Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:06 AM - Re: Fuel Selector (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
2. 05:06 AM - Re: Fuel Selector (jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com)
3. 05:11 AM - Re: Fuel Selector (Bobby J. Hughes)
4. 05:51 AM - Re: Fuel Selector (linn Walters)
5. 06:21 AM - Re: Re: Fuel Selector (linn Walters)
6. 06:29 AM - Re: Fuel Sender Float Wire (Kelly McMullen)
7. 06:46 AM - Trim Tab errors? (Kelly McMullen)
8. 07:02 AM - Re: Trim Tab errors? (Rick Sked)
9. 07:02 AM - Re: Re: Fuel Selector (Tim Olson)
10. 07:29 AM - Re: Re: Fuel Selector (Rick Sked)
11. 08:02 AM - Re: Re: Fuel Selector (Tim Olson)
12. 11:59 AM - Re: wiring kit (John Kirkland)
13. 04:40 PM - Engine mounting ear nut torque (Chris)
14. 09:27 PM - Re: Indicator lights - what functions to include (David Schaefer)
15. 10:13 PM - Re: Trim Tab errors? (woxofswa)
16. 10:21 PM - Re: Fuselage before wings? (woxofswa)
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 |
|
The things that usually get me in the most trouble involve something motorized
and the phrase "hey honey, check this out". :)
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Albert Gardner
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 1:01 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Fuel Selector
I once was doing a very aggressive slip in my RV-9A trying to show my wife
something one the ground on my side of the plane while sucking gas out of
the left tank. Suddenly, the loudest no-sound I ever heard when everything
was quite. Wings level, switch tanks, boost on, the fan started up. My wife
said, "Don't EVER do that again!" I'm leaving my valve as Left/Right/Off. As
far as I'm concerned, this wheel has been invented.
Albert Gardner
Yuma, AZ
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Selector |
Nearly the only thing that determines how hard a pump has to suck to get
fuel is the difference in height between the outlet of the tank and the
inlet of the engine. The lowest intake fuel port determines this number,
not the number of lines.
Rick, there is nothing complicated at all about Left - Right - Off. That
is why there has never been a pile of aluminum laying on the ground with
one empty tank of fuel, and one not so empty tank of fuel adding to the
fire. Please remind those families that there is nothing complicated
about Left - Right - Off. The point of my question was simply to ask why
it is done this way in low wing aircraft; I know there must be some reason
I am missing, which Bob, Linn, and Albert helped me understand. I for one
will never stop asking why things are done the way they are. I am happy
to know that your airplane has been built 100% per plans, you are a
flawless robot of a pilot, and are at no risk of making me have to fight
for my right to fly out of my field. Mistakes happen, there are defects
in material and workmanship, and sometimes luck just isn't on our sides.
Fortunately we have places like this to ask simple questions like these to
help us understand why. Your absolutely right, the wheel is perfect, that
is why I can't figure out why we ever invented wooden wheels, rubber
wheels, then wheels filled with air, the stone wheel was perfect, it
rolled just fine. If it ain't broke don't fix it, I get it, but I need to
understand how and why. Sorry.....
Thanks, Jason
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 |
|
You can tie the tanks together with a transfer pump and timer. Requires
one extra hole in your left tank unless you are already returning fuel
back to the tank anyway. The cooling loop through the right tank is not
needed with avgas.
Bobby
40116
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 1:15 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Fuel Selector
I have had fuel selector valves on my brain, and have a few questions.
Why can't a low wing airplane draw from both tanks at once? To me if
the fuel is available at the inlet of the pump it should draw from both,
just as well as a high wing with gravity working for it. Probably
something obvious I am missing.... Has anyone ever considered using an
electrically activated fuel selector valve like the ones used in dual
fuel tank trucks? Switching tanks would then just be the flip of a
switch. I think the failure mode of this device would be to stay open
on whichever tank is selected. I will admit, complicating something as
critical as fuel management any more than is absolutely necessary does
make me nervous. Just got stuck on my brain for some reason..... Any
thoughts?
Thanks, Jason Kreidler
N44YH - #40617 Finishing - 4 Partner Build
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: | Re: Fuel Selector |
Well, that blows my theory. Thanks Albert, for being our test pilot!!!
;-)
Linn .... hopefully with correct clock!!!
