Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:33 AM - Harmonic resonance from the new Eggenfellner Gen 3 drive? (John Jessen)
2. 04:42 AM - Re: SB (Wayne Edgerton)
3. 04:52 AM - Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
4. 04:58 AM - Re: Harmonic resonance from the new Eggenfellner Gen 3 drive? (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
5. 05:00 AM - Two interesting aviation things in the news this morning.... (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
6. 06:03 AM - Pax stick quick connect pin (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
7. 06:10 AM - Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] (Condrey, Bob (US SSA))
8. 07:02 AM - Re: Harmonic resonance from the new Eggenfellner Gen 3 driv e? (n801bh@netzero.com)
9. 07:20 AM - Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] (Tim Olson)
10. 07:22 AM - GTR serial connections (Ronald Grover)
11. 07:57 AM - Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] (Condrey, Bob (US SSA))
12. 08:08 AM - Re: GTR serial connections (Condrey, Bob (US SSA))
13. 08:19 AM - Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] (Rene Felker)
14. 08:23 AM - Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] (Tim Olson)
15. 08:47 AM - Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] (David McNeill)
16. 08:49 AM - Re: Two interesting aviation things in the news this morning.... (John Gonzalez)
17. 09:21 AM - Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] (John Gonzalez)
18. 10:47 AM - SB Pictures ()
19. 01:23 PM - Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] (Rene Felker)
20. 03:38 PM - Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] (John Cox)
21. 04:35 PM - Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] (Kelly McMullen)
22. 04:54 PM - Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] (John Cumins)
23. 05:16 PM - Re: SB (johngoodman)
24. 06:23 PM - Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] (Don McDonald)
25. 08:02 PM - Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] (bcondrey)
26. 08:23 PM - Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] (bcondrey)
27. 10:01 PM - Rudder Gust Lock (Albert Gardner)
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: | Harmonic resonance from the new Eggenfellner Gen 3 drive? |
This might be of interest to some...from the GlaStar list:
= = = = =
I was reading the Eggenfellner list today and saw that several guys are now
reporting harmonic resonance as a result of installing the new Gen 3 drive.
It doesn't appear to matter what prop or engine you are using it with since
both the 2.5 and 3.0 soobs and the Quinti prop and the MT props are
involved.
So, guys are saying they are hearing a repeating beat sound about once per
second.
Would anyone from this group that has installed the Gen 3 and been using it
for a while care to comment on this? This sounds a bit concerning.
Jan Eggenfellner doesn't deny that this is happening, but says it can be
solved with proper prop installation, balancing, keeping things from
touching the cowl and so on.
So, I'm just wondering if this is just something that only a handful of guys
are experiencing or ?
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 |
|
I and another RV10, both of us flying, on my field performed the SB
yesterday and found no cracks. As Dave said it's fairly easy to perform
the inspection with the emp fairing off, with a flex mirror and flash
light. I have about 125 hours and I think the other 10 has about 60
hours. I plan on waiting on pulling the tail off for now and do like
Dave and continue the inspections.
Wayne Edgerton N602WT
Time: 03:15:35 PM PST US
From: "Dave Saylor" <Dave@AirCraftersLLC.com>
Subject: SB
I just finished looking at our plane. No cracks after 141 hours.
The
inspection is easy with the emp fairing off. I'm not going to
pull the tail
off unless more people find cracks or unless there's a better
reason.
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
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: | Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] |
That was the first thing I noticed too. It certainly looks like the cracks were
induced from a repeated compression and release of bulkhead in that area.
Doublers may only be a band aid for this and I bet we will see more of these
as the fleet gain hours. If it really is being partially caused by asymmetric
trim tab loading, seems like someone could come up with a mod fairly quickly.
I know I'll be looking at the trim servo setup while I have it off.
Michael
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Leikam
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 12:36 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
After looking closely at the pictures, it appears that the metal is not only
cracked, but also "crinkled." If you look at the skin to the left of the
crack, it appears to also be deformed which concurs with the failure of the
bulkhead. First thought is there was substantial down pressure
(compression) on the longeron and on the F1010A angle at this point.
Except when rolling, would there ever be uneven force on the HS? And even
then I would think the forces would be very little. Would it be possible to
detect equal tensional stress on the other side?
I agree with the twisted HS theory.
Dave Leikam
#40496 N89DA (Reserved)
Muskego, WI
- Original Message -----
From: "David McNeill" <dlm46007@cox.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 11:29 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
>
> I doubt it was the engine. I just talked with someone who flew the 220
> version for transition training September 2007. He squawked the aircraft
> for
> inadequate up trim. I have flown the 540 version for 33 hours and never
> gotten the trim setting more than 2 bars from neutral. Inadequate up trim
> suggest to me that a improperly rigged trim system might have the two
> elevator halves fighting each other and twisting the elevators and
> stressing
> the horizontal stab.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ben Westfall
> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 9:02 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
>
>
>
> Oops forgot my name on the last one...
>
> Ben Westfall
> #40579
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of David McNeill
> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 7:36 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
>
>
> This is what I found about an hour ago. Look at the end of the pdf.
>
>
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: | Harmonic resonance from the new Eggenfellner Gen 3 drive? |
Hmm, surprised he didn't catch that in his testing phase of the design.
;-) Bet you money there is an "improvement" by this time next year and he
denies any issues right up to that point.
Michael
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of John Jessen
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 5:28 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Harmonic resonance from the new Eggenfellner Gen 3 driv
e?
This might be of interest to some...from the GlaStar list:
= = = =
I was reading the Eggenfellner list today and saw that several guys are now
reporting harmonic resonance as a result of installing the new Gen 3 drive
. It doesn't appear to matter what prop or engine you are using it with sin
ce both the 2.5 and 3.0 soobs and the Quinti prop and the MT props are invo
lved.
So, guys are saying they are hearing a repeating beat sound about once per
second.
Would anyone from this group that has installed the Gen 3 and been using it
for a while care to comment on this? This sounds a bit concerning.
Jan Eggenfellner doesn't deny that this is happening, but says it can be so
lved with proper prop installation, balancing, keeping things from touching
the cowl and so on.
So, I'm just wondering if this is just something that only a handful of guy
s are experiencing or ?
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: | Two interesting aviation things in the news this morning.... |
Didn't realize the FAA was this far along in testing.....
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2008/pulpit_20080606_005036.html
And from the world of the absurd.....
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/06/the-pentagons-n.html
Michael
Do not archive
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: | Pax stick quick connect pin |
Can't remember who but someone was asking about the quick connect pin on th
e pax stick I had. I've attached some pictures.
Michael
Do not archive
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: | Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] |
Interesting. When I flew with Alex D. for my transition training he
carried 2 cases of oil in the baggage area in his IO-540 bird. Also, he
said that he normally lands with half flaps (he has a flap positioning
system) unless there are rear seat passengers. When only front seat
occupants there is a very noticeable nose down pitching when going from
half to full flaps.
