RV10-List Digest Archive

Fri 08/29/08


Total Messages Posted: 49



Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 01:13 AM - Re: Aluminum Door Handles (truflite)
     2. 04:54 AM - Re: Fuel Tank lables (orchidman)
     3. 05:01 AM - Re: Seat Belt support Bracket (orchidman)
     4. 05:03 AM - Boost Pump - On or Off for Takeoff? (jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com)
     5. 05:09 AM - Re: Hi Tim. (Scott Schmidt)
     6. 05:16 AM - Re: Re: Fuel Tank lables (David McNeill)
     7. 05:51 AM - Re: Hi Tim. (Michael Wellenzohn)
     8. 06:06 AM - Re: Boost Pump - On or Off for Takeoff? (Rene Felker)
     9. 06:10 AM - Re: Vegas crash (Rick Sked)
    10. 06:10 AM - Re: Boost Pump - On or Off for Takeoff? (Kelly McMullen)
    11. 06:39 AM - Re: Vegas crash (Kelly McMullen)
    12. 07:09 AM - Re: Re: Hartzell Composite Three blade (Rob Kermanj)
    13. 07:27 AM - Re: Fuel Tank lables (orchidman)
    14. 08:23 AM - Re: Re: Hartzell Composite Three blade (RobHickman@aol.com)
    15. 09:05 AM - Re: Re: Hartzell Composite Three blade (Rob Kermanj)
    16. 09:55 AM - Re: Vegas crash (woxofswa)
    17. 10:28 AM - Re: Seat Belt support Bracket (Cal Hoffman)
    18. 11:53 AM - Avemco Insurance Quote (Robin Marks)
    19. 12:07 PM - Re: Avemco Insurance Quote (Dj Merrill)
    20. 12:53 PM - Re: Avemco Insurance Quote (Robin Marks)
    21. 01:14 PM - Re: Avemco Insurance Quote (Dj Merrill)
    22. 01:23 PM - Re: Avemco Insurance Quote (William Souza)
    23. 02:04 PM - brake linings (David McNeill)
    24. 02:04 PM - Re: Avemco Insurance Quote (gary)
    25. 03:00 PM - baggage door lock length (pascal)
    26. 03:18 PM - Re: Avemco Insurance Quote (Rick Sked)
    27. 03:45 PM - filling canopy pinholes-better time than another? (tomhanaway)
    28. 03:55 PM - Re: Avemco Insurance Quote (Wndwlkr1228@AOL.COM)
    29. 03:56 PM - Re: Avemco Insurance Quote (Doug Preston)
    30. 04:04 PM - Re: filling canopy pinholes-better time than another? (Rick Sked)
    31. 05:25 PM - Shoulder harness bracket (partner14)
    32. 05:43 PM - Re: Shoulder harness bracket (Rick Sked)
    33. 05:47 PM - Got PPL (tomhanaway)
    34. 05:58 PM - Re: Got PPL (Robin Marks)
    35. 06:02 PM - Re: Boost Pump - On or Off for Takeoff? (gengrumpy@aol.com)
    36. 06:02 PM - Re: filling canopy pinholes-better time than another? (AndrewTR30)
    37. 06:02 PM - Re: filling canopy pinholes-better time than another? (AndrewTR30)
    38. 06:18 PM - Re: Re: Hartzell Composite Three blade (John Cox)
    39. 06:32 PM - Re: Vegas crash (Rick Sked)
    40. 06:33 PM - Re: Re: filling canopy pinholes-better time than another? (Rick Sked)
    41. 06:38 PM - Re: baggage door lock length (Lenny Iszak)
    42. 07:06 PM - Re: Got PPL (Rick Sked)
    43. 07:23 PM - Re: Vegas crash (David McNeill)
    44. 07:33 PM - Re: Avemco Insurance Quote (cloudvalley@comcast.net)
    45. 07:56 PM - Re: Vegas crash (Rick Sked)
    46. 08:34 PM - Re: Vegas crash (John Cox)
    47. 09:03 PM - Re: Vegas crash 415MK (David McNeill)
    48. 09:05 PM - Re: Vegas crash (Rick Sked)
    49. 10:20 PM - Re: Vegas crash (John 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
    Time: 01:13:58 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Aluminum Door Handles
    From: "truflite" <davidnellis691@comcast.net>
    Pictures will be forthcoming. I hope to have something in about 2-3 weeks. Have to wait for the factory handles to get here and start design and manufacture the prototype. Stay tuned. Dave -------- David Nellis 7A Slider Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 1384#201384


    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
    Time: 04:54:34 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Fuel Tank lables
    From: "orchidman" <gary@wingscc.com>
    Gary, My check went out yesterday afternoon also. Thanks, Gary -------- Gary Blankenbiller RV10 - # 40674 Instrument Panel, Fiberglass - SB (N2GB registered) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 1393#201393


    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
    Time: 05:01:14 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Seat Belt support Bracket
    From: "orchidman" <gary@wingscc.com>
    Check went out in yesterdays mail. Thanks, Gary -------- Gary Blankenbiller RV10 - # 40674 Instrument Panel, Fiberglass - SB (N2GB registered) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 1394#201394