Albert Gardner wrote:
>
> I once was doing a very aggressive slip in my RV-9A trying to show my wife
> something one the ground on my side of the plane while sucking gas out of
> the left tank. Suddenly, the loudest no-sound I ever heard when everything
> was quite. Wings level, switch tanks, boost on, the fan started up. My wife
> said, "Don't EVER do that again!" I'm leaving my valve as Left/Right/Off. As
> far as I'm concerned, this wheel has been invented.
> Albert Gardner
> Yuma, AZ
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of linn Walters
> I'm not so sure ..... but I don't want to be a test pilot!!! The straw
> test fails because it isn't like our fuel system at all. Consider
> this: I think we all agree that there's no problem in level flight. In
> a truly coordinated turn there would be no difference from a level
> flight condition due to the dihedral. In a slipping turn if there's
> enough 'force' to cause the 'low' tank fuel to move toward the tip, then
> the 'high' side has the same force and would (in the absence of engine
> fuel flow) have head pressure and would tend to drain toward the low
> tank. The reverse would also be true. As long as the engine doesn't
> suck more fuel than would flow, then the 'low' port wouldn't 'unport'.
> At least that's my reasoning. Show me where I went wrong!
> Linn
>
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Selector |
jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com wrote:
>
> Nearly the only thing that determines how hard a pump has to suck to
> get fuel is the difference in height between the outlet of the tank
> and the inlet of the engine. The lowest intake fuel port determines
> this number, not the number of lines.
True .... I use the term 'head pressure' a lot ...... but in the case of
a pump sucking uphill I'm at a loss for a term. Any ideas??
> Rick, there is nothing complicated at all about Left - Right - Off.
> That is why there has never been a pile of aluminum laying on the
> ground with one empty tank of fuel, and one not so empty tank of fuel
> adding to the fire. Please remind those families that there is
> nothing complicated about Left - Right - Off. The point of my
> question was simply to ask why it is done this way in low wing
> aircraft; I know there must be some reason I am missing, which Bob,
> Linn, and Albert helped me understand.
Well, remember that what I said was in theory ..... In Albert's case,
he unported his ONLY source of fuel at that point (I hope) since he
probably has a left/right/off selector. I didn't think of that when I
answered his email. The next time he does the slippy thing I'll bet
he'll at least select the 'inside' tank!!! Another educational
experience shared with the group.
> I for one will never stop asking why things are done the way they are.
I'm glad for that!!! I can't come up with all the questions!!! We're
all still learning .... it's just that some have learned more than
others. Your question was a good one ..... because the conventional
wisdom just may be 'urban legend'. Out very tough job is to separate
out the truth from the fiction (especially on a list) and arrive at a
safe, sound, reasonable answer. The answer to your question just might
have boiled down to: It's the 'safest' or 'simplest' or .....
whatever. I've never asked the question because I just accepted it.
> I am happy to know that your airplane has been built 100% per plans,
> you are a flawless robot of a pilot, and are at no risk of making me
> have to fight for my right to fly out of my field. Mistakes happen,
> there are defects in material and workmanship, and sometimes luck just
> isn't on our sides. Fortunately we have places like this to ask
> simple questions like these to help us understand why. Your
> absolutely right, the wheel is perfect, that is why I can't figure out
> why we ever invented wooden wheels, rubber wheels, then wheels filled
> with air, the stone wheel was perfect, it rolled just fine. If it
> ain't broke don't fix it, I get it, but I need to understand how and
> why. Sorry.....
Hmmm. I detect a slight 'I been flamed' reaction. I have learned to
take what I perceive as a 'negative reaction' to an email with a grain
of salt. I just give the writer the benefit of the doubt and attribute
the 'nasty comment' to his having a bad day. Whether he had one or not
just doesn't matter. To me, he was, and I'm the one that counts!!! And,
it could have been ME that woke up on the wrong side of the bed .....
but I never do that!!! ;-)
Linn
do not archive
>
> Thanks, Jason
> *
>
> *
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Sender Float Wire |
Hmm, I'm getting close to starting said trim tabs. Any enlightenment
on how I can mis-re-read the plans so I can become a charter member of
this do-over until get it right club? (yes, I've already been through
the initiation ceremony).
Kelly
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 10:48 PM, John Gonzalez <indigoonlatigo@msn.com> wrote:
> I made a total of three right trim tabs.
> Plans don't become crystal clear until we screw up because we believe what
> we want to believe, we believe what we think to be true and not necessarily
> what is.
