Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:43 AM - Re: Filling tanks (Jesse Saint)
2. 06:08 AM - A340-600 (Fred Williams, M.D.)
3. 07:23 AM - Re: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's the Leadership? (Deems Davis)
4. 07:42 AM - Re: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's the Leadership? (Phillips, Jack)
5. 08:34 AM - Re: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's the Leadership? (John Ackerman)
6. 08:35 AM - Re: battery master question (John Ackerman)
7. 09:06 AM - Re: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 (William Curtis)
8. 09:23 AM - Re: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's the Leadership? (gommone7@bellsouth.net)
9. 09:24 AM - Re: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's the Leadership? (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
10. 09:26 AM - Re: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 (davidsoutpost@comcast.net)
11. 09:36 AM - Re: battery master question (Ben Westfall)
12. 09:39 AM - Re: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 (GRANSCOTT@aol.com)
13. 09:46 AM - Re: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 (Rob Kermanj)
14. 09:48 AM - Re: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
15. 10:03 AM - Rudder Trim - Spring Bias (jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com)
16. 10:04 AM - Re: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's the Leadership? (John W. Cox)
17. 10:05 AM - Re: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 (orchidman)
18. 10:06 AM - Re: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 (William Curtis)
19. 10:14 AM - Mod1 Overhead Console (jayb)
20. 10:44 AM - Re: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias (Ralph E. Capen)
21. 11:09 AM - Re: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 (Eric Ekberg)
22. 11:16 AM - Re: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 (GRANSCOTT@aol.com)
23. 11:19 AM - Re: pnuematic rivet squeezer (jayb)
24. 11:20 AM - Re: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias (Steven DiNieri)
25. 11:21 AM - Re: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias (jkreidler)
26. 11:29 AM - Re: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 (Gerry Filby)
27. 11:53 AM - Re: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 (William Curtis)
28. 12:07 PM - Re: Re: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias (Carlos Hernandez)
29. 12:14 PM - Airbus response (David McNeill)
30. 12:23 PM - Re: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias (Pascal)
31. 02:54 PM - Re: Airbus response (John Jessen)
32. 03:48 PM - Re: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias (kilopapa@antelecom.net)
33. 04:56 PM - Re: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's the Leadership? (Rick Sked)
34. 05:03 PM - Re: Airbus response (Rick Sked)
35. 05:07 PM - Re: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias (Rick Sked)
36. 05:29 PM - Re: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's the Leadership? (Dave Saylor)
37. 08:15 PM - Re: OSH RV-10 Operatonr seminar was: Establishing gross weight (John W. Cox)
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: Filling tanks |
Are you wanting to test to see if the floats move, or actually to
calibrate? Getting the dihedral would probably be the hardest thing.
Are you limited on space and can't get the wing on the fuse, or just
don't want to? The wing goes on very quickly and easily, so if you
have the room and can put even one wing on at a time, I would pin it
in place with a few bolts, even without the nuts, and test it on the
fuse. You might need to support the tip so the fuse doesn't tip with
just one wing on (considering the 30 gallons of fuel). The
calibration is so easy in my experience, that I would just wait, but
that's me.
do not archive
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
On Feb 22, 2008, at 12:56 AM, Dawson-Townsend,Timothy wrote:
>
> Group:
>
> Before attaching the wings, I'd like to fill up the tanks, more to
> test the fuel quantity indicators than anything else. Is supporting
> a wing with 3-4 sawhorses, maybe with plywood on top, sufficient for
> the 180 pounds or so of fuel that will be in there?
>
> Thoughts? Suggestions? What have others done?
>
> Thanks,
>
> TDT
> 40025 - off the jacks
>
>
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 |
|
What a comedy of errors.
Hey, wait a minute, those engine pods don't look too damaged..........
Could be another mod in the making?
Fred Williams
40515
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: | Re: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's |
the Leadership?
It's too bad the ARC couldn't agree on proposed rule changes, (for
'economic' reasons) so now we're left with the FAA drafting the
changes. Its fairly obvious that based on the varied interests of the
representative parties, that ANY changes that were considered were going
to result in a financial hit to at least one of the represented
segments. In this business world this is what happens when there is a
Leadership void. Which is what I see happening here. What I find
personally extremely disappointing is that the EAA, who at one time was
the best representative for 'us' (homebuilders) seems to have become a
victim of the 'special interests' and has followed vs. lead on this one.
My letter is on it's way.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.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: | Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's |
the Leadership?
And why would you be surprised that the EAA would be afraid to step up
and defend homebuilders? The EAA has not really cared much for
homebuilders since Paul Poberezny stepped down as President. Name all
the airplanes that Tom P. has ever built (hint- the number is a single
digit that starts with a "Z"). EAA has become the friend of anyone that
will contribute money in the form of corporate sponsorships, giving us
such aviation icons as the "Nestle Theater in the Woods".
Don't get me wrong, I'm a friend of EAA and have been a member for a
long time (33 yearrs), but in the last 10 years it has definitely gone
in a direction I don't care for. After giving a great deal to
homebuilding in the first 40 years of its existence, it has coasted ever
since.
Jack Phillips
EAA #81225
RV-10 #40610
Will that SB Wing Kit never arrive?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules -
Where's the Leadership?
It's too bad the ARC couldn't agree on proposed rule changes, (for
'economic' reasons) so now we're left with the FAA drafting the
changes. Its fairly obvious that based on the varied interests of the
representative parties, that ANY changes that were considered were going
to result in a financial hit to at least one of the represented
segments. In this business world this is what happens when there is a
Leadership void. Which is what I see happening here. What I find
personally extremely disappointing is that the EAA, who at one time was
the best representative for 'us' (homebuilders) seems to have become a
victim of the 'special interests' and has followed vs. lead on this one.
My letter is on it's way.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
> *
> *
_________________________________________________
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify
the sender
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - Norsk
- Portuguese
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: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's |
the Leadership?
Yes, Deems!
Amen, Jack!
One of life's great disappointments is the commercialization of what
was once "our" organization.
Much more not said.
John Ackerman
EAA 56868
RV10 40458
On Feb 22, 2008, at 8:38 AM, Phillips, Jack wrote:
> <Jack.Phillips@cardinalhealth.com>
>
> And why would you be surprised that the EAA would be afraid to step up
> and defend homebuilders? The EAA has not really cared much for
> homebuilders since Paul Poberezny stepped down as President. Name all
> the airplanes that Tom P. has ever built (hint- the number is a single
> digit that starts with a "Z"). EAA has become the friend of anyone
> that
> will contribute money in the form of corporate sponsorships, giving us
> such aviation icons as the "Nestle Theater in the Woods".
>
> Don't get me wrong, I'm a friend of EAA and have been a member for a
> long time (33 yearrs), but in the last 10 years it has definitely gone
> in a direction I don't care for. After giving a great deal to
> homebuilding in the first 40 years of its existence, it has coasted
> ever
> since.
>
> Jack Phillips
> EAA #81225
> RV-10 #40610
> Will that SB Wing Kit never arrive?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 10:22 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules -
> Where's the Leadership?
>
>
> It's too bad the ARC couldn't agree on proposed rule changes, (for
> 'economic' reasons) so now we're left with the FAA drafting the
> changes. Its fairly obvious that based on the varied interests of the
> representative parties, that ANY changes that were considered were
> going
>
> to result in a financial hit to at least one of the represented
> segments. In this business world this is what happens when there is a
> Leadership void. Which is what I see happening here. What I find
> personally extremely disappointing is that the EAA, who at one time
> was
> the best representative for 'us' (homebuilders) seems to have become a
> victim of the 'special interests' and has followed vs. lead on this
> one.
>
> My letter is on it's way.
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
> http://deemsrv10.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: | Re: battery master question |
Watch out - the B&C contactor does not fit the RV10 firewall location..
On Feb 21, 2008, at 3:43 PM, Rick Sked wrote:
> Ben,
>
> You have to buy it seperate or I believe it comes in the wring kit.
>
> Rick Sked
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ben Westfall" <rv10@sinkrate.com>
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 2:20:24 PM (GMT-0800) America/
> Los_Angeles
> Subject: RV10-List: battery master question
>
>
> Does Van=92s supply the battery master in the kit or do you have to
> buy it separately. I am at work getting ready to place a parts
> order and thus cannot remember/verify if I have one or not yet.
>
> Here=92s to hoping that buying a standard kit and building the entire
> thing with the help of my wife meets the 51% rule!! Do mods count
> as extra percentage points? If so one can build 105+% of the plane
> then. I am thinking this makes Deems the % champion J
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Ben Westfall
> PDX #40579 (N109LB Reserved)
>
> get=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> p://forums.matronics.com
> blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
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: | WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 |
David,
Try at least to contain you bigotry with a post that begins with "Arabs WRECKED
A340-600"
http://aircrewbuzz.com/2007/11/new-a340-600-in-ground-accident-at.html
Just because it was painted with the name of the Abu Dhabi carrier Eithad Airways
you make the implication that "Arabs" are incompetent because they "wrecked"
a brand new A-340-600. A quick search would have provided the correct, uncolored
information but instead you posted clearly biased misinformation. Would
it have been as comic had the aircraft been painted with British Airway colors?
"At the time of the accident, there were nine people on board the aircraft, including
two Airbus staff, and seven employees of Abu Dhabi Aircraft Technologies
(ADAT). Five of those nine people were injured, but as of today only the two
Airbus employees and one ADAT employee remained hospitalized. None of their injuries
are reported to be life-threatening.
Etihad Airways confirms that there were no Etihad staff involved in the accident."
Sorry, I don't find humor in misinformation thinly masking bigotry. I guess that
is why we should limit the subjects of this list to RV-10 related issues.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those
who matter don't mind."
-- Dr. Suess
-------- Original Message --------
>
> TIMEOUT FOR HUMOR
>
>
> Arabs WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07
>
>
> These are pictures of the wreck of a brand new A340-600, that had never
> flown. (never saw (1) hour in the air)
>
>
> Thank these French and their Arab friends for this bit of "comedy of
> errors".
>
>
> Nine employees of the Arab airline were in the aircraft, but "no employees"
> from Airbus were present.
>
>
> The Arab's taxied out to the run-up area.
>
>
> Then they took all four engines to takeoff power with virtually an empty
> aircraft. (They obvious didn't read the run-up manuals.)
>
>
> No chocks were set, (not that it would have mattered at that power setting).
>
>
> "Brakes will not hold it back at full power anyway".
>
>
> As it turns out the takeoff warning horn was blaring away in the cockpit
> because they had all FOUR engines at full power.
>
>
> The aircraft computers thought they were trying to takeoff but it had not
> been configured properly (flaps/slats, etc, etc).