    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
    Time: 05:03:54 AM PST US
    Subject: Boost Pump - On or Off for Takeoff?
    From: jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com
    A few days ago the conversation around our hangar was about the use of the electric fuel pump. I reviewed the POHs that were available on Tim's site and still didn't find a clear answer. So to my question, is the electric fuel pump supposed to be on or off during takeoff? The answer to this question even appears to vary in the certified world, some Pipers have it on for takeoff, some Beechcraft have it off. The follow up question of course would be, why, or why not? Thanks, Jason Kreidler 4-Partner Build (Jason Kreidler, Tony Kolar, Kyle Hokel, Wayne Elsner) Sheboygan Falls, WI #40617 Finishing


    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
    Time: 05:09:07 AM PST US
    From: Scott Schmidt <scottmschmidt@yahoo.com>
    Subject: Re: Hi Tim.
    Sorry about that all, stupid me forgot to change the To: section. And Werner you are right I was mainly concerned with fuel prices. Can you fly IFR in Switzerland with an Experimental? This country is beautiful. Scott Schmidt Cell 801-718-1277 scottmschmidt@yahoo.com --- On Thu, 8/28/08, Werner Schneider <glastar@gmx.net> wrote: > From: Werner Schneider <glastar@gmx.net> > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Hi Tim. > To: rv10-list@matronics.com > Date: Thursday, August 28, 2008, 1:40 PM > <glastar@gmx.net> > > Hi Scott, > > tell me where you are this weekend and I will prove, that > flying in > Switzerland can compete with flying in the US :-) > > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfeUZgk5rnk> > > You might know, the PC-12 and PC-6 are made in Switzerland, > I would > regard the PC-12 as the RV-10 in the certified world (ok a > bit uprated > RV-10) > > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFzP9CRFdWw&feature=related> > > Sorry, couldn't resist on that. > > Werner > > Scott Schmidt wrote: > > Hi Tim, just wanted to say a quick hi from > Switzerland. We are having > > a great time here and the motorcycling is off the > charts > > incredible. I might as well just sell my bike and > come here once a > > year to ride. We have the best flying though in the > US by far. > > > > Good to hear Ed had his first flight and made it down > OK. I bet that > > was a little stressful. > > I will email you later. It is hard to type on their > keyboards here. > > They switch the z and y. > > Say hi to the girls from RaNae and I. > > > > Scott Schmidt > > Cell 801-718-1277 > > scottmschmidt@yahoo.com > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com> > > To: rv10-list@matronics.com > > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 9:50:40 PM > > Subject: RV10-List: N929EH Flies! > > > <Tim@myrv10.com > > <mailto:Tim@myrv10.com>> > > > > News from Saturday.....fellow RV-10 builder Ed Hayden > > did his 1st flight out in Hillsboro, OR on Saturday > > a.m.! He's got a great looking plane, as you can > > see here: > > > > http://www.myrv10.com/osh2/photos/N929EH.jpg > > > > He's got the Flightline AC system installed, which > is > > one of the things that is unique about his plane. > > He reported that the plane flew beautifully, and > handled > > real well...and he was very pleased with the > performance. > > > > The first flight, however, did not go uneventfully, > > and here is where y'all should listen closely and > prepare > > yourself... > > > > Ed has a lightspeed ignition on one side, and a slick > mag > > on the other, just like I and many other have. In > this > > case, the lightspeed was once again the one good thing > > he had going for him. As I understand it (sorry that > > it's 2nd hand) he got to 1000' on takeoff and > the plane > > started missing real bad....making lots of noise. He > > radioed the tower of his problems and immediate need > > to return to land. He ran it on the lightspeed only > (which > > only gives maybe a 10 RPM drop on the mag test) and > > said he had a beautiful landing. > > > > Upon having an A&P come over and test the mag, it > was > > readily determined that this was indeed a slick mag > > failure. What ISN'T unique about this is that I > now know > > of TWO RV-10 builders who've had slick mags fail > on > > their first > > * > > > > > > * >


    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
    Time: 05:16:46 AM PST US
    From: "David McNeill" <dlm46007@cox.net>
    Subject: Re: Fuel Tank lables
    Not to rain on anyone's parade but fuel tank labels are usually provide at no charge by the paint shops. They do it in quantity for the aircraft that they paint. Also if they are on the plane when sent to the paint shop they will be removed and replaced after the paint. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of orchidman Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 4:54 AM Subject: RV10-List: Re: Fuel Tank lables Gary, My check went out yesterday afternoon also. Thanks, Gary -------- Gary Blankenbiller RV10 - # 40674 Instrument Panel, Fiberglass - SB (N2GB registered) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 1393#201393


    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
    Time: 05:51:03 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Hi Tim.
    From: "Michael Wellenzohn" <rv-10@wellenzohn.net>
    Hey Scott, if you are close to Zuerich let me contact me would be great to meet up with you. Call +41 78 7905454. I am building my -10 in Zuerich. Best Michael www.wellenzohn.net -------- RV-10 builder (engine, prop, finishing) #511 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 1404#201404