> It happens with more than following aircraft plans.
> John Socrates 409
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: | Trim Tab errors? |
Re-sent to have correct subject.
Hmm, I'm getting close to starting said trim tabs. Any enlightenment
on how I can mis-re-read the plans so I can become a charter member of
this do-over until get it right club? (yes, I've already been through
the initiation ceremony).
Kelly
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 10:48 PM, John Gonzalez <indigoonlatigo@msn.com> wrote:
> I made a total of three right trim tabs.
> Plans don't become crystal clear until we screw up because we believe what
> we want to believe, we believe what we think to be true and not necessarily
> what is.
> It happens with more than following aircraft plans.
> John Socrates 409
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: Trim Tab errors? |
I made three trim tabs, the first was awful and I ordered another skin, the second
was OK and the third try as they say was the charm. If I were to build them
again I would build a mini rib for the ends and screw bending them. I think
the real key to a good bend is making your blocks out of a good piece of hardwood
and clamping them very tight so there is no way they can slip. After doing
all the fiberglass stuff a composite rib for the end would be a piece of cake.
Rick S.
40185
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kelly McMullen" <kellym@aviating.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 6:46:11 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: RV10-List: Trim Tab errors?
Re-sent to have correct subject.
Hmm, I'm getting close to starting said trim tabs. Any enlightenment
on how I can mis-re-read the plans so I can become a charter member of
this do-over until get it right club? (yes, I've already been through
the initiation ceremony).
Kelly
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 10:48 PM, John Gonzalez <indigoonlatigo@msn.com> wrote:
> I made a total of three right trim tabs.
> Plans don't become crystal clear until we screw up because we believe what
> we want to believe, we believe what we think to be true and not necessarily
> what is.
> It happens with more than following aircraft plans.
> John Socrates 409
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: Fuel Selector |
I for one am happy to have the left/right/off as an option. It
does one thing that a Both position doesn't....it ensures that
I have full control over knowing what quantity is left in each
of my tanks. With a both position, you may not know the exact
quantity in each tank. The pressure coming out of the tank
isn't just a function of the height of the tank outlet, but
a function of the height of the column of fuel above it, and
that column is a sloshing variable.
As for the un-porting of fuel, it's a real problem, which is
why many certified planes are placarded or have POH warnings
about minimum takeoff fuel and such. Coordinated approaches
are very important too, and while they teach you in your private
pilots course that you can choose between crabbing on final
and kicking the crab angle out at the last second, or slipping
to keep the nose aligned with the runway, you really have to
be wary of what you do when you're carrying less than 5 or
maybe even 10 gallons in a tank.
So that is why I personally love having just left/right/off,
and not both. I have a totalizer and two float gauges,
and can roughly mentally calculate my fuel levels that I
should have burned. Keeping them isolated helps me
ensure that I know more positively what my tanks hold.
Incidently, even in high-wing planes, I think the "both"
position perhaps promotes sloppy fuel management in some
cases. Myself, I don't have rarely....extremely rarely,
landed with less than 5 gallons of fuel in a tank. Maybe
only 2 or 3 times, and 2 of them where when I purposely
ran the tank dry having a near-full opposite tank. But,
when I am on a long flight, I alternate fuel tanks a couple
times during the flight and then as I get lower in quantity
I keep one tank set to arrive in the terminal area with
at least 10 gallons of fuel, whereas I don't mind at that
point if the other tank has only 5 or 6 gallons left.
But, being conservative, there have actually been very few
times I've landed with under 16-18 gallons, because I set
my high alarm to go off at 7 gallons per side. Fuel and
spark are the 2 most important things to making it safely
to the ground, as far as I can tell.
It's funny that experimentals have such a nasty accident
rate in the "fuel management" category. I can only
wonder if this is because people tend to try to experiment
on their fuel system, rather than just going with the old
proven methods.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com wrote:
>
> Nearly the only thing that determines how hard a pump has to suck to get
> fuel is the difference in height between the outlet of the tank and the
> inlet of the engine. The lowest intake fuel port determines this
> number, not the number of lines.
>
> Rick, there is nothing complicated at all about Left - Right - Off.