>
>
> Then one of these brain surgeons decided to pull the "Ground Sense"
> circuit breaker to quiet the alarms.
>
>
> This fools the aircraft into thinking it is in the air."A big, big mistake"!
>
>
>
> As soon as they did that, the computers automaticlly "released" all the
> brakes. ("this is a Safety feature so that pilots don't land with the brakes
> on".)There was No time to stop and no one smart enough thought to reduce the
> max power setting.....
>
> So the rest is as you see it below.
>
>
>
> No one is talking, so who knows if there were survivors.
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's |
the Leadership?
Are you guys talking about the association who write about certified airplanes
in the experimental magazine,and I thinks the grand prize for this year is a Certified
airplane,Yeahh you rigth,its all lost in the big money.
thats a shame .
Hugo Terrosa
RV10 #40456
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: John Ackerman <johnag5b@cableone.net>
>
>
> Yes, Deems!
> Amen, Jack!
> One of life's great disappointments is the commercialization of what
> was once "our" organization.
> Much more not said.
> John Ackerman
> EAA 56868
> RV10 40458
>
> On Feb 22, 2008, at 8:38 AM, Phillips, Jack wrote:
>
> > <Jack.Phillips@cardinalhealth.com>
> >
> > And why would you be surprised that the EAA would be afraid to step up
> > and defend homebuilders? The EAA has not really cared much for
> > homebuilders since Paul Poberezny stepped down as President. Name all
> > the airplanes that Tom P. has ever built (hint- the number is a single
> > digit that starts with a "Z"). EAA has become the friend of anyone
> > that
> > will contribute money in the form of corporate sponsorships, giving us
> > such aviation icons as the "Nestle Theater in the Woods".
> >
> > Don't get me wrong, I'm a friend of EAA and have been a member for a
> > long time (33 yearrs), but in the last 10 years it has definitely gone
> > in a direction I don't care for. After giving a great deal to
> > homebuilding in the first 40 years of its existence, it has coasted
> > ever
> > since.
> >
> > Jack Phillips
> > EAA #81225
> > RV-10 #40610
> > Will that SB Wing Kit never arrive?
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
> > Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 10:22 AM
> > To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules -
> > Where's the Leadership?
> >
> >
> > It's too bad the ARC couldn't agree on proposed rule changes, (for
> > 'economic' reasons) so now we're left with the FAA drafting the
> > changes. Its fairly obvious that based on the varied interests of the
> > representative parties, that ANY changes that were considered were
> > going
> >
> > to result in a financial hit to at least one of the represented
> > segments. In this business world this is what happens when there is a
> > Leadership void. Which is what I see happening here. What I find
> > personally extremely disappointing is that the EAA, who at one time
> > was
> > the best representative for 'us' (homebuilders) seems to have become a
> > victim of the 'special interests' and has followed vs. lead on this
> > one.
> >
> > My letter is on it's way.
> >
> > Deems Davis # 406
> > 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
> > http://deemsrv10.com/
> >
> >
> >> *
>
>
>
>
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: | Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's |
the Leadership?
I agree with everything you and Deems are saying. The main heartburn the FAA
seems to have at the moment is two things, the build to order shops (there are
a couple on this list) and pushing the limits of 51% with the quick builds.
Companies like Van's, that turn a blind eye to the build to order shops, stand
to lose the most because this means lost revenue and no one wants to see that.
The build to order shops would naturally change their business model or disappear
completely. Some of them are unorganized one man shops that fly below
the radar anyway. Some of the true builder assist shops may have to change things
up a little because the FAA will probably increase their scrutiny of aircraft
that come out of them but I think many, like Dave's, will do just fine and
possibly even better.
My biggest concern through this process was how hard some of the "industry" members
would push the FAA on trying to legitimize the build to order (BTO) shops.
Let's be honest, the majority of this committee had just such an intent.
If they pushed too hard the FAA might just decide they don't need any of this
headache and shut it all down. I'm glad to see the attempt to find a loophole
has been squarely closed as an option and the FAA is deciding to take enforcement
actions against anyone who falsely certifies their federal documents.
While I'm not fond of the BTO shops, as far as I'm concerned they are not breaking
the law unless they too falsely certify that a builder did the work. But
as long as there is no place for them to knowingly state such a thing they are
free and clear. It was also a fore gone conclusion that the FAA probably wouldn't
legitimize the BTO's anyway. As long as the likes of Cessna, Cirrus,
and other real manufacturers exist, there is no way in hell they would have allowed
BTO's to exist and provide a product at a greatly reduced cost without the
same level of oversight to level the field. I think the FAA should go after
some of the well know shops to get their records and then have at the guys who
clearly did little to no work. Seize the aircraft and airworthiness certificate
and then some hefty fines will stop things pretty quick. It's time to end
the flagrant violation of the regs that have been putting our privileges at
risk. God knows if the FAA found out one of us took an aspirin before a flight
they would probably force an emergency suspension of that persons certificate.
My $0.02
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Phillips, Jack
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 9:38 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's
the Leadership?
And why would you be surprised that the EAA would be afraid to step up
and defend homebuilders? The EAA has not really cared much for
homebuilders since Paul Poberezny stepped down as President. Name all
the airplanes that Tom P. has ever built (hint- the number is a single
digit that starts with a "Z"). EAA has become the friend of anyone that
will contribute money in the form of corporate sponsorships, giving us
such aviation icons as the "Nestle Theater in the Woods".
Don't get me wrong, I'm a friend of EAA and have been a member for a
long time (33 yearrs), but in the last 10 years it has definitely gone
in a direction I don't care for. After giving a great deal to
homebuilding in the first 40 years of its existence, it has coasted ever
since.
Jack Phillips
EAA #81225
RV-10 #40610
Will that SB Wing Kit never arrive?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules -
Where's the Leadership?
It's too bad the ARC couldn't agree on proposed rule changes, (for
'economic' reasons) so now we're left with the FAA drafting the
changes. Its fairly obvious that based on the varied interests of the
representative parties, that ANY changes that were considered were going
to result in a financial hit to at least one of the represented
segments. In this business world this is what happens when there is a
Leadership void. Which is what I see happening here. What I find
personally extremely disappointing is that the EAA, who at one time was
the best representative for 'us' (homebuilders) seems to have become a
victim of the 'special interests' and has followed vs. lead on this one.
My letter is on it's way.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
do not archive
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: | WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 |
I agree with William and furthermore, these types of posts have absolutely nothing
to do with the RV construction community.
David Clifford
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "William Curtis" <wcurtis@nerv10.com>
>
> David,
>
> Try at least to contain you bigotry with a post that begins with "Arabs WRECKED
> A340-600"
> http://aircrewbuzz.com/2007/11/new-a340-600-in-ground-accident-at.html
>
> Just because it was painted with the name of the Abu Dhabi carrier Eithad
> Airways you make the implication that "Arabs" are incompetent because they
> "wrecked" a brand new A-340-600. A quick search would have provided the
> correct, uncolored information but instead you posted clearly biased
> misinformation. Would it have been as comic had the aircraft been painted with
> British Airway colors?
>
> "At the time of the accident, there were nine people on board the aircraft,
> including two Airbus staff, and seven employees of Abu Dhabi Aircraft
> Technologies (ADAT). Five of those nine people were injured, but as of today
> only the two Airbus employees and one ADAT employee remained hospitalized. None
> of their injuries are reported to be life-threatening.
>
> Etihad Airways confirms that there were no Etihad staff involved in the
> accident."
>
> Sorry, I don't find humor in misinformation thinly masking bigotry. I guess
> that is why we should limit the subjects of this list to RV-10 related issues.
>
> William
> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
> "Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and
> those who matter don't mind."
> -- Dr. Suess
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> >
> > TIMEOUT FOR HUMOR
> >
> >
> > Arabs WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07
> >
> >
> > These are pictures of the wreck of a brand new A340-600, that had never
> > flown. (never saw (1) hour in the air)
> >
> >
> > Thank these French and their Arab friends for this bit of "comedy of
> > errors".
> >
> >
> > Nine employees of the Arab airline were in the aircraft, but "no employees"
> > from Airbus were present.
> >
> >
> > The Arab's taxied out to the run-up area.
> >
> >
> > Then they took all four engines to takeoff power with virtually an empty
> > aircraft. (They obvious didn't read the run-up manuals.)
> >
> >
> > No chocks were set, (not that it would have mattered at that power setting).
> >
> >
> > "Brakes will not hold it back at full power anyway".
> >
> >
> > As it turns out the takeoff warning horn was blaring away in the cockpit
> > because they had all FOUR engines at full power.
> >
> >
> > The aircraft computers thought they were trying to takeoff but it had not
> > been configured properly (flaps/slats, etc, etc).
> >
> >
> > Then one of these brain surgeons decided to pull the "Ground Sense"
> > circuit breaker to quiet the alarms.
> >
> >
> > This fools the aircraft into thinking it is in the air."A big, big mistake"!
> >
> >
> >
> > As soon as they did that, the computers automaticlly "released" all the
> > brakes. ("this is a Safety feature so that pilots don't land with the brakes
> > on".)There was No time to stop and no one smart enough thought to reduce the
> > max power setting.....
> >
> > So the rest is as you see it below.