    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
    Time: 06:06:20 AM PST US
    From: "Rene Felker" <rene@felker.com>
    Subject: Boost Pump - On or Off for Takeoff?
    Here is my opinion...everyone has one. For fuel injected (IO-540) engines, the fuel pump should be on for takeoffs and landings as a precaution against the mechanical fuel pump failing. It is my understanding that on some engine types, you should NOT use the electric fuel pump because it can cause the engine to flood. I have the pump on for takeoffs and landing. Rene' Felker RV-10 N423CF Flying 801-721-6080 From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 6:03 AM Subject: RV10-List: Boost Pump - On or Off for Takeoff? A few days ago the conversation around our hangar was about the use of the electric fuel pump. I reviewed the POHs that were available on Tim's site and still didn't find a clear answer. So to my question, is the electric fuel pump supposed to be on or off during takeoff? The answer to this question even appears to vary in the certified world, some Pipers have it on for takeoff, some Beechcraft have it off. The follow up question of course would be, why, or why not? Thanks, Jason Kreidler 4-Partner Build (Jason Kreidler, Tony Kolar, Kyle Hokel, Wayne Elsner) Sheboygan Falls, WI #40617 Finishing


    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
    Time: 06:10:12 AM PST US
    From: Rick Sked <ricksked@embarqmail.com>
    Subject: Re: Vegas crash
    And to add to all this a Piper Navajo went into a house=C2-yesterday kill ing the pilot. He lost the right engine on departure and was trying to make it back to the airport, Witnesses said it looked like he was going to make it to Jones Blvd to set it down=C2-but impacted the LARGE power lines th at run along that street, this made him veer into the home, everyone said t he aircraft impacted sideways. Guess we have to ban twin engine aircraft at Las Vegas airports now along with the experimentals. No one on the ground was hurt. FWIW, the Velocity crash last week was the first time since the a irport opened on Decemeber 7, 1941 that anyone on the ground was injured or killed as a result of an aircraft crash. Rick sked 40185 do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: "David McNeill" <dlm46007@cox.net> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 6:10:51 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vegas crash check this; I was in the area and IIRC this was a new supercharger instalat ion. NTSB Identification: LAX04LA322 . The docket is stored in the Docket Management System (DMS). Please contact Records Management Division 14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation Accident occurred Saturday, September 18, 2004 in Mesa, AZ Probable Cause Approval Date: 1/31/2006 Aircraft: Wolf Glassair IIS, registration: N110UX Injuries: 2 Fatal. Immediately after takeoff the experimental category airplane climbed to 100 feet, rolled left, and collided with terrain. The airplane took off, was a irborne by mid field, and climbed to about 100 feet. After the initial clim b it did not appear to be climbing or accelerating normally. Some witnesses reported that the engine did not sound good and described engine noise flu ctuations. About this time, the pilot transmitted to the local controller t hat he was declaring an emergency and needed to return for landing. The con troller cleared the flight to land on any runway. The airplane then rolled to the left and impacted the ground inverted. The airplane had just complet ed an annual inspection and was undergoing a post maintenance check flight with the pilot and a mechanic onboard. Components that were replaced or ove rhauled during the annual inspection included the engine driven fuel pump, the fuel filter, and the supercharger . A post impact ground fire destroyed many engine components, including those that were replaced at the annual, and consumed the composite airframe. The propeller exhibited evidence of le ading edge polishing, torsional twisting, and chordwise striations. Examina tion of the wreckage found no evidence of a preimpact malfunction or failur e of the control system or powerplant. The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) o f this accident as follows: a partial loss of power for undetermined reason s, and, the failure of the pilot to maintain an adequate airspeed while man euvering for a forced landing that resulted in a stall and a collision with terrain. From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m atronics.com] On Behalf Of David McNeill Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 5:57 PM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vegas crash I saw this=C2-in the AM also. If you want to see an eerily similar report and result check the NTSB for N110UX. I believe the=C2-latter supercharg er was supplied by a LAS company.=C2- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m atronics.com] On Behalf Of GenGrumpy@aol.com Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 5:28 PM Subject: RV10-List: Vegas crash Thought I'd pass this along to keep all in the know here. grumpy do not archive Editor's Note: Below is the unedited text of the National Transportation Sa fety Board's preliminary report on last week's fatal crash of a Velocity 17 3RG in North Las Vegas, NV. Of note is the fact the accident flight was to be the first with the engine 's supercharger engaged. According to the owner/builder of the aircraft, se veral high-speed taxi tests had been conducted with the supercharger engage d in the days prior to the accident. As ANN reported , the plane crashed into a home last Friday, just after tak eoff from the North Las Vegas Airport (VGT). The accident claimed the lives of pilot Mack Creekmore Murphree Jr., 76, and two people living inside the home, identified as Jack and Lucy Costa. NTSB Identification: LAX08LA274 14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation Accident occurred Friday, August 22, 2008 in North Las Vegas, NV Aircraft: Killgore M/Killgore K Velocity 173RG, registration: N415MK Injuries: 3 Fatal. This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report=C2- =C2- =C2- will be corrected when the f inal report has been completed. On August 22, 2008, at 0628 Pacific daylight time, an experimental Killgore M/Killgore K Velocity 173RG, N415MK, collided with a residential building in North Las Vegas, Nevada. The airplane is registered to the owner/builder and it was being operated by the pilot under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. The certificated airline transport pilot and t wo people on the ground were killed. Post impact fire destroyed the airplan e and partially burned the residence. The local flight departed North Las V egas Airport at 0627. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no fl ight plan had been filed. Preliminary information obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA) revealed that the airplane departed North Las Vegas from runway 12 lef t. Shortly after takeoff the air traffic controller observed that the airpl ane was not gaining altitude. The controller asked the pilot if he needed a ssistance, to which the pilot responded, "I'm going down, I'm going down." The airplane then collided with a house 1.1 miles southeast of the airport. The owner/builder was interviewed by the National Transportation Safety Boa rd investigator-in-charge after the accident. He reported that the engine w as equipped with a supercharger, and that the purpose of the flight was to test the performance of the airplane and engine with the supercharger engag ed. He further reported that the supercharger was tested on multiple occasi ons during high speed taxi tests and ground runs the week prior to the acci dent, but that this was to be the first time it would be engaged for flight . The pilot held an airline transport pilot certificate with ratings for airp lane single engine land, multiengine land, and instrument airplane. He addi tionally held a flight engineer certificate, mechanic certificate, and a fl ight instructor certificate for airplane single engine, multiengine, and in strument airplane. On his latest FAA third-class medical application, dated September 7, 2006, the pilot stated that he had amassed 6,250 hours of tot al flight time. The canard configuration, four-seat, low-wing, retractable gear airplane, w as issued a Special Airworthiness Certificate on March 9, 2008. It was powe red by a Lycoming IO-360-C1C, engine and equipped with a three bladed MT-Pr opeller, model MTV-18-B. The Experimental Amateur-Built Airplane Operating Limitations for the accid ent airplane specified the following compliance under the section: Phase 1 Limitations-Initial Flight Testing, 'After a minimum time of (5) hours, and after controllability, airworthines s, and safety checks required by FAR 90.319(b) and chapter 4 of Advisory Ci rcular 90.89A are established and recorded in the airplane logbook the airp lane then may complete the remaining hours required in Phase 1 while based at North Las Vegas Airport (VGT); OR, a one time flight to the "Airplane Ba se of Operations" may also be conducted remaining clear of all densely popu lated areas and congested airways. NOTE: Airplane Base of Operations: Show Low Regional Airport (KSOW). This airplane must be operated for at least 25 (Twenty Five) hours in the assigned geographic areas' Review of the airplane maintenance logbook records revealed that on March 1 7, 2008, the airplane had amassed a total flight time of 5.1 hours. A logbo ok entry for that date noted, 'This airplane meets all the controllability, airworthiness, and safety checks required by FAR 91.319(b) and chapter 4 o f advisory circular 90-89A. It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here . href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics .com/Navigator?RV10-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums .matronics.com href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.ma tronics.com/c href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http:// www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List href="http://forums.matronics.com"> http://forums.matronics.com href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution"> =================== ==== ======================= ==