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 1:11 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
Dave, i agreeI
If folks take the time and go back through the archive and read the
original posts (12/06) which witnessed the 'twist' and the follow on
discussion regarding the Elevator trim rigging and how following Van's
plan instructions, can and will result in a twisted HS. the situation
described there is entirely consistent with the results depicted in the
picture of the crack. I believe that there is a VERY high likelihood
that the root cause of the crack lies in a twisting moment induced by
the asynchronous movement of the elevator trim tabs. I was the individ
David refers to that flew 220RV late last year, and there was not enough
up elevator trim available to take the significant back pressure off the
elevator during landings. I believe this is also consistent with the
trim rigging and twisting explanation. Here's an excerpt from my post
following transition training.
**This brings up the next point and that is elevator authority. N220RV
had
NO balast in the rear when we flew. We initiated our approach with 20
degrees of flaps (second detent), Turning downwind we added full flaps.
With full flaps there is NOT enough trim to take the back pressure off
of the stick. I found that the back pressure was much more than I found
comfortable, and flew some landings with 2 hands! Makes it
difficult/impossible to develop a fingertip feel on landings. The other
item has been reported by several others and that is when landing it
takes the full aft movement of the stick. The topic has been discussed &
debated previously, but in my opinion with only 2 people and no
baggage/balast there is not enough elevator. Towards the end of 8.1
hours, I was able to get some of the rust scrubbed off, got a little
less shy about the rapidly approaching ground, and found a way to
'muscle' a couple of good landings. then Mike says " let me show you
something, .... we took another trip around the pattern flew exactly as
before only on our base leg after extending full flaps, he had me 'blip'
off a degree or two of flap at a time until the back pressure I'd grown
unaccustomed to holding was gone..... then flew the rest of the landing
!!!!! WOW!!! what a difference !!!!! Mike why did you keep this little
secret to the end??????? the plane landed almost identical to full
flaps, but the 'feel' was completely different and actually a joy!!!!!**
Dave Leikam wrote:
>
> After looking closely at the pictures, it appears that the metal is
> not only cracked, but also "crinkled." If you look at the skin to the
> left of the crack, it appears to also be deformed which concurs with
> the failure of the bulkhead. First thought is there was substantial
> down pressure (compression) on the longeron and on the F1010A angle at
> this point. Except when rolling, would there ever be uneven force on
> the HS? And even then I would think the forces would be very
> little. Would it be possible to detect equal tensional stress on the
> other side?
>
> I agree with the twisted HS theory.
>
> Dave Leikam
> #40496 N89DA (Reserved)
> Muskego, WI
>
>
> - Original Message ----- From: "David McNeill" <dlm46007@cox.net>
> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 11:29 PM
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
>
>
>>
>> I doubt it was the engine. I just talked with someone who flew the
220
>> version for transition training September 2007. He squawked the
>> aircraft for
>> inadequate up trim. I have flown the 540 version for 33 hours and
never
>> gotten the trim setting more than 2 bars from neutral. Inadequate up
>> trim
>> suggest to me that a improperly rigged trim system might have the two
>> elevator halves fighting each other and twisting the elevators and
>> stressing
>> the horizontal stab.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ben
Westfall
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 9:02 PM
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
>>
>>
>>
>> Oops forgot my name on the last one...
>>
>> Ben Westfall
>> #40579
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of David
McNeill
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 7:36 PM
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
>>
>>
>>
>> This is what I found about an hour ago. Look at the end of the pdf.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: Harmonic resonance from the new Eggenfellner Gen 3 driv |
e?
I local 7-A builder just switched his box to the new gen 3 one. It has n
oticable gear lash noise the last older style one didn't. Jan told him t
he same thing you commented on.
do not archive
Ben Haas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
-- John Jessen <n212pj@gmail.com> wrote:
This might be of interest to some...from the GlaStar list: = = =
= = I was reading the Eggenfellner list today and saw that several
guys are now reporting harmonic resonance as a result of installing the
new Gen 3 drive. It doesn't appear to matter what prop or engine you ar
e using it with since both the 2.5 and 3.0 soobs and the Quinti prop and
the MT props are involved.
So, guys are saying they are hearing a repeating beat sound about once p
er second.
Would anyone from this group that has installed the Gen 3 and been using
it for a while care to comment on this? This sounds a bit concerning.
Jan Eggenfellner doesn't deny that this is happening, but says it can be
solved with proper prop installation, balancing, keeping things from to
uching the cowl and so on.
So, I'm just wondering if this is just something that only a handful of
guys are experiencing or ?
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
=
____________________________________________________________
Scan, remove and block Spyware. Click now!
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/fc/Ioyw6i4tANUe2noJZxvx132St
aUwwqeAGbqEzCj5Sx8MWnPSpP24Je/
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] |
This just proves how individual these airplanes will be, based
on equippage. N220RV has a LIGHTER engine than the IO-540,
so if N220RV ran out of elevator, something probably really
wasn't right to begin with. I remain skeptical that following
the plans will absolutely result in a twisted tail. I've looked
back on many flights, and even during stall buffet, and watched
the tail. On my last flight, both elevator horns were about 1/4"
up in cruise, but they were symmetrical. And now for the best
part. I have zero problems trimming my stick for 100% hands
off flight, with full flaps, and a 70kt approach speed. I
actually take most people who are NON-pilots who want to learn,
and show them that their job is to trim to the approach airspeed,
and that at that point, releasing their hand from the stick, or
only touching with fingertips, is what they want to do to test
for good trim. And I show them that if you just put your hands
down for a sec, the plane flies just fine.
So while I do get intrigued by the reports people give of other
RV-10's running out of nose-up trim, or reports of twisted
tails, I'm not really sure I will believe that doing it the
plans way is the cause. I think these planes are naturally
so diverse in layout and weighting and design that you're just
seeing that natural variation. For instance, N220RV is
a pretty stripped down plane, built by Vans. Alex's RV-10
is a John Nys plane equipped with A/C, and we've got people
building with extreme variations in engine choice, battery
positions and quantities, propellers, builder attention to
detail, and builders ability to follow plans.
One other thing to keep in mind is that some planes only have
trim tabs on one side, so our asymmetric trim isn't necessarily
that odd. But, that said, wouldn't it be cool if there was
a trim servo mechanism mod that did allow both tabs to provide
the same nose down and nose up trim amounts, while being
symmetrical.