> That is why there has never been a pile of aluminum laying on the
> ground with one empty tank of fuel, and one not so empty tank of fuel
> adding to the fire. Please remind those families that there is nothing
> complicated about Left - Right - Off. The point of my question was
> simply to ask why it is done this way in low wing aircraft; I know there
> must be some reason I am missing, which Bob, Linn, and Albert helped me
> understand. I for one will never stop asking why things are done the
> way they are. I am happy to know that your airplane has been built 100%
> per plans, you are a flawless robot of a pilot, and are at no risk of
> making me have to fight for my right to fly out of my field. Mistakes
> happen, there are defects in material and workmanship, and sometimes
> luck just isn't on our sides. Fortunately we have places like this to
> ask simple questions like these to help us understand why. Your
> absolutely right, the wheel is perfect, that is why I can't figure out
> why we ever invented wooden wheels, rubber wheels, then wheels filled
> with air, the stone wheel was perfect, it rolled just fine. If it ain't
> broke don't fix it, I get it, but I need to understand how and why.
> Sorry.....
>
> Thanks, Jason
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Selector |
Thanks for posting that Tim,
It's kinda what I was trying to say but not as well written.
There are certain things I feel you just shouldn't with, especially if it's not
broke although I did use steel braided flex lines on my -10 but they have been
proven to be reliable and I plan to have them on a time change item on my condition
inmspections. If I were to do it again I may have only used the flex line
from the fuselage side to the tank. It would be easier to replace. I think
we need to just make sure we do it better than the certified fleet sometimes.
The fiasco here in Vegas is a good reason for that. I was talking to an owner
of a Aerocommander this weekend and he was so frustrated at the shop performing
work on his aircraft, he went in and found a "kid", maybe 19 in his words "hacking"
on his airplane. The shop has three "mechanics" and one A&P/ with IA
that "supervises" all the others who are not certified. He was upset about the
fact he is paying top dollar for A&P services but in the end, the A&P only makes
sure it was done right and signs it off. Now I was a 19 year old aircraft
mechanic at one point but I would bet that I had much more training and I know
I had more direct supervsion than what was being described to me last weekend.
The twin Baron (I think it was a Baron) that went down had very recently been
in the shop for engine work...but they continue to focus on the experimental
and student pilots as the high risk activities. I can only recall one accident
related to training and that was few years ago and was the result of a stall
spin after the engine failed during of all things..engine out procedures. I can
tell you there have been a bunch of incidents related to certifed aircraft
and I know of no other incidents except the Velocity for exp[erimentals at VGT.
Guess I rambled but we can't afford to not do it better than everyone else when
it comes to experimental aviation. The fuel management issue still amazes
me because a large percentage of that is a result of flying with air in the tanks.
Rick S.
40185
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 6:59:10 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Fuel Selector
I for one am happy to have the left/right/off as an option. It
does one thing that a Both position doesn't....it ensures that
I have full control over knowing what quantity is left in each
of my tanks. With a both position, you may not know the exact
quantity in each tank. The pressure coming out of the tank
isn't just a function of the height of the tank outlet, but
a function of the height of the column of fuel above it, and
that column is a sloshing variable.
As for the un-porting of fuel, it's a real problem, which is
why many certified planes are placarded or have POH warnings
about minimum takeoff fuel and such. Coordinated approaches
are very important too, and while they teach you in your private
pilots course that you can choose between crabbing on final
and kicking the crab angle out at the last second, or slipping
to keep the nose aligned with the runway, you really have to
be wary of what you do when you're carrying less than 5 or
maybe even 10 gallons in a tank.
So that is why I personally love having just left/right/off,
and not both. I have a totalizer and two float gauges,
and can roughly mentally calculate my fuel levels that I
should have burned. Keeping them isolated helps me
ensure that I know more positively what my tanks hold.
Incidently, even in high-wing planes, I think the "both"
position perhaps promotes sloppy fuel management in some
cases. Myself, I don't have rarely....extremely rarely,
landed with less than 5 gallons of fuel in a tank. Maybe
only 2 or 3 times, and 2 of them where when I purposely
ran the tank dry having a near-full opposite tank. But,
when I am on a long flight, I alternate fuel tanks a couple
times during the flight and then as I get lower in quantity
I keep one tank set to arrive in the terminal area with
at least 10 gallons of fuel, whereas I don't mind at that
point if the other tank has only 5 or 6 gallons left.
But, being conservative, there have actually been very few
times I've landed with under 16-18 gallons, because I set
my high alarm to go off at 7 gallons per side. Fuel and
spark are the 2 most important things to making it safely
to the ground, as far as I can tell.