> >
> >
> >
> > No one is talking, so who knows if there were survivors.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
<html><body>
<DIV>I agree with William and furthermore, these types of posts have absolutely
nothing to do with the RV construction community.</DIV>
<DIV>David Clifford</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: "William Curtis" <wcurtis@nerv10.com> <BR><BR>> --> RV10-List message posted by: "William Curtis" <WCURTIS@NERV10.COM><BR>> <BR>> David, <BR>> <BR>> Try at least to contain you bigotry with a post that begins with "Arabs WRECKED <BR>> A340-600" <BR>> http://aircrewbuzz.com/2007/11/new-a340-600-in-ground-accident-at.html <BR>> <BR>> Just because it was painted with the name of the Abu Dhabi carrier Eithad <BR>> Airways you make the implication that "Arabs" are incompetent because they <BR>> "wrecked" a brand new A-340-600. A quick search would have provided the <BR>> correct, uncolored information but instead you posted clearly biased <BR>> misinformation. Would it have been as comic had the aircraft been painted with <BR>> British Airway colors? <BR>> <BR>> "At the time of the
accide
nt, there were nine people on board the aircraft, <BR>> including two Airbus staff, and seven employees of Abu Dhabi Aircraft <BR>> Technologies (ADAT). Five of those nine people were injured, but as of today <BR>> only the two Airbus employees and one ADAT employee remained hospitalized. None <BR>> of their injuries are reported to be life-threatening. <BR>> <BR>> Etihad Airways confirms that there were no Etihad staff involved in the <BR>> accident." <BR>> <BR>> Sorry, I don't find humor in misinformation thinly masking bigotry. I guess <BR>> that is why we should limit the subjects of this list to RV-10 related issues. <BR>> <BR>> William <BR>> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/ <BR>> "Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and <BR>> those who matter don't mind." <BR>> -- Dr. Suess <BR>> <BR>> -------- Original Message -------- <BR>> > <BR>> > TIMEOUT FOR HUMOR <BR>> > <BR>>
; >
<BR>> > Arabs WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 <BR>> > <BR>>
> <BR>> > These are pictures of the wreck of a brand new A340-600,
that had never <BR>> > flown. (never saw (1) hour in the air) <BR>>
> <BR>> > <BR>> > Thank these French and their Arab friends
for this bit of "comedy of <BR>> > errors". <BR>> > <BR>> >
<BR>> > Nine employees of the Arab airline were in the aircraft, but "no
employees" <BR>> > from Airbus were present. <BR>> > <BR>> >
<BR>> > The Arab's taxied out to the run-up area. <BR>> > <BR>>
> <BR>> > Then they took all four engines to takeoff power with virtually
an empty <BR>> > aircraft. (They obvious didn't read the run-up
manuals.) <BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>> > No chocks were set, (not that
it would have mattered at that power setting). <BR>> > <BR>> >
<BR>> > "Brakes will not hold it back at full
power
anyway". <BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>> > As it turns out the takeoff
warning horn was blaring away in the cockpit <BR>> > because they had all
FOUR engines at full power. <BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>> > The aircraft
computers thought they were trying to takeoff but it had not <BR>> >
been configured properly (flaps/slats, etc, etc). <BR>> > <BR>> >
<BR>> > Then one of these brain surgeons decided to pull the "Ground
Sense" <BR>> > circuit breaker to quiet the alarms. <BR>> > <BR>>
> <BR>> > This fools the aircraft into thinking it is in the air."A
big, big mistake"! <BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>> >
As soon as they did that, the computers automaticlly "released" all the <BR>>
> brakes. ("this is a Safety feature so that pilots don't land with the
brakes <BR>> > on".)There was No time to stop and no one smart enough thought
to reduce the <BR>> > max power setting..
... <B
>>
<pre><b><font size=2 color="#000000" face="courier new,courier">
</b></font></pre></body></html>
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: | battery master question |
Thanks all for the responses. I picked up Van's $17 contactor today on my
way to work.
On another note Van's has on display the AFS-3500 and AFS-3400 efis's there
at the will call counter. I got to give props to Rob and all at Advanced
Flight Systems. Their efis really looks sharp and has a lot to offer in
the, for lack of a better term, "blue collar" efis choices (you know
everything other than chelton / garmin / or OP).
-Ben
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Ackerman
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 8:33 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: battery master question
Watch out - the B&C contactor does not fit the RV10 firewall location..
On Feb 21, 2008, at 3:43 PM, Rick Sked wrote:
Ben,
You have to buy it seperate or I believe it comes in the wring kit.
Rick Sked
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Westfall" <rv10@sinkrate.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 2:20:24 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RV10-List: battery master question
Does Van's supply the battery master in the kit or do you have to buy it
separately. I am at work getting ready to place a parts order and thus
cannot remember/verify if I have one or not yet.
Here's to hoping that buying a standard kit and building the entire thing
with the help of my wife meets the 51% rule!! Do mods count as extra
percentage points? If so one can build 105+% of the plane then. I am
thinking this makes Deems the % champion :-)
Thanks,
-Ben Westfall
PDX #40579 (N109LB Reserved)
get=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
p://forums.matronics.com
blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://forums.matronics.com
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 |
In a message dated 2/22/2008 11:08:58 AM Central Standard Time,
wcurtis@nerv10.com writes:
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter
and those who matter don't mind."
-- Dr. Suess
William I agree with you but can you tell me what Dr Suess has to do with
RV's?
**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/
2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
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: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 |
Amen! Good on you William.
Rob
On Feb 22, 2008, at 12:15 PM, William Curtis wrote:
>
> David,
>
> Try at least to contain you bigotry with a post that begins with
> "Arabs WRECKED A340-600"
> http://aircrewbuzz.com/2007/11/new-a340-600-in-ground-accident-at.html
>
> Just because it was painted with the name of the Abu Dhabi carrier
> Eithad Airways you make the implication that "Arabs" are incompetent
> because they "wrecked" a brand new A-340-600. A quick search would
> have provided the correct, uncolored information but instead you
> posted clearly biased misinformation. Would it have been as comic
> had the aircraft been painted with British Airway colors?
>
> "At the time of the accident, there were nine people on board the
> aircraft, including two Airbus staff, and seven employees of Abu
> Dhabi Aircraft Technologies (ADAT). Five of those nine people were
> injured, but as of today only the two Airbus employees and one ADAT
> employee remained hospitalized. None of their injuries are reported
> to be life-threatening.
>
> Etihad Airways confirms that there were no Etihad staff involved in
> the accident."
>
> Sorry, I don't find humor in misinformation thinly masking bigotry.
> I guess that is why we should limit the subjects of this list to
> RV-10 related issues.
>
> William
> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
> "Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't
> matter and those who matter don't mind."
> -- Dr. Suess
> -------- Original Message --------
>>
>> TIMEOUT FOR HUMOR
>>
>>
>> Arabs WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07
>>
>>
>> These are pictures of the wreck of a brand new A340-600, that had
>> never
>> flown. (never saw (1) hour in the air)
>>
>>
>> Thank these French and their Arab friends for this bit of "comedy of
>> errors".
>>
>>
>> Nine employees of the Arab airline were in the aircraft, but "no
>> employees"
>> from Airbus were present.
>>
>>
>> The Arab's taxied out to the run-up area.
>>
>>
>> Then they took all four engines to takeoff power with virtually an
>> empty
>> aircraft. (They obvious didn't read the run-up manuals.)
>>
>>
>> No chocks were set, (not that it would have mattered at that power
>> setting).
>>
>>
>> "Brakes will not hold it back at full power anyway".
>>
>>
>> As it turns out the takeoff warning horn was blaring away in the
>> cockpit
>> because they had all FOUR engines at full power.
>>
>>
>> The aircraft computers thought they were trying to takeoff but it
>> had not
>> been configured properly (flaps/slats, etc, etc).
>>
>>
>> Then one of these brain surgeons decided to pull the "Ground Sense"
>> circuit breaker to quiet the alarms.
>>
>>
>> This fools the aircraft into thinking it is in the air."A big, big
>> mistake"!
>>
>>
>>
>> As soon as they did that, the computers automaticlly "released" all
>> the
>> brakes. ("this is a Safety feature so that pilots don't land with
>> the brakes
>> on".)There was No time to stop and no one smart enough thought to
>> reduce the
>> max power setting.....
>>
>> So the rest is as you see it below.
>>
>>
>>
>> No one is talking, so who knows if there were survivors.
>
>
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: | WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 |
"Would it have been as comic had the aircraft been painted with British Airway
colors?"
Hell yes! Funny how when the governments refer to Arab nations it's not a problem.
Kinda like referring to me as an American. Oh wait, I can see how some
people would now consider that an insult.
Yawn
Do not archive as like everything else it's my opinion and I have not been held
to any standards in my ramblings. Heh
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Curtis
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 11:15 AM
Subject: re: RV10-List: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07
David,
Try at least to contain you bigotry with a post that begins with "Arabs WRECKED
A340-600"
http://aircrewbuzz.com/2007/11/new-a340-600-in-ground-accident-at.html
Just because it was painted with the name of the Abu Dhabi carrier Eithad Airways
you make the implication that "Arabs" are incompetent because they "wrecked"
a brand new A-340-600. A quick search would have provided the correct, uncolored
information but instead you posted clearly biased misinformation. Would
it have been as comic had the aircraft been painted with British Airway colors?
"At the time of the accident, there were nine people on board the aircraft, including
two Airbus staff, and seven employees of Abu Dhabi Aircraft Technologies
(ADAT). Five of those nine people were injured, but as of today only the two
Airbus employees and one ADAT employee remained hospitalized. None of their injuries
are reported to be life-threatening.
Etihad Airways confirms that there were no Etihad staff involved in the accident."
Sorry, I don't find humor in misinformation thinly masking bigotry. I guess that
is why we should limit the subjects of this list to RV-10 related issues.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those
who matter don't mind."
-- Dr. Suess
-------- Original Message --------
>
> TIMEOUT FOR HUMOR
>
>
> Arabs WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07
>
>
> These are pictures of the wreck of a brand new A340-600, that had never
> flown. (never saw (1) hour in the air)
>
>
> Thank these French and their Arab friends for this bit of "comedy of
> errors".
>
>
> Nine employees of the Arab airline were in the aircraft, but "no employees"
> from Airbus were present.
>
>
> The Arab's taxied out to the run-up area.
>
>
> Then they took all four engines to takeoff power with virtually an empty
> aircraft. (They obvious didn't read the run-up manuals.)
>
>
> No chocks were set, (not that it would have mattered at that power setting).
>
>
> "Brakes will not hold it back at full power anyway".
>
>
> As it turns out the takeoff warning horn was blaring away in the cockpit
> because they had all FOUR engines at full power.
>
>
> The aircraft computers thought they were trying to takeoff but it had not
> been configured properly (flaps/slats, etc, etc).
>
>
> Then one of these brain surgeons decided to pull the "Ground Sense"
> circuit breaker to quiet the alarms.
>
>
> This fools the aircraft into thinking it is in the air."A big, big mistake"!
>
>
> As soon as they did that, the computers automaticlly "released" all the
> brakes. ("this is a Safety feature so that pilots don't land with the brakes
> on".)There was No time to stop and no one smart enough thought to reduce the
> max power setting.....
>
> So the rest is as you see it below.
>
>
> No one is talking, so who knows if there were survivors.
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: | Rudder Trim - Spring Bias |
I have 'developed' a spring bias rudder trim system for the RV-10. After
sharing this idea with Deems he encouraged me to do the same with the rest
of the group. So here goes, but before I get into any details let me
preface this whole conversation with a few thoughts. This is all in
theory, I have absolutely no actual flight testing to back up any of the
'claims', or assumptions. Just good old common sense and a tiny bit of
engineering. Our airplane is not in the air yet, I had hoped to get in
the air, prove out the system, then share with the world. To prevent
anyone else for possibly needlessly cutting into their rudder to add a
trim tab, I have decided to bear the scrutiny of an unproven, theoretical
system. Please be gentle...