    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
    Time: 06:10:54 AM PST US
    From: "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2@gmail.com>
    Subject: Re: Boost Pump - On or Off for Takeoff?
    Look to aircraft with the same engine and fuel injection and low wings for your answer. Bonanzas have TCM engines with either a Bendix pressure carb or TCM fuel injection, with entirely different requirements than the plane your engine came out of, a Comanche 260. With the RV10, I'd say have it on. The RSA system(or equivalent) isn't sensitive to small variations in fuel pressure, and if the mechanical pump were to fail at 50 ft, you would have a much less eventful flight if you discovered it at 1000 ft when you turned the boost pump off than if the fire went out at 50 ft. On 8/29/08, jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com <jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com> wrote: > > A few days ago the conversation around our hangar was about the use of the > electric fuel pump. I reviewed the POHs that were available on Tim's site > and still didn't find a clear answer. So to my question, is the electric > fuel pump supposed to be on or off during takeoff? The answer to this > question even appears to vary in the certified world, some Pipers have it on > for takeoff, some Beechcraft have it off. > > The follow up question of course would be, why, or why not? > > Thanks, Jason Kreidler > 4-Partner Build (Jason Kreidler, Tony Kolar, Kyle Hokel, Wayne Elsner) > Sheboygan Falls, WI > #40617 Finishing > >