As far as "the Fix" goes, I'm mixed on that one too. It does
look like perhaps there was a little compression to the
bulkhead, but also that perhaps that bulkhead was pushed
forward or aft, twisting slightly. And when you see that the
patch is just another layer of metal over that area, it kind
of makes me wonder why that patch just won't do it again.
it seems that you'd want it to attach to the side skin, and
especially that you'd want to prevent any movement relative
to the longeron, of that top angle of aluminum. Then again,
you don't always want complete stiffness, so maybe that's
part of it too.
I'll do the SB as planned but still watch to see what they
come up with next. As far as trim goes though, I just don't
see a problem in my particular plane, with how the trim
functions, built per plans.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Condrey, Bob (US SSA) wrote:
>
> Interesting. When I flew with Alex D. for my transition training he
> carried 2 cases of oil in the baggage area in his IO-540 bird. Also, he
> said that he normally lands with half flaps (he has a flap positioning
> system) unless there are rear seat passengers. When only front seat
> occupants there is a very noticeable nose down pitching when going from
> half to full flaps.
>
> Bob
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
> Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 1:11 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
>
>
> Dave, i agreeI
>
> If folks take the time and go back through the archive and read the
> original posts (12/06) which witnessed the 'twist' and the follow on
> discussion regarding the Elevator trim rigging and how following Van's
> plan instructions, can and will result in a twisted HS. the situation
> described there is entirely consistent with the results depicted in the
> picture of the crack. I believe that there is a VERY high likelihood
> that the root cause of the crack lies in a twisting moment induced by
> the asynchronous movement of the elevator trim tabs. I was the individ
> David refers to that flew 220RV late last year, and there was not enough
>
> up elevator trim available to take the significant back pressure off the
>
> elevator during landings. I believe this is also consistent with the
> trim rigging and twisting explanation. Here's an excerpt from my post
> following transition training.
>
>
> **This brings up the next point and that is elevator authority. N220RV
> had
> NO balast in the rear when we flew. We initiated our approach with 20
> degrees of flaps (second detent), Turning downwind we added full flaps.
> With full flaps there is NOT enough trim to take the back pressure off
> of the stick. I found that the back pressure was much more than I found
> comfortable, and flew some landings with 2 hands! Makes it
> difficult/impossible to develop a fingertip feel on landings. The other
>
> item has been reported by several others and that is when landing it
> takes the full aft movement of the stick. The topic has been discussed &
>
> debated previously, but in my opinion with only 2 people and no
> baggage/balast there is not enough elevator. Towards the end of 8.1
> hours, I was able to get some of the rust scrubbed off, got a little
> less shy about the rapidly approaching ground, and found a way to
> 'muscle' a couple of good landings. then Mike says " let me show you
> something, .... we took another trip around the pattern flew exactly as
> before only on our base leg after extending full flaps, he had me 'blip'
>
> off a degree or two of flap at a time until the back pressure I'd grown
> unaccustomed to holding was gone..... then flew the rest of the landing
> !!!!! WOW!!! what a difference !!!!! Mike why did you keep this little
>
> secret to the end??????? the plane landed almost identical to full
> flaps, but the 'feel' was completely different and actually a joy!!!!!**
>
>
>
>
>
> Dave Leikam wrote:
>>
>> After looking closely at the pictures, it appears that the metal is
>> not only cracked, but also "crinkled." If you look at the skin to the
>
>> left of the crack, it appears to also be deformed which concurs with
>> the failure of the bulkhead. First thought is there was substantial
>> down pressure (compression) on the longeron and on the F1010A angle at
>
>> this point. Except when rolling, would there ever be uneven force on
>> the HS? And even then I would think the forces would be very
>> little. Would it be possible to detect equal tensional stress on the
>> other side?
>>
>> I agree with the twisted HS theory.
>>
>> Dave Leikam
>> #40496 N89DA (Reserved)
>> Muskego, WI
>>
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: | GTR serial connections |
Gentlemen,
I have the three screen Horizon GTR system with the ARINC 429 module on
display 1, GPS on display 2, and display three has nothing.
GNS 430
SL30
GTX330
Sorcerer Autopilot.
My problem is the Grand Rapids EFIS will not send commands to the Sorcerer.
The 430 will drive the autopilot but intermittently loses the GPSS
suggesting that the serial connection is OK but there is a problem with the
ARINC429. Trutrak documentation stated both Serial and ARINC 429 are needed
for GPSS and GPSV.
In the Grand Rapids documentation they say the ARINC 429 can be connected to
as many devices as you wish. A friend suggested that I provide a dedicated
ARINC 429 connection between the 430 and the Sorcerer. I think all of the
ARINC 429 connections to the 430 have been used.
Does anybody have any suggestions?? GTR has been helpful but they don't
seem to know what is going on here.
Ron Grover
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: | Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] |
Tim,
You bring up a good point about configuration differences. There is a
lot of focus on empty weight but equally important is where the empty
weight CG winds up.
Regarding Alex's plane - Although John N. built it (but didn't do the
finish work), the airframe itself is in a stock configuration and
doesn't have some of the telltale signs of being built by John N. (i.e.
second set of fuel tanks outboard). That plane does have AC and a heavy
looking interior but even with full flaps on approach there's plenty of
trim authority, he just prefers half flaps.
Regarding comments from Deems, it seems strange that with the small
continental up front that you'd still have a CG in the forward part of
the envelope. I've never flown that plane but do have the numbers from
410RV and its empty weight ARM is at 106.99". You'd think with a
lighter engine that the CG would be a little farther aft
I also notice that your empty weight Arm is 108.67" (from your POH) and
mine is 108.20" which makes a huge difference in the handling feel.
See you Saturday at BNW!
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 9:17 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
This just proves how individual these airplanes will be, based
on equippage. N220RV has a LIGHTER engine than the IO-540,
so if N220RV ran out of elevator, something probably really
wasn't right to begin with. I remain skeptical that following
the plans will absolutely result in a twisted tail. I've looked
back on many flights, and even during stall buffet, and watched
the tail. On my last flight, both elevator horns were about 1/4"
up in cruise, but they were symmetrical. And now for the best
part. I have zero problems trimming my stick for 100% hands
off flight, with full flaps, and a 70kt approach speed. I
actually take most people who are NON-pilots who want to learn,
and show them that their job is to trim to the approach airspeed,
and that at that point, releasing their hand from the stick, or
only touching with fingertips, is what they want to do to test
for good trim. And I show them that if you just put your hands
down for a sec, the plane flies just fine.
So while I do get intrigued by the reports people give of other
RV-10's running out of nose-up trim, or reports of twisted
tails, I'm not really sure I will believe that doing it the
plans way is the cause. I think these planes are naturally
so diverse in layout and weighting and design that you're just
seeing that natural variation. For instance, N220RV is
a pretty stripped down plane, built by Vans. Alex's RV-10
is a John Nys plane equipped with A/C, and we've got people
building with extreme variations in engine choice, battery
positions and quantities, propellers, builder attention to
detail, and builders ability to follow plans.