I will attempt to verbalize the system. I used two torsion springs, one
mounted / wrapped around, each rudder bar (the bar that connects the
rudder pedals). One of the springs is fixed on both ends providing a
torsional force on the rudder bar. The other springs free end is hooked
to a servo motor that allows approximately 30 degrees deflection. The
theory is that the two springs will seek equilibrium (OK, that's not much
theory, that's more fact), here is where the testing needs to happen. If
I deflect the one springs free arm 30 degrees, will it create enough force
to put the airplane in trim. The springs apply about an 8 pound force to
the rudder cables (pre-load if you will), assuming they will want to
maintain in equilibrium a 30 degree deflection should be more than enough
to trim the airplane. The servo will act as sort of a fine tuning
mechanism, the course adjustment will be accomplished by winding more or
less tension in one spring or the other during flight testing.
I like a few things about this method.
1) It can be installed to any flying airplane with no modifications
required other than wiring.
2) There is a chance that this system could be made manual and eliminate
the RAC servo if desired.
3) This system provides tension to both rudder cables, no more 'flopping
rudder'.
4) Keeps the rudder 'clean'.
5) Doesn't add much extra rudder input force.
I sent pictures of this system to Deems, I will 'attempt' to post some
pictures to this forum if there is interest. Comments welcome, I
apologize for the extremely long post, but I have added Deems questions
below, I figured if he asked, many more will have the same questions....
1. How did you determine which spring type/size/strength to use?
OK, you busted me!! I didn't do the math, I feel extremely guilty about
this, as an engineer, I should probably go back and figure the forces
here. Here is what I did; since I grew up in the business of garage doors
(my Dad owned his own company doing this), I went to Fleet Farm (one of
our local supply houses, similar to most lumbar yards) and found a garage
door spring that had an ID that would slide over the rudder bar with room
to spare, and would fit between the two rudder bars (I will measure this
for you). I then cut lengths of the spring until I got what I 'thought'
was a reasonable amount of force with two turns of pre-load, and bent some
custom ends on them. With torsion springs you have two options to
increase the reaction force. You can add turns of pre-load, or you can
shorten the spring with the same number of turns. I just went until I
reached what I 'felt' was a happy medium. Remember that as you wind a
torsion spring more and more the inside diameter decreases, until it
eventually binds on the shaft (rudder bar). What mostly drove me not to
do the math, was I had absolutely no idea what sort of corrective rudder
pressure was required to put the ball in the middle. My plan all along
has been to get it in the air and do some experimenting, I installed the
system so that modification of the spring force should be simple. I just
need to start dating a contortionist :)
2. I assume that you can 'adjust the torsional load somewhat by moving
the collar/s, Is that true?
Correct, I started out with each spring wound an equal amount. If I find
that I need additional trim to one side or the other I will wind one of
the springs to compensate. The servo will just provide the 'fine tuning'.
3. One of the pictures shows the center support brace minus the delrin
bushings, I'm assuming that leaving those out is not a requirement of
your approach and was just the result of taking the picture before they
were installed?
Correct, in fact there isn't a single modification to the airframe, if I
remove the system no one could ever tell it was installed. I built the
mount so that it could be used in either the forward or aft rudder
mounting positions, my pedals are mounted in the aft position. But I
drilled and prepped the airframe to mount the rudder pedals in either
position.
4. What about the mount for the RAC servo, do you have a picture of it
before the servo is mounted.
See attached.... The angle was determined by something, I just don't
recall what anymore. I know it has to be at an angle to work though. I
can measure if you decide to attempt this.
5. Also it' looks like you used a small section of SS cable to connect
the servo arm to the spring coil, correct? Picture?
Correct, see attached. One end is run through the servo arm, the other
gets hooked by the spring. The spring on the pilot side is hooked over
the opposite rudder bar.
I gave some thought to your desire to have a manually operated system, I
think this system could be done manually with very little pain. You may
be able to add a knob that would come out of the sub panel, really
anywhere along its length. What would have to happen is a bracket would
need to be made that slid over the rudder bar with a nut in it. Then a
threaded shaft running from the rudder bar to the sub panel would be used
to adjust the free arm of the spring. It may be best if the spring were
pushed by the shaft instead of pulled, as this would make the mechanism a
bit simpler. I could do a drawing of what I am thinking if you are not
following.
While it was not my intention to begin producing kits, if there is enough
interest, I could be persuaded to fabricate a few.
Thanks, Jason
Jason Kreidler - 40617 Finishing
(4 Partner Build)
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: | Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's |
the Leadership?
Deems, you have hit it on the head.
Randy Hansen is our (everyone's EAA Government Relations Rep). He wrote
this glowing passage after Oregon killed an exclusion for one grade of
gasoline to be available for aircraft operators of STCed MOGAS engines
and LSAs with Rotax (which require a restriction on 100LL).
"When we sent our first EAA member e-Alert/Notice to
Oregon members,
Dan Clem and the Department of Ag were very strongly
opposed to asking
the state legislature to amend the new ethanol mandating
bill. They
said that because this was only a special secession and
that all special
secession bills had already been identified, that any
modifications
would not be looked at or accepted. In actual practice,
the OPA and EAA
members were able to bring their concerns before their
individual
legislators and get the bill listing several exemptions,
including
aviation, introduced and acted on. Hopefully, this
afternoon the bill
will be finalized and passed. While the "exclude all
premium gasoline
from ethanol-blending" point of view has not, so far,
carried the day -
it has been an overwhelming success to get this far into
the special
Oregon legislature secession with a bill that state
advisors said should
not have happened. So, EAA must offer our congrats to
the entire team
for this huge effort and success."
The role of the Director of Aviation, Dan Clem, has now been brought
into question on Ethanol at the Pump. Nothing about HB2210 which is law
or the SB1079 Amendment A6 which was supposed to correct it during the
Emergency Session this week, can be called a success. When pilots, who
had waited hours for the Railroad Lobbyists to finish talking, our
legislators walked out of the hearing on them.
The result is that Oregon is the first state in the union to mandate
that all consumers buy adulterated fuel at the pump with a minimum of
10% ethanol. Greenies want all states to mandate Ethanol. Several
states provided fuel exemptions. Oregon is not one of them. The First
Responders who use gasoline emergency generators, the boat and auto
aficionados and of course aviators be damned. Everything was tried,
nothing persuaded our legislators. The EAA did nothing but offer
congrats to some entire team which did not represent our interests. Now
all of you flying from other states had better check fuel supply first.
Don't get me wrong, I love the EAA for what it presents, but legislative
and government relations are a travesty. The ARC is not much different.
The EAA needs to focus primarily on Experimental Certificated
Aircraft.... Period.
John Cox #600
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 7:22 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules -
Where's the Leadership?
It's too bad the ARC couldn't agree on proposed rule changes, (for
'economic' reasons) so now we're left with the FAA drafting the
changes. Its fairly obvious that based on the varied interests of the
representative parties, that ANY changes that were considered were going
to result in a financial hit to at least one of the represented
segments. In this business world this is what happens when there is a
Leadership void. Which is what I see happening here. What I find
personally extremely disappointing is that the EAA, who at one time was
the best representative for 'us' (homebuilders) seems to have become a
victim of the 'special interests' and has followed vs. lead on this one.
My letter is on it's way.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
> *
> *
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: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 |
msausen wrote:
> "Would it have been as comic had the aircraft been painted with British Airway
colors?"
>
> Hell yes! --
Its Friday so I guess we have to be politically correct.
Ya-all have a good day!
--------
Gary Blankenbiller
RV10 - # 40674
Fuselage SB
(N410GB reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=165583#165583
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 |
> William I agree with you but can you tell me what Dr Suess has to do with RV's?
That's in jest --right? I can't tell?
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those
who matter don't mind."
-- Dr. Suess
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: | Mod1 Overhead Console |
Yet another overhead. Pretty nice and small too.
The Mod1 Overhead Console is mounted to top of cabin or top wing skin
with four stainless steel screws into the four standoffs or posts on Console.
The lights are the same ones that come standard w/ Accuracy Overhead. I think I've
seen them on Stein's website too.
http://www.cockpitlights.com/console.html
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=165588#165588
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: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias |
When do we get to see some pictures?
-----Original Message-----
>From: jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com
>Sent: Feb 22, 2008 12:55 PM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RV10-List: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias
>
>I have 'developed' a spring bias rudder trim system for the RV-10. After
>sharing this idea with Deems he encouraged me to do the same with the rest
>of the group. So here goes, but before I get into any details let me
>preface this whole conversation with a few thoughts. This is all in
>theory, I have absolutely no actual flight testing to back up any of the
>'claims', or assumptions. Just good old common sense and a tiny bit of
>engineering. Our airplane is not in the air yet, I had hoped to get in
>the air, prove out the system, then share with the world. To prevent
>anyone else for possibly needlessly cutting into their rudder to add a
>trim tab, I have decided to bear the scrutiny of an unproven, theoretical
>system. Please be gentle...
>
>I will attempt to verbalize the system. I used two torsion springs, one
>mounted / wrapped around, each rudder bar (the bar that connects the
>rudder pedals). One of the springs is fixed on both ends providing a
>torsional force on the rudder bar. The other springs free end is hooked
>to a servo motor that allows approximately 30 degrees deflection. The
>theory is that the two springs will seek equilibrium (OK, that's not much
>theory, that's more fact), here is where the testing needs to happen. If
>I deflect the one springs free arm 30 degrees, will it create enough force
>to put the airplane in trim. The springs apply about an 8 pound force to
>the rudder cables (pre-load if you will), assuming they will want to
>maintain in equilibrium a 30 degree deflection should be more than enough
>to trim the airplane. The servo will act as sort of a fine tuning
>mechanism, the course adjustment will be accomplished by winding more or
>less tension in one spring or the other during flight testing.
>
>I like a few things about this method.
>1) It can be installed to any flying airplane with no modifications
>required other than wiring.
>2) There is a chance that this system could be made manual and eliminate
>the RAC servo if desired.
>3) This system provides tension to both rudder cables, no more 'flopping
>rudder'.
>4) Keeps the rudder 'clean'.
>5) Doesn't add much extra rudder input force.
>
>I sent pictures of this system to Deems, I will 'attempt' to post some
>pictures to this forum if there is interest. Comments welcome, I
>apologize for the extremely long post, but I have added Deems questions
>below, I figured if he asked, many more will have the same questions....
>
>
>1. How did you determine which spring type/size/strength to use?