It's funny that experimentals have such a nasty accident
rate in the "fuel management" category. I can only
wonder if this is because people tend to try to experiment
on their fuel system, rather than just going with the old
proven methods.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
jason.kreidler@regalbeloit.com wrote:
>
> Nearly the only thing that determines how hard a pump has to suck to get
> fuel is the difference in height between the outlet of the tank and the
> inlet of the engine. The lowest intake fuel port determines this
> number, not the number of lines.
>
> Rick, there is nothing complicated at all about Left - Right - Off.
> That is why there has never been a pile of aluminum laying on the
> ground with one empty tank of fuel, and one not so empty tank of fuel
> adding to the fire. Please remind those families that there is nothing
> complicated about Left - Right - Off. The point of my question was
> simply to ask why it is done this way in low wing aircraft; I know there
> must be some reason I am missing, which Bob, Linn, and Albert helped me
> understand. I for one will never stop asking why things are done the
> way they are. I am happy to know that your airplane has been built 100%
> per plans, you are a flawless robot of a pilot, and are at no risk of
> making me have to fight for my right to fly out of my field. Mistakes
> happen, there are defects in material and workmanship, and sometimes
> luck just isn't on our sides. Fortunately we have places like this to
> ask simple questions like these to help us understand why. Your
> absolutely right, the wheel is perfect, that is why I can't figure out
> why we ever invented wooden wheels, rubber wheels, then wheels filled
> with air, the stone wheel was perfect, it rolled just fine. If it ain't
> broke don't fix it, I get it, but I need to understand how and why.
> Sorry.....
>
> Thanks, Jason
>
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: | Re: Fuel Selector |
Regarding the braided lines....I don't think that in that
case it's quite the same as changing the fuel distribution
method. With the lines, I actually think there's a good
argument that the braided lines will be more reliable
and basically immune to flex fatigue cracking, whereas
there are many of us who found first-hand that there have
been bad batches of aluminum tubing from Van's in that
3/8" size. (and even the good batches aren't necessarily
all that fantastic) I think that probably the best
someone can do would be to use conductive teflon lines
that are overbraided with stainless and have anti-chafe
covering. That would probably be the ideal. The
drawback to the braided lines is just weight. The
additional drawback to the various rubber type braided
lines is even more weight, and a life limit. But those
things aren't really in the same ballpark as some of
the other mods. After all, what kind of lines are used
from the firewall forward? No matter what kind of lines
are used, they need protection, and need to be well
secured. I actually plan at some point to replace
my lines with braided conductive teflon, and go all
the way from tank to firewall that way with some
exceptions.
Regarding that maintenance fiasco, I think that's
just another example of how businesses react with payroll
when the economy tightens...not to mention our ever
decreasing worker quality that the country produces.
It amazes me how poor the work ethic is in many of
the people that are turned out today. I know when
we go hiring, the "Good help is hard to find" saying
really holds true. Funny that unemployment is starting
to be such a big thing again, yet around here we
really have trouble finding top notch skills.
Sorry for the rambling, but yep Rick, you're
preaching to the choir. If the news could only
be balanced and give perspective to crash reporting,
people would have an entirely different opinion
about flying.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Rick Sked wrote:
>
> Thanks for posting that Tim,
>
> It's kinda what I was trying to say but not as well written. There
> are certain things I feel you just shouldn't with, especially if it's
> not broke although I did use steel braided flex lines on my -10 but
> they have been proven to be reliable and I plan to have them on a
> time change item on my condition inmspections. If I were to do it
> again I may have only used the flex line from the fuselage side to
> the tank. It would be easier to replace. I think we need to just make
> sure we do it better than the certified fleet sometimes. The fiasco
> here in Vegas is a good reason for that. I was talking to an owner of
> a Aerocommander this weekend and he was so frustrated at the shop
> performing work on his aircraft, he went in and found a "kid", maybe
> 19 in his words "hacking" on his airplane. The shop has three
> "mechanics" and one A&P/ with IA that "supervises" all the others who
> are not certified. He was upset about the fact he is paying top
> dollar for A&P services but in the end, the A&P only makes sure it
> was done right and signs it off. Now I w! as a 19 year old aircraft
> mechanic at one point but I would bet that I had much more training
> and I know I had more direct supervsion than what was being described
> to me last weekend. The twin Baron (I think it was a Baron) that went
> down had very recently been in the shop for engine work...but they
> continue to focus on the experimental and student pilots as the high
> risk activities. I can only recall one accident related to training
> and that was few years ago and was the result of a stall spin after
> the engine failed during of all things..engine out procedures. I can
> tell you there have been a bunch of incidents related to certifed
> aircraft and I know of no other incidents except the Velocity for
> exp[erimentals at VGT. Guess I rambled but we can't afford to not do
> it better than everyone else when it comes to experimental aviation.