One other thing to keep in mind is that some planes only have
trim tabs on one side, so our asymmetric trim isn't necessarily
that odd. But, that said, wouldn't it be cool if there was
a trim servo mechanism mod that did allow both tabs to provide
the same nose down and nose up trim amounts, while being
symmetrical.
As far as "the Fix" goes, I'm mixed on that one too. It does
look like perhaps there was a little compression to the
bulkhead, but also that perhaps that bulkhead was pushed
forward or aft, twisting slightly. And when you see that the
patch is just another layer of metal over that area, it kind
of makes me wonder why that patch just won't do it again.
it seems that you'd want it to attach to the side skin, and
especially that you'd want to prevent any movement relative
to the longeron, of that top angle of aluminum. Then again,
you don't always want complete stiffness, so maybe that's
part of it too.
I'll do the SB as planned but still watch to see what they
come up with next. As far as trim goes though, I just don't
see a problem in my particular plane, with how the trim
functions, built per plans.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | GTR serial connections |
First thing I'd check is to make sure that the GRT ARINC is set to low
speed. If it isn't you'll see some very strange behavior on the AP (ask
me how I know...).
Bob N442PM
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ronald Grover
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 9:20 AM
Subject: RV10-List: GTR serial connections
Gentlemen,
I have the three screen Horizon GTR system with the ARINC 429 module on
display 1, GPS on display 2, and display three has nothing.
GNS 430
SL30
GTX330
Sorcerer Autopilot.
My problem is the Grand Rapids EFIS will not send commands to the
Sorcerer. The 430 will drive the autopilot but intermittently loses the
GPSS suggesting that the serial connection is OK but there is a problem
with the ARINC429. Trutrak documentation stated both Serial and ARINC
429 are needed for GPSS and GPSV.
In the Grand Rapids documentation they say the ARINC 429 can be
connected to as many devices as you wish. A friend suggested that I
provide a dedicated ARINC 429 connection between the 430 and the
Sorcerer. I think all of the ARINC 429 connections to the 430 have been
used.
Does anybody have any suggestions?? GTR has been helpful but they don't
seem to know what is going on here.
Ron Grover
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: | Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] |
On the trim issue. My empty weight CG is aft of 410RV. During transition
training with no ballast in 410RV I ran out of trim on landing with full
flaps. On my airplane I have plenty of trim and always land full flaps.
Rene' Felker
RV-10 N423CF Flying
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 8:17 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
This just proves how individual these airplanes will be, based
on equippage. N220RV has a LIGHTER engine than the IO-540,
so if N220RV ran out of elevator, something probably really
wasn't right to begin with. I remain skeptical that following
the plans will absolutely result in a twisted tail. I've looked
back on many flights, and even during stall buffet, and watched
the tail. On my last flight, both elevator horns were about 1/4"
up in cruise, but they were symmetrical. And now for the best
part. I have zero problems trimming my stick for 100% hands
off flight, with full flaps, and a 70kt approach speed. I
actually take most people who are NON-pilots who want to learn,
and show them that their job is to trim to the approach airspeed,
and that at that point, releasing their hand from the stick, or
only touching with fingertips, is what they want to do to test
for good trim. And I show them that if you just put your hands
down for a sec, the plane flies just fine.
So while I do get intrigued by the reports people give of other
RV-10's running out of nose-up trim, or reports of twisted
tails, I'm not really sure I will believe that doing it the
plans way is the cause. I think these planes are naturally
so diverse in layout and weighting and design that you're just
seeing that natural variation. For instance, N220RV is
a pretty stripped down plane, built by Vans. Alex's RV-10
is a John Nys plane equipped with A/C, and we've got people
building with extreme variations in engine choice, battery
positions and quantities, propellers, builder attention to
detail, and builders ability to follow plans.
One other thing to keep in mind is that some planes only have
trim tabs on one side, so our asymmetric trim isn't necessarily
that odd. But, that said, wouldn't it be cool if there was
a trim servo mechanism mod that did allow both tabs to provide
the same nose down and nose up trim amounts, while being
symmetrical.
As far as "the Fix" goes, I'm mixed on that one too. It does
look like perhaps there was a little compression to the
bulkhead, but also that perhaps that bulkhead was pushed
forward or aft, twisting slightly. And when you see that the
patch is just another layer of metal over that area, it kind
of makes me wonder why that patch just won't do it again.
it seems that you'd want it to attach to the side skin, and
especially that you'd want to prevent any movement relative
to the longeron, of that top angle of aluminum. Then again,
you don't always want complete stiffness, so maybe that's
part of it too.
I'll do the SB as planned but still watch to see what they
come up with next. As far as trim goes though, I just don't
see a problem in my particular plane, with how the trim
functions, built per plans.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Condrey, Bob (US SSA) wrote:
<bob.condrey@baesystems.com>
>
> Interesting. When I flew with Alex D. for my transition training he
> carried 2 cases of oil in the baggage area in his IO-540 bird. Also, he
> said that he normally lands with half flaps (he has a flap positioning
> system) unless there are rear seat passengers. When only front seat
> occupants there is a very noticeable nose down pitching when going from
> half to full flaps.
>
> Bob
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
> Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 1:11 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
>
>
> Dave, i agreeI
>
> If folks take the time and go back through the archive and read the
> original posts (12/06) which witnessed the 'twist' and the follow on
> discussion regarding the Elevator trim rigging and how following Van's
> plan instructions, can and will result in a twisted HS. the situation
> described there is entirely consistent with the results depicted in the
> picture of the crack. I believe that there is a VERY high likelihood
> that the root cause of the crack lies in a twisting moment induced by
> the asynchronous movement of the elevator trim tabs. I was the individ
> David refers to that flew 220RV late last year, and there was not enough
>
> up elevator trim available to take the significant back pressure off the
>
> elevator during landings. I believe this is also consistent with the
> trim rigging and twisting explanation. Here's an excerpt from my post
> following transition training.
>
>
> **This brings up the next point and that is elevator authority. N220RV
> had
> NO balast in the rear when we flew. We initiated our approach with 20
> degrees of flaps (second detent), Turning downwind we added full flaps.
