanding why too loose is a problem. This
is what is holding me up from adding the fin.
Bill DeRouchey
N939SB, flying
DejaVu <wvu@ameritel.net> wrote:
Tim,
I should also mention, which I forgot before, that by tightening the
the
large fork to nose gear leg nut it took care of 80% of the need for
right
rudder input during cruise. At the end before tightening this nut I
had to
give so much right rudder that my foot got tired. Once a gust of
wind hit
during cruise I went from right rudder input to left rudder input to
center
the ball. After tightening only resting my foot on the pedal was
required.
Probably 3-5lbs at most. I decided that rudder trim is not even
necessary.
Anh
N591VU - 102 hours
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 11:49 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Shimmy comments
>
>
>
> I've been wanting to wait a bit and write up a little on tire
> balancing and such, because my tires are not at all balanced
> and I want to see how much better things gets once they are.
> But, I did have a curve to throw into the wheel shimmy thing
> we hear about with the RV-10.
>
> First, its ESSENTIAL that you take your nosewheel and re-torque
> the axle bolt and the large fork to gear leg nut on the nosewheel
> once you hit 40-75 hours. You will find that the required 26lbs of
> breakout force has dropped to almost nothing on that large nut.
> This will cause a lot of extra shake. Remember that Anh tightened
> his 3 full flats to get it back to spec. You will prevent a lot
> of problems by using the new nosewheel spacers, and keeping
> everything tight for the first 100 hours or more.
>
> But, the curveball is, I think a lot of people who are feeling
> shimmy are mis-diagnosing it. I was once told by John that my
> main gear was where he saw the shimmy when I taxied. I believed
> him, but I also know I feel some in the nose as well. Keep in mind
> that none of the tires are balanced yet, and my mains are now
> in the process of wearing the outer tread on the opposite side
> of the tire.
>
> Well, this weekend I had shimmy on landing and I decided to hold
> the nosewheel ALL the way off the ground as I had a perfect CG
> balance to do it with, having baggage and rear passengers.
> What I found was that I felt my normal shimmy on landing at
> 35-40kts, but I only had the mains on the ground. Don't ask
> me why, just yet, but I can tell you without a doubt that some
> of the shimmy people are complaining about is main gear
> shimmy, not nose. It may be a while but I'll report back once
> I've balanced my tires, and I'll also report back next spring
> once I've swapped in new tires and balanced them.
>
> --
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
&
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: | Baffling Question |
As Tim said, it mainly needs to seal, but it is best if you have it flat
against the cylinder. I would probably try to trim the gaskets a little
first to get it to pass, then my next move would be to trim the metal a
little, but there is not a lot of extra room around the edges.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Olson [mailto:Tim@MyRV10.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Baffling Question
Michael, I think that metal baffle should be flat against the cylinder,
so you may want to sand or file slightly to make it go around the
gasket. Not sure if it really matters a huge amount, but you'll
want it to seal well either way. It seems your gaskets may be just
a little larger than some. If it likes sitting there though with
no stress on the metal, you could RTV it too if you wanted. Just
make sure it seals well.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Michael Wellenzohn wrote:
<rv-10@wellenzohn.net>
>
> Hi,
>
> does the baffling need to be on top of the rubber gasket or in front of
it?
> See attached picture.
>
> Michael
>
> --------
> RV-10 builder (fuselage)
> #511
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140458#140458
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/fairings_013_125.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Canopy top comes with the Fuse in the Standard Kit (I don't know about the
QB kit), which is a huge box. The finishing kit comes with the engine
mount, gear, doors, windows, etc, I think. The weight shouldn't be anything
that most pickups couldn't handle, but check those dimensions with your
truck and you should be fine.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Olson [mailto:Tim@MyRV10.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 3:13 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Finish kit
I think the finishing kit also includes the canopy top which is
in a huge crate on it's own. You can probably get the thin box
that you describe in a pickup (I didn't use a pickup though so
it's a guess), but I'm not sure if you'd get the big canopy
box to fit.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Fred Williams, M.D. wrote:
> <drfred@suddenlinkmail.com>
>
> Did anybody have trouble picking up their finish kit in a standard truck
> bed? It lists at 8 ft x 4 ft x 27 inches. I'd rather not take the
> trailer if I can avoid it.
> Fred Williams
> 40515
>
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: | Stein's wiring kit |
I might recommend doing most of your planning first, even to the point of
planning wiring runs and measuring their length, deciding on wire size and
wire color, and what kind of connections you are going to have on each end.
With a little planning I think you will be better off just ordering the
amount of each wire you think you will need and going from there. If time
isn't crucial, then estimate low and add some (slow shipping) if you need
it. If time important, then estimate a little high and find someone to buy
the extra from you.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
_____
From: Ben Westfall [mailto:rv10@sinkrate.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 3:17 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Stein's wiring kit
Has anyone purchased Stein's "Master kit"?
http://www.steinair.com/masterkit.htm I am considering purchasing it but
wanted to hear any feedback from others that have or have passed on it.
Obviously the #2 wire is a little short for 10's but what other changes or
additions have people gone with? I have not yet talked to Stein about it
which I am sure he has something to say. Just curious to hear others
feedback.
-Ben
40579
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Op Tech panel at Oshkosh |
Don't be bashful Luther, post it here so we can all drool!
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
Mr Luther Strickland wrote:
>
> I've also opted for OP technologies. I've been
> working with Accuracy Avionics for about 8 months now.
> The panel should be ready for me to pick up in the
> next few weeks. If anyone is interested in a copy of
> the drawings for the panel shoot me a note off line to
> LJS2@pge.com.