> The fuel management issue still amazes me because a large percentage
> of that is a result of flying with air in the tanks.
>
> Rick S. 40185 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 |
|
Mine came all in one bag. Call Vans to report the shortage.
--------
RV-10 #40333
N540XP (reserved)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=218951#218951
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: | Engine mounting ear nut torque |
Checked the archives with no luck, can't seem to find any info in engine
documentation, therefore does anybody know the torque required for the
nuts which hold the ears on the IO-540-D4A5 ? Its a 3/8 stud so does the
usual torque number apply?
Thanks
Chris Lucas
#40072
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: Indicator lights - what functions to include |
The EFIS warning is tripped by things like terrain alerts, obstacles etc.
That alert can be re-set (or acknowledged) from the EFIS. However ANY
warnings generated by the EIS must be cleared by the front buttons on the
EIS or as I found out the hard way several years ago with a remote line out
the back of the EIS to a button. The EIS goes back to GRT for this
addition. I ran my wire into a db9 since it's just one wire sticking out
the back of the EIS.
David W. Schaefer
RV-6A N142DS "Nerdgasm"
TMX-IO360 Dual-LightSpeed Plasma IIIs, Hartzell Blended Airfoil, GRT EFIS
www.n142ds.com
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 10:12 AM, MauleDriver <MauleDriver@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> I'm burying my EIS too. I haven't studied the alarm situation there
> closely but my intent was to drive everything thru the EFIS and hopefully
> configure the EIS to run silent and deep. I'll have to look for that wire.
>
> What do you see tripping the EFIS warning? Is that a fully configurable
> feature in the GRT HS or is it a generic alarm used for a variety of
> conditions?
>
> Thanks.
> (I love this list-server)
>
> David Schaefer wrote:
>
> I currently have Primary and Secondary BUS low voltage, EIS warning (oil
> pressure only at startup), EFIS warning, X-Feed engaged, Starter engaged and
> Fuel Pump On.
>
> Remember when ordering your EIS to specify a remote line to silence the EIS
> warning ...! If it's buried like mine, it's not available to silence the
> alarm.
>
> I'll send you a picture off-line. I have a wonderful new system that
> allows for dimming and push to test for a mixture of both positive and
> negative triggered lamps!
>
> David W. Schaefer
> RV-6A N142DS "Nerdgasm"
> TMX-IO360 Dual-LightSpeed Plasma IIIs, Hartzell Blended Airfoil, GRT EFIS
> HS
> www.n142ds.com
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 5:48 PM, MauleDriver <MauleDriver@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Looking for thoughts regarding indicator/annunciator lights on my panel.
>> Some of the particulars include:
>> dual buss dual batt dual alt
>> 3 screen GRT HX
>> GRT EIS (hidden)
>> Garmin stack
>> PS 9000
>> TT AP
>> TT ADI
>>
>> My plan so far includes:
>> Door open - 2 lights
>> Low Voltage - 2 lights - 1 per buss
>> I'm thinking it makes sense to add 1 low oil pressure light
>> That's 5 lights
>> Some of that can be displayed thru the GRTs but I'm thinking it makes
>> sense to have the 5 tracked independent of the GRTs
>>
>> The GRT can drive an indicator or 3 but I'm unable to figure out a use for
>> it.
>>
>> I would love to hear what others are doing or planning.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Bill "building a panel" Watson
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> *
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com*
>
>
> *
>
>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Trim Tab errors? |
You might try bending them as closely as possible and then making them perfect
with a dab or swipe of superfil and a little sanding/shaping.
--------
Myron Nelson
Mesa, AZ
Emp completed, legacy build fuse in progress
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=219028#219028
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: | Re: Fuselage before wings? |
I am doing the fuselage first and it has worked out fine so far.
One of my concerns was simply storing the wings during the much longer fuselage
build, and dealing with spiders, rodents, moisture, et-cetera.
--------
Myron Nelson
Mesa, AZ
Emp completed, legacy build fuse in progress
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=219030#219030
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! --
|