> With full flaps there is NOT enough trim to take the back pressure off
> of the stick. I found that the back pressure was much more than I found
> comfortable, and flew some landings with 2 hands! Makes it
> difficult/impossible to develop a fingertip feel on landings. The other
>
> item has been reported by several others and that is when landing it
> takes the full aft movement of the stick. The topic has been discussed &
>
> debated previously, but in my opinion with only 2 people and no
> baggage/balast there is not enough elevator. Towards the end of 8.1
> hours, I was able to get some of the rust scrubbed off, got a little
> less shy about the rapidly approaching ground, and found a way to
> 'muscle' a couple of good landings. then Mike says " let me show you
> something, .... we took another trip around the pattern flew exactly as
> before only on our base leg after extending full flaps, he had me 'blip'
>
> off a degree or two of flap at a time until the back pressure I'd grown
> unaccustomed to holding was gone..... then flew the rest of the landing
> !!!!! WOW!!! what a difference !!!!! Mike why did you keep this little
>
> secret to the end??????? the plane landed almost identical to full
> flaps, but the 'feel' was completely different and actually a joy!!!!!**
>
>
>
>
>
> Dave Leikam wrote:
>>
>> After looking closely at the pictures, it appears that the metal is
>> not only cracked, but also "crinkled." If you look at the skin to the
>
>> left of the crack, it appears to also be deformed which concurs with
>> the failure of the bulkhead. First thought is there was substantial
>> down pressure (compression) on the longeron and on the F1010A angle at
>
>> this point. Except when rolling, would there ever be uneven force on
>> the HS? And even then I would think the forces would be very
>> little. Would it be possible to detect equal tensional stress on the
>> other side?
>>
>> I agree with the twisted HS theory.
>>
>> Dave Leikam
>> #40496 N89DA (Reserved)
>> Muskego, WI
>>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] |
Exactly....lots of differences. Just pointing out that between
all of the planes there are significant equipment differences.
For me, I've been a pretty firm believer that you should not
TRY to "fix" the "noseheavy problem" any more than by doing
things that are natural to your design, because it will be very
easy to go overboard with moving that CG aft. I have a PC925,
and have smaller batteries under the passenger knees. Both
were part of my intended design, and let to a slight shift in
aft CG...which you pointed out. But to go further than that
by much, like if I wanted to switch props, and do some other
funky stuff, won't give the same loading options that I have.
I actually can hold the nose off to REAL slow speeds even
when there are only front-seaters on board., so trim is not
an issue at all, nor is elevator authority. Personally I
think the goal should be to stay as close to the very far
forward CG position like N410RV has as you CAN....only making
the compromises to put weight aft that you need to for your
other goals. It's been said over and over that being aft
CG by too far is the most dangerous...and it's far more
important to be in CG than under gross when considering your
loadings. So preserving as much of the forward CG is
a good idea.
Yep, will see you there at BNW!
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Condrey, Bob (US SSA) wrote:
>
> Tim,
>
> You bring up a good point about configuration differences. There is a
> lot of focus on empty weight but equally important is where the empty
> weight CG winds up.
>
> Regarding Alex's plane - Although John N. built it (but didn't do the
> finish work), the airframe itself is in a stock configuration and
> doesn't have some of the telltale signs of being built by John N. (i.e.
> second set of fuel tanks outboard). That plane does have AC and a heavy
> looking interior but even with full flaps on approach there's plenty of
> trim authority, he just prefers half flaps.
>
> Regarding comments from Deems, it seems strange that with the small
> continental up front that you'd still have a CG in the forward part of
> the envelope. I've never flown that plane but do have the numbers from
> 410RV and its empty weight ARM is at 106.99". You'd think with a
> lighter engine that the CG would be a little farther aft
>
> I also notice that your empty weight Arm is 108.67" (from your POH) and
> mine is 108.20" which makes a huge difference in the handling feel.
>
> See you Saturday at BNW!
>
> Bob
>
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: | Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] |
My point with respect to running out of up trim, is: if the trim was not
proper, the left elevator half could be commanding nose down while the right
elevator could be commanding nose up. Could be a real problem at high cruise
speed or even abrupt movement of the controls near maneuvering speed. IIRC
the V tail bonanza used to peel the leading edges of the ruddervators back
in opposite directions until the fifth or so AD fixed it. A mistake on a
factory airplane is hard to believe but not impossible.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 7:17 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
This just proves how individual these airplanes will be, based
on equippage. N220RV has a LIGHTER engine than the IO-540,
so if N220RV ran out of elevator, something probably really wasn't right to
begin with. I remain skeptical that following the plans will absolutely
result in a twisted tail. I've looked back on many flights, and even during
stall buffet, and watched the tail. On my last flight, both elevator horns
were about 1/4"
up in cruise, but they were symmetrical. And now for the best part. I have
zero problems trimming my stick for 100% hands off flight, with full flaps,
and a 70kt approach speed. I actually take most people who are NON-pilots
who want to learn, and show them that their job is to trim to the approach
airspeed, and that at that point, releasing their hand from the stick, or
only touching with fingertips, is what they want to do to test
for good trim. And I show them that if you just put your hands
down for a sec, the plane flies just fine.
So while I do get intrigued by the reports people give of other RV-10's
running out of nose-up trim, or reports of twisted tails, I'm not really
sure I will believe that doing it the plans way is the cause. I think these
planes are naturally so diverse in layout and weighting and design that
you're just
seeing that natural variation. For instance, N220RV is
a pretty stripped down plane, built by Vans. Alex's RV-10 is a John Nys
plane equipped with A/C, and we've got people building with extreme
variations in engine choice, battery positions and quantities, propellers,
builder attention to detail, and builders ability to follow plans.
One other thing to keep in mind is that some planes only have trim tabs on
one side, so our asymmetric trim isn't necessarily that odd. But, that
said, wouldn't it be cool if there was a trim servo mechanism mod that did
allow both tabs to provide the same nose down and nose up trim amounts,
while being symmetrical.
As far as "the Fix" goes, I'm mixed on that one too. It does look like
perhaps there was a little compression to the bulkhead, but also that
perhaps that bulkhead was pushed forward or aft, twisting slightly. And
when you see that the patch is just another layer of metal over that area,
it kind of makes me wonder why that patch just won't do it again.
it seems that you'd want it to attach to the side skin, and especially that
you'd want to prevent any movement relative to the longeron, of that top
angle of aluminum. Then again, you don't always want complete stiffness, so
maybe that's part of it too.
I'll do the SB as planned but still watch to see what they come up with
next. As far as trim goes though, I just don't see a problem in my
particular plane, with how the trim functions, built per plans.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Condrey, Bob (US SSA) wrote:
> --> <bob.condrey@baesystems.com>
>
> Interesting. When I flew with Alex D. for my transition training he
> carried 2 cases of oil in the baggage area in his IO-540 bird. Also,
> he said that he normally lands with half flaps (he has a flap
> positioning
> system) unless there are rear seat passengers. When only front seat
> occupants there is a very noticeable nose down pitching when going
> from half to full flaps.