>
> Jearl Strickland #214
>
> --- Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>> <deemsdavis@cox.net>
>>
>> Patrick O'Neil has also ordered his OP Tech systems.
>>
>>
>> Deems Davis # 406
>> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
>> http://deemsrv10.com/
>> gary wrote:
>>
>>>
>> <speckter@comcast.net>
>>
>>> I too have an OP tech panel (integrated system) My
>>>
>> math says that there are
>>
>>> 3 of us, but I hear rumors of more folks that have
>>>
>> chosen OP. If any of you
>>
>>> are lurking, speak up and we can compare notes.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>> 40274
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On
>>>
>> Behalf Of John W. Cox
>>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 6:28 PM
>>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Op Tech panel at
>>>
>> Oshkosh
>>
>>>
>> <johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
>>
>>> Dwayne, great to have you surface like this. Your
>>>
>> selections with the
>>
>>> help of the gang at Accuracy adds another rung at
>>>
>> climbing the ladder of
>>
>>> RV-10s setting a new kit building standard.
>>>
>>> I too, think Deems has done his homework and look
>>>
>> forward to his Phase
>>
>>> I, fly off.
>>>
>>> Your panel is one of the top 10 in my book.
>>>
>>> John
>>> 40600
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On
>>>
>> Behalf Of dherring10
>>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 10:07 AM
>>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: RV10-List: Re: Op Tech panel at Oshkosh
>>>
>>> <dherring10@suddenlink.net>
>>>
>>> George,
>>> I just saw your post about my panel Tony had in
>>>
>> his booth at Oshkosh.
>>
>>> John is correct that I am a lurker. Maybe when I
>>>
>> actually have a flying
>>
>>> airplane I will feel that I can give advice about
>>>
>> building to others.
>>
>>> Besides there have always been such good answers
>>>
>> posted by the time I
>>
>>> read the questions that in most instances I could
>>>
>> not add anything. Tim
>>
>>> Olsen has told me to respond anyway so maybe I'll
>>>
>> start now. Here are a
>>
>>> couple more pictures of my panel. Some of the
>>>
>> items and switches Tony
>>
>>> and Eric had installed on the panel are not the
>>>
>> ones that will actually
>>
>>> be used. They were just trying to fill the holes
>>>
>> for the show. Let me
>>
>>> know if you have any specific questions that I can
>>>
>> answer and feel free
>>
>>> to contact me offline if you want. I was looking
>>>
>> at both the Chelton and
>>
>>> OP Tech systems and had decided on the Chelton
>>>
>> until the D2 problems.
>>
>>> After Tony and I talked about and I did my own
>>>
>> research I decided to use
>>
>>> the OP Tech. Hoping for good things with the
>>>
>> buy-out of OP Te!
>>
>>> ch by Aerosonics. Besides if Deems was using
>>>
>> them I knew he had done
>>
>>> the homework.
>>>
>>> I will tell you that Tony, Eric and all the gang
>>>
>> at Accuracy Avionics
>>
>>> have been great to work with. I think they will
>>>
>> ship the panel to me
>>
>>> sometime this month. I wish I was really ready for
>>>
>> it.
>>
>>> dwayne@mid-westglass.com
>>>
>>> Dwayne Herring
>>> 40506
>>> QB Fuse
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>>
>>>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=137631#137631
>
>>>
>>>
>>> Attachments:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/panel_2_183.jpg
>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/panel_1_183.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> browse
>> Subscriptions page,
>> FAQ,
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>
>> Web Forums!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
>
>
>
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 |
|
I picked up the fuselage in a full size truck bed. It went between the
truck whel wells just perfectly. The finish kit dimensions shows the same
width as the fuselage. I plan to use the same truck when my finish kit gets
to the terminal. Hopefully by Thanksgiving!
-Chris Lucas
#40072
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@saintaviation.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 4:50 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Finish kit
>
> Canopy top comes with the Fuse in the Standard Kit (I don't know about the
> QB kit), which is a huge box. The finishing kit comes with the engine
> mount, gear, doors, windows, etc, I think. The weight shouldn't be
> anything
> that most pickups couldn't handle, but check those dimensions with your
> truck and you should be fine.
>
> Jesse Saint
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
> jesse@saintaviation.com
> www.saintaviation.com
> Cell: 352-427-0285
> Fax: 815-377-3694
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Olson [mailto:Tim@MyRV10.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 3:13 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Finish kit
>
>
> I think the finishing kit also includes the canopy top which is
> in a huge crate on it's own. You can probably get the thin box
> that you describe in a pickup (I didn't use a pickup though so
> it's a guess), but I'm not sure if you'd get the big canopy
> box to fit.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> Fred Williams, M.D. wrote:
>> <drfred@suddenlinkmail.com>
>>
>> Did anybody have trouble picking up their finish kit in a standard truck
>> bed? It lists at 8 ft x 4 ft x 27 inches. I'd rather not take the
>> trailer if I can avoid it.
>> Fred Williams
>> 40515
>>
>
>
>
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 |
|
I picked up mine in my Toyota Sequoia. It was very tight and the dog had to share
the front seats with my wife and I, but we did it without anything on the roof
rack. We could have strapped the motor mount up there if necessary. We packed
very carefully and mercifully it was not raining in Aurora. The big gorillas
are the seats, the motor mounts and the cowling. Everything else is manageable.
The new fashionable pink cowling is a bit flimsy for the roof rack and was
my big concern. But it all went inside. On a truck get good tarps to protect
from wind and rain
We also got the FWF kit at the same time
--------
OSH '08 or Bust
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140578#140578
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! --
|