    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
    Time: 06:39:30 AM PST US
    From: "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2@gmail.com>
    Subject: Re: Vegas crash
    Rick, why don't you notify LAS tower they can't allow any twins any more. ;-) I guess most of the airlines might have just a tad of heartburn over that. Maybe just composite twins......then at least Southwest could continue, while America Worst..oops, US Scare couldn't fly those Scarebuses anymore. Totally tongue in cheek. do not archive. On 8/29/08, Rick Sked <ricksked@embarqmail.com> wrote: > > > And to add to all this a Piper Navajo went into a house yesterday killing > the pilot. He lost the right engine on departure and was trying to make it > back to the airport, Witnesses said it looked like he was going to make it > to Jones Blvd to set it down but impacted the LARGE power lines that run > along that street, this made him veer into the home, everyone said the > aircraft impacted sideways. Guess we have to ban twin engine aircraft at Las > Vegas airports now along with the experimentals. No one on the ground was > hurt. FWIW, the Velocity crash last week was the first time since the > airport opened on Decemeber 7, 1941 that anyone on the ground was injured or > killed as a result of an aircraft crash. > > Rick sked > > 40185 > > do not archive > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David McNeill" <dlm46007@cox.net> > To: rv10-list@matronics.com > Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 6:10:51 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles > Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vegas crash > > > check this; I was in the area and IIRC this was a new supercharger > instalation. > > NTSB Identification: LAX04LA322. > The docket is stored in the Docket Management System (DMS). Please contact > Records Management Division > 14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation > Accident occurred Saturday, September 18, 2004 in Mesa, AZ > Probable Cause Approval Date: 1/31/2006 > Aircraft: Wolf Glassair IIS, registration: N110UX > Injuries: 2 Fatal. > > Immediately after takeoff the experimental category airplane climbed to 100 > feet, rolled left, and collided with terrain. The airplane took off, was > airborne by mid field, and climbed to about 100 feet. After the initial > climb it did not appear to be climbing or accelerating normally. Some > witnesses reported that the engine did not sound good and described engine > noise fluctuations. About this time, the pilot transmitted to the local > controller that he was declaring an emergency and needed to return for > landing. The controller cleared the flight to land on any runway. The > airplane then rolled to the left and impacted the ground inverted. The > airplane had just completed an annual inspection and was undergoing a post > maintenance check flight with the pilot and a mechanic onboard. Components > that were replaced or overhauled during the annual inspection included the > engine driven fuel pump, the fuel filter, and the supercharger. A post > impact ground fire destroyed many engine components, including those that > were replaced at the annual, and consumed the composite airframe. The > propeller exhibited evidence of leading edge polishing, torsional twisting, > and chordwise striations. Examination of the wreckage found no evidence of a > preimpact malfunction or failure of the control system or powerplant. > > The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of > this accident as follows: a partial loss of power for undetermined reasons, > and, the failure of the pilot to maintain an adequate airspeed while > maneuvering for a forced landing that resulted in a stall and a collision > with terrain. > > > ________________________________ > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > David McNeill > Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 5:57 PM > To: rv10-list@matronics.com > Subject: RE: RV10-List: Vegas crash > > > I saw this in the AM also. If you want to see an eerily similar report and > result check the NTSB for N110UX. I believe the latter supercharger was > supplied by a LAS company. > > ________________________________ > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > GenGrumpy@aol.com > Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 5:28 PM > To: rv10-list@matronics.com > Subject: RV10-List: Vegas crash > > > Thought I'd pass this along to keep all in the know here. > > grumpy > > do not archive > > Editor's Note: Below is the unedited text of the National Transportation > Safety Board's preliminary report on last week's fatal crash of a Velocity > 173RG in North Las Vegas, NV. > > Of note is the fact the accident flight was to be the first with the > engine's supercharger engaged. According to the owner/builder of the > aircraft, several high-speed taxi tests had been conducted with the > supercharger engaged in the days prior to the accident. > > As ANN reported, the plane crashed into a home last Friday, just after > takeoff from the North Las Vegas Airport (VGT). The accident claimed the > lives of pilot Mack Creekmore Murphree Jr., 76, and two people living inside > the home, identified as Jack and Lucy Costa. > NTSB Identification: LAX08LA274 > 14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation > Accident occurred Friday, August 22, 2008 in North Las Vegas, NV > Aircraft: Killgore M/Killgore K Velocity 173RG, registration: N415MK > Injuries: 3 Fatal. > > This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. > Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has > been completed. > > On August 22, 2008, at 0628 Pacific daylight time, an experimental Killgore > M/Killgore K Velocity 173RG, N415MK, collided with a residential building in > North Las Vegas, Nevada. The airplane is registered to the owner/builder and > it was being operated by the pilot under the provisions of 14 Code of > Federal Regulations Part 91. The certificated airline transport pilot and > two people on the ground were killed. Post impact fire destroyed the > airplane and partially burned the residence. The local flight departed North > Las Vegas Airport at 0627. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and > no flight plan had been filed. > > Preliminary information obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration > (FAA) revealed that the airplane departed North Las Vegas from runway 12 > left. Shortly after takeoff the air traffic controller observed that the > airplane was not gaining altitude. The controller asked the pilot if he > needed assistance, to which the pilot responded, "I'm going down, I'm going > down." The airplane then collided with a house 1.1 miles southeast of the > airport. > > The owner/builder was interviewed by the National Transportation Safety > Board investigator-in-charge after the accident. He reported that the engine > was equipped with a supercharger, and that the purpose of the flight was to > test the performance of the airplane and engine with the supercharger > engaged. He further reported that the supercharger was tested on multiple > occasions during high speed taxi tests and ground runs the week prior to the > accident, but that this was to be the first time it would be engaged for > flight. > > The pilot held an airline transport pilot certificate with ratings for > airplane single engine land, multiengine land, and instrument airplane. He > additionally held a flight engineer certificate, mechanic certificate, and a > flight instructor certificate for airplane single engine, multiengine, and > instrument airplane. On his latest FAA third-class medical application, > dated September 7, 2006, the pilot stated that he had amassed 6,250 hours of > total flight time. > > > The canard configuration, four-seat, low-wing, retractable gear airplane, > was issued a Special Airworthiness Certificate on March 9, 2008. It was > powered by a Lycoming IO-360-C1C, engine and equipped with a three bladed > MT-Propeller, model MTV-18-B. > > The Experimental Amateur-Built Airplane Operating Limitations for the > accident airplane specified the following compliance under the section: > Phase 1 Limitations-Initial Flight Testing, > > 'After a minimum time of (5) hours, and after controllability, > airworthiness, and safety checks required by FAR 90.319(b) and chapter 4 of > Advisory Circular 90.89A are established and recorded in the airplane > logbook the airplane then may complete the remaining hours required in Phase > 1 while based at North Las Vegas Airport (VGT); OR, a one time flight to the > "Airplane Base of Operations" may also be conducted remaining clear of all > densely populated areas and congested airways. NOTE: Airplane Base of > Operations: Show Low Regional Airport (KSOW). This airplane must be operated > for at least 25 (Twenty Five) hours in the assigned geographic areas' > > Review of the airplane maintenance logbook records revealed that on March > 17, 2008, the airplane had amassed a total flight time of 5.1 hours. A > logbook entry for that date noted, 'This airplane meets all the > controllability, airworthiness, and safety checks required by FAR 91.319(b) > and chapter 4 of advisory circular 90-89A. > > > ________________________________ > It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here. > > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List > href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com > href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c > > > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List > href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com > href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c > > > get=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List > p://forums.matronics.com > blank>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
    Time: 07:09:27 AM PST US
    From: Rob Kermanj <flysrv10@gmail.com>
    Subject: Re: Hartzell Composite Three blade
    Dial your RPM down, You'll do much better. On Aug 25, 2008, at 9:03 PM, RobHickman@aol.com wrote: > I have the MT govenor, speed test is scheduled for this week. > > Jennifer and I flew it to Seattle on Sunday and we got the > following speeds: > > 8500 FT > 2450 RPM > Full Throttle > 169-171 KTS True Airspeed > > Rob Hickman > N402RH RV-10 > > > It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal > here. > >