>
> Bob
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
> Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 1:11 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
>
>
> Dave, i agreeI
>
> If folks take the time and go back through the archive and read the
> original posts (12/06) which witnessed the 'twist' and the follow on
> discussion regarding the Elevator trim rigging and how following
> Van's plan instructions, can and will result in a twisted HS. the
> situation described there is entirely consistent with the results
> depicted in the picture of the crack. I believe that there is a VERY
> high likelihood that the root cause of the crack lies in a twisting
> moment induced by the asynchronous movement of the elevator trim tabs.
> I was the individ David refers to that flew 220RV late last year, and
> there was not enough
>
> up elevator trim available to take the significant back pressure off
> the
>
> elevator during landings. I believe this is also consistent with the
> trim rigging and twisting explanation. Here's an excerpt from my post
> following transition training.
>
>
> **This brings up the next point and that is elevator authority. N220RV
> had NO balast in the rear when we flew. We initiated our approach
> with 20 degrees of flaps (second detent), Turning downwind we added
> full flaps.
> With full flaps there is NOT enough trim to take the back pressure off
> of the stick. I found that the back pressure was much more than I
> found comfortable, and flew some landings with 2 hands! Makes it
> difficult/impossible to develop a fingertip feel on landings. The
> other
>
> item has been reported by several others and that is when landing it
> takes the full aft movement of the stick. The topic has been discussed
> &
>
> debated previously, but in my opinion with only 2 people and no
> baggage/balast there is not enough elevator. Towards the end of 8.1
> hours, I was able to get some of the rust scrubbed off, got a little
> less shy about the rapidly approaching ground, and found a way to
> 'muscle' a couple of good landings. then Mike says " let me show you
> something, .... we took another trip around the pattern flew exactly
> as before only on our base leg after extending full flaps, he had me
'blip'
>
> off a degree or two of flap at a time until the back pressure I'd
> grown unaccustomed to holding was gone..... then flew the rest of the
> landing !!!!! WOW!!! what a difference !!!!! Mike why did you keep
> this little
>
> secret to the end??????? the plane landed almost identical to full
> flaps, but the 'feel' was completely different and actually a
> joy!!!!!**
>
>
>
>
>
> Dave Leikam wrote:
>>
>> After looking closely at the pictures, it appears that the metal is
>> not only cracked, but also "crinkled." If you look at the skin to
>> the
>
>> left of the crack, it appears to also be deformed which concurs with
>> the failure of the bulkhead. First thought is there was substantial
>> down pressure (compression) on the longeron and on the F1010A angle
>> at
>
>> this point. Except when rolling, would there ever be uneven force on
>> the HS? And even then I would think the forces would be very
>> little. Would it be possible to detect equal tensional stress on the
>> other side?
>>
>> I agree with the twisted HS theory.
>>
>> Dave Leikam
>> #40496 N89DA (Reserved)
>> Muskego, WI
>>
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: | Two interesting aviation things in the news this morning.... |
Thanks,
I needed that....HOPE.
Very interesting and hopeful.
John G. 409
From: rvbuilder@sausen.netTo: rv10-list@matronics.comDate: Thu, 12 Jun 2008
06:57:36 -0500Subject: RV10-List: Two interesting aviation things in the n
ews this morning....
Didn=92t realize the FAA was this far along in testing=85..
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2008/pulpit_20080606_005036.html
And from the world of the absurd=85..
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/06/the-pentagons-n.html
Michael
Do not archive
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: | Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] |
But also think not only of a twisted HS theory but remember the tail fuse s
kin is part of this equation, I don't see it so much as compression problem
as a shearing problem...the fuse side skin going in a different direction
from longeron and the horizontal angle that is going across the top and fas
tening to the HS stab. As though the HS is not rolling, but rather yawing a
nd cycling with some harmonic.
John G. 409> From: daveleikam@wi.rr.com> To: rv10-list@matronics.com> Subje
ct: Re: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 00:36:05 -
m>> > After looking closely at the pictures, it appears that the metal is n
ot only > cracked, but also "crinkled." If you look at the skin to the left
of the > crack, it appears to also be deformed which concurs with the fail
ure of the > bulkhead. First thought is there was substantial down pressure
> (compression) on the longeron and on the F1010A angle at this point. > E
xcept when rolling, would there ever be uneven force on the HS? And even >
then I would think the forces would be very little. Would it be possible to
> detect equal tensional stress on the other side?> > I agree with the twi
sted HS theory.> > Dave Leikam> #40496 N89DA (Reserved)> Muskego, WI> > > -
Original Message ----- > From: "David McNeill" <dlm46007@cox.net>> To: <rv
10-list@matronics.com>> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 11:29 PM> Subject: R
"David McNeill" <dlm46007@cox.net>> >> > I doubt it was the engine. I just
talked with someone who flew the 220> > version for transition training Se
ptember 2007. He squawked the aircraft > > for> > inadequate up trim. I hav
e flown the 540 version for 33 hours and never> > gotten the trim setting m
ore than 2 bars from neutral. Inadequate up trim> > suggest to me that a im
properly rigged trim system might have the two> > elevator halves fighting
each other and twisting the elevators and > > stressing> > the horizontal s
tab.> >> > -----Original Message-----> > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matro
nics.com> > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ben
Westfall> > Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 9:02 PM> > To: rv10-list@matroni
cs.com> > Subject: RE: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]> >> > --> RV10-List
message posted by: "Ben Westfall" <rv10@sinkrate.com>> >> >> > Oops forgot
my name on the last one...> >> > Ben Westfall> > #40579> >> > -----Origina
l Message-----> > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com> > [mailto:own
er-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of David McNeill> > Sent: Wedn
esday, June 11, 2008 7:36 PM> > To: rv10-list@matronics.com> > Subject: RV1
0-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]> >> >> >> > This is what I found about an hou
========================> _
=====================> > >
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 |
|
It light of the j-channel discussion of the last week or so, notice that in the
Van SB picture, the j-channel also touches the bulkhead as well.
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: | Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] |
Tim, I fell into the forward CG trap. I put moving the CG aft as one of my
design objectives based on discussions on the old Yahoo list and this list.
In doing so I did move the CG back a little and now I am regretting it
because it limits the amount of weight I can put in the back of the plane
without running out of the aft CG. In the end I like what I did from a
design point and may have done it that way anyway.
I have a bigger battery in the back and I put my O2 system behind the
baggage compartment bulkhead.
I am now thinking of adding a little weight to the engine......got any ideas
on some useful things I could put up there?
Rene' Felker
RV-10 N423CF Flying
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 9:20 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
Exactly....lots of differences. Just pointing out that between
all of the planes there are significant equipment differences.
For me, I've been a pretty firm believer that you should not
TRY to "fix" the "noseheavy problem" any more than by doing
things that are natural to your design, because it will be very
easy to go overboard with moving that CG aft. I have a PC925,
and have smaller batteries under the passenger knees. Both
were part of my intended design, and let to a slight shift in
aft CG...which you pointed out. But to go further than that
by much, like if I wanted to switch props, and do some other
funky stuff, won't give the same loading options that I have.