>OK, you busted me!! I didn't do the math, I feel extremely guilty about
>this, as an engineer, I should probably go back and figure the forces
>here. Here is what I did; since I grew up in the business of garage doors
>(my Dad owned his own company doing this), I went to Fleet Farm (one of
>our local supply houses, similar to most lumbar yards) and found a garage
>door spring that had an ID that would slide over the rudder bar with room
>to spare, and would fit between the two rudder bars (I will measure this
>for you). I then cut lengths of the spring until I got what I 'thought'
>was a reasonable amount of force with two turns of pre-load, and bent some
>custom ends on them. With torsion springs you have two options to
>increase the reaction force. You can add turns of pre-load, or you can
>shorten the spring with the same number of turns. I just went until I
>reached what I 'felt' was a happy medium. Remember that as you wind a
>torsion spring more and more the inside diameter decreases, until it
>eventually binds on the shaft (rudder bar). What mostly drove me not to
>do the math, was I had absolutely no idea what sort of corrective rudder
>pressure was required to put the ball in the middle. My plan all along
>has been to get it in the air and do some experimenting, I installed the
>system so that modification of the spring force should be simple. I just
>need to start dating a contortionist :)
>
>2. I assume that you can 'adjust the torsional load somewhat by moving
>the collar/s, Is that true?
>Correct, I started out with each spring wound an equal amount. If I find
>that I need additional trim to one side or the other I will wind one of
>the springs to compensate. The servo will just provide the 'fine tuning'.
>
>3. One of the pictures shows the center support brace minus the delrin
>bushings, I'm assuming that leaving those out is not a requirement of
>your approach and was just the result of taking the picture before they
>were installed?
>Correct, in fact there isn't a single modification to the airframe, if I
>remove the system no one could ever tell it was installed. I built the
>mount so that it could be used in either the forward or aft rudder
>mounting positions, my pedals are mounted in the aft position. But I
>drilled and prepped the airframe to mount the rudder pedals in either
>position.
>
>4. What about the mount for the RAC servo, do you have a picture of it
>before the servo is mounted.
>See attached.... The angle was determined by something, I just don't
>recall what anymore. I know it has to be at an angle to work though. I
>can measure if you decide to attempt this.
>
>5. Also it' looks like you used a small section of SS cable to connect
>the servo arm to the spring coil, correct? Picture?
>Correct, see attached. One end is run through the servo arm, the other
>gets hooked by the spring. The spring on the pilot side is hooked over
>the opposite rudder bar.
>
>I gave some thought to your desire to have a manually operated system, I
>think this system could be done manually with very little pain. You may
>be able to add a knob that would come out of the sub panel, really
>anywhere along its length. What would have to happen is a bracket would
>need to be made that slid over the rudder bar with a nut in it. Then a
>threaded shaft running from the rudder bar to the sub panel would be used
>to adjust the free arm of the spring. It may be best if the spring were
>pushed by the shaft instead of pulled, as this would make the mechanism a
>bit simpler. I could do a drawing of what I am thinking if you are not
>following.
>
>While it was not my intention to begin producing kits, if there is enough
>interest, I could be persuaded to fabricate a few.
>
>Thanks, Jason
>
>Jason Kreidler - 40617 Finishing
>(4 Partner Build)
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 |
William,
I can't help but wonder, if it had been "Americans wrecked a plane" instead,
would you still pull the racism card?
Also, how does your accusation that a member is a bigot help the RV
community? Even were it true (which I doubt it is - but I wouldn't care
anyway as this is a RV-10 list, not a let's fight bigotry list), wouldn't it
be better to just ignore it and move on?
-Eric
do not archive
On 2/22/08, William Curtis <wcurtis@nerv10.com> wrote:
>
>
> David,
>
> Try at least to contain you bigotry with a post that begins with "Arabs
> WRECKED A340-600"
> http://aircrewbuzz.com/2007/11/new-a340-600-in-ground-accident-at.html
>
> Just because it was painted with the name of the Abu Dhabi carrier Eithad
> Airways you make the implication that "Arabs" are incompetent because they
> "wrecked" a brand new A-340-600. A quick search would have provided the
> correct, uncolored information but instead you posted clearly
> biased misinformation. Would it have been as comic had the aircraft been
> painted with British Airway colors?
>
> "At the time of the accident, there were nine people on board the
> aircraft, including two Airbus staff, and seven employees of Abu Dhabi
> Aircraft Technologies (ADAT). Five of those nine people were injured, but as
> of today only the two Airbus employees and one ADAT employee remained
> hospitalized. None of their injuries are reported to be life-threatening.
>
> Etihad Airways confirms that there were no Etihad staff involved in the
> accident."
>
> Sorry, I don't find humor in misinformation thinly masking bigotry. I
> guess that is why we should limit the subjects of this list to RV-10 related
> issues.
>
> William
> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
> "Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter
> and those who matter don't mind."
> -- Dr. Suess
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> >
> > TIMEOUT FOR HUMOR
> >
> >
> > Arabs WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07
> >
> >
> > These are pictures of the wreck of a brand new A340-600, that had never
> > flown. (never saw (1) hour in the air)
> >
> >
> > Thank these French and their Arab friends for this bit of "comedy of
> > errors".
> >
> >
> > Nine employees of the Arab airline were in the aircraft, but "no
> employees"
> > from Airbus were present.
> >
> >
> > The Arab's taxied out to the run-up area.
> >
> >
> > Then they took all four engines to takeoff power with virtually an empty
> > aircraft. (They obvious didn't read the run-up manuals.)
> >
> >
> > No chocks were set, (not that it would have mattered at that power
> setting).
> >
> >
> > "Brakes will not hold it back at full power anyway".
> >
> >
> > As it turns out the takeoff warning horn was blaring away in the cockpit
> > because they had all FOUR engines at full power.
> >
> >
> > The aircraft computers thought they were trying to takeoff but it had
> not
> > been configured properly (flaps/slats, etc, etc).
> >
> >
> > Then one of these brain surgeons decided to pull the "Ground Sense"
> > circuit breaker to quiet the alarms.
> >
> >
> > This fools the aircraft into thinking it is in the air."A big, big
> mistake"!
> >
> >
> >
> > As soon as they did that, the computers automaticlly "released" all the
> > brakes. ("this is a Safety feature so that pilots don't land with the
> brakes
> > on".)There was No time to stop and no one smart enough thought to reduce
> the
> > max power setting.....
> >
> > So the rest is as you see it below.
> >
> >
> >
> > No one is talking, so who knows if there were survivors.
>
>
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 |
In a message dated 2/22/2008 12:08:17 PM Central Standard Time,
wcurtis@nerv10.com writes:
That's in jest --right? I can't tell?
I was hoping to lighten the moment and work off of the comment...
P 8-]
**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/
2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
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: pnuematic rivet squeezer |
Talk about interest... There must be a world-wide shortage of pneumatic squeezers
judging by the number of emails I received.
It's up for grabs on ebay as item #150218602763.
Regards,
Jay
do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=165592#165592
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: | Rudder Trim - Spring Bias |
Jason, its sounds like a very elegant solution i can't wait to see some
pics.
[Steven DiNieri]
rom: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 12:55 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias
I have 'developed' a spring bias rudder trim system for the RV-10. After
sharing this idea with Deems he encouraged me to do the same with the rest
of the group. So here goes, but before I get into any details let me
preface this whole conversation with a few thoughts. This is all in theory,
I have absolutely no actual flight testing to back up any of the 'claims',
or assumptions. Just good old common sense and a tiny bit of engineering.
Our airplane is not in the air yet, I had hoped to get in the air, prove out
the system, then share with the world. To prevent anyone else for possibly
needlessly cutting into their rudder to add a trim tab, I have decided to
bear the scrutiny of an unproven, theoretical system. Please be gentle...
I will attempt to verbalize the system. I used two torsion springs, one
mounted / wrapped around, each rudder bar (the bar that connects the rudder
pedals). One of the springs is fixed on both ends providing a torsional
force on the rudder bar. The other springs free end is hooked to a servo
motor that allows approximately 30 degrees deflection. The theory is that
the two springs will seek equilibrium (OK, that's not much theory, that's
more fact), here is where the testing needs to happen. If I deflect the one
springs free arm 30 degrees, will it create enough force to put the airplane
in trim. The springs apply about an 8 pound force to the rudder cables
(pre-load if you will), assuming they will want to maintain in equilibrium a
30 degree deflection should be more than enough to trim the airplane. The
servo will act as sort of a fine tuning mechanism, the course adjustment
will be accomplished by winding more or less tension in one spring or the
other during flight testing.
I like a few things about this method.
1) It can be installed to any flying airplane with no modifications required
other than wiring.
2) There is a chance that this system could be made manual and eliminate the
RAC servo if desired.
3) This system provides tension to both rudder cables, no more 'flopping
rudder'.
4) Keeps the rudder 'clean'.
5) Doesn't add much extra rudder input force.
I sent pictures of this system to Deems, I will 'attempt' to post some
pictures to this forum if there is interest. Comments welcome, I apologize
for the extremely long post, but I have added Deems questions below, I
figured if he asked, many more will have the same questions....
1. How did you determine which spring type/size/strength to use?
OK, you busted me!! I didn't do the math, I feel extremely guilty about
this, as an engineer, I should probably go back and figure the forces here.
Here is what I did; since I grew up in the business of garage doors (my Dad
owned his own company doing this), I went to Fleet Farm (one of our local
supply houses, similar to most lumbar yards) and found a garage door spring
that had an ID that would slide over the rudder bar with room to spare, and
would fit between the two rudder bars (I will measure this for you). I then
cut lengths of the spring until I got what I 'thought' was a reasonable
amount of force with two turns of pre-load, and bent some custom ends on
them. With torsion springs you have two options to increase the reaction
force. You can add turns of pre-load, or you can shorten the spring with
the same number of turns. I just went until I reached what I 'felt' was a
happy medium. Remember that as you wind a torsion spring more and more the
inside diameter decreases, until it eventually binds on the shaft (rudder
bar). What mostly drove me not to do the math, was I had absolutely no idea
what sort of corrective rudder pressure was required to put the ball in the
middle. My plan all along has been to get it in the air and do some
experimenting, I installed the system so that modification of the spring
force should be simple. I just need to start dating a contortionist :)
2. I assume that you can 'adjust the torsional load somewhat by moving
the collar/s, Is that true?
Correct, I started out with each spring wound an equal amount. If I find
that I need additional trim to one side or the other I will wind one of the
springs to compensate. The servo will just provide the 'fine tuning'.
3. One of the pictures shows the center support brace minus the delrin
bushings, I'm assuming that leaving those out is not a requirement of
your approach and was just the result of taking the picture before they
were installed?
Correct, in fact there isn't a single modification to the airframe, if I
remove the system no one could ever tell it was installed. I built the
mount so that it could be used in either the forward or aft rudder mounting
positions, my pedals are mounted in the aft position. But I drilled and
prepped the airframe to mount the rudder pedals in either position.