    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
    Time: 07:27:03 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Fuel Tank lables
    From: "orchidman" <gary@wingscc.com>
    dlm46007(at)cox.net wrote: > Not to rain on anyone's parade but fuel tank labels are usually provide at > no charge by the paint shops. They do it in quantity for the aircraft that > they paint. Also if they are on the plane when sent to the paint shop they > will be removed and replaced after the paint. > > -- True, but I will probably fly for several months before I paint. Would like something a little better then a Sharpie for this time period. [Mr. Green] -------- Gary Blankenbiller RV10 - # 40674 Instrument Panel, Fiberglass - SB (N2GB registered) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 1427#201427


    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
    Time: 08:23:20 AM PST US
    From: RobHickman@aol.com
    Subject: Re: Hartzell Composite Three blade
    In a message dated 8/29/2008 7:11:12 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, flysrv10@gmail.com writes: Dial your RPM down, You'll do much better. I am flying to eastern Washington later today to drop off my neighbors at Moses Lake so I will give different RPM settings a try. Rob Hickman N402RH RV-10 **************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here. (http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)


    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
    Time: 09:05:13 AM PST US
    From: Rob Kermanj <flysrv10@gmail.com>
    Subject: Re: Hartzell Composite Three blade
    I have been told the IO54 has the most torque around 2200 RPM. I don't remember the source. I have tested different RPMs and I get the best speed around 2250. It kinda adds up, lower RPM has less drag. Rob. On Aug 29, 2008, at 11:21 AM, RobHickman@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 8/29/2008 7:11:12 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, flysrv10@gmail.com > writes: > Dial your RPM down, You'll do much better. > I am flying to eastern Washington later today to drop off my > neighbors at Moses Lake so I will give different RPM settings a try. > > Rob Hickman > N402RH RV-10 > > > It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal > here. > >


    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
    Time: 09:55:20 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Vegas crash
    From: "woxofswa" <woxof@aol.com>
    -------- Myron Nelson Mesa, AZ Emp completed, legacy build fuse in progress Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 1462#201462


    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
    Time: 10:28:51 AM PST US
    From: "Cal Hoffman" <cehoffman@bellsouth.net>
    Subject: Re: Seat Belt support Bracket
    Put me on the list for the bracket. Check in the mail on 8/29. Cal Hoffman 97 Myrick Street Barnwell, SC 29812 40119 Fiberglas and Instruments ----- Original Message ----- From: "partner14" <building_partner@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 11:53 PM Subject: RV10-List: Seat Belt support Bracket > > Ok, it's been redesigned, punched out, tumbled, and ready to install. I > will finish installing mine on Friday. They look great. Not trying to > make money here, just taking advantage of my brothers equipment and I had > promised 3 to RV10 guys in this area. We ran off 20, and 8 are already > spoken for. $12 should cover the bracket and shipping. Any questions on > how I installed mine, just give me a call. > > Don McDonald > 11460 Elks Circle > Rancho Cordova, Ca 95742 > > 916-801-8402 > > #40636 > Almost ready to pour fuel to it! > > -------- > Don A. McDonald > 40636 > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 1090#201090 > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_2625c_159.jpg > > >


    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
    Time: 11:53:08 AM PST US
    Subject: Avemco Insurance Quote
    From: "Robin Marks" <robin1@mrmoisture.com>
    I just got off the phone with Avemco to see about insuring my -10 for first flight and then basic flight coverage. I have 4 other plans insured with them and receive a multi-plane discount. Unfortunately their quote is not reality based as coverage begins only after 10 hours of fly off (no First Flight Coverage) and for $200K hull coverage the quote was close to $8,000. I informed them that the plane will be in a hangar, it is a Technically Advanced Aircraft (Panel), I have 800 TT, 500 of which are Retract, High Performance plus 125 Tail Wheel. Not bad for 6 years of flying (I thought). I now have filled out the EAA form as suggested by Wayne E and I hope to hear back from multiple insurance companies. I read the archives (Really!) and it seems like the insurance should be closer to $3,000. I am looking forward to the day I cancel 4 additional aircraft from Avemco and move them over to the new insurance carrier. Robin BPE Cold Induction / James Cowl Air box Complete! Ready to fly...