I actually can hold the nose off to REAL slow speeds even
when there are only front-seaters on board., so trim is not
an issue at all, nor is elevator authority. Personally I
think the goal should be to stay as close to the very far
forward CG position like N410RV has as you CAN....only making
the compromises to put weight aft that you need to for your
other goals. It's been said over and over that being aft
CG by too far is the most dangerous...and it's far more
important to be in CG than under gross when considering your
loadings. So preserving as much of the forward CG is
a good idea.
Yep, will see you there at BNW!
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Condrey, Bob (US SSA) wrote:
<bob.condrey@baesystems.com>
>
> Tim,
>
> You bring up a good point about configuration differences. There is a
> lot of focus on empty weight but equally important is where the empty
> weight CG winds up.
>
> Regarding Alex's plane - Although John N. built it (but didn't do the
> finish work), the airframe itself is in a stock configuration and
> doesn't have some of the telltale signs of being built by John N. (i.e.
> second set of fuel tanks outboard). That plane does have AC and a heavy
> looking interior but even with full flaps on approach there's plenty of
> trim authority, he just prefers half flaps.
>
> Regarding comments from Deems, it seems strange that with the small
> continental up front that you'd still have a CG in the forward part of
> the envelope. I've never flown that plane but do have the numbers from
> 410RV and its empty weight ARM is at 106.99". You'd think with a
> lighter engine that the CG would be a little farther aft
>
> I also notice that your empty weight Arm is 108.67" (from your POH) and
> mine is 108.20" which makes a huge difference in the handling feel.
>
> See you Saturday at BNW!
>
> Bob
>
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: | Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] |
Know your aircraft's mission! It is time for Tim James to provide
discussion and pictures on his roll bar, VGs and low slow speed
improvements. While he is at it, he can mention the tail
counter-weights which brought his CG "Dead nuts on".
Like Clint said..."A man has to know his limitations". Following the
plan is great and safe. It should never be discouraged. Knowing why the
10 is built or designed the way it is, is important as a baseline. When
you know more or are trying something Experimental there are lots of
options available to those with proper training, technical education and
skill.
I don't think there will ever be a factory discussion on what led to
this crack. Or why the J stringer make contact or that the doubler is
the final solution or that the bulkhead might have been spec'ed with a
beefier stock of material. It is just a fix without meaningful
discussion. Those who are on to asymmetric horizontal trim control may
just have stubbed their toe on a potential cause. Great discussions.
More fleet hours and less accidents are a good thing.
Tim mentioned several of the variables. Now why would N220RV have it
and N410RV with significantly more hours be okay?
John Cox
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rene Felker
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 1:20 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
Tim, I fell into the forward CG trap. I put moving the CG aft as one of
my
design objectives based on discussions on the old Yahoo list and this
list.
In doing so I did move the CG back a little and now I am regretting it
because it limits the amount of weight I can put in the back of the
plane
without running out of the aft CG. In the end I like what I did from a
design point and may have done it that way anyway.
I have a bigger battery in the back and I put my O2 system behind the
baggage compartment bulkhead.
I am now thinking of adding a little weight to the engine......got any
ideas
on some useful things I could put up there?
Rene' Felker
RV-10 N423CF Flying
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 9:20 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
Exactly....lots of differences. Just pointing out that between
all of the planes there are significant equipment differences.
For me, I've been a pretty firm believer that you should not
TRY to "fix" the "noseheavy problem" any more than by doing
things that are natural to your design, because it will be very
easy to go overboard with moving that CG aft. I have a PC925,
and have smaller batteries under the passenger knees. Both
were part of my intended design, and let to a slight shift in
aft CG...which you pointed out. But to go further than that
by much, like if I wanted to switch props, and do some other
funky stuff, won't give the same loading options that I have.
I actually can hold the nose off to REAL slow speeds even
when there are only front-seaters on board., so trim is not
an issue at all, nor is elevator authority. Personally I
think the goal should be to stay as close to the very far
forward CG position like N410RV has as you CAN....only making
the compromises to put weight aft that you need to for your
other goals. It's been said over and over that being aft
CG by too far is the most dangerous...and it's far more
important to be in CG than under gross when considering your
loadings. So preserving as much of the forward CG is
a good idea.
Yep, will see you there at BNW!
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Condrey, Bob (US SSA) wrote:
<bob.condrey@baesystems.com>
>
> Tim,
>
> You bring up a good point about configuration differences. There is a
> lot of focus on empty weight but equally important is where the empty
> weight CG winds up.
>
> Regarding Alex's plane - Although John N. built it (but didn't do the
> finish work), the airframe itself is in a stock configuration and
> doesn't have some of the telltale signs of being built by John N.
(i.e.
> second set of fuel tanks outboard). That plane does have AC and a
heavy
> looking interior but even with full flaps on approach there's plenty
of
> trim authority, he just prefers half flaps.
>
> Regarding comments from Deems, it seems strange that with the small
> continental up front that you'd still have a CG in the forward part of
> the envelope. I've never flown that plane but do have the numbers
from
> 410RV and its empty weight ARM is at 106.99". You'd think with a
> lighter engine that the CG would be a little farther aft
>
> I also notice that your empty weight Arm is 108.67" (from your POH)
and
> mine is 108.20" which makes a huge difference in the handling feel.
>
> See you Saturday at BNW!
>
> Bob
>
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: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] |
Is the target empty wt CG what 410RV has or something else? I believe
it has well over 1000 hours on it now, as it was over 900 last August
when I flew in it.
It would seem desirable to start planning towards whatever the goal is
from the start of the tail cone on. Wonder if
Vans will spec that bulkhead in subsequent kits for the next thickness
up. I expect I will have the same as all others when I pickup my
empenage kit, allegedly arriving tomorrow.
Kelly
Builder # yet to come.
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 3:34 PM, John Cox <johnwcox@pacificnw.com> wrote:
>
> Know your aircraft's mission! It is time for Tim James to provide
> discussion and pictures on his roll bar, VGs and low slow speed
> improvements. While he is at it, he can mention the tail
> counter-weights which brought his CG "Dead nuts on".
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: | Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] |
I talked to Vans yesterday to ask that exact question. There is no plans to
change the bulkhead to a thicker product. The doublers are the final fix to
it as of yesterday.
I received my Emp. Kit today and now have a very full garage. Kelly make
lots of room the box is 11 ft long almost 4 ft wide and weights 300 pounds.
I am serial number 40864 and anything after 40866 will have the sb kit
included in build kit.
So the fun begins.
John G. Cumins
#40864 Inventory starting soon.