4. What about the mount for the RAC servo, do you have a picture of it
before the servo is mounted.
See attached.... The angle was determined by something, I just don't recall
what anymore. I know it has to be at an angle to work though. I can
measure if you decide to attempt this.
5. Also it' looks like you used a small section of SS cable to connect
the servo arm to the spring coil, correct? Picture?
Correct, see attached. One end is run through the servo arm, the other gets
hooked by the spring. The spring on the pilot side is hooked over the
opposite rudder bar.
I gave some thought to your desire to have a manually operated system, I
think this system could be done manually with very little pain. You may be
able to add a knob that would come out of the sub panel, really anywhere
along its length. What would have to happen is a bracket would need to be
made that slid over the rudder bar with a nut in it. Then a threaded shaft
running from the rudder bar to the sub panel would be used to adjust the
free arm of the spring. It may be best if the spring were pushed by the
shaft instead of pulled, as this would make the mechanism a bit simpler. I
could do a drawing of what I am thinking if you are not following.
While it was not my intention to begin producing kits, if there is enough
interest, I could be persuaded to fabricate a few.
Thanks, Jason
Jason Kreidler - 40617 Finishing
(4 Partner Build)
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: | Re: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias |
Enclosed are a few photographs....
Thanks, Jason
Jason Kreidler - 40617 Finishing
(4 Partner Build)
--------
RV-10 Quick Build
4 Partner Build - Finishing
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=165593#165593
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/copilotside_947.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/overview_610.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/pilotside_821.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/servomtg1_720.jpg
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: | WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 |
Obviously I'm not William nor speaking for him ...
But ...
I'm reminded of the quote (I forgot who) "All that must happen for evil to
triumph is for good people to do nothing."
"Evil" is a bit over the top in this case and the perceived "bigotry" may
not have been intended, but the implication of the words crossed my mind to.
If I were to take issue with the post it would be that there was ANY humor
in people getting hurt, some seriously, in an aviation accident of any kind.
"There but for the grace of [add your favorite content] go I".
Lets get back to building and wish the unfortunate victims a speedy
recovery.
g
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Ekberg
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07
William,
I can't help but wonder, if it had been "Americans wrecked a plane" instead,
would you still pull the racism card?
Also, how does your accusation that a member is a bigot help the RV
community? Even were it true (which I doubt it is - but I wouldn't care
anyway as this is a RV-10 list, not a let's fight bigotry list), wouldn't it
be better to just ignore it and move on?
-Eric
do not archive
On 2/22/08, William Curtis <wcurtis@nerv10.com> wrote:
David,
Try at least to contain you bigotry with a post that begins with "Arabs
WRECKED A340-600"
http://aircrewbuzz.com/2007/11/new-a340-600-in-ground-accident-at.html
Just because it was painted with the name of the Abu Dhabi carrier Eithad
Airways you make the implication that "Arabs" are incompetent because they
"wrecked" a brand new A-340-600. A quick search would have provided the
correct, uncolored information but instead you posted clearly biased
misinformation. Would it have been as comic had the aircraft been painted
with British Airway colors?
"At the time of the accident, there were nine people on board the aircraft,
including two Airbus staff, and seven employees of Abu Dhabi Aircraft
Technologies (ADAT). Five of those nine people were injured, but as of today
only the two Airbus employees and one ADAT employee remained hospitalized.
None of their injuries are reported to be life-threatening.
Etihad Airways confirms that there were no Etihad staff involved in the
accident."
Sorry, I don't find humor in misinformation thinly masking bigotry. I guess
that is why we should limit the subjects of this list to RV-10 related
issues.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter
and those who matter don't mind."
-- Dr. Suess
-------- Original Message --------
>
> TIMEOUT FOR HUMOR
>
>
> Arabs WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07
>
>
> These are pictures of the wreck of a brand new A340-600, that had never
> flown. (never saw (1) hour in the air)
>
>
> Thank these French and their Arab friends for this bit of "comedy of
> errors".
>
>
> Nine employees of the Arab airline were in the aircraft, but "no
employees"
> from Airbus were present.
>
>
> The Arab's taxied out to the run-up area.
>
>
> Then they took all four engines to takeoff power with virtually an empty
> aircraft. (They obvious didn't read the run-up manuals.)
>
>
> No chocks were set, (not that it would have mattered at that power
setting).
>
>
> "Brakes will not hold it back at full power anyway".
>
>
> As it turns out the takeoff warning horn was blaring away in the cockpit
> because they had all FOUR engines at full power.
>
>
> The aircraft computers thought they were trying to takeoff but it had not
> been configured properly (flaps/slats, etc, etc).
>
>
> Then one of these brain surgeons decided to pull the "Ground Sense"
> circuit breaker to quiet the alarms.
>
>
> This fools the aircraft into thinking it is in the air."A big, big
mistake"!
>
>
> As soon as they did that, the computers automaticlly "released" all the
> brakes. ("this is a Safety feature so that pilots don't land with the
brakes
> on".)There was No time to stop and no one smart enough thought to reduce
the
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: | WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07 |
Thanks Gene! That EXACT quote came to mind as I read the below reply however I
did not intend to respond since this thread has taken away much RV-10 building
time from list participants.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those
who matter don't mind."
-- Dr. Suess
-------- Original Message --------
>
> Obviously I'm not William nor speaking for him ...
But ...
I'm reminded of the quote (I forgot who) "All that must happen for evil to
triumph is for good people to do nothing."
"Evil" is a bit over the top in this case and the perceived "bigotry" may
not have been intended, but the implication of the words crossed my mind to.
If I were to take issue with the post it would be that there was ANY humor
in people getting hurt, some seriously, in an aviation accident of any kind.
"There but for the grace of [add your favorite content] go I".
Lets get back to building and wish the unfortunate victims a speedy
recovery.
g
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: WRECKED A340-600 at TULOUSE FRANCE 11-07
William,
I can't help but wonder, if it had been "Americans wrecked a plane" instead,
would you still pull the racism card?
Also, how does your accusation that a member is a bigot help the RV
community? Even were it true (which I doubt it is - but I wouldn't care
anyway as this is a RV-10 list, not a let's fight bigotry list), wouldn't it
be better to just ignore it and move on?
-Eric
do not archive
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias |
First I must admit I'm building a 7A. Second - you guys are an awesome
resource for ideas! Do any of you repeat offenders know if the rudder
tubes are the same size in the 10 and 7? I like this idea very much and,
with your permission Jason, I'd like to use it if it works.
Carlos in Arizona
(Watching this development with great interest.)
jkreidler wrote:
>
> Enclosed are a few photographs....
>
> Thanks, Jason
>
> Jason Kreidler - 40617 Finishing
> (4 Partner Build)
>
> --------
> RV-10 Quick Build
> 4 Partner Build - Finishing
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=165593#165593
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/copilotside_947.jpg
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/overview_610.jpg
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/pilotside_821.jpg
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/servomtg1_720.jpg
>
>
>
--
Carlos Hernandez <carlosh@sec-engr.com>
Structural Engineers Company
2963 W. Elliot Rd. - Suite 3
Chandler, AZ 85224
Phone: 480.968.8600
Fax: 480.968.8608
www.sec-engr.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged.
This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual or
organization named above. If you are not the intended recipient or
an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any review, dissemination or copyingof this email and
its attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is
prohibited. If you havereceived this email in error, please
immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email
from your system.
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 |
|
It seems that the first response on the PC crowd in this country is to play
the racism card. I assure you that the ethnicity of those on board was the
least of my concerns. The real concern was the stupidity of the airmen.
However let's address the race issue. I spent 16 years living and working in
the Middle East so I know better than most the strengths and weaknesses of
the culture. I have visited in their villages , attended their weddings and
speak, read and write limited Arabic. I assure you that there are more
incompetents in technical positions in the East than in the West; this is in
part due to their culture and religion. As an example I was hiring a data
processing analyst for my group; I was sent two Arabs by my Arab boss ( a
stand in vacation replacement) for the interview. Both had been schooled in
the USA. Both had BS degrees in computer science and one had a MS in
computer science. One had a BS in computer science from Eastern Michigan
University where his transcript showed barely passing grades. The other had
a BS and MS from Florida State University and had a GPA A-. Needless to say
I chose the good grade fellow. My stand in boss then told me to hire the low
grade fellow; It so happened that that fellow was of the same tribe as my
stand in boss and brother of the Manager of computer operations. I did as
instructed and when my real boss (another Arab, same tribe) returned I
recounted the situation. Shortly thereafter my first choice was sent to my
group and the low graded fellow was put somewhere else. In another case the
head of the Aviation department is a well qualified Arab who has qualified
as a B737 and G IV captain at Flight Safety where ratings are not handed out
by tribal decree.
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias |
Jason;
you mentioned "While it was not my intention to begin producing kits, if
there is enough interest, I could be persuaded to fabricate a few. "
I may be interested after hearing how well it works and you feel that
the "engineering" is complete.
Thanks!
Pascal
----- Original Message -----
From: jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 9:55 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias
I have 'developed' a spring bias rudder trim system for the RV-10.
After sharing this idea with Deems he encouraged me to do the same with
the rest of the group. So here goes, but before I get into any details
let me preface this whole conversation with a few thoughts. This is all
in theory, I have absolutely no actual flight testing to back up any of
the 'claims', or assumptions. Just good old common sense and a tiny bit
of engineering. Our airplane is not in the air yet, I had hoped to get
in the air, prove out the system, then share with the world. To prevent
anyone else for possibly needlessly cutting into their rudder to add a
trim tab, I have decided to bear the scrutiny of an unproven,
theoretical system. Please be gentle...
I will attempt to verbalize the system. I used two torsion springs,
one mounted / wrapped around, each rudder bar (the bar that connects the
rudder pedals). One of the springs is fixed on both ends providing a
torsional force on the rudder bar. The other springs free end is hooked
to a servo motor that allows approximately 30 degrees deflection. The
theory is that the two springs will seek equilibrium (OK, that's not
much theory, that's more fact), here is where the testing needs to
happen. If I deflect the one springs free arm 30 degrees, will it
create enough force to put the airplane in trim. The springs apply
about an 8 pound force to the rudder cables (pre-load if you will),
assuming they will want to maintain in equilibrium a 30 degree
deflection should be more than enough to trim the airplane. The servo
will act as sort of a fine tuning mechanism, the course adjustment will
be accomplished by winding more or less tension in one spring or the
other during flight testing.
I like a few things about this method.
1) It can be installed to any flying airplane with no modifications
required other than wiring.
2) There is a chance that this system could be made manual and
eliminate the RAC servo if desired.