    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
    Time: 12:07:05 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Avemco Insurance Quote
    From: Dj Merrill <deej@deej.net>
    Robin Marks wrote: > > I just got off the phone with Avemco to see about insuring my -10 for > first flight and then basic flight coverage. I have 4 other plans > Interesting! The last time I called Avemco (maybe 2 years ago), they told me that they did not cover any experimental aircraft. Apparently they changed their minds, but now charge such a high premium that effectively they've priced themselves out of the market anyways. -Dj do not archive -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ http://deej.net/sportsman/ "Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005


    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
    Time: 12:53:26 PM PST US
    Subject: Avemco Insurance Quote
    From: "Robin Marks" <robin1@mrmoisture.com>
    Avemco does cover experimental as the last 5+ years I had my RV-4 and RV-6A covered with them (at a competitive rate). Robin Snip Interesting! The last time I called Avemco (maybe 2 years ago), they told me that they did not cover any experimental aircraft. Apparently they changed their minds, but now charge such a high premium that effectively they've priced themselves out of the market anyways. -Dj do not archive -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ http://deej.net/sportsman/ "Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005


    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
    Time: 01:14:08 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Avemco Insurance Quote
    From: Dj Merrill <deej@deej.net>
    Robin Marks wrote: > > Avemco does cover experimental as the last 5+ years I had my RV-4 and > RV-6A covered with them (at a competitive rate). > > Very strange! Maybe there was a new person that answered the phone when I called. They had an ad in Kitplanes if I remember correctly, which is why I called. I asked him if they did not cover experimentals, why did they have an ad in Kitplanes, which is specifically for experimentals, but all he could tell me was that it was a relatively recent decision not to cover experimentals anymore (within the previous year time frame I believe). I ended up going with AIG and have been very happy with them. -Dj do not archive -- Dj Merrill - N1JOV Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ http://deej.net/sportsman/ "Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005


    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
    Time: 01:23:03 PM PST US
    From: William Souza <electspec@sbcglobal.net>
    Subject: Re: Avemco Insurance Quote
    Give Jenny Estes A call at NATIONAIR AVIATION INSURANCE @ 877-475-5860 OR NATIONAIR.COM. I have my RV-10 insured for full coverage @ $225,000 hull and under $4800.00 yr. Bill Souza RV-10 SoCal RV Group --- Robin Marks <robin1@mrmoisture.com> wrote: > <robin1@mrmoisture.com> > > I just got off the phone with Avemco to see about > insuring my -10 for > first flight and then basic flight coverage. I have > 4 other plans > insured with them and receive a multi-plane > discount. Unfortunately > their quote is not reality based as coverage begins > only after 10 hours > of fly off (no First Flight Coverage) and for $200K > hull coverage the > quote was close to $8,000. I informed them that the > plane will be in a > hangar, it is a Technically Advanced Aircraft > (Panel), I have 800 TT, > 500 of which are Retract, High Performance plus 125 > Tail Wheel. Not bad > for 6 years of flying (I thought). > I now have filled out the EAA form as suggested by > Wayne E and I hope to > hear back from multiple insurance companies. > I read the archives (Really!) and it seems like the > insurance should be > closer to $3,000. > I am looking forward to the day I cancel 4 > additional aircraft from > Avemco and move them over to the new insurance > carrier. > > Robin > BPE Cold Induction / James Cowl Air box Complete! > Ready to fly... > > > > browse > Un/Subscription, > FAQ, > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List > > Forums! > > Admin. > > > > >


    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
    Time: 02:04:27 PM PST US
    From: "David McNeill" <dlm46007@cox.net>
    Subject: brake linings
    Just a follow up. I got my sets today and they are the Cleveland 66-11200 This is the real deal as these same linings are priced at about $70 for a set for the mains versus Vans price of $33 rivets included.


    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
    Time: 02:04:27 PM PST US
    From: "gary" <speckter@comcast.net>
    Subject: Avemco Insurance Quote
    I have a great independent agent who shops all the major carriers and the price is great. Contact me off line if you want his name. Gary Specketer -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 1:52 PM Subject: RV10-List: Avemco Insurance Quote I just got off the phone with Avemco to see about insuring my -10 for first flight and then basic flight coverage. I have 4 other plans insured with them and receive a multi-plane discount. Unfortunately their quote is not reality based as coverage begins only after 10 hours of fly off (no First Flight Coverage) and for $200K hull coverage the quote was close to $8,000. I informed them that the plane will be in a hangar, it is a Technically Advanced Aircraft (Panel), I have 800 TT, 500 of which are Retract, High Performance plus 125 Tail Wheel. Not bad for 6 years of flying (I thought). I now have filled out the EAA form as suggested by Wayne E and I hope to hear back from multiple insurance companies. I read the archives (Really!) and it seems like the insurance should be closer to $3,000. I am looking forward to the day I cancel 4 additional aircraft from Avemco and move them over to the new insurance carrier. Robin BPE Cold Induction / James Cowl Air box Complete! Ready to fly...