Your Total Technology Solution Provider
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 4:32 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
Is the target empty wt CG what 410RV has or something else? I believe
it has well over 1000 hours on it now, as it was over 900 last August
when I flew in it.
It would seem desirable to start planning towards whatever the goal is
from the start of the tail cone on. Wonder if
Vans will spec that bulkhead in subsequent kits for the next thickness
up. I expect I will have the same as all others when I pickup my
empenage kit, allegedly arriving tomorrow.
Kelly
Builder # yet to come.
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 3:34 PM, John Cox <johnwcox@pacificnw.com> wrote:
>
> Know your aircraft's mission! It is time for Tim James to provide
> discussion and pictures on his roll bar, VGs and low slow speed
> improvements. While he is at it, he can mention the tail
> counter-weights which brought his CG "Dead nuts on".
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 |
|
Perhaps it's time to take another look at why the RV-10 even needs two trim tabs....
--------
#40572 QB Fuselage, wings finished
N711JG reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=187667#187667
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: | Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] |
Rene, I added a dry sump oil seperator that looks pretty cool.... might add a couple
of pounds. I wanted to do what I could to keep the crud off the bottom
of the plane. Designed for big block engines, so it should handle the IO540.
Don McDonald
#40636 Still Finishing.
Rene Felker <rene@felker.com> wrote:
Tim, I fell into the forward CG trap. I put moving the CG aft as one of my
design objectives based on discussions on the old Yahoo list and this list.
In doing so I did move the CG back a little and now I am regretting it
because it limits the amount of weight I can put in the back of the plane
without running out of the aft CG. In the end I like what I did from a
design point and may have done it that way anyway.
I have a bigger battery in the back and I put my O2 system behind the
baggage compartment bulkhead.
I am now thinking of adding a little weight to the engine......got any ideas
on some useful things I could put up there?
Rene' Felker
RV-10 N423CF Flying
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 9:20 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1]
Exactly....lots of differences. Just pointing out that between
all of the planes there are significant equipment differences.
For me, I've been a pretty firm believer that you should not
TRY to "fix" the "noseheavy problem" any more than by doing
things that are natural to your design, because it will be very
easy to go overboard with moving that CG aft. I have a PC925,
and have smaller batteries under the passenger knees. Both
were part of my intended design, and let to a slight shift in
aft CG...which you pointed out. But to go further than that
by much, like if I wanted to switch props, and do some other
funky stuff, won't give the same loading options that I have.
I actually can hold the nose off to REAL slow speeds even
when there are only front-seaters on board., so trim is not
an issue at all, nor is elevator authority. Personally I
think the goal should be to stay as close to the very far
forward CG position like N410RV has as you CAN....only making
the compromises to put weight aft that you need to for your
other goals. It's been said over and over that being aft
CG by too far is the most dangerous...and it's far more
important to be in CG than under gross when considering your
loadings. So preserving as much of the forward CG is
a good idea.
Yep, will see you there at BNW!
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Condrey, Bob (US SSA) wrote:
>
> Tim,
>
> You bring up a good point about configuration differences. There is a
> lot of focus on empty weight but equally important is where the empty
> weight CG winds up.
>
> Regarding Alex's plane - Although John N. built it (but didn't do the
> finish work), the airframe itself is in a stock configuration and
> doesn't have some of the telltale signs of being built by John N. (i.e.
> second set of fuel tanks outboard). That plane does have AC and a heavy
> looking interior but even with full flaps on approach there's plenty of
> trim authority, he just prefers half flaps.
>
> Regarding comments from Deems, it seems strange that with the small
> continental up front that you'd still have a CG in the forward part of
> the envelope. I've never flown that plane but do have the numbers from
> 410RV and its empty weight ARM is at 106.99". You'd think with a
> lighter engine that the CG would be a little farther aft
>
> I also notice that your empty weight Arm is 108.67" (from your POH) and
> mine is 108.20" which makes a huge difference in the handling feel.
>
> See you Saturday at BNW!
>
> Bob
>
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: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] |
Kelly,
The info on 410RV is just data, not a target. It is puts the empty CGjust forward
of the forward CG limit and when you add fuel/pilot you're within the envelope.
As discussed many times the plane will have more trim authority during
the landing phase if the CG is shifted an inch or two aft by carrying some weight
in the baggage compartment. As I understand it, the decision to make the
empty CG forward is because the arms for fuel, pilot, passengers and baggage are
all aft of the forward CG limit.
My (N442PM) empty CG is aft of the factory plane for the following reasons:
- I have a pair of PC-680 batteries instead of the standard Concorde in the standard
battery location with the second battery contactor colocated.
- I have dual LSE Plasma III ignitions which means no mags
- I have a B&C 20 amp alternator on the vacuum pad and angled oil filter adapter
which adds back a little weight up front.
- I've got a pretty full panel which is heavier than the factory planes but close
to the CG line.
For those wanting to do a little planning, here are the numbers:
Fwd CG limit: 107.8375" (15% of chord)
Aft CG limit: 116.2375" (30% of chord)
Fuel: 108.9"
Front seats: 114.582"
Rear seats: 151.2586"
Baggage: 173.5"
Disclaimer: Unless your plane is identical in every way to one of those mentioned,
your information WILL be different. I only include it for context of the
discussion on the need for trim.
Bob N442PM
(36.1 hours as of a few minutes ago!)
Is the target empty wt CG what 410RV has or something else? I believe
it has well over 1000 hours on it now, as it was over 900 last August
when I flew in it.
It would seem desirable to start planning towards whatever the goal is
from the start of the tail cone on. Wonder if
Vans will spec that bulkhead in subsequent kits for the next thickness
up. I expect I will have the same as all others when I pickup my
empenage kit, allegedly arriving tomorrow.
Kelly
Builder # yet to come.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=187689#187689
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: | Re: Emailing: sb08-6-1[1] |
The final fix is indeed the doubler approach. When you receive your SB package
it will contain a replacement chapter 10 of the construction manual with the
doublers in addition to directions on how to retrofit them to a tailcone that
is already constructed. Parts consist of the 2 doublers and a bag with a lot
of AD4 size rivets...
I did the inspection this afternoon and found all was well. Given that I only
have 36 hours on the plane and am 11 months away from the annual I'll do the 25
hour inspection routine and let the dust settle before tearing into things.
Maybe somebody will come up with an easier way!
Bob N442PM
40 hour fly-off should be finished tomorrow!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=187694#187694
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: | Rudder Gust Lock |
When I tie down in the open I secure the rudder with a cord after using the
seat belt to hold the stick aft and centered. Works OK but I'm thinking of
using a short piece of rubber tube with a hold cut in it for the tail
light/strobe to stick thru.
Albert Gardner
N991RV
Yuma, AZ
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! --
|