3) This system provides tension to both rudder cables, no more
'flopping rudder'.
4) Keeps the rudder 'clean'.
5) Doesn't add much extra rudder input force.
I sent pictures of this system to Deems, I will 'attempt' to post some
pictures to this forum if there is interest. Comments welcome, I
apologize for the extremely long post, but I have added Deems questions
below, I figured if he asked, many more will have the same questions....
1. How did you determine which spring type/size/strength to use?
OK, you busted me!! I didn't do the math, I feel extremely guilty
about this, as an engineer, I should probably go back and figure the
forces here. Here is what I did; since I grew up in the business of
garage doors (my Dad owned his own company doing this), I went to Fleet
Farm (one of our local supply houses, similar to most lumbar yards) and
found a garage door spring that had an ID that would slide over the
rudder bar with room to spare, and would fit between the two rudder bars
(I will measure this for you). I then cut lengths of the spring until I
got what I 'thought' was a reasonable amount of force with two turns of
pre-load, and bent some custom ends on them. With torsion springs you
have two options to increase the reaction force. You can add turns of
pre-load, or you can shorten the spring with the same number of turns.
I just went until I reached what I 'felt' was a happy medium. Remember
that as you wind a torsion spring more and more the inside diameter
decreases, until it eventually binds on the shaft (rudder bar). What
mostly drove me not to do the math, was I had absolutely no idea what
sort of corrective rudder pressure was required to put the ball in the
middle. My plan all along has been to get it in the air and do some
experimenting, I installed the system so that modification of the spring
force should be simple. I just need to start dating a contortionist :)
2. I assume that you can 'adjust the torsional load somewhat by moving
the collar/s, Is that true?
Correct, I started out with each spring wound an equal amount. If I
find that I need additional trim to one side or the other I will wind
one of the springs to compensate. The servo will just provide the 'fine
tuning'.
3. One of the pictures shows the center support brace minus the delrin
bushings, I'm assuming that leaving those out is not a requirement of
your approach and was just the result of taking the picture before
they
were installed?
Correct, in fact there isn't a single modification to the airframe, if
I remove the system no one could ever tell it was installed. I built
the mount so that it could be used in either the forward or aft rudder
mounting positions, my pedals are mounted in the aft position. But I
drilled and prepped the airframe to mount the rudder pedals in either
position.
4. What about the mount for the RAC servo, do you have a picture of it
before the servo is mounted.
See attached.... The angle was determined by something, I just don't
recall what anymore. I know it has to be at an angle to work though. I
can measure if you decide to attempt this.
5. Also it' looks like you used a small section of SS cable to connect
the servo arm to the spring coil, correct? Picture?
Correct, see attached. One end is run through the servo arm, the
other gets hooked by the spring. The spring on the pilot side is hooked
over the opposite rudder bar.
I gave some thought to your desire to have a manually operated system,
I think this system could be done manually with very little pain. You
may be able to add a knob that would come out of the sub panel, really
anywhere along its length. What would have to happen is a bracket would
need to be made that slid over the rudder bar with a nut in it. Then a
threaded shaft running from the rudder bar to the sub panel would be
used to adjust the free arm of the spring. It may be best if the spring
were pushed by the shaft instead of pulled, as this would make the
mechanism a bit simpler. I could do a drawing of what I am thinking if
you are not following.
While it was not my intention to begin producing kits, if there is
enough interest, I could be persuaded to fabricate a few.
Thanks, Jason
Jason Kreidler - 40617 Finishing
(4 Partner Build)
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 |
|
It's all way more complicated than we can handle on this forum.
Everything from the interpretation of the term "Arab," to each person's
personal history, to the way words "sound" to a person reading an email.
It's an edgy time right now, here in the States and elsewhere. And, of
course, that's a about as gross an understatement as I will ever be able to
make. In part the RV-10 experience, this list of good people (everyone on
this list I consider a good person, everyone), the passion we all share
about flying and building...all help us deal with what is happening in the
world. It provides a little break and something to focus on. It certainly
doesn't allow us to turn our backs and walk away from important issues, such
as racism or unnecessary wars (is a war ever necessary?), but it does give
us a little break, like watching a football game (USA-type or otherwise).
The tension and realities are just below the surface, and that's why, in my
opinion, the responses to something such as this are so quick, and perhaps
so quickly accusatory, necessarily so or not.
Beyond the material harm to the plane, people did get hurt. It looks funny
from a distance, but it was tragic to those involved. It was also not an
isolated "stupid" event. There are plenty such events all around the globe.
No one is immune from this type of tragedy. No one.
I, for one, believe its time to move on, to get back to the focus of the
forum. There are plenty of other opportunities and forums, on-line and off,
to address what we individually believe needs addressing. Us humans seem to
have a knack about providing things that need addressing. At that we excel.
Anyway....
John Jessen
40328
do not archive
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of David McNeill
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 12:11 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Airbus response
It seems that the first response on the PC crowd in this country is to play
the racism card. I assure you that the ethnicity of those on board was the
least of my concerns. The real concern was the stupidity of the airmen.
However let's address the race issue. I spent 16 years living and working in
the Middle East so I know better than most the strengths and weaknesses of
the culture. I have visited in their villages , attended their weddings and
speak, read and write limited Arabic. I assure you that there are more
incompetents in technical positions in the East than in the West; this is in
part due to their culture and religion. As an example I was hiring a data
processing analyst for my group; I was sent two Arabs by my Arab boss ( a
stand in vacation replacement) for the interview. Both had been schooled in
the USA. Both had BS degrees in computer science and one had a MS in
computer science. One had a BS in computer science from Eastern Michigan
University where his transcript showed barely passing grades. The other had
a BS and MS from Florida State University and had a GPA A-. Needless to say
I chose the good grade fellow. My stand in boss then told me to hire the low
grade fellow; It so happened that that fellow was of the same tribe as my
stand in boss and brother of the Manager of computer operations. I did as
instructed and when my real boss (another Arab, same tribe) returned I
recounted the situation. Shortly thereafter my first choice was sent to my
group and the low graded fellow was put somewhere else. In another case the
head of the Aviation department is a well qualified Arab who has qualified
as a B737 and G IV captain at Flight Safety where ratings are not handed out
by tribal decree.
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias |
Jason,
Thanks for taking the time to share your work on a Rudder
Trim system. I look forward to the pictures. This is one
of the prime attributes of the experimental community.
Kevin
40494
do not archive
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com
Subject: RV10-List: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias
>I have 'developed' a spring bias rudder trim system for the
>RV-10. After sharing this idea with Deems he encouraged
>me to do the same with the rest of the group. So here
>goes, but before I get into any details let me preface
>this whole conversation with a few thoughts. This is all
>in theory, I have absolutely no actual flight testing to
>back up any of the 'claims', or assumptions. Just good
>old common sense and a tiny bit of engineering.
---snipped---
>While it was not my intention to begin producing kits, if
>there is enough interest, I could be persuaded to
>fabricate a few.
>
>Thanks, Jason
>
>Jason Kreidler - 40617 Finishing
>(4 Partner Build)
>
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's |
the Leadership?
Hey Hugo!!
You been hiding in the workshop? Haven't heard from you lately. I penciled out
a letter myself today..Very basic, just asked to preserve my right or should I
say privilege to assemble my own aerospace coupe in my own garage...I just want
to be able to sell it after 200 hours and do it all over, not sure why, fricken
cowl is driving me nuts!!! reminds me of flying a helicopter...can't move
one thing without changing the parameters on four others...maybe I'm just being
picky on the fit.
Rick Sked
40185
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: gommone7@bellsouth.net
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 9:20:46 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's
the Leadership?
Are you guys talking about the association who write about certified airplanes
in the experimental magazine,and I thinks the grand prize for this year is a Certified
airplane,Yeahh you rigth,its all lost in the big money.
thats a shame .
Hugo Terrosa
RV10 #40456
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: John Ackerman <johnag5b@cableone.net>
>
>
> Yes, Deems!
> Amen, Jack!
> One of life's great disappointments is the commercialization of what
> was once "our" organization.
> Much more not said.
> John Ackerman
> EAA 56868
> RV10 40458
>
> On Feb 22, 2008, at 8:38 AM, Phillips, Jack wrote:
>
> > <Jack.Phillips@cardinalhealth.com>
> >
> > And why would you be surprised that the EAA would be afraid to step up
> > and defend homebuilders? The EAA has not really cared much for
> > homebuilders since Paul Poberezny stepped down as President. Name all
> > the airplanes that Tom P. has ever built (hint- the number is a single
> > digit that starts with a "Z"). EAA has become the friend of anyone
> > that
> > will contribute money in the form of corporate sponsorships, giving us
> > such aviation icons as the "Nestle Theater in the Woods".
> >
> > Don't get me wrong, I'm a friend of EAA and have been a member for a
> > long time (33 yearrs), but in the last 10 years it has definitely gone
> > in a direction I don't care for. After giving a great deal to
> > homebuilding in the first 40 years of its existence, it has coasted
> > ever
> > since.
> >
> > Jack Phillips
> > EAA #81225
> > RV-10 #40610
> > Will that SB Wing Kit never arrive?
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
> > Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 10:22 AM
> > To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules -
> > Where's the Leadership?
> >
> >
> > It's too bad the ARC couldn't agree on proposed rule changes, (for
> > 'economic' reasons) so now we're left with the FAA drafting the
> > changes. Its fairly obvious that based on the varied interests of the
> > representative parties, that ANY changes that were considered were
> > going
> >
> > to result in a financial hit to at least one of the represented
> > segments. In this business world this is what happens when there is a
> > Leadership void. Which is what I see happening here. What I find
> > personally extremely disappointing is that the EAA, who at one time
> > was
> > the best representative for 'us' (homebuilders) seems to have become a
> > victim of the 'special interests' and has followed vs. lead on this
> > one.
> >
> > My letter is on it's way.
> >
> > Deems Davis # 406
> > 'Its all done....Its just not put together'
> > http://deemsrv10.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: | Re: Airbus response |
If you haven't been over=C2-there you can't appreciate what David is sayi
ng.=C2-Considering his experience in the region...I'm sure it was not int
ended as it was recieved. I don't say this to=C2-defend him...He is far f
rom in need of that. I'm just very glad I'm from the American Tribe...much
more respectful, at least=C2-in our country=C2-you OR your wife can dri
ve to the store...there only you (the male)=C2-can.
Rick S.