    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
    Time: 03:00:04 PM PST US
    From: "pascal" <pascal@rv10builder.net>
    Subject: baggage door lock length
    Anyone know how long the arm is for the baggage door lock. Have a 5/8th lock need to create the arm. Thanks Pascal


    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
    Time: 03:18:10 PM PST US
    From: Rick Sked <ricksked@embarqmail.com>
    Subject: Re: Avemco Insurance Quote
    You can't beat Jenny, I'm at $3600 but that's for $125K hull, bulders risk, transport, liability all that good stuff. Prior to the first flight it will go up to $250k on the hull and around the same, $4800 I'm guessing. Rick S. 40185 do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Souza" <electspec@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 1:22:45 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles Subject: Re: RV10-List: Avemco Insurance Quote Give Jenny Estes A call at NATIONAIR AVIATION INSURANCE @ 877-475-5860 OR NATIONAIR.COM. I have my RV-10 insured for full coverage @ $225,000 hull and under $4800.00 yr. Bill Souza RV-10 SoCal RV Group --- Robin Marks <robin1@mrmoisture.com> wrote: > <robin1@mrmoisture.com> > > I just got off the phone with Avemco to see about > insuring my -10 for > first flight and then basic flight coverage. I have > 4 other plans > insured with them and receive a multi-plane > discount. Unfortunately > their quote is not reality based as coverage begins > only after 10 hours > of fly off (no First Flight Coverage) and for $200K > hull coverage the > quote was close to $8,000. I informed them that the > plane will be in a > hangar, it is a Technically Advanced Aircraft > (Panel), I have 800 TT, > 500 of which are Retract, High Performance plus 125 > Tail Wheel. Not bad > for 6 years of flying (I thought). > I now have filled out the EAA form as suggested by > Wayne E and I hope to > hear back from multiple insurance companies. > I read the archives (Really!) and it seems like the > insurance should be > closer to $3,000. > I am looking forward to the day I cancel 4 > additional aircraft from > Avemco and move them over to the new insurance > carrier. > > Robin > BPE Cold Induction / James Cowl Air box Complete! > Ready to fly... > > > > browse > Un/Subscription, > FAQ, > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List > > Forums! > > Admin. > > > > >


    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
    Time: 03:45:46 PM PST US
    Subject: filling canopy pinholes-better time than another?
    From: "tomhanaway" <tomhanaway@comcast.net>
    Canopy is on (not yet riveted) and I'm satisfied with fit. Does it make more sense to go forward with doors and windows now or should I fill pinholes (with canopy either on or off fuselage) and do initial prime of canopy before moving forward? Just trying to figure out best order of steps to follow. Thanks, Tom H. Boynton Beach, FL Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p 1508#201508


    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
    Time: 03:55:25 PM PST US
    From: Wndwlkr1228@AOL.COM
    Subject: Re: Avemco Insurance Quote
    A few years ago, I was with AVEMCO. Then they decided to cancel all coverage of experimental aircraft. I was building a RV-6A at the time so I cancelled all of my policies in protest. Even though my coverage was about to expire anyway, they billed me for not renewing my policy. I am with Jenny at Nationwide and have been since then. George S. RV-6A panel In a message dated 8/29/2008 3:19:57 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, ricksked@embarqmail.com writes: --> RV10-List message posted by: Rick Sked <ricksked@embarqmail.com> You can't beat Jenny, I'm at $3600 but that's for $125K hull, bulders risk, transport, liability all that good stuff. Prior to the first flight it will go up to $250k on the hull and around the same, $4800 I'm guessing. Rick S. 40185 do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Souza" <electspec@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 1:22:45 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles Subject: Re: RV10-List: Avemco Insurance Quote --> RV10-List message posted by: William Souza <electspec@sbcglobal.net> Give Jenny Estes A call at NATIONAIR AVIATION INSURANCE @ 877-475-5860 OR NATIONAIR.COM. I have my RV-10 insured for full coverage @ $225,000 hull and under $4800.00 yr. Bill Souza RV-10 SoCal RV Group --- Robin Marks <robin1@mrmoisture.com> wrote: > --> RV10-List message posted by: "Robin Marks" > <robin1@mrmoisture.com> > > I just got off the phone with Avemco to see about > insuring my -10 for > first flight and then basic flight coverage. I have > 4 other plans > insured with them and receive a multi-plane > discount. Unfortunately > their quote is not reality based as coverage begins > only after 10 hours > of fly off (no First Flight Coverage) and for $200K > hull coverage the > quote was close to $8,000. I informed them that the > plane will be in a > hangar, it is a Technically Advanced Aircraft > (Panel), I have 800 TT, > 500 of which are Retract, High Performance plus 125 > Tail Wheel. Not bad > for 6 years of flying (I thought). > I now have filled out the EAA form as suggested by > Wayne E and I hope to > hear back from multiple insurance companies. > I read the archives (Really!) and it seems like the > insurance should be > closer to $3,000. > I am looking forward to the day I cancel 4 > additional aircraft from > Avemco and move them over to the new insurance > carrier. > > Robin > BPE Cold Induction / James Cowl Air box Complete! > Ready to fly... > > > > browse > Un/Subscription, > FAQ, > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List > > Forums! > > Admin. > > > > > **************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here. (http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)


    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
    Time: 03:56:38 PM PST US