40185
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "David McNeill" <dlm46007@cox.net>
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 12:10:44 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RV10-List: Airbus response
It seems that the first response on the PC crowd in this country is to play
the racism card. I assure you that the ethnicity of those on board was the
least of my concerns. The real concern was the stupidity of the airmen. Ho
wever let's address the race issue. I spent 16 years living and working in
the Middle East so I know better than most the strengths and weaknesses of
the culture. I have visited in their villages , attended their weddings and
speak, read and write limited Arabic.=C2-I assure you that there are mor
e incompetents in technical positions in the East than in the West; this is
in part due to their culture and religion. As an example I was hiring a da
ta processing analyst for my group; I was sent two Arabs by my Arab boss (
a stand in vacation replacement) for the interview. Both had been schooled
in the USA. Both had BS degrees in computer science and one had a MS in com
puter science. One had a BS in computer science from Eastern Michigan Unive
rsity where=C2-his transcript showed barely passing grades. The other had
a BS and MS from=C2-Florida State University and had a GPA A-. Needless
to say I chose the good grade fellow. My stand in boss then told me to hire
the low grade fellow; It so happened that that fellow was of the same trib
e as=C2-my stand in boss and brother of the Manager of computer operation
s. I did as instructed and when my real boss (another Arab, same tribe) ret
urned=C2-I recounted the situation. Shortly thereafter my first choice wa
s sent to my group and the low graded fellow was put somewhere else. In ano
ther case the head of the Aviation department is a well qualified Arab who
has qualified as a B737 and G IV captain at Flight Safety where ratings are
=====================
====
=======================
==
Message 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias |
Very Cool!!! Like the torsion springs in a garage door....good thinking. Bu
t alas...I ain't crawling under that panel one more time.
Rick S.
40185
----- Original Message -----
From: "jason kreidler" <jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com>
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 9:55:17 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RV10-List: Rudder Trim - Spring Bias
I have 'developed' a spring bias rudder trim system for the RV-10. =C2-Af
ter sharing this idea with Deems he encouraged me to do the same with the r
est of the group. =C2-So here goes, but before I get into any details let
me preface this whole conversation with a few thoughts. =C2-This is all
in theory, I have absolutely no actual flight testing to back up any of the
'claims', or assumptions. =C2-Just good old common sense and a tiny bit
of engineering. =C2-Our airplane is not in the air yet, I had hoped to ge
t in the air, prove out the system, then share with the world. =C2-To pre
vent anyone else for possibly needlessly cutting into their rudder to add a
trim tab, I have decided to bear the scrutiny of an unproven, theoretical
system. =C2-Please be gentle...
I will attempt to verbalize the system. =C2-I used two torsion springs, o
ne mounted / wrapped around, each rudder bar (the bar that connects the rud
der pedals). =C2-One of the springs is fixed on both ends providing a tor
sional force on the rudder bar. =C2-The other springs free end is hooked
to a servo motor that allows approximately 30 degrees deflection. =C2-The
theory is that the two springs will seek equilibrium (OK, that's not much
theory, that's more fact), here is where the testing needs to happen. =C2
-If I deflect the one springs free arm 30 degrees, will it create enough
force to put the airplane in trim. =C2-The springs apply about an 8 pound
force to the rudder cables (pre-load if you will), assuming they will want
to maintain in equilibrium a 30 degree deflection should be more than enou
gh to trim the airplane. =C2-The servo will act as sort of a fine tuning
mechanism, the course adjustment will be accomplished by winding more or le
ss tension in one spring or the other during flight testing.
I like a few things about this method.
1) It can be installed to any flying airplane with no modifications require
d other than wiring.
2) There is a chance that this system could be made manual and eliminate th
e RAC servo if desired.
3) This system provides tension to both rudder cables, no more 'flopping ru
dder'.
4) Keeps the rudder 'clean'.
5) Doesn't add much extra rudder input force.
I sent pictures of this system to Deems, I will 'attempt' to post some pict
ures to this forum if there is interest. =C2-Comments welcome, I apologiz
e for the extremely long post, but I have added Deems questions below, I fi
gured if he asked, many more will have the same questions....
1. How did you determine which spring type/size/strength to use?
OK, you busted me!! =C2-I didn't do the math, I feel extremely guilty abo
ut this, as an engineer, I should probably go back and figure the forces he
re. =C2-Here is what I did; since I grew up in the business of garage doo
rs (my Dad owned his own company doing this), I went to Fleet Farm (one of
our local supply houses, similar to most lumbar yards) and found a garage d
oor spring that had an ID that would slide over the rudder bar with room to
spare, and would fit between the two rudder bars (I will measure this for
you). =C2-I then cut lengths of the spring until I got what I 'thought' w
as a reasonable amount of force with two turns of pre-load, and bent some c
ustom ends on them. =C2-With torsion springs you have two options to incr
ease the reaction force. =C2-You can add turns of pre-load, or you can sh
orten the spring with the same number of turns. =C2-I just went until I r
eached what I 'felt' was a happy medium. =C2-Remember that as you wind a
torsion spring more and more the inside diameter decreases, until it eventu
ally binds on the shaft (rudder bar). =C2-What mostly drove me not to do
the math, was I had absolutely no idea what sort of corrective rudder press
ure was required to put the ball in the middle. =C2-My plan all along has
been to get it in the air and do some experimenting, I installed the syste
m so that modification of the spring force should be simple. =C2-I just n
eed to start dating a contortionist :)
2. I assume that you can 'adjust the torsional load somewhat by moving
the collar/s, Is that true?
Correct, I started out with each spring wound an equal amount. =C2-If I f
ind that I need additional trim to one side or the other I will wind one of
the springs to compensate. =C2-The servo will just provide the 'fine tun
ing'.
3. One of the pictures shows the center support brace minus the delrin
bushings, I'm assuming that leaving those out is not a requirement of
your approach and was just the result of taking the picture before they
were installed?
Correct, in fact there isn't a single modification to the airframe, if I re
move the system no one could ever tell it was installed. =C2-I built the
mount so that it could be used in either the forward or aft rudder mounting
positions, my pedals are mounted in the aft position. =C2-But I drilled
and prepped the airframe to mount the rudder pedals in either position.
4. What about the mount for the RAC servo, do you have a picture of it
before the servo is mounted.
See attached.... =C2-The angle was determined by something, I just don't
recall what anymore. =C2-I know it has to be at an angle to work though.
=C2-I can measure if you decide to attempt this.
5. Also it' looks like you used a small section of SS cable to connect
the servo arm to the spring coil, correct? Picture?
Correct, see attached. =C2-One end is run through the servo arm, the othe
r gets hooked by the spring. =C2-The spring on the pilot side is hooked o
ver the opposite rudder bar.
I gave some thought to your desire to have a manually operated system, I th
ink this system could be done manually with very little pain. =C2-You may
be able to add a knob that would come out of the sub panel, really anywher
e along its length. =C2-What would have to happen is a bracket would need
to be made that slid over the rudder bar with a nut in it. =C2-Then a th
readed shaft running from the rudder bar to the sub panel would be used to
adjust the free arm of the spring. =C2-It may be best if the spring were
pushed by the shaft instead of pulled, as this would make the mechanism a b
it simpler. =C2-I could do a drawing of what I am thinking if you are not
following.
While it was not my intention to begin producing kits, if there is enough i
nterest, I could be persuaded to fabricate a few.
Thanks, Jason
Jason Kreidler - 40617 Finishing
(4 Partner Build)
====
=======================
===
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules - Where's |
the Leadership?
Deems,
The ARC did agree on a few things. We agreed that flagrant pro building
exists and that it should not, and we agreed on several fixes to the current
system.
Where we disagreed most significantly was in how to define the major
portion. No one thought we should count hours or dollars. No one wanted a
rivet (epoxy/thread/grain) count. I believe the rule was poorly written and
has somehow managed to serve us anyway. A lot of credit for the success of
the current situation is, I believe, that initially there was not any real
financial incentive to pro building. Back in the day you could buy a nice
plane for less effort than you or a pro could build one. When that equation
started to change, pro building became worthwhile and there wasn't anyone
enforcing the fact that it was not within the rules. It was a cottage
industry.
Now that there is real money involved (several hundred million dollars by my
accounting--very little mine >:-(), you are correct in that the parties at
the table mainly had their interests in mind. Everyone wants it to work for
himself after it all shakes out. You are also correct in that the committee
was pretty well balanced in terms of personalities so that no one party
emerged as the leader for the rest of us to rally around. I don't think
that was intentional when the committee members were selected. I think the
FAA wanted a broad and representative sample of the industry and that's what
they got. Earl Lawrence from EAA was helpful and did stand up for its
membership and the industry as well as he could, especially considering that
a workable definition of "major portion" is such a slippery critter.
I think there is an elegant solution that has not yet surfaced. I hope that
with more input from more people it will show itself. I don't really think
that amateur building is in much danger. Violaters will probaly not be
tolerated much longer, but those who've gotten away with it so far, I think,
are pretty safe. FAA lawyers made it pretty clear that pursuing what's
already happened under current conditions would be difficult to impossible.
Write those letters!
Thanks for listening,
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 7:22 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Amendment and Revision to Kit Building Rules -
Where's the Leadership?
It's too bad the ARC couldn't agree on proposed rule changes, (for
'economic' reasons) so now we're left with the FAA drafting the changes.
Its fairly obvious that based on the varied interests of the representative
parties, that ANY changes that were considered were going to result in a
financial hit to at least one of the represented segments. In this business
world this is what happens when there is a Leadership void. Which is what I
see happening here. What I find personally extremely disappointing is that
the EAA, who at one time was the best representative for 'us' (homebuilders)
seems to have become a victim of the 'special interests' and has followed
vs. lead on this one.
My letter is on it's way.
Deems Davis # 406
'Its all done....Its just not put together'
http://deemsrv10.com/
> *
> *
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 |
|
| Subject: | OSH RV-10 Operatonr seminar was: Establishing gross weight |
Purging important old posts and converting some to PDFs for research.
We should contact AirVenture about a meeting tent to discuss RV-10
Operating Issues like the Lancair boys. We have plenty flying now and
could pack a tent.
What say you? We could segway right into Pilot Proficiency.
EAA asked if I wanted to be a Featured Speaker. I can at least find out
how to reserve a tent.
JC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 5:42 AM
Subject: RV10-List: OSH RV-10 Operatonr seminar was: Establishing gross
weight
Let's do it!
How can we make this happen?
I'm willing to assist, with the caveat, that I am NOT qualified to
provide the content but willing to help assist in the organization,
administration and delivery.
Perhaps this could be a step towards a Pilot Proficiency program?
Deems Davis # 406
Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! )
http://deemsrv10.com/
John W. Cox wrote:
> OSH
>
> Anybody want to talk about an RV-10 Operator's Seminar at OSH like
> Lancair does? So we can hammer out these issues.
>
> John Cox
>
> *
> *
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! --
|